[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 227 (Tuesday, November 30, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67905-67907]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26023]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-900]


Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of 
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and 
Final Determination of No Shipments; 2019-2020

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that diamond 
sawblades and parts thereof (diamond sawblades) from the People's 
Republic of China (China) were sold at less than normal value by 
certain exporters during the period of review (POR) November 1, 2019, 
through October 31, 2020.

DATES: Applicable November 30, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allison Hollander, 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) 482-2805.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 2, 2021, Commerce published in the Federal Register the 
preliminary results of the 2019-2020 administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades from China.\1\ We invited 
interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results and we 
received a case brief on behalf of Husqvarna (Hebei) Co., Ltd. 
(Husqvarna) \2\ and comments submitted by the Diamond Sawblades 
Manufacturers' Coalition (DSMC).\3\ On September 1, 2021, Husqvarna 
requested that Commerce conduct a hearing and subsequently, on 
September 24, 2021, withdrew its request for a hearing.\4\ The 
administrative review covers 53 companies, inclusive of the two 
mandatory respondents, Jiangsu Fengtai Single Entity (Jiangsu Fengtai) 
and Zhejiang Wanli Tools Group Co., Ltd. (Zhejiang Wanli).\5\ For a 
complete description of the events that occurred since the Preliminary 
Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's 
Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review and Preliminary Determination of No Shipments; 
2019-2020, 86 FR 41446 (August 2, 2021) (Preliminary Results), and 
accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
    \2\ See Husqvarna's Letter, ``Diamond Sawblades and Parts 
Thereof from China: Case Brief,'' dated September 1, 2021.
    \3\ See DSMC's Letter, ``Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof 
from the People's Republic of China: Letter in Lieu of Case Brief,'' 
dated September 1, 2021 (DSMC Letter).
    \4\ See Husqvarna's Letters, ``Diamond Sawblades and Parts 
Thereof from China: Request for Hearing,'' dated September 1, 2021; 
and ``Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from China: Withdrawal of 
Hearing Request,'' dated September 24, 2021.
    \5\ See Memorandum, ``Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of 
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's Republic of 
China Administrative Review 2019-2020: Respondent Selection,'' dated 
March 2, 2021.
    \6\ See Memorandum, ``Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from 
the People's Republic of China: Decision Memorandum for the Final 
Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final 
Determination of No Shipments; 2019-2020,'' dated concurrently with, 
and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order \7\ are diamond sawblades. A 
full description of the scope of the Order is contained in the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's 
Republic of China and the Republic of Korea: Antidumping Duty 
Orders, 74 FR 57145 (November 4, 2009) (Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by 
interested parties in this review are addressed in the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues that parties raised and to 
which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum follows as an 
appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public 
document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service 
System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Final Determination of No Shipments

    In the Preliminary Results, we preliminarily determined that five 
companies, Bosun Tools Co., Ltd., Chengdu Huifeng New Material 
Technology Co., Ltd., Danyang Weiwang Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd., 
Weihai Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co., Ltd., and Wuhan Wanbang 
Laser Diamond Tools Co., Ltd., which have been eligible for separate 
rates in previous segments of the proceeding and are subject to this 
review, did not have any shipments of subject merchandise during the 
POR.\8\ No party commented on the Preliminary Results regarding our no-
shipments determination with respect to these five companies. 
Therefore, for the final results of review, we continue to find that 
these companies did not have any shipments of subject merchandise 
during the POR and will issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on 
these final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See the ``Separate Rates'' section of the Preliminary 
Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Preliminary Results, based on information on the record, we 
preliminarily found that Husqvarna had entries of subject merchandise 
during the POR. Further, because it did not file a separate rate 
application or separate rate certification (SRC), we preliminarily 
considered Husqvarna to be part of the China-wide entity. Based on 
additional information placed on the record since the Preliminary 
Results, we find that Husqvarna did not have any shipments of subject 
merchandise during the POR \9\ and therefore, we will issue appropriate 
instructions to CBP based on the final results of review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on a review of the record and comments received from 
Husqvarna and DSMC regarding our Preliminary Results, and for the 
reasons explained in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, for the final 
results of review, we made a change to the margin assigned to Xiamen ZL 
Diamond Technology Co.,

[[Page 67906]]

Ltd. (Xiamen ZL) and determined that Husqvarna had no shipments during 
the POR. For a discussion of the above-referenced changes, see the 
``Changes Since the Preliminary Results'' section of the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum.

Separate Rate for Non-Selected Company

    In the Preliminary Results, we found that evidence provided by one 
respondent, Xiamen ZL, supported finding an absence of both de jure and 
de facto government control, and, therefore, we preliminarily granted a 
separate rate to this company.\10\ Since the issuance of the 
Preliminary Results, we received comments from DSMC regarding Xiamen 
ZL's separate rate eligibility.\11\ However, for the final results of 
review, we continue to find that Xiamen ZL is eligible to receive a 
separate rate in this review. For further discussion, see the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Preliminary Results Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 
6-7.
    \11\ See DSMC Letter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Preliminary Results, because we denied the separate rate 
eligibility for the two respondents selected for individual 
examination, Jiangsu Fengtai and Zhejiang Wanli, and treated them as 
part of the China-wide entity, we preliminarily applied to the non-
selected respondent the separate rate assigned to eligible respondents 
in the last completed administrative review, which at the time was 0.00 
percent.\12\ However, since the Preliminary Results, Commerce issued 
the final results of the 2018-2019 administrative review of diamond 
sawblades from China.\13\ Thus, for the final results of review, we 
find it appropriate to assign the separate rate assigned to eligible 
respondents in the 2018-2019 Final Results (currently the most recently 
completed administrative review) as the dumping margin for the non-
selected separate rate respondent, i.e., 41.03 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Preliminary Results Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 
7.
    \13\ See Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the People's 
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review; 2018-2019, 86 FR 46823 (August 20, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

China-Wide Entity

    As stated in the Preliminary Results, because no party requested a 
review of the China-wide entity in this review, the entity is not under 
review, and the entity's rate (i.e., 82.05 percent) is not subject to 
change.\14\ Aside from the no-shipment and separate rate companies 
discussed above, Commerce considers all other companies for which a 
review was requested (which did not file a separate rate application) 
listed in Appendix II to this notice, to be part of the China-wide 
entity.\15\ Additionally, as discussed above, because we denied 
separate rate eligibility for Jiangsu Fengtai and Zhejiang Wanli, these 
two companies are also part of the China-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See, e.g., Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from the 
People's Republic of China; Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 80 FR 32344, 32345 (June 8, 2015).
    \15\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Reviews, 83 FR 1329, 1331-32 (January 11, 2018) 
(``All firms listed below that wish to qualify for separate rate 
status in the administrative reviews involving NME countries must 
complete, as appropriate, either a separate rate application or 
certification, as described below.''); see also Appendix II for the 
list of companies that are subject to this administrative review 
that are considered to be part of the China-wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Results of the Administrative Review

    Commerce determines that the following weighted-average dumping 
margin exists for the administrative review covering the period 
November 1, 2019, through October 31, 2020:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
 Exporters: Separate rate applicable to the following non-     dumping
                     selected companies                         margin
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xiamen ZL Diamond Technology Co., Ltd......................       41.03
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    Normally, Commerce discloses to interested parties the calculations 
performed in connection with the final results of a review within five 
days of any public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, 
within five days of the date of publication of the notice of final 
results in the Federal Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). 
However, because Commerce denied the separate rate eligibility for the 
two respondents selected for individual examination and treated them as 
part of the China-wide entity, there are no calculations to disclose.

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), 
Commerce has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 
shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject 
merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review.\16\ 
Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier 
than 35 days after the date of publication of these final results of 
this review in the Federal Register. If a timely summons is filed at 
the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will 
direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties 
to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired (i.e., within 
90 days of publication).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the non-selected respondent that received a separate rate, 
Xiamen ZL, we will instruct CBP to apply an antidumping duty assessment 
rate of 41.03 percent to all entries of subject merchandise that 
entered the United States during the POR. For the six companies that we 
determined had no reviewable entries of the subject merchandise in this 
review period, any suspended entries that entered under that exporter's 
case number (i.e., at that exporter's rate) will be liquidated at the 
China-wide rate, 82.05 percent. For entries of subject merchandise 
during the POR which were exported by the companies listed in Appendix 
II of this notice, we will instruct CBP to apply the antidumping duty 
assessment rate of the China-wide entity to all entries of subject 
merchandise exported by these companies.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this review for shipments of the 
subject merchandise from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 
for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by 
section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For subject merchandise exported 
by the company listed above that has a separate rate, the cash deposit 
rate will be the rate established in these final results of review for 
the exporter as listed above; (2) for previously investigated or 
reviewed Chinese and non-Chinese exporters not listed above that 
received a separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding, the 
cash deposit rate will continue to be the existing exporter-specific 
rate; (3) for all Chinese exporters of subject merchandise that have 
not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate 
will be that for the China-wide entity; and (4) for all non-Chinese 
exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own 
rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the Chinese 
exporter that supplied that non-Chinese exporter. These deposit 
requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further 
notice.

[[Page 67907]]

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 POR. Failure to comply with this 
requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that reimbursement 
of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double 
antidumping duties.

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order (APO)

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to APO of 
their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of 
proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.305. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of 
APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby 
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO 
is a violation subject to sanction.

Notification to Interested Parties

    Commerce is issuing and publishing the final results of this review 
in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 
CFR 351.221(b)(5).

    Dated: November 23, 2021.
James Maeder,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations.

Appendix I

List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Changes Since the Preliminary Results
V. Discussion of the Issues
VI. Recommendation

Appendix II

    Companies that are subject to this administrative review that 
are considered to be part of the China-wide entity are:

1. ASHINE Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.
2. Danyang City Ou Di Ma Tools Co., Ltd.
3. Danyang Hantronic Import & Export Co., Ltd.
4. Danyang Huachang Diamond Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
5. Danyang Like Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
6. Danyang NYCL Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
7. Danyang Tongyu Tools Co., Ltd.
8. Danyang Tsunda Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.
9. Diamond Tools Technology (Thailand) Co., Ltd.
10. Fujian Quanzhou Aotu Precise Machine Co., Ltd.
11. Guilin Tebon Superhard Material Co., Ltd.
12. Hangzhou Deer King Industrial and Trading Co., Ltd.
13. Hangzhou Kingburg Import & Export Co., Ltd.
14. Hebei XMF Tools Group Co., Ltd.
15. Henan Huanghe Whirlwind Co., Ltd.
16. Henan Huanghe Whirlwind International Co., Ltd.
17. Hong Kong Hao Xin International Group Limited
18. Hubei Changjiang Precision Engineering Materials Technology Co., 
Ltd.
19. Hubei Sheng Bai Rui Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.
20. Huzhou Gu's Import & Export Co., Ltd.
21. Jiangsu Fengtai Single Entity *
22. Jiangsu Huachang Diamond Tools Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
23. Jiangsu Inter-China Group Corporation
24. Jiangsu Yaofeng Tools Co., Ltd.
25. Jiangsu Youhe Tool Manufacturer Co., Ltd.
26. Orient Gain International Limited
27. Pantos Logistics (HK) Company Limited
28. Protec Tools Co., Ltd.
29. Pujiang Talent Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.
30. Qingdao Hyosung Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.
31. Qingdao Shinhan Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd.
32. Qingyuan Shangtai Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.
33. Quanzhou Sunny Superhard Tools Co., Ltd.
34. Quanzhou Zhongzhi Diamond Tool Co., Ltd.
35. Rizhao Hein Saw Co., Ltd.
36. Saint-Gobain Abrasives (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.
37. Shanghai Jingquan Industrial Trade Co., Ltd.
38. Shanghai Starcraft Tools Co., Ltd.
39. Shanghai Vinon Tools Industrial Co.
40. Sino Tools Co., Ltd.
41. Wuhan Baiyi Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.
42. Wuhan Sadia Trading Co., Ltd.
43. Wuhan ZhaoHua Technology Co., Ltd.
44. Zhejiang Wanli Tools Group Co., Ltd.*
45. ZL Diamond Technology Co., Ltd.
46. ZL Diamond Tools Co., Ltd.

    * Selected as mandatory respondents, these companies were found to 
be part of the China-wide entity in the instant review.

[FR Doc. 2021-26023 Filed 11-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P