[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 93 (Monday, May 13, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41380-41381]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-10315]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-580-884]


Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic of 
Korea: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2021

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that 
Hyundai Steel Company (Hyundai Steel) and POSCO, producers/exporters of 
certain hot-rolled steel flat products (hot-rolled steel) from the 
Republic of Korea (Korea), received countervailable subsidies during 
the period of review (POR) January 1, 2021, through December 31, 2021.

DATES: Applicable May 13, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nathan James or Kelsie Hohenberger, 
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) 482-5305 or (202) 
482-2517, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On November 6, 2023, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of 
this administrative review in the Federal Register and invited 
interested parties to comment.\1\ On February 22, 2024, Commerce 
extended the deadline for issuing the final results until May 3, 
2024.\2\ For a complete description of the events that occurred since 
the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic 
of Korea: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 2021, 88 FR 76178 
(November 6, 2023) (Preliminary Results), and accompanying 
Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM).
    \2\ See Memorandum, ``Extension of Deadline for Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review,'' dated February 22, 
2024.
    \3\ See Memorandum, ``Decision Memorandum for the Final Results 
of the Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2021,'' dated 
concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and 
Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil and 
the Republic of Korea: Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty 
Determinations and Countervailing Duty Orders, 81 FR 67960 (October 
3, 2016) (Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The merchandise covered by this Order is hot-rolled steel. For a 
complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum.

Analysis of Comments Received

    We addressed all issues raised in interested parties' case briefs 
in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised by 
parties, to which Commerce responded in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum, is provided as an 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 https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on comments received from interested parties, we made certain 
changes to Hyundai Steel's and POSCO's countervailable subsidy rate 
calculations from the Preliminary Results. For a discussion of these 
comments, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

[[Page 41381]]

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.\5\ For a full description of the methodologies underlying all 
of Commerce's conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Results of Administrative Review

    We determine that, for the period January 1, 2021, through December 
31, 2021, the following total net countervailable subsidy rates exist:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Subsidy rate
                    Producer/exporter                       (percent ad
                                                             valorem)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyundai Steel Company \6\...............................            0.76
POSCO \7\...............................................            0.86
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As discussed in the Preliminary Results PDM, Commerce has 
found the following companies to be cross-owned with Hyundai Steel 
Company: Hyundai ITC and Hyundai Green Power. Additionally, we note 
that Hyundai Steel Company is also known as Hyundai Steel Co., Ltd.
    \7\ As discussed in the Preliminary Results PDM, Commerce has 
found the following companies to be cross-owned with POSCO: Pohang 
Scrap Recycling Distribution Center Co. Ltd.; POSCO Chemical; POSCO 
M-Tech; POSCO Nippon Steel RHF Joint Venture Co., Ltd.; POSCO 
Terminal, and POSCO Steel Processing and Service. Also as discussed 
in the Preliminary Results we note that POSCO has an affiliated 
trading company through which it exported certain subject 
merchandise, i.e., POSCO International Corporation (POSCO 
International). POSCO International was not selected as a mandatory 
respondent, but was examined in the context of POSCO. Therefore, 
there is not an individually-established rate for POSCO 
International; POSCO International's subsidies are accounted for in 
terms of POSCO's total subsidy rate. Entries of subject merchandise 
exported by POSCO International will receive the rate of the 
producer listed on the entry form with U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP). Thus, the subsidy rate applied to POSCO (and 
POSCO's cross-owned affiliates) is also applied to POSCO 
International for entries of subject merchandise produced by POSCO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), Commerce has determined, and CBP 
shall assess, countervailing duties on all appropriate entries of 
subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this 
review, for the above-listed companies at the applicable ad valorem 
assessment rates listed. Commerce intends to issue assessment 
instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of 
publication of the final results of this review in the Federal 
Register. If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of 
International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to 
liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request 
for a statutory injunction has expired (i.e., within 90 days of 
publication).

Cash Deposit Rates

    Commerce intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of 
estimated countervailing duties in the amounts shown for the companies 
listed above on shipments of the subject merchandise 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 all-others rate or 
most recent company-specific rate applicable to the company, as 
appropriate. These cash deposits, when imposed, shall remain in effect 
until further notice.

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a final 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(a)(3). 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 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: May 3, 2024.
Ryan Majerus,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, performing the 
non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for 
Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Subsidies Valuation
IV. Analysis of Programs
V. Discussion of the Issues
    Comment 1: Whether the Korea Emissions Trading System (K-ETS) 
Program Is Countervailable
    Comment 2: Whether To Modify the K-ETS Benchmark and Benefit 
Calculations
    Comment 3: Whether the Government of Korea's (GOK's) Provision 
of Electricity was Consistent With Market Principles During the POR
    Comment 4: Whether the Electricity for Less-Than-Adequate-
Remuneration (LTAR) Program Is Specific
    Comment 5: Whether To Modify the Benefit Calculation for the 
Electricity for LTAR Program
    Comment 6: Whether the Benchmark Calculations for Electricity 
for More Than Adequate Remuneration (MTAR) Should Differentiate for 
Time-of-Use
    Comment 7: Whether Certain Industrial Technology Innovation 
Promotion Act (ITIPA) Grants Received by POSCO SPS and POSCO 
Chemical are Tied to Non-Subject Merchandise
    Comment 8: Whether Certain of POSCO Chemical's Local Tax 
Exemptions Under the Restriction of Special Location Taxation Act 
(RSLTA) Article 78 Are Tied to Non-Subject Merchandise
    Comment 9: Whether Certain of POSCO's Quota Tariff Import Duty 
Exemptions Under Article 71 of the Custom's Act Are Tied to Non-
Subject Merchandise
    Comment 10: Whether Hyundai Steel Is Cross-Owned With Hyundai 
Green Power (HGP)
    Comment 11: Whether POSCO International Received Tax Credits 
Under RSTA Article 25(1)(5)
VI. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2024-10315 Filed 5-10-24; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P