Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014, 14087-14089 [2016-05940]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 51 / Wednesday, March 16, 2016 / Notices pending a final and conclusive court decision. Amended Final Determination Because there is now a final court decision with respect to the Ethan Allen Scope Ruling, the Department is amending its final scope ruling. The Department finds that the scope of the WBF Order does not cover the products addressed in the Ethan Allen Scope Ruling. The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) that the cash deposit rate will be zero percent for the four chests imported by Ethan Allen. In the event that the CIT’s ruling is not appealed, or if appealed, upheld by the CAFC, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate entries of Ethan Allen’s four chests at issue without regard to antidumping and/or countervailing duties, and to lift suspension of liquidation of such entries. This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of the Act. Dated: March 9, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2016–05942 Filed 3–15–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–580–867] Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013–2014 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On September 4, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on large power transformers from the Republic of Korea.1 The review covers five producers/exporters of the subject merchandise, Hyosung Corporation (Hyosung), Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. (Hyundai), ILJIN, ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd. (ILJIN Electric), and LSIS Co., Ltd. (LSIS). ILJIN, ILJIN Electric, and LSIS, were not selected for individual examination. The period of review mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: 1 See Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013– 2014, 80 FR 53496 (September 4, 2015) (Preliminary Results). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:11 Mar 15, 2016 Jkt 238001 (POR) is August 1, 2013, through July 31, 2014. As a result of our analysis of the comments and information received, these final results differ from the Preliminary Results. For the final weighted-average dumping margins, see the ‘‘Final Results of Review’’ section below. DATES: Effective Date: March 16, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Davis (Hyosung) or Edythe Artman (Hyundai), AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–7924 or (202) 482–3931, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On September 4, 2015, the Department published the Preliminary Results. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii), we invited parties to comment on our Preliminary Results.2 On October 16, 2015, Hyundai timely submitted a case brief and on October 19, 2015, Hyosung and ABB Inc. (Petitioner) timely submitted case briefs.3 Rebuttal briefs were also timely filed by Hyosung, Hyundai, and Petitioner, on October 27, 2015.4 On December 22, 2015, the Department issued a memorandum extending the time period for issuing the final results of this administrative review from January 4, 2016 to February 24, 2016.5 On February 29, 2016, the Department further extended the final results to March 8, 2015.6 2 The Department issued the briefing schedule in a Memorandum to the File, dated September 9, 2015. This briefing schedule was later extended at the request of interested parties to October 16, 2015 for briefs and October 26, 2015 for rebuttal briefs. 3 See Case Brief from Petitioner regarding Hyundai, (Petitioner Brief Hyundai), Brief from Petitioner regarding Hyosung (Petitioner Brief Hyosung), and Hyosung Brief, all dated October 19, 2015, and Hyundai Brief, dated October 16, 2015. 4 See Hyosung Rebuttal Brief, Hyundai Rebuttal Brief and Petitioner Rebuttal Brief: All dated October 26, 2015. Petitioner requested an extension for the briefing schedule to 30 days after Hyundai’s submission of a post-verification supplemental questionnaire and an extension for filing rebuttal briefs, which the Department partially granted for all parties in a letter dated September 29, 2015 and extended in a letter dated October 13, 2015. See Letter to Petitioner dated September 29, 2015 and Letter to Petitioner dated October 13, 2015. 5 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for AD/CVD Operations, ‘‘Large Power Transformers from the Republic of Korea: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013– 2014’’ (December 22, 2015). 6 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for AD/CVD Operations, ‘‘Large Power Transformers from the Republic of Korea: PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 14087 Scope of the Order The scope of this order covers large liquid dielectric power transformers (LPTs) having a top power handling capacity greater than or equal to 60,000 kilovolt amperes (60 megavolt amperes), whether assembled or unassembled, complete or incomplete. The merchandise subject to the order is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States at subheadings 8504.23.0040, 8504.23.0080 and 8504.90.9540.7 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.8 A list of the issues that parties raised and to which we responded is attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on-file electronically via ACCESS. ACCESS is available to registered users at https:// access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at https://enforcement.ita.doc.gov/frn/ index.html. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on a review of the record and comments received from interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we recalculated Hyosung’s and Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013– 2014’’ (February 29, 2016); see also Memorandum to the Record from Ron Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance, regarding ‘‘Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Government Closure During Snowstorm Jonas,’’ dated January 27, 2016. As explained in this memorandum, the Department has exercised its discretion to toll all administrative deadlines due to the recent closure of the Federal Government. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by four business days. The revised deadline for the final determination is now March 8, 2016. 7 For a full description of the scope of the order, see the Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, titled ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Large Power Transformers from the Republic of Korea; 2013–2014’’ (Issues and Decision Memorandum), which is issued concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice. 8 Id. E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM 16MRN1 14088 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 51 / Wednesday, March 16, 2016 / Notices Hyundai’s weighted-average dumping margins for these final results. For Hyosung, we revised our margin program by adjusting our treatment of Hyosung’s installation revenue, indirect selling expense ratio, U.S. commission expenses, and U.S. warranty expenses.9 For Hyundai, we revised the margin program with respect to our treatment of bank charges and packing expenses incurred in the home market, installation and supervision expenses incurred in both markets, domestic inventory carrying costs and U.S. credit expenses, and U.S. commission expenses.10 As a result of the aforementioned recalculations of Hyosung’s and Hyundai’s weighted-average dumping margins, the weighted-average dumping margin for the three non-selected companies also changed. Final Results of the Review As a result of this review, the Department determines the following weighted-average dumping margins 11 for the period August 1, 2013, through July 31, 2014, are as follows: Manufacturer/exporter Weightedaverage margin (percent) Hyosung Corporation ................ Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd ......................................... ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd .............. ILJIN ......................................... LSIS Co., Ltd ............................ 9.40 4.07 6.74 6.74 6.74 Duty Assessment mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES The Department shall determine and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess antidumping duties 9 See Memorandum from Brian Davis to the File, regarding ‘‘Analysis of Data Submitted by Hyosung Corporation in the Final Results of the Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Large Power Transformers from the Republic of Korea; 2013–2014’’ (Hyosung Final Analysis Memorandum), dated March 23, 2014, at section ‘‘Changes from the Preliminary Results,’’ for further information. 10 See Memorandum from Edythe Artman to the File, regarding ‘‘Analysis of Data Submitted by Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. in the Final Results of the Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Large Power Transformers from the Republic of Korea; 2013– 2014’’ (Hyundai Final Analysis Memorandum), dated March 23, 2014, at section ‘‘Changes from the Preliminary Results,’’ for further information. 11 As we did not have publicly-ranged U.S. sales volumes for Hyosung for the period August 1, 2013, through July 31, 2014, to calculate a weightedaverage percentage margin for the non-selected companies (i.e., ILJIN, ILJIN Electric, and LSIS) in this review, the rate applied to the non-selected companies is a simple-average percentage margin calculated based on the margins calculated for Hyosung and Hyundai. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:11 Mar 15, 2016 Jkt 238001 on all appropriate entries.12 For any individually examined respondents whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis, we calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer’s examined sales to the total entered value of those same sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Upon issuance of the final results of this administrative review, if any importer-specific assessment rates calculated in the final results are above de minimis (i.e., at or above 0.5 percent), the Department will issue instructions directly to CBP to assess antidumping duties on appropriate entries. To determine whether the duty assessment rates covering the period were de minimis, in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), for each respondent we calculated importer (or customer)specific ad valorem rates by aggregating the amount of dumping calculated for all U.S. sales to that importer or customer and dividing this amount by the total entered value of the sales to that importer (or customer). Where an importer (or customer)-specific ad valorem rate is greater than de minimis, and the respondent has reported reliable entered values, we apply the assessment rate to the entered value of the importer’s/customer’s entries during the review period. We intend to issue assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review. Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of this notice for all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication of these final results, as provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for respondents noted above will be the rate established in the final results of this administrative review; (2) for merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not covered in this administrative review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this 12 In these final results, the Department applied the assessment rate calculation method adopted in Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012). PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the manufacturer of the subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 22.00 percent, the all-others rate established in the antidumping investigation.13 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Notification to Importers Regarding the 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 the POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. Administrative Protective Order This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. 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 this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h). Dated: March 8, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix List of Topics Discussed in the Final Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. List of Issues III. Background 13 See Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 53177 (August 31, 2012). E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM 16MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 51 / Wednesday, March 16, 2016 / Notices IV. Scope of the Order V. Discussion of Interested Party Comments A. General Issues Comment 1: The Use of Constructed Value to Calculate Normal Value Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Apply the Transaction-to-Transaction Method, and Whether the Department Should Alter Its Application of Differential Pricing in this Administrative Review Warranty Guarantee Expenses Comment 30: Correction to Hyundai’s Liquidation Instructions VI. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2016–05940 Filed 3–15–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES B. Hyosung—Specific Issues Comment 3: The Department’s Capping of Certain Expense Revenues Comment 4: The Department’s Adjustment to Home Market Warranty Expenses and Indirect Selling Expenses Comment 5: The Department’s Treatment of Ocean Freight Revenue Comment 6: The Department’s Treatment of U.S. Commission Expenses Comment 7: Clerical Error Related to U.S. Direct Selling Expenses [A–570–956 and C–570–957] C. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd.— Specific Issues Comment 8: Hyundai’s Reporting of Constructed Value Comment 9: The Department’s Treatment of U.S. Commission Offset Comment 10: Hyundai’s Failure to Report Reimbursed Expenses Comment 11: Hyundai Reporting of U.S. and Home Market Dates of Sale Comment 12: Hyundai’s Reported Installation and Supervision Expenses Comment 13: Hyundai’s Calculations of Indirect Selling Expenses for the Home and U.S. Markets Comment 14: Hyundai’s Failure to Provide Audited 2013 Financial Statements for Hyundai Corporation (Korea) Comment 15: Application of Adverse Facts Available to Hyundai Comment 16: Hyundai’s Reporting of U.S. Credit Expenses Comment 17: Hyundai’s Reporting of Bank Charges Incurred on its U.S. Sales Comment 18: Hyundai’s Reporting of U.S. Brokerage Expenses Comment 19: Hyundai’s Reporting of U.S. Inland Freight Expenses for U.S. Sales that Included Spare Parts Comment 20: Hyundai’s Reporting of its U.S. Supervision Costs Comment 21: Verification of Amounts Reported by Hyundai for Warranty Expenses and Domestic Indirect Selling Expenses Incurred in the United States Comment 22: Hyundai’s Failure to Report Inventory Carrying Costs Incurred in the United States Comment 23: Issues with Specific U.S. Sales Comment 24: Hyundai’s Reporting of Insurance and Packing Expenses for Home-Market Sales Comment 25: Hyundai’s Reporting of HomeMarket Inland Trucking Expenses Comment 26: Hyundai’s Reporting Home Market Insurance Expenses Comment 27: Hyundai’s Reporting of Other Direct Selling Expenses Comment 28: Hyundai’s Reporting of Actual Packing Expenses Comment 29: Hyundai’s Reporting of SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:11 Mar 15, 2016 Jkt 238001 Seamless Carbon Alloy Steel Standard Line and Pressure Pipes From the People’s Republic of China: Continuation of Antidumping Duty Order and Countervailing Duty Order Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. AGENCY: As a result of the determinations by the Department of Commerce (the Department) and the International Trade Commission (ITC) that revocation of the antidumping duty (AD) order and countervailing duty (CVD) order on seamless carbon alloy steel standard line and pressure pipes (seamless pipe) from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and countervailable subsidies and material injury to an industry in the United States, the Department is publishing a notice of continuation of the antidumping duty order and the countervailing duty order. DATES: Effective Date: March 16, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aleksandras Nakutis, Office IV, or, Peter Zukowski, Office I, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3147 or (202) 482–0189. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On November 10, 2010, the Department published the AD and CVD orders on imports of seamless pipes from the PRC.1 There have been no administrative reviews since issuance of the Orders. There have been no related 1 See Certain Seamless Carbon and Alloy Steel Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe From the People’s Republic of China: Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order, 75 FR 69052 (November 10, 2010); see also Certain Seamless Carbon and Alloy Steel Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe From the People’s Republic of China: Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Countervailing Duty Order, 75 FR 69050 (November 10, 2010) (Orders). PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 14089 findings or rulings (e.g., changed circumstances review, scope ruling, duty absorption review) since issuance of the Orders. On October 1, 2015, the Department published a notice of initiation of the first sunset review of the AD and CVD Orders on seamless pipe from the PRC, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).2 As a result of its reviews, the Department determined that revocation of the AD order would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and that revocation of the CVD order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of countervailable subsidies. The Department, therefore, notified the ITC of the magnitude of the margin and the net countervailable subsidy rates likely to prevail should the antidumping order and the countervailing duty order be revoked.3 On March 7, 2016, the ITC published notice of its determination, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, that revocation of the AD and CVD orders on seamless pipe from the PRC would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.4 Scope of the Orders The scope of these orders consists of certain seamless carbon and alloy steel (other than stainless steel) pipes and redraw hollows, less than or equal to 16 inches (406.4 mm) in outside diameter, regardless of wall-thickness, manufacturing process (e.g., hotfinished or cold-drawn), end finish (e.g., plain end, beveled end, upset end, threaded, or threaded and coupled), or surface finish (e.g., bare, lacquered or coated). Redraw hollows are any unfinished carbon or alloy steel (other than stainless steel) pipe or ‘‘hollow profiles’’ suitable for cold finishing operations, such as cold drawing, to meet the American Society for Testing 2 See Initiation of Five-Year ‘‘Sunset’’ Reviews, 80 FR 59133 (October 1, 2015). 3 See Seamless Carbon and Alloy Steel Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of the Expedited Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 81 FR 7305 (February 11, 2016) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum; see also Seamless Carbon and Alloy Steel Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of Expedited First Sunset Review of the Countervailing Duty Order, 81 FR 5985 (February 4, 2016) and the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. 4 See Certain Seamless Carbon and Alloy Steel Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe from China: Determination, 81 FR 11837 (March 7, 2016); see also Certain Seamless Carbon and Alloy Steel Standard, Line, and Pressure Pipe from China: Investigation Numbers 701–TA–469 and 731–TA– 1168 (Review), USITC Publication 4595, (February 2016). E:\FR\FM\16MRN1.SGM 16MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 51 (Wednesday, March 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14087-14089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05940]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-867]


Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014

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

SUMMARY: On September 4, 2015, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on large power transformers from 
the Republic of Korea.\1\ The review covers five producers/exporters of 
the subject merchandise, Hyosung Corporation (Hyosung), Hyundai Heavy 
Industries Co., Ltd. (Hyundai), ILJIN, ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd. (ILJIN 
Electric), and LSIS Co., Ltd. (LSIS). ILJIN, ILJIN Electric, and LSIS, 
were not selected for individual examination. The period of review 
(POR) is August 1, 2013, through July 31, 2014. As a result of our 
analysis of the comments and information received, these final results 
differ from the Preliminary Results. For the final weighted-average 
dumping margins, see the ``Final Results of Review'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-
2014, 80 FR 53496 (September 4, 2015) (Preliminary Results).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: March 16, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Davis (Hyosung) or Edythe Artman 
(Hyundai), AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 
(202) 482-7924 or (202) 482-3931, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On September 4, 2015, the Department published the Preliminary 
Results. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii), we invited 
parties to comment on our Preliminary Results.\2\ On October 16, 2015, 
Hyundai timely submitted a case brief and on October 19, 2015, Hyosung 
and ABB Inc. (Petitioner) timely submitted case briefs.\3\ Rebuttal 
briefs were also timely filed by Hyosung, Hyundai, and Petitioner, on 
October 27, 2015.\4\ On December 22, 2015, the Department issued a 
memorandum extending the time period for issuing the final results of 
this administrative review from January 4, 2016 to February 24, 
2016.\5\ On February 29, 2016, the Department further extended the 
final results to March 8, 2015.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Department issued the briefing schedule in a Memorandum 
to the File, dated September 9, 2015. This briefing schedule was 
later extended at the request of interested parties to October 16, 
2015 for briefs and October 26, 2015 for rebuttal briefs.
    \3\ See Case Brief from Petitioner regarding Hyundai, 
(Petitioner Brief Hyundai), Brief from Petitioner regarding Hyosung 
(Petitioner Brief Hyosung), and Hyosung Brief, all dated October 19, 
2015, and Hyundai Brief, dated October 16, 2015.
    \4\ See Hyosung Rebuttal Brief, Hyundai Rebuttal Brief and 
Petitioner Rebuttal Brief: All dated October 26, 2015. Petitioner 
requested an extension for the briefing schedule to 30 days after 
Hyundai's submission of a post-verification supplemental 
questionnaire and an extension for filing rebuttal briefs, which the 
Department partially granted for all parties in a letter dated 
September 29, 2015 and extended in a letter dated October 13, 2015. 
See Letter to Petitioner dated September 29, 2015 and Letter to 
Petitioner dated October 13, 2015.
    \5\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for AD/CVD Operations, ``Large Power Transformers from the 
Republic of Korea: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014'' (December 22, 
2015).
    \6\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for AD/CVD Operations, ``Large Power Transformers from the 
Republic of Korea: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014'' (February 29, 
2016); see also Memorandum to the Record from Ron Lorentzen, Acting 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance, regarding 
``Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Government 
Closure During Snowstorm Jonas,'' dated January 27, 2016. As 
explained in this memorandum, the Department has exercised its 
discretion to toll all administrative deadlines due to the recent 
closure of the Federal Government. All deadlines in this segment of 
the proceeding have been extended by four business days. The revised 
deadline for the final determination is now March 8, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The scope of this order covers large liquid dielectric power 
transformers (LPTs) having a top power handling capacity greater than 
or equal to 60,000 kilovolt amperes (60 megavolt amperes), whether 
assembled or unassembled, complete or incomplete. The merchandise 
subject to the order is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States at subheadings 8504.23.0040, 8504.23.0080 
and 8504.90.9540.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For a full description of the scope of the order, see the 
Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, titled ``Issues 
and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the Administrative 
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Large Power Transformers 
from the Republic of Korea; 2013-2014'' (Issues and Decision 
Memorandum), which is issued concurrently with, and hereby adopted 
by, this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.\8\ A list of the issues that parties raised and to which we 
responded is attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Issues and 
Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on-file electronically 
via ACCESS. ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the 
main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version 
of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the 
Internet at https://enforcement.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The signed 
Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on a review of the record and comments received from 
interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we recalculated 
Hyosung's and

[[Page 14088]]

Hyundai's weighted-average dumping margins for these final results.
    For Hyosung, we revised our margin program by adjusting our 
treatment of Hyosung's installation revenue, indirect selling expense 
ratio, U.S. commission expenses, and U.S. warranty expenses.\9\ For 
Hyundai, we revised the margin program with respect to our treatment of 
bank charges and packing expenses incurred in the home market, 
installation and supervision expenses incurred in both markets, 
domestic inventory carrying costs and U.S. credit expenses, and U.S. 
commission expenses.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Memorandum from Brian Davis to the File, regarding 
``Analysis of Data Submitted by Hyosung Corporation in the Final 
Results of the Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order 
on Large Power Transformers from the Republic of Korea; 2013-2014'' 
(Hyosung Final Analysis Memorandum), dated March 23, 2014, at 
section ``Changes from the Preliminary Results,'' for further 
information.
    \10\ See Memorandum from Edythe Artman to the File, regarding 
``Analysis of Data Submitted by Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. 
in the Final Results of the Administrative Review of the Antidumping 
Duty Order on Large Power Transformers from the Republic of Korea; 
2013-2014'' (Hyundai Final Analysis Memorandum), dated March 23, 
2014, at section ``Changes from the Preliminary Results,'' for 
further information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of the aforementioned recalculations of Hyosung's and 
Hyundai's weighted-average dumping margins, the weighted-average 
dumping margin for the three non-selected companies also changed.

Final Results of the Review

    As a result of this review, the Department determines the following 
weighted-average dumping margins \11\ for the period August 1, 2013, 
through July 31, 2014, are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ As we did not have publicly-ranged U.S. sales volumes for 
Hyosung for the period August 1, 2013, through July 31, 2014, to 
calculate a weighted-average percentage margin for the non-selected 
companies (i.e., ILJIN, ILJIN Electric, and LSIS) in this review, 
the rate applied to the non-selected companies is a simple-average 
percentage margin calculated based on the margins calculated for 
Hyosung and Hyundai.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
                   Manufacturer/exporter                        margin
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyosung Corporation........................................         9.40
Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd..........................         4.07
ILJIN Electric Co., Ltd....................................         6.74
ILJIN......................................................         6.74
LSIS Co., Ltd..............................................         6.74
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Duty Assessment

    The Department shall determine and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries.\12\ For any individually examined respondents whose weighted-
average dumping margin is above de minimis, we calculated importer-
specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the 
total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to 
the total entered value of those same sales in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.212(b)(1). Upon issuance of the final results of this 
administrative review, if any importer-specific assessment rates 
calculated in the final results are above de minimis (i.e., at or above 
0.5 percent), the Department will issue instructions directly to CBP to 
assess antidumping duties on appropriate entries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In these final results, the Department applied the 
assessment rate calculation method adopted in Antidumping 
Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and 
Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Proceedings: Final 
Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To determine whether the duty assessment rates covering the period 
were de minimis, in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 
351.106(c)(2), for each respondent we calculated importer (or 
customer)-specific ad valorem rates by aggregating the amount of 
dumping calculated for all U.S. sales to that importer or customer and 
dividing this amount by the total entered value of the sales to that 
importer (or customer). Where an importer (or customer)-specific ad 
valorem rate is greater than de minimis, and the respondent has 
reported reliable entered values, we apply the assessment rate to the 
entered value of the importer's/customer's entries during the review 
period.
    We intend to issue assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days 
after publication of the final results of this review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of this notice for all shipments of subject merchandise 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the 
publication of these final results, as provided by section 751(a)(2) of 
the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for respondents noted above will be 
the rate established in the final results of this administrative 
review; (2) for merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not 
covered in this administrative review but covered in a prior segment of 
the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company 
specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this 
proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a 
prior review, or the original investigation, but the manufacturer is, 
the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most 
recently completed segment of this proceeding for the manufacturer of 
the subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other 
manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 22.00 percent, the all-
others rate established in the antidumping investigation.\13\ These 
cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until 
further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Large Power Transformers From the Republic of Korea: 
Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 53177 (August 31, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Importers Regarding the 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 the POR. Failure to comply 
with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred and 
the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which 
continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of 
the proceeding. 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 this notice in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).

    Dated: March 8, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

List of Topics Discussed in the Final Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. List of Issues
III. Background

[[Page 14089]]

IV. Scope of the Order
V. Discussion of Interested Party Comments

A. General Issues

Comment 1: The Use of Constructed Value to Calculate Normal Value
Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Apply the Transaction-to-
Transaction Method, and Whether the Department Should Alter Its 
Application of Differential Pricing in this Administrative Review

B. Hyosung--Specific Issues

Comment 3: The Department's Capping of Certain Expense Revenues
Comment 4: The Department's Adjustment to Home Market Warranty 
Expenses and Indirect Selling Expenses
Comment 5: The Department's Treatment of Ocean Freight Revenue
Comment 6: The Department's Treatment of U.S. Commission Expenses
Comment 7: Clerical Error Related to U.S. Direct Selling Expenses

C. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd.--Specific Issues

Comment 8: Hyundai's Reporting of Constructed Value
Comment 9: The Department's Treatment of U.S. Commission Offset
Comment 10: Hyundai's Failure to Report Reimbursed Expenses
Comment 11: Hyundai Reporting of U.S. and Home Market Dates of Sale
Comment 12: Hyundai's Reported Installation and Supervision Expenses
Comment 13: Hyundai's Calculations of Indirect Selling Expenses for 
the Home and U.S. Markets
Comment 14: Hyundai's Failure to Provide Audited 2013 Financial 
Statements for Hyundai Corporation (Korea)
Comment 15: Application of Adverse Facts Available to Hyundai
Comment 16: Hyundai's Reporting of U.S. Credit Expenses
Comment 17: Hyundai's Reporting of Bank Charges Incurred on its U.S. 
Sales
Comment 18: Hyundai's Reporting of U.S. Brokerage Expenses
Comment 19: Hyundai's Reporting of U.S. Inland Freight Expenses for 
U.S. Sales that Included Spare Parts
Comment 20: Hyundai's Reporting of its U.S. Supervision Costs
Comment 21: Verification of Amounts Reported by Hyundai for Warranty 
Expenses and Domestic Indirect Selling Expenses Incurred in the 
United States
Comment 22: Hyundai's Failure to Report Inventory Carrying Costs 
Incurred in the United States
Comment 23: Issues with Specific U.S. Sales
Comment 24: Hyundai's Reporting of Insurance and Packing Expenses 
for Home-Market Sales
Comment 25: Hyundai's Reporting of Home-Market Inland Trucking 
Expenses
Comment 26: Hyundai's Reporting Home Market Insurance Expenses
Comment 27: Hyundai's Reporting of Other Direct Selling Expenses
Comment 28: Hyundai's Reporting of Actual Packing Expenses
Comment 29: Hyundai's Reporting of Warranty Guarantee Expenses
Comment 30: Correction to Hyundai's Liquidation Instructions
VI. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2016-05940 Filed 3-15-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.