[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 152 (Tuesday, August 9, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48455-48459]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-17066]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-122-858]


Certain Softwood Lumber Products From Canada: Final Results and 
Final Rescission, in Part, of the Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Review, 2020

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines that 
producers and exporters of certain softwood lumber products (softwood 
lumber) from Canada received countervailable subsidies during the 
period of review (POR), January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020. 
With respect to 18 companies, we are rescinding this administrative 
review because none of the companies had a reviewable entry during the 
POR.

DATES: Applicable August 9, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan Hall-Eastman (Canfor), John 
Hoffner (JDIL), Kristen Johnson/Samuel Brummitt (Resolute), and Laura 
Griffith (West Fraser), AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and 
Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 
(202) 482-1468, (202) 482-3315, (202) 482-4793/(202) 482-7851, and 
(202) 482-6430, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    Commerce published the preliminary results of this countervailing 
duty (CVD) administrative review of softwood lumber from Canada on 
February 4, 2022, and invited interested parties to comment.\1\ For a 
summary of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Results and a 
full discussion of the issues raised by parties for the final results, 
see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: 
Preliminary Results, Partial Rescission, and Preliminary Intent to 
Rescind, in Part, the Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 
2020, 87 FR 6500 (February 4, 2022) (Preliminary Results).
    \2\ See Memorandum, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 
Final Results of the Administrative Review of the Countervailing 
Duty Order on Certain Softwood Lumber Products from Canada; 2020,'' 
dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues 
and Decision Memorandum). The Issues and Decision Memorandum 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 https://access.trade.gov. In addition, members 
of the public may access the IDM directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The product covered by this order is certain softwood lumber 
products from Canada. For a complete description of the scope of the 
Order, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Final Rescission of Administrative Review, in Part

    Based on our analysis of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 
data and comments received from interested parties, we determine that 
the 18 companies listed below had no reviewable shipments, sales, or 
entries of subject merchandise during the POR. Absent evidence of 
shipments on the record, we are rescinding the administrative review of 
these companies, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3). For further 
information, see ``Final Rescission of Administrative Review, in Part'' 
in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

AA Trading Ltd.
Blanchette & Blanchette Inc.
Canada Pallet Corp.
Careau Bois Inc.
Cedarcoast Lumber Products
CWP--Montreal inc.
Goldband Shake & Shingle Ltd.
Imperial Cedar Products, Ltd.
Les Produits Forestiers D&G Lt[eacute]e (aka, D&G Forest Products Ltd.)
Marcel Lauzon Inc.
North American Forest Products Ltd. (located in Saint-Quentin, New 
Brunswick)
Sapphire Lumber Company
Scierie Alexandre Lemay & Fils Inc.
Skeena Sawmills Ltd
Sonora Logging Ltd.

[[Page 48456]]

Suncoast Industries Inc.
Western Timber Products, Inc.
WWW Timber Products Ltd.

Analysis of Subsidy Programs and Comments Received

    Commerce conducted this CVD administrative review in accordance 
with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
Act). The subsidy programs under review, and the issues raised in case 
and rebuttal briefs submitted by the interested parties, are discussed 
in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues that the 
parties raised, and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum, is attached to this notice at Appendix I. Based on our 
analysis of the comments received from the interested parties, we made 
changes to the subsidy rates calculated for certain respondents. For a 
discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Rate for Non-Selected Companies Under Review

    Because the rates calculated for the companies selected for 
individual review are above de minimis and not based entirely on facts 
available, we applied a subsidy rate based on a weighted average of the 
subsidy rates calculated for the reviewed companies using sales data 
submitted by those companies to calculate a rate for the companies not 
selected for review. This is consistent with the methodology that we 
would use in an investigation to establish the all-others rate, 
pursuant to section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act. A list of all non-selected 
companies is included in Appendix II.
    For further information on the calculation of the non-selected 
rate, see ``Final Ad Valorem Rate for Non-Selected Companies under 
Review'' in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. For a list of the non-
selected companies, see Appendix II to this notice.

Final Results of Administrative Review

    In accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) and of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.221(b)(5), we determine that the following total estimated 
countervailable subsidy rates exist for 2020:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Subsidy rate
                        Companies                           ad valorem
                                                             (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canfor Corporation and its cross-owned affiliates \3\...    0.95 percent
J.D. Irving, Limited and its cross-owned affiliates \4\.    2.41 percent
Resolute FP Canada Inc. and its cross-owned affiliates     10.10 percent
 \5\....................................................
West Fraser Mills Ltd. and its cross-owned affiliates       3.62 percent
 \6\....................................................
Non-Selected Companies..................................    3.83 percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed for these 
final results of review within five days of the date of publication of 
this notice in the Federal Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.224(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Commerce finds the following companies to be cross-owned 
with Canfor Corporation: Canadian Forest Products., Ltd. and Canfor 
Wood Products Marketing, Ltd.
    \4\ Commerce finds the following companies to be cross-owned 
with J.D. Irving, Limited: Miramichi Timber Holdings Limited, The 
New Brunswick Railway Company, Rothesay Paper Holdings Ltd., and St. 
George Pulp & Paper Limited.
    \5\ Commerce finds the following companies to be cross-owned 
with Resolute FP Canada Inc.: Produits Forestiers Maurice SEC. and 
Resolute Forest Products Inc.
    \6\ Commerce finds the following companies to be cross-owned 
with West Fraser Mills Ltd.: West Fraser Timber Co., Ltd., Blue 
Ridge Lumber Inc., Sunpine Inc., Sundre Forest Products Inc., 
Manning Forest Products, Ltd., and West Fraser Alberta Holdings, 
Ltd.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.212(b)(2), Commerce will determine, and CBP shall assess, 
countervailing duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise 
covered by this review.
    Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier 
than 41 days after the date of publication of the final results of this 
review in the Federal Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 356.8(a).

Cash Deposit Requirements

    In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act, Commerce 
intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated 
countervailing duties in the amounts shown for the companies subject to 
this review. For all non-reviewed companies, we will instruct CBP to 
continue to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties at 
the most recent company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the 
company, as appropriate. These cash deposits, when imposed, shall 
remain in effect until further notice.

Administrative Protective Order (APO)

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to 
APO of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction 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 the terms of an 
APO is a sanctionable violation.

Notification to Interested Parties

    Commerce is issuing and publishing these final results of 
administrative review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 
777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4) and 351.221(b)(5).

    Dated: August 3, 2022.
Ryan Majerus,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations.

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

I. Summary
II. List of Issues
III. Case History
IV. Period of Review
V. Final Rescission of Administrative Review, in Part
VI. Scope of the Order
VII. Subsidies Valuation
VIII. Analysis of Programs
IX. Final Ad Valorem Rate for Non-Selected Companies Under Review
X. Analysis of Comments

A. General Issues

Comment 1: Whether Commerce Respects Canadian Sovereignty
Comment 2: Whether Commerce's Specificity Analysis for Certain 
Qu[eacute]bec Programs Is Consistent With the Law
Comment 3: Whether Commerce's Countervailable Findings for 
Qu[eacute]bec's Grant Programs Are Appropriate
Comment 4: Whether Electricity Curtailment Programs Are 
Countervailable
Comment 5: Whether Agreements with Consumers to Reduce Energy 
Consumption and GHG Are Grants
Comment 6: Whether Commerce Should Rescind Lemay's Review
Comment 7: Whether Commerce Should Consider Climate Change Goals
Comment 8: Whether Commerce Should Have Used a Sampling Methodology 
to Select Respondents for This Review

B. General Stumpage Issues

Comment 9: Whether Stumpage Is an Untied Subsidy

C. Alberta Stumpage Issues

Comment 10: Whether the Alberta Stumpage Market Is Distorted
Comment 11: Whether TDA Survey Prices Are an Appropriate Benchmark 
for Alberta Crown-Origin Stumpage
Comment 12: Whether FRIAA Dues are Part of the Alberta Stumpage 
Price

D. British Columbia Stumpage Issues

Comment 13: Whether There Is a Useable Tier-One Benchmark in British 
Columbia

[[Page 48457]]

E. New Brunswick Stumpage Issues

Comment 14: Whether the Private Stumpage Market in New Brunswick Is 
Distorted and Should be Used as Tier-One Benchmarks

F. Ontario Stumpage Issues

Comment 15: Whether Ontario's Crown Stumpage Market Is Distorted
Comment 16: Whether the MNP Ontario Survey Prices May Serve as an 
Appropriate Tier One Benchmark
Comment 17: Whether Ontario's Stumpage Prices Distort the Log Market

G. Qu[eacute]bec Stumpage Issues

Comment 18: Whether Qu[eacute]bec's Stumpage Market Is Distorted
Comment 19: Whether Qu[eacute]bec's Auction Prices Are an 
Appropriate Tier-One Benchmark to Measure Whether the GOO and the 
GOQ Sold Crown-Origin Standing Timber for LTAR

H. British Columbia Stumpage Benchmark Issues

Comment 20: Whether Commerce Should Use F2M Pricing Data as a 
Benchmark for BC Stumpage and the BC LER
Comment 21: Use and Selection of a Beetle-Killed Benchmark Price for 
the Final Results
Comment 22: Whether Commerce's Selection of a Log Volume Conversion 
Factor Was Appropriate
Comment 23: Whether Commerce Should Adjust the BC Log Benchmark 
Price for Certain Scaling and G&A Costs
Comment 24: Whether to Account for BC's ``Stand-as-a-Whole'' 
Stumpage Pricing

I. Nova Scotia Stumpage Benchmark Issues

Comment 25: Whether Private Standing Timber Prices in Nova Scotia 
Are Available in the Provinces at Issue
Comment 26: Whether the Tree Size in Nova Scotia, as Measured by 
Diameter, Is Comparable to Tree Size in Qu[eacute]bec, Ontario, and 
Alberta
Comment 27: Whether SPF Tree Species in Nova Scotia Are Comparable 
to SPF Tree Species in Qu[eacute]bec, Ontario, and Alberta
Comment 28: Whether Nova Scotia's Forest Is Comparable to the 
Forests of New Brunswick, Qu[eacute]bec, Ontario, and Alberta
Comment 29: Whether to Revise the Conversion Factor Used in 
Calculation of the Nova Scotia Benchmark
Comment 30: Whether Commerce Should Adjust the Method Used to Index 
the Nova Scotia Benchmark
Comment 31: Whether the Nova Scotia Benchmark is Comparable or 
Should Be Adjusted to Account for Log Product Characteristics
Comment 32: Reliability of Nova Scotia Private-Origin Standing 
Timber Benchmark
Comment 33: Whether Nova Scotia Is Comparable to Qu[eacute]bec, 
Ontario, and Alberta in Terms of Haulage Costs and Whether to 
Otherwise Adjust the Nova Scotia Benchmark to Account for Such 
Differences
Comment 34: Whether to Adjust the Nova Scotia Benchmark to Account 
for Spruce Budworm-Infested Timber
Comment 35: Whether to Adjust the Nova Scotia Benchmark to Account 
for Beetle-Killed-Timber Harvested in Alberta
Comment 36: Whether Pulp Mill Consumption of Standing Timber in Nova 
Scotia Creates Unique Market Conditions that Are Not Comparable to 
Market Conditions in Qu[eacute]bec, Ontario, and Alberta
Comment 37: Whether to Add a C$3.00/m3 Silviculture Fee to the Nova 
Scotia Benchmark
Comment 38: Whether to Compare Government Transaction-Specific 
Prices to an Average Benchmark Price or Offset the LTAR Benefit 
Using Negative Benefits
Comment 39: Whether the Nova Scotia Benchmark Adequately Accounts 
for Regional and Country-Level Differences
Comment 40: Whether Commerce Should Publicly Disclose the Anonymized 
Data that Comprise the 2017-2018 Private Market Survey and the Price 
Index Used to Calculate the Nova Scotia Benchmark
Comment 41: Whether Log Pricing Differences Between Nova Scotia and 
New Brunswick Require an Adjustment to the Nova Scotia Benchmark 
Utilized in JDIL's Stumpage Benefit Analysis
Comment 42: Whether Commerce Should Make Adjustments to Stumpage 
Rates Paid by the Respondents to Account for ``Total Remuneration'' 
in Alberta, New Brunswick, Ontario, and Qu[eacute]bec

J. Log Export Restraint Issues

Comment 43: Whether Commerce Should Find Restrictions on Log Exports 
in Alberta, New Brunswick, Ontario, and Qu[eacute]bec to Be 
Countervailable Subsidies
Comment 44: Whether the LER in British Columbia Results in a 
Financial Contribution
Comment 45: Whether Log Export Restraints Have an Impact in British 
Columbia

K. Purchase of Goods for MTAR Issues

 British Columbia

Comment 46: Whether Commerce Correctly Calculated a Benefit for BC 
Hydro EPAs
Comment 47: Whether Benefits Under the BC Hydro EPA Program Are Tied 
to Electricity Production and Not Lumber Products

 Ontario and Qu[eacute]bec

Comment 48: Whether Resolute's Ontario and Qu[eacute]bec Electricity 
PPAs Are Tied to Non-Subject Merchandise
Comment 49: Whether Commerce Applied the Correct Benchmark to 
Calculate the Benefit Under the IESO CHP III Program
Comment 50: Whether the IESO CHP III Program Is Specific
Comment 51: Whether Commerce Applied the Correct Benchmark to 
Calculate the Benefit Under the Hydro-Qu[eacute]bec PAE 2011-01 
Program
Comment 52: Whether the Hydro-Qu[eacute]bec PAE 2011-01 Program Is 
Specific

L. Grant Program Issues

 Federal

Comment 53: Whether Funds West Fraser Received for a Lignin Plant 
through the SDTC Program are Tied to Non-Subject Merchandise
Comment 54: Whether the SDTC Program Is Specific
Comment 55: Whether the Green Jobs Program Is Countervailable

 Alberta

Comment 56: Whether the CES Program Is Specific
Comment 57: Whether the TIER Program Is Countervailable
Comment 58: Whether the Payments Made from AESO to West Fraser for 
Load Shedding Constitute a Financial Contribution
Comment 59: Whether the AESO Load Shedding Program Is a Grant
Comment 60: Whether the Benefit Calculation For Load Shedding 
Payments to West Fraser Should Be Adjusted For West Fraser's Costs 
Incurred
Comment 61: Whether the AESO Load Shedding Program Is Specific

 British Columbia

    Comment 62: Whether the Purchase of Carbon Offsets From Canfor 
Is Countervailable

 New Brunswick

Comment 63: Whether Commerce Should Continue to Find the 
Silviculture and License Management Programs Countervailable
Comment 64: Whether Commerce Should Find LIREPP Countervailable

 Ontario

Comment 65: Whether the IESO Demand Response Provides a Benefit and 
Is Specific
Comment 66: Whether the IESO IEI Is Specific
Comment 67: Whether the OFRFP Is Countervailable
Comment 68: Whether the TargetGHG Is Specific
Comment 69: Whether the TargetGHG Is Tied to Non-Subject Merchandise

 Qu[eacute]bec

Comment 70: Whether the PCIP and PIAF Are Countervailable
Comment 71: Whether the PDB Is Countervailable
Comment 72: Whether the C[ocirc]te-Nord Wood Residue Program Is 
Countervailable
Comment 73: Whether the Investment Program in Public Forests 
Affected by Natural or Anthropogenic Disturbances Is Countervailable
Comment 74: Whether the MCRP Is Countervailable
Comment 75: Whether the PIB Is Countervailable
Comment 76: Whether the [Eacute]coPerformance Is Specific
Comment 77: Whether the FDRCMO Is Countervailable
Comment 78: Whether the MFOR Is De Facto Specific
Comment 79: Whether FDRCMO and MFOR Are Non-Recurring Subsidies
Comment 80: Whether the Hydro-Qu[eacute]bec IEO Provides a Benefit 
and Is Specific
Comment 81: Whether the Hydro-Qu[eacute]bec Special L Rate Is Tied 
to the Production of Paper

[[Page 48458]]

Comment 82: Whether the Hydro-Qu[eacute]bec Special L Rate Confers a 
Benefit
Comment 83: Whether the Hydro-Qu[eacute]bec EDL Is De Jure Specific
Comment 84: Whether Road Clearing Contracts with Hydro-Qu[eacute]bec 
Are Countervailable

M. Tax and Other Revenue Foregone Programs Issues

 Federal

Comment 85: Whether the Federal and Provincial SR&ED Tax Credits Are 
Specific
Comment 86: Whether the ACCA for Class 29 and Class 53 Assets 
Program Is Specific
Comment 87: Whether Commerce Was Correct to Treat the ACCA as an 
Individual Program
Comment 88: Whether the Class 1 Additional CCA Program Provides a 
Financial Contribution that Confers a Benefit
Comment 89: Whether the Class 1 Additional CCA Program Is Specific

 Alberta

Comment 90: Whether Tax Savings Under Alberta's Schedule D Are 
Countervailable
Comment 91: Whether Alberta's TEFU Program Is Countervailable
Comment 92: Whether the Property Tax EOA Is Countervailable

 British Columbia

Comment 93: Whether BCAA Section 9 Closure Allowance Provides a 
Financial Contribution and Is Specific
Comment 94: Whether British Columbia's Coloured Fuel Program Is 
Countervailable
Comment 95: Whether the CleanBC CIIP and CIF Are Countervailable

 New Brunswick

Comment 96: Whether Commerce Correctly Calculated the Benefit JDIL 
Received from the Atlantic Investment Tax Credit
Comment 97: Whether Commerce Correctly Calculated the Benefit JDIL 
Received from the New Brunswick Research & Development Tax Credit
Comment 98: Whether Commerce Should Find New Brunswick's Property 
Tax Incentives for Private Forest Producers Program Countervailable
Comment 99: Whether the Gasoline and Fuel Tax Program Provides a 
Financial Contribution in the Form of Revenue Forgone or Can Be 
Found Specific

 Qu[eacute]bec

Comment 100: Whether the Tax Credit for Investments Relating to 
Manufacturing and Processing Equipment Is Specific
Comment 101: Whether the Tax Credit for an On-the-Job Training Is 
Specific
Comment 102: Whether the Research Consortium Tax Credit Is De Facto 
Specific
Comment 103: Whether the Refund of Fuel Tax Paid on Fuel Used for 
Stationary Purposes Is Specific
Comment 104: Whether the Additional CCA Relating to Manufacturing 
and Processing Equipment Is Specific

N. Company-Specific Issues

 Resolute

Comment 105: Whether Commerce Should Reconsider If the GOO Forgave 
Debt Owed by Resolute
Comment 106: Whether Commerce Erred in Calculating Resolute's 
Benefit Under the Additional CCA Relating to Manufacturing and 
Processing Equipment Program

 West Fraser

Comment 107: Whether to Revise West Fraser's Sales Denominators
XI. Recommendation

Appendix II--Non-Selected Exporters/Producers

1074712 BC Ltd.
5214875 Manitoba Ltd.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In the Initiation Notice, AM Lumber Brokerage was not 
included. Subsequently, we determined that 5214875 Manitoba was 
doing business under the name AM Lumber Brokerage. Thus, entries 
made under company name AM Lumber Brokerage should be entered under 
5214875 Manitoba. See Initiation Notice, 86 FR at 12610.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

54 Reman
752615 B.C Ltd., Fraserview Remanufacturing Inc., dba Fraserview 
Cedar Products.
9224-5737 Quebec Inc. (aka A.G. Bois)
Absolute Lumber Products, Ltd.
Adwood Manufacturing Ltd.
Aler Forest Products, Ltd.
All American Forest Products Inc.
Alpa Lumber Mills Inc.
Andersen Pacific Forest Products Ltd.
Anglo-American Cedar Products, Ltd.
Antrim Cedar Corporation
Aquila Cedar Products, Ltd.
Arbec Lumber Inc. (aka Arbec Bois Doeuvre Inc.)
Aspen Planers Ltd.
B&L Forest Products Ltd
B.B. Pallets Inc.
Babine Forest Products Limited
Bakerview Forest Products Inc.
Bardobec Inc.
BarretteWood Inc.
Barrette-Chapais Ltee
Benoit & Dionne Produits Forestiers Ltee
Best Quality Cedar Products Ltd.
Blanchet Multi Concept Inc.
Bois Aise de Montreal Inc.
Bois Bonsai Inc.
Bois Daaquam inc. (aka Daaquam Lumber Inc.)
Bois D'oeuvre Cedrico Inc. (aka Cedrico Lumber Inc.)
Bois et Solutions Marketing SPEC, Inc. (aka SPEC Wood & Marketing 
Solution or SPEC Wood and Marketing Solutions Inc.)
Boisaco Inc.
Boscus Canada Inc.
Boucher Bros. Lumber Ltd.
BPWood Ltd.
Bramwood Forest Inc.
Brunswick Valley Lumber Inc.
Burrows Lumber (CD) Ltd., Theo A. Burrows Lumber Company Limited 
(aka Burrows Lumber Inc.)
Busque & Laflamme Inc.
Campbell River Shake & Shingle Co., Ltd.
Canasia Forest Industries Ltd.
Canyon Lumber Company, Ltd.
Carrier & Begin Inc.
Carrier Forest Products Ltd.
Carrier Lumber Ltd.
Carter Forest Products Inc.
Cedar Island Forest Products Ltd.
Cedar Valley Holdings Ltd.
Cedarland Forest Products Ltd.
Cedarline Industries, Ltd.
Central Cedar Ltd.
Central Forest Products Inc.
Centurion Lumber, Ltd.
Chaleur Forest Products Inc.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In the Initiation Notice, we included the company name 
``Fornebu Lumber Co. Ltd.'' See Initiation Notice, 86 FR at 12608. 
Subsequently, we determined that the successor-in-interest to 
Fornebu Lumber Co. Ltd. is Chaleur Forest Products Inc. See Certain 
Softwood Lumber Products from Canada: Notice of Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 86 FR 43189 
(August 6, 2021) (Chaleur CCR Final).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Chaleur Forest Products LP \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In the Initiation Notice, we included the company name 
``Chaleur Sawmills LP.'' See Initiation Notice, 86 FR at 12607. 
Subsequently, we determined that the successor-in-interest to 
Chaleur Sawmills LP is Chaleur Forest Products LP. See Chaleur CCR 
Final.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Channel-ex Trading Corporation
Clair Industrial Development Corp. Ltd.
Clermond Hamel Ltee
CNH Products Inc.
Coast Mountain Cedar Products Ltd.
Columbia River Shake & Shingle Ltd./Teal Cedar Products Ltd., dba 
The Teal Jones Group \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In the Initiation Notice, ``Teal Cedar Products Ltd.'' and 
``The Teal-Jones Group'' were inadvertently listed separately. See 
Initiation Notice, 86 FR at 12610.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commonwealth Plywood Co. Ltd.
Comox Valley Shakes (2019) Ltd.
Conifex Fibre Marketing Inc.
Cowichan Lumber Ltd.
CS Manufacturing Inc., dba Cedarshed
CWP--Industriel Inc.
D & D Pallets Ltd.
Dakeryn Industries Ltd.
Decker Lake Forest Products Ltd.
Delco Forest Products Ltd.
Delta Cedar Specialties Ltd.
Devon Lumber Co. Ltd.
DH Manufacturing Inc.
Direct Cedar Supplies Ltd.
Distribution Rioux Inc.
Doubletree Forest Products Ltd.
Downie Timber Ltd.
Dunkley Lumber Ltd.
EACOM Timber Corporation
East Fraser Fiber Co. Ltd.
Edgewood Forest Products Inc.
Elrod Cartage Ltd.
ER Probyn Export Ltd.
Falcon Lumber Ltd.
Fontaine Inc.
Foothills Forest Products Inc.
Fraser Specialty Products Ltd.
FraserWood Industries Ltd.
Furtado Forest Products Ltd.
Gilbert Smith Forest Products Ltd.
Glandell Enterprises Inc.
Goldwood Industries Ltd.
Goodfellow Inc.
Gorman Bros. Lumber Ltd.
Greendale Industries Inc.
Greenwell Resources Inc.
Griff Building Supplies Ltd.

[[Page 48459]]

Groupe Crete Chertsey Inc.
Groupe Crete Division St-Faustin Inc.
Groupe Lebel Inc.
Groupe Lignarex inc.
H.J. Crabbe & Sons Ltd.
Haida Forest Products Ltd.
Hampton Tree Farms, LLC dba Hampton Lumber Sales Canada
Hornepayne Lumber LP
Hudson Mitchell & Sons Lumber Inc.
Hy Mark Wood Products Inc.
Interfor Corporation
Interfor Sales & Marketing Ltd.
Intertran Holdings Ltd. dba Richmond Terminal
Island Cedar Products Ltd
J&G Log Works Ltd.
J.H. Huscroft Ltd.
Jan Woodlands (2001) Inc.
Jasco Forest Products Ltd.
Jazz Forest Products Ltd.
Jhajj Lumber Corporation
Kalesnikoff Lumber Co. Ltd.
Kan Wood, Ltd.
Kebois Ltd (aka Kebois Ltee)
Kelfor Industries Ltd.
Kermode Forest Products Ltd.
Keystone Timber Ltd.
L'Atelier de Readaptation au Travail de Beauce Inc.
Lafontaine Lumber Inc.
Langevin Forest Products Inc.
Lecours Lumber Co. Limited
Leisure Lumber Ltd.
Les Bardeaux Lajoie Inc.
Les Bois d'oeuvre Beaudoin Gauthier inc.
Les Bois Martek Lumber
Les Bois Traites M.G. Inc.
Les Chantiers de Chibougamau ltd.
Les Industries P.F. Inc.
Leslie Forest Products Ltd.
Lignum Forest Products LLP
Linwood Homes Ltd.
Lonestar Lumber Inc.
Lulumco Inc.
Magnum Forest Products, Ltd.
Maibec inc.
Manitou Forest Products Ltd.
Marwood Ltd.
Materiaux Blanchet Inc.
Mid Valley Lumber Specialties, Ltd.
Midway Lumber Mills Ltd.
Mill & Timber Products Ltd.
Millar Western Forest Products Ltd.
Mirax Lumber Products Ltd.
Mobilier Rustique (Beauce) Inc.
Monterra Lumber Mills Limited
Morwood Forest Products Inc.
Multicedre ltee
Nakina Lumber Inc.
National Forest Products Ltd.
Nicholson and Cates Ltd
Norsask Forest Products Limited Partnership
North American Forest Products Ltd. (located in Abbotsford, British 
Columbia)
North Enderby Timber Ltd.
Northland Forest Products Ltd.
Olympic Industries, Inc./Olympic Industries Inc-Reman Code/Olympic 
Industries ULC/Olympic Industries ULC-Reman/Olympic Industries ULC-
Reman Code
Oregon Canadian Forest Products Inc. dba Oregon Canadian Forest 
Products
Pacific Coast Cedar Products, Ltd.
Pacific Lumber Remanufacturing Inc.
Pacific Pallet, Ltd.
Pacific Western Wood Works Ltd.
PalletSource Inc.
Parallel Wood Products Ltd.
Pat Power Forest Products Corporation
Phoenix Forest Products Inc.
Pioneer Pallet & Lumber Ltd.
Porcupine Wood Products Ltd.
Portbec Forest Products Ltd (aka Les Produits Forestiers Portbec 
Ltee)
Power Wood Corp.
Precision Cedar Products Corp.
Prendiville Industries Ltd. (aka Kenora Forest Products)
Produits Forestiers Petit Paris Inc.
Produits forestiers Temrex, s.e.c. (aka Temrex Forest Products LP)
Produits Matra Inc. and Sechoirs de Beauce Inc.
Promobois G.D.S. inc.
Rayonier A.M. Canada GP
Rembos Inc.
Rene Bernard Inc.
Rick Dubois
Rielly Industrial Lumber Inc.
River City Remanufacturing Inc.
S&R Sawmills Ltd
S&W Forest Products Ltd.
San Industries Ltd.
Sawarne Lumber Co. Ltd.
Scierie St-Michel inc.
Scierie West Brome Inc.
Scott Lumber Sales
Shakertown Corp.
Sigurdson Forest Products Ltd.
Silvaris Corporation
Sinclar Group Forest Products Ltd.
Skana Forest Products Ltd.
Source Forest Products
South Beach Trading Inc.
South Coast Reman Ltd.
South Fraser Container Terminals
Specialiste du Bardeau de Cedre Inc (aka SBC)
Spruceland Millworks Inc.
Star Lumber Canada Ltd.
Suncoh Custom Lumber Ltd.
Sundher Timber Products Inc.
Surplus G Rioux
Surrey Cedar Ltd.
Taan Forest Limited Partnership
Taiga Building Products Ltd.
Tall Tree Lumber Company
Terminal Forest Products Ltd.
The Wood Source Inc.
Tolko Industries Ltd. and Tolko Marketing and Sales Ltd.
Trans-Pacific Trading Ltd.
Triad Forest Products Ltd.
Twin Rivers Paper Co. Inc.
Tyee Timber Products Ltd.
Usine Sartigan Inc.
Vaagen Fibre Canada, ULC
Valley Cedar 2 Inc.
Vancouver Specialty Cedar Products Ltd.
Visscher Lumber Inc
W.I. Woodtone Industries Inc.
Waldun Forest Product Sales Ltd.
Watkins Sawmills Ltd.
West Bay Forest Products Ltd.
Western Forest Products Inc.
Western Lumber Sales Limited
Westminster Industries Ltd.
Weston Forest Products Inc.
Weyerhaeuser Co.
White River Forest Products L.P.
Winton Homes Ltd.
Woodline Forest Products Ltd.
Woodstock Forest Products
Woodtone Specialties Inc.

[FR Doc. 2022-17066 Filed 8-8-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P