Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From Brazil: Final Affirmative Determination, and Final Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part, 53416-53419 [2016-19376]

Download as PDF 53416 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Notices Currency Conversion Recommendation [FR Doc. 2016–19261 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–351–846] Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From Brazil: Final Affirmative Determination, and Final Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part 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 hot-rolled steel flat products (hot-rolled steel, or HRS) from Brazil. For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the ‘‘Final Determination’’ section of this notice. The period of investigation is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014. DATES: Effective August 12, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sergio Balbontin, Nicholas Czajkowski, or Lana Nigro, 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) 482–6478, (202) 482–1395, and (202) 482–1779, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Background The Department published the Preliminary Determination on January 15, 2016.1 A summary of the 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 1 See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From Brazil: Preliminary Affirmative Determination and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 81 FR 2168 (January 15, 2016) (Preliminary Determination) and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM). 2 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hot- VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Aug 11, 2016 Jkt 238001 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 http://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 http:// enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version are identical in content. 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. In the Preliminary Determination, we did not modify the scope language as it appeared in the Initiation Notice.4 No interested party submitted scope comments in case or rebuttal briefs; therefore, the scope of this investigation remains unchanged for this final determination. Scope of the Investigation The products covered by this investigation are certain hot-rolled steel flat products from Brazil. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see the ‘‘Scope of the Investigation,’’ attached to this notice at Appendix I. available and, because the Government of Brazil and the respondent companies did not act to the best of their abilities 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 applied facts available, with adverse inferences, for the Reduction of Tax on Industrialized Products for Machines and Equipment, the BNDES FINAME ´ Loan program, and the Ex-Tarifario program, in accordance with section 776(a) and (b) of the Act. For further information, see the section ‘‘Use of Adverse Facts Available’’ 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 Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part Use of Adverse Facts Available In making this final determination, the Department relied, in part, on facts On October 23, 2015, the petitioner filed a timely critical circumstances allegation pursuant to section 703(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206(c)(1), alleging that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of hot-rolled steel from Brazil.6 We preliminarily determined that critical circumstances existed with respect to CSN and Usiminas, but not for all others companies.7 Based on additional import data that became available since the Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances, we are departing from our preliminary finding. For this final determination, in accordance with section 705(a) of the Act, we find that critical circumstances exist with respect to CSN but that critical circumstances do not exist with respect to Usiminas and all other producers and exporters of Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil,’’ dated concurrently with this determination (Issues and Decision Memorandum) and hereby adopted by this notice. 3 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Certain HotRolled Steel Products from Australia, Brazil, Japan, the Netherlands, the Republic of Korea, Turkey and the United Kingdom: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determinations,’’ dated March 14, 2016. 4 See Preliminary Determination PDM at ‘‘Scope Comments.’’ 5 See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 6 See letter from the Petitioner, ‘‘Certain HotRolled Steel Flat Products From Australia, Brazil, Japan and the Netherlands—Critical Circumstances Allegations,’’ dated October 23, 2015. 7 See Antidumping Duty Investigations of Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From Australia, Brazil, Japan, and the Netherlands and Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain HotRolled Steel Flat Products From Brazil: Preliminary Determinations of Critical Circumstances, 80 FR 76444 (December 9, 2015) (Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances). 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 have responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice at Appendix II. PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\12AUN1.SGM 12AUN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Notices hot-rolled steel from Brazil.8 For a complete discussion, see the ‘‘Critical Circumstances’’ section of the Issues and Decision Memorandum. Suspension of Liquidation Final Determination In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we calculated a rate for Usiminas and CSN, 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 by 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 based entirely on facts otherwise available, pursuant to section 776 of the Act. Neither of the respondents’ rates was zero or de minimis or based entirely on facts otherwise available. Notwithstanding the language of section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, we did not calculate the ‘‘all-others’’ rate by weight averaging the rates of the two individually investigated respondents using their actual export sales data, because doing so risks disclosure of proprietary information. Instead, we calculated the all-others rate using the simple average of the respondents’ calculated rates.9 The estimated countervailable subsidy rates are as follows: Subsidy rate (percent) Company mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Companhia Siderurgica Nacional (CSN) ........................................ Usinas Siderurgicas de Minas Gerais S.A. (Usiminas) ............. All Others ...................................... 11.30 11.09 11.20 8 See Issues and Decision Memorandum; see also Memorandum ‘‘Calculations for Final Determination of Critical Circumstances in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain HotRolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil,’’ dated concurrently with this notice. 9 See Memorandum to Dana S. Mermelstein, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, ‘‘Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil; Calculation of the All Others Rate for the Final Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil,’’ dated concurrently with this notice. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Aug 11, 2016 Jkt 238001 As a result of our 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 hotrolled steel from Brazil, that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after October 17, 2015, for CSN and Usiminas, for which we found critical circumstances exist, and on or after January 15, 2016, the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register, for all other exporters. In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for countervailing duty (CVD) purposes for subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after May 14, 2016, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all entries from October 17, 2015, or January 15, 2016, as applicable, through May 14, 2016. As a result of our negative critical circumstances determination for Usiminas, we will instruct CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation, and to liquidate, without regard to countervailing duties, subject merchandise exported by Usiminas and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after October 17, 2015 and before January 15, 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 or securities posted as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled. ITC 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 for Enforcement and Compliance. PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 53417 Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders In the event that 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 destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return/ 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 which is subject to sanction. This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.201(c). Dated: August 4, 2016. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I—Scope of the Investigation The products covered by this investigation are certain hot-rolled, flat-rolled steel products, with or without patterns in relief, and 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 thickness, and 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 of 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 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 achieve 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 unless the resulting measurement makes the product covered by the existing antidumping 1 or countervailing duty 2 orders 1 Notice of Amendment of Final Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Cut-To-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate Products From France, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan and the Republic of Korea, 65 FR 6585 (February 10, 2000). 2 Notice of Amended Final Determinations: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate E:\FR\FM\12AUN1.SGM Continued 12AUN1 mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES 53418 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Notices on Certain Cut-To-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate Products From the Republic of Korea (A–580–836; C–580–837), 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, or • 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or • 0.10 percent of niobium, 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, the substrate for 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. The substrate for motor lamination steels contains 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 hot-rolled steel that has been further processed in a third country, including but not limited to pickling, oiling, levelling, annealing, tempering, temper rolling, skin passing, 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 hot-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 From India and the Republic of Korea; and Notice of Countervailing Duty Orders: Certain Cut-ToLength Carbon-Quality Steel Plate From France, India, Indonesia, Italy, and the Republic of Korea, 65 FR 6587 (February 10, 2000). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Aug 11, 2016 Jkt 238001 scope of this investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation: • Universal mill plates (i.e., hot-rolled, flat-rolled products not in coils that have been rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 mm but not exceeding 1250 mm, of a thickness not less than 4.0 mm, and without patterns in relief); • Products that have been cold-rolled (cold-reduced) after hot-rolling; 3 • Ball bearing steels; 4 • Tool steels; 5 and • Silico-manganese steels; 6 The products subject to this investigation are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers: 7208.10.1500, 7208.10.3000, 7208.10.6000, 7208.25.3000, 7208.25.6000, 7208.26.0030, 7208.26.0060, 7208.27.0030, 7208.27.0060, 7208.36.0030, 7208.36.0060, 7208.37.0030, 7208.37.0060, 7208.38.0015, 7208.38.0030, 7208.38.0090, 7208.39.0015, 7208.39.0030, 7208.39.0090, 7208.40.6030, 7208.40.6060, 7208.53.0000, 7208.54.0000, 7208.90.0000, 7210.70.3000, 7211.14.0030, 7211.14.0090, 7211.19.1500, 7211.19.2000, 7211.19.3000, 7211.19.4500, 7211.19.6000, 7211.19.7530, 7211.19.7560, 7211.19.7590, 7225.11.0000, 7225.19.0000, 7225.30.3050, 7225.30.7000, 7225.40.7000, 7225.99.0090, 7226.11.1000, 7226.11.9030, 7226.11.9060, 7226.19.1000, 7226.19.9000, 7226.91.5000, 7226.91.7000, and 7226.91.8000. The products subject to the investigation may also enter under the following HTSUS numbers: 7210.90.9000, 7211.90.0000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 3 For purposes of this scope exclusion, rolling operations such as a skin pass, levelling, temper rolling or other minor rolling operations after the hot-rolling process for purposes of surface finish, flatness, shape control, or gauge control do not constitute cold-rolling sufficient to meet this exclusion. 4 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. 5 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. 6 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. PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 7212.50.0000, 7214.91.0015, 7214.91.0060, 7214.91.0090, 7214.99.0060, 7214.99.0075, 7214.99.0090, 7215.90.5000, 7226.99.0180, and 7228.60.6000. 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. Final Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part IV. Scope of the Investigation V. Use of Adverse Facts Available VI. Subsidies Valuation A. Allocation Period B. Attribution of Subsidies C. Denominators VII. Interest Rates Benchmarks and Discount Rates VIII. 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 IX. 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 To Calculate the FINAME Program Benefit for Usiminas 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 E:\FR\FM\12AUN1.SGM 12AUN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 156 / Friday, August 12, 2016 / Notices 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 X. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2016–19376 Filed 8–11–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Scope of the Investigation DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–580–883] Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products From the Republic of Korea: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Department) determines that certain hot-rolled steel flat products (hot-rolled steel) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) are being, or are 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 estimated weighted-average dumping margins are listed below in the ‘‘Final Determination’’ section of this notice. DATES: Effective August 12, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Javier Barrientos or Matthew Renkey, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–2243 or (202) 482–2312, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: Background The Department published the preliminary determination on March 22, 2016.1 A summary of the events that occurred since the Department 1 See Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 81 FR 15228 (March 22, 2016) (Preliminary Determination), and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Aug 11, 2016 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 Final Issues and Decision Memorandum.2 Also, as explained in the memorandum from the Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, the Department exercised its authority to toll all administrative deadlines due to the closure of the Federal Government.3 As a consequence, all deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by four business days. Jkt 238001 The products covered by this investigation are certain hot-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. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in this investigation are addressed in the Final Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice.4 A list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as Appendix I. The Final 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 it is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room B–8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Final Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http:// enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed and electronic versions of the Final Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. 2 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Affirmative Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea,’’ (Final Issues and Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with this determination and hereby adopted by this notice. 3 See Memorandum to the File from Ron Lorentzen, Acting A/S for Enforcement & Compliance, ‘‘Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Government Closure During Snowstorm Jonas,’’ dated January 27, 2016. 4 See Final Issues and Decision Memorandum. PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 53419 Verification As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in January, April, and June 2016, the Department verified the sales, cost, and further manufacturing data reported by the mandatory respondents Hyundai Steel Company and POSCO,5 pursuant to section 782(i) of the Act. We used standard verification procedures, including an examination of relevant accounting and production records, and original source documents provided by respondents. Use of Adverse Facts Available In making this final determination, the Department relied, in part, on facts available for both POSCO and Hyundai Steel Company. Furthermore, because Hyundai Steel Company did not act to the best of its ability in responding to certain of the Department’s requests for information, we drew an adverse inference where appropriate in selecting from among the facts otherwise available.6 For further information, see the accompanying Final Issues and Decision Memorandum. Changes to the Margin Calculations Since the Preliminary Determination Based on our analysis of the comments received and our findings at verification, we made certain changes to the margin calculations for Hyundai Steel Company and POSCO. For a discussion of these changes, see the Final Issues and Decision Memorandum. We have also revised the all-others rate in accordance with the methodology described below. All-Others Rate Consistent with sections 735(c)(1)(B)(i)(II) and 735(c)(5) of the Act, the Department also calculated an estimated all-others rate. Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated all-others rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. Where the rates for investigated companies are zero or de minimis, or based entirely on facts otherwise available, section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act instructs the Department to establish an ‘‘all others’’ rate using ‘‘any reasonable method.’’ 5 We are continuing to collapse the mandatory respondent POSCO and Daewoo International Corporation (DWI), and henceforward refer to the collapsed entity as ‘‘POSCO.’’ See Preliminary Determination, 81 FR at 15229. 6 See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act. E:\FR\FM\12AUN1.SGM 12AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 156 (Friday, August 12, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53416-53419]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-19376]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-351-846]


Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hot-Rolled Steel 
Flat Products From Brazil: Final Affirmative Determination, and Final 
Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part

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 hot-rolled steel flat products (hot-rolled steel, or HRS) 
from Brazil. For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the 
``Final Determination'' section of this notice. The period of 
investigation is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.

DATES: Effective August 12, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sergio Balbontin, Nicholas Czajkowski, 
or Lana Nigro, 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-
6478, (202) 482-1395, and (202) 482-1779, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Department published the Preliminary Determination on January 
15, 2016.\1\ A summary of the 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 http://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 http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum 
and the electronic version are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hot-Rolled 
Steel Flat Products From Brazil: Preliminary Affirmative 
Determination and Alignment of Final Determination With Final 
Antidumping Duty Determination, 81 FR 2168 (January 15, 2016) 
(Preliminary Determination) and accompanying Preliminary Decision 
Memorandum (PDM).
    \2\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to 
Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 
Compliance, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final 
Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain 
Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil,'' dated concurrently 
with this determination (Issues and Decision Memorandum) and hereby 
adopted by 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, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, 
``Certain Hot-Rolled Steel Products from Australia, Brazil, Japan, 
the Netherlands, the Republic of Korea, Turkey and the United 
Kingdom: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary 
Determinations,'' dated March 14, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Preliminary Determination, we did not modify the scope 
language as it appeared in the Initiation Notice.\4\ No interested 
party submitted scope comments in case or rebuttal briefs; therefore, 
the scope of this investigation remains unchanged for this final 
determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Preliminary Determination PDM at ``Scope Comments.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are certain hot-rolled 
steel flat products from Brazil. For a complete description of the 
scope of this investigation, see the ``Scope of the Investigation,'' 
attached to this notice at Appendix I.

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 have responded in the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice at Appendix II.

Use of Adverse Facts Available

    In making this final determination, the Department relied, in part, 
on facts available and, because the Government of Brazil and the 
respondent companies did not act to the best of their abilities 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 applied facts available, with 
adverse inferences, for the Reduction of Tax on Industrialized Products 
for Machines and Equipment, the BNDES FINAME Loan program, and the Ex-
Tarif[aacute]rio program, in accordance with section 776(a) and (b) of 
the Act. For further information, see the section ``Use of Adverse 
Facts Available'' in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (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 Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part

    On October 23, 2015, the petitioner filed a timely critical 
circumstances allegation pursuant to section 703(e)(1) of the Act and 
19 CFR 351.206(c)(1), alleging that critical circumstances exist with 
respect to imports of hot-rolled steel from Brazil.\6\ We preliminarily 
determined that critical circumstances existed with respect to CSN and 
Usiminas, but not for all others companies.\7\ Based on additional 
import data that became available since the Preliminary Determination 
of Critical Circumstances, we are departing from our preliminary 
finding. For this final determination, in accordance with section 
705(a) of the Act, we find that critical circumstances exist with 
respect to CSN but that critical circumstances do not exist with 
respect to Usiminas and all other producers and exporters of

[[Page 53417]]

hot-rolled steel from Brazil.\8\ For a complete discussion, see the 
``Critical Circumstances'' section of the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See letter from the Petitioner, ``Certain Hot-Rolled Steel 
Flat Products From Australia, Brazil, Japan and the Netherlands--
Critical Circumstances Allegations,'' dated October 23, 2015.
    \7\ See Antidumping Duty Investigations of Certain Hot-Rolled 
Steel Flat Products From Australia, Brazil, Japan, and the 
Netherlands and Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hot-
Rolled Steel Flat Products From Brazil: Preliminary Determinations 
of Critical Circumstances, 80 FR 76444 (December 9, 2015) 
(Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances).
    \8\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum; see also Memorandum 
``Calculations for Final Determination of Critical Circumstances in 
the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Hot-Rolled Steel 
Flat Products from Brazil,'' dated concurrently with this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Determination

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we 
calculated a rate for Usiminas and CSN, 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 by 
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 based entirely 
on facts otherwise available, pursuant to section 776 of the Act. 
Neither of the respondents' rates was zero or de minimis or based 
entirely on facts otherwise available. Notwithstanding the language of 
section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, we did not calculate the ``all-
others'' rate by weight averaging the rates of the two individually 
investigated respondents using their actual export sales data, because 
doing so risks disclosure of proprietary information. Instead, we 
calculated the all-others rate using the simple average of the 
respondents' calculated rates.\9\ The estimated countervailable subsidy 
rates are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Memorandum to Dana S. Mermelstein, Program Manager, AD/
CVD Operations, Office I, ``Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty 
Determination: Hot-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil; 
Calculation of the All Others Rate for the Final Determination in 
the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Hot-Rolled Steel Flat 
Products from Brazil,'' dated concurrently with this notice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Subsidy
                           Company                                rate
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Companhia Siderurgica Nacional (CSN).........................      11.30
Usinas Siderurgicas de Minas Gerais S.A. (Usiminas)..........      11.09
All Others...................................................      11.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Suspension of Liquidation

    As a result of our 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 hot-rolled 
steel from Brazil, that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after October 17, 2015, for CSN and Usiminas, for 
which we found critical circumstances exist, and on or after January 
15, 2016, the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination 
in the Federal Register, for all other exporters. In accordance with 
section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed CBP to discontinue the 
suspension of liquidation for countervailing duty (CVD) purposes for 
subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after 
May 14, 2016, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all 
entries from October 17, 2015, or January 15, 2016, as applicable, 
through May 14, 2016. As a result of our negative critical 
circumstances determination for Usiminas, we will instruct CBP to 
discontinue the suspension of liquidation, and to liquidate, without 
regard to countervailing duties, subject merchandise exported by 
Usiminas and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after October 
17, 2015 and before January 15, 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 or securities posted as a result of the suspension of 
liquidation will be refunded or canceled.

ITC 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 for Enforcement and Compliance.

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

    In the event that 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 destruction of 
proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return/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 which is subject to sanction.
    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 
705(d) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.201(c).

    Dated: August 4, 2016.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I--Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are certain hot-
rolled, flat-rolled steel products, with or without patterns in 
relief, and 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 
thickness, and 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 of 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 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 achieve 
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 unless the resulting measurement makes the product 
covered by the existing antidumping \1\ or countervailing duty \2\ 
orders

[[Page 53418]]

on Certain Cut-To-Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate Products From 
the Republic of Korea (A-580-836; C-580-837), and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Notice of Amendment of Final Determinations of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Cut-To-Length 
Carbon-Quality Steel Plate Products From France, India, Indonesia, 
Italy, Japan and the Republic of Korea, 65 FR 6585 (February 10, 
2000).
    \2\ Notice of Amended Final Determinations: Certain Cut-to-
Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate From India and the Republic of 
Korea; and Notice of Countervailing Duty Orders: Certain Cut-To-
Length Carbon-Quality Steel Plate From France, India, Indonesia, 
Italy, and the Republic of Korea, 65 FR 6587 (February 10, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (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, or
     0.80 percent of molybdenum, or
     0.10 percent of niobium, 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, the 
substrate for 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. The substrate for motor 
lamination steels contains 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 hot-rolled steel that has been 
further processed in a third country, including but not limited to 
pickling, oiling, levelling, annealing, tempering, temper rolling, 
skin passing, 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 hot-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:
     Universal mill plates (i.e., hot-rolled, flat-rolled 
products not in coils that have been rolled on four faces or in a 
closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 mm but not exceeding 1250 
mm, of a thickness not less than 4.0 mm, and without patterns in 
relief);
     Products that have been cold-rolled (cold-reduced) 
after hot-rolling; \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ For purposes of this scope exclusion, rolling operations 
such as a skin pass, levelling, temper rolling or other minor 
rolling operations after the hot-rolling process for purposes of 
surface finish, flatness, shape control, or gauge control do not 
constitute cold-rolling sufficient to meet this exclusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Ball bearing steels; \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 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; \5\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 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 steels; \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The products subject to this investigation are currently 
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) under item numbers: 7208.10.1500, 7208.10.3000, 
7208.10.6000, 7208.25.3000, 7208.25.6000, 7208.26.0030, 
7208.26.0060, 7208.27.0030, 7208.27.0060, 7208.36.0030, 
7208.36.0060, 7208.37.0030, 7208.37.0060, 7208.38.0015, 
7208.38.0030, 7208.38.0090, 7208.39.0015, 7208.39.0030, 
7208.39.0090, 7208.40.6030, 7208.40.6060, 7208.53.0000, 
7208.54.0000, 7208.90.0000, 7210.70.3000, 7211.14.0030, 
7211.14.0090, 7211.19.1500, 7211.19.2000, 7211.19.3000, 
7211.19.4500, 7211.19.6000, 7211.19.7530, 7211.19.7560, 
7211.19.7590, 7225.11.0000, 7225.19.0000, 7225.30.3050, 
7225.30.7000, 7225.40.7000, 7225.99.0090, 7226.11.1000, 
7226.11.9030, 7226.11.9060, 7226.19.1000, 7226.19.9000, 
7226.91.5000, 7226.91.7000, and 7226.91.8000. The products subject 
to the investigation may also enter under the following HTSUS 
numbers: 7210.90.9000, 7211.90.0000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 
7212.50.0000, 7214.91.0015, 7214.91.0060, 7214.91.0090, 
7214.99.0060, 7214.99.0075, 7214.99.0090, 7215.90.5000, 
7226.99.0180, and 7228.60.6000.
    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. Final Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. Use of Adverse Facts Available
VI. Subsidies Valuation
    A. Allocation Period
    B. Attribution of Subsidies
    C. Denominators
VII. Interest Rates Benchmarks and Discount Rates
VIII. 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
IX. 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-Tarif[aacute]rio 
Program
    Comment 4: Whether Ex-Tarif[aacute]rio is De Facto Specific
    Comment 5: Whether Ex-Tarif[aacute]rio 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 Company-Specific Interest Rate 
Benchmark To Calculate the FINAME Program Benefit for Usiminas
    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

[[Page 53419]]

    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
X. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2016-19376 Filed 8-11-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P