[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 51 (Tuesday, March 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13826-13827]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06127]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-924]


Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From the 
People's Republic of China: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony 
With Final Results of Administrative Review and Notice of Amended Final 
Results of Administrative Review Pursuant to Court Decision

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On February 27, 2015 the United States Court of International 
Trade (``CIT'') sustained the Department of Commerce's (``the 
Department'') final results of remand redetermination, pursuant to the 
CIT's remand order, in DuPont Teijin Films China Limited, et al. v. 
United States, Slip Op. 15-19 (CIT February 27, 2015).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court 
Remand, Court No. 13-00229, dated January 9, 2015, available at: 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/remands/index.html (``PET Film Final 
Remand''); see also DuPont Teijin Films China Limited, et al. v. 
United States, Consol. Court No. 13-00229, Slip Op. 15-19 (CIT 2015) 
(``Remand Opinion and Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals 
for the Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 
F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (``Timken''), as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 
2010) (``Diamond Sawblades''), the Department is notifying the public 
that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the 
Department's PET Film Final Results \2\ and is amending the final 
results with respect to DuPont Teijin Film China Limited Co., Ltd. 
(``DuPont'') and Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd. (``Wanhua'') for the period 
of review from November 1, 2010, through October 31, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From 
the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2010-2011, 78 FR 35245 (June 12, 2013) (``PET 
Film Final Results'').

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: March 9, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Martin, Office IV, Enforcement 
& Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230; telephone: (202) 482-3936.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 12, 2013, the Department published the PET Film Final 
Results. Interested parties DuPont, DuPont Hongji Films Foshan Co., 
Ltd., DuPont Teijin Hongji Films Ningbo Co., Ltd., DuPont Teijin Films 
U.S. Limited Partnership, and Wanhua, appealed the PET Film Final 
Results to the CIT. On September 11, 2014, the CIT remanded several 
issues with respect to the PET Film Final Results.\3\ Specifically, the 
CIT held that: (1) The Department's approach of valuing DuPont's 
recycled Polyethylene Terephthalate (``PET'') chips factor of 
production, while denying its by-product offset for recyclable PET 
waste, was unreasonable because it resulted in double-counting, and the 
Department must ``reconsider its approach, and adopt a methodology that 
does not result in double-counting costs, insofar as reasonably 
avoidable;'' and (2) the Department's brokerage and handling 
calculation for DuPont ``incorrectly assumes that a shipment weighing 
less will incur lower document preparation and customs clearance costs, 
while a shipment weighing more will incur higher preparation costs,'' 
and that the brokerage and handling figure therefore required 
``recalculation.'' \4\ The CIT also held that because Wanhua's separate 
rate was based on DuPont's rate, ``any change to DuPont's margin 
following remand shall be applied to Wanhua's rate as well.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See DuPont Teijin Films China Ltd. v. United States, 7 F. 
Supp. 3d 1338 (CIT 2014).
    \4\ Id. at 1347-51.
    \5\ Id. at 1359.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to the CIT's remand instructions, the Department re-
examined record evidence and made the following changes. The Department 
revised its calculation of DuPont's margin in two ways. First, the 
Department reopened the record to allow DuPont an opportunity to 
substantiate its by-product offset, and granted that offset. Second, 
the Department adjusted DuPont's brokerage and handling surrogate value 
calculation by dividing the surrogate value for document preparation 
and customs clearance costs by the weight of DuPont's shipments. In 
addition, the Department revised its calculation of Wanhua's separate 
rate by adjusting it for any changes to DuPont's margin, given that its 
margin was solely based on DuPont's margin.

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades, the CAFC held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``Act''), the Department must publish a 
notice of a court decision that

[[Page 13827]]

is not ``in harmony'' with a Department determination and must suspend 
liquidation of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The 
CIT's February 27, 2015, judgment sustaining the PET Film Final Remand 
constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with 
the PET Film Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of 
the publication requirements of Timken. Accordingly, the Department 
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. Since the PET Film Final 
Results, the Department established a new cash deposit rate for DuPont 
and Wanhua.\6\ Therefore, DuPont's and Wanhua's cash deposit rates do 
not need to be updated as a result of these amended final results. The 
cash deposit rates for DuPont and Wanhua will remain the rates 
established for the subsequent and most recent period during which each 
respondent was reviewed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From 
the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2011-2012, 79 FR 37715 (July 2, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amended Final Results

    Because there is now a final court decision with respect to the PET 
Film Final Results, the revised weighted-average dumping margins are as 
follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
                          Exporter                              margin
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DuPont Teijin Films China Limited..........................         4.42
Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd....................................         4.42
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: March 11, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-06127 Filed 3-16-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P