Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet From Germany: Preliminary Results of Changed Circumstances Review, and Intent To Revoke the Antidumping Duty Order, in Part, 7686-7689 [2024-02231]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
7686
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices
publication of the final results of this
review in the Federal Register. If a
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).
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this
administrative review for all shipments
of the subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date, as provided for by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash
deposit rate for SRF, Jindal, and
Polyplex will be zero, the rate
established in the final results of this
review; (2) for previously reviewed or
investigated companies not covered in
this review, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the company-specific rate
published for the most recent period; (3)
if the exporter is not a firm covered in
this or any previous review or in the
original less-than-fair-value (LTFV)
investigation but the manufacturer is,
the cash deposit rate will be the rate
established for the most recent period
for the manufacturer of the
merchandise; and (4) if neither the
exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm
covered in this or any previous review
or the LTFV investigation, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the allothers rate of 5.71 percent, which is the
all-others rate established by Commerce
in the LTFV investigation.16 These cash
deposit requirements, when imposed,
shall remain in effect until further
notice.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
This notice also 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 ADs
prior to liquidation of the relevant
entries during this review period.
Failure to comply with this requirement
could result in the Commerce’s
presumption that reimbursement of ADs
16 See Order at 44176 (showing the dumping
margin computed for all other producers/exporters
as 24.14 percent); and Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip
from India, 67 FR 34899, 34901 (May 16, 2002)
(showing an adjustment of 18.43 percent for export
subsidies found in the companion countervailing
duty investigation). The cash deposit rate for all
other exporters is the net of these figures (i.e., 5.71
percent).
17:56 Feb 02, 2024
Administrative Protective Order
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 the terms of an APO is
a sanctionable violation.
Notification to Interested Parties
These results are being issued and
published in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19
CFR 351.221(b)(5) and 19 CFR
351.213(h)(2).
Dated: January 29, 2024.
Abdelali Elouaradia,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement
and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2024–02181 Filed 2–2–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–428–849]
Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet From
Germany: Preliminary Results of
Changed Circumstances Review, and
Intent To Revoke the Antidumping
Duty Order, in Part
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of
Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily
intends to revoke, in part, the
antidumping duty (AD) order on
common alloy aluminum sheet (CAAS)
from Germany with respect to certain
lithographic-grade aluminum sheet.
Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
DATES: Applicable February 5, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephanie Trejo, 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) 482–4390.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Notification to Importers
VerDate Sep<11>2014
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double ADs.
Jkt 262001
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Background
On April 27, 2021, Commerce
published the AD order on common
alloy aluminum sheet from Germany.1
On May 9, 2023, Eastman Kodak
Company (Kodak), a U.S. importer of
subject merchandise, requested that
Commerce conduct a changed
circumstances review (CCR), and
revoke, in part, the CAAS AD Germany
Order with respect to certain
lithographic-grade aluminum sheet
pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
and 19 CFR 351.216(b).2 On July 24,
2023, Commerce issued proposed
partial revocation language for the scope
in which it omitted references to enduse certificates which had been
included by Kodak and solicited
interested parties comments on that
language.3 On July 31, 2023, Commerce
initiated the requested CCR.4 In the
Initiation Notice, Commerce invited
interested parties to provide comments
and/or factual information regarding the
CCR, including comments on industry
support and the proposed partial
revocation language.5 On August 30,
2023, the Aluminum Association
Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet Trade
Enforcement Working Group and its
individual members (Aluminum
Association) and Kodak commented on
the CCR.6 On September 6, 2023, Kodak
responded to the Aluminum
Association’s comments.7
Scope of the CAAS AD Germany Order
The products covered by the Order
are common alloy aluminum sheet,
which is a flat-rolled aluminum product
1 See Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet from
Bahrain, Brazil, Croatia, Egypt, Germany, India,
Indonesia, Italy, Oman, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia,
South Africa, Spain, Taiwan and the Republic of
Turkey: Antidumping Duty Orders, 86 FR 22139
(April 27, 2021) (CAAS AD Germany Order or
Order).
2 See Kodak’s Letter, ‘‘Request for Expedited
Changed Circumstances Review,’’ dated May 9,
2023 (CCR Request); see also Kodak’s Letter,
‘‘Supplemental Questionnaire Response,’’ dated
June 9, 2023 (Kodak’s Supplemental Questionnaire
Response).
3 See Memorandum, ‘‘Proposed Exclusion
Language,’’ dated July 24, 2023.
4 See Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet from
Germany: Notice of Initiation of Changed
Circumstances Review, and Consideration of
Revocation, in Part, of the Antidumping Duty
Order, 88 FR 49446 (July 31, 2023) (Initiation
Notice).
5 Id., 88 FR at 49448.
6 See Aluminum Association’s Letter,
‘‘Petitioners’ Response to Department’s Initiation
Notice,’’ dated August 30, 2023 (Aluminum
Association’s Comments) and Kodak’s Letter,
‘‘Comments on Changed Circumstances Review,’’
dated August 30, 2023 (Kodak’s Comments).
7 See Kodak’s Letter, ‘‘Rebuttal Comments on
Changed Circumstances Review,’’ dated September
6, 2023.
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices
having a thickness of 6.3 mm or less, but
greater than 0.2 mm, in coils or cut-tolength, regardless of width. Common
alloy sheet within the scope of the
Order includes both not clad aluminum
sheet, as well as multi-alloy, clad
aluminum sheet. With respect to not
clad aluminum sheet, common alloy
sheet is manufactured from a 1XXX-,
3XXX-, or 5XXX-series alloy as
designated by the Aluminum
Association. With respect to multi-alloy,
clad aluminum sheet, common alloy
sheet is produced from a 3XXX-series
core, to which cladding layers are
applied to either one or both sides of the
core. The use of a proprietary alloy or
non-proprietary alloy that is not
specifically registered by the Aluminum
Association as a discrete 1XXX-,
3XXX-, or 5XXX-series alloy, but that
otherwise has a chemistry that is
consistent with these designations, does
not remove an otherwise in-scope
product from the scope.
Common alloy sheet may be made to
ASTM specification B209–14 but can
also be made to other specifications.
Regardless of specification, however, all
common alloy sheet meeting the scope
description is included in the scope.
Subject merchandise includes common
alloy sheet that has been further
processed in a third country, including
but not limited to annealing, tempering,
painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting,
punching, and/or slitting, or any other
processing that would not otherwise
remove the merchandise from the scope
of the order if performed in the country
of manufacture of the common alloy
sheet.
Excluded from the scope of the Order
is aluminum can stock, which is
suitable for use in the manufacture of
aluminum beverage cans, lids of such
cans, or tabs used to open such cans.
Aluminum can stock is produced to
gauges that range from 0.200 mm to
0.292 mm, and has an H–19, H–41, H–
48, H–39, or H–391 temper. In addition,
aluminum can stock has a lubricant
applied to the flat surfaces of the can
stock to facilitate its movement through
machines used in the manufacture of
beverage cans. Aluminum can stock is
properly classified under Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) subheadings 7606.12.3045 and
7606.12.3055.
Where the nominal and actual
measurements vary, a product is within
the scope if application of either the
nominal or actual measurement would
place it within the scope based on the
definitions set for the above.
Common alloy sheet is currently
classifiable under HTSUS subheadings
7606.11.3060, 7606.11.6000,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Feb 02, 2024
Jkt 262001
7606.12.3096, 7606.12.6000,
7606.91.3095, 7606.91.6095,
7606.92.3035, and 7606.92.6095.
Further, merchandise that falls within
the scope of the Order may also be
entered into the United States under
HTSUS subheadings 7606.11.3030,
7606.12.3015, 7606.12.3025,
7606.12.3035, 7606.12.3091,
7606.91.3055, 7606.91.6055,
7606.92.3025, 7606.92.6055,
7607.11.9090. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the scope of the
Order is dispositive.
Preliminary Results of CCR and Intent
To Revoke the CAAS AD Germany
Order, in Part
Pursuant to section 751(d)(1) of the
Act, and 19 CFR 351.222(g), Commerce
may revoke an order, in whole or in
part, based on a review under section
751(b) of the Act (i.e., a CCR). Section
751(b)(1) of the Act requires a CCR to be
conducted upon receipt of a request
which shows changed circumstances
sufficient to warrant a review. Section
782(h)(2) of the Act gives Commerce the
authority to revoke an order if producers
accounting for substantially all of the
production of the domestic like product
have expressed a lack of interest in the
order. Section 351.222(g) of Commerce’s
regulations provides that Commerce
will conduct a CCR under 19 CFR
351.216, and may revoke an order (in
whole or in part), if it concludes that: (i)
producers accounting for substantially
all of the production of the domestic
like product to which the order pertains
have expressed a lack of interest in the
relief provided by the order, in whole or
in part; or (ii) if other changed
circumstances sufficient to warrant
revocation exist. Thus, both the Act and
Commerce’s regulations require that
‘‘substantially all’’ domestic producers
express a lack of interest in the order for
Commerce to revoke the order, in whole
or in part.8 Commerce has interpreted
‘‘substantially all’’ to mean producers
accounting for at least 85 percent of the
total U.S. production of the domestic
like product covered by the order.9
Information on the record indicates
that the Aluminum Association and its
8 See section 782(h) of the Act; and 19 CFR
351.222(g).
9 See, e.g., Honey from Argentina; Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Changed Circumstances
Reviews; Preliminary Intent to Revoke Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Orders, 77 FR 67790,
67791 (November 14, 2012), unchanged in Honey
from Argentina; Final Results of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Changed Circumstances
Reviews; Revocation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Orders, 77 FR 77029
(December 31, 2012).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7687
individual members, as well as Kaiser
Aluminum Corporation and Jupiter
Aluminum Corporation—two U.S.
producers of CAAS that are not part of
the Aluminum Association—
(collectively Domestic Producers), do
not oppose Kodak’s exclusion request.
Moreover, record information indicates
that in 2022 the Domestic Producers
accounted for at least 85 percent of the
total U.S. production of the domestic
like product covered by the Order.10
In light of the above evidence and in
the absence of any interested party
comments claiming that the Domestic
Producers do not account for
substantially all of the production of the
domestic like product to which the
CAAS AD Germany Order pertains, we
preliminarily determine that producers
accounting for substantially all of the
production of the domestic like product
to which the CAAS AD Germany Order
pertains lack interest in the relief
provided by the CAAS AD Germany
Order with respect to the lithographicgrade aluminum sheet identified by
Kodak. Thus, we preliminarily
determine that changed circumstances
warrant revocation of the CAAS AD
Germany Order, in part, with respect to
the lithographic-grade aluminum sheet
identified by Kodak.
Accordingly, we are notifying the
public of our intent to revoke the CAAS
AD Germany Order, in part, with
respect to the following lithographicgrade aluminum sheet and include the
following exclusion language in the
scope of the CAAS AD Germany Order:
Also excluded from the scope of the
Order is lithographic-grade aluminum
sheet that meets the following criteria:
(i) a Copper (Cu) content of no more
than 0.01 percent, a Zinc (Zn) content
of ≤0.05%, a Silicon (Si) content of
0.05%–0.20% and an Iron (Fe) content
of 0.30%–0.50%; (ii) a thickness
between 0.267 mm–0.3705 mm, (iii) a
width of 500 mm–1650 mm, (iv) a
maximum wave height of no more than
3.0 mm, (v) a tensile strength of 130
MPa or more (after baking), and (vi) a
surface roughness less than or equal to
Ra 0.26 mm.
We have not included the language
regarding end-use certifications
proposed by Kodak and supported by
the Aluminum Association in the above
exclusion language. Commerce’s general
practice is not to use end-use language
in scopes 11 or end-use certifications
10 See Kodak’s Supplemental Questionnaire
Response at 1 and Exhibit 1; see also Aluminum
Association’s Comments at 2 and Attachment 1.
11 See Raw Flexible Magnets from the People’s
Republic of China: Final Affirmative Countervailing
Duty Determination, 73 FR 39667 (July 10, 2008),
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
Continued
05FEN1
7688
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices
because such certifications ‘‘are difficult
to administer and to enforce’’ 12 and
‘‘depend on a generally un-verifiable
supposition about the end-use of
individual sales, and would be subject
to manipulation.’’ 13 While Commerce
has implemented end-use certifications
in some proceedings, it does so under
limited circumstances 14 including
where ‘‘evidence had been proffered
that would provide a reasonable basis to
believe or suspect that substitution was
occurring, and then would only apply
the program {(i.e., end-use certification
program)} to products for which such
evidence existed.’’ 15 No such evidence
has been provided in this review.
Moreover, Kodak stated that
‘‘{l}ithographic-grade aluminum sheet
is a niche product that is made to
stringent specifications and is
distinguishable from other aluminum
sheet products’’ 16 and the physical and
chemical characteristics in the proposed
scope exclusion language were
‘‘narrowly tailored to cover only
lithographic-grade aluminum sheet.’’ 17
Neither Kodak, nor the Aluminum
Association, has explained why the
physical and chemical characteristics of
lithographic-grade aluminum sheet
included in the above scope exclusion
do not sufficiently distinguish the
product from subject CAAS.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Application of Revocation
Kodak requested retroactive
application of this partial revocation
starting October 15, 2020, the date of
publication in the Federal Register of
the preliminary determination in the
underlying investigation and the date of
and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum (IDM) at ‘‘Scope Comments’’ (‘‘{a}s
an initial matter, the Department does not generally
define subject merchandise by end-use
application.’’).
12 See Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires
from the People’s Republic of China: Final
Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 40485 (July 15, 2008),
and accompanying IDM at Comment 19.
13 Id.
14 Id. (‘‘{a}lthough the Department has
implemented such certification programs {(i.e., enduse certification programs)} in the past, we
generally do so only in limited circumstances.’’).
15 Id.; see also Carbon and Alloy Seamless
Standard, Line and Pressure Pipe (Under 41⁄2
Inches) from Japan and Romania: Final Results of
the Expedited Fourth Sunset Reviews of the
Antidumping Duty Orders, 88 FR 3970 (January 23,
2023), and accompanying IDM at ‘‘Scope of the
Orders’’ (‘‘{w}ith regard to the excluded products
listed above, {Commerce} will not instruct CBP to
require end-use certification until such time as {the
petitioner} or other interested parties provide to
{Commerce} a reasonable basis to believe or suspect
that the products are being used in a covered
application.’’).
16 See CCR Request at 5.
17 See Kodak’s Comments at 6.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Feb 02, 2024
Jkt 262001
institution of provisional measures.18
Section 751(d)(3) of the Act provides
that ‘‘{a} determination under this
section to revoke an order . . . shall
apply with respect to unliquidated
entries of the subject merchandise
which are entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after
the date determined by the
administering authority.’’ Commerce’s
general practice is to instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
liquidate without regard to antidumping
and/or countervailing duties, and to
refund any estimated antidumping and/
or countervailing duties, on all
unliquidated entries of the merchandise
covered by a revocation that are not
covered by the final results of an
administrative review or automatic
liquidation instruction.19 However,
Commerce has exercised its discretion
and deviated from this general practice
if the particular facts of a case have
implications for the effective date of the
partial revocation selected by
Commerce.20 Specifically, when
selecting the effective date for partial
revocation, Commerce has considered
factors such as the effective date
proposed by the petitioner (and/or the
effective date agreed to by all parties),21
the existence of unliquidated entries
18 See
CCR Request at 14–15.
e.g., Certain Pasta from Italy: Final Results
of Countervailing Duty Changed Circumstances
Review and Revocation, In Part, 76 FR 27634 (May
12, 2011); Stainless Steel Bar from the United
Kingdom: Notice of Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Review and Revocation of Order, in
Part, 72 FR 65706 (November 23, 2007); Notice of
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review and Revocation of Order In
Part: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat
Products from Germany, 71 FR 66163 (November
13, 2006); Notice of Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Changed Circumstances Reviews and
Revocation of Orders in Part: Certain CorrosionResistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Canada
and Germany, 71 FR 14498 (March 22, 2006);
Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Changed Circumstances Review, and Determination
to Revoke Order in Part: Certain Cased Pencils from
the People’s Republic of China, 68 FR 62428
(November 4, 2003).
20 See section 751(d)(3) of the Act; Itochu
Building Products v. United States, Slip Op. 14–37
at 12 (CIT April 8, 2014) (Itochu) (‘‘The statutory
provision, as discussed above, provides Commerce
with discretion in the selection of the effective date
for a partial revocation following a changed
circumstances review, but that discretion may not
be exercised arbitrarily so as to decide the question
presented without considering the relevant and
competing considerations.’’).
21 See, e.g., Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire
Rod from Brazil, Canada, Indonesia, Mexico,
Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine: Final
Results of Changed Circumstances Review, 68 FR
64079 (November 12, 2003); Stainless Steel Hollow
Products from Sweden; Termination of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final
Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, and Revocation In Part
of Antidumping Duty Order, 60 FR 42529 (August
16, 1995).
19 See
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
dating back to the requested effective
date,22 whether an interested party
requested the effective date of the
revocation,23 and whether the requested
effective date creates potential
administrability issues (e.g., the
products covered by the partial
revocation are in the sales database used
in the dumping margin calculations for
a completed administrative review with
a period of review that overlaps with the
date requested).24
The Domestic Producers have not
proposed an effective date or
specifically agreed to the effective date
proposed by Kodak, Kodak has not
provided any evidence of unliquidated
entries dating back to the requested
effective date, and the German producer
from which Kodak obtains the
lithographic-grade aluminum sheet,
Speira GmbH,25 is currently under
review in the administrative review of
the CAAS AD Germany Order covering
the period April 1, 2022 through March
31, 2023.26 Given the forgoing, we
preliminarily determine to follow
Commerce’s general practice and apply
the partial revocation to all unliquidated
entries of the merchandise covered by
this revocation that are not covered by
the final results of an administrative
review or automatic liquidation
instruction (i.e., unliquidated entries on
or after April 1, 2023).27
22 See Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the
People’s Republic of China: Final Results of
Changed Circumstances Review, and Revocation in
Part of Antidumping Duty Order, 74 FR 50956
(October 2, 2009); Notice of Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review,
and Determination To Revoke Order in Part: Certain
Cased Pencils from the People’s Republic of China,
71 FR 13352 (March 15, 2006); Stainless Steel Sheet
and Strip in Coils from Japan: Final Results of
Changed Circumstance Antidumping Duty Review,
and Determination To Revoke Order in Part, 65 FR
77578 (December 12, 2000).
23 See Large Newspaper Printing Presses and
Components Thereof, Whether Assembled or
Unassembled, from Japan: Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review and Intent To Revoke Antidumping Duty
Order, In Part, 64 FR 72315 (December 27, 1999).
24 See Itochu, Slip Op. 14–37 at 3.
25 See CCR Request at 14–15.
26 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 88 FR
38021, 38023 (June 12, 2023).
27 Commerce issued the final results of the
administrative review of the CAAS AD Germany
Order covering the period October 15, 2020 through
March 31, 2022 on November 3, 2023. See Common
Alloy Aluminum Sheet from Germany: Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2020–
2022, 88 FR 77556 (November 13, 2023). Commerce
issued the automatic liquidation instruction for the
administrative review of the CAAS AD Germany
Order covering the period April 1, 2022 through
March 31, 2023 on July 21, 2023. See CBP Message
3202416, ‘‘Automatic Liquidation Instructions,’’
dated July 21, 2023.
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices
Public Comment
Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results of
review in accordance with 19 CFR
351.309(c)(1)(ii). Written comments may
be submitted no later than 14 days after
the date of publication of these
preliminary results of review in the
Federal Register. Rebuttal comments,
limited to issues raised in written
comments, may be filed no later than
five days after the due date for
comments.28 All submissions must be
filed electronically using Enforcement
and Compliance’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (ACCESS).29
ACCESS is available to registered users
at https://access.trade.gov. An
electronically filed document must be
successfully received in its entirety by
ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern Time on the
deadlines set forth in this notice.
Interested parties who submit case or
rebuttal briefs must submit: (1) a table
of contents listing each issue discussed
in the brief; and (2) a table of
authorities.30 As provided under 19 CFR
351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), in prior
proceedings we have encouraged
interested parties to provide an
executive summary of their brief that
should be limited to five pages total,
including footnotes. In this review, we
instead request that interested parties
provide at the beginning of their briefs
a public, executive summary for each
issue raised in their briefs.31 Further, we
request that interested parties limit their
executive summary of each issue to no
more than 450 words, not including
citations. We intend to use the executive
summaries as the basis of the comment
summaries included in the issues and
decision memorandum that will
accompany the final results in this
review. We request that interested
parties include footnotes for relevant
citations in the executive summary of
each issue. Note that Commerce has
amended certain of its requirements
pertaining to the service of documents
in 19 CFR 351.303(f).32
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Final Results of the CCR
Commerce will issue the final results
of this CCR, which will include its
28 See 19 CFR 351.309(d); see also Administrative
Protective Order, Service, and Other Procedures in
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings,
88 FR 67069, 67077 (September 29, 2023) (APO and
Final Service Rule).
29 See, generally, 19 CFR 351.303.
30 See 19 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2).
31 We use the term ‘‘issue’’ here to describe an
argument that Commerce would normally address
in a comment of the Issues and Decision
Memorandum.
32 See APO and Final Service Rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Feb 02, 2024
Jkt 262001
analysis of any written comments, no
later than 270 days after the date on
which this review was initiated.33 If, in
the final results of this review,
Commerce continues to determine that
changed circumstances warrant the
revocation of the CAAS AD Germany
Order, in part, we will instruct CBP to
liquidate without regard to antidumping
duties, and to refund any estimated
antidumping duties deposited on, all
unliquidated entries of the merchandise
covered by the revocation that are not
covered by the final results of an
administrative review or an automatic
liquidation instruction to CBP. The
current requirement for cash deposits of
estimated antidumping duties on all
entries of subject merchandise will
continue unless it is modified pursuant
to the final results of this CCR.
Notification to Interested Parties
These preliminary results of changed
circumstances review and this notice
are published in accordance with
sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.216, 19 CFR
351.221(c)(3), and 19 CFR 351.222.
Dated: January 30, 2024.
Abdelali Elouaradia,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement
and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2024–02231 Filed 2–2–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[RTID 0648–XD590]
Fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico and
South Atlantic; Southeast Data,
Assessment, and Review (SEDAR);
Public Meeting
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of SEDAR 79 Assessment
Webinar I for Gulf of Mexico and South
Atlantic Mutton Snapper.
AGENCY:
The SEDAR 79 assessment
process of Gulf of Mexico and South
Atlantic mutton snapper will consist of
a Data Workshop, and a series of
assessment webinars, and a Review
Workshop. See SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
SUMMARY:
The SEDAR 79 Assessment
webinar I will be held February 23,
2024, from 1 p.m. until 4 p.m., eastern
DATES:
33 See
PO 00000
19 CFR 351.216(e).
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7689
time. The established times may be
adjusted as necessary to accommodate
the timely completion of discussion
relevant to the assessment process. Such
adjustments may result in the meeting
being extended from or completed prior
to the time established by this notice.
The meeting will be held
via webinar. The webinar is open to
members of the public. Those interested
in participating should contact Julie A.
Neer at SEDAR (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT) to request an
invitation providing webinar access
information. Please request webinar
invitations at least 24 hours in advance
of each webinar.
SEDAR address: 4055 Faber Place
Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC
29405.
ADDRESSES:
Julie
A. Neer, SEDAR Coordinator; (843) 571–
4366; email: Julie.neer@safmc.net.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The Gulf
of Mexico, South Atlantic, and
Caribbean Fishery Management
Councils, in conjunction with NOAA
Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf
States Marine Fisheries Commissions
have implemented the Southeast Data,
Assessment and Review (SEDAR)
process, a multi-step method for
determining the status of fish stocks in
the Southeast Region. SEDAR is a multistep process including: (1) Data
Workshop, (2) a series of assessment
webinars, and (3) A Review Workshop.
The product of the Data Workshop is a
report that compiles and evaluates
potential datasets and recommends
which datasets are appropriate for
assessment analyses. The assessment
webinars produce a report that describes
the fisheries, evaluates the status of the
stock, estimates biological benchmarks,
projects future population conditions,
and recommends research and
monitoring needs. The product of the
Review Workshop is an Assessment
Summary documenting panel opinions
regarding the strengths and weaknesses
of the stock assessment and input data.
Participants for SEDAR Workshops are
appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South
Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery
Management Councils and NOAA
Fisheries Southeast Regional Office,
HMS Management Division, and
Southeast Fisheries Science Center.
Participants include data collectors and
database managers; stock assessment
scientists, biologists, and researchers;
constituency representatives including
fishermen, environmentalists, and
NGO’s; International experts; and staff
of Councils, Commissions, and State
and Federal agencies.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 24 (Monday, February 5, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7686-7689]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02231]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-428-849]
Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet From Germany: Preliminary Results of
Changed Circumstances Review, and Intent To Revoke the Antidumping Duty
Order, in Part
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily
intends to revoke, in part, the antidumping duty (AD) order on common
alloy aluminum sheet (CAAS) from Germany with respect to certain
lithographic-grade aluminum sheet. Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
DATES: Applicable February 5, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Trejo, 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) 482-4390.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On April 27, 2021, Commerce published the AD order on common alloy
aluminum sheet from Germany.\1\ On May 9, 2023, Eastman Kodak Company
(Kodak), a U.S. importer of subject merchandise, requested that
Commerce conduct a changed circumstances review (CCR), and revoke, in
part, the CAAS AD Germany Order with respect to certain lithographic-
grade aluminum sheet pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.216(b).\2\ On July 24, 2023,
Commerce issued proposed partial revocation language for the scope in
which it omitted references to end-use certificates which had been
included by Kodak and solicited interested parties comments on that
language.\3\ On July 31, 2023, Commerce initiated the requested CCR.\4\
In the Initiation Notice, Commerce invited interested parties to
provide comments and/or factual information regarding the CCR,
including comments on industry support and the proposed partial
revocation language.\5\ On August 30, 2023, the Aluminum Association
Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet Trade Enforcement Working Group and its
individual members (Aluminum Association) and Kodak commented on the
CCR.\6\ On September 6, 2023, Kodak responded to the Aluminum
Association's comments.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet from Bahrain, Brazil,
Croatia, Egypt, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Oman, Romania,
Serbia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Taiwan and the Republic of
Turkey: Antidumping Duty Orders, 86 FR 22139 (April 27, 2021) (CAAS
AD Germany Order or Order).
\2\ See Kodak's Letter, ``Request for Expedited Changed
Circumstances Review,'' dated May 9, 2023 (CCR Request); see also
Kodak's Letter, ``Supplemental Questionnaire Response,'' dated June
9, 2023 (Kodak's Supplemental Questionnaire Response).
\3\ See Memorandum, ``Proposed Exclusion Language,'' dated July
24, 2023.
\4\ See Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet from Germany: Notice of
Initiation of Changed Circumstances Review, and Consideration of
Revocation, in Part, of the Antidumping Duty Order, 88 FR 49446
(July 31, 2023) (Initiation Notice).
\5\ Id., 88 FR at 49448.
\6\ See Aluminum Association's Letter, ``Petitioners' Response
to Department's Initiation Notice,'' dated August 30, 2023 (Aluminum
Association's Comments) and Kodak's Letter, ``Comments on Changed
Circumstances Review,'' dated August 30, 2023 (Kodak's Comments).
\7\ See Kodak's Letter, ``Rebuttal Comments on Changed
Circumstances Review,'' dated September 6, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the CAAS AD Germany Order
The products covered by the Order are common alloy aluminum sheet,
which is a flat-rolled aluminum product
[[Page 7687]]
having a thickness of 6.3 mm or less, but greater than 0.2 mm, in coils
or cut-to-length, regardless of width. Common alloy sheet within the
scope of the Order includes both not clad aluminum sheet, as well as
multi-alloy, clad aluminum sheet. With respect to not clad aluminum
sheet, common alloy sheet is manufactured from a 1XXX-, 3XXX-, or 5XXX-
series alloy as designated by the Aluminum Association. With respect to
multi-alloy, clad aluminum sheet, common alloy sheet is produced from a
3XXX-series core, to which cladding layers are applied to either one or
both sides of the core. The use of a proprietary alloy or non-
proprietary alloy that is not specifically registered by the Aluminum
Association as a discrete 1XXX-, 3XXX-, or 5XXX-series alloy, but that
otherwise has a chemistry that is consistent with these designations,
does not remove an otherwise in-scope product from the scope.
Common alloy sheet may be made to ASTM specification B209-14 but
can also be made to other specifications. Regardless of specification,
however, all common alloy sheet meeting the scope description is
included in the scope. Subject merchandise includes common alloy sheet
that has been further processed in a third country, including but not
limited to annealing, tempering, painting, varnishing, trimming,
cutting, punching, and/or slitting, or any other processing that would
not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the order if
performed in the country of manufacture of the common alloy sheet.
Excluded from the scope of the Order is aluminum can stock, which
is suitable for use in the manufacture of aluminum beverage cans, lids
of such cans, or tabs used to open such cans. Aluminum can stock is
produced to gauges that range from 0.200 mm to 0.292 mm, and has an H-
19, H-41, H-48, H-39, or H-391 temper. In addition, aluminum can stock
has a lubricant applied to the flat surfaces of the can stock to
facilitate its movement through machines used in the manufacture of
beverage cans. Aluminum can stock is properly classified under
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings
7606.12.3045 and 7606.12.3055.
Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product is within
the scope if application of either the nominal or actual measurement
would place it within the scope based on the definitions set for the
above.
Common alloy sheet is currently classifiable under HTSUS
subheadings 7606.11.3060, 7606.11.6000, 7606.12.3096, 7606.12.6000,
7606.91.3095, 7606.91.6095, 7606.92.3035, and 7606.92.6095. Further,
merchandise that falls within the scope of the Order may also be
entered into the United States under HTSUS subheadings 7606.11.3030,
7606.12.3015, 7606.12.3025, 7606.12.3035, 7606.12.3091, 7606.91.3055,
7606.91.6055, 7606.92.3025, 7606.92.6055, 7607.11.9090. Although the
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes,
the written description of the scope of the Order is dispositive.
Preliminary Results of CCR and Intent To Revoke the CAAS AD Germany
Order, in Part
Pursuant to section 751(d)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.222(g),
Commerce may revoke an order, in whole or in part, based on a review
under section 751(b) of the Act (i.e., a CCR). Section 751(b)(1) of the
Act requires a CCR to be conducted upon receipt of a request which
shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review. Section
782(h)(2) of the Act gives Commerce the authority to revoke an order if
producers accounting for substantially all of the production of the
domestic like product have expressed a lack of interest in the order.
Section 351.222(g) of Commerce's regulations provides that Commerce
will conduct a CCR under 19 CFR 351.216, and may revoke an order (in
whole or in part), if it concludes that: (i) producers accounting for
substantially all of the production of the domestic like product to
which the order pertains have expressed a lack of interest in the
relief provided by the order, in whole or in part; or (ii) if other
changed circumstances sufficient to warrant revocation exist. Thus,
both the Act and Commerce's regulations require that ``substantially
all'' domestic producers express a lack of interest in the order for
Commerce to revoke the order, in whole or in part.\8\ Commerce has
interpreted ``substantially all'' to mean producers accounting for at
least 85 percent of the total U.S. production of the domestic like
product covered by the order.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See section 782(h) of the Act; and 19 CFR 351.222(g).
\9\ See, e.g., Honey from Argentina; Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Changed Circumstances Reviews; Preliminary
Intent to Revoke Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 77 FR
67790, 67791 (November 14, 2012), unchanged in Honey from Argentina;
Final Results of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Changed
Circumstances Reviews; Revocation of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Orders, 77 FR 77029 (December 31, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information on the record indicates that the Aluminum Association
and its individual members, as well as Kaiser Aluminum Corporation and
Jupiter Aluminum Corporation--two U.S. producers of CAAS that are not
part of the Aluminum Association--(collectively Domestic Producers), do
not oppose Kodak's exclusion request. Moreover, record information
indicates that in 2022 the Domestic Producers accounted for at least 85
percent of the total U.S. production of the domestic like product
covered by the Order.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Kodak's Supplemental Questionnaire Response at 1 and
Exhibit 1; see also Aluminum Association's Comments at 2 and
Attachment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In light of the above evidence and in the absence of any interested
party comments claiming that the Domestic Producers do not account for
substantially all of the production of the domestic like product to
which the CAAS AD Germany Order pertains, we preliminarily determine
that producers accounting for substantially all of the production of
the domestic like product to which the CAAS AD Germany Order pertains
lack interest in the relief provided by the CAAS AD Germany Order with
respect to the lithographic-grade aluminum sheet identified by Kodak.
Thus, we preliminarily determine that changed circumstances warrant
revocation of the CAAS AD Germany Order, in part, with respect to the
lithographic-grade aluminum sheet identified by Kodak.
Accordingly, we are notifying the public of our intent to revoke
the CAAS AD Germany Order, in part, with respect to the following
lithographic-grade aluminum sheet and include the following exclusion
language in the scope of the CAAS AD Germany Order:
Also excluded from the scope of the Order is lithographic-grade
aluminum sheet that meets the following criteria: (i) a Copper (Cu)
content of no more than 0.01 percent, a Zinc (Zn) content of <=0.05%, a
Silicon (Si) content of 0.05%-0.20% and an Iron (Fe) content of 0.30%-
0.50%; (ii) a thickness between 0.267 mm-0.3705 mm, (iii) a width of
500 mm-1650 mm, (iv) a maximum wave height of no more than 3.0 mm, (v)
a tensile strength of 130 MPa or more (after baking), and (vi) a
surface roughness less than or equal to Ra 0.26 [micro]m.
We have not included the language regarding end-use certifications
proposed by Kodak and supported by the Aluminum Association in the
above exclusion language. Commerce's general practice is not to use
end-use language in scopes \11\ or end-use certifications
[[Page 7688]]
because such certifications ``are difficult to administer and to
enforce'' \12\ and ``depend on a generally un-verifiable supposition
about the end-use of individual sales, and would be subject to
manipulation.'' \13\ While Commerce has implemented end-use
certifications in some proceedings, it does so under limited
circumstances \14\ including where ``evidence had been proffered that
would provide a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that
substitution was occurring, and then would only apply the program
{(i.e., end-use certification program){time} to products for which
such evidence existed.'' \15\ No such evidence has been provided in
this review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Raw Flexible Magnets from the People's Republic of
China: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 73 FR
39667 (July 10, 2008), and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum (IDM) at ``Scope Comments'' (``{a{time} s an initial
matter, the Department does not generally define subject merchandise
by end-use application.'').
\12\ See Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road Tires from the
People's Republic of China: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of
Critical Circumstances, 73 FR 40485 (July 15, 2008), and
accompanying IDM at Comment 19.
\13\ Id.
\14\ Id. (``{a{time} lthough the Department has implemented such
certification programs {(i.e., end-use certification
programs){time} in the past, we generally do so only in limited
circumstances.'').
\15\ Id.; see also Carbon and Alloy Seamless Standard, Line and
Pressure Pipe (Under 4\1/2\ Inches) from Japan and Romania: Final
Results of the Expedited Fourth Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping
Duty Orders, 88 FR 3970 (January 23, 2023), and accompanying IDM at
``Scope of the Orders'' (``{w{time} ith regard to the excluded
products listed above, {Commerce{time} will not instruct CBP to
require end-use certification until such time as {the
petitioner{time} or other interested parties provide to
{Commerce{time} a reasonable basis to believe or suspect that the
products are being used in a covered application.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, Kodak stated that ``{l{time} ithographic-grade aluminum
sheet is a niche product that is made to stringent specifications and
is distinguishable from other aluminum sheet products'' \16\ and the
physical and chemical characteristics in the proposed scope exclusion
language were ``narrowly tailored to cover only lithographic-grade
aluminum sheet.'' \17\ Neither Kodak, nor the Aluminum Association, has
explained why the physical and chemical characteristics of
lithographic-grade aluminum sheet included in the above scope exclusion
do not sufficiently distinguish the product from subject CAAS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See CCR Request at 5.
\17\ See Kodak's Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application of Revocation
Kodak requested retroactive application of this partial revocation
starting October 15, 2020, the date of publication in the Federal
Register of the preliminary determination in the underlying
investigation and the date of institution of provisional measures.\18\
Section 751(d)(3) of the Act provides that ``{a{time} determination
under this section to revoke an order . . . shall apply with respect to
unliquidated entries of the subject merchandise which are entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date
determined by the administering authority.'' Commerce's general
practice is to instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
liquidate without regard to antidumping and/or countervailing duties,
and to refund any estimated antidumping and/or countervailing duties,
on all unliquidated entries of the merchandise covered by a revocation
that are not covered by the final results of an administrative review
or automatic liquidation instruction.\19\ However, Commerce has
exercised its discretion and deviated from this general practice if the
particular facts of a case have implications for the effective date of
the partial revocation selected by Commerce.\20\ Specifically, when
selecting the effective date for partial revocation, Commerce has
considered factors such as the effective date proposed by the
petitioner (and/or the effective date agreed to by all parties),\21\
the existence of unliquidated entries dating back to the requested
effective date,\22\ whether an interested party requested the effective
date of the revocation,\23\ and whether the requested effective date
creates potential administrability issues (e.g., the products covered
by the partial revocation are in the sales database used in the dumping
margin calculations for a completed administrative review with a period
of review that overlaps with the date requested).\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See CCR Request at 14-15.
\19\ See e.g., Certain Pasta from Italy: Final Results of
Countervailing Duty Changed Circumstances Review and Revocation, In
Part, 76 FR 27634 (May 12, 2011); Stainless Steel Bar from the
United Kingdom: Notice of Final Results of Changed Circumstances
Review and Revocation of Order, in Part, 72 FR 65706 (November 23,
2007); Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review and Revocation of Order In Part: Certain
Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Germany, 71 FR
66163 (November 13, 2006); Notice of Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Changed Circumstances Reviews and Revocation of Orders in Part:
Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Canada
and Germany, 71 FR 14498 (March 22, 2006); Notice of Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, and Determination
to Revoke Order in Part: Certain Cased Pencils from the People's
Republic of China, 68 FR 62428 (November 4, 2003).
\20\ See section 751(d)(3) of the Act; Itochu Building Products
v. United States, Slip Op. 14-37 at 12 (CIT April 8, 2014) (Itochu)
(``The statutory provision, as discussed above, provides Commerce
with discretion in the selection of the effective date for a partial
revocation following a changed circumstances review, but that
discretion may not be exercised arbitrarily so as to decide the
question presented without considering the relevant and competing
considerations.'').
\21\ See, e.g., Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from
Brazil, Canada, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago, and
Ukraine: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review, 68 FR 64079
(November 12, 2003); Stainless Steel Hollow Products from Sweden;
Termination of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, Final
Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, and Revocation In Part of Antidumping Duty Order, 60 FR
42529 (August 16, 1995).
\22\ See Steel Wire Garment Hangers from the People's Republic
of China: Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review, and
Revocation in Part of Antidumping Duty Order, 74 FR 50956 (October
2, 2009); Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, and Determination To Revoke Order in Part:
Certain Cased Pencils from the People's Republic of China, 71 FR
13352 (March 15, 2006); Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils
from Japan: Final Results of Changed Circumstance Antidumping Duty
Review, and Determination To Revoke Order in Part, 65 FR 77578
(December 12, 2000).
\23\ See Large Newspaper Printing Presses and Components
Thereof, Whether Assembled or Unassembled, from Japan: Final Results
of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and
Intent To Revoke Antidumping Duty Order, In Part, 64 FR 72315
(December 27, 1999).
\24\ See Itochu, Slip Op. 14-37 at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Domestic Producers have not proposed an effective date or
specifically agreed to the effective date proposed by Kodak, Kodak has
not provided any evidence of unliquidated entries dating back to the
requested effective date, and the German producer from which Kodak
obtains the lithographic-grade aluminum sheet, Speira GmbH,\25\ is
currently under review in the administrative review of the CAAS AD
Germany Order covering the period April 1, 2022 through March 31,
2023.\26\ Given the forgoing, we preliminarily determine to follow
Commerce's general practice and apply the partial revocation to all
unliquidated entries of the merchandise covered by this revocation that
are not covered by the final results of an administrative review or
automatic liquidation instruction (i.e., unliquidated entries on or
after April 1, 2023).\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See CCR Request at 14-15.
\26\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 88 FR 38021, 38023 (June 12, 2023).
\27\ Commerce issued the final results of the administrative
review of the CAAS AD Germany Order covering the period October 15,
2020 through March 31, 2022 on November 3, 2023. See Common Alloy
Aluminum Sheet from Germany: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2020-2022, 88 FR 77556 (November 13, 2023).
Commerce issued the automatic liquidation instruction for the
administrative review of the CAAS AD Germany Order covering the
period April 1, 2022 through March 31, 2023 on July 21, 2023. See
CBP Message 3202416, ``Automatic Liquidation Instructions,'' dated
July 21, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 7689]]
Public Comment
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary
results of review in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii). Written
comments may be submitted no later than 14 days after the date of
publication of these preliminary results of review in the Federal
Register. Rebuttal comments, limited to issues raised in written
comments, may be filed no later than five days after the due date for
comments.\28\ All submissions must be filed electronically using
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\29\ ACCESS is available
to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. An electronically
filed document must be successfully received in its entirety by ACCESS,
by 5 p.m. Eastern Time on the deadlines set forth in this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See 19 CFR 351.309(d); see also Administrative Protective
Order, Service, and Other Procedures in Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 88 FR 67069, 67077 (September 29,
2023) (APO and Final Service Rule).
\29\ See, generally, 19 CFR 351.303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs must submit:
(1) a table of contents listing each issue discussed in the brief; and
(2) a table of authorities.\30\ As provided under 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2)
and (d)(2), in prior proceedings we have encouraged interested parties
to provide an executive summary of their brief that should be limited
to five pages total, including footnotes. In this review, we instead
request that interested parties provide at the beginning of their
briefs a public, executive summary for each issue raised in their
briefs.\31\ Further, we request that interested parties limit their
executive summary of each issue to no more than 450 words, not
including citations. We intend to use the executive summaries as the
basis of the comment summaries included in the issues and decision
memorandum that will accompany the final results in this review. We
request that interested parties include footnotes for relevant
citations in the executive summary of each issue. Note that Commerce
has amended certain of its requirements pertaining to the service of
documents in 19 CFR 351.303(f).\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See 19 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2).
\31\ We use the term ``issue'' here to describe an argument that
Commerce would normally address in a comment of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum.
\32\ See APO and Final Service Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of the CCR
Commerce will issue the final results of this CCR, which will
include its analysis of any written comments, no later than 270 days
after the date on which this review was initiated.\33\ If, in the final
results of this review, Commerce continues to determine that changed
circumstances warrant the revocation of the CAAS AD Germany Order, in
part, we will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to antidumping
duties, and to refund any estimated antidumping duties deposited on,
all unliquidated entries of the merchandise covered by the revocation
that are not covered by the final results of an administrative review
or an automatic liquidation instruction to CBP. The current requirement
for cash deposits of estimated antidumping duties on all entries of
subject merchandise will continue unless it is modified pursuant to the
final results of this CCR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See 19 CFR 351.216(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
These preliminary results of changed circumstances review and this
notice are published in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216, 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3), and 19 CFR
351.222.
Dated: January 30, 2024.
Abdelali Elouaradia,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2024-02231 Filed 2-2-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
