Notice2021-15743
Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results, Notice of Amended Final Results of Review; 2015-16
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
July 23, 2021
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentInternational Trade Administration
Abstract
On July 9, 2021, the Court of International Trade (CIT) sustained the final results of redetermination pursuant to remand pertaining to the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on large power transformers (LPTs) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) covering the period August 1, 2015, through July 31, 2016. The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is notifying the public that the final judgment is not in harmony with the final results of the administrative review, and that Commerce is amending the final results of review with respect to the weighted-average dumping margin assigned to Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., Hyosung Corporation, and the non-examined company ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 139 (Friday, July 23, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 139 (Friday, July 23, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38980-38982]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15743]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-580-867]
Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: Notice of
Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results, Notice of Amended
Final Results of Review; 2015-16
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 9, 2021, the Court of International Trade (CIT)
sustained the final results of redetermination pursuant to remand
pertaining to the administrative review of the antidumping duty order
on large power transformers (LPTs) from the Republic of Korea (Korea)
covering the period August 1, 2015, through July 31, 2016. The
Department of Commerce (Commerce) is notifying the public that the
final judgment is not in harmony with the final results of the
administrative review, and that Commerce is amending the final results
of review with respect to the weighted-average dumping margin assigned
to Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., Hyosung Corporation, and the
non-examined company ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd.
DATES: Applicable July 19, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John K. Drury, AD/CVD Operations,
Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0195.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 16, 2018, Commerce issued the final results of the
administrative review for the period August 1, 2015, through July 31,
2016.\1\ In the Final Results, Commerce determined a weighted-average
dumping margin for the two mandatory respondents, Hyundai Heavy
Industries Co., Ltd. (Hyundai) and Hyosung Corporation (Hyosung), based
on total facts available with an adverse inference, of 60.81 percent.
Further, Commerce determined the weighted-average dumping margin for
the three companies that were under review but not selected for
individual examination, ILJIN, ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd. (ILJIN
Electric), and LSIS Co., Ltd.
[[Page 38981]]
(LSIS), based on the rates determined for the mandatory respondents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Large Power Transformers from the Republic of Korea:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2015-2016,
83 FR 11679 (March 16, 2018) (Final Results), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 5, 2019, the CIT remanded various aspects of the Final
Results to Commerce.\2\ Specifically, the CIT directed Commerce to
further explain or reconsider its reliance on total facts available
with adverse inferences for both Hyundai and Hyosung. For Hyundai, the
Court directed Commerce to further explain or reconsider its reliance
on total facts available with adverse inferences with respect to
Hyundai's failure to: (1) Provide information on accessories; (2)
report home market gross unit prices properly; and (3) disclose an
affiliated sales agent. For Hyosung, the Court directed Commerce to
further explain or reconsider its reliance on total facts available
with adverse inferences with respect to Hyosung's failure to: (1)
Report service-related revenues contained on order acknowledgement
forms (OAFs); (2) report certain discounts and rebates; and (3) explain
the use of one invoice for multiple sales across multiple
administrative reviews.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Hyundai Heavy Industries, Co. Ltd. and Hyosung
Corporation, Iljin Electric Co., Ltd. v. United States and ABB Inc.,
Consol. Court No. 18-00066, Slip Op. 19-105 (CIT August 5, 2019)
(First Remand Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the First Remand Order, Commerce reconsidered and
further explained its finding regarding Hyundai's failure to: (1)
Provide information regarding accessories; (2) report home market gross
unit prices properly; and (3) disclose an affiliated sales agent.
Commerce also reconsidered and further explained its findings regarding
Hyosung's failure to: (1) Report service-related revenues recorded on
OAFs; (2) report certain discounts and rebates; and (3) explain the use
of one invoice for multiple sales across multiple administrative
reviews.\3\ With respect to Hyosung, Commerce determined that the
issues related to service-related revenues recorded on OAFs and the use
of one invoice for multiple sales across multiple reviews were no
longer a basis for Commerce's application of total facts available with
adverse inferences but that the failure to report certain discounts and
rebates continued to constitute a basis for Commerce's application of
total facts available with adverse inferences. For Hyundai, Commerce
found that Hyundai's reporting with respect to accessories was not a
basis for Commerce's application of total facts available with adverse
inferences, but continued to find that the application of total facts
available with adverse inferences was warranted due to the
understatement of home market prices and inconsistent treatment of
merchandise under consideration.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Memorandum, ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand Hyundai Heavy Industries, Co. Ltd. and Hyosung
Corporation, Iljin Electric Co., Ltd. v. United States and ABB Inc.,
Consol. Court No. 18-00066, Slip Op. 19-105 (CIT August 5, 2019),''
dated December 19, 2019, and available at <a href="https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/19-105.pdf">https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/19-105.pdf</a> .
\4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 18, 2020, the CIT remanded Commerce's Final First
Results of Redetermination with respect to the application of total
adverse facts available for both Hyundai and Hyosung, finding that
Commerce's redeterminations were not supported by substantial
evidence.\5\ Pursuant to the Second Remand Order, Commerce reconsidered
its reliance on total facts available with adverse inferences for both
Hyundai and Hyosung. Commerce determined that the application of
partial facts available with no adverse inferences was warranted with
respect to both Hyundai and Hyosung.\6\ Commerce calculated a weighted-
average dumping margin of zero percent for both Hyundai and Hyosung.\7\
Commerce also applied an average of these two rates, i.e., zero
percent, to ILJIN Electric, which was not selected for individual
examination during the period of review and which was party to this
litigation.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Hyundai Heavy Industries, Co. Ltd. and Hyosung
Corporation and Iljin Electric Co., Ltd. v. United States and ABB
Enterprise Software Inc., Consol. Court No. 18-00066, Slip Op. 20-
165 (CIT November 18, 2020) (Second Remand Order).
\6\ See Memorandum, ``Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
to Court Remand: Hyundai Heavy Industries, Co. Ltd. and Hyosung
Corporation, Iljin Electric Co., Ltd. v. United States and ABB Inc.,
Court No. 18-00066, Slip Op. 20-165 (CIT November 18, 2020),'' dated
April 5, 2021, and available at <a href="https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/20-165.pdf">https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/20-165.pdf</a> (Final Results of Second Redetermination).
\7\ Id.
\8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 9, 2021, the CIT sustained Commerce's Final Second Results
of Redetermination.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Hyundai Heavy Industries, Co. Ltd. and Hyosung
Corporation and Iljin Electric Co., Ltd. v. United States and ABB
Enterprise Software Inc., Consol. Court No. 18-00066, Slip Op. 21-84
(CIT July 9, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 sections 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 a Commerce determination
and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court
decision. The CIT's July 9, 2021, judgment sustaining Commerce's Final
Second Results of Redetermination constitutes a final decision of the
CIT that is not in harmony with the Final Results. This notice is
published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.
Accordingly, Commerce will continue the suspension of liquidation of
the subject merchandise at issue pending expiration of the period to
appeal or, if appealed, pending a final and conclusive court decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken), at 341.
\11\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626
F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce is amending
the Final Results with respect to the weighted-average dumping margin
calculated for Hyundai, Hyosung and ILJIN Electric. Based on the Final
Results of Second Redetermination, as affirmed by the CIT, the revised
weighted-average dumping margin for Hyundai, Hyosung, and ILJIN
Electric, from August 1, 2015, through July 31, 2016, are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Producer or exporter dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd........................... 0.00
Hyosung Corporation......................................... 0.00
ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd..................................... 0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the event that the CIT's final judgement is not appealed or, if
appealed, is upheld by a final and conclusive court decision, Commerce
will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to assess antidumping
duties on unliquidated entries of subject merchandise based on the
weighted-average dumping margins listed above for the Amended Final
Results.
Cash Deposit Requirements
Since the Final Results, Commerce has established new cash deposit
rates for Hyundai, Hyosung, and ILJIN Electric.\12\ Therefore, this
Final Results of Second Redetermination, as affirmed by the CIT, and as
published in this notice, does not prospectively change the existing
cash deposit rates for Hyundai, Hyosung, and ILJIN Electric.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See, e.g., Large Power Transformers from the Republic of
Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Duty
Administrative Review; 2016-2017, 84 FR 16461 (April 19, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 38982]]
Notification to Interested Parties
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 19, 2021.
Christian Marsh,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2021-15743 Filed 7-22-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on July 23, 2021.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.