SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On September 23, 2021, Commerce published its Final Determination in the LTFV investigation of certain aluminum foil from Türkiye. On November 12, 2021, Commerce subsequently published the Order on certain aluminum foil from Türkiye.

Assan and the Aluminum Association Trade Enforcement Working Group and its individual members (the Aluminum Association, or the petitioner), appealed Commerce's Final Determination. On May 8, 2024, the CIT remanded the Final Determination to Commerce, holding that Commerce must reconsider or further explain its duty drawback methodology and its treatment of Assan Single Entity's raw material premium costs and net hedging gains.^[4]

In its First Final Results of Redetermination, issued in May 2024, Commerce revised its duty drawback methodology to base the benefit only on import duties associated with subject merchandise.^[5] Commerce also provided further explanation for its treatment of Assan Single Entity's raw material premium costs and net hedging gains, but made no change to the underlying margin calculations for either of these issues.^[6] As a result, the estimated weighted-average dumping margin for Assan Single Entity and for all other producers and exporters changed from 2.28 percent to 2.30 percent. The CIT issued a judgment sustaining Commerce's First Final Results of Redetermination on duty drawback and raw material premium costs and remanded, in part, Commerce's explanation of Assan Single Entity's net hedging gains, providing Commerce with another opportunity to explain its analysis.^[7]

In its Second Draft Results of Redetermination, issued in April 2026, Commerce further explained its choice to rely on Assan's income statement for classification of its net hedging gains over Assan's cash flow statement, and continued to include these net hedging gains as an offset to Assan Single Entity's reported cost of manufacturing.^[8] Subsequently, the petitioner filed a motion for dismissal of the litigation. The CIT issued a judgment sustaining Commerce's First Final Results of Redetermination with respect to Commerce's duty drawback methodology and its treatment of Assan Single Entity's raw material premium costs ^[9] and dismissed the case with respect to the remaining issue in the Second Remand Order.^[10]

Timken Notice

In its decision in Timken,^[11] as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,^[12] the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to section 516A(c) and (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce must publish a notice of 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 February 18, 2026, judgment sustaining in part Commerce's First Final Results of Redetermination and the CIT's May 5, 2026, dismissal with respect to the remaining issue constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with Commerce's Final Determination. Thus, this notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.

Amended Final Determination

Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending its Final Determination with respect to Assan Single Entity as follows:

( printed page 28559)

Cash Deposit Requirements

Because Assan Single Entity has a superseding cash deposit rate, i.e., there have been final results published in a subsequent administrative review,^[16] this notice will not affect the current cash deposit rate for Assan Single Entity. For all other exporters or producers that do not have a superseding cash deposit rate from a completed segment of this proceeding, Commerce will issue revised cash deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection for cash deposit rate for all-others producers and exporters.

Notification to Interested Parties

This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

91 FR 28557