37790 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 149 / Thursday, August 2, 2018 / Notices 

62See Anti-Circumvention Ruling Request— 

Taiwan at Exhibits 1, 4, and 9; Anti-Circumvention 

Ruling Request—Korea at Exhibits 14, 17. 

63See Anti-Circumvention Ruling Request— 

Taiwan at 9–10, Exhibit 4; Anti-Circumvention 

Ruling Request—Korea at 24 and Exhibit 2. 

64See Anti-Circumvention Ruling Request— 

Taiwan. at 10–11, Exhibit 9; Anti-Circumvention 

Ruling Request—Korea at 24, Exhibit 2. 

65See Anti-Circumvention Ruling Request— 

Korea at 24–25, Exhibit 19. 

66See Anti-Circumvention Ruling Request— 

Taiwan at 11, Exhibit 10. 

relied on published sources, 

Commerce’s prior conclusions in CORE 

China Circumvention Final, and 

information presented in the ‘‘minor or 

insignificant process’’ portion of their 

anti-circumvention allegations to 

indicate that the value of the substrate 

(HRS and CRS manufactured in Korea 

and Taiwan) is a significant portion of 

the total value of the CORE exported 

from Vietnam to the United States.62 We 

find that this information adequately 

meets the requirements of this factor, as 

discussed above, for the purposes of 

initiating these anti-circumvention 

inquiries. 

Finally, with respect to the additional 

factors listed under section 781(b)(3) of 

the Act, we find that the domestic 

producers presented evidence 

indicating that shipments of CORE from 

Vietnam to the United States increased 

since the imposition of the Orders 63 and 

that shipments of HRS from Korea and 

Taiwan to Vietnam also increased since 

the Orders took effect.64 Furthermore, 

we find that the domestic producers 

have presented evidence that the largest 

Korean manufacturer of CRS (POSCO) is 

affiliated with a company in Vietnam 

that completes the merchandise.65 We 

also find that the domestic producers 

provided sufficient evidence to 

demonstrate that a Taiwanese steel 

manufacturer, CSC, owns 56 percent of 

Vietnamese CORE producer, CSVC.66

Accordingly, we are initiating formal 

anti-circumvention inquiries concerning 

the AD and CVD orders on CORE from 

Korea and the AD order on CORE from 

Taiwan, pursuant to section 781(b) of 

the Act. 

As these inquiries are initiated on a 

country-wide basis (i.e., not exclusive to 

the producers mentioned immediately 

above), Commerce intends to issue 

questionnaires to solicit information 

from the Vietnamese producers and 

exporters concerning their shipments of 

CORE to the United States and the 

origin of any imported HRS and CRS 

being processed into CORE. A 

company’s failure to respond 

completely to Commerce’s requests for 

information may result in the 

application of partial or total facts 

available, pursuant to section 776(a) of 

the Act, which may include adverse 

inferences, pursuant to section 776(b) of 

the Act. 

While we believe sufficient factual 

information has been submitted by the 

domestic producers supporting their 

request for inquiries, we do not find that 

the record supports the simultaneous 

issuance of a preliminary ruling. Such 

inquiries are by their nature typically 

complicated and can require 

information regarding production in 

both the country subject to the order 

and the third country completing the 

product. As noted above, Commerce 

intends to request additional 

information regarding the statutory 

criteria to determine whether shipments 

of CORE from Vietnam are 

circumventing the AD and CVD orders 

on CORE from Korea and the AD order 

on CORE from Taiwan. Thus, with 

further development of the record 

required before a preliminary ruling can 

be issued, Commerce does not find it 

appropriate to issue a preliminary ruling 

at this time. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.225(e), Commerce finds that the 

issue of whether a product is included 

within the scope of an order cannot be 

determined based solely upon the 

application and the descriptions of the 

merchandise. Accordingly, Commerce 

will notify by mail all parties on 

Commerce’s scope service list of the 

initiation of these anti-circumvention 

inquiries. In addition, in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.225(f)(1)(i) and (ii), in 

this notice of initiation issued under 19 

CFR 351.225(e), we have included a 

description of the product that is the 

subject of these anti-circumvention 

inquiries (i.e., CORE that contains the 

characteristics as provided in the scope 

of the Orders) and an explanation of the 

reasons for Commerce’s decision to 

initiate an anti-circumvention inquiry, 

as provided above. 

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.225(l)(2), if Commerce issues a 

preliminary affirmative determination, 

we will then instruct U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection to suspend 

liquidation and require a cash deposit of 

estimated antidumping and 

countervailing duties, at the applicable 

rate, for each unliquidated entry of the 

merchandise at issue, entered or 

withdrawn from warehouse for 

consumption on or after the date of 

initiation of the inquiry. Commerce will 

establish a schedule for questionnaires 

and comments on the issues. In 

accordance with section 781(f) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.225(f)(5), 

Commerce intends to issue its final 

determination within 300 days of the 

date of publication of this initiation. 

This notice is published in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(f). 

Dated: July 27, 2018. 

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. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16565 Filed 8–1–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–881, C–580–882] 

Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products 

From the Republic of Korea: Initiation 

of Anti-Circumvention Inquiries on the 

Antidumping Duty and Countervailing 

Duty Orders 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: In response to requests from 

ArcelorMittal USA LLC, Nucor 

Corporation, United States Steel 

Corporation, Steel Dynamics, Inc. and 

California Steel Industries (collectively, 

the domestic producers), the 

Department of Commerce (Commerce) is 

initiating a country-wide anticircumvention inquiries to determine 

whether imports of certain cold-rolled 

steel flat products (CRS), which are 

completed in the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam (Vietnam) from hot-rolled steel 

(HRS) produced in the Republic of 

Korea (Korea), are circumventing the 

antidumping duty (AD) and 

countervailing duty (CVD) orders on 

CRS from Korea. 

DATES: Applicable August 2, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tyler Weinhold or Fred Baker, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–1121 or (202) 482–2924, 

respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On July 28, 2015, AK Steel 

Corporation, ArcelorMittal USA LLC, 

Nucor Corporation, Steel Dynamics, 

Inc., and the United States Steel 

Corporation (the domestic producers) 

filed petitions seeking the imposition of 

antidumping and countervailing duties 

on imports of CRS from Brazil, the 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 149 / Thursday, August 2, 2018 / Notices 37791 

1See Petitioners’ Letter, ‘‘Certain Cold-Rolled 

Steel Flat Products from Brazil, China, India, Japan, 

Korea, Netherlands, Russia, and the United 

Kingdom,’’ dated July 28, 2015. 

2See Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from 

Brazil, India, the People’s Republic of China, the 

Republic of Korea, and the Russian Federation: 

Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations, 80 

FR 51206 (August 24, 2015); and Certain ColdRolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil, the People’s 

Republic of China, India, Japan, the Republic of 

Korea, the Netherlands, the Russian Federation, 

and the United Kingdom: Initiation of Less-ThanFair-Value Investigations, 80 FR 51198 (August 24, 

2015). 

3See Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from 

the Republic of Korea: Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value, 81 FR 49953 (July 29, 

2016); and Countervailing Duty Investigation of 

Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the 

Republic of Korea: Final Affirmative Determination, 

81 FR 49943 (July 29, 2016). 

4See Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil, 

India, Korea, Russia, and the United Kingdom; 

Determinations, 81 FR 63806 (September 16, 2016). 

5See Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from 

Brazil, India, the Republic of Korea, and the United 

Kingdom: Amended Final Affirmative Antidumping 

Determinations for Brazil and the United Kingdom 

and Antidumping Duty Orders, 81 FR 64432 

(September 20, 2016) (AD Order); see also Certain 

Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil, India, 

and the Republic of Korea: Amended Final 

Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and 

Countervailing Duty Order (the Republic of Korea) 

and Countervailing Duty Orders (Brazil and India), 

81 FR 64436 (September 20, 2016) (CVD Order) 

(collectively Orders). 

6See the Domestic Producers’ Letter, ‘‘Certain 

Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic 

of Korea: Request for Circumvention Ruling 

Pursuant to Section 781(b) of the Tariff Act of 

1930,’’ dated June 12, 2018 (Anti-Circumvention 

Ruling Request). 7 Id., at 25. 

8Ball bearing steels are defined as steels which 

contain, in addition to iron, each of the following 

elements by weight in the amount specified: (i) Not 

less than 0.95 nor more than 1.13 percent of carbon; 

(ii) not less than 0.22 nor more than 0.48 percent 

of manganese; (iii) none, or not more than 0.03 

percent of sulfur; (iv) none, or not more than 0.03 

percent of phosphorus; (v) not less than 0.18 nor 

more than 0.37 percent of silicon; (vi) not less than 

1.25 nor more than 1.65 percent of chromium; (vii) 

none, or not more than 0.28 percent of nickel; (viii) 

none, or not more than 0.38 percent of copper; and 

Continued 

People’s Republic of China, India, 

Japan, Korea, the Netherlands, Russia, 

and the United Kingdom.1 In response 

to these petitions, Commerce initiated 

AD and CVD investigations on August 

24, 2015.2 Following Commerce’s final 

affirmative determinations of dumping 

and countervailable subsidies,3 and the 

U.S. International Trade Commission 

(ITC)’s finding of material injury,4

Commerce issued AD and CVD orders 

on imports of CRS from Korea 

(collectively, Orders).5

On June 12, 2018, pursuant to section 

781(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 

351.225(h), the domestic producers 

submitted a request for Commerce to 

initiate anti-circumvention inquiries to 

determine whether entities in Vietnam 

are circumventing the Orders by 

exporting, to the United States, CRS 

which is completed or assembled in 

Vietnam using HRS sourced from 

Korea.6 Further, pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.225(f), the domestic producers 

request that Commerce initiate anticircumvention inquiries and issue in 

conjunction with initiation of the 

inquiries a preliminary determination of 

circumvention of the Orders to suspend 

liquidation of imports of CRS from 

Vietnam.7

Scope of the Orders 

The products covered by the orders 

are certain cold-rolled (cold-reduced), 

flat-rolled steel products, whether or not 

annealed, painted, varnished, or coated 

with plastics or other non-metallic 

substances. The products covered do 

not include those that are clad, plated, 

or coated with metal. The products 

covered include coils that have a width 

or other lateral measurement (‘‘width’’) 

of 12.7 mm or greater, regardless of form 

of coil (e.g., in successively 

superimposed layers, spirally 

oscillating, etc.). The products covered 

also include products not in coils (e.g., 

in straight lengths) of a thickness less 

than 4.75 mm and a width that is 12.7 

mm or greater and that measures at least 

10 times the thickness. The products 

covered also include products not in 

coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a 

thickness of 4.75 mm or more and a 

width exceeding 150 mm and measuring 

at least twice the thickness. The 

products described above may be 

rectangular, square, circular, or other 

shape and include products of either 

rectangular or non-rectangular crosssection where such cross-section is 

achieved subsequent to the rolling 

process, i.e., products which have been 

‘‘worked after rolling’’ (e.g., products 

which have been beveled or rounded at 

the edges). For purposes of the width 

and thickness requirements referenced 

above: 

(1) Where the nominal and actual 

measurements vary, a product is within 

the scope if application of either the 

nominal or actual measurement would 

place it within the scope based on the 

definitions set forth above, and 

(2) where the width and thickness 

vary for a specific product (e.g., the 

thickness of certain products with nonrectangular cross-section, the width of 

certain products with non-rectangular 

shape, etc.), the measurement at its 

greatest width or thickness applies. 

Steel products included in the scope 

of the orders are products in which: (1) 

Iron predominates, by weight, over each 

of the other contained elements; (2) the 

carbon content is 2 percent or less, by 

weight; and (3) none of the elements 

listed below exceeds the quantity, by 

weight, respectively indicated: 

• 2.50 percent of manganese, or 

• 3.30 percent of silicon, or 

• 1.50 percent of copper, or 

• 1.50 percent of aluminum, or 

• 1.25 percent of chromium, or 

• 0.30 percent of cobalt, or 

• 0.40 percent of lead, or 

• 2.00 percent of nickel, or 

• 0.30 percent of tungsten (also called 

wolfram), or 

• 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or 

• 0.10 percent of niobium (also called 

columbium), or 

• 0.30 percent of vanadium, or 

• 0.30 percent of zirconium 

Unless specifically excluded, 

products are included in this scope 

regardless of levels of boron and 

titanium. 

For example, specifically included in 

this scope are vacuum degassed, fully 

stabilized (commonly referred to as 

interstitial-free (IF)) steels, high strength 

low alloy (HSLA) steels, motor 

lamination steels, Advanced High 

Strength Steels (AHSS), and Ultra High 

Strength Steels (UHSS). If steels are 

recognized as low carbon steels with 

micro-alloying levels of elements such 

as titanium and/or niobium added to 

stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. 

HSLA steels are recognized as steels 

with micro-alloying levels of elements 

such as chromium, copper, niobium, 

titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum. 

Motor lamination steels contain microalloying levels of elements such as 

silicon and aluminum. AHSS and UHSS 

are considered high tensile strength and 

high elongation steels, although AHSS 

and UHSS are covered whether or not 

they are high tensile strength or high 

elongation steels. 

Subject merchandise includes coldrolled steel that has been further 

processed in a third country, including 

but not limited to annealing, tempering, 

painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, 

punching, and/or slitting, or any other 

processing that would not otherwise 

remove the merchandise from the scope 

of the orders if performed in the country 

of manufacture of the cold-rolled steel. 

All products that meet the written 

physical description, and in which the 

chemistry quantities do not exceed any 

one of the noted element levels listed 

above, are within the scope of the orders 

unless specifically excluded. The 

following products are outside of and/ 

or specifically excluded from the scope 

of the orders: 

• Ball bearing steels; 8


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
37792 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 149 / Thursday, August 2, 2018 / Notices 

(ix) none, or not more than 0.09 percent of 

molybdenum. 

9Tool steels are defined as steels which contain 

the following combinations of elements in the 

quantity by weight respectively indicated: (i) More 

than 1.2 percent carbon and more than 10.5 percent 

chromium; or (ii) not less than 0.3 percent carbon 

and 1.25 percent or more but less than 10.5 percent 

chromium; or (iii) not less than 0.85 percent carbon 

and 1 percent to 1.8 percent, inclusive, manganese; 

or (iv) 0.9 percent to 1.2 percent, inclusive, 

chromium and 0.9 percent to 1.4 percent, inclusive, 

molybdenum; or (v) not less than 0.5 percent carbon 

and not less than 3.5 percent molybdenum; or (vi) 

not less than 0.5 percent carbon and not less than 

5.5 percent tungsten. 

10Silico-manganese steel is defined as steels 

containing by weight: (i) Not more than 0.7 percent 

of carbon; (ii) 0.5 percent or more but not more than 

1.9 percent of manganese, and (iii) 0.6 percent or 

more but not more than 2.3 percent of silicon. 

11 Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel from Germany, 

Japan, and Poland: Final Determinations of Sales at 

Less Than Fair Value and Certain Final Affirmative 

Determination of Critical Circumstances, 79 FR 

42501, 42503 (July 22, 2014). This determination 

defines grain-oriented electrical steel as ‘‘a flatrolled alloy steel product containing by weight at 

least 0.6 percent but not more than 6 percent of 

silicon, not more than 0.08 percent of carbon, not 

more than 1.0 percent of aluminum, and no other 

element in an amount that would give the steel the 

characteristics of another alloy steel, in coils or in 

straight lengths.’’ 

12Non-Oriented Electrical Steel from the People’s 

Republic of China, Germany, Japan, the Republic of 

Korea, Sweden, and Taiwan: Antidumping Duty 

Orders, 79 FR 71741, 71741–42 (December 3, 2014). 

The orders define NOES as ‘‘cold-rolled, flat-rolled, 

alloy steel products, whether or not in coils, 

regardless of width, having an actual thickness of 

0.20 mm or more, in which the core loss is 

substantially equal in any direction of 

magnetization in the plane of the material. The term 

‘substantially equal’ means that the cross grain 

direction of core loss is no more than 1.5 times the 

straight grain direction (i.e., the rolling direction) of 

core loss. NOES has a magnetic permeability that 

does not exceed 1.65 Tesla when tested at a field 

of 800 A/m (equivalent to 10 Oersteds) along (i.e., 

parallel to) the rolling direction of the sheet (i.e., 

B800 value). NOES contains by weight more than 

1.00 percent of silicon but less than 3.5 percent of 

silicon, not more than 0.08 percent of carbon, and 

not more than 1.5 percent of aluminum. NOES has 

a surface oxide coating, to which an insulation 

coating may be applied.’’ 

13See Anti-Circumvention Ruling Request at 7. 

See also sections 781(b)(1)(A)(i) and (iii) of the Act. 

14See Anti-Circumvention Ruling Request at 

Exhibit 1. 

15 Id. at 7. See also section 781(b)(1)(B)(ii) of the 

Act. 

16 Id. at 7–8 and Exhibit 3 

17 Id. at 8, Exhibit 4, and Exhibit 5. 

• Tool steels; 9

• Silico-manganese steel; 10

• Grain-oriented electrical steels 

(GOES) as defined in the final 

determination of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce in Grain-Oriented Electrical 

Steel From Germany, Japan, and 

Poland.11

• Non-Oriented Electrical Steels 

(NOES), as defined in the antidumping 

orders issued by the U.S. Department of 

Commerce in Non-Oriented Electrical 

Steel From the People’s Republic of 

China, Germany, Japan, the Republic of 

Korea, Sweden, and Taiwan.12

The products subject to the orders are 

currently classified in the Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States 

(HTSUS) under item numbers: 

7209.15.0000, 7209.16.0030, 

7209.16.0060, 7209.16.0070, 

7209.16.0091, 7209.17.0030, 

7209.17.0060, 7209.17.0070, 

7209.17.0091, 7209.18.1530, 

7209.18.1560, 7209.18.2510, 

7209.18.2520, 7209.18.2580, 

7209.18.6020, 7209.18.6090, 

7209.25.0000, 7209.26.0000, 

7209.27.0000, 7209.28.0000, 

7209.90.0000, 7210.70.3000, 

7211.23.1500, 7211.23.2000, 

7211.23.3000, 7211.23.4500, 

7211.23.6030, 7211.23.6060, 

7211.23.6090, 7211.29.2030, 

7211.29.2090, 7211.29.4500, 

7211.29.6030, 7211.29.6080, 

7211.90.0000, 7212.40.1000, 

7212.40.5000, 7225.50.6000, 

7225.50.8080, 7225.99.0090, 

7226.92.5000, 7226.92.7050, and 

7226.92.8050. 

The products subject to the orders 

may also enter under the following 

HTSUS numbers: 7210.90.9000, 

7212.50.0000, 7215.10.0010, 

7215.10.0080, 7215.50.0016, 

7215.50.0018, 7215.50.0020, 

7215.50.0061, 7215.50.0063, 

7215.50.0065, 7215.50.0090, 

7215.90.5000, 7217.10.1000, 

7217.10.2000, 7217.10.3000, 

7217.10.7000, 7217.90.1000, 

7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 

7217.90.5090, 7225.19.0000, 

7226.19.1000, 7226.19.9000, 

7226.99.0180, 7228.50.5015, 

7228.50.5040, 7228.50.5070, 

7228.60.8000, and 7229.90.1000. 

The HTSUS subheadings above are 

provided for convenience and U.S. 

Customs purposes only. The written 

description of the scope of the orders is 

dispositive. 

Merchandise Subject to the AntiCircumvention Inquiries 

These anti-circumvention inquiries 

cover imports of CRS exported from 

Vietnam manufactured from HRS 

produced in Korea. 

Initiation of Anti-Circumvention 

Inquiries 

Section 781(b)(1) of the Act provides 

that Commerce may find circumvention 

of an AD or CVD order when 

merchandise of the same class or kind 

subject to the order is completed or 

assembled in a foreign country other 

than the country to which the order 

applies. In conducting an anticircumvention inquiry, under section 

781(b)(1) of the Act, Commerce relies on 

the following criteria: (A) Merchandise 

imported into the United States is of the 

same class or kind as any merchandise 

produced in a foreign country that is the 

subject of an antidumping or 

countervailing duty order or finding; (B) 

before importation into the United 

States, such imported merchandise is 

completed or assembled in another 

foreign country from merchandise 

which is subject to the order or 

merchandise which is produced in the 

foreign country that is subject to the 

order; (C) the process of assembly or 

completion in the foreign country 

referred to in section (B) is minor or 

insignificant; (D) the value of the 

merchandise produced in the foreign 

country to which the AD or CVD order 

applies is a significant portion of the 

total value of the merchandise exported 

to the United States; and (E) the 

administering authority determines that 

action is appropriate to prevent evasion 

of such order or finding. As discussed 

below, the domestic producers provided 

evidence with respect to these criteria. 

A. Merchandise of the Same Class or 

Kind 

The domestic producers claim that 

CRS exported to the United States is the 

same class or kind as that covered by 

the Orders in these inquiries.13 The 

domestic producers provided evidence 

to show that the merchandise from 

Vietnam enters the United States under 

the same tariff classification as subject 

merchandise.14

B. Completion of Merchandise in a 

Foreign Country 

The domestic producers note that 

section 781(b)(l)(B)(ii) of the Act 

requires that Commerce ‘‘must 

determine whether, prior to importation 

into the United States, the merchandise 

in the third country is completed from 

merchandise produced in the country 

subject to the antidumping or 

countervailing duty order.’’ 15 The 

domestic producers presented evidence 

showing substantial imports of Korean 

HRS into Vietnam following 

Commerce’s August 2015 initiation of 

AD and CVD investigations concerning 

CRS from Korea.16 Additionally, the 

domestic producers provide evidence 

that, from 2015 through 2017, little to 

no capacity existed in Vietnam to 

produce HRS, and that HRS production 

in Vietnam did not begin until 2017.17

Nevertheless, the domestic producers 

maintain that despite Vietnamese 

imports of HRS being significant even 

before the initiation of AD and CVD 

investigations on CRS from Korea in 

mid-2015, imports increased by 26 

percent between 2014 and 2016, before 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 149 / Thursday, August 2, 2018 / Notices 37793 

18 Id. at 8 and Exhibit 3. 

19 Id. at 5–6, 8–9, and Exhibit 1. 

20 Id. at 10–11. 

21 Id. 

22 Id. (citing Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat 

Products from the People’s Republic of China: 

Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Anti 

Circumvention Inquiries on the Antidumping Duty 

and Countervailing Duty Orders, 82 FR 58178 

(December 11, 2017) (CRS China Circumvention 

Preliminary) and accompanying Preliminary 

Decision Memorandum at 16–17; and Certain ColdRolled Steel Flat Products from the People’s 

Republic of China: Affirmative Final Determination 

of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty and 

Countervailing Duty Orders, 83 FR 23891 (May 23, 

2018) (CRS China Circumvention Final), and the 

accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at 

32). 

23See Anti-Circumvention Ruling Request at 11– 

12. 

24 Id. at 12. 

25 Id. 

26 Id. at 12–14. 

27 Id. at 12–13 (citing CRS China Circumvention 

Final and the accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at 37–38). 

28 Id. at 13. 

29 Id. 

30 Id. at 13–14. 

31 Id. at 14–18. 

32 Id. at 15–18 (citing Certain Hot-Rolled Steel 

Flat Products from Australia, Brazil, Japan, Korea, 

the Netherlands, Turkey, and The United Kingdom, 

Inv. Nos. 701–TA–545–547 and 73l–TA–1291– 

1297, USITC Publication 4570 (Oct. 2015) 

(Preliminary) at I–18 to I–22). 

33See id. at 17 (citing Cold-Rolled Steel Flat 

Products from Brazil, China, India, Japan, Korea, 

Netherlands, Russia and the United Kingdom, Inv. 

Nos. 701–TA–540–544 and 731–TA–1283–1290, 

USITC Publication 4564 (Sept. 2015) (Preliminary) 

at 1–21). 

34See id. at 14–15 (citing CRS China 

Circumvention Final and the accompanying Issues 

and Decision Memorandum at 39). 

35 Id. at 18–19 (citing CRS China Circumvention 

Final and the accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at 39). 

36 Id. at 18–19 (citing CRS China Circumvention 

Final and the accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at 39). 

dropping only slightly in 2017.18 The 

domestic producers also provide 

information reflecting the fact that 

imports into the United States of CRS 

from Korea significantly decreased after 

the imposition of the Orders, and that 

imports into the United States of CRS 

from Vietnam, as well as imports into 

Vietnam of Korean HRS, also increased 

significantly.19

C. Minor or Insignificant Process 

The domestic producers maintain that 

the process for completing CRS from 

HRS is minor or insignificant. Under 

section 781(b)(2) of the Act, Commerce 

considers five factors to determine 

whether the process of assembly or 

completion in the foreign country in 

which the merchandise is completed or 

assembled is minor or insignificant: (A) 

The level of investment in the foreign 

country in which the merchandise is 

completed or assembled; (B) the level of 

research and development in the foreign 

country in which the merchandise is 

completed or assemble; (C) the nature of 

the production process in the foreign 

country in which the merchandise is 

completed or assembled; (D) the extent 

of production facilities in the foreign 

country in which the merchandise is 

completed or assembled, and (E) 

whether the value of the processing 

performed in the foreign country in 

which the merchandise is completed or 

assembled represents a small proportion 

of the value of the merchandise 

imported into the United States. 

(1) Level of Investment 

The domestic producers contend that 

the level of investment necessary to 

construct a factory that can produce 

CRS from HRS in Vietnam is 

insignificant. In support of its 

contention, the domestic producers 

compare the investment necessary to 

install a cold-rolling facility with the 

investment necessary to produce HRS 

using a fully-integrated production 

process.20 The domestic producers cite 

Commerce’s findings in the earlier anticircumvention ruling regarding 

Vietnamese CRS using Chinese HRS 

inputs (i.e., substrate).21 There, 

Commerce pointed to record evidence 

showing the cost to build an integrated 

steel mill in China to produce HRS was 

in the range of 250 million to 10 billion 

U.S. dollars (USD) and that the cost to 

build a cold-rolling mill in Vietnam to 

produce CRS from HRS substrate was as 

low as 28 million USD.22 The domestic 

producers also provide evidence that 

the cost to build one integrated steel 

mill in Korea was 5 billion USD, and 

that the cost of building an integrated 

steel mill in Vietnam to one Vietnamese 

firm, Formosa Ha Tinh, was 10.6 billion 

USD.23 Finally, the domestic producers 

provided evidence that the cost of 

building a coated steel sheet factory, 

including a cold-rolling mill, was only 

70 million USD.24 The domestic 

producers, therefore, conclude that in 

comparison to the investment necessary 

for an integrated steel mill in Korea, the 

cost of a cold-rolling mill in Vietnam is 

insignificant.25

(2) Level of Research and Development 

The domestic producers assert that 

the level of research and development 

(R&D) in Vietnam is either minimal or 

non-existent.26 The domestic producers 

cite to Commerce’s findings in CRS 

China Circumvention Final, where 

Commerce found that no R&D 

investments had been made by 

mandatory respondents POSCO 

Vietnam and VNSteel Phu My Flat Steel 

Limited.27 The domestic producers 

contend that rather than developing its 

own technology, CRS producers in 

Vietnam are using technology 

developed abroad.28 As an example of 

Vietnamese producers using technology 

developed abroad, the domestic 

producers provided evidence that Dong 

A, a Vietnamese steel company, uses 

European and Japanese equipment in its 

coated sheet facility (which includes a 

pickling and cold-rolling mill).29 In 

contrast, the domestic producers point 

to POSCO’s R&D activities in Korea, 

which included employing an R&D 

laboratory staff of 934 personnel as of 

December 31, 2017, as well as total R&D 

expenses of hundreds of billions of 

Korean Won from 2015 through 2017.30

(3) Nature of Production Process 

According to the domestic producers, 

the production process undertaken by 

Vietnamese producers of CRS is less 

complex than steelmaking, and it is 

minimal in nature.31 Citing the ITC 

report in the underlying investigation of 

CRS from Korea, the domestic producers 

describe the process to produce HRS as 

consisting of three distinct stages 

(melting and refining steel, casting 

molten steel into semi-finished forms, 

and hot-rolling the semi-finished forms 

into HRS).32 In contrast, the domestic 

producers provide information 

indicating that the production of CRS 

from HRS involves less processing 

(cleaning and pickling, rolling, 

annealing, and tempering).33 Further, 

the domestic producers cite Commerce’s 

findings in CRS China Circumvention 

Final, where Commerce found the 

production process to produce CRS 

from HRS inputs in Vietnam to be 

comparatively minor.34

(4) Extent of Production Facilities in 

Vietnam 

The domestic producers provide 

information indicating that production 

facilities in Vietnam are more limited 

compared to facilities in Korea.35 They 

maintain that Vietnam had little to no 

HRS capacity during the relevant 

period. The domestic producers also 

point to CRS China Circumvention 

Final, where Commerce found that ‘‘the 

vast majority of production activities 

necessary to produce CRS occur at the 

molten steel, semi-finished steel, and 

hot-rolling stages.’’ 36 The domestic 

producers conclude that the extent of 

production facilities in Vietnam 

required to convert Korean HRS to CRS 

are no greater than those facilities 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
37794 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 149 / Thursday, August 2, 2018 / Notices 

37 Id. at 19. 

38 Id. at 19–20 (citing CRS China Circumvention 

Final and the accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at 10, 21, and 21). 

39 Id. at 21 (citing Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products 

from China and Japan, Inv. Nos. 701–TA–541 and 

731–TA–1284 and 1286, USITC Publication 4619 

(July 2016) (Final) at VII–30 (Table VII–41)). 

40 Id. at 20–21 and exhibit 13. 

41 Id. at 22. 

42 Id. 

43 Id. 

44 Id. 

45 Id. at 7 and Attachment 1. 

46 Id. at 5–9, Exhibit 3, Exhibit 4, and Exhibit 5. 

47 Id. at 10–12. 48 Id. at 12–13. 49 Id. at 14–18. 50 Id. at 18–19. 51 Id. at 19–21. 52 Id. at 14–18. 53 Id. at 5. 54 Id. at 6. 

55 Id. at 6 and Exhibit 2. 

required to convert Chinese HRS to 

CRS.37

(5) Value of Processing in Vietnam 

The domestic producers assert that 

producing HRS in Korea accounts for a 

large percentage of the total value of 

CRS that is produced in Vietnam using 

HRS from Korea. As support, the 

domestic producers again point to CRS 

China Circumvention Final, where 

Commerce found that CRS producers 

did not incur significant additional 

costs in the production of CRS, beyond 

the cost of HRS substrate inputs, that 

the value of further processing in 

Vietnam comprised only a small 

proportion of the total export value, and 

that the value of HRS produced in China 

constituted a significant portion of the 

value of the CRS exported to the United 

States.38 Additionally, the domestic 

producers cite the recent ITC 

investigation of CRS from China and 

Japan, stating that the information 

contained therein demonstrates that the 

cost of Korean HRS inputs account for 

‘‘roughly 81 to 89 percent’’ of the value 

of CRS.39 Finally, citing a 2017 

Financial Times article, the domestic 

producers further argue that the cost of 

producing HRS in Korea is higher than 

the cost of producing HRS in China.40

D. Additional Factors To Consider in 

Determining Whether Action Is 

Necessary 

Section 781(b)(3) of the Act directs 

Commerce to consider additional factors 

in determining whether to include 

merchandise assembled or completed in 

a foreign country within the scope of the 

order, such as: ‘‘(A) the pattern of trade, 

including sourcing patterns, (B) whether 

the manufacturer or exporter of the 

merchandise . . . is affiliated with the 

person who uses the merchandise . . . 

to assemble or complete in the foreign 

country the merchandise that is 

subsequently imported into the United 

States, and (C) whether imports into the 

foreign country of the merchandise . . . 

have increased after the initiation of the 

investigation which resulted in the 

issuance of such order or finding.’’ 

Regarding patterns of trade, the 

domestic producers contend that 

exports of CRS from Vietnam to the 

United States skyrocketed as exports 

from Korea declined in the period after 

the initiation of the underlying 

investigation, as compared to the period 

before it.41 The domestic producers 

further explain that while recent exports 

of CRS from Vietnam to the United 

States have declined slightly, this 

decline is largely due to Commerce’s 

investigation of circumvention of the 

AD and CVD orders on CRS from the 

China.42 The domestic producers also 

point to the fact that exports of HRS 

from Korea to Vietnam also increased 

after the original investigations 

commenced.43 Finally, regarding 

affiliation, the domestic producers point 

out that major Vietnamese CRS 

producer POSCO Vietnam is wholly 

owned by Korea’s largest steel 

manufacturer, POSCO.44

Analysis of the Allegations 

Based on our analysis of the domestic 

producer’s anti-circumvention 

allegations and the information 

provided therein, Commerce determines 

that anti-circumvention inquiries of the 

AD and CVD orders on CRS from Korea 

are warranted. 

With regard to whether the 

merchandise from Vietnam is of the 

same class or kind as the merchandise 

produced in Korea, the domestic 

producers presented information to 

Commerce indicating that, pursuant to 

section 781(b)(1)(A) of the Act, the 

merchandise being produced in and/or 

exported from Vietnam is of the same 

class or kind as CRS produced in Korea, 

which is subject to the Orders.45

Consequently, Commerce finds that the 

domestic producers provided sufficient 

information in their requests regarding 

the class or kind of merchandise to 

support the initiation of these anticircumvention inquiries. 

With regard to completion or 

assembly of merchandise in a foreign 

country, pursuant to section 781(b)(1)(B) 

of the Act, the domestic producers also 

presented information to Commerce 

indicating that the CRS exported from 

Vietnam to the United States is 

produced in Vietnam using HRS from 

Korea.46 We find that the information 

presented by the domestic producers 

regarding this criterion supports its 

request to initiate these anticircumvention inquiries. 

Commerce finds that the domestic 

producers sufficiently addressed the 

factors described in sections 

781(b)(1)(C) and 781(b)(2) of the Act 

regarding whether the process of 

assembly or completion of CRS in 

Vietnam is minor or insignificant. In 

particular, information in the domestic 

producers’ submission indicates that: (1) 

The level of investment in cold-rolling 

facilities is minimal when compared 

with the level of investment for basic 

steel making facilities; 47 (2) there is 

little or no research and development 

taking place in Vietnam; 48 (3) the CRS 

production processes involve the simple 

processing of HRS from a country 

subject to the Orders; 49 (4) the CRS 

production facilities in Vietnam are 

more limited compared to facilities in 

Korea; 50 and (5) the value of the 

processing performed in Vietnam is a 

small proportion of the value of the CRS 

imported into the United States.51

With respect to the value of the 

merchandise produced in Korea, 

pursuant to section 781(b)(1)(D) of the 

Act, the domestic producers relied on 

published sources, Commerce’s prior 

conclusions in CRS China 

Circumvention Final, and information 

presented in the ‘‘minor or insignificant 

process’’ portion of its anticircumvention allegation to indicate 

that the value of the key material, HRS, 

produced in Korea is significant relative 

to the total value of the CRS exported 

to the United States.52 We find that this 

information adequately meets the 

requirements of this factor, as discussed 

above, for the purposes of initiating 

these anti-circumvention inquiries. 

Finally, with respect to the additional 

factors listed under section 781(b)(3) of 

the Act, we find that the domestic 

producers presented evidence 

indicating that shipments of CRS from 

Vietnam to the United States increased 

since the imposition of the Orders 53 and 

that shipments of HRS from Korea to 

Vietnam also increased since the Orders 

took effect.54 Furthermore, we find that 

the domestic producers have presented 

evidence that the largest Korean 

manufacturer of CRS (POSCO) is 

affiliated with a company in Vietnam 

that completes the merchandise.55

Accordingly, we are initiating formal 

anti-circumvention inquiries concerning 

the AD and CVD orders on CRS from 

Korea, pursuant to section 781(b) of the 

Act. 

As these inquiries are initiated on a 

country-wide basis (i.e., not exclusive to 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 149 / Thursday, August 2, 2018 / Notices 37795 

the producers mentioned immediately 

above), Commerce intends to issue 

questionnaires to solicit information 

from the Vietnamese producers and 

exporters concerning their shipments of 

CRS to the United States and the origin 

of the imported HRS being processed 

into CRS. A company’s failure to 

respond completely to Commerce’s 

requests for information may result in 

the application of partial or total facts 

available, pursuant to section 776(a) of 

the Act, which may include adverse 

inferences, pursuant to section 776(b) of 

the Act. 

While we believe sufficient factual 

information has been submitted by the 

domestic producers supporting their 

request for inquiries, we do not find that 

the record supports the simultaneous 

issuance of a preliminary ruling. Such 

inquiries are by their nature typically 

complicated and can require 

information regarding production in 

both the country subject to the order 

and the third country completing the 

product. As noted above, Commerce 

intends to request additional 

information regarding the statutory 

criteria to determine whether shipments 

of CRS from Vietnam are circumventing 

the AD and CVD orders on CRS from 

Korea. Thus, with further development 

of the record required before a 

preliminary ruling can be issued, 

Commerce does not find it appropriate 

to issue a preliminary ruling at this 

time. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.225(e), Commerce finds that the 

issue of whether a product is included 

within the scope of an order cannot be 

determined based solely upon the 

application and the descriptions of the 

merchandise. Accordingly, Commerce 

will notify by mail all parties on 

Commerce’s scope service list of the 

initiation of these anti-circumvention 

inquiries. In addition, in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.225(f)(1)(i) and (ii), in 

this notice of initiation issued under 19 

CFR 351.225(e), we have included a 

description of the product that is the 

subject of these anti-circumvention 

inquiries (i.e., CRS that contains the 

characteristics as provided in the scope 

of the Orders) and an explanation of the 

reasons for Commerce’s decision to 

initiate an anti-circumvention inquiry, 

as provided above. 

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.225(l)(2), if Commerce issues a 

preliminary affirmative determination, 

we will then instruct U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection to suspend 

liquidation and require a cash deposit of 

estimated antidumping and 

countervailing duties, at the applicable 

rate, for each unliquidated entry of the 

merchandise at issue, entered or 

withdrawn from warehouse for 

consumption on or after the date of 

initiation of the inquiry. Commerce will 

establish a schedule for questionnaires 

and comments on the issues. In 

accordance with section 781(f) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.225(f)(5), 

Commerce intends to issue its final 

determination within 300 days of the 

date of publication of this initiation. 

This notice is published in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(f). 

Dated: July 27, 2018. 

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. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16566 Filed 8–1–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

The Department of Commerce will 

submit to the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) for clearance the 

following proposal for collection of 

information under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 

Chapter 35). 

Agency: National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 

Title: Documentation of fish harvest. 

OMB Control Number: 0648–0365. 

Form Number(s): None. 

Type of Request: Regular (extension of 

a currently approved information 

collection). 

Number of Respondents: 414. 

Average Hours per Response: 10 

minutes. 

Burden Hours: 69. 

Needs and Uses: The seafood dealers 

who process red porgy, greater 

amberjack, gag grouper, black grouper, 

red grouper, scamp, red hind, rock hind, 

yellowmouth grouper, yellowfin 

grouper, graysby or coney during 

seasonal fishery closures for applicable 

species must maintain documentation, 

as specified in 50 CFR part 300 subpart 

K and 50 CFR 622.192(i), that such fish 

were harvested from areas other than 

state or Federal waters in the South 

Atlantic. The documentation includes 

information on the vessel that harvested 

the fish, and where and when the fish 

were offloaded. NMFS requires the 

information for the enforcement of 

fishery regulations. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit organizations; individuals or 

households. 

Frequency: On occasion. 

Respondent’s Obligation: Mandatory. 

This information collection request 

may be viewed at reginfo.gov. Follow 

the instructions to view Department of 

Commerce collections currently under 

review by OMB. 

Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to OIRA_Submission@

omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395–5806. 

Dated: July 27, 2018. 

Sarah Brabson, 

NOAA PRA Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16500 Filed 8–1–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XG353 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 

Meeting of the Atlantic Highly 

Migratory Species Advisory Panel 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting and 

webinar/conference call. 

SUMMARY: NMFS will hold a 2-day 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species 

(HMS) Advisory Panel (AP) meeting in 

September 2018. The intent of the 

meeting is to consider options for the 

conservation and management of 

Atlantic HMS. The meeting is open to 

the public. 

DATES: The AP meeting and webinar 

will be held from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. on 

Wednesday, September 5, and from 8:30 

a.m. to 3 p.m. on Thursday, September 

6. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the Sheraton Silver Spring Hotel, 8777 

Georgia Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 

20910. 

The meeting on Wednesday, 

September 5, and Thursday, September 

6, will also be accessible via conference 

call and webinar. Conference call and 

webinar access information are available 

at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/ 

event/september-2018-hms-advisorypanel-meeting. Once finalized, the 

meeting agenda, presentations/ 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES