80 FR 44029 - Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Determination and Amended Final Determination of the Antidumping Duty Investigation
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 142 (July 24, 2015)
International Trade Administration
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 142 (July 24, 2015)
| Page Range | 44029-44031 | |
| FR Document | 2015-18214 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 142 (Friday, July 24, 2015)] [Notices] [Pages 44029-44031] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-18214] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-970] Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Determination and Amended Final Determination of the Antidumping Duty Investigation AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On July 6, 2015, the United States Court of International Trade (``CIT'') issued Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co. v. United States, Ct. No. 12-20, Slip Op. 15-71 (CIT July 6, 2015), affirming the Department of Commerce's (the ``Department'') amended final determination of sales at less than fair value in the antidumping duty investigation on multilayered wood flooring from the People's Republic of China (``Amended Final [[Page 44030]] Determination''),\1\ as modified by the Department's fourth remand redetermination pursuant to court order. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 76 FR 64318 (October 18, 2011) (``Final Determination''); Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 76 FR 76690 (December 8, 2011) (``Amended Final Determination''). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (``Timken''), as clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (``Diamond Sawblades''), the Department is notifying the public that the Court's final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Amended Final Determination, and that the Department is revising its Amended Final Determination. DATES: Effective Date: July 16, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Galantucci and Brandon Farlander, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482- 2923 and (202) 482-0182, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The litigation in this case relates to the Department's final determination in the antidumping duty investigation covering multilayered wood flooring from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''),\2\ which was later amended.\3\ Pursuant to a series of remand orders issued by the CIT \4\ that resulted in four remand redeterminations,\5\ the Department: (1) Revised its calculation of dumping margins for two mandatory respondents and the PRC-wide entity; and (2) the Department made certain findings regarding the dumping margins for eight separate rate respondents that were plaintiffs in the litigation, as summarized below.\6\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ See Final Determination, 76 FR at 64318. \3\ See Amended Final Determination, 76 FR at 76690. \4\ See Baroque Timber Indus. (Zhongshan) Co., Ltd. v. United States, 925 F. Supp. 2d 1332 (CIT July 31, 2013); Baroque Timber Indus. (Zhongshan) Co., Ltd. v. United States, 971 F. Supp. 2d 1333 (CIT March 31, 2014); Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co. v. United States, 44 F. Supp. 3d 1376 (CIT January 23, 2015). \5\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, Court No. 12-00007, dated November 14, 2013; Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, Court No. 12-00007, dated May 29, 2014; Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, Court No. 12-00020, dated October 14, 2014; and Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, Court No. 12-00020, dated March 24, 2015. \6\ The eight separate rate respondents were cooperative respondents, but were not individually investigated in the antidumping duty investigation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Regarding the dumping margins for two mandatory respondents in the investigation, on April 23, 2014, the CIT granted a consent motion for severance and entered final judgment in Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Company, Limited v. United States and Zhejiang Layo Wood Industry Co., Ltd. v. United States with respect to Layo Wood and the Samling Group.\7\ The Department previously gave notice of this decision, as well as the amended dumping margins of zero percent calculated for Layo Wood and Samling Group, in accordance with the notice requirements of Timken.\8\ Further, because we changed the surrogate values in our first remand redetermination for mandatory respondents Layo Wood and Samling Group, the highest calculated transaction-specific rate on the record became 25.62 percent, and we assigned that rate to the PRC-wide entity.\9\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ The full names of those companies are Zhejiang Layo Wood Industry Co. Ltd. (``Layo Wood'') and Baroque Timber Industries (Zhongshan) Co., Ltd., Riverside Plywood Corporation, Samling Elegant Living Trading (Labuan) Limited, Samling Global USA, Inc., Samling Riverside Co., Ltd., and Suzhou Times Flooring Co., Ltd. (collectively, ``the Samling Group''). \8\ See Multilayered Wood Flooring from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Final Determination and Amended Final Determination of the Antidumping Duty Investigation, 79 FR 25109 (May 2, 2014). \9\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Order, Court No. 12-00007, dated November 14, 2013, at 27. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Regarding the dumping margins for the eight separate rate respondents that were plaintiffs to this litigation, the CIT issued a series of a remand orders before affirming the Department's fourth remand redetermination.\10\ As a result of the Department's second redetermination on remand, the Department assigned to seven of the eight separate rate respondents above de minimis antidumping duty rates for the investigation, but found that it was unnecessary to calculate an exact rate for those respondents because any rate assigned for the investigation stage of the proceeding would be superseded by the rates assigned to those companies in the first administrative review and would not be used for liquidation purposes. The CIT affirmed this portion of the Department's remand redetermination on January 23, 2015.\11\ However, the eighth separate rate respondent, Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co. (``Changzhou Hawd''), did not have any shipments of subject merchandise during the first period of review and the Department did not assign Changzhou Hawd a separate rate from the first administrative review. Thus, in a fourth remand redetermination, the Department assigned Changzhou Hawd a margin of 3.30 percent (Changzhou Hawd's original rate from the Department's Amended Final Determination in the investigation),\12\ effective for cash deposit purposes only, pending final establishment in the second administrative review of Changzhou Hawd's new cash deposit rate and assessment rate. On July 6, 2015, the CIT found that the Department's methodology in applying this rate was supported by substantial evidence and in accordance with law.\13\ Subsequent to the CIT's entry of judgment, the Department published the final results of the second administrative review, which have superseded the cash deposit rate of 3.30 percent assigned to Changzhou Hawd for purposes of this litigation.\14\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ See Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co. v. United States, Ct. No. 12-20, Slip Op. 15-71 (CIT July 6, 2015). \11\ See Changzhou Hawd Flooring Co. v. United States, 44 F. Supp. 3d 1376, 1387-88 (CIT January 23, 2015). The seven respondents to which the Department's determination applied were: Fine Furniture (Shanghai) Limited, Armstrong Wood Products (Kunshan) Co., Ltd., Dunhua City; Jisen Wood Industry Co., Ltd., Dunhua City Dexin Wood Industry Co., Ltd., Dalian Huilong Wooden Products Co., Ltd., Kunshan Yingyi-Nature Wood Industry Co., Ltd., and Karly Wood Product Limited. \12\ This cash deposit rate of 3.30 percent was the original rate applied to Changzhou Hawd in the Amended Final Determination. The rate was calculated by taking the simple average of the two non- de minimis rates calculated for Layo Wood and the Samling Group in the Amended Final Determination. Although Layo Wood's and the Samling Group's rates were subsequently changed on remand (thus altering the basis for Changzhou Hawd's 3.30 percent rate), the Department provided evidence that the rate was ``reasonably reflective'' of Changzhou Hawd's ``potential dumping margin,'' and the CIT sustained this determination. See Changzhou Hawd, Slip Op. 15-71 (CIT July 6, 2015), at 11. \13\ See Changzhou Hawd, Slip Op. 15-71 (CIT July 6, 2015), at 3-4. \14\ See Multilayered Wood Flooring From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final Results of New Shipper Review; 2012-2013, 80 FR 41476 (July 15, 2015). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Timken Notice In its decision in Timken, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), the Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Department determination and must suspend [[Page 44031]] liquidation of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's July 6, 2015 final judgment affirming the Department's redetermination constitutes a final decision of the Court that is not in harmony with the original Amended Final Determination. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Amended Final Determination There is now a final court decision with respect to the Amended Final Determination as it concerns the eight separate rate respondents and the PRC-wide entity in this matter. For the eight separate rate respondents, as of the date of this notice, all eight companies have received updated cash deposit rates, and their rates will not change as a result of this litigation. However, for the PRC-wide entity, the Department is amending the Amended Final Determination and the revised cash deposit rate for this entity is as follows: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Cash deposit Exporter rate (percent) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ PRC-wide entity........................................ 25.62 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: July 20, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2015-18214 Filed 7-23-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 142 / Friday, July 24, 2015 / Notices 44029
Frequency of Responses: Annually. regulation (5 CFR 1320) implementing without compromising RUS loan
Comments: Comments are invited on: provisions of the Paperwork Reduction security, and to reduce the cost to
(a) Whether the proposed collection of Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13) requires borrowers, in terms of time, expenses
information is necessary for the proper that interested members of the public and paperwork, of obtaining lien
performance of the functions of the and affected agencies have an accommodations and subordinations.
Agency, including whether the opportunity to comment on information The information required to be
information will have practical utility; collection and recordkeeping activities submitted is limited to necessary
(b) the accuracy of the Agency’s (see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice information that would allow the
estimate of the burden of the proposed identifies an information collection that Agency to make a determination on the
collection of information, including the RUS is submitting to OMB for borrower’s request to subordinate and
validity of the methodology and reinstatement. accommodate their lien with other
assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance Comments are invited on: (a) Whether lenders.
the quality, utility, and clarity of the the proposed collection of information Estimate of Burden: Public Reporting
information to be collected; and (d) is necessary for the proper performance burden for this collection of information
ways to minimize the burden of the of the functions of the Agency, is estimated to average 19 hours per
collection of information on those who including whether the information will response.
are to respond, including through the have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of Respondents: Not-for-profit
use of appropriate automated, the Agency’s estimate of the burden of institutions; Business or other for profit.
electronic, mechanical, or other the proposed collection of information Estimated Number of Respondents:
technological collection techniques or including the validity of the 21.
other forms of information technology. methodology and assumptions used; (c) Estimated Number of Responses per
All responses to this notice will be ways to enhance the quality, utility and Respondent: 1.
summarized and included in the request clarity of the information to be Estimated Total Annual Burden on
to OMB for approval. All comments will collected; and (d) ways to minimize the Respondents: 290 hours.
become a matter of public record. burden of the collection of information Copies of this information collection
on those who are to respond, including can be obtained from MaryPat Daskal,
Done in Washington, DC, this 10th day of through the use of appropriate
July, 2015. Program Development and Regulatory
automated, electronic, mechanical, or Analysis, at (202) 720–7853. FAX: (202)
Ann Bartuska, other technological collection
Deputy Under Secretary, Research, 720–8435.
techniques or other forms of information All responses to this notice will be
Education, and Economics. technology. Comments may be sent to:
[FR Doc. 2015–18058 Filed 7–23–15; 8:45 am]
summarized and included in the request
Thomas P. Dickson, Acting Director, for OMB approval. All comments will
BILLING CODE 3410–22–P Program Development and Regulatory also become a matter of public record.
Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, STOP 1522, Dated: July 16, 2015.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Brandon McBride,
Washington, DC 20250–1522. FAX: Administrator, Rural Utilities Service.
Rural Utilities Service (202) 720–8435. [FR Doc. 2015–18111 Filed 7–23–15; 8:45 am]
Information Collection Activity; Title: Lien Accommodations and BILLING CODE P
Comment Request Subordinations, 7 CFR 1717, Subparts R
& S.
Rural Utilities Service, USDA.
AGENCY: OMB Control Number: 0572–0100.
Type of Request: Extension of a DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Notice and request for
ACTION:
comments. currently approved collection.
Abstract: The RE Act of 1936, as International Trade Administration
SUMMARY: In accordance with the amended (7 U.S.C. 901 et seq.), [A–570–970]
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 authorizes and empowers the
U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended), the Administrator of RUS to make loans in Multilayered Wood Flooring From the
Rural Utilities Service (RUS) invites the several United States and Territories People’s Republic of China: Notice of
comments on this information of the United States for rural Court Decision Not in Harmony With
collection for which RUS intends to Electrification and the furnishing of the Final Determination and Amended
request approval from the Office of electric energy to persons in rural areas Final Determination of the
Management and Budget (OMB). who are not receiving central station Antidumping Duty Investigation
DATES: Comments on this notice must be
service. The RE Act also authorizes and
empowers the Administrator of RUS to AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance,
received by September 22, 2015. International Trade Administration,
provide financial assistance to
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
borrowers for purposes provided in the Department of Commerce.
Thomas P. Dickson, Acting Director, RE Act by accommodating or SUMMARY: On July 6, 2015, the United
Program Development and Regulatory subordinating loans made by the States Court of International Trade
Analysis, Rural Utilities Service, 1400 national Rural Utilities Cooperative (‘‘CIT’’) issued Changzhou Hawd
Independence Ave. SW., STOP 1522, Finance Corporation, the Federal Flooring Co. v. United States, Ct. No.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Room 5181, South Building, Financing Bank, and other lending 12–20, Slip Op. 15–71 (CIT July 6,
Washington, DC 20250–1522. agencies. Title 7 CFR part 1717, 2015), affirming the Department of
Telephone: (202) 690–4492. FAX: (202) subparts R & S sets forth policy and Commerce’s (the ‘‘Department’’)
720–4120. procedures to facilitate and support amended final determination of sales at
Email: Thomas.Dickson@ borrowers’ efforts to obtain private less than fair value in the antidumping
wdc.usda.gov. sector financing of their capital needs, duty investigation on multilayered
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office to allow borrowers greater flexibility in wood flooring from the People’s
of Management and Budget’s (OMB) the management of their business affairs Republic of China (‘‘Amended Final
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:59 Jul 23, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24JYN1.SGM 24JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_44171/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 142 / Friday, July 24, 2015 / Notices 44031
liquidation of entries pending a Docket Number: 15–010. Applicant: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. Howard Hughes Medical Institute,
The CIT’s July 6, 2015 final judgment Chevy Chase, MD 20815. Instrument: International Trade Administration
affirming the Department’s Electron Microscope. Manufacturer:
redetermination constitutes a final JEOL Ltd., Japan. Intended Use: See [A–570–933]
decision of the Court that is not in notice at 80 FR 26896, May 11, 2015.
harmony with the original Amended Docket Number: 15–011. Applicant: Frontseating Service Valves From the
Final Determination. This notice is University of South Alabama, Mobile, People’s Republic of China; Final
published in fulfillment of the AL 36688. Instrument: Electron Results of Antidumping Duty
publication requirements of Timken. Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Czech Administrative Review; 2013–2014
Amended Final Determination Republic s.r.o., Czech Republic.
Intended Use: See notice at 80 FR AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance,
There is now a final court decision 26896, May 11, 2015. International Trade Administration,
with respect to the Amended Final Docket Number: 15–012. Applicant: Department of Commerce.
Determination as it concerns the eight Albert Einstein College of Medicine of SUMMARY: On April 8, 2015, the
separate rate respondents and the PRC- Yeshiva University, Bronx, NY 10461. Department of Commerce (‘‘the
wide entity in this matter. For the eight Instrument: Electron Microscope. Department’’) published the preliminary
separate rate respondents, as of the date Manufacturer: JEOL Ltd., Japan. results of the administrative review of
of this notice, all eight companies have Intended Use: See notice at 80 FR the antidumping duty on frontseating
received updated cash deposit rates, and 26896, May 11, 2015. service valves from the People’s
their rates will not change as a result of Docket Number: 15–014. Applicant: Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).1 The period
this litigation. However, for the PRC- Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, of review is April 1, 2013, through April
wide entity, the Department is MD 21218. Instrument: Electron 28, 2014. The review covers one
amending the Amended Final Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI exporter of the subject merchandise,
Determination and the revised cash Company, the Netherlands. Intended Zhejiang Sanhua Co., Ltd. (‘‘Sanhua’’).
deposit rate for this entity is as follows: Use: See notice at 80 FR 26896, May 11, We find that Sanhua made no sales in
2015. the United States at prices below normal
Cash deposit Docket Number: 15–016. Applicant:
Exporter rate value. None of the interested parties
(percent) Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ submitted case or rebuttal briefs.
08901. Instrument: LN Microscope. Therefore, we made no changes to our
PRC-wide entity .................... 25.62 Manufacturer: Luigs Neumann, margin calculations for Sanhua. The
Germany. Intended Use: See notice at 80 final weighted-average dumping margin
This notice is issued and published in FR 26896, May 1, 2015. for this review is listed below in the
accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), Docket Number: 15–017. Applicant: section entitled ‘‘Final Results of the
751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. City University of New York, New York, Review.’’
Dated: July 20, 2015. NY 10017. Instrument: Electron
Microscope. DATES: Effective date: July 24, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Manufacturer: FEI Company, Japan. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Compliance. Intended Use: See notice at 80 FR Laurel LaCivita, AD/CVD Operations,
[FR Doc. 2015–18214 Filed 7–23–15; 8:45 am]
26896, May 11, 2015. Office III, Enforcement and Compliance,
Docket Number: 15–018. Applicant: U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
City University of New York, New York, Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
NY 10017. Instrument: Electron Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI 482–4243.
Company, Japan. Intended Use: See
notice at 80 FR 26896, May 11, 2015. Background
International Trade Administration
Comments: None received. Decision: On April 8, 2015, the Department
Idaho National Laboratory, et al.; Approved. No instrument of equivalent published the preliminary results of the
Notice of Consolidated Decision on scientific value to the foreign subject administrative review of the
Applications for Duty-Free Entry of instrument, for such purposes as these order.2 At that time, we invited
Electron Microscope instruments are intended to be used, interested parties to comment on our
was being manufactured in the United preliminary results.
This is a decision consolidated States at the time the instruments were
pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Subsequent to the Preliminary
ordered. Reasons: Each foreign Results, Sanhua placed comments on
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural instrument is an electron microscope
Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. the record concerning the Preliminary
and is intended for research or scientific Results 3 in lieu of a case brief. No other
L. 89–651, as amended by Pub. L. 106– educational uses requiring an electron
36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301). party provided comments on our
microscope. We know of no electron Preliminary Results.
Related records can be viewed between microscope, or any other instrument
8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. in Room 3720, suited to these purposes, which was 1 See Frontseating Service Valves from the
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
being manufactured in the United States People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, at the time of order of each instrument. Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013–
DC. 2014, 80 FR 18811 (April 8, 2015) (‘‘Preliminary
Docket Number: 15–005. Applicant: Dated: July 20, 2015. Results’’).
Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, Gregory W. Campbell, 2 Id.
3 See letter from Sanhua, ‘‘Frontseating Service
ID 83415. Instrument: Electron Director, Subsidies Enforcement Office,
Enforcement and Compliance. Valves from the People’s Republic of China; A–570–
Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI, Czech 933; Comments by Zhejiang Sanhua Co., Ltd.
Republic. Intended Use: See notice at 80 [FR Doc. 2015–18212 Filed 7–23–15; 8:45 am] Regarding the Preliminary Results,’’ dated May 8,
FR 26896, May 11, 2015. BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 2015 (‘‘Sanhua’s Comment Letter’’).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:59 Jul 23, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\24JYN1.SGM 24JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_44171/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-23 09:25:07
Document Modified: 2018-02-23 09:25:07
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Dates | Effective Date: July 16, 2015. | |
| Contact | Robert Galantucci and Brandon Farlander, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482- 2923 and (202) 482-0182, respectively. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 44029 |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR