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, 68561-68563 [2020-23959]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Notices
Analysis
Commerce continues to find, based on
record evidence, that the selected
respondents, Pa´nuco and Grupo PIASA,
were in compliance with the terms of
the amended AD Agreement 14 during
the POR, including the polarity testing
requirements and reference price
provisions. We also determine that the
amended AD Agreement is preventing
price suppression or undercutting and
can be effectively monitored, and there
have been no violations by the selected
respondents of the amended AD
Agreement during the POR.
The issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs are addressed in the
accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum and business proprietary
memorandum.15 The issues are
identified in the Appendix to this
notice. The Issues and 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 Issues and
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the internet at https://
trade.gov/enforcement/frn/.
The signed Issues and Decision
Memorandum and electronic versions of
the Issues and Decision Memorandum
are identical in content.
written notification of the return or
destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a sanctionable violation.
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Order
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
[C–570–980]
14 See Agreement Suspending the Antidumping
Duty Investigation of Sugar from Mexico, 79 FR
78039 (December 29, 2014) and Sugar From Mexico:
Amendment to the Agreement Suspending the
Antidumping Duty Investigation, 82 FR 31945 (July
11, 2017) (AD Amendment). Consistent with a
ruling from the Court of International Trade,
Commerce published in the Federal Register a
notice of the termination of the 2017 AD
Amendment (which was in effect during period of
review), with an applicable date of December 7,
2019. See Sugar from Mexico: Notice of
Termination of Amendment to the Agreement
Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation, 84
FR 67711 (December 11, 2019).
15 See Issues and Decision Memorandum; see also
Memorandum to the File from David Cordell,
through Sally C. Gannon, Director for Bilateral
Agreements, ‘‘Proprietary Discussion of Issues for
the Final Results of the Administrative Review of
the Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty
Investigation on Sugar from Mexico, for the period
December 1, 2017 through November 30, 2018,’’
dated concurrently and hereby adopted by this
notice.
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
Notification to Interested Parties
We are issuing and publishing these
results of review in accordance with
sections 751(a)(l) and 777(i)(l) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.213 and 19 CFR
351.221(b)(5).
Dated: October 21, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix
Issues and Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Scope of the Agreement
III. Background
IV. Discussion of the Issues
Issue 1: Alleged Possible Violations of the
Amended AD Agreement
• Certain Sales in the Home Market
• Sales for Home Market Calculation
Issue 2: Status of the Amended AD
Agreement.
V. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2020–23923 Filed 10–28–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
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 October 19, 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 2015
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 2015 administrative
review of solar cells from China, and
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
68561
that Commerce is amending the final
results.
DATES: Applicable: October 29, 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 23, 2018, Commerce
published its final results of the 2015
administrative review of solar cells.1
Commerce reached affirmative
determinations for mandatory
respondents Canadian Solar 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. Commerce requested
a voluntary remand regarding four
issues before the Court: (1) Its finding,
based on adverse facts available, that the
respondents used the Export Buyer’s
Credit Program; (2) its determination
that China’s provision of aluminum
extrusions is a specific subsidy; (3) the
decision to average two datasets from
IHS technology and U.N. Comtrade in
calculating the benchmark for
aluminum extrusions; and (4) the
determination that China’s provision of
electricity is a specific subsidy.
On February 25, 2020, the Court
granted Commerce’s requests for
voluntary remands, and remanded
additional aspects of Commerce’s Final
Results.2 Specifically, the Court
concluded that Commerce did not
adequately explain how the polysilicon
market in China is distorted through
GOC intervention and how that
distortion affects prices for imported
products.3 Additionally, the Court
found that Commerce had
misinterpreted evidence regarding the
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; 2015,
83 FR 34828 (July 23, 2018) (Final Results), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum,
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; 2015, 83 FR 54566 (October 30, 2018)
(Amended Final Results).
2 See Canadian Solar Inc., et al. v. United States,
Slip Op. 20–23 (CIT February 25, 2020) (Remand
Order).
3 Id. at 6 (citing Changzhou 3rd Review 2nd
Remand Order, Slip Op. 19–137 at 20).
E:\FR\FM\29OCN1.SGM
29OCN1
68562
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Notices
inclusion of terminal handling charges
in the Xeneta ocean freight data,4 and
that Commerce had erred in not fixing
an allegedly mistranslated heading on
the GOC’s electricity tariff schedules.5
Commerce issued its final remand
redetermination in June 2020.6 In its
final remand redetermination,
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 in the
third administrative review.7 For
aluminum extrusions, Commerce
offered additional explanation regarding
the specificity of aluminum extrusions
provided at less than adequate
remuneration (LTAR) and revised its
benefit calculations to use the more
product-specific annual data from IHS
exclusively rather than averaging them
with less specific monthly Comtrade
data.8 For electricity, Commerce also
fixed a translation error in the electricity
tariff schedules on the record 9 and
offered additional explanation regarding
its conclusion that the provision of
electricity for LTAR is specific, and
thus, countervailable.10 Commerce also
solicited new information regarding the
polysilicon industry in China and
placed additional information on the
record that supported its finding that
the polysilicon market in China is
distorted by government involvement,
such that we cannot rely on prices for
polysilicon imported into China.11
Regarding international freight costs,
Commerce revised its benchmark
calculations to include the Xeneta data
on the record, in compliance with the
Court’s order.12
The Court sustained Commerce’s
remand redetermination in full.13
Specifically, the Court found that
Commerce’s determinations regarding
the Export Buyer’s Credit Program, as
well as the aluminum extrusions and
polysilicon benchmarks, complied with
the options the Court provided in
previous remand orders.14 For
polysilicon, the Court explained that
Commerce reasonably identified further
evidence supporting its finding of
market distortion.15 The Court also
concluded that Commerce’s decision to
average the Xeneta data with the Maersk
data in computing an ocean freight
benchmark, and its decision to correct
the translation error on the electricity
schedules complied with the Court’s
order.16 Finally, the Court found that
Commerce appropriately identified the
missing information and facts that,
when combined with an adverse
inference, supported finding that the
provision of electricity is regionally
specific.17
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,18 as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades,19 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 October 19, 2020 judgment
constitutes a final decision of that court
that is not in harmony with Commerce’s
Final Results and Amended 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
Amended Final Results with respect to
Canadian Solar, Trina Solar, and all
other producers and exporters subject to
this review. The revised total subsidy
rates for the period January 1, 2015
through December 31, 2015 are as
follows: 20
Subsidy rate
(percent ad valorem)
Exporter or producer
Canadian Solar Inc. and its Cross-Owned Affiliates 21 ...........................................................................................................
Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and its Cross-Owned Affiliates 22 ..........................................................................
Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic Technology Co., Ltd ..............................................................................................................
Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd .......................................................................................................
Beijing Tianneng Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd .......................................................................................................
Canadian Solar International, Ltd ............................................................................................................................................
Chint Solar (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd ................................................................................................................................................
Dongguan Sunworth Solar Energy Co., Ltd ............................................................................................................................
ERA Solar Co., Ltd ..................................................................................................................................................................
ET Solar Energy Limited .........................................................................................................................................................
ET Solar Industry Limited ........................................................................................................................................................
Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd ......................................................................................................................
Hangzhou Sunny Energy Science and Technology Co., Ltd ..................................................................................................
Hangzhou Zhejiang University Sunny Energy Science and Technology Co., Ltd ..................................................................
Hengdian Group DMEGC Magnetics Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................................
Hengshui Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd ..................................................................................................................
4 Id.
at 9.
at 11.
6 See Canadian Solar Inc., et al. v. United States,
Consol. Court No. 18–00184; Slip Op. 20–23 (CIT
February 25, 2020), ‘‘Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand,’’ dated
June 26, 2020 (Final Remand Redetermination).
7 Id. at 11–12.
8 Id. at 12–13.
9 Id. at 30.
10 Id. at 2.
11 Id. at 20–30.
12 Id. at 30.
13 See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. v.
United States, Slip Op. 20–108 (October 19, 2020).
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
5 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
14 Id. at 5–6 (Export Buyer’s Credit Program) and
6–10 (aluminum extrusions) (citing, e.g.,
Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. v. United
States, Slip Op. 20–108 (CIT 2020)).
15 Id. at 13–15.
16 Id. at 15–16.
17 Id. at 12–13.
18 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).
19 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v.
United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
20 See Second Remand Redetermination at 48.
21 See Amended Final Results, 83 FR at 54567.
Cross-owned affiliates are: Canadian Solar Inc.;
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang) Inc.;
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc.; CSI
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5.02
2.93
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
Cells Co., Ltd.; CSI Solar Power (China) Inc.; CSI
Solartronics (Changshu) Co., Ltd.; CSI Solar
Technologies Inc.; CSI Solar Manufacture Inc.
(name was changed to CSI New Energy Holding Co.,
Ltd. in July 2015); CSI–GCL Solar Manufacturing
(Yancheng) Co., Ltd.; Changshu Tegu New Materials
Technology Co., Ltd.; Changshu Tlian Co., Ltd.; and
Suzhou Sanysolar Materials Technology Co., Ltd.
22 Id. Cross-owned affiliates are: Changzhou Trina
Solar Energy Co., Ltd.; Trina Solar (Changzhou)
Science and 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.
E:\FR\FM\29OCN1.SGM
29OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 210 / Thursday, October 29, 2020 / Notices
Subsidy rate
(percent ad valorem)
Exporter or producer
JA Solar Technology Yangzhou Co., Ltd ................................................................................................................................
Jiangsu High Hope Int’l Group ................................................................................................................................................
Jiawei Solarchina Co., Ltd .......................................................................................................................................................
Jiawei Solarchina (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd ...................................................................................................................................
JingAo Solar Co., Ltd ..............................................................................................................................................................
Jinko Solar Co., Ltd .................................................................................................................................................................
Jinko Solar Import and Export Co., Ltd ...................................................................................................................................
Jinko Solar International Limited .............................................................................................................................................
Jinko Solar (U.S.) Inc ..............................................................................................................................................................
Lightway Green New Energy Co., Ltd .....................................................................................................................................
Lixian Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................................
Luoyang Suntech Power Co., Ltd ...........................................................................................................................................
Ningbo Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance Co., Ltd ....................................................................................................................
Risen Energy Co., Ltd .............................................................................................................................................................
Shanghai JA Solar Technology Co., Ltd .................................................................................................................................
Shenzhen Glory Industries Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................................................
Shenzhen Topray Solar Co., Ltd .............................................................................................................................................
Sumec Hardware & Tools Co. Ltd ..........................................................................................................................................
Systemes Versilis, Inc .............................................................................................................................................................
Taizhou BD Trade Co., Ltd .....................................................................................................................................................
tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd .................................................................................................................................................
Tianjin Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd .......................................................................................................................
Toenergy Technology Hangzhou Co., Ltd ..............................................................................................................................
Wuxi Suntech Power Co., Ltd .................................................................................................................................................
Yingli Energy (China) Co., Ltd .................................................................................................................................................
Zhejiang Era Solar Technology Co., Ltd .................................................................................................................................
Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co., Ltd ..................................................................................................................................................
Zhejiang Sunflower Light Energy Science & Technology Limited Liability Company ............................................................
Amended Cash Deposit Rates
Commerce will issue revised cash
deposit instructions to U.S. Customs
and Border Protection, based on the
rates indicated above, for all firms that
do not have a superseding cash deposit
rate (e.g., from a subsequent
administrative review).
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: October 23, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020–23959 Filed 10–28–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–201–846]
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Agreement Suspending the
Countervailing Duty Investigation on
Sugar From Mexico: Final Results of
the 2018 Administrative Review
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Commerce) continues to find that the
respondents selected for individual
examination were in compliance with
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:03 Oct 28, 2020
Jkt 253001
the Agreement Suspending the
Countervailing Duty Investigation on
Sugar from Mexico (CVD Agreement), as
amended on June 30, 2017 (collectively,
amended CVD Agreement), and that the
amended CVD Agreement is meeting the
statutory requirements under sections
704(c) and (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act), during the period
of review (POR) from January 1, 2018,
through December 31, 2018.
DATES: Applicable October 29, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sally C. Gannon or David Cordell,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0162 or
(202) 482–0408, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On February 6, 2020, Commerce
published the Preliminary Results of
this administrative review.1 On March
6, 2020, the American Sugar Coalition
and its members (collectively ASC),2 the
1 See Suspension Agreement on Sugar From
Mexico; 2018 Administrative Review of the
Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty
Investigation on Sugar From Mexico (as Amended),
85 FR 6906 (February 6, 2020) (Preliminary
Results).
2 The members of the ASC are as follows:
American Sugar Cane League, American Sugarbeet
Growers Association, American Sugar Refining,
Inc., Florida Sugar Cane League, Rio Grande Valley
Sugar Growers, Inc., Sugar Cane Growers
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
68563
Sfmt 4703
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
4.22
petitioners, filed a request for a hearing,
which they later withdrew.3 On June 24,
2020, Commerce set the briefing
schedule for the final results of this
review.4 On July 6, 2020, the ASC filed
a case brief and the Government of
Mexico (GOM) filed a letter in lieu of a
case brief.5 On July 13, 2020, the
respondents filed a letter in lieu of a
rebuttal brief.6
On April 24, 2020, Commerce tolled
all deadlines in administrative reviews
by 50 days.7 On July 14, 2020,
Commerce extended the deadline for the
Cooperative of Florida, and the United States Beet
Sugar Association.
3 See Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Sugar from Mexico:
Request for Hearing’’ dated March 6, 2020; see also
‘‘Sugar from Mexico: Withdrawal of Request for a
Hearing,’’ dated July 16, 2020.
4 See Memorandum, ‘‘Establishment of Briefing
Schedule for the 2017–2018 Administrative
Reviews of the Agreement Suspending the
Antidumping Investigation on Sugar from Mexico
and the Agreement Suspending the Countervailing
Duty Investigation on Sugar from Mexico,’’ dated
June 24, 2020.
5 See GOM Letter, ‘‘Administrative Review of the
Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty
Investigation on Sugar from Mexico: Letter in Lieu
of Case Brief,’’ dated July 6, 2020; see also ASC Case
Brief, ‘‘Case Brief filed by the American Sugar
Coalition and its Members,’’ dated July 6, 2020.
6 See Letter in Lieu of Rebuttal brief filed by
Ca´mara Nacional de Las Industrias Azucarera y
Alcoholera (Ca´mara) ‘‘Sugar from Mexico—Rebuttal
Brief,’’ dated July 13, 2020.
7 See Memorandum to the Record, from Jeffrey I.
Kessler, ‘‘Tolling of Deadlines for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews in
Response to Operational Adjustments Due to
COVID–19,’’ dated April 24, 2020.
E:\FR\FM\29OCN1.SGM
29OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 210 (Thursday, October 29, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68561-68563]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23959]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 19, 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 2015 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 2015 administrative review of solar cells from
China, and that Commerce is amending the final results.
DATES: Applicable: October 29, 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 23, 2018, Commerce published its final results of the 2015
administrative review of solar cells.\1\ Commerce reached affirmative
determinations for mandatory respondents Canadian Solar Inc. and its
cross-owned affiliates (collectively, Canadian Solar) and 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. Commerce requested a
voluntary remand regarding four issues before the Court: (1) Its
finding, based on adverse facts available, that the respondents used
the Export Buyer's Credit Program; (2) its determination that China's
provision of aluminum extrusions is a specific subsidy; (3) the
decision to average two datasets from IHS technology and U.N. Comtrade
in calculating the benchmark for aluminum extrusions; and (4) the
determination that China's provision of electricity is a specific
subsidy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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; 2015, 83 FR
34828 (July 23, 2018) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum, 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; 2015, 83 FR 54566 (October 30, 2018) (Amended
Final Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 25, 2020, the Court granted Commerce's requests for
voluntary remands, and remanded additional aspects of Commerce's Final
Results.\2\ Specifically, the Court concluded that Commerce did not
adequately explain how the polysilicon market in China is distorted
through GOC intervention and how that distortion affects prices for
imported products.\3\ Additionally, the Court found that Commerce had
misinterpreted evidence regarding the
[[Page 68562]]
inclusion of terminal handling charges in the Xeneta ocean freight
data,\4\ and that Commerce had erred in not fixing an allegedly
mistranslated heading on the GOC's electricity tariff schedules.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Canadian Solar Inc., et al. v. United States, Slip Op.
20-23 (CIT February 25, 2020) (Remand Order).
\3\ Id. at 6 (citing Changzhou 3rd Review 2nd Remand Order, Slip
Op. 19-137 at 20).
\4\ Id. at 9.
\5\ Id. at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce issued its final remand redetermination in June 2020.\6\
In its final remand redetermination, 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 in the third
administrative review.\7\ For aluminum extrusions, Commerce offered
additional explanation regarding the specificity of aluminum extrusions
provided at less than adequate remuneration (LTAR) and revised its
benefit calculations to use the more product-specific annual data from
IHS exclusively rather than averaging them with less specific monthly
Comtrade data.\8\ For electricity, Commerce also fixed a translation
error in the electricity tariff schedules on the record \9\ and offered
additional explanation regarding its conclusion that the provision of
electricity for LTAR is specific, and thus, countervailable.\10\
Commerce also solicited new information regarding the polysilicon
industry in China and placed additional information on the record that
supported its finding that the polysilicon market in China is distorted
by government involvement, such that we cannot rely on prices for
polysilicon imported into China.\11\ Regarding international freight
costs, Commerce revised its benchmark calculations to include the
Xeneta data on the record, in compliance with the Court's order.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Canadian Solar Inc., et al. v. United States, Consol.
Court No. 18-00184; Slip Op. 20-23 (CIT February 25, 2020), ``Final
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand,'' dated June
26, 2020 (Final Remand Redetermination).
\7\ Id. at 11-12.
\8\ Id. at 12-13.
\9\ Id. at 30.
\10\ Id. at 2.
\11\ Id. at 20-30.
\12\ Id. at 30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Court sustained Commerce's remand redetermination in full.\13\
Specifically, the Court found that Commerce's determinations regarding
the Export Buyer's Credit Program, as well as the aluminum extrusions
and polysilicon benchmarks, complied with the options the Court
provided in previous remand orders.\14\ For polysilicon, the Court
explained that Commerce reasonably identified further evidence
supporting its finding of market distortion.\15\ The Court also
concluded that Commerce's decision to average the Xeneta data with the
Maersk data in computing an ocean freight benchmark, and its decision
to correct the translation error on the electricity schedules complied
with the Court's order.\16\ Finally, the Court found that Commerce
appropriately identified the missing information and facts that, when
combined with an adverse inference, supported finding that the
provision of electricity is regionally specific.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. v. United
States, Slip Op. 20-108 (October 19, 2020).
\14\ Id. at 5-6 (Export Buyer's Credit Program) and 6-10
(aluminum extrusions) (citing, e.g., Changzhou Trina Solar Energy
Co., Ltd. v. United States, Slip Op. 20-108 (CIT 2020)).
\15\ Id. at 13-15.
\16\ Id. at 15-16.
\17\ Id. at 12-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\18\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\19\ 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 October
19, 2020 judgment constitutes a final decision of that court that is
not in harmony with Commerce's Final Results and Amended 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\19\ 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 Amended Final Results with respect to Canadian Solar, Trina Solar,
and all other producers and exporters subject to this review. The
revised total subsidy rates for the period January 1, 2015 through
December 31, 2015 are as follows: \20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Second Remand Redetermination at 48.
\21\ See Amended Final Results, 83 FR at 54567. Cross-owned
affiliates are: Canadian Solar Inc.; Canadian Solar Manufacturing
(Luoyang) Inc.; Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc.; CSI
Cells Co., Ltd.; CSI Solar Power (China) Inc.; CSI Solartronics
(Changshu) Co., Ltd.; CSI Solar Technologies Inc.; CSI Solar
Manufacture Inc. (name was changed to CSI New Energy Holding Co.,
Ltd. in July 2015); CSI-GCL Solar Manufacturing (Yancheng) Co.,
Ltd.; Changshu Tegu New Materials Technology Co., Ltd.; Changshu
Tlian Co., Ltd.; and Suzhou Sanysolar Materials Technology Co., Ltd.
\22\ Id. Cross-owned affiliates are: Changzhou Trina Solar
Energy Co., Ltd.; Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science and 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsidy rate
Exporter or producer (percent ad valorem)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canadian Solar Inc. and its Cross-Owned Affiliates 5.02
\21\.............................................
Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. and its 2.93
Cross-Owned Affiliates \22\......................
Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic Technology Co., Ltd. 4.22
Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy Resources Co., 4.22
Ltd..............................................
Beijing Tianneng Yingli New Energy Resources Co., 4.22
Ltd..............................................
Canadian Solar International, Ltd................. 4.22
Chint Solar (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd................... 4.22
Dongguan Sunworth Solar Energy Co., Ltd........... 4.22
ERA Solar Co., Ltd................................ 4.22
ET Solar Energy Limited........................... 4.22
ET Solar Industry Limited......................... 4.22
Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd....... 4.22
Hangzhou Sunny Energy Science and Technology Co., 4.22
Ltd..............................................
Hangzhou Zhejiang University Sunny Energy Science 4.22
and Technology Co., Ltd..........................
Hengdian Group DMEGC Magnetics Co., Ltd........... 4.22
Hengshui Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd..... 4.22
[[Page 68563]]
JA Solar Technology Yangzhou Co., Ltd............. 4.22
Jiangsu High Hope Int'l Group..................... 4.22
Jiawei Solarchina Co., Ltd........................ 4.22
Jiawei Solarchina (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd............. 4.22
JingAo Solar Co., Ltd............................. 4.22
Jinko Solar Co., Ltd.............................. 4.22
Jinko Solar Import and Export Co., Ltd............ 4.22
Jinko Solar International Limited................. 4.22
Jinko Solar (U.S.) Inc............................ 4.22
Lightway Green New Energy Co., Ltd................ 4.22
Lixian Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd....... 4.22
Luoyang Suntech Power Co., Ltd.................... 4.22
Ningbo Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance Co., Ltd.. 4.22
Risen Energy Co., Ltd............................. 4.22
Shanghai JA Solar Technology Co., Ltd............. 4.22
Shenzhen Glory Industries Co., Ltd................ 4.22
Shenzhen Topray Solar Co., Ltd.................... 4.22
Sumec Hardware & Tools Co. Ltd.................... 4.22
Systemes Versilis, Inc............................ 4.22
Taizhou BD Trade Co., Ltd......................... 4.22
tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd..................... 4.22
Tianjin Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd...... 4.22
Toenergy Technology Hangzhou Co., Ltd............. 4.22
Wuxi Suntech Power Co., Ltd....................... 4.22
Yingli Energy (China) Co., Ltd.................... 4.22
Zhejiang Era Solar Technology Co., Ltd............ 4.22
Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co., Ltd..................... 4.22
Zhejiang Sunflower Light Energy Science & 4.22
Technology Limited Liability Company.............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Cash Deposit Rates
Commerce will issue revised cash deposit instructions to U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, based on the rates indicated above, for
all firms that do not have a superseding cash deposit rate (e.g., from
a subsequent administrative review).
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: October 23, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-23959 Filed 10-28-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
