Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2017 / Notices 51395 

1See Large Power Transformers from the 

Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review; 2012–2013, 80 FR 

17034 (March 31, 2015) (Final Results) and 

accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. 

2See Large Power Transformers from the 

Republic of Korea: Amended Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012– 

2013, 80 FR 26001 (May 6, 2015) (First Amended 

Final Results) and accompanying Decision 

Memorandum and Large Power Transformers from 

the Republic of Korea: Second Amended Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review; 2012–2013, 80 FR 35628 (June 22, 2015) 

(Second Amended Final Results) and accompanying 

Decision Memorandum, respectively. 

3See ABB INC. v. United States, Slip Op. 16–95 

(CIT, October 7, 2016) (Remand Order). 

4 Id. 

5See Department Memorandum, ‘‘Final Results of 

Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand ABB 

INC. v. United States Court No. 15–00108, Slip-Op. 

16–95 (CIT October 7, 2016),’’ February 2, 2017 

(Final Redetermination) (available at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/remands/16-95.pdf). 

6See ABB, INC. v. United States, Court No. 15– 

00108, Slip Op. 17–137 (CIT 2017). 

7See Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 

(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken), at 341. 

8See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. 

United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 20 10) 

(Diamond Sawblades). 

9See, e.g., Large Power Transformers from the 

Republic of Korea: Amended Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Duty 

Administrative Review; 2013–2014, 81 FR 27088 

(May 5, 2016). 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–867] 

Large Power Transformers From the 

Republic of Korea: Notice of Court 

Decision Not in Harmony With Final 

Results, Notice of Amended Final 

Results 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On October 10, 2017, the 

Court of International Trade (CIT or 

Court) sustained the final remand 

results pertaining to the administrative 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on large power transformers (LPTs) from 

the Republic of Korea (Korea) covering 

the period February 16, 2012, through 

July 31, 2013. The Department of 

Commerce (the Department) is notifying 

the public that the final judgment in this 

case is not in harmony with the final 

results, notice of amended final results, 

and notice of second amended final 

results of the administrative review and 

that the Department is amending the 

second amended final results with 

respect to the dumping margins 

assigned to Hyosung Corporation 

(Hyosung), Hyundai Heavy Industries 

Co., Ltd. (Hyundai), and the companies 

not selected for individual examination 

(ILJIN, ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd., and LSIS 

Co., Ltd.). 

DATES: Applicable October 20, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Moses Song, 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) 482–5041. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On March 31, 2015, the Department 

issued the Final Results.1 On May 6, 

2015, in response to ministerial error 

allegations, the Department issued the 

First Amended Final Results and on 

June 22, 2015, the Second Amended 

Final Results.2 Hyosung and Hyundai 

are Korean producers/exporters of LPTs 

and were mandatory respondents in the 

underlying administrative review. In the 

Second Amended Final Results, the 

Department assigned dumping margins 

of 8.23 percent and 12.36 percent to 

Hyosung and Hyundai, respectively. 

On October 7, 2016, the CIT 

remanded various aspects of the Second 

Final Results to the Department.3

Specifically, the Court instructed the 

Department to further address a 

sequencing issue regarding certain of 

Hyundai’s U.S. sales documents on the 

record. The Court also directed the 

Department to further explain: (1) Its 

treatment of the U.S. commissions of 

Hyosung and Hyundai; (2) the record 

basis for such treatment; (3) whether 

such U.S. commissions resulted in the 

granting of commission offsets, and (4) 

the legal and factual basis for the 

granting or denial of the commission 

offsets.4

Pursuant to the Remand Order, the 

Department issued its Final 

Redetermination, which addressed the 

Court’s holdings and revised the 

weighted-average dumping margins for 

Hyosung and Hyundai to 9.09 percent 

and 13.82 percent, respectively, and the 

rate assigned to the companies not 

selected for individual examination to 

11.73 percent.5 On October 10, 2017, the 

CIT sustained in whole the 

Department’s Final Redetermination.6

Timken Notice 

In its decision in Timken,7 as clarified 

by Diamond Sawblades,8 the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Federal 

Circuit held that, pursuant to sections 

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

Department must publish a notice of a 

court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’ 

with a Department determination and 

must suspend liquidation of entries 

pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. 

The CIT’s October 10, 2017, final 

judgment sustaining the Department’s 

Final Redetermination constitutes a 

final decision of the Court that is not in 

harmony with the Second Amended 

Final Results. This notice is published 

in fulfillment of the publication 

requirements of Timken. Accordingly, 

the Department will continue the 

suspension of liquidation of the subject 

merchandise at issue pending expiration 

of the period to appeal or, if appealed, 

pending a final and conclusive court 

decision. 

Amended Final Results 

Because there is now a final court 

decision, the Department is amending 

the Second Amended Final Results with 

respect to the dumping margins 

calculated for Hyosung, Hyundai, and 

the companies not selected for 

individual examination. Based on the 

Final Redetermination, as affirmed by 

the CIT, the revised dumping margins 

for Hyosung, Hyundai, and the 

companies not selected for individual 

examination from February 16, 2012, 

through July 31, 2013, are as follows: 

Producer/exporter 

Weightedaverage 

margin 

(percent) 

Hyosung Corporation ............ 9.09 

Hyundai Heavy Industries 

Co., Ltd ............................. 13.82 

ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd .......... 11.73 

ILJIN ..................................... 11.73 

LSIS Co., Ltd ........................ 11.73 

In the event that the CIT’s rulings are 

not appealed or, if appealed, are upheld 

by a final and conclusive court decision, 

the Department will instruct Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP) to assess 

antidumping duties on unliquidated 

entries of subject merchandise based on 

the revised dumping margins listed 

above. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

Since the Second Amended Final 

Results, the Department has established 

new cash deposit rates for the 

companies listed above.9 Therefore, this 

Final Redetermination, and as affirmed 

by the Court, does not change the laterestablished cash deposit rates for the 

companies listed above. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice is issued and published in 

accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), 

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


Pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES
51396 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 213 / Monday, November 6, 2017 / Notices 

1See Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from 

India and the People’s Republic of China: Initiation 

of Countervailing Duty Investigations, 82 FR 29029 

(June 27, 2017) (Initiation Notice). 

2See Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber from the 

People’s Republic of China and India: 

Postponement of Preliminary Determination in the 

Countervailing Duty Investigations, 82 FR 37048 

(August 8, 2017). 

3See Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary 

Affirmative Determination: Countervailing Duty 

Investigation of Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber 

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

concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this 

notice (Preliminary Decision Memorandum). 

4See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 

Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). 

5See Initiation Notice. 

6See 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. 

7See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act. 

8As discussed in the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum, the Department has found the 

following companies to be cross-owned with 

Jiangyin Hailun Chemical Fiber Co. Ltd.: Jiangyin 

Bolun Chemical Fiber Co., Ltd. (Bolun); Jiangyin 

Fenghua Synthetic Fiber Co., Ltd. (Fenghua); 

Jiangsu Hailun Petrochemicals Co., Ltd. (Hailun 

Petrochemical); Jiangyin Huamei Special Fiber Co., 

Ltd. (Huamei); Jiangyin Huasheng Polymerization 

Co., Ltd. (Huasheng); Jiangyin Huaxing Synthetic 

Co., Ltd. (Huaxing); Jiangying Huayi Polymerization 

Co., Ltd. (Huayi); Jiangsu Sanfangxiang Group Co., 

Ltd. (Sanfangxiang Group); Jiangsu Sanfangxiang 

International Trading Co., Ltd. (Sanfangxiang 

Trading); Sanhai International Trading PTE Ltd. 

(Sanhai); Jiangyin Xingsheng Plastic Co., Ltd. 

(Xingsheng Plastic); Jiangyin Xingtai New Material 

Co., Ltd. (Xingtai); Jiangsu Xingye Plastic Co., Ltd. 

(Xingye Plastic); Jiangsu Xingye Polytech Co., Ltd. 

(Xingye Polytech); Jiangyin Xingyu New Material 

Co., Ltd. (Xingyu); Jiangyin Xinlun Chemical Fiber 

Co., Ltd. (Xinlun); Jiangyin Xinyuan Thermal Power 

Co., Ltd. (Xinyuan Thermal); and Jiangyin Yunlun 

Chemical Fiber Co., Ltd. (Yunlun). 

9As discussed in the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum, the Department has found Jiangsu 

Huahong Industrial Group Co., Ltd. to be crossowned with Jiangyin Huahong Chemical Fiber Co. 

Ltd.; Jiangyin Hongkai Chemical Fiber Co., Ltd. 

Dated: October 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. 

[FR Doc. 2017–24072 Filed 11–3–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–061] 

Fine Denier Polyester Staple Fiber 

From the People’s Republic of China: 

Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing 

Duty Determination 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) preliminarily 

determines that countervailable 

subsidies are being provided to 

producers and exporters of fine denier 

polyester staple fiber (fine denier PSF) 

from the People’s Republic of China 

(PRC). The period of investigation is 

January 1, 2016, through December 31, 

2016. 

DATES: Applicable November 6, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Yasmin Bordas or Davina Friedmann, 

AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–3813 or (202) 482–0698, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

This preliminary determination is 

made in accordance with section 703(b) 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 

(the Act). The Department published the 

notice of initiation of this investigation 

on June 27, 2017.1 On August 8, 2017, 

the Department postponed the 

preliminary determination of this 

investigation, and the revised deadline 

is now October 30, 2017.2 For a 

complete description of the events that 

followed the initiation of this 

investigation, see the Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum.3 A list of topics 

discussed in the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum is included as Appendix 

II to this notice. 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 Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum can be accessed 

directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/ 

frn/. The signed and electronic versions 

of the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum are identical in content. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The product covered by this 

investigation is fine denier PSF from the 

PRC. For a complete description of the 

scope of this investigation, see 

Appendix I. 

Scope Comments 

In accordance with the preamble to 

the Department’s regulations,4 the 

Initiation Notice set aside a period of 

time for parties to raise issues regarding 

product coverage, (i.e., scope).5 Certain 

interested parties commented on the 

scope of the investigation as it appeared 

in the Initiation Notice, as well as 

additional language proposed by the 

Department. The Department intends to 

issue its preliminary decision regarding 

comments concerning the scope of the 

antidumping duty (AD) and 

countervailing duty (CVD) 

investigations in the preliminary 

determination of the companion AD 

investigation. 

Methodology 

The Department is conducting this 

investigation in accordance with section 

701 of the Act. For each of the subsidy 

programs found countervailable, the 

Department preliminarily determines 

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

contribution by an ‘‘authority’’ that 

gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, 

and that the subsidy is specific.6

The Department notes that, in making 

these findings, it relied, in part, on facts 

available and, because it finds that one 

or more respondents did not act to the 

best of their ability to respond to the 

Department’s requests for information, it 

drew an adverse inference where 

appropriate in selecting from among the 

facts otherwise available.7 For further 

information, see ‘‘Use of Facts 

Otherwise Available and Adverse 

Inferences’’ in the Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum. 

All-Others Rate 

Sections 703(d) and 705(c)(5)(A) of 

the Act provide that in the preliminary 

determination, the Department shall 

determine an estimated all-others rate 

for companies not individually 

examined. This rate shall be an amount 

equal to the weighted average of the 

estimated subsidy rates established for 

those companies individually 

examined, excluding any zero and de 

minimis rates and any rates based 

entirely under section 776 of the Act. 

Notwithstanding the language of section 

705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, we have not 

calculated the ‘‘all-others’’ rate by 

weight-averaging the rates of the two 

individually investigated respondents, 

because doing so risks disclosure of 

proprietary information. Therefore, for 

the ‘‘all-others’’ rate, we calculated a 

simple average of the two responding 

companies’ rates. 

Preliminary Determination 

The Department preliminarily 

determines that thefollowing estimated 

countervailable subsidy rates exist: 


Pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES