Anthracite FR published notice for comments

The Appalachian Region Independent Power Producers Association (ARIPPA) supports the Section 232 investigation, arguing that anthracite coal is a strategic industrial raw material essential for national security, steel production, and infrastructure. They emphasize that domestic production must be preserved to reduce dependence on foreign suppliers and to support the coal refuse reclamation-to-energy industry.

Mid-Continent Coal and Coke Co. opposes Section 232 restrictions or tariffs on imported anthracite coal, arguing that such actions would increase costs and risks for the domestic steel industry. The company emphasizes that a diversified supply chain, including imports, is necessary to ensure reliable production and maintain the competitiveness of American steel.

Keystone Anthracite Company, Inc. supports the proposed Section 232 investigation and requests that the Department of Commerce recommend a 100 percent tariff on all imported anthracite. The company argues that foreign imports threaten the domestic anthracite industry and the national security of the U.S. steel supply chain by creating market distortions and risks of supply weaponization.

The Essential Minerals Association (EMA) urges the Department of Commerce to quickly conclude its Section 232 investigation and impose a 100 percent tariff on imported anthracite. They argue that domestic anthracite is vital for U.S. steel production and national security, and that unfair trade practices from countries like Peru and Russia threaten the viability of the American mining sector.

Lehigh Anthracite supports the Pennsylvania Anthracite Council's recommendations regarding the Section 232 investigation of anthracite coal imports. The company argues that imported anthracite creates unfair competition due to lower regulatory and environmental costs, threatening the viability of domestic production and national security.

The Main Street Foundation's Center for Regulatory Analysis and Engagement (CRAE) submits a detailed memorandum urging the Department of Commerce to conduct a precise, evidence-based investigation into the national-security effects of anthracite and metallurgical bituminous coal imports. They argue that Commerce must distinguish between different types of coal, account for the interconnectedness of domestic production, imports, and exports, and evaluate the potential negative downstream effects on steelmakers and manufacturers before implementing any restrictions.

Sesuveca del Perú S.A.C., a Peruvian anthracite coal exporter, argues that Peruvian imports complement rather than displace U.S. domestic production. They contend that Peru is a reliable, market-based supplier that enhances U.S. supply chain resilience and diversification without posing a national security risk.

Kevin Wigoda, Controller of Gilberton Coal Company, supports the Department of Commerce's Section 232 investigation into anthracite coal imports. The company argues that low-priced imports undermine the domestic industry, threaten national security by depleting domestic resources, and shift the costs of land reclamation and environmental management onto the public.

Peter Pritchard, CEO of Javelin Global Commodities, argues that the U.S. should maintain its current approach of not imposing tariffs on imported anthracite. He contends that domestic supply is structurally limited and that importing high-quality anthracite from Peru is essential for diversifying supply chains, reducing reliance on Russia, and supporting the domestic steel industry.

Matthew Dewees, President of Carbon Sales, Inc., requests that anthracite coal be designated as a critical mineral. He argues that the company's product is essential for the nation's drinking water and sewage treatment, and that relying on foreign sources for this material would be catastrophic.