Melamine From Germany, India, Japan, the Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations, 17413-17418 [2024-05127]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 48 (Monday, March 11, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17413-17418]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-05127]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-428-852, A-533-924, A-588-882, A-518-001, A-421-817, A-274-810]


Melamine From Germany, India, Japan, the Netherlands, Qatar, and 
Trinidad and Tobago: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

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


DATES: Applicable March 5, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate Johnson (Germany) at (202) 482-
4929; Charles DeFilippo (India) at (202) 482-3797; Carolyn Adie (Japan) 
at (202) 482-6250; Fred Baker (the Netherlands) at (202) 482-2924; 
Gorden Struck (Qatar) at (202) 482-8151; and Brittany Bauer (Trinidad 
and Tobago) at (202) 482-3860, 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 14, 2024, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) 
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of melamine 
from Germany, India, Japan, the Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and 
Tobago filed in proper form on behalf of Cornerstone Chemical Company 
(the petitioner).\1\ These AD Petitions were accompanied by 
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of melamine from 
Germany, India, Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Petitioner's Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,'' dated February 14, 2024 
(the Petitions).
    \2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Between February 16 and 28, 2024, Commerce requested supplemental 
information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions in separate 
supplemental questionnaires.\3\ The petitioner filed responses to the 
supplemental questionnaires between February 22 and 29, 2024.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Commerce's Letter, ``Supplemental Questions,'' dated 
February 16, 2024 (General Issues Questionnaire); see also Country-
Specific AD Supplemental Questionnaires: Germany Supplemental, India 
Supplemental, Japan Supplemental, the Netherlands Supplemental, 
Qatar Supplemental, and Trinidad and Tobago Supplemental, dated 
February 16, 2024; and Memoranda, ``Phone Call,'' dated February 23, 
2024, and February 28, 2024, respectively.
    \4\ See Petitioner's Letters, ``Petitioner's Response to Volume 
I General Issues Supplemental Questionnaire,'' dated February 22, 
2024 (General Issues Supplement); see also Country-Specific AD 
Supplemental Responses, dated February 22, 2024; Country-Specific 
Second AD Supplemental Responses, dated February 27, 2024; and 
Trinidad and Tobago Third AD Supplemental Response, dated February 
29, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of melamine from 
Germany, India, Japan, the Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago 
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 imports of such products are materially injuring, or threatening 
material injury to, the melamine industry in the United States. 
Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions were 
accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner 
supporting its allegations.
    Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of 
the domestic industry, because the petitioner is an interested party, 
as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also finds that 
the petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support for the 
initiation of the requested LTFV investigations.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See section on ``Determination of Industry Support for the 
Petitions,'' infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Periods of Investigation

    Because the Petitions were filed on February 14, 2024, pursuant to 
19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) for each of 
these LTFV investigations is January 1, 2023, through December 31, 
2023.

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is melamine from 
Germany, India, Japan, the Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago. 
For a full description of the scope of these investigations, see the 
appendix to this notice.

Comments on the Scope of the Investigations

    On February 16, 2024, Commerce requested information and 
clarification from the petitioner regarding the proposed scope to 
ensure that the scope language in the Petitions is an accurate 
reflection of the products for which the

[[Page 17414]]

domestic industry is seeking relief.\6\ On February 22, 2024, the 
petitioner provided clarifications and revised the scope.\7\ The 
description of merchandise covered by these investigations, as 
described in the appendix to this notice, reflects these revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See General Issues Questionnaire.
    \7\ See General Issues Supplement at 5-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are 
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding 
product coverage (i.e., scope).\8\ Commerce will consider all scope 
comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will 
consult with interested parties prior to the issuance of the 
preliminary determinations. 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 scope comments be submitted by 5:00 p.m. Eastern 
Time (ET) on March 25, 2024, which is 20 calendar days from the 
signature date of this notice.\10\ Any rebuttal comments, which may 
include factual information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on April 4, 
2024, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble); see also 19 CFR 
351.312.
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual 
information'').
    \10\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically via 
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), unless an exception 
applies.\11\ An electronically filed document must be received 
successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 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_on_Electronic_Filing_Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Product Characteristics

    Commerce is providing interested parties an opportunity to comment 
on the appropriate physical characteristics of melamine 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 cost of production (COP) 
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 melamine, 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 25, 
2024, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this 
notice.\12\ Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on 
April 4, 2024, which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment 
deadline. All comments and submissions to Commerce must be filed 
electronically using ACCESS, as explained above, on the record of each 
of the LTFV investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 U.S. 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 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 Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United 
States, 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

[[Page 17415]]

``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 investigations.\15\ Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that melamine, 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 Petitions at Volume I (pages 14-17 and Exhibits I-3 
through I-5, I-21 and I-22).
    \16\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as 
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support, 
see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklists: Melamine 
from Germany, India, Japan, the Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and 
Tobago, dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice 
(Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists) at Attachment II, 
Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Petitions Covering Melamine from Germany, India, Japan, the 
Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago (Attachment II). These 
checklists are on file electronically via ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 2023.\17\ The petitioner 
stated that there are no other known producers of melamine in the 
United States and provided information to support its claim; therefore, 
the Petitions are supported by 100 percent of the U.S. industry.\18\ We 
relied on the data provided by the petitioner for purposes of measuring 
industry support.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 5 and Exhibit I-1).
    \18\ Id. at 5 and Exhibits I-3 and I-8.
    \19\ Id. For further discussion, see Attachment II of the 
Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions and other 
information readily available to Commerce indicates that the petitioner 
has established industry support for the Petitions.\20\ 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).\21\ 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.\22\ 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.\23\ 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.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 5 and Exhibits I-3 and I-
8). For further discussion, see Attachment II of the Country-
Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
    \21\ See Attachment II of the Country-Specific AD Initiation 
Checklists; see also section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
    \22\ See Attachment II of the Country-Specific AD Initiation 
Checklists.
    \23\ Id.
    \24\ 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 states that 
subject imports from Germany, India, the Netherlands, Qatar, and 
Trinidad and Tobago exceed the negligibility threshold provided for 
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 17-18 and Exhibit I-23).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With regard to Japan, while the allegedly dumped imports do not 
exceed the statutory requirements for negligibility,\26\ the petitioner 
alleges and provides supporting evidence that: (1) there is a 
reasonable indication that data obtained in the ITC's investigation 
will establish that imports exceed the negligibility threshold \27\ and 
(2) there is the potential that imports from Japan will imminently 
exceed the negligibility threshold and therefore, are not negligible 
for purposes of a threat determination.\28\ The petitioner's arguments 
regarding the reasonable indication that information obtained in the 
ITC's investigation will demonstrate that imports from Japan exceed the 
negligibility threshold are consistent with the SAA. Furthermore, the 
petitioner's arguments regarding the potential for imports from Japan 
to imminently exceed the negligibility threshold are consistent with 
the statutory criteria for ``negligibility in threat analysis'' under 
section 771(24)(A)(iv) of the Act, which provides that imports shall 
not be treated as negligible if there is a potential that subject 
imports from a country will imminently exceed the statutory 
requirements for negligibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Id.
    \27\ Id. at 18 and Exhibit I-25; see also Statement of 
Administrative Action Accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, 
H.R. Doc. 103-316, Vol. 1 (1994) (SAA), at 857.
    \28\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 18 and Exhibit I-25); see 
also section 771(24)(A)(iv) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by the significant volume of subject imports; reduced 
market share; underselling and price depression and/or suppression; 
lost sales and revenues; decline in shipments, production, and capacity 
utilization; and adverse effect on financial performance.\29\ We 
assessed the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material 
injury, threat of material injury, causation, as well as negligibility, 
and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by 
adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for 
initiation.\30\ In accordance with section 771(7)(G)(ii)(III) of the 
Act, which provides an exception to the mandatory cumulation provision 
for imports from any country designated as a beneficiary country under 
the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA), we considered the 
petitioner's allegation of injury with respect to Trinidad and Tobago, 
a designated beneficiary under CBERA, independently of the allegations 
for Germany, India, Japan, the Netherlands, and Qatar, and found that 
the information provided satisfies the requirements for initiation.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 1-3, 17-40, and Exhibits 
I-1, I-3 through I-5, I-8, I-13, and I-23 through I-31).
    \30\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists at Attachment 
III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Melamine from Germany, India, Japan, the Netherlands, 
Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago.
    \31\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Sales at LTFV

    The following is a description of the allegations of sales at LTFV 
upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate LTFV investigations 
of imports of melamine from Germany, India, Japan, the Netherlands, 
Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago. 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

[[Page 17416]]

Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.

U.S. Price

    For Germany, India, Japan, the Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and 
Tobago, the petitioner based export price (EP) on the average unit 
values (AUVs) derived from official import statistics for imports of 
melamine from these countries into the United States during the 
POI.\32\ For Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and 
Tobago, the petitioner also based EP on transaction-specific AUVs 
(i.e., month- and port-specific AUVs) derived from official import 
statistics and tied to ship manifest data.\33\ For India and Qatar, the 
petitioner also based EP on pricing information for sales, or offers 
for sale, of melamine produced in and exported from each country.\34\ 
For each country, the petitioner made certain adjustments to U.S. price 
to calculate net ex-factory U.S. prices, where applicable.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
    \33\ Id.
    \34\ See India AD Initiation Checklist and Qatar AD Initiation 
Checklist.
    \35\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value 36
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ In accordance with section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for each 
of these LTFV investigations, Commerce will request information 
necessary to calculate the CV and 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Germany, India, and Qatar, the petitioner based NV on home 
market prices obtained through market research for melamine produced in 
and sold, or offered for sale, in the respective countries during the 
POI.\37\ For India and Qatar, the petitioner provided information 
indicating that the prices for melamine sold or offered for sale in the 
respective countries were below the COP.\38\ Therefore, for India and 
Qatar, the petitioner calculated NV based on constructed value 
(CV).\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ See Germany AD Initiation Checklist, India AD Initiation 
Checklist, and Qatar AD Initiation Checklist.
    \38\ See India AD Initiation Checklist and Qatar AD Initiation 
Checklist.
    \39\ See India AD Initiation Checklist and Qatar AD Initiation 
Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Japan, the petitioner stated that it was unable to obtain home 
market prices for melamine produced and sold in Japan and based NV on 
the POI AUV of publicly-available export data for exports of melamine 
from Japan to a third country, Italy.\40\ The petitioner provided 
information indicating that third country prices were below the COP and 
therefore based NV on CV.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ See Japan AD Initiation Checklist.
    \41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the Netherlands, the petitioner stated that it was unable to 
obtain home market or third country pricing information for melamine to 
use as a basis for NV.\42\ Therefore, for the Netherlands, the 
petitioner calculated NV based on CV.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See The Netherlands AD Initiation Checklist.
    \43\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Trinidad and Tobago, the petitioner contends that the home 
market is not viable based on available information and based NV on the 
POI AUV of publicly-available export data for exports of melamine from 
Trinidad and Tobago to a third country, Germany.\44\ The petitioner 
provided information indicating that third country prices were below 
the COP and therefore based NV on CV.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See Trinidad and Tobago AD Initiation Checklist.
    \45\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For further discussion of CV for India, Japan, the Netherlands, 
Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago, see the section ``Normal Value Based on 
Constructed Value,'' below.

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value

    As noted above, for India, Japan, Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago, 
the petitioner provided information indicating that the prices for 
melamine sold or offered for sale in the respective home market or in 
third country markets were below the COP.\46\ Also, as noted above for 
the Netherlands, the petitioner stated that it was unable to obtain 
home market or third country prices for melamine to use as a basis for 
NV.\47\ Therefore, for India, Japan, the Netherlands, Qatar, and 
Trinidad and Tobago, the petitioner calculated NV based on CV.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
    \47\ Id.
    \48\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, the petitioner calculated CV 
as the sum of the cost of manufacturing, selling, general and 
administrative (SG&A), financial expenses, and profit.\49\ For each of 
these countries, in calculating the cost of manufacturing, the 
petitioner relied on its own production experience and input 
consumption rates, valued using publicly available information 
applicable to the respective countries or, for certain inputs, using 
its own costs.\50\ In calculating SG&A, financial expenses, and profit 
ratios, the petitioner relied on the fiscal year 2022 financial 
statements of a producer of identical or comparable merchandise 
domiciled in the respective countries, where applicable.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ Id.
    \50\ Id.
    \51\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to 
believe that imports of melamine from Germany, India, Japan, the 
Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago are being, or are likely to 
be, sold in the United States at LTFV. Based on comparisons of EP to NV 
in accordance with sections 772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated 
dumping margins for melamine for each of the countries covered by this 
initiation are as follows: (1) Germany--139.74 to 218.73 percent; (2) 
India--393.82 to 632.74 percent; (3) Japan--102.53 to 127.69 percent; 
(4) the Netherlands--34.84 to 72.16 percent; (5) Qatar--143.75 to 
504.23 percent; and (6) Trinidad and Tobago--49.78 to 146.85 
percent.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of LTFV Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the Petitions and supplemental 
responses, we find that they meet the requirements of section 732 of 
the Act. Therefore, we are initiating LTFV investigations to determine 
whether imports of melamine from Germany, India, Japan, the 
Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago 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 these initiations.

Respondent Selection

    In the Petitions, the petitioner identified one company in Germany 
as a producer/exporter of melamine (i.e., LAT Nitrogen Piesteritz 
GmbH), one company in India as a producer/exporter of melamine (i.e., 
Guajarat State Fertilizer and Chemicals Limited), one company in Japan 
as a producer/exporter of melamine (i.e., Mitsui Chemicals, Inc.), one 
company in the Netherlands as a producer/exporter of melamine (i.e., 
OCI Nitrogen B.V.), two companies in Qatar as producers/exporters of 
melamine (i.e., Qatar Melamine Company and Muntajat Qatar Chemical and 
Petrochemical Marketing and Distribution Company), and one company in 
Trinidad and Tobago as a producer/exporter of melamine (i.e., Methanol 
Holdings (Trinidad) Limited) and provided independent third-party

[[Page 17417]]

information as support.\53\ We currently know of no additional 
producers/exporters of melamine from Germany, India, Japan, the 
Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 13-14 and Exhibits I-8 and 
I-18); see also General Issues Supplement at 1-4 and Exhibits I-S1 
and I-S2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, Commerce intends to individually examine all known 
producers/exporters in the investigations from these countries (i.e., 
the companies cited above). We invite interested parties to comment on 
this issue. Such comments may include factual information within the 
meaning of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21). Parties wishing to comment must do so 
within three business days of the publication of this notice in the 
Federal Register. Comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. 
An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its 
entirety via ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. ET on the specified deadline. Because 
we intend to examine all known producers/exporters in Germany, India, 
Japan, the Netherlands, Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago, if no comments 
are received or if comments received further support the existence of 
these sole producers/exporters in the respective countries, we do not 
intend to conduct respondent selection and will proceed to issuing the 
initial AD questionnaires to the companies identified. However, if 
comments are received which create a need for a respondent selection 
process, we intend to finalize our decisions regarding respondent 
selection within 20 days of publication of this notice.

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 Germany, India, Japan, the Netherlands, 
Qatar, and Trinidad and Tobago 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

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

Preliminary Determinations 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 melamine from Germany, India, Japan, the 
Netherlands, Qatar, and/or Trinidad and Tobago are materially injuring, 
or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.\54\ A negative ITC 
determination for any country will result in the investigation being 
terminated with respect to that country.\55\ Otherwise, these LTFV 
investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time 
limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \55\ 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 of production 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 \56\ 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.\57\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \57\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Particular Market Situation Allegation

    Section 773(e) of the Act addresses the concept of particular 
market situation (PMS) for purposes of CV, stating 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 Commerce. 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, or as otherwise specified by 
Commerce.\58\ 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, Commerce 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, standalone submission; under limited circumstances we will 
grant untimely filed requests for the extension of time limits, where 
we determine, based on 19 CFR 351.302, that extraordinary circumstances 
exist. Parties should review Commerce's regulations concerning the 
extension of time limits and the Time Limits Final Rule prior to 
submitting factual information in these investigations.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ See 19 CFR 351.301; see also Extension of Time Limits; 
Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013) (Time Limits Final 
Rule), available at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm.
    \59\ See 19 CFR 351.302; see also, e.g., Time Limits Final Rule.

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

[[Page 17418]]

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\60\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\61\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \61\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule); see also 
frequently asked questions regarding the Final Rule, available at 
https://enforcement.trade.gov/tlei/notices/factual_info_final_rule_FAQ_07172013.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
administrative protective order in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 
Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure 
that they meet the requirements of 19 CFR 351.103(d) (e.g., by filing 
the required letter of appearance). Note that Commerce has amended 
certain of its requirements pertaining to the service of documents in 
19 CFR 351.303(f).\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ See Administrative Protective Order, Service, and Other 
Procedures in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 88 FR 
67069 (September 29, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) 
and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).

    Dated: March 5, 2024
Ryan Majerus,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, performing the 
non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for 
Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

Scope of the Investigations

    The merchandise subject to these investigations is melamine 
(Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) registry number 108-78-01, 
molecular formula C3 H6 N6). 
Melamine is also known as 2,4,6-triamino-s-triazine; 1,3,5-Triazine-
2,4,6-triamine; Cyanurotriamide; Cyanurotriamine; Cyanuramide; and 
by various brand names. Melamine is a crystalline powder or granule. 
All melamine is covered by the scope of these investigations 
irrespective of purity, particle size, or physical form. Melamine 
that has been blended with other products is included within this 
scope when such blends include constituent parts that have been 
intermingled, but that have not been chemically reacted with each 
other to produce a different product. For such blends, only the 
melamine component of the mixture is covered by the scope of these 
investigations. Melamine that is otherwise subject to these 
investigations is not excluded when commingled with melamine from 
sources not subject to these investigations. Only the subject 
component of such commingled products is covered by the scope of 
these investigations.
    The subject merchandise is provided for in subheading 
2933.61.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading and CAS registry number are 
provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written 
description of the scope is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2024-05127 Filed 3-8-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P