Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Russian Federation: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Final Negative Critical Circumstances Determination, 49935-49938 [2016-17937]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 146 / Friday, July 29, 2016 / Notices research or scientific educational uses requiring an electron microscope. We know of no electron microscope, or any other instrument suited to these purposes, which was being manufactured in the United States at the time of order of each instrument. Dated: July 22, 2016. Gregory W. Campbell, Director, Subsidies Enforcement Office, Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2016–18018 Filed 7–28–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–821–823] Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Russian Federation: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Final Negative Critical Circumstances Determination Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of certain cold-rolled steel flat products (cold-rolled steel) from the Russian Federation (Russia). For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the ‘‘Final Determination’’ section of this notice. The period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014. DATES: Effective July 29, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristen Johnson (the NLMK Companies) and Stephanie Moore (the Severstal Companies), AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4793 and (202) 482–3692, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: Background The Department published the Preliminary Determination on December 22, 2015.1 On July 1, 2016, the 1 See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Russian Federation: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, Preliminary Negative Critical Circumstances Determination, and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 80 FR 79564 (December 22, 2015) (Preliminary Determination), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Jul 28, 2016 Jkt 238001 Department issued a Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum with respect to the Provision of Mining Rights for Less Than Adequate Remuneration (LTAR) program.2 A complete summary of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice.3 The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Final Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://enforcement.trade.gov/ frn/. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version identical in content. Scope of the Investigation The products covered by this investigation are cold-rolled steel flat products from Russia. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see the ‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ in Appendix II of this notice. Scope Comments In accordance with the Preliminary Scope Determination,4 the Department set aside a period of time for parties to address the scope issues in case briefs 2 See Memorandum To Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, titled ‘‘Decision Memorandum for the Post-Preliminary Analysis of Program Which Required More Information at the Preliminary Determination: Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Russian Federation,’’ dated July 1, 2016 (PostPreliminary Decision Memorandum). 3 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Russian Federation: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination,’’ dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 4 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Certain ColdRolled Steel Products from Brazil, the People’s Republic of China, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,’’ dated February 29, 2016. PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 49935 or other written comments on scope issues. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted to the records of the cold-rolled steel investigations, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Final Scope Decision Memorandum.5 The Final Scope Decision Memorandum is incorporated by, and hereby adopted by, this notice. Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received The subsidy programs under investigation and the issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues that parties raised, and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice at Appendix I. Use of Adverse Facts Available In making this final determination, the Department relied, in part, on facts available with regard to specificity of the Provision of Natural Gas for LTAR, to specificity of the Provision of Mining Rights for LTAR program, and to the Severstal Companies’ use of the Tax Deduction for Exploration Expenses. Because neither the Government of Russia nor the Severstal Companies acted to the best of their ability in responding to the Department’s requests for certain information, we drew an adverse inference where appropriate in selecting from among the facts otherwise available.6 For further information, see the section ‘‘Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences’’ in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. Changes Since the Preliminary Determination Based on our analysis of the comments received from parties and the minor corrections presented, and additional items discovered at verification, we made certain changes to the respondents’ subsidy rate calculations. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 5 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Certain ColdRolled Steel Products from Brazil, the People’s Republic of China, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom: ‘‘Final Scope Comments Decision Memorandum,’’ dated May 16, 2016. 6 See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act. E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM 29JYN1 49936 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 146 / Friday, July 29, 2016 / Notices Final Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances As discussed in the Preliminary Determination, on October 30, 2015, Petitioners 7 filed a timely critical circumstances allegation, pursuant to section 703(e)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). and 19 CFR 351.206(c)(1), alleging that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of cold-rolled steel from Russia.8 We continue to determine that critical circumstances do not exist for the NLMK Companies, the Severstal Companies, and all other producers/ exporters of subject merchandise in Russia. A discussion of our negative determination of critical circumstances can be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum at the section, ‘‘Final Determination of Critical Circumstances.’’ Final Determination In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we calculated a rate for the NLMK Companies and the Severstal Companies, the exporters/ producers of subject merchandise selected for individual examination in this investigation. In accordance with sections 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) and 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, for companies not individually investigated, we apply an ‘‘all-others’’ rate, which is normally calculated by weighting the subsidy rates of the individual companies selected as mandatory respondents with those companies’ exports of the subject merchandise to the United States. Under section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, the allothers rate excludes zero and de minimis rates calculated for the exporters and producers individually investigated, as well as any rates determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. In this investigation, the only non-de minimis rate is the rate calculated for the NLMK Companies. Consequently, the rate calculated for the NLMK Companies is assigned as the all others rate. On this basis, the estimated countervailable subsidy rates are as follows: Company Subsidy rate Novolipetsk Steel OJSC, Novex Trading (Swiss) S.A., Altai-Koks OJSC, Dolomite OJSC, Stoilensky OJSC, Studenovskaya (Stagdok) OJSC, Trading House LLC, Vtorchermet NLMK LLC, Vtorchermet OJSC, and Vtorchermet NLMK Center LLC (collectively, the NLMK Companies). PAO Severstal, Severstal Export GmbH, JSC Karelsky Okatysh, AO OLKON, AO Vorkutaugol, and JSC Vtorchermet (collectively, the Severstal Companies). All Others ........................................................................................................................................................... Disclosure We intend to disclose to parties in this proceeding the calculations performed for this final determination within five days of the date of public announcement of our final determination, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation As a result of our affirmative Preliminary Determination and pursuant to section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of cold-rolled steel from Russia, other than subject merchandise produced/exported by the Severstal Companies which received a preliminary de minimis countervailing duty rate, that were entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after December 22, 2015, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register.9 In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we issued instructions to CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for countervailing duty (CVD) purposes for subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after April 20, 2016, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all entries 7 Petitioners are ArcelorMittal USA LLC, United States Steel Corporation, Nucor Corporation, Steel VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Jul 28, 2016 Jkt 238001 from December 22, 2015 through April 19, 2016. If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order and will reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act and will require a cash deposit of estimated CVDs for such entries of subject merchandise in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all estimated duties deposited as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled. International Trade Commission Notification In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the ITC all nonprivileged and non-proprietary information relating to this investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or under an administrative protective order (APO), without the written consent of the Assistant Dynamics, Inc., California Steel Industries, and AK Steel Corporation. PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 6.95 percent ad valorem. 0.62 percent ad valorem (de minimis). 6.95 percent ad valorem. Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders (APOs) In the event the ITC issues a final negative injury determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to an 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 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 violation subject to sanction. This determination and notice are issued and published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: July 20, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I—List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Final Determination of Critical Circumstances IV. Scope of the Investigation V. Subsidies Valuation VI. Benchmarks and Discount Rates VII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and 8 See 9 See E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM Preliminary Determination, 80 FR at 79565. Preliminary Determination, 80 FR at 79565. 29JYN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 146 / Friday, July 29, 2016 / Notices Adverse Inferences VIII. Analysis of Programs IX. Analysis of Comments Comment 1: Whether Gazprom Is a Government Authority Comment 2: Whether the Provision of Natural Gas for LTAR Is De Facto Specific Comment 3: Whether the Natural Gas Market in Russia Is Distorted Comment 4: Standard Applied to Select a Tier Two Benchmark Comment 5: Availability of Tier Two Natural Gas Prices to Purchasers in Russia Comment 6: Comparability Adjustments to a Tier Two Benchmark Comment 7: Whether the Department Should Use a Tier Three Benchmark Comment 8: Whether to Adjust the Natural Gas Benchmark to Reflect Revised Data Comment 9: Whether the NLMK Companies Benefited from the Provision of Mining Rights Comment 10: Whether Timing of the PostPreliminary Decision Memorandum Violated Interested Parties Due Process Rights Comment 11: Whether the GOR’s Provision of Mining Rights Constitutes General Infrastructure that Is Not Countervailable Comment 12: Whether the GOR Acted to the Best of Its Ability With Regard to Usage Data Provided in Connection with the Provision of Mining Rights for LTAR Program Comment 13: Whether the Provision of Mining Rights Is Specific Comment 14: Whether the Mining Rights for LTAR Program Confers Recurring Benefits Comment 15: Use of Mining Rights—Not Coal—to Measure the Benefit Comment 16: Whether to Deduct Costs from the Coal Benchmark Rather than Adding Costs to the Extraction Price Paid by the Severstal Companies Comment 17: Revisions to Coal Benchmark Price Calculated in Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum Comment 18: Whether to Countervail the Severstal Companies’ Tax Debt WriteOffs Comment 19: Reduction in Extraction Payments Program Comment 20: Whether the Tax Deduction for Exploration Expenses Is Specific Comment 21: Whether to Apply Adverse Facts Available With Regard to the Benefit the Severstal Companies Received Under the Tax Deduction for Exploration Expenses Program Comment 22: Applicable De Minimis Rate for Russian CVD Proceedings Comment 23: Use of the NLMK Companies’ Verified Sales Data Comment 24: Calculation of the Severstal Companies’ Sales Denominator X. Recommendation Appendix II—Scope of the Investigation The products covered by this investigation are certain cold-rolled (cold-reduced), flatrolled steel products, whether or not annealed, painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Jul 28, 2016 Jkt 238001 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 cross-section 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 non-rectangular crosssection, 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 this investigation 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 microalloying levels of elements such as titanium and/or niobium added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 49937 recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum. Motor lamination steels contain micro-alloying 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 cold-rolled 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 investigation 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 these investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of these investigation: • Ball bearing steels; 10 • Tool steels; 11 • Silico-manganese steel; 12 • 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.13 10 Ball 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 (ix) none, or not more than 0.09 percent of molybdenum. 11 Tool 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. 12 Silico-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. 13 See 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 42,501, 42,503 (Dep’t of Commerce, July 22, 2014). This determination defines grain-oriented electrical steel as ‘‘a flat- E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM Continued 29JYN1 49938 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 146 / Friday, July 29, 2016 / Notices • Non-Oriented Electrical Steels (NOES), as defined in the antidumping orders issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce in NonOriented Electrical Steel From the People’s Republic of China, Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Sweden, and Taiwan.14 The products subject to this investigation 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 investigation 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 investigation is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2016–17937 Filed 7–28–16; 8:45 am] asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P rolled 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.’’ 14 See Non-Oriented Electrical Steel from the People’s Republic of China, Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Sweden, and Taiwan: Antidumping Duty Orders, 79 FR 71,741, 71,741– 42 (Dep’t of Commerce, Dec. 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.’’ VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Jul 28, 2016 Jkt 238001 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–533–865] Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products From India: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) determines that imports of certain cold-rolled steel flat products (‘‘cold-rolled steel’’) from India are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’). The final estimated weightedaverage dumping margins of sales at LTFV are listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Final Determination Margins.’’ The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is July 1, 2014, through June 30, 2015. DATES: Effective July 29, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick O’Connor, AD/CVD Operations, Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0989. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background The Department published in the Federal Register the preliminary determination on March 7, 2016.1 A summary of the events that have occurred since the Department published the Preliminary Determination, as well as a full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.2 The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and is available to all parties in the Central 1 See Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products From India: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures, 81 FR 11741 (March 7, 2016) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’). 2 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance ‘‘Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from India: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination of Sales at Less-Than-Fair-Value,’’ dated concurrently with this notice (‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’). PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https:// enforcement.trade.gov. The signed and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Scope of the Investigation The products covered by this investigation are cold-rolled steel from India. For a full description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix I to this notice. Scope Comments In accordance with the Preliminary Scope Determination,3 the Department set aside a period of time for parties to address scope issues in case briefs or other written comments on scope issues. For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal responses submitted on the records of the cold-rolled steel investigations, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, see the Final Scope Decision Memorandum.4 The Final Scope Decision Memorandum is incorporated by, and hereby adopted by, this notice. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs that were submitted by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum accompanying this notice, and which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice at Appendix II. Verification As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’), in February and March 2016, the Department verified the sales and cost data reported by the collapsed entity JSW Steel Limited (‘‘JSWSL’’)/JSW 3 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Certain ColdRolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil, the People’s Republic of China, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination,’’ dated February 29, 2016 (‘‘Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum’’). 4 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Certain ColdRolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil, the People’s Republic of China, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom: Final Scope Comments Decision Memorandum,’’ dated May 16, 2016 (‘‘Final Scope Decision Memorandum’’). E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM 29JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 146 (Friday, July 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49935-49938]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17937]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-821-823]


Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel 
Flat Products From the Russian Federation: Final Affirmative 
Countervailing Duty Determination and Final Negative Critical 
Circumstances Determination

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) determines that 
countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters 
of certain cold-rolled steel flat products (cold-rolled steel) from the 
Russian Federation (Russia). For information on the estimated subsidy 
rates, see the ``Final Determination'' section of this notice. The 
period of investigation (POI) is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 
2014.

DATES: Effective July 29, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristen Johnson (the NLMK Companies) 
and Stephanie Moore (the Severstal Companies), AD/CVD Operations, 
Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4793 and (202) 482-3692, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Department published the Preliminary Determination on December 
22, 2015.\1\ On July 1, 2016, the Department issued a Post-Preliminary 
Decision Memorandum with respect to the Provision of Mining Rights for 
Less Than Adequate Remuneration (LTAR) program.\2\ A complete summary 
of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Determination, as 
well as a full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this 
final determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice.\3\ The Issues and 
Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically 
via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to 
registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and is available to all 
parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department 
of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Final 
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum 
and the electronic version identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled 
Steel Flat Products from the Russian Federation: Preliminary 
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, Preliminary Negative 
Critical Circumstances Determination, and Alignment of Final 
Determination With Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 80 FR 79564 
(December 22, 2015) (Preliminary Determination), and accompanying 
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
    \2\ See Memorandum To Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant 
Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, titled ``Decision 
Memorandum for the Post-Preliminary Analysis of Program Which 
Required More Information at the Preliminary Determination: 
Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat 
Products from the Russian Federation,'' dated July 1, 2016 (Post-
Preliminary Decision Memorandum).
    \3\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to 
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, 
``Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel 
Flat Products from the Russian Federation: Issues and Decision 
Memorandum for the Final Determination,'' dated concurrently with 
this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are cold-rolled steel 
flat products from Russia. For a complete description of the scope of 
this investigation, see the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' in Appendix 
II of this notice.

Scope Comments

    In accordance with the Preliminary Scope Determination,\4\ the 
Department set aside a period of time for parties to address the scope 
issues in case briefs or other written comments on scope issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, 
``Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Products from Brazil, the People's 
Republic of China, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian 
Federation, and the United Kingdom: Scope Comments Decision 
Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,'' dated February 29, 
2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal 
responses submitted to the records of the cold-rolled steel 
investigations, and accompanying discussion and analysis of all 
comments timely received, see the Final Scope Decision Memorandum.\5\ 
The Final Scope Decision Memorandum is incorporated by, and hereby 
adopted by, this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, 
``Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Products from Brazil, the People's 
Republic of China, India, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian 
Federation, and the United Kingdom: ``Final Scope Comments Decision 
Memorandum,'' dated May 16, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received

    The subsidy programs under investigation and the issues raised in 
the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are 
discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues 
that parties raised, and to which we responded in the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice at Appendix I.

Use of Adverse Facts Available

    In making this final determination, the Department relied, in part, 
on facts available with regard to specificity of the Provision of 
Natural Gas for LTAR, to specificity of the Provision of Mining Rights 
for LTAR program, and to the Severstal Companies' use of the Tax 
Deduction for Exploration Expenses. Because neither the Government of 
Russia nor the Severstal Companies acted to the best of their ability 
in responding to the Department's requests for certain information, we 
drew an adverse inference where appropriate in selecting from among the 
facts otherwise available.\6\ For further information, see the section 
``Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences'' in the 
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our analysis of the comments received from parties and the 
minor corrections presented, and additional items discovered at 
verification, we made certain changes to the respondents' subsidy rate 
calculations. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum.

[[Page 49936]]

Final Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances

    As discussed in the Preliminary Determination, on October 30, 2015, 
Petitioners \7\ filed a timely critical circumstances allegation, 
pursuant to section 703(e)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(the Act). and 19 CFR 351.206(c)(1), alleging that critical 
circumstances exist with respect to imports of cold-rolled steel from 
Russia.\8\ We continue to determine that critical circumstances do not 
exist for the NLMK Companies, the Severstal Companies, and all other 
producers/exporters of subject merchandise in Russia. A discussion of 
our negative determination of critical circumstances can be found in 
the Issues and Decision Memorandum at the section, ``Final 
Determination of Critical Circumstances.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Petitioners are ArcelorMittal USA LLC, United States Steel 
Corporation, Nucor Corporation, Steel Dynamics, Inc., California 
Steel Industries, and AK Steel Corporation.
    \8\ See Preliminary Determination, 80 FR at 79565.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Determination

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we 
calculated a rate for the NLMK Companies and the Severstal Companies, 
the exporters/producers of subject merchandise selected for individual 
examination in this investigation.
    In accordance with sections 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) and 705(c)(5)(A) of 
the Act, for companies not individually investigated, we apply an 
``all-others'' rate, which is normally calculated by weighting the 
subsidy rates of the individual companies selected as mandatory 
respondents with those companies' exports of the subject merchandise to 
the United States. Under section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, the all-
others rate excludes zero and de minimis rates calculated for the 
exporters and producers individually investigated, as well as any rates 
determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. In this 
investigation, the only non-de minimis rate is the rate calculated for 
the NLMK Companies. Consequently, the rate calculated for the NLMK 
Companies is assigned as the all others rate. On this basis, the 
estimated countervailable subsidy rates are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Company                            Subsidy rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Novolipetsk Steel OJSC, Novex Trading        6.95 percent ad valorem.
 (Swiss) S.A., Altai-Koks OJSC, Dolomite
 OJSC, Stoilensky OJSC, Studenovskaya
 (Stagdok) OJSC, Trading House LLC,
 Vtorchermet NLMK LLC, Vtorchermet OJSC,
 and Vtorchermet NLMK Center LLC
 (collectively, the NLMK Companies).
PAO Severstal, Severstal Export GmbH, JSC    0.62 percent ad valorem (de
 Karelsky Okatysh, AO OLKON, AO               minimis).
 Vorkutaugol, and JSC Vtorchermet
 (collectively, the Severstal Companies).
All Others.................................  6.95 percent ad valorem.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    We intend to disclose to parties in this proceeding the 
calculations performed for this final determination within five days of 
the date of public announcement of our final determination, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    As a result of our affirmative Preliminary Determination and 
pursuant to section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and 
Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all entries of cold-
rolled steel from Russia, other than subject merchandise produced/
exported by the Severstal Companies which received a preliminary de 
minimis countervailing duty rate, that were entered or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption, on or after December 22, 2015, the date of 
publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal 
Register.\9\ In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we issued 
instructions to CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for 
countervailing duty (CVD) purposes for subject merchandise entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, on or after April 20, 2016, but to continue 
the suspension of liquidation of all entries from December 22, 2015 
through April 19, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Preliminary Determination, 80 FR at 79565.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final 
affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order and will 
reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act 
and will require a cash deposit of estimated CVDs for such entries of 
subject merchandise in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC 
determines that material injury, or threat of material injury, does not 
exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all estimated duties 
deposited as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be refunded 
or canceled.

International Trade Commission Notification

    In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the 
ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the 
ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information relating to this 
investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and 
business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC 
confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or 
under an administrative protective order (APO), without the written 
consent of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders (APOs)

    In the event the ITC issues a final negative injury determination, 
this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to an 
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 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 violation subject to sanction.
    This determination and notice are issued and published pursuant to 
sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: July 20, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I--List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Final Determination of Critical Circumstances
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. Subsidies Valuation
VI. Benchmarks and Discount Rates
VII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and

[[Page 49937]]

Adverse Inferences
VIII. Analysis of Programs
IX. Analysis of Comments
    Comment 1: Whether Gazprom Is a Government Authority
    Comment 2: Whether the Provision of Natural Gas for LTAR Is De 
Facto Specific
    Comment 3: Whether the Natural Gas Market in Russia Is Distorted
    Comment 4: Standard Applied to Select a Tier Two Benchmark
    Comment 5: Availability of Tier Two Natural Gas Prices to 
Purchasers in Russia
    Comment 6: Comparability Adjustments to a Tier Two Benchmark
    Comment 7: Whether the Department Should Use a Tier Three 
Benchmark
    Comment 8: Whether to Adjust the Natural Gas Benchmark to 
Reflect Revised Data
    Comment 9: Whether the NLMK Companies Benefited from the 
Provision of Mining Rights
    Comment 10: Whether Timing of the Post-Preliminary Decision 
Memorandum Violated Interested Parties Due Process Rights
    Comment 11: Whether the GOR's Provision of Mining Rights 
Constitutes General Infrastructure that Is Not Countervailable
    Comment 12: Whether the GOR Acted to the Best of Its Ability 
With Regard to Usage Data Provided in Connection with the Provision 
of Mining Rights for LTAR Program
    Comment 13: Whether the Provision of Mining Rights Is Specific
    Comment 14: Whether the Mining Rights for LTAR Program Confers 
Recurring Benefits
    Comment 15: Use of Mining Rights--Not Coal--to Measure the 
Benefit
    Comment 16: Whether to Deduct Costs from the Coal Benchmark 
Rather than Adding Costs to the Extraction Price Paid by the 
Severstal Companies
    Comment 17: Revisions to Coal Benchmark Price Calculated in 
Post-Preliminary Decision Memorandum
    Comment 18: Whether to Countervail the Severstal Companies' Tax 
Debt Write-Offs
    Comment 19: Reduction in Extraction Payments Program
    Comment 20: Whether the Tax Deduction for Exploration Expenses 
Is Specific
    Comment 21: Whether to Apply Adverse Facts Available With Regard 
to the Benefit the Severstal Companies Received Under the Tax 
Deduction for Exploration Expenses Program
    Comment 22: Applicable De Minimis Rate for Russian CVD 
Proceedings
    Comment 23: Use of the NLMK Companies' Verified Sales Data
    Comment 24: Calculation of the Severstal Companies' Sales 
Denominator
X. Recommendation

Appendix II--Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation 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 cross-section 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 non-rectangular 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 this investigation 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 micro-alloying 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 cold-rolled 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 investigation 
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 these 
investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products 
are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of these 
investigation:
     Ball bearing steels; \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Ball 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 (ix) none, or not more than 0.09 percent of 
molybdenum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Tool steels; \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Tool 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Silico-manganese steel; \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Silico-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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     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.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 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 42,501, 42,503 (Dep't of Commerce, July 22, 
2014). This determination defines grain-oriented electrical steel as 
``a flat-rolled 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.''

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

[[Page 49938]]

     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.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Non-Oriented Electrical Steel from the People's 
Republic of China, Germany, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Sweden, 
and Taiwan: Antidumping Duty Orders, 79 FR 71,741, 71,741-42 (Dep't 
of Commerce, Dec. 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.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The products subject to this investigation 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 investigation 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 investigation is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2016-17937 Filed 7-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.