[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 108 (Friday, June 5, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32089-32090]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-13828]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-832]


Pure Magnesium From the People's Republic of China: Notice of 
Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final Results of the 2009-
2010 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On May 21, 2015, the United States Court of International 
Trade (``CIT'' or ``Court'') sustained the Final Remand Results \1\ 
issued by the Department of Commerce (``Department'') concerning the 
2009-2010 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on pure 
magnesium from the People's Republic of China.\2\ In the Final Remand 
Results, the Department changed the data source for inland freight and 
selected different financial statements for the calculation of the 
surrogate financial ratios, while it continued to find that the 
untimely and thus previously rejected factual information was 
irrelevant and showed no ``fraud'' on the part of the respondent, 
Tianjin Magnesium International Co., Ltd. (``TMI'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court 
Remand, Court Order No. 12-00006, Slip Op. 13-9 (CIT 2013), dated 
January 22, 2013 (``Final Remand Results'').
    \2\ See US Magnesium LLC v. United States, Court Order No. 12-
00006, Slip Op. 15-47 (CIT May 21, 2015) (``TMI II'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') in Timken,\3\ as clarified by 
Diamond Sawblades,\4\ the Department is notifying the public that the 
final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department's 
final results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty 
order on pure magnesium from the People's Republic of China covering 
the period of review (``POR'') from May 1, 2009, through April 30, 
2010.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 
1990) (``Timken'').
    \4\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (``Diamond Sawblades'').
    \5\ See Pure Magnesium from the People's Republic of China: 
Final Results of the 2009-2010 Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 76945 (December 9, 2011) 
and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (``Final Results'').

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: May 31, 2015

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eve Wang, AD/CVD Operations Office 
III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6231.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On December 9, 2011, the Department issued the Final Results.\6\ US 
Magnesium LLC (``USM'') challenged certain aspects of the Department's 
Final Results. On January 22, 2013, the Court remanded the Final 
Results to the Department: (1) To consider whether previously rejected 
factual information contained prima facie evidence of fraud by TMI in 
accordance with the factors outlined in Home Products,\7\ and (2) to 
explain its rationale for selecting Infobanc data based on substantial 
evidence on the record or, alternatively, to select a new surrogate 
value for truck freight.\8\ Additionally, the Department requested a 
voluntary remand to reconsider: (1) The selection of Hindalco 
Industries Limited's (``Hindalco'') financial statements for 
calculating surrogate financial ratios, and (2) USM's claim that the 
Department made errors when calculating the surrogate value for 
labor.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Final Results.
    \7\ See Home Prods. Int'l v. United States, 633 F.3d 1369 (Fed. 
Cir. 2011) (``Home Products'').
    \8\ See US Magnesium LLC v. United States, Court Order No. 12-
00006, Slip Op. 13-9 (CIT January 22, 2013) (``TMI I'').
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with TMI I, the Department opened the administrative 
record to accept the previously rejected factual information and 
concluded that this factual information did not demonstrate prima facie 
evidence of fraud by TMI.\10\ The Department also determined that the 
Infobanc data did not constitute the best information available to 
value truck freight and, instead, selected World Bank data for the 
Final Remand Results.\11\ Additionally, the Department selected Madras 
Aluminum Company's financial statements to value the surrogate 
financial ratios. Lastly, the Department corrected errors in its 
calculation of the labor rate.\12\ On May 21, 2015, the Court entered 
judgement sustaining the Final Remand Results entirely.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Final Remand Results.
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the 
CAFC held that, pursuant to section

[[Page 32090]]

516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), the 
Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not ``in 
harmony'' with a Department determination and must suspend liquidation 
of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The Court's 
judgment in TMI II sustaining the Final Remand Results constitutes a 
final decision of the Court that is not in harmony with the 
Department's Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of 
the publication requirement of Timken.

Amended Final Results

    Because there is now a final court decision, the Department is 
amending the Final Results with respect to the surrogate value for 
truck freight and financial ratios, in addition to correcting the 
errors in its calculation of the labor rate. The revised weighted-
average dumping margin for TMI during the period May 1, 2009, through 
April 30, 2010, is as follows:

                    Weighted-Average Dumping Margin:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Weighted-
                                                                average
                          Exporter                              dumping
                                                                margin
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TMI.........................................................       51.26
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of 
liquidation of the subject merchandise pending the expiration of the 
period of appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court 
decision. In the event the Court's ruling is not appealed or, if 
appealed, upheld by the CAFC, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs 
and Border Protection to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated 
entries of subject merchandise exported by the above listed exporter at 
the rate listed above.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    Since the Final Remand Results, the Department has established a 
new cash deposit rate for TMI.\13\ Therefore, the cash deposit rate for 
TMI does not need to be updated as a result of these amended final 
results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Pure Magnesium From the People's Republic of China: 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2011-2012, 
79 FR 94 (January 2, 2014); Pure Magnesium From the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review; 2013-2014, 80 FR 26541 (May 8, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 
516A(e), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: May 29, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-13828 Filed 6-4-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P