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 the Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results, 73242-73244 [2021-28071]

Download as PDF 73242 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 245 / Monday, December 27, 2021 / Notices timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired (i.e., within 90 days of publication). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), because the respondent did not report entered value, we calculated importerspecific per-unit duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total quantity of those sales. Where either the respondent’s weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent) within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), or an importerspecific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.5 To determine whether an importer-specific per-unit duty assessment rate is de minimis, we calculated an estimated entered value. The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable.6 Consistent with Commerce’s clarification of its assessment practice, for entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Bothwell for which it did not know 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.7 Cash Deposit Requirements khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of forged steel fittings from Taiwan entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results as provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate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 Bothwell will be equal to the weightedaverage dumping margin established in the final results of this review; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this review but 5 See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101, 8102 (February 14, 2012). 6 See section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act. 7 For a full discussion of this practice, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:11 Dec 23, 2021 Jkt 256001 covered in a prior completed segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the companyspecific rate published in the completed segment for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or the original less-than-fairvalue (LTFV) investigation, but the producer is, then the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in the completed segment for the most recent period for the producer of the merchandise; (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 116.17 percent, the allothers rate established in the LTFV investigation.8 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Dated: December 20, 2021. Ryan Majerus, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, Performing the Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. Discussion of the Issue Comment: Whether Commerce Should Request Additional Information From Bothwell V. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2021–28070 Filed 12–23–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Notification to Importers DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE This notice serves as a final 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 POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. International Trade Administration Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders 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), 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 subject to sanction. Notification to Interested Parties We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5). 8 See PO 00000 Order, 83 FR at 48281. Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 [A–570–979] 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 the Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On December 8, 2021, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued its final judgment in Canadian Solar International Limited et al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 17– 00173, sustaining the Department of Commerce (Commerce)’s fourth remand results pertaining to the administrative review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules (solar cells), from the People’s Republic of China (China) covering the period December 1, 2014, through November 30, 2015. Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT’s final judgment is not in harmony with the final results of the 2014–2015 AD administrative review of solar cells from China and that Commerce is amending those final results with respect to the dumping margin assigned to the following companies: (1) The collapsed entity comprising Canadian Solar International Limited; Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc.; Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc.; CSI Cells Co., Ltd.; CSI– GCL Solar Manufacturing (YanCheng) Co., Ltd.; and CSI Solar Power (China) Inc. (collectively, Canadian Solar); (2) the collapsed entity comprising Yingli AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM 27DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 245 / Monday, December 27, 2021 / Notices Energy (China) Company Limited; Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Tianjin Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Hengshui Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Lixian Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic Technology Co., Ltd.; Beijing Tianneng Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; and Shenzhen Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd. (collectively, Yingli); and (3) Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd. DATES: Applicable December 18, 2021. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Pedersen, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2769. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES On June 27, 2017, Commerce published the final results of the 2014– 2015 AD administrative review of solar cells from China. In the Final Results, Commerce selected Thailand as the primary surrogate country and relied on Thai import data to value nitrogen that was used in manufacturing solar cells.1 After correcting a ministerial error in the Final Results (i.e., Commerce inadvertently omitted certain U.S. indirect selling expenses from its calculations), on August 25, 2017, Commerce published the Amended Final Results.2 Respondents, Canadian Solar, Trina,3 Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd., and Ningbo Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance Co., Ltd. (Ningbo Qixin), and domestic interested party, SolarWorld Americas, Inc., challenged Commerce’s Amended Final Results (CIT case numbers 17– 00173, 17–00187, 17–00193, and 17– 00200). Yingli sought to intervene in CIT case number 17–00197. The CIT 1 See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments; 2014–2015, 82 FR 29033 (June 27, 2017) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 13. 2 See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, from the People’s Republic of China: Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014– 2015, 82 FR 40560 (August 25, 2017) (Amended Final Results). 3 We used ‘‘Trina’’ to refer to the following companies that we treated as a single entity: 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.; Turpan Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd.; and Hubei Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:11 Dec 23, 2021 Jkt 256001 consolidated case numbers 17–00173, 17–00187, 17–00193, 17–00197, and 17– 00200 into case number 17–00173 in September 2017. On April 16, 2019, the CIT sustained Commerce’s Amended Final Results with respect to: (1) The surrogates that it selected to value aluminum frames, nitrogen, polysilicon ingots and blocks, and financial ratios; (2) its decision to include import values with zero import quantities in its surrogate value calculations; and (3) its decision to deny Trina an offset for debt restructuring income. However, the CIT remanded the Amended Final Results to Commerce to reconsider, or further explain: (1) The surrogate that it selected to value solar module glass; (2) its application of an adverse inference in selecting partial facts available for use in calculating Canadian Solar’s dumping margin; and (3) its decision to reject Ningbo Qixin’s separate rate application.4 In its first remand redetermination, issued in July 2019, Commerce: (1) Under respectful protest, valued solar module glass using Bulgarian import data, rather than Thai import data; (2) further explained its determination to rely on facts available with an adverse inference in calculating Canadian Solar’s dumping margin; and (3) continued to deny Ningbo Qixin a separate rate after reopening the record to permit Ningbo Qixin to establish that it made a shipment of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR (which it failed to establish).5 The CIT sustained Commerce’s redetermination with respect to the value of solar module glass, and its denial of Ningbo Qixin’s request for a separate rate, but remanded to Commerce its partial adverse facts available determination with respect to Canadian Solar for a second time.6 In its second remand redetermination, issued in February 2020, Commerce reexamined its partial adverse facts available determination with respect to Canadian Solar and, under respectful protest, determined not to apply an adverse inference when selecting from among the facts available in calculating a dumping margin for Canadian Solar.7 4 See Canadian Solar Int’l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 378 F. Supp. 3d 1292 (CIT 2019). 5 See Results of Remand Redetermination, Canadian Solar International Limited, et al. v. United States, Court No. 17–00173, Slip Op. 19–47 (Court of International Trade April 16, 2019), dated July 15, 2019. 6 See Canadian Solar Int’l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 415 F. Supp. 3d 1326 (CIT 2019). 7 See Canadian Solar International Limited, et al. v. United States, Court No. 17–00173, Slip Op. 19– 152 (Court of International Trade December 3, 2019) Final Results of Second Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, dated February 10, 2020. PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 73243 The CIT sustained Commerce’s second redetermination.8 In June 2020, in SolarWorld, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) vacated the CIT’s judgement sustaining Commerce’s use of Thai import data to value nitrogen in the 2013–2014 AD administrative review of solar cells from China and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s opinion.9 Subsequently, the CIT held that SolarWorld constitutes an intervening change in controlling law, and thus, it vacated its earlier judgment sustaining Commerce’s valuation of nitrogen in the 2014–2015 AD administrative review of solar cells from China.10 The CIT also remanded the nitrogen issue in the 2014–2015 AD administrative review of solar cells from China to Commerce for it to adequately explain why the Thai surrogate value for nitrogen was not aberrational or adopt an alternative surrogate value for nitrogen. In its third remand redetermination, issued in January 2021, Commerce continued to value nitrogen using Thai import data. Specifically, in its third remand redetermination Commerce explained why it did not find the average unit value (AUV) of Thai imports of nitrogen during the period of review (POR) to be aberrational, clarified its practice for evaluating whether an AUV from a surrogate country is aberrational, and addressed the discrepancies between U.S. POR exports of nitrogen to Thailand and Thai POR imports of nitrogen from the United States.11 The CIT remanded the case to Commerce for a fourth time, ordering Commerce to reconsider, or further explain, its use of Thai import data to value nitrogen.12 In its final remand redetermination, issued in September 2021, under respectful protest, Commerce used Mexican import data, rather than Thai import data, to value nitrogen.13 The CIT sustained Commerce’s final redetermination.14 8 See Canadian Solar Int’l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 448 F. Supp. 3d 1333 (CIT 2020). 9 See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United States, 962 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2020) (SolarWorld). 10 See Canadian Solar Int’l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 471 F. Supp. 3d 1379 (CIT 2020). 11 See Canadian Solar International Limited, et al. v. United States, Court No. 17–00173, Slip Op. 20– 134 (CIT September 14, 2020), dated January 12, 2021. 12 See Canadian Solar Int’l Limited et al. v. United States, 532 F. Supp. 3d 1273 (CIT 2021). 13 See Canadian Solar International Limited, et al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 17–00173 (CIT July 28, 2021), dated September 27, 2021. 14 See Canadian Solar International Limited et al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 17–00173, Slip Op. 21–166 (CIT Dec. 8, 2021). E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM 27DEN1 73244 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 245 / Monday, December 27, 2021 / Notices Timken Notice as In its decision in clarified by Diamond Sawblades,16 the CAFC 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 a court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with Commerce’s determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s December 8, 2021, judgment constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with Commerce’s Amended Final Results. Thus, this notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES Timken,15 results covering these companies have been published in a subsequent administrative review of the AD order on solar cells from China, we will not issue revised cash deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in connection with this notice. Thus, this notice will not affect the current cash deposit rate of these companies. Liquidation of Suspended Entries At this time, Commerce remains enjoined, by orders of the CIT, from liquidating entries of subject merchandise that was entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period December 1, 2014, through November Amended Final Results 30, 2015 and produced and/or exported Because there is now a final court by the collapsed entity comprising judgment, Commerce is amending its Canadian Solar International Limited; Final Results and Amended Final Canadian Solar Manufacturing Results with respect to Canadian Solar, (Changshu), Inc.; Canadian Solar Yingli and Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd. as Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc.; CSI Cells follows: Co., Ltd.; CSI–GCL Solar Manufacturing (YanCheng) Co., Ltd.; and CSI Solar WeightedPower (China) Inc., or exported by any average of the following entities: (1) the Exporter dumping collapsed entity comprising Yingli margin (percent) Energy (China) Company Limited; Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy Canadian Solar International Resources Co., Ltd.; Tianjin Yingli New Limited; Canadian Solar Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Hengshui Manufacturing (Changshu), Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Inc.; Canadian Solar ManLixian Yingli New Energy Resources ufacturing (Luoyang), Inc.; Co., Ltd.; Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic CSI Cells Co., Ltd.; CSI– Technology Co., Ltd.; Beijing Tianneng GCL Solar Manufacturing (YanCheng) Co., Ltd.; CSI Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Solar Power (China) Inc ... 0.00 Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Yingli Energy (China) ComCo., Ltd.; and Shenzhen Yingli New pany Limited; Baoding Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; (2) Shanghai Tianwei Yingli New Energy BYD Co., Ltd.; (3) Ningbo Qixin Solar Resources Co., Ltd.; Electrical Appliance Co., Ltd.; (4) Chint Tianjin Yingli New Energy Solar (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd.; (5) ERA Solar Resources Co., Ltd.; Co., Ltd.; (6) ET Solar Energy Limited; Hengshui Yingli New En(7) Hangzhou Sunny Energy Science & ergy Resources Co., Ltd.; Technology Co., Ltd.; (8) Hengdian Lixian Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Group DMEGC Magnetics Co., Ltd.; (9) Baoding Jiasheng PhotoJA Solar Technology Yangzhou Co., voltaic Technology Co., Ltd.; (10) Jiawei Solarchina (Shenzhen) Ltd.; Beijing Tianneng Co., Ltd.; (11) Jiawei Solarchina Co., Yingli New Energy ReLtd.; (12) JingAo Solar Co., Ltd.; (13) sources Co., Ltd.; Hainan Lightway Green New Energy Co., Ltd.; Yingli New Energy Re(14) Ningbo ETDZ Holdings, Ltd.; (15) sources Co., Ltd.; Risen Energy Co., Ltd.; (16) Shanghai JA Shenzhen Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd ... 0.00 Solar Technology Co., Ltd.; (17) Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd ........ 0.00 Shenzhen Sungold Solar Co., Ltd.; (18) Shenzhen Topray Solar Co., Ltd.; (19) Star Power International Limited; (20) Cash Deposit Requirements Systemes Versilis, Inc.; (21) Taizhou BD Because Canadian Solar, Yingli, and Trade Co., Ltd.; (22) tenKsolar Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd. all have a (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.; (23) Toenergy superseding cash deposit rate, i.e., final Technology Hangzhou Co., Ltd.; (24) Wuxi Tianran Photovoltaic Co., Ltd.; 15 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (25) Zhejiang Era Solar Technology Co., (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken). Ltd.; and (26) Zhejiang Sunflower Light 16 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Energy Science & Technology Limited Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades). Liability Company. These entries will VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:11 Dec 23, 2021 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 remain enjoined pursuant to the terms of injunctions during the pendency of any appeals process. In the event the CIT’s ruling is not appealed, or, if appealed, upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on any unliquidated entries described in the preceding paragraph, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when either the respondent’s weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis or the importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is not zero or de minimis. Where either the respondent’s weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importerspecific assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent), we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.17 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: December 20, 2021. Ryan Majerus, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, Performing the Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2021–28071 Filed 12–23–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–971] Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, and Intent to Rescind Review, in Part; 2019 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of multilayered wood flooring (wood flooring) from the People’s Republic of China (China). The period of review (POR) is January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results of review. DATES: Applicable December 27, 2021. AGENCY: 17 See E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). 27DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 245 (Monday, December 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73242-73244]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-28071]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-979]


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 the Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 8, 2021, the U.S. Court of International Trade 
(CIT) issued its final judgment in Canadian Solar International Limited 
et al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 17-00173, sustaining the 
Department of Commerce (Commerce)'s fourth remand results pertaining to 
the administrative review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on 
crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into 
modules (solar cells), from the People's Republic of China (China) 
covering the period December 1, 2014, through November 30, 2015. 
Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT's final judgment is not 
in harmony with the final results of the 2014-2015 AD administrative 
review of solar cells from China and that Commerce is amending those 
final results with respect to the dumping margin assigned to the 
following companies: (1) The collapsed entity comprising Canadian Solar 
International Limited; Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc.; 
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc.; CSI Cells Co., Ltd.; CSI-
GCL Solar Manufacturing (YanCheng) Co., Ltd.; and CSI Solar Power 
(China) Inc. (collectively, Canadian Solar); (2) the collapsed entity 
comprising Yingli

[[Page 73243]]

Energy (China) Company Limited; Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy 
Resources Co., Ltd.; Tianjin Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; 
Hengshui Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Lixian Yingli New 
Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic Technology 
Co., Ltd.; Beijing Tianneng Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; 
Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; and Shenzhen Yingli New 
Energy Resources Co., Ltd. (collectively, Yingli); and (3) Shanghai BYD 
Co., Ltd.

DATES: Applicable December 18, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Pedersen, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2769.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 27, 2017, Commerce published the final results of the 2014-
2015 AD administrative review of solar cells from China. In the Final 
Results, Commerce selected Thailand as the primary surrogate country 
and relied on Thai import data to value nitrogen that was used in 
manufacturing solar cells.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not 
Assembled Into Modules, from the People's Republic of China: Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final 
Determination of No Shipments; 2014-2015, 82 FR 29033 (June 27, 
2017) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum at Comment 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After correcting a ministerial error in the Final Results (i.e., 
Commerce inadvertently omitted certain U.S. indirect selling expenses 
from its calculations), on August 25, 2017, Commerce published the 
Amended Final Results.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not 
Assembled Into Modules, from the People's Republic of China: Amended 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015, 
82 FR 40560 (August 25, 2017) (Amended Final Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Respondents, Canadian Solar, Trina,\3\ Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd., and 
Ningbo Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance Co., Ltd. (Ningbo Qixin), and 
domestic interested party, SolarWorld Americas, Inc., challenged 
Commerce's Amended Final Results (CIT case numbers 17-00173, 17-00187, 
17-00193, and 17-00200). Yingli sought to intervene in CIT case number 
17-00197. The CIT consolidated case numbers 17-00173, 17-00187, 17-
00193, 17-00197, and 17-00200 into case number 17-00173 in September 
2017. On April 16, 2019, the CIT sustained Commerce's Amended Final 
Results with respect to: (1) The surrogates that it selected to value 
aluminum frames, nitrogen, polysilicon ingots and blocks, and financial 
ratios; (2) its decision to include import values with zero import 
quantities in its surrogate value calculations; and (3) its decision to 
deny Trina an offset for debt restructuring income. However, the CIT 
remanded the Amended Final Results to Commerce to reconsider, or 
further explain: (1) The surrogate that it selected to value solar 
module glass; (2) its application of an adverse inference in selecting 
partial facts available for use in calculating Canadian Solar's dumping 
margin; and (3) its decision to reject Ningbo Qixin's separate rate 
application.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ We used ``Trina'' to refer to the following companies that 
we treated as a single entity: 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.; Turpan Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd.; 
and Hubei Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd.
    \4\ See Canadian Solar Int'l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 378 
F. Supp. 3d 1292 (CIT 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its first remand redetermination, issued in July 2019, Commerce: 
(1) Under respectful protest, valued solar module glass using Bulgarian 
import data, rather than Thai import data; (2) further explained its 
determination to rely on facts available with an adverse inference in 
calculating Canadian Solar's dumping margin; and (3) continued to deny 
Ningbo Qixin a separate rate after reopening the record to permit 
Ningbo Qixin to establish that it made a shipment of subject 
merchandise to the United States during the POR (which it failed to 
establish).\5\ The CIT sustained Commerce's redetermination with 
respect to the value of solar module glass, and its denial of Ningbo 
Qixin's request for a separate rate, but remanded to Commerce its 
partial adverse facts available determination with respect to Canadian 
Solar for a second time.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Results of Remand Redetermination, Canadian Solar 
International Limited, et al. v. United States, Court No. 17-00173, 
Slip Op. 19-47 (Court of International Trade April 16, 2019), dated 
July 15, 2019.
    \6\ See Canadian Solar Int'l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 415 
F. Supp. 3d 1326 (CIT 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its second remand redetermination, issued in February 2020, 
Commerce reexamined its partial adverse facts available determination 
with respect to Canadian Solar and, under respectful protest, 
determined not to apply an adverse inference when selecting from among 
the facts available in calculating a dumping margin for Canadian 
Solar.\7\ The CIT sustained Commerce's second redetermination.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Canadian Solar International Limited, et al. v. United 
States, Court No. 17-00173, Slip Op. 19-152 (Court of International 
Trade December 3, 2019) Final Results of Second Redetermination 
Pursuant to Court Order, dated February 10, 2020.
    \8\ See Canadian Solar Int'l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 448 
F. Supp. 3d 1333 (CIT 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In June 2020, in SolarWorld, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
Federal Circuit (CAFC) vacated the CIT's judgement sustaining 
Commerce's use of Thai import data to value nitrogen in the 2013-2014 
AD administrative review of solar cells from China and remanded the 
case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion.\9\ 
Subsequently, the CIT held that SolarWorld constitutes an intervening 
change in controlling law, and thus, it vacated its earlier judgment 
sustaining Commerce's valuation of nitrogen in the 2014-2015 AD 
administrative review of solar cells from China.\10\ The CIT also 
remanded the nitrogen issue in the 2014-2015 AD administrative review 
of solar cells from China to Commerce for it to adequately explain why 
the Thai surrogate value for nitrogen was not aberrational or adopt an 
alternative surrogate value for nitrogen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United States, 962 
F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2020) (SolarWorld).
    \10\ See Canadian Solar Int'l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 471 
F. Supp. 3d 1379 (CIT 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its third remand redetermination, issued in January 2021, 
Commerce continued to value nitrogen using Thai import data. 
Specifically, in its third remand redetermination Commerce explained 
why it did not find the average unit value (AUV) of Thai imports of 
nitrogen during the period of review (POR) to be aberrational, 
clarified its practice for evaluating whether an AUV from a surrogate 
country is aberrational, and addressed the discrepancies between U.S. 
POR exports of nitrogen to Thailand and Thai POR imports of nitrogen 
from the United States.\11\ The CIT remanded the case to Commerce for a 
fourth time, ordering Commerce to reconsider, or further explain, its 
use of Thai import data to value nitrogen.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Canadian Solar International Limited, et al. v. United 
States, Court No. 17-00173, Slip Op. 20-134 (CIT September 14, 
2020), dated January 12, 2021.
    \12\ See Canadian Solar Int'l Limited et al. v. United States, 
532 F. Supp. 3d 1273 (CIT 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its final remand redetermination, issued in September 2021, 
under respectful protest, Commerce used Mexican import data, rather 
than Thai import data, to value nitrogen.\13\ The CIT sustained 
Commerce's final redetermination.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Canadian Solar International Limited, et al. v. United 
States, Consol. Court No. 17-00173 (CIT July 28, 2021), dated 
September 27, 2021.
    \14\ See Canadian Solar International Limited et al. v. United 
States, Consol. Court No. 17-00173, Slip Op. 21-166 (CIT Dec. 8, 
2021).

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

[[Page 73244]]

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken,\15\ as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades,\16\ the CAFC 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 a court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with Commerce's 
determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a 
``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's December 8, 2021, judgment 
constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with 
Commerce's Amended Final Results. Thus, this notice is published in 
fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 
1990) (Timken).
    \16\ 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 and Amended Final Results with respect to Canadian 
Solar, Yingli and Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd. as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Weighted-
                                                              average
                        Exporter                              dumping
                                                              margin
                                                             (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canadian Solar International Limited; Canadian Solar                0.00
 Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc.; Canadian Solar
 Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc.; CSI Cells Co., Ltd.; CSI-
 GCL Solar Manufacturing (YanCheng) Co., Ltd.; CSI Solar
 Power (China) Inc......................................
Yingli Energy (China) Company Limited; Baoding Tianwei              0.00
 Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Tianjin Yingli
 New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Hengshui Yingli New
 Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Lixian Yingli New Energy
 Resources Co., Ltd.; Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic
 Technology Co., Ltd.; Beijing Tianneng Yingli New
 Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Hainan Yingli New Energy
 Resources Co., Ltd.; Shenzhen Yingli New Energy
 Resources Co., Ltd.....................................
Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd...................................            0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    Because Canadian Solar, Yingli, and Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd. all have 
a superseding cash deposit rate, i.e., final results covering these 
companies have been published in a subsequent administrative review of 
the AD order on solar cells from China, we will not issue revised cash 
deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in 
connection with this notice. Thus, this notice will not affect the 
current cash deposit rate of these companies.

Liquidation of Suspended Entries

    At this time, Commerce remains enjoined, by orders of the CIT, from 
liquidating entries of subject merchandise that was entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period December 1, 
2014, through November 30, 2015 and produced and/or exported by the 
collapsed entity comprising Canadian Solar International Limited; 
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc.; Canadian Solar 
Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc.; CSI Cells Co., Ltd.; CSI-GCL Solar 
Manufacturing (YanCheng) Co., Ltd.; and CSI Solar Power (China) Inc., 
or exported by any of the following entities: (1) the collapsed entity 
comprising Yingli Energy (China) Company Limited; Baoding Tianwei 
Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Tianjin Yingli New Energy 
Resources Co., Ltd.; Hengshui Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; 
Lixian Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Baoding Jiasheng 
Photovoltaic Technology Co., Ltd.; Beijing Tianneng Yingli New Energy 
Resources Co., Ltd.; Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; and 
Shenzhen Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; (2) Shanghai BYD Co., 
Ltd.; (3) Ningbo Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance Co., Ltd.; (4) Chint 
Solar (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd.; (5) ERA Solar Co., Ltd.; (6) ET Solar 
Energy Limited; (7) Hangzhou Sunny Energy Science & Technology Co., 
Ltd.; (8) Hengdian Group DMEGC Magnetics Co., Ltd.; (9) JA Solar 
Technology Yangzhou Co., Ltd.; (10) Jiawei Solarchina (Shenzhen) Co., 
Ltd.; (11) Jiawei Solarchina Co., Ltd.; (12) JingAo Solar Co., Ltd.; 
(13) Lightway Green New Energy Co., Ltd.; (14) Ningbo ETDZ Holdings, 
Ltd.; (15) Risen Energy Co., Ltd.; (16) Shanghai JA Solar Technology 
Co., Ltd.; (17) Shenzhen Sungold Solar Co., Ltd.; (18) Shenzhen Topray 
Solar Co., Ltd.; (19) Star Power International Limited; (20) Systemes 
Versilis, Inc.; (21) Taizhou BD Trade Co., Ltd.; (22) tenKsolar 
(Shanghai) Co., Ltd.; (23) Toenergy Technology Hangzhou Co., Ltd.; (24) 
Wuxi Tianran Photovoltaic Co., Ltd.; (25) Zhejiang Era Solar Technology 
Co., Ltd.; and (26) Zhejiang Sunflower Light Energy Science & 
Technology Limited Liability Company. These entries will remain 
enjoined pursuant to the terms of injunctions during the pendency of 
any appeals process.
    In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or, if appealed, 
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to 
instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on any unliquidated entries 
described in the preceding paragraph, in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.212(b). We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries covered by this review when either the respondent's 
weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis or the 
importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is not zero or de minimis. 
Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero 
or de minimis, or an importer-specific assessment rate is de minimis 
(i.e., less than 0.5 percent), we will instruct CBP to liquidate the 
appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 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: December 20, 2021.
Ryan Majerus,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, Performing the 
Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Assistant Secretary for 
Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2021-28071 Filed 12-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P