Quiero saber acerca de...

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 168 / Thursday, September 2, 2021 / Notices scope of this Order, see Scope of the Order, in the attached appendix.
Methodology Commerce is conducting this administrative review in accordance with section 751a1B of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213.
Preliminary Results of Administrative Review Commerce considers China to be a non-market economy NME country.11
In accordance with section 77118Ci of the Act, any determination that a foreign country is an NME country shall remain in effect until revoked by Commerce. Therefore, we continue to treat China as an NME country for the purposes of these preliminary results.
ICF Cable and Jin Tiong are the companies subject to this review. In the Initiation Notice, Commerce explained:

Exporters, whether or not located in the NME country, owned wholly by entities located in market-economy countries, provided that the ultimate owners are also located in market-economy countries wholly market-economy owned firms, need only fill out the certifications contained in this application and provide supporting documentation for the fields in the application that are marked with an asterisk, . These marked fields pertain to the firms eligibility for separate rates consideration and support the firms claim that it is in fact wholly owned by a market-economy entity.
This information is also necessary for administration once a separate rate has been issued.14

Commerce also stated that either a separate rate certification or a separate rate application, as appropriate, is due from each company no later than 30
days after publication of the Initiation Notice, noting that the deadline applies equally to NME-owned firms, wholly foreign-owned firms, and foreign sellers who purchase and export subject merchandise to the United States. 13
Thus, the deadline for the submission of a separate rate certification or separate rate application in this review was March 16, 2021.

Therefore, there is no basis for Jin Tiongs claim that it was exempt from filing a separate rate application based on it being located in Singapore, a market-economy country. The separate rate application clearly instructs such a company to provide the necessary information to demonstrate that it is wholly foreign owned.
Further, in the Initiation Notice, Commerce explained that for exporters and producers who submit a Separate Rate Application or Certification and subsequently are selected as mandatory respondents, these exporters and producers will no longer be eligible for separate rate status unless they respond to all parts of the questionnaire as mandatory respondents. 15 Commerce thus notified the respondents under review that it would select respondents for individual examination from those companies that had submitted a separate rate application or certification as applicable. Commerce did not receive a separate rate application from either ICF Cable or Jin Tiong.16
Therefore, absent the submission of the required information necessary to establish whether any exporter is independent from the control of the government of the subject NME, i.e., China, Jin Tong was not eligible for individual examination in this administrative review. Commerce thus
11 See Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Aluminum Foil from the Peoples Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 82 FR 50858, 50861
November 2, 2017, and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum at 8, unchanged in Certain Aluminum Foil from the Peoples Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 9282 March 5, 2018.
12 See Initiation Notice, 86 FR at 8167.
13 Id.

14 See Peoples Republic of China China Separate Rate Application and Required Supporting Documentation, available at https
enforcement.trade.gov/nme/sep-rate-files/app20190221/prc-sr-app-022119.pdf, at 3.
15 Id.
16 For ICF Cable and Jin Tiong, neither company had previously received a company-specific rate in the investigation, and, therefore, a separate rate application was the appropriate information which was required in this review for each company to demonstrate their eligibility for a separate rate.

In proceedings involving non-market economy NME countries, Commerce begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should be assigned a single antidumping duty deposit rate. It is Commerces policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject to an administrative review in an NME country this single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be entitled to a separate rate.

All firms listed in the Initiation Notice that wish to qualify for separate rate status in the administrative reviews involving NME
countries must complete, as appropriate, either a separate rate application or certification, as described below. 12

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1

The instructions for filing a separate rate application clearly state that each exporter is required to submit the necessary information needed to determine a companys eligibility for separate rate consideration:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:33 Sep 01, 2021

Jkt 253001

PO 00000

Frm 00021

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

49307

withdrew the antidumping questionnaire erroneously sent to Jin Tiong. Additionally, because neither Jin Tong nor ICF Cable attempted to demonstrate that they are entitled to a separate rate, the aforementioned presumption of government control is applicable, and Commerce preliminary determines that both companies subject to this review are part of the China-wide entity.17
In addition, Commerce no longer considers the NME-wide entity as an exporter conditionally subject to an antidumping duty administrative review.18 Accordingly, the NME-wide entity is not under review unless Commerce specifically receives a request for and initiates, or self-initiates, a review of the NME-wide entity. In this administrative review, no party requested a review of the China-wide entity. Moreover, we have not selfinitiated a review of the China-wide entity. Because no review of the Chinawide entity has been initiated, the China-wide entitys entries are not subject to the review, and the rate applicable to the China-wide entity is not subject to change as a result of this review. The existing weighted-average dumping margin, and, therefore, the applicable cash deposit rate and assessment rate for antidumping duties, is 52.79 percent, the rate established in the final determination of the less-thanfair-value investigation.19
Disclosure and Public Comment Normally, Commerce discloses the calculations used in its analysis to parties in a review within five days of the date of publication of the notice of preliminary results, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224b. However, for the preliminary results of review, there are no calculations on the record to disclose.
Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.20
Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed no later than seven days after the time limit for 17 See Hydrofluorocarbon Blends from the Peoples Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, in Part; 20192020, 86 FR 24587 May 7, 2021.
18 See 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, 65970 November 4, 2013.
19 See Order, 84 FR at 70497.
20 See 19 CFR 351.309c.

E:FRFM02SEN1.SGM

02SEN1