Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 42291 

13See 19 CFR 351.310(d). 

14See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act; 19 CFR 

351.213(h). 

15See Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 

‘‘Rate for Non-Selected Companies’’ (for an 

explanation of how we preliminarily determined 

the rate for non-selected companies). 

16See Large Power Transformers from the 

Republic of Korea: Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 

53177 (August 31, 2012). 

1See Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 81 FR 

71064 (October 14, 2016) (Initiation Notice). 

Although there were 32 companies in the initiation, 

it included SDC International Australia Pty Ltd. Per 

the Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to 

Voluntary Remand Order: SDC International Aust. 

PTY. Ltd. v. United States, CIT Court No. 16–00062 

(January 20, 2017), we found both SDC 

International Aust. Pty. Ltd. and SDC International 

Australia Pty Ltd., to be the same company. 

Continued 

DC 20230, at a date and time to be 

determined.13 Parties should confirm 

the date, time, and location of the 

hearing two days before the scheduled 

date. 

The Department intends to publish 

the final results of this administrative 

review, including the results of its 

analysis of issues raised in any case or 

rebuttal brief, no later than 120 days 

after publication of these preliminary 

results, unless extended.14

Assessment Rates 

Upon completion of this 

administrative review, the Department 

shall determine, and Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, 

antidumping duties on all appropriate 

entries. If the preliminary results are 

unchanged for the final results, we will 

instruct CBP to apply an ad valorem 

assessment rate of 60.81 percent to all 

entries of subject merchandise during 

the period of review which were 

produced and/or exported by Hyosung, 

Hyundai, and the aforementioned 

companies which were not selected for 

individual examination.15 We intend to 

issue liquidation instructions to CBP 15 

days after publication of the final results 

of this review. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of the final results of this 

administrative review for all shipments 

of the 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withdrawn from warehouse, for 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 Hyosung and 

Hyundai and other companies listed 

above will be equal to the weightedaverage dumping margin established in 

the final results of this administrative 

review; (2) for previously reviewed or 

investigated companies not listed above, 

the cash deposit rate will continue to be 

the company-specific rate published for 

the most recently completed segment of 

this proceeding in which they were 

reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a firm 

covered in this review, a prior review, 

or in the investigation but the producer 

is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate 

established for the most recently 

completed segment of this proceeding 

for the producer of the merchandise; 

and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other 

producers or exporters will continue to 

be the all-others rate of 22.00 percent, 

the rate established in the investigation 

of this proceeding.16 These cash deposit 

requirements, when imposed, shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice also serves as a 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 the Department’s presumption 

that reimbursement of antidumping 

duties occurred and the subsequent 

assessment of double antidumping 

duties. 

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. 

Dated: August 31, 2017. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix 

List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Scope of the Order 

IV. Application of Facts Available and Use of 

Adverse Inference 

A. Application of Facts Available 

B. Use of Adverse Inference 

C. Selection and Corroboration of the 

Adverse Facts Available Rate 

V. Discussion of The Issues 

A. Hyosung-Specific Issues Failure to 

Report Separately Service-Related 

Revenues Invoice Used in last Period of 

Review (POR) Used in this POR for 

Different Sale Unreported Sales 

Adjustments 

B. Hyundai-Specific Issues Failure to 

Separately Report the Prices and Costs 

for Accessories Understatement of the 

Home Market Gross Unit Price 

Undisclosed Relationship with 

Hyundai’s Sales Agent 

VI. Rate for Non-Selected Companies 

VII. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2017–18998 Filed 9–6–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–909] 

Certain Steel Nails From the People’s 

Republic of China: Preliminary Results 

of the Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and Preliminary 

Determination of No Shipments; 2015– 

2016 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) preliminarily 

determines that mandatory respondents 

Stanley Works (Langfang) Fastening 

Systems Co., Ltd. and Stanley Black & 

Decker, Inc. (collectively Stanley), and 

Tianjin Lianda Group Co, Ltd. (Tianjin 

Lianda) sold subject merchandise in the 

United States at prices below normal 

value (NV) during the period of review 

(POR), August 1, 2015, through July 31, 

2016. If these preliminary results are 

adopted in the final results, the 

Department will instruct U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP) to assess 

antidumping duties (AD) on all 

appropriate entries of subject 

merchandise during the POR. Interested 

parties are invited to comment on these 

preliminary results. 

DATES: Applicable September 7, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew Renkey or Courtney Canales, 

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) 482–2312 or 

(202) 482–4997, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On October 14, 2016, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

notice of initiation of an administrative 

review of the AD order on certain steel 

nails (Nails) from the People’s Republic 

of China (PRC) for the period of review 

August 1, 2015, through July 31, 2016. 

The Department initiated a review with 

respect to 31 companies.1 The 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

42292 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 

Therefore, SDC International Aust. Pty. Ltd. is the 

party under review; SDC International Australia Pty 

Ltd. is not under review as a distinct company. 2See Respondent Selection Memo dated February 

2, 2017. 3The Department added the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule category 7907.00.6000, ‘‘Other articles of 

zinc: Other,’’ to the language of the Order. See 

Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Senior Advisor 

for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations, through James C. Doyle, Director, Office 

9, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations, regarding ‘‘Certain Steel Nails from the 

People’s Republic of China: Cobra Anchors Co. Ltd. 

Final Scope Ruling,’’ dated September 19, 2013. 

4See ‘‘Certain Steel Nails from the People’s 

Republic of China: Decision Memorandum for the 

Preliminary Results of the 2015–2016 Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review,’’ (Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with 

these results and hereby adopted by this notice, for 

a complete description of the Scope of the Order. 5Although Shanxi Yuci, Besco Machinery 

Industry (Zheijiang) Co., Ltd., Certified Products 

International Inc., PT Enterprise Inc., Shanghai Jade 

Shuttle Hardware Tools Co., Ltd., and Zhejian GemChun Hardware Accessory Co., Ltd. submitted a No 

Shipments Letter, they are not among the 31 

companies initiated on in this review, and therefore 

are not subject to this review. Therefore, we have 

only evaluated the no shipment claims of the two 

companies that submitted no shipments letters and 

for which this review was initiated. 

6See Non-Market Economy Antidumping 

Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76 

FR 65694, 65694–95 (October 24, 2011) and the 

‘‘Assessment Rates’’ section, below. 

7See Antidumping Proceedings: Announcement 

of Change in Department Practice for Respondent 

Selection in Antidumping Duty Proceedings and 

Conditional Review of the Nonmarket Economy 

Entity in NME Antidumping Duty Proceedings, 78 

FR 65963 (November 4, 2013). 

8 Id.; Certain Steel Nails from the People’s 

Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review; 2012–2013, 80 FR 

18816, 18817 and accompanying Issues and 

Decision Memorandum. 

9These companies are: Aironware (Shanghai) Co., 

Ltd., Certified Products Taiwan Inc., Chiieh Yung 

Metal Ind. Corp., Faithful Engineering Products Co., 

Ltd., and Huanghua Xionghua Hardware Products 

Co., Ltd. 

10See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from 

France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United 

Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Reviews and Rescission of Reviews 

in Part, 73 FR 52823, 52824 (September 11, 2008), 

and accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comment 16. 

Department selected two mandatory 

respondents, Stanley and Tianjin 

Lianda, based on highest volume of 

exports.2 On April 21, 2017, the 

Department extended the preliminary 

results of review to August 31, 2017. 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise covered by the order 

includes certain steel nails having a 

shaft length up to 12 inches. Certain 

steel nails subject to the order are 

currently classified under the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS) subheadings 

7317.00.55, 7317.00.65, 7317.00.75, and 

7907.00.6000.3 While the HTSUS 

subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the scope of the 

order is dispositive.4

Preliminary Determination of No 

Shipments 

Based on the no-shipments letters 

filed by two companies,5 the 

Department preliminarily determines 

that these companies had no shipments 

during the POR. For additional 

information regarding this 

determination, including a list of these 

companies, see the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum. Consistent with our 

assessment practice in non-market 

economy (NME) administrative reviews, 

the Department is not rescinding this 

review for these companies, but intends 

to complete the review and issue 

appropriate instructions to CBP based 

on the final results of the review.6

Separate Rates 

The Department preliminarily 

determines that information placed on 

the record by the mandatory 

respondents Stanley and Tianjin Lianda, 

as well as by the 22 other separate rate 

applicants, demonstrates that these 

companies are entitled to separate rate 

status. See Preliminary Results of 

Review section below. For additional 

information, see the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum. 

PRC-Wide Entity 

The Department’s policy regarding 

conditional review of the PRC-wide 

entity applies to this administrative 

review.7 Under this policy, the PRCwide entity will not be under review 

unless a party specifically requests, or 

the Department self-initiates, a review of 

the entity. Because no party requested a 

review of the PRC-wide entity in this 

review, the entity is not under review 

and the weighted-average dumping 

margin determined for the PRC-wide 

entity is not subject to change (i.e., 

118.04 percent) as a result of this 

review.8 Aside from the companies 

discussed above, the Department 

considers all other companies for which 

a review was requested 9 to be part of 

the PRC-wide entity. For additional 

information, see the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum; see also 

Appendix 2 for a list of companies 

considered as part of the PRC-wide 

entity. 

Rate for Separate-Rate Companies Not 

Individually Examined 

The statute and the Department’s 

regulations do not address the 

establishment of a rate to be applied to 

respondents not selected for individual 

examination when the Department 

limits its examination of companies 

subject to the administrative review 

pursuant to section 777A(c)(2)(B) of the 

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

Generally, the Department looks to 

section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which 

provides instructions for calculating the 

all-others rate in an investigation, for 

guidance when calculating the rate for 

companies not individually examined 

in an administrative review. Section 

735(c)(5)(A) of the Act articulates a 

preference for not calculating an allothers rate using rates which are zero, 

de minimis or based entirely on facts 

available (FA). Accordingly, the 

Department’s usual practice has been to 

determine the dumping margin for 

companies not individually examined 

by averaging the weighted-average 

dumping margins for the individually 

examined respondents, excluding rates 

that are zero, de minimis, or based 

entirely on facts available.10 Consistent 

with this practice, in this review, we 

calculated weighted-average dumping 

margins for both Stanley and Tianjin 

Lianda that are both not zero, de 

minimis or based entirely on FA; 

therefore, the Department assigned to 

the companies not individually 

examined, but which demonstrated 

their eligibility for a separate rate, the 

weighted average of the weightedaverage dumping margins calculated for 

Stanley and Tianjin Lianda in these 

preliminary results. This average has 

been weighted by the ranged, publicly 

available sale quantities for Stanley and 

Tianjin Lianda in the U.S. market. 

Methodology 

The Department is conducting this 

review in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1)(B) and 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act. 

Constructed export prices and export 

prices have been calculated in 

accordance with section 772 of the Act. 

Because the PRC is a non-market 

economy country within the meaning of 

section 771(18) of the Act, normal value 

(NV) has been calculated in accordance 

with section 773(c) of the Act. 

For a full description of the 

methodology underlying our 

conclusions, see the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum. The 

Preliminary 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 http://access.trade.gov, and is 

available to all parties in the Central 

Records Unit, room B8024 of the main 

Department of Commerce building. In 

addition, a complete version of the 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 42293 

11See 19 CFR 351.309; see also 19 CFR 351.303 

(for general filing requirements). 

12See 19 CFR 351.212(b). 

13See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 

14See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum can 

be accessed directly on the internet at 

http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The 

signed Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum and the electronic 

versions of the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum are identical in content. 

Preliminary Results of Review 

The Department preliminarily 

determines that the following weightedaverage dumping margins exist for the 

period August 1, 2015, through July 31, 

2016: 

Exporter/producer Weighted-average 

dumping margin 

Stanley ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 3.60 

Tianjin Lianda ................................................................................................................................................................................ 332.95 

Dezhou Hualude Hardware Products Co., Ltd .............................................................................................................................. 28.21 

Hebei Cangzhou New Century Foreign Trade Co., Ltd ................................................................................................................ 28.21 

Hebei Minmetals Co., Ltd .............................................................................................................................................................. 28.21 

Nanjing CAIQING Hardware Co., Ltd ............................................................................................................................................ 28.21 

Nanjing Toua Hardware & Tools Co., Ltd ..................................................................................................................................... 28.21 

Qingdao D&L Group Ltd ................................................................................................................................................................ 28.21 

SDC International Aust. PTY. LTD ................................................................................................................................................ 28.21 

Shandong Dinglong Import & Export Co., Ltd ............................................................................................................................... 28.21 

Shandong Oriental Cherry Hardware Group Co., Ltd ................................................................................................................... 28.21 

Shandong Qingyun Hongyi Hardware Products Co., Ltd ............................................................................................................. 28.21 

Shanghai Curvet Hardware Products Co., Ltd .............................................................................................................................. 28.21 

Shanghai Yueda Nails Industry Co., Ltd a.k.a. Shanghai Yueda ................................................................................................. 28.21 

Shanxi Hairui Trade Co., Ltd ......................................................................................................................................................... 28.21 

Shanxi Pioneer Hardware Industrial Co., Ltd ................................................................................................................................ 28.21 

Shanxi Tianli Industries Co., Ltd ................................................................................................................................................... 28.21 

Suntec Industries Co., Ltd ............................................................................................................................................................. 28.21 

S-Mart (Tianjin) Technology Development Co., Ltd ...................................................................................................................... 28.21 

Tianjin Jinchi Metal Products Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................................................... 28.21 

Tianjin Jinghai County Hongli Industry & Business Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................ 28.21 

Tianjin Universal Machinery Imp. & Exp. Corporation .................................................................................................................. 28.21 

Tianjin Zhonglian Metals Ware Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................................................ 28.21 

Xi’an Metals & Minerals Import & Export Co., Ltd ........................................................................................................................ 28.21 

Disclosure 

The Department intends to disclose to 

interested parties the calculations 

performed in connection with these 

preliminary results within five days of 

its public announcement or, if there is 

no public announcement, within five 

days of the date of publication of this 

notice in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.224(b). 

Public Comment 

Case briefs or other written comments 

may be submitted to the Assistant 

Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance no later than 30 days after 

the date of publication of these 

preliminary results, unless the Secretary 

alters the time limit. Rebuttal briefs, 

limited to issues raised in case briefs, 

may be submitted no later than five days 

after the deadline date for case briefs.11

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and 

(d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or 

rebuttal briefs in this administrative 

review are encouraged to submit with 

each argument: (1) A statement of the 

issue; (2) a brief summary of the 

argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), 

interested parties who wish to request a 

hearing, limited to issues raised in the 

case and rebuttal briefs, must submit a 

written request to the Assistant 

Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, within 30 days after the date 

of publication of this notice. Requests 

should contain the party’s name, 

address, and telephone number, the 

number of participants, whether any 

participant is a foreign national, and a 

list of the issues to be discussed. If a 

request for a hearing is made, the 

Department intends to hold the hearing 

at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 

1401 Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230, at a time and 

date to be determined. Parties should 

confirm by telephone the date, time, and 

location of the hearing two days before 

the scheduled date. 

The Department intends to issue the 

final results of this administrative 

review, which will include the results of 

our analysis of all issues raised in the 

case briefs, within 120 days of 

publication of these preliminary results 

in the Federal Register, pursuant to 

section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, unless 

extended. 

Assessment Rates 

Upon issuance of the final results, the 

Department will determine, and CBP 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries covered by this 

review.12 The Department intends to 

issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 

days after the publication date of the 

final results of this review. 

For any individually examined 

respondent whose weighted average 

dumping margin is not zero or de 

minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent) in 

the final results of this review, the 

Department will calculate importerspecific assessment rates on the basis of 

the ratio of the total amount of dumping 

calculated for the importer’s examined 

sales to the total entered value of those 

sales, in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.212(b)(1). Where an importerspecific ad valorem rate is not zero or 

de minimis, the Department will 

instruct CBP to collect the appropriate 

duties at the time of liquidation.13

Where either a respondent’s weightedaverage dumping margin is zero or de 

minimis, or an importer-specific ad 

valorem assessment rate is zero or de 

minimis, the Department will instruct 

CBP to liquidate appropriate entries 

without regard to antidumping duties.14

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES

42294 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 172 / Thursday, September 7, 2017 / Notices 

publication of the final results of this 

review for shipments of the subject 

merchandise from the PRC entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after the publication 

date, as provided by sections 

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

companies listed above that have a 

separate rate, the cash deposit rate will 

be equal to the weighted-average 

dumping margin established in the final 

results of this review (except, if the rate 

is de minimis, then cash deposit rate 

will be zero); (2) for previously 

examined PRC and non-PRC exporters 

not listed above that at the time of entry 

are eligible for a separate rate based on 

a prior completed segment of this 

proceeding, the cash deposit rate will 

continue to be the existing exporterspecific cash deposit rate; (3) for all PRC 

exporters of subject merchandise that 

have not been found to be entitled to a 

separate rate at the time of entry, the 

cash deposit rate will be that for the 

PRC-wide entity (i.e., 118.04 percent); 

and (4) for all non-PRC exporters of 

subject merchandise which at the time 

of entry are not eligible for a separate 

rate, the cash deposit rate will be the 

rate applicable to the PRC exporter that 

supplied that non-PRC exporter. These 

deposit requirements, when imposed, 

shall remain in effect until further 

notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice also serves as a 

preliminary 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 the POR. 

Failure to comply with this requirement 

could result in the Department’s 

presumption that reimbursement of 

antidumping duties occurred and the 

subsequent assessment of double 

antidumping duties. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This preliminary determination is 

issued and published in accordance 

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

the Act. 

Dated: August 31, 2017. 

Gary Taverman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations, 

performing the non-exclusive functions and 

duties of the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance. 

Appendix 1 

List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum 

1. Summary 

2. Background 

3. Scope of the Order 

4. Preliminary Determination of No 

Shipments 

5. Non-Market Economy Country Status 

6. Separate Rates 

7. Application of Facts Available and Use of 

Adverse Inference 

8. Facts Available 

9. Surrogate Country 

10. Date of Sale 

11. Normal Value Comparisons 

12. Factor Valuation Methodology 

13. Comparisons to Normal Value 

14. Currency Conversion 

15. Recommendation 

Appendix 2 

1. Aironware (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. 

2. Certified Products Taiwan Inc. 

3. Chiieh Yung Metal Ind. Corp. 

4. Faithful Engineering Products Co., Ltd. 

5. Huanghua Xionghua Hardware Products 

Co., Ltd. 

[FR Doc. 2017–18977 Filed 9–6–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

Proposed Information Collection; 

Comment Request; EU–U.S. Privacy 

Shield; Invitation for Applications for 

Inclusion on the List of Arbitrators 

AGENCY: International Trade 

Administration. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Commerce, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork and 

respondent burden, invites the general 

public and other Federal agencies to 

take this opportunity to comment on 

proposed and/or continuing information 

collections, as required by the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before November 6, 

2017. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments 

to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental 

Paperwork Clearance Officer, 

Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 

14th and Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230 (or via the 

Internet at PRAcomments@doc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

copies of the information collection 

instrument and instructions should be 

directed to Nasreen Djouini at the U.S. 

Department of Commerce, either by 

email at Nasreen.Djouini@trade.gov, or 

by fax at: 202–482–5522. More 

information on the arbitration 

mechanism may be found at https://

www.privacyshield.gov/ 

article?id=ANNEX-I-introduction. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

The EU–U.S. Privacy Shield 

Framework was designed by the U.S. 

Department of Commerce (DOC) and the 

European Commission (Commission) to 

provide companies on both sides of the 

Atlantic with a mechanism to comply 

with data protection requirements when 

transferring personal data from the 

European Union to the United States in 

support of transatlantic commerce. On 

July 12, 2016, the Commission deemed 

the EU–U.S. Privacy Shield Framework 

(Privacy Shield) adequate to enable data 

transfers under EU law, and on August 

1, 2016, the DOC began accepting selfcertifications from U.S. companies to 

join the program (81 FR 47752; July 22, 

2016). For more information on the 

Privacy Shield, visit 

www.privacyshield.gov. 

As described in Annex I of the 

Privacy Shield, the DOC and the 

Commission have committed to 

implement an arbitration mechanism to 

provide European individuals with the 

ability to invoke binding arbitration to 

determine, for residual claims, whether 

an organization has violated its 

obligations under the Privacy Shield. 

Organizations voluntarily self-certify to 

the Privacy Shield and, upon 

certification, the commitments the 

organization has made to comply with 

the Privacy Shield become legally 

enforceable under U.S. law. 

Organizations that self-certify to the 

Privacy Shield commit to binding 

arbitration of residual claims if the 

individual chooses to exercise that 

option. Under the arbitration option, a 

Privacy Shield Panel (consisting of one 

or three arbitrators, as agreed by the 

parties) has the authority to impose 

individual-specific, non-monetary 

equitable relief (such as access, 

correction, deletion, or return of the 

individual’s data in question) necessary 

to remedy the violation of the Privacy 

Shield only with respect to the 

individual. The parties will select the 

arbitrators from the list of arbitrators 

described below. 

The DOC and the European 

Commission seek to develop a list of at 

least 20 arbitrators. To be eligible for 

inclusion on the list, applicants must be 

admitted to practice law in the United 

States and have expertise in both U.S. 

privacy law and EU data protection law. 

Applicants shall not be subject to any 

instructions from, or be affiliated with, 

any Privacy Shield organization, or the 

U.S., EU, or any EU Member State or 

any other governmental authority, 

public authority or enforcement 

authority. 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES