Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017, 32720-32722 [2019-14482]
Download as PDF
32720
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Notices
Dated: July 1, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
results of this review.2 Commerce also
exercised its discretion to toll all
deadlines affected by the partial federal
government closure from December 22,
2018 through the resumption of
operations on January 29, 2019.3 On
June 3, 2019, Commerce again extended
the deadline for the final results.4 Thus,
the deadline for the final results of this
administrative review is June 21, 2019.
Commerce conducted this review in
accordance with section 751(a) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
[FR Doc. 2019–14556 Filed 7–8–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–580–883]
Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products
From the Republic of Korea: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2016–2017
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Commerce) determines that certain hotrolled steel flat products (hot-rolled
steel) from the Republic of Korea
(Korea) were sold in the United States
at less than normal value (NV) during
the period of review (POR) March 22,
2016 through September 30, 2017.
DATES: Effective July 9, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Benito Ballesteros or Justin Neuman,
AD/CVD Operations, Office V,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–7425 or
(202) 482–0486, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
On November 14, 2018, Commerce
published the Preliminary Results of
this review in the Federal Register.1
Commerce conducted verification of
mandatory respondents, Hyundai Steel
Company (Hyundai Steel) and POSCO,
and certain U.S. affiliates in March and
April 2019. In accordance with 19 CFR
351.309, we invited interested parties to
comment on the Preliminary Results.
Between May 21, 2019 and June 10,
2019, Commerce received timely filed
case and rebuttal briefs from various
interested parties.
On December 21, 2018, Commerce
extended the deadline for the final
1 See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from
the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016–
2017, 83 FR 56821 (November 14, 2018)
(Preliminary Results), and accompanying
Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:47 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
Scope of the Order
The product covered by this review is
hot-rolled steel from Korea. For a full
description of the Scope, see the Issues
and Decision Memorandum.5
Analysis of Comments Received
We addressed all issues raised in the
case and rebuttal briefs in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum, which is hereby
adopted by this notice. The issues are
identified in the Appendix to this
notice. The Issues and Decision
Memorandum is a public document and
is on file electronically via Enforcement
and Compliance’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (ACCESS).
ACCESS is available to registered users
at https://access.trade.gov and in the
Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of
the main Commerce building. In
addition, a complete version of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum can
be accessed directly on the internet at
https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/
index.html. The signed Issues and
Decision Memorandum and the
electronic version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
2 See Memorandum, ‘‘Certain Hot-Rolled Steel
Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Extension
of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review,’’ dated December 21, 2018.
3 See Memorandum to the Record from Gary
Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations,
performing the non-exclusive functions and duties
of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance, ‘‘Deadlines Affected by the Partial
Shutdown of the Federal Government,’’ dated
January 28, 2019. All deadlines in this segment of
the proceeding have been extended by 40 days.
4 See Memorandum, ‘‘Certain Hot-Rolled Steel
Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Extension
of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review,’’ dated June 3, 2019.
5 See Memorandum, ‘‘Certain Hot-Rolled Steel
Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Issues
and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of
the 2016–2017 Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review,’’ dated concurrently with this notice
(Issues and Decision Memorandum).
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our review and analysis of
the comments received and our findings
at verification, we made certain changes
to the margin calculations for both
Hyundai Steel and POSCO. For a
discussion of these changes, see the
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
Rate for Non-Examined Companies
The statue and Commerce’s
regulations do not address the
establishment of a rate to be applied to
companies not selected for individual
examination when Commerce limits its
examination in an administrative review
pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the
Act. Generally, Commerce looks to
section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which
provides instructions for calculating the
all-others rate in a market economy
investigation, for guidance when
calculating the rate for companies
which were not selected for individual
examination in an administrative
review. Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of
the Act, the all-others rate is normally
‘‘an amount equal to the weighted
average of the estimated weighted
average dumping margins established
for exporters and producers
individually investigated, excluding any
zero or de minimis margins, and any
margins determined entirely {on the
basis of facts available}.’’
For these final results, we calculated
a weighted-average dumping margin
that is not zero, de minimis, or
determined entirely on the basis of facts
available for Hyundai Steel and POSCO.
Accordingly, Commerce has assigned to
the companies not individually
examined a margin of 7.78 percent,
which is the simple average of Hyundai
Steel’s and POSCO’s calculated
weighted-average dumping margins for
these final results.6
Final Results of Review
Commerce determines that the
following weighted-average dumping
margins exist for the period March 22,
2016 through September 30, 2017:
6 For more information regarding the calculation
of this margin, see Memorandum, ‘‘Calculation of
the Margin for Non-Examined Companies,’’ dated
June 21, 2019. Because we cannot apply our normal
methodology of calculating a weighted-average
margin due to requests to protect business
proprietary information, we find this rate to be the
best proxy of the actual weighted-average margin
determined for the individually-examined
respondents.
E:\FR\FM\09JYN1.SGM
09JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Notices
Final
dumping
margins
(percent)
Producer or exporter
Hyundai Steel Company .......................
POSCO/POSCO Daewoo Co., Ltd 7 .....
Non-examined companies 8 ..................
5.44
10.11
7.78
Disclosure
We intend to disclose the calculations
performed for these final results of
review within five days of the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.224(b).
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Assessment Rate
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), Commerce
shall determine, and U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries of subject merchandise in
accordance with the final results of this
review. Commerce intends to issue
assessment instructions to CBP 15 days
after the date of publication of the final
results of this review in the Federal
Register.
Where the respondent reported
reliable entered values, we calculated
importer- (or customer-) specific ad
valorem rates by aggregating the
dumping margins calculated for all U.S.
sales to each importer (or customer) and
dividing this amount by the total
entered value of the sales to each
importer (or customer).9 Where
Commerce calculated a weightedaverage dumping margin by dividing the
total amount of dumping for reviewed
sales to that party by the total sales
quantity associated with those
transactions, Commerce will direct CBP
to assess importer- (or customer-)
specific assessment rates based on the
resulting per-unit rates.10 Where an
importer- (or customer-) specific ad
valorem or per-unit rate is greater than
de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent),
Commerce will instruct CBP to collect
the appropriate duties at the time of
liquidation.11 Where an importer- (or
customer-) specific ad valorem or perunit rate is zero or de minimis,
Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate
7 In the Preliminary Results, Commerce collapsed
POSCO and POSCO Daewoo Corporation (PDW).
See Preliminary Results, and accompanying PDM.
As no interested parties commented on the
preliminary affiliation finding, Commerce will
continue to treat these two companies as a single
entity for the final results.
8 The non-examined companies subject to this
review are: Daewoo International Corp.; Dongbu
Steel Co., Ltd.; Dongkuk Industries Co., Ltd.;
Marubeni-Itochu Steel Korea; Soon Hong Trading
Co.; and Sungjin Co.
9 See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
10 Id.
11 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:47 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
appropriate entries without regard to
antidumping duties.12
For the companies which were not
selected for individual review, we will
assign an assessment rate based on the
methodology described in the ‘‘Rates for
Non-Examined Companies’’ section,
above.
Consistent with Commerce’s
assessment practice, for entries of
subject merchandise during the POR
produced by Hyundai Steel and POSCO,
or the non-examined companies for
which the producer did not know that
its merchandise was destined for the
United States, 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.13
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective for all
shipments of the subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the date of
publication, as provided by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash
deposit rate for the companies listed in
these final results will be equal to the
weighted-average dumping margin
established in the final results of this
review; (2) for merchandise exported by
producers or exporters not covered in
this 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 in which they were
reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a firm
covered in this review or the original
less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation
but the producer is, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate established for the
most recently completed segment of this
proceeding for the producer of the
subject merchandise; and (4) the cash
deposit rate for all other producers or
exporters will continue to be 5.55
percent,14 the all-others rate established
in the LTFV investigation. These cash
deposit requirements, when imposed,
shall remain in effect until further
notice.
19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
a full discussion of this practice, see
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954
(May 6, 2003).
14 See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from
Australia, Brazil, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the
Netherlands, the Republic of Turkey, and the
United Kingdom: Amended Final Affirmative
Antidumping Determinations for Australia, the
Republic of Korea, and the Republic of Turkey and
Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 67962 (October 3,
2016).
PO 00000
12 See
13 For
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32721
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder
to importers of their responsibility
under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a
certificate regarding the reimbursement
of antidumping duties prior to
liquidation of the relevant entries
during this POR. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
presumption that reimbursement of
antidumping duties occurred and the
subsequent assessment of double
antidumping duties.
Administrative Protective Order
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of the return or
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.
Notification to Interested Parties
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) and 351.221(b)(5) of
Commerce’s regulations.
Dated: June 21, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix
List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Changes Since the Preliminary Results
V. Discussion of the Issues
Comment 1: Usability of Hyundai Steel’s
Cost Database
Comment 2: Whether Hyundai Steel is
Affiliated With Certain Home Market
Customers
Comment 3: Application of Adverse Facts
Available (AFA) for Hyundai Steel
Comment 4: Hyundai Steel’s Sales Under
Temporary Import Bond (TIB)
Comment 5: Hyundai Steel’s Overrun Sales
Comment 6: Hyundai Steel Gross Unit
Price Variables
Comment 7: Hyundai Steel Late Payment
Fees
Comment 8: Whether POSAM’s Indirect
Selling Expense Ratio Should be Revised
Comment 9: Whether Commerce Should
Correct Errors Made in the Preliminary
Results
Comment 10: Whether POSCO Incorrectly
Included Freight Revenues in the Gross
Unit Price for UPI’s Sales
E:\FR\FM\09JYN1.SGM
09JYN1
32722
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Notices
Comment 11: Whether Commerce Should
Apply Partial AFA to POSCO’s U.S.
Inventory Carrying Costs
Comment 12: Whether Commerce Should
Revise UPI’s Further Manufacturing G&A
Expense Ratio
Comment 13: Whether Commerce Should
Revise UPI’s G&A and INTEX Ratio
Denominators
Comment 14: Whether Commerce Should
Revise the Further Manufacturing Cost of
UPI’s Non-Prime Products
Comment 15: Whether Commerce Should
Revise UPI’s U.S. Brokerage and
Handling Expenses
Comment 16: Whether POSCO/UPI Should
Receive a CEP Offset
Comment 17: POSCO’s CONNUM-Specific
Costs Reporting and Whether to Smooth
Cost
Comment 18: Whether Commerce Should
Apply the Quarterly Cost Methodology
to POSCO
VI. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2019–14482 Filed 7–8–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–875]
Non-Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings
From the People’s Republic of China:
Continuation of Antidumping Duty
Order
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: As a result of the
determinations by the Department of
Commerce (Commerce) and the
International Trade Commission (ITC)
that revocation of the antidumping duty
(AD) order on non-malleable cast iron
pipe fittings (NMPF) from the People’s
Republic of China (China) would likely
lead to a continuation or recurrence of
dumping and material injury to an
industry in the United States,
Commerce is publishing a notice of
continuation of the AD order.
DATES: Applicable July 9, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ariela Garvett, AD/CVD Operations,
Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3609.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Background
On April 7, 2003, Commerce
published the notice of the AD order on
NMPF from China.1 On January 2, 2019,
1 See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: NonMalleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings from the People’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:47 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
the ITC instituted its review of the
Order.2 On February 5, 2019, Commerce
published the initiation of the third
sunset review of the Order, pursuant to
section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act).3 Commerce
received a timely notice of intent to
participate in this review from Anvil
International, LLC and Ward
Manufacturing LLC (collectively, the
petitioners), a domestic interested party,
within the deadline specified in 19 CFR
351.218(d)(1)(i).4 On March 7, 2019,
Commerce received a complete and
adequate substantive response from the
petitioners within the 30-day deadline
specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i).5
Commerce received no substantive
responses from respondent interested
parties. Pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B)
of the Act, Commerce conducted an
expedited (120-day) sunset review of the
Order.6 On May 10, 2019, the ITC
published its notice to conduct an
expedited five-year review of the
Order.7
As a result of its review, Commerce
determined, pursuant to section
751(c)(1) of the Act, that revocation of
the Order on NMPF from China would
likely lead to continuation or recurrence
of dumping. Commerce, therefore,
notified the ITC of the magnitude of the
margin of dumping rates likely to
prevail should this Order be revoked.8
On July 1, 2019, the ITC published its
determination that revocation of the
Order would likely lead to a
continuation or recurrence of material
injury to an industry in the United
States within a reasonably foreseeable
time, pursuant to section 751(c) of the
Act.9
Republic of China, 68 FR 16765 (April 7, 2003)
(Order).
2 See Non-Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings from
the People’s Republic of China; Institution of FiveYear Review, 84 FR 14 (January 2, 2019).
3 See Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews, 84
FR 1705 (February 5, 2019).
4 See Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Non-Malleable Cast Iron
Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of China,’’
dated February 5, 2019.
5 See Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Non-Malleable Cast Iron
Pipe Fittings from the People’s Republic of China,
Third Review: Substantive Response to Notice of
Initiation,’’ dated March 7, 2019.
6 See Non-Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings from
the People’s Republic of China: Final Results of
Expedited Third Sunset Review of Antidumping
Duty Order, 84 FR 27088 (June 11, 2019) and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum
(Issues and Decision Memorandum).
7 See Non-Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings from
the People’s Republic of China; Scheduling of an
Expedited Five-Year Review, 84 FR 20659 (May 10,
2019).
8 See Issues and Decision Memorandum.
9 See Non-Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings from
China; Determination, 84 FR 31349 (July 1, 2019);
see also Non-Malleable Cast Iron Pipe Fittings from
China: Investigation No. 731–TA–990 (Third
Review), USITC Publication 4915 (June 2019).
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the Order
are finished and unfinished nonmalleable cast iron pipe fittings with an
inside diameter ranging from 1⁄4 inch to
6 inches, whether threaded or
unthreaded, regardless of industry or
proprietary specifications. The subject
fittings include elbows, ells, tees,
crosses, and reducers as well as flanged
fittings. These pipe fittings are also
known as ‘‘cast iron pipe fittings’’ or
‘‘gray iron pipe fittings.’’ These cast iron
pipe fittings are normally produced to
ASTM A–126 and ASME B.16.4
specifications and are threaded to
ASME B1.20.1 specifications. Most
building codes require that these
products are Underwriters Laboratories
(UL) certified. The scope does not
include cast iron soil pipe fittings or
grooved fittings or grooved couplings.
Fittings that are made out of ductile
iron that have the same physical
characteristics as the gray or cast iron
fittings subject to the scope above or
which have the same physical
characteristics and are produced to
ASME B.16.3, ASME B.16.4, or ASTM
A–395 specifications, threaded to ASME
B1.20.1 specifications and UL certified,
regardless of metallurgical differences
between gray and ductile iron, are also
included in the scope of the Order.
These ductile fittings do not include
grooved fittings or grooved couplings.
Ductile cast iron fittings with
mechanical joint ends (MJ), or push on
ends (PO), or flanged ends and
produced to American Water Works
Association (AWWA) specifications
AWWA C110 or AWWA C153 are not
included.
Imports of covered merchandise are
classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)
under item numbers 7307.11.00.30,
7307.11.00.60, 7307.19.30.60 and
7307.19.30.85. HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes. The written description of the
scope of the Order is dispositive.10
Continuation of the Order
As a result of the determinations by
Commerce and the ITC that revocation
of the Order would likely lead to a
continuation or recurrence of dumping
and material injury to an industry in the
United States, pursuant to section
751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.218(a), Commerce hereby orders the
continuation of this Order on NMPF
from China. U.S. Customs and Border
Protection will continue to collect AD
cash deposits at the rates in effect at the
10 See
E:\FR\FM\09JYN1.SGM
Order.
09JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 9, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32720-32722]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14482]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-580-883]
Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic of
Korea: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-
2017
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that certain
hot-rolled steel flat products (hot-rolled steel) from the Republic of
Korea (Korea) were sold in the United States at less than normal value
(NV) during the period of review (POR) March 22, 2016 through September
30, 2017.
DATES: Effective July 9, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Benito Ballesteros or Justin Neuman,
AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-7425 or (202)
482-0486, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 14, 2018, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of
this review in the Federal Register.\1\ Commerce conducted verification
of mandatory respondents, Hyundai Steel Company (Hyundai Steel) and
POSCO, and certain U.S. affiliates in March and April 2019. In
accordance with 19 CFR 351.309, we invited interested parties to
comment on the Preliminary Results. Between May 21, 2019 and June 10,
2019, Commerce received timely filed case and rebuttal briefs from
various interested parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic
of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; 2016-2017, 83 FR 56821 (November 14, 2018) (Preliminary
Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 21, 2018, Commerce extended the deadline for the final
results of this review.\2\ Commerce also exercised its discretion to
toll all deadlines affected by the partial federal government closure
from December 22, 2018 through the resumption of operations on January
29, 2019.\3\ On June 3, 2019, Commerce again extended the deadline for
the final results.\4\ Thus, the deadline for the final results of this
administrative review is June 21, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Memorandum, ``Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products
from the Republic of Korea: Extension of Deadline for Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,'' dated December 21,
2018.
\3\ See Memorandum to the Record from Gary Taverman, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ``Deadlines
Affected by the Partial Shutdown of the Federal Government,'' dated
January 28, 2019. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding
have been extended by 40 days.
\4\ See Memorandum, ``Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products
from the Republic of Korea: Extension of Deadline for Final Results
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,'' dated June 3, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Scope of the Order
The product covered by this review is hot-rolled steel from Korea.
For a full description of the Scope, see the Issues and Decision
Memorandum.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Memorandum, ``Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products
from the Republic of Korea: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the
Final Results of the 2016-2017 Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review,'' dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
We addressed all issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this
notice. The issues are identified in the Appendix to this notice. The
Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file
electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).
ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and
in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Commerce building.
In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum
can be accessed directly on the internet at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. 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 our review and analysis of the comments received and our
findings at verification, we made certain changes to the margin
calculations for both Hyundai Steel and POSCO. For a discussion of
these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
Rate for Non-Examined Companies
The statue and Commerce's regulations do not address the
establishment of a rate to be applied to companies not selected for
individual examination when Commerce limits its examination in an
administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act.
Generally, Commerce looks to section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which
provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in a market
economy investigation, for guidance when calculating the rate for
companies which were not selected for individual examination in an
administrative review. Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-
others rate is normally ``an amount equal to the weighted average of
the estimated weighted average dumping margins established for
exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero
or de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely {on the
basis of facts available{time} .''
For these final results, we calculated a weighted-average dumping
margin that is not zero, de minimis, or determined entirely on the
basis of facts available for Hyundai Steel and POSCO. Accordingly,
Commerce has assigned to the companies not individually examined a
margin of 7.78 percent, which is the simple average of Hyundai Steel's
and POSCO's calculated weighted-average dumping margins for these final
results.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ For more information regarding the calculation of this
margin, see Memorandum, ``Calculation of the Margin for Non-Examined
Companies,'' dated June 21, 2019. Because we cannot apply our normal
methodology of calculating a weighted-average margin due to requests
to protect business proprietary information, we find this rate to be
the best proxy of the actual weighted-average margin determined for
the individually-examined respondents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of Review
Commerce determines that the following weighted-average dumping
margins exist for the period March 22, 2016 through September 30, 2017:
[[Page 32721]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final
dumping
Producer or exporter margins
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hyundai Steel Company....................................... 5.44
POSCO/POSCO Daewoo Co., Ltd \7\............................. 10.11
Non-examined companies \8\.................................. 7.78
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclosure
We intend to disclose the calculations performed for these final
results of review within five days of the date of publication of this
notice in the Federal Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ In the Preliminary Results, Commerce collapsed POSCO and
POSCO Daewoo Corporation (PDW). See Preliminary Results, and
accompanying PDM. As no interested parties commented on the
preliminary affiliation finding, Commerce will continue to treat
these two companies as a single entity for the final results.
\8\ The non-examined companies subject to this review are:
Daewoo International Corp.; Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd.; Dongkuk
Industries Co., Ltd.; Marubeni-Itochu Steel Korea; Soon Hong Trading
Co.; and Sungjin Co.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rate
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b),
Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject
merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review.
Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after
the date of publication of the final results of this review in the
Federal Register.
Where the respondent reported reliable entered values, we
calculated importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem rates by
aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all U.S. sales to each
importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the total entered
value of the sales to each importer (or customer).\9\ Where Commerce
calculated a weighted-average dumping margin by dividing the total
amount of dumping for reviewed sales to that party by the total sales
quantity associated with those transactions, Commerce will direct CBP
to assess importer- (or customer-) specific assessment rates based on
the resulting per-unit rates.\10\ Where an importer- (or customer-)
specific ad valorem or per-unit rate is greater than de minimis (i.e.,
0.50 percent), Commerce will instruct CBP to collect the appropriate
duties at the time of liquidation.\11\ Where an importer- (or customer-
) specific ad valorem or per-unit rate is zero or de minimis, Commerce
will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to
antidumping duties.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
\10\ Id.
\11\ Id.
\12\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the companies which were not selected for individual review, we
will assign an assessment rate based on the methodology described in
the ``Rates for Non-Examined Companies'' section, above.
Consistent with Commerce's assessment practice, for entries of
subject merchandise during the POR produced by Hyundai Steel and POSCO,
or the non-examined companies for which the producer did not know that
its merchandise was destined for the United States, 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.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ For a full discussion of this practice, see Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties,
68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all
shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as
provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate
for the companies listed in these final results will be equal to the
weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of
this review; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not
covered in this 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 in which they were reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a
firm covered in this review or the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV)
investigation but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the
rate established for the most recently completed segment of this
proceeding for the producer of the subject merchandise; and (4) the
cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to
be 5.55 percent,\14\ the all-others rate established in the LTFV
investigation. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Australia,
Brazil, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Netherlands, the Republic
of Turkey, and the United Kingdom: Amended Final Affirmative
Antidumping Determinations for Australia, the Republic of Korea, and
the Republic of Turkey and Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 67962
(October 3, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the presumption that reimbursement of
antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double
antidumping duties.
Administrative Protective Order
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written
notification of the return or 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.
Notification to Interested Parties
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) and
351.221(b)(5) of Commerce's regulations.
Dated: June 21, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Changes Since the Preliminary Results
V. Discussion of the Issues
Comment 1: Usability of Hyundai Steel's Cost Database
Comment 2: Whether Hyundai Steel is Affiliated With Certain Home
Market Customers
Comment 3: Application of Adverse Facts Available (AFA) for
Hyundai Steel
Comment 4: Hyundai Steel's Sales Under Temporary Import Bond
(TIB)
Comment 5: Hyundai Steel's Overrun Sales
Comment 6: Hyundai Steel Gross Unit Price Variables
Comment 7: Hyundai Steel Late Payment Fees
Comment 8: Whether POSAM's Indirect Selling Expense Ratio Should
be Revised
Comment 9: Whether Commerce Should Correct Errors Made in the
Preliminary Results
Comment 10: Whether POSCO Incorrectly Included Freight Revenues
in the Gross Unit Price for UPI's Sales
[[Page 32722]]
Comment 11: Whether Commerce Should Apply Partial AFA to POSCO's
U.S. Inventory Carrying Costs
Comment 12: Whether Commerce Should Revise UPI's Further
Manufacturing G&A Expense Ratio
Comment 13: Whether Commerce Should Revise UPI's G&A and INTEX
Ratio Denominators
Comment 14: Whether Commerce Should Revise the Further
Manufacturing Cost of UPI's Non-Prime Products
Comment 15: Whether Commerce Should Revise UPI's U.S. Brokerage
and Handling Expenses
Comment 16: Whether POSCO/UPI Should Receive a CEP Offset
Comment 17: POSCO's CONNUM-Specific Costs Reporting and Whether
to Smooth Cost
Comment 18: Whether Commerce Should Apply the Quarterly Cost
Methodology to POSCO
VI. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2019-14482 Filed 7-8-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P