Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 102 / Friday, May 28, 2021 / Notices 28749 

1See Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from 

Turkey: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value and Final Negative Determination of 

Critical Circumstances, 83 FR 13249 (March 28, 

2018) (Final Determination), and accompanying 

Issues and Decision Memorandum (IDM). 

2See Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Italy, 

the Republic of Korea, Spain, the Republic of 

Turkey, and the United Kingdom: Antidumping 

Duty Orders and Amended Final Affirmative 

Antidumping Duty Determinations for Spain and 

the Republic of Turkey, 83 FR 23417–18 (May 21, 

2018) (Amended Final Determination and Order). 

3See Icdas Celik Enerji Tersane ve Ulasim 

Sanayi, A.S., et al. v. United States, Consol. Court 

No. 18–00143, Slip Op. 20–10 (January 28, 2020) 

(First Remand Order) at 30. 

4See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant 

to Court Remand, Icdas Celik Enerji Tersane ve 

Ulasim Sanayi, A.S., et al. v. United States, Consol. 

Ct. No. 18–00143, Slip Op. 20–10, dated April 27, 

2020 (First Results of Redetermination). 

5 Id. at 44. 

6See Icdas Celik Enerji Tersane ve Ulasim 

Sanayi, A.S., et al. v. United States, Consol. Court 

No. 18–00143, Slip Op. 20–137 (Sept. 23, 2020) 

(Second Remand Order) at 17. 

7See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant 

to Second Court Remand, Icdas Celik Enerji Tersane 

ve Ulasim Sanayi, A.S., et al. v. United States, 

Consol. Ct. No. 18–00143, Slip Op. 20–137, dated 

December 11, 2020 (Second Results of 

Redetermination). 

8See Icdas Celik Enerji Tersane ve Ulasim 

Sanayi, A.S., et al. v. United States, Consol. Court 

No. 18–00143, Slip Op. 21–65 (May 20, 2021) (CIT 

Final Judgment). 

9See Timken Co. v United States, 893 F.2d 337 

(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken). 

10See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. 

United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) 

(Diamond Sawblades). 

(FTZ) Board docketed an application 

submitted by the Port Authority of New 

York and New Jersey, grantee of FTZ 49, 

requesting subzone status subject to the 

existing activation limit of FTZ 49, on 

behalf of Woodfield Distribution LLC, in 

Dayton, New Jersey. 

The application was processed in 

accordance with the FTZ Act and 

Regulations, including notice in the 

Federal Register inviting public 

comment (86 FR 19220, April 13, 2021). 

The FTZ staff examiner reviewed the 

application and determined that it 

meets the criteria for approval. Pursuant 

to the authority delegated to the FTZ 

Board Executive Secretary (15 CFR 

400.36(f)), the application to establish 

Subzone 49V was approved on May 25, 

2021, subject to the FTZ Act and the 

Board’s regulations, including Section 

400.13, and further subject to FTZ 49’s 

2,000-acre activation limit. 

Dated: May 25, 2021. 

Elizabeth Whiteman, 

Acting Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2021–11347 Filed 5–27–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–489–831] 

Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod From 

the Republic of Turkey: Notice of Court 

Decision Not in Harmony With 

Amended Final Determination of 

Antidumping Duty Investigation; 

Notice of Amended Final 

Determination, Amended Antidumping 

Duty Order; Notice of Revocation of 

Antidumping Duty Order, in Part 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On May 20, 2021, the United 

States Court of International Trade (CIT) 

issued its final judgment in Icdas Celik 

Enerji Tersane ve Ulasim Sanayi, A.S., 

et al. v. United States, Consol. Court no. 

18–000143, sustaining the Department 

of Commerce (Commerce)’s second 

remand determination pertaining to the 

antidumping duty (AD) investigation of 

carbon and alloy steel wire rod (wire 

rod) from the Republic of Turkey 

(Turkey) covering the period of 

investigation January 1, 2016, through 

December 31, 2016. Commerce is 

notifying the public that the CIT’s final 

judgement is not in harmony with 

Commerce’s amended final 

determination in that investigation, and 

that Commerce is amending the 

amended final determination and the 

resulting AD order with respect to the 

dumping margin assigned to producer 

and/or exporter Icdas Celik Enerji 

Tersane ve Ulasim Sanayi A.S. (Icdas) 

and all other producers and/or 

exporters. In addition, Commerce is 

amending the amended final 

determination to exclude merchandise 

produced and exported by Habas Sinai 

ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S. 

(Habas) from the order. 

DATES: Applicable May 30, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emily Halle, AD/CVD Operations, Office 

V, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0176. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On March 28, 2018, Commerce 

published its Final Determination in the 

AD investigation of wire rod from 

Turkey.1 After correcting a ministerial 

error contained in the Final 

Determination, on May 21, 2018, 

Commerce published the Amended 

Final Determination and Order, and 

calculated a revised weighted-average 

dumping margin of 4.93 percent for 

Habas, 7.94 percent for Icdas, and 6.44 

percent for all other producers/exporters 

of subject merchandise.2

Icdas and Habas appealed 

Commerce’s Final Determination, as 

modified by the Amended Final 

Determination and Order. On January 

28, 2020, the CIT remanded the 

Amended Final Determination and 

Order to Commerce, directing 

Commerce to recalculate Habas’ and 

Icdas’ duty drawback adjustments using 

a different calculation methodology 

than the duty neutral methodology 

Commerce applied in the Final 

Determination, which allocated the duty 

drawback over total cost of production.3

In its first remand redetermination, 

issued in April 2020, Commerce 

recalculated Icdas’ and Habas’ duty 

drawback adjustment by adding the full 

amount of exempted duties to Habas’ 

and Icdas’ U.S. price, and adding the 

same per-unit duty amount to normal 

value as a circumstance-of-sale 

adjustment.4 As a result of the changes 

in the First Results of Redetermination, 

Commerce calculated estimated 

weighted-average dumping margins of 

3.22 percent for Habas, 8.72 percent for 

Icdas, and 4.78 percent for all other 

producers/exporters of subject 

merchandise.5 The CIT remanded 

Commerce’s determination for a second 

time, ordering Commerce to recalculate 

normal value without making a 

circumstance-of-sale adjustment related 

to the duty drawback adjustment made 

to U.S. price.6

In its final remand redetermination, 

issued in December 2020, Commerce 

calculated a duty drawback adjustment 

for Habas and Icdas without making a 

circumstance-of-sale adjustment to 

normal value, resulting in a revised 

weighted-average dumping margin of 

0.00 percent for Habas, and 4.44 percent 

for Icdas and all other producers/ 

exporters of subject merchandise.7

The CIT sustained Commerce’s final 

redetermination.8

Timken Notice 

In its decision in Timken,9 as clarified 

by Diamond Sawblades,10 the Court of 

Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) 

held that, pursuant to sections 516A(c) 

and (e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (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 

May 20, 2021, judgment constitutes a 

final decision of the CIT that is not in 

harmony with Commerce’s Amended 

Final Determination and Order. Thus, 

28750 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 102 / Friday, May 28, 2021 / Notices 

11As discussed below in the ‘‘Liquidation of 

Suspended Entries’’ section, entries produced and 

exported by Habas are excluded from the AD order. 

12Section 733(b)(3) of the Act defines de minimis 

dumping margin as ‘‘less than 2 percent ad valorem 

or the equivalent specific rate for the subject 

merchandise.’’ 

13See Second Results of Redetermination at 7. 

14 Id. 

15See Timken, 893 F.2d 337. 

16See Diamond Sawblades, 626 F.3d 1374. 

1See Trailstar’s Letter, ‘‘Request for 

Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty 

Order on Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in 

Diameter from the People’s Republic of China,’’ 

dated September 30, 2020 (Trailstar’s Review 

Request) (requesting review of Zhejiang Jingu 

Company Limited). 

2See Trans Texas’ Letter, ‘‘Request for 

Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty 

Order on Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches in 

Diameter from the People’s Republic of China,’’ 

dated September 30, 2020 (Trans Texas’ Review 

Request) (requesting review of Xingmin Intelligent 

Transportation Systems (Group) Co., Ltd.). 

3See Rimco’s Letter, ‘‘Antidumping Duty Order, 

Certain Steel Wheels 12 to 16.5 Inches from the 

this notice is published in fulfillment of 

the publication requirements of Timken. 

Amended Final Determination and 

Antidumping Duty Order 

Because there is now a final court 

judgment, Commerce is amending its 

Amended Final Determination and 

Order with respect to Habas, Icdas, and 

all other producers/exporters as follows: 

Producer/exporter 

Weightedaverage 

dumping 

margin 

(percent) 

Cash deposit 

rate 

(adjusted for 

export subsidies) 

Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S11 ............................................................................... 0.00 0.00 

Icdas Celik Enerji Tersane ve Ulasim Sanayi A.S ...................................................................................... 4.44 0.65 

All Others ..................................................................................................................................................... 4.44 0.65 

Notice of Revocation of Antidumping 

Duty Order, in Part 

Pursuant to section 735(a)(4) of the 

Act, Commerce ‘‘shall disregard any 

weighted average dumping margin that 

is de minimis as defined in section 

733(b)(3) of the Act.’’ 12 As a result of 

this amended final determination, 

Commerce is hereby excluding from this 

Order merchandise produced and 

exported by Habas, for which Commerce 

has calculated an estimated weightedaverage dumping margin of 0.00 

percent.13 This exclusion will not be 

applicable to merchandise exported to 

the United States by Habas in any other 

producer/exporter combination or by 

third parties that sourced subject 

merchandise from the excluded 

producer/exporter combination.14 As a 

result of the exclusion, Commerce will 

not initiate any new administrative 

reviews of the AD order with respect to 

merchandise produced and exported by 

Habas. However, a review may be 

conducted with regard to merchandise 

produced by Habas and exported by 

another company or produced by any 

other company and exported by Habas, 

as such merchandise is not subject to 

exclusion. 

Cash Deposit Requirements for Icdas 

and All Other Producers/Exporters 

Because Icdas and all other 

producers/exporters do not have 

superseding cash deposit rates, i.e., 

there have been no final results 

published in subsequent administrative 

reviews for Icdas and all other 

producers/exporters, Commerce will 

issue revised cash deposit instructions 

to U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP). 

Liquidation of Suspended Entries 

As a result of this Amended Final 

Determination and Order, in which 

Commerce calculated a revised 

weighted-average dumping margin of 

0.00 percent for Habas, Commerce is 

hereby excluding merchandise 

produced and exported by Habas from 

the AD order. Accordingly, for entries of 

merchandise produced and exported by 

Habas that were entered, or withdrawn 

from warehouse for consumption, prior 

to May 30, 2021, Commerce will direct 

CBP to liquidate such entries without 

regard to antidumping duties. 

For entries of merchandise produced 

and exported by Habas that were 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse 

for consumption, on or after May 30, 

2021, Commerce will direct CBP to 

continue the suspension of liquidation 

at a cash deposit rate of 0.00 percent. 

Pursuant to Timken,15 as clarified by 

Diamond Sawblades,16 under sections 

516A(c) and (e) of the Act, Commerce 

must suspend liquidation of such 

entries pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court 

decision. If the CIT’s ruling is not 

appealed, or if appealed and upheld, 

Commerce will instruct CBP to 

terminate the suspension of liquidation 

and to liquidate entries produced and 

exported by Habas, and entered on or 

after May 30, 2021, without regard to 

antidumping duties. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with sections 516A(c) and 

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

Dated: May 25, 2021. 

Christian Marsh, 

Acting Assistant Secretary, for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2021–11466 Filed 5–27–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–090] 

Certain Steel Trailer Wheels 12 to 16.5 

Inches in Diameter From the People’s 

Republic of China: Rescission of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review; 2019–2020 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(Commerce) is rescinding the 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on certain steel 

trailer wheels 12 to 16.5 inches in 

diameter (steel wheels) from the 

People’s Republic of China (China) for 

the period April 22, 2019, through 

August 31, 2020. 

DATES: Applicable May 28, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex 

Cipolla, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4956. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On October 30, 2020, based on timely 

requests for review of five companies by 

TRAILSTAR LLC (Trailstar),1 Trans 

Texas Tire, LLC (Trans Texas),2 and 

Rimco Inc. (Rimco),3 Commerce