[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 189 (Friday, September 28, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49635-49637]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-24404]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-821]


Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain Hot-
Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India

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

ACTION: Notice of final affirmative countervailing duty investigation.

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

SUMMARY: On April 20, 2001, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published in the Federal Register its preliminary affirmative 
determination in the countervailing duty investigation of certain hot-
rolled carbon steel flat products from India for the period April 1, 
1999 through March 31, 2000.
    The net subsidy rates in the Final Determination differ from those 
of the Preliminary Determination. The revised final net subsidy rates 
for the investigated companies are listed below in the ``Suspension of 
Liquidation'' section of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 28, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric B. Greynolds at (202) 482-6071 or 
Robert Copyak at (202) 482-2209, Office of AD/CVD Enforcement VI, Group 
II, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, Room 4012, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, 
NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute and Regulations

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are 
references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective 
date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise 
indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are to the 
regulations codified at 19 CFR part 351 (2000).

Background

    On April 20, 2001, the Department published the preliminary results 
of investigation on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from 
India. See Notice of Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty 
Determination and Alignment of Final Countervailing Determination with 
Final Antidumping Duty Determinations: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel 
Flat Products from India, 66 FR 20240 (April 20, 2001) (Preliminary 
Results). This investigation covers the following manufacturer/
exporters: Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL), Essar Steel Limited 
(Essar), Ispat Industries Limited (Ispat), and the Tata Iron and Steel 
Company Limited (TISCO). The investigation covers the period April 1, 
1999, through March 31, 2000. The investigation covers 10 programs.
    We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary 
Determination. On August 20, 2001, we received comments from 
petitioners and respondents. On August 30, 2001, we received rebuttal 
comments from petitioners and respondents. At the request of the 
Department, respondents subsequently submitted revised rebuttal 
comments on September 6, 2001. A public hearing was held at the 
Department of Commerce on September 5, 2001.
    The Government of India (GOI) submitted a proposed suspension 
agreement on April 20, 2001. The GOI proposed an agreement again on 
August 6, 2001. The Department did not accept the GOI's proposals.
    Although the deadline for this determination was originally 
September 17, 2001, in light of the events of September 11, 2001, and 
the subsequent closure of the Federal Government for reasons of 
security, the timeframe for issuing this determination has been 
extended by four days.

Scope of the Investigation

    The merchandise subject to this investigation is certain hot-rolled 
flat-rolled carbon-quality steel products of a rectangular shape, of a 
width of 0.5 inch or greater, neither clad, plated, nor coated with 
metal and whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or 
other non-metallic substances, in coils (whether or not in successively 
superimposed layers), regardless of thickness, and in straight lengths, 
of a thickness of less than 4.75 mm and of a width measuring at least 
10 times the thickness. Universal mill plate (i.e., flat-rolled 
products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width 
exceeding 150 mm, but not exceeding 1250 mm, and of a thickness of not 
less than 4 mm, not in coils and without patterns in relief) of a 
thickness not less than 4.0 mm is not included within the scope of this 
investigation.
    Specifically included within the scope of this investigation are 
vacuum degassed, fully stabilized (commonly referred to as 
interstitial-free (IF)) steels, high strength low alloy (HSLA) steels, 
and the substrate for motor lamination steels. IF steels are recognized 
as low carbon steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as 
titanium or niobium (also commonly referred to as columbium), or both, 
added to stabilize carbon and nitrogen elements. HSLA steels are 
recognized as steels with micro-alloying levels of elements such as 
chromium, copper, niobium, vanadium, and molybdenum. The substrate for 
motor lamination steels contains micro-alloying levels of elements such 
as silicon and aluminum.
    Steel products included in the scope of this investigation, 
regardless of definitions in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 
United States (HTS), are products in which: (i) Iron predominates, by 
weight, over each of the other contained elements; (ii) the carbon 
content is 2 percent or less, by weight; and (iii) none of the elements 
listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated:

1.80 percent of manganese, or
2.25 percent of silicon, or
1.00 percent of copper, or
0.50 percent of aluminum, or
1.25 percent of chromium, or
0.30 percent of cobalt, or
0.40 percent of lead, or

[[Page 49636]]

1.25 percent of nickel, or
0.30 percent of tungsten, or
0.10 percent of molybdenum, or
0.10 percent of niobium, or
0.15 percent of vanadium, or
0.15 percent of zirconium.

    All products that meet the physical and chemical description 
provided above are within the scope of this investigation unless 
otherwise excluded. The following products, by way of example, are 
outside or specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation:
     Alloy hot-rolled steel products in which at least one of 
the chemical elements exceeds those listed above (including, e.g., ASTM 
specifications A543, A387, A514, A517, A506).
     SAE/AISI grades of series 2300 and higher.
     Ball bearings steels, as defined in the HTS.
     Tool steels, as defined in the HTS.
     Silico-manganese (as defined in the HTS) or silicon 
electrical steel with a silicon level exceeding 2.25 percent.
     ASTM specifications A710 and A736.
     USS Abrasion-resistant steels (USS AR 400, USS AR 500).
     All products (proprietary or otherwise) based on an alloy 
ASTM specification (sample specifications: ASTM A506, A507).
     Non-rectangular shapes, not in coils, which are the result 
of having been processed by cutting or stamping and which have assumed 
the character of articles or products classified outside chapter 72 of 
the HTS.
    The merchandise subject to this investigation is classified in the 
HTS at subheadings: 7208.10.15.00, 7208.10.30.00, 7208.10.60.00, 
7208.25.30.00, 7208.25.60.00, 7208.26.00.30, 7208.26.00.60, 
7208.27.00.30, 7208.27.00.60, 7208.36.00.30, 7208.36.00.60, 
7208.37.00.30, 7208.37.00.60, 7208.38.00.15, 7208.38.00.30, 
7208.38.00.90, 7208.39.00.15, 7208.39.00.30, 7208.39.00.90, 
7208.40.60.30, 7208.40.60.60, 7208.53.00.00, 7208.54.00.00, 
7208.90.00.00, 7211.14.00.90, 7211.19.15.00, 7211.19.20.00, 
7211.19.30.00, 7211.19.45.00, 7211.19.60.00, 7211.19.75.30, 
7211.19.75.60, and 7211.19.75.90. Certain hot-rolled flat-rolled 
carbon-quality steel covered by this investigation, including: vacuum 
degassed fully stabilized; high strength low alloy; and the substrate 
for motor lamination steel may also enter under the following tariff 
numbers: 7225.11.00.00, 7225.19.00.00, 7225.30.30.50, 7225.30.70.00, 
7225.40.70.00, 7225.99.00.90, 7226.11.10.00, 7226.11.90.30, 
7226.11.90.60, 7226.19.10.00, 7226.19.90.00, 7226.91.50.00, 
7226.91.70.00, 7226.91.80.00, and 7226.99.00.00. Subject merchandise 
may also enter under 7210.70.30.00, 7210.90.90.00, 7211.14.00.30, 
7212.40.10.00, 7212.40.50.00, and 7212.50.00.00. Although the HTS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and U.S. Customs purposes, the 
Department's written description of the merchandise under investigation 
is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this investigation are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum'' (Decision Memorandum) dated September 19, 2001, which is 
hereby adopted by this notice. A list of issues which parties have 
raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in the Decision 
Memorandum, is attached to this notice as Appendix I. Parties can find 
a complete discussion of all issues raised in this investigation and 
the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on 
file in room B-099 of the Main Commerce Building. In addition, a 
complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on 
the World Wide Web at http://www.ia.ita.doc.gov, under the heading 
``Federal Register Notices.'' The paper copy and electronic version of 
the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i)(I) of the Act, we have 
calculated individual rates for the companies under investigation. For 
the period April 1, 1999, through March 31, 2000, we determine the net 
subsidy rates for the investigated companies to be as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Net subsidy
                                                                 rate
                     Producer/Exporter                       (percent ad
                                                               valorem)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Essar Steel Limited (Essar)................................         8.32
Ispat Industries Limited (Ispat)...........................        31.94
Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL)....................        18.38
Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited (TISCO)................         9.26
All Others Rate............................................        16.17
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in the Decision Memorandum, we have applied the facts 
available rate to Jindal. To calculate the ``all others'' rate, we 
weight-averaged the individual rates of SAIL, Essar, TISCO, and Ispat 
by each company's respective sales of subject merchandise made to the 
United States during the POI.
    Under Sec. 351.526 of the regulations, the Department can adjust 
cash deposit rates to account for program-wide changes. During this 
investigation, the Department verified that two programs have been 
terminated subsequent to the POI. Therefore, we are adjusting the cash 
deposit rates to take into account these program-wide changes. Thus, in 
determining the cash deposit rates listed below, we have deducted the 
subsidies found for these two programs from the overall subsidy rate 
calculated for the investigated companies.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Cash
                                                               deposit
                     Producer/Exporter                           rate
                                                             (percent ad
                                                               valorem)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Essar Steel Limited (Essar)................................         8.25
Ispat Industries Limited (Ispat)...........................        31.89
Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL)....................        18.22
Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited (TISCO)................         9.17
All Others Rate............................................        16.08
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with our preliminary affirmative determination, we 
instructed the U.S. Customs Service to suspend liquidation of all 
entries of certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India, 
which were entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or 
after April 20, 2001, the date of the publication of our preliminary 
determination in the Federal Register. In accordance with section 
703(d) of the Act, we instructed the U.S. Customs Service to 
discontinue the suspension of liquidation for merchandise entered on or 
after August 18, 2001, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of 
entries made between April 20, 2001 and August 17, 2001.
    We will reinstate suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of 
the Act for all entries if the ITC issues a final affirmative injury 
determination and will require a cash deposit of estimated 
countervailing duties for such entries of merchandise in the amounts 
indicated above. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat 
of material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated 
and all estimated duties deposited or securities posted as a result of 
the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled.

ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the 
ITC of our determination. In addition, we are

[[Page 49637]]

making available to the ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary 
information related to this investigation. We will allow the ITC access 
to all privileged and business proprietary information in our files, 
provided that the ITC confirms that it will not disclose such 
information, either publically or under an administrative protective 
order (APO), without the written consent of the Assistant Secretary for 
Import Administration.
    If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material 
injury, does not exist, these proceedings will be terminated. If 
however, the ITC determines that such injury does exist, we will issue 
a countervailing duty order.

Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury 
determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties 
subject to APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction of 
proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.305(a)(3). Failure to comply is a violation of the APO.
    This determination is published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 
777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: September 21, 2001.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I--Issues and Decision Memorandum

Methodology and Background Information

I. The Net Subsidy Rate Attributable to Jindal Vijaynagar Ltd.

II. Subsidies Valuation Information

    A. Allocation Period
    B. Creditworthiness
    C. Benchmarks for Loans and Discount Rate

III. Program-Wide Changes

Analysis of Programs

I. Programs Conferring Subsidies

    A. Pre-Shipment and Post-Shipment Export Financing
    B. Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme
    C. Advance Licenses
    D. Special Import Licenses (SILs)
    E. Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS)
    F. Loans from the Steel Development Fund (SDF) Fund
    G. The GOI's Forgiveness of SDF Loans Issued to SAIL
    H. GOI Forgiveness of Other Loans Issued to SAIL
    I. Loan Guarantees from the GOI
    J. Exemption of Export Credit from Interest Taxes

II. Programs Determined To Be Not Used

    A. Income Tax Deductions Under Section 80 HHC
    B. Grant-in-Aid Reported on SAIL's Annual Reports

III. Total Ad Valorem Rate

IV. Analysis of Comments

    Comment 1: Steel Development Loans and Loan Forgiveness
    Comment 2: Attribution of the GOI's Waiver of SAIL's SDF Loans
    Comment 3: The Attribution of GOI Debt Forgiveness
    Comment 4: Suspension of Interest Payments Due on SAIL's SDF 
Loans During the POI
    Comment 5: Countervailability of Advance Licenses
    Comment 6: Countervailability of DEPS
    Comment 7: Program-Wide Changes
    Comment 8: Income Tax Deductions under Section 80HHC of the 
Indian Tax Act
    Comment 9: Uncreditworthy Allegations
    Comment 10: Denominator to be Used for SAIL and Essar's Pre-
shipment Export Financing
    Comment 11: Long-term Interest Rate Benchmark for Calculating 
the Benefit to Essar from the Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme
    Comment 12: Sales Tax Obtained from the Sales of Special Import 
Licenses
    Comment 13: Exemption of Export Credit from Interest Tax
    Comment 14: Ispat's Uninstalled and Common Capital Equipment 
under the EPCGS
    Comment 15: Ispat's Corrected FOB Sales Values
    Comment 16: Value of DEPS Benefits Conferred on Ispat
    Comment 17: Petitioners' Allegation of Errors in the Calculation 
of Ispat's Subsidy Rate
    Comment 18: Guarantee Fees Charged by the GOI for Loans Obtained 
by SAIL from International Lending Institutions
    Comment 19: Calculation of TISCO's Long-term Benchmark Interest 
Rate
    Comment 20: Calculation of Duty and Application Fees Actually 
Paid by TISCO Under the EPCGS Program
    Comment 21: Calculation of TISCO's SDF Loan Repayments
    Comment 22: Calculation of TISCO's Short-Term Rupee-Denominated 
Benchmark Interest Rate
    Comment 23: Calculation of DEPS Program Rate for TISCO
    Comment 24: Benefit to TISCO Under the EPCGS Program
    Comment 25: Denominator for TISCO's Post-Shipment Export 
Financing Program
    Comment 26: Calculation of TISCO's SDF Loans

[FR Doc. 01-24404 Filed 9-27-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P