[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 54 (Monday, March 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15291-15294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6566]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-816]


Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the 
Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the Sixteenth 
Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 14, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the preliminary results of the antidumping duty 
administrative review for certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat 
products (CORE) from the Republic of Korea (Korea). See Certain 
Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of 
Korea: Notice of Preliminary Results of the Sixteenth Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 75 FR 55769 (September 14, 2010) (Preliminary 
Results). This review covers eight manufacturers and/or exporters 
(collectively, the respondents) of the subject merchandise: LG Chem., 
Ltd. (LG Chem); Haewon MSC Co. Ltd. (Haewon); Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd. 
(Dongbu); Hyundai HYSCO (HYSCO); Pohang Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. (POSCO) 
and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd. (POCOS) (collectively, POSCO); 
Dongkuk Industries Co., Ltd. (Dongkuk); LG Hausys, Ltd. (Hausys); and 
Union Steel Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Union).\1\ The period of review 
(POR) is August 1, 2008, through July 31, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As noted in the Preliminary Results, the Department selected 
HYSCO, POSCO, Dongbu and Union as mandatory respondents in this 
review. See Memorandum from Dennis McClure, International Trade 
Compliance Analyst, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, to 
Melissa Skinner, Director, Office 3, entitled ``2008-2009 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Corrosion-Resistant Carbon 
Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Selection of 
Respondents for Individual Review,'' dated December 7, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of our analysis of the comments received, these final 
results differ from the Preliminary Results. For our final results, we 
find that Union and Dongbu made sales of subject merchandise at less 
than normal value (NV), and that POSCO and HYSCO have not. In addition, 
based on the final results for the respondents selected for individual 
review, we have determined a weighted-average margin for those 
companies that were not selected for individual review.

DATES: Effective Date: March 21, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis McClure (Union), Jolanta Lawska 
(HYSCO), Christopher Hargett

[[Page 15292]]

(Dongbu) and Victoria Cho (the POSCO Group, and non-selected 
companies), Office 3, AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 
(202) 482-5973, (202) 482-8362, (202) 482-4161, and (202) 482-5075, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On September 14, 2010, the Department published the Preliminary 
Results. In the Preliminary Results, the Department determined that 
Union and Dongbu made sales of subject merchandise at less than NV 
during the POR, and that HYSCO and POSCO did not. In addition, based on 
the preliminary results for the respondents selected for individual 
review, the Department calculated a weighted-average margin for those 
companies that were not selected for individual review.
    We conducted sales verifications at the POSCO Group from October 18 
through 22, 2010, at HYSCO from October 25 through 29, 2010, and at 
Union from November 1 through 5, 2010. We conducted cost verifications 
at HYSCO from October 4 through 8, 2010, at the POSCO Group from 
October 11 through 15, 2010, and at Union from November 8 through 12, 
2010. On December 7, 15, and 21, 2010, respectively, the Department 
released sales verification reports for Union, HYSCO, and the POSCO 
Group. On November 29, December 6, and December 17, 2010, respectively, 
the Department released cost verification reports for the POSCO Group, 
HYSCO, and Union.
    On December 13, 2010, the Department extended the time limits for 
the final results of this review until no later than March 14, 2011. 
See Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of 
Korea: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 77615 (December 13, 
2010).

Comments From Interested Parties

    We invited parties to comment on our Preliminary Results. On 
January 14, 2011, United States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel) filed 
case briefs concerning all four mandatory respondents. On January 14, 
2011, HYSCO, POSCO, Union, and Dongbu each filed case briefs. On 
January 14, 2011, Hausys submitted its case brief, stating that it 
supports the arguments submitted by Union and Dongbu in their case 
briefs because Hausys's dumping margin would be based on the 
respondents subject to individual examination. On January 21, 2011, 
U.S. Steel and Nucor Corporation (Nucor) (collectively, petitioners) 
each filed rebuttal briefs. On January 21, 2011, HYSCO, POSCO, Union, 
and Dongbu each filed rebuttal briefs.

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 non-rectangular 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 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 briefs by parties to 
this administrative review are addressed in the accompanying 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 Internet at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes From the Preliminary Results

    As a result of the Department's analysis of comments received, we 
have made certain changes to the calculations of company-specific 
weight-average margins.
    For Union, we revised our treatment of laminated CORE products as 
noted at Comment 2 of our Issues and Decision Memorandum. See also 
``Calculation Memorandum for Union Steel,'' from Dennis McClure to the 
File, dated March 14, 2011. We have also revised Union's reported cost 
of manufacturing figures to reflect a recalculation of Union's scrap 
offset, GNA-expense rate calculation, cost of goods sold denominator to 
reflect the FY scrap revenue, and financial expense ratio as noted at 
Comments 16, 17, 18, and 19. See also ``Cost of Production and 
Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results--Union 
Steel Co. Ltd.,'' from Kristin Case to Neal Halper, dated March 14, 
2010.
    For the POSCO Group, we revised our treatment of laminated CORE 
products, U.S. warranty expenses, home market indirect selling 
expenses, and U.S. indirect selling expenses incurred in the country of 
manufacture, as noted at Comments 2, 6, and 9 of our Issues and

[[Page 15293]]

Decision Memorandum. See also ``Calculation Memorandum for Pohang Iron 
& Steel Company, Ltd. (POSCO), and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd. 
(POCOS) (collectively, the POSCO Group),'' from Victoria Cho to the 
File, dated March 14, 2011. We have also revised the POSCO Group's 
reported cost of manufacturing figures to reflect a recalculation of 
POSCO's total cost of manufacturing, as noted at Comment 12. See also 
``Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for 
the Final Results--Pohang Iron & Steel Company, Ltd., and Pohang Coated 
Steel Co., Ltd.,'' from Sheikh M. Hannan to Neal M. Halper, dated March 
14, 2011.
    For HYSCO, we calculated the temper rolling cost adjustment factors 
for both temper rolled and non-temper rolled products and applied them 
to HYSCO's reported cost file as noted at Comment 5 of our Issues and 
Decision Memorandum. See also ``Cost of Production and Constructed 
Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results--Hyundai HYSCO,'' 
from Ji Young Oh to Neal M. Halper, dated March 14, 2011 (HYSCO's Final 
Cost Calculation Memorandum). Moreover, we reversed our adjustment made 
in the Preliminary Results as facts available, regarding the use of 
weighted-average value of SOTHMAT, DIRLAB, and FOH from the cost file 
for CONNUMS with negative values and disregarded the cost file field 
COMADJ3 as noted at Comment 4 of our Issues and Decision Memorandum. 
See Preliminary Results, 75 FR at 55774; see also HYSCO's Final Cost 
Calculation Memorandum.
    We have made no changes to Dongbu's margin calculations since the 
Preliminary Results. See ``Final Results in the 16th Administrative 
Review on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea: 
Calculation Memorandum for Dongbu Steel,'' from Christopher Hargett to 
the File, dated March 14, 2011.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following weighted-average margins exist:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Percent
                     Manufacturer/exporter                       margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HYSCO.........................................................  \a\ 0.20
The POSCO Group...............................................  \a\ 9.05
Union.........................................................      2.27
Dongbu........................................................      3.89
Review-Specific Average Rate..................................      3.0%
Applicable to the Following Companies\2\: LG Chem, Haewon,
 Hausys and Dongkuk...........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ (de minimis).

Assessment

    The Department will determine, and U.S. 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 intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions 
directly to CBP 15 days after publication of these final results of 
review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This rate is a weight-average percentage margin (based on 
the two reviewed companies with an affirmative dumping margin) for 
the period August 1, 2008, through July 31, 2009, and does not 
include zero and de minimis rates or any rates based solely upon 
facts available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on 
May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification applies to POR entries of 
subject merchandise produced by companies examined in this review 
(i.e., companies for which a dumping margin was calculated) where the 
companies did not know that their merchandise was destined for the 
United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate 
unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the 
intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full 
discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 
2003).

Cash Deposit Requirements

    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 less-than-fair-value 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 further notice.

Reimbursement of Duties

    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 and/or countervailing 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 and/or countervailing duties occurred and 
the subsequent increase in antidumping duties by the amount of 
antidumping and/or countervailing duties reimbursed.

Administrative Protective Order

    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 14, 2011.
Kim Glas,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

APPENDIX I

    List of Comments in the Accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum:

A. General Issues

Comment 1: Treatment of ``Negative Dumping Margins'' (Zeroing)
Comment 2: Treatment of Laminated Products in Model Match

B. Company-Specific Issues

Hyundai HYSCO

Comment 3: Liquidation Instructions
Comment 4: Cost Adjustments Made by HYSCO
Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Treat All Products that 
Passed Through the

[[Page 15294]]

Continuous Galvanizing Line as Temper-Rolled

The POSCO Group

Comment 6: POSCO's Average Warranty Expense for U.S. Price
Comment 7: The Department's Treatment of Service Fees in its Home 
Market Indirect Selling Expenses
Comment 8: The POSCO Group's Home Market Warranty Expenses for Non-
Prime Merchandise with Certain Gross Unit Prices
Comment 9: The Allocation of POSCO's Home Market Warranty Expense 
Over All Home Market Sales
Comment 10: The Treatment of POSAM's Other Expenses in its U.S. 
Indirect Selling Expenses
Comment 11: The Treatment of the POSCO Group's Actual Interest 
Expense in INDIRSU
Comment 12: Beginning Inventory Variances for Semi-finished Goods
Comment 13: Reported Costs
Comment 14: General and Administrative Expense Ratio Calculation

Union

Comment 15: Cost-Recovery Test when Using a Quarterly-Cost 
Methodology
Comment 16: Scrap Offset
Comment 17: General and Administrative Expenses
Comment 18: Cost of Goods Sold (COGS) Denominator
Comment 19: Financial Expenses

Dongbu

Comment 20: Calculation of Home Market-Short Term Interest Rate
Comment 21: Reported U.S. Customs Duty

[FR Doc. 2011-6566 Filed 3-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P