SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On June 28 and August 10, 2022, Commerce published in the Federal Register the Final Results and Amended Final Results, respectively, of the 2019-2020 AD administrative review of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules, (solar cells) from the People's Republic of China (China).^[1] In the Amended Final Results Commerce calculated weighted-average dumping margins of 20.99 and 12.24 percent for Jinko ^[2] and Risen,^[3] respectively, and a separate rate of 14.79 percent for JA Solar Yangzhou, Shanghai JA Solar, BYD, and other non-individually examined companies that qualified for a separate rate (collectively, the separate rate companies).

Jinko, Risen, JA Solar Yangzhou, Shanghai JA Solar, BYD, and Trina ^[4] appealed Commerce's Amended Final Results. On May 1, 2024, the CIT remanded the Amended Final Results to Commerce and instructed Commerce to further explain or reconsider the surrogate values that it assigned to solar glass and air freight, its methodology for calculating facts available with an adverse inference, and the dumping margin that it applied to JA Solar Yangzhou, Shanghai JA Solar, and BYD.^[5]

In its first remand redetermination, issued in August 2024, Commerce explained its selection of surrogate values for solar glass and air freight and the methodology that it used to apply facts available with an adverse inference to Risen, and noted that since it made no changes to its calculations, it was not necessary to recalculate the separate rate assigned to JA Solar Yangzhou, Shanghai JA Solar, or BYD.^[6] The CIT remanded the review to Commerce for a second time, ordering Commerce to reconsider the surrogate value that it selected for solar glass, its calculation of facts available with an adverse inference, and its determination of the separate rate assigned to JA Solar Yangzhou, Shanghai JA Solar, and BYD.^[7]

In its second remand redetermination, issued in September 2025, Commerce continued to select the same surrogate value for solar glass, continued to use, and explained why it was reasonable to use, the same methodology to apply partial adverse facts available (AFA) to Risen, and continued to assign JA Solar Yangzhou, Shanghai JA Solar, and BYD the same separate rate that it assigned to these companies in the Amended Final Results.^[8] The CIT remanded the review to Commerce for a third time, ordering Commerce to reconsider its valuation of solar glass and its determination of the separate rate assigned to JA Solar Yangzhou, Shanghai JA Solar, and BYD.^[9]

In its final remand redetermination, issued in August 2026, Commerce assigned a new surrogate value to solar glass and recalculated the separate rate that it assigned to JA Solar Yangzhou, Shanghai JA Solar, and BYD.^[10] The CIT sustained Commerce's final redetermination.^[11]

Timken Notice

In its decision in Timken,^[12] as clarified by Diamond Sawblades,^[13] 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 a court decision that is not “in harmony” with Commerce's determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a “conclusive” court decision. The CIT's October 29, 2026, judgment constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with Commerce's Final Results (as amended). Thus, this notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.

Amended Final Results

Because there is now a final court judgment regarding the 2019-2020 AD administrative review of solar cells from China, Commerce is amending its Final Results (as previously amended) with respect to Jinko, Risen, JA Solar Yangzhou, Shanghai JA Solar, and BYD. Specifically, in these amended final results of review pursuant to the final court judgement noted above, Commerce determines that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margins exist for the companies listed below for the period December 1, 2019, through November 30, 2020: ( printed page 73202)

Cash Deposit Requirements

Commerce will issue appropriate cash deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) based on these amended results of review. Because Jinko, BYD, JA Solar Yangzhou, and Shanghai JA Solar each have a superseding cash deposit rate, i.e., Commerce published in the Federal Register the final results of subsequent reviews covering these companies, Commerce will not issue revised cash deposit instructions for these companies based on these amended results of review. Thus, this notice will not affect the current cash deposit rates for these companies. However, because Risen does not have a superseding cash deposit rate, Commerce will issue a revised cash deposit instruction regarding Risen to CBP.

Liquidation of Suspended Entries

At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by the CIT's order from liquidating entries of subject merchandise that was exported by Jinko, Risen Energy Co., Ltd., JA Solar Yangzhou, Shanghai JA Solar, BYD, or Trina ^[15] and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period December 1, 2019 through November 30, 2020. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the terms of the injunctions during the pendency of any appeals process.

In the event that the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or, if appealed, upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce intends to instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise exported by Jinko, Risen Energy Co., Ltd., JA Solar Yangzhou, Shanghai JA Solar, BYD, or Trina in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b). Commerce will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the estimated weighted-average dumping margin for the exporter or the importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate for an importer of the exporter's subject merchandise is not zero or de minimis. Where the estimated weighted-average dumping margin for the exporter or an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate for an importer of the exporter's subject merchandise is zero or de minimis,^[16] Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.

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 73200