81060 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Part 705 

[Docket No. 201203–0323] 

RIN 0694–AH55 

Section 232 Steel and Aluminum Tariff 

Exclusions Process 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, U.S. Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Interim final rule. 

SUMMARY: This interim final rule revises 

aspects of the process for requesting 

exclusions from the duties and 

quantitative limitations on imports of 

aluminum and steel discussed in three 

previous Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Commerce’’) interim final rules 

implementing the exclusion process 

authorized by the President under 

Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act 

of 1962, as amended (‘‘232’’). These 

changes are also informed by a notice of 

inquiry with request for comments on 

the 232 exclusions process that was 

published by Commerce on May 26, 

2020. Based on public comments on the 

current process for submissions to 

Commerce, Commerce is publishing this 

interim final rule to make additional 

revisions to the 232 exclusion process, 

including to the 232 Exclusions Portal. 

DATES: 

Effective date: This interim final rule 

is effective December 14, 2020, except 

for amendatory instructions 3 and 5 that 

are effective December 29, 2020. 

Comments: Comments on this interim 

final rule must be received by BIS no 

later than February 12, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: See SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section for information on 

submitting exclusion requests, 

objections thereto, rebuttals, and 

surrebuttals. You may submit 

comments, identified by docket number 

BIS–2020–0022 or RIN 0694–AH55, 

through the Federal eRulemaking 

website: http://www.regulations.gov. No 

other submission methods are being 

used for submitting comments on this 

interim final rule. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

All filers using the portal should use 

the name of the person or entity 

submitting comments as the name of 

their files, in accordance with the 

instructions below. Anyone submitting 

business confidential information 

should clearly identify the business 

confidential portion at the time of 

submission, file a statement justifying 

nondisclosure and referring to the 

specific legal authority claimed, and 

provide a non-confidential version of 

the submission. 

For comments submitted 

electronically containing business 

confidential information, the file name 

of the business confidential version 

should begin with the characters ‘‘BC.’’ 

Any page containing business 

confidential information must be clearly 

marked ‘‘BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL’’ 

on the top of that page. The 

corresponding non-confidential version 

of those comments must be clearly 

marked ‘‘PUBLIC.’’ The file name of the 

non-confidential version should begin 

with the character ‘‘P.’’ The ‘‘BC’’ and 

‘‘P’’ should be followed by the name of 

the person or entity submitting the 

comments or rebuttal comments. Any 

submissions with file names that do not 

begin with a ‘‘BC’’ or ‘‘P’’ will be 

assumed to be public and will be made 

publicly available through http://

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

questions regarding this interim final 

rule, contact Erika Maynard at 202–482– 

5572 or via email Erika.Maynard@

bis.doc.gov, or email Steel232@

bis.doc.gov regarding provisions in this 

rule specific to steel exclusion requests 

and Aluminum232@bis.doc.gov 

regarding provisions in this rule specific 

to aluminum exclusion requests. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On March 8, 2018, President Trump 

issued Proclamations 9704 and 9705, 

imposing duties on imports of 

aluminum and steel. The Proclamations 

also authorized the Secretary of 

Commerce to grant exclusions from the 

duties if the Secretary determines the 

steel or aluminum article for which the 

exclusion is requested is not ‘‘produced 

in the United States in a sufficient and 

reasonably available amount or of a 

satisfactory quality’’ or should be 

excluded ‘‘based upon specific national 

security considerations,’’ and provided 

authority for the Secretary to issue 

procedures for exclusion requests. On 

April 30, 2018, Proclamations 9739 and 

9740, and on May 31, 2018, 

Proclamations 9758 and 9759, set 

quantitative limitations on the import of 

steel and aluminum from certain 

countries in lieu of the duties. On 

August 29, 2018, in Proclamations 9776 

and 9777, President Trump also 

authorized the Secretary to grant 

exclusions from quantitative limitations 

based on the same standards applicable 

to exclusions from the tariffs. 

Implementing and Improving the 232 

Exclusions Process 

On March 19, 2018, Commerce first 

issued an interim final rule, 

Requirements for Submissions 

Requesting Exclusions from the 

Remedies Instituted in Presidential 

Proclamations Adjusting Imports of 

Steel into the United States and 

Adjusting Imports of Aluminum into the 

United States; and the filing of 

Objections to Submitted Exclusion 

Requests for Steel and Aluminum (83 

FR 12106) (the ‘‘March 19 rule’’), laying 

out procedures for the 232 exclusions 

process, including one supplement for 

the procedures for steel and a second 

supplement for the procedures for 

aluminum. 

On September 11, 2018, Commerce 

issued a second interim final rule, 

Submissions of Exclusion Requests and 

Objections to Submitted Requests for 

Steel and Aluminum (83 FR 46026) (the 

‘‘September 11 rule’’), that revised the 

two supplements added by the March 

19 rule with improvements designed to 

ensure a transparent, fair, and efficient 

exclusion and objection process. 

On June 10, 2019, Commerce issued a 

third interim final rule, Implementation 

of New Commerce Section 232 

Exclusions Portal (84 FR 26751) (the 

‘‘June 10 rule’’), that revised the two 

supplements added by the March 19 

and September 11 rules to grant the 

public the ability to submit new 

exclusion requests through the 232 

Exclusions Portal while still allowing 

the opportunity for public comment on 

the portal. 

On May 26, 2020, Commerce issued a 

notice of inquiry with request for 

comment, Notice of Inquiry Regarding 

the Exclusion Process for Section 232 

Steel and Aluminum Import Tariffs and 

Quotas (85 FR 31441) (the ‘‘May 26 

notice’’), that sought public comment on 

the appropriateness of the information 

requested and considered in applying 

the exclusion criteria, and the efficiency 

and transparency of the process 

employed. 

Why is Commerce publishing this 

interim final rule? 

Commerce is publishing this interim 

final rule to implement additional 

changes the Department has determined 

will further improve the 232 exclusions 

process. Commerce believes these 

changes will make important 

improvements, but is also requesting 

public comments to evaluate how 

effective these changes will be in further 

improving the 232 exclusions process. 

This process is consistent with the 

Department’s approach since the 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81061 

beginning of implementing the 232 

exclusion process. The public has 

supported this approach. 

What are some of the key changes 

included in this interim final rule? 

This interim final rule is being 

published at this time, in particular, to 

make the following three key changes to 

the 232 exclusions process. 

First, it addresses the need to create 

a more efficient method for approving 

exclusions where objections have not 

been received in the past for certain 

steel or aluminum articles. Commerce 

has determined creating general 

approved exclusions that may be used 

by any importing entity is warranted. 

This has been noted by commenters 

who submit exclusion requests, and by 

trade associations that represent those 

companies, as one of the most important 

changes that could be made to improve 

the efficiency of the 232 exclusion 

process. As described in much greater 

detail below, this interim final rule 

addresses this issue with the adoption 

of General Approved Exclusions (GAEs). 

This change will result in an estimated 

immediate decrease of 5,000 exclusion 

requests annually, resulting in a 

significant improvement in efficiency, 

with the possibility of more in the 

future. Unlike exclusion requests, GAEs 

do not include quantity limits. 

Second, it addresses a trend identified 

by commenters and validated in data 

reviewed by Commerce—that certain 

exclusion requesters may have 

requested more volume than they may 

have needed for their own business 

purposes compared to past usage. 

Submitting large numbers of unneeded 

exclusion requests decreases the 

efficiency of the 232 exclusions process 

for potential objectors and Commerce. It 

also creates issues for potential 

objectors. As described in greater detail 

below, this issue is addressed by adding 

a new certification requirement for 

volumes requested. Along the same 

lines, the rule also adds a note to 

remind all parties submitting 232 

submissions of the prohibition against 

making false statements to the U.S. 

Government and the consequences that 

may occur for such false statements. 

Third, the rule addresses an objector 

concern they were being held to a 

higher standard than foreign suppliers 

because of the interpretation that 

‘‘immediately’’ meant the objector 

needed to be able to provide the steel or 

aluminum articles within 8 weeks, even 

though a foreign supplier may not be 

able to provide the same steel or 

aluminum article until much longer 

than 8 weeks. With this rule the term 

‘‘immediately,’’ is retained but language 

has been modified to apply the same 

time standard to U.S. objectors and 

foreign suppliers for when the steel or 

aluminum articles need to be provided 

to the exclusion requester. 

What changes are not being addressed 

in this interim final rule? 

While this rule addresses the 

remaining comments from the 

September 11 rule, it also addresses 

some of the comments received on the 

232 Exclusions Portal from the June 10 

rule. However, comments requesting 

changes requiring software modification 

or involving additional cost and time to 

implement are still under consideration 

and not addressed here. Some examples 

of comments still under consideration 

include the following. There is a 

comment to allow confidential business 

information (CBI) submissions in the 

232 Exclusions Portal which would 

require software changes and additional 

certifications. Another commenter 

requested two separate portals for the 

steel and aluminum exclusion 

processes. There are also several 

comments regarding the usability and 

search functionality of the 232 

Exclusions Portal including adding a 

filter for steel and aluminum on the 

main portal page; adding product 

classes to the main portal screen with a 

filtering function; improving search 

functionality by adding a simple ‘‘find 

all’’ type of search capability; adding the 

capability to be able to download 

individual submissions and all data; 

making it easier to extract data for 

queried databases; adding the ability to 

cross search with multiple criteria; 

providing an easier way to identify 

exclusion requests by HTSUS 

classification and other criteria; 

including the actual due date for filing 

submissions, not just days remaining; 

adding a withdraw feature to the 

dashboard; adding a notification feature 

when objections are posted; and adding 

the ability to refresh without resetting 

the filters. Commerce is continuing to 

evaluate these comments and may 

implement additional changes to further 

improve the 232 Exclusions Portal at a 

later date. 

This interim final rule does not 

summarize or respond to the comments 

included in the May 26 notice. 

Commerce will address these comments 

in the next rule. However, as noted 

below, there is significant overlap in the 

comments received on the September 11 

and June 10 rules, so some of the 

comments received on the May 26 

notice are also being addressed in this 

interim final rule. For example, the 

three key changes to the 232 exclusions 

process described above being made in 

this interim final rule will also be 

responsive to comments received on the 

May 26 notice. 

The following are some examples of 

comments from the May 26 notice that 

are still being reviewed. Additional 

changes to the 232 Exclusions Portal 

were requested by some commenters 

based on their additional experience, 

e.g., the portal being programmed to flag 

for special attention those exclusion 

requests that have been waiting a certain 

number of days/months for a 

determination. Some comments 

addressed the role of objections in the 

232 exclusions process and whether 

objections have an outsized influence 

on the process, in particular on how 

long the Commerce decision-making 

process takes and whether an exclusion 

will be granted. Some comments 

requested creating a process to give 

preferential treatment for products 

further manufactured or substantially 

transformed in the United States, 

because such producers are an essential 

part of the U.S. steel and aluminum 

industry. Other commenters requested a 

60-day window for submitting exclusion 

requests on a bi-annual basis and only 

product exclusion requests submitted 

during these bi-annual periods would be 

considered. 

Additional Improvements to the 232 

Exclusions Process 

As noted above, the interim final rule 

being published today addresses the 

remaining comments from the 

September 11 rule and highlights what 

comments have been addressed from the 

June 10 rule. There is some significant 

overlap among those comments and 

comments received in response to the 

May 26 notice, so the revisions to the 

232 exclusions process described below 

will also be responsive to some of the 

same comments received in response to 

the May 26 notice. Commerce intends to 

publish at least one subsequent interim 

final rule that will describe the 

unaddressed comments received on the 

May 26 notice and any additional 

revisions Commerce will make to the 

232 exclusions process as a result of 

those comments. The comments on the 

May 26 notice also included various 

comments on the 232 Exclusions Portal, 

certain of which are addressed below. 

Other comments will be summarized 

and addressed with the remaining 

comments on the June 10 rule that are 

not included in today’s rule. Because of 

the programming cost and time involved 

with making changes to the 232 

Exclusions Portal, Commerce requires 

more time to review and respond to 

those comments, in particular for 

comments where Commerce agrees that 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81062 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

changes to the 232 Exclusions Portal 

may be warranted. 

Commerce is focused on improving 

the 232 exclusions process as quickly as 

possible. As additional revisions are 

ready to be made, such as those being 

made in this rule, Commerce will 

publish those changes as quickly as 

possible to improve the 232 exclusions 

process. This approach of publishing a 

series of interim final rules has allowed 

Commerce to improve the 232 

exclusions process on an ongoing basis, 

allowing the public to submit additional 

comments on whether the most recently 

made changes have helped to improve 

the process. 

This rule makes various edits to 

supplement no. 1 to part 705 to improve 

the 232 exclusions process. This rule 

also removes the provisions from 

supplement no. 2 to part 705 and 

consolidates those into supplement no. 

1. This rule also adds new supplements 

no. 2 and no. 3 for identifying General 

Approved Exclusions (GAEs) for steel 

and aluminum articles under the 232 

exclusions process and the first 

approved tranches of GAEs for steel and 

aluminum articles. GAEs address a longstanding request from public comments 

of exclusion requesters to create a more 

efficient process to approve certain 

exclusions for use by all importers 

where Commerce has determined that 

no objections will be received and 

where it is warranted to approve an 

exclusion for all importers to use. This 

rule also removes Annex 1 to 

supplements no. 1 and 2, since this 

guidance is no longer needed with this 

rule’s removal of references to 

www.regulations.gov from the 232 

exclusions process. Finally, this rule 

makes some non-substantive edits to 

supplement no. 1 to part 705 to improve 

readability of the supplement. 

Public Comments and BIS Responses 

The public comment period on the 

May 26 notice closed on July 10, 2020. 

BIS received eighty-two public 

comments on the notice of inquiry. 

Many commenters referenced the 

imposition of duties and quantitative 

limitations, questioning whether or not 

such regulations were beneficial. Those 

comments are outside the scope of the 

May 26 notice that solicited comments 

on the 232 exclusions process; thus 

Commerce is generally not summarizing 

or providing responses to those general 

comments on the duties and 

quantitative limitations. Certain 

comments described and addressed 

below are those received in response to 

the September 11 and June 10 rules. 

However, some of the comments in 

responses below address issues that also 

were raised in some of the comments 

received in response to the May 26 

notice. As a result, the responses below 

are responsive in part to comments on 

the May 26 notice, and also are 

responsive to comments on the 

September 11 and June 10 rules. 

Improving Tracking and Transparency 

Comment (a)(1): Develop an adequate 

tracking system that supplies relevant 

information (more than is available 

now) for 232 submissions. Commenters 

requested that Commerce provide 

stakeholders a way to more easily 

review the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 

of the United States (HTSUS) code and 

product information, country of origin, 

volume, and alloys of posted 

exclusions—preferably, in a searchable 

database. Commenters indicated that 

having to open each file to identify this 

information places a burden on 

potential objectors, which the 

commenters suggested could be 

addressed with a searchable database. 

BIS response: Commerce has made 

changes to allow for easier tracking and 

searching of information in the 232 

Exclusions Portal, as described in 

greater detail below for the 

improvements that have been made to 

the 232 Exclusions Portal (see BIS 

response to Comment (g)(2) below). 

Comment (a)(2): Exclusion rejection 

for incomplete submissions should be 

more transparent. A commenter noted 

that, while they do not expect 

Commerce to customize each individual 

response, the commenter believes that 

additional steps can be taken to help 

U.S. businesses understand the reason 

for a rejection. This commenter 

requested that Commerce should 

include on the rejection form that is 

posted online a list of common reasons 

for rejection. The commenter believes 

this would provide invaluable guidance 

to the countless small businesses 

attempting to navigate this difficult 

process. This commenter believes the 

current rejection form leaves 

manufacturers guessing as to why the 

government rejected their applications, 

especially when that business for years 

used the identical HTSUS code 

accepted by U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) to import that product. 

BIS response: Commerce agrees that 

greater transparency benefits all 

applicants to the 232 exclusions 

process. Commerce moved its HTSUS 

administrability review to the start of 

the process in early 2019, reducing 

sharply the number of exclusion denials 

due to incomplete submissions 

identified later in the review process. 

Incomplete submissions now receive a 

rejection notification that includes the 

specific reasons for a rejection. 

Commerce does plan to update the 

rejection form used in the 232 

Exclusions Portal to include a list of 

common reasons for rejection. 

Commerce agrees that providing this 

additional information will make the 

process more efficient, because those 

receiving rejections will more easily 

understand what was wrong with their 

exclusion request that resulted in a 

rejection. This may reduce the overall 

number of 232 exclusion submissions 

submitted. 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

Comment (b)(1): Supportive of the 

new CBI provisions. A commenter 

asserted that one of the most significant 

changes is the BIS decision to allow 

companies to submit CBI during the 

rebuttal and surrebuttal process. This 

same commenter also believes that 

further changes can improve the process 

beyond what BIS has already proposed. 

BIS response: Commerce agrees that 

adding the CBI process has helped to 

improve the 232 exclusions process. As 

described below, Commerce is open to 

improving the CBI process, but that 

must be done in accordance with the 

larger purpose of allowing CBI in the 

232 exclusion process, as well as the 

current technical limitations in the 232 

Exclusions Portal. 

Comment (b)(2): Allow CBI to also be 

submitted for exclusions and objections. 

Commenters urged Commerce to expand 

the CBI provision by allowing 

companies to submit CBI within their 

original exclusion request. These 

commenters asserted that, given the 

amount of detail required to complete 

the exclusion request form, companies 

may be hesitant to submit exclusion 

requests for fear of sharing CBI with 

their competitors. 

BIS response: Commerce does not 

agree. The information required on the 

exclusion request form does not require 

revealing CBI in order to adequately 

complete the form, so allowing CBI in 

support of the initial exclusion request 

is not needed. Moreover, exclusion 

requesters can indicate they have CBI, 

allowing Commerce reviewers to request 

that CBI if needed for their review of the 

request and objections. 

Comment (b)(3): Allowing CBI in 

exclusions and objections would 

alleviate some concerns over short 

seven-day rebuttal and surrebuttal 

periods. One commenter asserted that, 

given the short seven-day window of the 

rebuttal process, allowing companies to 

submit CBI at the time of the application 

would relieve the unnecessary burdens 

placed on filers by the short rebuttal 

window. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81063 

BIS response: Commerce 

acknowledges the shortness of the 

seven-day rebuttal and surrebuttal 

period, but does not agree with the 

commenter that allowing CBI in the 

exclusion request or in objections would 

alleviate the burden on exclusion 

requesters or objectors during the 

rebuttal and surrebuttal period. The 

most appropriate time in the 232 

exclusion review process for CBI is 

during the rebuttal and surrebuttal 

phase when information that goes 

beyond what is included in the 

exclusion and objection forms may be 

needed to properly evaluate an 

exclusion request. Allowing CBI in 

exclusion requests and objections would 

slow the Commerce review process 

without adding any real benefit to the 

review process. As noted above, 

exclusion requesters and objectors can 

indicate they have CBI and Commerce 

reviewers can request that information if 

needed for review. 

Comment (b)(4): Process to submit CBI 

needs to be further clarified. A 

commenter believes the current CBI 

process is confusing because parties 

must submit the exclusion request form 

with a vague, yet somewhat detailed 

summary of the CBI and then 

supplement the form by sending a 

separate email to BIS with the actual 

confidential information. This same 

commenter was also concerned that 

parties risk the possibility that 

Commerce will reject their exclusion 

request for being an incomplete 

submission before Commerce has even 

received their confidential information. 

BIS response: Commerce understands 

the point being made by the commenter 

but does not agree that this requirement 

is unreasonable. Because the 232 

Exclusion Process is a public process, 

there needs to be transparency to allow 

the other public parties involved in the 

process (objector(s) and exclusion 

requesters) to have an idea of the scope 

and type of CBI information that is 

being provided to supplement a rebuttal 

or a surrebuttal. 

Comment (b)(5): Section 301 

exclusion request process uses a clear 

and simple method by which parties 

can submit CBI—Commerce should 

adopt same process to allow submission 

of public and private version. A 

commenter encouraged Commerce to 

implement a method similar to that of 

the Section 301 exclusion process for 

the Section 232 exclusion request 

process, allowing parties to submit both 

public and confidential versions of the 

exclusion request form. 

BIS response: Commerce sees the 

benefit of adopting the same type of 

approach as used under the Section 301 

process. However, the security needed 

to protect such information in the 232 

Exclusions Portal would require 

additional programming and 

certifications. Therefore, at the current 

time Commerce will not be making 

these changes. If the 232 Exclusions 

Portal can accommodate CBI at a future 

date, Commerce will revisit this issue. 

Exclusion Requests 

Comment (c)(1): Standard Commerce 

applies to exclusion requests remains 

unclear—need to specify whether in 

aggregate or for a specific requester. A 

commenter was concerned that it is 

unclear whether a specific requester’s 

lack of availability and quality of 

material is the relevant consideration, or 

whether analysis of material quantities 

in the aggregate U.S. market provides a 

better metric. The commenter believes 

the proper standard should be the 

availability of material to the requesting 

company in the needed quality and 

quantity because this is largely in the 

control of the objecting supplier. 

BIS response: Commerce confirms 

here that exclusion requests are being 

reviewed based on the availability of 

material to the requesting company in 

the needed quality and quantity by U.S. 

suppliers. This rule clarifies that the 

standard applied to the review of an 

exclusion request is a case-by-case 

review to determine whether the 

requester has shown that the article is 

not produced in the United States in a 

sufficiently and reasonably available 

amount or of a satisfactory quality, or 

that there are specific national security 

considerations to grant the exclusion. In 

general, if no U.S. supplier submits an 

objection, absent a national security 

concern, Commerce approves such 

exclusion requests because a 

determination can be made that a U.S. 

supplier is not available to supply to the 

exclusion requester the needed quality 

and quantity of steel or aluminum 

described in the exclusion request. 

Comment (c)(2): Inconsistencies in the 

posted exclusion requests make it 

difficult for objectors to adequately 

review and respond. Commenters in this 

area are concerned whether exclusion 

requesters are consistently filling out 

the forms, and whether Commerce is 

adequately ensuring that the exclusion 

forms being posted meet the required 

standards of the form. For example, one 

commenter noted that hundreds of 

exclusion requests include no alloy 

designation (Question 4.b), but instead 

reference the HTSUS code or simply 

leave that field blank. This commenter 

asserted that an alloy designation is an 

important identifier for assessing the 

validity of an exclusion request, so its 

omission in many exclusion requests 

makes it difficult for potential objectors. 

Another commenter noted that many 

exclusion requests—including those 

that have already been approved—fail to 

indicate a volume associated with the 

included countries of origin. 

BIS response: Commerce 

acknowledges that, in certain cases, 

there has been some variability in how 

exclusion requesters or objectors have 

filled out the respective forms. 

Commerce has revised its standard 

operating procedures (SOPs) and 

conducted training for those reviewing 

232 submissions at Commerce to 

emphasize the importance of ensuring 

that the exclusion and objection forms 

are being completed in accordance with 

the information required on the forms. 

As a result of this comment, Commerce 

has highlighted these issues to the 

Commerce reviewers of the 232 

submissions to ensure consistency and 

warns that submissions that do not meet 

the standards of the information 

required on the forms will be rejected. 

Comment (c)(3): ‘‘Size ranges’’ 

clarification was helpful in the 

September 11 rule, but additional 

clarification needed. A commenter 

noted that the September 11 rule offers 

some additional information on 

acceptable ranges but could be 

improved. The BIS response to 

Comment (g)(3) in the September 11 

rule states that the exclusion request 

form allows for a product that may be 

within a specific range but not for 

products across a wide range. A 

permissible range must be within the 

minimum and maximum range that is 

specified in the tariff provision and 

applicable legal notes for the provision. 

This commenter believes that this 

suggests that products identical in all 

aspects, with the exception of a 

dimensional characteristic, and 

classified within the same HTSUS 

statistical reporting number, could be 

included within a single request. 

However, the commenter was concerned 

that the regulatory text under paragraph 

(c)(2) suggests that separate exclusion 

requests must be submitted for steel 

products with ‘‘distinct critical 

dimensions’’ covered by a common 

HTSUS statistical reporting number, 

and examples provided in the rule are 

for specific sizes of products, which 

does not appear inconsistent with 

Comment (g)(3) from the September 11 

rule. 

BIS response: Commerce agrees a 

clarification to paragraph (c)(2) is 

warranted. This interim final rule, as 

described below in the regulatory 

changes, removes the word ‘‘distinct’’ 

before ‘‘critical’’ in the example 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81064 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

provided under paragraph (c)(2). This 

change is made to avoid any potential 

confusion on the scope of ranges that 

are permissible under an exclusion 

request. Commerce clarifies that 

products identical in all aspects, with 

the exception of a dimensional 

characteristic, and that are classified 

within the same HTSUS statistical 

reporting number, may be included 

within a single request. However, 

objections that indicate the ability to 

produce one or more products within 

the range, even if not the entire range, 

will be considered to be valid objections 

to an exclusion request. 

Comment (c)(4): Concerned that 

Commerce is not adequately reviewing 

exclusion requests. A commenter 

requested that Commerce fully evaluate 

all exclusion requests—including those 

for which no objections are filed—to 

ensure that the volumes requested are 

proportional to the U.S. market. This 

commenter was concerned that, 

generally, it seems Commerce is not 

evaluating whether there is actually 

demand in the market for these large 

volumes, and has granted requests based 

simply on the absence of any objections. 

BIS response: Commerce recognizes 

that there are exclusion requests for 

volumes that exceed prior years’ 

consumption but that often receive no 

objections. Commerce also recognizes 

that there are objections that, in total, 

exceed the objectors’ total capacity. 

Commerce is reviewing this issue to 

determine whether there is an approach 

to factor volumes requested and 

objected to in an objective, transparent, 

and efficient way. As an initial step to 

address this issue, this interim final rule 

makes regulatory changes to the 232 

exclusions process, as described below 

under the 232 exclusion request volume 

certification heading to require a 

certification from exclusion requesters 

for volume requested and, when 

applicable, a certification for volume 

requested but unfulfilled due to 

legitimate circumstances when 

submitting exclusion requests in the 232 

Exclusions Portal. 

Comment (c)(5): Does not believe 

Commerce has implemented an 

expedited approval process for 

exclusions that receive no objections— 

contrary to what was stated in the 

September 11 rule and in statements by 

Commerce in other venues that 

Commerce would adopt such an 

expedited process. One commenter 

noted that Commerce does not yet 

appear to be adjudicating requests faster 

as a result of the updated exclusion 

process with some exclusion requests. 

BIS response: Commerce believes this 

comment was likely made as Commerce 

was working to address the initial 

backlog of exclusion requests that did 

receive objections and does not reflect 

the current status. At this time, the 

expedited review process for exclusions 

that do not receive objections is 

functioning well, with an average 

response time, as of July 20, 2020, of 

approximately 60 days, less than half 

the average processing time for 

exclusions that receive objections and a 

significant decrease in overall response 

times compared to earlier in the process. 

Comment (c)(6): Product descriptions 

in exclusion requests and approval 

decisions need to be more specific to 

ensure CBP can determine what is 

approved. A commenter noted that 

Commerce has granted a number of 

exclusion requests where the ‘‘product 

description’’ on both the request and 

Commerce’s decision document is only 

the name for a general category of 

products and any detail regarding the 

size, chemistry, and other 

characteristics that may indicate that 

particular product at issue is not 

available from domestic sources are not 

carried over from the application. This 

commenter noted that greater specificity 

was needed in the approved exclusions. 

BIS response: Commerce works 

closely with CBP. Additional 

information is provided to CBP to 

ensure that CBP is able to effectively 

implement approved exclusions. CBP 

consults as needed with Commerce if 

any questions arise regarding the scope 

of a specific approved exclusion 

request. 

Comment (c)(7): Need to specify when 

the validity of an approved exclusion 

request begins. A commenter noted that 

there has been a number of exclusions 

granted where shipments were entered 

after the posting of the request but 

before the decision. The commenter 

asked for clarification if the one-year 

timeframe begins once the decision is 

made or if some other point is used to 

start the one-year timeframe. 

BIS response: Commerce clarifies that, 

as specified in paragraph (h)(2)(iii)(A) 

(Effective date for approved exclusions), 

an approved exclusion will be effective 

five business days after publication of 

the Commerce response granting an 

exclusion in the 232 Exclusions Portal. 

If granted, exclusions are generally 

effective for one year from the date of 

signature on the Decision Memo. 

Companies may also file Post-Summary 

Corrections with CBP on unliquidated 

entries to recoup any tariffs paid on 

products that made entry between the 

submission date and the date of 

signature. Companies are able to receive 

retroactive relief on granted requests 

dating back to the date of the request’s 

submission on unliquidated entries. 

However, requesters should note that 

where retroactive relief is granted, the 

quantities granted retroactive relief are 

still counted against the total quantity 

granted in the exclusion. The exclusion 

request expires when either the quantity 

granted has been exhausted or the 

exclusion reaches the end of the 

effective period specified in the 

decision memo (generally one year from 

the date of the decision), whichever 

comes first, and no pro-rata additional 

quantity is provided for retroactive 

relief. Given that duties do not apply for 

countries with quotas, retroactive relief 

is not applicable for exclusions from 

quotas. 

Once the exclusion becomes effective, 

the steel or aluminum articles specified 

in the approved decision memo in 

entries that have not been liquidated by 

CBP are those eligible for tariff refunds 

or tariff exclusions. 

Comment (c)(8): Product exclusions 

should be permanent not temporary 

(and on a universal basis). A commenter 

noted that temporary exclusions inject 

significant uncertainty into the business 

planning of companies and therefore 

recommended permanent exclusions. 

BIS response: Commerce does not 

agree that all product exclusions should 

be permanent and issued on a universal 

basis because that would defeat the 

purpose of the duties. Commerce does 

agree that for certain steel and 

aluminum articles, a more efficient 

approval mechanism is warranted and 

that the approval should be universal. 

Specifically, for certain steel and 

aluminum articles, Commerce has 

created General Approved Exclusions 

(GAEs) under the new supplements no. 

2 and 3 to part 705 being added to this 

rule, which will be available to all 

importers. 

Comment (c)(9): Create streamlined 

process to allow one company seeking 

an exclusion for the same product 

already approved to a second company 

to quickly obtain an approved 

exclusion. A commenter requested that 

Commerce provide a streamlined 

process whereby a second company 

seeking to use an exclusion already 

granted to a U.S. company can quickly 

obtain the right to use the same product 

exclusion. 

BIS response: Commerce does not 

agree. The exclusion process is intended 

to be specific to each requester and each 

request must be reviewed on its own 

merits, allowing for potential objections 

and permitting rebuttal and surrebuttal 

process to play out as needed. As 

referenced in the previous comment, the 

GAEs are also responsive to some of 

what this commenter is requesting in 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81065 

terms of creating a more efficient 

approval process where Commerce 

determines that relief is warranted in a 

particular circumstance for all 

importers. 

Comment (c)(10): Commerce should 

use its discretion to make exclusions 

available to all importers. A commenter 

requested that if a product is not made 

in the United States or is not made in 

sufficient quantity or quality, Commerce 

must grant a broader product exclusion 

(not just on a company-by-company, 

product-by-product basis). Another 

commenter noted that the Secretary and 

others at Commerce have repeatedly 

denied associations the ability to submit 

exclusion requests on behalf of their 

industries for widely used goods, 

because Commerce sought to identify 

those products receiving the most 

requests. However, the Secretary has yet 

to exercise this authority to grant 

general exclusions despite the same 

HTSUS codes receiving multiple 

requests. 

BIS response: As noted above, in this 

rule, Commerce is creating GAEs with 

the additions of supplement no. 2 and 

3 to part 705. The creation of GAEs 

addresses this comment and will create 

a more efficient 232 exclusion process 

and reduce the burdens on exclusion 

requesters. 

Comment (c)(11): Explain 

circumstances under which BIS will 

approve broader product exclusions and 

how U.S. companies may request such 

an exclusion. A commenter noted that 

Commerce continues to state that it is 

considering approving broader 

exclusion requests, which can apply to 

multiple importers. However, no 

additional guidance has been provided 

as to how groups of companies can ask 

for such a broader exclusion. 

BIS response: This rule explains the 

circumstances when Commerce will 

approve broader product exclusions. 

These provisions are described in the 

new supplements no. 2 and 3 to part 

705 with the addition of GAEs. The 

introductory text of the new 

supplements explain the process of how 

Commerce will approve these GAEs. As 

previously noted, these determinations 

for what steel or aluminum articles 

warrant being included in a GAE will be 

made by Commerce, in consultation 

with the other agencies referenced in 

the new supplements. The public will 

not be involved in requesting new or 

revised GAEs, but Commerce will use 

the information provided in exclusion 

requests to inform its review process for 

what additional GAE should be added 

or what revisions should be made to 

existing GAEs. 

Comment (c)(12): Process for making 

changes to an approved exclusion 

request. A commenter requested 

guidance be provided for how to make 

a correction to an application for 

exclusion after the exclusion has been 

approved. 

BIS response: This is a feature under 

consideration, but until that revision 

can be implemented, a new exclusion 

request will need to be submitted in the 

event of such circumstances. Commerce 

does clarify that BIS will make, when 

warranted in the 232 Exclusions Portal, 

technical corrections and a few other 

forms of ‘‘non-substantive changes’’ 

including: Importer of record (IOR) 

changes; supplier/manufacturer 

changes; corrections to match product 

descriptions with product 

specifications; and corrections to 

organization information (i.e., 

accidental transposition of fields). 

Objections 

Comment (d)(1): Concerned that 

Commerce has too much leeway to 

interpret the criteria ‘‘not produced in 

the United States in a sufficient and 

reasonably available amount’’ and ‘‘not 

produced in the United States in a 

satisfactory quality.’’ A commenter was 

concerned that this broad interpretation 

by Commerce could lead to the negation 

of exclusion requests in situations 

where one company files an objection 

that claims that it in theory could make 

that product in sufficient quantity or 

quality. The commenter noted that 

rebuttals to these claims are difficult to 

make without more detailed information 

from objectors on how they could make 

products in sufficient quantity or 

quality. 

BIS response: The criteria comes from 

the underlying Proclamations that 

authorize the creation of the 232 

exclusions process. Therefore, 

Commerce does not have the discretion 

to change the criteria. Commerce added 

the rebuttal process, as well as the 

surrebuttal process, to allow requesters 

and objectors to further address the 

representations made in objections and 

rebuttals. Ultimately, if an exclusion 

request is not approved because of an 

objection, the exclusion requester will 

be able to determine definitively 

whether an objector is in fact able to 

provide the steel or aluminum article in 

question by attempting to obtain the 

product from the objector. Should all 

objectors be unable to produce a 

requested product as they represented 

in their objections, the requester may 

submit a new request with 

documentation evidencing this refusal. 

Commerce understands that time is vital 

to an exclusion requester and seeks to 

ensure that objectors provide sufficient 

information for a thorough evaluation of 

the request and objection. Moreover, 

objectors must certify their ability to 

manufacture the products described 

within their objections. 

Comment (d)(2): Objections should be 

reviewed cumulatively. A commenter is 

concerned that Commerce is not 

considering the cumulative impact of 

objections to exclusions. This 

commenter noted that U.S. producers 

that are filing objections to exclusion 

requests are routinely stating that the 

objector can and would fill the demand 

for the subject product. This commenter 

noted that while it may be true that the 

objector could reasonably expect to fill 

the needs of an individual company 

making an exclusion request, it is 

possible (or likely) that the objector 

could not fill the full demand for that 

product from all companies requesting 

an exclusion let alone all of the demand 

from other customers in the U.S. 

BIS response: Commerce is aware of 

this concern and has evaluated statistics 

on the 232 exclusions process, 

determining that, although there may be 

some anecdotal examples of where this 

occurred, as a general trend, the 

statistics do not support that this is a 

significant issue with objections in the 

232 exclusions process. In the past year, 

BIS has received objections to exclusion 

requests for approximately 19 million 

metric tons of steel products, or roughly 

16% of total U.S. steel production 

capacity. None of the companies with 

publicly available capacity figures 

objected to more than their total 

capacity. When factoring in that 

multiple companies often object to the 

same exclusion request, volume 

objected to as a percentage of total 

capacity was significantly lower. 

Exclusion requesters are encouraged to 

provide documentation in their requests 

or rebuttal filings that objectors are 

unable to supply the products being 

requested because of insufficient 

capacity. 

Comment (d)(3): Exclusion process 

guidelines are unclear about the 

obligations that come with filing an 

objection. A commenter asked for 

clarification from Commerce about 

whether producers should be submitting 

objections if they have the capability to 

make a product, but not the immediate 

capacity, or if they can only produce a 

fraction of the requested volume for a 

specific manufacturer. For example, the 

commenter noted that aluminum 

producers have expressed a concern that 

filing an objection will obligate that 

producer to offer for sale the full scope 

and volume of imports included in a 

request—which, if importers are 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81066 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

requesting massive volumes, might be 

impossible. 

BIS response: Commerce agrees this 

should be clarified in the regulations 

and makes changes to paragraph 

(c)(6)(i), as described below, to address 

this issue. Commerce has the ability to 

deny a part of an exclusion request 

when an objector demonstrates 

sufficiently in the objection and any 

potential surrebuttal that they are able 

to produce a portion of the requested 

quantity of a steel or aluminum article 

within the required time needed by the 

importer. Therefore, objectors should 

not be deterred from submitting 

objections when they may not be able to 

fulfill 100% of the requested exclusion. 

Over time, as more of their domestic 

capacity comes back online or is added, 

these same objectors may be able to 

fulfill larger percentages of the 

exclusion requests, which would help to 

better achieve the stated purposes of the 

duties in helping to support the 

domestic production capabilities and 

capacity that are critical to protecting 

U.S. national security. Commerce is 

reviewing this issue to determine 

whether there is an objective, 

transparent, and efficient approach to 

take into consideration volumes 

requested and objected to under the 232 

exclusions process. 

Comment (d)(4): Modify the objection 

form (and the rebuttal and surrebuttal 

form) to clarify whether companies can 

object on the ostensible grounds that 

they have the capability to make a 

product. A commenter requested 

guidance on how Commerce will 

consider objections from producers that 

have the capability to make a product 

but do not have immediately available 

capacity to meet the importer’s stated 

needs. 

BIS response: Commerce does not 

agree that the objection form, or the 

rebuttal or surrebuttal form need to be 

updated to address this commenter’s 

concern. The information required on 

rebuttal and surrebuttal forms, as well 

as the objection criteria specified in 

paragraph (d), provides a clear standard 

that Commerce may apply. After 

reviewing an objection, rebutters may 

also inform the Commerce review 

process by evaluating and commenting 

on whether an objector will be able to 

provide the needed steel or aluminum 

article in the quantity and quality and 

to make that ‘‘immediately available’’ 

from an exclusion requester’s 

perspective. As described below, this 

rule makes additional changes for what 

constitutes being ‘‘immediately 

available,’’ and these changes will 

further clarify the application of this 

criteria to make sure that U.S. producers 

are being held to the same standard as 

potential foreign competitors in meeting 

the time required for delivery of the 

steel or aluminum article for which they 

are requesting an exclusion. 

Comment (d)(5): Objecting parties 

should be required to fill orders. A 

commenter noted that this would 

prevent the objection process from 

becoming a lever for business 

competition with domestic parties 

objecting to an exclusion request and 

then refusing to fill orders or only filling 

orders at inflated prices. This 

commenter also asked that companies 

that were denied an exclusion requested 

on the basis of an objection be permitted 

to show evidence of an inability to 

secure material and gain an exception if 

the objecting party cannot fill orders. 

BIS response: Commerce understands 

the reasoning behind this comment but 

is also mindful that it is not the role of 

Commerce to dictate whether an 

objector must sell the steel or aluminum 

article, or whether the exclusion 

requester must purchase the steel or 

aluminum article from the objector. For 

example, as the commenter noted, the 

objector may be able to provide the steel 

or aluminum but at a price that is not 

tenable for the exclusion requester or at 

a price that does not justify the 

exclusion requester switching suppliers 

of the steel or aluminum article. 

Commerce believes that these types of 

business decisions should be left to the 

two companies involved so as to not 

unduly influence the functioning of the 

market. As for the request to allow an 

exclusion requester to subsequently 

reference in a new exclusion request 

that an objector was not able to provide 

the steel or aluminum in a previous 

exclusion request, the current process 

already addresses that sufficiently. First, 

the exclusion requester may submit a 

new exclusion request. The earlier 

objector may choose not to object to the 

new exclusion request based on their 

past experience of not being able to 

provide the steel or aluminum article. 

Assuming no other objector comes 

forward, the exclusion request will be 

reviewed under the expedited process. 

If the same objector objects to the new 

exclusion request, the rebuttal process 

allows the exclusion requester to 

document in the rebuttal the past 

activity with that objector. 

Comment (d)(6): Objections should 

also be rejected for incompleteness. If 

Commerce is rejecting requests based on 

incompleteness, we believe it should 

extend the same scrutiny to objections. 

BIS response: Commerce agrees and 

does reject objections for 

incompleteness when warranted. BIS 

does review objections (and rebuttals/ 

surrebuttals) for completeness, but a 

rejection is rare for these filings in the 

232 Exclusions Portal. The Portal has 

mandatory fields that ensure most 

filings are complete. However, there is 

a different standard of what is necessary 

for a complete submission of an 

exclusion request versus an objection. 

The former generally must meet more 

specific review criteria. At this time, 

objectors may list capacity, utilization, 

manufacturing, or delivery time data as 

CBI on the objection form. Commerce’s 

International Trade Administration 

(ITA), on behalf of BIS and Commerce, 

will then request this information if 

needed. 

Comment (d)(7): Delivery times are 

getting much longer because of the 

tariffs and U.S. producers are 

approaching maximum capacity 

utilization rates. A commenter noted 

that prior to the imposition of tariffs for 

non-specialty metals, many steel users 

reported roughly six-week to eight-week 

lead times. Since the steel tariffs took 

effect, those same members report the 

doubling of delivery times, creating 

significant delays and interruptions in 

the manufacturing supply chain that 

could lead Original Equipment 

Manufacturers (OEMs) to source their 

inputs from non-U.S. sources that 

experience less volatility due to 

government interference. 

BIS response: To the extent there has 

been an increase in delivery times 

related to the tariffs, importers seeking 

exclusions can always import the article 

and pay the tariffs while their exclusion 

requests are pending. In addition, an 

objector must have the article 

‘‘immediately available’’ in the needed 

quantity and quality. As referenced 

below in the clarifications being made 

to ‘‘immediately available,’’ the 

previous criteria were holding U.S. 

producers in many cases to shorter 

delivery times than foreign competitors, 

a discrepancy that is being addressed in 

this rule. Commerce believes that the 

‘‘immediately available’’ criterion, 

which is being refined in this rule, 

provides a reasonable standard that 

should not result in a lengthening of the 

time period for delivery of steel and 

aluminum articles for U.S. users. 

Comment (d)(8): Producers should be 

held accountable. A commenter 

requested that Commerce hold 

organizations that file objections to the 

highest of standards. Commerce should 

require specificity before considering 

the objection and should question and 

verify the assertions made by the 

objectors or claims made in surrebuttals. 

BIS response: Commerce agrees that 

all parties, both objectors and 

requesters, should be held to the 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81067 

standards set forth in the regulations. 

Accordingly, parties making 

submissions to Commerce with regard 

to an exclusion request are required to 

legally certify the veracity of the 

submission. These standards are 

specified on the objection and 

surrebuttal forms, in the criteria 

specified in paragraphs (d) and (g), on 

the exclusion request and rebuttal 

forms, and in the criteria specified in 

paragraphs (c) and (f) of supplement no. 

1 to part 705. 

Comment (d)(9): U.S. steel producers 

are approaching maximum capacity 

utilization rates. A commenter noted 

that one objector reported its facility is 

currently operating at an 89% capacity 

utilization rate, well above the 80% 

target set by Commerce and at levels not 

seen since prior to the Great Recession. 

This commenter also noted that the 

American Iron and Steel Institute 

reported that for the week ending 

November 10, 2018, domestic raw steel 

production saw a capacity utilization 

rate of 81.7%, also above the 80% 

threshold. 

BIS response: As stated in the 232 

report, the 80 percent figure is an 

‘‘average’’ rate for financial viability of 

the industry which is ‘‘necessary to 

sustain adequate profitability and 

continued capital investment, research, 

and development, and workforce 

enhancement in the steel sector.’’ The 

U.S. steel industry’s capacity utilization 

rates have not been sustained. That said, 

making changes to the duties being 

imposed and/or quotas implemented are 

outside the scope of this rule. 

Criteria Defining What Is Meant by 

Available ‘‘immediately’’ 

Comment (e)(1): September 11 rule 

defining what was meant by available 

‘‘immediately’’ was a positive step that 

improved the 232 process. A commenter 

noted that setting a clear definition of 

‘‘available immediately’’ at eight weeks 

is a reasonable timeline and helps 

provide stability to steel and 

aluminum-using manufacturers. 

BIS response: Commerce agrees that 

providing a definition of ‘‘immediately 

available’’ was a positive step in 

providing greater transparency and 

consistency for the 232 exclusion 

process. However, defining 

‘‘immediately available’’ as eight weeks 

meant that, in certain cases, U.S. 

producers could be held to a shorter 

delivery time than foreign competitors 

and was more restrictive than the 

timeframe needed by the importer for 

their business needs. As described 

below, to address this fairness issue and 

to create equal treatment, this interim 

final rule revises the criteria for 

available ‘‘immediately’’ and specifies 

that if an objector is asserting that it is 

not currently producing the steel or 

aluminum identified in an exclusion 

request but can produce the steel or 

aluminum, the objector must be able to 

make it available in accordance with the 

commercial needs of the U.S. user of the 

steel or aluminum, as described in the 

exclusion request. Under this revised 

criteria in paragraph (d)(4), the objector 

must identify how it will be able to 

produce and deliver the quantity of steel 

or aluminum needed either within eight 

weeks, or if after eight weeks, by a date 

which is earlier than the date that a 

named foreign supplier can deliver the 

entire quantity of the requested product. 

It is incumbent on both the exclusion 

requester and the objecting producers to 

provide supplemental evidence 

supporting their claimed delivery times. 

Comment (e)(2): Objections that do 

not clearly meet the ‘‘immediately’’ 

standard should be rejected. A 

commenter noted that objections to 

exclusion requests available on the 232 

Exclusions Portal reveal numerous 

vague assertions that clearly do not meet 

the available ‘‘immediately’’ threshold 

set forth by Commerce. This commenter 

recommends that Commerce reject these 

objections outright. 

BIS response: Commerce holds 

objectors to the standard specified in the 

regulations under paragraph (d) and 

requires objectors to complete the 

objection form, and the surrebuttal form 

as applicable, fully and accurately. If an 

objector is not able to meet the available 

‘‘immediately’’ criteria, Commerce will 

not deny such an exclusion request. 

Requesters can provide additional 

information on the rebuttal form. In 

reviewing the exclusion request to make 

a final determination, Commerce takes 

into account information provided in 

the rebuttal to evaluate whether the 

objector can produce the article in 

sufficient quantity and quality, and 

within the time specified in the criteria 

in paragraph (d) of supplement no. 1 to 

part 705. 

Comment (e)(3): Defining eight weeks 

as ‘‘immediate delivery’’ is unrealistic 

and it would be better to make the 

standard based on the nature of the 

product. A commenter noted that it is 

unrealistic to require domestic 

producers to supply a requested product 

in the volume requested within eight 

weeks as a prerequisite to filing a valid 

objection and that this requirement 

appears to reflect a misunderstanding of 

how both the steel industry and 

international shipping work. This 

commenter also noted that in 

determining that eight weeks is the 

appropriate timeframe, Commerce 

regrettably rejected a suggestion that the 

time frame should depend on the nature 

of the product—with simpler products 

subject to a shorter timeframe than more 

sophisticated products—and in any 

case, should be no shorter than 12 to 16 

weeks. 

BIS response: As described above, 

Commerce agrees that clarification is 

warranted for use of eight weeks under 

the available ‘‘immediately’’ criteria. 

The changes this rule makes will also be 

responsive to this commenter’s 

concerns. 

Comment (e)(4): Allowing foreign 

suppliers one year to supply the steel or 

aluminum for approved exclusions, but 

only allowing eight weeks for domestic 

suppliers creates an unfair playing field. 

A commenter noted that granted 

exclusions are valid for one year and 

will presumably be supplied by foreign 

producers over the course of that year, 

not all at once. This commenter noted 

that requiring a U.S. producer to supply 

the consumer within eight weeks makes 

little sense and runs counter to the 

rationale underlying the adjustments to 

imports ordered by the President. 

BIS response: Commerce agrees and is 

making changes in the rule for how 

‘‘immediately’’ is defined to create equal 

treatment for U.S. and foreign 

producers. 

Comment (e)(5): ‘‘Immediately’’ 

should mean being able to provide the 

steel or aluminum as quickly as a 

foreign supplier. A commenter noted 

that the minimum standard that 

Commerce should establish for 

objections is 12 weeks (84 days), which 

they consider a reasonable and 

representative time for a foreign 

producer to make a simple steel item 

and ship it to the United States. This 

commenter recommended that 

Commerce should only determine that 

the domestic product is not 

‘‘immediately’’ available when a 

domestic source cannot provide 

material before offshore suppliers. 

BIS response: Commerce has retained 

eight weeks as part of the available 

‘‘immediately’’ criteria under paragraph 

(d)(4) but, as described elsewhere in this 

rule, is also making changes to the 

criteria that are responsive to this 

commenter’s concerns. 

Comment (e)(6): Need to specify the 

quantity that needs to be supplied 

within the ‘‘immediate delivery’’ 

timeframe. A commenter noted that 

there is no indication in the current 

version of the regulations of the quantity 

that must be supplied within the 

‘‘immediate delivery’’ timeframe. The 

commenter noted that the current 

regulations specify that if an objector is 

not currently producing the product at 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81068 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

issue, then ‘‘the objector must identify 

how it will be able to produce the article 

within eight weeks,’’ detailing in 

writing the timeline to start production. 

This commenter recommends clarifying 

whether this means the production must 

merely start, shipments of commercial 

quantities must begin, or the total 

quantity must be delivered within the 

specified time. 

BIS response: Commerce agrees this 

should be clarified. As described below, 

this rule revises paragraph (d)(4) of 

supplement no. 1 to specify the objector 

must identify how it will be able to 

produce and deliver the quantity of steel 

or aluminum needed either within eight 

weeks, or if after eight weeks, by a date 

which is earlier than the date that a 

named foreign supplier can deliver the 

entire quantity of the requested product. 

The addition of the phrase ‘‘and 

deliver’’ after the term ‘‘produce’’ will 

address the concern raised by this 

commenter. 

Comment (e)(7): Production capacity 

for steel and aluminum producers must 

be considered during objection and 

rebuttal process. As Commerce 

considers objections filed by steel and 

aluminum companies, Commerce must 

ask the steel and aluminum producers 

several probing questions to truly 

determine the capabilities of suppliers 

to meet the consuming industries’ needs 

and consider these answers surrounding 

domestic capacity when making 

exclusion decisions. The commenter 

noted that these questions should 

include at a minimum: ‘‘Do the steel or 

aluminum companies currently 

manufacture and supply the product in 

the United States? If so, have their 

deliveries to their customers been 

timely, and is so, for how long? What is 

the steel or aluminum companies’ 

current manufacturing capacity and 

timeframe for ramping up if they 

currently do not have the capacity?’’ 

BIS response: Commerce believes the 

information required on the objection 

form, surrebuttal form as applicable, 

and the criteria in paragraph (d) to 

supplement no. 1 that is used by 

Commerce, is sufficiently informative to 

determine the production capabilities of 

objectors. This information is also 

supplemented by the evidence provided 

through rebuttals and surrebuttals, and 

through CBI submitted in support of 

rebuttals and surrebuttals. Commerce 

does not believe additional questions 

are required to be added to the objection 

or surrebuttal forms in order to make 

determinations on the production 

capabilities of objectors. 

Rebuttals and Surrebuttals 

Comment (f)(1): Seven days is not 

enough time for rebuttals and 

surrebuttals. A commenter does not 

agree that allowing only seven days for 

such comments is appropriate. This 

commenter noted that considering the 

volumes of new information being 

submitted in some rebuttals, one week 

is not enough time for a domestic 

producer to analyze the information and 

offer a meaningful surrebuttal. 

BIS response: Commerce does not 

agree. The length of time for decisions 

under the 232 exclusions process is a 

concern for many entities, including 

Commerce. The inclusion of the rebuttal 

and surrebuttal comment periods helps 

to better inform the 232 exclusion 

process for Commerce, but Commerce is 

also mindful not to allow these 

additional comment periods to add any 

more time to the review process than is 

needed. Commerce believes that those 

parties involved in a 232 submission 

that receives an objection or a rebuttal 

should place a priority on reviewing the 

objection or rebuttal in a timely fashion, 

submitting any warranted rebuttal or 

surrebuttal. Commerce believes a oneweek period is sufficient for the review 

of an objection or rebuttal, and allows 

for the party to conduct any needed 

follow up conversations and to prepare 

and submit a rebuttal or surrebuttal as 

applicable. 

Comment (f)(2): Allowing unlimited 

number of refilings of exclusions 

undermines the usefulness of objections, 

and the rebuttal/surrebuttal process. A 

commenter questioned whether 

rebuttals and surrebuttals are a 

worthwhile use of resources if 

requesters remain free to submit 

unlimited numbers of exemption 

requests. This commenter noted that a 

requester could, in lieu of a rebuttal, file 

a revised request addressing whatever 

deficiencies were identified in the 

objection. This commenter noted that 

this would alleviate some of the 

unfairness of requiring domestic 

producers to respond to untold volumes 

of new information in just a few days 

and would aid Commerce’s analysis by 

promoting thoughtful and complete 

original application requests instead of 

reviews of hurried rebuttal and 

surrebuttal comments. 

BIS response: As a general matter, 

Commerce believes that it is important 

to allow an unlimited number of 

exclusion requests to be submitted. As 

described above, the ability to submit a 

successive exclusion request is a key 

way that the 232 exclusion process 

addresses cases where an objection may 

have resulted in the denial of an 

exclusion request, but then 

subsequently no objector was able to 

deliver the steel or aluminum in the 

quantity and quality needed 

‘‘immediately.’’ Therefore, Commerce 

does not agree that a restriction should 

be added to restrict the number of 

exclusion requests that may be 

submitted. 

Comment (f)(3): Allowing unlimited 

refilings of exclusions allows for the 

potential to overwhelm potential 

objectors. A commenter noted that if 

Commerce continues the rebuttal and 

surrebuttal process, it should consider 

limiting a party’s ability to file multiple 

exclusion requests for the same product. 

This commenter noted that the current 

system provides an incentive for entities 

seeking exclusions to submit them over 

and over again with only minor 

modifications in an attempt to 

overwhelm domestic producers so that 

domestic interests fail to file objections 

because there are simply too many 

requests or they believe an objection to 

have already been filed. 

BIS response: As noted above, 

Commerce is reviewing the issue of the 

volume of articles subject to exclusion 

requests and objections and will address 

this issue in a subsequent IFR. 

232 Exclusions Portal 

Since the launch of the 232 

Exclusions Portal, Commerce has 

implemented a number of 

enhancements that address some of the 

key comments received in response to 

the June 10 and May 26 rule. Commerce 

has highlighted the changes made to the 

232 Exclusions Portal, which are 

responsive to these comments received 

in response to the June 10 rule, as well 

as some of the comments received on 

the May 26 notice. There are additional 

requested changes to the 232 Exclusions 

Portal in response to the June 10 rule 

and the May 26 notice that Commerce 

is still reviewing. Commerce will 

summarize and address those comments 

in at least one subsequent rule, although 

enhancements in the functionality of the 

232 Exclusions Portal, similar to the 

enhancements described below, will 

likely be implemented on an ongoing 

basis as they are ready to be 

implemented. 

Comment (g)(1): Ability to import 

previously-filed submissions. A 

commenter noted that allowing the 

ability to import previously-filed 

submissions would be extremely 

beneficial for exclusion requesters and 

objectors, reducing the time burdens on 

repeat users of the 232 Exclusions 

Portal. Another commenter noted that 

the nature of manual entry in the new 

232 Exclusions Portal is likely to create 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81069 

significant opportunity for errors and 

requires significantly more time and 

resource allocation than under the 

previous system. The ability to reuse 

information included in previously 

submitted 232 submission forms would 

be very beneficial. A commenter 

acknowledged that the user guide for 

the 232 Exclusions Portal provides 

information on creating a profile within 

web-browsers, but a simplified system 

for importing previously-filed 

submissions by users through their 

dashboard would be immensely 

beneficial for all users of the system. 

BIS response: Commerce clarifies here 

that the AutoFill Feature of the 232 

Exclusions Portal addresses these 

comments. The AutoFill Feature that 

launched with the 232 Exclusions Portal 

addresses several of the comments 

submitted in response to the June 10 

rule. AutoFill enables users to 

effectively import previous filings by 

allowing them to fill out a filing once 

and then save that template for reuse in 

future filings. It also allows users to save 

their in-progress filings as templates. A 

native save/share feature is still under 

discussion. 

Comment (g)(2): Increasing the search 

functionality in the 232 Exclusions 

Portal. Commerce received a number of 

comments requesting improvements to 

various aspects of the search 

functionality in the 232 Exclusions 

Portal. A commenter requested that 

product class should be a searchable 

field, and that product class should be 

added to the main portal screen with a 

filtering function. Another commenter 

noted that the search functionality 

needs to be improved by adding a 

simple ‘‘find all’’ type of search 

capability in the 232 Exclusions Portal. 

One commenter noted that the search 

functionality is not as good as it is in 

www.regulations.gov. Another 

commenter requested a change be made 

to allow the download of individual 

submissions and all data in the new 

portal. Specifically, this commenter 

noted that it is extremely important that 

all users can download both individual 

submissions (exclusion requests, 

objections, rebuttal, and surrebuttal 

filings) and the information found in the 

portal in its entirety, as can be done 

currently in www.regulations.gov. 

Another commenter noted that it is 

difficult to extract data for queried 

databases, particularly from the volume 

and origin fields. Another commenter 

requested allowing users to refresh the 

portal without resetting the filters. 

BIS response: Commerce had 

addressed a number of these concerns 

with the 232 Exclusions Portal by 

improving the Public Data Extract 

functionality of the portal. The Public 

Data Extract tool allows users to 

download a filterable and searchable set 

of all filed data in the 232 Exclusions 

Portal, effectively functioning as an 

advanced search feature. Commerce 

will continue to consider additional 

measures to improve the Public Data 

Extract tool. 

Comment (g)(3): Improving Dashboard 

functionality. A commenter requested 

that the dashboard allow organizations 

to allow others in their organizations to 

view submissions made by others in the 

same organization. 

BIS response: Commerce has made 

changes under the Dashboard Limit to 

address these types of requests for 

additional Dashboard functionality. 

Commerce expanded the Dashboard 

View in the 232 Exclusions Portal in 

2020, improving dashboard 

functionality by allowing users to see all 

of their filings in one location on the 

front page of their Dashboard. 

Comment (g)(4): Allow extensions of 

time when 232 Exclusions Portal is not 

accessible. A commenter expressed 

concern about technical issues with 

accessing the new 232 Exclusions 

Portal. This commenter requested that if 

documented information technology 

issues with the portal occur, Commerce 

should be able to extend the time for 

companies to file exclusion requests or 

objections. 

BIS response: Commerce has taken 

steps to address technical extensions for 

timelines for 232 submission. 

Specifically, BIS works with users on a 

case-by-case basis to address any 

technical issues encountered and take 

necessary corrective action. 

Occasionally these corrective measures 

may include reopening filing windows 

during periods in which they were 

inaccessible. 

Changes Made in This Interim Final 

Rule To Improve the 232 Exclusions 

Process 

Simplification of the Text 

As described further below, this rule 

makes three changes to simplify the text 

for the 232 exclusions process by 

removing one of the supplements, and 

making conforming changes to add 

references to aluminum in the steel 

supplement; removing references to 

www.regulations.gov; and, as a 

conforming change, removing the 

Annex that provided steps for using 

www.regulations.gov. 

When Commerce added supplements 

nos. 1 and 2 to part 705, the objective 

was to create two parallel supplements 

with one specific to the 232 exclusion 

process for steel under supplement no. 

1, and a second one specific to the 232 

exclusion process for aluminum under 

supplement no. 2. Commerce has 

reevaluated whether this parallel 

structure is needed because the vast 

majority of the text is identical between 

the two supplements and, when making 

updates to improve the regulatory 

provisions, it creates the potential for 

unintended differences between the two 

supplements and makes updating the 

two supplements more burdensome 

than necessary. For these reasons, in 

this rule Commerce is removing 

supplement no. 2 to part 705 and is 

making conforming changes to 

supplement no. 1 where information 

that is specific to aluminum needs to be 

added because of the removal of 

supplement no. 2. 

This interim final rule updates and 

simplifies the text in supplement no. 1 

by removing various references to 

www.regulations.gov and all text that 

was previously needed in supplement 

no. 1 to describe the previous process of 

using www.regulations.gov for 

submitting 232 submissions. At this 

time, there are no longer any more 

pending 232 exclusion requests in 

www.regulations.gov. Therefore, 

Commerce is removing those references 

to www.regulations.gov from 

supplement no. 1 in this rule, thus 

simplifying and shortening the text in 

supplement no. 1 considerably. 

As an additional conforming change 

related to the removal of references to 

www.regulations.gov, this rule removes 

Annex 1 to Supplements No. 1 and 2 to 

Part 705—Steps for Using 

Regulations.gov to File Rebuttals and 

Surrebuttals. The additional guidance 

included in this Annex is no longer 

needed because www.regulations.gov is 

no longer being used for the 232 

exclusions process. The 232 Exclusions 

Portal does not require guidance on the 

steps to be included in the regulations. 

Adding Reminder Regarding 

Consequences for False Statements or 

Representations 

This interim final rule adds a new 

Note 2 to Paragraph (b) to remind all 

parties submitting 232 submissions 

under supplement no. 1 to part 705 that 

it is a criminal offense to willfully make 

a false statement or representation to 

any department or agency of the United 

States Government as to any matter 

within its jurisdiction [18 U.S.C. 

1001(2018)]. As a conforming change, 

this interim final rule redesignates the 

existing Note to Paragraph (b) as Note 1 

to Paragraph (b). 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81070 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

Improving the Fairness and Efficiency of 

the Review Process 

In order to improve the efficiency of 

the review process, this interim final 

rule reduces the page limit for exclusion 

requests, objections to submitted 

exclusion requests, rebuttals, and 

surrebuttals. In paragraph (e), this rule 

removes the 25-page limit for exclusions 

and objections to submitted exclusions 

requests, and replaces that with a 5,000- 

word limit. In paragraph (f)(2), this rule 

removes the ten-page limit for rebuttals 

and replaces that with a 2,500-word 

limit. In paragraph (g)(2), this rule 

removes the ten-page limit for 

surrebuttals and replaces that with a 

2,500-word limit. 

232 Exclusion Request Volume 

Certification 

This interim final rule makes changes 

to ensure that the volume request in 

exclusion requests is consistent with the 

past use of steel or aluminum by an 

exclusion requester. This interim final 

rule revises paragraph (c)(5) (Substance 

of exclusion requests) by redesignating 

the existing text of paragraph (c)(5) as a 

new paragraph (c)(5)(i). This interim 

final rule adds a new paragraph (c)(5)(ii) 

(Certification for volume requested). 

New paragraph (c)(5)(i) specifies that 

in order to ensure that the volume 

requested in an exclusion request is 

consistent with legitimate business 

needs for the same steel or aluminum 

articles obtained (i.e., imported from 

abroad either directly by the requester 

or indirectly by purchasing from 

distributors) by the entity requesting an 

exclusion, a certification needs to be 

made in the 232 Exclusions Portal when 

completing the submission of a 232 

exclusion request. The 232 Exclusions 

Portal will include the text specified in 

paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(A)–(E), and this 

exclusion request certification for 

volume requested must be signed in the 

232 Exclusions Portal by an 

organization official specifically 

authorized to certify the document as 

being accurate and complete to the best 

of his/her knowledge. 

The person signing the certification 

under paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(A) must attest 

that the exclusion requester intends to 

manufacture, process, or otherwise 

transform the imported product for 

which they have filed an exclusion 

request, or has a purchase order or 

orders for such products. 

Under paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(B), the 

exclusion requester must certify that 

they do not intend to use the requested 

exclusion, if granted, solely to hedge or 

arbitrage the price. 

Under paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(C), the 

exclusion requester must certify that 

they expect to consume, sell, or 

otherwise use the total volume of 

product across all their active 

exclusions and pending exclusion 

requests in the course of their 

organization’s business activities within 

the next calendar year. 

Under new paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(D), the 

exclusion requester is submitting an 

exclusion request for a product for 

which they previously received an 

exclusion, they must certify that they 

either imported the full amount of their 

approved exclusion(s) last year, or 

intended to import the full amount but 

could not due to one of the reasons 

specified in new paragraphs 

(c)(5)(ii)(D)(1)–(3). The criteria included 

in new paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(D)(1)–(3) 

that must be attested to, if applicable, 

are intended to ensure that, if a 

requester did not import the full 

amount, there were legitimate business 

reasons justifying that outcome. These 

legitimate business reasons are loss of 

contract(s); business downturns; or 

other factors that were beyond the 

organization’s control that directly 

resulted in less need for steel or 

aluminum articles. 

Under new paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(E), the 

exclusion requester certifies that the 

exclusion amount requested this year is 

in line with what their organization 

expects to import based on their current 

business outlook. Lastly, paragraph 

(c)(5)(ii)(E) requires the exclusion 

requester to certify that, if contacted by 

Commerce, their organization will 

provide documentation that justifies the 

assertions in the certification regarding 

past imports of steel or aluminum 

articles and projections for the current 

year, as it relates to past and current 

calendar year exclusion requests. 

This interim final rule adds a new 

Note 2 to paragraphs (c)(5)(i) and (ii) to 

make the public aware that an exclusion 

request that does not include a 

certification made in accordance with 

(c)(5)(i) and (ii) will be treated as an 

incomplete submission and will 

therefore be rejected. 

Clarification of Eight Weeks and 

Available ‘‘Immediately’’ 

This rule makes changes to clarify 

when an objector would be required to 

be able to provide the steel or aluminum 

in the quantity and quality to which 

they were objecting on the basis that 

they could provide that steel or 

aluminum ‘‘immediately.’’ 

In the introductory text of paragraph 

(c)(6), this rule revises the criteria to 

clarify that an objector must be able to 

provide the steel or aluminum ‘‘by a 

date earlier than the time required for 

the requester to obtain the entire 

quantity of the product from the 

requester’s foreign supplier,’’ instead of 

being strictly limited to producing it 

within eight weeks. 

In paragraph (c)(6)(i), this rule retains 

the term ‘‘immediately,’’ but clarifies 

that the aluminum or steel does not 

need to be produced within eight weeks 

in certain cases. This interim final rule 

clarifies that ‘‘immediately’’ now means 

produced and delivered within eight 

weeks or, if not possible, then produced 

and delivered within a time frame that 

is equal to or earlier than that needed by 

the requester as demonstrated by the 

time required to obtain the product from 

the requester’s foreign supplier. This 

change is made to create a more equal 

playing field between U.S. objectors and 

foreign producers, and to ensure that 

U.S. producers are not given less time 

to be able to meet the steel or aluminum 

demand being requested in an exclusion 

request. For example, if a requester can 

obtain foreign-produced steel described 

in an exclusion request in 12 weeks, 

there is no reason to arbitrarily limit the 

U.S. producer to having to produce the 

steel within eight weeks. The change 

this interim final rule makes to the term 

‘‘immediately’’ addresses this issue. 

This interim final rule also revises 

paragraph (c)(6)(i) to address the 

scenario where an objector can produce 

and deliver a portion of the steel or 

aluminum that is being requested in the 

exclusion request. This new sentence 

clarifies that, consistent with current 

practice, Commerce may partially 

approve an exclusion request when an 

objector can produce and deliver a 

portion, which is less than 100 percent 

but 10 percent or more, of the amount 

of steel or aluminum being requested in 

the exclusion request. In such cases, 

Commerce may partially approve a 

requested exclusion for that percentage 

of imported steel or aluminum that the 

objector has demonstrated it can 

produce and deliver. 

This interim final rule revises 

paragraph (d)(4) to clarify that, if an 

objector is not currently producing the 

steel or aluminum but can produce the 

aluminum or steel and make it available 

‘‘immediately,’’ the objector still has 

ground to object to the exclusion 

request. This rule defines the term 

‘‘immediately’’ to mean that the objector 

must be able to produce and deliver the 

quantity of steel or aluminum needed 

either within eight weeks, or if after 

eight weeks, by a date earlier than the 

time required for the requester to obtain 

the entire quantity of the product from 

the requester’s foreign supplier. It is 

incumbent upon both the exclusion 

requester and objecting producers to 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81071 

provide supplemental evidence 

supporting their claimed delivery times. 

General Approved Exclusions (GAEs) 

This rule adds a new Supplement No. 

2 to Part 705—General Approved 

Exclusions (GAEs) for Steel Articles 

Under the 232 Exclusions Process, and 

a new Supplement No. 3 to Part 705— 

General Approved Exclusions (GAEs) 

for Aluminum Articles under the 232 

Exclusions Process. These two 

supplements identify the steel and 

aluminum articles that have been 

approved for import under a GAE. This 

rule adds 108 GAEs for steel articles 

under supplement no. 2 part 705 and 15 

GAEs for aluminum articles under 

supplement no. 3 to part 705. Each GAE 

is identified under the GAE identifier 

column, e.g., GAE.1.S: 7304592030 (for 

the first approved GAE for steel) or 

GAE.1.A: 7609000000 (for the first 

approved GAE for aluminum). 

The Secretary of Commerce, in 

consultation with the Secretary of 

Defense, the Secretary of the Treasury, 

the Secretary of State, the United States 

Trade Representative, the Assistant to 

the President for Economic Policy, the 

Assistant to the President for National 

Security Affairs, and other senior 

Executive Branch officials as 

appropriate, makes these determinations 

that certain aluminum and steel articles 

may be authorized under a GAE 

consistent with the objectives of the 232 

exclusions process as outlined in 

supplement no. 1 to this part. The GAEs 

described in these supplements may be 

used by any importer. The two new 

supplements specify that, in order to 

use a GAE, the importer must reference 

the GAE identifier in the Automated 

Commercial Environment (ACE) system 

that corresponds to the steel or 

aluminum articles being imported. 

GAEs do not include quantity limits. 

The effective date for each GAE will be 

fifteen calendar days after the date of 

publication of a Federal Register notice 

either adding or revising a specific GAE 

identifier in supplement no. 1 to this 

part. There will be no retroactive relief 

for GAEs. This interim final rule also 

specifies that relief is only available to 

steel or aluminum articles that are 

entered for consumption, or withdrawn 

from warehouse for consumption, on or 

after the effective date of a GAE 

included in supplement no. 1 to this 

part. These GAEs are indefinite in 

length, but Commerce may at any time 

issue a Federal Register notice 

removing, revising, or adding to an 

existing GAE in this supplement as 

warranted to align with the objectives of 

the 232 exclusions process as described 

in supplement no. 1 to this part. 

Commerce may periodically publish 

notices of inquiry in the Federal 

Register soliciting public comments on 

potential removals, revisions, or 

additions to this supplement. 

Other Changes and Clarifications to the 

232 Exclusions Process 

In paragraph (b)(5)(iii), this interim 

final rule adds a new paragraph 

(b)(5)(iii)(A) and redesignates existing 

paragraphs (b)(5)(iii)(A)–(C) as 

paragraphs (B) to (D). New paragraph 

(b)(5)(iii)(A) clarifies the process for 

handling CBI related to exclusion 

requests or objections by directing 

exclusion requesters and objectors to 

check the appropriate box in the 232 

Exclusions Portal to indicate that the 

filer has relevant CBI for consideration 

when applicable. This new paragraph 

also clarifies the existing practice that if 

Commerce determines after review that 

the CBI is needed, Commerce will 

directly request the CBI. 

In paragraph (c)(2) (Identification of 

exclusion requests), this rule removes 

the word ‘‘distinct’’ in the phrase 

‘‘distinct critical dimensions.’’ This 

change is being made to avoid any 

potential confusion on the scope of 

ranges that are permissible under an 

exclusion request. This change will 

make clear that, provided the range 

being requested in an exclusion request 

is within the minimum and maximum 

range that is specified in the HTSUS 

statistical reporting number and 

applicable notes for the provision, a 

single exclusion request may be 

requested for that steel or aluminum 

article. Objections that indicate the 

ability to produce one or more products 

within the range, even if not the entire 

range, will be considered to be valid 

objections to an exclusion request. 

Also in paragraph (c)(2), this rule 

removes the Note to paragraph (c)(2) 

because it is no longer needed. The 

exclusions form on the 232 Exclusions 

Portal does not include that block for 

countries subject to a quantitative 

limitation, so the instructions in the 

Note to paragraph (c)(2) are no longer 

needed. 

In paragraph (c)(6) (Criteria used to 

review exclusion requests) introductory 

text, this interim final rule adds one 

sentence at the end for clarification and 

to alert the public that items for which 

a broader determination has been made 

will be identified in supplements no. 2 

or 3 to part 705. 

In paragraph (d)(3) (Time limit for 

submitting objections to submitted 

exclusions requests), this interim final 

rule makes revisions to specify that the 

30-day clock starts at 11:59 p.m. Eastern 

Time on the calendar day an exclusion 

request is posted in the 232 Exclusions 

Portal. 

In paragraph (h)(1)(i), this interim 

final rule adds the term ‘‘rejected’’ 

before the phrase ‘‘or denied’’ to clarify 

that exclusion requests that do not 

satisfy the requirements specified in 

paragraphs (b) and (c) of this 

supplement may be rejected or denied. 

In paragraph (h)(2)(iv) (Validity 

period for exclusion requests), this 

interim final rule makes revisions to add 

the phrase ‘‘from the date of the 

signature on the decision memo’’ to 

clarify that exclusions will generally be 

approved for one year from the date of 

the signature on the decision memo. 

Types of Comments Commerce Is 

Requesting on This Rule 

Commerce is not seeking comments 

regarding the duties or quantitative 

limitations themselves or the exclusion 

and objection process overall. Rather, 

Commerce seeks comments on whether 

the specific changes included in this 

fourth interim final rule have addressed 

earlier concerns with the 232 exclusions 

process. Specifically, Commerce 

encourages comments on these 232 

exclusions process changes and on 

which features are an improvement and 

comments highlighting any areas of 

concern or suggestions for 

improvement. 

Commerce will continue to make 

improvements to the 232 exclusions 

process, including improvements based 

on comments received on this rule, and 

parties will be notified of any additional 

changes to the 232 exclusions process 

and of any new features to the 232 

Exclusions Portal. 

Rulemaking Requirements 

1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 

direct agencies to assess all costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying both costs and benefits, of 

reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, 

and of promoting flexibility. This rule 

has been determined to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action,’’ although not 

economically significant, under section 

3(f) of Executive Order 12866. Pursuant 

to Proclamations 9704 and 9705 of 

March 8, 2018, and Proclamations 9776 

and 9777 of August 29, 2018, the 

establishment of procedures for an 

exclusions process under each 

Proclamation shall be published in the 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81072 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

Federal Register and are exempt from 

Executive Order 13771. 

2. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA) 

provides that an agency generally 

cannot conduct or sponsor a collection 

of information, and no person is 

required to respond to nor be subject to 

a penalty for failure to comply with a 

collection of information, unless that 

collection has obtained Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

approval and displays a currently valid 

OMB Control Number. 

This final regulation involves four 

collections currently approved by OMB 

with the following control numbers 

• Exclusions from the Section 232 

National Security Adjustments of 

Imports of Steel and Aluminum (control 

number 0694–0139). 

• Objections from the Section 232 

National Security Adjustments of 

Imports of Steel and Aluminum (control 

number 0694–0138). 

• Procedures for Submitting Rebuttals 

and Surrebuttals Requests for 

Exclusions from and Objections to the 

Section 232 Adjustments for Steel and 

Aluminum (OMB control number 0694– 

0141). 

• Procedures for Submitting Requests 

for Expedited Relief from Quantitative 

Limits—Existing Contract: Section 232 

National Security Investigations of Steel 

Imports (OMB control number 0694– 

0140). 

This rule is expected to reduce the 

burden hours for one of the collections 

associated with this rule, OMB control 

number 0694–0139. This reduction is 

expected because of the addition of 108 

GAEs for steel and 15 GAEs for 

aluminum, which is expected to result 

in a decrease of 5,000 exclusion request 

per year. This is expected to be a 

reduction in 5,000 burden hours for a 

total savings of 740,000 dollars to the 

public. This is also expected to be a 

reduction in 30,000 burden hours for a 

total savings of 1,170,000 dollars to the 

U.S. Government. The steel and 

aluminum articles that have been 

identified as being eligible for GAEs 

have typically not received any 

objections, so the addition of these new 

GAEs is not estimated to result in a 

decrease in the number of objections, 

rebuttals, or surrebuttals received by 

BIS. This rule is not expected to 

increase the burden hours for two of the 

collections associated with this rule, 

OMB control numbers 0694–0138, 

0694–0141 as minimal changes are 

anticipated. BIS is making a change to 

the collection for OMB control number 

0694–0140 to account for certification 

that needs to be made in the 232 

Exclusions Portal under paragraph 

(c)(5)(ii). Any comments regarding the 

collection of information associated 

with this rule, including suggestions for 

reducing the burden, may be sent to 

https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. 

3. This rule does not contain policies 

with Federalism implications as that 

term is defined in Executive Order 

13132. 

4. The provisions of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 

553) requiring notice of proposed 

rulemaking, the opportunity for public 

comment, and a delay in effective date 

are inapplicable because this regulation 

involves a military or foreign affairs 

function of the United States. (See 5 

U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). As explained in the 

reports submitted by the Secretary to the 

President, steel and aluminum are being 

imported into the United States in such 

quantities or under such circumstances 

as to threaten to impair the national 

security of the United States, and 

therefore the President is implementing 

these remedial actions (as described 

Proclamations 9704 and 9705 of March 

8, 2018) to protect U.S. national security 

interests. That implementation includes 

the creation of an effective process by 

which affected domestic parties can 

obtain exclusion requests ‘‘based upon 

specific national security 

considerations.’’ Commerce started this 

process with the publication of the 

March 19 rule and refined the process 

with the publication of the September 

11 and June 10 rules and is continuing 

this process with the publication of 

today’s interim final rule. The revisions 

to the exclusion request process are 

informed by the comments received in 

response to the March 19 rule and 

Commerce’s experience with managing 

the 232 exclusions process. Commenters 

on the past rules (March 19, September 

11 and June 10 rules) were generally 

supportive and welcomed the idea of 

creating an exclusion process, but most 

of the commenters believe the exclusion 

process, although improving over time, 

still could be significantly improved in 

order for it to achieve the intended 

purpose. The commenters identified a 

number of areas where transparency, 

effectiveness, and fairness of the process 

could be improved. Commerce 

understands the importance of having a 

transparent, fair, and efficient product 

exclusion request process, consistent 

with the directive provided by the 

President to create this type of process 

to mitigate any unintended 

consequences of imposing the tariffs on 

steel and aluminum in order to protect 

critical U.S. national security interests. 

The publication of today’s rule should 

make further improvements in all three 

respects, but because of the scope of this 

new process, BIS is publishing today’s 

rule as an interim final rule with a 

request for comments. 

In addition, Commerce finds that 

there is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B) to waive the provisions of the 

Administrative Procedure Act requiring 

prior notice and the opportunity for 

public comment, and that there is good 

cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) to waive 

the delay in effective date, because such 

delays would be either impracticable or 

contrary to the public interest. In order 

to ensure that the actions taken to adjust 

imports do not undermine users of steel 

or aluminum that are subject to the 

remedial actions instituted by the 

Proclamations and that are critical to 

protecting the national security of the 

United States, the Presidential 

Proclamations authorized the Secretary 

of Commerce, in consultation with the 

Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of 

the Treasury, the Secretary of State, the 

United States Trade Representative, the 

Assistant to the President for Economic 

Policy, the Assistant to the President for 

National Security Affairs, and other 

senior Executive Branch officials as 

appropriate, to grant exclusions for the 

import of goods not currently available 

in the United States in a sufficient 

quantity or satisfactory quality, or for 

other specific national security reasons. 

The Presidential Proclamations further 

directed the Secretary to, within ten 

days, issue procedures for submitting 

and granting these requests for 

exclusions—this interim final rule 

fulfills that direction. As described 

above, the Secretary complied with the 

direction from the President with the 

publication of the March 19 rule, as well 

as in the improvements made in the 

September 11 and June 10 rules, and is 

taking the next step in improving the 

232 exclusions process by making 

needed changes with the publication of 

today’s rule. The immediate 

implementation of an effective 

exclusion request process, consistent 

with the intent of the Presidential 

Proclamations, also required creating a 

process to allow any individual or 

organization in the United States to 

submit objections to submitted 

exclusion requests. The objection 

process was created with the 

publication of the March 19 rule, and 

the rebuttal and surrebuttal process was 

added in the publication of the 

September 11 rule to further improve 

the 232 exclusions process. The 

publication of today’s rule makes 

needed changes in the 232 exclusions 

process to create the type of fair, 

transparent, and efficient process that 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81073 

was intended in the March 19, 

September 11 and June 10 rules, but was 

still found lacking by commenters in 

several key respects. Today’s rule makes 

critical changes to ensure a fair, 

transparent, and efficient exclusion 

process. 

If this interim final rule were to be 

delayed to allow for public comment or 

to provide for a thirty day delay in the 

date of effectiveness, companies in the 

United States would be unable to 

immediately benefit from the 

improvements made in the exclusion, 

objection, rebuttal, and surrebuttal 

process and could face significant 

economic hardship, which could 

potentially create a detrimental effect on 

the general U.S. economy. Whether they 

were supportive of tariffs or against 

tariffs, the comments received on the 

March 19, September 11 and June 10 

rules were clear that an efficient 

exclusion request, objection, rebuttal, 

and surrebuttal process was needed, 

that the March 19 rule had not 

sufficiently created such a process, and 

that, although substantial improvements 

were made with the publications of the 

September 11 and June 10 rules, 

additional improvements were needed. 

Commenters noted that, if specific 

improvements are not made, significant 

economic consequences could occur. 

Commenters also thought the 

inefficiencies of the process could 

undermine other critical U.S. national 

security interests. Likewise, our national 

security could be impacted if Commerce 

lacked adequate information to make a 

fair, transparent and efficient 

determination for all parties involved 

and to ensure the critical national 

security considerations are being 

protected. 

Because a notice of proposed 

rulemaking and an opportunity for prior 

public comment are not required for this 

rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or by any other 

law, the analytical requirements of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq., are not applicable. Accordingly, 

no regulatory flexibility analysis is 

required and none has been prepared. 

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 705 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Business and industry, 

Classified information, Confidential 

business information, Imports, 

Investigations, National security. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, part 705 of subchapter A of 

15 CFR chapter VII is amended as 

follows: 

PART 705—EFFECT OF IMPORTED 

ARTICLES ON THE NATIONAL 

SECURITY 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 705 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Section 232 of the Trade 

Expansion Act of 1962, as amended (19 

U.S.C. 1862) and Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1979 

(44 FR 69273, December 3, 1979). 

■ 2. Supplement No. 1 to part 705 is 

revised to read as follows: 

Supplement No. 1 to Part 705— 

Requirements for Submissions 

Requesting Exclusions From the 

Adjustment of Imports of Aluminum 

and Steel Imposed Pursuant to Section 

232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, 

as Amended 

On March 8, 2018, the President 

issued Proclamations 9704 and 9705 

concurring with the findings of the 

January 11, 2018 reports of the Secretary 

of Commerce on the effects of imports 

of aluminum and steel mill articles 

(steel articles) on the national security 

and determining that adjusting 

aluminum and steel imports through the 

imposition of duties is necessary so that 

their imports will no longer threaten to 

impair the national security. Clause 3 of 

Proclamations 9704 and 9705 also 

authorized the Secretary of Commerce, 

in consultation with the Secretary of 

Defense, the Secretary of the Treasury, 

the Secretary of State, the United States 

Trade Representative, the Assistant to 

the President for Economic Policy, the 

Assistant to the President for National 

Security Affairs, and other senior 

Executive Branch officials as 

appropriate, to grant exclusions from 

the duties at the request of directly 

affected parties located in the United 

States if the requested steel or 

aluminum article is determined not to 

be produced in the United States in a 

sufficient and reasonably available 

amount or of a satisfactory quality or 

based upon specific national security 

considerations. On August 29, 2018, the 

President issued Proclamation 9776. 

Clause 1 of Proclamation 9776, 

authorizes the Secretary of Commerce, 

in consultation with the Secretary of 

State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the 

Secretary of Defense, the United States 

Trade Representative, the Assistant to 

the President for National Security 

Affairs, the Assistant to the President for 

Economic Policy, and such other senior 

Executive Branch officials as the 

Secretary deems appropriate, to provide 

relief from the applicable quantitative 

limitations set forth in Proclamation 

9740 and Proclamation 9759 for steel 

articles and as set forth in Proclamation 

9739 and 9758 for aluminum articles 

and their accompanying annexes, as 

amended, at the request of a directly 

affected party located in the United 

States for any steel or aluminum article 

determined by the Secretary to not be 

produced in the United States in a 

sufficient and reasonably available 

amount or of a satisfactory quality. The 

Secretary is also authorized to provide 

such relief based upon specific national 

security considerations. 

(a) Scope. This supplement specifies 

the requirements and process for how 

directly affected parties located in the 

United States may submit requests for 

exclusions from the duties and 

quantitative limitations imposed by the 

President. This supplement also 

specifies the requirements and process 

for how parties in the United States may 

submit objections to submitted 

exclusion requests for relief from the 

duties or quantitative limitations 

imposed by the President and the 

process for rebuttals to submitted 

objections and surrebuttals (collectively, 

‘‘232 submissions’’). This supplement 

identifies the time periods for such 

submissions, the methods of 

submission, and the information that 

must be included in such submissions. 

(b) Required forms. The 232 

Exclusions Portal (https://

www.commerce.gov/page/section-232- 

investigations) includes four web-based 

forms that are to be used for submitting 

exclusion requests, objections to 

exclusion requests, rebuttals, and 

surrebuttals described in this 

supplement. On the 232 Exclusions 

Portal, each web-based form is available 

on the portal at the bottom of the 

preceding filing. For example, a party 

submitting an objection will access the 

objection form by scrolling to the 

bottom of the exclusion request, a 

rebuttal filer will access the rebuttal 

form by scrolling to the bottom of the 

objection form, and a surrebuttal filer 

would access the surrebuttal form by 

scrolling to the bottom of the rebuttal 

form. The U.S. Department of 

Commerce requires requesters and 

objectors to use the appropriate form as 

specified under paragraphs (b)(1) and 

(2) of this supplement for submitting 

exclusion requests and objections to 

submitted exclusion requests and the 

forms specified under paragraphs (b)(3) 

and (4) of this supplement for 

submitting rebuttals and surrebuttals. In 

addition, submitters of exclusion 

requests, objections to submitted 

exclusion requests, rebuttals, and 

surrebuttals to the 232 Exclusions Portal 

will be required to complete a webbased registration on the 232 Exclusions 

Portal prior to submitting any 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81074 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

documents. In order to register, 

submitters will be required to provide 

an email and establish a password for 

the account. After completing the 

registration, submitters will be able to 

login to an account on the 232 

Exclusions Portal and submit exclusion 

requests, objections, rebuttals, and 

surrebuttal documents. 

(1) Form required for submitting 

exclusion requests. The full name of the 

form used for submitting steel exclusion 

requests is Request for Exclusion from 

Remedies: Section 232 National 

Security Investigation of Steel Imports. 

The full name of the form used for 

submitting aluminum exclusion 

requests is Request for Exclusion from 

Remedies: Section 232 National 

Security Investigation of Aluminum 

Imports. The Title of the web-based 

fillable form for both steel and 

aluminum in the 232 Exclusions Portal 

is Exclusion Request. 

(2) Form required for submitting 

objections to submitted exclusion 

requests. The name of the form used for 

submitting objections to submitted steel 

exclusion requests is Objection Filing to 

Posted Section 232 Exclusion Request: 

Steel. The name of the form used for 

submitting objections to submitted 

aluminum exclusion requests is 

Objection Filing to Posted Section 232 

Exclusion Request: Aluminum. The 

Title of the web-based fillable form for 

both steel and aluminum in the 232 

Exclusions Portal is Objection. 

(3) Form required for submitting 

rebuttals. The name of the form used for 

submitting rebuttals to steel objections 

is Rebuttal to Objection Received for 

Section 232 Exclusion Request: Steel. 

The name of the form used for 

submitting rebuttals to aluminum 

objections is Rebuttal to Objection 

Received for Section 232 Exclusion 

Request: Aluminum. The Title of the 

web-based fillable form for both steel 

and aluminum in the 232 Exclusions 

Portal is Rebuttal. 

(4) Form required for submitting 

surrebuttals. The name of the form used 

for submitting surrebuttals to steel 

objections is Surrebuttal to Rebuttal 

Received on Section 232 Objection: 

Steel. The name of the form used for 

submitting surrebuttals to aluminum 

objections is Surrebuttal to Rebuttal 

Received on Section 232 Objection: 

Aluminum. The Title of the web-based 

fillable form for both steel and 

aluminum in the 232 Exclusions Portal 

is Surrebuttal. 

Note to Paragraphs (b)(1) Through (4): On 

the 232 Exclusions Portal, each exclusion 

request is assigned a distinct ID #, which is 

also used with its associated 232 

submissions, but preceded with an acronym 

indicating the file type: Exclusion Requests 

(ER ID #), Objection (OF ID #), Rebuttals (RB 

ID #) and Surrebuttals (SR ID #). For an 

example of the four possible types of 232 

submissions associated with a single 

exclusion request, you could have ER ID 237, 

OF ID 237, RB ID 237 and SR ID 237. The 

232 Exclusions Portal will automatically 

assign the two letter designator depending on 

the type of web-based form being submitted 

in the portal and will assign an ID number 

to the original exclusion request and that ID 

number will be common to any objection, 

rebuttal, or surrebuttal submitted pertaining 

to the same exclusion request. 

(5) Public disclosure and information 

protected from public disclosure. (i) 

Information submitted in 232 

submissions will be subject to public 

review and made available for public 

inspection and copying, except for the 

information described in paragraph 

(b)(5)(iii) of this supplement. 

Individuals and organizations must 

fully complete the relevant forms. 

(ii) Information not subject to public 

disclosure should not be submitted. 

Personally identifiable information, 

including social security numbers and 

employer identification numbers, 

should not be provided. Information 

that is subject to government-imposed 

access and dissemination or other 

specific national security controls, e.g., 

classified information or information 

that has U.S. Government restrictions on 

dissemination to non-U.S. citizens or 

other categories of persons that would 

prohibit public disclosure of the 

information, may not be included in 232 

submissions. Individuals and 

organizations that have confidential 

business information (‘‘CBI’’) that they 

believe relevant to the Secretary’s 

consideration of the 232 submission 

should so indicate in the appropriate 

field of the relevant form, or on the 

rebuttal or surrebuttal submission, 

following the procedures in paragraph 

(b)(5)(iii) of this supplement. 

(iii) Procedures for identifying, but not 

disclosing confidential or proprietary 

business information (CBI) in the public 

version, and procedures for submitting 

CBI. For persons seeking to submit 

confidential or proprietary business 

information (CBI), the 232 submission 

available to the public must contain a 

summary of the CBI in sufficient detail 

to permit a reasonable understanding of 

the substance of the information. If the 

submitting person claims that 

summarization is not possible, the claim 

must be accompanied by a full 

explanation of the reasons supporting 

that claim. Generally, numerical data 

will be considered adequately 

summarized if grouped or presented in 

terms of indices or figures within ten 

percent of the actual figure. If an 

individual portion of the numerical data 

is voluminous (e.g., five pages of 

numerical data), at least one percent of 

the numerical data, representative of 

that portion, must be summarized. In 

order to submit CBI that is not for public 

release as a separate email submission 

to the U.S. Department of Commerce, 

you must follow the procedures in 

paragraphs (b)(3)(iii)(A)–(D) of this 

supplement to assist the U.S. 

Department of Commerce in identifying 

these submissions and associating these 

submissions with the respective 232 

submission in the 232 Exclusions Portal. 

Submitters with classified information 

should contact the U.S. Department of 

Commerce for instructions on the 

appropriate methods to send this type of 

information. 

(A) For CBI related to exclusion 

requests or objections, check the 

appropriate box in the 232 Exclusions 

Portal indicating that the filer has 

relevant CBI for consideration. If 

Commerce determines after review that 

the CBI is needed, Commerce will 

directly request the CBI from the 

exclusion requester or objector as 

warranted. 

(B) For CBI related to rebuttals or 

surrebuttals, on the same day that you 

submit your 232 submission in the 232 

Exclusions Portal, submit the CBI via 

email to the U.S. Department of 

Commerce. The email address used is 

different depending on the type of 

submission the emailed CBI is for, as 

follows: CBI for rebuttals use 

232rebuttals@doc.gov; and CBI for 

surrebuttals use 232surrebuttals@

doc.gov. 

(C) For rebuttals and surrebuttals 

pertaining to 232 submissions for 

exclusion requests the email subject line 

must only include the original 232 

Exclusions Portal Exclusion Request 

(ER) ID # and the body of the email must 

include the 232 Exclusions Portal 

Rebuttal (RB) ID #, or Surrebuttal (SR) 

ID # you received from the 232 

Exclusions Portal when you 

successfully submitted your rebuttal or 

surrebuttal. These naming conventions 

used in the 232 Exclusions Portal, 

respectively, will assist the U.S. 

Department of Commerce to associate 

the CBI that will not be posted in the 

232 Exclusions Portal with the 

information included in the public 

submission. 

(D) Submit the CBI as an attachment 

to that email. The CBI is limited to a 

maximum of five pages per rebuttal or 

surrebuttal. The email is to be limited to 

sending your CBI. All other information 

for the public submission, and public 

versions of the CBI, where appropriate, 

for a 232 submission in the 232 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81075 

Exclusions Portal following the 

procedures identified in this 

supplement, as appropriate. 

Note 1 to Paragraph (b) for Submissions of 

Supporting Documents (Attachments): 

Supporting attachments must be emailed as 

PDF documents. 

Note 2 to Paragraph (b): It is a criminal 

offense to willfully make a false statement or 

representation to any department or agency 

of the United States Government as to any 

matter within its jurisdiction [18 U.S.C. 

1001(2018)]. 

(c) Exclusion requests. (1) Who may 

submit an exclusion request? Only 

directly affected individuals or 

organizations located in the United 

States may submit an exclusion request. 

An individual or organization is 

‘‘directly affected’’ if they are using steel 

in business activities (e.g., construction, 

manufacturing, or supplying steel 

product to users) in the United States. 

(2) Identification of exclusion 

requests. Separate exclusion requests 

must be submitted for steel products 

with chemistry by percentage 

breakdown by weight, metallurgical 

properties, surface quality (e.g., 

galvanized, coated), and critical 

dimensions covered by a common 

HTSUS statistical reporting number. 

Separate exclusion requests must be 

submitted for aluminum products with 

critical dimensions covered by a 

common HTSUS statistical reporting 

number. The exclusion request forms 

allow for minimum and maximum 

dimensions. A permissible range must 

be within the minimum and maximum 

range that is specified in the HTSUS 

statistical reporting number and 

applicable notes. Separate exclusion 

requests must also be submitted for 

products falling in more than one tendigit HTSUS statistical reporting 

number. The U.S. Department of 

Commerce will approve exclusions on a 

product basis, and the approvals will be 

limited to the individual or organization 

that submitted the specific exclusion 

request, unless Commerce approves a 

broader application of the productbased exclusion request to apply to 

additional importers. Other directlyaffected individuals or organizations 

located in the United States that wish to 

submit an exclusion request for a steel 

or aluminum product that has already 

been the subject of an approved 

exclusion request may submit an 

exclusion request under this 

supplement. These additional exclusion 

requests by other directly-affected 

individuals or organizations in the 

United States are not required to 

reference the previously approved 

exclusion but are advised to do so, if 

they want Commerce to take that 

exclusion into account when reviewing 

a subsequent exclusion request. Directly 

affected individuals and organizations 

in the United States will not be 

precluded from submitting a request for 

exclusion of a product even though an 

exclusion request submitted for that 

product by another requester or that 

requester was denied or is no longer 

valid. 

(3) Where to submit exclusion 

requests? All exclusion requests must be 

submitted directly on the 232 

Exclusions Portal (https://

www.commerce.gov/page/section-232- 

investigations). 

(4) No time limit for submitting 

exclusion requests. Exclusion requests 

may be submitted at any time. 

(5)(i) Substance of exclusion requests. 

An exclusion request must specify the 

business activities in the United States 

within which the requester is engaged 

that qualify the individual or 

organization to be directly affected and 

thus eligible to submit an exclusion 

request. The request should clearly 

identify, and provide support for, the 

basis upon which the exclusion is 

sought. An exclusion will only be 

granted if an article is not produced in 

the United States in a sufficient, 

reasonably available amount, and of a 

satisfactory quality, or for specific 

national security considerations. 

(ii) Certification for volume requested. 

In order to ensure that the volume 

requested in an exclusion request is 

consistent with legitimate business 

needs for the same steel or aluminum 

articles obtained (i.e., imported from 

abroad either directly by the requester 

or indirectly by purchasing from 

distributors) by the entity requesting an 

exclusion, the following certification in 

paragraphs (c)(5)(ii)(A)–(E) must be 

acknowledged in the 232 Exclusions 

Portal when completing the submission 

of a 232 exclusion request. The 

exclusion request certification for 

volume requested must be signed by an 

organization official specifically 

authorized to certify the document (the 

certification being made in the 232 

Exclusions Portal) as being accurate and 

complete. The undersigned certifies in 

the 232 Exclusions Portal that the 

information herein supplied in response 

to this paragraph is complete and 

correct to the best of his/her knowledge. 

By signing the certification below, I 

attest that: 

(A) My organization intends to 

manufacture, process, or otherwise 

transform the imported product for 

which I have filed an exclusion request 

or I have a purchase order or orders for 

such products; 

(B) My organization does not intend 

to use the exclusion for which I have 

filed an exclusion request, if granted, 

solely to hedge or arbitrage the price; 

(C) My organization expects to 

consume, sell, or otherwise use the total 

volume of product across all my active 

exclusions and pending exclusion 

requests in the course of my 

organization’s business activities within 

the next calendar year; 

(D) If my organization is submitting 

an exclusion request for a product for 

which we previously received an 

exclusion, I certify that my organization 

either imported the full amount of our 

approved exclusion(s) last year or 

intended to import the full amount but 

could not due to one of the following 

reasons: 

(1) Loss of contract(s); 

(2) Unanticipated business 

downturns; or 

(3) Other factors that were beyond my 

organization’s control that directly 

resulted in less need for steel or 

aluminum articles; and 

(E) I certify that the exclusion amount 

requested this year is in line with what 

my organization expects to import based 

on our current business outlook. If 

requested by the Department of 

Commerce, my organization shall 

provide documentation that justifies its 

assertions in this certification regarding 

its past imports of steel or aluminum 

articles and its projections for the 

current year, as it relates to past and 

current calendar year exclusion 

requests. 

Note to Paragraphs (c)(5)(i) and (ii): Any 

exclusion request that does not include a 

certification made in accordance with 

(c)(5)(ii) will be treated as an incomplete 

submission and will therefore be rejected. 

(6) Criteria used to review exclusion 

requests. The U.S. Department of 

Commerce will review each exclusion 

request to determine whether an article 

described in an exclusion request meets 

any of the following three criteria: The 

article is not produced in the United 

States in an amount which can be 

delivered in a time period equal to or 

less than the time needed for the 

requester to obtain the product from 

their foreign supplier, is not produced 

in the United States in a satisfactory 

quality, or for specific national security 

considerations. The reviews will be 

made on a case-by-case basis to 

determine whether the requester has 

shown that the article is not produced 

in the United States in sufficient and 

reasonably available amount or of a 

satisfactory quality, or that there are 

specific national security considerations 

to grant the exclusion. To provide 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81076 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

additional context on the meaning and 

application of the criteria, paragraphs 

(c)(6)(i)–(iii) of this supplement define 

keys terms used in the review criteria 

and provide illustrative application 

examples. The U.S. Department of 

Commerce will use the same criteria 

identified in paragraphs (c)(6)(i)–(iii) of 

this supplement when determining 

whether it is warranted to approve 

broader product-based exclusions based 

on trends the Department may see over 

time with 232 submissions. The public 

is not permitted to request broader 

product-based exclusions that would 

apply to all importers, because the 

Department makes these determinations 

over time by evaluating the macro 

trends in 232 submissions. Items for 

which a broader determination has been 

made will be identified in supplements 

no. 2 or 3 to part 705. 

(i) Not produced in the United States 

in a sufficient and reasonably available 

amount. The exclusion review criterion 

‘‘Not produced in the United States in 

a sufficient and reasonably available 

amount’’ means that the amount that is 

needed by the end user requesting the 

exclusion is not available immediately 

in the United States to meet its specified 

business activities. Available 

‘‘immediately’’ means that a product 

(whether it is currently being produced 

in the United States, or could be 

produced in the United States) can be 

delivered by a U.S. producer ‘‘within 

eight weeks’’, or, if that is not possible, 

by a date earlier than the time required 

for the requester to obtain the entire 

quantity of the product from the 

requester’s foreign supplier. 

Furthermore, to the extent that an 

objector can produce and deliver a 

portion, which is less than 100 percent, 

but ten percent or more, of the amount 

of steel or aluminum needed in the 

business activities of the user in the 

United States described in the exclusion 

request, the Department of Commerce 

may deny a requested exclusion for that 

percentage of imported steel or 

aluminum. It is incumbent upon both 

the exclusion requester, and objecting 

producers, to provide supplemental 

evidence supporting their claimed 

delivery times. 

(ii) Not produced in the United States 

in a satisfactory quality. The exclusion 

review criterion ‘‘not produced in the 

United States in a satisfactory quality’’ 

does not mean the steel or aluminum 

needs to be identical, but it does need 

to be equivalent as a substitute product. 

‘‘Substitute product’’ for purposes of 

this review criterion means that the 

steel or aluminum being produced by an 

objector can meet ‘‘immediately’’ (see 

paragraph (c)(6)(i) of this supplement) 

the quality (e.g., industry specs or 

internal company quality controls or 

standards), regulatory, or testing 

standards, in order for the U.S.- 

produced steel to be used in that 

business activity in the United States by 

that end user. 

(A) Steel application examples. For a 

steel example, if a U.S. business activity 

requires that steel plates to be provided 

must meet certain military testing and 

military specification standards in order 

to be used in military combat vehicles, 

that requirement would be taken into 

account when reviewing the exclusion 

request and any objections, rebuttals, 

and surrebuttals submitted. As another 

steel example, if a U.S. business activity 

requires that steel tubing to be provided 

must meet certain Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) approvals to be 

used in medical devices, that 

requirement would be taken into 

account when reviewing the exclusion 

request and any objections, rebuttals, 

and surrebuttals submitted. Another 

steel example would be a food 

manufacturer that requires tin-plate 

approval from the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) to make any 

changes in the tin-plate it uses to make 

cans for fruit juices. An objector would 

not have to make steel for use in making 

the cans that was identical, but it would 

have to be a ‘‘substitute product,’’ 

meaning it could meet the USDA 

certification standards. 

(B) Aluminum application examples. 

For an aluminum example, if a U.S. 

business activity requires that 

aluminum to be provided must meet 

certain military testing and military 

specification standards in order to be 

used in military aircraft, that 

requirement would be taken into 

account when reviewing the exclusion 

request and any objections, rebuttals, 

and surrebuttals submitted. Another 

aluminum example would be a U.S. 

pharmaceutical manufacturer that 

requires approval from the Food and 

Drug Administration (FDA) to make any 

changes in its aluminum product pill 

bottle covers. An objector would not 

have to make aluminum for use in 

making the product covers that was 

identical, but it would have to be a 

‘‘substitute product,’’ meaning it could 

meet the FDA certification standards. 

(iii) For specific national security 

considerations. The exclusion review 

criterion ‘‘or for specific national 

security considerations’’ is intended to 

allow the U.S. Department of 

Commerce, in consultation with other 

parts of the U.S. Government as 

warranted, to make determinations 

whether a particular exclusion request 

should be approved based on specific 

national security considerations. 

(A) Steel application examples. For 

example, if the steel included in an 

exclusion request is needed by a U.S. 

defense contractor for making critical 

items for use in a military weapons 

platform for the U.S. Department of 

Defense, and the duty or quantitative 

limitation will prevent the military 

weapons platform from being produced, 

the exclusion will likely be granted. The 

U.S. Department of Commerce, in 

consultation with the other parts of the 

U.S. Government as warranted, can 

consider other impacts to U.S. national 

security that may result from not 

approving an exclusion, e.g., the 

unintended impacts that may occur in 

other downstream industries using steel, 

but in such cases the demonstrated 

concern with U.S. national security 

would need to be tangible and clearly 

explained and ultimately determined by 

the U.S. Government. 

(B) Aluminum application examples. 

For example, if the aluminum included 

in an exclusion request is needed by a 

U.S. defense contractor for making 

critical items for use in a military 

weapons platform for the U.S. 

Department of Defense, and the duty or 

quantitative limitation will prevent the 

military weapons platform from being 

produced, the exclusion will likely be 

granted. The U.S. Department of 

Commerce, in consultation with the 

other parts of the U.S. Government as 

warranted, can consider other impacts 

to U.S. national security that may result 

from not approving an exclusion, e.g., 

the unintended impacts that may occur 

in other downstream industries using 

aluminum, but in such cases the 

demonstrated concern with U.S. 

national security would need to be 

tangible and clearly explained and 

ultimately determined by the U.S. 

Government. 

(d) Objections to submitted exclusion 

requests. (1) Who may submit an 

objection to a submitted exclusion 

request? Any individual or organization 

that manufactures steel or aluminum 

articles in the United States may file 

objections to steel exclusion requests, 

but the U.S. Department of Commerce 

will only consider information directly 

related to the submitted exclusion 

request that is the subject of the 

objection. 

(2) Identification of objections to 

submitted exclusion requests. When 

submitting an objection to a submitted 

exclusion request, the objector must 

locate the exclusion request and submit 

the objection in response to the request 

directly in the 232 Exclusions Portal. 

Once the relevant exclusion request has 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81077 

been located, an individual or 

organization that would like to submit 

an objection will access the objection 

form by scrolling to the bottom of the 

exclusion request form and then fill out 

the web-based form for submitting their 

objection to the exclusion request in the 

232 Exclusions Portal (https://

www.commerce.gov/page/section-232- 

investigations). 

(3) Time limit for submitting 

objections to submitted exclusions 

requests. All objections to submitted 

exclusion requests must be submitted 

directly on the 232 Exclusions Portal 

(https://www.commerce.gov/page/ 

section-232-investigations) no later than 

30 days after the related exclusion 

request is posted, with the 30-day clock 

starting at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on 

the calendar day an exclusion request is 

posted. 

(4) Substance of objections to 

submitted exclusion requests. The 

objection should clearly identify, and 

provide support for, its opposition to 

the proposed exclusion, with reference 

to the specific basis identified in, and 

the support provided for, the submitted 

exclusion request. If the objector is 

asserting that it is not currently 

producing the steel or aluminum 

identified in an exclusion request but 

can produce the steel or aluminum and 

make that steel or aluminum available 

‘‘immediately’’ in accordance with the 

time required for the user of steel or 

aluminum in the United States to obtain 

the product from its foreign suppliers, 

the objector must identify how it will be 

able to produce and deliver the quantity 

of steel or aluminum needed either 

within eight weeks, or if after eight 

weeks, by a date which is earlier than 

the named foreign supplier would 

deliver the entire quantity of the 

requested product. It is incumbent on 

both the exclusion requester, and 

objecting producers, to provide 

supplemental evidence supporting their 

claimed delivery times. This 

requirement includes specifying in 

writing to Department of Commerce as 

part of the objection, the timeline the 

objector anticipates in order to start or 

restart production of the steel included 

in the exclusion request to which it is 

objecting. For example, a summary 

timeline that specifies the steps that will 

occur over the weeks needed to produce 

that steel or aluminum would be helpful 

to include, not only for the Department 

of Commerce review of the objection, 

but also for the requester of the 

exclusion and its determination whether 

to file a rebuttal to the objection. The 

U.S. Department of Commerce 

understands that, in certain cases, 

regulatory approvals, such as from the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

or some approvals at the state or local 

level, may be required to start or restart 

production and that some of these types 

of approvals may be outside the control 

of an objector. 

(e) Limitations on the size of 

submissions. Each exclusion request 

and each objection to a submitted 

exclusion request is to be limited to a 

maximum of 5,000 words, inclusive of 

all exhibits and attachments, but 

exclusive of the respective forms and 

any CBI provided to the U.S. 

Department of Commerce. Each 

attachment to a submission must be less 

than 10 MB. 

(f) Rebuttal process. Only individuals 

or organizations that have submitted an 

exclusion request pursuant to this 

supplement may submit a rebuttal to 

any objection(s) posted in the 232 

Exclusions Portal (https://

www.commerce.gov/page/section-232- 

investigations). The objections to 

submitted exclusion requests process 

identified under paragraph (d) of this 

supplement already establish a formal 

response process for steel and 

aluminum manufacturers in the United 

States. 

(1) Identification of rebuttals. When 

submitting a rebuttal, the individual or 

organization that submitted the 

exclusion request will access the 

rebuttal form by scrolling to the bottom 

of the objection form and then filling 

out the web-based form for submitting 

their rebuttal to the objection in the 232 

Exclusions Portal (https://

www.commerce.gov/page/section-232- 

investigations). 

(2) Format and size limitations for 

rebuttals. Similar to the exclusions 

process identified under paragraph (c) 

of this supplement and the objection 

process identified under paragraph (d) 

of this supplement, the rebuttal process 

requires the submission of a government 

form as specified in paragraph (b)(3) of 

this supplement. Each rebuttal is to be 

limited to a maximum of 2,500 words, 

inclusive of all exhibits and 

attachments, but exclusive of the 

rebuttal form and any CBI provided to 

the U.S. Department of Commerce. Each 

attachment to a submission must be less 

than 10 MB. 

(3) Substance of rebuttals. Rebuttals 

must address an objection to the 

exclusion request made by the 

requester. If multiple objections were 

received on a particular exclusion, the 

requester may submit a rebuttal to each 

objector. The most effective rebuttals 

will be those that aim to correct factual 

errors or misunderstandings in the 

objection(s). 

(4) Time limit for submitting rebuttals. 

The rebuttal period begins on the date 

the Department opens the rebuttal 

period after the posting of the last 

objection in the 232 Exclusions Portal. 

The rebuttal period ends seven days 

after the rebuttal comment period is 

opened. This seven-day rebuttal period 

allows for the individual or organization 

that submitted an exclusion request 

pursuant to this supplement to submit 

any written rebuttals that it believes are 

warranted. 

(g) Surrebuttal process. Only 

individuals or organizations that have a 

posted objection to a submitted 

exclusion request pursuant to this 

supplement may submit a surrebuttal to 

a rebuttal (see paragraph (f) of this 

supplement) posted to their objection to 

an exclusion request in the 232 

Exclusions Portal (https://

www.commerce.gov/page/section-232- 

investigations). 

(1) Identification of surrebuttals. 

When submitting a surrebuttal, the 

individual or organization that 

submitted the objection will access the 

surrebuttal form by scrolling to the 

bottom of the rebuttal form and then 

filling out the web-based form for 

submitting their surrebuttal to the 

rebuttal in the 232 Exclusions Portal 

(https://www.commerce.gov/page/ 

section-232-investigations). 

(2) Format and size limitations for 

surrebuttals. Similar to the exclusions 

process identified under paragraph (c) 

of this supplement, the objection 

process identified under paragraph (d) 

of this supplement, and the rebuttal 

process identified under paragraph (f) of 

this supplement, the surrebuttal process 

requires the submission of a government 

form as specified in paragraph (b)(4) of 

this supplement. The surrebuttal must 

be submitted in the 232 Exclusions 

Portal. Each surrebuttal is to be limited 

to a maximum of 2,500 words, inclusive 

of all exhibits and attachments, but 

exclusive of the surrebuttal form and 

any CBI provided to the U.S. 

Department of Commerce. Each 

attachment to a submission must be less 

than 10 MB. 

(3) Substance of surrebuttals. 

Surrebuttals must address a rebuttal to 

an objection to the exclusion request 

made by the requester. The most 

effective surrebuttals will be those that 

aim to correct factual errors or 

misunderstandings in the rebuttal to an 

objection. 

(4) Time limit for submitting 

surrebuttals. The surrebuttal period 

begins on the date the Department 

opens the surrebuttal comment period 

after the posting of the last rebuttal to 

an objection to an exclusion request in 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81078 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

the 232 Exclusions Portal. The 

surrebuttal period ends seven days after 

the surrebuttal comment period is 

opened. This seven-day surrebuttal 

period allows for the individual or 

organization that submitted an objection 

to a submitted exclusion request 

pursuant to this supplement to submit 

any written surrebuttals that it believes 

are warranted to respond to a rebuttal. 

(h) Disposition of 232 submissions— 

(1) Disposition of incomplete 

submissions. (i) Exclusion requests that 

do not satisfy the requirements specified 

in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this 

supplement will be rejected. 

(ii) Objection filings that do not 

satisfy the requirements specified in 

paragraphs (b) and (d) will not be 

considered. 

(iii) Rebuttal filings that do not satisfy 

the requirements specified in 

paragraphs (b) and (f) will not be 

considered. 

(iv) Surrebuttal filings that do not 

satisfy the requirements specified in 

paragraphs (b) and (g) will not be 

considered. 

(2) Disposition of complete 

submissions—(i) Posting of responses in 

the 232 Exclusions Portal. The U.S. 

Department of Commerce will post 

responses (decision memos) in the 232 

Exclusions Portal to each exclusion 

request. The U.S. Department of 

Commerce response to an exclusion 

request will also be responsive to any of 

the objection(s), rebuttal(s) and 

surrebuttal(s) for that submitted 

exclusion request submitted through the 

232 Exclusions Portal. 

(ii) Streamlined review process for 

‘‘No Objection’’ requests. The U.S. 

Department of Commerce will grant 

properly filed exclusion requests which 

meet the requisite criteria, receive no 

objections, and present no national 

security concerns. If an exclusion 

request’s 30-day comment period in the 

232 Exclusions Portal has expired and 

no objections have been submitted, BIS 

will immediately assess the request for 

any national security concerns. If BIS 

identifies no national security concerns, 

it will post a decision granting the 

exclusion request in the 232 Exclusions 

Portal. 

(iii) Effective date for approved 

exclusions and date used for calculating 

duty refunds—(A) Effective date for 

approved exclusions. Approved 

exclusions will be effective five 

business days after publication of the 

U.S. Department of Commerce response 

granting an exclusion in the 232 

Exclusions Portal. Starting on that date, 

the requester will be able to rely upon 

the approved exclusion request in 

calculating the duties owed on the 

product imported in accordance with 

the terms listed in the approved 

exclusion request. Companies are able 

to receive retroactive relief on granted 

requests dating back to the date of the 

request’s submission on unliquidated 

entries. 

(B) Contact for obtaining duty 

refunds. The U.S. Department of 

Commerce does not provide refunds on 

tariffs. Any questions on the refund of 

duties should be directed to CBP. 

(iv) Validity period for exclusion 

requests. Exclusions will generally be 

approved for one year from the date of 

the signature on the decision memo, but 

may be valid for shorter or longer than 

one year depending on the specifics of 

the exclusion request; any objections 

filed; and analysis by the U.S. 

Department of Commerce and other 

parts of the U.S. Government, as 

warranted, of the current supply and 

demand in the United States, including 

any limitations or other factors that the 

Department determines should be 

considered in order to achieve the 

national security objectives of the duties 

and quantitative limitations. 

(A) Examples of what fact patterns 

may warrant a longer exclusion validity 

period. Individuals or organizations 

submitting exclusion requests or 

objections may, and are encouraged to 

specify how long they believe an 

exclusion may be warranted and specify 

the rationale for that recommended time 

period. For example, an individual or 

organization submitting an exclusion 

request may request a longer validity 

period if there are factors outside of 

their control that may make it warranted 

to grant a longer period. These factors 

may include regulatory requirements 

that make a longer validity period 

justified, e.g., for an aircraft 

manufacturer that would require a 

certain number of years to make a 

change to an FAA-approved type 

certificate or for a manufacturer of 

medical items to obtain FDA approval. 

Business considerations, such as the 

need for a multi-year contract for steel 

with strict delivery schedules in order 

to complete a significant U.S. project by 

an established deadline, e.g., a large 

scale oil and gas exploration project, is 

another illustrative example of the types 

of considerations that a person 

submitting an exclusion request may 

reference. 

(B) Examples of what criteria may 

warrant a shorter exclusion validity 

period. Objectors are encouraged to 

provide their suggestions for how long 

they believe an appropriate validity 

period should be for an exclusion 

request. In certain cases, this may be an 

objector indicating it has committed to 

adding new capacity that will be coming 

online within six months, so a shorter 

six-month period is warranted. 

Conversely, if an objector knows it will 

take two years to obtain appropriate 

regulatory approvals, financing and/or 

completing construction to add new 

capacity, the objector may, in 

responding to an exclusion that requests 

a longer validity period, e.g., three 

years, indicate that although they agree 

a longer validity period than one year 

may be warranted in this case, that two 

years is sufficient. 

(C) None of the illustrative fact 

patterns identified in paragraphs 

(h)(2)(iv)(A) or (B) of this supplement 

will be determinative in and of 

themselves for establishing the 

appropriate validity period, but this 

type of information is helpful for the 

U.S. Department of Commerce to 

receive, when warranted, to help 

determine the appropriate validity 

period if a period other than one year 

is requested. 

(3) Review period and implementation 

of any needed conforming changes—(i) 

Review period. The review period 

normally will not exceed 106 days for 

requests that receive objections, 

including adjudication of objections 

submitted on exclusion requests and 

any rebuttals to objections, and 

surrebuttals. The estimated 106-day 

period begins on the day the exclusion 

request is posted in the 232 Exclusions 

Portal, and ends once a decision to grant 

or deny is made on the exclusion 

request. 

(ii) Coordination with other agencies 

on approval and implementation. Other 

agencies of the U.S. Government, such 

as CBP, will take any additional steps 

needed to implement an approved 

exclusion request. These additional 

steps needed to implement an approved 

exclusion request are not part of the 

review criteria used by the U.S. 

Department of Commerce to determine 

whether to approve an exclusion 

request, but are an important 

component in ensuring the approved 

exclusion request can be properly 

implemented. The U.S. Department of 

Commerce will provide CBP with 

information that will identify each 

approved exclusion request pursuant to 

this supplement. Individuals or 

organizations whose exclusion requests 

are approved must report information 

concerning any applicable exclusion in 

such form as CBP may require. These 

exclusion identifiers will be used by 

importers in the data collected by CBP 

in order for CBP to determine whether 

an import is within the scope of an 

approved exclusion request. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81079 

(i) For further information. If you have 

questions on this supplement, you may 

contact the Director, Industrial Studies, 

Office of Technology Evaluation, Bureau 

of Industry and Security, U.S. 

Department of Commerce, at (202) 482– 

5642 or Steel232@bis.doc.gov regarding 

steel exclusion requests, or at (202) 482– 

4757 or Aluminum232@bis.doc.gov 

regarding aluminum exclusion requests. 

The U.S. Department of Commerce 

website includes FAQs, best practices 

other companies have used for 

submitting exclusion requests and 

objections, and helpful checklists. The 

U.S. Department of Commerce has also 

included a manual providing 

instruction on the 232 Exclusions Portal 

for exclusion requests submitted on or 

after June 13, 2019, titled 232 

Exclusions Portal Comprehensive Guide 

(‘‘232 Exclusions Guide’’) and posted 

online at (https://www.commerce.gov/ 

page/section-232-investigations) to 

assist your understanding when making 

232 submissions in the 232 Exclusions 

Portal. 

■ 3. Effective December 29, 2020 

Supplement No. 2 to part 705 is revised 

to read as follows: 

Supplement No. 2 to Part 705—General 

Approved Exclusions (GAEs) for Steel 

Articles Under the 232 Exclusions 

Process 

This supplement identifies steel 

articles that have been approved for 

import under a General Approved 

Exclusion (GAE). The Secretary of 

Commerce, in consultation with the 

Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of 

the Treasury, the Secretary of State, the 

United States Trade Representative, the 

Assistant to the President for Economic 

Policy, the Assistant to the President for 

National Security Affairs, and other 

senior Executive Branch officials as 

appropriate, makes these determinations 

that certain steel articles may be 

authorized under a GAE consistent with 

the objectives of the 232 Exclusions 

Process as outlined in supplement no. 1 

to this part. The GAEs described in this 

supplement may be used by any 

importer. GAEs do not include quantity 

limits. Each GAE identifier will be 

effective fifteen calendar days after 

publication of a Federal Register notice 

either adding or revising a specific GAE 

identifier. There is no retroactive relief 

for GAEs. Relief is only available to steel 

articles that are entered for 

consumption, or withdrawn from 

warehouse for consumption, on or after 

the effective date of a GAE included in 

supplement no. 2 to this part. In order 

to use a GAE, the importer must include 

the GAE identifier in the Automated 

Commercial Environment (ACE) system 

that corresponds to the steel articles 

being imported. These GAEs are 

indefinite in length, but the Department 

of Commerce on behalf of the Secretary 

of Commerce may at any time issue a 

Federal Register notice removing, 

revising or adding to an existing GAE in 

this supplement as warranted to align 

with the objectives of the 232 exclusions 

process as described in supplement no. 

1 to this part. The Department of 

Commerce on behalf of the Secretary of 

Commerce may periodically publish 

notices of inquiry in the Federal 

Register soliciting public comments on 

potential removals, revisions or 

additions to this supplement. 

GAE identifier 

Description of steel that may be imported (at 10-digit harmonized 

tariff schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical 

reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level) 

Other limitations 

(e.g., country of 

import or quantity 

allowed) 

Federal Register citation 

GAE.1.S: 7304592030 ...... 7304592030. TUBES/PIPES/HLLW PRFLS OTH ALLOY STL, 

SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT COLD-TRTD, SUITABLE FOR BOILERS ETC, HEAT-RESISTING STL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.2.S: 7304592080 ...... 7304592080. TUBES/PIPES/H PRFLS ALLOY STL, SMLSS, CIRC 

CS, NOT COLD-TRTD, SUIT FOR BOILERS ETC, NOT HTRSST STL, OS DIAM >406.4MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.3.S: 7220900060 ...... 7220900060. OTHER FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH 

<600MM, FURTH WRKD THAN COLD-RLD, </=0.5% OR >/ 

=24% NICKEL, <15% CHROMIUM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.4.S: 7222406000 ...... 7222406000. ANGLES SHAPES AND SECTIONS STAINLESS 

STEEL, OTHER THAN HOT ROLLED, NOT DRILLED, NOT 

PUNCHED, AND NOT OTHERWISE ADVANCED.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.5.S: 7306901000 ...... 7306901000. OTH TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES IRON/ 

NONALLOY STL, RIVETED/SIMILARLY CLOSED (NOT WELDED).

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.6.S: 7212600000 ...... 7212600000. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH 

<600MM, CLAD.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.7.S: 7227901060 ...... 7227901060. BARS/RODS TOOL STL (NOT HIGH-SPEED), HOTRLD, IRR COILS, NOT TEMPRD/TREATD/PARTLY MFTD, NOT 

BALL BEARING STEEL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.8.S: 7220207060 ...... 7220207060. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM, 

COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >0.25MM BUT </=1.25MM, </=0.5% 

NICKEL, <15% CHROMIUM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.9.S: 7223005000 ...... 7223005000. FLAT WIRE OF STAINLESS STEEL ........................... ............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.10.S: 7220208000 .... 7220208000. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM, 

COLD-RLD, THK </=0.25MM, RAZOR BLADE STL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.11.S: 7217108060 .... 7217108060. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/ 

COATED, >0.6% CARBON, NOT HEAT-TREATED, DIAM 

<1.0MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.12.S: 7226923060 .... 7226923060. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH <300MM, 

COLD-RLD, TOOL STEEL OTH THAN HIGH-SPEED, OTHER 

THAN BALL-BEARING STEEL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.13.S: 7229905016 .... 7229905016. ROUND WIRE OTHER ALLOY STL, DIAM <1.0MM ... ............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.14.S: 7215500018 .... 7215500018. OTHER BARS/RODS IRON/NONALLOY STL, COLDFORMED/FINISHED, NOT COILS, <0.25% CARBON, DIAMETER OR CROSS-SECTN >/=76MM BUT <228MM............................. 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.15.S: 7304598060 .... 7304598060. TUBES/PIPES/HLLW PRFLS OTH ALLOY STL, 

SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT CLD-TRTD, OS DIAMETER >285.8MM 

BUT <406.4MM, WALL THK<12.7MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81080 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

GAE identifier 

Description of steel that may be imported (at 10-digit harmonized 

tariff schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical 

reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level) 

Other limitations 

(e.g., country of 

import or quantity 

allowed) 

Federal Register citation 

GAE.16.S: 7228501040 .... 7228501040. OTHER BARS/RODS TOOL STL (NOT HIGHSPEED), COLD-FRMD/FNSHD, MAX CS <18MM, OTHER THAN 

OF ROUND OR RECTANGULAR CROSS SECTION WITH SURFACES GROUND, MILLED, OR POLISHED.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.17.S: 7304246030 .... 7304246030. TUBING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL, 

SEAMLESS, OUTSIDE DIAM </=114.3MM, WALL THK >9.5 MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.18.S: 7229905031 .... 7229905031. ROUND WIRE OTHER ALLOY STL, WITH DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT <1.5MM............................. 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.19.S: 7304598010 .... 7304598010. TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES OTH ALLOY 

STL, SEAMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT COLD-TREATED, NOT HEATRESISTANT, OUTSIDE DIAM <38.1MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.20.S: 7219310010 .... 7219310010. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=600MM, 

COLD-RLD, THK >/=4.75MM, COILS.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.21.S: 7304598045 .... 7304598045. TUBES/PIPES/HLLW PRFLS OTH ALLOY STL, 

SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT CLD-TRTD, NOT HEAT-RESISTANT, 

OS DIAMETER >190.5MM BUT <285.8MM, WALL THK<12.7MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.22.S: 7306401090 .... 7306401090. OTH TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PRFLS STAINLESS 

STL, WELDED, CIRC CS, WALL THK <1.65MM, </=0.5% NICKEL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.23.S: 7220206010 .... 7220206010. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM, 

COLD-RLD, THK >1.25MM, >0.5% NICKEL, >1.5% BUT <5% BY 

WEIGHT OF MOLYBDENUM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.24.S: 7211296080 .... 7211296080. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WIDTH 

>300MM BUT <600MM, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, COLDRLD, >/=0.25% CRBN, THK </=1.25MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.25.S: 7217201500 .... 7217201500. FLAT WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/COATED WITH ZINC............................. 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.26.S: 7219120026 .... 7219120026. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >1575MM, 

HOT-RLD, COILS, THK >6.8MM BUT <10MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.27.S: 7219320020 .... 7219320020. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=1370MM, 

COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >3MM BUT <4.75MM, COILS, >0.5% 

NICKEL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.28.S: 7304243010 .... 7304243010. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL, 

SEAMLESS, THREADED/COUPLED, OUTSIDE DIAM 

<215.9MM, WALL THK <12.7MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.29.S: 7219220035 .... 7219220035. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, THICKNESS >/ 

=4.75MM BUT <10MM, WIDTH >/=600MM BUT <1575MM, HOTRLD, NOT COILS, THK 4.75-10MM, >0.5% NICKEL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.30.S: 7222403085 .... 7222403085. SHAPES/SECTIONS STAINLESS STL, HOT-RLD, 

NOT DRILLED/PUNCHED/ADVANCED, MAX CROSS SECTION 

<80MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.31.S: 7222403045 .... 7222403045. SHAPES/SECTIONS STAINLESS STL, HOT-RLD, 

NOT DRILLED/PUNCHED/ADVANCED, MAX CS >/=80MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.32.S: 7219110060 .... 7219110060. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >1575MM, 

HOT-RLD, COILS, THK >10MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.33.S: 7304515005 .... 7304515005. TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES OTH ALLOY 

STL, SEAMLESS, CIRC CS, COLD-DRWN/RLD, HIGH-NICKEL 

ALLOY STL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.34.S: 7219330025 .... 7219330025. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=1370MM, 

COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >1MM BUT <3MM, COILS, </=0.5% 

NICKEL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.35.S: 7217901000 .... 7217901000. WIRE, IRON OR NONALLOY STEEL, COATED WITH 

PLASTICS.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.36.S: 7219110030 .... 7219110030. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=600MM 

BUT <1575MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, THK >10MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.37.S: 7217108030 .... 7217108030. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/ 

COATED, >0.6% CARBON, HEAT-TREATED, DIAMETER >/ 

=1.0MM BUT <1.5MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.38.S: 7212200000 .... 7212200000. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH 

<600MM, ELECTROLYTICALLY PLATED/COATED WITH ZINC.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.39.S: 7217204560 .... 7217204560. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/ 

COATED WITH ZINC, DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT <1.5MM, >/ 

=0.6% CARBON.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.40.S: 7220206060 .... 7220206060. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM, 

COLD-RLD, THK >1.25MM, </=0.5% NICKEL, <15% CHROMIUM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.41.S: 7217108025 .... 7217108025. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/ 

COATED, >0.6% CARBON, HEAT-TREATED, DIAM <1.0MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.42.S: 7220121000 .... 7220121000. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=300MM 

BUT <600MM, HOT-RLD, THK <4.75MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.43.S: 7209900000 .... 7209900000. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH >/ 

=600MM, COLD-RLD, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, WHETHER 

OR NOT IN COILS.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.44.S: 7213913020 .... 7213913020. BARS/RODS IRON/NA STL, IRR COILS, HOT-RLD, 

CIRC CS<14MM DIAM, NOT TEMPRD/TREATD/PARTLY MFTD, 

WELDING QUALITY WIRE ROD.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.45.S: 7306617060 .... 7306617060. OTH TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES OTH 

ALLOY STL (NOT STAINLESS), WELDED, SQ/RECT CS, WALL 

THK <4MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.46.S: 7216330090 .... 7216330090. H SECTIONS IRON/NONALLOY STL, HOT-RLD/ 

DRWN/EXTRD, HEIGHT >/=80MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81081 

GAE identifier 

Description of steel that may be imported (at 10-digit harmonized 

tariff schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical 

reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level) 

Other limitations 

(e.g., country of 

import or quantity 

allowed) 

Federal Register citation 

GAE.47.S: 7217905030 .... 7217905030. WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/COATED WITH BASE METALS OR PLASTICS, <0.25% CARBON............................. 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.48.S: 7226923030 .... 7226923030. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH <300MM, 

COLD-RLD, TOOL STEEL OTH THAN HIGH-SPEED, BALLBEARING STL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.49.S: 7219120051 .... 7219120051. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=1370MM 

BUT <1575MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, THICKNESS >/=4.75MM BUT 

<6.8MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.50.S: 7227906020 .... 7227906020. BARS/RODS OTHER ALLOY STL, IRR COILS, HOTRLD, NOT TOOL STL, WELDING QUALITY WIRE RODS............................. 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.51.S: 7217905090 .... 7217905090. WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/COATED WITH BASE METALS OR PLASTICS, >/=0.6% CARBON............................. 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.52.S: 7219220040 .... 7219220040. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, HOT-RLD, NOT 

COILS, THK >/=4.75 MM BUT <10MM, NOT HIGH-NICKEL 

ALLOY, >0.5% NICKEL, </=1.5% OR >/=5% MOLYBDENUM, 

WIDTH >1575MM BUT <1880MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.53.S: 7219320038 .... 7219320038. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT <4.75MM, COILS, WIDTH >600MM BUT 

<1370MM, NOT HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, >0.5% NICKEL, </=1.5% 

OR >/=5% MOLYBDENUM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.54.S: 7219320045 .... 7219320045. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=1370MM, 

COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT <4.75MM, NOT COILS.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.55.S: 7219350005 .... 7219350005. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=600MM, 

COLD-RLD, THK <0.5MM, COILS, >0.5% BUT <24% NICKEL, 

>1.5% BUT <5% MOLYBDENUM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.56.S: 7219320036 .... 7219320036. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, COLD-RLD, THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT <4.75MM, COILS, WIDTH >600MM BUT 

<1370MM, NOT HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, >0.5% NICKEL, >1.5% 

BUT <5% MOLYBDENUM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.57.S: 7304901000 .... 7304901000. TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES IRON/ 

NONALLOY STL, SEAMLESS, NONCIRCULAR CROSS SECTION, WALL THK >/=4MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.58.S: 7304390002 .... 7304390002. TUBES/PIPES/HLLW PRFLS IRON/NA STL, 

SMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT COLD-TRTD, SUITABLE FOR BOILERS ETC, OS DIAM <38.1MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.59.S: 7219120071 .... 7219120071. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >600MM 

BUT <1370MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, THICKNESS >/=4.75MM BUT 

<10MM, NOT HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, >0.5% NICKEL, </=1.5% 

OR >/=5% MOLYBDENUM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.60.S: 7225501110 .... 7225501110. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH >/=600MM, 

COLD-RLD, TOOL STEEL, HIGH-SPEED STL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.61.S: 7217905060 .... 7217905060. WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/COATED, 

>0.25% BUT <0.6% CARBON.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.62.S: 7220125000 .... 7220125000. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM, 

HOT-RLD, THK <4.75MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.63.S: 7226928005 .... 7226928005. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH <300MM, 

COLD-RLD, NOT TOOL STL, THK >0.25MM, HIGH-NICKEL 

ALLOY STL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.64.S: 7217106000 .... 7217106000. OTHER WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/ 

COATED, <0.25% CARBON.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.65.S: 7219120021 .... 7219120021. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=1370MM 

BUT </=1575MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, THICKNESS >6.8MM BUT 

</=10MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.66.S: 7304390016 .... 7304390016. TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES IRON/NA STL, 

SEAMLESS, CIRC CS, NOT COLD-TRTD, GALVANIZED, OS 

DIAM </=114.3MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.67.S: 7304244040 .... 7304244040. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL, 

SEAMLESS, NOT THREADED/COUPLED, OS DIAMETER >/ 

=215.9MM BUT </=285.8MM, WALL THK >/=12.7MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.68.S: 7302101015 .... 7302101015. OTHER RAILS IRON/NONALLOY STL, NEW, NOT 

HEAT TREATED, >30KG/M.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.69.S: 7304413005 .... 7304413005. TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PRFLS STAINLESS STL, 

SEAMLESS, CIRC CS, COLD-DRWN/RLD, EXT DIAM <19MM, 

HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY STL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.70.S: 7215500090 .... 7215500090. OTHER BARS/RODS IRON/NONALLOY STL, COLDFORMED/FINISHED, NOT COILS, >/=0.6% CARBON............................. 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.71.S: 7217304541 .... 7217304541. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/ 

COATED W/OTH BASE METALS, DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT 

<1.5MM, <0.25% CARBON.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.72.S: 7227200030 .... 7227200030. BARS/RODS SILICO-MANGANESE STL, IRR COILS, 

HOT-RLD, WELDING QUALITY WIRE RODS, STAT NOTE 6.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.73.S: 7306697060 .... 7306697060. OTH TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES OTH 

ALLOY STL (NOT STAINLESS), WELDED, OTH NONCIRCULAR 

CS, WALL THK <4MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.74.S: 7302101045 .... 7302101045. OTHER RAILS IRON/NONALLOY STL, NEW, HEAT 

TREATED, >30KG/M.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.75.S: 7219210005 .... 7219210005. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=600MM, 

HOT-RLD, NOT COILS, THK >10MM, HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY STL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.76.S: 7304293160 .... 7304293160. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) OTH ALLOY STL, 

SEAMLESS, THREADED/COUPLED, OS DIAMETER >285.8MM 

BUT </=406.4MM, WALL THK >/=12.7MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81082 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

GAE identifier 

Description of steel that may be imported (at 10-digit harmonized 

tariff schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical 

reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level) 

Other limitations 

(e.g., country of 

import or quantity 

allowed) 

Federal Register citation 

GAE.77.S: 7305316090 .... 7305316090. OTHER TUBES/PIPES ALLOY STL, CIRC CS, EXT 

DIAM >406.4MM, NOT LINE PIPE OR CASING (OIL/GAS), LONGITUDINALLY WELDED, NOT TAPERED PIPES/TUBES, NONSTAINLESS ALLOY STEEL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.78.S: 7216400010 .... 7216400010. L SECTIONS IRON/NONALLOY STL, HOT-ROLLED/ 

DRAWN/EXTRUDED, HEIGHT >/=80MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.79.S: 7226990110 .... 7226990110. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH <600MM, 

ELECTROLYTICALLY PLATD/COATD W/ZINC, NOT GRAIN 

ORIENTED, NOT OF HIGH-SPEED STEEL, FURTHER 

WORKED THAN HOT-ROLLED OR COLD-ROLLED.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.80.S: 7225506000 .... 7225506000. FLAT-ROLLED OTH ALLOY STL, WDTH >/=600MM, 

COLD-RLD, THK >/=4.75MM, NOT OF TOOL STEEL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.81.S: 7304905000 .... 7304905000. TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES IRON/ 

NONALLOY STL, SEAMLESS, NOT CIRCULAR CS, WALL THK 

<4MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.82.S: 7219220005 .... 7219220005. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/=600MM, 

HOT-RLD, NOT COILS, THICKNESS >/=4.75MM BUT </=10MM, 

HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY STL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.83.S: 7217104045 .... 7217104045. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/ 

COATED, <0.25% CARBON, DIAM <1.5MM, HEAT-TREATED, 

IN COILS WEIGHING >2 KG.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.84.S: 7209270000 .... 7209270000. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH >/ 

=600MM, COLD-RLD, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, NOT 

COILS, THK 0.5–1MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.85.S: 7219900060 .... 7219900060. OTHER FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH >/ 

=600MM, FURTHER WORKED THAN COLD-RLD, </=0.5% 

NICKEL, <15% CHROMIUM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.86.S: 7219120081 .... 7219120081. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=600MM 

BUT <1370MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, NOT HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, 

THICKNESS >/=4.75MM BUT </=10MM, </=0.5% NICKEL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.87.S: 7304293180 .... 7304293180. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) OTH ALLOY STL, 

SEAMLESS, THREADED/COUPLED, OUTSIDE DIAM >406.4MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.88.S: 7224100005 .... 7224100005. INGOTS AND OTHER PRIMARY FORMS OF HIGHNICKEL ALLOY STEEL............................. 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.89.S: 7213200080 .... 7213200080. BARS/RODS IRON/NONALLOY STL, HOT-RLD, IRR 

COILS, FREE-CUTTING STL, <0.1% LEAD.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.90.S: 7216100010 .... 7216100010. U SECTIONS IRON/NONALLOY STL, HOT-ROLLED/ 

DRAWN/EXTRUDED, HEIGHT <80MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.91.S: 7306695000 .... 7306695000. OTH TUBES/PIPES/HOLLOW PROFILES IRON/ 

NONALLOY STL, WELDED, OTH NONCIRCULAR CS, WALL 

THK <4MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.92.S: 7208390015 .... 7208390015. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NA STL, WDTH >/=600MM, 

HOT-RLD, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, COILS, THK <3MM, 

HIGH-STRENGTH STL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.93.S: 7208380015 .... 7208380015. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NA STL, WDTH >/=600MM, 

HOT-RLD, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, COILS, THICKNESS 

>/=3MM BUT <4.75MM, HIGH-STRENGTH STL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.94.S: 7217104090 .... 7217104090. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, NOT PLATED/ 

COATED, <0.25% CARBON, DIAM <1.5MM, NOT HEAT-TREATED.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.95.S: 7302105020 .... 7302105020. RAILS OF ALLOY STEEL, NEW .................................. ............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.96.S: 7210706030 .... 7210706030. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NA STL, WDTH >/=600MM, 

PAINTD/VARNSHD/COATD W/PLASTICS, ELECTROLYTICALLY 

PLATD/COATD W/ZINC.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.97.S: 7304244060 .... 7304244060. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL, 

SEAMLESS, NOT THREADED/COUPLED, OS DIAMETER 

>285.8MM BUT </=406.4MM, WALL THK>/=12.7MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.98.S: 7229200015 .... 7229200015. ROUND WIRE SI-MN STL, DIAM </=1.6MM, 

<0.20%C, >0.9% MN, >0.6% SI, FOR ELEC ARC WELDING, 

NOT PLATD/COATD W/COPPER.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.99.S: 7304243040 .... 7304243040. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL, 

SEAMLESS, THREADED/COUPLED, OUTSIDE DIAMETER >/ 

=215.9MM BUT </=285.8MM, WALL THK>/=12.7MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.100.S: 7304243020 .. 7304243020. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL, 

SEAMLESS, THREADED/COUPLED, OUTSIDE DIAM 

<215.9MM, WALL THK >/=12.7MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.101.S: 7219130081 .. 7219130081. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WIDTH >/=600MM 

BUT <1370MM, HOT-RLD, COILS, THICKNESS >/=3MM BUT 

<4.75MM, </=0.5% OR >/=24% NICKEL.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.102.S: 7211140090 .. 7211140090. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH 

<600MM, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, HOT-RLD, THK >/ 

=4.75MM, COILS.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.103.S: 7218910030 .. 7218910030. SEMIFINISHED STAINLESS STL, RECTANGULAR 

CROSS SECTION, WDTH <4X THK, CS AREA >/=232 CM2.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.104.S: 7306213000 .. 7306213000. CASING (OIL/GAS DRILLING) STAINLESS STL, 

WELDED, THREADED/COUPLED.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.105.S: 7211234500 .. 7211234500. FLAT-ROLLED IRON/NONALLOY STL, WDTH 

<300MM, NOT CLAD/PLATED/COATED, COLD-RLD, <0.25% 

CRBN, THK </=0.25MM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 81083 

GAE identifier 

Description of steel that may be imported (at 10-digit harmonized 

tariff schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical 

reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level) 

Other limitations 

(e.g., country of 

import or quantity 

allowed) 

Federal Register citation 

GAE.106.S: 7220206080 .. 7220206080. FLAT-ROLLED STAINLESS STL, WDTH <300MM, 

COLD-RLD, THK >1.25MM, NOT HIGH-NICKEL ALLOY, </=0.5% 

NICKEL, >/=15% CHROMIUM.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.107.S: 7305391000 .. 7305391000. OTHER TUBES/PIPES IRON/NONALLOY STL, CIRC 

CS, EXT DIAM >406.4MM, WELDED, OTHER THAN 

LONGITUDALLY WELDED.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.108.S: 7217204550 .. 7217204550. ROUND WIRE IRON/NONALLOY STL, PLATED/ 

COATED WITH ZINC, DIAMETER >/=1.0MM BUT <1.5MM, >/ 

=0.25% BUT <0.6% CARBON.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

Annex 1 to Supplements No. 1 and 2 

to part 705 [Removed] 

■ 4. Annex 1 to Supplements No. 1 and 

2 to part 705 is removed. 

■ 5. Effective December 29, 2020. add 

Supplement No. 3 to part 705 to read as 

follows: 

Supplement No. 3 to Part 705—General 

Approved Exclusions (GAEs) for 

Aluminum Articles Under the 232 

Exclusions Process 

This supplement identifies aluminum 

articles that have been approved for 

import under a General Approved 

Exclusion (GAE). The Secretary of 

Commerce, in consultation with the 

Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of 

the Treasury, the Secretary of State, the 

United States Trade Representative, the 

Assistant to the President for Economic 

Policy, the Assistant to the President for 

National Security Affairs, and other 

senior Executive Branch officials as 

appropriate, makes these determinations 

that certain aluminum articles may be 

authorized under a GAE consistent with 

the objectives of the 232 exclusions 

process as outlined in supplement no. 1 

to this part. The GAEs described in this 

supplement may be used by any 

importer. GAEs do not include quantity 

limits. Each GAE identifier will be 

effective fifteen calendar days after 

publication of a Federal Register notice 

either adding or revising a specific GAE 

identifier. There is no retroactive relief 

for GAEs. Relief is only available to 

aluminum articles that are entered for 

consumption, or withdrawn from 

warehouse for consumption, on or after 

the effective date of a GAE included in 

supplement no. 2 to this part. In order 

to use a GAE, the importer must 

reference the GAE identifier in the 

Automated Commercial Environment 

(ACE) system that corresponds to the 

aluminum articles being imported. 

These GAEs are indefinite in length, but 

the Department of Commerce on behalf 

of the Secretary of Commerce may at 

any time issue a Federal Register notice 

removing, revising or adding to an 

existing GAE in this supplement as 

warranted to align with the objectives of 

the 232 exclusions process as described 

in supplement no. 1 to this part. The 

Department of Commerce on behalf of 

the Secretary of Commerce may 

periodically publish notices of inquiry 

in the Federal Register soliciting public 

comments on potential removals, 

revisions or additions to this 

supplement. 

GAE identifier 

Description of aluminum that may be imported (at 10-digit 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical 

reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level) 

Other limitations 

(e.g., country of 

import or quantity 

allowed) 

Federal Register citation 

GAE.1.A: 7609000000 ...... 7609000000. ALUMINUM TUBE OR PIPE FITTINGS (COUPLINGS, 

ELBOWS, SLEEVES).

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.2.A: 7607205000 ...... 7607205000. ALUMINUM FOIL OF THICKNESS .............................. ............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.3.A: 7607196000 ...... 7607196000. ALUMINUM FOIL OF THICKNESS .............................. ............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.4.A: 7604210010 ...... 7604210010. ALUMINUM ALLOY HOLLOW PROFILES OF HEATTREATABLE INDUSTRIAL ALLOYS OF A KIND DESCRIBED IN 

NOTE 6 TO THIS CHAPTER.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.5.A: 7604291010 ...... 7604291010. ALUMINUM ALLOY PROFILES OTHER THAN HOLLOW PROFILES OF HEAT-TREATABLE INDUSTRIAL ALLOYS 

OF A KIND DESCRIBED IN NOTE 6 TO THIS CHAPTER.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.6.A: 7607191000 ...... 7607191000. ALUMINUM FOIL OF THICKNESS .............................. ............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.7.A: 7606116000 ...... 7606116000. ALUMINUM PLATES, SHEETS AND STRIP, THICKNESS >0.2MM, RECTANGULAR (INCLUDING SQUARE), NOT 

ALLOYED, CLAD.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.8.A: 7605290000 ...... 7605290000. ALUMINUM WIRE ALLOY, MAXIMUM CROSS-SECTIONAL DIMENSION </=7MM............................. 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.9.A: 7601209080 ...... 7601209080. UNWROUGHT ALUMINUM ALLOY, SHEET INGOT 

(SLAB) OF A KIND DESCRIBED IN STATISTICAL NOTE 3 TO 

THIS CHAPTER.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.10.A: 7607116010 .... 7607116010. ALUMINUM FOIL OF THICKNESS >0.01 MM AND </ 

=0.15 MM, ROLLED, NOT BACKED, BOXED & WEIGHING </ 

=11.3 KG.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.11.A: 7616995170 .... 7616995170. ALUMINUM FORGINGS ............................................... ............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.12.A: 7607201000 .... 7607201000. ALUMINUM FOIL OF THICKNESS </=0.2 MM, 

BACKED, COVERED OR DECORATED WITH A CHARACTER, 

DESIGN, FANCY EFFECT OR PATTERN.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.13.A: 7604295090 .... 7604295090. ALUMINUM ALLOY BARS AND RODS, OTHER 

THAN ROUND CROSS SECTION, OTHER THAN HEAT-TREATABLE INDUSTRIAL ALLOYS OF A KIND DESCRIBED IN 

NOTES 5 & 6 OF THIS CHAPTER.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2
81084 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 240 / Monday, December 14, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 

GAE identifier 

Description of aluminum that may be imported (at 10-digit 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) statistical 

reporting number or more narrowly defined at product level) 

Other limitations 

(e.g., country of 

import or quantity 

allowed) 

Federal Register citation 

GAE.14.A: 7601209095 .... 7601209095. UNWROUGHT ALUMINUM ALLOY, OTHER THAN 

COILS OF UNIFORM CROSS-SECTION </=9.5 MM, CONTAINING <25% SILICON, OTHER THAN ALLUMINUM VANADIUM MASTER ALLOY, OTHER THAN REMELT SCRAP INGOT, 

OTHER THAN SHEET INGOT, OTHER THAN FOUNDRY INGOT.

............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

GAE.15.A:7616995160 ...... 7616995160. ALUMINUM CASTINGS ................................................ ............................ 85 FR [INSERT FR PAGE NUMBER AND 

12/14/2020]. 

Matthew S. Borman, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2020–27110 Filed 12–10–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES2