[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 48 (Monday, March 14, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12443-12446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-1065]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

(A-580-816)


Notice of Final Results of the Tenth Administrative Review and 
New Shipper Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Corrosion-
Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On September 7, 2004, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the preliminary results of the antidumping duty 
administrative review and antidumping duty new shipper review for 
certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products (CORE) from the 
Republic of Korea (Preliminary Results). This review covers four 
manufacturers and exporters of the subject merchandise: Union Steel 
Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Union); Pohang Iron & Steel Company, Ltd. 
(POSCO), Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd. (POCOS), and Pohang Steel 
Industries

[[Page 12444]]

Co., Ltd. (PSI) (collectively, POSCO); Dongbu Steel Corporation, Ltd. 
(Dongbu); and Dongshin Special Steel Co., Ltd. (Dongshin).\1\ The 
period of review (POR) is August 1, 2002, through July 31, 2003. In 
response to a request from Hyundai Hysco (HYSCO), the Department is 
also conducting a new shipper review. The POR for the new shipper 
review is also August 1, 2002, through July 31, 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On May 5, 2004, the Department rescinded the review of SeAH 
Steel Corporation (SeAH) because neither SeAH nor its affiliates had 
exports or sales of the subject merchandise to the United States 
during the POR. See Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products 
from Korea: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 69 FR 25059 (May 5, 2004). On June 22, 2004, the Department 
published a correction regarding its rescission of the review of 
SeAH. See Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea: 
Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 69 FR 
34646, in which the Department addressed a comment from petitioners 
that it inadvertently failed to address in the March 4, 2004, 
rescission notice. Upon review of petitioners' additional comment, 
the Department determined to continue to rescind the review of SeAH. 
Id. at 34647.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of our analysis of the comments received, these final 
results differ from the preliminary results. For our final results, we 
have found that during the POR POSCO sold subject merchandise at less 
than normal value (NV). We have also found that Union, Dongbu, and 
HYSCO did not make sales of the subject merchandise at less than NV 
(i.e., they have ``zero'' or de minimis dumping margins). Regarding 
Dongshin, because it failed to respond to the Department's 
questionnaire, we preliminarily determined to resort to adverse facts 
available and assigned to Dongshin the all others rate in effect for 
this order (17.70 percent), which is the highest margin upheld in this 
proceeding. See Preliminary Results, 69 FR at 54104. Since the 
publication of the Preliminary Results, we have not received any 
comments from interested parties that would warrant reconsideration of 
our finding. Therefore, we have continued to assign a rate of 17.70 
percent to Dongshin. The final results are listed in the ``Final 
Results of Review'' section below. Furthermore, we rescinded the 
request for review of the antidumping order for SeAH Steel Corporation 
(SeAH) because neither SeAH nor its affiliates had exports or sales of 
subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. For more 
information, see Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from 
Korea: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 69 
FR 25059 (May 5, 2004) (Partial Rescission of CORE).

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 14, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martin Claessens (Union), Preeti 
Tolani (Dongbu), Lyman Armstrong (POSCO), and Joy Zhang (HYSCO) at 
(202) 482-5451, (202) 482-0395, (202) 482-3601, and (202) 482-1168, 
respectively; AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On September 7, 2004, the Department of Commerce published the 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and 
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review for Certain Corrosion-resistant 
Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea, 69 FR 54101 
(September 7, 2004). On October 29, 2004, the Department published the 
notice of extension of final results of the antidumping administrative 
review of corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products from Korea, 
extending the date for these final results to March 7, 2005. See 
Corrosion Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea: Extension of 
Time Limits for the Final Results of Antidumping Administrative Review 
and New Shipper Review, 69 FR 63140.
    From November 8 through November 19, 2004, the Department conducted 
the cost verification of POSCO in Pohang, South Korea, and the sales 
verification in Seoul, South Korea. The constructed export price (CEP) 
verification was conducted at POSAM's headquarters in Fort Lee, New 
Jersey, on January 13 and 14, 2005. The Department conducted the cost 
and sales verification of Union in Seoul, South Korea, from November 10 
through November 23, 2004, and the CEP verification was conducted at 
the Torrance, California, facility of Dongkuk International, Inc. on 
January 25 and 26, 2005. The Department conducted the cost and sales 
verification of Dongbu in Seoul, South Korea, from January 11 through 
January 21, 2005, and the CEP verification was conducted at the 
Torrance, California, facility of Dongbu's subsidiary, Dongbu USA 
Incorporated on January 27 and January 28, 2005. From January 10 
through January 21, 2005, the Department conducted the sales 
verification of HYSCO in Seoul, South Korea and the cost verification 
at HYSCO's plant in Suncheon, South Korea.

Comments from Interested Parties

    We invited parties to comment on our Preliminary Results. On 
February 11, 2005, United States Steel Corporation (US Steel) filed 
case briefs, concerning POSCO and Union, and International Steel Group 
(ISG) filed a case brief concerning POSCO, Union, Dongbu, and HYSCO.\2\ 
POSCO and Union, each filed case briefs on February 11, 2005. On 
February 16, 2005, US Steel and ISG submitted rebuttal briefs 
concerning POSCO, and Union, Dongbu, and HYSCO also submitted rebuttal 
briefs. On February 18, 2005, a public hearing was held at the 
Department with respect to POSCO, Union, Dongbu, and HYSCO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ US Steel and ISG are petitioners in this segment of the 
proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    This order covers cold-rolled (cold-reduced) carbon steel flat-
rolled carbon steel products, of rectangular shape, either clad, 
plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, 
aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or 
not corrugated or painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other 
nonmetallic substances in addition to the metallic coating, in coils 
(whether or not in successively superimposed layers) and of a width of 
0.5 inch or greater, or in straight lengths which, if of a thickness 
less than 4.75 millimeters, are of a width of 0.5 inch or greater and 
which measures at least 10 times the thickness or if of a thickness of 
4.75 millimeters or more are of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters 
and measures at least twice the thickness, as currently classifiable in 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item 
numbers 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 
7210.49.0090, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 
7210.70.6090, 7210.90.1000, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 
7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 
7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, 7212.60.0000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 
7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 
7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090. Included in this order are 
corrosion-resistant flat-rolled products of nonrectangular cross-
section where such cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling 
process (i.e., products which have been ``worked after rolling'') for 
example, products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges. 
Excluded from this order are flat-rolled steel products either plated 
or coated with tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead 
(``terne plate''), or both

[[Page 12445]]

chromium and chromium oxides (``tin-free steel''), whether or not 
painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic 
substances in addition to the metallic coating. Also excluded from this 
order are clad products in straight lengths of 0.1875 inch or more in 
composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters and 
measures at least twice the thickness. Also excluded from this order 
are certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are three-
layered corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat-rolled products less than 
4.75 millimeters in composite thickness that consist of a carbon steel 
flat-rolled product clad on both sides with stainless steel in a 20%-
60%-20% ratio.
    These HTSUS item numbers are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes. The written descriptions remain dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal brief by parties to 
these administrative reviews are addressed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the 
issues which parties have raised, and to which we have responded in the 
Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an 
Appendix. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the 
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following weighted-average margins exist:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Weighted-Average
                Producer/Manufacturer                       Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dongbu..............................................     0.33 de minimis
Union...............................................     0.36 de minimis
POSCO...............................................                2.34
HYSCO...............................................                0.00
Dongshin............................................              17.70%
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment

    The Department will determine, and Customs and Border Protection 
(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries, 
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department calculated importer-
specific duty assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total 
antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total 
entered value of the examined sales for that importer. Where the 
assessment rate is above de minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess 
duties on all entries of subject merchandise by that importer. The 
Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to 
CBP within 15 days of publication of these final results.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective 
upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for 
all shipments of CORE from Korea entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 
for consumption on or after the publication date of these final 
results, as provided by section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act): (1) for companies covered by this review, the cash 
deposit rate will be the rate listed above; (2) for previously reviewed 
or investigated companies other than those covered by this review, the 
cash deposit rate will be the company-specific rate established for the 
most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this 
review, a prior review, or the investigation, but the producer is, the 
cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent 
period for the manufacturer of the subject merchandise; and (4) if 
neither the exporter nor the producer is a firm covered in this review, 
a prior review, or the investigation, the cash deposit rate will be 
17.70 percent, the ``All Others'' rate established in the less-than-
fair-value investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain in 
effect until publication of the final results of the next 
administrative review.
    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402 (f) 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 presumption that reimbursement of 
antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent increase in antidumping 
duties by the amount of antidumping duties reimbursed.
    This notice also is the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written 
notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion 
to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply 
with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable 
violation.
    We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: March 7, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

APPENDIX I

List of Comments and Issues in the Decision Memorandum

General Issues:

Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Request Further Information 
and Change its Model-Match Methodology
Comment 2: Whether Expenses Incurred by Parent Companies in Korea for 
Activities Performed There Should Be Treated as Constructed Export 
Price (CEP) Selling Expenses
Comment 3: Whether POSCO and Dongbu Have Provided Sufficient Evidence 
to Make a Case for the Department to Allow CEP Offsets
Comment 4: Whether the Department Should Modify its Existing Criteria 
for Adjusting U.S. Prices for Drawback and Restate or Disallow 
Respondents' Drawback Adjustments
Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Deduct ``Safeguard Duties'' 
When Calculating United States Prices

Company-Specific Issues:

Dongbu

Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Exclude Certain Low-priced 
Home Market Sales from Dongbu's Database
Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Recalculate Dongbu's Credit 
Expenses on Home Market Sales Denominated in U.S. Dollars
Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Reallocate Dongbu's Home 
Market Indirect Selling Expenses on the Basis of Sales
Comment 4: Whether the Department Should Recalculate Dongbu's U.S. 
Interest Revenue Based on a 365-day Year
Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Use Dongbu's Standard Costs 
plus POR Variances or Historical Costs Adjusted for Inflation in Order 
to Calculate the Cost of Production of Merchandise Sold but Not 
Produced During the POR

POSCO

Comment 6: Whether the Department Should Exclude POSCO's ``Unusual'' 
U.S. Sale from its Margin Calculation Or, Alternatively, Treat it as 
Non-prime
Comment 7: Whether the Department Should Adjust POSCO's Reported Duty 
Drawback
Comment 8: Whether the Department Should Recalculate POSCO's Credit

[[Page 12446]]

Expense to Take into Account On-invoice Rebates
Comment 9: Whether the Department Should Revise POSCO's General and 
Administrative Selling (G&A) Expense Ratio
Comment 10:Whether the Department Should Revise POSCO's Interest 
Expense Ratio
Comment 11:Whether the Department Should Re-Calculate POSAM's U.S. 
Indirect Selling Expense (ISE)
Comment 12:Whether the Department Should Calculate POSAM's Net Interest 
Expense and Add it to POSAM's U.S. Indirect Selling Expense
Comment 13: Whether Department Should Re-Calculate POSCO's U.S. Credit 
Expense
Comment 14: Ministerial Errors with Respect to POSCO's Overrun Sales 
and Seconds
Comment 15:Whether the Department Should Adjust POSCO's Home Market 
Interest Revenue

Union

Comment 16: Whether Union's Scrap Offsets Include Value Added Tax (VAT)
Comment 17: Whether Union Reimbursed Dongkuk International, Inc. for 
Antidumping Duties
Comment 18: Ministerial Errors for Union
Comment 19: Union's U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses - Commission Sales
    Comment 20: Union's U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses - Slab and Scrap 
Revenue
    Comment 21: Union's Treatment of Bad Debt Expenses
Comment 22: Union's Net U.S. Interest Expense
Comment 23: Whether to Use Partial Facts Available for Union - Freight 
Costs

HYSCO

Comment 24: Whether the Department Should Treat HYSCO's U.S. After-Sale 
Technical Service as a Direct Selling Expense
Comment 25: Whether HYSCO Failed to Report Warehousing Expenses for Its 
U.S. Sales
Comment 26: Whether HYSCO Fails to Report U.S. Commissions
Comment 27: Whether HYSCO Misreported its Home Market Indirect Selling 
Expenses
Comment 28: Whether the Department Should Treat Certain HYSCO's Local 
Sales as U.S. Sales
Comment 29: Whether the Department Should Recalculate HYSCO's Costs by 
Applying Different Production Yields
[FR Doc. E5-1065 Filed 3-11-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE: 3510-DS-S