13826 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 51 / Tuesday, March 17, 2015 / Notices 

1See 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’’). 

2See 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’’). 

3See DuPont Teijin Films China Ltd. v. United 

States, 7 F. Supp. 3d 1338 (CIT 2014). 

4 Id. at 1347–51. 

5 Id. at 1359. 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date, as provided by section 

751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For 

previously investigated or reviewed PRC 

and non-PRC exporters not listed above 

that received a separate rate in a prior 

segment of this proceeding, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be the 

existing exporter-specific rate; (2) for all 

PRC exporters of subject merchandise 

that have not been found to be entitled 

to a separate rate, including Henan 

Sanli, the cash deposit rate will be that 

for the PRC-wide entity; and (3) for all 

non-PRC exporters of subject 

merchandise which have not received 

their own rate, the cash deposit rate will 

be the rate applicable to the PRC 

exporter that supplied that non-PRC 

exporter. These cash deposit 

requirements, when imposed, shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice serves as a final reminder 

to importers of their responsibility 

under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a 

certificate regarding the reimbursement 

of antidumping duties prior to 

liquidation of the relevant entries 

during this POR. Failure to comply with 

this requirement could result in the 

Secretary’s presumption that 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping duties. 

Administrative Protective Orders 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective order (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 or 

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 sanctionable violation. 

These final results of review are 

issued and published in accordance 

with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the 

Act. 

Dated: March 10, 2015. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06105 Filed 3–16–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

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

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. 

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

Pursuant to the CIT’s remand 

instructions, the Department reexamined 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 51 / Tuesday, March 17, 2015 / Notices 13827 

6See 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). 

1On December 8, 1978, the Department of the 

Treasury published the antidumping duty finding, 

which is equivalent to an antidumping duty order 

published after 1980, on PC strand from Japan. See 

Steel Wire Strand for Prestressed Concrete from 

Japan: Finding of Dumping, 43 FR 57599 (December 

8, 1978). 

2See Initiation of Five-year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 79 

FR 65186 (November 3, 2014) (Initiation Notice). 

3See Notices of Intent to Participate in Brazil, 

India, Japan, Korea, Mexico, and Thailand Sunset 

Reviews (November 17, 2014). 

4See memorandum to Paul Piquado entitled 

‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 

Expedited Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping 

Duty Finding/Orders on Prestressed Concrete Steel 

Wire Strand from Brazil, India, Japan, the Republic 

of Korea, Mexico, and Thailand,’’ dated 

concurrently with and hereby adopted by this 

notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 

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. 

Amended Final Results 

Because there is now a final court 

decision with respect to the PET Film 

Final Results, the revised weightedaverage dumping margins are as follows: 

Exporter 

Weightedaverage 

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 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–351–837, A–533–828, A–588–068, A–580– 

852, A–201–831, A–549–820] 

Prestressed Concrete Steel Wire 

Strand From Brazil, India, Japan, the 

Republic of Korea, Mexico, and 

Thailand: Final Results of the 

Expedited Sunset Reviews of the 

Antidumping Duty Finding/Orders 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) finds that revocation 

of the antidumping duty finding/orders 

on prestressed concrete steel wire strand 

(PC strand) from Brazil, India, Japan, the 

Republic of Korea, Mexico, and 

Thailand would be likely to lead to 

continuation or recurrence of dumping 

as indicated in the ‘‘Final Results of 

Sunset Review’’ section of this notice. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 17, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Romani or Minoo Hatten, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement 

and Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–0198 or (202) 482– 

1690, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On November 3, 2014, the Department 

published the notice of initiation of the 

sunset reviews of the antidumping duty 

finding 1 orders on PC strand from 

Brazil, India, Japan, the Republic of 

Korea (Korea), Mexico, and Thailand 

pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).2

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.218(d)(1)(i), the Department 

received notices of intent to participate 

in these sunset reviews from Insteel 

Wire Products Company and Sumiden 

Wire Products Corp. (collectively, the 

domestic interested parties) within 15 

days after the date of publication of the 

Initiation Notice and the effective date 

of the initiation of this sunset review.3

The domestic interested parties claimed 

interested party status under section 

771(9)(C), of the Act. 

The Department received complete 

substantive responses to the Initiation 

Notice from the domestic interested 

parties within the 30-day period 

specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). 

The Department received no substantive 

responses from any respondent 

interested parties. In accordance with 

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

CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the 

Department conducted expedited (120- 

day) sunset reviews of the antidumping 

duty finding/orders on PC strand from 

Brazil, India, Japan, Korea, Mexico, and 

Thailand. 

Scope of the Finding/Orders 

The product covered in the sunset 

reviews of the antidumping duty orders 

on PC strand from Brazil, India, Korea, 

Mexico, and Thailand is steel strand 

produced from wire of non-stainless, 

non-galvanized steel, which is suitable 

for use in prestressed concrete (both 

pre-tensioned and post-tensioned) 

applications. The product definition 

encompasses covered and uncovered 

strand and all types, grades, and 

diameters of PC strand. 

The product covered in the sunset 

review of the antidumping duty finding 

on PC strand from Japan is steel wire 

strand, other than alloy steel, not 

galvanized, which is stress-relieved and 

suitable for use in prestressed concrete. 

The merchandise subject to the 

finding/orders is currently classifiable 

under subheadings 7312.10.3010 and 

7312.10.3012 of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). 

Although the HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes, the written description of the 

merchandise under the finding/orders is 

dispositive. A full description of the 

scope of the order is contained in the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum.4

Analysis of Comments Received 

A complete discussion of all issues 

raised in these reviews are addressed in 

the accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum, which is hereby adopted 

by this notice, including the likelihood 

of continuation or recurrence of 

dumping in the event of revocation and 

the magnitude of dumping margins 

likely to prevail if the finding/orders 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES