81_FR_35432 81 FR 35326 - Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From Italy: Final Affirmative Determination and Final Affirmative Critical Circumstances, in Part

81 FR 35326 - Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From Italy: Final Affirmative Determination and Final Affirmative Critical Circumstances, in Part

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 106 (June 2, 2016)

Page Range35326-35329
FR Document2016-12971

The Department of Commerce (the ``Department'') determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of certain corrosion-resistant steel products (``corrosion- resistant steel'') from Italy as provided in section 705 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the ``Act''). For information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the ``Final Determination'' section of this notice. The period of investigation is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 106 (Thursday, June 2, 2016) 
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 106 (Thursday, June 2, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35326-35329]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-12971]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-475-833]


Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-Resistant 
Steel Products From Italy: Final Affirmative Determination and Final 
Affirmative Critical Circumstances, in Part

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the ``Department'') determines 
that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and 
exporters of certain corrosion-resistant steel products (``corrosion-
resistant steel'') from Italy as provided in section 705 of the Tariff 
Act of 1930, as amended (the ``Act''). For information on the estimated 
subsidy rates, see the ``Final Determination'' section of this notice. 
The period of investigation is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 
2014.

DATES: Effective Date: June 2, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Palmer, Irene Gorelik, and Katie 
Marksberry, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone 
202.482.9068, 202.482.6905, and 202.482.7906, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The Department published the Preliminary Determination on November 
6, 2015,\1\ published the Preliminary Critical Circumstances on 
November 5, 2015,\2\ and placed the Post-Preliminary Analysis on the 
record of this investigation on April 13, 2016.\3\ A summary of the 
events that occurred since the post-preliminary analysis, as well as a 
full discussion of the issues raised by parties for this final 
determination, may be found in the Issues and Decision Memo.\4\ The 
Issues and Decision Memo is a public document and is on file 
electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (``ACCESS''). 
ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov, and 
is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of 
the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete 
version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly 
at http://trade.gov/enforcement. The signed Issues and Decision Memo 
and the electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memo are 
identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain Corrosion-
Resistant Steel Products From Italy: Preliminary Affirmative 
Determination, 80 FR 68839 (November 6, 2015) (``Preliminary 
Determination'') and accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum 
(``Prelim Decision Memo'').
    \2\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations of 
Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From India, Italy, the People's 
Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Preliminary 
Determinations of Critical Circumstances, 80 FR 68504 (November 5, 
2015) (``Preliminary Critical Circumstances'').
    \3\ See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for 
Enforcement and Compliance, re: ``Post-Preliminary Analysis of 
Countervailing Duty Investigation: Certain Corrosion Resistant Steel 
from Italy,'' dated April 13, 2016 (``Post-Preliminary Analysis'').
    \4\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to 
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, 
``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Affirmative 
Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain 
Corrosion Resistant Steel from Italy,'' dated concurrently with this 
notice (``Issues and Decision Memo'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in the memorandum from the Acting Assistant Secretary 
for Enforcement and Compliance, the Department has exercised its 
discretion to toll all administrative deadlines due to the closure of 
the Federal Government. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding 
have been extended by four business days. The revised deadline for the 
final determination is now May 24, 2016.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Memorandum to the Record from Ron Lorentzen, Acting 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance, regarding 
``Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Government 
Closure During Snowstorm Jonas,'' dated January 27, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are corrosion-resistant 
steel products from Italy. For a complete description of the scope of 
this investigation, see Appendix II.

Scope Comments

    In accordance with the Preliminary Scope Determination,\6\ the 
Department set aside a period of time for parties to address scope 
issues in case briefs or other written comments on scope issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Associate Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, 
``Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's 
Republic of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: 
Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary 
Determinations,'' dated December 21, 2015 (``Preliminary Scope 
Decision Memorandum''). See also Memorandum to the File, ``Certain 
Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the People's Republic of 
China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Correction 
to Preliminary Determination Scope Memorandum,'' dated January 29, 
2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal 
responses submitted to the record of this final determination, and 
accompanying discussion and analysis of all comments timely received, 
see the Final Scope Decision Memorandum.\7\ The Final Scope Decision 
Memorandum is incorporated by, and hereby adopted by, this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, 
``Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Final Determinations,'' 
dated concurrently with this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Methodology

    The Department is conducting this countervailing duty (``CVD'') 
investigation in accordance with section 701 of the Act. For each of 
the subsidy programs found countervailable, we determine that there is 
a subsidy, i.e., a financial contribution by an ``authority'' that 
gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is 
specific.\8\ For a full description of the methodology underlying our 
conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act regarding 
financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) of the Act regarding 
benefit; and section 771(5A) of the Act regarding specificity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received

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

Adverse Facts Available

    Section 776(a) of the Act provides that, subject to section 782(d) 
of the Act, the Department shall apply ``facts otherwise available'' 
if: (1) Necessary information is not on the record; or (2) an 
interested party or any other person (A) withholds information that has 
been requested, (B) fails to provide information within the deadlines 
established, or in the form and manner requested by the Department, 
subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 of the Act, (C) 
significantly impedes a

[[Page 35327]]

proceeding, or (D) provides information that cannot be verified as 
provided by section 782(i) of the Act. Furthermore, section 776(b) of 
the Act provides that the Department may use an adverse inference in 
applying the facts otherwise available when a party fails to cooperate 
by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with a request for 
information.
    In this case, the Department twice requested information with 
respect to the Industrial Development Grants Under Law 488/92, 
Technological Innovation Grants and Loans Under Law 46/82, Certain 
Social Security Reductions and Exemptions (``Sgravi'' Benefits), and 
Equalization Fund from the Government of Italy. The Government of Italy 
withheld necessary information with respect to each of these programs, 
failed to provide information in the form and manner requested, and did 
not provide requested information by the deadlines for submission of 
the information, as explained in more detail in the Prelim Decision 
Memo and the Issues and Decisions Memo. Furthermore, the Department has 
concluded that the Government of Italy did not cooperate to the best of 
its ability in providing the requested information. Accordingly, 
pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act, we have determined that 
for each of these programs, the application of adverse facts available 
is warranted. For the Industrial Development Grants Under Law 488/92 
and Technological Innovation Grants and Loans Under Law 46/82, and 
Equalization Fund programs, we have determined as adverse facts 
available that these programs are de facto specific, in accordance with 
section 771(5A)(D)(iii) of the Act. For the Sgravi Benefits, we have 
determined that the reduced tax revenue due to the Government of Italy 
under these provisions constitutes a financial contribution within the 
meaning of section 771(5)(D)(ii) of the Act as revenue forgone. We have 
also determined that the revenue forgone under the Sgravi Benefits, is 
either de facto specific, in accordance with section 771(5A)(D)(ii) of 
the Act, or regionally specific, in accordance with section 
771(5A)(D)(iv) of the Act. More specifically, we find that Laws 53/2000 
and 167/2011 are de facto specific accordance with 771(5A)(iii) of the 
Act, and that Law 223/91 is regionally specific, in accordance with 
section 771(5A)(D)(iv).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Prelim Decision Memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, one company selected as a mandatory respondent, Ilva 
S.p.A. (``Ilva''), did not respond to the Department's questionnaires 
or participate in the investigation. Accordingly, as adverse facts 
available, pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b), we have determined that 
Ilva benefitted from certain countervailable programs during the POI 
and calculated a rate for Ilva based on those programs.\10\ For further 
information, see the section ``Use of Facts Otherwise Available and 
Adverse Inferences'' in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Determination

    Based on our review and analysis of the comments received from 
parties, we made certain changes to Ilva's subsidy rate calculations 
since the Preliminary Determination. Additionally we have modified our 
analysis of the Equalization Fund and now determine that an adverse 
inference is warranted in determining whether the program is specific. 
For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memo.

Final Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part

    On July 23, 2015, Petitioners \11\ filed a timely critical 
circumstances allegation, pursuant to section 733(e)(1) of the Act and 
19 CFR 351.206(c)(1), alleging that critical circumstances exist with 
respect to imports of corrosion-resistant steel from Italy.\12\ We 
preliminarily determined that critical circumstances did not exist for 
Acciaieria Arvedi S.p.A. (``Arvedi''), Marcegaglia S.p.A. 
(``Marcegaglia''), and the all-others companies, but did exist for 
Ilva. That determination remains unchanged and a discussion of our 
final critical circumstances determination can be found in the Issues 
and Decision Memo at the section, ``Final Determination of Critical 
Circumstances, In Part.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ United States Steel Corporation, Nucor Corporation, Steel 
Dynamics Inc., California Steel Industries, ArcelorMittal USA LLC, 
and AK Steel Corporation (collectively, ``Petitioners'').
    \12\ See Letter from Petitioners, ``Corrosion-Resistant Steel 
Products from India, Italy, the People's Republic of China, the 
Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Critical Circumstances Allegations,'' 
July 23, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Determination

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we 
calculated an individual rate for each producer/exporter of the subject 
merchandise individually investigated. In accordance with section 
705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, for companies not individually 
investigated, we apply an ``all-others'' rate, which is normally 
calculated by weighting the subsidy rates of the individual companies 
selected as mandatory respondents by those companies' exports of the 
subject merchandise to the United States. Under section 705(c)(5)(i) of 
the Act, the all-others rate excludes zero and de minimis rates 
calculated for the exporters and producers individually investigated as 
well as rates based entirely on facts otherwise available. Where the 
rates for the individually investigated companies are all zero or de 
minimis, or determined entirely using facts otherwise available, 
section 705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act instructs the Department to 
establish an all-others rate using ``any reasonable method.'' Where the 
countervailable subsidy rates for all of the individually investigated 
respondents are zero or de minimis or are based on AFA, the 
Department's practice, pursuant to 705(c)(5)(A)(ii), is to calculate 
the all others rate based on a simple average of the zero or de minimis 
margins and the margins based on AFA. Notwithstanding the language of 
section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, we have not calculated the ``all-
others'' rate by weight averaging the rates of the two individually 
investigated respondents and the rate based on AFA, because Ilva failed 
to report volume data that would enable the Department to determine the 
all-others rate based on a weighted-average. Therefore, and consistent 
with the Department's practice, for the ``all-others'' rate, we 
calculated a simple average of the two responding firms' de minimis 
rates and the AFA rate for the non-responsive company.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See, e.g., Countervailing Duty Investigation of Chlorinated 
Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary 
Determination and Alignment of Final Determination With Final 
Antidumping Determination, 79 FR 10097 (February 24, 2014); see 
also, Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From Taiwan: Final Affirmative 
Countervailing Duty Determination, 79 FR 61602 (October 14, 2014) 
and accompanying Issues and Decision Memo at VIII. Calculation of 
the All Others Rate.

[[Page 35328]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Exporter/producer                 Subsidy rate (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acciaieria Arvedi S.p.A., Finarvedi         0.48 (de minimis).
 S.p.A., Arvedi Tubi Acciaio S.p.A., Euro-
 Trade S.p.A., and Siderurgica Triestina
 Srl., collectively, the Arvedi Group.
Marcegaglia S.p.A. and Marfin S.p.A., the   0.07 (de minimis).
 Marcegaglia Group.
Ilva S.p.A................................  38.51
All Others................................  13.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation

    As a result of our Preliminary Determination, and pursuant to 
section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (``CBP'') to suspend liquidation of appropriate entries of 
merchandise under consideration from Italy \14\ that were entered or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on November 6, 2015, or 
after August 7, 2015 (for those entities for which we found critical 
circumstances exist), which is 90 days before the publication date in 
the Federal Register of the Preliminary Determination. In accordance 
with section 703(d) of the Act, we issued instructions to CBP to 
discontinue the suspension of liquidation for CVD purposes for subject 
merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after March 5, 
2016, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all entries from 
August 7, 2015 or November 6, 2015, as relevant, through March 4, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Other than entries produced and/or exported by Arvedi and 
Marcegaglia for which we calculated de minimis rates in the 
Preliminary Determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the U.S. International Trade Commission (the ``ITC'') issues a 
final affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order and 
will reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of 
the Act and will require a cash deposit of estimated CVDs for such 
entries of subject merchandise in the amounts indicated above, other 
than those produced and/or exported by Arvedi and Marcegaglia because 
those companies rates are de minimis. Because Arvedi and Marcegaglia 
were found to receive de minimis subsidies, they would be excluded from 
the CVD order. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of 
material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and 
all estimated duties deposited as a result of the suspension of 
liquidation will be refunded or canceled.

International Trade Commission Notification

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

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders

    In the event the ITC issues a final negative injury determination, 
this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to an 
APO of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary 
information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction 
of APO materials, or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby 
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO 
is a violation subject to sanction.
    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 
705(d) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(c).

    Dated: May 24, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

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

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Final Determination of Critical Circumstances, in Part
IV. Scope of the Investigation
V. List of Issues
VI. Subsidies Valuation
VII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences
VIII. Analysis of Programs
IX. Calculation of the All-Others Rate
X. Analysis of Comments
    Comment 1: Whether White Certificates Are Countervailable
    Comment 2: Whether the Program To Purchase Ferriera Di Servola 
Is Not Countervailable or Not Used During the POI
    Comment 3: Whether To Include Countervailable Programs From the 
Post-Preliminary Memo in Ilva's AFA Rate
XI. Recommendation

Appendix II--Scope of the Investigation

    The products covered by this investigation are certain flat-
rolled steel products, either clad, plated, or coated with 
corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, 
aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated 
or painted, varnished, laminated, or coated with plastics or other 
non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating. The 
products covered include coils that have a width of 12.7 mm or 
greater, regardless of form of coil (e.g., in successively 
superimposed layers, spirally oscillating, etc.). The products 
covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in straight 
lengths) of a thickness less than 4.75 mm and a width that is 12.7 
mm or greater and that measures at least 10 times the thickness. The 
products covered also include products not in coils (e.g., in 
straight lengths) of a thickness of 4.75 mm or more and a width 
exceeding 150 mm and measuring at least twice the thickness. The 
products described above may be rectangular, square, circular, or 
other shape and include products of either rectangular or non-
rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved 
subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., products which have been 
``worked after rolling'' (e.g., products which have been beveled or 
rounded at the edges). For purposes of the width and thickness 
requirements referenced above:
    (1) Where the nominal and actual measurements vary, a product is 
within the scope if application of either the nominal or actual 
measurement would place it within the scope based on the definitions 
set forth above, and
    (2) where the width and thickness vary for a specific product 
(e.g., the thickness of certain products with non-rectangular cross-
section, the width of certain products with non-rectangular shape, 
etc.), the measurement at its greatest width or thickness applies.
    Steel products included in the scope of this investigation are 
products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of 
the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or 
less, by weight; and (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds 
the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

 2.50 percent of manganese, or
 3.30 percent of silicon, or
 1.50 percent of copper, or
 1.50 percent of aluminum, or
 1.25 percent of chromium, or
 0.30 percent of cobalt, or
 0.40 percent of lead, or
 2.00 percent of nickel, or
 0.30 percent of tungsten (also called wolfram), or

[[Page 35329]]

 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or
 0.10 percent of niobium (also called columbium), or
 0.30 percent of vanadium, or
 0.30 percent of zirconium

    Unless specifically excluded, products are included in this 
scope regardless of levels of boron and titanium.
    For example, specifically included in this scope are vacuum 
degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to as interstitial-
free (``IF'')) steels and high strength low alloy (``HSLA'') steels. 
IF steels are recognized as low carbon steels with micro-alloying 
levels of elements such as titanium and/or niobium added to 
stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are recognized 
as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as chromium, 
copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum.
    Furthermore, this scope also includes Advanced High Strength 
Steels (``AHSS'') and Ultra High Strength Steels (``UHSS''), both of 
which are considered high tensile strength and high elongation 
steels.
    Subject merchandise also includes corrosion-resistant steel that 
has been further processed in a third country, including but not 
limited to annealing, tempering, painting, varnishing, trimming, 
cutting, punching and/or slitting or any other processing that would 
not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the 
investigation if performed in the country of manufacture of the in-
scope corrosion resistant steel.
    All products that meet the written physical description, and in 
which the chemistry quantities do not exceed any one of the noted 
element levels listed above, are within the scope of this 
investigation unless specifically excluded. The following products 
are outside of and/or specifically excluded from the scope of this 
investigation:
     Flat-rolled steel products either plated or coated with 
tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (``terne 
plate''), or both chromium and chromium oxides (``tin free steel''), 
whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other 
non-metallic substances in addition to the metallic coating;
     Clad products in straight lengths of 4.7625 mm or more 
in composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and 
measures at least twice the thickness; and
     Certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are 
three-layered corrosion-resistant flat-rolled steel products less 
than 4.75 mm in composite thickness that consist of a flat-rolled 
steel product clad on both sides with stainless steel in a 20%-60%-
20% ratio.
    The products subject to the investigation are currently 
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(``HTSUS'') under item numbers: 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 
7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 
7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 
7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 
7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 
7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, and 7212.60.0000.
    The products subject to the investigation may also enter under 
the following HTSUS item numbers: 7210.90.1000, 7215.90.1000, 
7215.90.3000, 7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 
7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 
7217.90.5090, 7225.91.0000, 7225.92.0000, 7225.99.0090, 
7226.99.0110, 7226.99.0130, 7226.99.0180, 7228.60.6000, 
7228.60.8000, and 7229.90.1000.
    The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the 
investigation is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2016-12971 Filed 6-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

35326 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 106 / Thursday, June 2, 2016 / Notices purposes only. The written description of the summary of the events that occurred set aside a period of time for parties to scope of the investigation is dispositive. since the post-preliminary analysis, as address scope issues in case briefs or [FR Doc. 2016–12967 Filed 6–1–16; 8:45 am] well as a full discussion of the issues other written comments on scope issues. BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P raised by parties for this final For a summary of the product determination, may be found in the coverage comments and rebuttal Issues and Decision Memo.4 The Issues responses submitted to the record of this DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE and Decision Memo is a public final determination, and accompanying document and is on file electronically discussion and analysis of all comments International Trade Administration via Enforcement and Compliance’s timely received, see the Final Scope [C–475–833] Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Decision Memorandum.7 The Final Centralized Electronic Service System Scope Decision Memorandum is Countervailing Duty Investigation of (‘‘ACCESS’’). ACCESS is available to incorporated by, and hereby adopted by, Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel registered users at http:// this notice. Products From Italy: Final Affirmative access.trade.gov, and is available to all Methodology Determination and Final Affirmative parties in the Central Records Unit, Critical Circumstances, in Part Room B8024 of the main Department of The Department is conducting this Commerce building. In addition, a countervailing duty (‘‘CVD’’) AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, complete version of the Issues and investigation in accordance with section International Trade Administration, Decision Memorandum can be accessed 701 of the Act. For each of the subsidy Department of Commerce. directly at http://trade.gov/enforcement. programs found countervailable, we SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce The signed Issues and Decision Memo determine that there is a subsidy, i.e., a (the ‘‘Department’’) determines that and the electronic versions of the Issues financial contribution by an ‘‘authority’’ countervailable subsidies are being and Decision Memo are identical in that gives rise to a benefit to the provided to producers and exporters of content. recipient, and that the subsidy is certain corrosion-resistant steel As explained in the memorandum specific.8 For a full description of the products (‘‘corrosion-resistant steel’’) from the Acting Assistant Secretary for methodology underlying our from Italy as provided in section 705 of Enforcement and Compliance, the conclusions, see the Issues and Decision the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Department has exercised its discretion Memo. ‘‘Act’’). For information on the to toll all administrative deadlines due Analysis of Subsidy Programs and estimated subsidy rates, see the ‘‘Final to the closure of the Federal Comments Received Determination’’ section of this notice. Government. All deadlines in this The period of investigation is January 1, segment of the proceeding have been The subsidy programs under 2014, through December 31, 2014. extended by four business days. The investigation and the issues raised in revised deadline for the final the case and rebuttal briefs by parties in DATES: Effective Date: June 2, 2016. determination is now May 24, 2016.5 this investigation are discussed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Issues and Decision Memo. A list of the Palmer, Irene Gorelik, and Katie Scope of the Investigation issues that parties raised, and to which Marksberry, AD/CVD Operations, Office The products covered by this we responded in the Issues and V, Enforcement and Compliance, investigation are corrosion-resistant Decision Memo, is attached to this International Trade Administration, steel products from Italy. For a complete notice at Appendix I. U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th description of the scope of this Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Adverse Facts Available investigation, see Appendix II. Washington, DC 20230; telephone Section 776(a) of the Act provides 202.482.9068, 202.482.6905, and Scope Comments that, subject to section 782(d) of the Act, 202.482.7906, respectively. In accordance with the Preliminary the Department shall apply ‘‘facts SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scope Determination,6 the Department otherwise available’’ if: (1) Necessary information is not on the record; or (2) Background Investigation: Certain Corrosion Resistant Steel an interested party or any other person The Department published the from Italy,’’ dated April 13, 2016 (‘‘Post-Preliminary (A) withholds information that has been Analysis’’). Preliminary Determination on 4 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy requested, (B) fails to provide November 6, 2015,1 published the Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and information within the deadlines Preliminary Critical Circumstances on Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, established, or in the form and manner November 5, 2015,2 and placed the Post- Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and requested by the Department, subject to Preliminary Analysis on the record of Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 the Final Affirmative Determination in the this investigation on April 13, 2016.3 A Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain of the Act, (C) significantly impedes a Corrosion Resistant Steel from Italy,’’ dated 1 See Countervailing Duty Investigation of Certain concurrently with this notice (‘‘Issues and Decision (‘‘Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum’’). See Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From Italy: Memo’’). also Memorandum to the File, ‘‘Certain Corrosion- Preliminary Affirmative Determination, 80 FR 5 See Memorandum to the Record from Ron Resistant Steel Products From the People’s Republic 68839 (November 6, 2015) (‘‘Preliminary Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for of China, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Determination’’) and accompanying Preliminary Enforcement & Compliance, regarding ‘‘Tolling of Taiwan: Correction to Preliminary Determination Decision Memorandum (‘‘Prelim Decision Memo’’). Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Scope Memorandum,’’ dated January 29, 2016. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 2 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Government Closure During Snowstorm Jonas,’’ 7 See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Investigations of Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products dated January 27, 2016. Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and From India, Italy, the People’s Republic of China, 6 See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Associate Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Scope Comments the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Preliminary Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determinations of Critical Circumstances, 80 FR Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Certain Determinations,’’ dated concurrently with this 68504 (November 5, 2015) (‘‘Preliminary Critical Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the notice. Circumstances’’). People’s Republic of China, India, Italy, the 8 See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act 3 See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Scope Comments regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, re: Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary of the Act regarding benefit; and section 771(5A) of ‘‘Post-Preliminary Analysis of Countervailing Duty Determinations,’’ dated December 21, 2015 the Act regarding specificity. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 01, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM 02JNN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 106 / Thursday, June 2, 2016 / Notices 35327 proceeding, or (D) provides information specific, in accordance with section at the section, ‘‘Final Determination of that cannot be verified as provided by 771(5A)(D)(iv).9 Critical Circumstances, In Part.’’ section 782(i) of the Act. Furthermore, In addition, one company selected as Final Determination section 776(b) of the Act provides that a mandatory respondent, Ilva S.p.A. the Department may use an adverse In accordance with section (‘‘Ilva’’), did not respond to the inference in applying the facts 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we calculated Department’s questionnaires or otherwise available when a party fails to an individual rate for each producer/ participate in the investigation. cooperate by not acting to the best of its exporter of the subject merchandise Accordingly, as adverse facts available, ability to comply with a request for individually investigated. In accordance pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b), we with section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, information. have determined that Ilva benefitted for companies not individually In this case, the Department twice from certain countervailable programs investigated, we apply an ‘‘all-others’’ requested information with respect to during the POI and calculated a rate for rate, which is normally calculated by the Industrial Development Grants Ilva based on those programs.10 For weighting the subsidy rates of the Under Law 488/92, Technological further information, see the section individual companies selected as Innovation Grants and Loans Under ‘‘Use of Facts Otherwise Available and mandatory respondents by those Law 46/82, Certain Social Security Adverse Inferences’’ in the companies’ exports of the subject Reductions and Exemptions (‘‘Sgravi’’ accompanying Issues and Decision merchandise to the United States. Under Benefits), and Equalization Fund from Memo. section 705(c)(5)(i) of the Act, the all- the Government of Italy. The Changes Since the Preliminary others rate excludes zero and de Government of Italy withheld necessary Determination minimis rates calculated for the information with respect to each of exporters and producers individually these programs, failed to provide Based on our review and analysis of investigated as well as rates based information in the form and manner the comments received from parties, we entirely on facts otherwise available. requested, and did not provide made certain changes to Ilva’s subsidy Where the rates for the individually requested information by the deadlines rate calculations since the Preliminary investigated companies are all zero or for submission of the information, as Determination. Additionally we have de minimis, or determined entirely explained in more detail in the Prelim modified our analysis of the using facts otherwise available, section Decision Memo and the Issues and Equalization Fund and now determine 705(c)(5)(A)(ii) of the Act instructs the Decisions Memo. Furthermore, the that an adverse inference is warranted Department to establish an all-others Department has concluded that the in determining whether the program is rate using ‘‘any reasonable method.’’ Government of Italy did not cooperate to specific. For a discussion of these Where the countervailable subsidy rates the best of its ability in providing the changes, see the Issues and Decision for all of the individually investigated requested information. Accordingly, Memo. respondents are zero or de minimis or pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of are based on AFA, the Department’s Final Affirmative Determination of practice, pursuant to 705(c)(5)(A)(ii), is the Act, we have determined that for Critical Circumstances, in Part to calculate the all others rate based on each of these programs, the application of adverse facts available is warranted. On July 23, 2015, Petitioners 11 filed a a simple average of the zero or de For the Industrial Development Grants timely critical circumstances allegation, minimis margins and the margins based Under Law 488/92 and Technological pursuant to section 733(e)(1) of the Act on AFA. Notwithstanding the language Innovation Grants and Loans Under and 19 CFR 351.206(c)(1), alleging that of section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, we Law 46/82, and Equalization Fund critical circumstances exist with respect have not calculated the ‘‘all-others’’ rate programs, we have determined as to imports of corrosion-resistant steel by weight averaging the rates of the two adverse facts available that these from Italy.12 We preliminarily individually investigated respondents programs are de facto specific, in and the rate based on AFA, because Ilva determined that critical circumstances accordance with section 771(5A)(D)(iii) failed to report volume data that would did not exist for Acciaieria Arvedi of the Act. For the Sgravi Benefits, we enable the Department to determine the S.p.A. (‘‘Arvedi’’), Marcegaglia S.p.A. have determined that the reduced tax all-others rate based on a weighted- (‘‘Marcegaglia’’), and the all-others revenue due to the Government of Italy average. Therefore, and consistent with companies, but did exist for Ilva. That the Department’s practice, for the ‘‘all- under these provisions constitutes a determination remains unchanged and a others’’ rate, we calculated a simple financial contribution within the discussion of our final critical average of the two responding firms’ de meaning of section 771(5)(D)(ii) of the circumstances determination can be minimis rates and the AFA rate for the Act as revenue forgone. We have also found in the Issues and Decision Memo non-responsive company.13 determined that the revenue forgone under the Sgravi Benefits, is either de 9 See Prelim Decision Memo. 13 See, e.g., Countervailing Duty Investigation of facto specific, in accordance with 10 See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act. Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People’s 11 United States Steel Corporation, Nucor section 771(5A)(D)(ii) of the Act, or Republic of China: Preliminary Determination and Corporation, Steel Dynamics Inc., California Steel Alignment of Final Determination With Final regionally specific, in accordance with Industries, ArcelorMittal USA LLC, and AK Steel Antidumping Determination, 79 FR 10097 section 771(5A)(D)(iv) of the Act. More Corporation (collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’). (February 24, 2014); see also, Non-Oriented asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES specifically, we find that Laws 53/2000 12 See Letter from Petitioners, ‘‘Corrosion- Electrical Steel From Taiwan: Final Affirmative and 167/2011 are de facto specific Resistant Steel Products from India, Italy, the Countervailing Duty Determination, 79 FR 61602 People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, (October 14, 2014) and accompanying Issues and accordance with 771(5A)(iii) of the Act, and Taiwan: Critical Circumstances Allegations,’’ Decision Memo at VIII. Calculation of the All and that Law 223/91 is regionally July 23, 2015. Others Rate. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 01, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM 02JNN1

35328 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 106 / Thursday, June 2, 2016 / Notices Subsidy rate Exporter/producer (percent) Acciaieria Arvedi S.p.A., Finarvedi S.p.A., Arvedi Tubi Acciaio S.p.A., Euro-Trade S.p.A., and Siderurgica Triestina Srl., 0.48 (de minimis). collectively, the Arvedi Group. Marcegaglia S.p.A. and Marfin S.p.A., the Marcegaglia Group .............................................................................................. 0.07 (de minimis). Ilva S.p.A ................................................................................................................................................................................. 38.51 All Others ................................................................................................................................................................................. 13.02 Continuation of Suspension of making available to the ITC all non- XI. Recommendation Liquidation privileged and non-proprietary Appendix II—Scope of the Investigation As a result of our Preliminary information relating to this investigation. We will allow the ITC The products covered by this investigation Determination, and pursuant to section are certain flat-rolled steel products, either 703(d) of the Act, we instructed U.S. access to all privileged and business clad, plated, or coated with corrosion- Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) proprietary information in our files, resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or to suspend liquidation of appropriate provided the ITC confirms that it will zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based entries of merchandise under not disclose such information, either alloys, whether or not corrugated or painted, consideration from Italy 14 that were publicly or under an administrative varnished, laminated, or coated with plastics entered or withdrawn from warehouse, protective order, without the written or other non-metallic substances in addition consent of the Assistant Secretary for to the metallic coating. The products covered for consumption, on November 6, 2015, include coils that have a width of 12.7 mm or after August 7, 2015 (for those Enforcement and Compliance. or greater, regardless of form of coil (e.g., in entities for which we found critical Notification Regarding Administrative successively superimposed layers, spirally circumstances exist), which is 90 days Protective Orders oscillating, etc.). The products covered also before the publication date in the include products not in coils (e.g., in straight In the event the ITC issues a final lengths) of a thickness less than 4.75 mm and Federal Register of the Preliminary negative injury determination, this a width that is 12.7 mm or greater and that Determination. In accordance with notice will serve as the only reminder measures at least 10 times the thickness. The section 703(d) of the Act, we issued to parties subject to an APO of their products covered also include products not instructions to CBP to discontinue the in coils (e.g., in straight lengths) of a responsibility concerning the suspension of liquidation for CVD thickness of 4.75 mm or more and a width disposition of proprietary information purposes for subject merchandise exceeding 150 mm and measuring at least disclosed under APO in accordance entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, twice the thickness. The products described with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely above may be rectangular, square, circular, or on or after March 5, 2016, but to written notification of the return or other shape and include products of either continue the suspension of liquidation destruction of APO materials, or rectangular or non-rectangular cross-section of all entries from August 7, 2015 or conversion to judicial protective order, where such cross-section is achieved November 6, 2015, as relevant, through subsequent to the rolling process, i.e., is hereby requested. Failure to comply March 4, 2016. products which have been ‘‘worked after If the U.S. International Trade with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation subject to sanction. rolling’’ (e.g., products which have been Commission (the ‘‘ITC’’) issues a final beveled or rounded at the edges). For This determination is issued and affirmative injury determination, we purposes of the width and thickness published pursuant to sections 705(d) requirements referenced above: will issue a CVD order and will reinstate and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR (1) Where the nominal and actual the suspension of liquidation under 351.210(c). measurements vary, a product is within the section 706(a) of the Act and will Dated: May 24, 2016. scope if application of either the nominal or require a cash deposit of estimated actual measurement would place it within CVDs for such entries of subject Paul Piquado, the scope based on the definitions set forth merchandise in the amounts indicated Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and above, and above, other than those produced and/ Compliance. (2) where the width and thickness vary for or exported by Arvedi and Marcegaglia a specific product (e.g., the thickness of Appendix I—List of Topics Discussed in certain products with non-rectangular cross- because those companies rates are de the Issues and Decision Memorandum minimis. Because Arvedi and section, the width of certain products with I. Summary non-rectangular shape, etc.), the Marcegaglia were found to receive de measurement at its greatest width or II. Background minimis subsidies, they would be thickness applies. III. Final Determination of Critical excluded from the CVD order. If the ITC Circumstances, in Part Steel products included in the scope of this determines that material injury, or IV. Scope of the Investigation investigation are products in which: (1) Iron threat of material injury, does not exist, V. List of Issues predominates, by weight, over each of the this proceeding will be terminated and VI. Subsidies Valuation other contained elements; (2) the carbon all estimated duties deposited as a result VII. Use of Facts Otherwise Available and content is 2 percent or less, by weight; and Adverse Inferences (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds of the suspension of liquidation will be the quantity, by weight, respectively refunded or canceled. VIII. Analysis of Programs IX. Calculation of the All-Others Rate indicated: • 2.50 percent of manganese, or asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES International Trade Commission X. Analysis of Comments Notification Comment 1: Whether White Certificates • 3.30 percent of silicon, or Are Countervailable • 1.50 percent of copper, or In accordance with section 705(d) of Comment 2: Whether the Program To • 1.50 percent of aluminum, or the Act, we will notify the ITC of our Purchase Ferriera Di Servola Is Not • 1.25 percent of chromium, or determination. In addition, we are Countervailable or Not Used During the • 0.30 percent of cobalt, or POI • 0.40 percent of lead, or 14 Other than entries produced and/or exported Comment 3: Whether To Include • 2.00 percent of nickel, or by Arvedi and Marcegaglia for which we calculated Countervailable Programs From the Post- • 0.30 percent of tungsten (also called de minimis rates in the Preliminary Determination. Preliminary Memo in Ilva’s AFA Rate wolfram), or VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 01, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM 02JNN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 106 / Thursday, June 2, 2016 / Notices 35329 • 0.80 percent of molybdenum, or item numbers: 7210.90.1000, 7215.90.1000, events occurred since the Preliminary • 0.10 percent of niobium (also called 7215.90.3000, 7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500, Determination was issued. columbium), or 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, In April 2016, the Department • 0.30 percent of vanadium, or 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090, received revised databases from JSW 2 • 0.30 percent of zirconium 7225.91.0000, 7225.92.0000, 7225.99.0090, and Uttam Galva Steels Ltd. (‘‘Uttam Unless specifically excluded, products are 7226.99.0110, 7226.99.0130, 7226.99.0180, 7228.60.6000, 7228.60.8000, and Galva’’), the mandatory respondents in included in this scope regardless of levels of 7229.90.1000. this investigation. boron and titanium. For example, specifically included in this The HTSUS subheadings above are Additionally, in April 2016, scope are vacuum degassed, fully stabilized provided for convenience and customs Petitioners,3 JSW, and Uttam Galva (commonly referred to as interstitial-free purposes only. The written description of the submitted case briefs 4 and rebuttal (‘‘IF’’)) steels and high strength low alloy scope of the investigation is dispositive. briefs.5 A hearing was held on May 4, (‘‘HSLA’’) steels. IF steels are recognized as [FR Doc. 2016–12971 Filed 6–1–16; 8:45 am] 2016. low carbon steels with micro-alloying levels BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Also, as explained in the of elements such as titanium and/or niobium memorandum from the Acting Assistant added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen Secretary for Enforcement and elements. HSLA steels are recognized as Compliance, the Department exercised steels with micro-alloying levels of elements DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE its authority to toll all administrative such as chromium, copper, niobium, titanium, vanadium, and molybdenum. International Trade Administration deadlines due to the recent closure of Furthermore, this scope also includes the Federal Government.6 As a Advanced High Strength Steels (‘‘AHSS’’) [A–533–863] consequence, all deadlines in this and Ultra High Strength Steels (‘‘UHSS’’), segment of the proceeding have been both of which are considered high tensile Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel extended by four business days. The strength and high elongation steels. Products From India: Final revised deadline for the final results is Subject merchandise also includes now May 24, 2016. Determination of Sales at Less Than corrosion-resistant steel that has been further processed in a third country, including but Fair Value and Final Negative Scope of the Investigation not limited to annealing, tempering, painting, Determination of Critical Circumstances The product covered by this varnishing, trimming, cutting, punching and/ or slitting or any other processing that would investigation is corrosion-resistant steel not otherwise remove the merchandise from AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, from the India. For a complete the scope of the investigation if performed in International Trade Administration, description of the scope of this the country of manufacture of the in-scope Department of Commerce. investigation, see the ‘‘Scope of the corrosion resistant steel. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce Investigation,’’ in Appendix I of this All products that meet the written physical notice. description, and in which the chemistry (‘‘the Department’’) determines that quantities do not exceed any one of the noted certain corrosion-resistant steel Scope Comments element levels listed above, are within the products (‘‘corrosion-resistant steel’’) In accordance with the Preliminary scope of this investigation unless specifically from India is being, or is likely to be, Scope Determination,7 the Department excluded. The following products are outside sold in the United States at less than fair of and/or specifically excluded from the value (‘‘LTFV’’), as provided in section 2 We refer to JSW Steel Ltd. (‘‘JSWSL’’) and its scope of this investigation: 735(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as wholly-owned affiliate JSW Steel Coated Products • Flat-rolled steel products either plated or amended (‘‘the Act’’). The period of Limited (‘‘JSCPL’’) collectively as ‘‘JSW.’’ coated with tin, lead, chromium, chromium investigation (‘‘POI’’) is April 1, 2014, 3 Petitioners are United States Steel Corporation, oxides, both tin and lead (‘‘terne plate’’), or Nucor Corporation, ArcelorMittal USA, AK Steel both chromium and chromium oxides (‘‘tin through March 31, 2015. The final Corporation, Steel Dynamics, Inc., and California free steel’’), whether or not painted, dumping margins of sales at LTFV are Steel Industries, Inc. varnished or coated with plastics or other listed below in the ‘‘Final 4 See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from non-metallic substances in addition to the Determination’’ section of this notice. Petitioners, ‘‘Case Brief of Petitioners’’ (April 18, metallic coating; 2016); Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from DATES: Effective Date: June 2, 2016. JSW, ‘‘JSW’s Resubmitted Case Brief’’ (April 21, • Clad products in straight lengths of 2016); and Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from 4.7625 mm or more in composite thickness FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Uttam Galva, ‘‘Uttam Galva Steels Limited’s Case and of a width which exceeds 150 mm and Kabir Archuletta or Ryan Mullen, AD/ Brief’’ (April 19, 2016). measures at least twice the thickness; and CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement 5 See Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from • Certain clad stainless flat-rolled and Compliance, International Trade Petitioners, ‘‘Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief’’ (April 25, products, which are three-layered corrosion- Administration, U.S. Department of 2016); Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from resistant flat-rolled steel products less than JSW, ‘‘JSW’s Rebuttal Brief’’ (April 25, 2016); and 4.75 mm in composite thickness that consist Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Letter to the Secretary of Commerce from Uttam of a flat-rolled steel product clad on both Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; Galva, ‘‘Uttam Galva Steels Limited’s Rebuttal sides with stainless steel in a 20%-60%-20% telephone: (202) 482–2593 or (202) 482– Brief’’ (April 25, 2016) . 6 See Memorandum to the File from Ron ratio. 5260, respectively. Lorentzen, Acting A/S for Enforcement & The products subject to the investigation SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Compliance, ‘‘Tolling of Administrative Deadlines are currently classified in the Harmonized As a Result of the Government Closure During Tariff Schedule of the United States Background Snowstorm Jonas’’ dated January 27, 2016. (‘‘HTSUS’’) under item numbers: 7 See Memorandum to Gary Taverman, Associate 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, On January 4, 2016, the Department asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, published the Preliminary Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Certain 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, Determination of this antidumping duty Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products From the 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.6000, (‘‘AD’’) investigation.1 The following People’s Republic of China, India, Italy, the 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Scope Comments Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 1 See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Steel Products Determinations,’’ dated December 21, 2015 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, from India: Affirmative Preliminary Determination (‘‘Preliminary Scope Decision Memorandum’’). See and 7212.60.0000. of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement also Memorandum to the File, ‘‘Certain Corrosion- The products subject to the investigation of Final Determination, 81 FR 63 (January 4, 2016) Resistant Steel Products From the People’s Republic may also enter under the following HTSUS (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’). Continued VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:30 Jun 01, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM 02JNN1


Document Created: 2016-06-02 01:23:13
Document Modified: 2016-06-02 01:23:13
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
ContactBob Palmer, Irene Gorelik, and Katie Marksberry, AD/CVD Operations, Office V, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone 202.482.9068, 202.482.6905, and 202.482.7906, respectively.
FR Citation81 FR 35326 
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR