[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 93 (Tuesday, May 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22491-22497]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09870]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-428-845, A-533-873, A-475-838, A-580-892, A-570-058, A-441-801]


Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel 
From the Federal Republic of Germany, India, Italy, the Republic of 
Korea, the People's Republic of China, and Switzerland: Initiation of 
Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

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

DATES: Effective May 9, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frances Veith at (202) 482-4295, or 
Shanah Lee at (202) 482-6386 (Federal Republic of Germany (Germany)), 
Omar Qureshi at (202) 482-5307 (India), Laurel LaCivita at (202) 482-
4243 (Italy), Annathea Cook at (202) 482-0250 (Republic of Korea 
(Korea)), Paul Stolz at (202) 482-4474 (People's Republic of China), 
and Amanda Brings at (202) 482-3927 (Switzerland), AD/CVD Operations, 
Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions

    On April 19, 2017, the U.S. Department of Commerce (the Department) 
received antidumping duty (AD) Petitions concerning imports of certain 
cold-drawn mechanical tubing of carbon and alloy steel (cold-drawn 
mechanical tubing) from Germany, India, Italy, Korea, the People's 
Republic of China (the PRC), and Switzerland, filed in proper form on 
behalf of ArcelorMittal Tubular Products; Michigan Seamless Tube, LLC; 
PTC Alliance Corp.; Webco Industries, Inc.; and Zekelman Industries, 
Inc. (collectively, the petitioners).\1\ The AD Petitions were 
accompanied by countervailing duty (CVD) Petitions on imports from 
India and the PRC. The petitioners are domestic producers of cold-drawn 
mechanical tubing.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and 
Alloy Steel from the People's Republic of China, the Federal 
Republic of Germany, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and 
Switzerland--Petitions for the Imposition of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duties'' (April 19, 2017) (the Petitions).
    \2\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 24, 2017, the Department requested additional information 
and clarification of certain areas of the Petitions.\3\ The petitioners 
filed responses to these requests on April 28, 2017.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Letter from the Department, ``Petitions for the 
Imposition of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from 
the People's Republic of China, the Federal Republic of Germany, 
India, Italy the Republic of Korea and Switzerland: Supplemental 
Questions,'' dated April 24, 2017 (General Iussues Supplement); see 
also Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 
Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from the 
People's Republic of China: Supplemental Questions; and Petition for 
the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Cold-Drawn 
Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from the Federal 
Republic of Germany: Supplemental Questions; and Petition for the 
Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of Cold-Drawn Mechanical 
Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from India: Supplemental Questions; 
and Petition for the Imposition of Antidumping Duties on Imports of 
Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from Italy: 
Supplemental Questions; and Petition for the Imposition of 
Antidumping Duties on Imports of Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of 
Carbon and Alloy Steel from Switzerland: Supplemental Questions. All 
of these documents are dated April 24, 2017. See also country-
specific memoranda to the file ``Telephone Call to Foreign Market 
Researcher Regarding Antidumping Petition.''
    \4\ See Letter from the petitioners, ``Certain Cold-Drawn 
Mechancial Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from the People's 
Republic of China, the Federal Republic of Germany, India, Italy, 
the Republic of Korea and Switzerland: Petitioners' Amendment to 
Volume I Relating to General Issues;'' see also ``Certain Cold-Drawn 
Mechanical Tubing from the People's Republic of China: Petitioners' 
Response to Questions Concerning the Antidumping Duty Petition;'' 
and ``Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing from the Federal Republic 
of Germany: Petitioners' Response to Questions Concerning the 
Antidumping Duty Petition;'' and ``Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical 
Tubing from India: Petitioners' Response to Questions Concerning the 
Antidumping Duty Petition;'' and ``Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical 
Tubing from India: Petitioners' Response to Questions Concerning the 
Antidumping Duty Petition;'' and ``Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical 
Tubing from the Italy: Petitioners' Response to Questions Concerning 
the Antidumping Duty Petition;'' and ``Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical 
Tubing from the Republic of Korea: Petitioners' Response to 
Questions Concerning the Antidumping Duty Petition;'' and ``Cold-
Drawn Mechanical Tubing from Switzerland: Response to the 
Department's Supplemental Petition Questions.'' Each of these 
documents is dated April 28, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of cold-drawn 
mechanical tubing from Germany, India, Italy, Korea, the PRC, and 
Switzerland are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States 
at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, 
and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material 
injury to, an industry in the United States. Also, consistent with 
section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by 
information reasonably available to the petitioners supporting their 
allegations.
    The Department finds that the petitioners filed these Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested 
parties as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. The Department also 
finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support 
with respect to the initiation of the AD investigations that the 
petitioners are requesting.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Periods of Investigation

    Because the Petitions were filed on April 19, 2017, the period of 
investigation (POI) for all investigations except the PRC is April 1, 
2016, through March 31, 2017. Because the PRC is a non-market economy 
(NME) country, the POI for that investigation is October 1, 2016, 
through March 31, 2017.

Scope of the Investigations

    The product covered by these investigations is cold-drawn 
mechanical tubing from Germany, India, Italy, Korea, the PRC, and 
Switzerland. For a full description of the scope of these 
investigations, see the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in Appendix I 
of this notice.

Comments on Scope of the Investigations

    During our review of the Petitions, the Department issued questions 
to, and received responses from, the petitioners pertaining to the 
proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions would 
be an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic 
industry is seeking relief.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See General Issues Supplement, at 1-6 and Exhibits GEN-SUPP-
1 and GEN-SUPP-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the preamble to the Department's regulations, we 
are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues 
regarding product coverage (scope).\7\ The Department will consider all 
comments received from parties and, if necessary, will consult with 
parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary

[[Page 22492]]

determinations. If scope comments include factual information (see 19 
CFR 351.102(b)(21)), all such factual information should be limited to 
public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, 
the Department requests all interested parties to submit such comments 
by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Tuesday, May 30, 2017, which is the 
next business day after 20 calendar days from the signature date of 
this notice.\8\ Any rebuttal comments, which may include factual 
information, must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on Friday, June 9, 2017, 
which is 10 calendar days from the deadline for initial comments.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule, 
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
    \8\ The twenty-day deadline falls on May 29, 2017, a federal 
holiday; accordingly, our due date will be on the next business day.
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department requests that any factual information the parties 
consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted 
during this time 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 the Department 
and request permission to submit the additional information. All such 
comments must be filed on the records of each of the concurrent AD and 
CVD investigations.

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\10\ An electronically-
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the 
time and date when it is due. Documents excepted 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 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 the Department's electronic 
filing requirements, which went into effect on 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

    The Department will provide interested parties an opportunity to 
comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of cold-drawn 
mechanical tubing to be reported in response to the Department's AD 
questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key 
physical characteristics of the merchandise under consideration in 
order to report the relevant costs of production 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 cold-drawn mechanical tubing, 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, the Department 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 May 30, 2017, 
which is the first business day after 20 calendar days from the 
signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments, must be filed by 
5:00 p.m. ET on June 9, 2017. All comments and submissions to the 
Department must be filed electronically using ACCESS, as explained 
above, on the records of the Germany, India, Italy, Korea, PRC, and 
Switzerland less-than-fair-value 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, the Department 
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 the Department 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 the Department and 
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\11\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a 
separate and distinct authority. In addition, the Department'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.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \12\ 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 
Petitions).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product

[[Page 22493]]

distinct from the scope of the investigations. Based on our analysis of 
the information submitted on the record, we have determined that cold-
drawn mechanical tubing, as defined in the scope, constitutes a single 
domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of 
that domestic like product.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
these cases, see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy 
Steel from the People's Republic of China (PRC AD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II, Analysis of Industry Support for the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Certain Cold-
Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from the People's 
Republic of China, the Federal Republic of Germany, India, Italy, 
the Republic of Korea, and Switzerland (Attachment II); Antidumping 
Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Cold-Drawn 
Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from the Federal 
Republic of Germany (Germany AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment 
II; Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain 
Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from India 
(India AD Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty 
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical 
Tubing of Carbon and Alloy Steel from Italy (Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II; Antidumping Duty Investigation 
Initiation Checklist: Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon 
and Alloy Steel from the Republic of Korea (Korea AD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II; and Antidumping Duty Investigation 
Initiation Checklist: Certain Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon 
and Alloy Steel from Switzerland (Switzerland AD Initiation 
Checklist), at Attachment II. These checklists are dated 
concurrently with 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioners have 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 Appendix I of 
this notice. The petitioners provided 2016 production or U.S. shipments 
of the domestic like product for all supporters of the Petitions, and 
compared this to the estimated total production of the domestic like 
product for the entire domestic industry.\14\ We relied on data the 
petitioners provided for purposes of measuring industry support.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2-3 and Exhibits GEN-3--
GEN-5; see also General Issues Supplement, at 6-8 and Exhibits GEN-
SUPP-3 and GEN-SUPP-4.
    \15\ Id. For further discussion, see PRC AD Initiation 
Checklist, Germany AD Initiation Checklist, India AD Initiation 
Checklist, Italy AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation 
Checklist, and Switzerland AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment 
II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, General Issues 
Supplement, and other information readily available to the Department 
indicates that the petitioners have established industry support for 
the Petitions.\16\ 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, the 
Department is not required to take further action in order to evaluate 
industry support (e.g., polling).\17\ 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.\18\ 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.\19\ Accordingly, the Department 
determines that the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic 
industry within the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, Germany AD Initiation 
Checklist, India AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, and Switzerland AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \17\ See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also PRC AD 
Initiation Checklist, Germany AD Initiation Checklist, India AD 
Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD 
Initiation Checklist, and Switzerland AD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II.
    \18\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist, Germany AD Initiation 
Checklist, India AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, and Switzerland AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because they are interested parties as 
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and they have demonstrated 
sufficient industry support with respect to the AD investigations that 
they are requesting that the Department initiate.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioners allege 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 less than normal value (NV). In addition, the 
petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility 
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 15-16; see also General 
Issues Supplement, at 9 and Exhibit GEN-SUPP-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price suppression 
or depression; lost sales and revenues; decreased production, capacity 
utilization, and U.S. shipments; declines in employment of production-
related workers, wages paid, and hours worked; and declines in 
financial performance.\22\ We have assessed the allegations and 
supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material 
injury, and causation, and we have determined that these allegations 
are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the statutory 
requirements for initiation.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Id., at 12-30 and Exhibits GEN-3, GEN-12 and GEN-14--GEN-
17.
    \23\ See PRC 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 Cold-Drawn Mechanical Tubing of Carbon and Alloy 
Steel from the People's Republic of China, the Federal Republic of 
Germany, India, Italy, the Republic of Korea, and Switzerland 
(Attachment III); Germany AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment 
III; India AD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; Italy AD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; Korea AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment III; and Switzerland AD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

    The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less 
than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to 
initiate AD investigations of imports of cold-drawn mechanical tubing 
from Germany, India, Italy, Korea, the PRC, and Switzerland. The 
sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. 
price and NV are discussed in greater detail in the country-specific 
initiation checklists.

Export Price

    For India, Italy, Korea, and the PRC, the petitioners based U.S. 
price on export price (EP) using price quotes for sales of cold-drawn 
mechanical tubing produced in, and exported from, the subject county 
and offered for sale in the United States.\24\ For Switzerland, the 
petitioners based EP on average unit values (AUVs) of publicly 
available import data.\25\ Where applicable, the petitioners made 
deductions from U.S. price for movement expenses, consistent

[[Page 22494]]

with the terms of sale, and for a reseller markup.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, PRC AD Initiation Checklist, and Korea AD Initiation 
Checklist.
    \25\ See Switzerland AD Initiation Checklist.
    \26\ See India AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, PRC AD Initiation 
Checklist, and Switzerland AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Constructed Export Price

    For Germany, the petitioners had reason to believe that the first 
transaction relating to the entry of goods into the United States was 
to a U.S. affiliate. Therefore, the petitioners based constructed 
export price (CEP) on a sales offer which was obtained from a 
confidential source.\27\ The petitioners made deductions from U.S. 
price for foreign movement expenses and U.S. importer's selling 
expenses to derive a net ex-factory CEP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ See Germany AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

    For Germany, India, Italy, Korea, and Switzerland, the petitioners 
provided home market price information obtained through market research 
for cold-drawn mechanical tubing produced in, and offered for sale in, 
each of these countries.\28\ For all five of these countries, the 
petitioners provided a declaration from a market researcher for the 
price information.\29\ Where applicable, the petitioners made 
deductions for movement expenses and imputed credit expenses, 
consistent with the terms of sale.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ See Germany AD Initiation Checklist, India AD Initiation 
Checklist, Italy AD Initiation Checklist, Korea AD Initiation 
Checklist, and Switzerland AD Initiation Checklist.
    \29\ Id.
    \30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Germany, Italy, Korea, and Switzerland, the petitioners also 
provided information that sales of cold-drawn mechanical tubing in the 
respective home markets were made at prices below the cost of 
production (COP). With respect to Germany, Italy, Korea, and 
Switzerland, the petitioners calculated NV based on home market prices 
and constructed value (CV).\31\ For further discussion of COP and NV 
based on CV, see below.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ See Germany AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, and Switzerland AD 
Initiation Checklist.
    \32\ In accordance with section 505(a) of the Trade Preferences 
Extension Act of 2015, amending section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for 
all of the investigations, the Department 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. The Department no longer requires a COP 
allegation to conduct this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the PRC, the petitioners stated that the Department 
has found the PRC to be a NME country in prior administrative 
proceedings in which the PRC has been involved.\33\ In accordance with 
section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the presumption of NME status remains 
in effect until revoked by the Department. The presumption of NME 
status for the PRC has not been revoked by the Department and, 
therefore, remains in effect for purposes of the initiation of this 
investigation. Accordingly, the NV of the product for the PRC is 
appropriately based on factors of production (FOPs) valued in a 
surrogate market economy country, in accordance with section 773(c) of 
the Act.\34\ In the course of this investigation, all parties, and the 
public, will have the opportunity to provide relevant information 
related to the granting of separate rates to individual exporters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 4-5.
    \34\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners claim that Mexico is an appropriate surrogate 
country because it is a market economy country that is at a level of 
economic development comparable to that of the PRC, it is a significant 
producer of comparable merchandise, and public information from Mexico 
is available to value all material input factors.\35\ Based on the 
information provided by the petitioners, we determine that it is 
appropriate to use Mexico as a surrogate country 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See Volume II of the Petition, at 5-6, Exhibit AD-PRC-3.A, 
B, and C, and Petition Supplement at 4-5 and Exhibit AD-PRC-Supp-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Factors of Production

    Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by the 
PRC producers/exporters is not available, the petitioners relied on the 
production experience of a domestic producer of cold-drawn mechanical 
tubing in the United States as an estimate of Chinese manufacturers' 
FOPs.\36\ The petitioners valued the estimated FOPs using surrogate 
values from Mexico and used the average POI exchange rate to convert 
the data to U.S. dollars.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Id., at 6 and Exhibit AD-PRC-4.B.
    \37\ See Volume II of the Petition at, 6-7 and Exhibit AD-PRC-
4.D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value

    Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the Act, COP consists of the cost 
of manufacturing (COM), SG&A, financial expenses, and packing expenses. 
The petitioners calculated COM based on the experience of a surrogate 
producer, adjusted for known differences between the surrogate producer 
and the producer(s) of the respective country (i.e., Germany, Italy, 
Korea, and Switzerland), during the proposed POI.\38\ Using publicly 
available data to account for price differences, the petitioners 
multiplied the surrogate usage quantities by the submitted value of the 
inputs used to manufacture cold-drawn mechanical tubing in each 
country.\39\ For Germany, Italy, Korea, and Switzerland, labor and 
energy rates were derived from publicly available sources multiplied by 
the product-specific usage rates.\40\ For Germany, Italy, Korea, and 
Switzerland, to determine factory overhead, the petitioners relied on 
the financial statements of companies they asserted were producers of 
identical or comparable merchandise operating in the respective foreign 
country or on their own experience for repairs and maintenance and 
other factory overhead. For SG&A, and financial expense rates, the 
petitioners relied on financial statements of companies they asserted 
were producers of identical or comparable merchandise operating in the 
respective foreign country.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Germany AD Initiation Checklist, Italy AD Initiation 
Checklist, Korea AD Initiation Checklist, and Switzerland AD 
Initiation Checklist.
    \39\ Id.
    \40\ Id.
    \41\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Germany, Italy, Korea, and Switzerland, because certain home 
market prices fell below COP, pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b), 
and 773(e) of the Act, as noted above, the petitioners also calculated 
NVs based on CV for those countries.\42\ Pursuant to section 773(e) of 
the Act, CV consists of the COM, SG&A, financial expenses, packing 
expenses, and profit. The petitioners calculated CV using the same 
average COM, SG&A, and financial expenses, to calculate COP.\43\ The 
petitioners relied on the financial statements of the same producers 
that they used for calculating manufacturing overhead, SG&A, and 
financial expenses to calculate the profit rate.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Id.
    \43\ Id.
    \44\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fair Value Comparisons

    Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to 
believe that imports of cold-drawn mechanical tubing from Germany, 
India, Italy, Korea, the PRC, and Switzerland are

[[Page 22495]]

being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair 
value. Based on comparisons of EP, or CEP, to NV in accordance with 
sections 772 and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for 
cold-drawn mechanical tubing are as follows: (1) Germany ranges from 
77.70 to 209.06 percent; \45\ (2) India is 33.80 percent; \46\ (3) 
Italy ranges from 37.08 to 68.95 percent; \47\ (4) Korea ranges from 
12.00 to 48.00 percent; \48\ (5) the PRC ranges from 87.58 to 186.89 
percent; \49\ and (6) Switzerland ranges from 38.02 to 52.21.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ See Germany AD Initiation Checklist.
    \46\ See India AD Initiation Checklist.
    \47\ See Italy AD Initiation Checklist.
    \48\ See Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
    \49\ See PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
    \50\ See Switzerland AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations

    Based upon the examination of the AD Petitions, 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 
cold-drawn mechanical tubing from Germany, India, Italy, Korea, the 
PRC, and Switzerland are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United 
States at less than fair value. 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.
    Under the the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, numerous 
amendments to the AD and CVD law were made.\51\ The 2015 law does not 
specify dates of application for those amendments. On August 6, 2015, 
the Department published an interpretative rule, in which it announced 
the applicability dates for each amendment to the Act, except for 
amendments contained in section 771(7) of the Act, which relate to 
determinations of material injury by the ITC.\52\ The amendments to 
sections 771(15), 773, 776, and 782 of the Act are applicable to all 
determinations made on or after August 6, 2015, and, therefore, apply 
to these AD investigations.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ See Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law 
114-27, 129 Stat. 362 (2015).
    \52\ See Dates of Application of Amendments to the Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Laws Made by the Trade Preferences Extension 
Act of 2015, 80 FR 46793 (August 6, 2015).
    \53\ Id. at 46794-95. The 2015 amendments may be found at 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1295/text/pl.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Respondent Selection

    The petitioners identified eight companies in Germany,\54\ 39 
companies in India,\55\ 12 companies in Italy,\56\ 17 companies in 
Korea,\57\ 91 companies in the PRC,\58\ and three companies in 
Switzerland,\59\ as producers/exporters of cold-drawn mechanical 
tubing. Following standard practice in AD investigations involving 
market economy countries, the Department will, where appropriate, 
select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 
data for U.S. imports of cold-drawn mechanical tubing during the 
respective POIs under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
subheadings. We intend to release CBP data under Administrative 
Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to information 
protected by APO within five business days of the announcement of the 
initiation of this investigation. Interested parties must submit 
applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may be found on 
the Department's Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ See Volume I at Exhibit GEN-11; and Germany AD Initiation 
Checklist.
    \55\ Id.; and India AD Initiation Checklist.
    \56\ Id., and Italy AD Initiation Checklist.
    \57\ Id.; and Korea AD Initiation Checklist.
    \58\ Id.; and PRC AD Initiation Checklist.
    \59\ Id.; and Switzerland AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties may submit comments regarding the CBP data and 
respondent selection by 5:00 p.m. ET on the seventh calendar day after 
publication of this notice. Parties wishing to submit rebuttal comments 
should submit those comments five calendar days after the deadline for 
initial comments.
    Comments must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An 
electronically-filed document must be received successfully, in its 
entirety, by ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the date noted above. 
If respondent selection is necessary, within 20 days of publication of 
this notice, we intend to make our decisions regarding respondent 
selection based upon comments received from interested parties and our 
analysis of the record information.
    With respect to the PRC, the petitioners named 12 PRC-producers/
exporters as accounting for the majority of exports of cold-drawn 
mechanical tubing to the United States from the PRC.\60\ In accordance 
with our standard practice for respondent selection in AD cases 
involving NME countries, we intend to issue quantity and value (Q&V) 
questionnaires to producers/exporters of merchandise subject to the 
investigation and, if necessary, base respondent selection on the 
responses received. For this investigation, the Department will request 
Q&V information from known exporters and producers identified, with 
complete contact information, in the Petition. In addition, the 
Department will post the Q&V questionnaire along with filing 
instructions on the Enforcement and Compliance Web site at http://www.trade.gov/enforcement/news.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ Though the petitioners listed 91 ``known Chinese producers 
of subject mechanical tubing'' in Volume I of the Petition at 
Exhibit Gen-11, they clarified in the PRC-specific Volume II of the 
Petition that ``to the best of the petitioners' knowledge, cold-
drawn mechanical tubing is manufactured in China and exported to the 
United States by several dozen companies, with the majority of 
exports coming from {12 listed producers and exporters for which 
company-specific information was attached{time} . See Volume II of 
the Petition at 1-2 and Exhibit AD-PRC-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Producers/exporters of cold-drawn mechanical tubing from the PRC 
that do not receive Q&V questionnaires by mail may still submit a 
response to the Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy from the 
Enforcement & Compliance Web site. The Q&V response must be submitted 
by the relevant PRC exporters/producers no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on 
May 24, 2017. 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.\61\ 
The specific requirements for submitting a separate-rate application in 
the PRC investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself, 
which is available on the Department's Web site 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.\62\ Exporters and producers who submit a separate-rate 
application and have been selected as mandatory respondents will be 
eligible for consideration for separate-rate status only if they 
respond to all parts of the Department's AD questionnaire as mandatory 
respondents. The Department requires that companies

[[Page 22496]]

from the PRC 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ 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).
    \62\ 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

    The Department 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 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.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ See Policy Bulletin 05.1 at 6 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A)(i) 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, Italy, Korea, the PRC, 
and Switzerland 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 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 cold-drawn mechanical tubing from Germany, 
India, Italy, Korea, the PRC, and Switzerland are materially injuring 
or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry.\64\ A negative ITC 
determination for any country will result in the investigation being 
terminated with respect to that country; \65\ otherwise, these 
investigations will proceed according to statutory and regulatory time 
limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
    \65\ 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 the Department; and (v) evidence other than 
factual information described in (i)-(iv). 19 CFR 351.301(b) requires 
that any party, when submitting factual information, must specify under 
which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being 
submitted \66\ 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.\67\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \67\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Extensions of Time Limits

    Parties may request an extension of time limits before the 
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351, 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. 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 the letter or memorandum setting 
forth 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.\68\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect for company/government officials, as well as their 
representatives. Investigations initiated on the basis of petitions 
filed on or after August 16, 2013, and other segments of any AD or CVD 
proceedings initiated on or after August 16, 2013, should use the 
formats for the revised certifications provided at the end of the Final 
Rule.\69\ The Department intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \69\ 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 
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, the 
Department 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 in 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).

    Dated: May 9, 2017.
Gary Taverman,
Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Operations.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigations

    The scope of these investigations covers cold-drawn mechanical 
tubing of carbon and

[[Page 22497]]

alloy steel (cold-drawn mechanical tubing) of circular cross-
section, in actual outside diameters less than 331 mm, and 
regardless of wall thickness, surface finish, end finish or industry 
specification. The subject cold-drawn mechanical tubing is a tubular 
product with a circular cross-sectional shape that has been cold-
drawn or otherwise cold-finished after the initial tube formation in 
a manner that involves a change in the diameter or wall thickness of 
the tubing, or both. The subject cold-drawn mechanical tubing may be 
produced from either welded (e.g., electric resistance welded, 
continuous welded, etc.) or seamless (e.g., pierced, pilgered or 
extruded, etc.) carbon or alloy steel tubular products. It may also 
be heat treated after cold working. Such heat treatments may 
include, but are not limited to, annealing, normalizing, quenching 
and tempering, stress relieving or finish annealing. Typical cold-
drawing methods for subject merchandise include, but are not limited 
to, drawing over mandrel, rod drawing, plug drawing, sink drawing 
and similar processes that involve reducing the outside diameter of 
the tubing with a die or similar device, whether or not controlling 
the inside diameter of the tubing with an internal support device 
such as a mandrel, rod, plug or similar device.
    Subject cold-drawn mechanical tubing is typically certified to 
meet industry specifications for cold-drawn tubing including but not 
limited to:
    (1) American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or 
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) specifications ASTM 
A-512, ASTM A-513 Type 3 (ASME SA513 Type 3), ASTM A-513 Type 4 
(ASME SA513 Type 4), ASTM A-513 Type 5 (ASME SA513 Type 5), ASTM A-
513 Type 6 (ASME SA513 Type 6), ASTM A-519 (cold-finished);
    (2) SAE International (Society of Automotive Engineers) 
specifications SAE J524, SAE J525, SAE J2833, SAE J2614, SAE J2467, 
SAE J2435, SAE J2613;
    (3) Aerospace Material Specification (AMS) AMS T-6736 (AMS 
6736), AMS 6371, AMS 5050, AMS 5075, AMS 5062, AMS 6360, AMS 6361, 
AMS 6362, AMS 6371, AMS 6372, AMS 6374, AMS 6381, AMS 6415;
    (4) United States Military Standards (MIL) MIL-T-5066 and MIL-T-
6736;
    (5) foreign standards equivalent to one of the previously listed 
ASTM, ASME, SAE, AMS or MIL specifications including but not limited 
to:
    (a) German Institute for Standardization (DIN) specifications 
DIN 2391-2, DIN 2393-2, DIN 2394-2);
    (b) European Standards (EN) EN 10305-1, EN 10305-2, EN 10305-4, 
EN 10305-6 and European national variations on those standards 
(e.g., British Standard (BS EN), Irish Standard (IS EN) and German 
Standard (DIN EN) variations, etc.);
    (c) Japanese Industrial Standard (JIS) JIS G 3441 and JIS G 
3445; and
    (6) proprietary standards that are based on one of the above-
listed standards.
    The subject cold-drawn mechanical tubing may also be dual or 
multiple certified to more than one standard. Pipe that is multiple 
certified as cold-drawn mechanical tubing and to other 
specifications not covered by this scope, is also covered by the 
scope of these investigations when it meets the physical description 
set forth above.
    Steel products included in the scope of these investigations are 
products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of 
the other contained elements; and (2) the carbon content is 2 
percent or less by weight.
    For purposes of this scope, the place of cold-drawing determines 
the country of origin of the subject merchandise. Subject 
merchandise that is subject to minor working in a third country that 
occurs after drawing in one of the subject countries including, but 
not limited to, heat treatment, cutting to length, straightening, 
nondestruction testing, deburring or chamfering, remains within the 
scope of the investigations.
    All products that meet the written physical description are 
within the scope of these investigations unless specifically 
excluded or covered by the scope of an existing order. Merchandise 
that meets the physical description of cold-drawn mechanical tubing 
above is within the scope of the investigations even if it is also 
dual or multiple certified to an otherwise excluded specification 
listed below. The following products are outside of, and/or 
specifically excluded from, the scope of these investigations:
    (1) Cold-drawn stainless steel tubing, containing 10.5 percent 
or more of chromium by weight and not more than 1.2 percent of 
carbon by weight;
    (2) products certified to one or more of the ASTM, ASME or 
American Petroleum Institute (API) specifications listed below:
     ASTM A-53;
     ASTM A-106;
     ASTM A-179 (ASME SA 179);
     ASTM A-192 (ASME SA 192);
     ASTM A-209 (ASME SA 209);
     ASTM A-210 (ASME SA 210);
     ASTM A-213 (ASME SA 213);
     ASTM A-334 (ASME SA 334);
     ASTM A-423 (ASME SA 423);
     ASTM A-498;
     ASTM A-496 (ASME SA 496);
     ASTM A-199;
     ASTM A-500;
     ASTM A-556;
     ASTM A-565;
     API 5L; and
     API 5CT

except that any cold-drawn tubing product certified to one of the 
above excluded specifications will not be excluded from the scope if 
it is also dual- or multiple-certified to any other specification 
that otherwise would fall within the scope of these investigations.

    The products subject to the investigations are currently 
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) under item numbers: 7304.31.3000, 7304.31.6050, 
7304.51.1000, 7304.51.5005, 7304.51.5060, 7306.30.5015, 
7306.30.5020, 7306.50.5030. Subject merchandise may also enter under 
numbers 7306.30.1000 and 7306.50.1000. 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. 2017-09870 Filed 5-15-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P