[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 25, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50386-50387]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20816]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-010]


Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products 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 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

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

SUMMARY: On July 25, 2019, the United States Court of International 
Trade (the Court) issued its final judgement sustaining the remand 
redetermination pertaining to the antidumping duty (AD) administrative 
review of certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic products (solar 
products), from the People's Republic of China (China) covering the 
period July 31, 2014 through January 31, 2016. The Department of 
Commerce (Commerce) is notifying the public that the final judgment in 
this case is not in harmony with Commerce's final results in the 2014-
2016 AD administrative review of solar products from China and that 
Commerce is amending the final results with respect to AD margins 
assigned, as detailed below.

DATES: Applicable August 4, 2019.

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 July 12, 2017, Commerce published the final results of the 2014-
2016 AD administrative review of solar products from China.\1\ In the 
Final Results, Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd./Trina Solar 
(Changzhou) Science and Technology Co., Ltd./Yangcheng Trina Solar 
Energy Co., Ltd./Turpan Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd./Hubei Trina Solar 
Energy Co., Ltd. (collectively, Trina) was not granted an export 
subsidy offset because Commerce did not make a determination in the 
countervailing duty (CVD) investigation of certain solar products from 
China that the Export Buyer's Credits Program was an export subsidy.\2\ 
However, the Court concluded that Commerce ``necessarily found'' that 
the Export Buyer's Credit Program was an export subsidy, and that such 
a finding is ``reasonably discernible'' from Commerce's description of 
the program.\3\ On January 25, 2019, the Court remanded the Final 
Results to Commerce directing Commerce to increase Trina's U.S. selling 
prices by the amount countervailed to offset a particular subsidy.\4\ 
In accordance with the Court's Remand Order, under respectful protest, 
Commerce increased Trina's U.S. selling prices by the amount 
countervailed to offset a subsidy that Trina received in the most 
recently completed segment of the corresponding CVD proceeding.\5\ On 
July 25, 2019, the Court sustained Commerce's Remand 
Redetermination.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products From 
the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review and Final Determination of No Shipments; 2014-
2016, 82 FR 32170 (July 12, 2017) (Final Results), and accompanying 
Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM) at Comment 2.
    \2\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Crystalline 
Silicon Photovoltaic Products from the People's Republic of China: 
Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 79 FR 76962 
(December 23, 2014), and accompanying IDM at Comment 16, unchanged 
in Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products from the 
People's Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Order; and Amended 
Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty an Determination and 
Countervailing Duty Order, 80 FR 8592 (February 18, 2015).
    \3\ See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. Et Al v. United 
States, 359 F. Supp. 3d 1329, 1339 (CIT 2019) (Remand Order).
    \4\ Id. at 1342.
    \5\ See Final Results of Remand Redetermination, Changzhou Trina 
Solar Energy Co., Ltd. Et Al v. United States, Court No. 17-00199, 
Slip. Op. 19-12 (Court of International Trade January 25, 2019) 
(Remand Redetermination).
    \6\ See Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd. Et Al v. United 
States, Court No. 17-00199, Slip. Op. 19-92, (Court of International 
Trade July 25, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken,\7\ as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,\8\ 
the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (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 a Commerce determination and must 
suspend liquidation of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. 
The Court's July 25, 2019, final judgment sustaining Commerce's Remand 
Redetermination constitutes a final decision of the Court that is not 
in harmony with Commerce's Final Results. This notice is published in 
fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Commerce 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341 (Fed. 
Cir. 1990) (Timken).
    \8\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 
F. 3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amended Final Results

    Because there is now a final Court decision, Commerce is amending 
the Final Results. The revised AD dumping

[[Page 50387]]

margin for the respondents during the period July 31, 2014 through 
January 31, 2016 is in the table below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-average
                      Exporter                          dumping margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd./Trina Solar                  3.42
 (Changzhou) Science and Technology Co., Ltd./
 Yangcheng Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd./Turpan Trina
 Solar Energy Co., Ltd./Hubei Trina Solar Energy
 Co., Ltd...........................................
BYD (Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd..................                3.42
Chint Solar (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd.....................                3.42
Hefei JA Solar Technology Co., Ltd..................                3.42
Perlight Solar Co., Ltd.............................                3.42
Shenzhen Sungold Solar Co., Ltd.....................                3.42
Sunny Apex Development Ltd..........................                3.42
Wuxi Suntech Power Co., Ltd.........................                3.42
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the event the Court's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed, 
upheld by the CAFC, Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of 
subject merchandise exported by the respondents listed above based on 
the assessment rates calculated by Commerce in these amended final 
results of review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    Aside from Shenzhen Sungold Solar Co., Ltd., none of the cash 
deposit rates of the respondents listed above have been superseded by 
cash deposit rates calculated in intervening administrative reviews of 
the AD order on solar products from China. Thus, effective August 4, 
2019, the cash deposit rate applicable to entries of subject 
merchandise exported by all companies listed above, aside from Shenzhen 
Sungold Solar Co., Ltd., is 3.42 percent. Because Shenzhen Sungold 
Solar Co., Ltd. lost its separate rate in the most recently completed 
review of this order,\9\ we have not revised its cash deposit rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Products from 
the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2017-2018, 84 FR 27764 (June 14, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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: September 18, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019-20816 Filed 9-24-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P