[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 223 (Tuesday, November 20, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65299-65304]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-22672]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-580-837]


Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from the 
Republic of Korea: Notice of Preliminary Results and Preliminary 
Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an 
administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on certain 
cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate (CTL plate) from the Republic 
of Korea (Korea) for the period January 1, 2006, through December 31, 
2006, the period of review (POR). We have preliminarily determined that 
the administrative review regarding DSEC Co., Ltd. (DSEC) should be 
rescinded. For information on the net subsidy rate for the other 
reviewed company, Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd. (DSM), see the 
``Preliminary Results of Review'' section of this notice. Interested 
parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results. See the 
``Public Comment'' section of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 20, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jolanta Lawska, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 4014, 14\th\ Street and Constitution 
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-8362.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On February 10, 2000, the Department published in the Federal 
Register the CVD order on CTL plate from Korea. See Notice of Amended 
Final Determination: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate 
From India and the Republic of Korea; and Notice of Countervailing Duty 
Orders: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate From France, 
India, Indonesia, Italy, and the Republic of Korea, 65 FR 6587 
(February 10, 2000) (CTL Plate Order). On February 2, 2007, the 
Department published a notice of opportunity to request an 
administrative review of this CVD order. See Antidumping or 
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; 
Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 72 FR 5007 (February 2, 
2007). On February 26, 2007, we received a timely request for review 
from DSM, a Korean producer and exporter of subject merchandise. On 
February 28, 2007, Nucor Corporation (petitioner) requested that the 
Department conduct an administrative review of the CVD order on CTL 
plate from Korea with respect to DSM, TC Steel, and DSEC. On March 28, 
2007, the Department initiated an administrative review of the CVD 
order on CTL plate from Korea, covering January 1, 2006, through 
December 31, 2006. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Administrative Reviews and Deferral of Administrative Reviews, 72 
FR 14516 (March 28, 2007). On May 3, 2007, petitioner withdrew its 
request for a review of TC Steel pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1). On 
July 6, 2007 we published in the Federal Register the notice of 
rescission for TC Steel. See Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel 
Plate from the Republic of Korea: Notice of Partial Rescission of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR 36962 (July 6, 2007). 
On May 24, 2007, the Department issued a questionnaire to the 
Government of Korea (GOK), DSM and DSEC. We received questionnaire 
responses from DSM, DSEC and the GOK on July 30, 2007. On September 13, 
2007, the Department issued supplemental questionnaires to the GOK and 
DSM. We received questionnaire responses from the GOK and DSM on 
October, 4, 2007. On August 6, 2007, and September 12, 2007, the 
Department issued supplemental questionnaires to DSEC. We received 
questionnaire responses from DSEC to the August supplemental 
questionnaire and the September supplemental questionnaire on August 
14, 2007, and September 19, 2007, respectively.
    On November 6, 2007, the Department published in the Federal 
Register an extension of the deadline for the preliminary results. See 
Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate Products from the 
Republic of Korea: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review, 72 FR 62625 (November 6, 2007).
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), this review covers only those 
producers or exporters for which a review was specifically requested.

Preliminary Intent to Rescind with Respect to DSEC

    Consistent with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we are preliminarily 
rescinding the review with respect to DSEC based on the absence of 
shipments of subject merchandise. See October 31, 2007, Memorandum to 
the File through Eric Greynolds, Program Manager, entitled 
``Administrative Review of the Countervailing Duty Order on Certain 
Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Korea- DSEC Co., Ltd.- 
Preliminary Rescission of Administrative Review.'' Accordingly, the 
only company subject to this review is DSM.

Scope of Order

    The products covered by the CVD order are certain hot-rolled 
carbon-quality steel: (1) universal mill plates (i.e., flat-rolled 
products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width 
exceeding 150 mm but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a nominal or actual 
thickness of not less than 4 mm, which are cut-to-length (not in coils) 
and without patterns in relief), of iron or non-alloy-quality steel; 
and (2) flat-rolled products, hot-rolled, of a nominal or actual 
thickness of 4.75 mm or more and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and 
measures at least twice the thickness, and which are cut-to-length (not 
in coils). Steel products to be included in the scope of the order are 
of rectangular, square, circular or other shape and of rectangular or 
non-rectangular cross-section where such non-rectangular 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. Steel products that meet the 
noted physical characteristics that are painted, varnished or coated 
with plastic or other non-metallic substances are included within this 
scope. Also, specifically included in the scope of the order are high 
strength, low alloy (HSLA) steels.

[[Page 65300]]

HSLA steels are recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of 
elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and 
molybdenum. Steel products to be included in this scope, regardless of 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) definitions, 
are products in which: (1) iron predominates, by weight, over each of 
the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is two percent or 
less, by weight; and (3) none of the elements listed below is equal to 
or exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated: 1.80 
percent of manganese, or 1.50 percent of silicon, or 1.00 percent of 
copper, or 0.50 percent of aluminum, or 1.25 percent of chromium, or 
0.30 percent of cobalt, or 0.40 percent of lead, or 1.25 percent of 
nickel, or 0.30 percent of tungsten, or 0.10 percent of molybdenum, or 
0.10 percent of niobium, or 0.41 percent of titanium, or 0.15 percent 
of vanadium, or 0.15 percent zirconium. All products that meet the 
written physical description, and in which the chemistry quantities do 
not equal or exceed any one of the levels listed above, are within the 
scope of this order unless otherwise specifically excluded. The 
following products are specifically excluded from the order: (1) 
products clad, plated, or coated with metal, whether or not painted, 
varnished or coated with plastic or other non-metallic substances; (2) 
SAE grades (formerly AISI grades) of series 2300 and above; (3) 
products made to ASTM A710 and A736 or their proprietary equivalents; 
(4) abrasion-resistant steels (i.e., USS AR 400, USS AR 500); (5) 
products made to ASTM A202, A225, A514 grade S, A517 grade S, or their 
proprietary equivalents; (6) ball bearing steels; (7) tool steels; and 
(8) silicon manganese steel or silicon electric steel.
    The merchandise subject to the order is currently classifiable in 
the HTSUS under subheadings: 7208.40.3030, 7208.40.3060, 7208.51.0030, 
7208.51.0045, 7208.51.0060, 7208.52.0000, 7208.53.0000, 7208.90.0000, 
7210.70.3000, 7210.90.9000, 7211.13.0000, 7211.14.0030, 7211.14.0045, 
7211.90.0000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, 7225.40.3050, 
7225.40.7000, 7225.50.6000, 7225.99.0090, 7226.91.5000, 7226.91.7000, 
7226.91.8000, 7226.99.0000.
    Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise covered by 
the order is dispositive.

Subsidies Valuation Information

A. Average Useful Life
    Under 19 CFR 351.524(d)(2), we will presume the allocation period 
for non-recurring subsidies to be the average useful life (AUL) of 
renewable physical assets for the industry concerned as listed in the 
Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) 1997 Class Life Asset Depreciation 
Range System (IRS Tables), as updated by the Department of the 
Treasury. The presumption will apply unless a party claims and 
establishes that the IRS Tables do not reasonably reflect the company-
specific AUL or the country-wide AUL for the industry under examination 
and that the difference between the company-specific and/or country-
wide AUL and the AUL from the IRS Tables is significant. According to 
the IRS Tables, the AUL of the steel industry is 15 years. No 
interested party challenged the 15-year AUL derived from the IRS 
Tables. Thus, in this review, we have allocated, where applicable, all 
of the non-recurring subsidies provided to the producers/exporters of 
subject merchandise over a 15-year AUL.
B. Benchmarks for Long-Term Loans Issued through 2006
    During the POR, DSM had outstanding long-term won-denominated and 
foreign currency-denominated loans from government-owned banks and 
Korean commercial banks. Based on our findings on this issue in prior 
investigations and administrative reviews, we are using the following 
benchmarks to calculate the subsidies attributable to respondent's 
countervailable long-term loans obtained in the years 1991 through 
2006:
    (1) For countervailable, foreign currency-denominated loans, 
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.505(a)(2)(ii) and consistent with our past 
practice, our preference is to use the company-specific, weighted-
average foreign currency-denominated interest rates on the company's 
loans from foreign bank branches in Korea, foreign securities, and 
direct foreign loans received after 1991. See, e.g., Final Affirmative 
Countervailing Duty Determination: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in 
Coils from the Republic of Korea, 64 FR 30636, 30640 (June 8, 1999) 
(Sheet and Strip Investigation); see also Final Negative Countervailing 
Duty Determination: Stainless Steel Plate in Coils from the Republic of 
Korea, 64 FR 15530, 15531 (March 31, 1999) (Plate in Coils 
Investigation). Where no such benchmarks are available, and consistent 
with 19 CFR 351.505(a)(3)(ii), we rely on the lending rates as reported 
by the IMF's International Financial Statistics Yearbook. See 
Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: 
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea, 71 
FR 50886 (August 28, 2006) (unchanged in final results by notice of 
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Stainless 
Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea, 72 FR 51615 
(January 3, 2007)); see also Notice of Final Results of Countervailing 
Duty Administrative Review: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel 
Plate from the Republic of Korea 72 FR 38565 (July 13, 2007) (2005 CTL 
Plate Final Results), and the accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum at Section I. B ``Subsidies Valuation Information'' (2005 
CTL Plate I&D Memo).
    (2) For countervailable, won-denominated, long-term loans, our 
practice is to use the company-specific corporate bond rate on the 
company's public and private bonds. This benchmark is consistent with 
our decision in Plate in Coils Investigation, 64 FR at 15531, in which 
we determined that the GOK did not direct or control the Korean 
domestic bond market after 1991, and that the interest rate on domestic 
bonds may serve as an appropriate benchmark interest rate. Where 
unavailable, we used the national average of the yields on three-year 
corporate bonds, as reported by the Bank of Korea (BOK). See Plate in 
Coils Investigation, 64 FR at 15531. See also 19 CFR 505(a)(3)(ii).
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.505(a)(2), our benchmarks take into 
consideration the structure of the government-provided loans. For 
fixed-rate loans, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.505(a)(2)(iii), we used as our 
benchmark fixed-rate loans issued in the same year that the government 
loans were issued. For variable-rate loans outstanding during the POR, 
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.505(a)(5)(i), our preference is to use the 
interest rates of variable-rate lending instruments issued during the 
year in which the government loans were issued. Where such benchmark 
instruments are unavailable, we use weighted-average interest rates of 
all variable- rate loans issued during the POR as our benchmark, as 
such rates better reflect a variable interest rate that would be in 
effect during the POR. This approach is in accordance with the 
Department's practice in similar cases. See, e.g., Final Results and 
Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: 
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip From the Republic of Korea, 68 FR 13267 
(March 19, 2003),

[[Page 65301]]

and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 8; see also 
19 CFR 351.505(a)(5)(ii); see also 2005 CTL Plate Final Results and 
2005 CTL Plate I&D Memo at I. B.

Programs Preliminarily Determined To Confer Subsidies

A. The GOK's Direction of Credit
    In the most recently completed administrative review of this CVD 
order, the Department reaffirmed earlier determinations that the GOK 
controlled and directed lending through year 2001. See 2005 CTL Plate 
Final Results and 2005 CTL Plate I&D Memo at I. A. In that review, the 
Department also noted that neither DSM nor the GOK provided any new 
information that would warrant a change in the Department's 
determination. Finding that the GOK did not act to the best of its 
ability, the Department employed an adverse inference and determined 
that the GOK continued its direction-of-credit policies from 2002 
through 2006. See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain Cut-to-Length 
Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from the Republic of Korea, 72 FR 10164, 
10165 (March 7, 2007) (2005 CTL Plate Preliminary Results) (unchanged 
in final results by 2005 CTL Plate Final Results).
    During the POR, DSM had outstanding loans that were received prior 
to the 2002 period. In this review, as in the prior administrative 
review, we asked the GOK for information pertaining to the GOK's 
direction-of-credit policies for the period from 2002 through 2006. The 
GOK did not provide any new or additional information that would 
warrant a departure from these prior findings, stating instead that:
    ``. . . the Government of Korea continues to believe that the 
evidence demonstrates that there has been no direction of credit to 
the Korean steel industry. Nevertheless, the Department has 
consistently found that long-term loans received by Korean steel 
producers were the result of the Korean Government's direction, 
despite the Government's repeated submission of evidence to the 
contrary. . . Consequently, in this review, the Government will not 
contest the Department's findings on direction of long-term loans.''
See July 30, 2007, GOK submission at pages 8-9. Because the GOK 
withheld the requested information on its lending policies, the 
Department does not have the necessary information on the record to 
determine whether the GOK has continued its direction-of-credit 
policies through 2006. Therefore, the Department must base its 
determination on facts otherwise available. See section 776(a)(2)(A) of 
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
    Section 776(b) of the Act further provides that the Department may 
use an adverse inference in applying the facts otherwise available when 
a party has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its 
ability to comply with a request for information. Section 776(b) of the 
Act also authorizes the Department to use as adverse facts available 
(AFA) information derived from the petition, the final determination, a 
previous administrative review, or other information placed on the 
record. For the reasons discussed below, we determine that, in 
accordance with sections 776(a)(2) and 776(b) of the Act, the use of 
AFA is appropriate for the preliminary results for the determination of 
direction of credit for loans received from 2002 through 2006.
    In this case, the GOK refused to supply requested information that 
was in its possession, even though the GOK had provided similar 
information in prior proceedings. See, e.g., Final Affirmative 
Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality 
Steel Plate from the Republic of Korea, 64 FR 73176, 73178 (December 
29, 1999) (CTL Plate Investigation). Therefore, consistent with 
sections 776(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Act, we find that the GOK did not 
act to the best of its ability and, therefore, are employing an adverse 
inference in selecting from among the facts otherwise available. 
Accordingly, we find that the GOK's direction-of-credit policies with 
respect to the Korean steel industry provide a financial contribution 
in the form of the provision of loans pursuant to section 771(5)(D)(i) 
of the Act, confer a benefit in the amount of the difference between 
the amount that firm paid for the countervailable loan and the amount 
the firm would pay on a comparable commercial loan within the meaning 
of section 771(5)(E)(ii) of the Act, and are specific pursuant to 
section 771(5A)(D)(iii) of the Act because they are limited to the 
steel industry. Therefore, we find that lending to Korean steel 
producers from domestic banks and government-owned banks through 2006 
is countervailable. Thus, any loans received by Korean steel producers 
through 2006 from domestic banks and government-owned banks that were 
outstanding during the POR are countervailable, to the extent that the 
interest amount paid on the loan is less than what would have been paid 
on a comparable commercial loan. The Department's decision to rely on 
adverse inferences when lacking a response from the GOK regarding the 
direction-of-credit issue, as it applies to the Korean steel industry, 
is also in accordance with its practice. See, e.g., Notice of 
Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: 
Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from the Republic of 
Korea, 71 FR 11397, 11399 (March 7, 2006) (unchanged in the Notice of 
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain 
Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from the Republic of Korea, 71 
FR 38861 (July 10, 2006).
    DSM received long-term fixed- and variable-rate loans from GOK-
owned or controlled institutions that were outstanding during the POR 
and had both won- and foreign currency-denominated loans outstanding 
during the POR. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.505(c)(2) and (4), we 
calculated the benefit for each fixed- and variable-rate loan received 
from GOK-owned or -controlled banks to be the difference between the 
actual amount of interest paid on the directed loan during the POR and 
the amount of interest that would have been paid during the POR at the 
benchmark interest rate. We conducted our benefit calculations using 
the benchmark interest rates described in the ``Subsidies Valuation 
Information'' section above.
    To calculate the total benefit for all directed credit, we used the 
benefits received only from won-denominated loans. There were no 
benefits received from foreign currency loans. To calculate the net 
subsidy rate, we divided DSM's total benefits received from won-
denominated loans by its respective total F.O.B. sales values during 
the POR, as this program is not tied to exports or a particular 
product. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the net subsidy rate 
under the direction-of-credit program to be less than 0.005 percent ad 
valorem for DSM, which according to the Department's practice, is 
considered not measurable and is not included in the calculation of the 
CVD rate. See 2005 CTL Plate and the accompanying 2005 CTL Plate I&D 
Memo at 6; see also, the ``Other Programs'' section of the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum that accompanied the Notice of Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain Softwood Lumber 
Products from Canada, 70 FR 73448 (December 12, 2005) (2005 Lumber 
Products Canada).

[[Page 65302]]

B. Asset Revaluation under Tax Programs under the Tax Reduction and 
Exemption Control Act (TERCL) Article 56(2)
    Under Article 56(2) of the TERCL, the GOK permitted companies that 
made an initial public offering between January 1, 1987, and December 
31, 1990, to revalue their assets at a rate higher than the 25 percent 
required of most other companies under the Asset Revaluation Act. The 
Department has previously found this program to be countervailable. For 
example, in the CTL Plate Investigation, the Department determined that 
this program was de facto specific under section 771(5A)(D)(iii) of the 
Act because the actual recipients of the subsidy were limited in number 
and the basic metal industry was a dominant user of this program. We 
also determined that a financial contribution was provided in the form 
of tax revenue foregone, pursuant to section 771(5)(D)(ii) of the Act. 
See CTL Plate Investigation, 64 FR at 73182-83. The Department further 
determined that a benefit was conferred, within the meaning of section 
771(5)(E) of the Act, on those companies that were able to revalue 
their assets under TERCL Article 56(2) because the revaluation resulted 
in participants paying fewer taxes than they would otherwise pay absent 
the program. Id. No new information, evidence of changed circumstances, 
or comments from interested parties were presented in this review to 
warrant any reconsideration of the countervailable status of this 
program.
    The benefit from this program is the difference that the 
revaluation of depreciable assets has on a company's tax liability each 
year. Evidence on the record indicates that DSM revalued its assets 
under Article 56(2) of the TERCL in 1988. However, DSM reports that in 
1998 it revalued its assets yet again. DSM states the revaluation in 
1998 was not pursuant to TERCL Article 56(2) and, according to the GOK, 
was consistent with Korean Generally Accepted Accounting Principles 
(GAAP). DSM claims that the asset revaluations that were adopted in 
1988 under Article 56(2) of TERCL were superseded when it revalued its 
assets in 1998. Hence, the 1988 asset revaluation would only affect the 
calculation of depreciation costs for tax years prior to 1998. However, 
there were certain assets that were not revalued in 1998. For those 
assets which were not revalued in 1998, we identified the total amount 
of the change in depreciation expense attributable to the 1988 asset 
revaluation for 2005 (the tax return submitted during the POR). We then 
multiplied this amount by the tax rate for 2005 to determine the 
benefit under this program. This is the same approach the Department 
used in the previous review. See 2005 CTL Plate Final Results and the 
``Asset Revaluation under Tax Programs under the Tax Reduction and 
Exemption Control Act (TERCL) Article 56(2)'' section of the 2005 CTL 
Plate I&D Memo. As this program is not tied to exports, we used the 
benefit amount as the numerator and DSM's total sales as the 
denominator. Using this methodology, we preliminarily determine the 
countervailable subsidy from this program to be less than 0.005 percent 
ad valorem, which, according to the Department's practice, is 
considered not measurable and is not included in the calculation of the 
CVD rate. See 2005 CTL Plate Final Results and 2005 CTL Plate I&D Memo 
at 6; see also, the ``Other Programs'' section of the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum that accompanied 2005 Lumber Products Canada.
C. GOK Infrastructure Investment at Inchon North Harbor
    Under the Act on Participation of Private Investment in 
Infrastructure (the Harbor Act), signed in 2000, the GOK contracts with 
private companies to construct infrastructure facilities at Inchon 
North Harbor. The program is designed to encourage private investment 
in public infrastructure facilities at Inchon North Harbor. The 
government compensates private parties for a portion of the 
construction costs of these facilities. In addition, the company is 
given right to operate the facility for a certain period of time.
    Under the Harbor Act, DSM participated in an agreement with the 
Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (MOMAF), under which DSM 
constructed one of 17 piers at Inchon North Harbor. According to the 
information submitted by DSM, the construction of the pier was 
completed in November 2006. Upon completion of this port facility, DSM 
received free use of harbor facilities at Inchon Port and the right to 
collect fees from other users of the facility for a period of 50 years. 
At the end of the 50-year period, operating rights revert to the GOK. 
Further, under the Harbor Act, the GOK is responsible for compensating 
DSM for 30 percent of the construction costs of the facility. DSM 
reported receiving payments from the GOK as reimbursements for 
construction costs it incurred during the POR.
    The Department has previously examined this program. See the ``GOK 
Infrastructure Investment at Inchon North Harbor'' section of the 2005 
CTL Plate I&D Memo, in which we determined that the reimbursements DSM 
received under the program constitute a direct financial contribution, 
in the form of grants, and confer a benefit within the meaning of 
sections 771(5)(D)(i) and 771(5)(E) of the Act, respectively. We also 
determined that the reimbursements DSM received under the program are 
de facto specific within the meaning of section 771(5A)(D)(iii)(I) of 
the Act because the GOK reported that only a few companies representing 
limited industries received reimbursements under the program. See the 
``GOK Infrastructure Investment at Inchon North Harbor'' section of the 
2005 CTL Plate I&D Memo. No new information, evidence of changed 
circumstances, or comments from interested parties were presented in 
this review to warrant any reconsideration of the countervailable 
status of this program. Therefore, we continue to find this program 
countervailable for same reasons stated in the 2005 CTL Plate Final 
Results.
    To calculate the benefit under this program, we first summed the 
amount of payments DSM received each year under the program. In 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.524(c), we are treating the grants DSM 
received under the program as non-recurring. Pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.524(b)(2), the Department allocates non-recurring benefits provided 
under a particular subsidy program to the year in which the benefits 
are received if the total amount approved under the subsidy program is 
less that 0.5 percent of the relevant sales of the firm in question, 
during the year in which the subsidy was approved. The GOK provided the 
total approved amount with the date of approval. For the preliminary 
results, the Department performed the 0.5 percent test by dividing the 
grant amount from the GOK at the time of receipt by DSM's total sales 
at the time of receipt. Because the amounts were less than 0.5 percent 
of DSM's total sales in the year of receipt, we expensed the grants to 
the year of receipt. On this basis, we preliminarily determine DSM's 
net subsidy rate under this program to be 0.29 percent ad valorem.
D. Research and Development under Korea Research Association of New 
Iron and Steelmaking Technology (KANIST) (formerly KNISTRA)
    Under this program, companies make contributions to KANIST, which 
also receives contributions from the GOK. KANIST then contracts with 
universities and other research

[[Page 65303]]

institutions. Upon completion of the projects, KANIST shares the 
results of the research with the companies that participated in the 
projects.
    The Department examined this program in the underlying 
investigation. In that segment of the proceeding, the Department 
determined that the GOK, through the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and 
Energy (MOCIE), provided research and development grants to support 
numerous projects designed to foster the development of efficient 
technology for industrial development. See CTL Plate Investigation, 64 
FR at 73185. We found this program to be specific as the grants were 
provided directly to respondents and their affiliates that are steel-
related, and that the grants provided a financial contribution. Id. See 
also sections 771(5A)(D)(ii) and 771(5)(D)(i) of the Act. Moreover, 
pursuant to section 771(5)(E) of the Act, the Department determined 
that the benefit was the amount of the GOK's contribution allocated to 
the percentage of the company's contribution and was conferred at the 
time of receipt. No new information, evidence of changed circumstances, 
or comments from interested parties were presented in this review to 
warrant any reconsideration of the countervailable status of this 
program.
    DSM reported that it participated in research and development 
projects coordinated by KANIST. In these projects, DSM and other Korean 
companies made contributions to KANIST, which also received 
contributions from the GOK. Specifically, DSM reported that it 
participated in four research and development projects. The first 
project deals with the ``Elimination of Accumulated Impurities and 
Metal Structural Non-detrimental Technology Development.'' DSM and the 
GOK made contributions to this project from 2002 through 2006. The 
remaining three projects are dedicated to the development of structural 
steel. See Exhibit D-6-A, Volume II, of DSM's July 30, 2007, 
questionnaire response; see also Exhibit G-4-B of the GOK's July 30, 
2007, questionnaire response. Based on the information in DSM's 
response, we preliminarily determine that the projects aimed at 
structural steel development are tied to non-subject merchandise. We 
also preliminarily determine that the remaining research and 
development project is relevant to the early stages of the steel 
production process and, therefore, attributable to DSM's total steel 
sales.
    In keeping with the Department's practice, we calculated the 
benefits related to the project on the ``Elimination of Accumulated 
Impurities and Metal Structural Non-detrimental Technology 
Development'' by allocating the GOK's payments based on DSM's 
contributions to the project. See 2005 CTL Plate Final Results and the 
``GOK Infrastructure Investment at Inchon North Harbor'' section of the 
2005 CTL Plate I&D Memo. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.524(b)(2), the 
Department allocates non-recurring benefits provided under a particular 
subsidy program to the year in which the benefits are received if the 
total amount approved under the subsidy program is less that 0.5 
percent of the relevant sales of the firm in question, during the year 
in which the subsidy was approved. However, the GOK and DSM did not 
provide the total approved amounts or the dates of approval. Therefore, 
we performed our analysis under 19 CFR 351.524(b)(2) by dividing the 
grant amounts from the GOK at the time of receipt by DSM's total steel 
sales at the time of receipt. Using this approach, the calculated 
percentages in each year were less than 0.5 percent. Therefore, we 
preliminarily determine that all of the GOK's contributions were 
expensed in the year of receipt. To calculate the net subsidy rate 
under the program, we divided the contributions made by the GOK during 
the POR that were allocated to DSM by DSM's total steel sales during 
the POR. On this basis, we preliminarily calculate a net subsidy rate 
for DSM to be less than 0.005 percent ad valorem, which, according to 
the Department's practice, is considered not measurable and is not 
included in the calculation of the CVD rate. See 2005 CTL Plate and the 
accompanying 2005 CTL Plate I&D Memo at 6; see also, the ``Other 
Programs'' section of the Issues and Decision Memorandum that 
accompanied 2005 Lumber Products Canada.

Programs Preliminarily Found to Be Not Used

    1. Special Cases of Tax for Balanced Development Among Areas (TERCL 
Articles 41, 42, 43, 44, and 45) (Reserve for Investment Program)
    2. Electricity Discounts (VRA, VCA, ELR and DLI Programs)
    3. Price Discount for DSM Land Purchase at Asan Bay
    4. Local Tax Exemption on Land Outside of Metropolitan Area
    5. Exemption of Value Added Tax on Anthracite Coal

Preliminary Results of Review

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and consistent with our 
practice, we preliminarily determine to rescind this review with 
respect to DSEC based on the absence of shipments of subject 
merchandise. See, e.g., Stainless Steel Bar from India; Preliminary 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper 
Review, and Partial Rescission of Administrative Review, 65 FR 12209 
(March 8, 2000) (unchanged in final results by notice of Stainless 
Steel Bar from India; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review and New Shipper Review and Partial Rescission of Administrative 
Review, 65 FR 48965 (August 10, 2000)); Pursulfates From the People's 
Republic of China; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, and Partial Rescission of Administrative Review, 
65 FR 18963 (April 10, 2000) (unchanged in final results by notice of 
Persulfates From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Partial Rescission of 
Administrative Review 65 FR 46691 (July 31, 2000).
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated a subsidy 
rate for DSM for 2006. We preliminarily determine that the total 
estimated net countervailable subsidy rate for DSM is 0.29 percent ad 
valorem for 2006, which is de minimis. See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1).
    If the final results of this review remain the same as these 
preliminary results, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection (CBP), 15 days after the date of publication of the 
final results, to liquidate shipments of CTL plate from DSM, entered, 
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption from January 1, 2006, 
through December 31, 2006, without regard to countervailing duties. 
Also, the Department will instruct CBP not to collect cash deposits of 
estimated countervailing duties on shipments of CTL plate from DSM, 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the 
publication of the final results of this administrative review.
    We will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits for non-
reviewed companies at the most recent company-specific or country-wide 
rate applicable to the company. Accordingly, the cash deposit rates 
that will be applied to non-reviewed companies covered by this order 
are those established in the most recently completed administrative 
proceeding. See CTL Plate Order, 65 FR 6589. These rates shall apply to 
all non-

[[Page 65304]]

reviewed companies until a review of a company assigned these rates is 
requested.

Public Comment

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(b), the Department will disclose to 
parties to the proceeding any calculations performed in connection with 
these preliminary results within five days after the date of the public 
announcement of this notice. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(b)(1), 
interested parties may submit written arguments in response to these 
preliminary results. Unless otherwise indicated by the Department, case 
briefs must be submitted within 30 days after the date of publication 
of this notice, and rebuttal briefs, limited to arguments raised in 
case briefs, must be submitted no later than five days after the time 
limit for filing case briefs. See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii). Parties who 
submit written arguments in this proceeding are requested to submit 
with the written argument: (1) a statement of the issue, and (2) a 
brief summary of the argument. Parties submitting case and/or rebuttal 
briefs are requested to provide the Department copies of the public 
version on disk. Case and rebuttal briefs must be served on interested 
parties in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f). Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.310, within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice, 
interested parties may request a public hearing on arguments to be 
raised in the case and rebuttal briefs. Unless the Secretary specifies 
otherwise, the hearing, if requested, will be held two days after the 
date for submission of rebuttal briefs.
    Representatives of parties to the proceeding may request disclosure 
of proprietary information under administrative protective order no 
later than 10 days after the representative's client or employer 
becomes a party to the proceeding, but in no event later than the date 
the case briefs, under 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii), are due. The 
Department will publish the final results of this administrative 
review, including the results of its analysis of arguments made in any 
case or rebuttal briefs.
    This administrative review is issued and published in accordance 
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: November 9, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-22672 Filed 11-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S