Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2022 / Notices 13701 

2021), and accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. 

8See Preliminary Results, 86 FR at 61132. 

9See section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act. 

10For a full discussion of this practice, see 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 

(May 6, 2003). 

11See Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic 

Products from Taiwan: Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value, 79 FR 76966, 76969 

(December 23, 2014). 

Final Results of Review 

We determine that the following 

weighted-average dumping margins 

exist for the non-selected respondents 

for the POR, February 1, 2020, through 

January 31, 2021: 

Producer/exporter 

Weightedaverage 

dumping 

margin 

(percent) 

Baoding Jiasheng Photovoltaic 

Technology Co. Ltd ................. 7.89 

Boviet Solar Technology Co., Ltd 7.89 

Kyocera Mexicana S.A. de C.V .. 7.89 

Sunrise Energy Co. Ltd .............. 7.89 

Disclosure 

As noted above, no party commented 

on the Preliminary Results. As a result, 

we have not modified our analysis from 

the Preliminary Results and will not 

issue a decision memorandum to 

accompany this Federal Register notice. 

We are adopting the Preliminary Results 

as the final results of this review. 

Further, because we have not changed 

our calculations since the Preliminary 

Results, there are no new calculations to 

disclose in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.224(b) for these final results. 

Assessment Rates 

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the 

Act, and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), 

Commerce has determined, and CBP 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries of subject 

merchandise in accordance with the 

final results of this review. In 

accordance with the Preliminary 

Results, we determined that no 

companies in this review had 

reviewable entries of subject 

merchandise upon which to calculate a 

dumping margin.8

For the companies which were not 

selected for individual review, we will 

instruct CBP to assess antidumping 

duties at an ad valorem rate equal to the 

non-selected rate determined in the 

previous administrative review. The 

final results of this review shall be the 

basis for the assessment of antidumping 

duties on entries of merchandise 

covered by the final results of this 

review and for future deposits of 

estimated duties, where applicable.9

For entries of subject merchandise 

produced during the POR by the 16 

companies that had no shipments 

during the POR, we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate such entries at the all-others 

rate if there is no rate for the 

intermediate company(-ies) involved in 

the transaction.10

Commerce intends to issue 

appropriate assessment instructions to 

CBP no earlier than 35 days after the 

date of publication of the final results of 

this review in the Federal Register. If a 

timely summons is filed at the U.S. 

Court of International Trade, the 

assessment instructions will direct CBP 

not to liquidate relevant entries until the 

time for parties to file a request for a 

statutory injunction has expired (i.e., 

within 90 days of publication). 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective for all 

shipments of subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date of the final results of 

this administrative review, as provided 

by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) 

The cash deposit rate for all remaining 

companies in this review will be equal 

to the weighted-average dumping 

margin of 7.89 percent that was 

established in the final results of the 

previous administrative review; (2) for 

previously reviewed or investigated 

companies not covered in this review, 

including the companies which 

Commerce has determined had no 

shipments in these final results, the 

cash deposit rate will continue to be the 

company-specific rate published for the 

most recently completed segment of this 

proceeding in which the companies 

participated; (3) if the exporter is not a 

firm covered in this review, a prior 

review, or the original LTFV 

investigation, but the producer is, then 

the cash deposit rate will be the cash 

deposit rate established for the most 

recently completed segment for the 

producer of the subject merchandise; 

and (4) if neither the exporter nor the 

manufacturer is a firm covered in this or 

any previous review or the LTFV 

investigation, the cash deposit rate for 

all other producers or exporters will 

continue to be 19.50 percent, the allothers rate established in the LTFV 

investigation.11 The 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 review period. Failure to 

comply with this requirement could 

result in Commerce’s presumption that 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping duties. 

Administrative Protective Order 

This notice also serves as the final 

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(a)(3), 

which continues to govern business 

proprietary information in this segment 

of the proceeding. Timely written 

notification of return/destruction of 

APO materials or conversion to judicial 

protective order is hereby requested. 

Failure to comply with the regulations 

and the terms of an APO is a 

sanctionable violation. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 

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

351.221(b)(5) and 19 CFR 351.213(h). 

Dated: March 3, 2022. 

Lisa W. Wang, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2022–05070 Filed 3–9–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–533–871] 

Finished Carbon Steel Flanges From 

India: Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review; 2019– 

2020 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) determines that producers 

and/or exporters subject to this 

administrative review did not make 

sales of finished carbon steel flanges 

from India at prices below normal value 

during the period of review (POR), 

August 1, 2019, through July 31, 2020. 

DATES: Applicable March 10, 2022. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
13702 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2022 / Notices 

1See Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India: 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; 2019–2020, 86 FR 50048 

(September 7, 2021) (Preliminary Results), and 

accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum 

(PDM). 

2 In prior segments of this proceeding, Commerce 

determined that Norma (India) Limited, USK 

Exports Private Limited, Uma Shanker Khandelwal 

& Co., and Bansidhar Chiranjilal should be 

collapsed and treated as a single entity (Norma 

Group). See Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from 

India: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less 

Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final 

Determination, 82 FR 9719 (February 8, 2017), and 

accompanying PDM at 4–5, unchanged in Finished 

Carbon Steel Flanges from India: Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 82 

FR 29483 (June 29, 2017); see also Finished Carbon 

Steel Flanges from India: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2017– 

2018, 84 FR 57848, 57849 (October 29, 2019), 

unchanged in Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from 

India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; 2017–2018, 85 FR 21391 

(April 17, 2020); Finished Carbon Steel Flanges 

from India: Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review and Preliminary 

Determination of No Shipments; 2018–2019, 85 FR 

83051, 83052 (December 21, 2020), unchanged in 

Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review and Final Determination of No Shipments; 

2018–2019, 86 FR 33226 (June 24, 2021). In this 

administrative review, Norma Group has presented 

evidence that the factual basis on which Commerce 

made its prior determination has not changed. See 

Norma Group’s Letter, ‘‘Finished Carbon Steel 

Flanges from India: Response to Section A–D of 

Antidumping Duty Supplemental Questionnaire,’’ 

dated August 11, 2021, at S1–2 through S1–8. 

Therefore, in this administrative review, Commerce 

continues to collapse these four entities and treat 

them as a single entity. 

3See Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 86 FR 

63081 (October 6, 2020). 4See Norma Group’s Letter, ‘‘Finished Carbon 

Steel Flanges from India: Case Brief of Norma India 

Limited, USK Exports Private Limited, Umashanker 

Khandelwal & Co and Bansidhar Chiranjilal, 

together constituting Norma Group,’’ dated October 

7, 2021; see also RNG’s Letter, ‘‘Finished Carbon 

Steel Flanges from India: Case Brief of R.N. Gupta 

& Company Limited,’’ dated October 7, 2021. 

5See Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Finished Carbon Steel 

Flanges from India: Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief,’’ 

dated October 14, 2021. 

6See Commerce’s Letter, ‘‘Rejection of Case Brief 

Previously Filed and Request for Resubmission of 

Its Case Brief in the 2019–2020 Administrative 

Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Finished 

Carbon Steel Flanges from India,’’ dated February 

24, 2022. 

7See Norma Group’s Case Brief, ‘‘Finished 

Carbon Steel Flanges from India: Case brief 

(Revised) of Norma India Limited, USK Exports 

Private Limited, Umashanker Khandelwal & Co and 

Bansidhar Chiranjilal, together constituting Norma 

Group,’’ dated February 28, 2022 (Norma Group’s 

Case Brief). 

8See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decisions 

Memorandum for the Final Results of 

Administrative Review: Finished Carbon Steel 

Flanges from India; 2019–2020,’’ dated concurrently 

with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and 

Decision Memorandum). 

9See Memorandum, ‘‘Finished Carbon Steel 

Flanges from India: Extension of Deadline for Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review,’’ dated December 9, 2021. 

10See Finished Carbon Steel Flanges from India 

and Italy: Antidumping Duty Orders, 82 FR 40136 

(August 24, 2017) (Order). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fred 

Baker or Preston Cox, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–2924 or (202) 482–5041, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On September 7, 2021, Commerce 

published the Preliminary Results of 

this administrative review and invited 

interested parties to comment.1 This 

administrative review covers 41 

producers and/or exporters of the 

subject merchandise. Commerce 

selected R.N. Gupta & Co. Ltd. (RNG) 

and the Norma Group 2 for individual 

examination. The producers/exporters 

not selected for individual examination 

are listed in the ‘‘Final Results of the 

Review’’ section of this notice.3

On October 7, 2021, the Norma Group 

and RNG submitted case briefs.4 On 

October 14, 2021, Weldbend 

Corporation and Boltex Manufacturing 

Co., L.P. (collectively, the petitioners), 

submitted a rebuttal brief with respect 

to Norma Group.5 On February 24, 2022, 

we rejected Norma Group’s case brief 

because it contained untimely filed new 

factual information.6 Norma Group filed 

a redacted version of its case brief on 

February 28, 2022.7 No other party 

submitted case or rebuttal briefs. For a 

description of the events that occurred 

since the Preliminary Results, see the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum.8 On 

December 9, 2021, we extended the 

deadline for the final results by 58 days, 

until March 4, 2022.9

Commerce conducted this 

administrative review in accordance 

with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (the Act). 

Scope of the Order 10

The scope of the Order covers 

finished carbon steel flanges. Finished 

carbon steel flanges are currently 

classified under subheadings 

7307.91.5010 and 7307.91.5050 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS). While HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the scope of this 

order is dispositive. 

For a full description of the scope of 

the Order, see the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised by the parties in 

their case and rebuttal briefs are 

addressed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. A list of the issues which 

parties raised, and to which we 

responded in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum, is attached in the 

appendix to this notice. 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 https://

access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete 

version of the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum can be accessed directly 

on the internet at https://

access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesList

Layout.aspx. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on a review of the record and 

our analysis of the comments received, 

Commerce made certain changes to the 

Preliminary Results. For detailed 

information, see the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. 

Final Results of Administrative Review 

For these final results, we determine 

that the following weighted-average 

dumping margins exist for the period 

August 1, 2019, through July 31, 2020: 

Producers/exporters 

Weighted-average 

dumping margin 

(percent) 

R.N. Gupta & Co., Ltd ................................................................................................................................................................... 0.00 

Norma (India) Limited/USK Exports Private Limited/Uma Shanker Khandelwal & Co./Bansidhar Chiranjilal 11 Chiranjilal ......... 0.00 

Non-Selected Companies 12 .......................................................................................................................................................... 0.00 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2022 / Notices 13703 

11See footnote 2, supra. 

12See Appendix II for a full list of non-selected 

companies. 

13See Albemarle Corp. v. United States, 821 F.3d 

1345 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (Albemarle). 

14See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). 

15See Notice of Discontinuation of Policy to Issue 

Liquidation Instructions After 15 Days in 

Applicable Antidumping and Countervailing Duly 

Administrative Proceedings, 86 FR 3995 (January 

15, 2021). 

Rate for Non-Selected Respondents 

The Act and Commerce’s regulations 

do not address the establishment of a 

weighted-average dumping margin to be 

applied to companies not selected for 

individual examination when 

Commerce limits its examination in an 

administrative review pursuant to 

section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. Generally, 

Commerce looks to section 735(c)(5) of 

the Act, which provides instructions for 

calculating the all-others rate in a lessthan-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, for 

guidance when calculating the 

weighted-average dumping margin for 

companies which were not selected for 

individual examination in an 

administrative review. Under section 

735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-others 

rate is normally an amount equal to the 

weighted average of the estimated 

weighted-average dumping margins 

established for exporters and producers 

individually investigated, excluding 

rates that are zero, de minimis (i.e., less 

than 0.5 percent), or determined entirely 

on the basis of facts available. 

Consistent with section 735(c)(5)(A) 

of the Act, for the companies that were 

not selected for individual review, we 

assigned a rate based on the rates for the 

respondents that were selected for 

individual examination. Consistent with 

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 

Federal Circuit’s decision in Albemarle, 

we are applying to the 36 companies not 

selected for individual examination the 

zero percent rates calculated for the 

mandatory respondents, RNG and the 

Norma Group.13 These are the only rates 

determined in this review for individual 

respondents and, thus, should be 

applied to the 36 firms not selected for 

individual examination under section 

735(c)(5)(B) of the Act. 

Disclosure 

Commerce intends to disclose the 

calculations performed for these final 

results to parties in this proceeding 

within five days of the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.224(b). 

Assessment Rates 

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), 

Commerce has determined, and U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries of subject 

merchandise in accordance with the 

final results of this review. Pursuant to 

19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce 

calculated importer-specific ad valorem 

duty assessment rates based on the ratio 

of the total amount of dumping 

calculated for the examined sales to the 

total entered value of those sales. Where 

the respondent’s weighted-average 

dumping margin is either zero or de 

minimis, we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate the appropriate entries 

without regard to antidumping duties. 

Because the weighted-average dumping 

margins of RNG, the Norma Group, and 

the 36 firms not selected for individual 

examination have been determined to be 

zero percent within the meaning of 19 

CFR 351.106(c), we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate the appropriate entries 

without regard to antidumping duties. 

In accordance with Commerce’s 

practice, for entries of subject 

merchandise during the POR for which 

RNG and the Norma Group did not 

know that the merchandise was 

destined for the United States, we will 

instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at 

the all-others rate if there is no 

company-specific rate for the 

intermediate company(ies) involved in 

the transaction.14

Consistent with its recent notice,15

Commerce intends to issue assessment 

instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 

days after the date of publication of the 

final results of this review in the 

Federal Register. If a timely summons is 

filed at the U.S. Court of International 

Trade, the assessment instructions will 

direct CBP not to liquidate relevant 

entries until the time for parties to file 

a request for a statutory injunction has 

expired (i.e., within 90 days of 

publication). 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective for all 

shipments of subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date of the final results of 

this administrative review, as provided 

by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) 

The cash deposit rates for the reviewed 

companies will be the rates established 

in the final results of this administrative 

review; (2) for merchandise exported by 

producers or exporters not covered in 

this administrative review but covered 

in a prior segment of the proceeding, the 

cash deposit rate will continue to be the 

company-specific rate published for the 

most recent period; (3) if the exporter is 

not a firm covered in this review, a prior 

review, or the original LTFV 

investigation, but the producer has been 

covered in a prior complete segment of 

this proceeding, then the cash deposit 

rate will be the rate established for the 

most recent segment of this proceeding 

for the producer of the subject 

merchandise; (4) the cash deposit rate 

for all other producers or exporters will 

continue to be 8.91 percent, the allothers rate established in the LTFV 

investigation. 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 and/or 

countervailing duties prior to 

liquidation of the relevant entries 

during this review period. Failure to 

comply with this requirement could 

result in Commerce’s presumption that 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

and/or countervailing duties occurred 

and the subsequent assessment of 

doubled antidumping duties. 

Notification Regarding Administrative 

Protective Order 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which 

continues to govern business 

proprietary information in this segment 

of the proceeding. 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 the terms of an APO is 

a sanctionable violation. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

We are issuing and publishing this 

notice in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 

CFR 351.213(h) and 351.221(b)(5). 

Dated: March 3, 2022. 

Lisa W. Wang, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

Appendix I 

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
13704 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2022 / Notices 

1See Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck 

Tires from the People’s Republic of China: 

Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty 

Administrative Review Rescission in Part, and 

Intent To Rescind in Part; 2019, 86 FR 50027 

(September 7, 2021) (Preliminary Results), and 

accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 

2See Memorandum, ‘‘Passenger Vehicles and 

Light Truck Tires from the People’s Republic of 

China: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2019,’’ 

dated December 6, 2021. 

3See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Results of the 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Review of 

Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires 

from the People’s Republic of China; 2019,’’ dated 

concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this 

notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 

4See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act 

regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) 

of the Act regarding benefit; and section 771(5A) of 

the Act regarding specificity. 

5See, e.g., Lightweight Thermal Paper from the 

People’s Republic of China: Notice of Rescission of 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2015, 

82 FR 14349 (March 20, 2017); and Circular Welded 

Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People’s 

Republic of China: Rescission of Countervailing 

Duty Administrative Review; 2017, 84 FR 14650 

(April 11, 2019). 

6See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2). 

7See 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3). 

III. Scope of the Order 

IV. Changes from the Preliminary Results 

V. Discussion of the Issues 

VI. Recommendation 

Appendix II 

Companies Not Selected for Individual 

Examination 

1. Adinath International 

2. Aditya Forge Limited 

3. Allena Group 

4. Alloyed Steel 

5. Balkrishna Steel Forge Pvt. Ltd. 

6. Bebitz Flanges Works Private Limited 

7. C. D. Industries 

8. CHW Forge 

9. CHW Forge Pvt. Ltd. 

10. Citizen Metal Depot 

11. Corum Flange 

12. DN Forge Industries 

13. Echjay Forgings Limited 

14. Falcon Valves and Flanges Private 

Limited 

15. Heubach International 

16. Hindon Forge Pvt. Ltd. 

17. Jai Auto Pvt. Ltd. 

18. Kinnari Steel Corporation 

19. Mascot Metal Manufacturers 

20. M F Rings and Bearing Races Ltd. 

21. Munish Forge Private Limited 

22. OM Exports 

23. Punjab Steel Works 

24. Raaj Sagar Steels 

25. Ravi Ratan Metal Industries 

26. R. D. Forge 

27. Rolex Fittings India Pvt. Ltd. 

28. Rollwell Forge Engineering Components 

and Flanges 

29. Rollwell Forge Pvt. Ltd. 

30. SHM (ShinHeung Machinery) 

31. Siddhagiri Metal & Tubes 

32. Sizer India 

33. Steel Shape India 

34. Sudhir Forgings Pvt. Ltd. 

35. Tirupati Forge Pvt. Ltd. 

36. Umashanker Khandelwal Forging Limited 

[FR Doc. 2022–05071 Filed 3–9–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–017] 

Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light 

Truck Tires From the People’s 

Republic of China: Final Results of 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Review and Rescission of Review, in 

Part; 2019 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) determines that certain 

producers/exporters of certain passenger 

vehicle and light truck tires from the 

People’s Republic of China (China) 

received countervailable subsidies 

during the period of review (POR), 

January 1, 2019, through December 31, 

2019. Additionally, we are rescinding 

the review for eight companies with no 

shipments of subject merchandise to the 

United States during the POR. 

DATES: Applicable March 10, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nicholas Czajkowski or Richard Roberts, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office I, 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1395 

and (202) 482–3463, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On September 7, 2021, Commerce 

published the Preliminary Results of 

this review and invited comments from 

interested parties.1 On December 6, 

2021, Commerce extended the deadline 

for the final results of this 

administrative review until March 4, 

2022.2 For a complete description of the 

events that occurred since the 

Preliminary Results, see the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum.3

Scope of the Order 

The products covered by the order are 

passenger vehicle and light truck tires 

from China. For a complete description 

of the scope of this order, see the Issues 

and Decision Memorandum. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised by the interested 

parties in their case and rebuttal briefs 

are addressed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. A list of these issues is 

provided in the Appendix to this notice. 

The Issues and Decision Memorandum 

is a public document and is on file 

electronically via Enforcement and 

Compliance’s Antidumping and CVD 

Centralized Electronic Service System 

(ACCESS). ACCESS is available to 

registered users at https://

access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete 

version of the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum can be accessed directly 

at https://access.trade.gov/public/ 

FRNoticesListLayout.aspx. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on the comments received from 

interested parties, we revised the 

calculation of the net countervailable 

subsidy rates for Sumitomo Rubber 

(Hunan) Co., Ltd. (SRH), Triangle Tyre 

Co., Ltd., and the non-selected 

respondents. For a discussion of these 

issues, see the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. 

Methodology 

Commerce conducted this review in 

accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act). For each of the subsidy programs 

found to be countervailable, we 

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

government-provided financial 

contribution that gives rise to a benefit 

to the recipient, and that the subsidy is 

specific.4 The Issues and Decision 

Memorandum contains a full 

description of the methodology 

underlying Commerce’s conclusions, 

including any determination that relied 

upon the use of facts otherwise 

available, including, adverse facts 

available, pursuant to sections 776(a) 

and (b) of the Act. 

Rescission of Administrative Review, in 

Part 

It is Commerce’s practice to rescind 

an administrative review of a 

countervailing duty order, pursuant to 

19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), when there are no 

reviewable entries of subject 

merchandise during the POR for which 

liquidation is suspended.5 Normally, 

upon completion of an administrative 

review, the suspended entries are 

liquidated at the countervailing duty 

assessment rate calculated for the 

review period.6 Therefore, for an 

administrative review of a company to 

be conducted, there must be a 

reviewable, suspended entry that 

Commerce can instruct U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP) to liquidate 

at the calculated countervailing duty 

assessment rate calculated for the 

review period.7


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES