[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 60 (Thursday, March 28, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11749-11751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05904]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-580-879]


Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the Republic of 
Korea: Final Results and Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review; 2015-2016

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that Hyundai 
Steel Company (Hyundai Steel), Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd/Dongbu Incheon 
Steel Co., Ltd. (Dongbu), producers and/or exporters of certain 
corrosion-resistant steel products (CORE) from the Republic of Korea 
(Korea), received countervailable subsidies during the period of review 
(POR) November 6, 2015, through December 31, 2016. Commerce is also 
rescinding the review with respect to Mitsubishi International 
Corporation.

DATES: Applicable March 28, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myrna Lobo at 202-482-2371 or Jun Jack 
Zhao at 202-482-1396, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and 
Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    Commerce published the Preliminary Results of on August 10, 
2018.\1\ For a history of events that occurred since the Preliminary 
Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the 
Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review; and Rescission of Review, Rescission of 
Review, in Part, and Intent to Rescind, in Part; 2015-16 (August 10, 
2018) (Preliminary Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision 
Memorandum.
    \2\ See Memorandum re: Issues and Decision Memorandum For the 
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review of 
Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from the Republic of Korea; 2015-
2017 (Issues and Decision Memorandum, or IDM), dated concurrently 
with, and hereby adopted by, this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 6, 2018, we postponed the final results of this review 
until February 6, 2019. As a result of the partial government shutdown, 
the deadline for the final results of this review was revised to March 
18, 2019.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Memorandum re: Deadlines Affected by the Partial 
Shutdown of the Federal Government, dated January 28, 2019. All 
deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by 40 
days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on an analysis of the comments received and information 
received from the Government of Korea (GOK) after the Preliminary 
Results, Commerce has revised its calculations for Hyundai Steel. 
Commerce did not make any changes to the subsidy rates determined for 
Dongbu. The final subsidy rates are listed in the ``Final Results of 
Administrative Review'' section, below.

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are certain corrosion-resistant 
steel products. For a complete description of the scope of this order, 
see attachment to the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in interested parties' case briefs are addressed 
in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. The issues are identified in the 
Appendix to this notice. The Issues and 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 to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 
B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a 
complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed 
directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed 
Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on the comments received from interested parties and 
information received from the GOK after the Preliminary Results, we 
made changes to the net subsidy rates calculated for Hyundai Steel. We 
did not make any changes to the net subsidy rates calculated for 
Dongbu. For a discussion of these issues, see the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum.

Methodology

    Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 
751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each 
of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we find that there is a 
subsidy, i.e., a government-provided financial contribution that gives 
rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is 
specific.\4\ For a description of the methodology underlying all of 
Commerce's conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Partial Rescission of Review

    Commerce initiated a review of Mitsubishi International Corporation 
(Mitsubishi) in this administrative review.\5\ In the Preliminary 
Results, we stated our intent to rescind the review with respect to 
Mitsubishi because Mitsubishi claimed no shipments during the POR and 
we did not receive any contradictory information. Therefore, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we are rescinding this

[[Page 11750]]

administrative review with respect to Mitsubishi.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Reviews, 82 FR 42974 (September 13, 2017) (Initiation 
Notice), corrected by Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Administrative Reviews, 82 FR 48051 (October 16, 2017) 
(Correction Notice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Companies Not Selected for Individual Review

    For the companies not selected for individual review, because the 
rates calculated for Dongbu and Hyundai Steel were above de minimis and 
not based entirely on facts available, we applied a subsidy rate based 
on a weighted-average of the subsidy rates calculated for Dongbu and 
Hyundai Steel using publicly ranged sales data submitted by 
respondents. This is consistent with the methodology that we would use 
in an investigation to establish the all-others rate, pursuant to 
section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act.

Final Results of Administrative Review

    In accordance with section 777A(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.221(b)(5), we determine the total estimated net countervailable 
subsidy rates for the period November 6, 2015, through December 31, 
2016 to be:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Subsidy rate (percent ad
                                                     valorem)
                 Company                 -------------------------------
                                               2015            2016
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd./Dongbu Incheon               7.63            8.47
 Steel Co., Ltd.........................
Hyundai Steel Company...................            0.61            0.57
Bukook Steel Co., Ltd...................            3.13            3.34
CJ Korea Express........................            3.13            3.34
DK Dongshin Co., Ltd....................            3.13            3.34
Dongbu Express..........................            3.13            3.34
Hongyi (HK) Hardware Products Co., Ltd..            3.13            3.34
Jeil Sanup Co., Ltd.....................            3.13            3.34
POSCO...................................            3.13            3.34
POSCO C&C...............................            3.13            3.34
POSCO Daewoo Corp.......................            3.13            3.34
Sejung Shipping Co., Ltd................            3.13            3.34
SeAH Steel..............................            3.13            3.34
Seil Steel Co., Ltd.....................            3.13            3.34
Soon Hong Trading Co., Ltd..............            3.13            3.34
Taisan Construction Co., Ltd............            3.13            3.34
TCC Steel Co., Ltd......................            3.13            3.34
Young Sun Steel Co......................            3.13            3.34
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment and Cash Deposit Requirements

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), Commerce intends to issue 
appropriate instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15 
days after publication of the final results of this review. We will 
instruct CBP to liquidate shipments of subject merchandise produced 
and/or exported by the companies listed above, entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse for consumption, from November 6, 2015, through December 
31, 2016, at the ad valorem rates listed above. The liquidation rate 
applicable to the period in 2015 will be the 2015 rates shown above, 
and the rates applicable to the period in 2016 will be the 2016 rates 
shown above. The 2016 rates will also serve as the cash deposit rates 
for exports of subject merchandise subsequent to these final results.
    We intend also to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of 
estimated countervailing duties, in the amounts shown above for 2016, 
on shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the 
final results of this review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will 
instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits at the most-recent 
company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the company, as 
appropriate. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall 
remain in effect until further notice.

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to 
an 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(a)(3), which 
continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of 
proceeding. 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 terms of an APO 
is a violation which is subject to sanction.

Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the 
date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
    These final results are issued and published in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: March 18, 2019.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix--List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Scope of the Order
III. Period of Review
IV. Rescission of Administrative Review, in Part
V. Subsidies Valuation Information
VI. Analysis of Programs
VII. Discussion of Comments
    Comment 1: Whether Hyundai Green Power is Hyundai Steel's Cross-
Owned Input Supplier
    Comment 2: Whether Tax Benefits Should be Adjusted to Account 
for the Special Rural Development Tax
    Comment 3: Whether Tax Credit Programs Under the RSTA Meet the 
Specificity Requirement
    Comment 4: Whether Suncheon Harbor Usage Fee Exemptions under 
the Harbor Act Are Countervailable
    Comment 5: Whether the Trading of Demand Response Resource 
Program is Specific
    Comment 6: Rescission of Review with Respect to Mitsubishi 
International Corporation
    Comment 7: Whether the Non-Government-Owned Banks Participating 
in Dongbu's Debt Restructuring Program Provided a Financial 
Contribution

[[Page 11751]]

    Comment 8: Whether Dongbu's Loan Restructuring by the GOK 
Creditors Provided a Financial Contribution and Benefit to Dongbu
    Comment 9: Whether Loan Restructuring Provided to Dongbu was 
Specific Pursuant to Section 771(5A)(D)(iii) of the Act
    Comment 10: Whether Commerce Should Use the Interest Rate of 
Commercial Banks Participating in the Creditor Bank Committee as the 
Loan Benchmark
    Comment 11: Whether the Debt-To-Equity Swaps in Dongbu's Debt 
Restructuring Program Conferred a Benefit
VIII. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2019-05904 Filed 3-27-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P