Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube Products From Turkey: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Amended Final Results of Review; Amended Final Results of Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube Products From the Republic of Turkey, 2014-2015, 51013-51015 [2020-18156]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 19, 2020 / Notices
rate for the intermediate company(ies)
involved in the transaction. We intend
to issue instructions to CBP 15 days
after publication of the final results of
this review.8
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of the notice of final results
of administrative review for all
shipments of citric acid from Colombia
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the date of
publication of the final results, as
provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act:
(1) The cash deposit rate for Sucroal
will be equal to the dumping margin
established in the final results of this
review, except if the ultimate rate is de
minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR
351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash
deposit rates will be zero; (2) for
merchandise exported by producers or
exporters not covered in this
administrative review but covered in a
prior segment of the proceeding, the
cash deposit rate will continue to be the
company-specific rate published for the
most recently completed segment of this
proceeding in which the producer or
exporter participated; (3) if the exporter
is not a firm covered in this review, a
prior review, or the original less-thanfair-value investigation but the producer
is, then the cash deposit rate will be the
rate established for the most recently
completed segment of the proceeding
for the producer of the merchandise;
and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other
producers or exporters will continue to
be 28.48 percent, the all-others rate
established in the antidumping duty
investigation.9 These cash deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Disclosure and Public Comment
Commerce intends to disclose to the
parties to the proceeding the
calculations performed in connection
with these preliminary results to
interested parties within five days of
publication of this notice.10
Interested parties may submit case
briefs to Commerce in response to these
preliminary results no later than 30 days
after the publication of this notice.11
Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised
in the case briefs, may be filed no later
than seven days after the date for filing
case briefs.12 Parties who submit case
8 See
19 CFR 356.8(a).
Citric Acid Order.
10 See 19 CFR 351.224(b).
11 See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii).
12 See 19 CFR 351.309(d)(1) and (2); see also
Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD Service
Requirements Due to COVID–19, 85 FR 17006
9 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Aug 18, 2020
Jkt 250001
briefs or rebuttal briefs in this
proceeding are encouraged to submit
with each argument: (1) A statement of
the issue; (2) a brief summary of the
argument; and (3) a table of
authorities.13 Case and rebuttal briefs
should be filed using ACCESS.14 Note
that Commerce has temporarily
modified certain of its requirements for
serving documents containing business
proprietary information, until further
notice.15
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c),
interested parties who wish to request a
hearing must submit a written request to
the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement
and Compliance, filed electronically via
ACCESS. An electronically-filed request
for a hearing must be received
successfully in its entirety by ACCESS
by 5 p.m. Eastern Time within 30 days
after the date of publication of this
notice.16 Hearing requests should
contain: (1) The party’s name, address,
and telephone number; (2) the number
of participants; and (3) a list of issues to
be discussed. Issues raised in the
hearing will be limited to issues raised
in the briefs. If a request for a hearing
is made, Commerce intends to hold the
hearing at a date and time to be
determined.17
Commerce intends to issue the final
results of this administrative review,
including the results of our analysis of
the issues raised in any written briefs,
not later than 120 days after the date of
publication of these preliminary results
in the Federal Register, unless
otherwise extended.18
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a
preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this
review period. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in
Commerce’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of doubled antidumping duties.
(March 26, 2020); and Temporary Rule Modifying
AD/CVD Service Requirements Due to COVID–19;
Extension of Effective Period, 85 FR 41363 (July 10,
2020).
13 See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2) and 19 CFR
351.303 (for general filing requirements).
14 See generally 19 CFR 351.303.
15 See Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD
Service Requirements Due to COVID–19; Extension
of Effective Period, 85 FR 41363 (July 10, 2020).
16 See 19 CFR 351.310(c); see also 19 CFR
351.303(b)(1).
17 See 19 CFR 351.310(c).
18 See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51013
Notification to Interested Parties
We are issuing and publishing these
results in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19
CFR 351.213(h)(1).
Dated: August 10, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix
List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary
Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Discussion of the Methodology
V. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2020–18154 Filed 8–18–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–489–501]
Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe
and Tube Products From Turkey:
Notice of Court Decision Not in
Harmony With Amended Final Results
of Review; Amended Final Results of
Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Welded
Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube
Products From the Republic of Turkey,
2014–2015
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 28, 2020, the U.S.
Court of International Trade (CIT)
sustained the Department of Commerce
(Commerce)’s third remand
redetermination pertaining to the
administrative review of welded carbon
steel standard pipe and tube products
(welded pipe and tube) from the
Republic of Turkey (Turkey) covering
the period of review (POR) May 1, 2014
through April 30, 2015. Commerce is
notifying the public that the CIT’s final
judgment is not in harmony with the
amended final results of the
administrative review, and that
Commerce is amending the weightedaverage dumping margin for Toscelik
Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. (Toscelik).
DATES: Applicable August 7, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael J. Heaney, AD/CVD Operations,
Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4475.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\19AUN1.SGM
19AUN1
51014
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 19, 2020 / Notices
Background
On December 20, 2016, Commerce
published the Final Results in the 2014–
2015 administrative review of welded
pipe and tube from Turkey, in which
Commerce calculated a weightedaverage dumping margin of 1.91
percent.1 After correcting ministerial
errors contained in the Final Results, on
February 17, 2017, Commerce published
the Amended Final Results, and
calculated a revised weighted-average
dumping margin of 3.40 percent for
Toscelik.2
Toscelik and the JMC Steel Group (a
domestic interested party) appealed
Commerce’s Final Results, as amended
by the Amended Final Results, to the
CIT. On June 6, 2018, the CIT issued its
First Remand Order, directing
Commerce to: (1) Reconsider the
calculation of Toscelik’s duty drawback
adjustment; and (2) provide further
explanation for granting Toscelik a
circumstance-of-sale adjustment for
warehousing expenses.3 On October 4,
2018, Commerce submitted its final
results of redetermination, recalculating
Toscelik’s duty drawback adjustment,
under respectful protest,4 and providing
further explanation for granting a
circumstance-of-sale adjustment for
warehousing expenses.5
On April 1, 2019, the CIT issued its
Second Remand Order, sustaining
Commerce’s explanation of Toscelik’s
circumstance-of-sale for adjustment for
warehousing expenses, but remanding
Commerce’s modified calculation of
Toscelik’s duty drawback adjustment.6
In particular, the CIT found that
Commerce’s additional circumstance-ofsale adjustment to correct a perceived
imbalance in Toscelik’s dumping
margin calculation ‘‘negates the
statutory duty drawback adjustment that
Toscelik earned by exporting its
finished product to the United States
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
1 See
Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and
Tube Products from Turkey: Final Results of
Antidumping Administrative Review; 2014–2015,
81 FR 92785 (December 20, 2016) (Final Results),
and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum.
2 See Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and
Tube Products from Turkey: Amended Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014–
2015, 82 FR 11002 (February 17, 2017) (Amended
Final Results).
3 See Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. v.
United States, 321 F. Supp. 3d 1270 (CIT 2018)
(First Remand Order) at 17–18.
4 See Viraj Group, Ltd. v. United States, 343 F.3d
1371 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
5 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand, Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi
A.S. v. United States, Court No. 17–00018, Slip Op.
18–66 (CIT June 6, 2018).
6 See Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. v.
United States, 375 F. Supp. 3d 1312 (CIT 2019)
(Second Remand Order).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Aug 18, 2020
Jkt 250001
and impinges on the agency’s ability to
make a fair comparison.’’ 7 On May 30,
2019, Commerce submitted its second
final results of redetermination,
recalculating Toscelik’s duty drawback
adjustment, including a circumstanceof-sale adjustment to account for the
imbalance between the amount of
import duties included in U.S. price as
a result of the duty drawback
adjustment and the amount of import
duties reflected in normal value.8
On December 18, 2019, in its Third
Remand Order, the CIT ordered
Commerce to recalculate normal value
without making a circumstance-of-sale
adjustment related to the duty drawback
adjustment made to U.S. price.9 On
March 13, 2020, in the third results of
redetermination, Commerce granted
Toscelik a duty drawback adjustment,
without making a circumstance-of-sale
adjustment to account for the imbalance
between the U.S. duty drawback
adjustment and the amount of import
duties reflected in normal value.10
Additionally, Commerce added an
imputed cost for import duties to the
cost of production.11 This amount is
based on Toscelik’s cost of
manufacturing during the POR for pipe
and tube and was calculated as the ratio
of the total amount of Toscelik’s
exempted import duties and its cost of
manufacturing during the POR. On July
28, 2020, the CIT sustained Commerce’s
third results of redetermination, and
entered final judgment.12
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,13 as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades,14 the
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
held that, pursuant to section 516A 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
7 See Second Remand Order, 375 F. Supp. 3d at
1316.
8 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand, Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi
A.S. v. United States, Court No. 17–00018, Slip Op.
19–41 (CIT April 1, 2019) (Second
Redetermination).
9 See Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. v.
United States, 415 F. Supp. 3d 1395 (CIT 2019)
(Third Remand Order).
10 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand, Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi
A.S. v. United States, Court No. 17–00018, Slip Op.
19–166 (CIT December 18, 2019) (Third
Redetermination).
11 Id.
12 See Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. v.
United States, Court No., 17–00018, Slip Op. 20–
105 (CIT July 28, 2020) (CIT Final Judgment).
13 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).
14 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir.
2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
determination and must suspend
liquidation of entries pending a
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s
July 28, 2020, final judgment constitutes
a final decision of the CIT that is not in
harmony with Commerce’s Amended
Final Results.15 Thus, this notice is
published in fulfillment of the
publication requirements of Timken and
section 516A of the Act.
Amended Final Results of Review
Because there is now a final court
judgment, Commerce is amending its
Amended Final Results with respect to
Toscelik as follows:
Exporter or producer
Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi
A.S. .........................................
Weightedaverage
dumping
margin
(percent)
0.00
Cash Deposit Requirements
Because Toscelik has a superseding
cash deposit rate, i.e., there have been
final results published in a subsequent
administrative review for Toscelik, this
notice will not affect the current cash
deposit rate for Toscelik.
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
If the CIT’s final judgment is not
appealed, or if appealed and upheld,
because Toscelik’s amended weightedaverage dumping margin is zero percent,
Commerce will instruct CBP to
terminate the suspension of liquidation,
and to liquidate and to assess duties at
a rate of zero for entries during the POR
that were produced and exported by
Toscelik.
Consistent with Commerce’s
assessment practice, for entries of
subject merchandise during the POR
produced by Toscelik for which
Toscelik did not know that the
merchandise was destined for the
United States, we will instruct CBP to
liquidate unreviewed entries at the allothers rate if there is no rate for the
intermediate company(ies) involved in
the transaction.16
Lastly, at this time, Commerce
remains enjoined by Court order from
liquidating entries that: (1) Were the
subject of the administrative
determination published in the Final
Results, as amended by the Amended
Final Results; 17 (2) were produced and/
15 See
CIT Final Judgment.
a full discussion of this practice, see
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954
(May 6, 2003).
17 See Final Results, 81 FR at 92785; see also
Amended Final Results, 82 FR at 11002.
16 For
E:\FR\FM\19AUN1.SGM
19AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 161 / Wednesday, August 19, 2020 / Notices
or exported by any of the following:
Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S.;
Tosyali Dis Ticaret A.S.; Tubeco Pipe
and Steel Corporation; and Toscelik
Metal Ticaret A.S.; (3) were entered, or
were withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after May 1, 2014
through and including April 30, 2015;
and (4) remain unliquidated as of 5:00
p.m. Eastern Time on February 17, 2017.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(c)(1) and
(e), 751(a) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: August 13, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020–18156 Filed 8–18–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–119]
Certain Vertical Shaft Engines Between
225cc and 999cc, and Parts Thereof,
From the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Affirmative Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value,
Preliminary Affirmative Determination
of Critical Circumstances,
Postponement of Final Determination,
and Extension of Provisional Measures
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
AGENCY:
The Department of Commerce
(Commerce) preliminarily determines
that certain vertical shaft engines
between 225cc and 999cc, and parts
thereof (vertical shaft engines) from the
People’s Republic of China (China) are
being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value
(LTFV). The period of investigation is
July 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019.
Interested parties are invited to
comment on this preliminary
determination.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
Applicable August 19, 2020.
Leo
Ayala or Alex Cipolla, 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) 482–3945 or (202) 482–4956,
respectively.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:34 Aug 18, 2020
Jkt 250001
Background
This preliminary determination is
made in accordance with section 733(b)
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act). Commerce published the
notice of initiation of this investigation
on February 18, 2020.1 On June 2, 2020,
Commerce postponed the preliminary
determination of this investigation, and
the revised deadline is now August 12,
2020.2 For a complete description of the
events that followed the initiation of
this investigation, see the Preliminary
Decision Memorandum.3 A list of topics
included in the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum is included as Appendix
II to this notice. The Preliminary
Decision Memorandum is a public
document and is on file electronically
via Enforcement and Compliance’s
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System
(ACCESS). ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://
access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete
version of the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum can be accessed directly
at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.
The signed and the electronic versions
of the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Scope of the Investigation
The products covered by this
investigation are vertical shaft engines
from China. For a complete description
of the scope of this investigation, see
Appendix I.
Scope Comments
In accordance with the preamble to
Commerce’s regulations,4 the Initiation
Notice set aside a period of time for
parties to raise issues regarding product
coverage (scope).5 Certain interested
parties commented on the scope of the
investigation as it appeared in the
Initiation Notice. For a summary of the
product coverage comments and
1 See Certain Vertical Shaft Engines Between
223cc and 999cc, and Parts Thereof from the
People’s Republic of China: Initiation of
Antidumping Duty Investigation, 85 FR 8809
(February 18, 2020) (Initiation Notice), and
accompanying AD Initiation Checklist.
2 See Certain Vertical Shaft Engines Between
225cc and 999cc, and Parts Thereof from the
People’s Republic of China: Postponement of
Preliminary Determination in the Antidumping
Duty Investigation, 85 FR 33622 (June 2, 2020).
3 See Memorandum, ‘‘Certain Vertical Shaft
Engines Between 225cc and 999cc, and Parts
Thereof from the People’s Republic of China:
Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary
Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Preliminary Affirmative Critical
Circumstances Determination,’’ dated concurrently
with, and hereby adopted by, this notice
(Preliminary Decision Memorandum).
4 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties,
Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
5 See Initiation Notice.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51015
rebuttal responses submitted to the
record for this investigation, and
accompanying discussion and analysis
of all comments timely received, see the
Preliminary Scope Decision
Memorandum.6 Commerce is not
preliminarily modifying the scope
language as it appeared in the Initiation
Notice.
Methodology
Commerce is conducting this
investigation in accordance with section
731 of the Act. Commerce has
calculated export prices in accordance
with section 772(a) of the Act. In
addition, Commerce has calculated
constructed export prices in accordance
with section 772(b) of the Act. Because
China is a non-market economy, within
the meaning of section 771(18) of the
Act, Commerce has calculated normal
value in accordance with section 773(c)
of the Act. Furthermore, pursuant to
section 776(a) and (b) of the Act,
Commerce has preliminarily relied
upon facts otherwise available, with
adverse inferences, with respect to the
China-wide entity. For a full description
of the methodology underlying
Commerce’s preliminary determination,
see the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum.
Preliminary Affirmative Determination
of Critical Circumstances
In accordance with section 733(e) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.206, Commerce
preliminarily determines that critical
circumstances exist with respect to
imports of vertical shaft engines from
China for: Loncin Motor Co., Ltd.
(Loncin); Chongqing Zongshen General
Power Machine Co., Ltd. (Zongshen);
the separate rate companies, and the
China-wide entity. For a full description
of the methodology and results of
Commerce’s critical circumstances
analysis, see the Preliminary Decision
Memorandum.
Combination Rates
In the Initiation Notice,7 Commerce
stated that it would calculate producer/
exporter combination rates for the
respondents that are eligible for a
separate rate in this investigation. Policy
Bulletin 05.1 describes this practice.8
6 See Memorandum, ‘‘Certain Vertical Shaft
Engines Between 223cc and 999cc, and Parts
Thereof from the People’s Republic of China: Scope
Comments Decision Memorandum for the
Preliminary Determination’’ dated June 4, 2020
(Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum).
7 See Initiation Notice, 85 FR at 8813.
8 See Enforcement and Compliance’s Policy
Bulletin No. 05.1, regarding, ‘‘Separate-Rates
Practice and Application of Combination Rates in
Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market
E:\FR\FM\19AUN1.SGM
Continued
19AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 161 (Wednesday, August 19, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51013-51015]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-18156]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-489-501]
Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube Products From Turkey:
Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Amended Final Results of
Review; Amended Final Results of Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube
Products From the Republic of Turkey, 2014-2015
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 28, 2020, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT)
sustained the Department of Commerce (Commerce)'s third remand
redetermination pertaining to the administrative review of welded
carbon steel standard pipe and tube products (welded pipe and tube)
from the Republic of Turkey (Turkey) covering the period of review
(POR) May 1, 2014 through April 30, 2015. Commerce is notifying the
public that the CIT's final judgment is not in harmony with the amended
final results of the administrative review, and that Commerce is
amending the weighted-average dumping margin for Toscelik Profil ve Sac
Endustrisi A.S. (Toscelik).
DATES: Applicable August 7, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Heaney, AD/CVD Operations,
Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4475.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 51014]]
Background
On December 20, 2016, Commerce published the Final Results in the
2014-2015 administrative review of welded pipe and tube from Turkey, in
which Commerce calculated a weighted-average dumping margin of 1.91
percent.\1\ After correcting ministerial errors contained in the Final
Results, on February 17, 2017, Commerce published the Amended Final
Results, and calculated a revised weighted-average dumping margin of
3.40 percent for Toscelik.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube Products from
Turkey: Final Results of Antidumping Administrative Review; 2014-
2015, 81 FR 92785 (December 20, 2016) (Final Results), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.
\2\ See Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe and Tube Products from
Turkey: Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2014-2015, 82 FR 11002 (February 17, 2017) (Amended Final
Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Toscelik and the JMC Steel Group (a domestic interested party)
appealed Commerce's Final Results, as amended by the Amended Final
Results, to the CIT. On June 6, 2018, the CIT issued its First Remand
Order, directing Commerce to: (1) Reconsider the calculation of
Toscelik's duty drawback adjustment; and (2) provide further
explanation for granting Toscelik a circumstance-of-sale adjustment for
warehousing expenses.\3\ On October 4, 2018, Commerce submitted its
final results of redetermination, recalculating Toscelik's duty
drawback adjustment, under respectful protest,\4\ and providing further
explanation for granting a circumstance-of-sale adjustment for
warehousing expenses.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. v. United States,
321 F. Supp. 3d 1270 (CIT 2018) (First Remand Order) at 17-18.
\4\ See Viraj Group, Ltd. v. United States, 343 F.3d 1371 (Fed.
Cir. 2003).
\5\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. v. United States,
Court No. 17-00018, Slip Op. 18-66 (CIT June 6, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 1, 2019, the CIT issued its Second Remand Order,
sustaining Commerce's explanation of Toscelik's circumstance-of-sale
for adjustment for warehousing expenses, but remanding Commerce's
modified calculation of Toscelik's duty drawback adjustment.\6\ In
particular, the CIT found that Commerce's additional circumstance-of-
sale adjustment to correct a perceived imbalance in Toscelik's dumping
margin calculation ``negates the statutory duty drawback adjustment
that Toscelik earned by exporting its finished product to the United
States and impinges on the agency's ability to make a fair
comparison.'' \7\ On May 30, 2019, Commerce submitted its second final
results of redetermination, recalculating Toscelik's duty drawback
adjustment, including a circumstance-of-sale adjustment to account for
the imbalance between the amount of import duties included in U.S.
price as a result of the duty drawback adjustment and the amount of
import duties reflected in normal value.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. v. United States,
375 F. Supp. 3d 1312 (CIT 2019) (Second Remand Order).
\7\ See Second Remand Order, 375 F. Supp. 3d at 1316.
\8\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. v. United States,
Court No. 17-00018, Slip Op. 19-41 (CIT April 1, 2019) (Second
Redetermination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 18, 2019, in its Third Remand Order, the CIT ordered
Commerce to recalculate normal value without making a circumstance-of-
sale adjustment related to the duty drawback adjustment made to U.S.
price.\9\ On March 13, 2020, in the third results of redetermination,
Commerce granted Toscelik a duty drawback adjustment, without making a
circumstance-of-sale adjustment to account for the imbalance between
the U.S. duty drawback adjustment and the amount of import duties
reflected in normal value.\10\ Additionally, Commerce added an imputed
cost for import duties to the cost of production.\11\ This amount is
based on Toscelik's cost of manufacturing during the POR for pipe and
tube and was calculated as the ratio of the total amount of Toscelik's
exempted import duties and its cost of manufacturing during the POR. On
July 28, 2020, the CIT sustained Commerce's third results of
redetermination, and entered final judgment.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. v. United States,
415 F. Supp. 3d 1395 (CIT 2019) (Third Remand Order).
\10\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. v. United States,
Court No. 17-00018, Slip Op. 19-166 (CIT December 18, 2019) (Third
Redetermination).
\11\ Id.
\12\ See Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S. v. United
States, Court No., 17-00018, Slip Op. 20-105 (CIT July 28, 2020)
(CIT Final Judgment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\13\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\14\ the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that,
pursuant to section 516A 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 CIT's July 28,
2020, final judgment constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is
not in harmony with Commerce's Amended Final Results.\15\ Thus, this
notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of
Timken and section 516A of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\14\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
\15\ See CIT Final Judgment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results of Review
Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending
its Amended Final Results with respect to Toscelik as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter or producer dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S...................... 0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
Because Toscelik has a superseding cash deposit rate, i.e., there
have been final results published in a subsequent administrative review
for Toscelik, this notice will not affect the current cash deposit rate
for Toscelik.
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
If the CIT's final judgment is not appealed, or if appealed and
upheld, because Toscelik's amended weighted-average dumping margin is
zero percent, Commerce will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of
liquidation, and to liquidate and to assess duties at a rate of zero
for entries during the POR that were produced and exported by Toscelik.
Consistent with Commerce's assessment practice, for entries of
subject merchandise during the POR produced by Toscelik for which
Toscelik did not know that the merchandise was destined for the United
States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the
all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies)
involved in the transaction.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ For a full discussion of this practice, see Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties,
68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lastly, at this time, Commerce remains enjoined by Court order from
liquidating entries that: (1) Were the subject of the administrative
determination published in the Final Results, as amended by the Amended
Final Results; \17\ (2) were produced and/
[[Page 51015]]
or exported by any of the following: Toscelik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi
A.S.; Tosyali Dis Ticaret A.S.; Tubeco Pipe and Steel Corporation; and
Toscelik Metal Ticaret A.S.; (3) were entered, or were withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after May 1, 2014 through and
including April 30, 2015; and (4) remain unliquidated as of 5:00 p.m.
Eastern Time on February 17, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Final Results, 81 FR at 92785; see also Amended Final
Results, 82 FR at 11002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(c)(1) and (e), 751(a) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: August 13, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-18156 Filed 8-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
