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, 73247-73249 [2021-28072]
Download as PDF
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 245 / Monday, December 27, 2021 / Notices
2. Anhui Yaolong Bamboo & Wood Products
Co. Ltd.
3. Armstrong Wood Products (Kunshan) Co.,
Ltd.
4. Benxi Wood Company
5. Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co., Ltd.
6. Dalian Guhua Wooden Product Co., Ltd.
7. Dalian Huilong Wooden Products Co., Ltd.
8. Dalian Jaenmaken Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
9. Dalian Jiahong Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
10. Dalian Kemian Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
11. Dalian Penghong Floor Products Co., Ltd.
12. Dalian Qianqiu Wooden Product Co., Ltd.
13. Dalian Shumaike Floor Manufacturing
Co., Ltd.
14. Dalian T-Boom Wood Products Co., Ltd.
15. Dongtai Fuan Universal Dynamics, LLC
16. Dun Hua Sen Tai Wood Co., Ltd.
17. Dunhua City Hongyuan Wood Industry
Co., Ltd.
18. Dunhua City Jisen Wood Industry Co.,
Ltd.
19. Dunhua Shengda Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
20. Fine Furniture (Shanghai) Limited
21. Fusong Jinlong Wooden Group Co., Ltd.
22. Fusong Jinqiu Wooden Product Co., Ltd.
23. Fusong Qianqiu Wooden Product Co.,
Ltd.
24. Guangdong Yihua Timber Industry Co.,
Ltd.
25. Guangzhou Homebon Timber
Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
26. HaiLin LinJing Wooden Products Co.,
Ltd.
27. Hangzhou Hanje Tec Company Limited
28. Hangzhou Zhengtian Industrial Co., Ltd.
29. Hunchun Forest Wolf Wooden Industry
Co., Ltd.
30. Hunchun Xingjia Wooden Flooring Inc.
31. Huzhou Chenghang Wood Co., Ltd.
32. Huzhou Fulinmen Imp. & Exp. Co., Ltd.
33. Huzhou Jesonwood Co., Ltd.
34. Huzhou Sunergy World Trade Co., Ltd.
35. Jiangsu Guyu International Trading Co.,
Ltd.
36. Jiangsu Keri Wood Co., Ltd.
37. Jiangsu Mingle Flooring Co., Ltd.
38. Jiangsu Simba Flooring Co., Ltd.
39. Jiashan HuiJiaLe Decoration Material Co.,
Ltd.
40. Jiashan On-Line Lumber Co., Ltd.
41. Jiaxing Brilliant Import & Export Co., Ltd.
42. Jiaxing Hengtong Wood Co., Ltd.
43. Jilin Xinyuan Wooden Industry Co., Ltd.
44. Karly Wood Product Limited
45. Kember Flooring, Inc., a.k.a. Kember
Hardwood Flooring, Inc.
46. Kemian Wood Industry (Kunshan) Co.,
Ltd.
47. Kingman Floors Co., Ltd.
48. Lauzon Distinctive Hardwood Flooring
49. Linyi Anying Wood Co., Ltd.
50. Linyi Youyou Wood Co., Ltd. (successorin-interest to Shanghai Lizhong Wood
Products Co., Ltd.) (a/k/a The Lizhong
Wood Industry Limited Company of
Shanghai)
51. Metropolitan Hardwood Floors, Inc.
52. Pinge Timber Manufacturing (Zhejiang)
Co., Ltd.
53. Power Dekor North America Inc.
54. Scholar Home (Shanghai) New Material
Co. Ltd.
55. Shanghaifloor Timber (Shanghai) Co.,
Ltd.
56. Sino-Maple (Jiangsu) Co., Ltd.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:11 Dec 23, 2021
Jkt 256001
73247
57. Suzhou Dongda Wood Co., Ltd.
58. Tongxiang Jisheng Import and Export Co.,
Ltd.
59. Xiamen Yung De Ornament Co., Ltd.
60. Xuzhou Shenghe Wood Co., Ltd.
61. Yekalon Industry, Inc.
62. Yihua Lifestyle Technology Co., Ltd.
63. Zhejiang Dadongwu GreenHome Wood
Co., Ltd. (a.k.a. Zhejiang Dadongwu
Greenhome Wood Co., Ltd. and Zhejiang
Dadongwu Green Home Wood Co., Ltd.)
64. Zhejiang Fuerjia Wooden Co., Ltd.
65. Zhejiang Jiechen Wood Industry Co., Ltd.
66. Zhejiang Longsen Lumbering Co., Ltd.
67. Zhejiang Simite Wooden Co., Ltd.
(4) Canadian Solar Manufacturing
(Luoyang) Inc.; (5) BYD (Shangluo)
Industrial Co., Ltd.; and (6) 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:
[FR Doc. 2021–28074 Filed 12–23–21; 8:45 am]
Background
On June 20, 2016, Commerce
published the final results of the 2013–
2014 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
Respondents, Trina, Canadian Solar
Inc. et al., BYD (Shangluo) Industrial
Co., Ltd., Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd., and
Yingli,2 and domestic interested party,
SolarWorld Americas, Inc. (SolarWorld),
challenged Commerce’s Final Results
(CIT case numbers 16–00132, 16–00134,
and 16–00135). The CIT consolidated
case numbers 16–00132, 16–00134, and
16–00135 into case number 16–00134 in
October 2016. On October 18, 2017, the
CIT sustained Commerce’s Final Results
with respect to: (1) The surrogates that
it selected to value aluminum frames,
semi-finished polysilicon ingots and
blocks, solar backsheets, nitrogen, and
financial ratios; and (2) its application
of adverse facts available with respect to
unreported factors of production.
However, the CIT remanded the Final
Results to Commerce to reconsider, or
further explain: (1) The surrogates that
it selected to value tempered glass and
scrapped solar cells and modules; and
(2) its decision to include import values
with zero import quantities in its
surrogate value calculations.3
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
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
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 SolarWorld
Americas, Inc., et al. v. United States,
Consol. Court No. 16–00134, 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, 2013, through November
30, 2014. Commerce is notifying the
public that the CIT’s final judgment is
not in harmony with the final results of
the 2013–2014 AD administrative
review of the 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 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.
(collectively, Trina); (2) Canadian Solar
International Limited; (3) Canadian
Solar Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc.;
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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; 2013–2014,
81 FR 39905 (June 20, 2016) (Final Results), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 21.
2 We used ‘‘Yingli’’ to refer to the following
companies that we treated as a single entity: 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.
3 See SolarWorld Americas, Inc.et al. v. United
States, 273 F. Supp. 3d 1254 (CIT 2017).
E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM
27DEN1
73248
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 245 / Monday, December 27, 2021 / Notices
In its first remand redetermination,
issued in January 2018, Commerce
further explained its surrogate value
selections for tempered glass and
scrapped solar cells and modules and
explained why it was appropriate to
include import values with zero import
quantities in its surrogate value
calculations.4 The CIT sustained
Commerce’s redetermination with
respect to including imports with zero
quantities in its surrogate value
calculations, but remanded to
Commerce for a second time its choice
of surrogates to value tempered glass
and scrapped solar cells and modules.5
In its second remand redetermination,
issued in July 2018, Commerce
reexamined its selection of the surrogate
values at issue and, under respectful
protest, valued tempered glass using
Bulgarian import data rather than Thai
import data and valued scrapped solar
cells and modules using a different Thai
tariff system classification number.6 The
CIT sustained Commerce’s second
redetermination.7 Commerce published
a notice of a court decision that was not
in harmony with the final results of its
review on February 1, 2019.8
Trina and SolarWorld appealed
various aspects of the CIT’s final
decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit (CAFC). On June 24,
2020, the CAFC affirmed the CIT’s
judgment: (1) Sustaining Commerce’s
inclusion of imports with zero
quantities in surrogate value
calculations; (2) Commerce’s valuation
of backsheets; and (3) remanding to
Commerce to further justify, or
reconsider, the surrogate that it selected
to value tempered glass. However, the
CAFC vacated the CIT’s judgment
sustaining Commerce’s selection of a
surrogate to value nitrogen and
remanded the case for further
proceedings consistent with its
opinion.9
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.10 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.11
In its final remand redetermination,
issued in September 2021, under
respectful protest, Commerce used
Bulgarian import data, rather than Thai
import data, to value nitrogen.12 The
CIT sustained Commerce’s final
redetermination.13
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,14 as
clarified by Diamond Sawblades,15 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 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 and Timken Notice and
Amended Final Results with respect to
Trina, Canadian Solar International
Limited; Canadian Solar Manufacturing
(Changshu) Inc.; Canadian Solar
Manufacturing (Luoyang) Inc.; BYD
(Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd.; and
Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd. as follows:
Weightedaverage
dumping margin
(percent)
Exporters
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.; Hubei
Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd .........................................................................................................................................................
Canadian Solar International Limited ..............................................................................................................................................
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc ..............................................................................................................................
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang) Inc .................................................................................................................................
BYD (Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd .................................................................................................................................................
Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd ...................................................................................................................................................................
Cash Deposit Requirements
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Because Trina, Canadian Solar
International Limited; Canadian Solar
Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc.;
4 See Final Results of Remand Redetermination,
SolarWorld Americas, Inc. v. United States, Court
No. 16–00134, Slip Op. 17–143 (Court of
International Trade October 18, 2017), dated
January 18, 2018.
5 See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United
States, 320 F. Supp. 3d 1341 (CIT 2018).
6 See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. v. United States,
Court No. 16–00134, Slip Op. 18–53 (Court of
International Trade June 18, 2018) Results of
Second Remand Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Order, dated July 31, 2018.
7 See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United
States, 355 F. Supp. 3d 1306 (CIT 2018).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:11 Dec 23, 2021
Jkt 256001
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Canadian Solar Manufacturing
(Luoyang) Inc.; 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
8 See 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
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 84 FR
1053 (February 1, 2019) (Timken Notice and
Amended Final Results).
9 See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United
States, 962 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2020).
10 See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United
States, Consol. Court No. 16–00134 (CIT September
2, 2020), Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand, dated January 14, 2021.
11 See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United
States, 532 F. Supp. 3d 1266 (CIT 2021).
12 See SolarWorld Americas, Inc., et al. v. United
States, Consol. Court No. 16–00134 (CIT July 28,
2021), Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to
Court Remand, dated September 27, 2021.
13 See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United
States, Consol. Court No. 16–00134, Slip Op. 21–
165 (CIT December 8, 2021).
14 See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken).
15 See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir.
2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM
27DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 245 / Monday, December 27, 2021 / Notices
these companies. Thus, this notice will
not affect the current cash deposit rate
of these companies. However, we will
issue revised cash deposit instructions
to CBP for BYD (Shangluo) Industrial
Co., Ltd.
[FR Doc. 2021–28072 Filed 12–23–21; 8:45 am]
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
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, 2013 through November
30, 2014 and exported by any of the
following companies: (1) Trina; (2)
Canadian Solar International Limited;
(3) Canadian Solar Manufacturing
(Changshu) Inc.; (4) Canadian Solar
Manufacturing (Luoyang) Inc.; (5) BYD
(Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd.; (6)
Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd.; (7) Wuxi
Suntech Power Co., Ltd/Luoyang
Suntech Power Co., Ltd.; (8) Dongguan
Sunworth Solar Energy Co., Ltd.; (9)
ERA Solar Co., Ltd.; (10) ET Solar
Energy Limited; (11) JA Solar
Technology Yangzhou Co., Ltd.; (12)
Jiangsu High Hope Int’l Group; (13)
JingAo Solar Co., Ltd.; (14) Ningbo
Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance Co.,
Ltd.; (15) Shenzhen Glory Industries
Co., Ltd.; and (16) Shenzhen Topray
Solar Co., Ltd. These entries will remain
enjoined pursuant to the terms of the
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.16
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.
16 See
19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:11 Dec 23, 2021
Jkt 256001
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.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–570–054]
Certain Aluminum Foil From the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review; 2019
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Commerce) determines that
countervailable subsidies are being
provided to producers and exporters of
certain aluminum foil (aluminum foil)
from the People’s Republic of China
(China). The period of review (POR) is
January 1, 2019, through December 31,
2019.
DATES: Applicable December 27, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tyler Weinhold, AD/CVD Operations,
Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1121.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
73249
Association Trade Enforcement Working
Group (the petitioners).3
Scope of the Order
The product covered by this order is
aluminum foil from China.4 For a
complete description of the scope of this
order, see the Issues and Decision
Memorandum.5
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in interested parties’
case briefs are addressed in the Issues
and Decision Memorandum. A list of
the issues raised by parties to which
Commerce responded in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum is provided in
Appendix I 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
at https://access.trade.gov/public/
FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on the comments received and
record evidence, we made certain
changes from the Preliminary Results
with respect to the net countervailable
subsidy rate calculated for Xiashun and
assigned to companies not selected for
individual examination in this review.
These changes are explained in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
Background
Methodology
Commerce published the Preliminary
Results of this review on July 7, 2021,
and invited comments from interested
parties.1 On August 13, 2021, we
received timely filed case briefs from
the following interested parties: Jiangsu
Zhongji Lamination Materials Co., Ltd.
(Zhongji); Xiamen Xiashun Aluminum
Foil Co., Ltd. (Xiashun); and the
Government of China (GOC).2 On
August 24, 2021, we received a timely
filed rebuttal brief from the Aluminum
Commerce conducted this review in
accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act). For each of the subsidy programs
found countervailable, we find that
there is a subsidy, i.e., a governmentprovided financial contribution that
gives rise to a benefit to the recipient,
1 See Certain Aluminum Foil from the People’s
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and
Rescission of Review, in Part; 2019, 86 FR 35735
(July 7, 2021) (Preliminary Results), and
accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
2 See Zhongji’s Case Brief, ‘‘Certain Aluminum
Foil from the People’s Republic of China: Case
Brief,’’ dated August 13, 2021 (Zhonji’s Case Brief);
Xiashun’s Case Brief, ‘‘Certain Aluminum Foil from
The People’s Republic of China—Case Brief,’’ dated
August 13, 2021 (Xiashun’s Case Brief); and GOC’s
Case Brief, ‘‘Certain Aluminum Foil from the
People’s Republic of China: Case Brief,’’ dated
August 13, 2021 (GOC’s Case Brief).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3 See Petitioner’s Rebuttal Brief, ‘‘Certain
Aluminum Foil from The People’s Republic Of
China . . . Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief,’’ dated
August 24, 2021 (the Petitioner’s Rebuttal Brief).
Individual Members of the Aluminum Association
Trade Enforcement Working Group include: JW
Aluminum Company, Novelis Corporation, and
Reynolds consumer Products LLC.
4 See Certain Aluminum Foil from the People’s
Republic of China: Amended Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination and
Countervailing Duty Order, 76 FR 17360 (April 19,
2018) (Order).
5 See Memorandum, ‘‘Decision Memorandum for
the Final Results of the 2019 Administrative Review
of the Countervailing Duty Order on Certain
Aluminum Foil from the People’s Republic of
China,’’ dated concurrently with, and hereby
adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM
27DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 245 (Monday, December 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73247-73249]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-28072]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 SolarWorld Americas, Inc., et al. v.
United States, Consol. Court No. 16-00134, 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, 2013, through November 30, 2014. Commerce is
notifying the public that the CIT's final judgment is not in harmony
with the final results of the 2013-2014 AD administrative review of the
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 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. (collectively, Trina); (2) Canadian
Solar International Limited; (3) Canadian Solar Manufacturing
(Changshu) Inc.; (4) Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang) Inc.; (5)
BYD (Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd.; and (6) 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 20, 2016, Commerce published the final results of the 2013-
2014 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; 2013-2014, 81 FR 39905 (June 20,
2016) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Respondents, Trina, Canadian Solar Inc. et al., BYD (Shangluo)
Industrial Co., Ltd., Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd., and Yingli,\2\ and
domestic interested party, SolarWorld Americas, Inc. (SolarWorld),
challenged Commerce's Final Results (CIT case numbers 16-00132, 16-
00134, and 16-00135). The CIT consolidated case numbers 16-00132, 16-
00134, and 16-00135 into case number 16-00134 in October 2016. On
October 18, 2017, the CIT sustained Commerce's Final Results with
respect to: (1) The surrogates that it selected to value aluminum
frames, semi-finished polysilicon ingots and blocks, solar backsheets,
nitrogen, and financial ratios; and (2) its application of adverse
facts available with respect to unreported factors of production.
However, the CIT remanded the Final Results to Commerce to reconsider,
or further explain: (1) The surrogates that it selected to value
tempered glass and scrapped solar cells and modules; and (2) its
decision to include import values with zero import quantities in its
surrogate value calculations.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ We used ``Yingli'' to refer to the following companies that
we treated as a single entity: 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.
\3\ See SolarWorld Americas, Inc.et al. v. United States, 273 F.
Supp. 3d 1254 (CIT 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73248]]
In its first remand redetermination, issued in January 2018,
Commerce further explained its surrogate value selections for tempered
glass and scrapped solar cells and modules and explained why it was
appropriate to include import values with zero import quantities in its
surrogate value calculations.\4\ The CIT sustained Commerce's
redetermination with respect to including imports with zero quantities
in its surrogate value calculations, but remanded to Commerce for a
second time its choice of surrogates to value tempered glass and
scrapped solar cells and modules.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Final Results of Remand Redetermination, SolarWorld
Americas, Inc. v. United States, Court No. 16-00134, Slip Op. 17-143
(Court of International Trade October 18, 2017), dated January 18,
2018.
\5\ See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United States, 320
F. Supp. 3d 1341 (CIT 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its second remand redetermination, issued in July 2018, Commerce
reexamined its selection of the surrogate values at issue and, under
respectful protest, valued tempered glass using Bulgarian import data
rather than Thai import data and valued scrapped solar cells and
modules using a different Thai tariff system classification number.\6\
The CIT sustained Commerce's second redetermination.\7\ Commerce
published a notice of a court decision that was not in harmony with the
final results of its review on February 1, 2019.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. v. United States, Court No.
16-00134, Slip Op. 18-53 (Court of International Trade June 18,
2018) Results of Second Remand Redetermination Pursuant to Court
Order, dated July 31, 2018.
\7\ See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United States, 355
F. Supp. 3d 1306 (CIT 2018).
\8\ See 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 Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 84 FR 1053 (February 1, 2019) (Timken
Notice and Amended Final Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trina and SolarWorld appealed various aspects of the CIT's final
decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC).
On June 24, 2020, the CAFC affirmed the CIT's judgment: (1) Sustaining
Commerce's inclusion of imports with zero quantities in surrogate value
calculations; (2) Commerce's valuation of backsheets; and (3) remanding
to Commerce to further justify, or reconsider, the surrogate that it
selected to value tempered glass. However, the CAFC vacated the CIT's
judgment sustaining Commerce's selection of a surrogate to value
nitrogen and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with
its opinion.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United States, 962
F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 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.\10\ 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.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United States,
Consol. Court No. 16-00134 (CIT September 2, 2020), Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, dated January 14, 2021.
\11\ See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United States, 532
F. Supp. 3d 1266 (CIT 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its final remand redetermination, issued in September 2021,
under respectful protest, Commerce used Bulgarian import data, rather
than Thai import data, to value nitrogen.\12\ The CIT sustained
Commerce's final redetermination.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See SolarWorld Americas, Inc., et al. v. United States,
Consol. Court No. 16-00134 (CIT July 28, 2021), Final Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, dated September 27, 2021.
\13\ See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United States,
Consol. Court No. 16-00134, Slip Op. 21-165 (CIT December 8, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\14\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\15\ 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 Final Results. Thus, this notice is published in fulfillment
of the publication requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\15\ 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 Timken Notice and Amended Final Results with
respect to Trina, Canadian Solar International Limited; Canadian Solar
Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc.; Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang)
Inc.; BYD (Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd.; and Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd.
as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
Exporters average dumping
margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd.; Trina Solar 0.00
(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.; Hubei Trina Solar
Energy Co., Ltd......................................
Canadian Solar International Limited.................. 0.00
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc........... 0.00
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang) Inc............ 0.00
BYD (Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd.................... 0.00
Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd................................. 0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
Because Trina, Canadian Solar International Limited; Canadian Solar
Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc.; Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang)
Inc.; 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
[[Page 73249]]
these companies. Thus, this notice will not affect the current cash
deposit rate of these companies. However, we will issue revised cash
deposit instructions to CBP for BYD (Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd.
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,
2013 through November 30, 2014 and exported by any of the following
companies: (1) Trina; (2) Canadian Solar International Limited; (3)
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu) Inc.; (4) Canadian Solar
Manufacturing (Luoyang) Inc.; (5) BYD (Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd.;
(6) Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd.; (7) Wuxi Suntech Power Co., Ltd/Luoyang
Suntech Power Co., Ltd.; (8) Dongguan Sunworth Solar Energy Co., Ltd.;
(9) ERA Solar Co., Ltd.; (10) ET Solar Energy Limited; (11) JA Solar
Technology Yangzhou Co., Ltd.; (12) Jiangsu High Hope Int'l Group; (13)
JingAo Solar Co., Ltd.; (14) Ningbo Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance
Co., Ltd.; (15) Shenzhen Glory Industries Co., Ltd.; and (16) Shenzhen
Topray Solar Co., Ltd. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant to
the terms of the 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.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 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. 2021-28072 Filed 12-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P