[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 9, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32720-32722]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14482]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-883]


Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic of 
Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-
2017

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that certain 
hot-rolled steel flat products (hot-rolled steel) from the Republic of 
Korea (Korea) were sold in the United States at less than normal value 
(NV) during the period of review (POR) March 22, 2016 through September 
30, 2017.

DATES: Effective July 9, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Benito Ballesteros or Justin Neuman, 
AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-7425 or (202) 
482-0486, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On November 14, 2018, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of 
this review in the Federal Register.\1\ Commerce conducted verification 
of mandatory respondents, Hyundai Steel Company (Hyundai Steel) and 
POSCO, and certain U.S. affiliates in March and April 2019. In 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.309, we invited interested parties to 
comment on the Preliminary Results. Between May 21, 2019 and June 10, 
2019, Commerce received timely filed case and rebuttal briefs from 
various interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic 
of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review; 2016-2017, 83 FR 56821 (November 14, 2018) (Preliminary 
Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 21, 2018, Commerce extended the deadline for the final 
results of this review.\2\ Commerce also exercised its discretion to 
toll all deadlines affected by the partial federal government closure 
from December 22, 2018 through the resumption of operations on January 
29, 2019.\3\ On June 3, 2019, Commerce again extended the deadline for 
the final results.\4\ Thus, the deadline for the final results of this 
administrative review is June 21, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Memorandum, ``Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products 
from the Republic of Korea: Extension of Deadline for Final Results 
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,'' dated December 21, 
2018.
    \3\ See Memorandum to the Record from Gary Taverman, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ``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.
    \4\ See Memorandum, ``Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products 
from the Republic of Korea: Extension of Deadline for Final Results 
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,'' dated June 3, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a) of 
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

Scope of the Order

    The product covered by this review is hot-rolled steel from Korea. 
For a full description of the Scope, see the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Memorandum, ``Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products 
from the Republic of Korea: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 
Final Results of the 2016-2017 Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review,'' dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision 
Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    We addressed all issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs in 
the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this 
notice. 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 https://access.trade.gov and 
in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Commerce building. 
In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum 
can be accessed directly on the internet 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 our review and analysis of the comments received and our 
findings at verification, we made certain changes to the margin 
calculations for both Hyundai Steel and POSCO. For a discussion of 
these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Rate for Non-Examined Companies

    The statue and Commerce's regulations do not address the 
establishment of a rate to be applied to companies not selected for 
individual examination when Commerce limits its examination in an 
administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. 
Generally, Commerce looks to section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which 
provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in a market 
economy investigation, for guidance when calculating the rate for 
companies which were not selected for individual examination in an 
administrative review. Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-
others rate is normally ``an amount equal to the weighted average of 
the estimated weighted average dumping margins established for 
exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero 
or de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely {on the 
basis of facts available{time} .''
    For these final results, we calculated a weighted-average dumping 
margin that is not zero, de minimis, or determined entirely on the 
basis of facts available for Hyundai Steel and POSCO. Accordingly, 
Commerce has assigned to the companies not individually examined a 
margin of 7.78 percent, which is the simple average of Hyundai Steel's 
and POSCO's calculated weighted-average dumping margins for these final 
results.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For more information regarding the calculation of this 
margin, see Memorandum, ``Calculation of the Margin for Non-Examined 
Companies,'' dated June 21, 2019. Because we cannot apply our normal 
methodology of calculating a weighted-average margin due to requests 
to protect business proprietary information, we find this rate to be 
the best proxy of the actual weighted-average margin determined for 
the individually-examined respondents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Results of Review

    Commerce determines that the following weighted-average dumping 
margins exist for the period March 22, 2016 through September 30, 2017:

[[Page 32721]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Final
                                                                dumping
                    Producer or exporter                        margins
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyundai Steel Company.......................................        5.44
POSCO/POSCO Daewoo Co., Ltd \7\.............................       10.11
Non-examined companies \8\..................................        7.78
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    We intend to disclose the calculations performed for these final 
results of review within five days of the date of publication of this 
notice in the Federal Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In the Preliminary Results, Commerce collapsed POSCO and 
POSCO Daewoo Corporation (PDW). See Preliminary Results, and 
accompanying PDM. As no interested parties commented on the 
preliminary affiliation finding, Commerce will continue to treat 
these two companies as a single entity for the final results.
    \8\ The non-examined companies subject to this review are: 
Daewoo International Corp.; Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd.; Dongkuk 
Industries Co., Ltd.; Marubeni-Itochu Steel Korea; Soon Hong Trading 
Co.; and Sungjin Co.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rate

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), 
Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 
shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject 
merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review. 
Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after 
the date of publication of the final results of this review in the 
Federal Register.
    Where the respondent reported reliable entered values, we 
calculated importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem rates by 
aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales to each 
importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the total entered 
value of the sales to each importer (or customer).\9\ Where Commerce 
calculated a weighted-average dumping margin by dividing the total 
amount of dumping for reviewed sales to that party by the total sales 
quantity associated with those transactions, Commerce will direct CBP 
to assess importer- (or customer-) specific assessment rates based on 
the resulting per-unit rates.\10\ Where an importer- (or customer-) 
specific ad valorem or per-unit rate is greater than de minimis (i.e., 
0.50 percent), Commerce will instruct CBP to collect the appropriate 
duties at the time of liquidation.\11\ Where an importer- (or customer-
) specific ad valorem or per-unit rate is zero or de minimis, Commerce 
will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to 
antidumping duties.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the companies which were not selected for individual review, we 
will assign an assessment rate based on the methodology described in 
the ``Rates for Non-Examined Companies'' section, above.
    Consistent with Commerce's assessment practice, for entries of 
subject merchandise during the POR produced by Hyundai Steel and POSCO, 
or the non-examined companies for which the producer did not know that 
its merchandise was destined for the United States, 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.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For a full discussion of this practice, see Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 
68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all 
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as 
provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate 
for the companies listed in these final results will be equal to the 
weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of 
this review; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not 
covered in this review but covered in a prior segment of the 
proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-
specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this 
proceeding in which they were reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a 
firm covered in this review or the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) 
investigation but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the 
rate established for the most recently completed segment of this 
proceeding for the producer of the subject merchandise; and (4) the 
cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to 
be 5.55 percent,\14\ the all-others rate established in the LTFV 
investigation. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall 
remain in effect until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Australia, 
Brazil, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Netherlands, the Republic 
of Turkey, and the United Kingdom: Amended Final Affirmative 
Antidumping Determinations for Australia, the Republic of Korea, and 
the Republic of Turkey and Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 67962 
(October 3, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this 
requirement could result in the presumption that reimbursement of 
antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double 
antidumping duties.

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written 
notification of the return or 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.

Notification to Interested Parties

    We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h) and 
351.221(b)(5) of Commerce's regulations.

    Dated: June 21, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Changes Since the Preliminary Results
V. Discussion of the Issues
    Comment 1: Usability of Hyundai Steel's Cost Database
    Comment 2: Whether Hyundai Steel is Affiliated With Certain Home 
Market Customers
    Comment 3: Application of Adverse Facts Available (AFA) for 
Hyundai Steel
    Comment 4: Hyundai Steel's Sales Under Temporary Import Bond 
(TIB)
    Comment 5: Hyundai Steel's Overrun Sales
    Comment 6: Hyundai Steel Gross Unit Price Variables
    Comment 7: Hyundai Steel Late Payment Fees
    Comment 8: Whether POSAM's Indirect Selling Expense Ratio Should 
be Revised
    Comment 9: Whether Commerce Should Correct Errors Made in the 
Preliminary Results
    Comment 10: Whether POSCO Incorrectly Included Freight Revenues 
in the Gross Unit Price for UPI's Sales

[[Page 32722]]

    Comment 11: Whether Commerce Should Apply Partial AFA to POSCO's 
U.S. Inventory Carrying Costs
    Comment 12: Whether Commerce Should Revise UPI's Further 
Manufacturing G&A Expense Ratio
    Comment 13: Whether Commerce Should Revise UPI's G&A and INTEX 
Ratio Denominators
    Comment 14: Whether Commerce Should Revise the Further 
Manufacturing Cost of UPI's Non-Prime Products
    Comment 15: Whether Commerce Should Revise UPI's U.S. Brokerage 
and Handling Expenses
    Comment 16: Whether POSCO/UPI Should Receive a CEP Offset
    Comment 17: POSCO's CONNUM-Specific Costs Reporting and Whether 
to Smooth Cost
    Comment 18: Whether Commerce Should Apply the Quarterly Cost 
Methodology to POSCO
VI. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2019-14482 Filed 7-8-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P