Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From India: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Amended Final Determination in Less Than Fair Value Investigation; Notice of Amended Final Determination Pursuant to Court Decision; and Notice of Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order, in Part

Published date08 January 2020
Citation85 FR 877
Record Number2020-00050
SectionNotices
CourtInternational Trade Administration
Federal Register, Volume 85 Issue 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 2020)
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 5 (Wednesday, January 8, 2020)]
                [Notices]
                [Pages 877-878]
                From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
                [FR Doc No: 2020-00050]
                -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
                International Trade Administration
                [A-533-863]
                Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From India: Notice of
                Court Decision Not in Harmony With Amended Final Determination in Less
                Than Fair Value Investigation; Notice of Amended Final Determination
                Pursuant to Court Decision; and Notice of Revocation of Antidumping
                Duty Order, in Part
                AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
                Department of Commerce.
                SUMMARY: On December 18, 2019, the United States Court of International
                Trade (CIT) sustained the Department of Commerce's (Commerce) remand
                redetermination pertaining to the less-than-fair-value (LTFV)
                investigation of certain corrosion-resistant steel products (corrosion-
                resistant steel) from India. Commerce is notifying the public that the
                final judgment in this case is not in harmony with Commerce's amended
                final determination in the LTFV investigation of corrosion-resistant
                steel from India. Pursuant to the CIT's final judgment, Uttam Galva
                Steels Ltd. (Uttam Galva) is being excluded from the order.
                DATES: Applicable December 28, 2019.
                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
                 The litigation in Uttam Galva Steels Limited v. United States
                relates to Commerce's final determination in the LTFV investigation
                covering corrosion-resistant steel from India.\1\ In its Amended Final
                Determination and Order, Commerce reached affirmative determinations
                for mandatory respondents Uttam Galva,\2\ as well as JSW Steel Ltd. and
                its wholly-owned affiliate JSW Steel Coated Products Limited
                (collectively, JSW).\3\ Uttam Galva appealed the Amended Final
                Determination and Order to the CIT, and on April 18, 2018, the CIT
                remanded Commerce's Amended Final Determination and Order.\4\ In its
                opinion, the CIT found that Commerce's duty drawback calculation was
                unreasonable and not in accordance with the law and instructed Commerce
                to recalculate Uttam Galva's duty drawback adjustment.\5\
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \1\ Court No. 16-00162, Slip Op. 2019-168 (CIT December 18,
                2019); see Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India:
                Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Final
                Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances, 81 FR 35329 (June
                2, 2016), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum; Certain
                Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from India, Italy, the People's
                Republic of China, the Republic of Korea and Taiwan: Amended Final
                Affirmative Antidumping Determination for India and Taiwan, and
                Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 48390 (July 25, 2016) (Amended Final
                Determination and Order); see also Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel
                Products from India, Italy, the People's Republic of China, the
                Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Notice of Correction to the
                Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 58475 (August 25, 2016).
                 \2\ In the underlying investigation, we found Uttam Galva Steels
                Limited and its affiliated companies Uttam Value Steels Limited,
                Atlantis International Services Company Ltd., Uttam Galva Steels,
                Netherlands, B.V., and Uttam Galva Steels (BVI) Limited
                (collectively, Uttam Galva), to comprise a single entity. See Final
                Determination, 81 FR at 35330 n.13.
                 \3\ Id.
                 \4\ See Uttam Galva Steels Ltd v. United States, 311 F. Supp. 3d
                1345 (CIT 2018).
                 \5\ Id., 311 F. Supp. at 1357.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 On August 16, 2018, Commerce filed Remand Results with the CIT,
                recalculating Uttam Galva's duty drawback adjustment.\6\ On March 12,
                2019, the CIT remanded the Remand Results to Commerce for a second
                redetermination.\7\ On May 29, 2019, Commerce filed its Second Remand
                Results with the CIT, wherein it revised its duty drawback calculation
                for a second time.\8\ On December 18, 2019, the CIT sustained
                Commerce's Second Remand Results.\9\
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \6\ See ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
                Remand, Uttam Galva Steels Limited v. United States, Court No. 16-
                00162, Slip Op. 18-44 (CIT 2018),'' dated August 16, 2018 (Remand
                Results).
                 \7\ See Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. v. United States, 374 F. Supp.
                3d 1360 (CIT 2019).
                 \8\ See ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court
                Remand, Uttam Galva Steels Limited v. United States, Court No. 16-
                00162, Slip Op. 19-34 (CIT 2019),'' dated May 29, 2019 (Second
                Remand Results).
                 \9\ See Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 16-
                00162, Slip Op. 2019-168 (CIT December 18, 2019).
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Timken Notice
                 In its decision in Timken,\10\ as clarified by Diamond
                Sawblades,\11\ the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal
                Circuit held that, pursuant to section 516A(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 CIT's December 18, 2019 final judgment sustaining
                Commerce's Second Remand Results constitutes a final decision of the
                Court that is not in harmony with Commerce's Amended Final
                Determination and Order. This notice is published in fulfillment of the
                publication requirements of Timken.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \10\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337, 341 (Fed.
                Cir. 1990) (Timken).
                 \11\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626
                F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                [[Page 878]]
                Amended Final Determination
                 Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending
                the Final Determination and Amended Final Determination and Order with
                respect to Uttam Galva and the all-others rate. The revised weighted-
                average dumping margins for Uttam Galva and all other exporters for the
                period April 1, 2014 through March 31, 2015, are as follows:
                ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Weighted-
                 average
                 Exporter/producer dumping margin
                 (percent)
                ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Uttam Galva Steels Limited; Uttam Value Steels Limited; 0.00
                 Atlantis International Services Company Ltd.; Uttam
                 Galva Steels, Netherlands, B.V.; Uttam Galva Steels
                 (BVI) Limited..........................................
                All Others.............................................. \12\ 4.43
                ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Partial Exclusion From Antidumping Duty Order
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \12\ As explained in the Second Remand Results, because Uttam
                Galva's antidumping duty margin is now 0.00 percent, its rate is no
                longer factored in the calculation of the all-others rate and the
                rate calculated for JSW is now the all-others rate. Further,
                although the dumping margin calculated for JSW and published in the
                Amended Final Determination and Order continues to be 4.43 percent,
                the adjustment for export subsidies results in a cash deposit rate
                of 0.47 percent. See Second Remand Results at 17.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Pursuant to section 735(a)(4) of the Act, Commerce ``shall
                disregard any weighted average dumping margin that is de minimis as
                defined in section 733(b)(3) of the Act.'' \13\ Furthermore, section
                735(c)(2) of the Act states that ``the investigation shall be
                terminated upon publication of that negative determination'' and
                Commerce shall ``terminate the suspension of liquidation'' and
                ``release any bond or other security, and refund any cash deposit.''
                \14\ As a result of this amended final determination, in which Commerce
                has calculated an estimated weighted-average dumping margin of 0.00
                percent for Uttam Galva, Commerce is hereby excluding merchandise
                produced and exported by Uttam Galva from the antidumping duty
                order.\15\ Accordingly, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border
                Protection (CBP) to release any bonds or other security and refund cash
                deposits pertaining to any suspended entries from Uttam Galva. This
                exclusion does not apply to any other companies (except those that
                comprise a single entity with Uttam Galva, which are listed in the
                table above).\16\
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \13\ Section 733(b)(3) of the Act defines de minimis dumping
                margin as ``less than 2 percent ad valorem or the equivalent
                specific rate for the subject merchandise.''
                 \14\ See sections 735(c)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act.
                 \15\ See Second Remand Results at 22.
                 \16\ See supra, fn. 2.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 However, pursuant to Timken, the suspension of liquidation must
                continue during the pendency of the appeals process. Thus, we will
                instruct CBP to suspend liquidation of all unliquidated entries from
                Uttam Galva at a cash deposit rate of 0.00 percent which are entered,
                or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption after December 28, 2019,
                which is ten days after the CIT's final decision, in accordance with
                section 516A of the Act.\17\ If the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or if
                appealed and upheld, Commerce will instruct CBP to terminate the
                suspension of liquidation and to liquidate entries produced and
                exported by Uttam Galva without regard to antidumping duties. As a
                result of the exclusion, Commerce will not initiate any new
                administrative reviews of Uttam Galva's entries pursuant to the
                antidumping duty order.\18\
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 \17\ See, e.g., Drill Pipe from the People's Republic of China:
                Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony with International Trade
                Commission's Injury Determination, Revocation of Antidumping and
                Countervailing Duty Orders Pursuant to Court Decision, and
                Discontinuation of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 79 FR
                78037, 78038 (December 29, 2014); High Pressure Steel Cylinders From
                the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in
                Harmony With Final Determination in Less Than Fair Value
                Investigation, Notice of Amended Final Determination Pursuant to
                Court Decision, Notice of Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order in
                Part, and Discontinuation of Fifth Antidumping Duty Administrative
                Review, 82 FR 46758, 46760 (October 6, 2017).
                 \18\ See Amended Final Determination and Order. Currently there
                are no ongoing administrative reviews of this order.
                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by CIT order from
                liquidating entries that: (1) Were produced and exported by Uttam Galva
                Steels Limited, and were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
                consumption on or after July 1, 2017, up to and including June 30,
                2018; and (2) were produced and/or exported by Uttam Value Steels
                Limited, and were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption
                on or after July 1, 2017, up to and including June 30, 2018. These
                entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the terms of the injunction
                during the pendency of any appeals process.
                Notification to Interested Parties
                 This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
                516A(c)(1) and (e) of the Act.
                 Dated: December 30, 2019.
                Jeffrey I. Kessler,
                Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
                [FR Doc. 2020-00050 Filed 1-7-20; 8:45 am]
                 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
                

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT