Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of Review, 50006-50007 [2020-17942]

Download as PDF 50006 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 159 / Monday, August 17, 2020 / Notices selection of U.S. Section members has been made. Applications received after September 16, 2020 will be considered only if vacancies have not already been filled. Authority: The Act of February 14, 1903, as amended (15 U.S.C. 1512 et seq.; 15 U.S.C. 171 et seq.), to foster, promote, and develop the foreign and domestic commerce of the United States. Section 2 of Reorganization Plan no. 3 of 1979, which assigns to the Secretary of Commerce responsibility for major nonagricultural international trade functions of the United States, including export development. Dated: August 4, 2020. David Olsen, International Trade Specialist, Office of North America. [FR Doc. 2020–17388 Filed 8–14–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–HE–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–011] Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products From the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of Review Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 4, 2020, the United States Court of International Trade (the Court) entered final judgment sustaining the final results of remand redetermination pursuant to court order by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) pertaining to the 2014– 2015 countervailing duty (CVD) administrative review of the order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic products (solar products) from the People’s Republic of China (China). Commerce is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with Commerce’s final results in the 2014–2015 administrative review of solar products from China, and that Commerce is amending the final results. DATES: Applicable August 14, 2020. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Caitlin Monks, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue AGENCY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Aug 14, 2020 Jkt 250001 NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2670. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On September 12, 2017, Commerce published its final results of the 2014– 2015 administrative review of solar products.1 Commerce reached affirmative determinations for mandatory respondent Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and its crossowned affiliates (collectively, Trina Solar), as well as numerous other producers and exporters not selected for individual review. On November 30, 2018, the Court remanded aspects of the Final Results to Commerce for further consideration.2 The Court remanded Commerce’s determinations as regards to the Export Buyer’s Credit Program and inclusion of Comtrade data in calculating the world market price for aluminum extrusions and solar glass.3 In its first remand redetermination, issued in April 2019,4 Commerce provided additional explanation and evidence for its determinations, but the Court continued to find them unsupported by substantial evidence and remanded them a second time.5 In its second remand redetermination, issued in February 2020,6 Commerce explained that, although it continues to believe that it is not possible to verify whether respondents used the Export Buyer’s Credit Program without the cooperation of the Government of China (GOC), it found the program not used, under protest, to comply with the Court’s order.7 Commerce also solicited additional information for the solar glass benchmark, and selected data from 1 See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, and Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014–2015, 82 FR 42792 (September 12, 2017) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. 2 See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. et al. v. United States, Slip Op. 18–167 (November 30, 2018). 3 Id. at 16. 4 See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. et al. v. United States, Court of International Trade Consolidated Court No. 17–00246, ‘‘Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand,’’ dated April 24, 2019. 5 See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co. v. United States, Slip Op. 19–143 (November 18, 2019). 6 See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and SolarWorld Americas, Inc. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 17–00246; Slip Op. 19–143 (November 18, 2019), ‘‘Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand,’’ dated February 28, 2020 (Second Remand Redetermination). 7 Id. at 7–8. PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 PV Insights consistent with Commerce’s preference for product-specific monthly data.8 For aluminum extrusions, Commerce used the more productspecific annual data from IHS exclusively rather than averaging them with less specific monthly Comtrade data, consistent with the Court’s order.9 The Court sustained Commerce’s second remand in full.10 Specifically, the Court found that Commerce’s determinations regarding the Export Buyer’s Credit Program, as well as the aluminum extrusions and solar glass benchmarks, complied with the options the Court provided in its remand opinion.11 Timken Notice In its decision in Timken,12 as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,13 the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to section 516A(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce must publish a notice of court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with a Commerce determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The Court’s August 4, 2020, judgment constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with Commerce’s Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, Commerce will continue suspension of liquidation of subject merchandise pending expiration of the period of appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court decision. Amended Final Results Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending the 2017 Final Results with respect to Trina Solar and all other producers and exporters subject to this review. The revised total subsidy rates for these companies for the period June 10, 2014 through December 31, 2015 are as follows: 14 8 Id. at 9–10. at 8–9. 10 See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and SolarWorld Americas, Inc. v. United States, Slip Op. 20–109 (August 4, 2020). 11 Id. at 3–6 (Export Buyer’s Credit Program) and 7–13 (benchmarks for aluminum extrusions and solar glass). 12 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken). 13 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010). 14 See Second Remand Redetermination at 20–21. 9 Id. E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM 17AUN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 159 / Monday, August 17, 2020 / Notices Subsidy rate (percent ad valorem) Exporter or producer Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and its Cross-Owned Affiliates 15 ...................................................................................... Chint Solar (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd ............................................................................................................................................................ Hefei JA Solar Technology Co., Ltd .................................................................................................................................................... Perlight Solar Co., Ltd ......................................................................................................................................................................... Risen Energy Co., Ltd ......................................................................................................................................................................... Shanghai JA Solar Technology Co., Ltd ............................................................................................................................................. Shenzhen Sungold Solar Co., Ltd ....................................................................................................................................................... Sunny Apex Development Limited ...................................................................................................................................................... Amended Cash Deposit Rates Commerce will issue revised cash deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection for all firms above that do not have a superseding cash deposit rate (e.g., from a subsequent administrative review). For such firms, the revised cash deposit rates will be the rates indicated above, effective August 14, 2020. Notification to Interested Parties This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: August 11, 2020. Jeffrey I. Kessler, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2020–17942 Filed 8–14–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–980] Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of Review Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 4, 2020, the United States Court of International Trade (the Court) entered final judgment sustaining the final results of remand redetermination pursuant to court order by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) pertaining to the 2014 AGENCY: 15 See Final Results, 82 FR at 42793. Cross-owned affiliates are: Trina Solar Limited; Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science & Technology Co., Ltd.; Yancheng Trina Solar Energy Technology Co., Ltd.; Changzhou Trina Solar Yabang Energy Co., Ltd.; Hubei Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd.; Turpan Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd.; and Changzhou Trina PV Ribbon Materials Co., Ltd. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:13 Aug 14, 2020 Jkt 250001 countervailing duty (CVD) administrative review of the order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules (solar cells), from the People’s Republic of China (China). Commerce is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with Commerce’s final results in the 2014 administrative review of solar cells from China, and that Commerce is amending the final results. DATES: Applicable August 14, 2020. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Caitlin Monks, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2670. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On July 17, 2017, Commerce published its final results of the 2014 administrative review of solar cells.1 Commerce reached affirmative determinations for mandatory respondents Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc. and its cross-owned affiliates (collectively, Canadian Solar) and Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and its crossowned affiliates (collectively, Trina Solar), as well as numerous other producers and exporters not selected for individual review. On November 30, 2018, the Court remanded aspects of the Final Results to Commerce for further consideration.2 The Court remanded 1 See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled into Modules, from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, and Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014, 82 FR 32678 (July 17, 2017) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM), as amended by Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled into Modules, from the People’s Republic of China: Amended Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 82 FR 46760 (October 6, 2017) (Amended Final Results). 2 See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. et al. v. United States, Slip Op. 18–166 (November 30, 2018). PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 50007 3.72 3.72 3.72 3.72 3.72 3.72 3.72 3.72 Commerce’s determinations as regards to the Export Buyer’s Credit Program, the inclusion of Comtrade data in calculating the world market price for aluminum extrusions and solar glass, Commerce’s decision to revert to a tiertwo benchmark in determining the price for polysilicon without considering a respondent’s proffered evidence, and the finding that the provision of electricity constitutes a specific and thus countervailable subsidy.3 In its first remand redetermination, issued in April 2019,4 Commerce provided additional explanation and evidence for its determinations, but the Court continued to find them unsupported by substantial evidence and remanded them a second time.5 In its second remand redetermination, issued in February 2020,6 Commerce explained that, although it continues to believe that it is not possible to verify whether respondents used the Export Buyer’s Credit Program without the cooperation of the Government of China (GOC), it found the program not used, under protest, to comply with the Court’s order.7 Commerce also solicited additional information for the solar glass benchmark, and selected data from PV Insights consistent with Commerce’s preference for product specific monthly data.8 For aluminum extrusions, Commerce used the more productspecific annual data from IHS exclusively rather than averaging them with less specific monthly Comtrade data, consistent with the Court’s order.9 3 Id. at 44. Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. et al. v. United States, Court of International Trade Consolidated Court No. 17–00198, ‘‘Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand,’’ dated April 24, 2019. 5 See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co. v. United States, Slip Op. 19–137 (November 8, 2019) (Second Remand Order). 6 See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 17–00198; Slip Op. 19–137 (November 8, 2019), ‘‘Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand,’’ dated February 28, 2020 (Second Remand Redetermination). 7 Id. at 11–12. 8 Id. at 13–14. 9 Id. at 12–13. 4 See E:\FR\FM\17AUN1.SGM 17AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 159 (Monday, August 17, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50006-50007]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17942]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-011]


Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products From the People's 
Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final 
Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and Notice of 
Amended Final Results of Review

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On August 4, 2020, the United States Court of International 
Trade (the Court) entered final judgment sustaining the final results 
of remand redetermination pursuant to court order by the Department of 
Commerce (Commerce) pertaining to the 2014-2015 countervailing duty 
(CVD) administrative review of the order on crystalline silicon 
photovoltaic products (solar products) from the People's Republic of 
China (China). Commerce is notifying the public that the final judgment 
in this case is not in harmony with Commerce's final results in the 
2014-2015 administrative review of solar products from China, and that 
Commerce is amending the final results.

DATES: Applicable August 14, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Caitlin Monks, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2670.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On September 12, 2017, Commerce published its final results of the 
2014-2015 administrative review of solar products.\1\ Commerce reached 
affirmative determinations for mandatory respondent Changzhou Trina 
Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and its cross-owned affiliates (collectively, 
Trina Solar), as well as numerous other producers and exporters not 
selected for individual review. On November 30, 2018, the Court 
remanded aspects of the Final Results to Commerce for further 
consideration.\2\ The Court remanded Commerce's determinations as 
regards to the Export Buyer's Credit Program and inclusion of Comtrade 
data in calculating the world market price for aluminum extrusions and 
solar glass.\3\ In its first remand redetermination, issued in April 
2019,\4\ Commerce provided additional explanation and evidence for its 
determinations, but the Court continued to find them unsupported by 
substantial evidence and remanded them a second time.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products from the 
People's Republic of China: Final Results of Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review, and Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 82 FR 42792 (September 12, 2017) 
(Final Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.
    \2\ See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. et al. v. United 
States, Slip Op. 18-167 (November 30, 2018).
    \3\ Id. at 16.
    \4\ See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. et al. v. United 
States, Court of International Trade Consolidated Court No. 17-
00246, ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court 
Remand,'' dated April 24, 2019.
    \5\ See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co. v. United States, Slip 
Op. 19-143 (November 18, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its second remand redetermination, issued in February 2020,\6\ 
Commerce explained that, although it continues to believe that it is 
not possible to verify whether respondents used the Export Buyer's 
Credit Program without the cooperation of the Government of China 
(GOC), it found the program not used, under protest, to comply with the 
Court's order.\7\ Commerce also solicited additional information for 
the solar glass benchmark, and selected data from PV Insights 
consistent with Commerce's preference for product-specific monthly 
data.\8\ For aluminum extrusions, Commerce used the more product-
specific annual data from IHS exclusively rather than averaging them 
with less specific monthly Comtrade data, consistent with the Court's 
order.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and SolarWorld 
Americas, Inc. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 17-00246; Slip 
Op. 19-143 (November 18, 2019), ``Final Results of Redetermination 
Pursuant to Court Remand,'' dated February 28, 2020 (Second Remand 
Redetermination).
    \7\ Id. at 7-8.
    \8\ Id. at 9-10.
    \9\ Id. at 8-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Court sustained Commerce's second remand in full.\10\ 
Specifically, the Court found that Commerce's determinations regarding 
the Export Buyer's Credit Program, as well as the aluminum extrusions 
and solar glass benchmarks, complied with the options the Court 
provided in its remand opinion.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and SolarWorld 
Americas, Inc. v. United States, Slip Op. 20-109 (August 4, 2020).
    \11\ Id. at 3-6 (Export Buyer's Credit Program) and 7-13 
(benchmarks for aluminum extrusions and solar glass).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken,\12\ as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades,\13\ the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, 
pursuant to section 516A(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
Act), Commerce must publish a notice of court decision that is not ``in 
harmony'' with a Commerce determination and must suspend liquidation of 
entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The Court's August 4, 
2020, judgment constitutes a final decision of that court that is not 
in harmony with Commerce's Final Results. This notice is published in 
fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, 
Commerce will continue suspension of liquidation of subject merchandise 
pending expiration of the period of appeal or, if appealed, pending a 
final and conclusive court decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 
1990) (Timken).
    \13\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amended Final Results

    Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending 
the 2017 Final Results with respect to Trina Solar and all other 
producers and exporters subject to this review. The revised total 
subsidy rates for these companies for the period June 10, 2014 through 
December 31, 2015 are as follows: \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Second Remand Redetermination at 20-21.

[[Page 50007]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Subsidy rate
                  Exporter or producer                     (percent  ad
                                                             valorem)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and its Cross-               3.72
 Owned Affiliates \15\..................................
Chint Solar (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd.........................            3.72
Hefei JA Solar Technology Co., Ltd......................            3.72
Perlight Solar Co., Ltd.................................            3.72
Risen Energy Co., Ltd...................................            3.72
Shanghai JA Solar Technology Co., Ltd...................            3.72
Shenzhen Sungold Solar Co., Ltd.........................            3.72
Sunny Apex Development Limited..........................            3.72
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amended Cash Deposit Rates
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Final Results, 82 FR at 42793. Cross-owned affiliates 
are: Trina Solar Limited; Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science & 
Technology Co., Ltd.; Yancheng Trina Solar Energy Technology Co., 
Ltd.; Changzhou Trina Solar Yabang Energy Co., Ltd.; Hubei Trina 
Solar Energy Co., Ltd.; Turpan Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd.; and 
Changzhou Trina PV Ribbon Materials Co., Ltd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce will issue revised cash deposit instructions to U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection for all firms above that do not have a 
superseding cash deposit rate (e.g., from a subsequent administrative 
review). For such firms, the revised cash deposit rates will be the 
rates indicated above, effective August 14, 2020.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: August 11, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-17942 Filed 8-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.