[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 229 (Wednesday, November 27, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65350-65352]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25775]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-893]


Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber From the Republic of Korea: 
Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is amending the Final 
Results of a changed circumstances review (CCR) of the antidumping duty 
(AD) order on fine denier polyester staple fiber (PSF) from the 
Republic of Korea (Korea) to correct certain ministerial errors.

DATES: Applicable November 27, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Hanna, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401

[[Page 65351]]

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0835.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On October 2, 2019, Commerce published the Final Results of a 
changed circumstances review (CCR) of the AD order on PSF from 
Korea.\1\ In those Final Results, Commerce determined, based on its 
successor-in-interest analysis and evidence that Toray Chemical Korea, 
Inc. (TCK) merged into Toray Advanced Materials Korea, Inc. (TAK), that 
TAK is the successor-in-interest to TCK. On October 1, 2019, TAK 
alleged that Commerce made certain ministerial errors in the CCR Final 
Results.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber (PSF) from the 
Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Changed Circumstances Review, 84 FR 52457 (October 2, 2019) (CCR 
Final Results).
    \2\ See TAK's Letter, ``Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from 
the Republic of Korea: Request to Correct Error in Final Results 
Notice of Changed Circumstances Review,'' dated October 1, 2019 
(TAK's Letter).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Legal Framework

    A ministerial error, as defined in section 751(h) of the Tariff Act 
of 1930, as amended (the Act), includes ``errors in addition, 
subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical errors resulting 
from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other type 
of unintentional error which the administering authority considers 
ministerial.'' \3\ Commerce's regulations (19 CFR 351.224(e)) provide 
that Commerce ``will analyze any comments received and, if appropriate, 
correct any ministerial error by amending . . . the final results of 
review . . . .''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 19 CFR 351.224(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

TAK's Comments

    According to TAK, Commerce erred by stating that it would 
``instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend entries of 
subject merchandise produced or exported by TAK at TCK current cash 
deposit rate of 0.00 percent'' because TCK was excluded from the AD 
order on PSF from Korea if it both produced and exported PSF and 
entries of such merchandise were not subject to suspension of 
liquidation or cash deposit requirements.\4\ TAK also alleges that 
Commerce erred in making its successor-in-interest determination 
effective upon publication of the final results of the CCR and not 
effective April 1, 2019, the date TCK merged into TAK.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber From the People's 
Republic of China, India, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: 
Antidumping Duty Orders, 83 FR 34545 (July 20, 2018).
    \5\ See TAK's Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis

    We agree with TAK. Thus, Commerce's determination that TAK is the 
successor-in-interest to TCK means that as of the effective date of 
Commerce's successor-in-interest determination, subject merchandise 
produced and exported by TAK is not subject to the antidumping duty 
order on PSF from Korea. Therefore, entries of such merchandise should 
not be subject to suspension of liquidation, but should be liquidated 
without regard to antidumping duties. For those entries, we should not 
have indicated in the CCR Final Results that we would ``instruct U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection to suspend entries of subject merchandise 
produced or exported by TAK at TCK's current cash deposit rate of 0.00 
percent'' (emphasis added) because: (1) PSF produced and exported by 
TAK is entitled to the exclusion that applies to PSF produced and 
exported by TCK; and (2) in the underlying investigation, Commerce 
instructed CBP not to suspend liquidation of entries of PSF produced 
and exported by TCK.
    On the other hand, for PSF produced by TCK but exported by another 
entity to the United States, or merchandise produced by another entity, 
and exported by TCK to the United States, TAK is the successor-in-
interest to TCK, but like TCK, TAK's merchandise would not be excluded 
from the AD order on PSF from Korea.
    In the CCR Final Results, we also indicated that our successor-in-
interest determination would take effect upon publication of the final 
results of the CCR.\6\ This approach is consistent with the position 
taken by Commerce in other CCRs, including two CCRs covering the same 
merger but different AD orders.\7\ However, we overlooked the fact that 
the instant CCR involved a company that had merchandise which it had 
both produced and exported that was excluded from the AD order on PSF 
from Korea, whereas the other CCRs that used the publication date as 
the effective date involved companies whose merchandise was subject to 
an AD order and had a cash deposit rate, no matter if they produced 
and/or exported their own merchandise to the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Final Results.
    \7\ See Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From the Republic of 
Korea: Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed 
Circumstances Review, 84 FR 45124 (August 28, 2019); Low Melt 
Polyester Staple Fiber From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 84 FR 
45129 (August 28, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products, an interested 
party argued that ``the Department's determination to apply Glynwed's 
antidumping duty deposit rate to Niagara prospectively from the 
publication date of the final results, is contrary to the Department's 
finding that Niagara is the successor-in-interest to Glynwed as of May 
21, 1999, and inconsistent with the retroactive application of 
Glynwed's countervailing duty deposit rate to Niagara.'' \8\ In 
response, Commerce explained that the effective date was applied 
retroactively in the countervailing duty case, because merchandise 
produced and exported by the predecessor company to a successor-in-
interest was excluded from the order:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Certain Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel Products 
From the United Kingdom: Final Results of Changed-Circumstances 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 64 FR 
66880-66881 (November 30, 1999) (Hot-Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon 
Steel Products).

    The basis for Niagara's apparent misunderstanding is that it 
fails to recognize that Glenwed, the predecessor company to Niagara, 
was excluded, ab initio, from the countervailing duty order, but has 
always been subject to the antidumping duty order. As such, Glenwed, 
and now its successor-in-interest Niagara, was never liable for any 
estimated cash deposits under the countervailing duty order. Thus, 
with the Department's determination that Niagara is the successor-
in-interest to Glenwed, Niagara (like Glenwed) is not now, and never 
was subject to the . . . order. Therefore, with respect to the 
countervailing duty order, it is appropriate to apply the changed 
circumstances-determination retroactively to May 21, 1999, the date 
Glenwed became Niagara . . . However, with respect to the 
antidumping duty order, it is appropriate to change the estimated 
cash deposit rate for Niagara only as of the effective date of the 
Department's final changed-circumstances determination. Because 
Glenwed was always subject to the antidumping duty order, it was 
always potentially liable for estimated cash deposits . . . However, 
because cash deposits are only estimates of the amount of 
antidumping duties that will be due, changes in cash deposit rates 
are not made retroactive.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Id.

    The record shows that TCK merged into TAK on April 1, 2019.\10\ 
Because there is no other information on the record calling into 
question the merger date, and no parties commented on this matter, 
consistent with previous practice as shown, it is appropriate to apply 
the effective date retroactively to April 1, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See TAK's Letter, ``Changed Circumstances Review Request,'' 
dated May 23, 2019 at Exhibit 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, we determine, in accordance with section 751(h) of the

[[Page 65352]]

Act and 19 CFR 351.224(f), that we made a ministerial error in the CCR 
Final Results by stating that we would instruct CBP to suspend entries 
of subject merchandise produced or exported by TAK at a 0.00 percent 
cash deposit rate. In fact, for merchandise both produced and exported 
by TAK, we will instruct CBP not to suspend liquidation of entries of 
subject merchandise because that merchandise is excluded from the AD 
order on PSF from Korea. For those entries, we will also instruct CBP 
to liquidate such entries without regard to antidumping duties. For 
entries of merchandise produced, but not exported, or exported, but not 
produced, by TAK, the all-others rate determined in the underlying 
investigation \11\ will continue to be applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ PSF from Korea Final, 83 FR at 24743.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the effective date of these results of a CCR, also 
in accordance with section 751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(f), we 
determine further that we made a ministerial error in the CCR Final 
Results when we indicated that the results would be effective upon 
publication of the final results notice, rather than the date of the 
merger. Because some of the merchandise exported by TAK will be 
excluded from the AD order on PSF from Korea, the effective date should 
be the date of the merger. Accordingly, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(e), 
we are amending the Final Results to correct these errors.
    Commerce intends to issue liquidation instructions to CBP 15 days 
after publication of these amended final results of this CCR 
instructing CBP to not suspend liquidation of, and to liquidate without 
regarding to antidumping duties, subject merchandise produced and 
exported by TCK's successor-in-interest, TAK, entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after April 1, 2019.

Notification to Importers

    This notice 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 antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply 
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

Notification to Interested Parties

    We are issuing this determination and publishing these final 
results and notice in accordance with sections 751(h) and 777(i) of the 
Act and 19 CFR 351.224(e).

    Dated: November 20, 2019.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2019-25775 Filed 11-26-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P