Notice2021-28071
Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results
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
December 27, 2021
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentInternational Trade Administration
Abstract
On December 8, 2021, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued its final judgment in Canadian Solar International Limited et al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 17-00173, sustaining the Department of Commerce (Commerce)'s fourth remand results pertaining to the administrative review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into modules (solar cells), from the People's Republic of China (China) covering the period December 1, 2014, through November 30, 2015. Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT's final judgment is not in harmony with the final results of the 2014-2015 AD administrative review of solar cells from China and that Commerce is amending those final results with respect to the dumping margin assigned to the following companies: (1) The collapsed entity comprising Canadian Solar International Limited; Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc.; Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc.; CSI Cells Co., Ltd.; CSI- GCL Solar Manufacturing (YanCheng) Co., Ltd.; and CSI Solar Power (China) Inc. (collectively, Canadian Solar); (2) the collapsed entity comprising Yingli Energy (China) Company Limited; Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Tianjin Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Hengshui Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Lixian Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic Technology Co., Ltd.; Beijing Tianneng Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; and Shenzhen Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd. (collectively, Yingli); and (3) Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 245 (Monday, December 27, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 245 (Monday, December 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73242-73244]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-28071]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-979]
Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled
into Modules, From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Court
Decision Not in Harmony With the Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; Notice of Amended Final Results
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 8, 2021, the U.S. Court of International Trade
(CIT) issued its final judgment in Canadian Solar International Limited
et al. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 17-00173, sustaining the
Department of Commerce (Commerce)'s fourth remand results pertaining to
the administrative review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on
crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not assembled into
modules (solar cells), from the People's Republic of China (China)
covering the period December 1, 2014, through November 30, 2015.
Commerce is notifying the public that the CIT's final judgment is not
in harmony with the final results of the 2014-2015 AD administrative
review of solar cells from China and that Commerce is amending those
final results with respect to the dumping margin assigned to the
following companies: (1) The collapsed entity comprising Canadian Solar
International Limited; Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc.;
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc.; CSI Cells Co., Ltd.; CSI-
GCL Solar Manufacturing (YanCheng) Co., Ltd.; and CSI Solar Power
(China) Inc. (collectively, Canadian Solar); (2) the collapsed entity
comprising Yingli
[[Page 73243]]
Energy (China) Company Limited; Baoding Tianwei Yingli New Energy
Resources Co., Ltd.; Tianjin Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.;
Hengshui Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Lixian Yingli New
Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic Technology
Co., Ltd.; Beijing Tianneng Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.;
Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; and Shenzhen Yingli New
Energy Resources Co., Ltd. (collectively, Yingli); and (3) Shanghai BYD
Co., Ltd.
DATES: Applicable December 18, 2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Pedersen, AD/CVD Operations,
Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2769.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On June 27, 2017, Commerce published the final results of the 2014-
2015 AD administrative review of solar cells from China. In the Final
Results, Commerce selected Thailand as the primary surrogate country
and relied on Thai import data to value nitrogen that was used in
manufacturing solar cells.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not
Assembled Into Modules, from the People's Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Final
Determination of No Shipments; 2014-2015, 82 FR 29033 (June 27,
2017) (Final Results), and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After correcting a ministerial error in the Final Results (i.e.,
Commerce inadvertently omitted certain U.S. indirect selling expenses
from its calculations), on August 25, 2017, Commerce published the
Amended Final Results.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not
Assembled Into Modules, from the People's Republic of China: Amended
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2014-2015,
82 FR 40560 (August 25, 2017) (Amended Final Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Respondents, Canadian Solar, Trina,\3\ Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd., and
Ningbo Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance Co., Ltd. (Ningbo Qixin), and
domestic interested party, SolarWorld Americas, Inc., challenged
Commerce's Amended Final Results (CIT case numbers 17-00173, 17-00187,
17-00193, and 17-00200). Yingli sought to intervene in CIT case number
17-00197. The CIT consolidated case numbers 17-00173, 17-00187, 17-
00193, 17-00197, and 17-00200 into case number 17-00173 in September
2017. On April 16, 2019, the CIT sustained Commerce's Amended Final
Results with respect to: (1) The surrogates that it selected to value
aluminum frames, nitrogen, polysilicon ingots and blocks, and financial
ratios; (2) its decision to include import values with zero import
quantities in its surrogate value calculations; and (3) its decision to
deny Trina an offset for debt restructuring income. However, the CIT
remanded the Amended Final Results to Commerce to reconsider, or
further explain: (1) The surrogate that it selected to value solar
module glass; (2) its application of an adverse inference in selecting
partial facts available for use in calculating Canadian Solar's dumping
margin; and (3) its decision to reject Ningbo Qixin's separate rate
application.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ We used ``Trina'' to refer to the following companies that
we treated as a single entity: Changzhou Trina Solar Energy Co.,
Ltd.; Trina Solar (Changzhou) Science and Technology Co., Ltd.;
Yancheng Trina Solar Energy Technology Co., Ltd.; Changzhou Trina
Solar Yabang Energy Co., Ltd.; Turpan Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd.;
and Hubei Trina Solar Energy Co., Ltd.
\4\ See Canadian Solar Int'l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 378
F. Supp. 3d 1292 (CIT 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its first remand redetermination, issued in July 2019, Commerce:
(1) Under respectful protest, valued solar module glass using Bulgarian
import data, rather than Thai import data; (2) further explained its
determination to rely on facts available with an adverse inference in
calculating Canadian Solar's dumping margin; and (3) continued to deny
Ningbo Qixin a separate rate after reopening the record to permit
Ningbo Qixin to establish that it made a shipment of subject
merchandise to the United States during the POR (which it failed to
establish).\5\ The CIT sustained Commerce's redetermination with
respect to the value of solar module glass, and its denial of Ningbo
Qixin's request for a separate rate, but remanded to Commerce its
partial adverse facts available determination with respect to Canadian
Solar for a second time.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Results of Remand Redetermination, Canadian Solar
International Limited, et al. v. United States, Court No. 17-00173,
Slip Op. 19-47 (Court of International Trade April 16, 2019), dated
July 15, 2019.
\6\ See Canadian Solar Int'l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 415
F. Supp. 3d 1326 (CIT 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its second remand redetermination, issued in February 2020,
Commerce reexamined its partial adverse facts available determination
with respect to Canadian Solar and, under respectful protest,
determined not to apply an adverse inference when selecting from among
the facts available in calculating a dumping margin for Canadian
Solar.\7\ The CIT sustained Commerce's second redetermination.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Canadian Solar International Limited, et al. v. United
States, Court No. 17-00173, Slip Op. 19-152 (Court of International
Trade December 3, 2019) Final Results of Second Redetermination
Pursuant to Court Order, dated February 10, 2020.
\8\ See Canadian Solar Int'l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 448
F. Supp. 3d 1333 (CIT 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In June 2020, in SolarWorld, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (CAFC) vacated the CIT's judgement sustaining
Commerce's use of Thai import data to value nitrogen in the 2013-2014
AD administrative review of solar cells from China and remanded the
case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion.\9\
Subsequently, the CIT held that SolarWorld constitutes an intervening
change in controlling law, and thus, it vacated its earlier judgment
sustaining Commerce's valuation of nitrogen in the 2014-2015 AD
administrative review of solar cells from China.\10\ The CIT also
remanded the nitrogen issue in the 2014-2015 AD administrative review
of solar cells from China to Commerce for it to adequately explain why
the Thai surrogate value for nitrogen was not aberrational or adopt an
alternative surrogate value for nitrogen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See SolarWorld Americas, Inc. et al. v. United States, 962
F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2020) (SolarWorld).
\10\ See Canadian Solar Int'l Ltd. et al. v. United States, 471
F. Supp. 3d 1379 (CIT 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its third remand redetermination, issued in January 2021,
Commerce continued to value nitrogen using Thai import data.
Specifically, in its third remand redetermination Commerce explained
why it did not find the average unit value (AUV) of Thai imports of
nitrogen during the period of review (POR) to be aberrational,
clarified its practice for evaluating whether an AUV from a surrogate
country is aberrational, and addressed the discrepancies between U.S.
POR exports of nitrogen to Thailand and Thai POR imports of nitrogen
from the United States.\11\ The CIT remanded the case to Commerce for a
fourth time, ordering Commerce to reconsider, or further explain, its
use of Thai import data to value nitrogen.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Canadian Solar International Limited, et al. v. United
States, Court No. 17-00173, Slip Op. 20-134 (CIT September 14,
2020), dated January 12, 2021.
\12\ See Canadian Solar Int'l Limited et al. v. United States,
532 F. Supp. 3d 1273 (CIT 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its final remand redetermination, issued in September 2021,
under respectful protest, Commerce used Mexican import data, rather
than Thai import data, to value nitrogen.\13\ The CIT sustained
Commerce's final redetermination.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Canadian Solar International Limited, et al. v. United
States, Consol. Court No. 17-00173 (CIT July 28, 2021), dated
September 27, 2021.
\14\ See Canadian Solar International Limited et al. v. United
States, Consol. Court No. 17-00173, Slip Op. 21-166 (CIT Dec. 8,
2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73244]]
Timken Notice
In its decision in Timken,\15\ as clarified by Diamond
Sawblades,\16\ the CAFC 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 December 8, 2021, judgment
constitutes a final decision of the CIT that is not in harmony with
Commerce's Amended Final Results. Thus, this notice is published in
fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir.
1990) (Timken).
\16\ See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United
States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amended Final Results
Because there is now a final court judgment, Commerce is amending
its Final Results and Amended Final Results with respect to Canadian
Solar, Yingli and Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd. as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canadian Solar International Limited; Canadian Solar 0.00
Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc.; Canadian Solar
Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc.; CSI Cells Co., Ltd.; CSI-
GCL Solar Manufacturing (YanCheng) Co., Ltd.; CSI Solar
Power (China) Inc......................................
Yingli Energy (China) Company Limited; Baoding Tianwei 0.00
Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Tianjin Yingli
New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Hengshui Yingli New
Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Lixian Yingli New Energy
Resources Co., Ltd.; Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic
Technology Co., Ltd.; Beijing Tianneng Yingli New
Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Hainan Yingli New Energy
Resources Co., Ltd.; Shenzhen Yingli New Energy
Resources Co., Ltd.....................................
Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd................................... 0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
Because Canadian Solar, Yingli, and Shanghai BYD Co., Ltd. all have
a superseding cash deposit rate, i.e., final results covering these
companies have been published in a subsequent administrative review of
the AD order on solar cells from China, we will not issue revised cash
deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in
connection with this notice. Thus, this notice will not affect the
current cash deposit rate of these companies.
Liquidation of Suspended Entries
At this time, Commerce remains enjoined, by orders of the CIT, from
liquidating entries of subject merchandise that was entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period December 1,
2014, through November 30, 2015 and produced and/or exported by the
collapsed entity comprising Canadian Solar International Limited;
Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Changshu), Inc.; Canadian Solar
Manufacturing (Luoyang), Inc.; CSI Cells Co., Ltd.; CSI-GCL Solar
Manufacturing (YanCheng) Co., Ltd.; and CSI Solar Power (China) Inc.,
or exported by any of the following entities: (1) the collapsed entity
comprising Yingli Energy (China) Company Limited; Baoding Tianwei
Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Tianjin Yingli New Energy
Resources Co., Ltd.; Hengshui Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.;
Lixian Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; Baoding Jiasheng
Photovoltaic Technology Co., Ltd.; Beijing Tianneng Yingli New Energy
Resources Co., Ltd.; Hainan Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; and
Shenzhen Yingli New Energy Resources Co., Ltd.; (2) Shanghai BYD Co.,
Ltd.; (3) Ningbo Qixin Solar Electrical Appliance Co., Ltd.; (4) Chint
Solar (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd.; (5) ERA Solar Co., Ltd.; (6) ET Solar
Energy Limited; (7) Hangzhou Sunny Energy Science & Technology Co.,
Ltd.; (8) Hengdian Group DMEGC Magnetics Co., Ltd.; (9) JA Solar
Technology Yangzhou Co., Ltd.; (10) Jiawei Solarchina (Shenzhen) Co.,
Ltd.; (11) Jiawei Solarchina Co., Ltd.; (12) JingAo Solar Co., Ltd.;
(13) Lightway Green New Energy Co., Ltd.; (14) Ningbo ETDZ Holdings,
Ltd.; (15) Risen Energy Co., Ltd.; (16) Shanghai JA Solar Technology
Co., Ltd.; (17) Shenzhen Sungold Solar Co., Ltd.; (18) Shenzhen Topray
Solar Co., Ltd.; (19) Star Power International Limited; (20) Systemes
Versilis, Inc.; (21) Taizhou BD Trade Co., Ltd.; (22) tenKsolar
(Shanghai) Co., Ltd.; (23) Toenergy Technology Hangzhou Co., Ltd.; (24)
Wuxi Tianran Photovoltaic Co., Ltd.; (25) Zhejiang Era Solar Technology
Co., Ltd.; and (26) Zhejiang Sunflower Light Energy Science &
Technology Limited Liability Company. These entries will remain
enjoined pursuant to the terms of injunctions during the pendency of
any appeals process.
In the event 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 any unliquidated entries
described in the preceding paragraph, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b). We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries covered by this review when either the respondent's
weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis or the
importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is not zero or de minimis.
Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero
or de minimis, or an importer-specific assessment rate is de minimis
(i.e., less than 0.5 percent), we will instruct CBP to liquidate the
appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Dated: December 20, 2021.
Ryan Majerus,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, Performing the
Non-Exclusive Functions and Duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2021-28071 Filed 12-23-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on December 27, 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.