Certain Fabricated Structural Steel From Canada, Mexico, and the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 7330-7337 [2019-03818]

Download as PDF 7330 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2019 / Notices shelving units prepackaged for sale from the People’s Republic of China. See Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale From the People’s Republic of China: Antidumping Duty Order, 80 FR 63,741 (October 21, 2017); Boltless Steel Shelving Units Prepackaged for Sale From the People’s Republic of China: Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Countervailing Duty Order, 80 FR 63,745 (October 21, 2017). Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are bulk-packed parts or components of boltless steel shelving units that were specifically excluded from the scope of the Boltless Steel Shelving Orders because such bulk-packed parts or components do not contain the steel vertical supports (i.e., uprights and posts) and steel horizontal supports (i.e., beams, braces) packaged together for assembly into a completed boltless steel shelving unit. Such excluded components of boltless steel shelving are defined as: (1) Boltless horizontal supports (beams, braces) that have each of the following characteristics: (a) A length of 95 inches or less, (b) made from steel that has a thickness of 0.068 inches or less, and (c) a weight capacity that does not exceed 2500 lbs per pair of beams for beams that are 78’’ or shorter, a weight capacity that does not exceed 2200 lbs per pair of beams for beams that are over 78’’ long but not longer than 90’’, and/or a weight capacity that does not exceed 1800 lbs per pair of beams for beams that are longer than 90’’; (2) shelf supports that mate with the aforementioned horizontal supports; and (3) boltless vertical supports (upright welded frames and posts) that have each of the following characteristics: (a) A length of 95 inches or less, (b) with no face that exceeds 2.90 inches wide, and (c) made from steel that has a thickness of 0.065 inches or less. Excluded from the scope of this investigation are: (1) Wall-mounted shelving and racks, defined as shelving and racks that suspend all of the load from the wall, and do not stand on, or transfer load to, the floor; (2) ceiling-mounted shelving and racks, defined as shelving and racks that suspend all of the load from the ceiling and do not stand on, or transfer load to, the floor; and (3) wall/ ceiling mounted shelving and racks, defined as shelving and racks that suspend the load from the ceiling and the wall and do not stand on, or transfer load to, the floor. The addition of a wall or ceiling bracket or other device to attach otherwise subject merchandise to a wall or ceiling does not meet the terms of this exclusion. Also excluded from the scope of this investigation is scaffolding that complies with ANSI/ASSE A10.8—2011—Scaffolding Safety Requirements, CAN/CSA S269.2–M87 (Reaffirmed 2003)—Access Scaffolding for Construction Purposes, and/or Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations at 29 CFR part 1926 subpart L—Scaffolds. Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are tubular racks such as garment racks and drying racks, i.e., racks in which the load bearing vertical and horizontal steel members consist solely of: (1) Round tubes that are no more than two VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:33 Mar 01, 2019 Jkt 247001 inches in diameter; (2) round rods that are no more than two inches in diameter; (3) other tubular shapes that have both an overall height of no more than two inches and an overall width of no more than two inches; and/or (4) wire. Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are portable tier racks. Portable tier racks must meet each of the following criteria to qualify for this exclusion: (1) They are freestanding, portable assemblies with a fully welded base and four freely inserted and easily removable corner posts; (2) They are assembled without the use of bolts, braces, anchors, brackets, clips, attachments, or connectors; (3) One assembly may be stacked on top of another without applying any additional load to the product being stored on each assembly, but individual portable tier racks are not securely attached to one another to provide interaction or interdependence; and (4) The assemblies have no mechanism (e.g., a welded foot plate with bolt holes) for anchoring the assembly to the ground. Also excluded from the scope of this investigation are accessories that are independently bolted to the floor and not attached to the rack system itself, i.e., column protectors, corner guards, bollards, and end row and end of aisle protectors. Merchandise covered by this investigation is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under the following subheadings: 7326.90.8688, 9403.20.0080, and 9403.90.8041. Subject merchandise may also enter under subheadings 7308.90.3000, 7308.90.6000, 7308.90.9590, and 9403.20.0090. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and U.S. Customs purposes only. The written description of the scope is dispositive. Appendix II—List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Period of Investigation IV. Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures V. Scope Comments VI. Scope of the Investigation VII. Selection of Respondents VIII. Discussion of the Methodology A. Non-Market Economy Country B. Surrogate Country and Surrogate Value Comments C. Separate Rates D. Dumping Margin for the Separate Rate Companies Not Individually Examined E. Combination Rates F. The China-Wide Entity G. Application of Facts Available and Adverse Inferences H. Date of Sale I. Fair Value Comparisons J. Export Price K. Normal Value L. Factor Valuation Methodology IX. Currency Conversion X. Adjustment Under Section 777A(f) of the Act XI. Adjustment for Countervailable Export PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Subsidies XII. Verification XIII. Conclusion [FR Doc. 2019–03820 Filed 3–1–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–122–864, A–201–850, A–570–102] Certain Fabricated Structural Steel From Canada, Mexico, and the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Applicable February 25, 2019. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Goldberger at (202) 482–4136 (Canada); Alice Maldonado at (202) 482–4682 (the People’s Republic of China (China)); and Jeffrey Pedersen at (202) 482–2769 (Mexico); AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: The Petitions On February 4, 2019, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) received antidumping duty (AD) Petitions concerning imports of certain fabricated structural steel (fabricated structural steel) from Canada, China, and Mexico, which were subsequently amended on February 21, 2019.1 The Petitions, as amended, were filed in proper form by a subgroup of the American Institute of Steel Construction, LLC, a trade association representing domestic producers of fabricated structural steel. Specifically, the petitioner is the American Institute of Steel Construction Full Member Subgroup (the petitioner). The AD Petitions were accompanied by countervailing duty (CVD) Petitions concerning imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico. On February 7, 2019, Commerce requested supplemental information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions in separate supplemental 1 See the petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated February 4, 2019, as amended on February 21, 2019 (the Petitions). E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2019 / Notices questionnaires.2 Responses to the supplemental questionnaires were filed on February 11 and 12, 2019.3 In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV) within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic industry producing fabricated structural steel in the United States. Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner supporting its allegations. Section 771(9)(E) of the Act states that ‘‘a trade or business association’’ is an interested party if ‘‘a majority’’ of its ‘‘members manufacture, produce, or wholesale a domestic like product in the United States. Based on information contained in the petitioner’s amended Petition submission of February 21, 2019,4 as well as its prior submissions pertaining to the membership of the American Institute of Steel Construction, LLC,5 Commerce finds 2 See Commerce Letters, ‘‘Re: Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, the People’s Republic of China, and Mexico: Supplemental Questions;’’ ‘‘Re: Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada: Supplemental Questions;’’ ‘‘Re: Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico: Supplemental Questions;’’ and ‘‘Re: Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from the People’s Republic of China: Supplemental Questions.’’ All of these documents are dated February 7, 2019. 3 See the petitioner’s Letters, ‘‘Re: Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada: Responses to Supplemental Questions on Canada AD Volume III of the Petition’’ (Canada AD Supplement); ‘‘Re: Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico: Response to Supplemental Questions on Mexico AD Volume III of the Petition’’ (Mexico AD Supplement); and ‘‘Re: Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from the People’s Republic of China: Responses to Supplemental Questions on China AD Volume IV of the Petition’’ (China AD Supplement). All of these documents are dated February 11, 2019; see also Petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Re: Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People’s Republic of China: Responses to Supplemental Questions on General and Injury Volume I of the Petition,’’ dated February 12, 2019 (General Issues Supplement). 4 See the petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People’s Republic of China: Amendment to Petition to Clarify Petitioner,’’ dated February 21, 2019 (Amendment to the Petitions) at 2. 5 See the petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated February 4, 2019 at Exhibit I–2. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:33 Mar 01, 2019 Jkt 247001 that the petitioner satisfactorily showed that a majority of its members manufacture, produce, or wholesale a domestic like product in the United States, and therefore the Petitions, as amended, have been filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Commerce also finds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the requested AD investigations.6 Periods of Investigation Because the Petitions were filed on February 4, 2019, and amended on February 21, 2019, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) for the Canada and Mexico investigations is January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018. Because China is a non-market economy (NME) country, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the POI for the China investigation is July 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018. Scope of the Investigations The product covered by these investigations is fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico. For a full description of the scope of these investigations, see the Appendix to this notice. Scope Comments During our review of the Petitions, Commerce contacted the petitioner regarding the proposed scope language to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions is an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.7 As a result, the scope of the Petitions was modified to clarify the description of merchandise covered by the Petitions. The description of the merchandise covered by these initiations, as described in the 6 See ‘‘Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada (Canada AD Initiation Checklist); Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from the People’s Republic of China (China AD Initiation Checklist); and Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico (Mexico AD Initiation Checklist). These checklists are dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents filed via ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. 7 See Memorandum, ‘‘Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, the People’s Republic of China, and Mexico: Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,’’ dated February 21, 2019; see also the petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People’s Republic of China: Revision to Scope,’’ dated February 22, 2019. PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 7331 Appendix to this notice, reflects these clarifications. As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce’s regulations, we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage (scope), including potential overlap with existing orders.8 To the extent that the scope of any of these investigations overlaps with existing AD/CVD orders, any products covered by that overlap will be excluded from the scope of the relevant investigation. Commerce will consider all comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will consult with interested parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determination. If scope comments include factual information,9 all such factual information should be limited to public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce requests that all interested parties submit scope comments by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on March 18, 2019, which is the next business day after 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 28, 2019, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comments deadline.10 Commerce requests that any factual information parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may be relevant, the party may contact Commerce and request permission to submit the additional information. All such submissions must be filed on the records of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations. Filing Requirements All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).11 8 See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997). 9 See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ‘‘factual information’’). 10 See 19 CFR 351.303(b). 11 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014) for details of Commerce’s electronic filing requirements, effective August 5, 2011. Information on help using ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/ help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https:// access.trade.gov/help/ E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM Continued 04MRN1 7332 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2019 / Notices An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents exempted from the electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance’s APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the applicable deadlines. Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires Commerce is providing interested parties an opportunity to comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of fabricated structural steel to be reported in response to Commerce’s AD questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the subject merchandise in order to report the relevant factors of production (FOPs) accurately, as well as to develop appropriate product-comparison criteria. Interested parties may provide any information or comments that they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product characteristics, and (2) product comparison criteria. We note that it is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on meaningful commercial differences among products. In other words, although there may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers to describe fabricated structural steel, it may be that only a select few product characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching products. Generally, Commerce attempts to list the most important physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics last. In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 18, 2019, which is the next business day after 20 calendar days from the Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20 Filling%20Procedures.pdf. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:33 Mar 01, 2019 Jkt 247001 signature date of this notice.12 Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 25, 2019. All comments and submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the record of each of the AD investigations. Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method to poll the ‘‘industry.’’ Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether ‘‘the domestic industry’’ has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,13 they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce’s determination is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may result in different definitions of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.14 12 See 19 CFR 351.303(b). section 771(10) of the Act. 14 See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)). 13 See PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ‘‘a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is ‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’ (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the petition). With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the Petitions.15 Based on our analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined that fabricated structural steel, as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like product.16 In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of the Investigations,’’ in the Appendix to this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its own production of the domestic like product in 2017.17 The petitioner estimated the production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry based on shipment data, because production data for the entire domestic industry are not available, and shipments are a close approximation of production in the fabricated structural steel industry.18 The petitioner compared its production to the estimated total production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic industry.19 We relied on data provided by the petitioner for purposes of measuring industry support.20 15 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 14–16 and Exhibit I–5; see also General Issues Supplement, at 1–3. 16 For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as applied to these cases and information regarding industry support, see Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, the People’s Republic of China, and Mexico (Attachment II); China AD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II; and Mexico AD Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. 17 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2–3 and Exhibit I–4. 18 Id. at 2–3 and Exhibits I–3 and I–4; see also General Issues Supplement, at 3–6. 19 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2–3. 20 Id. at 2–3 and Exhibit I–3 and I–4; see also General Issues Supplement, at 3–6. For further discussion, see Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; China AD Initiation Checklist, at E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2019 / Notices On February 12 and February 13, 2019, we received comments on industry support from Canada, the provincial government of Que´bec, and Mexico, respectively.21 The petitioner responded to the Canada’s and Mexico’s comments on February 19, 2019.22 On February 19, 2019, we received comments on industry support from Corey, S.A. de C.V. (Corey), a Mexican producer and exporter of fabricated structural steel.23 The petitioner responded to the comments from Corey on February 21, 2019.24 In addition, the petitioner subsequently clarified and amended the Petitions on February 21, 2019, in response to the comments from Canada, Mexico, and Corey.25 During consultations held with respect to the Canada and Mexico CVD petitions, Canada and Mexico discussed industry support comments and provided additional comments in the respective CVD consultation papers.26 On February 22, 2019, we received additional comments on industry support from Canada, Que´bec, and Mexico.27 The Attachment II; and Mexico AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 21 See Letter from the Government of Canada, the Government of Que´bec, and Export Development Canada, ‘‘Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada (A–122–864 and C–122–865)—Request for Postponement of Initiation and Disclosure of Members of Petitioner American Institute of Steel Construction and Identities of Known Domestic Producers,’’ dated February 12, 2019 (Canada Letter); see also Letter from the Government of Mexico, ‘‘Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico (A–201–850 and C–201–851)—Request to Dismiss Petitions or Otherwise Postpone Initiation,’’ dated February 13, 2019 (Mexico Letter). 22 See the petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada and Mexico: Response to Respondents’ Request to Reject Petitions or Postpone Initiation,’’ dated February 19, 2019. 23 See Letter from Corey, ‘‘Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico: Standing Challenge—Request to Decline Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations,’’ dated February 19, 2019. 24 See the petitioner’s Letter, ‘‘Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada and Mexico: Response to Respondents’ Standing Challenge and Request to Decline Initiation,’’ dated February 21, 2019. 25 See Amendment to the Petitions. 26 See Ex-Parte Memorandum, ‘‘Meeting with Officials from the Government of Mexico on the Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico’’ dated February 19, 2019; see also Memorandum, ‘‘Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada: GOC Consultations,’’ dated February 21, 2019; see also Letter from Mexico, ‘‘Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico (C–201–851)— Submission of Consultations Paper,’’ dated February 20, 2019; see also Letter from Canada, ‘‘Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada (A–122– 864 and C–122–865)—Consultations Paper. 27 See Letter from Que ´ bec, ‘‘Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, (A–122–864 and C–122–865): Response to AISC Amendment to Petition,’’ dated February 22, 2019; see also Letter from Canada, ‘‘Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada (A–122– 864 and C–122–865)—Response to AISC VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:33 Mar 01, 2019 Jkt 247001 petitioner responded to Canada’s, Que´bec’s, and Mexico’s comments on February 25, 2019.28 For further discussion of these comments, see the country-specific AD initiation checklists, at Attachment II. Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the General Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the Petitions.29 First, the Petitions established support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product and, as such, Commerce is not required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).30 Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.31 Finally, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petitions.32 Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject Amendment to Petition,’’ dated February 22, 2019; see also Letter from Mexico, ‘‘Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico (C–201–851, A–201–850)— Comments on Change of Petitioner,’’ dated February 22, 2019. 28 See Letter from the petitioner, ‘‘Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated February 25, 2019. 29 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; China AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Mexico AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 30 See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; China AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Mexico AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 31 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; China AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Mexico AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II. 32 Id. PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 7333 merchandise sold at LTFV. In addition, the petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.33 The petitioner contends that the industry’s injured condition is illustrated by the significant volume and increasing market share of subject imports; reduced market share of the U.S. industry; underselling and price depression or suppression; declines in production, shipments, and capacity utilization; negative impact on employment variables; decline in the domestic industry’s financial performance; and lost sales and revenues.34 We have assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material injury, causation, negligibility, as well as cumulation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for initiation.35 Allegations of Sales at LTFV The following is a description of the allegation of sales at LTFV upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate AD investigations of imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and normal value (NV) are discussed in greater detail in the AD Initiation Checklist for each country. Export Price For China and Mexico, the petitioner based export price (EP) on pricing information for fabricated structural steel produced in, and exported from, those countries and sold or offered for sale in the United States.36 For China, the petitioner deducted from U.S. price foreign inland freight, foreign brokerage and handling, ocean freight and insurance, and U.S. port expenses.37 For 33 See Volume I of the Petitions, at 22 and Exhibit I–8. 34 Id. at 11–41 and Exhibits I–3, I–5, I–8, I–10 through I–22; see also General Issues Supplement, at 6. 35 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, the People’s Republic of China, and Mexico (Attachment III); see also China AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; see also Mexico AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III. 36 See China and Mexico AD Initiation Checklists; see also See Volume IV of the Petition, at 3 and Exhibit IV–2. 37 See Volume IV of the Petition at 4; see also China AD Supplement, at Exhibit IV—Supp–2. E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1 7334 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2019 / Notices Mexico, the petitioner deducted from U.S. price foreign inland freight, foreign brokerage and handling, U.S. brokerage and handling, and U.S. inland freight.38 Constructed Export Price For Canada, because the petitioner had reason to believe that the sale was made on a constructed export price (CEP) basis,39 the petitioner based CEP on pricing information for fabricated structural steel produced in Canada by a Canadian producer and sold or offered for sale in the United States.40 The petitioner made deductions from U.S. price for foreign inland freight (including foreign inland insurance and foreign brokerage and handling), U.S. inland freight, and U.S. brokerage and handling charges.41 The petitioner also deducted further manufacturing expenses and CEP profit from U.S. price.42 Normal Value For Canada and Mexico, the petitioner was unable to obtain information relating to the prices charged for fabricated structural steel in Canada and Mexico, or any third country market.43 The petitioner noted that fabricated structural steel is a specialized product which is sold to specific classes of customers and for special projects and, with few exceptions, no two fabricated structural steel projects are identical.44 Because home market and third country prices were not reasonably available, the petitioners calculated NV based on constructed value (CV). For further discussion of CV, see the section ‘‘Normal Value Based on Constructed Value’’ below.45 With respect to China, Commerce considers China to be an NME country.46 In accordance with section 38 See the Mexico AD Initiation Checklist at 7–8 and Volume IV of the Petition at 5–6. 39 See Canada AD Supplement, at 1. The petitioner requested business proprietary treatment for the information regarding why it believes the offer for sale was made on a CEP basis. 40 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist. 41 Id. 42 Id. 43 See Canada and Mexico AD Initiation Checklists. 44 See Volume II of the Petition, at 11; and Volume III of the Petition, at 9. 45 In accordance section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for this investigation, Commerce will request information necessary to calculate the CV and cost of production (COP) to determine whether there are reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product have been made at prices that represent less than the COP of the product. 46 See Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Aluminum Foil from the People’s Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less-Than-Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 82 FR 50858, 50861 (November 2, 2017), and accompanying decision VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:33 Mar 01, 2019 Jkt 247001 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any determination that a foreign country is an NME country shall remain in effect until revoked by Commerce. Therefore, we continue to treat China as an NME country for purposes of the initiation of this investigation. Accordingly, NV in China is appropriately based on factors of production (FOPs) valued in a surrogate market economy country, in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.47 The Petitions claim Brazil is an appropriate surrogate country for China because it is a market economy country that is at a level of economic development comparable to that of China, and it is a significant producer of identical merchandise.48 The Petitions provided publicly-available information from Brazil to value all FOPs.49 However, the Petitions relied upon the financial statement of Grupo Carso, S.A.B. de C.V. (Carso), a Mexican producer of fabricated structural steel, to value financial ratios (i.e., manufacturing overhead, selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and profit) because the petitioner stated that it attempted to locate the financial ratios of a producer of identical or comparable merchandise in Brazil; however, ‘‘many companies within Brazil have reported net losses for their most recent fiscal years or have been required to report ‘qualified’ financial statements.’’ 50 Therefore, based on the information provided by the petitioner, we determine that it is appropriate to use Brazil as the primary surrogate country, but rely on the financial statement of a Mexican producer of fabricated structural steel to value financial ratios, for initiation purposes. Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit comments regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly available information to value FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination. Factors of Production Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by the Chinese producer/exporter was not memorandum, China’s Status as a Non-Market Economy, unchanged in Certain Aluminum Foil from the People’s Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 83 FR 9282 (March 5, 2018). 47 See China AD Initiation Checklist. 48 See Volume IV of the Petition, at 9–10 and Exhibit IV–11. 49 Id. at 16 and Exhibit IV–17 50 Id. at 18 and Exhibits IV–10 and IV–21. PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 reasonably available, the Petitions used the product-specific consumption rates of a U.S. fabricated structural steel producer as a surrogate to estimate the Chinese manufacturer’s FOPs.51 The Petitions valued the estimated FOPs using surrogate values from Brazil, as noted above.52 The Petitions used an average exchange rate to convert the data to U.S. dollars, where applicable.53 Normal Value Based on Constructed Value As noted above, because home market and third country prices were not available for Mexico and Canada, the Petitions based NV on CV.54 Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the cost of manufacturing (COM), SG&A expenses, financial expenses, and profit.55 For Canada and Mexico, the Petitions calculated the COM based on the input factors of production and usage rates from a U.S. producer of fabricated structural steel. The input factors of production were valued using publicly available data on costs specific to Canada and Mexico during the proposed POI.56 Specifically, the prices for raw materials (and propane for Canada) were valued using publicly available import and domestic price data for Canada and Mexico.57 Labor and energy costs were valued using publicly available sources for Canada and Mexico.58 For Canada, the Petitions relied on the fiscal year (FY) 2017 audited financial statements of Empire Industries Limited (Empire), a Canadian producer of fabricated structural steel, to determine the per-unit factory overhead costs associated with the production of fabricated structural steel.59 The Petitions also relied on Empire’s FY 2017 audited financial statements to determine the SG&A expense ratio used to calculate the per-unit SG&A expenses and the financial expense ratio 60 used to calculate the per-unit financial expenses.61 To determine the profit rate, the Petitions relied on Empire’s FY 2017 audited financial statements.62 Because 51 Id. at 11 and Exhibit IV–12. at 16 and Exhibits IV–17; see also China AD Supplement at Exhibit IV–Supp–3. 53 See Volume IV of the Petition at 15 and Exhibit IV–16. 54 See Volume II of the Petition at 11; and Volume III of the Petition at 9. 55 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist and Mexico AD Initiation Checklist. 56 Id. 57 Id. 58 Id. 59 See Volume II of the Petition at 18 and Exhibit II–22A and Exhibit II–22B. 60 See Canada AD Initiation Checklist. 61 Id. 62 Id. 52 Id. E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2019 / Notices Empire operated at a loss for FY 2017, the Petitions conservatively did not include an amount for profit in the calculation of CV. For Mexico, the Petitions calculated factory overhead, SG&A, interest and profit based on the 2017 audited financial statements of Carso, a Mexican producer of fabricated structural steel.63 Fair Value Comparisons Based on the data provided by the Petitions, there is reason to believe that imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at LTFV. Based on comparisons of EP, or CEP, to NV in accordance with sections 772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for fabricated structural steel for each of the countries covered by this initiation are as follows: (1) Canada—30.41 percent; 64 (2) China—222.35 percent; 65 and (3) Mexico—30.58 percent.66 Initiation of LTFV Investigations Based upon the examination of the Petitions and supplemental responses, we find that the Petitions meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD investigations to determine whether imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at LTFV. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation. Respondent Selection With respect to Canada and Mexico, the petitioner named 50 companies in Canada 67 and 18 companies in Mexico,68 as producers/exporters of fabricated structural steel. Following standard practice in AD investigations involving market economy countries, in the event Commerce determines that the number of companies is large and it cannot individually examine each company based upon Commerce’s resources, where appropriate, Commerce intends to select respondents in Canada and Mexico based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) numbers 63 See Mexico AD Initiation Checklist. Canada AD Initiation Checklist. 65 See China AD Initiation Checklist. 66 See Mexico AD Initiation Checklist. 67 See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I–7. 68 Id. 64 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:33 Mar 01, 2019 Jkt 247001 listed with the scope in the Appendix, below.69 With respect to China, the petitioners named 220 producers/exporters of fabricated structural steel in China. In AD investigations involving NME countries, Commerce selects respondents based on quantity and value (Q&V) questionnaires in cases where it cannot individually examine each company based upon its resources. After considering the large number of producers and exporters identified in the Petition, and considering the resources that must be used by Commerce to mail Q&V questionnaires to all of these companies, Commerce has determined that we do not have sufficient administrative resources to mail Q&V questionnaires to all 220 identified producers and exporters. Therefore, Commerce has determined to limit the number of Q&V questionnaires it will send out to exporters and producers based on CBP data for imports during the POI under the appropriate HTSUS numbers listed with the scope in the Appendix, below. Accordingly, Commerce will send Q&V questionnaires to the largest producers and exporters that are identified in the CBP data for which there is address information on the record. On February 25, 2019, Commerce released CBP data on imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico under APO to all parties with access to information protected by APO and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment on the CBP data must do so within three business days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of these investigations.70 We further stated that we will not accept rebuttal comments. In addition, Commerce will post the Q&V questionnaire along with filing instructions on the Enforcement and Compliance website at http:// www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp. In accordance with our standard practice for respondent selection in AD cases involving NME countries, we intend to base respondent selection on the responses to the Q&V questionnaire that we receive. 69 See, e.g., Polyester Textured Yarn from India and the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 83 FR 58223, 58227 (November 19, 2018). 70 See Memoranda, ‘‘Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada: Release of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Data;’’ ‘‘Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from the People’s Republic of China: Release of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Data;’’ and ‘‘LessThan-Fair-Value Investigation of Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico: Release of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Data,’’ dated February 25, 2019. PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 7335 Producers/exporters of fabricated structural steel from China that do not receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response to the Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy of the Q&V questionnaire from Enforcement & Compliance’s website. The Q&V response must be submitted by the relevant Chinese exporters/ producers no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on March 15, 2019. All Q&V responses must be filed electronically via ACCESS. Separate Rates In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation, exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate application.71 The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application in the China investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself, which is available on Commerce’s website at http://enforcement.trade.gov/ nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separaterate application will be due 30 days after publication of this initiation notice.72 Exporters and producers who submit a separate-rate application and are selected as mandatory respondents will be eligible for consideration for separate-rate status only if they respond to all parts of Commerce’s AD questionnaire as mandatory respondents. Commerce requires that companies from China submit a response to both the Q&V questionnaire and the separate-rate application by the respective deadlines in order to receive consideration for separate-rate status. Companies not filing a timely Q&V response will not receive separate-rate consideration. Use of Combination Rates Commerce will calculate combination rates for certain respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME investigation. The Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin states: {w}hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now assign in its NME Investigation will be specific to those producers that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the 71 See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin 05.1). 72 Although in past investigations this deadline was 60 days, consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(a), which states that ‘‘the Secretary may request any person to submit factual information at any time during a proceeding,’’ this deadline is now 30 days. E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1 7336 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2019 / Notices period of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the application of ‘‘combination rates’’ because such rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation.73 Distribution of Copies of the Petitions In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been provided to the governments of Canada, China, and Mexico via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petitions to each exporter named in the Petitions, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). ITC Notification We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 732(d) of the Act. Preliminary Determination by the ITC The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and/or Mexico are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.74 A negative ITC determination for any country will result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that country.75 Otherwise, the investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits. Submission of Factual Information Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)–(iv). Section 351.301(b) of Commerce’s regulations requires any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted 76 and, if the information is submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the record, to provide an explanation identifying the information already on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct.77 Time limits for the submission of factual information are addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based on the type of factual information being submitted. Interested parties should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information in these investigations. Particular Market Situation Allegation Section 504 of the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 amended the Act by adding the concept of particular market situation (PMS) for purposes of CV under section 773(e) of the Act.78 Section 773(e) of the Act states that ‘‘if a particular market situation exists such that the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of any kind does not accurately reflect the cost of production in the ordinary course of trade, the administering authority may use another calculation methodology under this subtitle or any other calculation methodology.’’ When an interested party submits a PMS allegation pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce will respond to such a submission consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v). If Commerce finds that a PMS exists under section 773(e) of the Act, then it will modify its dumping calculations appropriately. Neither section 773(e) of the Act nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v) set a deadline for the submission of PMS allegations and supporting factual information. However, in order to administer section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting factual information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus, should an interested party wish to submit a PMS allegation and supporting new factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, it must do so no later than 20 days after submission of a respondent’s initial section D questionnaire response. Extensions of Time Limits Parties may request an extension of time limits before the expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension 76 See 73 See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added). 74 See section 733(a) of the Act. 75 Id. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:33 Mar 01, 2019 Jkt 247001 19 CFR 351.301(b). 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2). 78 See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 114–27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015). 77 See PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform parties in a letter or memorandum of the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will grant untimelyfiled requests for the extension of time limits. Parties should review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-201309-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information in these investigations. Certification Requirements Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.79 Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g).80 Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification requirements. Notification to Interested Parties Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, Commerce published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)). This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c). 79 See section 782(b) of the Act. also Certification of Factual Information to Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_ info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf. 80 See E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 42 / Monday, March 4, 2019 / Notices Dated: February 25, 2019. Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix—Scope of the Investigations The merchandise covered by these investigations is carbon and alloy fabricated structural steel. Fabricated structural steel is made from steel in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; and (2) the carbon content is two percent or less by weight. Fabricated structural steel products are steel products that have been fabricated for erection or assembly into structures, including, but not limited to, buildings (commercial, office, institutional, and multifamily residential); industrial and utility projects; parking decks; arenas and convention centers; medical facilities; and ports, transportation and infrastructure facilities. Fabricated structural steel is manufactured from carbon and alloy (including stainless) steel products such as angles, columns, beams, girders, plates, flange shapes (including manufactured structural shapes utilizing welded plates as a substitute for rolled wide flange sections), channels, hollow structural section (HSS) shapes, base plates, and plate-work components. Fabrication includes, but is not limited to cutting, drilling, welding, joining, bolting, bending, punching, pressure fitting, molding, grooving, adhesion, beveling, and riveting and may include items such as fasteners, nuts, bolts, rivets, screws, hinges, or joints. The inclusion, attachment, joining, or assembly of non-steel components with fabricated structural steel does not remove the fabricated structural steel from the scope. Fabricated structural steel is covered by the scope of the investigations regardless of whether it is painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other metallic or nonmetallic substances and regardless of whether it is assembled or partially assembled, such as into modules, modularized construction units, or subassemblies of fabricated structural steel. Subject merchandise includes fabricated structural steel that has been assembled or further processed in the subject country or a third country, including but not limited to painting, varnishing, trimming, cutting, drilling, welding, joining, bolting, punching, bending, beveling, riveting, galvanizing, coating, and/or slitting or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigations if performed in the country of manufacture of the fabricated structural steel. Specifically excluded from the scope of these investigations are: 1. Fabricated steel concrete reinforcing bar (rebar) if: (i) It is a unitary piece of fabricated rebar, not joined, welded, or otherwise connected with any other steel product or part; or (ii) it is joined, welded, or otherwise connected only to other rebar. 2. Fabricated structural steel for bridges and bridge sections that meets American VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:33 Mar 01, 2019 Jkt 247001 Association of State and Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) bridge construction requirements or any state or local derivatives of the AASHTO bridge construction requirements. 3. Pre-engineered metal building systems, which are defined as complete metal buildings that integrate steel framing, roofing and walls to form one, pre-engineered building system, that meet Metal Building Manufacturers Association guide specifications. Pre-engineered metal building systems are typically limited in height to no more than 60 feet or two stories. 4. Steel roof and floor decking systems that meet Steel Deck Institute standards. 5. Open web steel bar joists and joist girders that meet Steel Joist Institute specifications. The products subject to the investigations are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings: 7308.90.3000, 7308.90.6000, and 7308.90.9590. The products subject to the investigations may also enter under the following HTSUS subheadings: 7216.91.0010, 7216.91.0090, 7216.99.0010, 7216.99.0090, 7222.40.6000, 7228.70.6000, 7301.10.0000, 7301.20.1000, 7301.20.5000, 7308.40.0000, 7308.90.9530, and 9406.90.0030. The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the investigations is dispositive. [FR Doc. 2019–03818 Filed 3–1–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–879] Polyvinyl Alcohol From the People’s Republic of China: Initiation and Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) is initiating a changed circumstances review and preliminarily determining that Sinopec Chongqing SVW Chemical Co., Ltd. (SVW) is the successor-in-interest to Sinopec Sichuan Vinylon Works (Sichuan SVW) for the purposes of the antidumping duty order on polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) from the People’s Republic of China (China). DATES: Applicable March 4, 2019. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Doss, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202–482–4474. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 7337 Background On October 1, 2003, Commerce published in the Federal Register an antidumping duty order on PVA from China.1 On December 7, 2018, SVW, a foreign producer and exporter of polyvinyl alcohol from China, and Wego Chemical and Mineral Corp. (Wego), an importer of polyvinyl alcohol from China (collectively, SVW and Wego) requested that, pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.216(b), Commerce conduct an expedited changed circumstances review of the Order to confirm that SVW is the successor-in-interest to Sichuan SVW and, accordingly, to assign SVW the cash deposit rate of Sichuan SVW.2 In its submission, SVW and Wego explain that Sinopec Sichuan Vinylon Works (i.e., Sichuan SVW) has changed its name to Sinopec Chongqing SVW Chemical Co., Ltd. (i.e., SVW), and aver that no substantive changes other than this change of name have otherwise occurred.3 SVW and Wego further requested that Commerce combine the notice of initiation and preliminary results pursuant to 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(ii) and (iii).4 We did not receive comments from other interested parties concerning this request. Commerce exercised its discretion to toll all deadlines affected by the partial federal government closure from December 22, 2018, through the resumption of operations on January 29, 2019.5 Accordingly, the revised deadline for issuance of this initiation and the preliminary results of changed circumstances review is now March 5, 2019. Scope of the Order The merchandise covered by the order is PVA. This product consists of all PVA hydrolyzed in excess of 80 percent, whether or not mixed or diluted with commercial levels of defoamer or boric acid, except as noted below. 1 See Antidumping Duty Order: Polyvinyl Alcohol from the People’s Republic of China, 68 FR 56620 (October 1, 2003) (the Order). 2 See SVW and Wego’s letter, ‘‘Polyvinyl Alcohol from China: Request for Changed Circumstances Review,’’ dated December 12, 2018 (CCR Request). 3 Id. at 1–4. 4 Id. at 2. 5 See Memorandum to the Record from Gary Taverman, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Deadlines Affected by the Partial Shutdown of the Federal Government,’’ dated January 28, 2019. All deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been extended by 40 days. E:\FR\FM\04MRN1.SGM 04MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 42 (Monday, March 4, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7330-7337]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03818]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-122-864, A-201-850, A-570-102]


Certain Fabricated Structural Steel From Canada, Mexico, and the 
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value 
Investigations

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

DATES: Applicable February 25, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Goldberger at (202) 482-4136 
(Canada); Alice Maldonado at (202) 482-4682 (the People's Republic of 
China (China)); and Jeffrey Pedersen at (202) 482-2769 (Mexico); AD/CVD 
Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 
NW, Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petitions

    On February 4, 2019, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) 
received antidumping duty (AD) Petitions concerning imports of certain 
fabricated structural steel (fabricated structural steel) from Canada, 
China, and Mexico, which were subsequently amended on February 21, 
2019.\1\ The Petitions, as amended, were filed in proper form by a 
subgroup of the American Institute of Steel Construction, LLC, a trade 
association representing domestic producers of fabricated structural 
steel. Specifically, the petitioner is the American Institute of Steel 
Construction Full Member Subgroup (the petitioner). The AD Petitions 
were accompanied by countervailing duty (CVD) Petitions concerning 
imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See the petitioner's Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition 
of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People's Republic of 
China,'' dated February 4, 2019, as amended on February 21, 2019 
(the Petitions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 7, 2019, Commerce requested supplemental information 
pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions in separate supplemental

[[Page 7331]]

questionnaires.\2\ Responses to the supplemental questionnaires were 
filed on February 11 and 12, 2019.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Commerce Letters, ``Re: Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada, the People's Republic of China, and 
Mexico: Supplemental Questions;'' ``Re: Petition for the Imposition 
of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Fabricated Structural 
Steel from Canada: Supplemental Questions;'' ``Re: Petition for the 
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Mexico: Supplemental Questions;'' and ``Re: 
Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 
Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from the People's Republic of 
China: Supplemental Questions.'' All of these documents are dated 
February 7, 2019.
    \3\ See the petitioner's Letters, ``Re: Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada: Responses to Supplemental Questions on 
Canada AD Volume III of the Petition'' (Canada AD Supplement); ``Re: 
Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico: Response to 
Supplemental Questions on Mexico AD Volume III of the Petition'' 
(Mexico AD Supplement); and ``Re: Certain Fabricated Structural 
Steel from the People's Republic of China: Responses to Supplemental 
Questions on China AD Volume IV of the Petition'' (China AD 
Supplement). All of these documents are dated February 11, 2019; see 
also Petitioner's Letter, ``Re: Certain Fabricated Structural Steel 
from Canada, Mexico, and the People's Republic of China: Responses 
to Supplemental Questions on General and Injury Volume I of the 
Petition,'' dated February 12, 2019 (General Issues Supplement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of fabricated 
structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico are being, or are 
likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV) 
within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that such imports are 
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic 
industry producing fabricated structural steel in the United States. 
Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are 
accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner 
supporting its allegations.
    Section 771(9)(E) of the Act states that ``a trade or business 
association'' is an interested party if ``a majority'' of its ``members 
manufacture, produce, or wholesale a domestic like product in the 
United States. Based on information contained in the petitioner's 
amended Petition submission of February 21, 2019,\4\ as well as its 
prior submissions pertaining to the membership of the American 
Institute of Steel Construction, LLC,\5\ Commerce finds that the 
petitioner satisfactorily showed that a majority of its members 
manufacture, produce, or wholesale a domestic like product in the 
United States, and therefore the Petitions, as amended, have been filed 
on behalf of the domestic industry. Commerce also finds that the 
petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the 
initiation of the requested AD investigations.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See the petitioner's Letter, ``Certain Fabricated Structural 
Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People's Republic of China: 
Amendment to Petition to Clarify Petitioner,'' dated February 21, 
2019 (Amendment to the Petitions) at 2.
    \5\ See the petitioner's Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition 
of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People's Republic of 
China,'' dated February 4, 2019 at Exhibit I-2.
    \6\ See ``Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 
Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada (Canada AD 
Initiation Checklist); Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from the People's 
Republic of China (China AD Initiation Checklist); and Antidumping 
Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Mexico (Mexico AD Initiation Checklist). These 
checklists are dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this 
notice and on file electronically via ACCESS. Access to documents 
filed via ACCESS is also available in the Central Records Unit, Room 
B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Periods of Investigation

    Because the Petitions were filed on February 4, 2019, and amended 
on February 21, 2019, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of 
investigation (POI) for the Canada and Mexico investigations is January 
1, 2018, through December 31, 2018. Because China is a non-market 
economy (NME) country, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the POI for 
the China investigation is July 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018.

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is fabricated 
structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico. For a full description 
of the scope of these investigations, see the Appendix to this notice.

Scope Comments

    During our review of the Petitions, Commerce contacted the 
petitioner regarding the proposed scope language to ensure that the 
scope language in the Petitions is an accurate reflection of the 
products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.\7\ As a 
result, the scope of the Petitions was modified to clarify the 
description of merchandise covered by the Petitions. The description of 
the merchandise covered by these initiations, as described in the 
Appendix to this notice, reflects these clarifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Memorandum, ``Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain 
Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, the People's Republic of 
China, and Mexico: Phone Call with Counsel to the Petitioner,'' 
dated February 21, 2019; see also the petitioner's Letter, ``Certain 
Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People's 
Republic of China: Revision to Scope,'' dated February 22, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are 
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding 
product coverage (scope), including potential overlap with existing 
orders.\8\ To the extent that the scope of any of these investigations 
overlaps with existing AD/CVD orders, any products covered by that 
overlap will be excluded from the scope of the relevant investigation. 
Commerce will consider all comments received from interested parties 
and, if necessary, will consult with interested parties prior to the 
issuance of the preliminary determination. If scope comments include 
factual information,\9\ all such factual information should be limited 
to public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, 
Commerce requests that all interested parties submit scope comments by 
5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on March 18, 2019, which is the next 
business day after 20 calendar days from the signature date of this 
notice. Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual information, 
must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 28, 2019, which is 10 calendar 
days from the initial comments deadline.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
    \10\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce requests that any factual information parties consider 
relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this 
period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual 
information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may be 
relevant, the party may contact Commerce and request permission to 
submit the additional information. All such submissions must be filed 
on the records of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using 
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\11\

[[Page 7332]]

An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its 
entirety by the time and date it is due. Documents exempted from the 
electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in 
paper form) with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 
18022, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, 
Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by 
the applicable deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order 
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and 
Compliance; Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046 
(November 20, 2014) for details of Commerce's electronic filing 
requirements, effective August 5, 2011. Information on help using 
ACCESS can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx and a 
handbook can be found at https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filling%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Product Characteristics for AD Questionnaires

    Commerce is providing interested parties an opportunity to comment 
on the appropriate physical characteristics of fabricated structural 
steel to be reported in response to Commerce's AD questionnaires. This 
information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics 
of the subject merchandise in order to report the relevant factors of 
production (FOPs) accurately, as well as to develop appropriate 
product-comparison criteria.
    Interested parties may provide any information or comments that 
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of 
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to 
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product 
characteristics, and (2) product comparison criteria. We note that it 
is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product 
comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on meaningful 
commercial differences among products. In other words, although there 
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers 
to describe fabricated structural steel, it may be that only a select 
few product characteristics take into account commercially meaningful 
physical characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment 
on the order in which the physical characteristics should be used in 
matching products. Generally, Commerce attempts to list the most 
important physical characteristics first and the least important 
characteristics last.
    In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in 
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product 
characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 18, 
2019, which is the next business day after 20 calendar days from the 
signature date of this notice.\12\ Any rebuttal comments must be filed 
by 5:00 p.m. ET on March 25, 2019. All comments and submissions to 
Commerce must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, 
on the record of each of the AD investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) 
Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if 
there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or 
(ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling 
method to poll the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which 
is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has 
been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like 
product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the 
ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\13\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a 
separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce's determination 
is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may 
result in different definitions of the like product, such differences 
do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \14\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the Petitions.\15\ Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that fabricated structural 
steel, as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like 
product, and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that 
domestic like product.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 14-16 and Exhibit I-5; 
see also General Issues Supplement, at 1-3.
    \16\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as 
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support, 
see Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II, Analysis of 
Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Petitions Covering Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, 
the People's Republic of China, and Mexico (Attachment II); China AD 
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II; and Mexico AD Initiation 
Checklist at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the Appendix to 
this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its 
own production of the domestic like product in 2017.\17\ The petitioner 
estimated the production of the domestic like product for the entire 
domestic industry based on shipment data, because production data for 
the entire domestic industry are not available, and shipments are a 
close approximation of production in the fabricated structural steel 
industry.\18\ The petitioner compared its production to the estimated 
total production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic 
industry.\19\ We relied on data provided by the petitioner for purposes 
of measuring industry support.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2-3 and Exhibit I-4.
    \18\ Id. at 2-3 and Exhibits I-3 and I-4; see also General 
Issues Supplement, at 3-6.
    \19\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2-3.
    \20\ Id. at 2-3 and Exhibit I-3 and I-4; see also General Issues 
Supplement, at 3-6. For further discussion, see Canada AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II; China AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II; and Mexico AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.

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

[[Page 7333]]

    On February 12 and February 13, 2019, we received comments on 
industry support from Canada, the provincial government of 
Qu[eacute]bec, and Mexico, respectively.\21\ The petitioner responded 
to the Canada's and Mexico's comments on February 19, 2019.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Letter from the Government of Canada, the Government of 
Qu[eacute]bec, and Export Development Canada, ``Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada (A-122-864 and C-122-865)--Request for 
Postponement of Initiation and Disclosure of Members of Petitioner 
American Institute of Steel Construction and Identities of Known 
Domestic Producers,'' dated February 12, 2019 (Canada Letter); see 
also Letter from the Government of Mexico, ``Fabricated Structural 
Steel from Mexico (A-201-850 and C-201-851)--Request to Dismiss 
Petitions or Otherwise Postpone Initiation,'' dated February 13, 
2019 (Mexico Letter).
    \22\ See the petitioner's Letter, ``Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada and Mexico: Response to Respondents' 
Request to Reject Petitions or Postpone Initiation,'' dated February 
19, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 19, 2019, we received comments on industry support from 
Corey, S.A. de C.V. (Corey), a Mexican producer and exporter of 
fabricated structural steel.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Letter from Corey, ``Fabricated Structural Steel from 
Mexico: Standing Challenge--Request to Decline Initiation of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations,'' dated February 
19, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner responded to the comments from Corey on February 21, 
2019.\24\ In addition, the petitioner subsequently clarified and 
amended the Petitions on February 21, 2019, in response to the comments 
from Canada, Mexico, and Corey.\25\ During consultations held with 
respect to the Canada and Mexico CVD petitions, Canada and Mexico 
discussed industry support comments and provided additional comments in 
the respective CVD consultation papers.\26\ On February 22, 2019, we 
received additional comments on industry support from Canada, 
Qu[eacute]bec, and Mexico.\27\ The petitioner responded to Canada's, 
Qu[eacute]bec's, and Mexico's comments on February 25, 2019.\28\ For 
further discussion of these comments, see the country-specific AD 
initiation checklists, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See the petitioner's Letter, ``Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada and Mexico: Response to Respondents' 
Standing Challenge and Request to Decline Initiation,'' dated 
February 21, 2019.
    \25\ See Amendment to the Petitions.
    \26\ See Ex-Parte Memorandum, ``Meeting with Officials from the 
Government of Mexico on the Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain 
Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico'' dated February 19, 2019; 
see also Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain 
Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada: GOC Consultations,'' dated 
February 21, 2019; see also Letter from Mexico, ``Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Mexico (C-201-851)--Submission of 
Consultations Paper,'' dated February 20, 2019; see also Letter from 
Canada, ``Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada (A-122-864 and C-
122-865)--Consultations Paper.
    \27\ See Letter from Qu[eacute]bec, ``Fabricated Structural 
Steel from Canada, (A-122-864 and C-122-865): Response to AISC 
Amendment to Petition,'' dated February 22, 2019; see also Letter 
from Canada, ``Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada (A-122-864 
and C-122-865)--Response to AISC Amendment to Petition,'' dated 
February 22, 2019; see also Letter from Mexico, ``Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Mexico (C-201-851, A-201-850)--Comments on 
Change of Petitioner,'' dated February 22, 2019.
    \28\ See Letter from the petitioner, ``Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People's Republic of 
China,'' dated February 25, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the General 
Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce 
indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the 
Petitions.\29\ First, the Petitions established support from domestic 
producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product and, as such, Commerce is not 
required to take further action in order to evaluate industry support 
(e.g., polling).\30\ Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have 
met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 
732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) 
who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total 
production of the domestic like product.\31\ Finally, the domestic 
producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry 
support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic 
producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for more than 
50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by 
that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, 
the Petitions.\32\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that the Petitions 
were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of 
section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; China 
AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Mexico AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \30\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also Canada AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; China AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II; and Mexico AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II.
    \31\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; China 
AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Mexico AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \32\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the 
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened 
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject 
merchandise sold at LTFV. In addition, the petitioner alleges that 
subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under 
section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 22 and Exhibit I-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by the significant volume and increasing market share of 
subject imports; reduced market share of the U.S. industry; 
underselling and price depression or suppression; declines in 
production, shipments, and capacity utilization; negative impact on 
employment variables; decline in the domestic industry's financial 
performance; and lost sales and revenues.\34\ We have assessed the 
allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat 
of material injury, causation, negligibility, as well as cumulation, 
and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by 
adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for 
initiation.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Id. at 11-41 and Exhibits I-3, I-5, I-8, I-10 through I-22; 
see also General Issues Supplement, at 6.
    \35\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, the 
People's Republic of China, and Mexico (Attachment III); see also 
China AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; see also Mexico AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Sales at LTFV

    The following is a description of the allegation of sales at LTFV 
upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate AD investigations of 
imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico. 
The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. 
price and normal value (NV) are discussed in greater detail in the AD 
Initiation Checklist for each country.

Export Price

    For China and Mexico, the petitioner based export price (EP) on 
pricing information for fabricated structural steel produced in, and 
exported from, those countries and sold or offered for sale in the 
United States.\36\ For China, the petitioner deducted from U.S. price 
foreign inland freight, foreign brokerage and handling, ocean freight 
and insurance, and U.S. port expenses.\37\ For

[[Page 7334]]

Mexico, the petitioner deducted from U.S. price foreign inland freight, 
foreign brokerage and handling, U.S. brokerage and handling, and U.S. 
inland freight.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See China and Mexico AD Initiation Checklists; see also See 
Volume IV of the Petition, at 3 and Exhibit IV-2.
    \37\ See Volume IV of the Petition at 4; see also China AD 
Supplement, at Exhibit IV--Supp-2.
    \38\ See the Mexico AD Initiation Checklist at 7-8 and Volume IV 
of the Petition at 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Constructed Export Price

    For Canada, because the petitioner had reason to believe that the 
sale was made on a constructed export price (CEP) basis,\39\ the 
petitioner based CEP on pricing information for fabricated structural 
steel produced in Canada by a Canadian producer and sold or offered for 
sale in the United States.\40\ The petitioner made deductions from U.S. 
price for foreign inland freight (including foreign inland insurance 
and foreign brokerage and handling), U.S. inland freight, and U.S. 
brokerage and handling charges.\41\ The petitioner also deducted 
further manufacturing expenses and CEP profit from U.S. price.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ See Canada AD Supplement, at 1. The petitioner requested 
business proprietary treatment for the information regarding why it 
believes the offer for sale was made on a CEP basis.
    \40\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist.
    \41\ Id.
    \42\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    For Canada and Mexico, the petitioner was unable to obtain 
information relating to the prices charged for fabricated structural 
steel in Canada and Mexico, or any third country market.\43\ The 
petitioner noted that fabricated structural steel is a specialized 
product which is sold to specific classes of customers and for special 
projects and, with few exceptions, no two fabricated structural steel 
projects are identical.\44\ Because home market and third country 
prices were not reasonably available, the petitioners calculated NV 
based on constructed value (CV). For further discussion of CV, see the 
section ``Normal Value Based on Constructed Value'' below.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ See Canada and Mexico AD Initiation Checklists.
    \44\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 11; and Volume III of the 
Petition, at 9.
    \45\ In accordance section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for this 
investigation, Commerce will request information necessary to 
calculate the CV and cost of production (COP) to determine whether 
there are reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the 
foreign like product have been made at prices that represent less 
than the COP of the product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to China, Commerce considers China to be an NME 
country.\46\ In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any 
determination that a foreign country is an NME country shall remain in 
effect until revoked by Commerce. Therefore, we continue to treat China 
as an NME country for purposes of the initiation of this investigation. 
Accordingly, NV in China is appropriately based on factors of 
production (FOPs) valued in a surrogate market economy country, in 
accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See Antidumping Duty Investigation of Certain Aluminum Foil 
from the People's Republic of China: Affirmative Preliminary 
Determination of Sales at Less-Than-Fair Value and Postponement of 
Final Determination, 82 FR 50858, 50861 (November 2, 2017), and 
accompanying decision memorandum, China's Status as a Non-Market 
Economy, unchanged in Certain Aluminum Foil from the People's 
Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value, 83 FR 9282 (March 5, 2018).
    \47\ See China AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Petitions claim Brazil is an appropriate surrogate country for 
China because it is a market economy country that is at a level of 
economic development comparable to that of China, and it is a 
significant producer of identical merchandise.\48\ The Petitions 
provided publicly-available information from Brazil to value all 
FOPs.\49\ However, the Petitions relied upon the financial statement of 
Grupo Carso, S.A.B. de C.V. (Carso), a Mexican producer of fabricated 
structural steel, to value financial ratios (i.e., manufacturing 
overhead, selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and 
profit) because the petitioner stated that it attempted to locate the 
financial ratios of a producer of identical or comparable merchandise 
in Brazil; however, ``many companies within Brazil have reported net 
losses for their most recent fiscal years or have been required to 
report `qualified' financial statements.'' \50\ Therefore, based on the 
information provided by the petitioner, we determine that it is 
appropriate to use Brazil as the primary surrogate country, but rely on 
the financial statement of a Mexican producer of fabricated structural 
steel to value financial ratios, for initiation purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ See Volume IV of the Petition, at 9-10 and Exhibit IV-11.
    \49\ Id. at 16 and Exhibit IV-17
    \50\ Id. at 18 and Exhibits IV-10 and IV-21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit comments 
regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly 
available information to value FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled 
date of the preliminary determination.

Factors of Production

    Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by the 
Chinese producer/exporter was not reasonably available, the Petitions 
used the product-specific consumption rates of a U.S. fabricated 
structural steel producer as a surrogate to estimate the Chinese 
manufacturer's FOPs.\51\ The Petitions valued the estimated FOPs using 
surrogate values from Brazil, as noted above.\52\ The Petitions used an 
average exchange rate to convert the data to U.S. dollars, where 
applicable.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ Id. at 11 and Exhibit IV-12.
    \52\ Id. at 16 and Exhibits IV-17; see also China AD Supplement 
at Exhibit IV-Supp-3.
    \53\ See Volume IV of the Petition at 15 and Exhibit IV-16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value

    As noted above, because home market and third country prices were 
not available for Mexico and Canada, the Petitions based NV on CV.\54\ 
Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, CV consists of the cost of 
manufacturing (COM), SG&A expenses, financial expenses, and profit.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ See Volume II of the Petition at 11; and Volume III of the 
Petition at 9.
    \55\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist and Mexico AD Initiation 
Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Canada and Mexico, the Petitions calculated the COM based on 
the input factors of production and usage rates from a U.S. producer of 
fabricated structural steel. The input factors of production were 
valued using publicly available data on costs specific to Canada and 
Mexico during the proposed POI.\56\ Specifically, the prices for raw 
materials (and propane for Canada) were valued using publicly available 
import and domestic price data for Canada and Mexico.\57\ Labor and 
energy costs were valued using publicly available sources for Canada 
and Mexico.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ Id.
    \57\ Id.
    \58\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Canada, the Petitions relied on the fiscal year (FY) 2017 
audited financial statements of Empire Industries Limited (Empire), a 
Canadian producer of fabricated structural steel, to determine the per-
unit factory overhead costs associated with the production of 
fabricated structural steel.\59\ The Petitions also relied on Empire's 
FY 2017 audited financial statements to determine the SG&A expense 
ratio used to calculate the per-unit SG&A expenses and the financial 
expense ratio \60\ used to calculate the per-unit financial 
expenses.\61\ To determine the profit rate, the Petitions relied on 
Empire's FY 2017 audited financial statements.\62\ Because

[[Page 7335]]

Empire operated at a loss for FY 2017, the Petitions conservatively did 
not include an amount for profit in the calculation of CV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ See Volume II of the Petition at 18 and Exhibit II-22A and 
Exhibit II-22B.
    \60\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist.
    \61\ Id.
    \62\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Mexico, the Petitions calculated factory overhead, SG&A, 
interest and profit based on the 2017 audited financial statements of 
Carso, a Mexican producer of fabricated structural steel.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ See Mexico AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the Petitions, there is reason to 
believe that imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, 
and Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at 
LTFV. Based on comparisons of EP, or CEP, to NV in accordance with 
sections 772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for 
fabricated structural steel for each of the countries covered by this 
initiation are as follows: (1) Canada--30.41 percent; \64\ (2) China--
222.35 percent; \65\ and (3) Mexico--30.58 percent.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ See Canada AD Initiation Checklist.
    \65\ See China AD Initiation Checklist.
    \66\ See Mexico AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of LTFV Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the Petitions and supplemental 
responses, we find that the Petitions meet the requirements of section 
732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating AD investigations to 
determine whether imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, 
China, and Mexico are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United 
States at LTFV. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 
19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary 
determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this 
initiation.

Respondent Selection

    With respect to Canada and Mexico, the petitioner named 50 
companies in Canada \67\ and 18 companies in Mexico,\68\ as producers/
exporters of fabricated structural steel. Following standard practice 
in AD investigations involving market economy countries, in the event 
Commerce determines that the number of companies is large and it cannot 
individually examine each company based upon Commerce's resources, 
where appropriate, Commerce intends to select respondents in Canada and 
Mexico based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. 
imports under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States (HTSUS) numbers listed with the scope in the Appendix, 
below.\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at Exhibit I-7.
    \68\ Id.
    \69\ See, e.g., Polyester Textured Yarn from India and the 
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value 
Investigations, 83 FR 58223, 58227 (November 19, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to China, the petitioners named 220 producers/
exporters of fabricated structural steel in China. In AD investigations 
involving NME countries, Commerce selects respondents based on quantity 
and value (Q&V) questionnaires in cases where it cannot individually 
examine each company based upon its resources. After considering the 
large number of producers and exporters identified in the Petition, and 
considering the resources that must be used by Commerce to mail Q&V 
questionnaires to all of these companies, Commerce has determined that 
we do not have sufficient administrative resources to mail Q&V 
questionnaires to all 220 identified producers and exporters. 
Therefore, Commerce has determined to limit the number of Q&V 
questionnaires it will send out to exporters and producers based on CBP 
data for imports during the POI under the appropriate HTSUS numbers 
listed with the scope in the Appendix, below. Accordingly, Commerce 
will send Q&V questionnaires to the largest producers and exporters 
that are identified in the CBP data for which there is address 
information on the record.
    On February 25, 2019, Commerce released CBP data on imports of 
fabricated structural steel from Canada, China, and Mexico under APO to 
all parties with access to information protected by APO and indicated 
that interested parties wishing to comment on the CBP data must do so 
within three business days of the publication date of the notice of 
initiation of these investigations.\70\ We further stated that we will 
not accept rebuttal comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \70\ See Memoranda, ``Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of 
Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada: Release of U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection Data;'' ``Less-Than-Fair-Value 
Investigation of Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from the 
People's Republic of China: Release of U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection Data;'' and ``Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigation of 
Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico: Release of U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection Data,'' dated February 25, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, Commerce will post the Q&V questionnaire along with 
filing instructions on the Enforcement and Compliance website at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp. In accordance with our standard 
practice for respondent selection in AD cases involving NME countries, 
we intend to base respondent selection on the responses to the Q&V 
questionnaire that we receive.
    Producers/exporters of fabricated structural steel from China that 
do not receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a response 
to the Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy of the Q&V questionnaire 
from Enforcement & Compliance's website. The Q&V response must be 
submitted by the relevant Chinese exporters/producers no later than 
5:00 p.m. ET on March 15, 2019. All Q&V responses must be filed 
electronically via ACCESS.

Separate Rates

    In order to obtain separate-rate status in an NME investigation, 
exporters and producers must submit a separate-rate application.\71\ 
The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application in 
the China investigation are outlined in detail in the application 
itself, which is available on Commerce's website at http://enforcement.trade.gov/nme/nme-sep-rate.html. The separate-rate 
application will be due 30 days after publication of this initiation 
notice.\72\ Exporters and producers who submit a separate-rate 
application and are selected as mandatory respondents will be eligible 
for consideration for separate-rate status only if they respond to all 
parts of Commerce's AD questionnaire as mandatory respondents. Commerce 
requires that companies from China submit a response to both the Q&V 
questionnaire and the separate-rate application by the respective 
deadlines in order to receive consideration for separate-rate status. 
Companies not filing a timely Q&V response will not receive separate-
rate consideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and 
Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigation 
involving Non-Market Economy Countries (April 5, 2005), available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf (Policy Bulletin 
05.1).
    \72\ Although in past investigations this deadline was 60 days, 
consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(a), which states that ``the Secretary 
may request any person to submit factual information at any time 
during a proceeding,'' this deadline is now 30 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Use of Combination Rates

    Commerce will calculate combination rates for certain respondents 
that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME investigation. The 
Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin states:

{w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates 
only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now 
assign in its NME Investigation will be specific to those producers 
that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, 
however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the 
producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the

[[Page 7336]]

period of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory 
respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as 
well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-
average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is 
referred to as the application of ``combination rates'' because such 
rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more 
producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply 
only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question and 
produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of 
investigation.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \73\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been 
provided to the governments of Canada, China, and Mexico via ACCESS. To 
the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public 
version of the Petitions to each exporter named in the Petitions, as 
provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, 
China, and/or Mexico are materially injuring, or threatening material 
injury to, a U.S. industry.\74\ A negative ITC determination for any 
country will result in the investigation being terminated with respect 
to that country.\75\ Otherwise, the investigations will proceed 
according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \75\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) 
Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence 
submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available 
information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the 
adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence 
placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual 
information described in (i)-(iv). Section 351.301(b) of Commerce's 
regulations requires any party, when submitting factual information, to 
specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information 
is being submitted \76\ and, if the information is submitted to rebut, 
clarify, or correct factual information already on the record, to 
provide an explanation identifying the information already on the 
record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or 
correct.\77\ Time limits for the submission of factual information are 
addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based 
on the type of factual information being submitted. Interested parties 
should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information 
in these investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \76\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \77\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Particular Market Situation Allegation

    Section 504 of the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 amended 
the Act by adding the concept of particular market situation (PMS) for 
purposes of CV under section 773(e) of the Act.\78\ Section 773(e) of 
the Act states that ``if a particular market situation exists such that 
the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of any kind 
does not accurately reflect the cost of production in the ordinary 
course of trade, the administering authority may use another 
calculation methodology under this subtitle or any other calculation 
methodology.'' When an interested party submits a PMS allegation 
pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce will respond to such a 
submission consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v). If Commerce finds 
that a PMS exists under section 773(e) of the Act, then it will modify 
its dumping calculations appropriately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Neither section 773(e) of the Act nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v) set a 
deadline for the submission of PMS allegations and supporting factual 
information. However, in order to administer section 773(e) of the Act, 
Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting factual 
information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus, should 
an interested party wish to submit a PMS allegation and supporting new 
factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, it must do 
so no later than 20 days after submission of a respondent's initial 
section D questionnaire response.

Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as 
otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request 
will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the 
time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are 
due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be 
considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. 
Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time 
limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for 
submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such 
a case, we will inform parties in a letter or memorandum of the 
deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must 
be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in 
a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will 
grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Parties 
should review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 
(September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information 
in these investigations.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\79\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\80\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \79\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \80\ See also Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Answers to 
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule are available at 
http://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, Commerce 
published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents 
Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). 
Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure 
that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing 
of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) 
and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).


[[Page 7337]]


    Dated: February 25, 2019.
Gary Taverman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Operations, performing the non-exclusive functions and duties of the 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix--Scope of the Investigations

    The merchandise covered by these investigations is carbon and 
alloy fabricated structural steel. Fabricated structural steel is 
made from steel in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over 
each of the other contained elements; and (2) the carbon content is 
two percent or less by weight. Fabricated structural steel products 
are steel products that have been fabricated for erection or 
assembly into structures, including, but not limited to, buildings 
(commercial, office, institutional, and multi-family residential); 
industrial and utility projects; parking decks; arenas and 
convention centers; medical facilities; and ports, transportation 
and infrastructure facilities. Fabricated structural steel is 
manufactured from carbon and alloy (including stainless) steel 
products such as angles, columns, beams, girders, plates, flange 
shapes (including manufactured structural shapes utilizing welded 
plates as a substitute for rolled wide flange sections), channels, 
hollow structural section (HSS) shapes, base plates, and plate-work 
components. Fabrication includes, but is not limited to cutting, 
drilling, welding, joining, bolting, bending, punching, pressure 
fitting, molding, grooving, adhesion, beveling, and riveting and may 
include items such as fasteners, nuts, bolts, rivets, screws, 
hinges, or joints.
    The inclusion, attachment, joining, or assembly of non-steel 
components with fabricated structural steel does not remove the 
fabricated structural steel from the scope.
    Fabricated structural steel is covered by the scope of the 
investigations regardless of whether it is painted, varnished, or 
coated with plastics or other metallic or non-metallic substances 
and regardless of whether it is assembled or partially assembled, 
such as into modules, modularized construction units, or sub-
assemblies of fabricated structural steel.
    Subject merchandise includes fabricated structural steel that 
has been assembled or further processed in the subject country or a 
third country, including but not limited to painting, varnishing, 
trimming, cutting, drilling, welding, joining, bolting, punching, 
bending, beveling, riveting, galvanizing, coating, and/or slitting 
or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the 
merchandise from the scope of the investigations if performed in the 
country of manufacture of the fabricated structural steel.
    Specifically excluded from the scope of these investigations 
are:
    1. Fabricated steel concrete reinforcing bar (rebar) if: (i) It 
is a unitary piece of fabricated rebar, not joined, welded, or 
otherwise connected with any other steel product or part; or (ii) it 
is joined, welded, or otherwise connected only to other rebar.
    2. Fabricated structural steel for bridges and bridge sections 
that meets American Association of State and Highway and 
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) bridge construction requirements 
or any state or local derivatives of the AASHTO bridge construction 
requirements.
    3. Pre-engineered metal building systems, which are defined as 
complete metal buildings that integrate steel framing, roofing and 
walls to form one, pre-engineered building system, that meet Metal 
Building Manufacturers Association guide specifications. Pre-
engineered metal building systems are typically limited in height to 
no more than 60 feet or two stories.
    4. Steel roof and floor decking systems that meet Steel Deck 
Institute standards.
    5. Open web steel bar joists and joist girders that meet Steel 
Joist Institute specifications.
    The products subject to the investigations are currently 
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) under subheadings: 7308.90.3000, 7308.90.6000, and 
7308.90.9590.
    The products subject to the investigations may also enter under 
the following HTSUS subheadings: 7216.91.0010, 7216.91.0090, 
7216.99.0010, 7216.99.0090, 7222.40.6000, 7228.70.6000, 
7301.10.0000, 7301.20.1000, 7301.20.5000, 7308.40.0000, 
7308.90.9530, and 9406.90.0030.
    The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the 
investigations is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2019-03818 Filed 3-1-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P