Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 43488-43491 [2010-18244]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 142 (Monday, July 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43488-43491]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-18244]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-821]


Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India: Final 
Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On January 11, 2010, the U.S. Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published in the Federal Register its preliminary results 
of the administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on 
certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products (hot-rolled carbon steel) 
from India for the period of review (POR) January 1, 2008, through 
December 31, 2008. See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products 
from India: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Review; 75 FR 1495 (January 11, 2010) (Preliminary Results). We 
preliminarily found that Tata Steel Limited (Tata) received 
countervailable subsidies during the POR. We received comments on our 
Preliminary Results from the Government of India (GOI), petitioners, 
and the respondent company, Tata.\1\ The final results are listed in 
the section ``Final Results of Review'' below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Petitioners are the United States Steel Corporation and 
Nucor Corporation (collectively, petitioners).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: July 26, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gayle Longest at (202) 482-3338, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On December 3, 2001, the Department published in the Federal 
Register the CVD order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products 
from India. See Notice of Amended Final Determination and Notice of 
Countervailing Duty Order: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 
Products from India, 66 FR 60198 (December 3, 2001). On February 2, 
2009, the Department initiated an administrative review covering Essar 
Steel Limited (Essar), Ispat Industries Limited (Ispat), JSW Steel 
Limited (JSW), and Tata. See Initiation of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation 
in Part, 74 FR 5821 (February 2, 2009) (Initiation). As a result of 
withdrawals of request for review, the Department rescinded this 
review, in part, with respect to Essar, Ispat, and JSW. See Certain 
Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from India: Partial Rescission of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR 26847 (June 4, 2009).
    On January 11, 2010, the Department published in the Federal 
Register its Preliminary Results of the administrative review of this 
order for the period January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2008. See 
Preliminary Results, 75 FR 1495. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), 
this administrative review covers Tata, a producer and exporter of 
subject merchandise.
    In the Preliminary Results, we invited interested parties to submit 
briefs or request a hearing. On February 12, 2010, we received comments 
from the GOI and Tata. On February 19, 2010, we received rebuttal 
comments from petitioners.

Scope of Order

    The merchandise subject to this order is certain hot-rolled carbon-
quality steel products of a rectangular shape, of a width of 0.5 inch 
or greater, neither clad, plated, nor coated with metal and whether or 
not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic 
substances, in coils (whether or not in successively superimposed 
layers), regardless of thickness, and in straight lengths, of a 
thickness of less than 4.75 mm and of a width measuring at least 10 
times the thickness. Universal mill plate (i.e., flat-rolled products 
rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, or a width exceeding 150 
mm, but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness of not less than 4 
mm, not in coils and without patterns in relief) of a thickness not 
less than 4.0 mm is not included within the scope of this order.
    Specifically included in the scope of this order are vacuum 
degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to as interstitial-free 
(IF) steels, high-strength low-alloy (HSLA) steels, and the substrate 
for motor lamination steels. IF steels are recognized as low-carbon 
steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as titanium or 
niobium (also commonly referred to as columbium), or both, added to 
stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized as 
steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, 
niobium, vanadium, and molybdenum. The substrate for motor lamination 
steels contains micro-alloying levels of elements such as silicon and 
aluminum.
    Steel products included in the scope of this order, regardless of 
definitions in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTS), are products in which: (i) Iron predominates, by weight, over 
each of the other contained elements; (ii) the carbon content is 2 
percent or less, by weight; and (iii) none of the elements listed below 
exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

1.80 percent of manganese, or
2.25 percent of silicon, or
1.00 percent of copper, or
0.50 percent of aluminum, or
1.25 percent of chromium, or
0.30 percent of cobalt, or
0.40 percent of lead, or
1.25 percent of nickel, or
0.30 percent of tungsten, or
0.10 percent of molybdenum, or
0.10 percent of niobium, or
0.15 percent of vanadium, or
0.15 percent of zirconium.

    All products that meet the physical and chemical description 
provided above are within the scope of this order unless otherwise 
excluded. The following products, by way of example, are outside or 
specifically excluded from the scope of this order.
     Alloy hot-rolled steel products in which at least one of 
the chemical elements exceeds those listed above (including, e.g., ASTM 
specifications A543, A387, A514, A517, A506).
     SAE/AISI grades of series 2300 and higher.
     Ball bearings steels, as defined in the HTS.
     Tool steels, as defined in the HTS.
     Silico-manganese (as defined in the HTS) or silicon 
electrical steel with a silicon level exceeding 2.25 percent.
     ASTM specifications A710 and A736.
     USS Abrasion-resistant steels (USS AR 400, USS AR 500).
     All products (proprietary or otherwise) based on an alloy 
ASTM specification (sample specifications: ASTM A506, A507).
     Non-rectangular shapes, not in coils, which are the result 
of having been processed by cutting or stamping and which have assumed 
the character of articles or products classified outside chapter 72 of 
the HTS.
    The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable in 
the HTS at

[[Page 43489]]

subheadings: 7208.10.15.00, 7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00, 
7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00, 7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60, 
7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60, 7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60, 
7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60, 7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30, 
7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15, 7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90, 
7208.40.60.30, 7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00, 7208.90.00.00, 
7211.14.00.90, 7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00, 7211.19.30.00, 
7211.19.45.00, 7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30, 7211.19.75.60, and 
7211.19.75.90. Certain hot-rolled flat-rolled carbon-quality steel 
covered by this order, including: Vacuum-degassed fully stabilized; 
high-strength low-alloy; and the substrate for motor lamination steel 
may also enter under the following tariff numbers: 7225.11.00.00, 
7225.19.00.00, 7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00, 7225.40.70.00, 
7225.99.00.90, 7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30, 7226.11.90.60, 
7226.19.10.00, 7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00, 7226.91.70.00, 
7226.91.80.00, and 7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise may also enter 
under 7210.70.30.00, 7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30, 7212.40.10.00, 
7212.40.50.00, and 7212.50.00.00. Although the HTS subheadings are 
provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department's written 
description of the merchandise subject to this order is dispositive.

Period of Review

    The POR for which we are measuring subsidies is from January 1, 
2008, through December 31, 2008.

Analysis of Comments

    On February 12, 2010 the GOI and Tata filed comments. On February 
19, 2010, petitioners filed rebuttal comments. All issues in the 
respondents' and petitioners' case and rebuttal briefs are addressed in 
the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Countervailing 
Duty Administrative Review on Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 
Products from India (Decision Memorandum), which is hereby adopted by 
this notice. A listing of the issues that parties raised and to which 
we have responded is attached to this notice as Appendix I. Parties can 
find a complete discussion of the issues raised in this review and the 
corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on 
file in the Central Records Unit (CRU) of the main commerce building. 
In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be 
accessed directly on the World Wide Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn.
    The paper copy and the electronic version of the Decision 
Memorandum are identical in content.

Final Results of Review

    After reviewing comments from all parties, we have made adjustments 
to our calculations as explained in our Decision Memorandum. Consistent 
with the Preliminary Results, we find that Tata received 
countervailable subsidies during the POR.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Total net countervailable
                 Company                            subsidy rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tata Steel Limited.......................  577.28 percent ad valorem.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates/Cash Deposits

    The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days after the date of 
publication of these final results of review to liquidate shipments of 
subject merchandise by Tata entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2008, at 
the ad valorem rate listed above. We will also instruct CBP to collect 
cash deposits for the respondent at the countervailing duty rate 
indicated above on all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of 
publication of these final results of review.
    For all non-reviewed companies, the Department will instruct CBP to 
assess countervailing duties at the cash deposit rates in effect at the 
time of entry, for entries between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 
2008. The cash deposit rates for all companies not covered by this 
review are not changed by the results of this review.

Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    This notice 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 or destruction of APO materials or conversion to 
judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with 
the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
    We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.

    Dated: July 19, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I--Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Adverse Facts Available (AFA)
    A. The GOI
    B. Tata
II. Analysis of Programs
    A. Programs Administered by the Government of India
    1. Pre- and Post-Shipment Export Financing
    2. Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS)
    3. Advance License Program (ALP)
    4. Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme (DEPS)
    5. Status Certificate Program
    6. Loan Guarantees From the GOI
    7. Steel Development Fund (SDF) Loans
    8. Captive Mining of Iron Ore
    9. Captive Mining Rights of Coal
    10. Export Oriented Units (EOU) Program: Duty-Free Import of 
Capital Goods and Raw Materials
    11. EOU Program: Reimbursement of Central Sales Tax (CST) Paid 
on Materials Procured Domestically
    12. Sale of High-Grade Iron Ore for Less Than Adequate 
Remuneration (LTAR)
    13. Market Development Assistance (MDA)
    14. Market Access Initiative (MAI)
    15. Special Economic Zone Act of 2005 (SEZ Act): Duty Free 
Import/Domestic Procurement of Goods and Services for Development, 
Operation, and Maintenance of SEZ Units Program
    16. SEZ Act: Exemption From Excise Duties on Goods Machinery and 
Capital Goods Brought From the Domestic Tariff Area for Use by an 
Enterprise in the SEZ
    17. SEZ Act: Drawback on Goods Brought or Services Provided From 
the Domestic Tariff Area Into a SEZ, or Services Provided in a SEZ 
by Service Providers Located Outside India
    18. SEZ Act: 100 Percent Exemption From Income Taxes on Export 
Income From the First 5 Years of Operation, 50 Percent for the Next 
5 Years, and a Further 50 Percent Exemption on Export Income 
Reinvested in India for an Additional 5 Years
    19. SEZ Act: Exemption From the Central Sales Tax (CST)
    20. SEZ Act: Exemption From the National Service Tax
    21. Duty Free Replenishment Certificate (DFRC) Scheme
    22. Target Plus Scheme (TPS)
    B. Programs Administered by the State Government of Gujarat
    1. State Government of Gujarat (SGOG) Tax Incentives: Sales Tax 
Exemptions of Purchases of Goods During the POR
    2. State Government of Gujarat (SGOG) Tax Incentives: Deferrals 
on Purchases of Goods From Prior Years (as Well as Deferrals Granted 
During the POR

[[Page 43490]]

    3. State Government of Gujarat (SGOG) Tax Incentives: Value 
Added Tax (VAT)
    4. Gujarat Special Economic Zone Act (SGOG SEZ Act): Stamp Duty 
and Registration Fees for Land Transfers, Loan Agreements, Credit 
Deeds, and Mortgages
    5. SGOG SEZ Act: Sales Tax, Purchase Tax, and Other Taxes 
Payable on Sales and Transactions
    6. SGOG SEZ Act: Sales and Other State Taxes on Purchases of 
Inputs (Both Goods and Services) for the SEZ or a Unit within the 
SEZ
    C. Programs Administered by the State Government of Maharashtra 
(SGOM)
    1. Sales Tax Program
    2. VAT Tax Refunds Under the SGOM Package Scheme of Incentives 
and the Maharashtra New Package Scheme of Incentives
    3. Electricity Duty Exemption Under the Package Scheme of 
Incentives for 1993
    4. Refunds of Octroi Under the PSI of 1993, Maharashtra 
Industrial Policy (MIP of 2001), and Maharashtra Industrial Policy 
(MIP of 2006)
    5. Loan Guarantees Based on Octroi Refunds by SGOM
    6. Infrastructure Assistance for Mega Projects
    7. Land for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
    8. Investment Subsidy
    D. Programs Administered by the State Government of Andhra 
Pradesh (SGAP)
    1. Grant Under the Industrial Investment Promotion Policy of 
2005-2010 (Andhra Pradesh IP): 25 Percent Reimbursement of Cost of 
Land in Industrial Estates and Industrial Development Areas
    2. Grant Under the Andhra Pradesh IP: Reimbursement of Power at 
the Rate of Rs. 0.75 ``Per Unit'' for the Period Beginning April 1, 
2005, through March 31, 2006 and for the Four Years Thereafter to be 
Determined by the Government of Andhra Pradesh (GOAP)
    3. Grant Under the Andhra Pradesh IP: A 50 Percent Subsidy for 
Expenses Incurred for Quality Certification Up to RS. 100 Lakhs
    4. Grant Under the Andhra Pradesh IP: A 25 Percent Subsidy on 
``Cleaner Production Measures'' Up to Rs. 5 Lakhs
    5. Grant Under the Andhra Pradesh IP: A 50 Percent Subsidy on 
Expenses Incurred in Patent Registration, up to Rs. 5 Lakhs
    6. Tax Incentives Under the Andhra Pradesh IP: 100 Percent 
Reimbursement of Stamp Duty and Transfer Duty Paid for the Purchase 
of Land and Buildings and the Obtaining of Financial Deeds and 
Mortgages
    7. Tax Incentives Under the Andhra Pradesh IP: A Grant of 25 
Percent of the Tax Paid to SGAP, Which is Applied as a Credit 
Against the Tax Owed the Following Year, for a Period of Five Years 
From the Date of Commencement of Production
    8. Tax Incentives Under the Andhra Pradesh IP: Exemption From 
the SGAP Non-agricultural Land Assessment (NALA)
    9. Provision of Goods/Services for Less Than Adequate 
Remuneration Under the Andhra Pradesh IP: Provision of 
Infrastructure for Industries Located More Than 10 Kilometers From 
Existing Industrial Estates or Industrial Development Areas
    E. Programs Administered by the State Government of Chhattisgarh 
(SGOC)
    1. Grant Under the Chhattisgarh Industrial Policy 2004-2009 
(CIP): A Direct
    Subsidy of 35 Percent of Total Capital Cost for the Project, up 
to a Maximum Amount Equivalent to the Amount of Commercial Tax/
Central Sales Tax Paid in a Seven Year Period
    2. Grant Under the CIP: A Direct Subsidy of 40 Percent Toward 
Total Interest Paid for a Period of 5 Years (up to Rs. Lakh per 
Year) on Loans and Working Capital for Upgrades in Technology
    3. Grant Under the CIP: Reimbursement of 50 Percent of Expenses 
(up to Rs. 75,000) Incurred for Quality Certification
    4. Grant Under the CIP: Reimbursement of 50 Percent of Expenses 
(up to 5 Lakh) for Obtaining Patents
    5. Tax Incentives Under the CIP: Total Exemption From 
Electricity Duties for a Period of 15 Years From the Date of 
Commencement of Commercial Production
    6. Tax Incentives Under the CIP: Exemption from Stamp Duty on 
Deeds Executed for Purchase or Lease of Land and Buildings and Deeds 
Relating to Loans and Advances To Be Taken by the Company for a 
Period of Three Years From the Date of Registration
    7. Tax Incentives Under the CIP: Exemption From Payment of Entry 
Tax for 7 Years (Excluding Minerals Obtained from Mining in the 
State)
    8. Tax Incentives Under the CIP: A 50 Percent Reduction of the 
Service Charges for Acquisition of Private Land by Chhattisgarh 
Industrial Development Corporation for Use by the Company
    9. Land for Less Than Adequate Remuneration (LTAR) Under CIP
    F. Programs Administered by the State Government of Jharkland 
(SGOJ)
    1. Tax Incentives Under the Jharkhand State Industrial Policy 
(JSIP) of 2001: Exemption of Electricity Duties
    2. Tax Incentives Under the JSIP: Offset of Jharkhand Sales Tax 
(JST)
    3. Grants Under the JSIP: Capital Investment Incentive
    4. Grants Under the JSIP: Capital Power Generating Subsidy
    5. Grants Under the JSIP: Interest Subsidy
    6. Tax Incentives Under the JSIP: Stamp Duty and Registration
    7. Grants Under the JSIP: Feasibility Study and Project Report 
Cost Reimbursement
    8. Grants Under the JSIP: Pollution Control Equipment Subsidy
    9. Grants Under the JSIP: Incentive for Quality Certification
    10. Infrastructure Subsidies to Mega Projects: Tax Incentives
    11. Infrastructure Subsidies to Mega Projects: Grants
    12. Infrastructure Subsidies to Mega Projects: Loans
    13. Employment Incentives Under the JSIP
    G. Programs Administered by the State Government of Karnataka 
(SGOK)
    1. SGOK's New Industrial Policy and Package of Incentives and 
Concessions of 1993 (1993 KIP): Tax Incentives
    2. 1993 KIP: Land at Less Than Adequate Remuneration
    3. 1993 KIP: Iron Ore, Limestone, and Dolomite at Less Than 
Adequate Remuneration
    4. 1993 KIP: Power/Electricity at Less Than Adequate 
Remuneration
    5. 1993 KIP: Water at Less Than Adequate Remuneration
    6. 1993 KIP: Roads and Other Infrastructure at Less Than 
Adequate Remuneration
    7. 1993 KIP: Port Facilities at Less Than Adequate Remuneration
    8. 1993 KIP: Grants
    9. 1993 KIP: Loans
    10. 1993 KIP: Tax Incentives
    11. SGOK's New Industrial Policy and Package of Incentives and 
Concessions of 1996 (1996 KIP): Loans
    12. 1996 KIP: Grants
    13. 1996 KIP: Provision of Goods and Services at Less Than 
Adequate Remuneration (LTAR)
    14. SGOK's New Industrial Policy and Package of Incentives and 
Concessions of 2001 (2001 KIP): Tax Incentives
    15. 2001 KIP: Loans
    16. 2001 KIP: Grants
    17. 2001 KIP: Provision of Goods and Services at Less Than 
Adequate Remuneration (LTAR)
    18. SGOK's New Industrial Policy and Package of Incentives and 
Concessions of 2006 (2006 KIP): Loans
    19. 2006 KIP: Tax Incentives
    20. 2006 KIP: Provision of Goods and Services for Less Than 
Adequate Remuneration (LTAR)
    21. 2006 KIP: Grants

Programs Determined To Be Terminated

    1. Exemption of Export Credit From Interest Taxes
    2. Income Tax Exemption Scheme Under Section (80 HHC)
III. Analysis of Comments
Comment 1: Whether The State Government Of Jharkhand (SGOJ) 
Cooperated To The Best Of Its Ability And Should Not Be Subject To 
The AFA Rate That The Department Preliminarily Applied To The SGOJ 
Programs
Comment 2: Whether The Programs Covered In The Review Have Provided 
Countervailable Benefits To Indian Exporters
Comment 3: Whether The Department Should Have Held Consultations 
With The GOI Before Including Many Of The Programs In Its 
Administrative Review
Comment 4: Whether The Application of The Adverse Facts Available 
(AFA) Standard Is Inconsistent With Article 12/7 Of WTO's ASCM
Comment 5: Whether The AFA Rates Arrived At For The SGOJ Programs 
Have No Rational Connection To Tata's Operations And Are Improper
Comment 6: Whether The Application Of

[[Page 43491]]

AFA Rates To Programs Administered By The State Governments 
Contradicts The Department's Prior Determinations In This Proceeding
Comment 7: Whether The Department's Calculation Methodology Is 
Incorrect As It Improperly Summed The Total Of The GOI And State-
Government AFA Rates Without Properly Accounting For The Percentage 
Of Tata's Total Turnover That The State Programs Could Have Applied 
To
Comment 8: Whether The Department Made A Clerical Error In The 
Calculation Of The AFA Rate For SGOJ Programs
Comment 9: Whether The Department's Discretion In Selecting AFA 
Margins Is Limited By The Requirement That Margins Be Reasonable, 
Reasonably Accurate Estimates Of Actual Margins, And Rationally 
Related To Practices In The Industry
Comment 10: Whether The AFA Margin From The Preliminary Results Is 
An Abuse Of The Department's Discretion Because It Is Claimed To Be 
Unreasonable, Anomalous, And Unrelated To The Country, The Industry, 
Or The Company
Comment 11: Whether The 586.43% Preliminary Margin Is Unlawful 
Because It Is Excessively High And Therefore Punitive
Comment 12: Whether The Department Improperly Applied To Tata Steel 
Numerous State Programs Relating To States Where Tata Steel Is Not 
Located
IV. Total Net Subsidy Rate
V. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2010-18244 Filed 7-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P