Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the Sixteenth Administrative Review, 15291-15294 [2011-6566]

Download as PDF mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Notices adopted by the Board (74 FR 1170, 1/12/ 09 (correction 74 FR 3987, 1/22/09); 75 FR 71069–71070, 11/22/10). The ASF is an option for grantees for the establishment or reorganization of general-purpose zones and can permit significantly greater flexibility in the designation of new ‘‘usage-driven’’ FTZ sites for operators/users located within a grantee’s ‘‘service area’’ in the context of the Board’s standard 2,000-acre activation limit for a general-purpose zone project. The application was submitted pursuant to the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a– 81u), and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally filed on March 15, 2011. FTZ 106 was established by the Board on September 13, 1984 (Board Order 271, 49 FR 36133, 9/21/84), and expanded on December 7, 1989 (Board Order 455, 54 FR 51441, 12/15/89), on February 10, 2000 (Board Order 1078, 65 FR 8337–8338, 2/18/00), on September 28, 2007 (Board Order 1529, 72 FR 56722–56723, 10/4/07), and on June 26, 2009 (Board Order 1628, 74 FR 32892, 7/9/09). The current zone project consists of six sites (totaling 1,450 acres) in the Oklahoma City area: Site 1 (1,061 acres)—within the 6,700-acre Will Rogers World Airport complex; Site 2 (6 acres)—Biagi Bros. Warehouse, 5002 SW 36th, Oklahoma City; Site 8 (30 acres)— Will Rogers World Airport NE, immediately northeast of Will Rogers World Airport, Oklahoma City; Site 12 (26 acres, sunset 10/31/2012)—ICON Center Industrial Park, 300 Arlington, Ada; Site 13 (308 acres)—within the 401-acre Guthrie/Edmond Regional Airport, 520 Airport Road, Guthrie; and, Site 14 (19 acres, expires 6/30/2014)— Industrial Gasket, Inc. dba International Group, facility, 720 South Sara Road, Mustang. (Note: Sites 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11 have expired or were deleted through a previous Board action.) The grantee’s proposed service area under the ASF would be Blaine, Caddo, Canadian, Cleveland, Comanche, Custer, Garfield, Garvin, Grady, Kay, Kingfisher, Lincoln, Logan, McClain, Noble, Oklahoma, Payne, Pontotoc, Pottawatomie, Seminole and Stephens Counties, Oklahoma. If approved, the grantee would be able to serve sites throughout the service area based on companies’ needs for FTZ designation. The proposed service area is within and adjacent to the Oklahoma City Customs and Border Protection port of entry. The applicant is requesting authority to reorganize its existing zone project to include existing Sites 12, 13 and 14 as ‘‘magnet sites’’, existing Site 2 as a ‘‘usage-driven’’ site, and combine VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:50 Mar 18, 2011 Jkt 223001 existing Site 1 and Site 8 to become Site 1 (new site total—1,091 acres) as a magnet site. The ASF allows for the possible exemption of one magnet site from the sunset time limits that generally apply to sites under the ASF, and the applicant proposes that Site 1 be so exempted. The applicant is also requesting approval of two additional ‘‘magnet’’ sites: Proposed Site 15 (67.688 acres)—Enid Woodring Regional Airport/Cimarron Industrial Park, 1026 S. 66th, Enid (Garfield County); and, Proposed Site 16 (63.434 acres)— Shawnee Regional Airport, 2202 Airport Road, Shawnee (Pottawatomie County). Because the ASF only pertains to establishing or reorganizing a generalpurpose zone, the application would have no impact on FTZ 106’s authorized subzones. In accordance with the Board’s regulations, Camille Evans of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to evaluate and analyze the facts and information presented in the application and case record and to report findings and recommendations to the Board. Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions (original and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the Board’s Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is May 20, 2011. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to June 6, 2011. A copy of the application will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 2111, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230–0002, and in the ‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the Board’s Web site, which is accessible via https:// www.trade.gov/ftz. For further information, contact Camille Evans at Camille.Evans@trade.gov or (202) 482– 2350. Dated: March 15, 2011. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2011–6562 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P PO 00000 Frm 00014 15291 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–580–816] Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the Sixteenth Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On September 14, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the antidumping duty administrative review for certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products (CORE) from the Republic of Korea (Korea). See Certain CorrosionResistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Preliminary Results of the Sixteenth Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 55769 (September 14, 2010) (Preliminary Results). This review covers eight manufacturers and/or exporters (collectively, the respondents) of the subject merchandise: LG Chem., Ltd. (LG Chem); Haewon MSC Co. Ltd. (Haewon); Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd. (Dongbu); Hyundai HYSCO (HYSCO); Pohang Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. (POSCO) and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd. (POCOS) (collectively, POSCO); Dongkuk Industries Co., Ltd. (Dongkuk); LG Hausys, Ltd. (Hausys); and Union Steel Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Union).1 The period of review (POR) is August 1, 2008, through July 31, 2009. As a result of our analysis of the comments received, these final results differ from the Preliminary Results. For our final results, we find that Union and Dongbu made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value (NV), and that POSCO and HYSCO have not. In addition, based on the final results for the respondents selected for individual review, we have determined a weighted-average margin for those companies that were not selected for individual review. DATES: Effective Date: March 21, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis McClure (Union), Jolanta Lawska (HYSCO), Christopher Hargett AGENCY: 1 As noted in the Preliminary Results, the Department selected HYSCO, POSCO, Dongbu and Union as mandatory respondents in this review. See Memorandum from Dennis McClure, International Trade Compliance Analyst, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, to Melissa Skinner, Director, Office 3, entitled ‘‘2008–2009 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Selection of Respondents for Individual Review,’’ dated December 7, 2009. Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\21MRN1.SGM 21MRN1 15292 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Notices (Dongbu) and Victoria Cho (the POSCO Group, and non-selected companies), Office 3, AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–5973, (202) 482– 8362, (202) 482–4161, and (202) 482– 5075, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Background On September 14, 2010, the Department published the Preliminary Results. In the Preliminary Results, the Department determined that Union and Dongbu made sales of subject merchandise at less than NV during the POR, and that HYSCO and POSCO did not. In addition, based on the preliminary results for the respondents selected for individual review, the Department calculated a weightedaverage margin for those companies that were not selected for individual review. We conducted sales verifications at the POSCO Group from October 18 through 22, 2010, at HYSCO from October 25 through 29, 2010, and at Union from November 1 through 5, 2010. We conducted cost verifications at HYSCO from October 4 through 8, 2010, at the POSCO Group from October 11 through 15, 2010, and at Union from November 8 through 12, 2010. On December 7, 15, and 21, 2010, respectively, the Department released sales verification reports for Union, HYSCO, and the POSCO Group. On November 29, December 6, and December 17, 2010, respectively, the Department released cost verification reports for the POSCO Group, HYSCO, and Union. On December 13, 2010, the Department extended the time limits for the final results of this review until no later than March 14, 2011. See Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 77615 (December 13, 2010). Comments From Interested Parties We invited parties to comment on our Preliminary Results. On January 14, 2011, United States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel) filed case briefs concerning all four mandatory respondents. On January 14, 2011, HYSCO, POSCO, Union, and Dongbu each filed case briefs. On January 14, 2011, Hausys submitted its case brief, stating that it supports the arguments submitted by Union and Dongbu in their case briefs because Hausys’s dumping margin VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:50 Mar 18, 2011 Jkt 223001 would be based on the respondents subject to individual examination. On January 21, 2011, U.S. Steel and Nucor Corporation (Nucor) (collectively, petitioners) each filed rebuttal briefs. On January 21, 2011, HYSCO, POSCO, Union, and Dongbu each filed rebuttal briefs. Scope of the Order This order covers cold-rolled (coldreduced) carbon steel flat-rolled carbon steel products, of rectangular shape, either clad, plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickelor iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated or painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances in addition to the metallic coating, in coils (whether or not in successively superimposed layers) and of a width of 0.5 inch or greater, or in straight lengths which, if of a thickness less than 4.75 millimeters, are of a width of 0.5 inch or greater and which measures at least 10 times the thickness or if of a thickness of 4.75 millimeters or more are of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters and measures at least twice the thickness, as currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0090, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.1000, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, 7212.60.0000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090. Included in this order are corrosion-resistant flatrolled products of non-rectangular cross-section where such 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. Excluded from this order are flat-rolled steel products either plated or coated with tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (terne plate), or both chromium and chromium oxides (tin-free steel), whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances in addition to the metallic coating. Also excluded from this order are clad products in straight lengths of 0.1875 inch or more in PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters and measures at least twice the thickness. Also excluded from this order are certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are three-layered corrosion-resistant carbon steel flatrolled products less than 4.75 millimeters in composite thickness that consist of a carbon steel flat-rolled product clad on both sides with stainless steel in a 20%–60%–20% ratio. These HTSUS item numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written descriptions remain dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this administrative review are addressed in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which parties have raised, and to which we have responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an Appendix. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at https:// ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Changes From the Preliminary Results As a result of the Department’s analysis of comments received, we have made certain changes to the calculations of company-specific weight-average margins. For Union, we revised our treatment of laminated CORE products as noted at Comment 2 of our Issues and Decision Memorandum. See also ‘‘Calculation Memorandum for Union Steel,’’ from Dennis McClure to the File, dated March 14, 2011. We have also revised Union’s reported cost of manufacturing figures to reflect a recalculation of Union’s scrap offset, GNA-expense rate calculation, cost of goods sold denominator to reflect the FY scrap revenue, and financial expense ratio as noted at Comments 16, 17, 18, and 19. See also ‘‘Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results— Union Steel Co. Ltd.,’’ from Kristin Case to Neal Halper, dated March 14, 2010. For the POSCO Group, we revised our treatment of laminated CORE products, U.S. warranty expenses, home market indirect selling expenses, and U.S. indirect selling expenses incurred in the country of manufacture, as noted at Comments 2, 6, and 9 of our Issues and E:\FR\FM\21MRN1.SGM 21MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Notices Decision Memorandum. See also ‘‘Calculation Memorandum for Pohang Iron & Steel Company, Ltd. (POSCO), and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd. (POCOS) (collectively, the POSCO Group),’’ from Victoria Cho to the File, dated March 14, 2011. We have also revised the POSCO Group’s reported cost of manufacturing figures to reflect a recalculation of POSCO’s total cost of manufacturing, as noted at Comment 12. See also ‘‘Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results— Pohang Iron & Steel Company, Ltd., and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd.,’’ from Sheikh M. Hannan to Neal M. Halper, dated March 14, 2011. For HYSCO, we calculated the temper rolling cost adjustment factors for both temper rolled and non-temper rolled products and applied them to HYSCO’s reported cost file as noted at Comment 5 of our Issues and Decision Memorandum. See also ‘‘Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results—Hyundai HYSCO,’’ from Ji Young Oh to Neal M. Halper, dated March 14, 2011 (HYSCO’s Final Cost Calculation Memorandum). Moreover, we reversed our adjustment made in the Preliminary Results as facts available, regarding the use of weighted-average value of SOTHMAT, DIRLAB, and FOH from the cost file for CONNUMS with negative values and disregarded the cost file field COMADJ3 as noted at Comment 4 of our Issues and Decision Memorandum. See Preliminary Results, 75 FR at 55774; see also HYSCO’s Final Cost Calculation Memorandum. We have made no changes to Dongbu’s margin calculations since the Preliminary Results. See ‘‘Final Results in the 16th Administrative Review on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea: Calculation Memorandum for Dongbu Steel,’’ from Christopher Hargett to the File, dated March 14, 2011. Final Results of Review We determine that the following weighted-average margins exist: Percent margin mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Manufacturer/exporter HYSCO ........................................... The POSCO Group ........................ Union .............................................. Dongbu ........................................... Review-Specific Average Rate ....... Applicable to the Following Companies2: LG Chem, Haewon, Hausys and Dongkuk .................. a (de a 0.20 a 9.05 2.27 3.89 17:50 Mar 18, 2011 The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department calculated importer-specific duty assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the examined sales for that importer. Where the assessment rate is above de minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess duties on all entries of subject merchandise by that importer. The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of these final results of review. The Department clarified its ‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification applies to POR entries of subject merchandise produced by companies examined in this review (i.e., companies for which a dumping margin was calculated) where the companies did not know that their merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the allothers rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). Cash Deposit Requirements The following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of CORE from Korea entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these final results, as provided by section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act): (1) For companies covered by this review, the cash deposit rate will be the rate listed above; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies other than those covered by this review, the cash deposit rate will be the company-specific rate established for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the less-thanfair-value investigation, but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be 2 This 3.0% minimis). VerDate Mar<15>2010 Assessment Jkt 223001 rate is a weight-average percentage margin (based on the two reviewed companies with an affirmative dumping margin) for the period August 1, 2008, through July 31, 2009, and does not include zero and de minimis rates or any rates based solely upon facts available. PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 15293 the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the subject merchandise; and (4) if neither the exporter nor the producer is a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the investigation, the cash deposit rate will be 17.70 percent, the all-others rate established in the less-than-fairvalue investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further notice. Reimbursement of Duties This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the presumption that reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent increase in antidumping duties by the amount of antidumping and/or countervailing duties reimbursed. Administrative Protective Order This notice also is the only 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. 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: March 14, 2011. Kim Glas, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. APPENDIX I List of Comments in the Accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum: A. General Issues Comment 1: Treatment of ‘‘Negative Dumping Margins’’ (Zeroing) Comment 2: Treatment of Laminated Products in Model Match B. Company-Specific Issues Hyundai HYSCO Comment 3: Liquidation Instructions Comment 4: Cost Adjustments Made by HYSCO Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Treat All Products that Passed Through the E:\FR\FM\21MRN1.SGM 21MRN1 15294 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Notices Continuous Galvanizing Line as TemperRolled The POSCO Group Comment 6: POSCO’s Average Warranty Expense for U.S. Price Comment 7: The Department’s Treatment of Service Fees in its Home Market Indirect Selling Expenses Comment 8: The POSCO Group’s Home Market Warranty Expenses for Non-Prime Merchandise with Certain Gross Unit Prices Comment 9: The Allocation of POSCO’s Home Market Warranty Expense Over All Home Market Sales Comment 10: The Treatment of POSAM’s Other Expenses in its U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses Comment 11: The Treatment of the POSCO Group’s Actual Interest Expense in INDIRSU Comment 12: Beginning Inventory Variances for Semi-finished Goods Comment 13: Reported Costs Comment 14: General and Administrative Expense Ratio Calculation Union Comment 15: Cost-Recovery Test when Using a Quarterly-Cost Methodology Comment 16: Scrap Offset Comment 17: General and Administrative Expenses Comment 18: Cost of Goods Sold (COGS) Denominator Comment 19: Financial Expenses Dongbu Comment 20: Calculation of Home MarketShort Term Interest Rate Comment 21: Reported U.S. Customs Duty [FR Doc. 2011–6566 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [Application No. 10–00005] Export Trade Certificate of Review Notice of issuance of an Export Trade Certificate of Review to ARC Industries Ltd. (‘‘ARC’’) (Application #10–00005). ACTION: On March 7, 2011, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued an Export Trade Certificate of Review to ARC Industries Ltd. (‘‘ARC’’). This notice summarizes the conduct for which certification has been granted. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph E. Flynn, Director, Office of Competition and Economic Analysis, International Trade Administration, by telephone at (202) 482–5131 (this is not a toll-free number) or e-mail at etca@trade.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title III of the Export Trading Company Act of mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:50 Mar 18, 2011 Jkt 223001 1982 (15 U.S.C. 4001–21) authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to issue Export Trade Certificates of Review. The regulations implementing Title III are found at 15 CFR part 325 (2010). The U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Office of Competition and Economic Analysis (‘‘OCEA’’) is issuing this notice pursuant to 15 CFR 325.6(b), which requires the Secretary of Commerce to publish a summary of the issuance in the Federal Register. Under Section 305(a) of the Export Trading Company Act (15 U.S.C. 4012(b)(1)) and 15 CFR 325.11(a), any person aggrieved by the Secretary’s determination may, within 30 days of the date of this notice, bring an action in any appropriate district court of the United States to set aside the determination on the ground that the determination is erroneous. Description of Certified Conduct ARC is certified to engage in the Export Trade Activities and Methods of Operation described below in the following Export Trade and Export Markets. I. Export Trade 1. Products: All products. 2. Services: All services. 3. Technology Rights: Technology rights that relate to Products and Services including, but not limited to, patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets. 4. Export Trade Facilitation Services (as They Relate to the Export of Products, Services, and Technology Rights): Export Trade Facilitation Services include professional services in the areas of government relations and assistance with State and Federal programs; foreign trade and business protocol; consulting; market research and analysis; collection of information on trade opportunities; marketing; negotiations; joint ventures; shipping; export management; export licensing; advertising; documentation and services related to compliance with customs requirements; insurance and financing; trade show exhibitions; organizational development; management and labor strategies; licensing of technology; transportation; and facilitating the formation of products and services associations. II. Export Markets The Export markets include all parts of the world except the United States: (the fifty States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Mariana Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands). III. Export Trade Activities and Methods of Operation 1. With respect to the export of Products and Services, licensing of Technology Rights and provision of Export Trade Facilitation Services, ARC may, subject to the terms and conditions listed below: a. Provide and/or arrange for the provision of Export Trade Facilitation Services; b. Engage in promotional and marketing activities and collect information on trade opportunities in the Export Markets and distribute such information to clients; c. Enter into exclusive and/or nonexclusive licensing and/or sales agreements with Suppliers for the export of products and services, and/or technology rights to Export Markets; d. Enter into exclusive and/or nonexclusive agreements with distributors and/or sales representatives in Export Markets; e. Allocate export sales or divide Export Markets among Suppliers for the sale and/or licensing of products and services and/or technology rights; f. Allocate export orders among Suppliers; g. Establish the price of products and services and/or technology rights for sales and/or licensing in Export Markets; and h. Negotiate, enter into, and/or manage licensing agreements for the export of technology rights. 2. ARC may exchange information with individual Suppliers on a one-toone basis regarding that Supplier’s inventories and near-term production schedules in order that the availability of Products for export can be determined and effectively coordinated by ARC with its distributors in Export Markets. IV. Terms and Conditions 1. In engaging in Export Trade Activities and Methods of Operation, ARC will not intentionally disclose, directly or indirectly, to any Supplier any information about any other Supplier’s costs, production, capacity, inventories, domestic prices, domestic sales, or U.S. business plans, strategies, or methods that is not already generally available to the trade or public. 2. ARC will comply with requests made by the Secretary of Commerce on behalf of the Secretary or the Attorney General for information or documents relevant to conduct under the Certificate. The Secretary of Commerce will request such information or E:\FR\FM\21MRN1.SGM 21MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 54 (Monday, March 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15291-15294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-6566]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-816]


Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the 
Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the Sixteenth 
Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 14, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the preliminary results of the antidumping duty 
administrative review for certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat 
products (CORE) from the Republic of Korea (Korea). See Certain 
Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of 
Korea: Notice of Preliminary Results of the Sixteenth Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 75 FR 55769 (September 14, 2010) (Preliminary 
Results). This review covers eight manufacturers and/or exporters 
(collectively, the respondents) of the subject merchandise: LG Chem., 
Ltd. (LG Chem); Haewon MSC Co. Ltd. (Haewon); Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd. 
(Dongbu); Hyundai HYSCO (HYSCO); Pohang Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. (POSCO) 
and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd. (POCOS) (collectively, POSCO); 
Dongkuk Industries Co., Ltd. (Dongkuk); LG Hausys, Ltd. (Hausys); and 
Union Steel Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Union).\1\ The period of review 
(POR) is August 1, 2008, through July 31, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As noted in the Preliminary Results, the Department selected 
HYSCO, POSCO, Dongbu and Union as mandatory respondents in this 
review. See Memorandum from Dennis McClure, International Trade 
Compliance Analyst, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, to 
Melissa Skinner, Director, Office 3, entitled ``2008-2009 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Corrosion-Resistant Carbon 
Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Selection of 
Respondents for Individual Review,'' dated December 7, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of our analysis of the comments received, these final 
results differ from the Preliminary Results. For our final results, we 
find that Union and Dongbu made sales of subject merchandise at less 
than normal value (NV), and that POSCO and HYSCO have not. In addition, 
based on the final results for the respondents selected for individual 
review, we have determined a weighted-average margin for those 
companies that were not selected for individual review.

DATES: Effective Date: March 21, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis McClure (Union), Jolanta Lawska 
(HYSCO), Christopher Hargett

[[Page 15292]]

(Dongbu) and Victoria Cho (the POSCO Group, and non-selected 
companies), Office 3, AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 
(202) 482-5973, (202) 482-8362, (202) 482-4161, and (202) 482-5075, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On September 14, 2010, the Department published the Preliminary 
Results. In the Preliminary Results, the Department determined that 
Union and Dongbu made sales of subject merchandise at less than NV 
during the POR, and that HYSCO and POSCO did not. In addition, based on 
the preliminary results for the respondents selected for individual 
review, the Department calculated a weighted-average margin for those 
companies that were not selected for individual review.
    We conducted sales verifications at the POSCO Group from October 18 
through 22, 2010, at HYSCO from October 25 through 29, 2010, and at 
Union from November 1 through 5, 2010. We conducted cost verifications 
at HYSCO from October 4 through 8, 2010, at the POSCO Group from 
October 11 through 15, 2010, and at Union from November 8 through 12, 
2010. On December 7, 15, and 21, 2010, respectively, the Department 
released sales verification reports for Union, HYSCO, and the POSCO 
Group. On November 29, December 6, and December 17, 2010, respectively, 
the Department released cost verification reports for the POSCO Group, 
HYSCO, and Union.
    On December 13, 2010, the Department extended the time limits for 
the final results of this review until no later than March 14, 2011. 
See Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of 
Korea: Notice of Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 77615 (December 13, 
2010).

Comments From Interested Parties

    We invited parties to comment on our Preliminary Results. On 
January 14, 2011, United States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel) filed 
case briefs concerning all four mandatory respondents. On January 14, 
2011, HYSCO, POSCO, Union, and Dongbu each filed case briefs. On 
January 14, 2011, Hausys submitted its case brief, stating that it 
supports the arguments submitted by Union and Dongbu in their case 
briefs because Hausys's dumping margin would be based on the 
respondents subject to individual examination. On January 21, 2011, 
U.S. Steel and Nucor Corporation (Nucor) (collectively, petitioners) 
each filed rebuttal briefs. On January 21, 2011, HYSCO, POSCO, Union, 
and Dongbu each filed rebuttal briefs.

Scope of the Order

    This order covers cold-rolled (cold-reduced) carbon steel flat-
rolled carbon steel products, of rectangular shape, either clad, 
plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, 
aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or 
not corrugated or painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other 
nonmetallic substances in addition to the metallic coating, in coils 
(whether or not in successively superimposed layers) and of a width of 
0.5 inch or greater, or in straight lengths which, if of a thickness 
less than 4.75 millimeters, are of a width of 0.5 inch or greater and 
which measures at least 10 times the thickness or if of a thickness of 
4.75 millimeters or more are of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters 
and measures at least twice the thickness, as currently classifiable in 
the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item 
numbers 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 
7210.49.0090, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 
7210.70.6090, 7210.90.1000, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 
7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 
7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, 7212.60.0000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 
7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 
7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090. Included in this order are 
corrosion-resistant flat-rolled products of non-rectangular cross-
section where such 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. 
Excluded from this order are flat-rolled steel products either plated 
or coated with tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead 
(terne plate), or both chromium and chromium oxides (tin-free steel), 
whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other 
nonmetallic substances in addition to the metallic coating. Also 
excluded from this order are clad products in straight lengths of 
0.1875 inch or more in composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 
150 millimeters and measures at least twice the thickness. Also 
excluded from this order are certain clad stainless flat-rolled 
products, which are three-layered corrosion-resistant carbon steel 
flat-rolled products less than 4.75 millimeters in composite thickness 
that consist of a carbon steel flat-rolled product clad on both sides 
with stainless steel in a 20%-60%-20% ratio.
    These HTSUS item numbers are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes. The written descriptions remain dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this administrative review are addressed in the accompanying Issues and 
Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of 
the issues which parties have raised, and to which we have responded in 
the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an 
Appendix. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes From the Preliminary Results

    As a result of the Department's analysis of comments received, we 
have made certain changes to the calculations of company-specific 
weight-average margins.
    For Union, we revised our treatment of laminated CORE products as 
noted at Comment 2 of our Issues and Decision Memorandum. See also 
``Calculation Memorandum for Union Steel,'' from Dennis McClure to the 
File, dated March 14, 2011. We have also revised Union's reported cost 
of manufacturing figures to reflect a recalculation of Union's scrap 
offset, GNA-expense rate calculation, cost of goods sold denominator to 
reflect the FY scrap revenue, and financial expense ratio as noted at 
Comments 16, 17, 18, and 19. See also ``Cost of Production and 
Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results--Union 
Steel Co. Ltd.,'' from Kristin Case to Neal Halper, dated March 14, 
2010.
    For the POSCO Group, we revised our treatment of laminated CORE 
products, U.S. warranty expenses, home market indirect selling 
expenses, and U.S. indirect selling expenses incurred in the country of 
manufacture, as noted at Comments 2, 6, and 9 of our Issues and

[[Page 15293]]

Decision Memorandum. See also ``Calculation Memorandum for Pohang Iron 
& Steel Company, Ltd. (POSCO), and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd. 
(POCOS) (collectively, the POSCO Group),'' from Victoria Cho to the 
File, dated March 14, 2011. We have also revised the POSCO Group's 
reported cost of manufacturing figures to reflect a recalculation of 
POSCO's total cost of manufacturing, as noted at Comment 12. See also 
``Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for 
the Final Results--Pohang Iron & Steel Company, Ltd., and Pohang Coated 
Steel Co., Ltd.,'' from Sheikh M. Hannan to Neal M. Halper, dated March 
14, 2011.
    For HYSCO, we calculated the temper rolling cost adjustment factors 
for both temper rolled and non-temper rolled products and applied them 
to HYSCO's reported cost file as noted at Comment 5 of our Issues and 
Decision Memorandum. See also ``Cost of Production and Constructed 
Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results--Hyundai HYSCO,'' 
from Ji Young Oh to Neal M. Halper, dated March 14, 2011 (HYSCO's Final 
Cost Calculation Memorandum). Moreover, we reversed our adjustment made 
in the Preliminary Results as facts available, regarding the use of 
weighted-average value of SOTHMAT, DIRLAB, and FOH from the cost file 
for CONNUMS with negative values and disregarded the cost file field 
COMADJ3 as noted at Comment 4 of our Issues and Decision Memorandum. 
See Preliminary Results, 75 FR at 55774; see also HYSCO's Final Cost 
Calculation Memorandum.
    We have made no changes to Dongbu's margin calculations since the 
Preliminary Results. See ``Final Results in the 16th Administrative 
Review on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea: 
Calculation Memorandum for Dongbu Steel,'' from Christopher Hargett to 
the File, dated March 14, 2011.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following weighted-average margins exist:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Percent
                     Manufacturer/exporter                       margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HYSCO.........................................................  \a\ 0.20
The POSCO Group...............................................  \a\ 9.05
Union.........................................................      2.27
Dongbu........................................................      3.89
Review-Specific Average Rate..................................      3.0%
Applicable to the Following Companies\2\: LG Chem, Haewon,
 Hausys and Dongkuk...........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ (de minimis).

Assessment

    The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department calculated 
importer-specific duty assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of 
the total antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the 
total entered value of the examined sales for that importer. Where the 
assessment rate is above de minimis, we will instruct CBP to assess 
duties on all entries of subject merchandise by that importer. The 
Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions 
directly to CBP 15 days after publication of these final results of 
review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This rate is a weight-average percentage margin (based on 
the two reviewed companies with an affirmative dumping margin) for 
the period August 1, 2008, through July 31, 2009, and does not 
include zero and de minimis rates or any rates based solely upon 
facts available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on 
May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification applies to POR entries of 
subject merchandise produced by companies examined in this review 
(i.e., companies for which a dumping margin was calculated) where the 
companies did not know that their merchandise was destined for the 
United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate 
unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the 
intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full 
discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 
2003).

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all 
shipments of CORE from Korea entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the publication date of these final results, as 
provided by section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
Act): (1) For companies covered by this review, the cash deposit rate 
will be the rate listed above; (2) for previously reviewed or 
investigated companies other than those covered by this review, the 
cash deposit rate will be the company-specific rate established 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 producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for 
the most recent period for the manufacturer of the subject merchandise; 
and (4) if neither the exporter nor the producer is a firm covered in 
this review, a prior review, or the investigation, the cash deposit 
rate will be 17.70 percent, the all-others rate established in the 
less-than-fair-value investigation. These deposit requirements shall 
remain in effect until further notice.

Reimbursement of Duties

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding 
the reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties prior to 
liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure 
to comply with this requirement could result in the presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred and 
the subsequent increase in antidumping duties by the amount of 
antidumping and/or countervailing duties reimbursed.

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also is the only 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. 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable 
violation.
    We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: March 14, 2011.
Kim Glas,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

APPENDIX I

    List of Comments in the Accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum:

A. General Issues

Comment 1: Treatment of ``Negative Dumping Margins'' (Zeroing)
Comment 2: Treatment of Laminated Products in Model Match

B. Company-Specific Issues

Hyundai HYSCO

Comment 3: Liquidation Instructions
Comment 4: Cost Adjustments Made by HYSCO
Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Treat All Products that 
Passed Through the

[[Page 15294]]

Continuous Galvanizing Line as Temper-Rolled

The POSCO Group

Comment 6: POSCO's Average Warranty Expense for U.S. Price
Comment 7: The Department's Treatment of Service Fees in its Home 
Market Indirect Selling Expenses
Comment 8: The POSCO Group's Home Market Warranty Expenses for Non-
Prime Merchandise with Certain Gross Unit Prices
Comment 9: The Allocation of POSCO's Home Market Warranty Expense 
Over All Home Market Sales
Comment 10: The Treatment of POSAM's Other Expenses in its U.S. 
Indirect Selling Expenses
Comment 11: The Treatment of the POSCO Group's Actual Interest 
Expense in INDIRSU
Comment 12: Beginning Inventory Variances for Semi-finished Goods
Comment 13: Reported Costs
Comment 14: General and Administrative Expense Ratio Calculation

Union

Comment 15: Cost-Recovery Test when Using a Quarterly-Cost 
Methodology
Comment 16: Scrap Offset
Comment 17: General and Administrative Expenses
Comment 18: Cost of Goods Sold (COGS) Denominator
Comment 19: Financial Expenses

Dongbu

Comment 20: Calculation of Home Market-Short Term Interest Rate
Comment 21: Reported U.S. Customs Duty

[FR Doc. 2011-6566 Filed 3-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.