48396 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 165 / Monday, August 30, 2021 / Notices 

1See Certain Softwood Lumber Products from 

Canada: Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing 

Duty Determination and Countervailing Duty Order, 

83 FR 347 (January 3, 2018) (CVD Order). 

2See Certain Softwood Lumber Products from 

Canada: Final Results of Countervailing Duty 

Expedited Review, 84 FR 32121 (July 5, 2019) (Final 

Results of Expedited Review), and accompanying 

Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM). 

3See Final Results of Expedited Review IDM at 19 

(citing URAA, Pub. L. 103–465, 108 Stat. 4809 

(1994)). 

4 Id. at 18 (citing SAA H.R. Doc. 103–316, Vol. I 

at 870 (1994), reprinted at 1994 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4040, 

4199, at 941. Section 102(d) of the URAA states that 

the SAA ‘‘shall be regarded as an authoritative 

expression by the United States concerning the 

interpretation and application of the Uruguay 

Round Agreements and this Act in any judicial 

proceeding in which a question arises concerning 

such interpretation or application’’). 

5See Final Results of Expedited Review IDM at 19 

(citing section 103(a) of the URAA). 

Co., Ltd. 

14. Tianjin Yingli New Energy Resources Co., 

Ltd. 

15. Yingli Green Energy International 

Trading Company Limited 

No-Reviewable Entries: 

16. BYD (Shangluo) Industrial Co., Ltd. 

17. Canadian Solar Manufacturing 

(Changshu) Inc. 

18. Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Luoyang) 

Inc. 

19. De-Tech Trading Limited HK 

20. Dongguan Sunworth Solar Energy Co., 

Ltd. 

21. Eoplly New Energy Technology Co., Ltd. 

22. ERA Solar Co., Ltd. 

23. ET Solar Energy Limited 

24. Hangzhou Sunny Energy Science and 

Technology Co., Ltd. 

25. Hengdian Group DMEGC Magnetics Co., 

Ltd. 

26. Jiangsu High Hope Int’l Group 

27. Jinko Solar International Limited 

28. LERRI Solar Technology Co., Ltd. 

29. Light Way Green New Energy Co., Ltd. 

30. Luoyang Suntech Power Co., Ltd. 

31. Ningbo ETDZ Holdings, Ltd. 

32. Sumec Hardware & Tools Co., Ltd. 

33. Sunpreme Solar Technology (Jiaxing) Co., 

Ltd. 

34. Systemes Versilis, Inc. 

35. tenKsolar (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. 

36. Tianneng Yingli New Energy Resources 

Co., Ltd. 

37. Toenergy Technology Hangzhou Co., Ltd. 

38. Zhejiang ERA Solar Technology Co., Ltd. 

39. Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co., Ltd. 

40. Zhejiang Sunflower Light Energy Science 

& Technology Limited Liability 

Company 

[FR Doc. 2021–18598 Filed 8–27–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–122–858] 

Certain Softwood Lumber Products 

From Canada: Notice of Court Decision 

Not in Harmony With the Final Results 

of Countervailing Duty Expedited 

Review; Notice of Rescission of Final 

Results of Expedited Review; Notice of 

Amended Cash Deposit Rates 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On August 18, 2021, the U.S. 

Court of International Trade (CIT) 

issued its final judgment in Committee 

Overseeing Action for Lumber 

International Trade Investigations or 

Negotiations, et al. v. United States, et 

al., Consol. Court No. 19–00122, 

sustaining the Department of 

Commerce’s (Commerce) remand results 

pertaining to the expedited review of 

the countervailing duty (CVD) order on 

certain softwood lumber products 

(softwood lumber) from Canada 

covering the period January 1, 2015, 

through December 31, 2015. Commerce 

is notifying the public that the CIT’s 

final judgment is not in harmony with 

Commerce’s final results of the 

expedited review, and that Commerce is 

rescinding the final results; reinstating 

the CVD order for Les Produits 

Forestiers D&G Lte ́e (D&G), Marcel 

Lauzon Inc. (MLI), North American 

Forest Products Ltd. (NAFB) (located in 

New Brunswick), Roland Boulanger & 

Cie Lte ́e (Roland), and Scierie 

Alexandre Lemay & Fils Inc. (Lemay) 

(including their cross-owned affiliates); 

and reassigning the cash deposit rate for 

the companies covered by the Final 

Results of Expedited Review. 

DATES: Applicable August 28, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristen Johnson, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4793. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On January 3, 2018, Commerce 

published the CVD order on softwood 

lumber from Canada.1 On July 5, 2019, 

Commerce published its Final Results of 

Expedited Review for the CVD Order.2

In the Final Results of Expedited 

Review, Commerce stated that it 

promulgated 19 CFR 351.214(k), its 

regulations for conducting CVD 

expedited reviews, pursuant to section 

103(a) of the Uruguay Round of 

Agreements Act (URAA), which made 

several amendments to the antidumping 

and CVD provisions of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (the Act).3

Specifically, Commerce explained that 

Article 19.3 of the World Trade 

Organization Agreement on Subsidies 

and Countervailing Measures (SCM 

Agreement) expressly provides for 

expedited reviews of non-investigated 

exporters or producers in CVD 

proceedings and that the Statement of 

Administrative Action (SAA) states that 

‘‘Article 19.3 of the Subsidies 

Agreement provides that any exporter 

whose exports are subject to a CVD 

order, but which was not actually 

investigated for reasons other than a 

refusal to cooperate, shall be entitled to 

an expedited review to establish an 

individual CVD rate for that exporter.’’ 4

Although the URAA did not implement 

a specific provision for the conduct of 

CVD expedited reviews in the Act, 

Commerce concluded that it had the 

authority to promulgate the CVD 

expedited review regulations at 19 CFR 

351.214(k) pursuant to section 103(a) of 

the URAA, which provides that 

‘‘appropriate officers of the United 

States Government may issue such 

regulations, as may be necessary to 

ensure that any provision of this Act, or 

amendment made by this Act, . . . is 

appropriately implemented . . . .’’ 5


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 165 / Monday, August 30, 2021 / Notices 48397 

6See Final Results of Expedited Review, 84 FR at 

32122. 7 Id. 

8 Id. 

9See Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber 

International Trade Investigations or Negotiations, 

et al. v. United States, et al., Court No. 19–00122, 

Slip Op. 20–167 (CIT 2020), at 17. The CIT also 

held that because the SAA does not propose any 

actions for the implementation of CVD expedited 

reviews, Commerce was not authorized to 

promulgate 19 CFR 351.214(k) under section 103(b) 

of the URAA, which provides for the issuance of 

‘‘{a}ny interim regulation necessary or appropriate 

to carry out any action proposed in the {SAA}.’’ Id. 

at 23–24. 

10 Id. at 17–18, 20–21. 

11 Id. at 3–4, 33–35. 12 Id. at 33. Although the CIT ruled that section 

103(b) of the URAA does not provide Commerce 

authority to promulgate its CVD expedited review 

regulations, the CIT allowed Commerce to further 

elaborate on its arguments regarding section 103(b) 

on remand. Id. 

13See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant 

to Court Remand, Committee Overseeing Action for 

Lumber International Trade Investigations or 

Negotiations, et al. v. United States, et al., Court No. 

19–00122, Slip Op. 20–167 (CIT 2020), dated 

February 17, 2021. 

14See Committee Overseeing Action for Lumber 

International Trade Investigations or Negotiations, 

et al. v. United States, et al., Court No. 19–00122, 

Slip Op. 21–104 (CIT 2021). Although the CIT 

vacated 19 CFR 351.214(k), it explained that 

because ‘‘notice and comment procedure is not 

required whe{n} a court vacates a rule after making 

a finding on the merits,’’ the CIT declined to order 

Commerce to formally repeal 19 CFR 351.214(k). Id. 

at fn. 28 (citing Nat’l Parks Cons. Ass’n v. Salazar, 

660 F. Supp. 2d 3, 5 (D.D.C. 2009) (citing Cement 

Kiln Recycling Coal. v. EPA, 255 F.3d 855, 872 (D.C. 

Cir. 2001))). 

15See CVD Order, 83 FR at 349. 

16See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 

(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken). 

17See Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers 

Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 

2010) (Diamond Sawblades). 

After determining that it had statutory 

authority to conduct the expedited 

review, Commerce found that among the 

eight companies subject to the CVD 

expedited review, five of the companies 

each had a de minimis subsidy rate and 

were, therefore, excluded from the CVD 

Order.6 The five companies are D&G, 

MLI, NAFB (located in New Brunswick), 

Roland, and Lemay (and their crossowned affiliates).7 The other three 

companies (and their cross-owned 

affiliates) subject to the review that 

received individual above de minimis 

rates are Fontaine Inc. (Fontaine), 

Mobilier Rustique (Beauce) Inc. 

(Mobilier Rustique), and Produits Matra 

Inc. and Sechoirs de Beauce Inc. 

(Produits Matra).8

The Committee Overseeing Action for 

Lumber International Trade 

Investigations or Negotiations appealed 

Commerce’s Final Results of Expedited 

Review. On November 19, 2020, the CIT 

held that Commerce exceeded its 

authority in promulgating 19 CFR 

351.214(k) pursuant to section 103(a) of 

the URAA.9 Specifically, the CIT 

explained that because section 103(a) of 

the URAA only authorizes Commerce to 

issue regulations for enacted provisions 

of the URAA, and because the URAA 

does not contain a provision explicitly 

authorizing CVD expedited reviews, 

section 103(a) cannot be the basis of 

Commerce’s authority for promulgating 

its CVD expedited review regulations.10

The CIT remanded the Final Results of 

Expedited Review to Commerce for 

Commerce to either take action in 

conformity with its opinion, or to 

consider alternative legal authorities 

interested parties had presented to the 

CIT as the basis for Commerce’s 

promulgation of its CVD expedited 

review regulations at 19 CFR 351.214(k) 

to determine individual subsidy rates 

for companies not individually 

examined in an investigation.11 These 

alternative legal authorities included 

sections 101(a), 101(b), and 103(b) of the 

URAA; sections 705(c), 751(a), 751(b), 

and 77A(e) of the Act; and the inherent 

authority of agencies to reconsider prior 

decisions.12

In its final remand redetermination, 

issued in February 2021, Commerce 

determined that, in accordance with the 

CIT’s opinion and interpretation of the 

URAA, section 103(a) of the URAA, as 

well as the other legal authorities 

presented to the CIT, are not adequate 

bases for the promulgation of the CVD 

expedited review regulations under 19 

CFR 351.214(k).13 The CIT sustained 

Commerce’s final redetermination; 

vacated the CVD expedited review 

regulations at 19 CFR 351.214(k); 

vacated the Final Results of Expedited 

Review; ordered that the companies 

excluded from the CVD Order as a result 

of the expedited review be reinstated 

under the CVD Order prospectively; and 

for all companies that were covered by 

the Final Results of Expedited Review, 

impose a cash deposit requirement 

based on the all-others rate from the 

investigation or the company-specific 

rate determined in the most recently 

completed administrative review in 

which the company was reviewed.14

Consequently, Commerce is reinstating 

the five excluded companies in the CVD 

Order prospectively (D&G, MLI, NAFB 

(located in New Brunswick), Roland, 

and Lemay) and imposing on those 

companies a 14.19 percent ad valorem 

cash deposit requirement based on the 

all-others rate from the investigation.15

Commerce is also assigning as the cash 

deposit rate for Fontaine, Mobilier 

Rustique, and Produits Matra either the 

all-others rate from the investigation, or 

the rate determined for the company in 

the most recently completed 

administrative review in which the 

company was reviewed. 

Notice 

In its decision in Timken,16 as 

clarified by Diamond Sawblades,17 the 

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 

held that, pursuant to section 516A(c) 

and (e) of 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. The CIT’s 

August 18, 2021, judgment constitutes a 

final decision of the CIT that is not in 

harmony with Commerce’s Final Results 

of Expedited Review. We are issuing this 

notice consistent with section 516A(c) 

of the Act and in accordance with the 

CIT’s order. 

Cash Deposit Rates 

Because there is now a final court 

judgment vacating the Final Results of 

Expedited Review, Commerce is 

reassigning the countervailable subsidy 

rates for the companies subject to the 

Final Results of Expedited Review as 

follows: 

Producer/exporter 

Subsidy rate 

(percent 

ad valorem) 

Les Produits Forestiers D&G Lte ́e and its cross-owned affiliates 18 ................................................................................................... 14.19 

Marcel Lauzon Inc. and its cross-owned affiliates 19 .......................................................................................................................... 14.19 

North American Forest Products Ltd. (located in New Brunswick) and its cross-owned affiliates 20 ................................................. 14.19 

Roland Boulanger & Cie Lte ́e and its cross-owned affiliates 21 .......................................................................................................... 14.19 

Scierie Alexandre Lemay & Fils Inc. and its cross-owned affiliates 22 ............................................................................................... 14.19 

Fontaine Inc. and its cross-owned affiliates 23 .................................................................................................................................... 14.19 

Mobilier Rustique (Beauce) Inc. and its cross-owned affiliates 24 ...................................................................................................... 14.19 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
48398 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 165 / Monday, August 30, 2021 / Notices 

18Commerce finds the following companies to be 

cross-owned with Les Produits Forestiers D&G Lte ́e: 

Le Groupe Gesco-Star Ltee, Les Produits Forestiers 

Portbec Ltee, and Les Produits Forestiers Startrees 

Ltee. The subsidy rate assigned to these companies 

is the all-others rate from the investigation. See 

CVD Order. 

19Commerce finds the following companies to be 

cross-owned with Marcel Lauzon Inc.: Placements 

Marcel Lauzon Ltee and Investissements LRC Inc. 

The subsidy rate assigned to these companies is the 

all-others rate from the investigation. See CVD 

Order. 

20Commerce finds the following companies to be 

cross-owned with North American Forest Products 

Ltd.: Parent-Violette Gestion Ltee and Le Groupe 

Parent Ltee. The subsidy rate assigned to these 

companies is the all-others rate from the 

investigation. See CVD Order. 

21Commerce finds the following companies to be 

cross-owned with Roland Boulanger & Cie Ltee: 

Industries Daveluyville Inc. and Les Manufacturiers 

Warwick Ltee. The subsidy rate assigned to these 

companies is the all-others rate from the 

investigation. See CVD Order. 

22Commerce finds the following companies to be 

cross-owned with Scierie Alexandre Lemay & Fils 

Inc.: Bois Lemay Inc. and Industrie Lemay Inc. The 

subsidy rate assigned to these companies is the allothers rate from the investigation. See CVD Order. 

23Commerce finds the following companies to be 

cross-owned with Fontaine Inc.: Gestion Natanis 

Inc., Les Placements Jean-Paul Fontaine Ltee, and 

Placements Nicolas Fontaine Inc. The subsidy rate 

assigned to these companies is the all-others rate 

from the investigation. See CVD Order. 

24Commerce finds the following companies to be 

cross-owned with Mobilier Rustique (Beauce) Inc.: 

J.F.S.R. Inc., Gestion C.A. Rancourt Inc., Gestion J.F. 

Rancourt Inc., Gestion Suzie Rancourt Inc., Gestion 

P.H.Q. Inc., 9331–3419 Quebec Inc., 9331–3468 

Quebec Inc., and SPQ Inc. The subsidy rate 

assigned to these companies is the all-others rate 

from the investigation. See CVD Order. 

25Commerce finds the following company to be 

cross-owned with Produits Matra Inc. and Sechoirs 

de Beauce Inc.: Bois Ouvre de Beauceville (1992), 

Inc. The subsidy rate assigned to these companies 

is the non-selected rate from the first administrative 

review of the order. See Certain Softwood Lumber 

Products from Canada: Final Results of the 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 2017– 

2018, 85 FR 77163 (December 1, 2020). 

1See Pentafluoroethane (R–125) from the People’s 

Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative 

Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment 

of Final Determination With Final Antidumping 

Duty Determination, 86 FR 33648 (June 25, 2021) 

(CVD Preliminary Determination). 

2See Pentafluoroethane (R–125) from the People’s 

Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 

Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Critical 

Circumstances, in Part, Postponement of Final 

Determination, and Extension of Provisional 

Measures, 86 FR 45959 (August 17, 2021) (AD 

Producer/exporter 

Subsidy rate 

(percent 

ad valorem) 

Produits Matra Inc. and Sechoirs de Beauce Inc. and its cross-owned affiliate 25 ............................................................................ 7.42 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

Commerce will issue revised cash 

deposit instructions to U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP). 

Liquidation of Suspended Entries 

At this time, Commerce remains 

enjoined by CIT order from liquidating 

entries of subject merchandise subject to 

the Final Results of Expedited Review 

that were produced and/or exported by 

Fontaine and that were entered into the 

United States, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption during the 

period April 28, 2017, through 

December 31, 2018. These entries will 

remain enjoined pursuant to the terms 

of the injunction during the pendency of 

any appeals process. In the event the 

CIT’s ruling is not appealed, or, if 

appealed, upheld by a final and 

conclusive court decision, Commerce 

intends to instruct CBP to assess 

countervailing duties on unliquidated 

entries of subject merchandise exported 

by Fontaine and that were entered into 

the United States, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption during the 

period April 28, 2017, through 

December 31, 2018. 

Furthermore, Commerce’s final results 

of administrative review of the CVD 

Order for the period April 28, 2017, 

through December 31, 2018 are 

currently the subject of a United States 

Mexico Canada Agreement (USMCA) 

Binational Panel Review (USMCA 

Secretariat File No.: USA–CDA–2020– 

10.12–01). Pursuant to that Panel 

Review, Commerce will continue to 

suspend liquidation of all entries of 

subject merchandise produced and/or 

exported by the companies subject to 

the first administrative review pending 

final disposition of the Binational Panel 

proceeding. Because Produits Matra was 

subject to the first administrative 

review, Commerce will continue to 

suspend liquidation of entries of subject 

merchandise produced and/or exported 

by Produits Matra (and its cross-owned 

affiliate) that were entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for the 

period April 28, 2017, through 

December 31, 2018, pending final 

disposition of the USMCA Binational 

Panel proceeding. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with sections 516A(c) and 

(e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: August 24, 2021. 

Ryan Majerus, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and 

Negotiations. 

[FR Doc. 2021–18596 Filed 8–27–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–138] 

Pentafluoroethane (R–125) From the 

People’s Republic of China: Amended 

Preliminary Countervailing Duty 

Determination 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) is amending the scope of 

the countervailing duty (CVD) 

investigation of pentafluoroethane (R– 

125) from the People’s Republic of 

China (China) to conform with the scope 

published in the preliminary 

determination of the companion 

antidumping duty (AD) investigation of 

R–125 from China. The period of 

investigation is January 1, 2020, through 

December 31, 2020. 

DATES: Applicable August 30, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joshua Tucker or Adam Simons, 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) 482–2044 or (202) 482–6172, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Commerce published its CVD 

Preliminary Determination on June 25, 

2021.1

On August 17, 2021, Commerce 

published the AD Preliminary 

Determination within which the scope 

of the investigations was amended to 

exclude certain products, and to clarify 

the inclusion of certain products, based 

upon comments received from 

interested parties.2


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES