Skip to Content

Notice

Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2017-2018

Document Details

Information about this document as published in the Federal Register.

Document Statistics
Document page views are updated periodically throughout the day and are cumulative counts for this document including its time on Public Inspection. Counts are subject to sampling, reprocessing and revision (up or down) throughout the day.
Published Document

This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

Start Preamble

AGENCY:

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

SUMMARY:

The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that producers/exporters subject to this review made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value during the period of review (POR) July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018.

DATES:

Applicable March 24, 2020.

Start Further Info

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Shanah Lee, Stephanie Berger, or Charles Doss, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6386, (202) 482-2483, or (202) 482-4474, respectively.

End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Start Printed Page 16614

Background

On September 12, 2019, Commerce published the Preliminary Results for this administrative review.[1] We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. This review covers three respondents: Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., Ltd. (Prosperity), Sheng Yu Steel Co., Ltd. (SYSCO), Synn Industrial Co., Ltd., and Yieh Phui Enterprise Co., Ltd. (collectively, Yieh Phui/Synn).[2] We received case briefs from California Steel Industries (California Steel) and Steel Dynamics, Inc. (Steel Dynamics), Prosperity, SYSCO, Toyota Tsusho America, Inc. (TAI), and Yieh Phui/Synn. We received rebuttal briefs from AK Steel Corporation (AK Steel) and SYSCO. We refer to California Steel, Steel Dynamics, and AK Steel collectively as the petitioners. Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

Scope of the Order

The product covered by the order is flat-rolled steel products, either clad, plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated or painted, varnished, laminated, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating. The subject merchandise is currently classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, and 7212.60.0000. The products subject to the orders may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7210.90.1000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090, 7225.91.0000, 7225.92.0000, 7225.99.0090, 7226.99.0110, 7226.99.0130, 7226.99.0180, 7228.60.6000, 7228.60.8000, and 7229.90.1000. The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

Analysis of the Comments Received

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this review are addressed in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.[3] A list of the issues which parties raised, and to which we respond in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached at the appendix. 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 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 at http://enforcement.trade.gov/​frn/​index.html. The signed and the electronic versions 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 made certain changes to the preliminary weighted-average margin calculations for Prosperity, SYSCO, and Yieh Phui/Synn. For detailed information, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Final Results of the Administrative Review

We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the respondents for the period July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018:

Exporter/producerWeighted- average dumping margin (percent)
Prosperity Tieh Enterprise Co., Ltd3.48
Sheng Yu Steel Co. Ltd6.84
Yieh Phui Enterprise Co., Ltd. and Synn Industrial Co., Ltd0.51

Assessment Rates

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce will 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.

For Prosperity, SYSCO, and Yieh Phui/Synn, we calculated importer-specific assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for each importer's examined sales and the total entered value of the sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).[4] For entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Prosperity, SYSCO, or Yieh Phui/Synn for which the producer did not know 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.

The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable.[5]

We intend to issue liquidation instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

The following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for the companies listed above will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margins established in the final results of this Start Printed Page 16615administrative review; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or exporters not covered in this review but covered in a prior completed segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original investigation, but the producer has been covered in a prior complete segment of this proceeding, then the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the producer of the merchandise; (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 3.66 percent,[6] the all-others rate from the Amended Final Determination. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

Notification to Importers

This notice also 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 review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in Commerce's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of 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.

Notification to Interested Parties

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

Start Signature

Dated: March 10, 2020.

Jeffrey I. Kessler,

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

End Signature

Appendix I

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: Treatment of Section 232 Duties Paid by Prosperity

Comment 2: Application of Differential Pricing Methodology to Prosperity's U.S. Sales

Comment 3: Universe of Constructed Export Price (CEP) Sales for SYSCO

Comment 4: SYSCO's Categorization of Sales as U.S. or Home Market

Comment 5: SYSCO's Costs on Arm's-Length Basis

Comment 6: SYSCO's Prime and Non-Prime Sales

Comment 7: Interest Revenue Cap—SYSCO

Comment 8: Yieh Phui's U.S. Date of Sale and Shipment Dates

Comment 9: Ministerial Error and Other Issues

VI. Recommendation

End Supplemental Information

Footnotes

1.  See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2017-2018, 84 FR 48120 (September 12, 2019) (Preliminary Results), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Back to Citation

2.  See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017, 83 FR 64527 (December 17, 2018), amended by Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan: Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2016-2017, 84 FR 5991 (February 25, 2019) (Final Results 2016-2017). In the Final Results 2016-2017, we collapsed Yieh Phui and Synn and treated them as a single entity.

Back to Citation

3.  See Memorandum, “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan, 2017-2018,” dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).

Back to Citation

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

Back to Citation

5.  See section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act.

Back to Citation

6.  See Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products from Taiwan: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony with Final Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation and Notice of Amended Final Determination of Investigation, 84 FR 6129 (February 26, 2019) (Amended Final Determination).

Back to Citation

[FR Doc. 2020-05487 Filed 3-23-20; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P