Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 11, 2018 / Notices 32075 

1See Certain Tin Mill Products from Japan: 

Notice of Antidumping Duty Order, 65 FR 52067 

(August 28, 2000). 

2See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews, 

82 FR 20314 (May 1, 2017). 

3See Certain Tin Mill Products from Japan: Final 

Results of the Expedited Third Sunset Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order, 82 FR 41933 (September 

5, 2017) (Final Results). 

4See Tin- and Chromium-Coated Steel Sheet 

from Japan: Investigation No. 701–TA–860 (Third 

Review), USITC Publication 4795 (June 2018); see 

also Tin- and Chromium-Coated Steel Sheet from 

Japan; Determination, 83 FR 29568 (June 25, 2018). 

5A full description of the scope of the order is 

contained in the memorandum to 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, from 

James Maeder, Senior Director performing the 

duties of Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 

Expedited Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty 

Order on Certain Tin Mill Products from Japan’’ 

(Issues and Decision Memorandum), dated August 

29, 2017. 

1See Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings from the People’s 

Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative 

Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment 

of Final Determination With Final Antidumping 

Duty Determination, 82 FR 60178 (December 19, 

2017) (Preliminary Determination). 

AD order on tin mill products from 

Japan.1 On May 1, 2017, Commerce 

published the notice of initiation of the 

third sunset review of the AD order on 

tin mill products from Japan, pursuant 

to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (the Act).2 Commerce 

conducted this sunset review on an 

expedited basis, pursuant to section 

751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2) because it 

received a complete, timely, and 

adequate response from a domestic 

interested party but no substantive 

responses from respondent interested 

parties. As a result of the review, 

Commerce determined, pursuant to 

sections 751(c)(1) and 752(c) of the Act, 

that revocation of the AD order would 

likely lead to a continuation or 

recurrence of dumping.3 Commerce, 

therefore, notified the ITC of the 

magnitude of the dumping margins 

likely to prevail should the AD order be 

revoked. On June 25, 2018, the ITC 

published notice of its determination, 

pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752(a) of 

the Act, that revocation of the AD order 

on tin mill products from Japan would 

likely lead to a continuation or 

recurrence of material injury to an 

industry in the United States within a 

reasonably foreseeable time.4

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by the 

antidumping duty order are tin mill flatrolled products that are coated or plated 

with tin, chromium or chromium 

oxides. Flat-rolled steel products coated 

with tin are known as tin plate. Flatrolled steel products coated with 

chromium or chromium oxides are 

known as tin-free steel or electrolytic 

chromium-coated steel. The 

merchandise covered by the order is 

currently classified in the Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States 

(HTSUS), under HTSUS subheadings 

7210.11.0000, 7210.12.0000, 

7210.50.0000, 7212.10.0000, and 

7212.50.0000 if of non-alloy steel and 

under HTSUS subheadings 

7225.99.0090, and 7226.99.0180 if of 

alloy steel. 

The HTSUS subheadings are provided 

for convenience and customs purposes. 

The written description of the scope of 

the order remains dispositive.5

Continuation of the Order 

As a result of the determinations by 

Commerce and the ITC that revocation 

of the AD order would likely lead to a 

continuation or recurrence of dumping 

and material injury to an industry in the 

United States, pursuant to section 

751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.218(a), Commerce hereby orders the 

continuation of the AD order on tin mill 

products from Japan. 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

will continue to collect AD cash 

deposits at the rates in effect at the time 

of entry for all imports of subject 

merchandise. The effective date of the 

continuation of the order will be the 

date of publication in the Federal 

Register of this notice of continuation. 

Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, 

Commerce intends to initiate the next 

five-year sunset review of the order not 

later than 30 days prior to the fifth 

anniversary of the effective date of 

continuation. 

This five-year sunset review and this 

notice are in accordance with section 

751(c) and 751(d)(2) of the Act and 

published pursuant to section 777(i)(1) 

of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4). 

Dated: July 3, 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. 2018–14826 Filed 7–10–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–063] 

Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings From the 

People’s Republic of China: Final 

Affirmative Countervailing Duty 

Determination 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) determines that 

countervailable subsidies are being 

provided to producers and exporters of 

Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings (soil pipe 

fittings) from the People’s Republic of 

China (China). The period of 

investigation is January 1, 2016, through 

December 31, 2016. 

DATES: Applicable July 11, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dennis McClure or Jinny Ahn, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement 

and Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–5973 or (202) 482–0339, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The mandatory respondents in this 

investigation are Shanxi Xuanshi 

Industrial Group Co., Ltd. (Shanxi 

Xuanshi), Shijiazhuang Chengmei 

Import & Export Co., Ltd. (Shijiazhuang 

Chengmei), and Wor-Biz International 

Trading Co., Ltd. (Anhui) (Wor-Biz). On 

December 19, 2017, Commerce 

published in the Federal Register the 

Preliminary Determination of the 

countervailing duty (CVD) investigation 

of cast iron soil pipes from China.1 In 

the Preliminary Determination, 

Commerce aligned the final CVD 

determination with the final 

determination in the companion 

antidumping duty (AD) investigation, in 

accordance with section 705(a)(1) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(4). 

On January 23, 2018, Commerce 

exercised its discretion to toll all 

deadlines affected by the closure of the 

Federal Government from January 20 

through 22, 2018. In accordance with 

Commerce’s practice, if the new 

deadline falls on a non-business day, 

the deadline will become the next 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
32076 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 11, 2018 / Notices 

2See Memorandum for The Record from 

Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance, performing the nonexclusive functions and duties of the Assistant 

Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, 

‘‘Deadlines Affected by the Shutdown of the 

Federal Government’’ (Tolling Memorandum), 

dated January 23, 2018. All deadlines in this 

segment of the proceeding have been extended by 

3 days. 

3See Memorandum, ‘‘Post-Preliminary Analysis 

of Countervailing Duty Investigation: Cast Iron Soil 

Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of China,’’ 

dated April 19, 2018 (Post-Preliminary Analysis). 4See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Determination of the 

Countervailing Duty Investigation of Cast Iron Soil 

Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of China’’ 

(Issues and Decision Memorandum), dated 

concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this 

notice. 

5See Memorandum, ‘‘Countervailing Duty and 

Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations of Cast Iron 

Soil Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of 

China: Final Scope Memorandum’’ (Final Scope 

Memorandum), dated concurrently with, and 

hereby adopted by, this notice. 

6See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act 

regarding financial contribution; see section 

771(5)(E) of the Act regarding benefit; see section 

771(5A) of the Act regarding specificity. 

7See sections 776(a), (b), and 782(d) of the Act. 

8See Memorandum regarding: Calculation of the 

All-Others Rate for the Final Determination, dated 

July 5, 2018. 

business day. Accordingly, the deadline 

for the final determination of this 

investigation was revised to July 5, 

2018.2 On April 19, 2018, Commerce 

released its Post-Preliminary Analysis.3

A summary of the events that 

occurred since Commerce published the 

Preliminary Determination, as well as a 

full discussion of the issues raised by 

interested parties for this final 

determination, can be found in the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum 

issued concurrently with this notice.4

The Issues and 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 http://access.trade.gov, and is 

available to all parties in the Central 

Records Unit, room B8024 of the main 

Department of Commerce building. In 

addition, a complete version of the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum can 

be accessed directly at http:// 

enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed 

Issues and Decision Memorandum and 

the electronic version are identical in 

content. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The products covered by this 

investigation are cast iron soil pipe 

fittings from China. For a full 

description of the scope of this 

investigation, see the ‘‘Scope of the 

Investigation’’ in Appendix I of this 

notice. For this final determination, 

Commerce has issued a scope 

memorandum addressing interested 

parties’’ comments regarding scope 

issues presented in the case briefs and 

in subsequent scope comments.5

Commerce has determined to modify 

the scope of the investigation to include 

two additional subheadings of the U.S. 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule under 

which subject merchandise may enter. 

Commerce has also provided a 

clarification in the Final Scope 

Memorandum. For further discussion, 

see Commerce’s Final Scope 

Memorandum. The scope in Appendix 

I reflects the final scope language. 

Analysis of Subsidy Programs and 

Comments Received 

The subsidy programs under 

investigation and the issues raised in 

the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in 

this investigation are discussed in the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum. A 

list of the issues that parties raised, and 

to which we responded in the Issues 

and Decision Memorandum, is attached 

to this notice at Appendix II. 

Methodology 

Commerce conducted this 

investigation in accordance with section 

701 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (the Act). For each of the 

subsidy programs found 

countervailable, Commerce determines 

that there is a subsidy, i.e. , a financial 

contribution by an ‘‘authority’’ that 

confers a benefit to the recipient, and 

that the subsidy is specific.6 For a full 

description of the methodology 

underlying our final determination, see 

the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 

In making these findings, Commerce 

relied, in part, on facts otherwise 

available and, because it finds that one 

or more respondents did not act to the 

best of their ability to respond to 

Commerce’s requests for information, 

Commerce drew an adverse inference 

where appropriate in selecting from 

among the facts otherwise available.7

For further information, see ‘‘Use of 

Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse 

Inferences’’ in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. 

Changes Since the Preliminary 

Determination 

Based on our review and analysis of 

the comments received from the 

interested parties, our findings at 

verification, and the minor corrections 

presented at verification, we made 

certain changes to the respondents’’ 

subsidy rate calculations. For a 

discussion of these changes, see the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum. 

Final Determination 

In accordance with section 

705(c)(l)(B)(i) of the Act, we calculated 

rates for Shanxi Xuanshi and Wor-Biz, 

producers/exporters of subject 

merchandise selected for individual 

examination in this investigation. With 

regard to Shijiazhuang Chengmei, for 

the reasons described in the Preliminary 

Determination, Commerce assigned a 

rate based entirely on adverse facts 

available pursuant to section 776 of the 

Act. No interested party commented on 

our preliminary decision, and so for 

purposes of this final determination, we 

continue to assign Shijiazhuang 

Chengmei a rate based entirely on AFA. 

Section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act 

provides that in the final determination, 

Commerce shall determine an estimated 

all-others rate for companies not 

individually examined. This rate shall 

be an amount equal to the weighted 

average of the estimated subsidy rates 

established for those companies 

individually examined, excluding any 

zero and de minimis rates and any rates 

based entirely under section 776 of the 

Act. In this investigation, we calculated 

individual estimated countervailable 

subsidy rates for Shanxi Xuanshi and 

Wor-Biz that are not zero, de minimis , 

or based entirely on facts otherwise 

available. As a result, we calculated the 

all-others rate based on a weighted 

average of the individual estimated 

subsidy rates calculated for the 

examined respondents using each 

company’s publicly ranged values for 

the merchandise under consideration.8

Commerce determines that the 

following estimated countervailable 

subsidy rates exist: 

Company Subsidy rate 

(percent) 

Shanxi Xuanshi Industrial Group Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................................................... 34.87 

Wor-Biz International Trading Co., Ltd. (Anhui) .................................................................................................................................. 7.37 

Shijiazhuang Chengmei Import & Export Co., Ltd .............................................................................................................................. 133.94 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 11, 2018 / Notices 32077 

Company Subsidy rate 

(percent) 

All-Others ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 23.28 

Disclosure 

We intend to disclose the calculations 

performed to parties in this proceeding, 

for this final determination, within five 

days of the date of publication of our 

final determination, in accordance with 

19 CFR 351.224(b). 

Continuation of Suspension of 

Liquidation 

As a result of our Preliminary 

Determination and pursuant to section 

703(d)(1)(B) and (d)(2) of the Act, 

Commerce instructed U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) to suspend 

liquidation of entries of subject 

merchandise as described in the scope 

of the investigation section entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after the date of 

publication of the Preliminary 

Determination in the Federal Register . 

In accordance with section 703(d) of the 

Act, we issued instructions to CBP to 

discontinue the suspension of 

liquidation for CVD purposes for subject 

merchandise entered, or withdrawn 

from warehouse, on or after April 18, 

2018, but to continue the suspension of 

liquidation of all entries from December 

19, 2017, through April 17, 2018. 

If the U.S. International Trade 

Commission (ITC) issues a final 

affirmative injury determination, we 

will issue a CVD order, will reinstate the 

suspension of liquidation under section 

706(a) of the Act, and will require a cash 

deposit of estimated countervailing 

duties for such entries of subject 

merchandise in the amounts indicated 

above. If the ITC determines that 

material injury, or threat of material 

injury, does not exist, this proceeding 

will be terminated and all estimated 

duties deposited or securities posted as 

a result of the suspension of liquidation 

will be refunded or canceled. 

International Trade Commission 

Notification 

In accordance with section 705(d) of 

the Act, we will notify the ITC of our 

determination. In addition, we are 

making available to the ITC all nonprivileged and non-proprietary 

information related to this investigation. 

We will allow the ITC access to all 

privileged and business proprietary 

information in our files, provided the 

ITC confirms that it will not disclose 

such information, either publicly or 

under an administrative protective order 

(APO), without the written consent of 

the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

Because the final determination in 

this proceeding is affirmative, in 

accordance with section 705(b) of the 

Act, the ITC will make its final 

determination as to whether the 

domestic industry in the United States 

is materially injured, or threatened with 

material injury, by reason of imports of 

soil pipe fittings from China no later 

than 45 days after our final 

determination. If the ITC determines 

that material injury or threat of material 

injury does not exist, the proceeding 

will be terminated and all cash deposits 

will be refunded. If the ITC determines 

that such injury does exist, Commerce 

will issue a CVD order directing CBP to 

assess, upon further instruction by 

Commerce, countervailing duties on all 

imports of the subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the effective 

date of the suspension of liquidation, as 

discussed above in the ‘‘Continuation of 

Suspension of Liquidation’’ section. 

Notification Regarding Administrative 

Protective Orders 

In the event that the ITC issues a final 

negative injury determination, this 

notice will serve as the only reminder 

to parties subject to an APO of their 

responsibility concerning the 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

written notification of the return/ 

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and terms of an 

APO is a violation which is subject to 

sanction. 

This determination is issued and 

published pursuant to sections 705(d) 

and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.210(c). 

Dated: July 5, 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. 

Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation 

The merchandise covered by this 

investigation is cast iron soil pipe fittings, 

finished and unfinished, regardless of 

industry or proprietary specifications, and 

regardless of size. Cast iron soil pipe fittings 

are nonmalleable iron castings of various 

designs and sizes, including, but not limited 

to, bends, tees, wyes, traps, drains, and other 

common or special fittings, with or without 

side inlets. 

Cast iron soil pipe fittings are classified 

into two major types—hubless and hub and 

spigot. Hubless cast iron soil pipe fittings are 

manufactured without a hub, generally in 

compliance with Cast Iron Soil Pipe Institute 

(CISPI) specification 301 and/or American 

Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) 

specification A888. Hub and spigot pipe 

fittings have hubs into which the spigot 

(plain end) of the pipe or fitting is inserted. 

Cast iron soil pipe fittings are generally 

distinguished from other types of 

nonmalleable cast iron fittings by the manner 

in which they are connected to cast iron soil 

pipe and other fittings. 

The subject imports are normally classified 

in subheading 7307.11.0045 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 

States (HTSUS): Cast fittings of nonmalleable 

cast iron for cast iron soil pipe. They may 

also be entered under HTSUS 7324.29.0000 

and 7307.92.3010. The HTSUS subheadings 

and specifications are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes only; the 

written description of the scope of this 

investigation is dispositive. 

Appendix II—List of Topics Discussed 

in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and 

Adverse Inferences 

IV. Subsidies Valuation 

V. Analysis of Programs 

VI. Analysis of Comments 

Comment 1: Whether Commerce Should 

Use a Tier 1 Benchmark for Shanxi 

Xuanshi’s Metallurgical Coke Benefit 

Calculation 

Comment 2: Whether Commerce Should 

Use a Tier 1 Benchmark for Shanxi 

Xuanshi’s Iron Ore Benefit Calculation 

Comment 3: Whether Commerce 

Appropriately Averaged Tier 2 Iron Ore 

Benchmark Prices and Used the 

Appropriate Benchmark for 

Transportation 

Comment 4: Whether Commerce 

Overstated the Subsidy Rate for Policy 

Loans, Purchases of Electricity, Pig Iron, 

and Ferrous Scrap for LTAR 

Comment 5: Whether Commerce 

Improperly Applied AFA to the 

Calculation of the Benefits Attributable 

to Guangzhou Premier for the Purchase 

of Pig Iron and Ferrous Scrap for LTAR 

Comment 6: Whether Commerce Should 

Consider Shanxi Xuanshi’s Steel Scrap 

as a Subsidizable Input 

Comment 7: Whether Commerce Erred in 

its Policy Loan Benefits Calculation for 

Shanxi Xuanshi 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
32078 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 133 / Wednesday, July 11, 2018 / Notices 

1See Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires 

from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results 

of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 

2015, 83 FR 16055 (April 13, 2018) (Final Results) 

and accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum (Final Results IDM). 

2See Guizhou Tyre’s letter to Commerce, 

‘‘Ministerial Error Submission of Guizhou Tyre 

Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from 

China,’’ April 23, 2018 (Guizhou Tyre’s Ministerial 

Error Allegation). 

3For a full description of the scope of the order, 

see Final Results IDM. 

4See Memorandum to the file, ‘‘Response to 

Ministerial Error Allegations in the Final Results,’’ 

dated concurrently with this notice. 5See Final Results, 83 FR at 16055. 6The appendix provides a list of the non-selected 

companies that are assigned this rate. 7The U.S. Court of International Trade issued the 

preliminary injunctions in case numbers 18–00100 

and 18–00108. 

Comment 8: Whether Commerce Erred in 

Its Electricity Benefits Calculation for 

Shanxi Xuanshi 

VII. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2018–14827 Filed 7–10–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–913] 

Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road 

Tires From the People’s Republic of 

China: Amended Final Results of 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Review, 2015 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) is amending the final 

results of the countervailing duty 

administrative review of certain new 

pneumatic off-the-road tires from the 

People’s Republic of China (China) to 

correct certain ministerial errors. The 

period of review (POR) is January 1, 

2015, through December 31, 2015. 

DATES: Applicable July 11, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Chien-Min Yang, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office VII, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

202–482–5484. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

In accordance with sections 751(a)(1) 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(the Act), and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), on 

April 13, 2018, Commerce published its 

final results in the countervailing duty 

administrative review of certain new 

phenumatic off-the-road tires from 

China.1 Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd. and its 

affiliate, Guizhou Tyre Import and 

Export Co., Ltd. (collectively, Guizhou 

Tyre) timely filed a ministerial error 

allegation on April 23, 2018, claiming 

Commerce had improperly failed to 

include revised land values accepted at 

verification as minor corrections in the 

final calculations.2

On May 2, 2018, Guizhou Tyre filed 

its complaint with the U.S. Court of 

International Trade (CIT) challenging 

the Final Results. On June 19, 2018, the 

United States sought leave from the CIT 

to address the ministerial error 

allegation and a related issue 

concerning a separate minor correction 

accepted at verification. On June 20, 

2018, the court granted the United 

States’ request. 

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by the scope are 

new pneumatic tires designed for offthe-road (OTR) and off-highway use. 

The subject merchandise is currently 

classifiable under Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 

subheadings: 4011.20.10.25, 

4011.20.10.35, 4011.20.50.30, 

4011.20.50.50, 4011.70.0010, 

4011.62.00.00, 4011.80.1020, 

4011.90.10, 4011.70.0050, 4011.80.1010, 

4011.80.1020, 4011.80.2010, 

4011.80.2020, 4011.80.8010, and 

4011.80.8020. While HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, our 

written description of the scope, which 

is contained in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum accompanying the Final 

Results, is dispositive.3

Ministerial Errors 

Section 751(h) of the Act, and 19 CFR 

351.224(f) defines a ‘‘ministerial error’’ 

as an error ‘‘in addition, subtraction, or 

other arithmetic function, clerical error 

resulting from inaccurate copying, 

duplication, or the like, and any other 

similar type of unintentional error 

which the Secretary considers 

ministerial.’’ Commerce has now 

determined that Guizhou Tyre’s alleged 

error is a ministerial error under section 

751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(f). 

Specifically, we find that not 

incorporating revised values regarding 

the total price paid for certain parcels of 

land, which were accepted as minor 

corrections and verified at verification, 

in our final calculations is an 

inadvertent omission within the 

meaning of ‘‘ministerial error.’’ We have 

also determined that we made an 

additional ministerial error by 

inadvertently omitting revised loan 

interest payment data submitted by 

Guizhou Tyre as a minor correction at 

verification. To correct these errors, we 

are amending Guizhou Tyre’s subsidy 

rate for its land-use rights program rate 

and its subsidy rate for its government 

policy lending program. See the 

Response to Ministerial Error 

Allegations for the revised program 

rates.4 These changes result in a change 

to the net subsidy rate for Guizhou Tyre. 

Similarly, because the subsidy rate for 

the non-selected companies in Final 

Results 5 was based on Guizhou Tyre’s 

net subsidy rate, these changes also 

result in a change to the subsidy rate for 

the non-selected companies. For a 

complete discussion of the errors at 

issue, see the Response to Ministerial 

Error Allegations. The revised net 

subsidy rates are provided below. 

Amended Final Results 

As a result of correcting the 

ministerial errors, we determine that 

Guizhou Tyre’s, Xuzhou Xugong’s and 

the non-selected companies’ total net 

countervailable subsidy rates for the 

period January 1, 2015, through 

December 31 2015, are as follows: 

Manufacturer/exporter 

Subsidy rate 

(percent ad 

valorem) 

Guizhou Tyre Co., Ltd. and/ 

or Guizhou Tyre Import 

and Export Co., Ltd ........... 31.48 

Non Selected Companies 6 .. 31.48 

Assessment Rates/Cash Deposits 

Normally Commerce would issue 

appropriate assessment instructions to 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP) 15 days after the date of 

publication of the amended final results 

of review. However, as noted above, 

Guizhou Tyre has filed its complaint 

with the CIT challenging the Final 

Results on May 8, 2018, and on May 8, 

and June 1, 2018, the U.S. Court of 

International Trade preliminarily 

enjoined liquidation of certain entries 

that are subject to the Final Results.7

Accordingly, Commerce will not 

instruct CBP to assess countervailing 

duties on those enjoined entries 

pending resolution of the associated 

litigation. 

Commerce also intends to instruct 

CBP to collect cash deposits of 

estimated countervailing duties, in the 

amount shown above for the companies 

listed above, on shipments of subject 

merchandise entered, or withdrawn 

from warehouse, for consumption on or 

after April 13, 2017, the date of 

publication of the Final Results. For all 

non-reviewed firms, we will instruct 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES