[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 100 (Thursday, May 23, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23763-23765]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10803]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-900]


Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of 
China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results 
of Review, Rescission of Administrative Review in Part, and Amended 
Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On May 7, 2019, the United States Court of International Trade 
(CIT) sustained the final remand redetermination pertaining to the 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on diamond 
sawblades and parts thereof from the People's Republic of China 
covering the period November 1, 2013, through October 31, 2014. The 
Department of Commerce (Commerce) is notifying the public that the 
CIT's final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the final 
results of the administrative review, that Commerce is rescinding the 
administrative review in part, and that Commerce is amending the final 
results with respect to the respondents eligible for separate rates.

DATES: Applicable May 17, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yang Jin Chun or Minoo Hatten, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-5760 or (202) 482-1690, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 14, 2016, Commerce published the Final Results, in which we 
valued cores produced by Weihai Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co., 
Ltd. (Weihai) using a build-up methodology, and calculated surrogate 
truck freight distance using the average of the distances between 
industrial estates in Bangkok and the Port of Bangkok.\1\ On March 22, 
2018, the CIT remanded the Final Results to Commerce to re-examine: (1) 
The withdrawals of review requests with

[[Page 23764]]

respect to Weihai in light of Glycine & More, Inc. v. United States, 
880 F.3d 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (Glycine & More); and (2) the surrogate 
truck freight distance used in the valuation of the truck freight 
expense. In addition, the CIT granted Commerce's request for a 
voluntary remand to address the issues concerning the valuation of 
Weihai's purchased cores and the rate for non-selected separate rate 
respondents.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review; 2013-2014, 81 FR 38673 (June 14, 2016) (Final Results) and 
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comments 11 and 19.
    \2\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United 
States, 301 F. Supp. 3d 1326 (CIT 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the first final remand redetermination, we stated our intent to 
accept all withdrawals of review requests with respect to Weihai, 
rescind the administrative review with respect to Weihai, and revise 
the surrogate truck freight distance. Because we intended to rescind 
the administrative review in part with respect to Weihai, we treated 
the issue of the valuation of Weihai's cores as moot. We assigned the 
revised rate for the Jiangsu Fengtai Single Entity \3\ as the separate 
rate to eligible non-selected respondents.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Jiangsu Fengtai Single Entity is comprised of Jiangsu 
Fengtai Diamond Tool Manufacture Co., Ltd., Jiangsu Fengtai Tools 
Co., Ltd., and Jiangsu Fengtai Sawing Industry Co., Ltd. See the 
Memorandum, ``Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's 
Republic of China--Collapsing of Jiangsu Fengtai Diamond Tool 
Manufacture Co., Ltd. and Affiliated Producers,'' dated November 30, 
2015.
    \4\ See Final Remand Redetermination dated August 6, 2018, 
pursuant to Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United 
States, 301 F. Supp. 3d 1326 (CIT 2018), and available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/18-28.pdf, aff'd in part, remanded in 
part, Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United States, 
359 F. Supp. 3d 1374 (CIT 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 1, 2019, the CIT remanded the Final Results to Commerce 
to reconsider Commerce's methodology in determining the separate rate 
for the non-selected respondents in this litigation. In addition, the 
CIT ordered that, if Commerce decides on remand to reinstate Weihai in 
the administrative review, Commerce must make appropriate adjustments 
in line with the CIT's previous remand order regarding the cores 
valuation and the revision to the surrogate truck freight distance with 
respect to Weihai.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United 
States, 359 F. Supp. 3d 1374 (CIT 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the second final remand redetermination, we continued to accept 
all withdrawals of review requests with respect to Weihai and stated 
our intent to rescind the administrative review, in part, with respect 
to Weihai. In response to the CIT's remand order, we relied on data for 
Weihai and the Jiangsu Fengtai Single Entity to recalculate the 
separate rate for the eligible non-selected respondents, with the 
adjustments to the cores valuation and the surrogate truck freight 
distance for Weihai.\6\ On May 7, 2019, the CIT sustained our second 
final remand redetermination in its entirety.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Final Second Remand Redetermination dated March 29, 
2019, pursuant to Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. 
United States, 359 F. Supp. 3d 1374 (CIT 2019), and available at 
https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/19-17.pdf.
    \7\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United 
States, Court No. 16-00124, Slip Op. 19-54 (CIT May 7, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341 
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken), as clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. 
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010), the United 
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to 
section 516A(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 a Commerce determination and must suspend liquidation of 
entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's May 7, 2019, 
final judgment sustaining the second final remand redetermination 
constitutes the CIT's final decision which is not ``in harmony'' with 
the Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the 
publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, Commerce will continue 
the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise pending 
expiration of the period to appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and 
conclusive court decision.

Rescission of Administrative Review in Part

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d), Commerce will rescind an 
administrative review in part ``if a party that requested a review 
withdraws the request within 90 days of the date of the publication of 
notice of initiation of the requested review. The Secretary may extend 
this time limit if the Secretary decides that it is reasonable to do 
so.'' \8\ Subsequent to the initiation of the review, the petitioner 
and Weihai timely withdrew their requests for review of Weihai.\9\ 
Robert Bosch Tools Corporation (Bosch) withdrew its request for review 
of Weihai after the regulatory 90-day period \10\ but we extended this 
time limit and accepted Bosch's withdrawal of its review request 
because we find it reasonable to do so under 19 CFR 351.213(d).\11\ 
Because no other party requested a review of Weihai, we are rescinding 
the review in part with respect to Weihai in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.213(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 19 CFR 351.213(d).
    \9\ See the petitioner's and Weihai's withdrawals of review 
request dated March 23, 2015.
    \10\ See Bosch's withdrawal of review request dated April 8, 
2015.
    \11\ See Final Remand Redetermination dated August 6, 2018, 
pursuant to Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United 
States, 301 F. Supp. 3d 1326 (CIT 2018), and available at https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/18-28.pdf, aff'd, remanded on other 
grounds, Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition v. United 
States, 359 F. Supp. 3d 1374 (CIT 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amended Final Results of Review

    Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending 
the Final Results with respect to the separate rate respondents as 
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Commerce determined that Chengdu Huifeng New Material 
Technology Co., Ltd., is the successor-in-interest to Chengdu 
Huifeng Diamond Tools Co., Ltd. See Diamond Sawblades and Parts 
Thereof from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 82 FR 60177 (December 
19, 2017).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-average
                      Exporter                          dumping margin
                                                           (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bosun Tools Co., Ltd................................               39.66
Chengdu Huifeng Diamond Tools Co., Ltd\12\..........               39.66
Danyang Huachang Diamond Tools Manufacturing Co.,                  39.66
 Ltd................................................
Danyang NYCL Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd...........               39.66
Danyang Weiwang Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd........               39.66
Guilin Tebon Superhard Material Co., Ltd............               39.66
Hangzhou Deer King Industrial and Trading Co., Ltd..               39.66
Hong Kong Hao Xin International Group Limited.......               39.66
Huzhou Gu's Import & Export Co., Ltd................               39.66

[[Page 23765]]

 
Jiangsu Fengtai Single Entity.......................               56.67
Jiangsu Huachang Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd.......               39.66
Jiangsu Inter-China Group Corporation \13\..........               39.66
Jiangsu Youhe Tool Manufacturer Co., Ltd............               39.66
Orient Gain International Limited...................               39.66
Pantos Logistics (HK) Company Limited...............               39.66
Qingyuan Shangtai Diamond Tools Co., Ltd............               39.66
Quanzhou Zhongzhi Diamond Tool Co., Ltd.............               39.66
Rizhao Hein Saw Co., Ltd............................               39.66
Saint-Gobain Abrasives (Shanghai) Co., Ltd..........               39.66
Shanghai Jingquan Industrial Trade Co., Ltd.........               39.66
Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond Tools Co\14\............               39.66
Xiamen ZL Diamond Technology Co., Ltd...............               39.66
Zhejiang Wanli Tools Group Co., Ltd.................               39.66
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed, 
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce will instruct 
the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping 
duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise based on the 
revised rates Commerce determined and listed above and, for Weihai, at 
the rate equal to the cash deposit of the estimated antidumping duty 
required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for 
consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's 
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 80 FR 75854, 75855, n.15 (December 
4, 2015), for the name variation of this company.
    \14\ Commerce determined that Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond Tools 
Co., Ltd., is the successor-in-interest to Wuhan Wanbang Laser 
Diamond Tools Co. See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the 
People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Changed Circumstances Review, 81 FR 20618 (April 8, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    As the cash deposit rate for Jiangsu Huachang Tools Manufacturing 
Co., Ltd., has not been subject to subsequent administrative reviews, 
Commerce will issue revised cash deposit instructions to CBP adjusting 
the rate from 29.76 percent to 39.66 percent, effective May 17, 2019. 
For all other respondents listed above, because the cash deposit rates 
have been updated in subsequent administrative reviews,\15\ we will not 
update their cash deposit rates as a result of these amended final 
results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review; 2015-2016, 83 FR 17527, 17528 (April 20, 2018), for Bosun 
Tools Co., Ltd., Danyang NYCL Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd., and 
Wuhan Wanbang Laser Diamond Tools Co., and Diamond Sawblades and 
Parts Thereof from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017, 83 FR 
39673, 39674, n.10 (August 10, 2018), unchanged in Diamond Sawblades 
and Parts Thereof from the People's Republic of China: Final Results 
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017, 83 FR 64331 
(December 14, 2018), for all other respondents listed above for 
which the cash deposit rates will not be updated as a result of 
these amended final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

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

    Dated: May 16, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019-10803 Filed 5-22-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P