[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 17, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3985-3987]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-1382]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-428-817]


Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Germany; Final 
Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Reviews.

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

SUMMARY: On September 8, 2000, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published in the Federal Register its preliminary results 
of administrative reviews of the countervailing duty order on certain 
cut-to-length carbon steel plate from Germany for the periods calendar 
year 1997 and calendar year 1998 (65 FR 54496). The Department has now 
completed these administrative reviews in accordance with section 
751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For information 
on the net subsidy for each reviewed company, and for all non-reviewed 
companies, please see the ``Final Results of Review'' section of this 
notice. We will instruct the U.S. Customs Service (Customs) to assess 
countervailing duties as detailed in the ``Final Results of Review'' 
section of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 17, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Copyak, Office of AD/CVD 
Enforcement VI, Group II, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
2786.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(b), these administrative reviews cover 
only those producers or exporters of the subject merchandise for which 
the administrative reviews were specifically requested. Accordingly, 
these administrative reviews cover exporter Novosteel SA and producer 
Reiner Brach GmbH and Co. KG. We received timely allegations of 
additional subsidies, including allegations of upstream subsidies. We 
initiated examinations of three of these alleged subsidy programs and 
determined not to initiate examinations of the alleged upstream subsidy 
programs. See memorandum to Melissa G. Skinner, Director, Office of AD/
CVD Enforcement VI, from Team, entitled 1997 and 1998 Administrative 
Reviews of the Countervailing Duty Order on Certain Cut-to-Length 
Carbon Steel Plate from Germany: Memorandum Regarding Affiliation, 
Cross-ownership, Upstream Subsidy Allegations, and Other Subsidy 
Allegations, dated August 23, 2000. (This memorandum is on file in 
public version form in the public file room of room B-099 of the main 
Commerce building.) These administrative reviews cover 39 programs and 
the periods calendar year 1997 and calendar year 1998.
    On September 8, 2000, the Department published in the Federal 
Register its preliminary results of administrative reviews. See Certain 
Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From Germany; Preliminary Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 65 FR 54496 (Preliminary 
Results). We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary 
Results. We received comments on October 10, 2000, and on October 27, 
2000.

Applicable Statute and Regulations

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are 
references to the provisions of the Act, as amended by the Uruguay 
Round Agreements Act (URAA) effective January 1, 1995. The

[[Page 3986]]

Department is conducting these administrative reviews in accordance 
with section 751(a) of the Act. In addition, unless otherwise 
indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations reference 19 
CFR part 351 (1999).

Scope of the Review

    The merchandise subject to these administrative reviews includes 
hot-rolled carbon steel universal mill plates (i.e., flat-rolled 
products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width 
exceeding 150 millimeters but not exceeding 1,250 millimeters and of a 
thickness of not less than 4 millimeters, not in coils and without 
patterns in relief), of rectangular shape, neither clad, plated nor 
coated with metal, whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with 
plastics or other nonmetallic substances; and certain hot-rolled carbon 
steel flat-rolled products in straight lengths, of rectangular shape, 
hot rolled, neither clad, plated, nor coated with metal, whether or not 
painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic 
substances, 4.75 millimeters or more in thickness and of a width which 
exceeds 150 millimeters and measures at least twice the thickness, as 
currently classifiable in the HTSUS under item numbers (7208.40.3030), 
(7208.40.3060), (7208.51.0030), (7208.51.0045), (7208.51.0060), 
(7208.52.0000), (7208.53.0000), (7208.90.0000), (7210.70.3000), 
(7210.90.9000), (7211.13.0000), (7211.14.0030), (7211.14.0045), 
(7211.90.0000), (7212.40.1000), (7212.40.5000), (7212.50.0000). 
Included in these administrative reviews are flat-rolled products of 
non-rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved 
subsequent to the rolling process (i.e., products which have been 
``worked after rolling'')--for example, products which have been 
beveled or rounded at the edges. Excluded from these reviews is grade 
X-70 plate. Also excluded from these administrative reviews is certain 
carbon cut-to-length steel plate with a maximum thickness of 80 mm in 
steel grades BS 7191, 355 EM, and 355 EMZ, as amended by Sable Offshore 
Energy Project specification XB MOO Y 15 0001, types 1 and 2.

Analysis of Programs

Programs Determined To Be Not Used

    We examined the following programs and determined, based on the 
questionnaire responses, that the producer and/or exporter of the 
subject merchandise did not apply for or receive benefits under these 
programs during the periods of review:
1. Capital Investment Grants
2. Investment Premium Act
3. Joint Scheme: Improvement of Regional Economic Structure--GA 
Investment Grants and Other GA Subsidies
4. Ruhr District Action Program
5. Aid for Closure of Steel Operations
6. Joint Program: Upswing East
7. Freight Programs under the Special Subsidies for Companies in the 
Zonal Border Area
8. Loan Guarantees under Treuhandanstalt Subsidies
9. Long-term Loans from the Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau (KfW)
10. Tax Programs under Special Subsidies for Companies in the Zonal 
Border Area
11. Structural Improvement Aids
12. ECSC Article 54 Loans
13. ECSC Article 54 Interest Rebates
14. ECSC Redeployment Aid Under Article 56(2)(b)
15. ECSC Article 54 Loans
16. ECSC Article 54 Interest Rebates
17. Loans with Reduced Interest Rates under the Steel Restructuring 
Plan
18. Federal and State Government Loan Guarantees under the Steel 
Restructuring Plan
19. Special Ruhr Plan
20. Zukunftsinitiative Montaregionen (ZIM)
21. Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau (KfW) Investment Loans for Eastern 
Germany
22. Deutsche Ausglechsbank Investment Loans for Eastern Germany
23. European Recovery Program Loans for Eastern Germany
24. Loan Guarantee Program Loans for Eastern Germany
25. Peine-Salzgitter Profit Transfer Agreement and Other Operation Loss 
Subsidies
26. Elimination of Duisburg Harbor Tolls
27. Export Credits at Preferential Rates
28. Miscellaneous Tax Subsidies
29. Loans from the Government of Nordrhein-Westphalen
30. Tax Subsidies for Eastern Germany
31. European Investment Bank Loans and Loan Guarantees
32. New Community Instrument Loans
33. European Regional Development Fund Aid
34. Nordrhein-Westphalen's Air Pollution Control Program
35. ECSC Article 54 Loan Guarantees
36. ECSC Article 56 Conversion Loans
37. European Social Funds Grants
38. Assistance Measures for the Companies within the Steel Industry to 
Partially Compensate for Costs of the Social Plans
39. Social Aid for the Workers in the Coal and Steel Industries

Analysis of Comments Received

    The comments submitted by interested parties are addressed in the 
``Issues and Decision Memorandum'' (Decision Memorandum) from Holly A. 
Kuga, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, to Troy 
H. Cribb, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated January 
8, 2000, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues 
addressed is attached to this notice as Appendix I. The Decision 
Memorandum is a public document which is on file in room B-099 of the 
Main Commerce Building and can be accessed via the internet at the 
website http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn and under the heading ``Germany.'' 
The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are 
identical in content.

Final Results of Administrative Reviews

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we calculated an 
individual subsidy rate for the producer/exporter subject to these 
administrative reviews. For the periods calendar year 1997 and calendar 
year 1998, we determine the net subsidy for Novosteel SA/Reiner Brach 
GmbH and Co. KG to be 0.00 percent ad valorem.
    As provided for in the Act and 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), any rate less 
than 0.5 percent ad valorem in an administrative review is de minimis. 
Accordingly, no countervailing duties will be assessed. The Department 
will instruct Customs to liquidate, without regard to countervailing 
duties, shipments of the subject merchandise from Novosteel SA produced 
by Reiner Brach GmbH and Co. KG, exported on or after January 1, 1997 
through December 31, 1997 and January 1, 1998 through December 31, 
1998. Also, the cash deposits for this producer will be zero.
    Because the URAA replaced the general rule in favor of a country-
wide rate with a general rule in favor of individual rates for 
investigated and reviewed companies, the procedures for establishing 
countervailing duty rates, including those for non-reviewed companies, 
are now essentially the same as those in antidumping cases, except as 
provided for in section 777A(e)(2)(B) of the Act. The requested review 
will normally cover only those companies specifically named. See 19 CFR 
351.213(b). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(c), for all companies for which 
a review was not requested, duties must be assessed at the cash deposit 
rate, and cash deposits must continue to be collected, at the rate 
previously ordered. As such, the countervailing duty cash deposit rate 
applicable to a company

[[Page 3987]]

can no longer change, except pursuant to a request for a review of that 
company. See Federal-Mogul Corporation and The Torrington Company v. 
United States, 822 F.Supp. 782 (CIT 1993) and Floral Trade Council v. 
United States, 822 F.Supp. 766 (CIT 1993) (interpreting 19 CFR 
353.22(e), the prior antidumping regulation on automatic assessment, 
which was identical to 19 CFR 355.22(g)). Therefore, the cash deposit 
rates for all companies except those covered by these reviews will be 
unchanged by the results of these reviews.
    We will instruct Customs to continue to collect cash deposits for 
non-reviewed companies at the most recent company-specific or country-
wide rate applicable to the company. Accordingly, the cash deposit 
rates that will be applied to non-reviewed companies covered by this 
order will be the rate for that company established in the most 
recently completed administrative proceeding conducted under the URAA. 
If such a review has not been conducted, the rate established in the 
most recently completed administrative proceeding pursuant to the 
statutory provisions that were in effect prior to the URAA amendments 
is applicable. See Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty 
Determinations: Certain Steel Products from Germany, 58 FR 37315 (July 
9, 1993). This rate shall apply to the non-reviewed companies until a 
review of a company assigned these rates is requested. In addition, for 
the periods calendar year 1997 and calendar year 1998, the assessment 
rates applicable to all non-reviewed companies covered by this order 
are the cash deposit rates in effect at the time of entry.
    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (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 return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to 
judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with 
the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
    These administrative reviews and this notice are issued and 
published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the 
Act.

    Dated: January 8, 2001.
Troy H. Cribb,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

APPENDIX 1--Issues Discussed in Decision Memorandum

Analysis of Comments

1. Upstream Subsidy Allegations
2. Need to Conduct Verification
3. Attribution of Subsidies
[FR Doc. 01-1382 Filed 1-16-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P