Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2018 / Notices 32631 

1See Certain Steel Nails from the People’s 

Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review, 2012–2013, 80 FR 

18816 (April 8, 2015) and accompanying Issues and 

Decision Memorandum (Final Results). 

2See Xi’an Metals & Minerals Import & Export 

Co., Ltd. v. United States, 256 F.Supp. 3d 1346, 

1356 (CIT September 6, 2017) (Remand Order). 

3 Id., at 1359. 

4See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant 

to Court Remand, Consol. Court No. 15–00109, Slip 

Op. 17–120 (CIT 2017), dated December 21, 2017 

(AR5 Remand Redetermination), available at http:// 

enforcement.trade.gov/remands/17-120.pdf. 

5 Id., at 7–14. 

6 Id., at 15–16. 

7 Id., at 19. 

8See Xi’an Metals & Minerals Import & Export 

Co., Ltd. v. United States, Consol. Court No. 15– 

00109, Slip Op. 18–70 (CIT June 19, 2018) (Final 

Judgment) at 3. 

9 Id., at 2–3. 

10See ‘‘Amended Final Results for the Fifth 

Administrative Review of Certain Steel Nails from 

Continued 

Topic to be considered: At this final 

meeting of the current (2016–2018) 

ETTAC charter, interagency 

representatives of the Trade Promotion 

Coordinating Committee’s 

Environmental Trade Working Group 

(TPCC ETWG) will respond to the 

recommendations that the ETTAC 

presented to the Secretary of 

Commerce’s designee on May 15. The 

meeting will be co-chaired by senior 

officials from the International Trade 

Administration and the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency. The 

ETTAC’s recommendations cover two 

primary themes: (1) Recommendations 

regarding how the U.S. Government can 

help level the playing field, address 

barriers and increase opportunities for 

U.S. environmental exporters through 

market development efforts, export 

financing, and trade policy engagements 

and negotiations; and recommendations 

aimed at improving the overall quality 

of services delivered by the U.S. 

Government to U.S. environmental 

exporters through enhancements to 

digital tools aimed at improving lead 

generation, lead dissemination, and 

metrics and tracking. The 

recommendations were developed by 

the ETTAC’s three subcommittees: 

Trade Promotion and Export Market 

Development, Professional Services and 

Infrastructure Advancement, and Trade 

Policy and American Competitiveness. 

OEEI will make the final agenda 

available to the public at least one week 

prior to the meeting. Please email 

amy.kreps@trade.gov or contact 202– 

482–3835 for a copy. 

Background: The ETTAC is mandated 

by Section 2313(c) of the Export 

Enhancement Act of 1988, as amended, 

15 U.S.C. 4728(c), to advise the 

Environmental Trade Working Group of 

the Trade Promotion Coordinating 

Committee, through the Secretary of 

Commerce, on the development and 

administration of programs to expand 

U.S. exports of environmental 

technologies, goods, services, and 

products. The ETTAC was originally 

chartered in May of 1994. It was most 

recently re-chartered until August 2018. 

Dated: July 9, 2018. 

Man Cho, 

Deputy Director, Office of Energy and 

Environmental Industries. 

[FR Doc. 2018–14994 Filed 7–12–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–909] 

Certain Steel Nails From the People’s 

Republic of China: Notice of Court 

Decision Not in Harmony With the 

Final Results of Administrative Review 

and Notice of Amended Final Results 

of Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On June 19, 2018, the United 

States Court of International Trade 

(Court) issued its final judgment in 

Xi’an Metals & Minerals Import & 

Export Co., Ltd. v. United States, 

Consol. Court No. 15–00109, sustaining, 

in part, and vacating, in part, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce’s (Commerce) 

final remand results in the fifth 

administrative review of certain steel 

nails from the People’s Republic of 

China (China). Commerce is notifying 

the public that the final judgment in this 

case is not in harmony with Commerce’s 

final results of the administrative 

review, covering the period of review 

(POR) August 1, 2012, through July 31, 

2013, and that Commerce is amending 

the final results with respect to the 

dumping margin assigned to The 

Stanley Works (Langfang) Fastening 

Systems Co., Ltd. (Stanley). The margin 

for Xi’an Metals & Minerals Import & 

Export Co., Ltd. (Xi’an Metals) remains 

unchanged as a result of the Court’s 

final judgment. 

DATES: Applicable June 19, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew Renkey, AD/CVD Operations 

Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2312. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On April 8, 2015, Commerce issued 

the Final Results, in which it 

determined weighted-average dumping 

margins of 13.19 percent for Stanley and 

72.52 percent Xi’an Metals.1 On 

September 6, 2017, the Court remanded 

to Commerce certain aspects of the Final 

Results, ordering Commerce to 

reconsider, in relevant part: (1) The 

potential double counting of certain 

labor costs by including line items such 

as ‘‘Salary & Bonus,’’ ‘‘Welfare,’’ and 

‘‘Social Security and Compensation’’ as 

selling, general, and administrative 

(SG&A) expenses in the surrogate 

financial ratios; 2 and (2) the presence of 

a transcription error in Stanley’s postverification factors of production (FOP) 

database.3

On December 21, 2017, Commerce 

filed the AR5 Remand Redetermination 

with the Court.4 Under respectful 

protest, Commerce recalculated the 

surrogate financial ratios by 

reclassifying certain labor-related line 

items from the selling, general, and 

administrative expenses numerator, to 

the materials, labor, and energy 

denominator of the financial ratios.5

Additionally, under respectful protest, 

Commerce corrected the transcription 

error present in Stanley’s postverification FOP database.6 As a result 

of these modifications, there were 

changes to the dumping margins 

assigned to both Xi’an Metals and 

Stanley. The resulting antidumping 

margins for Xi’an Metals and Stanley 

were 64.27 percent and 8.04 percent, 

respectively.7

On June 19, 2018, the Court sustained 

the AR5 Remand Redetermination with 

respect to the correction of the 

transcription error in Stanley’s FOP 

database.8 In addition, the Court vacated 

the remand order with respect to the 

issue of the calculation of the surrogate 

financial ratios, and reinstated this 

aspect of Commerce’s Final Results.9 In 

light of the Court’s Final Judgment, the 

dumping margin for Xi’an Metals is 

unchanged from its dumping margin 

assigned in the Final Results. 

Additionally, because the Court 

reinstated the Final Results with respect 

to the calculation of the surrogate 

financial ratios, for these amended final 

results, we recalculated Stanley’s 

dumping margin to reflect only the 

correction of the transcription error in 

Stanley’s FOP database.10


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
32632 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2018 / Notices 

the People’s Republic of China: Analysis 

Memorandum for Stanley,’’ dated concurrently with 

this notice. 

11See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 

(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken). 

12See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. 

United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) 

(Diamond Sawblades). 

13See Certain Steel Nails from the People’s 

Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review; 2013–2014, 81 FR 

14092 (March 16, 2016); Certain Steel Nails from 

the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Final 

Determination of No Shipments and Final Partial 

Rescission; 2014–2015, 82 FR 14344 (March 20, 

2017); and Certain Steel Nails from the People’s 

Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review and Final 

Determination of No Shipments; 2015–2016, 83 FR 

11683 (March 16, 2018). 

1See the Memorandum, ‘‘Certain Hot-Rolled Steel 

Flat Products from Brazil: Decision Memorandum 

for Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; 2016–2017’’ (dated 

concurrently with this Federal Register notice) 

(Preliminary Decision Memorandum). 

2See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from 

Australia, Brazil, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the 

Netherlands, the Republic of Turkey, and the 

United Kingdom: Amended Final Affirmative 

Antidumping Determinations for Australia, the 

Republic of Korea, and the Republic of Turkey and 

Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 67962 (October 3, 

2016) (Antidumping Duty Order). 

Timken Notice 

In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 

341,11 as clarified by Diamond 

Sawblades,12 the Court of Appeals for 

the Federal Circuit (CAFC) held that, 

pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended (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 Court’s June 19, 2018, Final 

Judgment constitutes a final decision of 

the Court that is not in harmony with 

Commerce’s Final Results. This notice is 

published in fulfillment of the 

publication requirement of Timken. 

Amended Final Results 

Because there is now a final court 

decision, Commerce is amending the 

Final Results with respect to Stanley. 

The revised weighted-average dumping 

margin for Stanley for the period August 

1, 2012, through July 31, 2013, is as 

follows: 

Exporter 

Weightedaverage 

margin 

(percent) 

Stanley .................................. 10.16 

Commerce will continue the 

suspension of liquidation of the subject 

merchandise pending the expiration of 

the period of appeal or, if appealed, 

pending a final and conclusive court 

decision. In the event the Court’s ruling 

is not appealed or, if appealed, upheld 

by the CAFC, Commerce will instruct 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection to 

assess antidumping duties on 

unliquidated entries of subject 

merchandise exported by Xi’an Metals 

and Stanley using the appropriate 

assessment rates. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

As stated in the AR5 Remand 

Redetermination, the cash deposit rate 

for Stanley has been superseded by cash 

deposit rates calculated in intervening 

administrative reviews of the 

antidumping duty order on certain steel 

nails from China.13 Thus, we will not 

alter Stanley’s cash deposit rate. 

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 6, 2018. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15011 Filed 7–12–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–351–845] 

Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products 

From Brazil: Preliminary Results of the 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review; 2016–2017 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) is conducting an 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on certain hotrolled steel flat products from Brazil. 

The period of review (POR) is March 22, 

2016, through Septemer 30, 2017. This 

review covers six producers/exporters of 

the subject merchandise. Commerce 

selected one mandatory respondent, 

Companhia Siderurgica Nacional (CSN), 

for individual examination. We 

preliminarily determine that sales of 

subject merchandise have been made 

below normal value (NV) during the 

POR. We invite interested parties to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

DATES: Applicable July 13, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Peter Zukowski, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0189. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by this 

investigation are certain hot-rolled steel 

flat products from Brazil. For a complete 

description of the scope of this order, 

please see the accompanying 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum.1

Methodology 

Commerce is conducting this review 

in accordance with sections 751(a) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act). For a full description of the 

methodology underlying our 

conclusions, see the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum. 

The Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum is a public document and 

is on file electronically via Enforcement 

and Compliance’s Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Centralized 

Electronic Service System (ACCESS). 

ACCESS is available to registered users 

at https://access.trade.gov, and to all 

parties in the Central Records Unit, 

room B8024 of the main Department of 

Commerce building. In addition, a 

complete version of the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum can be found at 

http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The 

signed Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum and the electronic 

version of the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum are identical in content. 

A list of the topics discussed in the 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum is 

attached as the Appendix to this notice. 

Adverse Facts Available 

Pursuant to section 776(a) and (b) of 

the Act, Commerce has preliminarily 

relied upon facts otherwise available 

with adverse inferences (AFA) for CSN 

because this respondent did not respond 

to Commerce’s antidumping duty 

questionnaire. For a complete 

explanation of the methodology and 

analysis underlying the preliminary 

application of AFA, see the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum. 

Adjustment for Export Subsidies 

In the original investigation, we 

subtracted from the final dumping 

margin of 33.14 percent the portion of 

CSN’s countervailing duty rate 

attributable to export subsidies (4.07 

percent) in order to calculate the cashdeposit rate of 29.07 percent.2 Since the 

publication of the Antidumping Duty 

Order, we have not conducted an 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES