Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Intent To Rescind Administrative Review in Part, 48716-48719 [E9-23112]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 184 (Thursday, September 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48716-48719]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23112]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-836]


Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate From the 
Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review and Intent To Rescind Administrative Review in 
Part

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On March 24, 2009, in response to a request from interested 
parties, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published a notice 
of initiation of the administrative review of the antidumping duty 
order on certain cut-to-length carbon-quality steel plate (CTL plate) 
from the Republic of Korea (Korea). The review covers four 
manufacturers/exporters. The period of review is February 1, 2008, 
through January 31, 2009. We have preliminarily determined that sales 
have been made below normal value by certain companies subject to this 
review. We invite interested parties to comment on these preliminary 
results. Parties who submit comments in this review are requested to 
submit with each argument a statement of the issue and a brief summary 
of the argument.

DATES: Effective Date: September 24, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yang Jin Chun or Richard Rimlinger, 
AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
5760 and (202) 482-4477, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On February 10, 2000, the Department published in the Federal 
Register the antidumping duty order on CTL plate from Korea. See Notice 
of Amendment of Final Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value 
and Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Cut-To-Length Carbon-Quality Steel 
Plate Products From France, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan and the 
Republic of Korea, 65 FR 6585 (February 10, 2000). On February 4, 2009, 
the Department published in the Federal Register a notice of 
opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty 
order on CTL plate from Korea. See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty 
Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request 
Administrative Review, 74 FR 6013 (February 4, 2009). On February 27, 
2009, pursuant to section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.213(b), Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd. 
(DSM), requested that the Department review its sales of subject 
merchandise from Korea and Nucor Corporation, the domestic interested 
party in this review, requested that the Department review the sales of 
subject merchandise from Korea produced or exported by Daewoo 
International Corporation (Daewoo), Hyosung Corporation (Hyosung), 
Hyundai Mipo Dockyard Co., Ltd. (Hyundai Mipo), and JeongWoo Industrial 
Machine Co., Ltd. (JeongWoo), during the period of review. On March 24, 
2009, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), the Department 
initiated the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on 
CTL plate from Korea produced and/or exported by DSM, Daewoo, Hyosung, 
Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo for the period of review. See Initiation of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests 
for Revocation in Part, 74 FR 12310, 12312 (March 24, 2009).
    On April 1, 2009, for purposes of selecting respondents in this 
review, we released the data we obtained from U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) on March 16, 2009, for this review to interested 
parties which have access to business-proprietary information under the 
Administrative Protective Order. See the April 1, 2009, memorandum to 
the File entitled ``Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate 
from the Republic of Korea: CBP Data'' (CBP Data Memo). On April 8, 
2009, DSM withdrew its request that the Department review its sales of 
subject merchandise. On May 7, 2009, we issued a quantity-and-value 
questionnaire to Daewoo, Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo. See the 
May 12, 2009, memorandum to the File entitled ``Certain Cut-to-Length 
Carbon Quality Steel Plate from the Republic of Korea: Release of 
Quantity-and-Value Questionnaire'' (Q&V Release Memo). On June 5, 2009, 
we rescinded the review in part with respect to CTL plate from Korea 
produced and/or exported by DSM. See Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-
Quality Steel Plate from the Republic of Korea: Partial Rescission of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR 27015 (June 5, 2009).

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the antidumping duty order are certain hot-
rolled carbon-quality steel: (1) Universal

[[Page 48717]]

mill plates (i.e., flat-rolled products rolled on four faces or in a 
closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 mm but not exceeding 1250 mm, 
and of a nominal or actual thickness of not less than 4 mm, which are 
cut-to length (not in coils) and without patterns in relief), of iron 
or non-alloy quality steel; and (2) flat-rolled products, hot-rolled, 
of a nominal or actual thickness of 4.75 mm or more and of a width 
which exceeds 150 mm and measures at least twice the thickness, and 
which are cut-to-length (not in coils). Steel products included in the 
scope of the order are of rectangular, square, circular, or other shape 
and of rectangular or non-rectangular cross section where such non-
rectangular cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process 
(i.e., products which have been ``worked after rolling'')--for example, 
products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges. Steel 
products that meet the noted physical characteristics that are painted, 
varnished, or coated with plastic or other non-metallic substances are 
included within the scope. Also, specifically included in the scope of 
the order are high strength, low alloy (HSLA) steels. HSLA steels are 
recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as 
chromium, copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum. Steel 
products included in the scope, regardless of Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) definitions, are products in 
which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other 
contained elements, (2) the carbon content is two percent or less, by 
weight, and (3) none of the elements listed below is equal to or 
exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated: 1.80 percent 
of manganese, or 1.50 percent of silicon, or 1.00 percent of copper, or 
0.50 percent of aluminum, or 1.25 percent of chromium, or 0.30 percent 
of cobalt, or 0.40 percent of lead, or 1.25 percent of nickel, or 0.30 
percent of tungsten, or 0.10 percent of molybdenum, or 0.10 percent of 
niobium, or 0.41 percent of titanium, or 0.15 percent of vanadium, or 
0.15 percent zirconium. All products that meet the written physical 
description, and in which the chemistry quantities do not equal or 
exceed any one of the levels listed above, are within the scope of the 
order unless otherwise specifically excluded. The following products 
are specifically excluded from the order: (1) Products clad, plated, or 
coated with metal, whether or not painted, varnished or coated with 
plastic or other non-metallic substances; (2) SAE grades (formerly AISI 
grades) of series 2300 and above; (3) products made to ASTM A710 and 
A736 or their proprietary equivalents; (4) abrasion-resistant steels 
(i.e., USS AR 400, USS AR 500); (5) products made to ASTM A202, A225, 
A514 grade S, A517 grade S, or their proprietary equivalents; (6) ball 
bearing steels; (7) tool steels; and (8) silicon manganese steel or 
silicon electric steel.
    Imports of steel plate are currently classified in the HTSUS under 
subheadings 7208.40.30.30, 7208.40.30.60, 7208.51.00.30, 7208.51.00.45, 
7208.51.00.60, 7208.52.00.00, 7208.53.00.00, 7208.90.00.00, 
7210.70.30.00, 7210.90.90.00, 7211.13.00.00, 7211.14.00.30, 
7211.14.00.45, 7211.90.00.00, 7212.40.10.00, 7212.40.50.00, 
7212.50.00.00, 7225.40.30.50, 7225.40.70.00, 7225.50.60.00, 
7225.99.00.90, 7226.91.50.00, 7226.91.70.00, 7226.91.80.00, and 
7226.99.00.00. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes. The written description of the merchandise covered by 
the order is dispositive.

Intent To Rescind in Part

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we will rescind an 
administrative review in part if we conclude that there were no exports 
of subject merchandise during the period of review. On May 20, 2009, 
Daewoo submitted a letter stating that it had no shipments of subject 
merchandise during the period of review. Daewoo's claim of no shipments 
is consistent with CBP data on the record of the review. See CBP Data 
Memo. Further, we have received no comments on Daewoo's May 20, 2009, 
submission. Because we preliminarily find that Daewoo had no shipments 
of subject merchandise during the period of review, we intend to 
rescind the administrative review with respect to Daewoo. If we 
continue to find at the time of our final results that Daewoo had no 
shipments of CTL plate from Korea, we will rescind the administrative 
review with respect to Daewoo.

Use of Adverse Facts Available

    For the reasons discussed below, we determine that the use of 
adverse facts available is appropriate for the preliminary results with 
respect to Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo.

A. Use of Facts Available

    Section 776(a)(2) of the Act provides that, if an interested party 
withholds information requested by the administering authority, fails 
to provide such information by the deadlines for submission of the 
information and in the form or manner requested, significantly impedes 
a proceeding under this title, or provides such information but the 
information cannot be verified as provided in section 782(i) of the 
Act, the Department shall use facts otherwise available in reaching the 
applicable determination.
    On May 7, 2009, we transmitted our questionnaire to Hyosung, 
Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo via Federal Express. We confirmed that 
Hyundai Mipo and JeongWoo signed for and received the questionnaire on 
May 11, 2009, and Hyosung signed for and received the questionnaire on 
May 12, 2009. See Q&V Release Memo. The due date for the responses to 
our questionnaire was May 18, 2009. The Department never received a 
response from Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, or JeongWoo.
    Because Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo did not provide their 
responses to the Department's questionnaire, Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and 
JeongWoo failed to provide any information to the Department within the 
meaning of section 776(a)(2) of the Act. As a result, we are unable to 
calculate margins for Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo and, 
therefore, must rely entirely on facts available.

B. Application of Adverse Inferences for Facts Available

    In selecting among the facts otherwise available, section 776(b) of 
the Act provides that, if the Department finds that an interested party 
has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to 
comply with a request for information, the Department may use an 
inference adverse to the interests of that party. In addition, the 
Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the Uruguay Round 
Agreements Act, H.R. Rep. 103-316, Vol. 1, 103d Cong. (1994), reprinted 
in 1994 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4040 (SAA), establishes that the Department may 
employ an adverse inference ``to ensure that the party does not obtain 
a more favorable result by failing to cooperate than if it had 
cooperated fully.'' See SAA at 870. The SAA also instructs the 
Department to consider, in employing adverse inferences, ``the extent 
to which a party may benefit from its own lack of cooperation.'' Id. 
Moreover, ``affirmative evidence of bad faith on the part of a 
respondent is not required before the Department may make an adverse 
inference.'' See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27340 (May 19, 1997).

[[Page 48718]]

    We find that, by failing completely to respond to our 
questionnaire, Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo withheld requested 
information and thus failed to cooperate to the best of their 
abilities. Therefore, we find it appropriate to use an inference that 
is adverse to these companies' interests in selecting from among the 
facts otherwise available. By doing so, we ensure that these companies 
will not obtain a more favorable rate by failing to cooperate than had 
they cooperated fully.

C. Selection of Information Used as Facts Available

    Where the Department applies an adverse facts-available rate 
because a respondent 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 authorizes the Department to rely on information derived from 
the petition, a final determination, a previous administrative review, 
or other information placed on the record. See also 19 CFR 351.308(c) 
and the SAA at 870.
    For the preliminary results, we have selected 32.70 percent as the 
adverse facts-available dumping margin for Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and 
JeongWoo. This rate is the rate we assigned as adverse facts available 
to Tae Chang Steel Co., Ltd. (TC Steel), which failed to submit its 
response to our antidumping questionnaire in the administrative review 
of this proceeding for the period February 1, 2006, through January 31, 
2007. See Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate Products 
From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review and Intent To Rescind Administrative Review in 
Part, 72 FR 65701, 65702-03 (November 23, 2007) (CTL Plate from Korea 
2006-07 Prelim), unchanged in Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality 
Steel Plate Products From the Republic of Korea: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Rescission of Administrative 
Review in Part, 73 FR 15132, 15133 (March 21, 2008) (CTL Plate from 
Korea 2006-07 Final) (collectively CTL Plate from Korea 2006-07). In 
CTL Plate from Korea 2006-07, the adverse facts-available rate of 32.70 
percent which we assigned to TC Steel was the highest product-specific 
margin we had calculated based on data reported by a respondent. See 
CTL Plate from Korea 2006-07 Prelim, 72 FR at 65702-03, and CTL Plate 
from Korea 2006-07 Final, 73 FR at 15133. We have selected this rate 
because we have never reviewed Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo in a 
prior segment of this proceeding and we do not have any additional 
information about these three companies. Id. Moreover, we believe this 
rate is sufficiently high to ensure that Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and 
JeongWoo do not obtain a more favorable result by failing to cooperate.

D. Corroboration of Information

    Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies 
on secondary information as facts available, it must corroborate, to 
the extent practicable, that information from independent sources that 
are reasonably at its disposal. The SAA clarifies that ``corroborate'' 
means that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary 
information to be used has probative value. See SAA at 870. The SAA 
also states that independent sources used to corroborate may include, 
for example, published price lists, official import statistics, and 
customs data as well as information obtained from interested parties 
during the particular proceeding. Id.
    To corroborate secondary information, to the extent practicable, 
the Department normally examines the reliability and relevance of the 
information to be used. See, e.g., Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof from 
France, et al.: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Reviews and Intent to Rescind Reviews in Part, 73 FR 25654, 25657 (May 
7, 2008), unchanged in Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, et 
al.: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and 
Rescission of Reviews in Part, 73 FR 52823, 52824 (September 11, 2008) 
(collectively AFBs 18). Unlike other types of information such as input 
costs or selling expenses, there are no independent sources for 
calculated dumping margins. The only sources for antidumping duty 
margins are administrative determinations. Thus, with respect to an 
administrative review, if the Department chooses to use as facts 
available a calculated dumping margin from a prior segment of the 
proceeding, it is not necessary to question the reliability of the 
margin for that time period. See AFBs 18 and Antifriction Bearings and 
Parts Thereof from France, et al.: Preliminary Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Reviews, Partial Rescission of Administrative 
Reviews, Notice of Intent To Rescind Administrative Reviews, and Notice 
of Intent To Revoke Order in Part, 69 FR 5949, 5953 (February 9, 2004), 
unchanged in Antifriction Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, et 
al.: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews, 
Rescission of Administrative Reviews in Part, and Determination To 
Revoke Order in Part, 69 FR 55574, 55576-77 (September 15, 2004).
    With respect to the relevance aspect of corroboration, the 
Department will consider information reasonably at its disposal to 
determine whether a margin continues to have relevance. Where 
circumstances indicate that the selected margin is not appropriate as 
adverse facts available, the Department will disregard the margin and 
determine an appropriate margin. For example, in Fresh Cut Flowers From 
Mexico; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 61 FR 
6812, 6814 (February 22, 1996), the Department disregarded the highest 
margin in that case as best information available (the predecessor to 
facts available) because the margin was based on another company's 
uncharacteristic business expense resulting in an unusually high 
margin. Similarly, the Department does not apply a margin that has been 
discredited or judicially invalidated. See D & L Supply Co. v. United 
States, 113 F.3d 1220, 1221 (CAFC 1997).
    In this review, there are no circumstances present to indicate that 
the selected margin is not appropriate as adverse facts available. 
Moreover, there is no information on the record of this review that 
demonstrates that 32.70 percent, which we assigned to TC Steel as an 
adverse facts-available rate in CTL Plate from Korea 2006-07, is not an 
appropriate adverse facts-available rate for Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and 
JeongWoo. Because there are no calculated margins for any other 
respondents in this administrative review, we examined transaction-
specific margins from the administrative review of the antidumping duty 
order on CTL plate from Korea for the period February 1, 2007, through 
January 31, 2008, and we found a number of transaction-specific margins 
in our calculation for DSM which were higher than 32.70 percent. See 
the September XX, 2009, memorandum to the File entitled ``Certain Cut-
to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from the Republic of Korea: 
Placement on Record'' for details which contain DSM's business-
proprietary information. With the information at our disposal for the 
corroboration of this adverse facts-available rate, we find that the 
rate of 32.70 percent is corroborated to the greatest extent 
practicable in accordance with section 776(c) of the Act.
    Because we are making an adverse inference with regard to Hyosung, 
Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo based on the most recent information at our 
disposal, we preliminarily find that the

[[Page 48719]]

rate of 32.70 percent is a reasonable indication of the margins that 
Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo would have received on their U.S. 
transactions had they responded to our request for information. We 
preliminarily find that use of the rate of 32.70 percent as adverse 
facts available is sufficiently high to ensure that Hyosung, Hyundai 
Mipo, and JeongWoo do not benefit from failing to cooperate in our 
review by refusing to respond to our questionnaire. See CTL Plate from 
Korea 2006-07 Final, 73 FR at 15133.

Preliminary Results of the Review

    As a result of our review, we preliminarily determine that the 
weighted-average dumping margins for CTL plate from Korea for the 
period February 1, 2008, through January 31, 2009, are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Margin
                        Company                             (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyosung................................................           32.70
Hyundai Mipo...........................................           32.70
JeongWoo...............................................           32.70
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure and Public Comment

    We will disclose the draft liquidation instructions to parties to 
this review within five days of the date of publication of this notice. 
See 19 CFR 351.224(b). Any interested party may request a hearing 
within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 
351.310. Interested parties who wish to request a hearing or to 
participate in a hearing if a hearing is requested must submit a 
written request to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration 
within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. Requests 
should contain the following: (1) The party's name, address, and 
telephone number; (2) the number of participants; (3) a list of issues 
to be discussed.
    Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the 
case briefs. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Case briefs from interested parties 
may be submitted not later than 30 days after the date of publication 
of this notice of preliminary results of review. See 19 CFR 
351.309(c)(1)(ii). Rebuttal briefs from interested parties, limited to 
the issues raised in the case briefs, may be submitted not later than 
five days after the time limit for filing the case briefs or comments. 
See 19 CFR 351.309(d)(1) and 19 CFR 351.310(c). Any hearing, if 
requested, will be held two days after the scheduled date for 
submission of rebuttal briefs. See 19 CFR 351.310(d). Parties who 
submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are requested 
to submit with each argument a statement of the issue, a summary of the 
arguments not exceeding five pages, and a table of statutes, 
regulations, and cases cited. See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2). The Department 
will issue the final results of this administrative review, including 
the results of its analysis of issues raised in any such written 
briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this 
notice. See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department will determine, and 
CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. 
Because we are relying on total adverse facts available to establish 
the dumping margins for Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo, we intend 
to instruct CBP to apply a dumping margin of 32.70 percent to CTL plate 
from Korea that was produced and/or exported by Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, 
and JeongWoo and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption 
during the period of review.
    The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions 
to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of review.

Cash-Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for 
all shipments of steel plate from Korea 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 rates 
for Hyosung, Hyundai Mipo, and JeongWoo will be the rate established in 
the final results of this review; (2) for previously reviewed or 
investigated companies not listed above, the cash-deposit rate will 
continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent 
period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a 
prior review, or the less-than-fair-value investigation but the 
manufacturer is, the cash-deposit rate will be the rate established for 
the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; (4) if 
neither the exporter nor the manufacturer has its own rate, the cash-
deposit rate will be 0.98 percent,\1\ the all-others rate established 
in the less-than-fair-value investigation, adjusted for the export-
subsidy rate in the companion countervailing duty investigation. These 
deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until 
further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the September XX, 2009, memorandum to the File entitled 
``Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from the Republic 
of Korea: All-Others Cash-Deposit Rate'' for details on the 
calculation of this rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Importers

    This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of 
their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during the period of review. Failure to comply 
with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
    These preliminary results of administrative review are issued and 
published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act 
and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: September 18, 2009.
Carole A. Showers,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations.
[FR Doc. E9-23112 Filed 9-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P