[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 106 (Thursday, June 2, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35326-35329]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[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