Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the 2009-2010 Administrative Review and Revocation, in Part, 14501-14504 [2012-5937]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 48 / Monday, March 12, 2012 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–533–824] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: March 12, 2012. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi Blum or Toni Page, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0197 or (202) 482– 1398, respectively. pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: Background On August 26, 2011, the Department of Commerce (Department) published a notice of initiation of an administrative review under the antidumping duty (AD) order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet and strip from India covering the period July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part, 76 FR 53404 (August 26, 2011). The Department initiated the review with respect to seven companies, Ester Industries Limited, Garware Polyester Ltd., Jindal Polyfilms Limited of India (Jindal), Polypacks Industries (Polypacks), Polyplex Corporation Ltd. (Polyplex), SRF Limited (SRF), and Vacmet India, Ltd. (Vacmet). On August 23, 2011, Vacmet and Polypacks timely withdrew their requests for a review. The Department published a rescission, in part, of the AD administrative review with respect to Vacmet and Polypacks on September 20, 2011. See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India: Rescission, In Part, of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 58244 (September 20, 2011). On November 25, 2011, Petitioners 1 timely withdrew their request for AD administrative reviews of Ester and Garware, and the Department published a rescission, in part, of the AD administrative review of the aforementioned companies on January 25, 2012. See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India: Rescission, In Part, of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 3730 (January 25, 2012). Jindal, Polyplex, and SRF remain subject to this review. The preliminary results of the antidumping duty administrative review are currently due April 1, 2012. Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department shall issue preliminary results in an administrative review of an antidumping duty order within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of the order for which the administrative review was requested. However, if the Department determines that it is not practicable to complete the preliminary results of the review within the aforementioned time limit, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2) allow the Department to extend the 245-day period to 365 days. Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2), we determine that it is not practicable to complete the preliminary results of this review within the original time limit. The Department needs additional time to analyze the extensive sales and cost questionnaire responses that were submitted, and we must issue additional supplemental questionnaires. Therefore, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department has decided to extend the time limit for the preliminary results from 245 days to 365 days. The preliminary results will now be due no later than July 30, 2012. Unless extended, the final results continue to be due 120 days after the publication of the preliminary results, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1). This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: March 6, 2012. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. [FR Doc. 2012–5894 Filed 3–9–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 1 Petitioners are DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc., SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics (America), Inc. VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:55 Mar 09, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 14501 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 2009–2010 Administrative Review and Revocation, in Part Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On September 6, 2011, 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).1 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).2 The period of review (POR) is August 1, 2009, through, July 31, 2010. 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 POSCO and HYSCO have not made sales of subject merchandise at less than NV. 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. Further, the Department has determined to revoke this antidumping duty order, in part, with respect to entries from POSCO. DATES: Effective Date: March 12, 2012. AGENCY: 1 See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Preliminary Results of the Seventeenth Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 55004 (September 6, 2011) (Preliminary Results). 2 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 ‘‘17th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Selection of Respondents for Individual Review,’’ dated October 29, 2010. E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM 12MRN1 14502 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 48 / Monday, March 12, 2012 / Notices FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Hargett (Union and HYSCO), Cindy Robinson (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) 482–4161, (202) 482– 3797, and (202) 482–5075, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On September 6, 2011, the Department published the Preliminary Results. We conducted sales and cost verifications at the POSCO Group and Dongbu from October 17, 2011, through October 21, 2011, in Seoul, Korea. On November 30, 2011, and December 1, 2011, respectively, the Department released the cost verification report and the sales verification report the POSCO Group. On December 5, 2012, and December 6, 2012, respectively, the Department released cost verification report and the sales verification report for Dongbu. On November 9, 2011, the Department extended the time limits for the final results of this review until no later than March 4, 2012.3 pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Comments From Interested Parties We invited parties to comment on our Preliminary Results. On January 9, 2012, United States Steel Corporation, Nucor Corporation, ArcelorMittal USA Llc (collectively, petitioners), HYSCO, POSCO, Union, LG Hausys, and Dongbu (collectively, respondents), filed case briefs. On January 17, 2012, petitioners and respondents, except LG Hausys, filed rebuttal briefs. On January 25, 2012, and January 27, 2012, respectively, POSCO and HYSCO resubmitted their rebuttal briefs redacting improperly-filed new factual information. On January 27, 2012, the Department held a public hearing regarding the instant case. On January 30, 2012, U.S. Steel re-submitted their case brief with respect to HYSCO redacting improperly-filed new factual information. 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, 3 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, 76 FR 69703 (November 9, 2011). VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:55 Mar 09, 2012 Jkt 226001 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 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 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 17th Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea (2009–2010),’’ from Gary Taverman, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, (‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’), dated concurrently with this notice and 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. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Import Administration’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (‘‘IA ACCESS’’). IA ACCESS is available in the Central Records Unit, main Commerce Building, room 7046. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum 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 changed the date of sale for certain U.S. sales as noted in Comment 7 of our Issues and Decision Memorandum. In addition, we revised the payment date and credit expense for certain sales with missing payment dates as noted at Comment 8 of our Issues and Decision Memorandum.4 As noted at Comment 9 of our Issues and Decision Memorandum, we have recalculated Dongbu’s dumping margin for certain billing adjustments.5 For 4 See also ‘‘Calculation Memorandum for Union Steel,’’ from Dennis McClure to the File, dated March 5, 2011. 5 See ‘‘Final Results in the 17th Administrative Review on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea: Calculation Memorandum for Dongbu Steel,’’ from Cindy Robinson to the File, dated March 5, 2012. E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM 12MRN1 14503 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 48 / Monday, March 12, 2012 / Notices POSCO, we re-allocated certain general and administrative, and interest expenses, for their cost of production.6 pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Notice of Revocation of the Order, In Part On August 31, 2010, the POSCO Group requested revocation of the order on CORE from Korea as it pertains to its sales.7 Under section 751(d)(1) of the Act, the Department ‘‘may revoke, in whole or in part’’ an antidumping duty order upon completion of a review. Although Congress has not specified the procedures that the Department must follow in revoking an order, the Department has developed a procedure for revocation that is set forth at 19 CFR 351.222. Under 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2), the Department may revoke an antidumping duty order in part if it concludes that (A) an exporter or producer has sold the merchandise at not less than normal value for a period of at least three consecutive years, (B) the exporter or producer has agreed in writing to its immediate reinstatement in the order if the Secretary concludes that the exporter or producer, subsequent to the revocation, sold the subject merchandise at less than normal value, and (C) the continued application of the antidumping duty order is no longer necessary to offset dumping. A request for revocation of an order in part for a company previously found dumping must address three elements. The company requesting the revocation must do so in writing and submit the following statements with the request: (1) The company’s certification that it sold the subject merchandise at not less than normal value during the current review period and that, in the future, it will not sell at less than normal value; (2) the company’s certification that, during each of the consecutive years forming the basis of the request, it sold the subject merchandise to the United States in commercial quantities; (3) the agreement to reinstatement in the order if the Department concludes that, subsequent to revocation, the company has sold the subject merchandise at less than normal value. See 19 CFR 351.222(e)(1). We find that the request dated August 31, 2010, from the POSCO Group meets all of the criteria under 19 CFR 351.222(e)(1). 6 See memo from Victoria Cho to the File, entitled ‘‘Final Results in the 17th Administrative Review on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea: Calculation Memorandum for Pohang Iron & Steel Company, Ltd. (POSCO) and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd. (POCOS) (collectively, the POSCO Group),’’ dated March 5, 2012 (POSCO Sales Calc Memo). 7 See Letter to the Department from POSCO, dated August 31, 2010. VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:55 Mar 09, 2012 Jkt 226001 With regard to the criteria of 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2), our final margin calculations show that the POSCO Group sold CORE at not less than normal value during the current review period. See ‘‘Final Results of Reviews’’ section below. In addition, it sold CORE at not less than normal value in the two preceding years.8 Based on our examination of the sales data submitted by the POSCO Group, we find that the POSCO Group sold the subject merchandise in the United States in commercial quantities in each of the consecutive years cited by the POSCO Group to support its request for revocation.9 Thus, we find that the POSCO Group had zero or de minimis dumping margins for the last three consecutive years and sold in commercial quantities all three years. Also, we find that application of the antidumping duty order to the POSCO Group is no longer warranted for the following reasons: (1) The company had zero or de minimis margins for a period of at least three consecutive years; (2) the company has agreed to immediate reinstatement of the order if we find that it has resumed making sales at less than fair value; (3) the continued application of the order is not otherwise necessary to offset dumping. Therefore, we find that the POSCO Group qualifies for revocation from the order on CORE from Korea pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2) and, thus, we will revoke the order with respect to CORE from Korea produced and exported to the United States by the POSCO Group. The revocation of the order in part with respect to merchandise produced and exported by the POSCO Group, is effective August 1, 2010. Final Results of Review: We determine that the following weighted-average margins exist: Manufacturer/Exporter HYSCO .............................. The POSCO Group ........... Union ................................. Dongbu .............................. Percent margin 0.25 (de minimis) 0.04 (de minimis) 3.66 4.80 8 See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the Fifteenth Administrative Review, 75 FR 13490 (March 22, 2010) (CORE 15 Final Results); see also Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the Sixteenth Administrative Review, 76 FR 15291 (March 21, 2011) (CORE 16 Final Results). 9 See POSCO Sales Calc Memo. 10 This rate is based on the margins calculated for those companies that were selected for individual review, excluding de minimis margins or margins based entirely on adverse facts available. PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Manufacturer/Exporter Review-Specific Average Rate Applicable to the Following Companies:10 LG Chem, Haewon, Hausys and Dongkuk. Percent margin 4.23 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. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to antidumping duties any entries for which the assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent). The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of 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 E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM 12MRN1 14504 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 48 / Monday, March 12, 2012 / Notices 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 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. B. Company-Specific Issues 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. Dongbu Comment 9: Treatment of Home Market Billing Adjustments. 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. pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Dated: March 5, 2012. Paul Piquado, 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: Collapsing Union and POSCO. VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:55 Mar 09, 2012 Jkt 226001 Hyundai HYSCO Comment 3: Treatment of Non-temper Rolled Merchandise. Comment 4: Date of Sale for U.S. Sales. The POSCO Group Comment 5: Revocation from the Order. Comment 6: Date of Sale for U.S. Sales. Union Comment 7: Date of Sale for U.S. Sales. Comment 8: Missing Payment Dates. [FR Doc. 2012–5937 Filed 3–9–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Max Planck Florida Institute, et al.; Notice of Consolidated Decision on Applications for Duty-Free Entry of Electron Microscope This is a decision consolidated pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89–651, as amended by Pub. L. 106– 36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301). Related records can be viewed between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. in Room 3720, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. Docket Number: 11–061. Applicant: Max Planck Florida Institute, Jupiter, FL 33458. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, Czech Republic. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 5767, February 6, 2012. Docket Number: 11–070. Applicant: University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, Czech Republic. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 5767, February 6, 2012. Docket Number: 11–071. Applicant: Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409–3103. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation, Japan. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 5767, February 6, 2012. Docket Number: 11–073. Applicant: Ball State University, Muncie, IN 47306. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: JEOL Ltd., Japan. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 5767, February 6, 2012. PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Docket Number: 11–075. Applicant: Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH 44115–2214. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, Czech Republic. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 5767, February 6, 2012. Docket Number: 12–003. Applicant: University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA 92697. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, Czech Republic. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 5767, February 6, 2012. Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such purposes as this instrument is intended to be used, is being manufactured in the United States at the time the instrument was ordered. Reasons: Each foreign instrument is an electron microscope and is intended for research or scientific educational uses requiring an electron microscope. We know of no electron microscope, or any other instrument suited to these purposes, which was being manufactured in the United States at the time of order of each instrument. Dated: March 5, 2012. Gregory W. Campbell, Director, Subsidies Enforcement Office, Import Administration. [FR Doc. 2012–5934 Filed 3–9–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration University of California, Davis, et al.; Notice of Decision on Applications for Duty-Free Entry of Scientific Instruments This is a decision pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89–651, as amended by Pub. L. 106–36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301). Related records can be viewed between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. in Room 3720, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. Docket Number: 11–072. Applicant: University of California, Davis, NEAT ORU, One Shields Avenue Davis, CA 95616. Instrument: Alexsys 1000 Calorimeter. Manufacturer: Setaram Instrumentation, France. Intended Use: See notice at 77 FR 5768, February 6, 2012. Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. We know of no instruments of equivalent scientific value to the foreign instruments described below, for such purposes as E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM 12MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 48 (Monday, March 12, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14501-14504]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5937]


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

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 2009-2010 
Administrative Review and Revocation, in Part

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 6, 2011, 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).\1\ 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).\2\ The period of review (POR) is August 1, 2009, 
through, July 31, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products 
From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Preliminary Results of the 
Seventeenth Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 55004 
(September 6, 2011) (Preliminary Results).
    \2\ 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 ``17th Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review of Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat 
Products from the Republic of Korea: Selection of Respondents for 
Individual Review,'' dated October 29, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 POSCO and HYSCO have not made sales of 
subject merchandise at less than NV. 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. Further, the Department has determined 
to revoke this antidumping duty order, in part, with respect to entries 
from POSCO.

DATES: Effective Date: March 12, 2012.

[[Page 14502]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Hargett (Union and HYSCO), 
Cindy Robinson (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) 482-4161, (202) 482-3797, and (202) 482-5075, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On September 6, 2011, the Department published the Preliminary 
Results. We conducted sales and cost verifications at the POSCO Group 
and Dongbu from October 17, 2011, through October 21, 2011, in Seoul, 
Korea. On November 30, 2011, and December 1, 2011, respectively, the 
Department released the cost verification report and the sales 
verification report the POSCO Group. On December 5, 2012, and December 
6, 2012, respectively, the Department released cost verification report 
and the sales verification report for Dongbu.
    On November 9, 2011, the Department extended the time limits for 
the final results of this review until no later than March 4, 2012.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 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, 76 FR 69703 
(November 9, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments From Interested Parties

    We invited parties to comment on our Preliminary Results. On 
January 9, 2012, United States Steel Corporation, Nucor Corporation, 
ArcelorMittal USA Llc (collectively, petitioners), HYSCO, POSCO, Union, 
LG Hausys, and Dongbu (collectively, respondents), filed case briefs. 
On January 17, 2012, petitioners and respondents, except LG Hausys, 
filed rebuttal briefs. On January 25, 2012, and January 27, 2012, 
respectively, POSCO and HYSCO re-submitted their rebuttal briefs 
redacting improperly-filed new factual information. On January 27, 
2012, the Department held a public hearing regarding the instant case. 
On January 30, 2012, U.S. Steel re-submitted their case brief with 
respect to HYSCO redacting improperly-filed new factual information.

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 ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum for the Final Results of the 17th Administrative Review of 
the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel 
Flat Products from the Republic of Korea (2009-2010),'' from Gary 
Taverman, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary 
for Import Administration, (``Issues and Decision Memorandum''), dated 
concurrently with this notice and 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. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a 
public document and is on file electronically via Import 
Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized 
Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS''). IA ACCESS is available in 
the Central Records Unit, main Commerce Building, room 7046. In 
addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can 
be accessed directly on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The 
signed Issues and Decision Memorandum 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 changed the date of sale for certain U.S. sales as 
noted in Comment 7 of our Issues and Decision Memorandum. In addition, 
we revised the payment date and credit expense for certain sales with 
missing payment dates as noted at Comment 8 of our Issues and Decision 
Memorandum.\4\ As noted at Comment 9 of our Issues and Decision 
Memorandum, we have recalculated Dongbu's dumping margin for certain 
billing adjustments.\5\ For

[[Page 14503]]

POSCO, we re-allocated certain general and administrative, and interest 
expenses, for their cost of production.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See also ``Calculation Memorandum for Union Steel,'' from 
Dennis McClure to the File, dated March 5, 2011.
    \5\ See ``Final Results in the 17th Administrative Review on 
Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea: 
Calculation Memorandum for Dongbu Steel,'' from Cindy Robinson to 
the File, dated March 5, 2012.
    \6\ See memo from Victoria Cho to the File, entitled ``Final 
Results in the 17th Administrative Review on Corrosion-Resistant 
Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea: Calculation Memorandum for 
Pohang Iron & Steel Company, Ltd. (POSCO) and Pohang Coated Steel 
Co., Ltd. (POCOS) (collectively, the POSCO Group),'' dated March 5, 
2012 (POSCO Sales Calc Memo).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notice of Revocation of the Order, In Part

    On August 31, 2010, the POSCO Group requested revocation of the 
order on CORE from Korea as it pertains to its sales.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Letter to the Department from POSCO, dated August 31, 
2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under section 751(d)(1) of the Act, the Department ``may revoke, in 
whole or in part'' an antidumping duty order upon completion of a 
review. Although Congress has not specified the procedures that the 
Department must follow in revoking an order, the Department has 
developed a procedure for revocation that is set forth at 19 CFR 
351.222. Under 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2), the Department may revoke an 
antidumping duty order in part if it concludes that (A) an exporter or 
producer has sold the merchandise at not less than normal value for a 
period of at least three consecutive years, (B) the exporter or 
producer has agreed in writing to its immediate reinstatement in the 
order if the Secretary concludes that the exporter or producer, 
subsequent to the revocation, sold the subject merchandise at less than 
normal value, and (C) the continued application of the antidumping duty 
order is no longer necessary to offset dumping.
    A request for revocation of an order in part for a company 
previously found dumping must address three elements. The company 
requesting the revocation must do so in writing and submit the 
following statements with the request: (1) The company's certification 
that it sold the subject merchandise at not less than normal value 
during the current review period and that, in the future, it will not 
sell at less than normal value; (2) the company's certification that, 
during each of the consecutive years forming the basis of the request, 
it sold the subject merchandise to the United States in commercial 
quantities; (3) the agreement to reinstatement in the order if the 
Department concludes that, subsequent to revocation, the company has 
sold the subject merchandise at less than normal value. See 19 CFR 
351.222(e)(1). We find that the request dated August 31, 2010, from the 
POSCO Group meets all of the criteria under 19 CFR 351.222(e)(1).
    With regard to the criteria of 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2), our final 
margin calculations show that the POSCO Group sold CORE at not less 
than normal value during the current review period. See ``Final Results 
of Reviews'' section below. In addition, it sold CORE at not less than 
normal value in the two preceding years.\8\ Based on our examination of 
the sales data submitted by the POSCO Group, we find that the POSCO 
Group sold the subject merchandise in the United States in commercial 
quantities in each of the consecutive years cited by the POSCO Group to 
support its request for revocation.\9\ Thus, we find that the POSCO 
Group had zero or de minimis dumping margins for the last three 
consecutive years and sold in commercial quantities all three years. 
Also, we find that application of the antidumping duty order to the 
POSCO Group is no longer warranted for the following reasons: (1) The 
company had zero or de minimis margins for a period of at least three 
consecutive years; (2) the company has agreed to immediate 
reinstatement of the order if we find that it has resumed making sales 
at less than fair value; (3) the continued application of the order is 
not otherwise necessary to offset dumping.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products 
from the Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the Fifteenth 
Administrative Review, 75 FR 13490 (March 22, 2010) (CORE 15 Final 
Results); see also Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat 
Products From the Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the 
Sixteenth Administrative Review, 76 FR 15291 (March 21, 2011) (CORE 
16 Final Results).
    \9\ See POSCO Sales Calc Memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, we find that the POSCO Group qualifies for revocation 
from the order on CORE from Korea pursuant to 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2) and, 
thus, we will revoke the order with respect to CORE from Korea produced 
and exported to the United States by the POSCO Group. The revocation of 
the order in part with respect to merchandise produced and exported by 
the POSCO Group, is effective August 1, 2010.
    Final Results of Review:
    We determine that the following weighted-average margins exist:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ This rate is based on the margins calculated for those 
companies that were selected for individual review, excluding de 
minimis margins or margins based entirely on adverse facts 
available.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Manufacturer/Exporter                    Percent margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HYSCO..................................  0.25
                                         (de minimis)
The POSCO Group........................  0.04
                                         (de minimis)
Union..................................  3.66
Dongbu.................................  4.80
Review-Specific Average Rate Applicable  4.23
 to the Following Companies:\10\ LG
 Chem, Haewon, Hausys and Dongkuk.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate 
without regard to antidumping duties any entries for which the 
assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less than 0.50 percent). The 
Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days 
after the date of 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 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

[[Page 14504]]

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 5, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
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: Collapsing Union and POSCO.

B. Company-Specific Issues

Hyundai HYSCO
    Comment 3: Treatment of Non-temper Rolled Merchandise.
    Comment 4: Date of Sale for U.S. Sales.
The POSCO Group
    Comment 5: Revocation from the Order.
    Comment 6: Date of Sale for U.S. Sales.
Union
    Comment 7: Date of Sale for U.S. Sales.
    Comment 8: Missing Payment Dates.
Dongbu
    Comment 9: Treatment of Home Market Billing Adjustments.
[FR Doc. 2012-5937 Filed 3-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.