Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Final Affirmative Determination, 49943-49946 [2016-17939]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 146 / Friday, July 29, 2016 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
• Tool steels; 2
• Silico-manganese steel; 3
• 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.4
• 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.5
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,
none, or not more than 0.38 percent of copper; and
(ix) none, or not more than 0.09 percent of
molybdenum.
2 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.
3 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.
4 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.’’
5 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
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.
Appendix II—List of Topics Discussed
in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum
I. Summary
Issues
II. Background
A. Case History
B. Period of Investigation
III. Scope of the Investigation
IV. Use of Adverse Facts Available
Subsidies Valuation
A. Allocation Period
B. Attribution of Subsidies
C. Denominators
V. Interest Rates Benchmarks and Discount
Rates
VI. Analysis of Programs
A. Programs Determined To Be
Countervailable
B. Program Determined To Be Not
Countervailable
C. Programs Determined To Be Not Used,
or Not To Confer a Measurable Benefit,
During the POI
D. Program Determined Not to Exist
VII. Analysis of Comments
Comment 1: Whether To Apply AFA to
both the GOB and Respondents for the
Reduction of IPI for Machines and
Equipment Program
Comment 2: Whether the Reduction of IPI
for Machines and Equipment Program is
Countervailable
Comment 3: Whether To Apply AFA for
´
the Ex-Tarifario Program
´
Comment 4: Whether Ex-Tarifario is De
Facto Specific
´
Comment 5: Whether Ex-Tarifario Provides
a Financial Contribution
Comment 6: Whether the FINAME Loan
Program is Specific
Comment 7: Whether To Apply AFA to
Determine the Benefit of the FINAME
Program
Comment 8: Whether To Re-Calculate the
FINAME Program for Usiminas
Comment 9: Whether To Use a CompanySpecific Interest Rate Benchmark for the
FINAME Loan Program
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49943
Comment 10: Whether the Integrated
Drawback Scheme is Countervailable
Comment 11: Whether Usiminas Received
a Benefit from the Integrated Drawback
Scheme
Comment 12: Whether Reintegra is
Countervailable
Comment 13: Whether To Recalculate the
Reintegra Subsidy Rate
Comment 14: Whether CSN Applied For/
Used the Reintegra Program During the
POI
Comment 15: Whether the Exemption of
Payroll Tax is Countervailable
Comment 16: Whether Subsidies Provided
to UMSA should be Attributed to
Usiminas
Comment 17: Whether the Economic
Subvention to National Innovation
Program is not Countervailable
Comment 18: Whether FINEP’s Economic
Subvention Program has not Conferred a
Measurable Benefit
Comment 19: Whether the Bahia State
Industrial Development and Economic
Integration Program (Desenvolve) is De
Jure specific
Comment 20: Whether the GOB’s
References to Web sites Constitute a Full
Response
VIII. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2016–17952 Filed 7–28–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–580–882]
Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products
From the Republic of Korea: Final
Affirmative 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/exporters of
certain cold-rolled steel flat products
(cold-rolled steel) from the Republic of
Korea (Korea) as provided in section 705
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act). For information on the
subsidy rates, see the ‘‘Final
Determination’’ section of this notice.
The period of investigation is January 1,
2014, through December 31, 2014.
DATES: Effective July 29, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yasmin Bordas or Emily Maloof, AD/
CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement
and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone (202) 482–3813 or (202) 482–
5649, respectively.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
49944
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 146 / Friday, July 29, 2016 / Notices
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published the
Preliminary Determination on December
22, 2015.1 A summary of events that
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
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/frn/. The signed
Issues and Decision Memorandum and
the electronic version are identical in
content.
Scope of the Investigation
The products covered by this
investigation are cold-rolled steel flat
products from Korea. For a complete
description of the scope of this
investigation, see the ‘‘Scope of the
Investigation,’’ in Appendix II of this
notice.
Scope Comments
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
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 to the records of
the cold-rolled steel investigations, and
accompanying decision and analysis of
all comments timely received, see the
1 See Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from
the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Negative
Countervailing Duty Determination, 80 FR 79567
(December 22, 2015) (Preliminary Determination).
2 See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, ‘‘Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination
in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain
Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic
of Korea,’’ dated July 20, 2016 (Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
3 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, ‘‘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 (Preliminary Scope
Determination).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:42 Jul 28, 2016
Jkt 238001
Final Scope Decision Memorandum.4
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 as Appendix I.
Use of Adverse Facts Available
In making this final determination,
the Department relied, in part, on facts
available and, because POSCO and
Hyundai Steel Co., Ltd. (Hyundai Steel)
did not act to the best of their ability in
responding to the Department’s requests
for information, we drew an adverse
inference where appropriate in selecting
from among the facts otherwise
available.5 Specifically, we find that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted for POSCO for its failure to
report certain cross-owned input
suppliers and facilities located in a
foreign economic zone (FEZ). We are
also applying adverse facts available to
POSCO’s affiliated trading company,
Daewoo International Corporation (DWI)
for certain loans presented at
verification. Further, we find that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted for Hyundai Steel for its
failure to report its location in an FEZ.
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.
Final Determination
In accordance with section
705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we calculated
4 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, ‘‘Certain
Cold-Rolled 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).
5 See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a rate for POSCO and Hyundai Steel, the
two 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
respondents with those companies’
export sales of the subject merchandise
to the United States. Under section
705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, the all-others
rate should exclude zero and de
minimis rates calculated for the
exporters and producers individually
investigated, and any rates determined
entirely under section 776 of the Act.
Therefore, we have excluded the rate
calculated for POSCO because it was
determined entirely under section 776
of the Act. Thus, for the ‘‘all-others’’
rate, we applied the rate calculated for
Hyundai Steel.
Company
POSCO .................................
Hyundai Steel Co., Ltd. ........
All-Others ..............................
Subsidy rate
(percent)
58.36
3.91
3.91
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).
Suspension of Liquidation
In the Preliminary Determination, the
total net countervailable subsidy rates
for the individually examined
respondents were de minimis and,
therefore, we did not suspend
liquidation of entries of certain coldrolled steel flat products from the
Republic of Korea. However, the
estimated subsidy rates for the
examined companies are above de
minimis in this final determination, we
are directing U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation
of entries of cold-rolled steel from Korea
that are entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after
the date of publication of this notice in
the Federal Register, and to require a
cash deposit for such entries of
merchandise in the amounts indicated
above. The suspension of liquidation
will remain in effect until further notice.
In addition, pursuant to section
705(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act, we are
directing the CBP to require a cash
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 146 / Friday, July 29, 2016 / Notices
deposit for such entries of merchandise
in the amount indicated above.
If the U.S. International Trade
Commission (ITC) issues a final
affirmative injury determination, we
will issue a CVD order and instruct CBP
to 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 or securities posted 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 related 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 of 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.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Dated: July 20, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
Compliance.
Appendix I—List of Topics Discussed in
the Final Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Investigation
IV. Subsidies Valuation
V. Benchmarks and Discount Rates
VI. Use of Facts Otherwise Available And
Adverse Inferences
VII. Analysis of Programs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:42 Jul 28, 2016
Jkt 238001
VIII. Calculation of All-Others Rate
IX. Analysis of Comments
Comment 1: Whether the Department
Should Apply Adverse Facts Available
(AFA) to the Provision of Electricity for
Less Than Adequate Remuneration
(LTAR)
Comment 2: Whether the Department
Should Find That the Provision of
Electricity for LTAR is a Countervailable
Subsidy
Comment 3: Whether the Department
Should Use Other submitted Data to
Measure the Adequacy of Remuneration
of Electricity
Comment 4: Whether the Department
Should Find the Provision of Natural Gas
for LTAR Countervailable
Comment 5: Application of AFA to POSCO
and Treatment of POSCO’s Unreported
Affiliates
Comment 6: Whether to Apply AFA to
POSCO Global R&D Center
Comment 7: Whether to Apply AFA to
Certain Loans Submitted at Verification
Comment 8: Whether to Apply AFA to
Hyundai Steel for Use of Certain Foreign
Economic Zones (FEZs)
Comment 9: Whether Certain Loans at the
Korean Export Import Bank (KEXIM)
Were Verified
Comment 10: The Department’s Treatment
of Unalleged Programs and Verification
of Non-Use
Comment 11: Whether to Apply AFA to the
GOK for Restriction of Special Taxation
Agreement (RSTA) Article 120
Comment 12: Whether to Apply AFA to the
GOK for DWI’s Debt Workout
Comment 13: Whether the Department
Finds Tax Programs de facto Specific
Comment 14: Whether the Department
Should Determine That the Local Tax
Exemption Hyundai Steel Received
Under RSTA Article 120 Is Related to the
Cold-Rolling Assets Purchased From
Hyundai HYSCO and Is, Therefore,
Attributable to Subject Merchandise
Comment 15: Whether the Department
Improperly Countervailed Property Tax
Exemptions Received by the Pohang
Plant Under RSLTA 78
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.6
The products covered do not include those
6 Since the Preliminary Determination, eight
interested parties (i.e., JFE Steel Corporation,
Electrolux Home Products, Inc., Electrolux Home
Care Products, Inc., ArcelorMittal USA LLC, AK
Steel Corporation, Nucor Corporation, Steel
Dynamics Inc., and United States Steel Corporation)
commented on the scope of the investigation. The
Department reviewed these comments and made no
changes. 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,’’ dated
concurrently with this final determination.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49945
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
recognized as steels with micro-alloying
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
49946
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 146 / Friday, July 29, 2016 / Notices
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 this investigation unless specifically
excluded. The following products are outside
of and/or specifically excluded from the
scope of this investigation:
• Ball bearing steels; 7
• Tool steels; 8
• Silico-manganese steel; 9
• 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.10
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
7 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.
8 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.
9 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.
10 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:42 Jul 28, 2016
Jkt 238001
• 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.11
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 this 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 customs
purposes only. The written description of the
scope of the investigation is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2016–17939 Filed 7–28–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
no other element in an amount that would give the
steel the characteristics of another alloy steel, in
coils or in straight lengths.’’
11 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.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–351–843]
Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products
From Brazil: 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 certain
cold-rolled steel flat products (coldrolled steel) from Brazil is being, or is
likely to be, sold in the United States at
less than fair value (LTFV). The period
of investigation (POI) is July 1, 2014,
through June 30, 2015. The final
dumping margins of sales at LTFV are
listed below in the ‘‘Final
Determination’’ section of this notice.
DATES: Effective July 29, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hermes Pinilla, AD/CVD Operations,
Office I, Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3477.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On March 7, 2016, the Department
published the Preliminary
Determination of this antidumping duty
(AD) investigation.1 On April 7, 2016,
we amended our Preliminary
Determination.2
The following events occurred since
the Amended Preliminary
Determination was issued. In June 2016,
U.S. Steel and Steel Dynamics, Inc.,3
and CSN submitted case briefs 4 and
rebuttal briefs.5
1 See Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products
From Brazil: Affirmative Preliminary Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of
Final Determination and Extension of Provisional
Measures, 81 FR 11754 (March 7, 2016)
(Preliminary Determination).
2 See Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products
From Brazil: Amended Preliminary Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 81 FR 20366
(April 7, 2016) (Amended Preliminary
Determination).
3 The petitioners in this case are AK Steel
Corporation (AK Steel), ArcelorMittal USA LLC,
Nucor Corporation, Steel Dynamics, Inc., and
United States Steel Corporation (collectively, the
petitioners).
4 See Letter from U.S. Steel, ‘‘Certain Cold-Rolled
Steel Flat Products From Brazil, Antidumping
Investigation: Case Brief’’ (June 17, 2016); Letter
from Steel Dynamics, Inc., ‘‘Certain Cold-Rolled
Steel Flat Products From Brazil,: SDI’s Case Brief’’
(June 17, 2016); Letter from CSN, ‘‘Certain ColdRolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil and Certain
Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil: CSN’s
Case Brief’’ (June 17, 2016).
5 See Letter from U.S. Steel, ‘‘Certain Cold-Rolled
Steel Flat Products From Brazil, Antidumping
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 146 (Friday, July 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49943-49946]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17939]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-580-882]
Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel
Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Final Affirmative
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/exporters of
certain cold-rolled steel flat products (cold-rolled steel) from the
Republic of Korea (Korea) as provided in section 705 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act). For information on the subsidy rates,
see the ``Final Determination'' section of this notice. The period of
investigation is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.
DATES: Effective July 29, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yasmin Bordas or Emily Maloof, AD/CVD
Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-3813
or (202) 482-5649, respectively.
[[Page 49944]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published the Preliminary Determination on December
22, 2015.\1\ A summary of events that 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 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/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum
and the electronic version are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the
Republic of Korea: Preliminary Negative Countervailing Duty
Determination, 80 FR 79567 (December 22, 2015) (Preliminary
Determination).
\2\ See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, ``Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Determination in the Countervailing Duty
Investigation of Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the
Republic of Korea,'' dated July 20, 2016 (Issues and Decision
Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Investigation
The products covered by this investigation are cold-rolled steel
flat products from Korea. 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,\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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, ``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 (Preliminary Scope
Determination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal
responses submitted to the records of the cold-rolled steel
investigations, and accompanying decision 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, ``Certain Cold-Rolled
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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 as Appendix I.
Use of Adverse Facts Available
In making this final determination, the Department relied, in part,
on facts available and, because POSCO and Hyundai Steel Co., Ltd.
(Hyundai Steel) did not act to the best of their ability in responding
to the Department's requests for information, we drew an adverse
inference where appropriate in selecting from among the facts otherwise
available.\5\ Specifically, we find that the application of adverse
facts available is warranted for POSCO for its failure to report
certain cross-owned input suppliers and facilities located in a foreign
economic zone (FEZ). We are also applying adverse facts available to
POSCO's affiliated trading company, Daewoo International Corporation
(DWI) for certain loans presented at verification. Further, we find
that the application of adverse facts available is warranted for
Hyundai Steel for its failure to report its location in an FEZ. For
further information, see the section ``Use of Facts Otherwise Available
and Adverse Inferences'' in the accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 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.
Final Determination
In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we
calculated a rate for POSCO and Hyundai Steel, the two 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 respondents with
those companies' export sales of the subject merchandise to the United
States. Under section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, the all-others rate
should exclude zero and de minimis rates calculated for the exporters
and producers individually investigated, and any rates determined
entirely under section 776 of the Act. Therefore, we have excluded the
rate calculated for POSCO because it was determined entirely under
section 776 of the Act. Thus, for the ``all-others'' rate, we applied
the rate calculated for Hyundai Steel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsidy rate
Company (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
POSCO................................................... 58.36
Hyundai Steel Co., Ltd.................................. 3.91
All-Others.............................................. 3.91
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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).
Suspension of Liquidation
In the Preliminary Determination, the total net countervailable
subsidy rates for the individually examined respondents were de minimis
and, therefore, we did not suspend liquidation of entries of certain
cold-rolled steel flat products from the Republic of Korea. However,
the estimated subsidy rates for the examined companies are above de
minimis in this final determination, we are directing U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of entries of cold-
rolled steel from Korea that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the date of publication of this notice in
the Federal Register, and to require a cash deposit for such entries of
merchandise in the amounts indicated above. The suspension of
liquidation will remain in effect until further notice. In addition,
pursuant to section 705(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act, we are directing the
CBP to require a cash
[[Page 49945]]
deposit for such entries of merchandise in the amount indicated above.
If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final
affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order and
instruct CBP to 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 or securities posted 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 related 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 of 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 Final Decision Memorandum
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Investigation
IV. Subsidies Valuation
V. Benchmarks and Discount Rates
VI. Use of Facts Otherwise Available And Adverse Inferences
VII. Analysis of Programs
VIII. Calculation of All-Others Rate
IX. Analysis of Comments
Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Apply Adverse Facts
Available (AFA) to the Provision of Electricity for Less Than
Adequate Remuneration (LTAR)
Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Find That the Provision
of Electricity for LTAR is a Countervailable Subsidy
Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Use Other submitted
Data to Measure the Adequacy of Remuneration of Electricity
Comment 4: Whether the Department Should Find the Provision of
Natural Gas for LTAR Countervailable
Comment 5: Application of AFA to POSCO and Treatment of POSCO's
Unreported Affiliates
Comment 6: Whether to Apply AFA to POSCO Global R&D Center
Comment 7: Whether to Apply AFA to Certain Loans Submitted at
Verification
Comment 8: Whether to Apply AFA to Hyundai Steel for Use of
Certain Foreign Economic Zones (FEZs)
Comment 9: Whether Certain Loans at the Korean Export Import
Bank (KEXIM) Were Verified
Comment 10: The Department's Treatment of Unalleged Programs and
Verification of Non-Use
Comment 11: Whether to Apply AFA to the GOK for Restriction of
Special Taxation Agreement (RSTA) Article 120
Comment 12: Whether to Apply AFA to the GOK for DWI's Debt
Workout
Comment 13: Whether the Department Finds Tax Programs de facto
Specific
Comment 14: Whether the Department Should Determine That the
Local Tax Exemption Hyundai Steel Received Under RSTA Article 120 Is
Related to the Cold-Rolling Assets Purchased From Hyundai HYSCO and
Is, Therefore, Attributable to Subject Merchandise
Comment 15: Whether the Department Improperly Countervailed
Property Tax Exemptions Received by the Pohang Plant Under RSLTA 78
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.\6\ 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:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Since the Preliminary Determination, eight interested
parties (i.e., JFE Steel Corporation, Electrolux Home Products,
Inc., Electrolux Home Care Products, Inc., ArcelorMittal USA LLC, AK
Steel Corporation, Nucor Corporation, Steel Dynamics Inc., and
United States Steel Corporation) commented on the scope of the
investigation. The Department reviewed these comments and made no
changes. 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,''
dated concurrently with this final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(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
[[Page 49946]]
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 this
investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products
are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of this
investigation:
Ball bearing steels; \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 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; \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 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; \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 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.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 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.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 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 this 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
customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the
investigation is dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2016-17939 Filed 7-28-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P