[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 248 (Monday, December 28, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 84296-84297]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-28591]



[[Page 84296]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-580-837]


Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate From the 
Republic of Korea: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Review; Calendar Year 2018

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that Hyundai 
Steel Co. (Hyundai Steel) and certain other producers/exporters of 
certain cut-to-length plate from the Republic of Korea (Korea) received 
countervailable subsidies that are above de minimis and that Dongkuk 
Steel Mill Co., Ltd. (DSM) received a de minimis net subsidy rate 
during the period of review (POR) January 1, 2018 through December 31, 
2018.

DATES: Applicable December 28, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Conniff (for Hyundai Steel) or 
Jolanta Lawska (for DSM), AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement 
and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 
(202) 482-1009 or (202) 482-8362, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On March 6, 2020, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of 
this administrative review.\1\ On April 24, 2020, Commerce tolled all 
deadlines in administrative reviews by 50 days.\2\ On July 21, 2020, 
Commerce tolled all deadlines in administrative reviews by an 
additional 60 days.\3\ Additionally, on August 6, 2020, Commerce issued 
a post-preliminary analysis memorandum.\4\ On August 19, 2020, we 
received timely filed case briefs from Nucor Corporation (the 
petitioner), the Government of Korea (GOK), DSM, and Hyundai Steel. On 
September 2, 2020, the GOK, Hyundai Steel and DSM submitted timely 
filed rebuttal briefs. On September 25, 2020, Commerce extended the 
deadline for issuing the final results of this review by 29 days.\5\ On 
November 2, 2020, Commerce further extended the final results of this 
review by 28 days to December 18, 2020.\6\ For a complete description 
of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Results, see the 
Issues and Decision Memorandum.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from 
the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review; Calendar Year 2018, 85 FR 13136 (March 6, 
2020) (Preliminary Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision 
Memorandum.
    \2\ See Memorandum, ``Tolling of Deadlines for Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews in Response to 
Operational Adjustments Due to COVID-19,'' dated April 24, 2020.
    \3\ See Memorandum, ``Tolling of Deadlines for Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews,'' dated July 21, 2020.
    \4\ See Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: 
Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from the Republic 
of Korea: Post-Preliminary Analysis Memorandum,'' dated August 6, 
2020.
    \5\ See Memorandum, ``Extension of Deadline for Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review,'' dated September 25, 
2020.
    \6\ See Memorandum, ``Extension of Deadline for Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review,'' dated November 2, 2020.
    \7\ See Memorandum, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Cut-to-
Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from the Republic of Korea; 
2018,'' dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice 
(Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The merchandise covered by the order is certain hot-rolled carbon-
quality steel plate. 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.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For a complete description of the scope of the order, see 
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 https://access.trade.gov. 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 and electronic 
versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in 
content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on the comments received from interested parties and record 
information, we have made changes to the net subsidy rates calculated 
for the mandatory respondents. For a discussion of these issues, see 
the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Methodology

    Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 
751(a)(l)(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 financial contribution from a government or public 
entity that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the 
subsidy is specific.\9\ For a full description of the methodology 
underlying our conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rate for Non-Selected Companies Under Review

    The statute and Commerce's regulations do not directly address the 
countervailing duty rates to be applied to companies not selected for 
individual examination where Commerce limited its examination in an 
administrative review pursuant to section 777A(e)(2) of the Act. 
However, Commerce normally determines the rates for non-selected 
companies in reviews in a manner that is consistent with section 
705(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for calculating the 
all-others rate in an investigation. Section 777A(e)(2) of the Act 
provides that ``the individual countervailable subsidy rates determined 
under subparagraph (A) shall be used to determine the all-others rate 
under section 705(c)(5) {of the Act{time} .'' Section 705(c)(5)(A) of 
the Act states that for companies not investigated, in general, we will 
determine an all-others rate by using the weighted-average 
countervailable subsidy rates established for each of the companies 
individually investigated, excluding zero and de minimis rates or any 
rates based solely on the facts available.
    We determine that Hyundai Steel received countervailable subsidies 
that

[[Page 84297]]

are above de minimis. Therefore, in these final results, we are 
applying the net subsidy rate calculated for Hyundai Steel to BDP 
International and Sung Jin Steel Co., Ltd.

Final Results of Administrative Review

    In accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.221(b)(5), we determine that the following total estimated net 
countervailable subsidy rates exist for the period January 1, 2018 
through December 31, 2018:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Subsidy rate
                         Company                           ad valorem  %
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd.............................          * 0.28
Hyundai Steel Company...................................            0.50
BDP International.......................................            0.50
Sung Jin Steel Co., Ltd.................................            0.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* (de minimis).

Disclosure

    Commerce intends 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).

Assessment Rates

    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 these final results to liquidate shipments of 
subject merchandise. Because we have calculated a de minimis 
countervailable subsidy rate for DSM, we will instruct CBP to liquidate 
the appropriate entries without regard to countervailing duties in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.212. We will instruct CBP to liquidate 
shipments of subject merchandise produced and/or exported by Hyundai 
Steel and the above listed companies, entered or withdrawn from 
warehouse for consumption from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 
2018, at the ad valorem rates listed above for each respective company.

Cash Deposit Instructions

    In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, we intend to 
instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing 
duties, in the amounts shown above, with the exception of DSM, 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. Because the countervailable subsidy rate for 
DSM is de minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to collect cash deposits 
at a rate of zero for DSM for all shipments of the subject merchandise 
that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or 
after the date of publication of the final results of this 
administrative review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP 
to continue to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties 
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 (APO)

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to APO of 
their responsibility concerning the disposition 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 the proceeding. 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

    These final results are issued and published in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

    Dated: December 18, 2020.
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. Period of Review
V. Subsidies Valuation Information
VI. Analysis of Programs
VII. Analysis of Comments
Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd. (DSM)
    Comment 1: Whether Commerce's Findings that the Demand Response 
Resources (DRR) Program Constitutes a Countervailable Subsidy is in 
Accordance with the Requirements of the Statute or the World Trade 
Organization (WTO) Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures (SCM Agreement)
    Comment 2: Whether the ``Energy Savings System'' (ESS) Discount 
Program Is Not a Subsidy Relating to Subject Merchandise
    Comment 3: Commerce Incorrectly Calculated the Benefit from the 
KEXIM Import Financing Used by DSM
    Comment 4: Whether Commerce Incorrectly Calculated the Benefit 
from the R&D Project for the Development of Earthquake-Proof 
Reinforced Steel Bars (ITIPA R&D)
    Comment 5: Commerce Incorrectly Described Unaffiliated Trading 
Companies as Affiliates of DSM in the Preliminary Issues and 
Decision Memorandum
Hyundai Steel Company (Hyundai Steel)
    Comment 6: Commerce Erred in its Preliminary Finding that the 
Reduction for Sewerage Fees Program for Hyundai Steel
    Comment 7: Commerce should continue to determine that the 
Upstream Electricity Subsidy Program is not Countervailable
    Comment 8: Whether the GOK Provided Carbon Emission Credits for 
Less Than Adequate Remuneration (LTAR) to Hyundai Steel
Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2020-28591 Filed 12-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P