Section 232 Steel and Aluminum Tariff Exclusions Process, 81060-81084 [2020-27110]
Download as PDF
81060
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
15 CFR Part 705
[Docket No. 201203–0323]
RIN 0694–AH55
Section 232 Steel and Aluminum Tariff
Exclusions Process
Bureau of Industry and
Security, U.S. Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Interim final rule.
AGENCY:
This interim final rule revises
aspects of the process for requesting
exclusions from the duties and
quantitative limitations on imports of
aluminum and steel discussed in three
previous Department of Commerce
(‘‘Commerce’’) interim final rules
implementing the exclusion process
authorized by the President under
Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act
of 1962, as amended (‘‘232’’). These
changes are also informed by a notice of
inquiry with request for comments on
the 232 exclusions process that was
published by Commerce on May 26,
2020. Based on public comments on the
current process for submissions to
Commerce, Commerce is publishing this
interim final rule to make additional
revisions to the 232 exclusion process,
including to the 232 Exclusions Portal.
DATES:
Effective date: This interim final rule
is effective December 14, 2020, except
for amendatory instructions 3 and 5 that
are effective December 29, 2020.
Comments: Comments on this interim
final rule must be received by BIS no
later than February 12, 2021.
ADDRESSES: See SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for information on
submitting exclusion requests,
objections thereto, rebuttals, and
surrebuttals. You may submit
comments, identified by docket number
BIS–2020–0022 or RIN 0694–AH55,
through the Federal eRulemaking
website: https://www.regulations.gov. No
other submission methods are being
used for submitting comments on this
interim final rule. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
All filers using the portal should use
the name of the person or entity
submitting comments as the name of
their files, in accordance with the
instructions below. Anyone submitting
business confidential information
should clearly identify the business
confidential portion at the time of
submission, file a statement justifying
nondisclosure and referring to the
specific legal authority claimed, and
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
provide a non-confidential version of
the submission.
For comments submitted
electronically containing business
confidential information, the file name
of the business confidential version
should begin with the characters ‘‘BC.’’
Any page containing business
confidential information must be clearly
marked ‘‘BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL’’
on the top of that page. The
corresponding non-confidential version
of those comments must be clearly
marked ‘‘PUBLIC.’’ The file name of the
non-confidential version should begin
with the character ‘‘P.’’ The ‘‘BC’’ and
‘‘P’’ should be followed by the name of
the person or entity submitting the
comments or rebuttal comments. Any
submissions with file names that do not
begin with a ‘‘BC’’ or ‘‘P’’ will be
assumed to be public and will be made
publicly available through https://
www.regulations.gov.
For
questions regarding this interim final
rule, contact Erika Maynard at 202–482–
5572 or via email Erika.Maynard@
bis.doc.gov, or email Steel232@
bis.doc.gov regarding provisions in this
rule specific to steel exclusion requests
and Aluminum232@bis.doc.gov
regarding provisions in this rule specific
to aluminum exclusion requests.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 8, 2018, President Trump
issued Proclamations 9704 and 9705,
imposing duties on imports of
aluminum and steel. The Proclamations
also authorized the Secretary of
Commerce to grant exclusions from the
duties if the Secretary determines the
steel or aluminum article for which the
exclusion is requested is not ‘‘produced
in the United States in a sufficient and
reasonably available amount or of a
satisfactory quality’’ or should be
excluded ‘‘based upon specific national
security considerations,’’ and provided
authority for the Secretary to issue
procedures for exclusion requests. On
April 30, 2018, Proclamations 9739 and
9740, and on May 31, 2018,
Proclamations 9758 and 9759, set
quantitative limitations on the import of
steel and aluminum from certain
countries in lieu of the duties. On
August 29, 2018, in Proclamations 9776
and 9777, President Trump also
authorized the Secretary to grant
exclusions from quantitative limitations
based on the same standards applicable
to exclusions from the tariffs.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Implementing and Improving the 232
Exclusions Process
On March 19, 2018, Commerce first
issued an interim final rule,
Requirements for Submissions
Requesting Exclusions from the
Remedies Instituted in Presidential
Proclamations Adjusting Imports of
Steel into the United States and
Adjusting Imports of Aluminum into the
United States; and the filing of
Objections to Submitted Exclusion
Requests for Steel and Aluminum (83
FR 12106) (the ‘‘March 19 rule’’), laying
out procedures for the 232 exclusions
process, including one supplement for
the procedures for steel and a second
supplement for the procedures for
aluminum.
On September 11, 2018, Commerce
issued a second interim final rule,
Submissions of Exclusion Requests and
Objections to Submitted Requests for
Steel and Aluminum (83 FR 46026) (the
‘‘September 11 rule’’), that revised the
two supplements added by the March
19 rule with improvements designed to
ensure a transparent, fair, and efficient
exclusion and objection process.
On June 10, 2019, Commerce issued a
third interim final rule, Implementation
of New Commerce Section 232
Exclusions Portal (84 FR 26751) (the
‘‘June 10 rule’’), that revised the two
supplements added by the March 19
and September 11 rules to grant the
public the ability to submit new
exclusion requests through the 232
Exclusions Portal while still allowing
the opportunity for public comment on
the portal.
On May 26, 2020, Commerce issued a
notice of inquiry with request for
comment, Notice of Inquiry Regarding
the Exclusion Process for Section 232
Steel and Aluminum Import Tariffs and
Quotas (85 FR 31441) (the ‘‘May 26
notice’’), that sought public comment on
the appropriateness of the information
requested and considered in applying
the exclusion criteria, and the efficiency
and transparency of the process
employed.
Why is Commerce publishing this
interim final rule?
Commerce is publishing this interim
final rule to implement additional
changes the Department has determined
will further improve the 232 exclusions
process. Commerce believes these
changes will make important
improvements, but is also requesting
public comments to evaluate how
effective these changes will be in further
improving the 232 exclusions process.
This process is consistent with the
Department’s approach since the
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
beginning of implementing the 232
exclusion process. The public has
supported this approach.
What are some of the key changes
included in this interim final rule?
This interim final rule is being
published at this time, in particular, to
make the following three key changes to
the 232 exclusions process.
First, it addresses the need to create
a more efficient method for approving
exclusions where objections have not
been received in the past for certain
steel or aluminum articles. Commerce
has determined creating general
approved exclusions that may be used
by any importing entity is warranted.
This has been noted by commenters
who submit exclusion requests, and by
trade associations that represent those
companies, as one of the most important
changes that could be made to improve
the efficiency of the 232 exclusion
process. As described in much greater
detail below, this interim final rule
addresses this issue with the adoption
of General Approved Exclusions (GAEs).
This change will result in an estimated
immediate decrease of 5,000 exclusion
requests annually, resulting in a
significant improvement in efficiency,
with the possibility of more in the
future. Unlike exclusion requests, GAEs
do not include quantity limits.
Second, it addresses a trend identified
by commenters and validated in data
reviewed by Commerce—that certain
exclusion requesters may have
requested more volume than they may
have needed for their own business
purposes compared to past usage.
Submitting large numbers of unneeded
exclusion requests decreases the
efficiency of the 232 exclusions process
for potential objectors and Commerce. It
also creates issues for potential
objectors. As described in greater detail
below, this issue is addressed by adding
a new certification requirement for
volumes requested. Along the same
lines, the rule also adds a note to
remind all parties submitting 232
submissions of the prohibition against
making false statements to the U.S.
Government and the consequences that
may occur for such false statements.
Third, the rule addresses an objector
concern they were being held to a
higher standard than foreign suppliers
because of the interpretation that
‘‘immediately’’ meant the objector
needed to be able to provide the steel or
aluminum articles within 8 weeks, even
though a foreign supplier may not be
able to provide the same steel or
aluminum article until much longer
than 8 weeks. With this rule the term
‘‘immediately,’’ is retained but language
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
has been modified to apply the same
time standard to U.S. objectors and
foreign suppliers for when the steel or
aluminum articles need to be provided
to the exclusion requester.
What changes are not being addressed
in this interim final rule?
While this rule addresses the
remaining comments from the
September 11 rule, it also addresses
some of the comments received on the
232 Exclusions Portal from the June 10
rule. However, comments requesting
changes requiring software modification
or involving additional cost and time to
implement are still under consideration
and not addressed here. Some examples
of comments still under consideration
include the following. There is a
comment to allow confidential business
information (CBI) submissions in the
232 Exclusions Portal which would
require software changes and additional
certifications. Another commenter
requested two separate portals for the
steel and aluminum exclusion
processes. There are also several
comments regarding the usability and
search functionality of the 232
Exclusions Portal including adding a
filter for steel and aluminum on the
main portal page; adding product
classes to the main portal screen with a
filtering function; improving search
functionality by adding a simple ‘‘find
all’’ type of search capability; adding the
capability to be able to download
individual submissions and all data;
making it easier to extract data for
queried databases; adding the ability to
cross search with multiple criteria;
providing an easier way to identify
exclusion requests by HTSUS
classification and other criteria;
including the actual due date for filing
submissions, not just days remaining;
adding a withdraw feature to the
dashboard; adding a notification feature
when objections are posted; and adding
the ability to refresh without resetting
the filters. Commerce is continuing to
evaluate these comments and may
implement additional changes to further
improve the 232 Exclusions Portal at a
later date.
This interim final rule does not
summarize or respond to the comments
included in the May 26 notice.
Commerce will address these comments
in the next rule. However, as noted
below, there is significant overlap in the
comments received on the September 11
and June 10 rules, so some of the
comments received on the May 26
notice are also being addressed in this
interim final rule. For example, the
three key changes to the 232 exclusions
process described above being made in
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
81061
this interim final rule will also be
responsive to comments received on the
May 26 notice.
The following are some examples of
comments from the May 26 notice that
are still being reviewed. Additional
changes to the 232 Exclusions Portal
were requested by some commenters
based on their additional experience,
e.g., the portal being programmed to flag
for special attention those exclusion
requests that have been waiting a certain
number of days/months for a
determination. Some comments
addressed the role of objections in the
232 exclusions process and whether
objections have an outsized influence
on the process, in particular on how
long the Commerce decision-making
process takes and whether an exclusion
will be granted. Some comments
requested creating a process to give
preferential treatment for products
further manufactured or substantially
transformed in the United States,
because such producers are an essential
part of the U.S. steel and aluminum
industry. Other commenters requested a
60-day window for submitting exclusion
requests on a bi-annual basis and only
product exclusion requests submitted
during these bi-annual periods would be
considered.
Additional Improvements to the 232
Exclusions Process
As noted above, the interim final rule
being published today addresses the
remaining comments from the
September 11 rule and highlights what
comments have been addressed from the
June 10 rule. There is some significant
overlap among those comments and
comments received in response to the
May 26 notice, so the revisions to the
232 exclusions process described below
will also be responsive to some of the
same comments received in response to
the May 26 notice. Commerce intends to
publish at least one subsequent interim
final rule that will describe the
unaddressed comments received on the
May 26 notice and any additional
revisions Commerce will make to the
232 exclusions process as a result of
those comments. The comments on the
May 26 notice also included various
comments on the 232 Exclusions Portal,
certain of which are addressed below.
Other comments will be summarized
and addressed with the remaining
comments on the June 10 rule that are
not included in today’s rule. Because of
the programming cost and time involved
with making changes to the 232
Exclusions Portal, Commerce requires
more time to review and respond to
those comments, in particular for
comments where Commerce agrees that
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
81062
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
changes to the 232 Exclusions Portal
may be warranted.
Commerce is focused on improving
the 232 exclusions process as quickly as
possible. As additional revisions are
ready to be made, such as those being
made in this rule, Commerce will
publish those changes as quickly as
possible to improve the 232 exclusions
process. This approach of publishing a
series of interim final rules has allowed
Commerce to improve the 232
exclusions process on an ongoing basis,
allowing the public to submit additional
comments on whether the most recently
made changes have helped to improve
the process.
This rule makes various edits to
supplement no. 1 to part 705 to improve
the 232 exclusions process. This rule
also removes the provisions from
supplement no. 2 to part 705 and
consolidates those into supplement no.
1. This rule also adds new supplements
no. 2 and no. 3 for identifying General
Approved Exclusions (GAEs) for steel
and aluminum articles under the 232
exclusions process and the first
approved tranches of GAEs for steel and
aluminum articles. GAEs address a longstanding request from public comments
of exclusion requesters to create a more
efficient process to approve certain
exclusions for use by all importers
where Commerce has determined that
no objections will be received and
where it is warranted to approve an
exclusion for all importers to use. This
rule also removes Annex 1 to
supplements no. 1 and 2, since this
guidance is no longer needed with this
rule’s removal of references to
www.regulations.gov from the 232
exclusions process. Finally, this rule
makes some non-substantive edits to
supplement no. 1 to part 705 to improve
readability of the supplement.
Public Comments and BIS Responses
The public comment period on the
May 26 notice closed on July 10, 2020.
BIS received eighty-two public
comments on the notice of inquiry.
Many commenters referenced the
imposition of duties and quantitative
limitations, questioning whether or not
such regulations were beneficial. Those
comments are outside the scope of the
May 26 notice that solicited comments
on the 232 exclusions process; thus
Commerce is generally not summarizing
or providing responses to those general
comments on the duties and
quantitative limitations. Certain
comments described and addressed
below are those received in response to
the September 11 and June 10 rules.
However, some of the comments in
responses below address issues that also
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
were raised in some of the comments
received in response to the May 26
notice. As a result, the responses below
are responsive in part to comments on
the May 26 notice, and also are
responsive to comments on the
September 11 and June 10 rules.
Improving Tracking and Transparency
Comment (a)(1): Develop an adequate
tracking system that supplies relevant
information (more than is available
now) for 232 submissions. Commenters
requested that Commerce provide
stakeholders a way to more easily
review the Harmonized Tariff Schedule
of the United States (HTSUS) code and
product information, country of origin,
volume, and alloys of posted
exclusions—preferably, in a searchable
database. Commenters indicated that
having to open each file to identify this
information places a burden on
potential objectors, which the
commenters suggested could be
addressed with a searchable database.
BIS response: Commerce has made
changes to allow for easier tracking and
searching of information in the 232
Exclusions Portal, as described in
greater detail below for the
improvements that have been made to
the 232 Exclusions Portal (see BIS
response to Comment (g)(2) below).
Comment (a)(2): Exclusion rejection
for incomplete submissions should be
more transparent. A commenter noted
that, while they do not expect
Commerce to customize each individual
response, the commenter believes that
additional steps can be taken to help
U.S. businesses understand the reason
for a rejection. This commenter
requested that Commerce should
include on the rejection form that is
posted online a list of common reasons
for rejection. The commenter believes
this would provide invaluable guidance
to the countless small businesses
attempting to navigate this difficult
process. This commenter believes the
current rejection form leaves
manufacturers guessing as to why the
government rejected their applications,
especially when that business for years
used the identical HTSUS code
accepted by U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) to import that product.
BIS response: Commerce agrees that
greater transparency benefits all
applicants to the 232 exclusions
process. Commerce moved its HTSUS
administrability review to the start of
the process in early 2019, reducing
sharply the number of exclusion denials
due to incomplete submissions
identified later in the review process.
Incomplete submissions now receive a
rejection notification that includes the
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
specific reasons for a rejection.
Commerce does plan to update the
rejection form used in the 232
Exclusions Portal to include a list of
common reasons for rejection.
Commerce agrees that providing this
additional information will make the
process more efficient, because those
receiving rejections will more easily
understand what was wrong with their
exclusion request that resulted in a
rejection. This may reduce the overall
number of 232 exclusion submissions
submitted.
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
Comment (b)(1): Supportive of the
new CBI provisions. A commenter
asserted that one of the most significant
changes is the BIS decision to allow
companies to submit CBI during the
rebuttal and surrebuttal process. This
same commenter also believes that
further changes can improve the process
beyond what BIS has already proposed.
BIS response: Commerce agrees that
adding the CBI process has helped to
improve the 232 exclusions process. As
described below, Commerce is open to
improving the CBI process, but that
must be done in accordance with the
larger purpose of allowing CBI in the
232 exclusion process, as well as the
current technical limitations in the 232
Exclusions Portal.
Comment (b)(2): Allow CBI to also be
submitted for exclusions and objections.
Commenters urged Commerce to expand
the CBI provision by allowing
companies to submit CBI within their
original exclusion request. These
commenters asserted that, given the
amount of detail required to complete
the exclusion request form, companies
may be hesitant to submit exclusion
requests for fear of sharing CBI with
their competitors.
BIS response: Commerce does not
agree. The information required on the
exclusion request form does not require
revealing CBI in order to adequately
complete the form, so allowing CBI in
support of the initial exclusion request
is not needed. Moreover, exclusion
requesters can indicate they have CBI,
allowing Commerce reviewers to request
that CBI if needed for their review of the
request and objections.
Comment (b)(3): Allowing CBI in
exclusions and objections would
alleviate some concerns over short
seven-day rebuttal and surrebuttal
periods. One commenter asserted that,
given the short seven-day window of the
rebuttal process, allowing companies to
submit CBI at the time of the application
would relieve the unnecessary burdens
placed on filers by the short rebuttal
window.
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
BIS response: Commerce
acknowledges the shortness of the
seven-day rebuttal and surrebuttal
period, but does not agree with the
commenter that allowing CBI in the
exclusion request or in objections would
alleviate the burden on exclusion
requesters or objectors during the
rebuttal and surrebuttal period. The
most appropriate time in the 232
exclusion review process for CBI is
during the rebuttal and surrebuttal
phase when information that goes
beyond what is included in the
exclusion and objection forms may be
needed to properly evaluate an
exclusion request. Allowing CBI in
exclusion requests and objections would
slow the Commerce review process
without adding any real benefit to the
review process. As noted above,
exclusion requesters and objectors can
indicate they have CBI and Commerce
reviewers can request that information if
needed for review.
Comment (b)(4): Process to submit CBI
needs to be further clarified. A
commenter believes the current CBI
process is confusing because parties
must submit the exclusion request form
with a vague, yet somewhat detailed
summary of the CBI and then
supplement the form by sending a
separate email to BIS with the actual
confidential information. This same
commenter was also concerned that
parties risk the possibility that
Commerce will reject their exclusion
request for being an incomplete
submission before Commerce has even
received their confidential information.
BIS response: Commerce understands
the point being made by the commenter
but does not agree that this requirement
is unreasonable. Because the 232
Exclusion Process is a public process,
there needs to be transparency to allow
the other public parties involved in the
process (objector(s) and exclusion
requesters) to have an idea of the scope
and type of CBI information that is
being provided to supplement a rebuttal
or a surrebuttal.
Comment (b)(5): Section 301
exclusion request process uses a clear
and simple method by which parties
can submit CBI—Commerce should
adopt same process to allow submission
of public and private version. A
commenter encouraged Commerce to
implement a method similar to that of
the Section 301 exclusion process for
the Section 232 exclusion request
process, allowing parties to submit both
public and confidential versions of the
exclusion request form.
BIS response: Commerce sees the
benefit of adopting the same type of
approach as used under the Section 301
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
process. However, the security needed
to protect such information in the 232
Exclusions Portal would require
additional programming and
certifications. Therefore, at the current
time Commerce will not be making
these changes. If the 232 Exclusions
Portal can accommodate CBI at a future
date, Commerce will revisit this issue.
Exclusion Requests
Comment (c)(1): Standard Commerce
applies to exclusion requests remains
unclear—need to specify whether in
aggregate or for a specific requester. A
commenter was concerned that it is
unclear whether a specific requester’s
lack of availability and quality of
material is the relevant consideration, or
whether analysis of material quantities
in the aggregate U.S. market provides a
better metric. The commenter believes
the proper standard should be the
availability of material to the requesting
company in the needed quality and
quantity because this is largely in the
control of the objecting supplier.
BIS response: Commerce confirms
here that exclusion requests are being
reviewed based on the availability of
material to the requesting company in
the needed quality and quantity by U.S.
suppliers. This rule clarifies that the
standard applied to the review of an
exclusion request is a case-by-case
review to determine whether the
requester has shown that the article is
not produced in the United States in a
sufficiently and reasonably available
amount or of a satisfactory quality, or
that there are specific national security
considerations to grant the exclusion. In
general, if no U.S. supplier submits an
objection, absent a national security
concern, Commerce approves such
exclusion requests because a
determination can be made that a U.S.
supplier is not available to supply to the
exclusion requester the needed quality
and quantity of steel or aluminum
described in the exclusion request.
Comment (c)(2): Inconsistencies in the
posted exclusion requests make it
difficult for objectors to adequately
review and respond. Commenters in this
area are concerned whether exclusion
requesters are consistently filling out
the forms, and whether Commerce is
adequately ensuring that the exclusion
forms being posted meet the required
standards of the form. For example, one
commenter noted that hundreds of
exclusion requests include no alloy
designation (Question 4.b), but instead
reference the HTSUS code or simply
leave that field blank. This commenter
asserted that an alloy designation is an
important identifier for assessing the
validity of an exclusion request, so its
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
81063
omission in many exclusion requests
makes it difficult for potential objectors.
Another commenter noted that many
exclusion requests—including those
that have already been approved—fail to
indicate a volume associated with the
included countries of origin.
BIS response: Commerce
acknowledges that, in certain cases,
there has been some variability in how
exclusion requesters or objectors have
filled out the respective forms.
Commerce has revised its standard
operating procedures (SOPs) and
conducted training for those reviewing
232 submissions at Commerce to
emphasize the importance of ensuring
that the exclusion and objection forms
are being completed in accordance with
the information required on the forms.
As a result of this comment, Commerce
has highlighted these issues to the
Commerce reviewers of the 232
submissions to ensure consistency and
warns that submissions that do not meet
the standards of the information
required on the forms will be rejected.
Comment (c)(3): ‘‘Size ranges’’
clarification was helpful in the
September 11 rule, but additional
clarification needed. A commenter
noted that the September 11 rule offers
some additional information on
acceptable ranges but could be
improved. The BIS response to
Comment (g)(3) in the September 11
rule states that the exclusion request
form allows for a product that may be
within a specific range but not for
products across a wide range. A
permissible range must be within the
minimum and maximum range that is
specified in the tariff provision and
applicable legal notes for the provision.
This commenter believes that this
suggests that products identical in all
aspects, with the exception of a
dimensional characteristic, and
classified within the same HTSUS
statistical reporting number, could be
included within a single request.
However, the commenter was concerned
that the regulatory text under paragraph
(c)(2) suggests that separate exclusion
requests must be submitted for steel
products with ‘‘distinct critical
dimensions’’ covered by a common
HTSUS statistical reporting number,
and examples provided in the rule are
for specific sizes of products, which
does not appear inconsistent with
Comment (g)(3) from the September 11
rule.
BIS response: Commerce agrees a
clarification to paragraph (c)(2) is
warranted. This interim final rule, as
described below in the regulatory
changes, removes the word ‘‘distinct’’
before ‘‘critical’’ in the example
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81064
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
provided under paragraph (c)(2). This
change is made to avoid any potential
confusion on the scope of ranges that
are permissible under an exclusion
request. Commerce clarifies that
products identical in all aspects, with
the exception of a dimensional
characteristic, and that are classified
within the same HTSUS statistical
reporting number, may be included
within a single request. However,
objections that indicate the ability to
produce one or more products within
the range, even if not the entire range,
will be considered to be valid objections
to an exclusion request.
Comment (c)(4): Concerned that
Commerce is not adequately reviewing
exclusion requests. A commenter
requested that Commerce fully evaluate
all exclusion requests—including those
for which no objections are filed—to
ensure that the volumes requested are
proportional to the U.S. market. This
commenter was concerned that,
generally, it seems Commerce is not
evaluating whether there is actually
demand in the market for these large
volumes, and has granted requests based
simply on the absence of any objections.
BIS response: Commerce recognizes
that there are exclusion requests for
volumes that exceed prior years’
consumption but that often receive no
objections. Commerce also recognizes
that there are objections that, in total,
exceed the objectors’ total capacity.
Commerce is reviewing this issue to
determine whether there is an approach
to factor volumes requested and
objected to in an objective, transparent,
and efficient way. As an initial step to
address this issue, this interim final rule
makes regulatory changes to the 232
exclusions process, as described below
under the 232 exclusion request volume
certification heading to require a
certification from exclusion requesters
for volume requested and, when
applicable, a certification for volume
requested but unfulfilled due to
legitimate circumstances when
submitting exclusion requests in the 232
Exclusions Portal.
Comment (c)(5): Does not believe
Commerce has implemented an
expedited approval process for
exclusions that receive no objections—
contrary to what was stated in the
September 11 rule and in statements by
Commerce in other venues that
Commerce would adopt such an
expedited process. One commenter
noted that Commerce does not yet
appear to be adjudicating requests faster
as a result of the updated exclusion
process with some exclusion requests.
BIS response: Commerce believes this
comment was likely made as Commerce
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
was working to address the initial
backlog of exclusion requests that did
receive objections and does not reflect
the current status. At this time, the
expedited review process for exclusions
that do not receive objections is
functioning well, with an average
response time, as of July 20, 2020, of
approximately 60 days, less than half
the average processing time for
exclusions that receive objections and a
significant decrease in overall response
times compared to earlier in the process.
Comment (c)(6): Product descriptions
in exclusion requests and approval
decisions need to be more specific to
ensure CBP can determine what is
approved. A commenter noted that
Commerce has granted a number of
exclusion requests where the ‘‘product
description’’ on both the request and
Commerce’s decision document is only
the name for a general category of
products and any detail regarding the
size, chemistry, and other
characteristics that may indicate that
particular product at issue is not
available from domestic sources are not
carried over from the application. This
commenter noted that greater specificity
was needed in the approved exclusions.
BIS response: Commerce works
closely with CBP. Additional
information is provided to CBP to
ensure that CBP is able to effectively
implement approved exclusions. CBP
consults as needed with Commerce if
any questions arise regarding the scope
of a specific approved exclusion
request.
Comment (c)(7): Need to specify when
the validity of an approved exclusion
request begins. A commenter noted that
there has been a number of exclusions
granted where shipments were entered
after the posting of the request but
before the decision. The commenter
asked for clarification if the one-year
timeframe begins once the decision is
made or if some other point is used to
start the one-year timeframe.
BIS response: Commerce clarifies that,
as specified in paragraph (h)(2)(iii)(A)
(Effective date for approved exclusions),
an approved exclusion will be effective
five business days after publication of
the Commerce response granting an
exclusion in the 232 Exclusions Portal.
If granted, exclusions are generally
effective for one year from the date of
signature on the Decision Memo.
Companies may also file Post-Summary
Corrections with CBP on unliquidated
entries to recoup any tariffs paid on
products that made entry between the
submission date and the date of
signature. Companies are able to receive
retroactive relief on granted requests
dating back to the date of the request’s
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
submission on unliquidated entries.
However, requesters should note that
where retroactive relief is granted, the
quantities granted retroactive relief are
still counted against the total quantity
granted in the exclusion. The exclusion
request expires when either the quantity
granted has been exhausted or the
exclusion reaches the end of the
effective period specified in the
decision memo (generally one year from
the date of the decision), whichever
comes first, and no pro-rata additional
quantity is provided for retroactive
relief. Given that duties do not apply for
countries with quotas, retroactive relief
is not applicable for exclusions from
quotas.
Once the exclusion becomes effective,
the steel or aluminum articles specified
in the approved decision memo in
entries that have not been liquidated by
CBP are those eligible for tariff refunds
or tariff exclusions.
Comment (c)(8): Product exclusions
should be permanent not temporary
(and on a universal basis). A commenter
noted that temporary exclusions inject
significant uncertainty into the business
planning of companies and therefore
recommended permanent exclusions.
BIS response: Commerce does not
agree that all product exclusions should
be permanent and issued on a universal
basis because that would defeat the
purpose of the duties. Commerce does
agree that for certain steel and
aluminum articles, a more efficient
approval mechanism is warranted and
that the approval should be universal.
Specifically, for certain steel and
aluminum articles, Commerce has
created General Approved Exclusions
(GAEs) under the new supplements no.
2 and 3 to part 705 being added to this
rule, which will be available to all
importers.
Comment (c)(9): Create streamlined
process to allow one company seeking
an exclusion for the same product
already approved to a second company
to quickly obtain an approved
exclusion. A commenter requested that
Commerce provide a streamlined
process whereby a second company
seeking to use an exclusion already
granted to a U.S. company can quickly
obtain the right to use the same product
exclusion.
BIS response: Commerce does not
agree. The exclusion process is intended
to be specific to each requester and each
request must be reviewed on its own
merits, allowing for potential objections
and permitting rebuttal and surrebuttal
process to play out as needed. As
referenced in the previous comment, the
GAEs are also responsive to some of
what this commenter is requesting in
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
terms of creating a more efficient
approval process where Commerce
determines that relief is warranted in a
particular circumstance for all
importers.
Comment (c)(10): Commerce should
use its discretion to make exclusions
available to all importers. A commenter
requested that if a product is not made
in the United States or is not made in
sufficient quantity or quality, Commerce
must grant a broader product exclusion
(not just on a company-by-company,
product-by-product basis). Another
commenter noted that the Secretary and
others at Commerce have repeatedly
denied associations the ability to submit
exclusion requests on behalf of their
industries for widely used goods,
because Commerce sought to identify
those products receiving the most
requests. However, the Secretary has yet
to exercise this authority to grant
general exclusions despite the same
HTSUS codes receiving multiple
requests.
BIS response: As noted above, in this
rule, Commerce is creating GAEs with
the additions of supplement no. 2 and
3 to part 705. The creation of GAEs
addresses this comment and will create
a more efficient 232 exclusion process
and reduce the burdens on exclusion
requesters.
Comment (c)(11): Explain
circumstances under which BIS will
approve broader product exclusions and
how U.S. companies may request such
an exclusion. A commenter noted that
Commerce continues to state that it is
considering approving broader
exclusion requests, which can apply to
multiple importers. However, no
additional guidance has been provided
as to how groups of companies can ask
for such a broader exclusion.
BIS response: This rule explains the
circumstances when Commerce will
approve broader product exclusions.
These provisions are described in the
new supplements no. 2 and 3 to part
705 with the addition of GAEs. The
introductory text of the new
supplements explain the process of how
Commerce will approve these GAEs. As
previously noted, these determinations
for what steel or aluminum articles
warrant being included in a GAE will be
made by Commerce, in consultation
with the other agencies referenced in
the new supplements. The public will
not be involved in requesting new or
revised GAEs, but Commerce will use
the information provided in exclusion
requests to inform its review process for
what additional GAE should be added
or what revisions should be made to
existing GAEs.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
Comment (c)(12): Process for making
changes to an approved exclusion
request. A commenter requested
guidance be provided for how to make
a correction to an application for
exclusion after the exclusion has been
approved.
BIS response: This is a feature under
consideration, but until that revision
can be implemented, a new exclusion
request will need to be submitted in the
event of such circumstances. Commerce
does clarify that BIS will make, when
warranted in the 232 Exclusions Portal,
technical corrections and a few other
forms of ‘‘non-substantive changes’’
including: Importer of record (IOR)
changes; supplier/manufacturer
changes; corrections to match product
descriptions with product
specifications; and corrections to
organization information (i.e.,
accidental transposition of fields).
Objections
Comment (d)(1): Concerned that
Commerce has too much leeway to
interpret the criteria ‘‘not produced in
the United States in a sufficient and
reasonably available amount’’ and ‘‘not
produced in the United States in a
satisfactory quality.’’ A commenter was
concerned that this broad interpretation
by Commerce could lead to the negation
of exclusion requests in situations
where one company files an objection
that claims that it in theory could make
that product in sufficient quantity or
quality. The commenter noted that
rebuttals to these claims are difficult to
make without more detailed information
from objectors on how they could make
products in sufficient quantity or
quality.
BIS response: The criteria comes from
the underlying Proclamations that
authorize the creation of the 232
exclusions process. Therefore,
Commerce does not have the discretion
to change the criteria. Commerce added
the rebuttal process, as well as the
surrebuttal process, to allow requesters
and objectors to further address the
representations made in objections and
rebuttals. Ultimately, if an exclusion
request is not approved because of an
objection, the exclusion requester will
be able to determine definitively
whether an objector is in fact able to
provide the steel or aluminum article in
question by attempting to obtain the
product from the objector. Should all
objectors be unable to produce a
requested product as they represented
in their objections, the requester may
submit a new request with
documentation evidencing this refusal.
Commerce understands that time is vital
to an exclusion requester and seeks to
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
81065
ensure that objectors provide sufficient
information for a thorough evaluation of
the request and objection. Moreover,
objectors must certify their ability to
manufacture the products described
within their objections.
Comment (d)(2): Objections should be
reviewed cumulatively. A commenter is
concerned that Commerce is not
considering the cumulative impact of
objections to exclusions. This
commenter noted that U.S. producers
that are filing objections to exclusion
requests are routinely stating that the
objector can and would fill the demand
for the subject product. This commenter
noted that while it may be true that the
objector could reasonably expect to fill
the needs of an individual company
making an exclusion request, it is
possible (or likely) that the objector
could not fill the full demand for that
product from all companies requesting
an exclusion let alone all of the demand
from other customers in the U.S.
BIS response: Commerce is aware of
this concern and has evaluated statistics
on the 232 exclusions process,
determining that, although there may be
some anecdotal examples of where this
occurred, as a general trend, the
statistics do not support that this is a
significant issue with objections in the
232 exclusions process. In the past year,
BIS has received objections to exclusion
requests for approximately 19 million
metric tons of steel products, or roughly
16% of total U.S. steel production
capacity. None of the companies with
publicly available capacity figures
objected to more than their total
capacity. When factoring in that
multiple companies often object to the
same exclusion request, volume
objected to as a percentage of total
capacity was significantly lower.
Exclusion requesters are encouraged to
provide documentation in their requests
or rebuttal filings that objectors are
unable to supply the products being
requested because of insufficient
capacity.
Comment (d)(3): Exclusion process
guidelines are unclear about the
obligations that come with filing an
objection. A commenter asked for
clarification from Commerce about
whether producers should be submitting
objections if they have the capability to
make a product, but not the immediate
capacity, or if they can only produce a
fraction of the requested volume for a
specific manufacturer. For example, the
commenter noted that aluminum
producers have expressed a concern that
filing an objection will obligate that
producer to offer for sale the full scope
and volume of imports included in a
request—which, if importers are
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81066
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
requesting massive volumes, might be
impossible.
BIS response: Commerce agrees this
should be clarified in the regulations
and makes changes to paragraph
(c)(6)(i), as described below, to address
this issue. Commerce has the ability to
deny a part of an exclusion request
when an objector demonstrates
sufficiently in the objection and any
potential surrebuttal that they are able
to produce a portion of the requested
quantity of a steel or aluminum article
within the required time needed by the
importer. Therefore, objectors should
not be deterred from submitting
objections when they may not be able to
fulfill 100% of the requested exclusion.
Over time, as more of their domestic
capacity comes back online or is added,
these same objectors may be able to
fulfill larger percentages of the
exclusion requests, which would help to
better achieve the stated purposes of the
duties in helping to support the
domestic production capabilities and
capacity that are critical to protecting
U.S. national security. Commerce is
reviewing this issue to determine
whether there is an objective,
transparent, and efficient approach to
take into consideration volumes
requested and objected to under the 232
exclusions process.
Comment (d)(4): Modify the objection
form (and the rebuttal and surrebuttal
form) to clarify whether companies can
object on the ostensible grounds that
they have the capability to make a
product. A commenter requested
guidance on how Commerce will
consider objections from producers that
have the capability to make a product
but do not have immediately available
capacity to meet the importer’s stated
needs.
BIS response: Commerce does not
agree that the objection form, or the
rebuttal or surrebuttal form need to be
updated to address this commenter’s
concern. The information required on
rebuttal and surrebuttal forms, as well
as the objection criteria specified in
paragraph (d), provides a clear standard
that Commerce may apply. After
reviewing an objection, rebutters may
also inform the Commerce review
process by evaluating and commenting
on whether an objector will be able to
provide the needed steel or aluminum
article in the quantity and quality and
to make that ‘‘immediately available’’
from an exclusion requester’s
perspective. As described below, this
rule makes additional changes for what
constitutes being ‘‘immediately
available,’’ and these changes will
further clarify the application of this
criteria to make sure that U.S. producers
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
are being held to the same standard as
potential foreign competitors in meeting
the time required for delivery of the
steel or aluminum article for which they
are requesting an exclusion.
Comment (d)(5): Objecting parties
should be required to fill orders. A
commenter noted that this would
prevent the objection process from
becoming a lever for business
competition with domestic parties
objecting to an exclusion request and
then refusing to fill orders or only filling
orders at inflated prices. This
commenter also asked that companies
that were denied an exclusion requested
on the basis of an objection be permitted
to show evidence of an inability to
secure material and gain an exception if
the objecting party cannot fill orders.
BIS response: Commerce understands
the reasoning behind this comment but
is also mindful that it is not the role of
Commerce to dictate whether an
objector must sell the steel or aluminum
article, or whether the exclusion
requester must purchase the steel or
aluminum article from the objector. For
example, as the commenter noted, the
objector may be able to provide the steel
or aluminum but at a price that is not
tenable for the exclusion requester or at
a price that does not justify the
exclusion requester switching suppliers
of the steel or aluminum article.
Commerce believes that these types of
business decisions should be left to the
two companies involved so as to not
unduly influence the functioning of the
market. As for the request to allow an
exclusion requester to subsequently
reference in a new exclusion request
that an objector was not able to provide
the steel or aluminum in a previous
exclusion request, the current process
already addresses that sufficiently. First,
the exclusion requester may submit a
new exclusion request. The earlier
objector may choose not to object to the
new exclusion request based on their
past experience of not being able to
provide the steel or aluminum article.
Assuming no other objector comes
forward, the exclusion request will be
reviewed under the expedited process.
If the same objector objects to the new
exclusion request, the rebuttal process
allows the exclusion requester to
document in the rebuttal the past
activity with that objector.
Comment (d)(6): Objections should
also be rejected for incompleteness. If
Commerce is rejecting requests based on
incompleteness, we believe it should
extend the same scrutiny to objections.
BIS response: Commerce agrees and
does reject objections for
incompleteness when warranted. BIS
does review objections (and rebuttals/
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
surrebuttals) for completeness, but a
rejection is rare for these filings in the
232 Exclusions Portal. The Portal has
mandatory fields that ensure most
filings are complete. However, there is
a different standard of what is necessary
for a complete submission of an
exclusion request versus an objection.
The former generally must meet more
specific review criteria. At this time,
objectors may list capacity, utilization,
manufacturing, or delivery time data as
CBI on the objection form. Commerce’s
International Trade Administration
(ITA), on behalf of BIS and Commerce,
will then request this information if
needed.
Comment (d)(7): Delivery times are
getting much longer because of the
tariffs and U.S. producers are
approaching maximum capacity
utilization rates. A commenter noted
that prior to the imposition of tariffs for
non-specialty metals, many steel users
reported roughly six-week to eight-week
lead times. Since the steel tariffs took
effect, those same members report the
doubling of delivery times, creating
significant delays and interruptions in
the manufacturing supply chain that
could lead Original Equipment
Manufacturers (OEMs) to source their
inputs from non-U.S. sources that
experience less volatility due to
government interference.
BIS response: To the extent there has
been an increase in delivery times
related to the tariffs, importers seeking
exclusions can always import the article
and pay the tariffs while their exclusion
requests are pending. In addition, an
objector must have the article
‘‘immediately available’’ in the needed
quantity and quality. As referenced
below in the clarifications being made
to ‘‘immediately available,’’ the
previous criteria were holding U.S.
producers in many cases to shorter
delivery times than foreign competitors,
a discrepancy that is being addressed in
this rule. Commerce believes that the
‘‘immediately available’’ criterion,
which is being refined in this rule,
provides a reasonable standard that
should not result in a lengthening of the
time period for delivery of steel and
aluminum articles for U.S. users.
Comment (d)(8): Producers should be
held accountable. A commenter
requested that Commerce hold
organizations that file objections to the
highest of standards. Commerce should
require specificity before considering
the objection and should question and
verify the assertions made by the
objectors or claims made in surrebuttals.
BIS response: Commerce agrees that
all parties, both objectors and
requesters, should be held to the
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
standards set forth in the regulations.
Accordingly, parties making
submissions to Commerce with regard
to an exclusion request are required to
legally certify the veracity of the
submission. These standards are
specified on the objection and
surrebuttal forms, in the criteria
specified in paragraphs (d) and (g), on
the exclusion request and rebuttal
forms, and in the criteria specified in
paragraphs (c) and (f) of supplement no.
1 to part 705.
Comment (d)(9): U.S. steel producers
are approaching maximum capacity
utilization rates. A commenter noted
that one objector reported its facility is
currently operating at an 89% capacity
utilization rate, well above the 80%
target set by Commerce and at levels not
seen since prior to the Great Recession.
This commenter also noted that the
American Iron and Steel Institute
reported that for the week ending
November 10, 2018, domestic raw steel
production saw a capacity utilization
rate of 81.7%, also above the 80%
threshold.
BIS response: As stated in the 232
report, the 80 percent figure is an
‘‘average’’ rate for financial viability of
the industry which is ‘‘necessary to
sustain adequate profitability and
continued capital investment, research,
and development, and workforce
enhancement in the steel sector.’’ The
U.S. steel industry’s capacity utilization
rates have not been sustained. That said,
making changes to the duties being
imposed and/or quotas implemented are
outside the scope of this rule.
Criteria Defining What Is Meant by
Available ‘‘immediately’’
Comment (e)(1): September 11 rule
defining what was meant by available
‘‘immediately’’ was a positive step that
improved the 232 process. A commenter
noted that setting a clear definition of
‘‘available immediately’’ at eight weeks
is a reasonable timeline and helps
provide stability to steel and
aluminum-using manufacturers.
BIS response: Commerce agrees that
providing a definition of ‘‘immediately
available’’ was a positive step in
providing greater transparency and
consistency for the 232 exclusion
process. However, defining
‘‘immediately available’’ as eight weeks
meant that, in certain cases, U.S.
producers could be held to a shorter
delivery time than foreign competitors
and was more restrictive than the
timeframe needed by the importer for
their business needs. As described
below, to address this fairness issue and
to create equal treatment, this interim
final rule revises the criteria for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
available ‘‘immediately’’ and specifies
that if an objector is asserting that it is
not currently producing the steel or
aluminum identified in an exclusion
request but can produce the steel or
aluminum, the objector must be able to
make it available in accordance with the
commercial needs of the U.S. user of the
steel or aluminum, as described in the
exclusion request. Under this revised
criteria in paragraph (d)(4), the objector
must identify how it will be able to
produce and deliver the quantity of steel
or aluminum needed either within eight
weeks, or if after eight weeks, by a date
which is earlier than the date that a
named foreign supplier can deliver the
entire quantity of the requested product.
It is incumbent on both the exclusion
requester and the objecting producers to
provide supplemental evidence
supporting their claimed delivery times.
Comment (e)(2): Objections that do
not clearly meet the ‘‘immediately’’
standard should be rejected. A
commenter noted that objections to
exclusion requests available on the 232
Exclusions Portal reveal numerous
vague assertions that clearly do not meet
the available ‘‘immediately’’ threshold
set forth by Commerce. This commenter
recommends that Commerce reject these
objections outright.
BIS response: Commerce holds
objectors to the standard specified in the
regulations under paragraph (d) and
requires objectors to complete the
objection form, and the surrebuttal form
as applicable, fully and accurately. If an
objector is not able to meet the available
‘‘immediately’’ criteria, Commerce will
not deny such an exclusion request.
Requesters can provide additional
information on the rebuttal form. In
reviewing the exclusion request to make
a final determination, Commerce takes
into account information provided in
the rebuttal to evaluate whether the
objector can produce the article in
sufficient quantity and quality, and
within the time specified in the criteria
in paragraph (d) of supplement no. 1 to
part 705.
Comment (e)(3): Defining eight weeks
as ‘‘immediate delivery’’ is unrealistic
and it would be better to make the
standard based on the nature of the
product. A commenter noted that it is
unrealistic to require domestic
producers to supply a requested product
in the volume requested within eight
weeks as a prerequisite to filing a valid
objection and that this requirement
appears to reflect a misunderstanding of
how both the steel industry and
international shipping work. This
commenter also noted that in
determining that eight weeks is the
appropriate timeframe, Commerce
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
81067
regrettably rejected a suggestion that the
time frame should depend on the nature
of the product—with simpler products
subject to a shorter timeframe than more
sophisticated products—and in any
case, should be no shorter than 12 to 16
weeks.
BIS response: As described above,
Commerce agrees that clarification is
warranted for use of eight weeks under
the available ‘‘immediately’’ criteria.
The changes this rule makes will also be
responsive to this commenter’s
concerns.
Comment (e)(4): Allowing foreign
suppliers one year to supply the steel or
aluminum for approved exclusions, but
only allowing eight weeks for domestic
suppliers creates an unfair playing field.
A commenter noted that granted
exclusions are valid for one year and
will presumably be supplied by foreign
producers over the course of that year,
not all at once. This commenter noted
that requiring a U.S. producer to supply
the consumer within eight weeks makes
little sense and runs counter to the
rationale underlying the adjustments to
imports ordered by the President.
BIS response: Commerce agrees and is
making changes in the rule for how
‘‘immediately’’ is defined to create equal
treatment for U.S. and foreign
producers.
Comment (e)(5): ‘‘Immediately’’
should mean being able to provide the
steel or aluminum as quickly as a
foreign supplier. A commenter noted
that the minimum standard that
Commerce should establish for
objections is 12 weeks (84 days), which
they consider a reasonable and
representative time for a foreign
producer to make a simple steel item
and ship it to the United States. This
commenter recommended that
Commerce should only determine that
the domestic product is not
‘‘immediately’’ available when a
domestic source cannot provide
material before offshore suppliers.
BIS response: Commerce has retained
eight weeks as part of the available
‘‘immediately’’ criteria under paragraph
(d)(4) but, as described elsewhere in this
rule, is also making changes to the
criteria that are responsive to this
commenter’s concerns.
Comment (e)(6): Need to specify the
quantity that needs to be supplied
within the ‘‘immediate delivery’’
timeframe. A commenter noted that
there is no indication in the current
version of the regulations of the quantity
that must be supplied within the
‘‘immediate delivery’’ timeframe. The
commenter noted that the current
regulations specify that if an objector is
not currently producing the product at
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81068
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
issue, then ‘‘the objector must identify
how it will be able to produce the article
within eight weeks,’’ detailing in
writing the timeline to start production.
This commenter recommends clarifying
whether this means the production must
merely start, shipments of commercial
quantities must begin, or the total
quantity must be delivered within the
specified time.
BIS response: Commerce agrees this
should be clarified. As described below,
this rule revises paragraph (d)(4) of
supplement no. 1 to specify the objector
must identify how it will be able to
produce and deliver the quantity of steel
or aluminum needed either within eight
weeks, or if after eight weeks, by a date
which is earlier than the date that a
named foreign supplier can deliver the
entire quantity of the requested product.
The addition of the phrase ‘‘and
deliver’’ after the term ‘‘produce’’ will
address the concern raised by this
commenter.
Comment (e)(7): Production capacity
for steel and aluminum producers must
be considered during objection and
rebuttal process. As Commerce
considers objections filed by steel and
aluminum companies, Commerce must
ask the steel and aluminum producers
several probing questions to truly
determine the capabilities of suppliers
to meet the consuming industries’ needs
and consider these answers surrounding
domestic capacity when making
exclusion decisions. The commenter
noted that these questions should
include at a minimum: ‘‘Do the steel or
aluminum companies currently
manufacture and supply the product in
the United States? If so, have their
deliveries to their customers been
timely, and is so, for how long? What is
the steel or aluminum companies’
current manufacturing capacity and
timeframe for ramping up if they
currently do not have the capacity?’’
BIS response: Commerce believes the
information required on the objection
form, surrebuttal form as applicable,
and the criteria in paragraph (d) to
supplement no. 1 that is used by
Commerce, is sufficiently informative to
determine the production capabilities of
objectors. This information is also
supplemented by the evidence provided
through rebuttals and surrebuttals, and
through CBI submitted in support of
rebuttals and surrebuttals. Commerce
does not believe additional questions
are required to be added to the objection
or surrebuttal forms in order to make
determinations on the production
capabilities of objectors.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
Rebuttals and Surrebuttals
Comment (f)(1): Seven days is not
enough time for rebuttals and
surrebuttals. A commenter does not
agree that allowing only seven days for
such comments is appropriate. This
commenter noted that considering the
volumes of new information being
submitted in some rebuttals, one week
is not enough time for a domestic
producer to analyze the information and
offer a meaningful surrebuttal.
BIS response: Commerce does not
agree. The length of time for decisions
under the 232 exclusions process is a
concern for many entities, including
Commerce. The inclusion of the rebuttal
and surrebuttal comment periods helps
to better inform the 232 exclusion
process for Commerce, but Commerce is
also mindful not to allow these
additional comment periods to add any
more time to the review process than is
needed. Commerce believes that those
parties involved in a 232 submission
that receives an objection or a rebuttal
should place a priority on reviewing the
objection or rebuttal in a timely fashion,
submitting any warranted rebuttal or
surrebuttal. Commerce believes a oneweek period is sufficient for the review
of an objection or rebuttal, and allows
for the party to conduct any needed
follow up conversations and to prepare
and submit a rebuttal or surrebuttal as
applicable.
Comment (f)(2): Allowing unlimited
number of refilings of exclusions
undermines the usefulness of objections,
and the rebuttal/surrebuttal process. A
commenter questioned whether
rebuttals and surrebuttals are a
worthwhile use of resources if
requesters remain free to submit
unlimited numbers of exemption
requests. This commenter noted that a
requester could, in lieu of a rebuttal, file
a revised request addressing whatever
deficiencies were identified in the
objection. This commenter noted that
this would alleviate some of the
unfairness of requiring domestic
producers to respond to untold volumes
of new information in just a few days
and would aid Commerce’s analysis by
promoting thoughtful and complete
original application requests instead of
reviews of hurried rebuttal and
surrebuttal comments.
BIS response: As a general matter,
Commerce believes that it is important
to allow an unlimited number of
exclusion requests to be submitted. As
described above, the ability to submit a
successive exclusion request is a key
way that the 232 exclusion process
addresses cases where an objection may
have resulted in the denial of an
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
exclusion request, but then
subsequently no objector was able to
deliver the steel or aluminum in the
quantity and quality needed
‘‘immediately.’’ Therefore, Commerce
does not agree that a restriction should
be added to restrict the number of
exclusion requests that may be
submitted.
Comment (f)(3): Allowing unlimited
refilings of exclusions allows for the
potential to overwhelm potential
objectors. A commenter noted that if
Commerce continues the rebuttal and
surrebuttal process, it should consider
limiting a party’s ability to file multiple
exclusion requests for the same product.
This commenter noted that the current
system provides an incentive for entities
seeking exclusions to submit them over
and over again with only minor
modifications in an attempt to
overwhelm domestic producers so that
domestic interests fail to file objections
because there are simply too many
requests or they believe an objection to
have already been filed.
BIS response: As noted above,
Commerce is reviewing the issue of the
volume of articles subject to exclusion
requests and objections and will address
this issue in a subsequent IFR.
232 Exclusions Portal
Since the launch of the 232
Exclusions Portal, Commerce has
implemented a number of
enhancements that address some of the
key comments received in response to
the June 10 and May 26 rule. Commerce
has highlighted the changes made to the
232 Exclusions Portal, which are
responsive to these comments received
in response to the June 10 rule, as well
as some of the comments received on
the May 26 notice. There are additional
requested changes to the 232 Exclusions
Portal in response to the June 10 rule
and the May 26 notice that Commerce
is still reviewing. Commerce will
summarize and address those comments
in at least one subsequent rule, although
enhancements in the functionality of the
232 Exclusions Portal, similar to the
enhancements described below, will
likely be implemented on an ongoing
basis as they are ready to be
implemented.
Comment (g)(1): Ability to import
previously-filed submissions. A
commenter noted that allowing the
ability to import previously-filed
submissions would be extremely
beneficial for exclusion requesters and
objectors, reducing the time burdens on
repeat users of the 232 Exclusions
Portal. Another commenter noted that
the nature of manual entry in the new
232 Exclusions Portal is likely to create
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
significant opportunity for errors and
requires significantly more time and
resource allocation than under the
previous system. The ability to reuse
information included in previously
submitted 232 submission forms would
be very beneficial. A commenter
acknowledged that the user guide for
the 232 Exclusions Portal provides
information on creating a profile within
web-browsers, but a simplified system
for importing previously-filed
submissions by users through their
dashboard would be immensely
beneficial for all users of the system.
BIS response: Commerce clarifies here
that the AutoFill Feature of the 232
Exclusions Portal addresses these
comments. The AutoFill Feature that
launched with the 232 Exclusions Portal
addresses several of the comments
submitted in response to the June 10
rule. AutoFill enables users to
effectively import previous filings by
allowing them to fill out a filing once
and then save that template for reuse in
future filings. It also allows users to save
their in-progress filings as templates. A
native save/share feature is still under
discussion.
Comment (g)(2): Increasing the search
functionality in the 232 Exclusions
Portal. Commerce received a number of
comments requesting improvements to
various aspects of the search
functionality in the 232 Exclusions
Portal. A commenter requested that
product class should be a searchable
field, and that product class should be
added to the main portal screen with a
filtering function. Another commenter
noted that the search functionality
needs to be improved by adding a
simple ‘‘find all’’ type of search
capability in the 232 Exclusions Portal.
One commenter noted that the search
functionality is not as good as it is in
www.regulations.gov. Another
commenter requested a change be made
to allow the download of individual
submissions and all data in the new
portal. Specifically, this commenter
noted that it is extremely important that
all users can download both individual
submissions (exclusion requests,
objections, rebuttal, and surrebuttal
filings) and the information found in the
portal in its entirety, as can be done
currently in www.regulations.gov.
Another commenter noted that it is
difficult to extract data for queried
databases, particularly from the volume
and origin fields. Another commenter
requested allowing users to refresh the
portal without resetting the filters.
BIS response: Commerce had
addressed a number of these concerns
with the 232 Exclusions Portal by
improving the Public Data Extract
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
functionality of the portal. The Public
Data Extract tool allows users to
download a filterable and searchable set
of all filed data in the 232 Exclusions
Portal, effectively functioning as an
advanced search feature. Commerce
will continue to consider additional
measures to improve the Public Data
Extract tool.
Comment (g)(3): Improving Dashboard
functionality. A commenter requested
that the dashboard allow organizations
to allow others in their organizations to
view submissions made by others in the
same organization.
BIS response: Commerce has made
changes under the Dashboard Limit to
address these types of requests for
additional Dashboard functionality.
Commerce expanded the Dashboard
View in the 232 Exclusions Portal in
2020, improving dashboard
functionality by allowing users to see all
of their filings in one location on the
front page of their Dashboard.
Comment (g)(4): Allow extensions of
time when 232 Exclusions Portal is not
accessible. A commenter expressed
concern about technical issues with
accessing the new 232 Exclusions
Portal. This commenter requested that if
documented information technology
issues with the portal occur, Commerce
should be able to extend the time for
companies to file exclusion requests or
objections.
BIS response: Commerce has taken
steps to address technical extensions for
timelines for 232 submission.
Specifically, BIS works with users on a
case-by-case basis to address any
technical issues encountered and take
necessary corrective action.
Occasionally these corrective measures
may include reopening filing windows
during periods in which they were
inaccessible.
Changes Made in This Interim Final
Rule To Improve the 232 Exclusions
Process
Simplification of the Text
As described further below, this rule
makes three changes to simplify the text
for the 232 exclusions process by
removing one of the supplements, and
making conforming changes to add
references to aluminum in the steel
supplement; removing references to
www.regulations.gov; and, as a
conforming change, removing the
Annex that provided steps for using
www.regulations.gov.
When Commerce added supplements
nos. 1 and 2 to part 705, the objective
was to create two parallel supplements
with one specific to the 232 exclusion
process for steel under supplement no.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
81069
1, and a second one specific to the 232
exclusion process for aluminum under
supplement no. 2. Commerce has
reevaluated whether this parallel
structure is needed because the vast
majority of the text is identical between
the two supplements and, when making
updates to improve the regulatory
provisions, it creates the potential for
unintended differences between the two
supplements and makes updating the
two supplements more burdensome
than necessary. For these reasons, in
this rule Commerce is removing
supplement no. 2 to part 705 and is
making conforming changes to
supplement no. 1 where information
that is specific to aluminum needs to be
added because of the removal of
supplement no. 2.
This interim final rule updates and
simplifies the text in supplement no. 1
by removing various references to
www.regulations.gov and all text that
was previously needed in supplement
no. 1 to describe the previous process of
using www.regulations.gov for
submitting 232 submissions. At this
time, there are no longer any more
pending 232 exclusion requests in
www.regulations.gov. Therefore,
Commerce is removing those references
to www.regulations.gov from
supplement no. 1 in this rule, thus
simplifying and shortening the text in
supplement no. 1 considerably.
As an additional conforming change
related to the removal of references to
www.regulations.gov, this rule removes
Annex 1 to Supplements No. 1 and 2 to
Part 705—Steps for Using
Regulations.gov to File Rebuttals and
Surrebuttals. The additional guidance
included in this Annex is no longer
needed because www.regulations.gov is
no longer being used for the 232
exclusions process. The 232 Exclusions
Portal does not require guidance on the
steps to be included in the regulations.
Adding Reminder Regarding
Consequences for False Statements or
Representations
This interim final rule adds a new
Note 2 to Paragraph (b) to remind all
parties submitting 232 submissions
under supplement no. 1 to part 705 that
it is a criminal offense to willfully make
a false statement or representation to
any department or agency of the United
States Government as to any matter
within its jurisdiction [18 U.S.C.
1001(2018)]. As a conforming change,
this interim final rule redesignates the
existing Note to Paragraph (b) as Note 1
to Paragraph (b).
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
81070
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Improving the Fairness and Efficiency of
the Review Process
In order to improve the efficiency of
the review process, this interim final
rule reduces the page limit for exclusion
requests, objections to submitted
exclusion requests, rebuttals, and
surrebuttals. In paragraph (e), this rule
removes the 25-page limit for exclusions
and objections to submitted exclusions
requests, and replaces that with a 5,000word limit. In paragraph (f)(2), this rule
removes the ten-page limit for rebuttals
and replaces that with a 2,500-word
limit. In paragraph (g)(2), this rule
removes the ten-page limit for
surrebuttals and replaces that with a
2,500-word limit.
232 Exclusion Request Volume
Certification
This interim final rule makes changes
to ensure that the volume request in
exclusion requests is consistent with the
past use of steel or aluminum by an
exclusion requester. This interim final
rule revises paragraph (c)(5) (Substance
of exclusion requests) by redesignating
the existing text of paragraph (c)(5) as a
new paragraph (c)(5)(i). This interim
final rule adds a new paragraph (c)(5)(ii)
(Certification for volume requested).
New paragraph (c)(5)(i) specifies that
in order to ensure that the volume
requested in an exclusion request is
consistent with legitimate business
needs for the same steel or aluminum
articles obtained (i.e., imported from
abroad either directly by the requester
or indirectly by purchasing from
distributors) by the entity requesting an
exclusion, a certification needs to be
made in the 232 Exclusions Portal when
completing the submission of a 232
exclusion request. The 232 Exclusions
Portal will include the text specified in
paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(A)–(E), and this
exclusion request certification for
volume requested must be signed in the
232 Exclusions Portal by an
organization official specifically
authorized to certify the document as
being accurate and complete to the best
of his/her knowledge.
The person signing the certification
under paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(A) must attest
that the exclusion requester intends to
manufacture, process, or otherwise
transform the imported product for
which they have filed an exclusion
request, or has a purchase order or
orders for such products.
Under paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(B), the
exclusion requester must certify that
they do not intend to use the requested
exclusion, if granted, solely to hedge or
arbitrage the price.
Under paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(C), the
exclusion requester must certify that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
they expect to consume, sell, or
otherwise use the total volume of
product across all their active
exclusions and pending exclusion
requests in the course of their
organization’s business activities within
the next calendar year.
Under new paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(D), the
exclusion requester is submitting an
exclusion request for a product for
which they previously received an
exclusion, they must certify that they
either imported the full amount of their
approved exclusion(s) last year, or
intended to import the full amount but
could not due to one of the reasons
specified in new paragraphs
(c)(5)(ii)(D)(1)–(3). The criteria included
in new paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(D)(1)–(3)
that must be attested to, if applicable,
are intended to ensure that, if a
requester did not import the full
amount, there were legitimate business
reasons justifying that outcome. These
legitimate business reasons are loss of
contract(s); business downturns; or
other factors that were beyond the
organization’s control that directly
resulted in less need for steel or
aluminum articles.
Under new paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(E), the
exclusion requester certifies that the
exclusion amount requested this year is
in line with what their organization
expects to import based on their current
business outlook. Lastly, paragraph
(c)(5)(ii)(E) requires the exclusion
requester to certify that, if contacted by
Commerce, their organization will
provide documentation that justifies the
assertions in the certification regarding
past imports of steel or aluminum
articles and projections for the current
year, as it relates to past and current
calendar year exclusion requests.
This interim final rule adds a new
Note 2 to paragraphs (c)(5)(i) and (ii) to
make the public aware that an exclusion
request that does not include a
certification made in accordance with
(c)(5)(i) and (ii) will be treated as an
incomplete submission and will
therefore be rejected.
Clarification of Eight Weeks and
Available ‘‘Immediately’’
This rule makes changes to clarify
when an objector would be required to
be able to provide the steel or aluminum
in the quantity and quality to which
they were objecting on the basis that
they could provide that steel or
aluminum ‘‘immediately.’’
In the introductory text of paragraph
(c)(6), this rule revises the criteria to
clarify that an objector must be able to
provide the steel or aluminum ‘‘by a
date earlier than the time required for
the requester to obtain the entire
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
quantity of the product from the
requester’s foreign supplier,’’ instead of
being strictly limited to producing it
within eight weeks.
In paragraph (c)(6)(i), this rule retains
the term ‘‘immediately,’’ but clarifies
that the aluminum or steel does not
need to be produced within eight weeks
in certain cases. This interim final rule
clarifies that ‘‘immediately’’ now means
produced and delivered within eight
weeks or, if not possible, then produced
and delivered within a time frame that
is equal to or earlier than that needed by
the requester as demonstrated by the
time required to obtain the product from
the requester’s foreign supplier. This
change is made to create a more equal
playing field between U.S. objectors and
foreign producers, and to ensure that
U.S. producers are not given less time
to be able to meet the steel or aluminum
demand being requested in an exclusion
request. For example, if a requester can
obtain foreign-produced steel described
in an exclusion request in 12 weeks,
there is no reason to arbitrarily limit the
U.S. producer to having to produce the
steel within eight weeks. The change
this interim final rule makes to the term
‘‘immediately’’ addresses this issue.
This interim final rule also revises
paragraph (c)(6)(i) to address the
scenario where an objector can produce
and deliver a portion of the steel or
aluminum that is being requested in the
exclusion request. This new sentence
clarifies that, consistent with current
practice, Commerce may partially
approve an exclusion request when an
objector can produce and deliver a
portion, which is less than 100 percent
but 10 percent or more, of the amount
of steel or aluminum being requested in
the exclusion request. In such cases,
Commerce may partially approve a
requested exclusion for that percentage
of imported steel or aluminum that the
objector has demonstrated it can
produce and deliver.
This interim final rule revises
paragraph (d)(4) to clarify that, if an
objector is not currently producing the
steel or aluminum but can produce the
aluminum or steel and make it available
‘‘immediately,’’ the objector still has
ground to object to the exclusion
request. This rule defines the term
‘‘immediately’’ to mean that the objector
must be able to produce and deliver the
quantity of steel or aluminum needed
either within eight weeks, or if after
eight weeks, by a date earlier than the
time required for the requester to obtain
the entire quantity of the product from
the requester’s foreign supplier. It is
incumbent upon both the exclusion
requester and objecting producers to
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
provide supplemental evidence
supporting their claimed delivery times.
General Approved Exclusions (GAEs)
This rule adds a new Supplement No.
2 to Part 705—General Approved
Exclusions (GAEs) for Steel Articles
Under the 232 Exclusions Process, and
a new Supplement No. 3 to Part 705—
General Approved Exclusions (GAEs)
for Aluminum Articles under the 232
Exclusions Process. These two
supplements identify the steel and
aluminum articles that have been
approved for import under a GAE. This
rule adds 108 GAEs for steel articles
under supplement no. 2 part 705 and 15
GAEs for aluminum articles under
supplement no. 3 to part 705. Each GAE
is identified under the GAE identifier
column, e.g., GAE.1.S: 7304592030 (for
the first approved GAE for steel) or
GAE.1.A: 7609000000 (for the first
approved GAE for aluminum).
The Secretary of Commerce, in
consultation with the Secretary of
Defense, the Secretary of the Treasury,
the Secretary of State, the United States
Trade Representative, the Assistant to
the President for Economic Policy, the
Assistant to the President for National
Security Affairs, and other senior
Executive Branch officials as
appropriate, makes these determinations
that certain aluminum and steel articles
may be authorized under a GAE
consistent with the objectives of the 232
exclusions process as outlined in
supplement no. 1 to this part. The GAEs
described in these supplements may be
used by any importer. The two new
supplements specify that, in order to
use a GAE, the importer must reference
the GAE identifier in the Automated
Commercial Environment (ACE) system
that corresponds to the steel or
aluminum articles being imported.
GAEs do not include quantity limits.
The effective date for each GAE will be
fifteen calendar days after the date of
publication of a Federal Register notice
either adding or revising a specific GAE
identifier in supplement no. 1 to this
part. There will be no retroactive relief
for GAEs. This interim final rule also
specifies that relief is only available to
steel or aluminum articles that are
entered for consumption, or withdrawn
from warehouse for consumption, on or
after the effective date of a GAE
included in supplement no. 1 to this
part. These GAEs are indefinite in
length, but Commerce may at any time
issue a Federal Register notice
removing, revising, or adding to an
existing GAE in this supplement as
warranted to align with the objectives of
the 232 exclusions process as described
in supplement no. 1 to this part.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
Commerce may periodically publish
notices of inquiry in the Federal
Register soliciting public comments on
potential removals, revisions, or
additions to this supplement.
Other Changes and Clarifications to the
232 Exclusions Process
In paragraph (b)(5)(iii), this interim
final rule adds a new paragraph
(b)(5)(iii)(A) and redesignates existing
paragraphs (b)(5)(iii)(A)–(C) as
paragraphs (B) to (D). New paragraph
(b)(5)(iii)(A) clarifies the process for
handling CBI related to exclusion
requests or objections by directing
exclusion requesters and objectors to
check the appropriate box in the 232
Exclusions Portal to indicate that the
filer has relevant CBI for consideration
when applicable. This new paragraph
also clarifies the existing practice that if
Commerce determines after review that
the CBI is needed, Commerce will
directly request the CBI.
In paragraph (c)(2) (Identification of
exclusion requests), this rule removes
the word ‘‘distinct’’ in the phrase
‘‘distinct critical dimensions.’’ This
change is being made to avoid any
potential confusion on the scope of
ranges that are permissible under an
exclusion request. This change will
make clear that, provided the range
being requested in an exclusion request
is within the minimum and maximum
range that is specified in the HTSUS
statistical reporting number and
applicable notes for the provision, a
single exclusion request may be
requested for that steel or aluminum
article. Objections that indicate the
ability to produce one or more products
within the range, even if not the entire
range, will be considered to be valid
objections to an exclusion request.
Also in paragraph (c)(2), this rule
removes the Note to paragraph (c)(2)
because it is no longer needed. The
exclusions form on the 232 Exclusions
Portal does not include that block for
countries subject to a quantitative
limitation, so the instructions in the
Note to paragraph (c)(2) are no longer
needed.
In paragraph (c)(6) (Criteria used to
review exclusion requests) introductory
text, this interim final rule adds one
sentence at the end for clarification and
to alert the public that items for which
a broader determination has been made
will be identified in supplements no. 2
or 3 to part 705.
In paragraph (d)(3) (Time limit for
submitting objections to submitted
exclusions requests), this interim final
rule makes revisions to specify that the
30-day clock starts at 11:59 p.m. Eastern
Time on the calendar day an exclusion
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
81071
request is posted in the 232 Exclusions
Portal.
In paragraph (h)(1)(i), this interim
final rule adds the term ‘‘rejected’’
before the phrase ‘‘or denied’’ to clarify
that exclusion requests that do not
satisfy the requirements specified in
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this
supplement may be rejected or denied.
In paragraph (h)(2)(iv) (Validity
period for exclusion requests), this
interim final rule makes revisions to add
the phrase ‘‘from the date of the
signature on the decision memo’’ to
clarify that exclusions will generally be
approved for one year from the date of
the signature on the decision memo.
Types of Comments Commerce Is
Requesting on This Rule
Commerce is not seeking comments
regarding the duties or quantitative
limitations themselves or the exclusion
and objection process overall. Rather,
Commerce seeks comments on whether
the specific changes included in this
fourth interim final rule have addressed
earlier concerns with the 232 exclusions
process. Specifically, Commerce
encourages comments on these 232
exclusions process changes and on
which features are an improvement and
comments highlighting any areas of
concern or suggestions for
improvement.
Commerce will continue to make
improvements to the 232 exclusions
process, including improvements based
on comments received on this rule, and
parties will be notified of any additional
changes to the 232 exclusions process
and of any new features to the 232
Exclusions Portal.
Rulemaking Requirements
1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866
direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). Executive Order 13563
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits, of
reducing costs, of harmonizing rules,
and of promoting flexibility. This rule
has been determined to be a ‘‘significant
regulatory action,’’ although not
economically significant, under section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Pursuant
to Proclamations 9704 and 9705 of
March 8, 2018, and Proclamations 9776
and 9777 of August 29, 2018, the
establishment of procedures for an
exclusions process under each
Proclamation shall be published in the
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81072
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Federal Register and are exempt from
Executive Order 13771.
2. The Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA)
provides that an agency generally
cannot conduct or sponsor a collection
of information, and no person is
required to respond to nor be subject to
a penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information, unless that
collection has obtained Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
approval and displays a currently valid
OMB Control Number.
This final regulation involves four
collections currently approved by OMB
with the following control numbers
• Exclusions from the Section 232
National Security Adjustments of
Imports of Steel and Aluminum (control
number 0694–0139).
• Objections from the Section 232
National Security Adjustments of
Imports of Steel and Aluminum (control
number 0694–0138).
• Procedures for Submitting Rebuttals
and Surrebuttals Requests for
Exclusions from and Objections to the
Section 232 Adjustments for Steel and
Aluminum (OMB control number 0694–
0141).
• Procedures for Submitting Requests
for Expedited Relief from Quantitative
Limits—Existing Contract: Section 232
National Security Investigations of Steel
Imports (OMB control number 0694–
0140).
This rule is expected to reduce the
burden hours for one of the collections
associated with this rule, OMB control
number 0694–0139. This reduction is
expected because of the addition of 108
GAEs for steel and 15 GAEs for
aluminum, which is expected to result
in a decrease of 5,000 exclusion request
per year. This is expected to be a
reduction in 5,000 burden hours for a
total savings of 740,000 dollars to the
public. This is also expected to be a
reduction in 30,000 burden hours for a
total savings of 1,170,000 dollars to the
U.S. Government. The steel and
aluminum articles that have been
identified as being eligible for GAEs
have typically not received any
objections, so the addition of these new
GAEs is not estimated to result in a
decrease in the number of objections,
rebuttals, or surrebuttals received by
BIS. This rule is not expected to
increase the burden hours for two of the
collections associated with this rule,
OMB control numbers 0694–0138,
0694–0141 as minimal changes are
anticipated. BIS is making a change to
the collection for OMB control number
0694–0140 to account for certification
that needs to be made in the 232
Exclusions Portal under paragraph
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
(c)(5)(ii). Any comments regarding the
collection of information associated
with this rule, including suggestions for
reducing the burden, may be sent to
https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAMain.
3. This rule does not contain policies
with Federalism implications as that
term is defined in Executive Order
13132.
4. The provisions of the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553) requiring notice of proposed
rulemaking, the opportunity for public
comment, and a delay in effective date
are inapplicable because this regulation
involves a military or foreign affairs
function of the United States. (See 5
U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). As explained in the
reports submitted by the Secretary to the
President, steel and aluminum are being
imported into the United States in such
quantities or under such circumstances
as to threaten to impair the national
security of the United States, and
therefore the President is implementing
these remedial actions (as described
Proclamations 9704 and 9705 of March
8, 2018) to protect U.S. national security
interests. That implementation includes
the creation of an effective process by
which affected domestic parties can
obtain exclusion requests ‘‘based upon
specific national security
considerations.’’ Commerce started this
process with the publication of the
March 19 rule and refined the process
with the publication of the September
11 and June 10 rules and is continuing
this process with the publication of
today’s interim final rule. The revisions
to the exclusion request process are
informed by the comments received in
response to the March 19 rule and
Commerce’s experience with managing
the 232 exclusions process. Commenters
on the past rules (March 19, September
11 and June 10 rules) were generally
supportive and welcomed the idea of
creating an exclusion process, but most
of the commenters believe the exclusion
process, although improving over time,
still could be significantly improved in
order for it to achieve the intended
purpose. The commenters identified a
number of areas where transparency,
effectiveness, and fairness of the process
could be improved. Commerce
understands the importance of having a
transparent, fair, and efficient product
exclusion request process, consistent
with the directive provided by the
President to create this type of process
to mitigate any unintended
consequences of imposing the tariffs on
steel and aluminum in order to protect
critical U.S. national security interests.
The publication of today’s rule should
make further improvements in all three
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
respects, but because of the scope of this
new process, BIS is publishing today’s
rule as an interim final rule with a
request for comments.
In addition, Commerce finds that
there is good cause under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B) to waive the provisions of the
Administrative Procedure Act requiring
prior notice and the opportunity for
public comment, and that there is good
cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive
the delay in effective date, because such
delays would be either impracticable or
contrary to the public interest. In order
to ensure that the actions taken to adjust
imports do not undermine users of steel
or aluminum that are subject to the
remedial actions instituted by the
Proclamations and that are critical to
protecting the national security of the
United States, the Presidential
Proclamations authorized the Secretary
of Commerce, in consultation with the
Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of
the Treasury, the Secretary of State, the
United States Trade Representative, the
Assistant to the President for Economic
Policy, the Assistant to the President for
National Security Affairs, and other
senior Executive Branch officials as
appropriate, to grant exclusions for the
import of goods not currently available
in the United States in a sufficient
quantity or satisfactory quality, or for
other specific national security reasons.
The Presidential Proclamations further
directed the Secretary to, within ten
days, issue procedures for submitting
and granting these requests for
exclusions—this interim final rule
fulfills that direction. As described
above, the Secretary complied with the
direction from the President with the
publication of the March 19 rule, as well
as in the improvements made in the
September 11 and June 10 rules, and is
taking the next step in improving the
232 exclusions process by making
needed changes with the publication of
today’s rule. The immediate
implementation of an effective
exclusion request process, consistent
with the intent of the Presidential
Proclamations, also required creating a
process to allow any individual or
organization in the United States to
submit objections to submitted
exclusion requests. The objection
process was created with the
publication of the March 19 rule, and
the rebuttal and surrebuttal process was
added in the publication of the
September 11 rule to further improve
the 232 exclusions process. The
publication of today’s rule makes
needed changes in the 232 exclusions
process to create the type of fair,
transparent, and efficient process that
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
was intended in the March 19,
September 11 and June 10 rules, but was
still found lacking by commenters in
several key respects. Today’s rule makes
critical changes to ensure a fair,
transparent, and efficient exclusion
process.
If this interim final rule were to be
delayed to allow for public comment or
to provide for a thirty day delay in the
date of effectiveness, companies in the
United States would be unable to
immediately benefit from the
improvements made in the exclusion,
objection, rebuttal, and surrebuttal
process and could face significant
economic hardship, which could
potentially create a detrimental effect on
the general U.S. economy. Whether they
were supportive of tariffs or against
tariffs, the comments received on the
March 19, September 11 and June 10
rules were clear that an efficient
exclusion request, objection, rebuttal,
and surrebuttal process was needed,
that the March 19 rule had not
sufficiently created such a process, and
that, although substantial improvements
were made with the publications of the
September 11 and June 10 rules,
additional improvements were needed.
Commenters noted that, if specific
improvements are not made, significant
economic consequences could occur.
Commenters also thought the
inefficiencies of the process could
undermine other critical U.S. national
security interests. Likewise, our national
security could be impacted if Commerce
lacked adequate information to make a
fair, transparent and efficient
determination for all parties involved
and to ensure the critical national
security considerations are being
protected.
Because a notice of proposed
rulemaking and an opportunity for prior
public comment are not required for this
rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or by any other
law, the analytical requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq., are not applicable. Accordingly,
no regulatory flexibility analysis is
required and none has been prepared.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 705
Administrative practice and
procedure, Business and industry,
Classified information, Confidential
business information, Imports,
Investigations, National security.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, part 705 of subchapter A of
15 CFR chapter VII is amended as
follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
PART 705—EFFECT OF IMPORTED
ARTICLES ON THE NATIONAL
SECURITY
1. The authority citation for part 705
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Section 232 of the Trade
Expansion Act of 1962, as amended (19
U.S.C. 1862) and Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1979
(44 FR 69273, December 3, 1979).
2. Supplement No. 1 to part 705 is
revised to read as follows:
■
Supplement No. 1 to Part 705—
Requirements for Submissions
Requesting Exclusions From the
Adjustment of Imports of Aluminum
and Steel Imposed Pursuant to Section
232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962,
as Amended
On March 8, 2018, the President
issued Proclamations 9704 and 9705
concurring with the findings of the
January 11, 2018 reports of the Secretary
of Commerce on the effects of imports
of aluminum and steel mill articles
(steel articles) on the national security
and determining that adjusting
aluminum and steel imports through the
imposition of duties is necessary so that
their imports will no longer threaten to
impair the national security. Clause 3 of
Proclamations 9704 and 9705 also
authorized the Secretary of Commerce,
in consultation with the Secretary of
Defense, the Secretary of the Treasury,
the Secretary of State, the United States
Trade Representative, the Assistant to
the President for Economic Policy, the
Assistant to the President for National
Security Affairs, and other senior
Executive Branch officials as
appropriate, to grant exclusions from
the duties at the request of directly
affected parties located in the United
States if the requested steel or
aluminum article is determined not to
be produced in the United States in a
sufficient and reasonably available
amount or of a satisfactory quality or
based upon specific national security
considerations. On August 29, 2018, the
President issued Proclamation 9776.
Clause 1 of Proclamation 9776,
authorizes the Secretary of Commerce,
in consultation with the Secretary of
State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the
Secretary of Defense, the United States
Trade Representative, the Assistant to
the President for National Security
Affairs, the Assistant to the President for
Economic Policy, and such other senior
Executive Branch officials as the
Secretary deems appropriate, to provide
relief from the applicable quantitative
limitations set forth in Proclamation
9740 and Proclamation 9759 for steel
articles and as set forth in Proclamation
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
81073
9739 and 9758 for aluminum articles
and their accompanying annexes, as
amended, at the request of a directly
affected party located in the United
States for any steel or aluminum article
determined by the Secretary to not be
produced in the United States in a
sufficient and reasonably available
amount or of a satisfactory quality. The
Secretary is also authorized to provide
such relief based upon specific national
security considerations.
(a) Scope. This supplement specifies
the requirements and process for how
directly affected parties located in the
United States may submit requests for
exclusions from the duties and
quantitative limitations imposed by the
President. This supplement also
specifies the requirements and process
for how parties in the United States may
submit objections to submitted
exclusion requests for relief from the
duties or quantitative limitations
imposed by the President and the
process for rebuttals to submitted
objections and surrebuttals (collectively,
‘‘232 submissions’’). This supplement
identifies the time periods for such
submissions, the methods of
submission, and the information that
must be included in such submissions.
(b) Required forms. The 232
Exclusions Portal (https://
www.commerce.gov/page/section-232investigations) includes four web-based
forms that are to be used for submitting
exclusion requests, objections to
exclusion requests, rebuttals, and
surrebuttals described in this
supplement. On the 232 Exclusions
Portal, each web-based form is available
on the portal at the bottom of the
preceding filing. For example, a party
submitting an objection will access the
objection form by scrolling to the
bottom of the exclusion request, a
rebuttal filer will access the rebuttal
form by scrolling to the bottom of the
objection form, and a surrebuttal filer
would access the surrebuttal form by
scrolling to the bottom of the rebuttal
form. The U.S. Department of
Commerce requires requesters and
objectors to use the appropriate form as
specified under paragraphs (b)(1) and
(2) of this supplement for submitting
exclusion requests and objections to
submitted exclusion requests and the
forms specified under paragraphs (b)(3)
and (4) of this supplement for
submitting rebuttals and surrebuttals. In
addition, submitters of exclusion
requests, objections to submitted
exclusion requests, rebuttals, and
surrebuttals to the 232 Exclusions Portal
will be required to complete a webbased registration on the 232 Exclusions
Portal prior to submitting any
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81074
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
documents. In order to register,
submitters will be required to provide
an email and establish a password for
the account. After completing the
registration, submitters will be able to
login to an account on the 232
Exclusions Portal and submit exclusion
requests, objections, rebuttals, and
surrebuttal documents.
(1) Form required for submitting
exclusion requests. The full name of the
form used for submitting steel exclusion
requests is Request for Exclusion from
Remedies: Section 232 National
Security Investigation of Steel Imports.
The full name of the form used for
submitting aluminum exclusion
requests is Request for Exclusion from
Remedies: Section 232 National
Security Investigation of Aluminum
Imports. The Title of the web-based
fillable form for both steel and
aluminum in the 232 Exclusions Portal
is Exclusion Request.
(2) Form required for submitting
objections to submitted exclusion
requests. The name of the form used for
submitting objections to submitted steel
exclusion requests is Objection Filing to
Posted Section 232 Exclusion Request:
Steel. The name of the form used for
submitting objections to submitted
aluminum exclusion requests is
Objection Filing to Posted Section 232
Exclusion Request: Aluminum. The
Title of the web-based fillable form for
both steel and aluminum in the 232
Exclusions Portal is Objection.
(3) Form required for submitting
rebuttals. The name of the form used for
submitting rebuttals to steel objections
is Rebuttal to Objection Received for
Section 232 Exclusion Request: Steel.
The name of the form used for
submitting rebuttals to aluminum
objections is Rebuttal to Objection
Received for Section 232 Exclusion
Request: Aluminum. The Title of the
web-based fillable form for both steel
and aluminum in the 232 Exclusions
Portal is Rebuttal.
(4) Form required for submitting
surrebuttals. The name of the form used
for submitting surrebuttals to steel
objections is Surrebuttal to Rebuttal
Received on Section 232 Objection:
Steel. The name of the form used for
submitting surrebuttals to aluminum
objections is Surrebuttal to Rebuttal
Received on Section 232 Objection:
Aluminum. The Title of the web-based
fillable form for both steel and
aluminum in the 232 Exclusions Portal
is Surrebuttal.
Note to Paragraphs (b)(1) Through (4): On
the 232 Exclusions Portal, each exclusion
request is assigned a distinct ID #, which is
also used with its associated 232
submissions, but preceded with an acronym
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
indicating the file type: Exclusion Requests
(ER ID #), Objection (OF ID #), Rebuttals (RB
ID #) and Surrebuttals (SR ID #). For an
example of the four possible types of 232
submissions associated with a single
exclusion request, you could have ER ID 237,
OF ID 237, RB ID 237 and SR ID 237. The
232 Exclusions Portal will automatically
assign the two letter designator depending on
the type of web-based form being submitted
in the portal and will assign an ID number
to the original exclusion request and that ID
number will be common to any objection,
rebuttal, or surrebuttal submitted pertaining
to the same exclusion request.
(5) Public disclosure and information
protected from public disclosure. (i)
Information submitted in 232
submissions will be subject to public
review and made available for public
inspection and copying, except for the
information described in paragraph
(b)(5)(iii) of this supplement.
Individuals and organizations must
fully complete the relevant forms.
(ii) Information not subject to public
disclosure should not be submitted.
Personally identifiable information,
including social security numbers and
employer identification numbers,
should not be provided. Information
that is subject to government-imposed
access and dissemination or other
specific national security controls, e.g.,
classified information or information
that has U.S. Government restrictions on
dissemination to non-U.S. citizens or
other categories of persons that would
prohibit public disclosure of the
information, may not be included in 232
submissions. Individuals and
organizations that have confidential
business information (‘‘CBI’’) that they
believe relevant to the Secretary’s
consideration of the 232 submission
should so indicate in the appropriate
field of the relevant form, or on the
rebuttal or surrebuttal submission,
following the procedures in paragraph
(b)(5)(iii) of this supplement.
(iii) Procedures for identifying, but not
disclosing confidential or proprietary
business information (CBI) in the public
version, and procedures for submitting
CBI. For persons seeking to submit
confidential or proprietary business
information (CBI), the 232 submission
available to the public must contain a
summary of the CBI in sufficient detail
to permit a reasonable understanding of
the substance of the information. If the
submitting person claims that
summarization is not possible, the claim
must be accompanied by a full
explanation of the reasons supporting
that claim. Generally, numerical data
will be considered adequately
summarized if grouped or presented in
terms of indices or figures within ten
percent of the actual figure. If an
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
individual portion of the numerical data
is voluminous (e.g., five pages of
numerical data), at least one percent of
the numerical data, representative of
that portion, must be summarized. In
order to submit CBI that is not for public
release as a separate email submission
to the U.S. Department of Commerce,
you must follow the procedures in
paragraphs (b)(3)(iii)(A)–(D) of this
supplement to assist the U.S.
Department of Commerce in identifying
these submissions and associating these
submissions with the respective 232
submission in the 232 Exclusions Portal.
Submitters with classified information
should contact the U.S. Department of
Commerce for instructions on the
appropriate methods to send this type of
information.
(A) For CBI related to exclusion
requests or objections, check the
appropriate box in the 232 Exclusions
Portal indicating that the filer has
relevant CBI for consideration. If
Commerce determines after review that
the CBI is needed, Commerce will
directly request the CBI from the
exclusion requester or objector as
warranted.
(B) For CBI related to rebuttals or
surrebuttals, on the same day that you
submit your 232 submission in the 232
Exclusions Portal, submit the CBI via
email to the U.S. Department of
Commerce. The email address used is
different depending on the type of
submission the emailed CBI is for, as
follows: CBI for rebuttals use
232rebuttals@doc.gov; and CBI for
surrebuttals use 232surrebuttals@
doc.gov.
(C) For rebuttals and surrebuttals
pertaining to 232 submissions for
exclusion requests the email subject line
must only include the original 232
Exclusions Portal Exclusion Request
(ER) ID # and the body of the email must
include the 232 Exclusions Portal
Rebuttal (RB) ID #, or Surrebuttal (SR)
ID # you received from the 232
Exclusions Portal when you
successfully submitted your rebuttal or
surrebuttal. These naming conventions
used in the 232 Exclusions Portal,
respectively, will assist the U.S.
Department of Commerce to associate
the CBI that will not be posted in the
232 Exclusions Portal with the
information included in the public
submission.
(D) Submit the CBI as an attachment
to that email. The CBI is limited to a
maximum of five pages per rebuttal or
surrebuttal. The email is to be limited to
sending your CBI. All other information
for the public submission, and public
versions of the CBI, where appropriate,
for a 232 submission in the 232
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Exclusions Portal following the
procedures identified in this
supplement, as appropriate.
Note 1 to Paragraph (b) for Submissions of
Supporting Documents (Attachments):
Supporting attachments must be emailed as
PDF documents.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Note 2 to Paragraph (b): It is a criminal
offense to willfully make a false statement or
representation to any department or agency
of the United States Government as to any
matter within its jurisdiction [18 U.S.C.
1001(2018)].
(c) Exclusion requests. (1) Who may
submit an exclusion request? Only
directly affected individuals or
organizations located in the United
States may submit an exclusion request.
An individual or organization is
‘‘directly affected’’ if they are using steel
in business activities (e.g., construction,
manufacturing, or supplying steel
product to users) in the United States.
(2) Identification of exclusion
requests. Separate exclusion requests
must be submitted for steel products
with chemistry by percentage
breakdown by weight, metallurgical
properties, surface quality (e.g.,
galvanized, coated), and critical
dimensions covered by a common
HTSUS statistical reporting number.
Separate exclusion requests must be
submitted for aluminum products with
critical dimensions covered by a
common HTSUS statistical reporting
number. The exclusion request forms
allow for minimum and maximum
dimensions. A permissible range must
be within the minimum and maximum
range that is specified in the HTSUS
statistical reporting number and
applicable notes. Separate exclusion
requests must also be submitted for
products falling in more than one tendigit HTSUS statistical reporting
number. The U.S. Department of
Commerce will approve exclusions on a
product basis, and the approvals will be
limited to the individual or organization
that submitted the specific exclusion
request, unless Commerce approves a
broader application of the productbased exclusion request to apply to
additional importers. Other directlyaffected individuals or organizations
located in the United States that wish to
submit an exclusion request for a steel
or aluminum product that has already
been the subject of an approved
exclusion request may submit an
exclusion request under this
supplement. These additional exclusion
requests by other directly-affected
individuals or organizations in the
United States are not required to
reference the previously approved
exclusion but are advised to do so, if
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
they want Commerce to take that
exclusion into account when reviewing
a subsequent exclusion request. Directly
affected individuals and organizations
in the United States will not be
precluded from submitting a request for
exclusion of a product even though an
exclusion request submitted for that
product by another requester or that
requester was denied or is no longer
valid.
(3) Where to submit exclusion
requests? All exclusion requests must be
submitted directly on the 232
Exclusions Portal (https://
www.commerce.gov/page/section-232investigations).
(4) No time limit for submitting
exclusion requests. Exclusion requests
may be submitted at any time.
(5)(i) Substance of exclusion requests.
An exclusion request must specify the
business activities in the United States
within which the requester is engaged
that qualify the individual or
organization to be directly affected and
thus eligible to submit an exclusion
request. The request should clearly
identify, and provide support for, the
basis upon which the exclusion is
sought. An exclusion will only be
granted if an article is not produced in
the United States in a sufficient,
reasonably available amount, and of a
satisfactory quality, or for specific
national security considerations.
(ii) Certification for volume requested.
In order to ensure that the volume
requested in an exclusion request is
consistent with legitimate business
needs for the same steel or aluminum
articles obtained (i.e., imported from
abroad either directly by the requester
or indirectly by purchasing from
distributors) by the entity requesting an
exclusion, the following certification in
paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(A)–(E) must be
acknowledged in the 232 Exclusions
Portal when completing the submission
of a 232 exclusion request. The
exclusion request certification for
volume requested must be signed by an
organization official specifically
authorized to certify the document (the
certification being made in the 232
Exclusions Portal) as being accurate and
complete. The undersigned certifies in
the 232 Exclusions Portal that the
information herein supplied in response
to this paragraph is complete and
correct to the best of his/her knowledge.
By signing the certification below, I
attest that:
(A) My organization intends to
manufacture, process, or otherwise
transform the imported product for
which I have filed an exclusion request
or I have a purchase order or orders for
such products;
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
81075
(B) My organization does not intend
to use the exclusion for which I have
filed an exclusion request, if granted,
solely to hedge or arbitrage the price;
(C) My organization expects to
consume, sell, or otherwise use the total
volume of product across all my active
exclusions and pending exclusion
requests in the course of my
organization’s business activities within
the next calendar year;
(D) If my organization is submitting
an exclusion request for a product for
which we previously received an
exclusion, I certify that my organization
either imported the full amount of our
approved exclusion(s) last year or
intended to import the full amount but
could not due to one of the following
reasons:
(1) Loss of contract(s);
(2) Unanticipated business
downturns; or
(3) Other factors that were beyond my
organization’s control that directly
resulted in less need for steel or
aluminum articles; and
(E) I certify that the exclusion amount
requested this year is in line with what
my organization expects to import based
on our current business outlook. If
requested by the Department of
Commerce, my organization shall
provide documentation that justifies its
assertions in this certification regarding
its past imports of steel or aluminum
articles and its projections for the
current year, as it relates to past and
current calendar year exclusion
requests.
Note to Paragraphs (c)(5)(i) and (ii): Any
exclusion request that does not include a
certification made in accordance with
(c)(5)(ii) will be treated as an incomplete
submission and will therefore be rejected.
(6) Criteria used to review exclusion
requests. The U.S. Department of
Commerce will review each exclusion
request to determine whether an article
described in an exclusion request meets
any of the following three criteria: The
article is not produced in the United
States in an amount which can be
delivered in a time period equal to or
less than the time needed for the
requester to obtain the product from
their foreign supplier, is not produced
in the United States in a satisfactory
quality, or for specific national security
considerations. The reviews will be
made on a case-by-case basis to
determine whether the requester has
shown that the article is not produced
in the United States in sufficient and
reasonably available amount or of a
satisfactory quality, or that there are
specific national security considerations
to grant the exclusion. To provide
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81076
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
additional context on the meaning and
application of the criteria, paragraphs
(c)(6)(i)–(iii) of this supplement define
keys terms used in the review criteria
and provide illustrative application
examples. The U.S. Department of
Commerce will use the same criteria
identified in paragraphs (c)(6)(i)–(iii) of
this supplement when determining
whether it is warranted to approve
broader product-based exclusions based
on trends the Department may see over
time with 232 submissions. The public
is not permitted to request broader
product-based exclusions that would
apply to all importers, because the
Department makes these determinations
over time by evaluating the macro
trends in 232 submissions. Items for
which a broader determination has been
made will be identified in supplements
no. 2 or 3 to part 705.
(i) Not produced in the United States
in a sufficient and reasonably available
amount. The exclusion review criterion
‘‘Not produced in the United States in
a sufficient and reasonably available
amount’’ means that the amount that is
needed by the end user requesting the
exclusion is not available immediately
in the United States to meet its specified
business activities. Available
‘‘immediately’’ means that a product
(whether it is currently being produced
in the United States, or could be
produced in the United States) can be
delivered by a U.S. producer ‘‘within
eight weeks’’, or, if that is not possible,
by a date earlier than the time required
for the requester to obtain the entire
quantity of the product from the
requester’s foreign supplier.
Furthermore, to the extent that an
objector can produce and deliver a
portion, which is less than 100 percent,
but ten percent or more, of the amount
of steel or aluminum needed in the
business activities of the user in the
United States described in the exclusion
request, the Department of Commerce
may deny a requested exclusion for that
percentage of imported steel or
aluminum. It is incumbent upon both
the exclusion requester, and objecting
producers, to provide supplemental
evidence supporting their claimed
delivery times.
(ii) Not produced in the United States
in a satisfactory quality. The exclusion
review criterion ‘‘not produced in the
United States in a satisfactory quality’’
does not mean the steel or aluminum
needs to be identical, but it does need
to be equivalent as a substitute product.
‘‘Substitute product’’ for purposes of
this review criterion means that the
steel or aluminum being produced by an
objector can meet ‘‘immediately’’ (see
paragraph (c)(6)(i) of this supplement)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
the quality (e.g., industry specs or
internal company quality controls or
standards), regulatory, or testing
standards, in order for the U.S.produced steel to be used in that
business activity in the United States by
that end user.
(A) Steel application examples. For a
steel example, if a U.S. business activity
requires that steel plates to be provided
must meet certain military testing and
military specification standards in order
to be used in military combat vehicles,
that requirement would be taken into
account when reviewing the exclusion
request and any objections, rebuttals,
and surrebuttals submitted. As another
steel example, if a U.S. business activity
requires that steel tubing to be provided
must meet certain Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) approvals to be
used in medical devices, that
requirement would be taken into
account when reviewing the exclusion
request and any objections, rebuttals,
and surrebuttals submitted. Another
steel example would be a food
manufacturer that requires tin-plate
approval from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) to make any
changes in the tin-plate it uses to make
cans for fruit juices. An objector would
not have to make steel for use in making
the cans that was identical, but it would
have to be a ‘‘substitute product,’’
meaning it could meet the USDA
certification standards.
(B) Aluminum application examples.
For an aluminum example, if a U.S.
business activity requires that
aluminum to be provided must meet
certain military testing and military
specification standards in order to be
used in military aircraft, that
requirement would be taken into
account when reviewing the exclusion
request and any objections, rebuttals,
and surrebuttals submitted. Another
aluminum example would be a U.S.
pharmaceutical manufacturer that
requires approval from the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) to make any
changes in its aluminum product pill
bottle covers. An objector would not
have to make aluminum for use in
making the product covers that was
identical, but it would have to be a
‘‘substitute product,’’ meaning it could
meet the FDA certification standards.
(iii) For specific national security
considerations. The exclusion review
criterion ‘‘or for specific national
security considerations’’ is intended to
allow the U.S. Department of
Commerce, in consultation with other
parts of the U.S. Government as
warranted, to make determinations
whether a particular exclusion request
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
should be approved based on specific
national security considerations.
(A) Steel application examples. For
example, if the steel included in an
exclusion request is needed by a U.S.
defense contractor for making critical
items for use in a military weapons
platform for the U.S. Department of
Defense, and the duty or quantitative
limitation will prevent the military
weapons platform from being produced,
the exclusion will likely be granted. The
U.S. Department of Commerce, in
consultation with the other parts of the
U.S. Government as warranted, can
consider other impacts to U.S. national
security that may result from not
approving an exclusion, e.g., the
unintended impacts that may occur in
other downstream industries using steel,
but in such cases the demonstrated
concern with U.S. national security
would need to be tangible and clearly
explained and ultimately determined by
the U.S. Government.
(B) Aluminum application examples.
For example, if the aluminum included
in an exclusion request is needed by a
U.S. defense contractor for making
critical items for use in a military
weapons platform for the U.S.
Department of Defense, and the duty or
quantitative limitation will prevent the
military weapons platform from being
produced, the exclusion will likely be
granted. The U.S. Department of
Commerce, in consultation with the
other parts of the U.S. Government as
warranted, can consider other impacts
to U.S. national security that may result
from not approving an exclusion, e.g.,
the unintended impacts that may occur
in other downstream industries using
aluminum, but in such cases the
demonstrated concern with U.S.
national security would need to be
tangible and clearly explained and
ultimately determined by the U.S.
Government.
(d) Objections to submitted exclusion
requests. (1) Who may submit an
objection to a submitted exclusion
request? Any individual or organization
that manufactures steel or aluminum
articles in the United States may file
objections to steel exclusion requests,
but the U.S. Department of Commerce
will only consider information directly
related to the submitted exclusion
request that is the subject of the
objection.
(2) Identification of objections to
submitted exclusion requests. When
submitting an objection to a submitted
exclusion request, the objector must
locate the exclusion request and submit
the objection in response to the request
directly in the 232 Exclusions Portal.
Once the relevant exclusion request has
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
been located, an individual or
organization that would like to submit
an objection will access the objection
form by scrolling to the bottom of the
exclusion request form and then fill out
the web-based form for submitting their
objection to the exclusion request in the
232 Exclusions Portal (https://
www.commerce.gov/page/section-232investigations).
(3) Time limit for submitting
objections to submitted exclusions
requests. All objections to submitted
exclusion requests must be submitted
directly on the 232 Exclusions Portal
(https://www.commerce.gov/page/
section-232-investigations) no later than
30 days after the related exclusion
request is posted, with the 30-day clock
starting at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on
the calendar day an exclusion request is
posted.
(4) Substance of objections to
submitted exclusion requests. The
objection should clearly identify, and
provide support for, its opposition to
the proposed exclusion, with reference
to the specific basis identified in, and
the support provided for, the submitted
exclusion request. If the objector is
asserting that it is not currently
producing the steel or aluminum
identified in an exclusion request but
can produce the steel or aluminum and
make that steel or aluminum available
‘‘immediately’’ in accordance with the
time required for the user of steel or
aluminum in the United States to obtain
the product from its foreign suppliers,
the objector must identify how it will be
able to produce and deliver the quantity
of steel or aluminum needed either
within eight weeks, or if after eight
weeks, by a date which is earlier than
the named foreign supplier would
deliver the entire quantity of the
requested product. It is incumbent on
both the exclusion requester, and
objecting producers, to provide
supplemental evidence supporting their
claimed delivery times. This
requirement includes specifying in
writing to Department of Commerce as
part of the objection, the timeline the
objector anticipates in order to start or
restart production of the steel included
in the exclusion request to which it is
objecting. For example, a summary
timeline that specifies the steps that will
occur over the weeks needed to produce
that steel or aluminum would be helpful
to include, not only for the Department
of Commerce review of the objection,
but also for the requester of the
exclusion and its determination whether
to file a rebuttal to the objection. The
U.S. Department of Commerce
understands that, in certain cases,
regulatory approvals, such as from the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
or some approvals at the state or local
level, may be required to start or restart
production and that some of these types
of approvals may be outside the control
of an objector.
(e) Limitations on the size of
submissions. Each exclusion request
and each objection to a submitted
exclusion request is to be limited to a
maximum of 5,000 words, inclusive of
all exhibits and attachments, but
exclusive of the respective forms and
any CBI provided to the U.S.
Department of Commerce. Each
attachment to a submission must be less
than 10 MB.
(f) Rebuttal process. Only individuals
or organizations that have submitted an
exclusion request pursuant to this
supplement may submit a rebuttal to
any objection(s) posted in the 232
Exclusions Portal (https://
www.commerce.gov/page/section-232investigations). The objections to
submitted exclusion requests process
identified under paragraph (d) of this
supplement already establish a formal
response process for steel and
aluminum manufacturers in the United
States.
(1) Identification of rebuttals. When
submitting a rebuttal, the individual or
organization that submitted the
exclusion request will access the
rebuttal form by scrolling to the bottom
of the objection form and then filling
out the web-based form for submitting
their rebuttal to the objection in the 232
Exclusions Portal (https://
www.commerce.gov/page/section-232investigations).
(2) Format and size limitations for
rebuttals. Similar to the exclusions
process identified under paragraph (c)
of this supplement and the objection
process identified under paragraph (d)
of this supplement, the rebuttal process
requires the submission of a government
form as specified in paragraph (b)(3) of
this supplement. Each rebuttal is to be
limited to a maximum of 2,500 words,
inclusive of all exhibits and
attachments, but exclusive of the
rebuttal form and any CBI provided to
the U.S. Department of Commerce. Each
attachment to a submission must be less
than 10 MB.
(3) Substance of rebuttals. Rebuttals
must address an objection to the
exclusion request made by the
requester. If multiple objections were
received on a particular exclusion, the
requester may submit a rebuttal to each
objector. The most effective rebuttals
will be those that aim to correct factual
errors or misunderstandings in the
objection(s).
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
81077
(4) Time limit for submitting rebuttals.
The rebuttal period begins on the date
the Department opens the rebuttal
period after the posting of the last
objection in the 232 Exclusions Portal.
The rebuttal period ends seven days
after the rebuttal comment period is
opened. This seven-day rebuttal period
allows for the individual or organization
that submitted an exclusion request
pursuant to this supplement to submit
any written rebuttals that it believes are
warranted.
(g) Surrebuttal process. Only
individuals or organizations that have a
posted objection to a submitted
exclusion request pursuant to this
supplement may submit a surrebuttal to
a rebuttal (see paragraph (f) of this
supplement) posted to their objection to
an exclusion request in the 232
Exclusions Portal (https://
www.commerce.gov/page/section-232investigations).
(1) Identification of surrebuttals.
When submitting a surrebuttal, the
individual or organization that
submitted the objection will access the
surrebuttal form by scrolling to the
bottom of the rebuttal form and then
filling out the web-based form for
submitting their surrebuttal to the
rebuttal in the 232 Exclusions Portal
(https://www.commerce.gov/page/
section-232-investigations).
(2) Format and size limitations for
surrebuttals. Similar to the exclusions
process identified under paragraph (c)
of this supplement, the objection
process identified under paragraph (d)
of this supplement, and the rebuttal
process identified under paragraph (f) of
this supplement, the surrebuttal process
requires the submission of a government
form as specified in paragraph (b)(4) of
this supplement. The surrebuttal must
be submitted in the 232 Exclusions
Portal. Each surrebuttal is to be limited
to a maximum of 2,500 words, inclusive
of all exhibits and attachments, but
exclusive of the surrebuttal form and
any CBI provided to the U.S.
Department of Commerce. Each
attachment to a submission must be less
than 10 MB.
(3) Substance of surrebuttals.
Surrebuttals must address a rebuttal to
an objection to the exclusion request
made by the requester. The most
effective surrebuttals will be those that
aim to correct factual errors or
misunderstandings in the rebuttal to an
objection.
(4) Time limit for submitting
surrebuttals. The surrebuttal period
begins on the date the Department
opens the surrebuttal comment period
after the posting of the last rebuttal to
an objection to an exclusion request in
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81078
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
the 232 Exclusions Portal. The
surrebuttal period ends seven days after
the surrebuttal comment period is
opened. This seven-day surrebuttal
period allows for the individual or
organization that submitted an objection
to a submitted exclusion request
pursuant to this supplement to submit
any written surrebuttals that it believes
are warranted to respond to a rebuttal.
(h) Disposition of 232 submissions—
(1) Disposition of incomplete
submissions. (i) Exclusion requests that
do not satisfy the requirements specified
in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this
supplement will be rejected.
(ii) Objection filings that do not
satisfy the requirements specified in
paragraphs (b) and (d) will not be
considered.
(iii) Rebuttal filings that do not satisfy
the requirements specified in
paragraphs (b) and (f) will not be
considered.
(iv) Surrebuttal filings that do not
satisfy the requirements specified in
paragraphs (b) and (g) will not be
considered.
(2) Disposition of complete
submissions—(i) Posting of responses in
the 232 Exclusions Portal. The U.S.
Department of Commerce will post
responses (decision memos) in the 232
Exclusions Portal to each exclusion
request. The U.S. Department of
Commerce response to an exclusion
request will also be responsive to any of
the objection(s), rebuttal(s) and
surrebuttal(s) for that submitted
exclusion request submitted through the
232 Exclusions Portal.
(ii) Streamlined review process for
‘‘No Objection’’ requests. The U.S.
Department of Commerce will grant
properly filed exclusion requests which
meet the requisite criteria, receive no
objections, and present no national
security concerns. If an exclusion
request’s 30-day comment period in the
232 Exclusions Portal has expired and
no objections have been submitted, BIS
will immediately assess the request for
any national security concerns. If BIS
identifies no national security concerns,
it will post a decision granting the
exclusion request in the 232 Exclusions
Portal.
(iii) Effective date for approved
exclusions and date used for calculating
duty refunds—(A) Effective date for
approved exclusions. Approved
exclusions will be effective five
business days after publication of the
U.S. Department of Commerce response
granting an exclusion in the 232
Exclusions Portal. Starting on that date,
the requester will be able to rely upon
the approved exclusion request in
calculating the duties owed on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
product imported in accordance with
the terms listed in the approved
exclusion request. Companies are able
to receive retroactive relief on granted
requests dating back to the date of the
request’s submission on unliquidated
entries.
(B) Contact for obtaining duty
refunds. The U.S. Department of
Commerce does not provide refunds on
tariffs. Any questions on the refund of
duties should be directed to CBP.
(iv) Validity period for exclusion
requests. Exclusions will generally be
approved for one year from the date of
the signature on the decision memo, but
may be valid for shorter or longer than
one year depending on the specifics of
the exclusion request; any objections
filed; and analysis by the U.S.
Department of Commerce and other
parts of the U.S. Government, as
warranted, of the current supply and
demand in the United States, including
any limitations or other factors that the
Department determines should be
considered in order to achieve the
national security objectives of the duties
and quantitative limitations.
(A) Examples of what fact patterns
may warrant a longer exclusion validity
period. Individuals or organizations
submitting exclusion requests or
objections may, and are encouraged to
specify how long they believe an
exclusion may be warranted and specify
the rationale for that recommended time
period. For example, an individual or
organization submitting an exclusion
request may request a longer validity
period if there are factors outside of
their control that may make it warranted
to grant a longer period. These factors
may include regulatory requirements
that make a longer validity period
justified, e.g., for an aircraft
manufacturer that would require a
certain number of years to make a
change to an FAA-approved type
certificate or for a manufacturer of
medical items to obtain FDA approval.
Business considerations, such as the
need for a multi-year contract for steel
with strict delivery schedules in order
to complete a significant U.S. project by
an established deadline, e.g., a large
scale oil and gas exploration project, is
another illustrative example of the types
of considerations that a person
submitting an exclusion request may
reference.
(B) Examples of what criteria may
warrant a shorter exclusion validity
period. Objectors are encouraged to
provide their suggestions for how long
they believe an appropriate validity
period should be for an exclusion
request. In certain cases, this may be an
objector indicating it has committed to
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
adding new capacity that will be coming
online within six months, so a shorter
six-month period is warranted.
Conversely, if an objector knows it will
take two years to obtain appropriate
regulatory approvals, financing and/or
completing construction to add new
capacity, the objector may, in
responding to an exclusion that requests
a longer validity period, e.g., three
years, indicate that although they agree
a longer validity period than one year
may be warranted in this case, that two
years is sufficient.
(C) None of the illustrative fact
patterns identified in paragraphs
(h)(2)(iv)(A) or (B) of this supplement
will be determinative in and of
themselves for establishing the
appropriate validity period, but this
type of information is helpful for the
U.S. Department of Commerce to
receive, when warranted, to help
determine the appropriate validity
period if a period other than one year
is requested.
(3) Review period and implementation
of any needed conforming changes—(i)
Review period. The review period
normally will not exceed 106 days for
requests that receive objections,
including adjudication of objections
submitted on exclusion requests and
any rebuttals to objections, and
surrebuttals. The estimated 106-day
period begins on the day the exclusion
request is posted in the 232 Exclusions
Portal, and ends once a decision to grant
or deny is made on the exclusion
request.
(ii) Coordination with other agencies
on approval and implementation. Other
agencies of the U.S. Government, such
as CBP, will take any additional steps
needed to implement an approved
exclusion request. These additional
steps needed to implement an approved
exclusion request are not part of the
review criteria used by the U.S.
Department of Commerce to determine
whether to approve an exclusion
request, but are an important
component in ensuring the approved
exclusion request can be properly
implemented. The U.S. Department of
Commerce will provide CBP with
information that will identify each
approved exclusion request pursuant to
this supplement. Individuals or
organizations whose exclusion requests
are approved must report information
concerning any applicable exclusion in
such form as CBP may require. These
exclusion identifiers will be used by
importers in the data collected by CBP
in order for CBP to determine whether
an import is within the scope of an
approved exclusion request.
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
(i) For further information. If you have
questions on this supplement, you may
contact the Director, Industrial Studies,
Office of Technology Evaluation, Bureau
of Industry and Security, U.S.
Department of Commerce, at (202) 482–
5642 or Steel232@bis.doc.gov regarding
steel exclusion requests, or at (202) 482–
4757 or Aluminum232@bis.doc.gov
regarding aluminum exclusion requests.
The U.S. Department of Commerce
website includes FAQs, best practices
other companies have used for
submitting exclusion requests and
objections, and helpful checklists. The
U.S. Department of Commerce has also
included a manual providing
instruction on the 232 Exclusions Portal
for exclusion requests submitted on or
after June 13, 2019, titled 232
Exclusions Portal Comprehensive Guide
(‘‘232 Exclusions Guide’’) and posted
online at (https://www.commerce.gov/
page/section-232-investigations) to
assist your understanding when making
232 submissions in the 232 Exclusions
Portal.
GAE identifier
GAE.1.S: 7304592030 ......
GAE.2.S: 7304592080 ......
GAE.3.S: 7220900060 ......
GAE.4.S: 7222406000 ......
GAE.5.S: 7306901000 ......
GAE.6.S: 7212600000 ......
GAE.7.S: 7227901060 ......
GAE.8.S: 7220207060 ......
GAE.9.S: 7223005000 ......
GAE.10.S: 7220208000 ....
GAE.11.S: 7217108060 ....
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
GAE.12.S: 7226923060 ....
GAE.13.S: 7229905016 ....
GAE.14.S: 7215500018 ....
GAE.15.S: 7304598060 ....
VerDate Sep<11>2014
3. Effective December 29, 2020
Supplement No. 2 to part 705 is revised
to read as follows:
■
Supplement No. 2 to Part 705—General
Approved Exclusions (GAEs) for Steel
Articles Under the 232 Exclusions
Process
This supplement identifies steel
articles that have been approved for
import under a General Approved
Exclusion (GAE). The Secretary of
Commerce, in consultation with the
Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of
the Treasury, the Secretary of State, the
United States Trade Representative, the
Assistant to the President for Economic
Policy, the Assistant to the President for
National Security Affairs, and other
senior Executive Branch officials as
appropriate, makes these determinations
that certain steel articles may be
authorized under a GAE consistent with
the objectives of the 232 Exclusions
Process as outlined in supplement no. 1
to this part. The GAEs described in this
supplement may be used by any
importer. GAEs do not include quantity
limits. Each GAE identifier will be
effective fifteen calendar days after
81079
publication of a Federal Register notice
either adding or revising a specific GAE
identifier. There is no retroactive relief
for GAEs. Relief is only available to steel
articles that are entered for
consumption, or withdrawn from
warehouse for consumption, on or after
the effective date of a GAE included in
supplement no. 2 to this part. In order
to use a GAE, the importer must include
the GAE identifier in the Automated
Commercial Environment (ACE) system
that corresponds to the steel articles
being imported. These GAEs are
indefinite in length, but the Department
of Commerce on behalf of the Secretary
of Commerce may at any time issue a
Federal Register notice removing,
revising or adding to an existing GAE in
this supplement as warranted to align
with the objectives of the 232 exclusions
process as described in supplement no.
1 to this part. The Department of
Commerce on behalf of the Secretary of
Commerce may periodically publish
notices of inquiry in the Federal
Register soliciting public comments on
potential removals, revisions or
additions to this supplement.
Description of steel that may be imported (at 10-digit harmonized
tariff schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical
reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level)
Other limitations
(e.g., country of
import or quantity
allowed)
7304592030. TUBES/PIPES/HLLW PRFLS OTH ALLOY STL,
SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT COLD-TRTD, SUITABLE FOR BOILERS ETC, HEAT-RESISTING STL.
7304592080. TUBES/PIPES/H PRFLS ALLOY STL, SMLSS, CIRC
CS, NOT COLD-TRTD, SUIT FOR BOILERS ETC, NOT HTRSST STL, OS DIAM >406.4MM.
7220900060. OTHER FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH
<600MM, FURTH WRKD THAN COLD-RLD, =0.5% OR >/
=24% NICKEL, <15% CHROMIUM.
7222406000. ANGLES SHAPES AND SECTIONS STAINLESS
STEEL, OTHER THAN HOT ROLLED, NOT DRILLED, NOT
PUNCHED, AND NOT OTHERWISE ADVANCED.
7306901000. OTH TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES IRON/
NONALLOY STL, RIVETED/SIMILARLY CLOSED (NOT WELDED).
7212600000. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH
<600MM, CLAD.
7227901060. BARS/RODS TOOL STL (NOT HIGH-SPEED), HOTRLD, IRR COILS, NOT TEMPRD/TREATD/PARTLY MFTD, NOT
BALL BEARING STEEL.
7220207060. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM,
COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >0.25MM BUT =1.25MM, =0.5%
NICKEL, <15% CHROMIUM.
7223005000. FLAT WIRE OF STAINLESS STEEL ...........................
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
7220208000. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM,
COLD-RLD, THK =0.25MM, RAZOR BLADE STL.
7217108060. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/
COATED, >0.6% CARBON, NOT HEAT-TREATED, DIAM
<1.0MM.
7226923060. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH <300MM,
COLD-RLD, TOOL STEEL OTH THAN HIGH-SPEED, OTHER
THAN BALL-BEARING STEEL.
7229905016. ROUND WIRE OTHER ALLOY STL, DIAM <1.0MM ...
7215500018. OTHER BARS/RODS IRON/NONALLOY STL, COLDFORMED/FINISHED, NOT COILS, <0.25% CARBON, DIAMETER OR CROSS-SECTN >/=76MM BUT <228MM.
7304598060. TUBES/PIPES/HLLW PRFLS OTH ALLOY STL,
SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT CLD-TRTD, OS DIAMETER >285.8MM
BUT <406.4MM, WALL THK<12.7MM.
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
............................
Federal Register citation
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
14DER2
81080
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
GAE identifier
GAE.16.S: 7228501040 ....
GAE.17.S: 7304246030 ....
GAE.18.S: 7229905031 ....
GAE.19.S: 7304598010 ....
GAE.20.S: 7219310010 ....
GAE.21.S: 7304598045 ....
GAE.22.S: 7306401090 ....
GAE.23.S: 7220206010 ....
GAE.24.S: 7211296080 ....
GAE.25.S: 7217201500 ....
GAE.26.S: 7219120026 ....
GAE.27.S: 7219320020 ....
GAE.28.S: 7304243010 ....
GAE.29.S: 7219220035 ....
GAE.30.S: 7222403085 ....
GAE.31.S: 7222403045 ....
GAE.32.S: 7219110060 ....
GAE.33.S: 7304515005 ....
GAE.34.S: 7219330025 ....
GAE.35.S: 7217901000 ....
GAE.36.S: 7219110030 ....
GAE.37.S: 7217108030 ....
GAE.38.S: 7212200000 ....
GAE.39.S: 7217204560 ....
GAE.40.S: 7220206060 ....
GAE.41.S: 7217108025 ....
GAE.42.S: 7220121000 ....
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
GAE.43.S: 7209900000 ....
GAE.44.S: 7213913020 ....
GAE.45.S: 7306617060 ....
GAE.46.S: 7216330090 ....
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Description of steel that may be imported (at 10-digit harmonized
tariff schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical
reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level)
Other limitations
(e.g., country of
import or quantity
allowed)
7228501040. OTHER BARS/RODS TOOL STL (NOT HIGHSPEED), COLD-FRMD/FNSHD, MAX CS <18MM, OTHER THAN
OF ROUND OR RECTANGULAR CROSS SECTION WITH SURFACES GROUND, MILLED, OR POLISHED.
7304246030. TUBING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL,
SEAMLESS, OUTSIDE DIAM =114.3MM, WALL THK >9.5 MM.
7229905031. ROUND WIRE OTHER ALLOY STL, WITH DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT <1.5MM.
7304598010. TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES OTH ALLOY
STL, SEAMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT COLD-TREATED, NOT HEATRESISTANT, OUTSIDE DIAM <38.1MM.
7219310010. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=600MM,
COLD-RLD, THK >/=4.75MM, COILS.
7304598045. TUBES/PIPES/HLLW PRFLS OTH ALLOY STL,
SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT CLD-TRTD, NOT HEAT-RESISTANT,
OS DIAMETER >190.5MM BUT <285.8MM, WALL THK<12.7MM.
7306401090. OTH TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PRFLS STAINLESS
STL, WELDED, CIRC CS, WALL THK <1.65MM, =0.5% NICKEL.
7220206010. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM,
COLD-RLD, THK >1.25MM, >0.5% NICKEL, >1.5% BUT <5% BY
WEIGHT OF MOLYBDENUM.
7211296080. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WIDTH
>300MM BUT <600MM, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, COLDRLD, >/=0.25% CRBN, THK =1.25MM.
7217201500. FLAT WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/COATED WITH ZINC.
7219120026. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >1575MM,
HOT-RLD, COILS, THK >6.8MM BUT <10MM.
7219320020. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=1370MM,
COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >3MM BUT <4.75MM, COILS, >0.5%
NICKEL.
7304243010. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL,
SEAMLESS,
THREADED/COUPLED,
OUTSIDE
DIAM
<215.9MM, WALL THK <12.7MM.
7219220035. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, THICKNESS >/
=4.75MM BUT <10MM, WIDTH >/=600MM BUT <1575MM, HOTRLD, NOT COILS, THK 4.75-10MM, >0.5% NICKEL.
7222403085. SHAPES/SECTIONS STAINLESS STL, HOT-RLD,
NOT DRILLED/PUNCHED/ADVANCED, MAX CROSS SECTION
<80MM.
7222403045. SHAPES/SECTIONS STAINLESS STL, HOT-RLD,
NOT DRILLED/PUNCHED/ADVANCED, MAX CS >/=80MM.
7219110060. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >1575MM,
HOT-RLD, COILS, THK >10MM.
7304515005. TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES OTH ALLOY
STL, SEAMLESS, CIRC CS, COLD-DRWN/RLD, HIGH-NICKEL
ALLOY STL.
7219330025. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=1370MM,
COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >1MM BUT <3MM, COILS, =0.5%
NICKEL.
7217901000. WIRE, IRON OR NONALLOY STEEL, COATED WITH
PLASTICS.
7219110030. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=600MM
BUT <1575MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, THK >10MM.
7217108030. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/
COATED, >0.6% CARBON, HEAT-TREATED, DIAMETER >/
=1.0MM BUT <1.5MM.
7212200000. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH
<600MM, ELECTROLYTICALLY PLATED/COATED WITH ZINC.
7217204560. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/
COATED WITH ZINC, DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT <1.5MM, >/
=0.6% CARBON.
7220206060. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM,
COLD-RLD, THK >1.25MM, =0.5% NICKEL, <15% CHROMIUM.
7217108025. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/
COATED, >0.6% CARBON, HEAT-TREATED, DIAM <1.0MM.
7220121000. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=300MM
BUT <600MM, HOT-RLD, THK <4.75MM.
7209900000. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH >/
=600MM, COLD-RLD, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, WHETHER
OR NOT IN COILS.
7213913020. BARS/RODS IRON/NA STL, IRR COILS, HOT-RLD,
CIRC CS<14MM DIAM, NOT TEMPRD/TREATD/PARTLY MFTD,
WELDING QUALITY WIRE ROD.
7306617060. OTH TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES OTH
ALLOY STL (NOT STAINLESS), WELDED, SQ/RECT CS, WALL
THK <4MM.
7216330090. H SECTIONS IRON/NONALLOY STL, HOT-RLD/
DRWN/EXTRD, HEIGHT >/=80MM.
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
............................
............................
............................
............................
Federal Register citation
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
GAE identifier
GAE.47.S: 7217905030 ....
GAE.48.S: 7226923030 ....
GAE.49.S: 7219120051 ....
GAE.50.S: 7227906020 ....
GAE.51.S: 7217905090 ....
GAE.52.S: 7219220040 ....
GAE.53.S: 7219320038 ....
GAE.54.S: 7219320045 ....
GAE.55.S: 7219350005 ....
GAE.56.S: 7219320036 ....
GAE.57.S: 7304901000 ....
GAE.58.S: 7304390002 ....
GAE.59.S: 7219120071 ....
GAE.60.S: 7225501110 ....
GAE.61.S: 7217905060 ....
GAE.62.S: 7220125000 ....
GAE.63.S: 7226928005 ....
GAE.64.S: 7217106000 ....
GAE.65.S: 7219120021 ....
GAE.66.S: 7304390016 ....
GAE.67.S: 7304244040 ....
GAE.68.S: 7302101015 ....
GAE.69.S: 7304413005 ....
GAE.70.S: 7215500090 ....
GAE.71.S: 7217304541 ....
GAE.72.S: 7227200030 ....
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
GAE.73.S: 7306697060 ....
GAE.74.S: 7302101045 ....
GAE.75.S: 7219210005 ....
GAE.76.S: 7304293160 ....
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Description of steel that may be imported (at 10-digit harmonized
tariff schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical
reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level)
Other limitations
(e.g., country of
import or quantity
allowed)
7217905030. WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/COATED WITH BASE METALS OR PLASTICS, <0.25% CARBON.
7226923030. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH <300MM,
COLD-RLD, TOOL STEEL OTH THAN HIGH-SPEED, BALLBEARING STL.
7219120051. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=1370MM
BUT <1575MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, THICKNESS >/=4.75MM BUT
<6.8MM.
7227906020. BARS/RODS OTHER ALLOY STL, IRR COILS, HOTRLD, NOT TOOL STL, WELDING QUALITY WIRE RODS.
7217905090. WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/COATED WITH BASE METALS OR PLASTICS, >/=0.6% CARBON.
7219220040. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, HOT-RLD, NOT
COILS, THK >/=4.75 MM BUT <10MM, NOT HIGH-NICKEL
ALLOY, >0.5% NICKEL, =1.5% OR >/=5% MOLYBDENUM,
WIDTH >1575MM BUT <1880MM.
7219320038. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT <4.75MM, COILS, WIDTH >600MM BUT
<1370MM, NOT HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, >0.5% NICKEL, =1.5%
OR >/=5% MOLYBDENUM.
7219320045. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=1370MM,
COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT <4.75MM, NOT COILS.
7219350005. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=600MM,
COLD-RLD, THK <0.5MM, COILS, >0.5% BUT <24% NICKEL,
>1.5% BUT <5% MOLYBDENUM.
7219320036. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT <4.75MM, COILS, WIDTH >600MM BUT
<1370MM, NOT HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, >0.5% NICKEL, >1.5%
BUT <5% MOLYBDENUM.
7304901000.
TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW
PROFILES
IRON/
NONALLOY STL, SEAMLESS, NONCIRCULAR CROSS SECTION, WALL THK >/=4MM.
7304390002. TUBES/PIPES/HLLW PRFLS IRON/NA STL,
SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT COLD-TRTD, SUITABLE FOR BOILERS ETC, OS DIAM <38.1MM.
7219120071. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >600MM
BUT <1370MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, THICKNESS >/=4.75MM BUT
<10MM, NOT HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, >0.5% NICKEL, =1.5%
OR >/=5% MOLYBDENUM.
7225501110. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH >/=600MM,
COLD-RLD, TOOL STEEL, HIGH-SPEED STL.
7217905060. WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/COATED,
>0.25% BUT <0.6% CARBON.
7220125000. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM,
HOT-RLD, THK <4.75MM.
7226928005. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH <300MM,
COLD-RLD, NOT TOOL STL, THK >0.25MM, HIGH-NICKEL
ALLOY STL.
7217106000. OTHER WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/
COATED, <0.25% CARBON.
7219120021. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=1370MM
BUT =1575MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, THICKNESS >6.8MM BUT
=10MM.
7304390016. TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES IRON/NA STL,
SEAMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT COLD-TRTD, GALVANIZED, OS
DIAM =114.3MM.
7304244040. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL,
SEAMLESS, NOT THREADED/COUPLED, OS DIAMETER >/
=215.9MM BUT =285.8MM, WALL THK >/=12.7MM.
7302101015. OTHER RAILS IRON/NONALLOY STL, NEW, NOT
HEAT TREATED, >30KG/M.
7304413005. TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PRFLS STAINLESS STL,
SEAMLESS, CIRC CS, COLD-DRWN/RLD, EXT DIAM <19MM,
HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY STL.
7215500090. OTHER BARS/RODS IRON/NONALLOY STL, COLDFORMED/FINISHED, NOT COILS, >/=0.6% CARBON.
7217304541. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/
COATED W/OTH BASE METALS, DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT
<1.5MM, <0.25% CARBON.
7227200030. BARS/RODS SILICO-MANGANESE STL, IRR COILS,
HOT-RLD, WELDING QUALITY WIRE RODS, STAT NOTE 6.
7306697060. OTH TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES OTH
ALLOY STL (NOT STAINLESS), WELDED, OTH NONCIRCULAR
CS, WALL THK <4MM.
7302101045. OTHER RAILS IRON/NONALLOY STL, NEW, HEAT
TREATED, >30KG/M.
7219210005. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=600MM,
HOT-RLD, NOT COILS, THK >10MM, HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY STL.
7304293160. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) OTH ALLOY STL,
SEAMLESS, THREADED/COUPLED, OS DIAMETER >285.8MM
BUT =406.4MM, WALL THK >/=12.7MM.
............................
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
............................
81081
Federal Register citation
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
............................
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
14DER2
81082
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
GAE identifier
GAE.77.S: 7305316090 ....
GAE.78.S: 7216400010 ....
GAE.79.S: 7226990110 ....
GAE.80.S: 7225506000 ....
GAE.81.S: 7304905000 ....
GAE.82.S: 7219220005 ....
GAE.83.S: 7217104045 ....
GAE.84.S: 7209270000 ....
GAE.85.S: 7219900060 ....
GAE.86.S: 7219120081 ....
GAE.87.S: 7304293180 ....
GAE.88.S: 7224100005 ....
GAE.89.S: 7213200080 ....
GAE.90.S: 7216100010 ....
GAE.91.S: 7306695000 ....
GAE.92.S: 7208390015 ....
GAE.93.S: 7208380015 ....
GAE.94.S: 7217104090 ....
GAE.95.S: 7302105020 ....
GAE.96.S: 7210706030 ....
GAE.97.S: 7304244060 ....
GAE.98.S: 7229200015 ....
GAE.99.S: 7304243040 ....
GAE.100.S: 7304243020 ..
GAE.101.S: 7219130081 ..
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
GAE.102.S: 7211140090 ..
GAE.103.S: 7218910030 ..
GAE.104.S: 7306213000 ..
GAE.105.S: 7211234500 ..
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Description of steel that may be imported (at 10-digit harmonized
tariff schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical
reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level)
Other limitations
(e.g., country of
import or quantity
allowed)
7305316090. OTHER TUBES/PIPES ALLOY STL, CIRC CS, EXT
DIAM >406.4MM, NOT LINE PIPE OR CASING (OIL/GAS), LONGITUDINALLY WELDED, NOT TAPERED PIPES/TUBES, NONSTAINLESS ALLOY STEEL.
7216400010. L SECTIONS IRON/NONALLOY STL, HOT-ROLLED/
DRAWN/EXTRUDED, HEIGHT >/=80MM.
7226990110. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH <600MM,
ELECTROLYTICALLY PLATD/COATD W/ZINC, NOT GRAIN
ORIENTED, NOT OF HIGH-SPEED STEEL, FURTHER
WORKED THAN HOT-ROLLED OR COLD-ROLLED.
7225506000. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH >/=600MM,
COLD-RLD, THK >/=4.75MM, NOT OF TOOL STEEL.
7304905000.
TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW
PROFILES
IRON/
NONALLOY STL, SEAMLESS, NOT CIRCULAR CS, WALL THK
<4MM.
7219220005. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=600MM,
HOT-RLD, NOT COILS, THICKNESS >/=4.75MM BUT =10MM,
HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY STL.
7217104045. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/
COATED, <0.25% CARBON, DIAM <1.5MM, HEAT-TREATED,
IN COILS WEIGHING >2 KG.
7209270000. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH >/
=600MM, COLD-RLD, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, NOT
COILS, THK 0.5–1MM.
7219900060. OTHER FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/
=600MM, FURTHER WORKED THAN COLD-RLD, =0.5%
NICKEL, <15% CHROMIUM.
7219120081. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=600MM
BUT <1370MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, NOT HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY,
THICKNESS >/=4.75MM BUT =10MM, =0.5% NICKEL.
7304293180. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) OTH ALLOY STL,
SEAMLESS, THREADED/COUPLED, OUTSIDE DIAM >406.4MM.
7224100005. INGOTS AND OTHER PRIMARY FORMS OF HIGHNICKEL ALLOY STEEL.
7213200080. BARS/RODS IRON/NONALLOY STL, HOT-RLD, IRR
COILS, FREE-CUTTING STL, <0.1% LEAD.
7216100010. U SECTIONS IRON/NONALLOY STL, HOT-ROLLED/
DRAWN/EXTRUDED, HEIGHT <80MM.
7306695000. OTH TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES IRON/
NONALLOY STL, WELDED, OTH NONCIRCULAR CS, WALL
THK <4MM.
7208390015. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NA STL, WDTH >/=600MM,
HOT-RLD, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, COILS, THK <3MM,
HIGH-STRENGTH STL.
7208380015. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NA STL, WDTH >/=600MM,
HOT-RLD, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, COILS, THICKNESS
>/=3MM BUT <4.75MM, HIGH-STRENGTH STL.
7217104090. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/
COATED, <0.25% CARBON, DIAM <1.5MM, NOT HEAT-TREATED.
7302105020. RAILS OF ALLOY STEEL, NEW ..................................
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
7210706030. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NA STL, WDTH >/=600MM,
PAINTD/VARNSHD/COATD W/PLASTICS, ELECTROLYTICALLY
PLATD/COATD W/ZINC.
7304244060. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL,
SEAMLESS, NOT THREADED/COUPLED, OS DIAMETER
>285.8MM BUT =406.4MM, WALL THK>/=12.7MM.
7229200015. ROUND WIRE SI-MN STL, DIAM =1.6MM,
<0.20%C, >0.9% MN, >0.6% SI, FOR ELEC ARC WELDING,
NOT PLATD/COATD W/COPPER.
7304243040. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL,
SEAMLESS, THREADED/COUPLED, OUTSIDE DIAMETER >/
=215.9MM BUT =285.8MM, WALL THK>/=12.7MM.
7304243020. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL,
SEAMLESS,
THREADED/COUPLED,
OUTSIDE
DIAM
<215.9MM, WALL THK >/=12.7MM.
7219130081. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=600MM
BUT <1370MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT
<4.75MM, =0.5% OR >/=24% NICKEL.
7211140090. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH
<600MM, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, HOT-RLD, THK >/
=4.75MM, COILS.
7218910030. SEMIFINISHED STAINLESS STL, RECTANGULAR
CROSS SECTION, WDTH <4X THK, CS AREA >/=232 CM2.
7306213000. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL,
WELDED, THREADED/COUPLED.
7211234500. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH
<300MM, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, COLD-RLD, <0.25%
CRBN, THK =0.25MM.
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
............................
............................
............................
Federal Register citation
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
............................
............................
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
GAE identifier
GAE.106.S: 7220206080 ..
GAE.107.S: 7305391000 ..
GAE.108.S: 7217204550 ..
Description of steel that may be imported (at 10-digit harmonized
tariff schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical
reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level)
Other limitations
(e.g., country of
import or quantity
allowed)
7220206080. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM,
COLD-RLD, THK >1.25MM, NOT HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, =0.5%
NICKEL, >/=15% CHROMIUM.
7305391000. OTHER TUBES/PIPES IRON/NONALLOY STL, CIRC
CS, EXT DIAM >406.4MM, WELDED, OTHER THAN
LONGITUDALLY WELDED.
7217204550. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/
COATED WITH ZINC, DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT <1.5MM, >/
=0.25% BUT <0.6% CARBON.
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
Annex 1 to Supplements No. 1 and 2
to part 705 [Removed]
4. Annex 1 to Supplements No. 1 and
2 to part 705 is removed.
■
5. Effective December 29, 2020. add
Supplement No. 3 to part 705 to read as
follows:
■
Supplement No. 3 to Part 705—General
Approved Exclusions (GAEs) for
Aluminum Articles Under the 232
Exclusions Process
This supplement identifies aluminum
articles that have been approved for
import under a General Approved
Exclusion (GAE). The Secretary of
Commerce, in consultation with the
Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of
the Treasury, the Secretary of State, the
United States Trade Representative, the
Assistant to the President for Economic
............................
GAE.2.A: 7607205000 ......
7609000000. ALUMINUM TUBE OR PIPE FITTINGS (COUPLINGS,
ELBOWS, SLEEVES).
7607205000. ALUMINUM FOIL OF THICKNESS ..............................
............................
GAE.3.A: 7607196000 ......
7607196000. ALUMINUM FOIL OF THICKNESS ..............................
............................
GAE.4.A: 7604210010 ......
7604210010. ALUMINUM ALLOY HOLLOW PROFILES OF HEATTREATABLE INDUSTRIAL ALLOYS OF A KIND DESCRIBED IN
NOTE 6 TO THIS CHAPTER.
7604291010. ALUMINUM ALLOY PROFILES OTHER THAN HOLLOW PROFILES OF HEAT-TREATABLE INDUSTRIAL ALLOYS
OF A KIND DESCRIBED IN NOTE 6 TO THIS CHAPTER.
7607191000. ALUMINUM FOIL OF THICKNESS ..............................
............................
GAE.5.A: 7604291010 ......
GAE.6.A: 7607191000 ......
GAE.7.A: 7606116000 ......
GAE.8.A: 7605290000 ......
GAE.9.A: 7601209080 ......
GAE.10.A: 7607116010 ....
GAE.11.A: 7616995170 ....
GAE.12.A: 7607201000 ....
GAE.13.A: 7604295090 ....
VerDate Sep<11>2014
7606116000. ALUMINUM PLATES, SHEETS AND STRIP, THICKNESS >0.2MM, RECTANGULAR (INCLUDING SQUARE), NOT
ALLOYED, CLAD.
7605290000. ALUMINUM WIRE ALLOY, MAXIMUM CROSS-SECTIONAL DIMENSION =7MM.
7601209080. UNWROUGHT ALUMINUM ALLOY, SHEET INGOT
(SLAB) OF A KIND DESCRIBED IN STATISTICAL NOTE 3 TO
THIS CHAPTER.
7607116010. ALUMINUM FOIL OF THICKNESS >0.01 MM AND
=0.15 MM, ROLLED, NOT BACKED, BOXED & WEIGHING
=11.3 KG.
7616995170. ALUMINUM FORGINGS ...............................................
7607201000. ALUMINUM FOIL OF THICKNESS =0.2 MM,
BACKED, COVERED OR DECORATED WITH A CHARACTER,
DESIGN, FANCY EFFECT OR PATTERN.
7604295090. ALUMINUM ALLOY BARS AND RODS, OTHER
THAN ROUND CROSS SECTION, OTHER THAN HEAT-TREATABLE INDUSTRIAL ALLOYS OF A KIND DESCRIBED IN
NOTES 5 & 6 OF THIS CHAPTER.
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Federal Register citation
to use a GAE, the importer must
reference the GAE identifier in the
Automated Commercial Environment
(ACE) system that corresponds to the
aluminum articles being imported.
These GAEs are indefinite in length, but
the Department of Commerce on behalf
of the Secretary of Commerce may at
any time issue a Federal Register notice
removing, revising or adding to an
existing GAE in this supplement as
warranted to align with the objectives of
the 232 exclusions process as described
in supplement no. 1 to this part. The
Department of Commerce on behalf of
the Secretary of Commerce may
periodically publish notices of inquiry
in the Federal Register soliciting public
comments on potential removals,
revisions or additions to this
supplement.
Other limitations
(e.g., country of
import or quantity
allowed)
GAE.1.A: 7609000000 ......
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Policy, the Assistant to the President for
National Security Affairs, and other
senior Executive Branch officials as
appropriate, makes these determinations
that certain aluminum articles may be
authorized under a GAE consistent with
the objectives of the 232 exclusions
process as outlined in supplement no. 1
to this part. The GAEs described in this
supplement may be used by any
importer. GAEs do not include quantity
limits. Each GAE identifier will be
effective fifteen calendar days after
publication of a Federal Register notice
either adding or revising a specific GAE
identifier. There is no retroactive relief
for GAEs. Relief is only available to
aluminum articles that are entered for
consumption, or withdrawn from
warehouse for consumption, on or after
the effective date of a GAE included in
supplement no. 2 to this part. In order
Description of aluminum that may be imported (at 10-digit
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical
reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level)
GAE identifier
81083
Federal Register citation
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT
12/14/2020].
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
FR PAGE NUMBER AND
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
............................
............................
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
14DER2
81084
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
GAE identifier
GAE.14.A: 7601209095 ....
GAE.15.A:7616995160 ......
Description of aluminum that may be imported (at 10-digit
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical
reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level)
Other limitations
(e.g., country of
import or quantity
allowed)
7601209095. UNWROUGHT ALUMINUM ALLOY, OTHER THAN ............................
COILS OF UNIFORM CROSS-SECTION =9.5 MM, CONTAINING <25% SILICON, OTHER THAN ALLUMINUM VANADIUM MASTER ALLOY, OTHER THAN REMELT SCRAP INGOT,
OTHER THAN SHEET INGOT, OTHER THAN FOUNDRY INGOT.
7616995160. ALUMINUM CASTINGS ................................................ ............................
Federal Register citation
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND
12/14/2020].
Matthew S. Borman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2020–27110 Filed 12–10–20; 8:45 am]
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
BILLING CODE 3510–33–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
03:46 Dec 12, 2020
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\14DER2.SGM
14DER2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 240 (Monday, December 14, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 81060-81084]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-27110]
[[Page 81059]]
Vol. 85
Monday,
No. 240
December 14, 2020
Part IV
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bureau of Industry and Security
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
15 Part 705
Section 232 Steel and Aluminum Tariff Exclusions Process; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 85 , No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 81060]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
15 CFR Part 705
[Docket No. 201203-0323]
RIN 0694-AH55
Section 232 Steel and Aluminum Tariff Exclusions Process
AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Interim final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This interim final rule revises aspects of the process for
requesting exclusions from the duties and quantitative limitations on
imports of aluminum and steel discussed in three previous Department of
Commerce (``Commerce'') interim final rules implementing the exclusion
process authorized by the President under Section 232 of the Trade
Expansion Act of 1962, as amended (``232''). These changes are also
informed by a notice of inquiry with request for comments on the 232
exclusions process that was published by Commerce on May 26, 2020.
Based on public comments on the current process for submissions to
Commerce, Commerce is publishing this interim final rule to make
additional revisions to the 232 exclusion process, including to the 232
Exclusions Portal.
DATES:
Effective date: This interim final rule is effective December 14,
2020, except for amendatory instructions 3 and 5 that are effective
December 29, 2020.
Comments: Comments on this interim final rule must be received by
BIS no later than February 12, 2021.
ADDRESSES: See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for information on
submitting exclusion requests, objections thereto, rebuttals, and
surrebuttals. You may submit comments, identified by docket number BIS-
2020-0022 or RIN 0694-AH55, through the Federal eRulemaking website:
https://www.regulations.gov. No other submission methods are being used
for submitting comments on this interim final rule. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
All filers using the portal should use the name of the person or
entity submitting comments as the name of their files, in accordance
with the instructions below. Anyone submitting business confidential
information should clearly identify the business confidential portion
at the time of submission, file a statement justifying nondisclosure
and referring to the specific legal authority claimed, and provide a
non-confidential version of the submission.
For comments submitted electronically containing business
confidential information, the file name of the business confidential
version should begin with the characters ``BC.'' Any page containing
business confidential information must be clearly marked ``BUSINESS
CONFIDENTIAL'' on the top of that page. The corresponding non-
confidential version of those comments must be clearly marked
``PUBLIC.'' The file name of the non-confidential version should begin
with the character ``P.'' The ``BC'' and ``P'' should be followed by
the name of the person or entity submitting the comments or rebuttal
comments. Any submissions with file names that do not begin with a
``BC'' or ``P'' will be assumed to be public and will be made publicly
available through https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions regarding this interim
final rule, contact Erika Maynard at 202-482-5572 or via email
[email protected], or email [email protected] regarding
provisions in this rule specific to steel exclusion requests and
[email protected] regarding provisions in this rule specific to
aluminum exclusion requests.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 8, 2018, President Trump issued Proclamations 9704 and
9705, imposing duties on imports of aluminum and steel. The
Proclamations also authorized the Secretary of Commerce to grant
exclusions from the duties if the Secretary determines the steel or
aluminum article for which the exclusion is requested is not ``produced
in the United States in a sufficient and reasonably available amount or
of a satisfactory quality'' or should be excluded ``based upon specific
national security considerations,'' and provided authority for the
Secretary to issue procedures for exclusion requests. On April 30,
2018, Proclamations 9739 and 9740, and on May 31, 2018, Proclamations
9758 and 9759, set quantitative limitations on the import of steel and
aluminum from certain countries in lieu of the duties. On August 29,
2018, in Proclamations 9776 and 9777, President Trump also authorized
the Secretary to grant exclusions from quantitative limitations based
on the same standards applicable to exclusions from the tariffs.
Implementing and Improving the 232 Exclusions Process
On March 19, 2018, Commerce first issued an interim final rule,
Requirements for Submissions Requesting Exclusions from the Remedies
Instituted in Presidential Proclamations Adjusting Imports of Steel
into the United States and Adjusting Imports of Aluminum into the
United States; and the filing of Objections to Submitted Exclusion
Requests for Steel and Aluminum (83 FR 12106) (the ``March 19 rule''),
laying out procedures for the 232 exclusions process, including one
supplement for the procedures for steel and a second supplement for the
procedures for aluminum.
On September 11, 2018, Commerce issued a second interim final rule,
Submissions of Exclusion Requests and Objections to Submitted Requests
for Steel and Aluminum (83 FR 46026) (the ``September 11 rule''), that
revised the two supplements added by the March 19 rule with
improvements designed to ensure a transparent, fair, and efficient
exclusion and objection process.
On June 10, 2019, Commerce issued a third interim final rule,
Implementation of New Commerce Section 232 Exclusions Portal (84 FR
26751) (the ``June 10 rule''), that revised the two supplements added
by the March 19 and September 11 rules to grant the public the ability
to submit new exclusion requests through the 232 Exclusions Portal
while still allowing the opportunity for public comment on the portal.
On May 26, 2020, Commerce issued a notice of inquiry with request
for comment, Notice of Inquiry Regarding the Exclusion Process for
Section 232 Steel and Aluminum Import Tariffs and Quotas (85 FR 31441)
(the ``May 26 notice''), that sought public comment on the
appropriateness of the information requested and considered in applying
the exclusion criteria, and the efficiency and transparency of the
process employed.
Why is Commerce publishing this interim final rule?
Commerce is publishing this interim final rule to implement
additional changes the Department has determined will further improve
the 232 exclusions process. Commerce believes these changes will make
important improvements, but is also requesting public comments to
evaluate how effective these changes will be in further improving the
232 exclusions process. This process is consistent with the
Department's approach since the
[[Page 81061]]
beginning of implementing the 232 exclusion process. The public has
supported this approach.
What are some of the key changes included in this interim final rule?
This interim final rule is being published at this time, in
particular, to make the following three key changes to the 232
exclusions process.
First, it addresses the need to create a more efficient method for
approving exclusions where objections have not been received in the
past for certain steel or aluminum articles. Commerce has determined
creating general approved exclusions that may be used by any importing
entity is warranted. This has been noted by commenters who submit
exclusion requests, and by trade associations that represent those
companies, as one of the most important changes that could be made to
improve the efficiency of the 232 exclusion process. As described in
much greater detail below, this interim final rule addresses this issue
with the adoption of General Approved Exclusions (GAEs). This change
will result in an estimated immediate decrease of 5,000 exclusion
requests annually, resulting in a significant improvement in
efficiency, with the possibility of more in the future. Unlike
exclusion requests, GAEs do not include quantity limits.
Second, it addresses a trend identified by commenters and validated
in data reviewed by Commerce--that certain exclusion requesters may
have requested more volume than they may have needed for their own
business purposes compared to past usage. Submitting large numbers of
unneeded exclusion requests decreases the efficiency of the 232
exclusions process for potential objectors and Commerce. It also
creates issues for potential objectors. As described in greater detail
below, this issue is addressed by adding a new certification
requirement for volumes requested. Along the same lines, the rule also
adds a note to remind all parties submitting 232 submissions of the
prohibition against making false statements to the U.S. Government and
the consequences that may occur for such false statements.
Third, the rule addresses an objector concern they were being held
to a higher standard than foreign suppliers because of the
interpretation that ``immediately'' meant the objector needed to be
able to provide the steel or aluminum articles within 8 weeks, even
though a foreign supplier may not be able to provide the same steel or
aluminum article until much longer than 8 weeks. With this rule the
term ``immediately,'' is retained but language has been modified to
apply the same time standard to U.S. objectors and foreign suppliers
for when the steel or aluminum articles need to be provided to the
exclusion requester.
What changes are not being addressed in this interim final rule?
While this rule addresses the remaining comments from the September
11 rule, it also addresses some of the comments received on the 232
Exclusions Portal from the June 10 rule. However, comments requesting
changes requiring software modification or involving additional cost
and time to implement are still under consideration and not addressed
here. Some examples of comments still under consideration include the
following. There is a comment to allow confidential business
information (CBI) submissions in the 232 Exclusions Portal which would
require software changes and additional certifications. Another
commenter requested two separate portals for the steel and aluminum
exclusion processes. There are also several comments regarding the
usability and search functionality of the 232 Exclusions Portal
including adding a filter for steel and aluminum on the main portal
page; adding product classes to the main portal screen with a filtering
function; improving search functionality by adding a simple ``find
all'' type of search capability; adding the capability to be able to
download individual submissions and all data; making it easier to
extract data for queried databases; adding the ability to cross search
with multiple criteria; providing an easier way to identify exclusion
requests by HTSUS classification and other criteria; including the
actual due date for filing submissions, not just days remaining; adding
a withdraw feature to the dashboard; adding a notification feature when
objections are posted; and adding the ability to refresh without
resetting the filters. Commerce is continuing to evaluate these
comments and may implement additional changes to further improve the
232 Exclusions Portal at a later date.
This interim final rule does not summarize or respond to the
comments included in the May 26 notice. Commerce will address these
comments in the next rule. However, as noted below, there is
significant overlap in the comments received on the September 11 and
June 10 rules, so some of the comments received on the May 26 notice
are also being addressed in this interim final rule. For example, the
three key changes to the 232 exclusions process described above being
made in this interim final rule will also be responsive to comments
received on the May 26 notice.
The following are some examples of comments from the May 26 notice
that are still being reviewed. Additional changes to the 232 Exclusions
Portal were requested by some commenters based on their additional
experience, e.g., the portal being programmed to flag for special
attention those exclusion requests that have been waiting a certain
number of days/months for a determination. Some comments addressed the
role of objections in the 232 exclusions process and whether objections
have an outsized influence on the process, in particular on how long
the Commerce decision-making process takes and whether an exclusion
will be granted. Some comments requested creating a process to give
preferential treatment for products further manufactured or
substantially transformed in the United States, because such producers
are an essential part of the U.S. steel and aluminum industry. Other
commenters requested a 60-day window for submitting exclusion requests
on a bi-annual basis and only product exclusion requests submitted
during these bi-annual periods would be considered.
Additional Improvements to the 232 Exclusions Process
As noted above, the interim final rule being published today
addresses the remaining comments from the September 11 rule and
highlights what comments have been addressed from the June 10 rule.
There is some significant overlap among those comments and comments
received in response to the May 26 notice, so the revisions to the 232
exclusions process described below will also be responsive to some of
the same comments received in response to the May 26 notice. Commerce
intends to publish at least one subsequent interim final rule that will
describe the unaddressed comments received on the May 26 notice and any
additional revisions Commerce will make to the 232 exclusions process
as a result of those comments. The comments on the May 26 notice also
included various comments on the 232 Exclusions Portal, certain of
which are addressed below. Other comments will be summarized and
addressed with the remaining comments on the June 10 rule that are not
included in today's rule. Because of the programming cost and time
involved with making changes to the 232 Exclusions Portal, Commerce
requires more time to review and respond to those comments, in
particular for comments where Commerce agrees that
[[Page 81062]]
changes to the 232 Exclusions Portal may be warranted.
Commerce is focused on improving the 232 exclusions process as
quickly as possible. As additional revisions are ready to be made, such
as those being made in this rule, Commerce will publish those changes
as quickly as possible to improve the 232 exclusions process. This
approach of publishing a series of interim final rules has allowed
Commerce to improve the 232 exclusions process on an ongoing basis,
allowing the public to submit additional comments on whether the most
recently made changes have helped to improve the process.
This rule makes various edits to supplement no. 1 to part 705 to
improve the 232 exclusions process. This rule also removes the
provisions from supplement no. 2 to part 705 and consolidates those
into supplement no. 1. This rule also adds new supplements no. 2 and
no. 3 for identifying General Approved Exclusions (GAEs) for steel and
aluminum articles under the 232 exclusions process and the first
approved tranches of GAEs for steel and aluminum articles. GAEs address
a long-standing request from public comments of exclusion requesters to
create a more efficient process to approve certain exclusions for use
by all importers where Commerce has determined that no objections will
be received and where it is warranted to approve an exclusion for all
importers to use. This rule also removes Annex 1 to supplements no. 1
and 2, since this guidance is no longer needed with this rule's removal
of references to www.regulations.gov from the 232 exclusions process.
Finally, this rule makes some non-substantive edits to supplement no. 1
to part 705 to improve readability of the supplement.
Public Comments and BIS Responses
The public comment period on the May 26 notice closed on July 10,
2020. BIS received eighty-two public comments on the notice of inquiry.
Many commenters referenced the imposition of duties and quantitative
limitations, questioning whether or not such regulations were
beneficial. Those comments are outside the scope of the May 26 notice
that solicited comments on the 232 exclusions process; thus Commerce is
generally not summarizing or providing responses to those general
comments on the duties and quantitative limitations. Certain comments
described and addressed below are those received in response to the
September 11 and June 10 rules. However, some of the comments in
responses below address issues that also were raised in some of the
comments received in response to the May 26 notice. As a result, the
responses below are responsive in part to comments on the May 26
notice, and also are responsive to comments on the September 11 and
June 10 rules.
Improving Tracking and Transparency
Comment (a)(1): Develop an adequate tracking system that supplies
relevant information (more than is available now) for 232 submissions.
Commenters requested that Commerce provide stakeholders a way to more
easily review the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS) code and product information, country of origin, volume, and
alloys of posted exclusions--preferably, in a searchable database.
Commenters indicated that having to open each file to identify this
information places a burden on potential objectors, which the
commenters suggested could be addressed with a searchable database.
BIS response: Commerce has made changes to allow for easier
tracking and searching of information in the 232 Exclusions Portal, as
described in greater detail below for the improvements that have been
made to the 232 Exclusions Portal (see BIS response to Comment (g)(2)
below).
Comment (a)(2): Exclusion rejection for incomplete submissions
should be more transparent. A commenter noted that, while they do not
expect Commerce to customize each individual response, the commenter
believes that additional steps can be taken to help U.S. businesses
understand the reason for a rejection. This commenter requested that
Commerce should include on the rejection form that is posted online a
list of common reasons for rejection. The commenter believes this would
provide invaluable guidance to the countless small businesses
attempting to navigate this difficult process. This commenter believes
the current rejection form leaves manufacturers guessing as to why the
government rejected their applications, especially when that business
for years used the identical HTSUS code accepted by U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) to import that product.
BIS response: Commerce agrees that greater transparency benefits
all applicants to the 232 exclusions process. Commerce moved its HTSUS
administrability review to the start of the process in early 2019,
reducing sharply the number of exclusion denials due to incomplete
submissions identified later in the review process. Incomplete
submissions now receive a rejection notification that includes the
specific reasons for a rejection. Commerce does plan to update the
rejection form used in the 232 Exclusions Portal to include a list of
common reasons for rejection. Commerce agrees that providing this
additional information will make the process more efficient, because
those receiving rejections will more easily understand what was wrong
with their exclusion request that resulted in a rejection. This may
reduce the overall number of 232 exclusion submissions submitted.
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
Comment (b)(1): Supportive of the new CBI provisions. A commenter
asserted that one of the most significant changes is the BIS decision
to allow companies to submit CBI during the rebuttal and surrebuttal
process. This same commenter also believes that further changes can
improve the process beyond what BIS has already proposed.
BIS response: Commerce agrees that adding the CBI process has
helped to improve the 232 exclusions process. As described below,
Commerce is open to improving the CBI process, but that must be done in
accordance with the larger purpose of allowing CBI in the 232 exclusion
process, as well as the current technical limitations in the 232
Exclusions Portal.
Comment (b)(2): Allow CBI to also be submitted for exclusions and
objections. Commenters urged Commerce to expand the CBI provision by
allowing companies to submit CBI within their original exclusion
request. These commenters asserted that, given the amount of detail
required to complete the exclusion request form, companies may be
hesitant to submit exclusion requests for fear of sharing CBI with
their competitors.
BIS response: Commerce does not agree. The information required on
the exclusion request form does not require revealing CBI in order to
adequately complete the form, so allowing CBI in support of the initial
exclusion request is not needed. Moreover, exclusion requesters can
indicate they have CBI, allowing Commerce reviewers to request that CBI
if needed for their review of the request and objections.
Comment (b)(3): Allowing CBI in exclusions and objections would
alleviate some concerns over short seven-day rebuttal and surrebuttal
periods. One commenter asserted that, given the short seven-day window
of the rebuttal process, allowing companies to submit CBI at the time
of the application would relieve the unnecessary burdens placed on
filers by the short rebuttal window.
[[Page 81063]]
BIS response: Commerce acknowledges the shortness of the seven-day
rebuttal and surrebuttal period, but does not agree with the commenter
that allowing CBI in the exclusion request or in objections would
alleviate the burden on exclusion requesters or objectors during the
rebuttal and surrebuttal period. The most appropriate time in the 232
exclusion review process for CBI is during the rebuttal and surrebuttal
phase when information that goes beyond what is included in the
exclusion and objection forms may be needed to properly evaluate an
exclusion request. Allowing CBI in exclusion requests and objections
would slow the Commerce review process without adding any real benefit
to the review process. As noted above, exclusion requesters and
objectors can indicate they have CBI and Commerce reviewers can request
that information if needed for review.
Comment (b)(4): Process to submit CBI needs to be further
clarified. A commenter believes the current CBI process is confusing
because parties must submit the exclusion request form with a vague,
yet somewhat detailed summary of the CBI and then supplement the form
by sending a separate email to BIS with the actual confidential
information. This same commenter was also concerned that parties risk
the possibility that Commerce will reject their exclusion request for
being an incomplete submission before Commerce has even received their
confidential information.
BIS response: Commerce understands the point being made by the
commenter but does not agree that this requirement is unreasonable.
Because the 232 Exclusion Process is a public process, there needs to
be transparency to allow the other public parties involved in the
process (objector(s) and exclusion requesters) to have an idea of the
scope and type of CBI information that is being provided to supplement
a rebuttal or a surrebuttal.
Comment (b)(5): Section 301 exclusion request process uses a clear
and simple method by which parties can submit CBI--Commerce should
adopt same process to allow submission of public and private version. A
commenter encouraged Commerce to implement a method similar to that of
the Section 301 exclusion process for the Section 232 exclusion request
process, allowing parties to submit both public and confidential
versions of the exclusion request form.
BIS response: Commerce sees the benefit of adopting the same type
of approach as used under the Section 301 process. However, the
security needed to protect such information in the 232 Exclusions
Portal would require additional programming and certifications.
Therefore, at the current time Commerce will not be making these
changes. If the 232 Exclusions Portal can accommodate CBI at a future
date, Commerce will revisit this issue.
Exclusion Requests
Comment (c)(1): Standard Commerce applies to exclusion requests
remains unclear--need to specify whether in aggregate or for a specific
requester. A commenter was concerned that it is unclear whether a
specific requester's lack of availability and quality of material is
the relevant consideration, or whether analysis of material quantities
in the aggregate U.S. market provides a better metric. The commenter
believes the proper standard should be the availability of material to
the requesting company in the needed quality and quantity because this
is largely in the control of the objecting supplier.
BIS response: Commerce confirms here that exclusion requests are
being reviewed based on the availability of material to the requesting
company in the needed quality and quantity by U.S. suppliers. This rule
clarifies that the standard applied to the review of an exclusion
request is a case-by-case review to determine whether the requester has
shown that the article is not produced in the United States in a
sufficiently and reasonably available amount or of a satisfactory
quality, or that there are specific national security considerations to
grant the exclusion. In general, if no U.S. supplier submits an
objection, absent a national security concern, Commerce approves such
exclusion requests because a determination can be made that a U.S.
supplier is not available to supply to the exclusion requester the
needed quality and quantity of steel or aluminum described in the
exclusion request.
Comment (c)(2): Inconsistencies in the posted exclusion requests
make it difficult for objectors to adequately review and respond.
Commenters in this area are concerned whether exclusion requesters are
consistently filling out the forms, and whether Commerce is adequately
ensuring that the exclusion forms being posted meet the required
standards of the form. For example, one commenter noted that hundreds
of exclusion requests include no alloy designation (Question 4.b), but
instead reference the HTSUS code or simply leave that field blank. This
commenter asserted that an alloy designation is an important identifier
for assessing the validity of an exclusion request, so its omission in
many exclusion requests makes it difficult for potential objectors.
Another commenter noted that many exclusion requests--including those
that have already been approved--fail to indicate a volume associated
with the included countries of origin.
BIS response: Commerce acknowledges that, in certain cases, there
has been some variability in how exclusion requesters or objectors have
filled out the respective forms. Commerce has revised its standard
operating procedures (SOPs) and conducted training for those reviewing
232 submissions at Commerce to emphasize the importance of ensuring
that the exclusion and objection forms are being completed in
accordance with the information required on the forms. As a result of
this comment, Commerce has highlighted these issues to the Commerce
reviewers of the 232 submissions to ensure consistency and warns that
submissions that do not meet the standards of the information required
on the forms will be rejected.
Comment (c)(3): ``Size ranges'' clarification was helpful in the
September 11 rule, but additional clarification needed. A commenter
noted that the September 11 rule offers some additional information on
acceptable ranges but could be improved. The BIS response to Comment
(g)(3) in the September 11 rule states that the exclusion request form
allows for a product that may be within a specific range but not for
products across a wide range. A permissible range must be within the
minimum and maximum range that is specified in the tariff provision and
applicable legal notes for the provision. This commenter believes that
this suggests that products identical in all aspects, with the
exception of a dimensional characteristic, and classified within the
same HTSUS statistical reporting number, could be included within a
single request. However, the commenter was concerned that the
regulatory text under paragraph (c)(2) suggests that separate exclusion
requests must be submitted for steel products with ``distinct critical
dimensions'' covered by a common HTSUS statistical reporting number,
and examples provided in the rule are for specific sizes of products,
which does not appear inconsistent with Comment (g)(3) from the
September 11 rule.
BIS response: Commerce agrees a clarification to paragraph (c)(2)
is warranted. This interim final rule, as described below in the
regulatory changes, removes the word ``distinct'' before ``critical''
in the example
[[Page 81064]]
provided under paragraph (c)(2). This change is made to avoid any
potential confusion on the scope of ranges that are permissible under
an exclusion request. Commerce clarifies that products identical in all
aspects, with the exception of a dimensional characteristic, and that
are classified within the same HTSUS statistical reporting number, may
be included within a single request. However, objections that indicate
the ability to produce one or more products within the range, even if
not the entire range, will be considered to be valid objections to an
exclusion request.
Comment (c)(4): Concerned that Commerce is not adequately reviewing
exclusion requests. A commenter requested that Commerce fully evaluate
all exclusion requests--including those for which no objections are
filed--to ensure that the volumes requested are proportional to the
U.S. market. This commenter was concerned that, generally, it seems
Commerce is not evaluating whether there is actually demand in the
market for these large volumes, and has granted requests based simply
on the absence of any objections.
BIS response: Commerce recognizes that there are exclusion requests
for volumes that exceed prior years' consumption but that often receive
no objections. Commerce also recognizes that there are objections that,
in total, exceed the objectors' total capacity. Commerce is reviewing
this issue to determine whether there is an approach to factor volumes
requested and objected to in an objective, transparent, and efficient
way. As an initial step to address this issue, this interim final rule
makes regulatory changes to the 232 exclusions process, as described
below under the 232 exclusion request volume certification heading to
require a certification from exclusion requesters for volume requested
and, when applicable, a certification for volume requested but
unfulfilled due to legitimate circumstances when submitting exclusion
requests in the 232 Exclusions Portal.
Comment (c)(5): Does not believe Commerce has implemented an
expedited approval process for exclusions that receive no objections--
contrary to what was stated in the September 11 rule and in statements
by Commerce in other venues that Commerce would adopt such an expedited
process. One commenter noted that Commerce does not yet appear to be
adjudicating requests faster as a result of the updated exclusion
process with some exclusion requests.
BIS response: Commerce believes this comment was likely made as
Commerce was working to address the initial backlog of exclusion
requests that did receive objections and does not reflect the current
status. At this time, the expedited review process for exclusions that
do not receive objections is functioning well, with an average response
time, as of July 20, 2020, of approximately 60 days, less than half the
average processing time for exclusions that receive objections and a
significant decrease in overall response times compared to earlier in
the process.
Comment (c)(6): Product descriptions in exclusion requests and
approval decisions need to be more specific to ensure CBP can determine
what is approved. A commenter noted that Commerce has granted a number
of exclusion requests where the ``product description'' on both the
request and Commerce's decision document is only the name for a general
category of products and any detail regarding the size, chemistry, and
other characteristics that may indicate that particular product at
issue is not available from domestic sources are not carried over from
the application. This commenter noted that greater specificity was
needed in the approved exclusions.
BIS response: Commerce works closely with CBP. Additional
information is provided to CBP to ensure that CBP is able to
effectively implement approved exclusions. CBP consults as needed with
Commerce if any questions arise regarding the scope of a specific
approved exclusion request.
Comment (c)(7): Need to specify when the validity of an approved
exclusion request begins. A commenter noted that there has been a
number of exclusions granted where shipments were entered after the
posting of the request but before the decision. The commenter asked for
clarification if the one-year timeframe begins once the decision is
made or if some other point is used to start the one-year timeframe.
BIS response: Commerce clarifies that, as specified in paragraph
(h)(2)(iii)(A) (Effective date for approved exclusions), an approved
exclusion will be effective five business days after publication of the
Commerce response granting an exclusion in the 232 Exclusions Portal.
If granted, exclusions are generally effective for one year from the
date of signature on the Decision Memo. Companies may also file Post-
Summary Corrections with CBP on unliquidated entries to recoup any
tariffs paid on products that made entry between the submission date
and the date of signature. Companies are able to receive retroactive
relief on granted requests dating back to the date of the request's
submission on unliquidated entries. However, requesters should note
that where retroactive relief is granted, the quantities granted
retroactive relief are still counted against the total quantity granted
in the exclusion. The exclusion request expires when either the
quantity granted has been exhausted or the exclusion reaches the end of
the effective period specified in the decision memo (generally one year
from the date of the decision), whichever comes first, and no pro-rata
additional quantity is provided for retroactive relief. Given that
duties do not apply for countries with quotas, retroactive relief is
not applicable for exclusions from quotas.
Once the exclusion becomes effective, the steel or aluminum
articles specified in the approved decision memo in entries that have
not been liquidated by CBP are those eligible for tariff refunds or
tariff exclusions.
Comment (c)(8): Product exclusions should be permanent not
temporary (and on a universal basis). A commenter noted that temporary
exclusions inject significant uncertainty into the business planning of
companies and therefore recommended permanent exclusions.
BIS response: Commerce does not agree that all product exclusions
should be permanent and issued on a universal basis because that would
defeat the purpose of the duties. Commerce does agree that for certain
steel and aluminum articles, a more efficient approval mechanism is
warranted and that the approval should be universal. Specifically, for
certain steel and aluminum articles, Commerce has created General
Approved Exclusions (GAEs) under the new supplements no. 2 and 3 to
part 705 being added to this rule, which will be available to all
importers.
Comment (c)(9): Create streamlined process to allow one company
seeking an exclusion for the same product already approved to a second
company to quickly obtain an approved exclusion. A commenter requested
that Commerce provide a streamlined process whereby a second company
seeking to use an exclusion already granted to a U.S. company can
quickly obtain the right to use the same product exclusion.
BIS response: Commerce does not agree. The exclusion process is
intended to be specific to each requester and each request must be
reviewed on its own merits, allowing for potential objections and
permitting rebuttal and surrebuttal process to play out as needed. As
referenced in the previous comment, the GAEs are also responsive to
some of what this commenter is requesting in
[[Page 81065]]
terms of creating a more efficient approval process where Commerce
determines that relief is warranted in a particular circumstance for
all importers.
Comment (c)(10): Commerce should use its discretion to make
exclusions available to all importers. A commenter requested that if a
product is not made in the United States or is not made in sufficient
quantity or quality, Commerce must grant a broader product exclusion
(not just on a company-by-company, product-by-product basis). Another
commenter noted that the Secretary and others at Commerce have
repeatedly denied associations the ability to submit exclusion requests
on behalf of their industries for widely used goods, because Commerce
sought to identify those products receiving the most requests. However,
the Secretary has yet to exercise this authority to grant general
exclusions despite the same HTSUS codes receiving multiple requests.
BIS response: As noted above, in this rule, Commerce is creating
GAEs with the additions of supplement no. 2 and 3 to part 705. The
creation of GAEs addresses this comment and will create a more
efficient 232 exclusion process and reduce the burdens on exclusion
requesters.
Comment (c)(11): Explain circumstances under which BIS will approve
broader product exclusions and how U.S. companies may request such an
exclusion. A commenter noted that Commerce continues to state that it
is considering approving broader exclusion requests, which can apply to
multiple importers. However, no additional guidance has been provided
as to how groups of companies can ask for such a broader exclusion.
BIS response: This rule explains the circumstances when Commerce
will approve broader product exclusions. These provisions are described
in the new supplements no. 2 and 3 to part 705 with the addition of
GAEs. The introductory text of the new supplements explain the process
of how Commerce will approve these GAEs. As previously noted, these
determinations for what steel or aluminum articles warrant being
included in a GAE will be made by Commerce, in consultation with the
other agencies referenced in the new supplements. The public will not
be involved in requesting new or revised GAEs, but Commerce will use
the information provided in exclusion requests to inform its review
process for what additional GAE should be added or what revisions
should be made to existing GAEs.
Comment (c)(12): Process for making changes to an approved
exclusion request. A commenter requested guidance be provided for how
to make a correction to an application for exclusion after the
exclusion has been approved.
BIS response: This is a feature under consideration, but until that
revision can be implemented, a new exclusion request will need to be
submitted in the event of such circumstances. Commerce does clarify
that BIS will make, when warranted in the 232 Exclusions Portal,
technical corrections and a few other forms of ``non-substantive
changes'' including: Importer of record (IOR) changes; supplier/
manufacturer changes; corrections to match product descriptions with
product specifications; and corrections to organization information
(i.e., accidental transposition of fields).
Objections
Comment (d)(1): Concerned that Commerce has too much leeway to
interpret the criteria ``not produced in the United States in a
sufficient and reasonably available amount'' and ``not produced in the
United States in a satisfactory quality.'' A commenter was concerned
that this broad interpretation by Commerce could lead to the negation
of exclusion requests in situations where one company files an
objection that claims that it in theory could make that product in
sufficient quantity or quality. The commenter noted that rebuttals to
these claims are difficult to make without more detailed information
from objectors on how they could make products in sufficient quantity
or quality.
BIS response: The criteria comes from the underlying Proclamations
that authorize the creation of the 232 exclusions process. Therefore,
Commerce does not have the discretion to change the criteria. Commerce
added the rebuttal process, as well as the surrebuttal process, to
allow requesters and objectors to further address the representations
made in objections and rebuttals. Ultimately, if an exclusion request
is not approved because of an objection, the exclusion requester will
be able to determine definitively whether an objector is in fact able
to provide the steel or aluminum article in question by attempting to
obtain the product from the objector. Should all objectors be unable to
produce a requested product as they represented in their objections,
the requester may submit a new request with documentation evidencing
this refusal. Commerce understands that time is vital to an exclusion
requester and seeks to ensure that objectors provide sufficient
information for a thorough evaluation of the request and objection.
Moreover, objectors must certify their ability to manufacture the
products described within their objections.
Comment (d)(2): Objections should be reviewed cumulatively. A
commenter is concerned that Commerce is not considering the cumulative
impact of objections to exclusions. This commenter noted that U.S.
producers that are filing objections to exclusion requests are
routinely stating that the objector can and would fill the demand for
the subject product. This commenter noted that while it may be true
that the objector could reasonably expect to fill the needs of an
individual company making an exclusion request, it is possible (or
likely) that the objector could not fill the full demand for that
product from all companies requesting an exclusion let alone all of the
demand from other customers in the U.S.
BIS response: Commerce is aware of this concern and has evaluated
statistics on the 232 exclusions process, determining that, although
there may be some anecdotal examples of where this occurred, as a
general trend, the statistics do not support that this is a significant
issue with objections in the 232 exclusions process. In the past year,
BIS has received objections to exclusion requests for approximately 19
million metric tons of steel products, or roughly 16% of total U.S.
steel production capacity. None of the companies with publicly
available capacity figures objected to more than their total capacity.
When factoring in that multiple companies often object to the same
exclusion request, volume objected to as a percentage of total capacity
was significantly lower. Exclusion requesters are encouraged to provide
documentation in their requests or rebuttal filings that objectors are
unable to supply the products being requested because of insufficient
capacity.
Comment (d)(3): Exclusion process guidelines are unclear about the
obligations that come with filing an objection. A commenter asked for
clarification from Commerce about whether producers should be
submitting objections if they have the capability to make a product,
but not the immediate capacity, or if they can only produce a fraction
of the requested volume for a specific manufacturer. For example, the
commenter noted that aluminum producers have expressed a concern that
filing an objection will obligate that producer to offer for sale the
full scope and volume of imports included in a request--which, if
importers are
[[Page 81066]]
requesting massive volumes, might be impossible.
BIS response: Commerce agrees this should be clarified in the
regulations and makes changes to paragraph (c)(6)(i), as described
below, to address this issue. Commerce has the ability to deny a part
of an exclusion request when an objector demonstrates sufficiently in
the objection and any potential surrebuttal that they are able to
produce a portion of the requested quantity of a steel or aluminum
article within the required time needed by the importer. Therefore,
objectors should not be deterred from submitting objections when they
may not be able to fulfill 100% of the requested exclusion. Over time,
as more of their domestic capacity comes back online or is added, these
same objectors may be able to fulfill larger percentages of the
exclusion requests, which would help to better achieve the stated
purposes of the duties in helping to support the domestic production
capabilities and capacity that are critical to protecting U.S. national
security. Commerce is reviewing this issue to determine whether there
is an objective, transparent, and efficient approach to take into
consideration volumes requested and objected to under the 232
exclusions process.
Comment (d)(4): Modify the objection form (and the rebuttal and
surrebuttal form) to clarify whether companies can object on the
ostensible grounds that they have the capability to make a product. A
commenter requested guidance on how Commerce will consider objections
from producers that have the capability to make a product but do not
have immediately available capacity to meet the importer's stated
needs.
BIS response: Commerce does not agree that the objection form, or
the rebuttal or surrebuttal form need to be updated to address this
commenter's concern. The information required on rebuttal and
surrebuttal forms, as well as the objection criteria specified in
paragraph (d), provides a clear standard that Commerce may apply. After
reviewing an objection, rebutters may also inform the Commerce review
process by evaluating and commenting on whether an objector will be
able to provide the needed steel or aluminum article in the quantity
and quality and to make that ``immediately available'' from an
exclusion requester's perspective. As described below, this rule makes
additional changes for what constitutes being ``immediately
available,'' and these changes will further clarify the application of
this criteria to make sure that U.S. producers are being held to the
same standard as potential foreign competitors in meeting the time
required for delivery of the steel or aluminum article for which they
are requesting an exclusion.
Comment (d)(5): Objecting parties should be required to fill
orders. A commenter noted that this would prevent the objection process
from becoming a lever for business competition with domestic parties
objecting to an exclusion request and then refusing to fill orders or
only filling orders at inflated prices. This commenter also asked that
companies that were denied an exclusion requested on the basis of an
objection be permitted to show evidence of an inability to secure
material and gain an exception if the objecting party cannot fill
orders.
BIS response: Commerce understands the reasoning behind this
comment but is also mindful that it is not the role of Commerce to
dictate whether an objector must sell the steel or aluminum article, or
whether the exclusion requester must purchase the steel or aluminum
article from the objector. For example, as the commenter noted, the
objector may be able to provide the steel or aluminum but at a price
that is not tenable for the exclusion requester or at a price that does
not justify the exclusion requester switching suppliers of the steel or
aluminum article. Commerce believes that these types of business
decisions should be left to the two companies involved so as to not
unduly influence the functioning of the market. As for the request to
allow an exclusion requester to subsequently reference in a new
exclusion request that an objector was not able to provide the steel or
aluminum in a previous exclusion request, the current process already
addresses that sufficiently. First, the exclusion requester may submit
a new exclusion request. The earlier objector may choose not to object
to the new exclusion request based on their past experience of not
being able to provide the steel or aluminum article. Assuming no other
objector comes forward, the exclusion request will be reviewed under
the expedited process. If the same objector objects to the new
exclusion request, the rebuttal process allows the exclusion requester
to document in the rebuttal the past activity with that objector.
Comment (d)(6): Objections should also be rejected for
incompleteness. If Commerce is rejecting requests based on
incompleteness, we believe it should extend the same scrutiny to
objections.
BIS response: Commerce agrees and does reject objections for
incompleteness when warranted. BIS does review objections (and
rebuttals/surrebuttals) for completeness, but a rejection is rare for
these filings in the 232 Exclusions Portal. The Portal has mandatory
fields that ensure most filings are complete. However, there is a
different standard of what is necessary for a complete submission of an
exclusion request versus an objection. The former generally must meet
more specific review criteria. At this time, objectors may list
capacity, utilization, manufacturing, or delivery time data as CBI on
the objection form. Commerce's International Trade Administration
(ITA), on behalf of BIS and Commerce, will then request this
information if needed.
Comment (d)(7): Delivery times are getting much longer because of
the tariffs and U.S. producers are approaching maximum capacity
utilization rates. A commenter noted that prior to the imposition of
tariffs for non-specialty metals, many steel users reported roughly
six-week to eight-week lead times. Since the steel tariffs took effect,
those same members report the doubling of delivery times, creating
significant delays and interruptions in the manufacturing supply chain
that could lead Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) to source their
inputs from non[hyphen]U.S. sources that experience less volatility due
to government interference.
BIS response: To the extent there has been an increase in delivery
times related to the tariffs, importers seeking exclusions can always
import the article and pay the tariffs while their exclusion requests
are pending. In addition, an objector must have the article
``immediately available'' in the needed quantity and quality. As
referenced below in the clarifications being made to ``immediately
available,'' the previous criteria were holding U.S. producers in many
cases to shorter delivery times than foreign competitors, a discrepancy
that is being addressed in this rule. Commerce believes that the
``immediately available'' criterion, which is being refined in this
rule, provides a reasonable standard that should not result in a
lengthening of the time period for delivery of steel and aluminum
articles for U.S. users.
Comment (d)(8): Producers should be held accountable. A commenter
requested that Commerce hold organizations that file objections to the
highest of standards. Commerce should require specificity before
considering the objection and should question and verify the assertions
made by the objectors or claims made in surrebuttals.
BIS response: Commerce agrees that all parties, both objectors and
requesters, should be held to the
[[Page 81067]]
standards set forth in the regulations. Accordingly, parties making
submissions to Commerce with regard to an exclusion request are
required to legally certify the veracity of the submission. These
standards are specified on the objection and surrebuttal forms, in the
criteria specified in paragraphs (d) and (g), on the exclusion request
and rebuttal forms, and in the criteria specified in paragraphs (c) and
(f) of supplement no. 1 to part 705.
Comment (d)(9): U.S. steel producers are approaching maximum
capacity utilization rates. A commenter noted that one objector
reported its facility is currently operating at an 89% capacity
utilization rate, well above the 80% target set by Commerce and at
levels not seen since prior to the Great Recession. This commenter also
noted that the American Iron and Steel Institute reported that for the
week ending November 10, 2018, domestic raw steel production saw a
capacity utilization rate of 81.7%, also above the 80% threshold.
BIS response: As stated in the 232 report, the 80 percent figure is
an ``average'' rate for financial viability of the industry which is
``necessary to sustain adequate profitability and continued capital
investment, research, and development, and workforce enhancement in the
steel sector.'' The U.S. steel industry's capacity utilization rates
have not been sustained. That said, making changes to the duties being
imposed and/or quotas implemented are outside the scope of this rule.
Criteria Defining What Is Meant by Available ``immediately''
Comment (e)(1): September 11 rule defining what was meant by
available ``immediately'' was a positive step that improved the 232
process. A commenter noted that setting a clear definition of
``available immediately'' at eight weeks is a reasonable timeline and
helps provide stability to steel and aluminum[hyphen]using
manufacturers.
BIS response: Commerce agrees that providing a definition of
``immediately available'' was a positive step in providing greater
transparency and consistency for the 232 exclusion process. However,
defining ``immediately available'' as eight weeks meant that, in
certain cases, U.S. producers could be held to a shorter delivery time
than foreign competitors and was more restrictive than the timeframe
needed by the importer for their business needs. As described below, to
address this fairness issue and to create equal treatment, this interim
final rule revises the criteria for available ``immediately'' and
specifies that if an objector is asserting that it is not currently
producing the steel or aluminum identified in an exclusion request but
can produce the steel or aluminum, the objector must be able to make it
available in accordance with the commercial needs of the U.S. user of
the steel or aluminum, as described in the exclusion request. Under
this revised criteria in paragraph (d)(4), the objector must identify
how it will be able to produce and deliver the quantity of steel or
aluminum needed either within eight weeks, or if after eight weeks, by
a date which is earlier than the date that a named foreign supplier can
deliver the entire quantity of the requested product. It is incumbent
on both the exclusion requester and the objecting producers to provide
supplemental evidence supporting their claimed delivery times.
Comment (e)(2): Objections that do not clearly meet the
``immediately'' standard should be rejected. A commenter noted that
objections to exclusion requests available on the 232 Exclusions Portal
reveal numerous vague assertions that clearly do not meet the available
``immediately'' threshold set forth by Commerce. This commenter
recommends that Commerce reject these objections outright.
BIS response: Commerce holds objectors to the standard specified in
the regulations under paragraph (d) and requires objectors to complete
the objection form, and the surrebuttal form as applicable, fully and
accurately. If an objector is not able to meet the available
``immediately'' criteria, Commerce will not deny such an exclusion
request. Requesters can provide additional information on the rebuttal
form. In reviewing the exclusion request to make a final determination,
Commerce takes into account information provided in the rebuttal to
evaluate whether the objector can produce the article in sufficient
quantity and quality, and within the time specified in the criteria in
paragraph (d) of supplement no. 1 to part 705.
Comment (e)(3): Defining eight weeks as ``immediate delivery'' is
unrealistic and it would be better to make the standard based on the
nature of the product. A commenter noted that it is unrealistic to
require domestic producers to supply a requested product in the volume
requested within eight weeks as a prerequisite to filing a valid
objection and that this requirement appears to reflect a
misunderstanding of how both the steel industry and international
shipping work. This commenter also noted that in determining that eight
weeks is the appropriate timeframe, Commerce regrettably rejected a
suggestion that the time frame should depend on the nature of the
product--with simpler products subject to a shorter timeframe than more
sophisticated products--and in any case, should be no shorter than 12
to 16 weeks.
BIS response: As described above, Commerce agrees that
clarification is warranted for use of eight weeks under the available
``immediately'' criteria. The changes this rule makes will also be
responsive to this commenter's concerns.
Comment (e)(4): Allowing foreign suppliers one year to supply the
steel or aluminum for approved exclusions, but only allowing eight
weeks for domestic suppliers creates an unfair playing field. A
commenter noted that granted exclusions are valid for one year and will
presumably be supplied by foreign producers over the course of that
year, not all at once. This commenter noted that requiring a U.S.
producer to supply the consumer within eight weeks makes little sense
and runs counter to the rationale underlying the adjustments to imports
ordered by the President.
BIS response: Commerce agrees and is making changes in the rule for
how ``immediately'' is defined to create equal treatment for U.S. and
foreign producers.
Comment (e)(5): ``Immediately'' should mean being able to provide
the steel or aluminum as quickly as a foreign supplier. A commenter
noted that the minimum standard that Commerce should establish for
objections is 12 weeks (84 days), which they consider a reasonable and
representative time for a foreign producer to make a simple steel item
and ship it to the United States. This commenter recommended that
Commerce should only determine that the domestic product is not
``immediately'' available when a domestic source cannot provide
material before offshore suppliers.
BIS response: Commerce has retained eight weeks as part of the
available ``immediately'' criteria under paragraph (d)(4) but, as
described elsewhere in this rule, is also making changes to the
criteria that are responsive to this commenter's concerns.
Comment (e)(6): Need to specify the quantity that needs to be
supplied within the ``immediate delivery'' timeframe. A commenter noted
that there is no indication in the current version of the regulations
of the quantity that must be supplied within the ``immediate delivery''
timeframe. The commenter noted that the current regulations specify
that if an objector is not currently producing the product at
[[Page 81068]]
issue, then ``the objector must identify how it will be able to produce
the article within eight weeks,'' detailing in writing the timeline to
start production. This commenter recommends clarifying whether this
means the production must merely start, shipments of commercial
quantities must begin, or the total quantity must be delivered within
the specified time.
BIS response: Commerce agrees this should be clarified. As
described below, this rule revises paragraph (d)(4) of supplement no. 1
to specify the objector must identify how it will be able to produce
and deliver the quantity of steel or aluminum needed either within
eight weeks, or if after eight weeks, by a date which is earlier than
the date that a named foreign supplier can deliver the entire quantity
of the requested product. The addition of the phrase ``and deliver''
after the term ``produce'' will address the concern raised by this
commenter.
Comment (e)(7): Production capacity for steel and aluminum
producers must be considered during objection and rebuttal process. As
Commerce considers objections filed by steel and aluminum companies,
Commerce must ask the steel and aluminum producers several probing
questions to truly determine the capabilities of suppliers to meet the
consuming industries' needs and consider these answers surrounding
domestic capacity when making exclusion decisions. The commenter noted
that these questions should include at a minimum: ``Do the steel or
aluminum companies currently manufacture and supply the product in the
United States? If so, have their deliveries to their customers been
timely, and is so, for how long? What is the steel or aluminum
companies' current manufacturing capacity and timeframe for ramping up
if they currently do not have the capacity?''
BIS response: Commerce believes the information required on the
objection form, surrebuttal form as applicable, and the criteria in
paragraph (d) to supplement no. 1 that is used by Commerce, is
sufficiently informative to determine the production capabilities of
objectors. This information is also supplemented by the evidence
provided through rebuttals and surrebuttals, and through CBI submitted
in support of rebuttals and surrebuttals. Commerce does not believe
additional questions are required to be added to the objection or
surrebuttal forms in order to make determinations on the production
capabilities of objectors.
Rebuttals and Surrebuttals
Comment (f)(1): Seven days is not enough time for rebuttals and
surrebuttals. A commenter does not agree that allowing only seven days
for such comments is appropriate. This commenter noted that considering
the volumes of new information being submitted in some rebuttals, one
week is not enough time for a domestic producer to analyze the
information and offer a meaningful surrebuttal.
BIS response: Commerce does not agree. The length of time for
decisions under the 232 exclusions process is a concern for many
entities, including Commerce. The inclusion of the rebuttal and
surrebuttal comment periods helps to better inform the 232 exclusion
process for Commerce, but Commerce is also mindful not to allow these
additional comment periods to add any more time to the review process
than is needed. Commerce believes that those parties involved in a 232
submission that receives an objection or a rebuttal should place a
priority on reviewing the objection or rebuttal in a timely fashion,
submitting any warranted rebuttal or surrebuttal. Commerce believes a
one-week period is sufficient for the review of an objection or
rebuttal, and allows for the party to conduct any needed follow up
conversations and to prepare and submit a rebuttal or surrebuttal as
applicable.
Comment (f)(2): Allowing unlimited number of refilings of
exclusions undermines the usefulness of objections, and the rebuttal/
surrebuttal process. A commenter questioned whether rebuttals and
surrebuttals are a worthwhile use of resources if requesters remain
free to submit unlimited numbers of exemption requests. This commenter
noted that a requester could, in lieu of a rebuttal, file a revised
request addressing whatever deficiencies were identified in the
objection. This commenter noted that this would alleviate some of the
unfairness of requiring domestic producers to respond to untold volumes
of new information in just a few days and would aid Commerce's analysis
by promoting thoughtful and complete original application requests
instead of reviews of hurried rebuttal and surrebuttal comments.
BIS response: As a general matter, Commerce believes that it is
important to allow an unlimited number of exclusion requests to be
submitted. As described above, the ability to submit a successive
exclusion request is a key way that the 232 exclusion process addresses
cases where an objection may have resulted in the denial of an
exclusion request, but then subsequently no objector was able to
deliver the steel or aluminum in the quantity and quality needed
``immediately.'' Therefore, Commerce does not agree that a restriction
should be added to restrict the number of exclusion requests that may
be submitted.
Comment (f)(3): Allowing unlimited refilings of exclusions allows
for the potential to overwhelm potential objectors. A commenter noted
that if Commerce continues the rebuttal and surrebuttal process, it
should consider limiting a party's ability to file multiple exclusion
requests for the same product. This commenter noted that the current
system provides an incentive for entities seeking exclusions to submit
them over and over again with only minor modifications in an attempt to
overwhelm domestic producers so that domestic interests fail to file
objections because there are simply too many requests or they believe
an objection to have already been filed.
BIS response: As noted above, Commerce is reviewing the issue of
the volume of articles subject to exclusion requests and objections and
will address this issue in a subsequent IFR.
232 Exclusions Portal
Since the launch of the 232 Exclusions Portal, Commerce has
implemented a number of enhancements that address some of the key
comments received in response to the June 10 and May 26 rule. Commerce
has highlighted the changes made to the 232 Exclusions Portal, which
are responsive to these comments received in response to the June 10
rule, as well as some of the comments received on the May 26 notice.
There are additional requested changes to the 232 Exclusions Portal in
response to the June 10 rule and the May 26 notice that Commerce is
still reviewing. Commerce will summarize and address those comments in
at least one subsequent rule, although enhancements in the
functionality of the 232 Exclusions Portal, similar to the enhancements
described below, will likely be implemented on an ongoing basis as they
are ready to be implemented.
Comment (g)(1): Ability to import previously-filed submissions. A
commenter noted that allowing the ability to import previously-filed
submissions would be extremely beneficial for exclusion requesters and
objectors, reducing the time burdens on repeat users of the 232
Exclusions Portal. Another commenter noted that the nature of manual
entry in the new 232 Exclusions Portal is likely to create
[[Page 81069]]
significant opportunity for errors and requires significantly more time
and resource allocation than under the previous system. The ability to
reuse information included in previously submitted 232 submission forms
would be very beneficial. A commenter acknowledged that the user guide
for the 232 Exclusions Portal provides information on creating a
profile within web-browsers, but a simplified system for importing
previously-filed submissions by users through their dashboard would be
immensely beneficial for all users of the system.
BIS response: Commerce clarifies here that the AutoFill Feature of
the 232 Exclusions Portal addresses these comments. The AutoFill
Feature that launched with the 232 Exclusions Portal addresses several
of the comments submitted in response to the June 10 rule. AutoFill
enables users to effectively import previous filings by allowing them
to fill out a filing once and then save that template for reuse in
future filings. It also allows users to save their in-progress filings
as templates. A native save/share feature is still under discussion.
Comment (g)(2): Increasing the search functionality in the 232
Exclusions Portal. Commerce received a number of comments requesting
improvements to various aspects of the search functionality in the 232
Exclusions Portal. A commenter requested that product class should be a
searchable field, and that product class should be added to the main
portal screen with a filtering function. Another commenter noted that
the search functionality needs to be improved by adding a simple ``find
all'' type of search capability in the 232 Exclusions Portal. One
commenter noted that the search functionality is not as good as it is
in www.regulations.gov. Another commenter requested a change be made to
allow the download of individual submissions and all data in the new
portal. Specifically, this commenter noted that it is extremely
important that all users can download both individual submissions
(exclusion requests, objections, rebuttal, and surrebuttal filings) and
the information found in the portal in its entirety, as can be done
currently in www.regulations.gov. Another commenter noted that it is
difficult to extract data for queried databases, particularly from the
volume and origin fields. Another commenter requested allowing users to
refresh the portal without resetting the filters.
BIS response: Commerce had addressed a number of these concerns
with the 232 Exclusions Portal by improving the Public Data Extract
functionality of the portal. The Public Data Extract tool allows users
to download a filterable and searchable set of all filed data in the
232 Exclusions Portal, effectively functioning as an advanced search
feature. Commerce will continue to consider additional measures to
improve the Public Data Extract tool.
Comment (g)(3): Improving Dashboard functionality. A commenter
requested that the dashboard allow organizations to allow others in
their organizations to view submissions made by others in the same
organization.
BIS response: Commerce has made changes under the Dashboard Limit
to address these types of requests for additional Dashboard
functionality. Commerce expanded the Dashboard View in the 232
Exclusions Portal in 2020, improving dashboard functionality by
allowing users to see all of their filings in one location on the front
page of their Dashboard.
Comment (g)(4): Allow extensions of time when 232 Exclusions Portal
is not accessible. A commenter expressed concern about technical issues
with accessing the new 232 Exclusions Portal. This commenter requested
that if documented information technology issues with the portal occur,
Commerce should be able to extend the time for companies to file
exclusion requests or objections.
BIS response: Commerce has taken steps to address technical
extensions for timelines for 232 submission. Specifically, BIS works
with users on a case-by-case basis to address any technical issues
encountered and take necessary corrective action. Occasionally these
corrective measures may include reopening filing windows during periods
in which they were inaccessible.
Changes Made in This Interim Final Rule To Improve the 232 Exclusions
Process
Simplification of the Text
As described further below, this rule makes three changes to
simplify the text for the 232 exclusions process by removing one of the
supplements, and making conforming changes to add references to
aluminum in the steel supplement; removing references to
www.regulations.gov; and, as a conforming change, removing the Annex
that provided steps for using www.regulations.gov.
When Commerce added supplements nos. 1 and 2 to part 705, the
objective was to create two parallel supplements with one specific to
the 232 exclusion process for steel under supplement no. 1, and a
second one specific to the 232 exclusion process for aluminum under
supplement no. 2. Commerce has reevaluated whether this parallel
structure is needed because the vast majority of the text is identical
between the two supplements and, when making updates to improve the
regulatory provisions, it creates the potential for unintended
differences between the two supplements and makes updating the two
supplements more burdensome than necessary. For these reasons, in this
rule Commerce is removing supplement no. 2 to part 705 and is making
conforming changes to supplement no. 1 where information that is
specific to aluminum needs to be added because of the removal of
supplement no. 2.
This interim final rule updates and simplifies the text in
supplement no. 1 by removing various references to www.regulations.gov
and all text that was previously needed in supplement no. 1 to describe
the previous process of using www.regulations.gov for submitting 232
submissions. At this time, there are no longer any more pending 232
exclusion requests in www.regulations.gov. Therefore, Commerce is
removing those references to www.regulations.gov from supplement no. 1
in this rule, thus simplifying and shortening the text in supplement
no. 1 considerably.
As an additional conforming change related to the removal of
references to www.regulations.gov, this rule removes Annex 1 to
Supplements No. 1 and 2 to Part 705_Steps for Using Regulations.gov to
File Rebuttals and Surrebuttals. The additional guidance included in
this Annex is no longer needed because www.regulations.gov is no longer
being used for the 232 exclusions process. The 232 Exclusions Portal
does not require guidance on the steps to be included in the
regulations.
Adding Reminder Regarding Consequences for False Statements or
Representations
This interim final rule adds a new Note 2 to Paragraph (b) to
remind all parties submitting 232 submissions under supplement no. 1 to
part 705 that it is a criminal offense to willfully make a false
statement or representation to any department or agency of the United
States Government as to any matter within its jurisdiction [18 U.S.C.
1001(2018)]. As a conforming change, this interim final rule
redesignates the existing Note to Paragraph (b) as Note 1 to Paragraph
(b).
[[Page 81070]]
Improving the Fairness and Efficiency of the Review Process
In order to improve the efficiency of the review process, this
interim final rule reduces the page limit for exclusion requests,
objections to submitted exclusion requests, rebuttals, and
surrebuttals. In paragraph (e), this rule removes the 25-page limit for
exclusions and objections to submitted exclusions requests, and
replaces that with a 5,000-word limit. In paragraph (f)(2), this rule
removes the ten-page limit for rebuttals and replaces that with a
2,500-word limit. In paragraph (g)(2), this rule removes the ten-page
limit for surrebuttals and replaces that with a 2,500-word limit.
232 Exclusion Request Volume Certification
This interim final rule makes changes to ensure that the volume
request in exclusion requests is consistent with the past use of steel
or aluminum by an exclusion requester. This interim final rule revises
paragraph (c)(5) (Substance of exclusion requests) by redesignating the
existing text of paragraph (c)(5) as a new paragraph (c)(5)(i). This
interim final rule adds a new paragraph (c)(5)(ii) (Certification for
volume requested).
New paragraph (c)(5)(i) specifies that in order to ensure that the
volume requested in an exclusion request is consistent with legitimate
business needs for the same steel or aluminum articles obtained (i.e.,
imported from abroad either directly by the requester or indirectly by
purchasing from distributors) by the entity requesting an exclusion, a
certification needs to be made in the 232 Exclusions Portal when
completing the submission of a 232 exclusion request. The 232
Exclusions Portal will include the text specified in paragraphs
(c)(5)(ii)(A)-(E), and this exclusion request certification for volume
requested must be signed in the 232 Exclusions Portal by an
organization official specifically authorized to certify the document
as being accurate and complete to the best of his/her knowledge.
The person signing the certification under paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(A)
must attest that the exclusion requester intends to manufacture,
process, or otherwise transform the imported product for which they
have filed an exclusion request, or has a purchase order or orders for
such products.
Under paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(B), the exclusion requester must certify
that they do not intend to use the requested exclusion, if granted,
solely to hedge or arbitrage the price.
Under paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(C), the exclusion requester must certify
that they expect to consume, sell, or otherwise use the total volume of
product across all their active exclusions and pending exclusion
requests in the course of their organization's business activities
within the next calendar year.
Under new paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(D), the exclusion requester is
submitting an exclusion request for a product for which they previously
received an exclusion, they must certify that they either imported the
full amount of their approved exclusion(s) last year, or intended to
import the full amount but could not due to one of the reasons
specified in new paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(D)(1)-(3). The criteria included
in new paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(D)(1)-(3) that must be attested to, if
applicable, are intended to ensure that, if a requester did not import
the full amount, there were legitimate business reasons justifying that
outcome. These legitimate business reasons are loss of contract(s);
business downturns; or other factors that were beyond the
organization's control that directly resulted in less need for steel or
aluminum articles.
Under new paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(E), the exclusion requester
certifies that the exclusion amount requested this year is in line with
what their organization expects to import based on their current
business outlook. Lastly, paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(E) requires the
exclusion requester to certify that, if contacted by Commerce, their
organization will provide documentation that justifies the assertions
in the certification regarding past imports of steel or aluminum
articles and projections for the current year, as it relates to past
and current calendar year exclusion requests.
This interim final rule adds a new Note 2 to paragraphs (c)(5)(i)
and (ii) to make the public aware that an exclusion request that does
not include a certification made in accordance with (c)(5)(i) and (ii)
will be treated as an incomplete submission and will therefore be
rejected.
Clarification of Eight Weeks and Available ``Immediately''
This rule makes changes to clarify when an objector would be
required to be able to provide the steel or aluminum in the quantity
and quality to which they were objecting on the basis that they could
provide that steel or aluminum ``immediately.''
In the introductory text of paragraph (c)(6), this rule revises the
criteria to clarify that an objector must be able to provide the steel
or aluminum ``by a date earlier than the time required for the
requester to obtain the entire quantity of the product from the
requester's foreign supplier,'' instead of being strictly limited to
producing it within eight weeks.
In paragraph (c)(6)(i), this rule retains the term ``immediately,''
but clarifies that the aluminum or steel does not need to be produced
within eight weeks in certain cases. This interim final rule clarifies
that ``immediately'' now means produced and delivered within eight
weeks or, if not possible, then produced and delivered within a time
frame that is equal to or earlier than that needed by the requester as
demonstrated by the time required to obtain the product from the
requester's foreign supplier. This change is made to create a more
equal playing field between U.S. objectors and foreign producers, and
to ensure that U.S. producers are not given less time to be able to
meet the steel or aluminum demand being requested in an exclusion
request. For example, if a requester can obtain foreign-produced steel
described in an exclusion request in 12 weeks, there is no reason to
arbitrarily limit the U.S. producer to having to produce the steel
within eight weeks. The change this interim final rule makes to the
term ``immediately'' addresses this issue.
This interim final rule also revises paragraph (c)(6)(i) to address
the scenario where an objector can produce and deliver a portion of the
steel or aluminum that is being requested in the exclusion request.
This new sentence clarifies that, consistent with current practice,
Commerce may partially approve an exclusion request when an objector
can produce and deliver a portion, which is less than 100 percent but
10 percent or more, of the amount of steel or aluminum being requested
in the exclusion request. In such cases, Commerce may partially approve
a requested exclusion for that percentage of imported steel or aluminum
that the objector has demonstrated it can produce and deliver.
This interim final rule revises paragraph (d)(4) to clarify that,
if an objector is not currently producing the steel or aluminum but can
produce the aluminum or steel and make it available ``immediately,''
the objector still has ground to object to the exclusion request. This
rule defines the term ``immediately'' to mean that the objector must be
able to produce and deliver the quantity of steel or aluminum needed
either within eight weeks, or if after eight weeks, by a date earlier
than the time required for the requester to obtain the entire quantity
of the product from the requester's foreign supplier. It is incumbent
upon both the exclusion requester and objecting producers to
[[Page 81071]]
provide supplemental evidence supporting their claimed delivery times.
General Approved Exclusions (GAEs)
This rule adds a new Supplement No. 2 to Part 705--General Approved
Exclusions (GAEs) for Steel Articles Under the 232 Exclusions Process,
and a new Supplement No. 3 to Part 705--General Approved Exclusions
(GAEs) for Aluminum Articles under the 232 Exclusions Process. These
two supplements identify the steel and aluminum articles that have been
approved for import under a GAE. This rule adds 108 GAEs for steel
articles under supplement no. 2 part 705 and 15 GAEs for aluminum
articles under supplement no. 3 to part 705. Each GAE is identified
under the GAE identifier column, e.g., GAE.1.S: 7304592030 (for the
first approved GAE for steel) or GAE.1.A: 7609000000 (for the first
approved GAE for aluminum).
The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of
Defense, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of State, the
United States Trade Representative, the Assistant to the President for
Economic Policy, the Assistant to the President for National Security
Affairs, and other senior Executive Branch officials as appropriate,
makes these determinations that certain aluminum and steel articles may
be authorized under a GAE consistent with the objectives of the 232
exclusions process as outlined in supplement no. 1 to this part. The
GAEs described in these supplements may be used by any importer. The
two new supplements specify that, in order to use a GAE, the importer
must reference the GAE identifier in the Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE) system that corresponds to the steel or aluminum
articles being imported. GAEs do not include quantity limits. The
effective date for each GAE will be fifteen calendar days after the
date of publication of a Federal Register notice either adding or
revising a specific GAE identifier in supplement no. 1 to this part.
There will be no retroactive relief for GAEs. This interim final rule
also specifies that relief is only available to steel or aluminum
articles that are entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse
for consumption, on or after the effective date of a GAE included in
supplement no. 1 to this part. These GAEs are indefinite in length, but
Commerce may at any time issue a Federal Register notice removing,
revising, or adding to an existing GAE in this supplement as warranted
to align with the objectives of the 232 exclusions process as described
in supplement no. 1 to this part. Commerce may periodically publish
notices of inquiry in the Federal Register soliciting public comments
on potential removals, revisions, or additions to this supplement.
Other Changes and Clarifications to the 232 Exclusions Process
In paragraph (b)(5)(iii), this interim final rule adds a new
paragraph (b)(5)(iii)(A) and redesignates existing paragraphs
(b)(5)(iii)(A)-(C) as paragraphs (B) to (D). New paragraph
(b)(5)(iii)(A) clarifies the process for handling CBI related to
exclusion requests or objections by directing exclusion requesters and
objectors to check the appropriate box in the 232 Exclusions Portal to
indicate that the filer has relevant CBI for consideration when
applicable. This new paragraph also clarifies the existing practice
that if Commerce determines after review that the CBI is needed,
Commerce will directly request the CBI.
In paragraph (c)(2) (Identification of exclusion requests), this
rule removes the word ``distinct'' in the phrase ``distinct critical
dimensions.'' This change is being made to avoid any potential
confusion on the scope of ranges that are permissible under an
exclusion request. This change will make clear that, provided the range
being requested in an exclusion request is within the minimum and
maximum range that is specified in the HTSUS statistical reporting
number and applicable notes for the provision, a single exclusion
request may be requested for that steel or aluminum article. Objections
that indicate the ability to produce one or more products within the
range, even if not the entire range, will be considered to be valid
objections to an exclusion request.
Also in paragraph (c)(2), this rule removes the Note to paragraph
(c)(2) because it is no longer needed. The exclusions form on the 232
Exclusions Portal does not include that block for countries subject to
a quantitative limitation, so the instructions in the Note to paragraph
(c)(2) are no longer needed.
In paragraph (c)(6) (Criteria used to review exclusion requests)
introductory text, this interim final rule adds one sentence at the end
for clarification and to alert the public that items for which a
broader determination has been made will be identified in supplements
no. 2 or 3 to part 705.
In paragraph (d)(3) (Time limit for submitting objections to
submitted exclusions requests), this interim final rule makes revisions
to specify that the 30-day clock starts at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on
the calendar day an exclusion request is posted in the 232 Exclusions
Portal.
In paragraph (h)(1)(i), this interim final rule adds the term
``rejected'' before the phrase ``or denied'' to clarify that exclusion
requests that do not satisfy the requirements specified in paragraphs
(b) and (c) of this supplement may be rejected or denied.
In paragraph (h)(2)(iv) (Validity period for exclusion requests),
this interim final rule makes revisions to add the phrase ``from the
date of the signature on the decision memo'' to clarify that exclusions
will generally be approved for one year from the date of the signature
on the decision memo.
Types of Comments Commerce Is Requesting on This Rule
Commerce is not seeking comments regarding the duties or
quantitative limitations themselves or the exclusion and objection
process overall. Rather, Commerce seeks comments on whether the
specific changes included in this fourth interim final rule have
addressed earlier concerns with the 232 exclusions process.
Specifically, Commerce encourages comments on these 232 exclusions
process changes and on which features are an improvement and comments
highlighting any areas of concern or suggestions for improvement.
Commerce will continue to make improvements to the 232 exclusions
process, including improvements based on comments received on this
rule, and parties will be notified of any additional changes to the 232
exclusions process and of any new features to the 232 Exclusions
Portal.
Rulemaking Requirements
1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has been determined to be a ``significant
regulatory action,'' although not economically significant, under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Pursuant to Proclamations 9704
and 9705 of March 8, 2018, and Proclamations 9776 and 9777 of August
29, 2018, the establishment of procedures for an exclusions process
under each Proclamation shall be published in the
[[Page 81072]]
Federal Register and are exempt from Executive Order 13771.
2. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
(PRA) provides that an agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a
collection of information, and no person is required to respond to nor
be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of
information, unless that collection has obtained Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) approval and displays a currently valid OMB Control
Number.
This final regulation involves four collections currently approved
by OMB with the following control numbers
Exclusions from the Section 232 National Security
Adjustments of Imports of Steel and Aluminum (control number 0694-
0139).
Objections from the Section 232 National Security
Adjustments of Imports of Steel and Aluminum (control number 0694-
0138).
Procedures for Submitting Rebuttals and Surrebuttals
Requests for Exclusions from and Objections to the Section 232
Adjustments for Steel and Aluminum (OMB control number 0694-0141).
Procedures for Submitting Requests for Expedited Relief
from Quantitative Limits--Existing Contract: Section 232 National
Security Investigations of Steel Imports (OMB control number 0694-
0140).
This rule is expected to reduce the burden hours for one of the
collections associated with this rule, OMB control number 0694-0139.
This reduction is expected because of the addition of 108 GAEs for
steel and 15 GAEs for aluminum, which is expected to result in a
decrease of 5,000 exclusion request per year. This is expected to be a
reduction in 5,000 burden hours for a total savings of 740,000 dollars
to the public. This is also expected to be a reduction in 30,000 burden
hours for a total savings of 1,170,000 dollars to the U.S. Government.
The steel and aluminum articles that have been identified as being
eligible for GAEs have typically not received any objections, so the
addition of these new GAEs is not estimated to result in a decrease in
the number of objections, rebuttals, or surrebuttals received by BIS.
This rule is not expected to increase the burden hours for two of the
collections associated with this rule, OMB control numbers 0694-0138,
0694-0141 as minimal changes are anticipated. BIS is making a change to
the collection for OMB control number 0694-0140 to account for
certification that needs to be made in the 232 Exclusions Portal under
paragraph (c)(5)(ii). Any comments regarding the collection of
information associated with this rule, including suggestions for
reducing the burden, may be sent to https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined in Executive Order 13132.
4. The provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, the opportunity for
public comment, and a delay in effective date are inapplicable because
this regulation involves a military or foreign affairs function of the
United States. (See 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). As explained in the reports
submitted by the Secretary to the President, steel and aluminum are
being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such
circumstances as to threaten to impair the national security of the
United States, and therefore the President is implementing these
remedial actions (as described Proclamations 9704 and 9705 of March 8,
2018) to protect U.S. national security interests. That implementation
includes the creation of an effective process by which affected
domestic parties can obtain exclusion requests ``based upon specific
national security considerations.'' Commerce started this process with
the publication of the March 19 rule and refined the process with the
publication of the September 11 and June 10 rules and is continuing
this process with the publication of today's interim final rule. The
revisions to the exclusion request process are informed by the comments
received in response to the March 19 rule and Commerce's experience
with managing the 232 exclusions process. Commenters on the past rules
(March 19, September 11 and June 10 rules) were generally supportive
and welcomed the idea of creating an exclusion process, but most of the
commenters believe the exclusion process, although improving over time,
still could be significantly improved in order for it to achieve the
intended purpose. The commenters identified a number of areas where
transparency, effectiveness, and fairness of the process could be
improved. Commerce understands the importance of having a transparent,
fair, and efficient product exclusion request process, consistent with
the directive provided by the President to create this type of process
to mitigate any unintended consequences of imposing the tariffs on
steel and aluminum in order to protect critical U.S. national security
interests. The publication of today's rule should make further
improvements in all three respects, but because of the scope of this
new process, BIS is publishing today's rule as an interim final rule
with a request for comments.
In addition, Commerce finds that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B) to waive the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act
requiring prior notice and the opportunity for public comment, and that
there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive the delay in
effective date, because such delays would be either impracticable or
contrary to the public interest. In order to ensure that the actions
taken to adjust imports do not undermine users of steel or aluminum
that are subject to the remedial actions instituted by the
Proclamations and that are critical to protecting the national security
of the United States, the Presidential Proclamations authorized the
Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense,
the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of State, the United
States Trade Representative, the Assistant to the President for
Economic Policy, the Assistant to the President for National Security
Affairs, and other senior Executive Branch officials as appropriate, to
grant exclusions for the import of goods not currently available in the
United States in a sufficient quantity or satisfactory quality, or for
other specific national security reasons. The Presidential
Proclamations further directed the Secretary to, within ten days, issue
procedures for submitting and granting these requests for exclusions--
this interim final rule fulfills that direction. As described above,
the Secretary complied with the direction from the President with the
publication of the March 19 rule, as well as in the improvements made
in the September 11 and June 10 rules, and is taking the next step in
improving the 232 exclusions process by making needed changes with the
publication of today's rule. The immediate implementation of an
effective exclusion request process, consistent with the intent of the
Presidential Proclamations, also required creating a process to allow
any individual or organization in the United States to submit
objections to submitted exclusion requests. The objection process was
created with the publication of the March 19 rule, and the rebuttal and
surrebuttal process was added in the publication of the September 11
rule to further improve the 232 exclusions process. The publication of
today's rule makes needed changes in the 232 exclusions process to
create the type of fair, transparent, and efficient process that
[[Page 81073]]
was intended in the March 19, September 11 and June 10 rules, but was
still found lacking by commenters in several key respects. Today's rule
makes critical changes to ensure a fair, transparent, and efficient
exclusion process.
If this interim final rule were to be delayed to allow for public
comment or to provide for a thirty day delay in the date of
effectiveness, companies in the United States would be unable to
immediately benefit from the improvements made in the exclusion,
objection, rebuttal, and surrebuttal process and could face significant
economic hardship, which could potentially create a detrimental effect
on the general U.S. economy. Whether they were supportive of tariffs or
against tariffs, the comments received on the March 19, September 11
and June 10 rules were clear that an efficient exclusion request,
objection, rebuttal, and surrebuttal process was needed, that the March
19 rule had not sufficiently created such a process, and that, although
substantial improvements were made with the publications of the
September 11 and June 10 rules, additional improvements were needed.
Commenters noted that, if specific improvements are not made,
significant economic consequences could occur. Commenters also thought
the inefficiencies of the process could undermine other critical U.S.
national security interests. Likewise, our national security could be
impacted if Commerce lacked adequate information to make a fair,
transparent and efficient determination for all parties involved and to
ensure the critical national security considerations are being
protected.
Because a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for
prior public comment are not required for this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or
by any other law, the analytical requirements of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., are not applicable. Accordingly,
no regulatory flexibility analysis is required and none has been
prepared.
List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 705
Administrative practice and procedure, Business and industry,
Classified information, Confidential business information, Imports,
Investigations, National security.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 705 of subchapter A
of 15 CFR chapter VII is amended as follows:
PART 705--EFFECT OF IMPORTED ARTICLES ON THE NATIONAL SECURITY
0
1. The authority citation for part 705 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as
amended (19 U.S.C. 1862) and Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1979 (44 FR 69273,
December 3, 1979).
0
2. Supplement No. 1 to part 705 is revised to read as follows:
Supplement No. 1 to Part 705--Requirements for Submissions Requesting
Exclusions From the Adjustment of Imports of Aluminum and Steel Imposed
Pursuant to Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as Amended
On March 8, 2018, the President issued Proclamations 9704 and 9705
concurring with the findings of the January 11, 2018 reports of the
Secretary of Commerce on the effects of imports of aluminum and steel
mill articles (steel articles) on the national security and determining
that adjusting aluminum and steel imports through the imposition of
duties is necessary so that their imports will no longer threaten to
impair the national security. Clause 3 of Proclamations 9704 and 9705
also authorized the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the
Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of
State, the United States Trade Representative, the Assistant to the
President for Economic Policy, the Assistant to the President for
National Security Affairs, and other senior Executive Branch officials
as appropriate, to grant exclusions from the duties at the request of
directly affected parties located in the United States if the requested
steel or aluminum article is determined not to be produced in the
United States in a sufficient and reasonably available amount or of a
satisfactory quality or based upon specific national security
considerations. On August 29, 2018, the President issued Proclamation
9776. Clause 1 of Proclamation 9776, authorizes the Secretary of
Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of
the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, the United States Trade
Representative, the Assistant to the President for National Security
Affairs, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, and such
other senior Executive Branch officials as the Secretary deems
appropriate, to provide relief from the applicable quantitative
limitations set forth in Proclamation 9740 and Proclamation 9759 for
steel articles and as set forth in Proclamation 9739 and 9758 for
aluminum articles and their accompanying annexes, as amended, at the
request of a directly affected party located in the United States for
any steel or aluminum article determined by the Secretary to not be
produced in the United States in a sufficient and reasonably available
amount or of a satisfactory quality. The Secretary is also authorized
to provide such relief based upon specific national security
considerations.
(a) Scope. This supplement specifies the requirements and process
for how directly affected parties located in the United States may
submit requests for exclusions from the duties and quantitative
limitations imposed by the President. This supplement also specifies
the requirements and process for how parties in the United States may
submit objections to submitted exclusion requests for relief from the
duties or quantitative limitations imposed by the President and the
process for rebuttals to submitted objections and surrebuttals
(collectively, ``232 submissions''). This supplement identifies the
time periods for such submissions, the methods of submission, and the
information that must be included in such submissions.
(b) Required forms. The 232 Exclusions Portal (https://www.commerce.gov/page/section-232-investigations) includes four web-
based forms that are to be used for submitting exclusion requests,
objections to exclusion requests, rebuttals, and surrebuttals described
in this supplement. On the 232 Exclusions Portal, each web-based form
is available on the portal at the bottom of the preceding filing. For
example, a party submitting an objection will access the objection form
by scrolling to the bottom of the exclusion request, a rebuttal filer
will access the rebuttal form by scrolling to the bottom of the
objection form, and a surrebuttal filer would access the surrebuttal
form by scrolling to the bottom of the rebuttal form. The U.S.
Department of Commerce requires requesters and objectors to use the
appropriate form as specified under paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this
supplement for submitting exclusion requests and objections to
submitted exclusion requests and the forms specified under paragraphs
(b)(3) and (4) of this supplement for submitting rebuttals and
surrebuttals. In addition, submitters of exclusion requests, objections
to submitted exclusion requests, rebuttals, and surrebuttals to the 232
Exclusions Portal will be required to complete a web-based registration
on the 232 Exclusions Portal prior to submitting any
[[Page 81074]]
documents. In order to register, submitters will be required to provide
an email and establish a password for the account. After completing the
registration, submitters will be able to login to an account on the 232
Exclusions Portal and submit exclusion requests, objections, rebuttals,
and surrebuttal documents.
(1) Form required for submitting exclusion requests. The full name
of the form used for submitting steel exclusion requests is Request for
Exclusion from Remedies: Section 232 National Security Investigation of
Steel Imports. The full name of the form used for submitting aluminum
exclusion requests is Request for Exclusion from Remedies: Section 232
National Security Investigation of Aluminum Imports. The Title of the
web-based fillable form for both steel and aluminum in the 232
Exclusions Portal is Exclusion Request.
(2) Form required for submitting objections to submitted exclusion
requests. The name of the form used for submitting objections to
submitted steel exclusion requests is Objection Filing to Posted
Section 232 Exclusion Request: Steel. The name of the form used for
submitting objections to submitted aluminum exclusion requests is
Objection Filing to Posted Section 232 Exclusion Request: Aluminum. The
Title of the web-based fillable form for both steel and aluminum in the
232 Exclusions Portal is Objection.
(3) Form required for submitting rebuttals. The name of the form
used for submitting rebuttals to steel objections is Rebuttal to
Objection Received for Section 232 Exclusion Request: Steel. The name
of the form used for submitting rebuttals to aluminum objections is
Rebuttal to Objection Received for Section 232 Exclusion Request:
Aluminum. The Title of the web-based fillable form for both steel and
aluminum in the 232 Exclusions Portal is Rebuttal.
(4) Form required for submitting surrebuttals. The name of the form
used for submitting surrebuttals to steel objections is Surrebuttal to
Rebuttal Received on Section 232 Objection: Steel. The name of the form
used for submitting surrebuttals to aluminum objections is Surrebuttal
to Rebuttal Received on Section 232 Objection: Aluminum. The Title of
the web-based fillable form for both steel and aluminum in the 232
Exclusions Portal is Surrebuttal.
Note to Paragraphs (b)(1) Through (4): On the 232 Exclusions
Portal, each exclusion request is assigned a distinct ID #, which is
also used with its associated 232 submissions, but preceded with an
acronym indicating the file type: Exclusion Requests (ER ID #),
Objection (OF ID #), Rebuttals (RB ID #) and Surrebuttals (SR ID #).
For an example of the four possible types of 232 submissions
associated with a single exclusion request, you could have ER ID
237, OF ID 237, RB ID 237 and SR ID 237. The 232 Exclusions Portal
will automatically assign the two letter designator depending on the
type of web-based form being submitted in the portal and will assign
an ID number to the original exclusion request and that ID number
will be common to any objection, rebuttal, or surrebuttal submitted
pertaining to the same exclusion request.
(5) Public disclosure and information protected from public
disclosure. (i) Information submitted in 232 submissions will be
subject to public review and made available for public inspection and
copying, except for the information described in paragraph (b)(5)(iii)
of this supplement. Individuals and organizations must fully complete
the relevant forms.
(ii) Information not subject to public disclosure should not be
submitted. Personally identifiable information, including social
security numbers and employer identification numbers, should not be
provided. Information that is subject to government-imposed access and
dissemination or other specific national security controls, e.g.,
classified information or information that has U.S. Government
restrictions on dissemination to non-U.S. citizens or other categories
of persons that would prohibit public disclosure of the information,
may not be included in 232 submissions. Individuals and organizations
that have confidential business information (``CBI'') that they believe
relevant to the Secretary's consideration of the 232 submission should
so indicate in the appropriate field of the relevant form, or on the
rebuttal or surrebuttal submission, following the procedures in
paragraph (b)(5)(iii) of this supplement.
(iii) Procedures for identifying, but not disclosing confidential
or proprietary business information (CBI) in the public version, and
procedures for submitting CBI. For persons seeking to submit
confidential or proprietary business information (CBI), the 232
submission available to the public must contain a summary of the CBI in
sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance
of the information. If the submitting person claims that summarization
is not possible, the claim must be accompanied by a full explanation of
the reasons supporting that claim. Generally, numerical data will be
considered adequately summarized if grouped or presented in terms of
indices or figures within ten percent of the actual figure. If an
individual portion of the numerical data is voluminous (e.g., five
pages of numerical data), at least one percent of the numerical data,
representative of that portion, must be summarized. In order to submit
CBI that is not for public release as a separate email submission to
the U.S. Department of Commerce, you must follow the procedures in
paragraphs (b)(3)(iii)(A)-(D) of this supplement to assist the U.S.
Department of Commerce in identifying these submissions and associating
these submissions with the respective 232 submission in the 232
Exclusions Portal. Submitters with classified information should
contact the U.S. Department of Commerce for instructions on the
appropriate methods to send this type of information.
(A) For CBI related to exclusion requests or objections, check the
appropriate box in the 232 Exclusions Portal indicating that the filer
has relevant CBI for consideration. If Commerce determines after review
that the CBI is needed, Commerce will directly request the CBI from the
exclusion requester or objector as warranted.
(B) For CBI related to rebuttals or surrebuttals, on the same day
that you submit your 232 submission in the 232 Exclusions Portal,
submit the CBI via email to the U.S. Department of Commerce. The email
address used is different depending on the type of submission the
emailed CBI is for, as follows: CBI for rebuttals use
[email protected]; and CBI for surrebuttals use
[email protected].
(C) For rebuttals and surrebuttals pertaining to 232 submissions
for exclusion requests the email subject line must only include the
original 232 Exclusions Portal Exclusion Request (ER) ID # and the body
of the email must include the 232 Exclusions Portal Rebuttal (RB) ID #,
or Surrebuttal (SR) ID # you received from the 232 Exclusions Portal
when you successfully submitted your rebuttal or surrebuttal. These
naming conventions used in the 232 Exclusions Portal, respectively,
will assist the U.S. Department of Commerce to associate the CBI that
will not be posted in the 232 Exclusions Portal with the information
included in the public submission.
(D) Submit the CBI as an attachment to that email. The CBI is
limited to a maximum of five pages per rebuttal or surrebuttal. The
email is to be limited to sending your CBI. All other information for
the public submission, and public versions of the CBI, where
appropriate, for a 232 submission in the 232
[[Page 81075]]
Exclusions Portal following the procedures identified in this
supplement, as appropriate.
Note 1 to Paragraph (b) for Submissions of Supporting Documents
(Attachments): Supporting attachments must be emailed as PDF
documents.
Note 2 to Paragraph (b): It is a criminal offense to willfully
make a false statement or representation to any department or agency
of the United States Government as to any matter within its
jurisdiction [18 U.S.C. 1001(2018)].
(c) Exclusion requests. (1) Who may submit an exclusion request?
Only directly affected individuals or organizations located in the
United States may submit an exclusion request. An individual or
organization is ``directly affected'' if they are using steel in
business activities (e.g., construction, manufacturing, or supplying
steel product to users) in the United States.
(2) Identification of exclusion requests. Separate exclusion
requests must be submitted for steel products with chemistry by
percentage breakdown by weight, metallurgical properties, surface
quality (e.g., galvanized, coated), and critical dimensions covered by
a common HTSUS statistical reporting number. Separate exclusion
requests must be submitted for aluminum products with critical
dimensions covered by a common HTSUS statistical reporting number. The
exclusion request forms allow for minimum and maximum dimensions. A
permissible range must be within the minimum and maximum range that is
specified in the HTSUS statistical reporting number and applicable
notes. Separate exclusion requests must also be submitted for products
falling in more than one ten-digit HTSUS statistical reporting number.
The U.S. Department of Commerce will approve exclusions on a product
basis, and the approvals will be limited to the individual or
organization that submitted the specific exclusion request, unless
Commerce approves a broader application of the product-based exclusion
request to apply to additional importers. Other directly-affected
individuals or organizations located in the United States that wish to
submit an exclusion request for a steel or aluminum product that has
already been the subject of an approved exclusion request may submit an
exclusion request under this supplement. These additional exclusion
requests by other directly-affected individuals or organizations in the
United States are not required to reference the previously approved
exclusion but are advised to do so, if they want Commerce to take that
exclusion into account when reviewing a subsequent exclusion request.
Directly affected individuals and organizations in the United States
will not be precluded from submitting a request for exclusion of a
product even though an exclusion request submitted for that product by
another requester or that requester was denied or is no longer valid.
(3) Where to submit exclusion requests? All exclusion requests must
be submitted directly on the 232 Exclusions Portal (https://www.commerce.gov/page/section-232-investigations).
(4) No time limit for submitting exclusion requests. Exclusion
requests may be submitted at any time.
(5)(i) Substance of exclusion requests. An exclusion request must
specify the business activities in the United States within which the
requester is engaged that qualify the individual or organization to be
directly affected and thus eligible to submit an exclusion request. The
request should clearly identify, and provide support for, the basis
upon which the exclusion is sought. An exclusion will only be granted
if an article is not produced in the United States in a sufficient,
reasonably available amount, and of a satisfactory quality, or for
specific national security considerations.
(ii) Certification for volume requested. In order to ensure that
the volume requested in an exclusion request is consistent with
legitimate business needs for the same steel or aluminum articles
obtained (i.e., imported from abroad either directly by the requester
or indirectly by purchasing from distributors) by the entity requesting
an exclusion, the following certification in paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(A)-
(E) must be acknowledged in the 232 Exclusions Portal when completing
the submission of a 232 exclusion request. The exclusion request
certification for volume requested must be signed by an organization
official specifically authorized to certify the document (the
certification being made in the 232 Exclusions Portal) as being
accurate and complete. The undersigned certifies in the 232 Exclusions
Portal that the information herein supplied in response to this
paragraph is complete and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. By
signing the certification below, I attest that:
(A) My organization intends to manufacture, process, or otherwise
transform the imported product for which I have filed an exclusion
request or I have a purchase order or orders for such products;
(B) My organization does not intend to use the exclusion for which
I have filed an exclusion request, if granted, solely to hedge or
arbitrage the price;
(C) My organization expects to consume, sell, or otherwise use the
total volume of product across all my active exclusions and pending
exclusion requests in the course of my organization's business
activities within the next calendar year;
(D) If my organization is submitting an exclusion request for a
product for which we previously received an exclusion, I certify that
my organization either imported the full amount of our approved
exclusion(s) last year or intended to import the full amount but could
not due to one of the following reasons:
(1) Loss of contract(s);
(2) Unanticipated business downturns; or
(3) Other factors that were beyond my organization's control that
directly resulted in less need for steel or aluminum articles; and
(E) I certify that the exclusion amount requested this year is in
line with what my organization expects to import based on our current
business outlook. If requested by the Department of Commerce, my
organization shall provide documentation that justifies its assertions
in this certification regarding its past imports of steel or aluminum
articles and its projections for the current year, as it relates to
past and current calendar year exclusion requests.
Note to Paragraphs (c)(5)(i) and (ii): Any exclusion request
that does not include a certification made in accordance with
(c)(5)(ii) will be treated as an incomplete submission and will
therefore be rejected.
(6) Criteria used to review exclusion requests. The U.S. Department
of Commerce will review each exclusion request to determine whether an
article described in an exclusion request meets any of the following
three criteria: The article is not produced in the United States in an
amount which can be delivered in a time period equal to or less than
the time needed for the requester to obtain the product from their
foreign supplier, is not produced in the United States in a
satisfactory quality, or for specific national security considerations.
The reviews will be made on a case-by-case basis to determine whether
the requester has shown that the article is not produced in the United
States in sufficient and reasonably available amount or of a
satisfactory quality, or that there are specific national security
considerations to grant the exclusion. To provide
[[Page 81076]]
additional context on the meaning and application of the criteria,
paragraphs (c)(6)(i)-(iii) of this supplement define keys terms used in
the review criteria and provide illustrative application examples. The
U.S. Department of Commerce will use the same criteria identified in
paragraphs (c)(6)(i)-(iii) of this supplement when determining whether
it is warranted to approve broader product-based exclusions based on
trends the Department may see over time with 232 submissions. The
public is not permitted to request broader product-based exclusions
that would apply to all importers, because the Department makes these
determinations over time by evaluating the macro trends in 232
submissions. Items for which a broader determination has been made will
be identified in supplements no. 2 or 3 to part 705.
(i) Not produced in the United States in a sufficient and
reasonably available amount. The exclusion review criterion ``Not
produced in the United States in a sufficient and reasonably available
amount'' means that the amount that is needed by the end user
requesting the exclusion is not available immediately in the United
States to meet its specified business activities. Available
``immediately'' means that a product (whether it is currently being
produced in the United States, or could be produced in the United
States) can be delivered by a U.S. producer ``within eight weeks'', or,
if that is not possible, by a date earlier than the time required for
the requester to obtain the entire quantity of the product from the
requester's foreign supplier. Furthermore, to the extent that an
objector can produce and deliver a portion, which is less than 100
percent, but ten percent or more, of the amount of steel or aluminum
needed in the business activities of the user in the United States
described in the exclusion request, the Department of Commerce may deny
a requested exclusion for that percentage of imported steel or
aluminum. It is incumbent upon both the exclusion requester, and
objecting producers, to provide supplemental evidence supporting their
claimed delivery times.
(ii) Not produced in the United States in a satisfactory quality.
The exclusion review criterion ``not produced in the United States in a
satisfactory quality'' does not mean the steel or aluminum needs to be
identical, but it does need to be equivalent as a substitute product.
``Substitute product'' for purposes of this review criterion means that
the steel or aluminum being produced by an objector can meet
``immediately'' (see paragraph (c)(6)(i) of this supplement) the
quality (e.g., industry specs or internal company quality controls or
standards), regulatory, or testing standards, in order for the U.S.-
produced steel to be used in that business activity in the United
States by that end user.
(A) Steel application examples. For a steel example, if a U.S.
business activity requires that steel plates to be provided must meet
certain military testing and military specification standards in order
to be used in military combat vehicles, that requirement would be taken
into account when reviewing the exclusion request and any objections,
rebuttals, and surrebuttals submitted. As another steel example, if a
U.S. business activity requires that steel tubing to be provided must
meet certain Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals to be used in
medical devices, that requirement would be taken into account when
reviewing the exclusion request and any objections, rebuttals, and
surrebuttals submitted. Another steel example would be a food
manufacturer that requires tin-plate approval from the U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA) to make any changes in the tin-plate it uses to
make cans for fruit juices. An objector would not have to make steel
for use in making the cans that was identical, but it would have to be
a ``substitute product,'' meaning it could meet the USDA certification
standards.
(B) Aluminum application examples. For an aluminum example, if a
U.S. business activity requires that aluminum to be provided must meet
certain military testing and military specification standards in order
to be used in military aircraft, that requirement would be taken into
account when reviewing the exclusion request and any objections,
rebuttals, and surrebuttals submitted. Another aluminum example would
be a U.S. pharmaceutical manufacturer that requires approval from the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to make any changes in its aluminum
product pill bottle covers. An objector would not have to make aluminum
for use in making the product covers that was identical, but it would
have to be a ``substitute product,'' meaning it could meet the FDA
certification standards.
(iii) For specific national security considerations. The exclusion
review criterion ``or for specific national security considerations''
is intended to allow the U.S. Department of Commerce, in consultation
with other parts of the U.S. Government as warranted, to make
determinations whether a particular exclusion request should be
approved based on specific national security considerations.
(A) Steel application examples. For example, if the steel included
in an exclusion request is needed by a U.S. defense contractor for
making critical items for use in a military weapons platform for the
U.S. Department of Defense, and the duty or quantitative limitation
will prevent the military weapons platform from being produced, the
exclusion will likely be granted. The U.S. Department of Commerce, in
consultation with the other parts of the U.S. Government as warranted,
can consider other impacts to U.S. national security that may result
from not approving an exclusion, e.g., the unintended impacts that may
occur in other downstream industries using steel, but in such cases the
demonstrated concern with U.S. national security would need to be
tangible and clearly explained and ultimately determined by the U.S.
Government.
(B) Aluminum application examples. For example, if the aluminum
included in an exclusion request is needed by a U.S. defense contractor
for making critical items for use in a military weapons platform for
the U.S. Department of Defense, and the duty or quantitative limitation
will prevent the military weapons platform from being produced, the
exclusion will likely be granted. The U.S. Department of Commerce, in
consultation with the other parts of the U.S. Government as warranted,
can consider other impacts to U.S. national security that may result
from not approving an exclusion, e.g., the unintended impacts that may
occur in other downstream industries using aluminum, but in such cases
the demonstrated concern with U.S. national security would need to be
tangible and clearly explained and ultimately determined by the U.S.
Government.
(d) Objections to submitted exclusion requests. (1) Who may submit
an objection to a submitted exclusion request? Any individual or
organization that manufactures steel or aluminum articles in the United
States may file objections to steel exclusion requests, but the U.S.
Department of Commerce will only consider information directly related
to the submitted exclusion request that is the subject of the
objection.
(2) Identification of objections to submitted exclusion requests.
When submitting an objection to a submitted exclusion request, the
objector must locate the exclusion request and submit the objection in
response to the request directly in the 232 Exclusions Portal. Once the
relevant exclusion request has
[[Page 81077]]
been located, an individual or organization that would like to submit
an objection will access the objection form by scrolling to the bottom
of the exclusion request form and then fill out the web-based form for
submitting their objection to the exclusion request in the 232
Exclusions Portal (https://www.commerce.gov/page/section-232-investigations).
(3) Time limit for submitting objections to submitted exclusions
requests. All objections to submitted exclusion requests must be
submitted directly on the 232 Exclusions Portal (https://www.commerce.gov/page/section-232-investigations) no later than 30 days
after the related exclusion request is posted, with the 30-day clock
starting at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the calendar day an exclusion
request is posted.
(4) Substance of objections to submitted exclusion requests. The
objection should clearly identify, and provide support for, its
opposition to the proposed exclusion, with reference to the specific
basis identified in, and the support provided for, the submitted
exclusion request. If the objector is asserting that it is not
currently producing the steel or aluminum identified in an exclusion
request but can produce the steel or aluminum and make that steel or
aluminum available ``immediately'' in accordance with the time required
for the user of steel or aluminum in the United States to obtain the
product from its foreign suppliers, the objector must identify how it
will be able to produce and deliver the quantity of steel or aluminum
needed either within eight weeks, or if after eight weeks, by a date
which is earlier than the named foreign supplier would deliver the
entire quantity of the requested product. It is incumbent on both the
exclusion requester, and objecting producers, to provide supplemental
evidence supporting their claimed delivery times. This requirement
includes specifying in writing to Department of Commerce as part of the
objection, the timeline the objector anticipates in order to start or
restart production of the steel included in the exclusion request to
which it is objecting. For example, a summary timeline that specifies
the steps that will occur over the weeks needed to produce that steel
or aluminum would be helpful to include, not only for the Department of
Commerce review of the objection, but also for the requester of the
exclusion and its determination whether to file a rebuttal to the
objection. The U.S. Department of Commerce understands that, in certain
cases, regulatory approvals, such as from the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) or some approvals at the state or local level, may be
required to start or restart production and that some of these types of
approvals may be outside the control of an objector.
(e) Limitations on the size of submissions. Each exclusion request
and each objection to a submitted exclusion request is to be limited to
a maximum of 5,000 words, inclusive of all exhibits and attachments,
but exclusive of the respective forms and any CBI provided to the U.S.
Department of Commerce. Each attachment to a submission must be less
than 10 MB.
(f) Rebuttal process. Only individuals or organizations that have
submitted an exclusion request pursuant to this supplement may submit a
rebuttal to any objection(s) posted in the 232 Exclusions Portal
(https://www.commerce.gov/page/section-232-investigations). The
objections to submitted exclusion requests process identified under
paragraph (d) of this supplement already establish a formal response
process for steel and aluminum manufacturers in the United States.
(1) Identification of rebuttals. When submitting a rebuttal, the
individual or organization that submitted the exclusion request will
access the rebuttal form by scrolling to the bottom of the objection
form and then filling out the web-based form for submitting their
rebuttal to the objection in the 232 Exclusions Portal (https://www.commerce.gov/page/section-232-investigations).
(2) Format and size limitations for rebuttals. Similar to the
exclusions process identified under paragraph (c) of this supplement
and the objection process identified under paragraph (d) of this
supplement, the rebuttal process requires the submission of a
government form as specified in paragraph (b)(3) of this supplement.
Each rebuttal is to be limited to a maximum of 2,500 words, inclusive
of all exhibits and attachments, but exclusive of the rebuttal form and
any CBI provided to the U.S. Department of Commerce. Each attachment to
a submission must be less than 10 MB.
(3) Substance of rebuttals. Rebuttals must address an objection to
the exclusion request made by the requester. If multiple objections
were received on a particular exclusion, the requester may submit a
rebuttal to each objector. The most effective rebuttals will be those
that aim to correct factual errors or misunderstandings in the
objection(s).
(4) Time limit for submitting rebuttals. The rebuttal period begins
on the date the Department opens the rebuttal period after the posting
of the last objection in the 232 Exclusions Portal. The rebuttal period
ends seven days after the rebuttal comment period is opened. This
seven-day rebuttal period allows for the individual or organization
that submitted an exclusion request pursuant to this supplement to
submit any written rebuttals that it believes are warranted.
(g) Surrebuttal process. Only individuals or organizations that
have a posted objection to a submitted exclusion request pursuant to
this supplement may submit a surrebuttal to a rebuttal (see paragraph
(f) of this supplement) posted to their objection to an exclusion
request in the 232 Exclusions Portal (https://www.commerce.gov/page/section-232-investigations).
(1) Identification of surrebuttals. When submitting a surrebuttal,
the individual or organization that submitted the objection will access
the surrebuttal form by scrolling to the bottom of the rebuttal form
and then filling out the web-based form for submitting their
surrebuttal to the rebuttal in the 232 Exclusions Portal (https://www.commerce.gov/page/section-232-investigations).
(2) Format and size limitations for surrebuttals. Similar to the
exclusions process identified under paragraph (c) of this supplement,
the objection process identified under paragraph (d) of this
supplement, and the rebuttal process identified under paragraph (f) of
this supplement, the surrebuttal process requires the submission of a
government form as specified in paragraph (b)(4) of this supplement.
The surrebuttal must be submitted in the 232 Exclusions Portal. Each
surrebuttal is to be limited to a maximum of 2,500 words, inclusive of
all exhibits and attachments, but exclusive of the surrebuttal form and
any CBI provided to the U.S. Department of Commerce. Each attachment to
a submission must be less than 10 MB.
(3) Substance of surrebuttals. Surrebuttals must address a rebuttal
to an objection to the exclusion request made by the requester. The
most effective surrebuttals will be those that aim to correct factual
errors or misunderstandings in the rebuttal to an objection.
(4) Time limit for submitting surrebuttals. The surrebuttal period
begins on the date the Department opens the surrebuttal comment period
after the posting of the last rebuttal to an objection to an exclusion
request in
[[Page 81078]]
the 232 Exclusions Portal. The surrebuttal period ends seven days after
the surrebuttal comment period is opened. This seven-day surrebuttal
period allows for the individual or organization that submitted an
objection to a submitted exclusion request pursuant to this supplement
to submit any written surrebuttals that it believes are warranted to
respond to a rebuttal.
(h) Disposition of 232 submissions--(1) Disposition of incomplete
submissions. (i) Exclusion requests that do not satisfy the
requirements specified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this supplement
will be rejected.
(ii) Objection filings that do not satisfy the requirements
specified in paragraphs (b) and (d) will not be considered.
(iii) Rebuttal filings that do not satisfy the requirements
specified in paragraphs (b) and (f) will not be considered.
(iv) Surrebuttal filings that do not satisfy the requirements
specified in paragraphs (b) and (g) will not be considered.
(2) Disposition of complete submissions--(i) Posting of responses
in the 232 Exclusions Portal. The U.S. Department of Commerce will post
responses (decision memos) in the 232 Exclusions Portal to each
exclusion request. The U.S. Department of Commerce response to an
exclusion request will also be responsive to any of the objection(s),
rebuttal(s) and surrebuttal(s) for that submitted exclusion request
submitted through the 232 Exclusions Portal.
(ii) Streamlined review process for ``No Objection'' requests. The
U.S. Department of Commerce will grant properly filed exclusion
requests which meet the requisite criteria, receive no objections, and
present no national security concerns. If an exclusion request's 30-day
comment period in the 232 Exclusions Portal has expired and no
objections have been submitted, BIS will immediately assess the request
for any national security concerns. If BIS identifies no national
security concerns, it will post a decision granting the exclusion
request in the 232 Exclusions Portal.
(iii) Effective date for approved exclusions and date used for
calculating duty refunds--(A) Effective date for approved exclusions.
Approved exclusions will be effective five business days after
publication of the U.S. Department of Commerce response granting an
exclusion in the 232 Exclusions Portal. Starting on that date, the
requester will be able to rely upon the approved exclusion request in
calculating the duties owed on the product imported in accordance with
the terms listed in the approved exclusion request. Companies are able
to receive retroactive relief on granted requests dating back to the
date of the request's submission on unliquidated entries.
(B) Contact for obtaining duty refunds. The U.S. Department of
Commerce does not provide refunds on tariffs. Any questions on the
refund of duties should be directed to CBP.
(iv) Validity period for exclusion requests. Exclusions will
generally be approved for one year from the date of the signature on
the decision memo, but may be valid for shorter or longer than one year
depending on the specifics of the exclusion request; any objections
filed; and analysis by the U.S. Department of Commerce and other parts
of the U.S. Government, as warranted, of the current supply and demand
in the United States, including any limitations or other factors that
the Department determines should be considered in order to achieve the
national security objectives of the duties and quantitative
limitations.
(A) Examples of what fact patterns may warrant a longer exclusion
validity period. Individuals or organizations submitting exclusion
requests or objections may, and are encouraged to specify how long they
believe an exclusion may be warranted and specify the rationale for
that recommended time period. For example, an individual or
organization submitting an exclusion request may request a longer
validity period if there are factors outside of their control that may
make it warranted to grant a longer period. These factors may include
regulatory requirements that make a longer validity period justified,
e.g., for an aircraft manufacturer that would require a certain number
of years to make a change to an FAA-approved type certificate or for a
manufacturer of medical items to obtain FDA approval. Business
considerations, such as the need for a multi-year contract for steel
with strict delivery schedules in order to complete a significant U.S.
project by an established deadline, e.g., a large scale oil and gas
exploration project, is another illustrative example of the types of
considerations that a person submitting an exclusion request may
reference.
(B) Examples of what criteria may warrant a shorter exclusion
validity period. Objectors are encouraged to provide their suggestions
for how long they believe an appropriate validity period should be for
an exclusion request. In certain cases, this may be an objector
indicating it has committed to adding new capacity that will be coming
online within six months, so a shorter six-month period is warranted.
Conversely, if an objector knows it will take two years to obtain
appropriate regulatory approvals, financing and/or completing
construction to add new capacity, the objector may, in responding to an
exclusion that requests a longer validity period, e.g., three years,
indicate that although they agree a longer validity period than one
year may be warranted in this case, that two years is sufficient.
(C) None of the illustrative fact patterns identified in paragraphs
(h)(2)(iv)(A) or (B) of this supplement will be determinative in and of
themselves for establishing the appropriate validity period, but this
type of information is helpful for the U.S. Department of Commerce to
receive, when warranted, to help determine the appropriate validity
period if a period other than one year is requested.
(3) Review period and implementation of any needed conforming
changes--(i) Review period. The review period normally will not exceed
106 days for requests that receive objections, including adjudication
of objections submitted on exclusion requests and any rebuttals to
objections, and surrebuttals. The estimated 106-day period begins on
the day the exclusion request is posted in the 232 Exclusions Portal,
and ends once a decision to grant or deny is made on the exclusion
request.
(ii) Coordination with other agencies on approval and
implementation. Other agencies of the U.S. Government, such as CBP,
will take any additional steps needed to implement an approved
exclusion request. These additional steps needed to implement an
approved exclusion request are not part of the review criteria used by
the U.S. Department of Commerce to determine whether to approve an
exclusion request, but are an important component in ensuring the
approved exclusion request can be properly implemented. The U.S.
Department of Commerce will provide CBP with information that will
identify each approved exclusion request pursuant to this supplement.
Individuals or organizations whose exclusion requests are approved must
report information concerning any applicable exclusion in such form as
CBP may require. These exclusion identifiers will be used by importers
in the data collected by CBP in order for CBP to determine whether an
import is within the scope of an approved exclusion request.
[[Page 81079]]
(i) For further information. If you have questions on this
supplement, you may contact the Director, Industrial Studies, Office of
Technology Evaluation, Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department
of Commerce, at (202) 482-5642 or [email protected] regarding steel
exclusion requests, or at (202) 482-4757 or [email protected]
regarding aluminum exclusion requests. The U.S. Department of Commerce
website includes FAQs, best practices other companies have used for
submitting exclusion requests and objections, and helpful checklists.
The U.S. Department of Commerce has also included a manual providing
instruction on the 232 Exclusions Portal for exclusion requests
submitted on or after June 13, 2019, titled 232 Exclusions Portal
Comprehensive Guide (``232 Exclusions Guide'') and posted online at
(https://www.commerce.gov/page/section-232-investigations) to assist
your understanding when making 232 submissions in the 232 Exclusions
Portal.
0
3. Effective December 29, 2020 Supplement No. 2 to part 705 is revised
to read as follows:
Supplement No. 2 to Part 705--General Approved Exclusions (GAEs) for
Steel Articles Under the 232 Exclusions Process
This supplement identifies steel articles that have been approved
for import under a General Approved Exclusion (GAE). The Secretary of
Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary
of the Treasury, the Secretary of State, the United States Trade
Representative, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, the
Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, and other
senior Executive Branch officials as appropriate, makes these
determinations that certain steel articles may be authorized under a
GAE consistent with the objectives of the 232 Exclusions Process as
outlined in supplement no. 1 to this part. The GAEs described in this
supplement may be used by any importer. GAEs do not include quantity
limits. Each GAE identifier will be effective fifteen calendar days
after publication of a Federal Register notice either adding or
revising a specific GAE identifier. There is no retroactive relief for
GAEs. Relief is only available to steel articles that are entered for
consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after
the effective date of a GAE included in supplement no. 2 to this part.
In order to use a GAE, the importer must include the GAE identifier in
the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) system that corresponds to
the steel articles being imported. These GAEs are indefinite in length,
but the Department of Commerce on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce
may at any time issue a Federal Register notice removing, revising or
adding to an existing GAE in this supplement as warranted to align with
the objectives of the 232 exclusions process as described in supplement
no. 1 to this part. The Department of Commerce on behalf of the
Secretary of Commerce may periodically publish notices of inquiry in
the Federal Register soliciting public comments on potential removals,
revisions or additions to this supplement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of steel that
may be imported (at 10- Other
digit harmonized tariff limitations
schedule of the United (e.g., country
GAE identifier States (HTSUS) statistical of import or Federal Register citation
reporting number or more quantity
narrowly defined at allowed)
product level)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GAE.1.S: 7304592030.................... 7304592030. TUBES/PIPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
HLLW PRFLS OTH ALLOY STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT COLD-
TRTD, SUITABLE FOR
BOILERS ETC, HEAT-
RESISTING STL.
GAE.2.S: 7304592080.................... 7304592080. TUBES/PIPES/H ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
PRFLS ALLOY STL, SMLSS, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
CIRC CS, NOT COLD-TRTD,
SUIT FOR BOILERS ETC, NOT
HT-RSST STL, OS DIAM
>406.4MM.
GAE.3.S: 7220900060.................... 7220900060. OTHER FLAT- ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
ROLLED STAINLESS STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
WDTH <600MM, FURTH WRKD
THAN COLD-RLD, =0.5% OR
>/=24% NICKEL, <15%
CHROMIUM.
GAE.4.S: 7222406000.................... 7222406000. ANGLES SHAPES ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
AND SECTIONS STAINLESS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STEEL, OTHER THAN HOT
ROLLED, NOT DRILLED, NOT
PUNCHED, AND NOT
OTHERWISE ADVANCED.
GAE.5.S: 7306901000.................... 7306901000. OTH TUBES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
IRON/NONALLOY STL,
RIVETED/SIMILARLY CLOSED
(NOT WELDED).
GAE.6.S: 7212600000.................... 7212600000. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<600MM, CLAD.
GAE.7.S: 7227901060.................... 7227901060. BARS/RODS TOOL ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STL (NOT HIGH-SPEED), HOT- NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
RLD, IRR COILS, NOT
TEMPRD/TREATD/PARTLY
MFTD, NOT BALL BEARING
STEEL.
GAE.8.S: 7220207060.................... 7220207060. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<300MM, COLD-RLD,
THICKNESS >0.25MM BUT
=1.25MM, =0.5% NICKEL,
<15% CHROMIUM.
GAE.9.S: 7223005000.................... 7223005000. FLAT WIRE OF ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STEEL. NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
GAE.10.S: 7220208000................... 7220208000. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<300MM, COLD-RLD, THK
=0.25MM, RAZOR BLADE STL.
GAE.11.S: 7217108060................... 7217108060. ROUND WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
PLATED/COATED, >0.6%
CARBON, NOT HEAT-TREATED,
DIAM <1.0MM.
GAE.12.S: 7226923060................... 7226923060. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<300MM, COLD-RLD, TOOL
STEEL OTH THAN HIGH-
SPEED, OTHER THAN BALL-
BEARING STEEL.
GAE.13.S: 7229905016................... 7229905016. ROUND WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OTHER ALLOY STL, DIAM NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<1.0MM.
GAE.14.S: 7215500018................... 7215500018. OTHER BARS/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
RODS IRON/NONALLOY STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
COLD-FORMED/FINISHED, NOT
COILS, <0.25% CARBON,
DIAMETER OR CROSS-SECTN >/
=76MM BUT <228MM.
GAE.15.S: 7304598060................... 7304598060. TUBES/PIPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
HLLW PRFLS OTH ALLOY STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT CLD-
TRTD, OS DIAMETER
>285.8MM BUT <406.4MM,
WALL THK<12.7MM.
[[Page 81080]]
GAE.16.S: 7228501040................... 7228501040. OTHER BARS/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
RODS TOOL STL (NOT HIGH- NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
SPEED), COLD-FRMD/FNSHD,
MAX CS <18MM, OTHER THAN
OF ROUND OR RECTANGULAR
CROSS SECTION WITH
SURFACES GROUND, MILLED,
OR POLISHED.
GAE.17.S: 7304246030................... 7304246030. TUBING (OIL/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, OUTSIDE
DIAM =114.3MM, WALL THK
>9.5 MM.
GAE.18.S: 7229905031................... 7229905031. ROUND WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OTHER ALLOY STL, WITH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT
<1.5MM.
GAE.19.S: 7304598010................... 7304598010. TUBES/PIPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
HOLLOW PROFILES OTH ALLOY NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, CIRC CS,
NOT COLD-TREATED, NOT
HEAT-RESISTANT, OUTSIDE
DIAM <38.1MM.
GAE.20.S: 7219310010................... 7219310010. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM, COLD-RLD, THK >/
=4.75MM, COILS.
GAE.21.S: 7304598045................... 7304598045. TUBES/PIPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
HLLW PRFLS OTH ALLOY STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT CLD-
TRTD, NOT HEAT-RESISTANT,
OS DIAMETER >190.5MM BUT
<285.8MM, WALL THK<12.7MM.
GAE.22.S: 7306401090................... 7306401090. OTH TUBES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
PIPES/HOLLOW PRFLS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STAINLESS STL, WELDED,
CIRC CS, WALL THK
<1.65MM, =0.5% NICKEL.
GAE.23.S: 7220206010................... 7220206010. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<300MM, COLD-RLD, THK
>1.25MM, >0.5% NICKEL,
>1.5% BUT <5% BY WEIGHT
OF MOLYBDENUM.
GAE.24.S: 7211296080................... 7211296080. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, WIDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
>300MM BUT <600MM, NOT
CLAD/PLATED/COATED, COLD-
RLD, >/=0.25% CRBN, THK
=1.25MM.
GAE.25.S: 7217201500................... 7217201500. FLAT WIRE IRON/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
NONALLOY STL, PLATED/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
COATED WITH ZINC.
GAE.26.S: 7219120026................... 7219120026. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
>1575MM, HOT-RLD, COILS,
THK >6.8MM BUT <10MM.
GAE.27.S: 7219320020................... 7219320020. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=1370MM, COLD-RLD,
THICKNESS >3MM BUT
<4.75MM, COILS, >0.5%
NICKEL.
GAE.28.S: 7304243010................... 7304243010. CASING (OIL/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, THREADED/
COUPLED, OUTSIDE DIAM
<215.9MM, WALL THK
<12.7MM.
GAE.29.S: 7219220035................... 7219220035. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, THICKNESS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
>/=4.75MM BUT <10MM,
WIDTH >/=600MM BUT
<1575MM, HOT-RLD, NOT
COILS, THK 4.75-10MM,
>0.5% NICKEL.
GAE.30.S: 7222403085................... 7222403085. SHAPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
SECTIONS STAINLESS STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
HOT-RLD, NOT DRILLED/
PUNCHED/ADVANCED, MAX
CROSS SECTION <80MM.
GAE.31.S: 7222403045................... 7222403045. SHAPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
SECTIONS STAINLESS STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
HOT-RLD, NOT DRILLED/
PUNCHED/ADVANCED, MAX CS
>/=80MM.
GAE.32.S: 7219110060................... 7219110060. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
>1575MM, HOT-RLD, COILS,
THK >10MM.
GAE.33.S: 7304515005................... 7304515005. TUBES/PIPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
HOLLOW PROFILES OTH ALLOY NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, CIRC CS,
COLD-DRWN/RLD, HIGH-
NICKEL ALLOY STL.
GAE.34.S: 7219330025................... 7219330025. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=1370MM, COLD-RLD,
THICKNESS >1MM BUT <3MM,
COILS, =0.5% NICKEL.
GAE.35.S: 7217901000................... 7217901000. WIRE, IRON OR ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
NONALLOY STEEL, COATED NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
WITH PLASTICS.
GAE.36.S: 7219110030................... 7219110030. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM BUT <1575MM, HOT-
RLD, COILS, THK >10MM.
GAE.37.S: 7217108030................... 7217108030. ROUND WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
PLATED/COATED, >0.6%
CARBON, HEAT-TREATED,
DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT
<1.5MM.
GAE.38.S: 7212200000................... 7212200000. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<600MM, ELECTROLYTICALLY
PLATED/COATED WITH ZINC.
GAE.39.S: 7217204560................... 7217204560. ROUND WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
COATED WITH ZINC,
DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT
<1.5MM, >/=0.6% CARBON.
GAE.40.S: 7220206060................... 7220206060. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<300MM, COLD-RLD, THK
>1.25MM, =0.5% NICKEL,
<15% CHROMIUM.
GAE.41.S: 7217108025................... 7217108025. ROUND WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
PLATED/COATED, >0.6%
CARBON, HEAT-TREATED,
DIAM <1.0MM.
GAE.42.S: 7220121000................... 7220121000. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=300MM BUT <600MM, HOT-
RLD, THK <4.75MM.
GAE.43.S: 7209900000................... 7209900000. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM, COLD-RLD, NOT
CLAD/PLATED/COATED,
WHETHER OR NOT IN COILS.
GAE.44.S: 7213913020................... 7213913020. BARS/RODS IRON/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
NA STL, IRR COILS, HOT- NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
RLD, CIRC CS<14MM DIAM,
NOT TEMPRD/TREATD/PARTLY
MFTD, WELDING QUALITY
WIRE ROD.
GAE.45.S: 7306617060................... 7306617060. OTH TUBES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES OTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
ALLOY STL (NOT
STAINLESS), WELDED, SQ/
RECT CS, WALL THK <4MM.
GAE.46.S: 7216330090................... 7216330090. H SECTIONS ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, HOT- NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
RLD/DRWN/EXTRD, HEIGHT >/
=80MM.
[[Page 81081]]
GAE.47.S: 7217905030................... 7217905030. WIRE IRON/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
COATED WITH BASE METALS
OR PLASTICS, <0.25%
CARBON.
GAE.48.S: 7226923030................... 7226923030. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<300MM, COLD-RLD, TOOL
STEEL OTH THAN HIGH-
SPEED, BALL-BEARING STL.
GAE.49.S: 7219120051................... 7219120051. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=1370MM BUT <1575MM, HOT-
RLD, COILS, THICKNESS >/
=4.75MM BUT <6.8MM.
GAE.50.S: 7227906020................... 7227906020. BARS/RODS ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OTHER ALLOY STL, IRR NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
COILS, HOT-RLD, NOT TOOL
STL, WELDING QUALITY WIRE
RODS.
GAE.51.S: 7217905090................... 7217905090. WIRE IRON/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
COATED WITH BASE METALS
OR PLASTICS, >/=0.6%
CARBON.
GAE.52.S: 7219220040................... 7219220040. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, HOT-RLD, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
NOT COILS, THK >/=4.75 MM
BUT <10MM, NOT HIGH-
NICKEL ALLOY, >0.5%
NICKEL, =1.5% OR >/=5%
MOLYBDENUM, WIDTH >1575MM
BUT <1880MM.
GAE.53.S: 7219320038................... 7219320038. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, COLD-RLD, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT
<4.75MM, COILS, WIDTH
>600MM BUT <1370MM, NOT
HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, >0.5%
NICKEL, =1.5% OR >/=5%
MOLYBDENUM.
GAE.54.S: 7219320045................... 7219320045. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=1370MM, COLD-RLD,
THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT
<4.75MM, NOT COILS.
GAE.55.S: 7219350005................... 7219350005. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM, COLD-RLD, THK
<0.5MM, COILS, >0.5% BUT
<24% NICKEL, >1.5% BUT
<5% MOLYBDENUM.
GAE.56.S: 7219320036................... 7219320036. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, COLD-RLD, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT
<4.75MM, COILS, WIDTH
>600MM BUT <1370MM, NOT
HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, >0.5%
NICKEL, >1.5% BUT <5%
MOLYBDENUM.
GAE.57.S: 7304901000................... 7304901000. TUBES/PIPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
HOLLOW PROFILES IRON/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
NONALLOY STL, SEAMLESS,
NONCIRCULAR CROSS
SECTION, WALL THK >/=4MM.
GAE.58.S: 7304390002................... 7304390002. TUBES/PIPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
HLLW PRFLS IRON/NA STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT COLD-
TRTD, SUITABLE FOR
BOILERS ETC, OS DIAM
<38.1MM.
GAE.59.S: 7219120071................... 7219120071. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
>600MM BUT <1370MM, HOT-
RLD, COILS, THICKNESS >/
=4.75MM BUT <10MM, NOT
HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, >0.5%
NICKEL, =1.5% OR >/=5%
MOLYBDENUM.
GAE.60.S: 7225501110................... 7225501110. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM, COLD-RLD, TOOL
STEEL, HIGH-SPEED STL.
GAE.61.S: 7217905060................... 7217905060. WIRE IRON/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
NONALLOY STL, PLATED/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
COATED, >0.25% BUT <0.6%
CARBON.
GAE.62.S: 7220125000................... 7220125000. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<300MM, HOT-RLD, THK
<4.75MM.
GAE.63.S: 7226928005................... 7226928005. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<300MM, COLD-RLD, NOT
TOOL STL, THK >0.25MM,
HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY STL.
GAE.64.S: 7217106000................... 7217106000. OTHER WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
PLATED/COATED, <0.25%
CARBON.
GAE.65.S: 7219120021................... 7219120021. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=1370MM BUT =1575MM,
HOT-RLD, COILS, THICKNESS
>6.8MM BUT =10MM.
GAE.66.S: 7304390016................... 7304390016. TUBES/PIPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
HOLLOW PROFILES IRON/NA NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, CIRC CS,
NOT COLD-TRTD,
GALVANIZED, OS DIAM
=114.3MM.
GAE.67.S: 7304244040................... 7304244040. CASING (OIL/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, NOT
THREADED/COUPLED, OS
DIAMETER >/=215.9MM BUT
=285.8MM, WALL THK >/
=12.7MM.
GAE.68.S: 7302101015................... 7302101015. OTHER RAILS ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, NEW, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
NOT HEAT TREATED, >30KG/M.
GAE.69.S: 7304413005................... 7304413005. TUBES/PIPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
HOLLOW PRFLS STAINLESS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, CIRC CS,
COLD-DRWN/RLD, EXT DIAM
<19MM, HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY
STL.
GAE.70.S: 7215500090................... 7215500090. OTHER BARS/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
RODS IRON/NONALLOY STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
COLD-FORMED/FINISHED, NOT
COILS, >/=0.6% CARBON.
GAE.71.S: 7217304541................... 7217304541. ROUND WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
COATED W/OTH BASE METALS,
DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT
<1.5MM, <0.25% CARBON.
GAE.72.S: 7227200030................... 7227200030. BARS/RODS ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
SILICO-MANGANESE STL, IRR NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
COILS, HOT-RLD, WELDING
QUALITY WIRE RODS, STAT
NOTE 6.
GAE.73.S: 7306697060................... 7306697060. OTH TUBES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES OTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
ALLOY STL (NOT
STAINLESS), WELDED, OTH
NONCIRCULAR CS, WALL THK
<4MM.
GAE.74.S: 7302101045................... 7302101045. OTHER RAILS ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, NEW, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
HEAT TREATED, >30KG/M.
GAE.75.S: 7219210005................... 7219210005. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM, HOT-RLD, NOT
COILS, THK >10MM, HIGH-
NICKEL ALLOY STL.
GAE.76.S: 7304293160................... 7304293160. CASING (OIL/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
GAS DRILLING) OTH ALLOY NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, THREADED/
COUPLED, OS DIAMETER
>285.8MM BUT =406.4MM,
WALL THK >/=12.7MM.
[[Page 81082]]
GAE.77.S: 7305316090................... 7305316090. OTHER TUBES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
PIPES ALLOY STL, CIRC CS, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
EXT DIAM >406.4MM, NOT
LINE PIPE OR CASING (OIL/
GAS), LONGITUDINALLY
WELDED, NOT TAPERED PIPES/
TUBES, NON-STAINLESS
ALLOY STEEL.
GAE.78.S: 7216400010................... 7216400010. L SECTIONS ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, HOT- NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
ROLLED/DRAWN/EXTRUDED,
HEIGHT >/=80MM.
GAE.79.S: 7226990110................... 7226990110. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<600MM, ELECTROLYTICALLY
PLATD/COATD W/ZINC, NOT
GRAIN ORIENTED, NOT OF
HIGH-SPEED STEEL, FURTHER
WORKED THAN HOT-ROLLED OR
COLD-ROLLED.
GAE.80.S: 7225506000................... 7225506000. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM, COLD-RLD, THK >/
=4.75MM, NOT OF TOOL
STEEL.
GAE.81.S: 7304905000................... 7304905000. TUBES/PIPES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
HOLLOW PROFILES IRON/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
NONALLOY STL, SEAMLESS,
NOT CIRCULAR CS, WALL THK
<4MM.
GAE.82.S: 7219220005................... 7219220005. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM, HOT-RLD, NOT
COILS, THICKNESS >/
=4.75MM BUT =10MM, HIGH-
NICKEL ALLOY STL.
GAE.83.S: 7217104045................... 7217104045. ROUND WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
PLATED/COATED, <0.25%
CARBON, DIAM <1.5MM, HEAT-
TREATED, IN COILS
WEIGHING >2 KG.
GAE.84.S: 7209270000................... 7209270000. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM, COLD-RLD, NOT
CLAD/PLATED/COATED, NOT
COILS, THK 0.5-1MM.
GAE.85.S: 7219900060................... 7219900060. OTHER FLAT- ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
ROLLED STAINLESS STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
WDTH >/=600MM, FURTHER
WORKED THAN COLD-RLD,
=0.5% NICKEL, <15%
CHROMIUM.
GAE.86.S: 7219120081................... 7219120081. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM BUT <1370MM, HOT-
RLD, COILS, NOT HIGH-
NICKEL ALLOY, THICKNESS >/
=4.75MM BUT =10MM,
=0.5% NICKEL.
GAE.87.S: 7304293180................... 7304293180. CASING (OIL/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
GAS DRILLING) OTH ALLOY NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, THREADED/
COUPLED, OUTSIDE DIAM
>406.4MM.
GAE.88.S: 7224100005................... 7224100005. INGOTS AND ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OTHER PRIMARY FORMS OF NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY STEEL.
GAE.89.S: 7213200080................... 7213200080. BARS/RODS IRON/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
NONALLOY STL, HOT-RLD, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
IRR COILS, FREE-CUTTING
STL, <0.1% LEAD.
GAE.90.S: 7216100010................... 7216100010. U SECTIONS ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, HOT- NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
ROLLED/DRAWN/EXTRUDED,
HEIGHT <80MM.
GAE.91.S: 7306695000................... 7306695000. OTH TUBES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
IRON/NONALLOY STL,
WELDED, OTH NONCIRCULAR
CS, WALL THK <4MM.
GAE.92.S: 7208390015................... 7208390015. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NA STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM, HOT-RLD, NOT CLAD/
PLATED/COATED, COILS, THK
<3MM, HIGH-STRENGTH STL.
GAE.93.S: 7208380015................... 7208380015. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NA STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM, HOT-RLD, NOT CLAD/
PLATED/COATED, COILS,
THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT
<4.75MM, HIGH-STRENGTH
STL.
GAE.94.S: 7217104090................... 7217104090. ROUND WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
PLATED/COATED, <0.25%
CARBON, DIAM <1.5MM, NOT
HEAT-TREATED.
GAE.95.S: 7302105020................... 7302105020. RAILS OF ALLOY ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STEEL, NEW. NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
GAE.96.S: 7210706030................... 7210706030. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NA STL, WDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM, PAINTD/VARNSHD/
COATD W/PLASTICS,
ELECTROLYTICALLY PLATD/
COATD W/ZINC.
GAE.97.S: 7304244060................... 7304244060. CASING (OIL/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, NOT
THREADED/COUPLED, OS
DIAMETER >285.8MM BUT
=406.4MM, WALL THK>/
=12.7MM.
GAE.98.S: 7229200015................... 7229200015. ROUND WIRE SI- ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
MN STL, DIAM =1.6MM, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<0.20%C, >0.9% MN, >0.6%
SI, FOR ELEC ARC WELDING,
NOT PLATD/COATD W/COPPER.
GAE.99.S: 7304243040................... 7304243040. CASING (OIL/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, THREADED/
COUPLED, OUTSIDE DIAMETER
>/=215.9MM BUT
=285.8MM, WALL THK>/
=12.7MM.
GAE.100.S: 7304243020.................. 7304243020. CASING (OIL/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, SEAMLESS, THREADED/
COUPLED, OUTSIDE DIAM
<215.9MM, WALL THK >/
=12.7MM.
GAE.101.S: 7219130081.................. 7219130081. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=600MM BUT <1370MM, HOT-
RLD, COILS, THICKNESS >/
=3MM BUT <4.75MM, =0.5%
OR >/=24% NICKEL.
GAE.102.S: 7211140090.................. 7211140090. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<600MM, NOT CLAD/PLATED/
COATED, HOT-RLD, THK >/
=4.75MM, COILS.
GAE.103.S: 7218910030.................. 7218910030. SEMIFINISHED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
RECTANGULAR CROSS
SECTION, WDTH <4X THK, CS
AREA >/=232 CM2.
GAE.104.S: 7306213000.................. 7306213000. CASING (OIL/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
STL, WELDED, THREADED/
COUPLED.
GAE.105.S: 7211234500.................. 7211234500. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<300MM, NOT CLAD/PLATED/
COATED, COLD-RLD, <0.25%
CRBN, THK =0.25MM.
[[Page 81083]]
GAE.106.S: 7220206080.................. 7220206080. FLAT-ROLLED ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
STAINLESS STL, WDTH NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
<300MM, COLD-RLD, THK
>1.25MM, NOT HIGH-NICKEL
ALLOY, =0.5% NICKEL, >/
=15% CHROMIUM.
GAE.107.S: 7305391000.................. 7305391000. OTHER TUBES/ ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
PIPES IRON/NONALLOY STL, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
CIRC CS, EXT DIAM
>406.4MM, WELDED, OTHER
THAN LONGITUDALLY WELDED.
GAE.108.S: 7217204550.................. 7217204550. ROUND WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/ NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
COATED WITH ZINC,
DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT
<1.5MM, >/=0.25% BUT
<0.6% CARBON.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annex 1 to Supplements No. 1 and 2 to part 705 [Removed]
0
4. Annex 1 to Supplements No. 1 and 2 to part 705 is removed.
0
5. Effective December 29, 2020. add Supplement No. 3 to part 705 to
read as follows:
Supplement No. 3 to Part 705--General Approved Exclusions (GAEs) for
Aluminum Articles Under the 232 Exclusions Process
This supplement identifies aluminum articles that have been
approved for import under a General Approved Exclusion (GAE). The
Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense,
the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of State, the United
States Trade Representative, the Assistant to the President for
Economic Policy, the Assistant to the President for National Security
Affairs, and other senior Executive Branch officials as appropriate,
makes these determinations that certain aluminum articles may be
authorized under a GAE consistent with the objectives of the 232
exclusions process as outlined in supplement no. 1 to this part. The
GAEs described in this supplement may be used by any importer. GAEs do
not include quantity limits. Each GAE identifier will be effective
fifteen calendar days after publication of a Federal Register notice
either adding or revising a specific GAE identifier. There is no
retroactive relief for GAEs. Relief is only available to aluminum
articles that are entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse
for consumption, on or after the effective date of a GAE included in
supplement no. 2 to this part. In order to use a GAE, the importer must
reference the GAE identifier in the Automated Commercial Environment
(ACE) system that corresponds to the aluminum articles being imported.
These GAEs are indefinite in length, but the Department of Commerce on
behalf of the Secretary of Commerce may at any time issue a Federal
Register notice removing, revising or adding to an existing GAE in this
supplement as warranted to align with the objectives of the 232
exclusions process as described in supplement no. 1 to this part. The
Department of Commerce on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce may
periodically publish notices of inquiry in the Federal Register
soliciting public comments on potential removals, revisions or
additions to this supplement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of aluminum
that may be imported (at Other
10-digit Harmonized limitations
Tariff Schedule of the (e.g., country
GAE identifier United States (HTSUS) of import or Federal Register citation
statistical reporting quantity
number or more narrowly allowed)
defined at product level)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GAE.1.A: 7609000000.................... 7609000000. ALUMINUM TUBE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OR PIPE FITTINGS NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
(COUPLINGS, ELBOWS,
SLEEVES).
GAE.2.A: 7607205000.................... 7607205000. ALUMINUM FOIL ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OF THICKNESS. NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
GAE.3.A: 7607196000.................... 7607196000. ALUMINUM FOIL ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OF THICKNESS. NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
GAE.4.A: 7604210010.................... 7604210010. ALUMINUM ALLOY ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
HOLLOW PROFILES OF HEAT- NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
TREATABLE INDUSTRIAL
ALLOYS OF A KIND
DESCRIBED IN NOTE 6 TO
THIS CHAPTER.
GAE.5.A: 7604291010.................... 7604291010. ALUMINUM ALLOY ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
PROFILES OTHER THAN NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
HOLLOW PROFILES OF HEAT-
TREATABLE INDUSTRIAL
ALLOYS OF A KIND
DESCRIBED IN NOTE 6 TO
THIS CHAPTER.
GAE.6.A: 7607191000.................... 7607191000. ALUMINUM FOIL ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OF THICKNESS. NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
GAE.7.A: 7606116000.................... 7606116000. ALUMINUM ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
PLATES, SHEETS AND STRIP, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
THICKNESS >0.2MM,
RECTANGULAR (INCLUDING
SQUARE), NOT ALLOYED,
CLAD.
GAE.8.A: 7605290000.................... 7605290000. ALUMINUM WIRE ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
ALLOY, MAXIMUM CROSS- NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
SECTIONAL DIMENSION
=7MM.
GAE.9.A: 7601209080.................... 7601209080. UNWROUGHT ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
ALUMINUM ALLOY, SHEET NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
INGOT (SLAB) OF A KIND
DESCRIBED IN STATISTICAL
NOTE 3 TO THIS CHAPTER.
GAE.10.A: 7607116010................... 7607116010. ALUMINUM FOIL ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OF THICKNESS >0.01 MM AND NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
=0.15 MM, ROLLED, NOT
BACKED, BOXED & WEIGHING
=11.3 KG.
GAE.11.A: 7616995170................... 7616995170. ALUMINUM ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
FORGINGS. NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
GAE.12.A: 7607201000................... 7607201000. ALUMINUM FOIL ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
OF THICKNESS =0.2 MM, NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
BACKED, COVERED OR
DECORATED WITH A
CHARACTER, DESIGN, FANCY
EFFECT OR PATTERN.
GAE.13.A: 7604295090................... 7604295090. ALUMINUM ALLOY ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
BARS AND RODS, OTHER THAN NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
ROUND CROSS SECTION,
OTHER THAN HEAT-TREATABLE
INDUSTRIAL ALLOYS OF A
KIND DESCRIBED IN NOTES 5
& 6 OF THIS CHAPTER.
[[Page 81084]]
GAE.14.A: 7601209095................... 7601209095. UNWROUGHT ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
ALUMINUM ALLOY, OTHER NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
THAN COILS OF UNIFORM
CROSS-SECTION =9.5 MM,
CONTAINING <25% SILICON,
OTHER THAN ALLUMINUM
VANADIUM MASTER ALLOY,
OTHER THAN REMELT SCRAP
INGOT, OTHER THAN SHEET
INGOT, OTHER THAN FOUNDRY
INGOT.
GAE.15.A:7616995160.................... 7616995160. ALUMINUM ................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE
CASTINGS. NUMBER AND 12/14/2020].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew S. Borman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2020-27110 Filed 12-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P