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

13828 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 51 / Tuesday, March 17, 2015 / Notices 

5On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and 

Compliance changed the name of Enforcement and 

Compliance’s AD and CVD Centralized Electronic 

Service System (‘‘IA ACCESS’’) to AD and CVD 

Centralized Electronic Service System (‘‘ACCESS’’). 

The Web site location was changed from http://

iaaccess.trade.gov to http://access.trade.gov. The 

Final Rule changing the references to the 

Regulations can be found at 79 FR 69046 

(November 20, 2014). 

1See Final Second Remand Redetermination, 

Consol. Court No. 06–250, available at: http://

enforcement.trade.gov/remands/14-13.pdf (Final 

Second Remand). 

2See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from 

France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United 

Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Reviews, 71 FR 40064 (July 14, 

2006) (AFBs 16). 3See JTEKT Corporation v. United States, 675 F. 

Supp. 2d (CIT 2009). 4See Final Results of Redetermination, JTEKT 

Corporation v. United States, Consol. Court No. 06– 

00250 (CIT December 18, 2009), dated May 17, 2010 

(Final First Remand), available at: http://

enforcement.trade.gov/remands/09-147.pdf. 5See JTEKT Corp. v. United States, 780 F. Supp. 

2d 1357 (CIT 2011). 6 Id. 

7Union Steel v. United States, 713 F.3d 1101 

(Fed. Cir. 2013). 8See JTEKT Corp. v. United States, Consol. Court 

No. 06–00250, slip op. 14–13 at 7 (CIT February 10, 

2014) (JTEKT III). 9See Redetermination Pursuant to Remand, 

JTEKT Corporation v. United States, Consol. Court 

No. 06–00250 (CIT January 29, 2010 and February 

10, 2014), dated May 17, 2010 (Final Second 

Remand). 

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).5

ACCESS is available to registered users 

at http://access.trade.gov and to all 

parties in the Central Records Unit in 

Room 7046 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/index.html. 

Final Results of Reviews 

Pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and 

752(c)(1) and (2) of the Act, we 

determine that revocation of the 

antidumping duty finding/orders on PC 

strand from Brazil, India, Japan, Mexico, 

Korea, and Thailand would be likely to 

lead to continuation or recurrence of 

dumping up to the following weightedaverage margin percentages: 

Country 

Weightedaverage 

margin 

(percent) 

Brazil ..................................... 118.75 

India ...................................... 102.07 

Japan .................................... 13.30 

Korea .................................... 54.19 

Mexico .................................. 77.20 

Thailand ................................ 12.91 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice serves as the only 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective orders (APO) 

of their responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written 

notification of the 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. 

The Department is issuing and 

publishing these final results and notice 

in accordance with sections 751(c), 

752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.218. 

Dated: March 3, 2015. 

Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2015–05815 Filed 3–16–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–588–804] 

Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From 

Japan: Notice of Court Decision Not in 

Harmony With the Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review and Notice of Amended Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; 2004–2005 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On February 25, 2015, the 

United States Court of International 

Trade (CIT or Court) issued final 

judgment in JTEKT Corp. v. United 

States, Consol. Court No. 06–00250 

(JTEKT Corp.), affirming the Department 

of Commerce’s (the Department) final 

results of redetermination pursuant to 

remand.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 final results of 

the administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on ball bearings 

and parts thereof from Japan, covering 

the period May 1, 2004 through April 

30, 2005, and is amending the final 

results with respect to Nachi-Fujikoshi 

Corporation and NTN Corporation. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 7, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas Schauer, Office I, Enforcement 

and Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–0410. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On July 14, 2006, the Department 

published AFBs 16.2 Nachi-Fujikoshi 

Corporation (Nachi), NTN Corporation 

(NTN), and other parties appealed AFBs 

16 to the CIT. On December 18, 2009, 

the CIT remanded AFBs 16 for the 

Department to, inter alia, (1) 

redetermine NTN’s freight expenses 

using a method that is consistent with 

the Department’s treatment of the freight 

expense of other respondents in the 

administrative review and (2) to 

redetermine the application of facts 

otherwise available for information that 

Nachi submitted on physical bearing 

characteristics.3 On May 17, 2010, the 

Department filed its results of 

redetermination pursuant to remand in 

accordance with the CIT’s order.4

On July 29, 2011, the CIT affirmed, in 

part, the Department’s first remand, 

which resulted in a weighted-average 

dumping margin of 13.91 percent for 

Nachi and a weighted-average dumping 

margin of 8.02 percent for NTN.5 The 

Court remanded issues regarding Nachi, 

NTN, and other respondent companies, 

relating to the Department’s use of 

zeroing and model match methodology.6

On June 4, 2012, the Court stayed the 

proceedings pending the appeal of 

Union Steel v. United States, which 

concerned zeroing.7 After the Federal 

Circuit issued its opinion in Union 

Steel, the Court lifted the stay and 

‘‘relieve[d] Commerce of the directive 

concerning zeroing’’ in JTEKT III but 

‘‘maintain[ed] the directive . . . as to 

the claim brought by NTN’’ pertaining 

to the model match methodology.8 In 

Final Second Remand, the Department 

further explained its analysis of this 

issue but did not further recalculate the 

weighted-average dumping margins for 

any respondents in the litigation.9 The 

Court affirmed the Department’s second 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES