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 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of the notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of citric acid from Colombia entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results, as provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit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
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.