[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 150 (Tuesday, August 4, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 47174-47176]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16880]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-932]


Certain Steel Threaded Rod From the People's Republic of China: 
Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Results of 
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 22, 2020, the United States Court of International 
Trade (CIT) sustained the final results of redetermination pertaining 
to the fourth administrative review of the antidumping duty order on 
certain steel threaded rod (steel threaded rod) from the People's 
Republic of China (China) covering the period of review (POR) April 1, 
2012 through March 31, 2013. 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 and that 
Commerce is amending the final results with respect to the dumping 
margin calculated for Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. (a/k/a Jiaxing 
Brother Standard Parts, Co., Ltd.), IFI & Morgan Ltd., and RMB 
Fasteners Ltd. (collectively, the RMB/IFI Group).

DATES: Applicable August 1, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry Huang, 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) 482-4047.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On December 3, 2014, Commerce published its Final Results in the 
2012-2013 administrative review of steel threaded rod from China.\1\ 
During the review, Commerce selected Thailand as the primary surrogate 
country, finding that data from Thailand provided the best available 
information on the record to value the RMB/IFI Group's reported factors 
of production (FOPs). Commerce also relied on a ``Doing Business 2014: 
Thailand'' report from the World Bank

[[Page 47175]]

to derive the RMB/IFI Group's brokerage and handling (B&H) costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the People's Republic of 
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 
2012-2013, 79 FR 71743 (December 3, 2014) (Final Results), and 
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The RMB/IFI Group challenged several aspects of the Final Results, 
including Commerce's surrogate value (SV) calculation for B&H costs. In 
Jiaxing Brother I,\2\ the CIT sustained all other challenged 
determinations, but remanded the Final Results to Commerce to 
reconsider the calculation of the B&H SV, finding Commerce's 
calculation unsupported by substantial evidence. In the First Remand 
Redetermination, Commerce revised the numerator of the B&H SV 
calculation downward to account for expenses associated with obtaining 
letters of credit. However, Commerce continued to rely on 10,000 
kilograms (kgs)--which is the container weight assumption underlying 
the World Bank survey data--as the denominator for the SV calculation, 
explaining that the use of the 10,000 kg figure has been adopted as the 
standard methodology across many cases. Commerce also noted that using 
this figure avoids mixing different sources of data in the calculation 
of the B&H SV, which would yield distorted results.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v. United 
States, 380 F. Supp. 3d 1343 (CIT 2019) (Jiaxing Brother I).
    \3\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Jiaxing 
Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. (a/k/a Jiaxing Brother Standard Part Co., 
Ltd.), IFI & Morgan Ltd., and RMB Fasteners Ltd. v. United States, 
Court No. 14-00316, Slip Op. 19-55 (CIT May 9, 2019), dated August 
27, 2019 (First Remand Redetermination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 3, 2020, the CIT issued Jiaxing Brother II.\4\ The 
Court sustained Commerce's determination to adjust the numerator of the 
B&H SV calculation in order to take into account the cost of acquiring 
letters of credit.\5\ With respect to the denominator, the CIT 
acknowledged Commerce's preference to use a single source for the B&H 
calculation and Commerce's past practice in this regard. However, it 
held that Commerce must further explain why using the weight of 10,000 
kg as the denominator is reasonable and supported by substantial 
evidence in light of the RMB/IFI Group's information indicating that 
B&H costs were not based on the specific weight of a container.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v. United 
States, 425 F. Supp. 3d 1338 (CIT 2020) (Jiaxing Brother II).
    \5\ Id., 425 F. Supp. 3d at 1351.
    \6\ Id., 425 F. Supp. 3d at 1348-51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its Second Remand Redetermination, consistent with Jiaxing 
Brother II, Commerce provided additional explanation regarding the 
selection of the 10,000 kg denominator.\7\ Commerce compared the 10,000 
kg figure assumed in the World Bank report to the alternatives proposed 
by the RMB/IFI Group (i.e., the purported average weight of the RMB/IFI 
Group's shipments or the maximum theoretical weight of a container) as 
well as to other information contained on the administrative record. 
Based on this analysis, Commerce found that the 10,000 kg figure 
continues to be the best data available on the record.\8\ On July 22, 
2020, the Court sustained Commerce's determination to use the weight of 
10,000 kg as the denominator for the SV calculation.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Jiaxing 
Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v. United States, Court No. 14-
00316, Slip Op. 20-13 (CIT February 3, 2020), dated April 17, 2020 
(Second Remand Redetermination).
    \8\ Id.
    \9\ See Jiaxing Brother Fastener Co., Ltd. et al. v. United 
States, Court No. 14-00316, Slip Op. 20-102 (CIT July 22, 2020) at 
13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Due to the removal of expenses associated with obtaining letters of 
credit in the B&H SV calculation, we have revised the RMB/IFI Group's 
weighted-average margin. The RMB/IFI Group's weighted-average margin 
decreased to 46.78 percent from the 47.62 percent margin calculated in 
the Final Results.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See First Remand Redetermination at 29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken,\11\ as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades,\12\ the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, 
pursuant to section 516A 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 July 22, 2020 judgment sustaining the Second 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 
1990) (Timken).
    \12\ 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 with respect to the RMB/IFI Group. The revised 
weighted-average dumping margin for the RMB/IFI Group for the period 
April 1, 2012 through March 31, 2013 is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Weighted-
                        Exporter                          average margin
                                                            (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RMB/IFI Group..........................................           46.78
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 the 
RMB/IFI Group 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,\13\ we will instruct CBP to liquidate the 
appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to Commerce's assessment practice, for entries that were 
not reported in the U.S. sales data submitted by the RMB/IFI Group 
during this review, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate such 
entries at the China-wide entity rate.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment 
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The cash deposit rate calculated for the RMB/IFI Group in the 2012-
2013 administrative review has been superseded by a cash deposit rate 
calculated in an intervening administrative review of the antidumping 
duty order on steel threaded rod from China.\15\ Thus, we will not 
alter the RMB/IFI Group's cash deposit rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the People's Republic 
of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 
2015-2016, 82 FR 51611 (November 7, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.


[[Page 47176]]


    Dated: July 28, 2020.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2020-16880 Filed 8-3-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P