61606 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 198 / Tuesday, October 14, 2014 / Notices 

1See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 79 

FR 6163 (February 3, 2014). 

2See Refined Brown Aluminum Oxide From 

China; Institution of a Five-Year Review; 79 FR 

6225 (February 3, 2014). 

3See Refined Brown Aluminum Oxide from the 

People’s Republic of China: Final Results of 

Expedited Second Sunset Review of the 

Antidumping Duty Order, 79 FR 26207 (May 7, 

2014). 

Return or Destruction of Proprietary 

Information 

This notice serves as the only 

reminder to parties subject to an 

administrative protective order (APO) of 

their responsibility concerning the 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

written notification of the return/

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and terms of an 

APO is a violation that is subject to 

sanction. 

This determination is issued and 

published pursuant to sections 705(d) 

and 777(i) of the Act. 

Dated: October 6, 2014. 

Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

Appendix I 

Scope of the Investigation 

The merchandise subject to this 

investigation consists of non-oriented 

electrical steel (NOES), which includes coldrolled, flat-rolled, alloy steel products, 

whether or not in coils, regardless of width, 

having an actual thickness of 0.20 mm or 

more, in which the core loss is substantially 

equal in any direction of magnetization in the 

plane of the material. The term ‘‘substantially 

equal’’ means that the cross grain direction 

of core loss is no more than 1.5 times the 

straight grain direction (i.e., the rolling 

direction) of core loss. NOES has a magnetic 

permeability that does not exceed 1.65 Tesla 

when tested at a field of 800 A/m (equivalent 

to 10 Oersteds) along (i.e., parallel to) the 

rolling direction of the sheet (i.e., B800 value). 

NOES contains by weight more than 1.00 

percent of silicon but less than 3.5 percent 

of silicon, not more than 0.08 percent of 

carbon, and not more than 1.5 percent of 

aluminum. NOES has a surface oxide coating, 

to which an insulation coating may be 

applied. 

NOES is subject to this investigation 

whether it is fully processed (i.e., fully 

annealed to develop final magnetic 

properties) or semi-processed (i.e., finished 

to final thickness and physical form but not 

fully annealed to develop final magnetic 

properties). Fully processed NOES is 

typically made to the requirements of ASTM 

specification A 677, Japanese Industrial 

Standards (JIS) specification C 2552, and/or 

International Electrotechnical Commission 

(IEC) specification 60404–8–4. Semiprocessed NOES is typically made to the 

requirements of ASTM specification A 683. 

However, the scope of this investigation is 

not limited to merchandise meeting the 

ASTM, JIS, and IEC specifications noted 

immediately above. 

NOES is sometimes referred to as coldrolled non-oriented (CRNO), non-grain 

oriented (NGO), non-oriented (NO), or coldrolled non-grain oriented (CRNGO) electrical 

steel. These terms are interchangeable. 

Excluded from the scope of this 

investigation are flat-rolled products not in 

coils that, prior to importation into the 

United States, have been cut to a shape and 

undergone all punching, coating, or other 

operations necessary for classification in 

Chapter 85 of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) as a 

part (i.e., lamination) for use in a device such 

as a motor, generator, or transformer. 

The subject merchandise is provided for in 

subheadings 7225.19.0000, 7226.19.1000, 

and 7226.19.9000 of the HTSUS. Subject 

merchandise may also be entered under 

subheadings 7225.50.8085, 7225.99.0090, 

7226.92.5000, 7226.92.7050, 7226.92.8050, 

7226.99.0180 of the HTSUS. Although 

HTSUS subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the scope is 

dispositive. 

Appendix II 

List of Comments and Issues in the Issues 

and Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Scope of the Investigation 

IV. Subsidies Valuation Analysis of Programs 

V. Analysis of Programs 

VI. Analysis of Comments 

Comment 1 Minor Corrections at the 

Verification of the Government of Korea 

Comment 2 Regional Specificity and the 

Restriction of Special Taxation Act 

(RSTA) Article 26 

Comment 3 The Use of Corporate Tax 

Returns in De Facto Specificity Analysis 

for RSTA Tax Deduction Programs 

Comment 4 Analyzing the Number of 

Recipients of Certain RSTA Tax 

Programs Based on Average Life Span of 

Purchased Assets 

Comment 5 Analyzing RSTA Articles 

10(1)(1), 10(1)(2), and 10(1)(3) as One 

Program 

Comment 6 The Number of RSTA Tax 

Incentives Recipients and ‘‘Limited’’ 

Comment 7 The Korea Export-Import 

Bank as an ‘‘Authority’’ 

Comment 8 Support for Acquisitions of 

Foreign Mines Program and De Jure 

Specificity 

Comment 9 Loans from the Korean 

Resources Corporation and the Korea 

National Oil Corporation and De Jure 

Specificity 

Comment 10 The Financial Contribution 

of DWI’s Debt Workout 

Comment 11 DWI’s Debt to the Korea 

Export Insurance Corporation 

VII. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2014–24379 Filed 10–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–882] 

Refined Brown Aluminum Oxide From 

the People’s Republic of China: 

Continuation of Antidumping Duty 

Order 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: As a result of the 

determinations by the Department of 

Commerce (Department) and the 

International Trade Commission (ITC) 

that revocation of the antidumping duty 

(AD) order on refined brown aluminum 

oxide (RBAO) from the People’s 

Republic of China (PRC) would likely 

lead to a continuation or recurrence of 

dumping and material injury to an 

industry in the United States, the 

Department is publishing this notice of 

continuation of the AD order. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 14, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Terre Keaton Stefanova, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office II, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–1280. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On February 3, 2014, the Department 

initiated 1 and the ITC instituted 2 fiveyear (‘‘sunset’’) reviews of the AD order 

on RBAO from the PRC pursuant to 

section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 

as amended (the Act). As a result of its 

review, the Department determined that 

revocation of the AD order on RBAO 

from the PRC would likely lead to a 

continuation or recurrence of dumping 

and, therefore, notified the ITC of the 

magnitude of the margins likely to 

prevail should the order be revoked.3

On October 6, 2014, the ITC published 

its determination, pursuant to section 

751(c) of the Act, that revocation of the 

AD order on RBAO from the PRC would 

likely lead to a continuation or 

recurrence of material injury to an 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 198 / Tuesday, October 14, 2014 / Notices 61607 

4See Investigation No. 731–TA–1022 (Second 

Review): Refined Brown Aluminum Oxide From 

China, 79 FR 60183 (October 6, 2014). 

1See sections 776(a) and (b) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (the Act). 

2See Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From the 

People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Affirmative 

Countervailing Duty Determination, Preliminary 

Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determination, 

and Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty 

Determination With Final Antidumping Duty 

Determination, 79 FR 16293 (March 25, 2014) 

(Preliminary Determination). 

3See Memorandum to Paul Piquado, Assistant 

Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Issues 

and Decision Memorandum for the Final 

Determination in the Countervailing Duty 

Investigation of Non-Oriented Electrical Steel from 

the People’s Republic of China’’ dated concurrently 

with and hereby adopted by this notice (Issues and 

Decision Memorandum). 

4See, e.g., Change in Policy Regarding Timing of 

Issuance of Critical Circumstances Determinations, 

63 FR 55364 (October 15, 1998). 

industry in the United States within a 

reasonably foreseeable time.4

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise covered by this 

order is ground, pulverized or refined 

brown artificial corundum, also known 

as brown aluminum oxide or brown 

fused alumina, in grit size of 3⁄8 inch or 

less. Excluded from the scope of the 

order is crude artificial corundum in 

which particles with a diameter greater 

than 3⁄8 inch constitute at least 50 

percent of the total weight of the entire 

batch. The scope includes brown 

artificial corundum in which particles 

with a diameter greater than 3⁄8 inch 

constitute less than 50 percent of the 

total weight of the batch. The 

merchandise covered by this order is 

currently classifiable under subheadings 

2818.10.20.00 and 2818.10.20.90 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS). Although the 

HTSUS subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the merchandise 

covered by the order is dispositive. 

Continuation of the Order 

As a result of the determinations by 

the Department and the ITC that 

revocation of the AD order would likely 

lead to a continuation or recurrence of 

dumping and material injury to an 

industry in the United States, pursuant 

to section 751(d)(2) of the Act, the 

Department hereby orders the 

continuation of the AD order on RBAO 

from the PRC. U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will continue to collect AD 

cash deposits at the rates in effect at the 

time of entry for all imports of subject 

merchandise. The effective date of the 

continuation of the order will be the 

date of publication in the Federal 

Register of this notice of continuation. 

Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, 

the Department intends to initiate the 

next five-year review of the order not 

later than 30 days prior to the fifth 

anniversary of the effective date of 

continuation. 

This five-year (‘‘sunset’’) review and 

this notice are in accordance with 

section 751(c) of the Act and published 

pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: October 8, 2014. 

Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2014–24479 Filed 10–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–997] 

Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From the 

People’s Republic of China: Final 

Affirmative Countervailing Duty 

Determination and Final Affirmative 

Critical Circumstances Determination 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) determines that 

countervailable subsidies are being 

provided to producers/exporters of nonoriented electrical steel (NOES) from the 

People’s Republic of China (PRC). The 

Department also determines critical 

circumstances exist for imports of the 

subject merchandise from the PRC. The 

period of investigation is January 1, 

2012, through December 31, 2012. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 14, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joshua Morris or Thomas Schauer, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–1779 and (202) 

482–0410, respectively. 

Background 

The petitioner in this investigation is 

AK Steel Corporation (Petitioner). This 

investigation covers 30 government 

programs. The respondents in this 

investigation are the Government of the 

PRC (the GOC) and Baoshan Iron & Steel 

Co., Ltd. (Baoshan). For this final 

determination, we continue to rely on 

facts available, with adverse inferences, 

for the GOC and for Baoshan, the only 

mandatory company-respondent, 

because they did not act to the best of 

their abilities and did not respond to 

our requests for information. Further, 

we continue to draw an adverse 

inference in selecting from among the 

facts otherwise available to calculate the 

ad valorem rate for Baoshan.1

Period of Investigation 

The period for which we are 

measuring subsidies, or period of 

investigation, is January 1, 2012, 

through December 31, 2012. 

Case History 

The events that have occurred since 

the Department published the 

Preliminary Determination on March 25, 

2014,2 are discussed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum.3 The Issues 

Decision Memorandum is a public 

document and is on file electronically 

via Enforcement and Compliance’s 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Centralized Electronic Service System 

(IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to 

registered users at http://

iaaccess.trade.gov, and is available to all 

parties in the Central Records Unit, 

room 7046 of the main Department of 

Commerce building. In addition, a 

complete version of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum can be accessed 

directly on the Internet at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. 

The signed and electronic versions of 

the Issues and Decision Memorandum 

are identical in content. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The merchandise subject to this 

investigation consists of NOES, which 

includes cold-rolled, flat-rolled, alloy 

steel products, whether or not in coils, 

regardless of width, having an actual 

thickness of 0.20 mm or more, in which 

the core loss is substantially equal in 

any direction of magnetization in the 

plane of the material. For a complete 

description of the scope of the 

investigation, see Appendix I to this 

notice. 

Critical Circumstances 

On February 25, 2014, Petitioner 

alleged that critical circumstances exist 

with respect to imports of NOES from 

the PRC. In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.206(c)(2)(i), we issued an 

affirmative preliminary critical 

circumstances determination not later 

than the date of the preliminary 

determination.4

We received no comments on our 

preliminary critical circumstances 

determination. Thus, in accordance 

with section 705(a)(2) of the Act, we 

determine critical circumstances exist 

with respect to Baoshan and all other 

producers/exporters. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES