[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 42 (Monday, March 4, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7339-7344]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-03819]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-122-865, C-201-851, C-570-103]


Certain Fabricated Structural Steel From Canada, Mexico, and the 
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Countervailing Duty 
Investigations

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

DATES: Applicable February 25, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Whitley Herndon at (202) 482-6274 
(Canada), Thomas Martin (202) 482-3936 or Trisha Tran at (202) 482-4852 
(Mexico), or Darla Brown at (202) 482-1791 (People's Republic of China 
(China)), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions

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

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

    During the period February 7 through February 14, 2019, Commerce 
requested supplemental information pertaining to certain aspects of the 
Petitions in separate supplemental questionnaires.\2\ Responses to the 
supplemental questionnaires were filed between February 12 and February 
19, 2019.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Commerce Letters, ``Petitions for the Imposition of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties on Imports of Certain 
Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, the People's Republic of 
China, and Mexico: Supplemental Questions,'' dated February 7, 2019, 
``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from the People's Republic of 
China (China): Supplemental Questions,'' dated February 7, 2019, 
``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Certain 
Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada: Supplemental Questions,'' 
dated February 8, 2019, ``Petition for the Imposition of 
Countervailing Duties on Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from 
Mexico: Supplemental Questions,'' dated February 8, 2019, and 
``Petition for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on Imports of 
Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico: Additional 
Supplemental Questions,'' dated February 14, 2019.
    \3\ See the petitioner's Letters, ``Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People's Republic of 
China: Responses to Supplemental Questions on General and Injury 
Volume I of the Petition,'' dated February 12, 2019 (General Issues 
Supplement), ``Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada: 
Responses to Supplemental Questions on Canada CVD Volume V of the 
Petition,'' dated February 12, 2019, ``Certain Fabricated Structural 
Steel from Canada: Responses to Supplemental Questions on Mexico CVD 
Volume VI of the Petition,'' dated February 12, 2019, ``Certain 
Fabricated Structural Steel from the People's Republic of China: 
Responses to Supplemental Questions on China CVD Volume VII of the 
Petition,'' dated February 12, 2019, and ``Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Mexico: Responses to Second Supplemental 
Questions in CVD Volume VI of the Petition,'' dated February 19, 
2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that the Governments of 
Canada, Mexico, and China, as well as the Canadian provincial 
governments of Alberta, British Colombia (BC), Manitoba, New Brunswick, 
Ontario, Qu[eacute]bec, Prince Edward Island (PEI) and Saskatchewan, 
are providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 
701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of fabricated structural steel 
in Canada, Mexico, and China and that imports of such products are 
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic 
industry producing fabricated structural steel in the United States. 
Consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for 
those alleged programs on which we are initiating CVD investigations, 
the Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably available to 
the petitioner supporting their allegations.

[[Page 7340]]

    Section 771(9)(E) of the Act states that ``a trade or business 
association'' is an interested party if ``a majority'' of its ``members 
manufacture, produce, or wholesale a domestic like product in the 
United States. Based on information contained in the petitioner's 
amended Petition submission of February 21, 2019,\4\ as well as its 
prior submissions pertaining to the membership of the American 
Institute of Steel Construction, LLC,\5\ Commerce finds that the 
petitioner satisfactorily showed that a majority of its members 
manufacture, produce, or wholesale a domestic like product in the 
United States, and therefore the Petitions, as amended, have been filed 
on behalf of the domestic industry. Commerce also finds that the 
petitioner demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the 
initiation of the requested CVD investigations.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Period of Investigations

    Because the Petitions were filed on February 4, 2019, and amended 
on February 21, 2019, the period of investigation for each 
investigation is January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2018.

Scope of the Investigations

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

Scope Comments

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

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

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

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

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

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using 
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).\11\ An electronically 
filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the 
time and date it is due. Documents exempted from the electronic 
submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) 
with Enforcement and Compliance's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 18022, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 
20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the applicable 
deadlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Consultations

    Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce 
notified representatives of Canada, Mexico, and China of the receipt of 
the Petitions and provided them the opportunity for consultations with 
respect to the CVD Petitions.\12\ Commerce held consultations with 
Canada and Mexico, on February 19, 2019.\13\ China did not request 
consultations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Commerce Letters, ``Certain Fabricated Structural Steel 
from Canada, Invitation for Consultations to Discuss the 
Countervailing Duty Petition'' dated February 5, 2019, 
``Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain Fabricated Structural 
Steel from Mexico,'' dated February 6, 2019, and ``Countervailing 
Duty Petition on Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from the 
People's Republic of China,'' dated February 5, 2019.
    \13\ See Memorandum, ``Consultations with Officials from the 
Government of Canada Regarding the Countervailing Duty Petition 
Concerning Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada,'' and ``Ex-Parte 
Meeting with Officials from the Government of Mexico on the 
Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain Fabricated Structural Steel 
from Mexico,'' both dated February 19, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(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

[[Page 7341]]

petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if 
the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or 
workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of 
the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) Poll the industry or 
rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for 
the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine 
industry support using a statistically valid sampling method to poll 
the ``industry.''
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers, as a whole, of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which 
is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has 
been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like 
product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the 
ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic 
like product,\14\ 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.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
    \15\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not 
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope 
of the Petitions.\16\ Based on our analysis of the information 
submitted on the record, we have determined that fabricated structural 
steel, as defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like 
product, and we have analyzed industry support in terms of that 
domestic like product.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 14-16 and Exhibit I-5; 
see also General Issues Supplement, at 1-3.
    \17\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as 
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support, 
see Canada CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II, Analysis of 
Industry Support for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Petitions Covering Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, 
the People's Republic of China, and Mexico (Attachment II); see also 
China CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; Mexico CVD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 
702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the Appendix to 
this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioner provided its 
own production of the domestic like product in 2017.\18\ The petitioner 
estimated the production of the domestic like product for the entire 
domestic industry based on shipment data, because production data for 
the entire domestic industry are not available, and shipments are a 
close approximation of production in the fabricated structural steel 
industry.\19\ The petitioner compared its production to the estimated 
total production of the domestic like product for the entire domestic 
industry.\20\ We relied on data provided by the petitioner for purposes 
of measuring industry support.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2-3 and Exhibit I-4.
    \19\ Id. at 2-3 and Exhibits I-3 and I-4; see also General 
Issues Supplement, at 3-6.
    \20\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 2-3.
    \21\ Id. at 2-3 and Exhibit I-3 and I-4; see also General Issues 
Supplement, at 3-6. For further discussion, see Canada CVD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; China CVD Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II; and Mexico CVD Initiation Checklist, at 
Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    From February 12 through February 13, 2019, we received comments on 
industry support from Canada, Quebec, and Mexico, respectively.\22\ The 
petitioner responded to Canada's and Mexico's comments on February 19, 
2019.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See Mexico Letter, ``Fabricated Structural Steel from 
Mexico (A-201-850 and C-201-851)--Request to Dismiss Petitions or 
Otherwise Postpone Initiation,'' dated February 13, 2019; see also 
Canada Letter, ``Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada (A-122-864 
and C-122-865)--Request for Postponement of Initiation and 
Disclosure of Members of Petitioner American Institute of Steel 
Construction and Identities of Known Domestic Producers,'' dated 
February 12, 2019; see also Mexico Letter, ``Fabricated Structural 
Steel from Mexico (C-201-851)--Submission of Consultations Paper,'' 
dated February 20, 2019.
    \23\ See the petitioner's Letter, ``Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada and Mexico: Response to Respondents' 
Request to Reject Petitions or Postpone Initiation,'' dated February 
19, 2019 (the petitioner's Response).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 19, 2019, we received comments on industry support from 
Corey, S.A. de C.V. (Corey), a Mexican producer and exporter of 
fabricated structural steel.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ See Letter from Corey, ``Fabricated Structural Steel from 
Mexico: Standing Challenge--Request to Decline Initiation of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations,'' dated February 
19, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner responded to the comments from Corey on February 21, 
2019.\25\ In addition, the petitioner subsequently clarified and 
amended the Petitions on February 21, 2019 in response to comments from 
Canada, Mexico, and Corey.\26\ During consultations held with respect 
to the Canada and Mexico CVD petitions, the both Canada and Mexico 
discussed industry support comments and provided additional comments in 
the respective CVD consultation papers.\27\ On February 22, 2019, we 
received additional comments on industry support from Canada, Quebec 
and Mexico.\28\ The petitioner responded to those comments on February 
25, 2019.\29\ For further discussion of these comments, see the 
country-specific CVD initiation checklists, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See the petitioner's Letter, ``Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada and Mexico: Response to Respondents' 
Standing Challenge and Request to Decline Initiation,'' dated 
February 21, 2019.
    \26\ See Amendment to the Petitions.
    \27\ See Ex-Parte Memorandum, ``Meeting with Officials from the 
Government of Mexico on the Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain 
Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico'' dated February 19, 2019; 
see also Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain 
Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada: GOC Consultations,'' dated 
February 21, 2019; see also Letter from Mexico, ``Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Mexico (C-201-851)--Submission of 
Consultations Paper,'' dated February 20, 2019; see also Letter from 
Canada, ``Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada (A-122-864 and C-
122-865)--Consultations Paper.
    \28\ See Letter from the GOQ, ``Fabricated Structural Steel from 
Canada, (A-122-864 and C-122-865): Response to AISC Amendment to 
Petition,'' dated February 22, 2019; see also Letter from Canada, 
``Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada (A-122-864 and C-122-
865)--Response to AISC Amendment to Petition,'' dated February 22, 
2019; see also Letter from Mexico, ``Fabricated Structural Steel 
from Mexico (C-201-851, A-201-850)--Comments on Change of 
Petitioner,'' dated February 22, 2019.
    \29\ See Letter from the petitioner, ``Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from Canada, Mexico, and the People's Republic of 
China,'' dated February 25, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the General 
Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce 
indicates that the petitioner has established industry support for the 
Petitions.\30\ First, the Petitions established support from domestic 
producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of

[[Page 7342]]

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).\31\ Second, the domestic producers 
(or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under 
section 702(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.\32\ Finally, the 
domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for 
industry support under section 702(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.\33\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that 
the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the 
meaning of section 702(b)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See Canada CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; 
China CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Mexico CVD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \31\ Id.; see also section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
    \32\ See Canada CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; 
China CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II; and Mexico CVD 
Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commerce finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of 
the domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in 
section 771(9)(E) of the Act, and it has demonstrated sufficient 
industry support with respect to the CVD investigations that it is 
requesting that Commerce initiate.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because Canada, China, and Mexico are ``Subsidies Agreement 
Countries'' within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 
701(a)(2) of the Act applies to these investigations. Accordingly, the 
ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from 
Canada, China, and/or Mexico materially injure, or threaten material 
injury to, a U.S. industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioners allege that imports of the subject merchandise are 
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are 
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry 
producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioner 
alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold 
provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at 22 and Exhibit I-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by the significant volume and increasing market share of 
subject imports; reduced market share of the U.S. industry; 
underselling and price depression or suppression; declines in 
production, shipments, and capacity utilization; negative impact on 
employment variables; decline in the domestic industry's financial 
performance; and lost sales and revenues.\36\ We have assessed the 
allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat 
of material injury, causation, negligibility, as well as cumulation, 
and we have determined that these allegations are properly supported by 
adequate evidence, and meet the statutory requirements for 
initiation.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Id. at 11-35 and Exhibits I-3, I-5, I-8, I-10 through I-22.
    \37\ See Canada CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions 
Covering Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada, the 
People's Republic of China, and Mexico (Attachment III); see also 
China CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III; see also Mexico 
CVD Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Initiation of CVD Investigations

    Based on the examination of the Petitions, we find that the 
Petitions meet the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore, 
we are initiating CVD investigations to determine whether imports of 
fabricated structural steel from Canada, Mexico, and China benefit from 
countervailable subsidies conferred by the governments of these 
countries. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary 
determination no later than 65 days after the date of this initiation.

Canada

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 43 of the 44 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate on each program, see Canada CVD Initiation Checklist. A 
public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is 
available on ACCESS.

Mexico

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 17 of the 19 
alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate on each program, see Mexico CVD Initiation Checklist. A 
public version of the initiation checklist for this investigation is 
available on ACCESS.

China

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation, in whole or 
part, on 25 of the 26 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the 
basis for our decision to initiate on each program, see China CVD 
Initiation Checklist. A public version of the initiation checklist for 
this investigation is available on ACCESS.

Respondent Selection

    In the Petitions, the petitioner named 50 companies in Canada,\38\ 
18 companies in Mexico,\39\ and 220 companies in China,\40\ as 
producers/exporters of fabricated structural steel. Commerce intends to 
follow its standard practice in CVD investigations and calculate 
company-specific subsidy rates in these investigations. In the event 
Commerce determines that the number of companies is large and it cannot 
individually examine each company based upon Commerce's resources, 
where appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents 
based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports 
of fabricated structural steel from Canada, Mexico, and China during 
the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 
States numbers listed in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the 
Appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ See Volume I of the Petition at Exhibit I-7.
    \39\ Id.
    \40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 20, 2019, Commerce released CBP data under 
Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to 
information protected by APO and indicated that interested parties 
wishing to comment regarding the CBP data and respondent selection must 
do so within three business days of the publication date of the notice 
of initiation of these CVD investigations.\41\

[[Page 7343]]

Commerce will not accept rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or 
respondent selection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Investigation of 
Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Canada: Releasing U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection Data,'' Memorandum, ``Countervailing 
Duty Petition on Certain Fabricated Structural Steel from Mexico: 
Release of Customs Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,'' 
and Memorandum, ``Countervailing Duty Petition on Certain Fabricated 
Structural Steel from the People's Republic of China: Release of 
Customs Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,'' each dated 
February 20, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 Commerce's website at http://enforcement.trade.gov/apo.
    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. 
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 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public versions of the Petitions have been 
provided to Canada, China, and Mexico via ACCESS. To the extent 
practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of 
the Petitions to each exporter named in the Petitions, as provided 
under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

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

Preliminary Determination by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of fabricated structural steel from Canada, 
China, and/or Mexico are materially injuring, or threatening material 
injury to, a U.S. industry.\42\ A negative ITC determination in any 
country will result in the investigation being terminated with respect 
to that country.\43\ Otherwise, these investigations will proceed 
according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
    \43\ See section 703(a)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submission of Factual Information

    Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) 
Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence 
submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available 
information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the 
adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence 
placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual 
information described in (i)-(iv). Section 351.301(b) of Commerce's 
regulations requires any party, when submitting factual information, to 
specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information 
is being submitted \44\ 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.\45\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
    \45\ 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 351.301, or as 
otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request 
will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the 
time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are 
due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be 
considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. 
Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time 
limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for 
submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such 
a case, we will inform parties in the letter or memorandum of the 
deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must 
be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in 
a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will 
grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Parties 
should review Extension of Time Limits; Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 
(September 20, 2013), available at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm, prior to submitting factual information 
in these investigations.

Certification Requirements

    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\46\ 
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 
351.303(g).\47\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the 
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \47\ 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, Commerce 
published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents 
Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). 
Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure 
that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the filing 
of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
    This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and 
777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.203(c).

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

Appendix--Scope of the Investigations

    The merchandise covered by these investigations is carbon and 
alloy fabricated structural steel. Fabricated structural steel is 
made from steel in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over 
each of the other contained elements; and (2) the carbon content is 
two percent or less by weight. Fabricated structural steel products 
are steel products that have been fabricated for erection or 
assembly into structures, including, but not limited to, buildings 
(commercial, office, institutional, and multi-family residential); 
industrial and utility projects; parking decks; arenas and 
convention centers; medical facilities; and ports, transportation 
and infrastructure facilities. Fabricated structural steel is 
manufactured from carbon and alloy (including stainless) steel 
products such as angles, columns, beams, girders, plates, flange 
shapes (including manufactured structural shapes utilizing welded 
plates as a substitute for rolled wide flange sections), channels, 
hollow structural section (HSS) shapes, base plates, and plate-work 
components. Fabrication includes, but is not limited to cutting, 
drilling, welding, joining, bolting, bending, punching, pressure 
fitting, molding, grooving, adhesion, beveling, and riveting and may 
include items such as fasteners, nuts, bolts, rivets, screws, 
hinges, or joints.
    The inclusion, attachment, joining, or assembly of non-steel 
components with

[[Page 7344]]

fabricated structural steel does not remove the fabricated 
structural steel from the scope.
    Fabricated structural steel is covered by the scope of the 
investigations regardless of whether it is painted, varnished, or 
coated with plastics or other metallic or non-metallic substances 
and regardless of whether it is assembled or partially assembled, 
such as into modules, modularized construction units, or sub-
assemblies of fabricated structural steel.
    Subject merchandise includes fabricated structural steel that 
has been assembled or further processed in the subject country or a 
third country, including but not limited to painting, varnishing, 
trimming, cutting, drilling, welding, joining, bolting, punching, 
bending, beveling, riveting, galvanizing, coating, and/or slitting 
or any other processing that would not otherwise remove the 
merchandise from the scope of the investigations if performed in the 
country of manufacture of the fabricated structural steel.
    Specifically excluded from the scope of these investigations 
are:
    1. Fabricated steel concrete reinforcing bar (rebar) if: (i) It 
is a unitary piece of fabricated rebar, not joined, welded, or 
otherwise connected with any other steel product or part; or (ii) it 
is joined, welded, or otherwise connected only to other rebar.
    2. Fabricated structural steel for bridges and bridge sections 
that meets American Association of State and Highway and 
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) bridge construction requirements 
or any state or local derivatives of the AASHTO bridge construction 
requirements.
    3. Pre-engineered metal building systems, which are defined as 
complete metal buildings that integrate steel framing, roofing and 
walls to form one, pre-engineered building system, that meet Metal 
Building Manufacturers Association guide specifications. Pre-
engineered metal building systems are typically limited in height to 
no more than 60 feet or two stories.
    4. Steel roof and floor decking systems that meet Steel Deck 
Institute standards.
    5. Open web steel bar joists and joist girders that meet Steel 
Joist Institute specifications.
    The products subject to the investigations are currently 
classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) under subheadings: 7308.90.3000, 7308.90.6000, and 
7308.90.9590.
    The products subject to the investigations may also enter under 
the following HTSUS subheadings: 7216.91.0010, 7216.91.0090, 
7216.99.0010, 7216.99.0090, 7222.40.6000, 7228.70.6000, 
7301.10.0000, 7301.20.1000, 7301.20.5000, 7308.40.0000, 
7308.90.9530, and 9406.90.0030.
    The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the 
investigations is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2019-03819 Filed 3-1-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P