Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 51615-51619 [E7-17748]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 174 / Monday, September 10, 2007 / Notices
People’s Republic of China. See
Laminated Woven Sacks from the
People’s Republic of China: Initiation of
Countervailing Duty Investigation, 72 FR
40839 (July 25, 2007). Currently, the
preliminary determination is due no
later than September 21, 2007.
Postponement of Due Date for
Preliminary Determination
On August 23, 2007, Bancroft Bag,
Inc., Coating Excellence International,
Inc., Hood Packaging Corporation, Mid–
America Packaging, LLC, and Polytex
Fibers Corporation (collectively,
petitioners), submitted a letter
requesting that the Department
postpone the preliminary determination
of the countervailing duty investigation
of LWS from the People’s Republic of
China by 65 days. Under section
703(c)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the Department may
extend the period for reaching a
preliminary determination in a
countervailing duty investigation until
not later than the 130th day after the
date on which the administering
authority initiates an investigation if the
petitioner makes a timely request for an
extension of the period within which
the determination must be made under
section 703(b) of the Act. Pursuant to
section 351.205(e) of the Department’s
regulations, the petitioners’ request for
postponement of the preliminary
determination was made 25 days or
more before the scheduled date of the
preliminary determination.
Accordingly, we are extending the due
date for the preliminary determination
by 65 days to November 25, 2007.
Because November 25, 2007 is a
Sunday, the Department will issue the
preliminary determination no later than
November 26, 2007.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 703(c)(2) of the Act.
Dated: August 31, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–17747 Filed 9–7–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
(C–580–835)
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils
from the Republic of Korea:
Preliminary Results of Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Sep 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the
countervailing duty (CVD) order on
stainless steel sheet and strip in coils
from the Republic of Korea (Korea) for
the period January 1, 2005, through
December 31, 2005. We preliminarily
find that the net subsidy rate for the
producer/exporter under review is de
minimis. See the ‘‘Preliminary Results
of Review’’ section of this notice.
Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results.
(See the ‘‘Public Comment’’ section of
this notice).
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 10, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Preeti Tolani or Robert Copyak, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 3, Import
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Room 4014, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0395 or
(202) 482–2209, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 6, 1999, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
CVD order on stainless steel sheet and
strip in coils from Korea. See Amended
Final Determination: Stainless Steel
Sheet and Strip in Coils from the
Republic of Korea; and Notice of
Countervailing Duty Orders: Stainless
Steel Sheet and Strip from France, Italy
and the Republic of Korea, 64 FR 42923
(August 6, 1999). On August 1, 2006, the
Department published a notice of
opportunity to request an administrative
review of this CVD order. See
Antidumping or Countervailing Duty
Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation; Opportunity to Request
Administrative Review, 71 FR 43441
(August 1, 2006). On August 8, 2006, we
received a timely request for review
from Dai Yang Metal Co., Ltd. (DMC).
On September 29, 2006, the Department
published a notice of initiation of the
administrative review of the CVD order
on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils
from Korea covering the period of
review (POR) January 1, 2005, through
December 31, 2005. See Initiation of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 71 FR 57465
(September 29, 2006). On September 27,
2006, the Department sent
questionnaires to DMC and the
Government of Korea (GOK). On
November 30, 2006, the Department
received questionnaire responses from
DMC and the GOK. On February 12,
2007, DMC and the GOK submitted
responses to the Department’s January
29, 2007, supplemental questionnaires.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51615
On May 9, 2007, the Department
published in the Federal Register an
extension of the preliminary results
deadline. See Stainless Steel Sheet and
Strip from the Republic of Korea:
Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary
Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review, 72 FR 26338.
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.213(b), this review covers only
those producers or exporters for which
a review was specifically requested. The
only company subject to this review is
DMC.
Scope of Order
The products subject to this order are
certain stainless steel sheet and strip in
coils. Stainless steel is an alloy steel
containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or
less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more
of chromium, with or without other
elements. The subject sheet and strip is
a flat–rolled product in coils that is
greater than 9.5 mm in width and less
than 4.75 mm in thickness and that is
annealed or otherwise heat treated and
pickled or otherwise descaled. The
subject sheet and strip may also be
further processed (e.g., cold–rolled,
polished, aluminized, coated), provided
that it maintains the specific
dimensions of sheet and strip following
such processing.
The merchandise subject to this order
is currently classifiable in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) at subheadings:
7219.13.00.30, 7219.13.00.50,
7219.13.00.70, 7219.13.00.80,
7219.14.00.30, 7219.14.00.65,
7219.14.00.90, 7219.32.00.05,
7219.32.00.20, 7219.32.00.25,
7219.32.00.35, 7219.32.00.36,
7219.32.00.38, 7219.32.00.42,
7219.32.00.44, 7219.33.00.05,
7219.33.00.20, 7219.33.00.25,
7219.33.00.35, 7219.33.00.36,
7219.33.00.38, 7219.33.00.42,
7219.33.00.44, 7219.34.00.05,
7219.34.00.20, 7219.34.00.25,
7219.34.00.30, 7219.34.00.35,
7219.35.00.05, 7219.35.00.15,
7219.35.00.30, 7219.35.00.35,
7219.90.00.10, 7219.90.00.20,
7219.90.00.25, 7219.90.00.60,
7219.90.00.80, 7220.12.10.00,
7220.12.50.00, 7220.20.10.10,
7220.20.10.15, 7220.20.10.60,
7220.20.10.80, 7220.20.60.05,
7220.20.60.10, 7220.20.60.15,
7220.20.60.60, 7220.20.60.80,
7220.20.70.05, 7220.20.70.10,
7220.20.70.15, 7220.20.70.60,
7220.20.70.80, 7220.20.80.00,
7220.20.90.30, 7220.20.90.60,
7220.90.00.10, 7220.90.00.15,
7220.90.00.60, and 7220.90.00.80.
Although the HTSUS subheadings are
E:\FR\FM\10SEN1.SGM
10SEN1
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
51616
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 174 / Monday, September 10, 2007 / Notices
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the Department’s written
description of the merchandise is
dispositive.
Excluded from the scope of this order
are the following: (1) sheet and strip that
is not annealed or otherwise heat treated
and pickled or otherwise descaled, (2)
sheet and strip that is cut to length, (3)
plate (i.e., flat–rolled stainless steel
products of a thickness of 4.75 mm or
more), (4) flat wire (i.e., cold–rolled
sections, with a prepared edge,
rectangular in shape, of a width of not
more than 9.5 mm), and (5) razor blade
steel. Razor blade steel is a flat rolled
product of stainless steel, not further
worked than cold–rolled (cold–
reduced), in coils, of a width of not
more than 23 mm and a thickness of
0.266 mm or less, containing, by weight,
12.5 to 14.5 percent chromium, and
certified at the time of entry to be used
in the manufacture of razor blades. See
Chapter 72 of the HTSUS, ‘‘Additional
U.S. Note’’ 1(d).
The Department has determined that
certain specialty stainless steel products
are also excluded from the scope of this
order. These excluded products are
described below:
Flapper valve steel is defined as
stainless steel strip in coils containing,
by weight, between 0.37 and 0.43
percent carbon, between 1.15 and 1.35
percent molybdenum, and between 0.20
and 0.80 percent manganese. This steel
also contains, by weight, phosphorus of
0.025 percent or less, silicon of between
0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of
0.020 percent or less. The product is
manufactured by means of vacuum arc
remelting, with inclusion controls for
sulphide of no more than 0.04 percent
and for oxide of no more than 0.05
percent. Flapper valve steel has a tensile
strength of between 210 and 300 ksi,
yield strength of between 170 and 270
ksi, plus or minus 8 ksi, and a hardness
(Hv) of between 460 and 590. Flapper
valve steel is most commonly used to
produce specialty flapper valves in
compressors.
Also excluded is a product referred to
as suspension foil, a specialty steel
product used in the manufacture of
suspension assemblies for computer
disk drives. Suspension foil is described
as 302/304 grade or 202 grade stainless
steel of a thickness between 14 and 127
microns, with a thickness tolerance of
plus–or-minus 2.01 microns, and
surface glossiness of 200 to 700 percent
Gs. Suspension foil must be supplied in
coil widths of not more than 407 mm,
and with a mass of 225 kg or less. Roll
marks may only be visible on one side,
with no scratches of measurable depth.
The material must exhibit residual
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Sep 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
stresses of 2 mm maximum deflection,
and flatness of 1.6 mm over 685 mm
length.
Certain stainless steel foil for
automotive catalytic converters is also
excluded from the scope of this order.
This stainless steel strip in coils is a
specialty foil with a thickness of
between 20 and 110 microns used to
produce a metallic substrate with a
honeycomb structure for use in
automotive catalytic converters. The
steel contains, by weight, carbon of no
more than 0.030 percent, silicon of no
more than 1.0 percent, manganese of no
more than 1.0 percent, chromium of
between 19 and 22 percent, aluminum
of no less than 5.0 percent, phosphorus
of no more than 0.045 percent, sulfur of
no more than 0.03 percent, lanthanum
of between 0.002 and 0.05 percent, and
total rare earth elements of more than
0.06 percent, with the balance iron.
Permanent magnet iron–chromiumcobalt alloy stainless strip is also
excluded from the scope of this order.
This ductile stainless steel strip
contains, by weight, 26 to 30 percent
chromium, and 7 to 10 percent cobalt,
with the remainder of iron, in widths
228.6 mm or less, and a thickness
between 0.127 and 1.270 mm. It exhibits
magnetic remanence between 9,000 and
12,000 gauss, and a coercivity of
between 50 and 300 oersteds. This
product is most commonly used in
electronic sensors and is currently
available under proprietary trade names
such as ‘‘Arnokrome III.’’1
Certain electrical resistance alloy steel
is also excluded from the scope of this
order. This product is defined as a non–
magnetic stainless steel manufactured to
American Society of Testing and
Materials (ASTM) specification B344
and containing, by weight, 36 percent
nickel, 18 percent chromium, and 46
percent iron, and is most notable for its
resistance to high temperature
corrosion. It has a melting point of 1390
degrees Celsius and displays a creep
rupture limit of 4 kilograms per square
millimeter at 1000 degrees Celsius. This
steel is most commonly used in the
production of heating ribbons for circuit
breakers and industrial furnaces, and in
rheostats for railway locomotives. The
product is currently available under
proprietary trade names such as ‘‘Gilphy
36.’’2
Certain martensitic precipitation–
hardenable stainless steel is also
excluded from the scope of this order.
This high–strength, ductile stainless
steel product is designated under the
1 ‘‘Arnokrome III’’ is a trademark of the Arnold
Engineering Company.
2 ‘‘Gilphy 36’’ is a trademark of Imphy, S.A.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Unified Numbering System (UNS) as
S45500–grade steel, and contains, by
weight, 11 to 13 percent chromium and
7 to 10 percent nickel. Carbon,
manganese, silicon and molybdenum
each comprise, by weight, 0.05 percent
or less, with phosphorus and sulfur
each comprising, by weight, 0.03
percent or less. This steel has copper,
niobium, and titanium added to achieve
aging, and will exhibit yield strengths as
high as 1700 Mpa and ultimate tensile
strengths as high as 1750 Mpa after
aging, with elongation percentages of 3
percent or less in 50 mm. It is generally
provided in thicknesses between 0.635
and 0.787 mm, and in widths of 25.4
mm. This product is most commonly
used in the manufacture of television
tubes and is currently available under
proprietary trade names such as
‘‘Durphynox 17.’’3
Finally, three specialty stainless steels
typically used in certain industrial
blades and surgical and medical
instruments are also excluded from the
scope of this order. These include
stainless steel strip in coils used in the
production of textile cutting tools (e.g.,
carpet knives).4 This steel is similar to
ASTM grade 440F, but containing, by
weight, 0.5 to 0.7 percent of
molybdenum. The steel also contains,
by weight, carbon of between 1.0 and
1.1 percent, sulfur of 0.020 percent or
less and includes between 0.20 and 0.30
percent copper and between 0.20 and
0.50 percent cobalt. This steel is sold
under proprietary names such as ‘‘GIN4
HI–C.’’ The second excluded stainless
steel strip in coils is similar to AISI
420–J2 and contains, by weight, carbon
of between 0.62 and 0.70 percent,
silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50
percent, manganese of between 0.45 and
0.80 percent, phosphorus of no more
than 0.025 percent and sulfur of no
more than 0.020 percent. This steel has
a carbide density on average of 100
carbide particles per square micron. An
example of this product is ‘‘GIN5’’ steel.
The third specialty steel has a chemical
composition similar to AISI 420 F, with
carbon of between 0.37 and 0.43
percent, molybdenum of between 1.15
and 1.35 percent, but lower manganese
of between 0.20 and 0.80 percent,
phosphorus of no mor than 0.025
percent, silicon of between 0.20 and
0.50 percent, and sulfur of no more than
0.020 percent. This product is supplied
with a hardness of more than Hv 500
guaranteed after customer processing,
and is supplied as, for example, ‘‘GIN6.’’
3 ‘‘Durphynox
17’’ is a trademark of Imphy, S.A.
list of uses is illustrative and provided for
descriptive purposes only.
4 This
E:\FR\FM\10SEN1.SGM
10SEN1
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 174 / Monday, September 10, 2007 / Notices
Subsidies Valuation Information
Benchmark for Long–Term Loans
issued through 2005: During the POR,
DMC had both won–denominated and
foreign currency–denominated long–
term loans outstanding which it
received from government–owned banks
and Korean commercial banks. Based on
our findings on this issue in prior
investigations and reviews, we are using
the following benchmarks to calculate
the subsidies attributable to
respondent’s long–term loans obtained
in the years 1991 through 2005:
(1) For countervailable foreign
currency–denominated loans, pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.505(a)(2)(i), and
consistent with our practice to date, our
preference is to use the company–
specific weighted–average foreign
currency–denominated interest rates on
the company’s loans from foreign bank
branches in Korea, foreign securities,
and direct foreign loans received after
April 1992. See Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination:
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils
from the Republic of Korea, 64 FR
30636, 30642 (June 8, 1999). See also
Final Negative Countervailing Duty
Determination: Stainless Steel Plate in
Coils from the Republic of Korea, 64 FR
15530, 15533 (March 31, 1999) (Plate in
Coils). For variable–rate loans
outstanding during the POR, pursuant to
19 CFR 351.505(a)(2)(i), our preference
is to use, as the benchmark, an interest
rate of a variable–rate lending
instrument issued during the POR; and
for long–term fixed–rate loans, pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.505(a)(2)(iii), our
preference is to use a benchmark rate
issued in the same year that the loan
was issued. However, no such
benchmark instruments were available,
and consistent with our methodology in
the prior administrative review, we
relied on the lending rates as reported
by the IMF’s International Financial
Statistics Yearbook. See Final Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Review: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip
in Coils from the Republic of Korea, 72
FR 120 (January 3, 2007).
(2) For countervailable won–
denominated long–term loans, our
practice is to use the company–specific
corporate bond rate on the company’s
public and private bonds, as we
determined that the GOK did not
control the Korean domestic bond
market after 1991, and that domestic
bonds may serve as an appropriate
benchmark interest rate. See Plate in
Coils, 64 FR at 15531. Where
unavailable, we use the national average
of the yields on three-year corporate
bonds, as reported by the Bank of Korea
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Sep 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
(BOK). We note that the use of the threeyear corporate bond rate from the BOK
follows the approach taken in Plate in
Coils, in which we determined that,
absent company–specific interest rate
information, the corporate bond rate is
the best indicator of a market rate for
won–denominated long–term loans in
Korea. Id.
I. Program Preliminarily Determined to
Confer Subsidies
The GOK’s Direction of Credit
1. Loans Received through 2005
In the most recently completed CVD
proceeding involving Korea, the
Department reaffirmed earlier
determinations that the GOK controlled
and directed lending to Korean steel
producers through year 2005. See Notice
of Final Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review: Certain Cut–toLength Carbon–Quality Steel Plate from
Korea, 72 FR 38565 (July 13, 2007)
(2005 CTL Plate Final Results). In
addition, in that review, the Department
noted that neither the respondent nor
the GOK provided any new information
that would warrant a change in the
Department’s determination. Finding
that the GOK did not act to the best of
its ability, the Department employed an
adverse inference and determined that
the GOK continued its direction–ofcredit policies with respect to the
Korean steel industry for the period
2002 through 2005. Id.
During the POR, DMC had
outstanding loans that were received
prior to and/or during the 2005 period.
As in the prior proceedings, we asked
the GOK for information pertaining to
the GOK’s direction–of-credit policies
through 2005. The GOK did not provide
any new or additional information that
would warrant a departure from these
prior findings, stating instead that:
the Government of Korea continues to
believe that the evidence
demonstrates that there has been no
direction of credit to the Korean
steel industry. Nevertheless, the
Department has consistently found
that long–term loans received by
Korean steel producers were the
result of the Korean Government’s
direction, despite the Government’s
repeated submission of evidence to
the contrary. . . . Consequently, in
this review, the Government will
not contest the Department’s
findings on direction of long–term
loans.
Because the GOK withheld the
requested information on its lending
policies, the Department does not have
the necessary information on the record
to determine whether the GOK has
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
51617
continued its direction–of-credit
policies with respect to the Korean steel
industry through 2005; therefore, the
Department must base its determination
on facts otherwise available. See section
776(a)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act).
Section 776(b) of the Act further
provides that the Department may use
an adverse inference in applying the
facts otherwise available when a party
has failed to cooperate by not acting to
the best of its ability to comply with a
request for information. Section 776(b)
of the Act also authorizes the
Department to use as adverse facts
available (AFA) information derived
from the petition, the final
determination, a previous
administrative review, or other
information placed on the record. For
the reasons discussed below, we
determine that, in accordance with
sections 776(a)(2) and 776(b) of the Act,
the use of AFA is appropriate for the
preliminary results for the
determination of direction of credit for
loans received through 2005.
In this case, the GOK refused to
supply requested information that was
in its possession, even though the GOK
had provided similar information in
prior proceedings. See, e.g., Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination: Certain Cut–to-Length
Carbon–Quality Steel Plate from the
Republic of Korea, 64 FR 73176, 73178
(December 29, 1999). Therefore,
consistent with sections 776(a)(2)(A)
and 776(b) of the Act, we find that the
GOK did not act to the best of its ability
and, therefore, we are employing an
adverse inference in selecting from
among the facts otherwise available. As
AFA, we find that the GOK’s direction–
of-credit policies for the steel industry
continued through 2005. As noted
above, the GOK’s direction–of-credit
policies with respect to the Korean steel
industry provide a financial
contribution, confer a benefit, and are
specific, pursuant to sections
771(5)(D)(i), 771(5)(E)(ii), and
771(5A)(D)(iii) of the Act, respectively.
Therefore, we find that lending to
Korean steel producers from domestic
banks and government–owned banks
through 2005 is countervailable. Thus,
any loans received by Korean steel
producers through 2005 from domestic
banks and government–owned banks
that were outstanding during the POR
are countervailable, to the extent that
the interest amount paid on the loan is
less than what would have been paid on
a comparable commercial loan. The
Department’s decision to rely on
adverse inferences when lacking a
response from the GOK regarding the
E:\FR\FM\10SEN1.SGM
10SEN1
51618
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 174 / Monday, September 10, 2007 / Notices
direction of credit issue, as it applies to
the Korean steel industry, is in
accordance with its practice. See 2005
CTL Plate Final Results.
2. Calculation of the Benefit and Net
Subsidy Rate Under the Direction of
Credit Program
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.505(c)(2) and (4), we calculated the
benefit for each fixed- and variable–rate
loan received from GOK–owned or
-controlled banks to be the difference
between the actual amount of interest
paid on the directed loan during the
POR and the amount of interest that
would have been paid during the POR
at the benchmark interest rate. We
conducted our benefit calculations
using the benchmark interest rates
described in the ‘‘Subsidies Valuation
Information’’ section above. For foreign
currency–denominated loans, we
converted the benefits into Korean won
using exchange rates obtained from the
BOK or, where BOK rates were not
available, from other publicly available
sources. We then summed the benefits
from each company’s long–term fixed–
rate and variable–rate won–
denominated loans.
To calculate the net subsidy rate, we
divided DMC’s total benefit by its total
f.o.b. sales values during the POR, as
this program is not tied to exports or a
particular product. On this basis, we
preliminarily determine the net subsidy
rate to be 0.03 percent ad valorem for
DMC.
II. Programs Preliminarily Determined
To Be Not Used
A. Investment Tax Credits under
RSTA Articles 11, 24, 25 and
TERCL Articles 24 and 71
B. Reserve for Export Loss under
Article 16 of TERCL
C. Reserve for Overseas Market
Development under Article 17 of
TERCL
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
D. Asset Revaluation under Article
56(2) of TERCL
E. Equipment Investment to Promote
Worker’s Welfare under Article 88
of TERCL
F. Special Cases of Tax for Balanced
Development Among Areas under
Articles 41–45 of TERCL
G. Requested Loan Adjustment
Program
H. Emergency Load Reduction
Program
I. Export Industry Facility Loan
J. Special Facility Loans
K. Energy Saving Facility Program
L. Research and Development Grants
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:27 Sep 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
M. Local Tax Exemption on Land
Outside of Metropolitan Area
N. Short–Term Export Financing
O. Exemption of VAT on Imports of
Anthracite Coal
P. Excessive Duty Drawback
Q. Special Depreciation of Assets on
Foreign Exchange Earnings
R. Export Insurance Rates Provided by
the Korean Export Insurance
Corporation
S. Loans from the National
Agricultural Cooperation
Federation
T. Tax Incentives for Highly
Advanced Technology Businesses
under the Foreign Investment and
Foreign Capital Inducement Act
III. Programs Preliminarily Determined
To Be Not Countervailable
A. Tax Credit for Improving
Enterprise’s Bill System under
Article 7–2 of RSTA
B. Tax Credit for Equipment to
Promote Worker’s Welfare under
Article 94 of RSTA
C. Tax Deduction for Boosting
Employment under Article 30–4 of
RSTA
Preliminary Results of Review
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated an
individual subsidy rate for the
producer/exporter subject to this
administrative review. For the period
January 1, 2005, through December 31,
2005, we preliminarily determine the
net subsidy for DMC to be 0.03 percent
ad valorem, which is de minimis. See 19
CFR 351.106(c)(1).
The Department intends to issue
assessment instructions to U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) 15 days
after the date of publication of the final
results of this review. If the final results
remain the same as these preliminary
results, the Department will instruct
CBP to liquidate without regard to
countervailing duties all shipments of
subject merchandise produced by DMC,
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption from January 1, 2005,
through December 31, 2005. The
Department will also instruct CBP not to
collect cash deposits of estimated
countervailing duties on shipments of
the subject merchandise produced by
DMC and Dongbu, entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the date of
publication of the final results of this
review.
If the final results of this review
remain the same as these preliminary
results, the Department intends to
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
instruct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP), 15 days after the date
of publication of the final results, to
liquidate shipments of certain stainless
steel sheet and strip in coils from DMC,
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption from January 1, 2005,
through December 31, 2005, without
regard to countervailing duties. Also,
the Department intends to instruct CBP
not to collect deposits of estimated
countervailing duties on shipments of
certain stainless steel sheet and strip in
coils from DMC, entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or
after the publication of the final results
of this administrative review. The
Department will issue appropriate
instructions directly to CBP within 15
days of the final results of this review.
We will instruct CBP to continue to
collect cash deposits for non–reviewed
companies at the most recent company–
specific or country–wide rate applicable
to the company. Accordingly, the cash
deposit rates that will be applied to
companies covered by this order, but
not examined in this review, are those
established in the most recently
completed administrative proceeding
for each company. These rates shall
apply to all non–reviewed companies
until a review of a company assigned
these rates is requested.
Public Comment
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(b), the
Department will disclose to parties to
the proceeding any calculations
performed in connection with these
preliminary results within five days
after the date of the public
announcement of this notice. Pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.309, interested parties
may submit written comments in
response to these preliminary results.
Unless otherwise indicated by the
Department, case briefs must be
submitted within 30 days after the
publication of these preliminary results.
Rebuttal briefs, which are limited to
arguments raised in case briefs, must be
submitted no later than five days after
the time limit for filing case briefs,
unless otherwise specified by the
Department. Parties who submit
arguments in this proceeding are
requested to submit with the argument:
(1) a statement of the issue, and (2) a
brief summary of the argument. Parties
submitting case and/or rebuttal briefs
are requested to provide the Department
copies of the public version on disk.
Case and rebuttal briefs must be served
on interested parties in accordance with
19 CFR 351.303(f). Also, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.310, within 30 days of the date
of publication of this notice, interested
parties may request a public hearing on
E:\FR\FM\10SEN1.SGM
10SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 174 / Monday, September 10, 2007 / Notices
arguments to be raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs. Unless the Secretary
specifies otherwise, the hearing, if
requested, will be held two days after
the date for submission of rebuttal
briefs.
Representatives of parties to the
proceeding may request disclosure of
proprietary information under
administrative protective order no later
than 10 days after the representative’s
client or employer becomes a party to
the proceeding, but in no event later
than the date the case briefs, under 19
CFR 351.309(c)(ii), are due. The
Department will publish the final
results of this administrative review,
including the results of its analysis of
issues raised in any case or rebuttal brief
or at a hearing.
These preliminary results of review
are issued and published in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).
Dated: August 31, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–17748 Filed 9–7–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Federal Consistency Appeal by AES
Sparrows Point LNG, LLC and MidAtlantic Express, L.L.C.
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Department of Commerce (Commerce).
ACTION: Notice of appeal.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This announcement provides
notice that AES Sparrows Point LNG,
LLC and Mid-Atlantic Express, L.L.C.
(collectively, ‘‘AES’’) have filed an
administrative appeal with the
Department of Commerce asking that
the Secretary override the State of
Maryland’s objection to AES’s proposed
LNG terminal in Baltimore County,
Maryland.
Materials from the appeal
record will be available at the NOAA
Office of the General Counsel for Ocean
Services, 1305 East-West Highway,
Room 6111, Silver Spring, MD 20910
and on the following Web site: https://
www.ogc.doc.gov/czma.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Odin Smith, Attorney-Advisor, NOAA
Office of the General Counsel, 301–713–
7392.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with NOTICES
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:56 Sep 07, 2007
Jkt 211001
51619
I. Notice of Appeal
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
AES has filed a notice of appeal with
the Secretary of Commerce pursuant to
the Coastal Zone Management Act of
1972 (CZMA), 16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.,
and implementing regulations found at
15 CFR part 930, subpart H. AES
appeals an objection, filed by the State
of Maryland, to a consistency
determination prepared by AES related
to its proposed LNG terminal project in
Baltimore County, Maryland.
Under the CZMA, the Secretary may
override the State’s objection on
grounds that the project is consistent
with the objectives or purposes of the
CZMA, or necessary in the interest of
national security. To make the
determination that the proposed activity
is ‘‘consistent with the objectives or
purposes’’ of the CZMA, the Secretary
must find that: (1) The proposed activity
furthers the national interest as
articulated in sections 302 or 303 of the
CZMA, in a significant or substantial
manner; (2) the adverse effects of the
proposed activity do not outweigh its
contribution to the national interest,
when those effects are considered
separately or cumulatively; and (3) no
reasonable alternative is available that
would permit the activity to be
conducted in a manner consistent with
enforceable policies of the State’s
coastal management program. 15 CFR
930.121. To make the determination that
the proposed activity is ‘‘necessary in
the interest of national security,’’ the
Secretary must find that a national
defense or other national security
interest would be significantly impaired
were the proposed activity not
permitted to go forward as proposed. 15
CFR 930.122.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
II. Appeal Documents
NOAA intends to provide the public
with access to all publicly available
materials and related documents
comprising the appeal record during
business hours, at the NOAA Office of
the General Counsel for Ocean Services.
For additional information about this
appeal contact Odin Smith, 301–713–
7392.
Dated: September 5, 2007.
Joel La Bissonniere,
Assistant General Counsel for Ocean Services.
[Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog No.
11.419 Coastal Zone Management Program
Assistance.]
[FR Doc. 07–4416 Filed 9–7–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–08–M
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
[Docket No. 070727423–7424–01]
RIN 0648–XB75
Endangered and Threatened Species;
Notice of Finding on a Petition to List
the Lynn Canal Stock of Pacific
Herring as a Threatened or
Endangered Species
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of petition finding;
request for information; and initiation of
status review.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On April 2, 2007, we, NMFS,
received a petition to list the Lynn
Canal (Alaska) stock of Pacific herring,
Clupea pallasi, as a threatened or
endangered species under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). After
review, we find that the petition
presents substantial scientific and
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
We are initiating a review of the status
of the Lynn Canal population of Pacific
herring, and we request data,
information, and comment on the
subject action. Specifically, we are
soliciting information regarding
population structure and stock
delineations of Pacific herring in
Southeast Alaska, the Gulf of Alaska,
and the North Pacific Ocean; population
trends and ecology of Pacific herring in
Lynn Canal and Southeast Alaska
waters; habitat requirements and current
habitat conditions; known and
anticipated threats to the viability of the
population; and efforts being made to
protect the species.
DATES: Information and comments
should be submitted to NMFS by
December 10, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Data, information, or
comments may be submitted to Kaja
Brix, Assistant Regional Administrator,
Protected Resources Division, Alaska
Region, NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian.
Information may be submitted by any
of the following methods:
• Mail: P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK
99802;
• Hand delivery to the Federal
Building: 709 West 9th Street, Juneau,
AK, 99802;
• Fax: (907) 586–7557;
• E-mail: LCHERRING@noaa.gov.
Include in the subject line of the e-mail
the following identifier: Lynn Canal
Herring. E-mail comments, with or
E:\FR\FM\10SEN1.SGM
10SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 174 (Monday, September 10, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51615-51619]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-17748]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(C-580-835)
Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of
Korea: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on
stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from the Republic of Korea
(Korea) for the period January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005. We
preliminarily find that the net subsidy rate for the producer/exporter
under review is de minimis. See the ``Preliminary Results of Review''
section of this notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on
these preliminary results. (See the ``Public Comment'' section of this
notice).
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 10, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Preeti Tolani or Robert Copyak, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Room 4014, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0395 or (202) 482-2209,
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 6, 1999, the Department published in the Federal Register
the CVD order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from Korea.
See Amended Final Determination: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in
Coils from the Republic of Korea; and Notice of Countervailing Duty
Orders: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip from France, Italy and the
Republic of Korea, 64 FR 42923 (August 6, 1999). On August 1, 2006, the
Department published a notice of opportunity to request an
administrative review of this CVD order. See Antidumping or
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation;
Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 71 FR 43441 (August 1,
2006). On August 8, 2006, we received a timely request for review from
Dai Yang Metal Co., Ltd. (DMC). On September 29, 2006, the Department
published a notice of initiation of the administrative review of the
CVD order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from Korea
covering the period of review (POR) January 1, 2005, through December
31, 2005. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews, 71 FR 57465 (September 29, 2006). On September
27, 2006, the Department sent questionnaires to DMC and the Government
of Korea (GOK). On November 30, 2006, the Department received
questionnaire responses from DMC and the GOK. On February 12, 2007, DMC
and the GOK submitted responses to the Department's January 29, 2007,
supplemental questionnaires.
On May 9, 2007, the Department published in the Federal Register an
extension of the preliminary results deadline. See Stainless Steel
Sheet and Strip from the Republic of Korea: Extension of Time Limit for
Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR
26338.
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), this review covers only those
producers or exporters for which a review was specifically requested.
The only company subject to this review is DMC.
Scope of Order
The products subject to this order are certain stainless steel
sheet and strip in coils. Stainless steel is an alloy steel containing,
by weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more of
chromium, with or without other elements. The subject sheet and strip
is a flat-rolled product in coils that is greater than 9.5 mm in width
and less than 4.75 mm in thickness and that is annealed or otherwise
heat treated and pickled or otherwise descaled. The subject sheet and
strip may also be further processed (e.g., cold-rolled, polished,
aluminized, coated), provided that it maintains the specific dimensions
of sheet and strip following such processing.
The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable in
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) at
subheadings: 7219.13.00.30, 7219.13.00.50, 7219.13.00.70,
7219.13.00.80, 7219.14.00.30, 7219.14.00.65, 7219.14.00.90,
7219.32.00.05, 7219.32.00.20, 7219.32.00.25, 7219.32.00.35,
7219.32.00.36, 7219.32.00.38, 7219.32.00.42, 7219.32.00.44,
7219.33.00.05, 7219.33.00.20, 7219.33.00.25, 7219.33.00.35,
7219.33.00.36, 7219.33.00.38, 7219.33.00.42, 7219.33.00.44,
7219.34.00.05, 7219.34.00.20, 7219.34.00.25, 7219.34.00.30,
7219.34.00.35, 7219.35.00.05, 7219.35.00.15, 7219.35.00.30,
7219.35.00.35, 7219.90.00.10, 7219.90.00.20, 7219.90.00.25,
7219.90.00.60, 7219.90.00.80, 7220.12.10.00, 7220.12.50.00,
7220.20.10.10, 7220.20.10.15, 7220.20.10.60, 7220.20.10.80,
7220.20.60.05, 7220.20.60.10, 7220.20.60.15, 7220.20.60.60,
7220.20.60.80, 7220.20.70.05, 7220.20.70.10, 7220.20.70.15,
7220.20.70.60, 7220.20.70.80, 7220.20.80.00, 7220.20.90.30,
7220.20.90.60, 7220.90.00.10, 7220.90.00.15, 7220.90.00.60, and
7220.90.00.80. Although the HTSUS subheadings are
[[Page 51616]]
provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department's written
description of the merchandise is dispositive.
Excluded from the scope of this order are the following: (1) sheet
and strip that is not annealed or otherwise heat treated and pickled or
otherwise descaled, (2) sheet and strip that is cut to length, (3)
plate (i.e., flat-rolled stainless steel products of a thickness of
4.75 mm or more), (4) flat wire (i.e., cold-rolled sections, with a
prepared edge, rectangular in shape, of a width of not more than 9.5
mm), and (5) razor blade steel. Razor blade steel is a flat rolled
product of stainless steel, not further worked than cold-rolled (cold-
reduced), in coils, of a width of not more than 23 mm and a thickness
of 0.266 mm or less, containing, by weight, 12.5 to 14.5 percent
chromium, and certified at the time of entry to be used in the
manufacture of razor blades. See Chapter 72 of the HTSUS, ``Additional
U.S. Note'' 1(d).
The Department has determined that certain specialty stainless
steel products are also excluded from the scope of this order. These
excluded products are described below:
Flapper valve steel is defined as stainless steel strip in coils
containing, by weight, between 0.37 and 0.43 percent carbon, between
1.15 and 1.35 percent molybdenum, and between 0.20 and 0.80 percent
manganese. This steel also contains, by weight, phosphorus of 0.025
percent or less, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur
of 0.020 percent or less. The product is manufactured by means of
vacuum arc remelting, with inclusion controls for sulphide of no more
than 0.04 percent and for oxide of no more than 0.05 percent. Flapper
valve steel has a tensile strength of between 210 and 300 ksi, yield
strength of between 170 and 270 ksi, plus or minus 8 ksi, and a
hardness (Hv) of between 460 and 590. Flapper valve steel is most
commonly used to produce specialty flapper valves in compressors.
Also excluded is a product referred to as suspension foil, a
specialty steel product used in the manufacture of suspension
assemblies for computer disk drives. Suspension foil is described as
302/304 grade or 202 grade stainless steel of a thickness between 14
and 127 microns, with a thickness tolerance of plus-or-minus 2.01
microns, and surface glossiness of 200 to 700 percent Gs. Suspension
foil must be supplied in coil widths of not more than 407 mm, and with
a mass of 225 kg or less. Roll marks may only be visible on one side,
with no scratches of measurable depth. The material must exhibit
residual stresses of 2 mm maximum deflection, and flatness of 1.6 mm
over 685 mm length.
Certain stainless steel foil for automotive catalytic converters is
also excluded from the scope of this order. This stainless steel strip
in coils is a specialty foil with a thickness of between 20 and 110
microns used to produce a metallic substrate with a honeycomb structure
for use in automotive catalytic converters. The steel contains, by
weight, carbon of no more than 0.030 percent, silicon of no more than
1.0 percent, manganese of no more than 1.0 percent, chromium of between
19 and 22 percent, aluminum of no less than 5.0 percent, phosphorus of
no more than 0.045 percent, sulfur of no more than 0.03 percent,
lanthanum of between 0.002 and 0.05 percent, and total rare earth
elements of more than 0.06 percent, with the balance iron.
Permanent magnet iron-chromium-cobalt alloy stainless strip is also
excluded from the scope of this order. This ductile stainless steel
strip contains, by weight, 26 to 30 percent chromium, and 7 to 10
percent cobalt, with the remainder of iron, in widths 228.6 mm or less,
and a thickness between 0.127 and 1.270 mm. It exhibits magnetic
remanence between 9,000 and 12,000 gauss, and a coercivity of between
50 and 300 oersteds. This product is most commonly used in electronic
sensors and is currently available under proprietary trade names such
as ``Arnokrome III.''\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Arnokrome III'' is a trademark of the Arnold Engineering
Company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certain electrical resistance alloy steel is also excluded from the
scope of this order. This product is defined as a non-magnetic
stainless steel manufactured to American Society of Testing and
Materials (ASTM) specification B344 and containing, by weight, 36
percent nickel, 18 percent chromium, and 46 percent iron, and is most
notable for its resistance to high temperature corrosion. It has a
melting point of 1390 degrees Celsius and displays a creep rupture
limit of 4 kilograms per square millimeter at 1000 degrees Celsius.
This steel is most commonly used in the production of heating ribbons
for circuit breakers and industrial furnaces, and in rheostats for
railway locomotives. The product is currently available under
proprietary trade names such as ``Gilphy 36.''\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Gilphy 36'' is a trademark of Imphy, S.A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certain martensitic precipitation-hardenable stainless steel is
also excluded from the scope of this order. This high-strength, ductile
stainless steel product is designated under the Unified Numbering
System (UNS) as S45500-grade steel, and contains, by weight, 11 to 13
percent chromium and 7 to 10 percent nickel. Carbon, manganese, silicon
and molybdenum each comprise, by weight, 0.05 percent or less, with
phosphorus and sulfur each comprising, by weight, 0.03 percent or less.
This steel has copper, niobium, and titanium added to achieve aging,
and will exhibit yield strengths as high as 1700 Mpa and ultimate
tensile strengths as high as 1750 Mpa after aging, with elongation
percentages of 3 percent or less in 50 mm. It is generally provided in
thicknesses between 0.635 and 0.787 mm, and in widths of 25.4 mm. This
product is most commonly used in the manufacture of television tubes
and is currently available under proprietary trade names such as
``Durphynox 17.''\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``Durphynox 17'' is a trademark of Imphy, S.A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, three specialty stainless steels typically used in certain
industrial blades and surgical and medical instruments are also
excluded from the scope of this order. These include stainless steel
strip in coils used in the production of textile cutting tools (e.g.,
carpet knives).\4\ This steel is similar to ASTM grade 440F, but
containing, by weight, 0.5 to 0.7 percent of molybdenum. The steel also
contains, by weight, carbon of between 1.0 and 1.1 percent, sulfur of
0.020 percent or less and includes between 0.20 and 0.30 percent copper
and between 0.20 and 0.50 percent cobalt. This steel is sold under
proprietary names such as ``GIN4 HI-C.'' The second excluded stainless
steel strip in coils is similar to AISI 420-J2 and contains, by weight,
carbon of between 0.62 and 0.70 percent, silicon of between 0.20 and
0.50 percent, manganese of between 0.45 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of
no more than 0.025 percent and sulfur of no more than 0.020 percent.
This steel has a carbide density on average of 100 carbide particles
per square micron. An example of this product is ``GIN5'' steel. The
third specialty steel has a chemical composition similar to AISI 420 F,
with carbon of between 0.37 and 0.43 percent, molybdenum of between
1.15 and 1.35 percent, but lower manganese of between 0.20 and 0.80
percent, phosphorus of no mor than 0.025 percent, silicon of between
0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of no more than 0.020 percent. This
product is supplied with a hardness of more than Hv 500 guaranteed
after customer processing, and is supplied as, for example, ``GIN6.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This list of uses is illustrative and provided for
descriptive purposes only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 51617]]
Subsidies Valuation Information
Benchmark for Long-Term Loans issued through 2005: During the POR,
DMC had both won-denominated and foreign currency-denominated long-term
loans outstanding which it received from government-owned banks and
Korean commercial banks. Based on our findings on this issue in prior
investigations and reviews, we are using the following benchmarks to
calculate the subsidies attributable to respondent's long-term loans
obtained in the years 1991 through 2005:
(1) For countervailable foreign currency-denominated loans,
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.505(a)(2)(i), and consistent with our practice
to date, our preference is to use the company-specific weighted-average
foreign currency-denominated interest rates on the company's loans from
foreign bank branches in Korea, foreign securities, and direct foreign
loans received after April 1992. See Final Affirmative Countervailing
Duty Determination: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the
Republic of Korea, 64 FR 30636, 30642 (June 8, 1999). See also Final
Negative Countervailing Duty Determination: Stainless Steel Plate in
Coils from the Republic of Korea, 64 FR 15530, 15533 (March 31, 1999)
(Plate in Coils). For variable-rate loans outstanding during the POR,
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.505(a)(2)(i), our preference is to use, as the
benchmark, an interest rate of a variable-rate lending instrument
issued during the POR; and for long-term fixed-rate loans, pursuant to
19 CFR 351.505(a)(2)(iii), our preference is to use a benchmark rate
issued in the same year that the loan was issued. However, no such
benchmark instruments were available, and consistent with our
methodology in the prior administrative review, we relied on the
lending rates as reported by the IMF's International Financial
Statistics Yearbook. See Final Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from
the Republic of Korea, 72 FR 120 (January 3, 2007).
(2) For countervailable won-denominated long-term loans, our
practice is to use the company-specific corporate bond rate on the
company's public and private bonds, as we determined that the GOK did
not control the Korean domestic bond market after 1991, and that
domestic bonds may serve as an appropriate benchmark interest rate. See
Plate in Coils, 64 FR at 15531. Where unavailable, we use the national
average of the yields on three-year corporate bonds, as reported by the
Bank of Korea (BOK). We note that the use of the three-year corporate
bond rate from the BOK follows the approach taken in Plate in Coils, in
which we determined that, absent company-specific interest rate
information, the corporate bond rate is the best indicator of a market
rate for won-denominated long-term loans in Korea. Id.
I. Program Preliminarily Determined to Confer Subsidies
The GOK's Direction of Credit
1. Loans Received through 2005
In the most recently completed CVD proceeding involving Korea, the
Department reaffirmed earlier determinations that the GOK controlled
and directed lending to Korean steel producers through year 2005. See
Notice of Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review:
Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from Korea, 72 FR
38565 (July 13, 2007) (2005 CTL Plate Final Results). In addition, in
that review, the Department noted that neither the respondent nor the
GOK provided any new information that would warrant a change in the
Department's determination. Finding that the GOK did not act to the
best of its ability, the Department employed an adverse inference and
determined that the GOK continued its direction-of-credit policies with
respect to the Korean steel industry for the period 2002 through 2005.
Id.
During the POR, DMC had outstanding loans that were received prior
to and/or during the 2005 period. As in the prior proceedings, we asked
the GOK for information pertaining to the GOK's direction-of-credit
policies through 2005. The GOK did not provide any new or additional
information that would warrant a departure from these prior findings,
stating instead that:
the Government of Korea continues to believe that the evidence
demonstrates that there has been no direction of credit to the Korean
steel industry. Nevertheless, the Department has consistently found
that long-term loans received by Korean steel producers were the result
of the Korean Government's direction, despite the Government's repeated
submission of evidence to the contrary. . . . Consequently, in this
review, the Government will not contest the Department's findings on
direction of long-term loans.
Because the GOK withheld the requested information on its lending
policies, the Department does not have the necessary information on the
record to determine whether the GOK has continued its direction-of-
credit policies with respect to the Korean steel industry through 2005;
therefore, the Department must base its determination on facts
otherwise available. See section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act).
Section 776(b) of the Act further provides that the Department may
use an adverse inference in applying the facts otherwise available when
a party has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its
ability to comply with a request for information. Section 776(b) of the
Act also authorizes the Department to use as adverse facts available
(AFA) information derived from the petition, the final determination, a
previous administrative review, or other information placed on the
record. For the reasons discussed below, we determine that, in
accordance with sections 776(a)(2) and 776(b) of the Act, the use of
AFA is appropriate for the preliminary results for the determination of
direction of credit for loans received through 2005.
In this case, the GOK refused to supply requested information that
was in its possession, even though the GOK had provided similar
information in prior proceedings. See, e.g., Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality
Steel Plate from the Republic of Korea, 64 FR 73176, 73178 (December
29, 1999). Therefore, consistent with sections 776(a)(2)(A) and 776(b)
of the Act, we find that the GOK did not act to the best of its ability
and, therefore, we are employing an adverse inference in selecting from
among the facts otherwise available. As AFA, we find that the GOK's
direction-of-credit policies for the steel industry continued through
2005. As noted above, the GOK's direction-of-credit policies with
respect to the Korean steel industry provide a financial contribution,
confer a benefit, and are specific, pursuant to sections 771(5)(D)(i),
771(5)(E)(ii), and 771(5A)(D)(iii) of the Act, respectively. Therefore,
we find that lending to Korean steel producers from domestic banks and
government-owned banks through 2005 is countervailable. Thus, any loans
received by Korean steel producers through 2005 from domestic banks and
government-owned banks that were outstanding during the POR are
countervailable, to the extent that the interest amount paid on the
loan is less than what would have been paid on a comparable commercial
loan. The Department's decision to rely on adverse inferences when
lacking a response from the GOK regarding the
[[Page 51618]]
direction of credit issue, as it applies to the Korean steel industry,
is in accordance with its practice. See 2005 CTL Plate Final Results.
2. Calculation of the Benefit and Net Subsidy Rate Under the Direction
of Credit Program
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.505(c)(2) and (4), we calculated the
benefit for each fixed- and variable-rate loan received from GOK-owned
or -controlled banks to be the difference between the actual amount of
interest paid on the directed loan during the POR and the amount of
interest that would have been paid during the POR at the benchmark
interest rate. We conducted our benefit calculations using the
benchmark interest rates described in the ``Subsidies Valuation
Information'' section above. For foreign currency-denominated loans, we
converted the benefits into Korean won using exchange rates obtained
from the BOK or, where BOK rates were not available, from other
publicly available sources. We then summed the benefits from each
company's long-term fixed-rate and variable-rate won-denominated loans.
To calculate the net subsidy rate, we divided DMC's total benefit
by its total f.o.b. sales values during the POR, as this program is not
tied to exports or a particular product. On this basis, we
preliminarily determine the net subsidy rate to be 0.03 percent ad
valorem for DMC.
II. Programs Preliminarily Determined To Be Not Used
A. Investment Tax Credits under RSTA Articles 11, 24, 25 and TERCL
Articles 24 and 71
B. Reserve for Export Loss under Article 16 of TERCL
C. Reserve for Overseas Market Development under Article 17 of
TERCL
D. Asset Revaluation under Article 56(2) of TERCL
E. Equipment Investment to Promote Worker's Welfare under Article
88 of TERCL
F. Special Cases of Tax for Balanced Development Among Areas under
Articles 41-45 of TERCL
G. Requested Loan Adjustment Program
H. Emergency Load Reduction Program
I. Export Industry Facility Loan
J. Special Facility Loans
K. Energy Saving Facility Program
L. Research and Development Grants
M. Local Tax Exemption on Land Outside of Metropolitan Area
N. Short-Term Export Financing
O. Exemption of VAT on Imports of Anthracite Coal
P. Excessive Duty Drawback
Q. Special Depreciation of Assets on Foreign Exchange Earnings
R. Export Insurance Rates Provided by the Korean Export Insurance
Corporation
S. Loans from the National Agricultural Cooperation Federation
T. Tax Incentives for Highly Advanced Technology Businesses under
the Foreign Investment and Foreign Capital Inducement Act
III. Programs Preliminarily Determined To Be Not Countervailable
A. Tax Credit for Improving Enterprise's Bill System under Article
7-2 of RSTA
B. Tax Credit for Equipment to Promote Worker's Welfare under
Article 94 of RSTA
C. Tax Deduction for Boosting Employment under Article 30-4 of RSTA
Preliminary Results of Review
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated an
individual subsidy rate for the producer/exporter subject to this
administrative review. For the period January 1, 2005, through December
31, 2005, we preliminarily determine the net subsidy for DMC to be 0.03
percent ad valorem, which is de minimis. See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1).
The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') 15 days after the date of
publication of the final results of this review. If the final results
remain the same as these preliminary results, the Department will
instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to countervailing duties all
shipments of subject merchandise produced by DMC, entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption from January 1, 2005, through December
31, 2005. The Department will also instruct CBP not to collect cash
deposits of estimated countervailing duties on shipments of the subject
merchandise produced by DMC and Dongbu, entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the
final results of this review.
If the final results of this review remain the same as these
preliminary results, the Department intends to instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP), 15 days after the date of publication of
the final results, to liquidate shipments of certain stainless steel
sheet and strip in coils from DMC, entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption from January 1, 2005, through December 31,
2005, without regard to countervailing duties. Also, the Department
intends to instruct CBP not to collect deposits of estimated
countervailing duties on shipments of certain stainless steel sheet and
strip in coils from DMC, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication of the final results of this
administrative review. The Department will issue appropriate
instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of the final results of
this review.
We will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits for non-
reviewed companies at the most recent company-specific or country-wide
rate applicable to the company. Accordingly, the cash deposit rates
that will be applied to companies covered by this order, but not
examined in this review, are those established in the most recently
completed administrative proceeding for each company. These rates shall
apply to all non-reviewed companies until a review of a company
assigned these rates is requested.
Public Comment
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(b), the Department will disclose to
parties to the proceeding any calculations performed in connection with
these preliminary results within five days after the date of the public
announcement of this notice. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309, interested
parties may submit written comments in response to these preliminary
results. Unless otherwise indicated by the Department, case briefs must
be submitted within 30 days after the publication of these preliminary
results. Rebuttal briefs, which are limited to arguments raised in case
briefs, must be submitted no later than five days after the time limit
for filing case briefs, unless otherwise specified by the Department.
Parties who submit arguments in this proceeding are requested to submit
with the argument: (1) a statement of the issue, and (2) a brief
summary of the argument. Parties submitting case and/or rebuttal briefs
are requested to provide the Department copies of the public version on
disk. Case and rebuttal briefs must be served on interested parties in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f). Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310,
within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice, interested
parties may request a public hearing on
[[Page 51619]]
arguments to be raised in the case and rebuttal briefs. Unless the
Secretary specifies otherwise, the hearing, if requested, will be held
two days after the date for submission of rebuttal briefs.
Representatives of parties to the proceeding may request disclosure
of proprietary information under administrative protective order no
later than 10 days after the representative's client or employer
becomes a party to the proceeding, but in no event later than the date
the case briefs, under 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii), are due. The Department
will publish the final results of this administrative review, including
the results of its analysis of issues raised in any case or rebuttal
brief or at a hearing.
These preliminary results of review are issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.221(b)(4).
Dated: August 31, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-17748 Filed 9-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
