35212 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 143 / Wednesday, July 25, 2018 / Notices 

1See Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks from the 

People’s Republic of China: Countervailing Duty 

Order, 78 FR 21596 (April 11,2013) (Order). 2See Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews, 83 

FR 9279 (March 5, 2018). 3See Letter from Elkay ‘‘First Five-Year (‘Sunset’) 

Review of Countervailing Duty Order on Drawn 

Stainless Steel Sinks from the People’s Republic of 

China/Elkay Manufacturing Company’s Notice of 

Intent to Participate,’’ dated March 16, 2018. 

4See Letter from Elkay ‘‘First Five-Year (‘Sunset’) 

Review of the Countervailing Duty Order on Drawn 

Stainless Steel Sinks from the People’s Republic of 

China/Substantive Response to the Notice of 

Initiation,’’ dated April 2, 2018. 

5See Letter to the ITC re: ‘‘Sunset Reviews 

Initiated on March 5, 2018,’’ dated April 10, 2018. 

6Mounting clips, fasteners, seals, and sounddeadening pads are not covered by the scope of this 

order if they are not included within the sales price 

of the drawn stainless steel sinks, regardless of 

whether they are shipped with or entered with 

drawn stainless steel sinks. 

7See Memorandum ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Expedited First Sunset 

Review of the Countervailing Duty Order on Drawn 

Stainless Steel Sinks from the People’s Republic of 

China,’’ dated concurrently with this notice (Issues 

and Decision Memorandum). 

included in the request for OMB 

approval of this information collection; 

they also will become a matter of public 

record. 

Sheleen Dumas, 

Departmental Lead PRA Officer, Office of the 

Chief Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15927 Filed 7–24–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–984] 

Drawn Stainless Steel Sinks From the 

People’s Republic of China: Final 

Results of the Expedited First Sunset 

Review of the Countervailing Duty 

Order 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: As a result of this sunset 

review, the Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) finds that revocation of the 

countervailing duty order would be 

likely to lead to the continuation or 

recurrence of a countervailable subsidy 

at the levels indicated in the ‘‘Final 

Results of Review’’ section of this 

notice. 

DATES: Applicable July 25, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Crespo, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3693. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On April 11, 2013, Commerce 

published its countervailing duty order 

on drawn stainless steel sinks from 

China.1 On March 5, 2018, Commerce 

published the notice of initiation of the 

first sunset review of the countervailing 

duty order on drawn stainless steel 

sinks from China pursuant to section 

751(c) of the Act.2 On March 16, 2018, 

Commerce received a notice of intent to 

participate from Elkay Manufacturing 

Company (Elkay), a domestic interested 

party, within the deadline specified in 

19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i).3 Elkay claimed 

interested party status under section 

771(9)(C) of the Act as a producer of 

stainless steel sinks in the United States. 

On April 2, 2018, Commerce received 

an adequate substantive response to the 

notice of initiation from Elkay within 

the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 

351.218(d)(3)(i).4 We received no 

substantive responses from respondent 

interested parties with respect to the 

order covered by this sunset review. 

On April 10, 2018, Commerce notified 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission (ITC) that it did not receive 

an adequate substantive response from 

respondent interested parties.5 As a 

result, pursuant to 751(c)(3)(B) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), 

Commerce conducted an expedited 

(120-day) sunset review of the 

countervailing duty order on drawn 

stainless steel sinks from China. 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise covered by the order 

includes drawn stainless steel sinks 

with single or multiple drawn bowls, 

with or without drain boards, whether 

finished or unfinished, regardless of 

type of finish, gauge, or grade of 

stainless steel. Mounting clips, 

fasteners, seals, and sound-deadening 

pads are also covered by the scope of 

this order if they are included within 

the sales price of the drawn stainless 

steel sinks.6 For purposes of this scope 

definition, the term ‘‘drawn’’ refers to a 

manufacturing process using metal 

forming technology to produce a smooth 

basin with seamless, smooth, and 

rounded corners. Drawn stainless steel 

sinks are available in various shapes 

and configurations and may be 

described in a number of ways 

including flush mount, top mount, or 

undermount (to indicate the attachment 

relative to the countertop). Stainless 

steel sinks with multiple drawn bowls 

that are joined through a welding 

operation to form one unit are covered 

by the scope of the order. Drawn 

stainless steel sinks are covered by the 

scope of the order whether or not they 

are sold in conjunction with non-subject 

accessories such as faucets (whether 

attached or unattached), strainers, 

strainer sets, rinsing baskets, bottom 

grids, or other accessories. 

Excluded from the scope of the order 

are stainless steel sinks with fabricated 

bowls. Fabricated bowls do not have 

seamless corners, but rather are made by 

notching and bending the stainless steel, 

and then welding and finishing the 

vertical corners to form the bowls. 

Stainless steel sinks with fabricated 

bowls may sometimes be referred to as 

‘‘zero radius’’ or ‘‘near zero radius’’ 

sinks. The products covered by this 

order are currently classified in the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS) under statistical 

reporting number 7324.10.0000 and 

7324.10.0010. Although the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the scope of the 

order is dispositive. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in this sunset review 

are addressed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum,7 which is hereby 

adopted by this notice. The issues 

discussed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum are the likelihood of 

continuation or recurrence of a 

countervailable subsidy and the net 

countervailable subsidy likely to prevail 

if the order were revoked. 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 to all 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 

on the internet at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/frn. The signed 

Issues and Decision Memorandum and 

the electronic version of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum are identical in 

content. 

Final Results of Review 

Pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and 

752(b) of the Act, Commerce determines 

that revocation of the countervailing 

duty order on drawn stainless steel 

sinks from China would be likely to lead 

to the continuation or recurrence of a 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 143 / Wednesday, July 25, 2018 / Notices 35213 

8See Order, 70 FR 21596, 21597. 

1See Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires 

from Sri Lanka: Final Affirmative Countervailing 

Duty Determination, and Final Determination of 

Critical Circumstances, 82 FR 2949, 2950 (January 

10, 2017) (Final Determination) and accompanying 

Issues and Decision Memorandum. 

2See Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires 

from India and Sri Lanka: Amended Final 

Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination for 

India and Countervailing Duty Orders, 82 FR 12556 

(Mar. 6, 2017) (Order). 

3See Government of Sri Lanka v. United States, 

Slip Op. 18–43 (CIT Apr. 17, 2018). 

4 Id. at 20. 

5See Final Results of Redetermination on 

Remand Pursuant to Government of Sri Lanka v. 

United States, Slip Op. 18–43 (CIT April 17, 2018), 

dated June 13, 2016 (Final Redetermination). See 

also https://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/18- 

43.pdf. 

6See Viraj Group, Ltd. v. United States, 343 F.3d 

1371 (Fed. Cir. 2003). 

7See Government of Sri Lanka v. United States, 

Slip Op. 18–87, Consol. Court No. 17–00059 (CIT 

July 11, 2018) (Final Remand Order). 

8See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d. 337 

(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken). 

9See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. 

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

(Diamond Sawblades). 

10See Sections 516A(c) and (e) of the Act. 

countervailable subsidy at the rates 

listed below: 8

Producer/exporter Net subsidy 

rate % 

Guangdong Yingao Kitche 

Utensils Co., Ltd. and 

Forshan Magang Kitchen 

Utensils Co., Ltd ............... 4.90 

Zhongshan Superte Kitchenware Co., Ltd .................... 12.31 

Foshan Zhaoshun Trade 

Co., Ltd ............................. 12.36 

All Others .............................. 8.61 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice also serves as the only 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective order (APO) of 

their responsibility concerning the 

return or destruction of proprietary 

information disclosed under APO in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 

Timely notification of the return or 

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective orders 

is hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and terms of an 

APO is a violation which is subject to 

sanction. 

We are issuing and publishing the 

final results and this notice in 

accordance with sections 751(c), 752(b), 

and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.218. 

Dated: July 2, 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. 2018–15883 Filed 7–24–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–542–801] 

Certain New Pneumatic Off-The-Road 

Tires From Sri Lanka: Notice of Court 

Decision Not in Harmony With Final 

Affirmative Countervailing Duty 

Determination, Notice of Amended 

Final Determination and Revocation of 

Countervailing Duty Order 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On July 11, 2018, the United 

States Court of International Trade (CIT) 

entered its final judgment sustaining the 

final results of remand redetermination 

pursuant to court order by the 

Department of Commerce (Commerce) 

pertaining to the countervailing duty 

(CVD) investigation of certain new 

pneumatic off-the-road tires (off road 

tires) from Sri Lanka. Commerce is 

notifying the public that the final 

judgment in this case is not in harmony 

with Commerce’s final determination in 

the CVD investigation of off road tires 

from Sri Lanka. Pursuant to the CIT’s 

final judgment, the mandatory 

respondent in the CVD investigation of 

off road tires from Sri Lanka received a 

net countervailable subsidy rate of 1.23 

percent, a rate that is de minimis and, 

therefore, Commerce is hereby revoking 

this order. 

DATES: Applicable July 21, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Whitley Herndon, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office II, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–6274. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On January 10, 2017, Commerce 

published the Final Determination in 

this proceeding.1 Commerce reached an 

affirmative determination that 

countervailable subsidies were provided 

to mandatory respondent Camso 

Loadstar (Private), Ltd. (Camso 

Loadstar). Commerce published the 

countervailing duty order resulting from 

the investigation on March 6, 2017.2

Camso Loadstar and the Government 

of Sri Lanka (GOSL) appealed the Final 

Determination and countervailing duty 

order to the CIT, and on April 17, 2018, 

the CIT remanded the Final 

Determination.3 Specifically, the CIT 

remanded the Final Determination 

directing Commerce to eliminate any 

duties attributable to the Guaranteed 

Price Scheme for Rubber (GPS) program 

based on mere reimbursement for 

excessive rubber payments.4 On June 

13, 2016, Commerce issued its final 

results of redetermination pursuant to 

remand in accordance with the CIT’s 

order.5 On remand, Commerce, under 

respectful protest,6 eliminated any 

duties attributable to the GPS program 

and recalculated the countervailable 

subsidy rate for Camso Loadstar 

accordingly. On July 11, 2018, the CIT 

sustained Commerce’s Final 

Redetermination.7 Thus, the effective 

date of this notice is July 21, 2018. 

Timken Notice 

In its decision in Timken,8 as clarified 

by Diamond Sawblades,9 the Court of 

Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal 

Circuit) held that, pursuant to section 

516A of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (the Act), Commerce must 

publish a notice of court decision that 

is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with a Commerce 

determination and must suspend 

liquidation of entries pending a 

‘‘conclusive’’ court decision.10 The 

CIT’s July 11, 2018, final judgment 

sustaining the Final Redetermination 

constitutes a final decision of that court 

that is not in harmony with Commerce’s 

Final Determination. Thus, this notice is 

published in fulfillment of the 

publication requirements of Timken and 

section 516A of the Act. 

Amended Final Determination 

Because there is now a final court 

decision, Commerce is amending the 

Final Determination with respect to 

Camso Loadstar. The revised 

countervailable subsidy rate for Camso 

Loadstar for the period January 1, 2015, 

through December 31, 2015, is as 

follows: 

Exporter or producer Subsidy rate 

(percent) 

Camso Loadstar (Private), Ltd 1.23 (de minimis). 

Revocation of the Order 

Pursuant to section 705(a)(3) of the 

Act, Commerce ‘‘shall disregard any 

countervailable subsidy that is de 

minimis as defined in section 703(b)(4)’’ 

of the Act. Furthermore, and pursuant to 

section 705(c)(2) of the Act, ‘‘the 

investigation shall be terminated upon 

publication of that negative 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES