[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 137 (Thursday, July 16, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43208-43209]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15305]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-471-807]


Certain Uncoated Paper from Portugal: Notice of Court Decision 
Not in Harmony With Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results of Review 
Pursuant to Court Decision; 2015-2017

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

SUMMARY: On July 7, 2020, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) 
sustained the final results of redetermination pertaining to the 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain uncoated 
paper from Portugal covering the period of review (POR) August 26, 2015 
through February 28, 2017. The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is 
notifying the public that the CIT's final judgement in this case is not 
in harmony with the final results of the administrative review, and 
that Commerce is amending the final results with respect to The 
Navigator Company, S.A. (Navigator).

DATES: Applicable July 17, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kabir Archuletta, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2593.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 13, 2018, Commerce published its Final Results in the 
2015-2017 administrative review of certain uncoated paper from 
Portugal.\1\ During the review, Commerce found that Navigator had 
failed to demonstrate that the allocation methodology for its U.S. 
brokerage and handling expenses did not create inaccuracies or 
distortions. Therefore, Commerce selected the

[[Page 43209]]

highest reported allocated U.S. brokerage and handling expense as 
adverse facts available (AFA) for the allocated U.S. brokerage and 
handling expenses.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Uncoated Paper from Portugal: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2017, 83 FR 39982 
(August 13, 2018) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and 
Decision Memorandum (IDM).
    \2\ Id. at Comment 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Navigator alleged, among other things, that Commerce made a 
ministerial error in the Final Results when applying AFA for 
Navigator's allocated U.S. brokerage and handling expenses.\3\ Commerce 
agreed that it committed a ministerial error in its selection of the 
figure used as AFA; therefore, Commerce modified its calculations to 
select instead the highest transaction-specific, actual U.S. brokerage 
and handling expense.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Certain Uncoated Paper from Portugal: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2017, 83 FR 52810 
(October 18, 2018) (Amended Final Results), and accompanying IDM.
    \4\ See Amended Final Results IDM at Allegation 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Navigator challenged Commerce's decision to base U.S. brokerage and 
handling expenses on AFA in the Final Results. In addition, The 
Packaging Corporation of America, United Steel, Paper and Forestry, 
Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial Service Workers 
International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC and the Domtar Corporation 
(collectively, the petitioners) challenged the value selected as AFA in 
Amended Final Results. On November 22, 2019, the CIT issued its Remand 
Order, remanding, in part, the Final Results and Amended Final Results 
to Commerce, stating that, in the Final Results, Commerce permissibly 
used facts otherwise available, but that the use of an adverse 
inference was not supported by substantive evidence, and that in the 
Amended Final Results, Commerce did not correct an inadvertent clerical 
error. but rather made an impermissible substantive modification to the 
Final Results.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See The Navigator Company, S.A. (Navigator) and Packaging 
Corporation of America et al. and Domtar Corporation v. United 
States and Packaging Corporation of America et al., Consol. Court 
No. 18-00192, Slip Op. 19-146 (CIT November 22, 2019) (Remand 
Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 19, 2020, Commerce issued the Final Redetermination 
Results,\6\ selecting a neutral facts available for allocated U.S. 
brokerage and handling expenses by calculating a weighted average of 
all positive allocated U.S. brokerage and handling expenses reported 
for the POR.\7\ On July 7, 2020, the CIT sustained Commerce's Final 
Redetermination Results.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court 
Remand in The Navigator Company, S.A. (Navigator) and Packaging 
Corporation of America et al. and Domtar Corporation v. United 
States and Packaging Corporation of America et al., Consol. Court 
No. 18-00192, Slip Op. 19-146, dated February 19, 2020 (Final 
Redetermination Results).
    \7\ See Final Redetermination Results at 5.
    \8\ See The Navigator Company, S.A. (Navigator) and Packaging 
Corporation of America et al. and Domtar Corporation v. United 
States and Packaging Corporation of America et al., Consol. Court 
No. 18-00192, Slip Op. 20-94 (CIT July 7, 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken,\9\ as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades,\10\ the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, 
pursuant to section 516A of the Trade Act of 1970, as amended (the 
Act), Commerce must publish 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.\11\ The CIT's July 7, 
2020 judgment sustaining the Final Redetermination Results constitutes 
a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with Commerce's 
Amended Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the 
publication requirements of Timken and section 516A of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Timken Co. v United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 
1990) (Timken).
    \10\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
    \11\ See sections 516A(c) and (e) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amended Final Results of Review

    Because there is now a final CIT decision, Commerce is amending its 
Amended Final Results with respect to Navigator for the POR as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
                          Exporter                             dumping
                                                                margin
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Navigator Company, S.A.................................        1.63
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Instructions

    In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed or, if appealed, 
upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to 
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess antidumping 
duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise exported by 
Navigator in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Commerce will 
calculate importer-specific ad valorem assessment rates on the basis of 
the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for each importer's 
examined sales and the total entered value of those sales, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). We will instruct CBP to assess 
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review 
when the importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate calculated is not 
zero or de minimis. Where an importer-specific ad valorem assessment 
rate is zero or de minimis,\12\ we will instruct CBP to liquidate the 
appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The cash deposit rate for Navigator has been superseded by cash 
deposit rates calculated in intervening administrative reviews of the 
antidumping duty order on certain uncoated paper from Portugal. Thus, 
we will not alter Navigator's cash deposit rate as a result of these 
amended final results of review.

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: July 9, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-15305 Filed 7-15-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P