Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate From the Republic of Korea: Final Results and Partial Recission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2019, 6842-6844 [2022-02490]

Download as PDF 6842 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2022 / Notices published a Best Practice Document for certifiers to increase consistency. AMS invites comments on this prioritization. jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1 Recommendations Related to Genetic Engineering and Excluded Methods (Multiple) NOSB has made a number of recommendations related to genetic engineering and included methods. For example, ‘‘Require Genetic Integrity for Transparency of Seed Grown on Organic Land—Instructions to Certifiers’’ (October 2019) and ‘‘Guidance of GMO Prevention Strategies’’ (October 2015) both recommend establishing thresholds for addressing the presence of genetic material contamination, with significant cost implications for testing and monitoring. The NOP has not prioritized these two recommendations given the significant implementation requirements and likely costs involved. AMS invites comments on this prioritization. The NOSB has also recommended developing ‘‘Guidance for Determining which New Technologies are Considered Excluded Methods’’ (October 2019). NOP has not made this recommendation a priority because it believes the current definition of Excluded Methods in the USDA organic regulations is sufficiently broad to cover a large range of new technologies. Augmenting this regulatory definition with a long list of prohibited technologies may cause confusion and could lead to an implied ‘‘allowance by omission’’ for technologies not listed. We believe the intent of this recommendation could be achieved by communicating the program’s position on excluded methods (that they are not allowed) more directly and investing resources into communicating with certifiers about NOP’s expectations for oversight. AMS invites comments on this prioritization. Develop Organic Personal Care Product Standards (December 2009) NOP has not made this recommendation a regulatory priority. This rulemaking would be very complex and would require a significant expansion of existing regulations. NOP has published two items: ‘‘Policy Memo: ‘‘Organic Personal Care/Cosmetics’’ and ‘‘Fact Sheet—Personal Care Products’’ that have allowed certifiers and operations to find a path to certification for these products within the existing rules and standards. Other private standards have been developed that are specific to organic cosmetic certification. Regulatory action in this area would require significant VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:36 Feb 04, 2022 Jkt 256001 interagency cooperation and review, as it would need to harmonize with current Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations regarding ingredient statements on cosmetics and personal care products. AMS invites comments on this prioritization. Restrict the Use of Livestock Vaccines Made From Excluded Methods (October 2019) NOP has not made this recommendation a regulatory priority. There has not been a strong justification or demonstrated need for this rulemaking. The organic livestock industry is not large enough to support the development, testing, and deployment of non-genetically modified (GMO) vaccines. Rulemaking would involve adding the non-GMO commercial availability as an annotation to § 205.603(a)(4). AMS invites comments on this prioritization. NOP Handbook Updates Along with the OFPA and the USDA organic regulations, the NOP Handbook, titled, The Program Handbook: Guidance and Instructions for Accredited Certifying Agents and Certified Operations provides those who own, manage, or certify organic operations with guidance, instructions, and policy memos that can assist them in complying with the USDA organic regulations. The Handbook is consistent with OMB’s Bulletin on Agency Good Guidance Practices (GGPs) published January 25, 2007 (72 FR 3432–3440). The purpose of the OMB’s GGPs is to help ensure that program guidance documents are developed with adequate public participation, are readily available to the public, and are not applied as binding requirements. The NOP Handbook is an important tool for organic operations and for certifying agents. There are a number of guidance, instructions, and policy memos that are part of the NOP Handbook that will need to be updated as a result of SOE; several also need updates to align with current NOP policy (e.g., label use-ups when certifiers exit the organic program; accreditation process updates based on NOP’s increased staffing and capabilities; and references to conservation tools administered by other USDA agencies). AMS invites public comments with respect to which NOP Handbook documents need updates from the organic community’s perspective. Request for Public Comments AMS seeks comments on the prioritization of outstanding NOSB PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 recommendations and NOP Handbook updates (specifically, comments on whether issues not currently included should be considered for regulatory action) as it considers future rulemaking and policy development activities. AMS welcomes input about whether current resources should be allocated in a different manner to support standards development, or other program priorities. Comments received in response to this notice will inform future regulatory and policy development activities. Erin Morris, Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service. [FR Doc. 2022–02429 Filed 2–4–22; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–580–888] Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-toLength Plate From the Republic of Korea: Final Results and Partial Recission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2019 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that POSCO and certain other producers/exporters of certain carbon and alloy steel cut-tolength plate (CTL plate) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) received de minimis net countervailable subsidies during the period of review (POR), January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019. DATES: Applicable February 7, 2022. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Faris Montgomery or George Ayache, AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1537 or (202) 482–2623. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background On August 5, 2021, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of this review.1 On November 2, 2021, 1 See Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-toLength Plate from the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, and Intent to Rescind Review, in Part; 2019, 86 FR 42788 (August 5, 2021) (Preliminary Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum. E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM 07FEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2022 / Notices Commerce extended the deadline for the final results of this review to no later than February 1, 2022.2 Subsequently, on December 2, 2021, Commerce issued its post-preliminary analysis.3 For a complete description of the events that followed the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.4 Scope of the Order 5 The merchandise covered by the Order is CTL plate. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in interested parties’ briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues addressed is attached to this notice at Appendix I. 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. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/ FRNoticesListLayout.aspx. Change Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of the case and rebuttal briefs and the evidence on the record, we made one change from the Preliminary Results and postpreliminary analysis. This change is explained in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1 Partial Rescission of Administrative Review As noted in the Preliminary Results, Commerce timely received a noshipment certification from Hyundai Steel Company (Hyundai). We inquired with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) whether Hyundai had shipped merchandise to the United 2 See Memorandum, ‘‘Extension of Deadline for Final Results,’’ dated November 2, 2021. 3 See Memorandum, ‘‘Post-Preliminary Analysis of the Countervailing Duty Administrative Review of Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from the Republic of Korea,’’ dated December 2, 2021 (Post-Preliminary Analysis Memorandum). 4 See Memorandum, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from the Republic of Korea; 2019,’’ dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 5 See Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-toLength Plate from the Republic of Korea: Countervailing Duty Order, 82 FR 24103 (May 25, 2017) (Order). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:36 Feb 04, 2022 Jkt 256001 States during the POR, and CBP provided no evidence to contradict the claims of no shipment made by Hyundai. Accordingly, in the Preliminary Results, Commerce stated its intention to rescind the review with respect to Hyundai in the final results. No party commented on this aspect of the Preliminary Results. Because there is no evidence on the record to indicate that Hyundai had shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR, we are rescinding the administrative review of Hyundai, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).6 Companies Not Selected for Individual Review The statute and Commerce’s regulations do not directly address the establishment of rates to be applied to companies not selected for individual examination where Commerce limits in examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 777(A)(e)(2) of the Act. However, Commerce normally determines the rates for non-selected companies in reviews in a manner that is consistent with section 705(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in an investigation. We also note that section 777A(e)(2) of the Act provides that ‘‘the individual countervailable subsidy rates determined under subparagraph (A) shall be used to determine the all-others rate under section 705(c)(5) {of the Act}.’’ Section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act states that, in general, for companies not investigated, we will determine an allothers rate by using the weightedaverage countervailable subsidy rates established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding zero and de minimis rates or any rates based solely on the facts available. Additionally, section 705(c)(5)(A)(ii) provides that when the countervailable subsidy rates established for all exporters and producers individually investigated are zero or de minimis rates, or based solely on facts available, Commerce may use any reasonable method to establish a rate for the companies not individually investigated, including averaging the weighted-average countervailable subsidy rates determined for the exporters and producers individually investigated. In the final results of this review, we calculated a de minimis net countervailable subsidy rate for POSCO, the sole mandatory respondent. As a result, for the reasons discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, we 6 See Issues and Decision Memorandum for complete discussion. PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 6843 have determined that it is appropriate to assign to the companies subject to the review, but not selected for individual examination, the de minimis net countervailable subsidy rate calculated for POSCO in this review. For a list of the 40 companies for which a review was requested and not rescinded, and which were not selected as mandatory respondents or found to be cross-owned with a mandatory respondent, see Appendix II to this notice. Final Results of Administrative Review In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we calculated an individual net countervailable subsidy rate for POSCO. Commerce determines that, during the POR, the net countervailable subsidy rates for the producers/exporters under review are as follows: Company POSCO: 7 .............................. Non-Selected Companies Under Review: 8 ................ Subsidy rate (percent ad valorem) *0.42 *0.42 * (De minimis). Disclosure Commerce intends 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.9 Assessment Rate Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register. If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired (i.e., within 90 days of publication). Because we have calculated a de minimis countervailable subsidy rate for the companies under review, we will 7 As discussed in the Preliminary Results, Commerce found the following companies to be cross-owned with POSCO: Pohang Scrap Recycling Distribution Center Co. Ltd.; POSCO Chemical; POSCO M-Tech; POSCO Nippon Steel RHF Joint Venture Co., Ltd.; and POSCO Terminal. No party commented on Commerce’s preliminary crossownership determination and there is no information on the record which warrants reconsideration of this determination. Therefore, for these final results, Commerce continues to find the above-referenced companies are cross-owned with POSCO. Accordingly, POSCO’s subsidy rate applies to each of its cross-owned companies. 8 See Appendix II. 9 See 19 CFR 351.224(b). E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM 07FEN1 6844 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2022 / Notices instruct CBP to liquidate shipments of subject merchandise produced and/or exported by the companies listed above, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, from January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, without regard to countervailing duties in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2) and 19 CFR 351.106(c). For the company for which this review is rescinded, countervailing duties will be assessed at a rate equal to the cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, during the period January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019. Cash Deposit Rates In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, Commerce intends to instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation but not to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties on shipments of subject merchandise by the companies under review entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this administrative review. For all non-reviewed firms subject to the Order, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties at the most recent company-specific rate or the all-others rate (4.31 percent), as appropriate.10 These cash deposit requirements, effective upon publication of these final results, shall remain in effect until further notice. Administrative Protective Order This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to an 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 terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1 Notice to Interested Parties We are issuing and publishing these final results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5). 10 See Order, 82 FR at 24104. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:36 Feb 04, 2022 Jkt 256001 Dated: January 31, 2022. Lisa W. Wang, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. 36. SNP Ltd. 37. Steel N People Ltd. 38. Summit Industry 39. Sungjin Co., Ltd. 40. Young Sun Steel Appendix I [FR Doc. 2022–02490 Filed 2–4–22; 8:45 am] List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Partial Rescission of Administrative Review IV. Scope of the Order V. Rate for Non-Examined Companies VI. Subsidies Valuation Information VII. Analysis of Programs VIII. Discussion of Comments Comment 1: Whether Electricity Is Subsidized by the Government of Korea Comment 2: Whether Commerce Should Modify the Methodology for Attributing POSCO International’s Subsidies to POSCO Comment 3: Whether the Korea Emissions Trading System (K–ETS) Is Countervailable Comment 4: Whether Commerce Should Modify the Benchmark Used in the Electricity for More Than Adequate Remuneration (MTAR) Program Comment 5: Whether Commerce Should Exclude Quota Tariff Import Duty Exemptions Received on Certain Items Used To Produce Non-Subject Merchandise IX. Recommendation Appendix II Non-Selected Companies Under Review 1. BDP International 2. Blue Track Equipment 3. Boxco 4. Bukook Steel Co., Ltd. 5. Buma CE Co., Ltd. 6. China Chengdu International TechnoEconomic Cooperation Co., Ltd. 7. Daehan I.M. Co., Ltd. 8. Daehan Tex Co., Ltd. 9. Daelim Industrial Co., Ltd. 10. Daesam Industrial Co., Ltd. 11. Daesin Lighting Co., Ltd. 12. Daewoo International Corp. 13. Dong Yang Steel Pipe 14. Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd. 15. Dongkuk Industries Co., Ltd. 16. Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd. 17. EAE Automotive Equipment 18. EEW KHPC Co., Ltd. 19. Eplus Expo Inc. 20. GS Global Corp. 21. Haem Co., Ltd. 22. Han Young Industries 23. Hyosung Corp. 24. Jinmyung Frictech Co., Ltd. 25. Khana Marine Ltd. 26. Kindus Inc. 27. Korean Iron and Steel Co., Ltd. 28. Kyoungil Precision Co., Ltd. 29. Menics 30. Qian’an Rentai Metal Products Co., Ltd. 31. Samsun C&T Corp. 32. Shinko 33. Shipping Imperial Co., Ltd. 34. Sinchang Eng Co., Ltd. 35. SK Networks Co., Ltd. PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–084, C–570–085] Quartz Surface Products From the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Scope and Circumvention Inquiries of the Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Orders Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is self-initiating a scope inquiry, pursuant to U.S. trade remedy laws, to determine whether imports of quartz surface products (QSP), completed in Malaysia using inputs manufactured in the People’s Republic of China (China), are covered by the antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders on QSP from China (collectively, the Orders). In addition, in accordance with our regulations, Commerce is also selfinitiating a country-wide circumvention inquiry to determine whether imports of QSP, if not covered by the scope of the Orders, are nonetheless circumventing the Orders, and is aligning both scope and circumvention inquiries in accordance with our regulations. DATES: Applicable February 7, 2022. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ajay Menon at (202) 482–0208, AD/CVD Operations, Office II or Barb Rawdon at (202) 482–0474, Office of Policy, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background On April 17, 2018, Cambria Company LLC filed petitions seeking the imposition of AD and CVD duties on imports of QSP from China.1 Following Commerce’s affirmative determinations of dumping and countervailable 1 See Certain Quartz Surface Products from the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Less-ThanFair-Value Investigation, 83 FR 22613 (May 16, 2018); Certain Quartz Surface Products from the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation, 83 FR 22618 (May 16, 2018). E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM 07FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 25 (Monday, February 7, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6842-6844]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02490]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-580-888]


Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate From the 
Republic of Korea: Final Results and Partial Recission of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2019

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that POSCO 
and certain other producers/exporters of certain carbon and alloy steel 
cut-to-length plate (CTL plate) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) 
received de minimis net countervailable subsidies during the period of 
review (POR), January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019.

DATES: Applicable February 7, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Faris Montgomery or George Ayache, AD/
CVD Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1537 or (202) 
482-2623.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 5, 2021, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of 
this review.\1\ On November 2, 2021,

[[Page 6843]]

Commerce extended the deadline for the final results of this review to 
no later than February 1, 2022.\2\ Subsequently, on December 2, 2021, 
Commerce issued its post-preliminary analysis.\3\ For a complete 
description of the events that followed the Preliminary Results, see 
the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from 
the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review, and Intent to Rescind Review, in Part; 2019, 
86 FR 42788 (August 5, 2021) (Preliminary Results), and accompanying 
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
    \2\ See Memorandum, ``Extension of Deadline for Final Results,'' 
dated November 2, 2021.
    \3\ See Memorandum, ``Post-Preliminary Analysis of the 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review of Certain Carbon and 
Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from the Republic of Korea,'' dated 
December 2, 2021 (Post-Preliminary Analysis Memorandum).
    \4\ See Memorandum, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain 
Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from the Republic of 
Korea; 2019,'' dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this 
notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order 5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut-to-Length Plate from 
the Republic of Korea: Countervailing Duty Order, 82 FR 24103 (May 
25, 2017) (Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The merchandise covered by the Order is CTL plate. For a complete 
description of the scope of the Order, see the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in interested parties' briefs are addressed in 
the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues addressed is 
attached to this notice at Appendix I. 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. In addition, a complete 
version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly 
at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Change Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of the case and rebuttal briefs and the 
evidence on the record, we made one change from the Preliminary Results 
and post-preliminary analysis. This change is explained in the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum.

Partial Rescission of Administrative Review

    As noted in the Preliminary Results, Commerce timely received a no-
shipment certification from Hyundai Steel Company (Hyundai). We 
inquired with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) whether Hyundai 
had shipped merchandise to the United States during the POR, and CBP 
provided no evidence to contradict the claims of no shipment made by 
Hyundai. Accordingly, in the Preliminary Results, Commerce stated its 
intention to rescind the review with respect to Hyundai in the final 
results. No party commented on this aspect of the Preliminary Results. 
Because there is no evidence on the record to indicate that Hyundai had 
shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR, 
we are rescinding the administrative review of Hyundai, pursuant to 19 
CFR 351.213(d)(3).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum for complete discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Companies Not Selected for Individual Review

    The statute and Commerce's regulations do not directly address the 
establishment of rates to be applied to companies not selected for 
individual examination where Commerce limits in examination in an 
administrative review pursuant to section 777(A)(e)(2) of the Act. 
However, Commerce normally determines the rates for non-selected 
companies in reviews in a manner that is consistent with section 
705(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for calculating the 
all-others rate in an investigation. We also note that section 
777A(e)(2) of the Act provides that ``the individual countervailable 
subsidy rates determined under subparagraph (A) shall be used to 
determine the all-others rate under section 705(c)(5) {of the 
Act{time} .'' Section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act states that, in 
general, for companies not investigated, we will determine an all-
others rate by using the weighted-average countervailable subsidy rates 
established for exporters and producers individually investigated, 
excluding zero and de minimis rates or any rates based solely on the 
facts available. Additionally, section 705(c)(5)(A)(ii) provides that 
when the countervailable subsidy rates established for all exporters 
and producers individually investigated are zero or de minimis rates, 
or based solely on facts available, Commerce may use any reasonable 
method to establish a rate for the companies not individually 
investigated, including averaging the weighted-average countervailable 
subsidy rates determined for the exporters and producers individually 
investigated.
    In the final results of this review, we calculated a de minimis net 
countervailable subsidy rate for POSCO, the sole mandatory respondent. 
As a result, for the reasons discussed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum, we have determined that it is appropriate to assign to the 
companies subject to the review, but not selected for individual 
examination, the de minimis net countervailable subsidy rate calculated 
for POSCO in this review. For a list of the 40 companies for which a 
review was requested and not rescinded, and which were not selected as 
mandatory respondents or found to be cross-owned with a mandatory 
respondent, see Appendix II to this notice.

Final Results of Administrative Review

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we calculated an 
individual net countervailable subsidy rate for POSCO. Commerce 
determines that, during the POR, the net countervailable subsidy rates 
for the producers/exporters under review are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ As discussed in the Preliminary Results, Commerce found the 
following companies to be cross-owned with POSCO: Pohang Scrap 
Recycling Distribution Center Co. Ltd.; POSCO Chemical; POSCO M-
Tech; POSCO Nippon Steel RHF Joint Venture Co., Ltd.; and POSCO 
Terminal. No party commented on Commerce's preliminary cross-
ownership determination and there is no information on the record 
which warrants reconsideration of this determination. Therefore, for 
these final results, Commerce continues to find the above-referenced 
companies are cross-owned with POSCO. Accordingly, POSCO's subsidy 
rate applies to each of its cross-owned companies.
    \8\ See Appendix II.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Subsidy rate
                         Company                            (percent ad
                                                             valorem)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
POSCO: \7\..............................................           *0.42
Non-Selected Companies Under Review: \8\................          *0.42
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* (De minimis).

Disclosure

    Commerce intends 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.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.224(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rate

    Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier 
than 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this 
review in the Federal Register. If a timely summons is filed at the 
U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will 
direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties 
to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired (i.e., within 
90 days of publication). Because we have calculated a de minimis 
countervailable subsidy rate for the companies under review, we will

[[Page 6844]]

instruct CBP to liquidate shipments of subject merchandise produced 
and/or exported by the companies listed above, entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse for consumption, from January 1, 2019, through December 
31, 2019, without regard to countervailing duties in accordance with 19 
CFR 351.212(b)(2) and 19 CFR 351.106(c). For the company for which this 
review is rescinded, countervailing duties will be assessed at a rate 
equal to the cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties required 
at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, 
during the period January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019.

Cash Deposit Rates

    In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, Commerce 
intends to instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation but not to 
collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties on shipments 
of subject merchandise by the companies under review entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of 
publication of the final results of this administrative review. For all 
non-reviewed firms subject to the Order, we will instruct CBP to 
continue to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties at 
the most recent company-specific rate or the all-others rate (4.31 
percent), as appropriate.\10\ These cash deposit requirements, 
effective upon publication of these final results, shall remain in 
effect until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Order, 82 FR at 24104.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to an 
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 terms of an APO is a sanctionable 
violation.

Notice to Interested Parties

    We are issuing and publishing these final results in accordance 
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

    Dated: January 31, 2022.
Lisa W. Wang,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Partial Rescission of Administrative Review
IV. Scope of the Order
V. Rate for Non-Examined Companies
VI. Subsidies Valuation Information
VII. Analysis of Programs
VIII. Discussion of Comments
    Comment 1: Whether Electricity Is Subsidized by the Government 
of Korea
    Comment 2: Whether Commerce Should Modify the Methodology for 
Attributing POSCO International's Subsidies to POSCO
    Comment 3: Whether the Korea Emissions Trading System (K-ETS) Is 
Countervailable
    Comment 4: Whether Commerce Should Modify the Benchmark Used in 
the Electricity for More Than Adequate Remuneration (MTAR) Program
    Comment 5: Whether Commerce Should Exclude Quota Tariff Import 
Duty Exemptions Received on Certain Items Used To Produce Non-
Subject Merchandise
IX. Recommendation

Appendix II

Non-Selected Companies Under Review

1. BDP International
2. Blue Track Equipment
3. Boxco
4. Bukook Steel Co., Ltd.
5. Buma CE Co., Ltd.
6. China Chengdu International Techno-Economic Cooperation Co., Ltd.
7. Daehan I.M. Co., Ltd.
8. Daehan Tex Co., Ltd.
9. Daelim Industrial Co., Ltd.
10. Daesam Industrial Co., Ltd.
11. Daesin Lighting Co., Ltd.
12. Daewoo International Corp.
13. Dong Yang Steel Pipe
14. Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd.
15. Dongkuk Industries Co., Ltd.
16. Dongkuk Steel Mill Co., Ltd.
17. EAE Automotive Equipment
18. EEW KHPC Co., Ltd.
19. Eplus Expo Inc.
20. GS Global Corp.
21. Haem Co., Ltd.
22. Han Young Industries
23. Hyosung Corp.
24. Jinmyung Frictech Co., Ltd.
25. Khana Marine Ltd.
26. Kindus Inc.
27. Korean Iron and Steel Co., Ltd.
28. Kyoungil Precision Co., Ltd.
29. Menics
30. Qian'an Rentai Metal Products Co., Ltd.
31. Samsun C&T Corp.
32. Shinko
33. Shipping Imperial Co., Ltd.
34. Sinchang Eng Co., Ltd.
35. SK Networks Co., Ltd.
36. SNP Ltd.
37. Steel N People Ltd.
38. Summit Industry
39. Sungjin Co., Ltd.
40. Young Sun Steel

[FR Doc. 2022-02490 Filed 2-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P