Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of Antidumping Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results, 20659-20661 [2021-08259]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 21, 2021 / Notices
A copy of the application will be
available for public inspection in the
‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the FTZ
Board’s website, which is accessible via
www.trade.gov/ftz.
For further information, contact
Qahira El-Amin at Qahira.El-Amin@
trade.gov.
Dated: April 15, 2021.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021–08260 Filed 4–20–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–533–885, C–533–886]
Polyester Textured Yarn from India:
Rescission of Antidumping Duty and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews; 2019–2020
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Commerce) is rescinding the
administrative reviews of the
antidumping duty (AD) and
countervailing duty (CVD) orders on
polyester textured yarn from India for
the periods of review (POR) July 1,
2019, through December 31, 2020 (AD)
and May 3, 2019, through December 31,
2020 (CVD), based on the timely
withdrawal of the requests for review.
DATES: Applicable April 21, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Samantha Kinney (AD) or Janae Martin
(CVD), AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2285 or
(202) 482–0238, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Background
On January 5, 2021, Commerce
published in the Federal Register a
notice of opportunity to request
administrative reviews of the AD and
CVD orders on polyester textured yarn
from India.1 On February 1, 2021,
Sanathan Textiles Private Limited
(Sanathan) requested administrative
reviews of the AD and CVD orders for
the PORs July 1, 2019, through
December 31, 2020 (AD), and May 3,
1 See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order,
Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
to Request Administrative Review, 86 FR 291
(January 5, 2021).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:12 Apr 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
2019, through December 31, 2020
(CVD).2 Pursuant to these requests,
Commerce initiated AD and CVD
administrative reviews with respect to
Sanathan, in accordance with section
751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act).3 Subsequent to the
initiation of these administrative
reviews, Sanathan timely withdrew its
requests for these reviews.4 No other
party requested an administrative
review of the AD or CVD order on
polyester textured yarn from India.
Rescission of Administrative Reviews
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1),
Commerce will rescind an
administrative review, in whole or in
part, if the party that requested a review
withdraws its request within 90 days of
the date of publication of the notice of
initiation. As stated above, Sanathan
withdrew its requests for administrative
reviews by the established 90-day
deadline and there were no other
requests for review. As a result,
Commerce is rescinding these reviews
in their entirety, in accordance with 19
CFR 351.213(d)(1).
Assessment
Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) to assess
antidumping and countervailing duties
on all appropriate entries at rates equal
to the cash deposit of estimated
antidumping and countervailing duties
required at the time of entry, or
withdrawal from warehouse, for
consumption, during the periods July 1,
2019, through December 31, 2020 (AD),
and May 3, 2019, through December 31,
2020 (CVD), in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(c)(1)(i). Commerce intends to
issue assessment instructions to CBP no
earlier than 35 days after publication of
this notice in the Federal Register.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder
to importers of their responsibility
under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a
2 See Sanathan’s Letters, ‘‘Polyester Texture yarn
from India (A–533–885)—Request for
Administrative Review of Anti-dumping duty order
on behalf of Sanathan Textiles,’’ dated February 1,
2021; and ‘‘Polyester Texture yarn from India (C–
533–886)—Request for Administrative Review of
Countervailing duty order on behalf of Sanathan
Textiles,’’ dated February 1, 2021.
3 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 86 FR
12599 (March 4, 2021).
4 See Sanathan’s Letters, ‘‘Polyester Texture yarn
from India (A–533–885)—Withdrawal Request for
Administrative Review of Anti-dumping duty order
on behalf of Sanathan Textiles,’’ dated March 12,
2021; and ‘‘Polyester Texture yarn from India (C–
533–886)—Withdrawal Request of Request for
Administrative Review of Countervailing duty order
on behalf of Sanathan Textiles,’’ dated March 12,
2021.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20659
certificate regarding the reimbursement
of antidumping and countervailing
duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this review
period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the
presumption that reimbursement of
antidumping and countervailing duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of doubled antidumping and
countervailing duties.
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a final
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),
which continues to govern business
proprietary information in this segment
of the proceeding. Timely 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
violation which is subject to sanction.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i)(l) of the Act, and 19 CFR
351.213(d)(4).
Dated: April 16, 2021.
James Maeder,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2021–08257 Filed 4–20–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–016]
Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light
Truck Tires From the People’s
Republic of China: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony With the
Results of Antidumping Administrative
Review; Notice of Amended Final
Results
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On January 29, 2021, the U.S.
Court of International Trade (CIT)
issued its final judgment in Shandong
Yongtai Group Co., Ltd. v. United
States, Consol. Court No. 18–00077,
sustaining the Department of Commerce
(Commerce)’s first remand results
pertaining to the administrative review
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\21APN1.SGM
21APN1
20660
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 21, 2021 / Notices
of the antidumping duty (AD) order on
certain passenger vehicle and light truck
tires (passenger tires) from the People’s
Republic of China (China) covering the
period of review (POR) January 27,
2015, through July 31, 2016. Commerce
is notifying the public that the CIT’s
final judgment is not in harmony with
Commerce’s final results of the
administrative review, and that
Commerce is amending the final results
with respect to the dumping margin
assigned to Shandong Yongtai Chemical
Co., Ltd. and its successor-in-interest
Shandong Yongtai Group Co., Ltd.
DATES: Applicable February 8, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni
Page, 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) 482–1398.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 16, 2018, Commerce
published its Final Results in the 2015–
2016 AD administrative review of
passenger tires from China.1 In that
proceeding, Commerce granted separate
rate status to Shandong Yongtai Group
Co., Ltd. (Yongtai Group), but did not
grant separate rate status to Shandong
Yongtai Chemical Co., Ltd. (Yongtai
Chemical) because Yongtai Group did
not identify any record information that
would allow Commerce to determine
that Yongtai Chemical merited a
separate rate or whether Yongtai Group
was the successor-in-interest of Yongtai
Chemical.2 Yongtai Group argued that it
was the successor-in-interest of Yongtai
Chemical and that Commerce should
have granted separate status to Yongtai
Chemical as well.3
Yongtai Group appealed Commerce’s
Final Results. On November 27, 2019,
the CIT remanded the Final Results to
Commerce to further consider the
separate rate status of Yongtai Chemical
and/or to consider whether Yongtai
Group was the successor-in-interest to
Yongtai Chemical.4 Following the CIT’s
Passenger Tires AR1 Remand Order,
Commerce determined it was
appropriate to reopen the record for this
remand to solicit information from
Yongtai Group to determine whether it
is the successor-in-interest to Yongtai
Chemical. On January 28, 2020,
Commerce issued a supplemental
questionnaire to Yongtai Group
soliciting information needed to
perform our successor-in-interest
analysis.5 On February 11, 2020,
Yongtai Group filed its response to
Commerce’s questionnaire.6
In its final remand redetermination,
issued in March 2020, Commerce
determined, after reconsidering the
record evidence submitted by Yongtai
Group in its separate rate application
and in the Yongtai Group Remand SQR,
that there was sufficient information on
the record to find Yongtai Group to be
the successor-in-interest to Yongtai
Chemical and grant separate rate status
to Yongtai Chemical.7 The CIT
sustained Commerce’s final
redetermination and severed this action
from the consolidated action with
Qingdao Sentury Co. Ltd. v. United
States, Court No. 18–00079 and Pirelli
Tyre Co. Ltd. v. United States, Court No.
18–00080.8
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,9 as clarified
by Diamond Sawblades,10 the Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit held
that, pursuant to section 516A(c) and (e)
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
January 29, 2021, judgment constitutes
a final decision of the CIT that is not in
harmony with Commerce’s Final
Results. Thus, this notice is published
in fulfillment of the publication
requirements of Timken.
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court
judgment, Commerce is amending its
Final Results with respect to Yongtai
Group and Yongtai Chemical as follows:
Exporter or producer
Shandong Yongtai Group Co., Ltd. formerly known as Shandong Yongtai Chemical Co., Ltd .............................
Estimated
weighted-average dumping
margin from
final determination (percent)
Estimated
weighted-average dumping
margin for remand redetermination (percent)
*
2.96
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
* Only Yongtai Group received a separate rate of 2.96 percent in the Final Results.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
Commerce will issue revised cash
deposit instructions to U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP).
Previously, the CIT enjoined
Commerce from liquidating entries that
were: (1) Exported by Shandong Yongtai
Chemical Co., Ltd.; (2) the subject of the
United States Department of
Commerce’s final determination in
certain passenger vehicle and light truck
tires from the PRC, 83 FR 11,690 (Mar.
16, 2018); (3) entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse for consumption, on or
after: (a) January 27, 2015, up to and
including July 25, 2015; and (b) August
6, 2015, up to and including July 31,
2016. Because the CIT’s ruling was not
1 See Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck
Tires from the People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and Final Determination of No Shipments;
2015–2016, 83 FR 11690 (March 16, 2018) (Final
Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum (IDM).
2 See Final Results IDM at Comment 12.
3 Id.
4 See Shandong Yongtai Group Co. v. United
States, 415 F. Supp. 3d. 1303 (CIT 2019) (Passenger
Tires AR1 Remand Order).
5 See Yongtai Group’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Passenger
Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People’s
Republic of China Supplemental Questionnaire Re:
Shandong Yongtai Group Co., Ltd.,’’ dated January
28, 2020.
6 See Yongtai Group’s Letter, ‘‘Supplemental
Questionnaire Response of Shandong Yongtai
Group Co., Ltd. (formerly Shandong Yongtai
Chemical Co., Ltd.), First Administrative Review of
the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Passenger
Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the People’s
Republic of China (REMAND),’’ dated February 11,
2020 (Yongtai Group Remand SQR).
7 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand, Shandong Yongtai Group Co. v.
United States, Consol. Ct. No. 18–00077, Slip Op.
19–150 (March 3, 2020).
8 See Shandong Yongtai Group Co. v. United
States, Consol. Ct. No. 18–00077, CIT Slip Op. 21–
10 (January 29, 2021).
9 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).
10 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir.
2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:12 Apr 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\21APN1.SGM
21APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 75 / Wednesday, April 21, 2021 / Notices
appealed and was upheld by a final and
conclusive court decision, the
injunction enjoying liquidation of such
entries has dissolved. Commerce
intends to instruct CBP to assess
antidumping duties on such entries, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). We
will instruct CBP to assess antidumping
duties on all such entries when the
importer-specific ad valorem assessment
rate is not zero or de minimis. Where an
import-specific ad valorem assessment
rate is zero or de minimis,11 we will
instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate
entries without regard to antidumping
duties.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 516A(c) and
(e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: April 14, 2021.
Christian Marsh,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement
and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2021–08259 Filed 4–20–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–570–094]
Refillable Stainless Steel Kegs From
the People’s Republic of China;
Rescission of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review; 2019
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Commerce) is rescinding the first
administrative review of the
countervailing duty (CVD) order on
refillable stainless steel kegs from the
People’s Republic of China (China) for
the period of review (POR) December
13, 2019, through December 31, 2019,
based on the timely withdrawal of the
request for review.
DATES: Applicable April 21, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Theodore Pearson, AD/CVD Operations,
Office I, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2631.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Background
On December 2, 2020, Commerce
published a notice of opportunity to
request an administrative review of the
11 See
19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:12 Apr 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
CVD order on refillable stainless steel
kegs from China for the POR December
13, 2019, through December 31, 2019.1
In accordance with section 751(a) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
and 19 CFR 351.213(b), Commerce
received a timely-filed request for an
administrative review from Ningbo
Master International Trade Co., Ltd.
(Ningbo Master.2 Commerce received no
other requests for administrative review.
On February 4, 2021, pursuant to this
request and in accordance with 19 CFR
351.221(c)(1)(i), Commerce published a
notice initiating an administrative
review of the CVD order on refillable
stainless steel kegs from China with
respect to Ningbo Master.3 On March
30, 2021, Ningbo Master withdrew its
request for an administrative review.4
Rescission of Review
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1),
Commerce will rescind an
administrative review, in whole or in
part, if the party or parties that
requested a review withdraws the
request within 90 days of the
publication date of the notice of
initiation of the requested review. As
noted above, Ningbo Master withdrew
its request for review within 90 days of
the publication date of the notice of
initiation. No other parties requested an
administrative review of the order.
Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.213(d)(1), we are rescinding this in
its entirety.
Assessment
Commerce intends to instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
assess countervailing duties on all
appropriate entries of refillable stainless
steel kegs from China during the POR.
Countervailing duties shall be assessed
at rates equal to the cash deposit of
estimated countervailing duties required
at the time of entry, or withdrawal from
warehouse, for consumption in
accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(c)(1)(i). Commerce intends to
issue appropriate assessment
instructions to CBP no earlier than 35
days after the date of publication of this
notice in the Federal Register.
1 See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order,
Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
to Request Administrative Review, 85 FR 77431
(December 2, 2020).
2 See Ningbo Master’s Letter, ‘‘Refillable Stainless
Steel Kegs from the People’s Republic of China—
Request for Administrative Review,’’ dated
December 31, 2020.
3 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 86 FR
8166 (February 4, 2021).
4 See Ningbo Master’s Letter, ‘‘Refillable Stainless
Steel Kegs from the People’s Republic of China—
Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review,’’
dated March 30, 2021.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20661
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Orders
This notice serves as a reminder to all
parties subject to administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return/
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 to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR
351.213(d)(4).
Dated: April 16, 2021.
James Maeder,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2021–08243 Filed 4–20–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
Review and Approval; Comment
Request; Application and Reports for
Scientific Research and Enhancement
Permits Under the Endangered
Species Act
National Oceanic &
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of information collection,
request for comment.
AGENCY:
The Department of
Commerce, in accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), invites the general public and
other Federal agencies to comment on
proposed, and continuing information
collections, which helps us assess the
impact of our information collection
requirements and minimize the public’s
reporting burden. The purpose of this
notice is to allow for 60 days of public
comment preceding submission of the
collection to OMB.
DATES: To ensure consideration,
comments regarding this proposed
information collection must be received
on or before June 21, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit written comments to
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\21APN1.SGM
21APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 21, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20659-20661]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08259]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-016]
Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From the People's
Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the
Results of Antidumping Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final
Results
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On January 29, 2021, the U.S. Court of International Trade
(CIT) issued its final judgment in Shandong Yongtai Group Co., Ltd. v.
United States, Consol. Court No. 18-00077, sustaining the Department of
Commerce (Commerce)'s first remand results pertaining to the
administrative review
[[Page 20660]]
of the antidumping duty (AD) order on certain passenger vehicle and
light truck tires (passenger tires) from the People's Republic of China
(China) covering the period of review (POR) January 27, 2015, through
July 31, 2016. Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT's final
judgment is not in harmony with Commerce's final results of the
administrative review, and that Commerce is amending the final results
with respect to the dumping margin assigned to Shandong Yongtai
Chemical Co., Ltd. and its successor-in-interest Shandong Yongtai Group
Co., Ltd.
DATES: Applicable February 8, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni Page, 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) 482-1398.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 16, 2018, Commerce published its Final Results in the
2015-2016 AD administrative review of passenger tires from China.\1\ In
that proceeding, Commerce granted separate rate status to Shandong
Yongtai Group Co., Ltd. (Yongtai Group), but did not grant separate
rate status to Shandong Yongtai Chemical Co., Ltd. (Yongtai Chemical)
because Yongtai Group did not identify any record information that
would allow Commerce to determine that Yongtai Chemical merited a
separate rate or whether Yongtai Group was the successor-in-interest of
Yongtai Chemical.\2\ Yongtai Group argued that it was the successor-in-
interest of Yongtai Chemical and that Commerce should have granted
separate status to Yongtai Chemical as well.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires from the
People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments; 2015-
2016, 83 FR 11690 (March 16, 2018) (Final Results), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM).
\2\ See Final Results IDM at Comment 12.
\3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yongtai Group appealed Commerce's Final Results. On November 27,
2019, the CIT remanded the Final Results to Commerce to further
consider the separate rate status of Yongtai Chemical and/or to
consider whether Yongtai Group was the successor-in-interest to Yongtai
Chemical.\4\ Following the CIT's Passenger Tires AR1 Remand Order,
Commerce determined it was appropriate to reopen the record for this
remand to solicit information from Yongtai Group to determine whether
it is the successor-in-interest to Yongtai Chemical. On January 28,
2020, Commerce issued a supplemental questionnaire to Yongtai Group
soliciting information needed to perform our successor-in-interest
analysis.\5\ On February 11, 2020, Yongtai Group filed its response to
Commerce's questionnaire.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Shandong Yongtai Group Co. v. United States, 415 F.
Supp. 3d. 1303 (CIT 2019) (Passenger Tires AR1 Remand Order).
\5\ See Yongtai Group's Letter, ``Certain Passenger Vehicle and
Light Truck Tires from the People's Republic of China Supplemental
Questionnaire Re: Shandong Yongtai Group Co., Ltd.,'' dated January
28, 2020.
\6\ See Yongtai Group's Letter, ``Supplemental Questionnaire
Response of Shandong Yongtai Group Co., Ltd. (formerly Shandong
Yongtai Chemical Co., Ltd.), First Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck
Tires from the People's Republic of China (REMAND),'' dated February
11, 2020 (Yongtai Group Remand SQR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its final remand redetermination, issued in March 2020, Commerce
determined, after reconsidering the record evidence submitted by
Yongtai Group in its separate rate application and in the Yongtai Group
Remand SQR, that there was sufficient information on the record to find
Yongtai Group to be the successor-in-interest to Yongtai Chemical and
grant separate rate status to Yongtai Chemical.\7\ The CIT sustained
Commerce's final redetermination and severed this action from the
consolidated action with Qingdao Sentury Co. Ltd. v. United States,
Court No. 18-00079 and Pirelli Tyre Co. Ltd. v. United States, Court
No. 18-00080.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Remand, Shandong Yongtai Group Co. v. United States, Consol. Ct. No.
18-00077, Slip Op. 19-150 (March 3, 2020).
\8\ See Shandong Yongtai Group Co. v. United States, Consol. Ct.
No. 18-00077, CIT Slip Op. 21-10 (January 29, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\9\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\10\ the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that,
pursuant to section 516A(c) and (e) 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 January 29, 2021, judgment constitutes a final decision of
the CIT that is not in harmony with Commerce's Final Results. Thus,
this notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements
of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\10\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending
its Final Results with respect to Yongtai Group and Yongtai Chemical as
follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Estimated
weighted- weighted-
average average dumping
Exporter or producer dumping margin margin for
from final remand
determination redetermination
(percent) (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shandong Yongtai Group Co., Ltd. * 2.96
formerly known as Shandong Yongtai
Chemical Co., Ltd.....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Only Yongtai Group received a separate rate of 2.96 percent in the
Final Results.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Commerce will issue revised cash deposit instructions to U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
Previously, the CIT enjoined Commerce from liquidating entries that
were: (1) Exported by Shandong Yongtai Chemical Co., Ltd.; (2) the
subject of the United States Department of Commerce's final
determination in certain passenger vehicle and light truck tires from
the PRC, 83 FR 11,690 (Mar. 16, 2018); (3) entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse for consumption, on or after: (a) January 27, 2015, up to and
including July 25, 2015; and (b) August 6, 2015, up to and including
July 31, 2016. Because the CIT's ruling was not
[[Page 20661]]
appealed and was upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, the
injunction enjoying liquidation of such entries has dissolved. Commerce
intends to instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on such entries,
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). We will instruct CBP to assess
antidumping duties on all such entries when the importer-specific ad
valorem assessment rate is not zero or de minimis. Where an import-
specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero or de minimis,\11\ we will
instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to
antidumping duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: April 14, 2021.
Christian Marsh,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2021-08259 Filed 4-20-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P