PLA5 2018 ER
Certain Hot-rolled Carbon Steel Plate
Statement of Reasons

[1] On December 27, 2018, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT), pursuant to subsection 76.03(3) of the Special Import Measures Act (SIMA), initiated an expiry review of its order made on January 7, 2014, in Expiry Review No. RR-2013-002, concerning the dumping of certain hot-rolled carbon steel plate and high-strength low-alloy steel plate (certain hot-rolled steel plate) originating in or exported from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania (the subject countries).

[2] As a result of the CITT’s notice of expiry review, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), on December 28, 2018, initiated an investigation to determine, pursuant to paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA, whether the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping of the goods.

[3] The CBSA received a response to its Expiry Review Questionnaire (ERQ) from Algoma Steel Inc. (Algoma)^{Footnote 1}, and Evraz Inc. NA Canada (Evraz)^{Footnote 2}, fully integrated producers of hot rolled steel plate in Canada. The submission made by Evraz expressed an opinion that the continued or resumed dumping of certain hot-rolled steel plate from the subject countries is likely if the CITT’s order is rescinded, and included information supporting their position. In addition to their response, Algoma provided the CBSA with additional information prior to the close of the record and supported the position taken by Evraz in its case briefs.

[4] The CBSA received responses to its ERQ from the following Canadian service centres that also produce subject hot-rolled steel plate: Acier Nova Inc.^{Footnote 3}, Samuel, Son & Co. Limited^{Footnote 4}, and SSAB Central Inc. (SSAB)^{Footnote 5}. SSAB expressed an opinion that the continued or resumed dumping of certain hot-rolled steel plate from the subject countries is likely if the CITT’s order is rescinded. Acier Nova Inc. and Samuel, Son & Co. Limited did not express an opinion on the likelihood of continued or resumed dumping of certain hot-rolled steel plate from the subject countries is likely if the CITT’s order is rescinded.

[5] The CBSA received responses to its ERQ from the following Canadian importers of certain hot-rolled steel plate: Accucut Profile & Grinding Ltd.,^{Footnote 6} A.M. Castle & Co. (Canada) Inc.,^{Footnote 7} Olbert Metal Sales Limited^{Footnote 8} and Russel Metals Inc.^{Footnote 9} These importers vary in level of trade from wholesalers, to distributors, to service centres. One importer imported an insignificant amount of subject goods from the Czech Republic in 2015. None of the importers expressed an opinion on the likelihood of continued or resumed dumping of subject goods.

[6] In addition, due to the imposition of provisional safeguards on October 25, 2018 by the Government of Canada, the CBSA requested additional information from importers and producers in Canada on how the provisional safeguard surtax of 25% with respect to imports of Heavy Plate has affected the Canadian market.^{Footnote 10} Responses to this request were received from Algoma, Evraz, Accucut Profile & Grinding Ltd., A.M. Castle & Co. (Canada) Inc., and Olbert Metal Sales Limited. In general, responses from the service centres indicated that prices for steel plate in Canada have increased, surtaxes are impacting profitability, and inventories are becoming lean as limited tariff based quotas are difficult to procure.^{Footnote 11} Meanwhile, Canadian producers indicated that there is increased competition in the portion of the product definition that is not subject to the provisional safeguard measures. The Canadian producers submitted that customers are sourcing steel plate not subject to the provisional safeguards in order to avoid paying the surtax.^{Footnote 12}

[7] The CBSA did not receive any response to the ERQ from producers/exporters of certain hot-rolled steel plate from the subject countries.

[8] Case briefs were received on behalf of the Canadian producers, Algoma^{Footnote 13} and Evraz^{Footnote 14}. In addition, SABB and Acier Nova Inc. sent letters of endorsement for the case briefs filed by Algoma. No other case briefs from any party were received by the CBSA. The case briefs submitted by the two Canadian producers included information supporting their position that continued or resumed dumping of subject goods is likely if the CITT’s order is rescinded.

[9] The CBSA did not receive any reply submissions from interested parties.

[10] With respect to Bulgaria, the analysis of information on the administrative record indicates that exporters in Bulgaria have a high export dependency on hot-rolled steel plate products; exporters in Bulgaria are selling at prices lower than European domestic benchmark prices and well below Canadian import prices; exporters in Bulgaria have an inability to compete in Canada at non-dumped prices; and there is a presence of low-priced imports of certain hot rolled steel plate in Canada from other countries with which exporters in Bulgaria would likely have to compete, in order to secure sales in the Canadian market.

[11] With respect to the Czech Republic, the analysis of information on the administrative record indicates that exporters in the Czech Republic have a high export dependency in order to maintain capacity utilization rates; exporters in the Czech Republic are selling at prices below Canadian import prices; exporters in the Czech Republic have a propensity to dump subject goods into Canada; exporters in the Czech Republic have an inability to compete in Canada at non-dumped prices; and there is a presence of low-priced imports of certain hot rolled steel plate in Canada from other countries with which exporters in the Czech Republic would likely have to compete, in order to secure sales in the Canadian market.

[12] With respect to Romania, the analysis of information of the administrative record indicates that exporters in Romania have a high export dependency in order to maintain capacity utilization rates; exporters in Romania are selling at prices lower than European domestic benchmark prices and well below Canadian import prices; there are trade measures in place against Romania by other countries; exporters in Romania have an inability to compete in Canada at non-dumped prices; and there is a presence of low priced imports of certain hot rolled steel plate in Canada from other countries with which exporters in Romania would likely have to compete, in order to secure sales in the Canadian market.

[13] For the forgoing reasons, the CBSA, having considered the relevant information on the administrative record, determined on May 24, 2019, under paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA, that the expiry of the order in respect of the dumping of certain hot-rolled steel plate originating in or exported from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping of the goods into Canada.

[14] On June 13, 2003, following a complaint filed by Algoma Steel Inc. and supported by IPSCO (now Evraz Inc. NA Canada) and Stelco Inc. (now Stelco Holdings Inc.), the CBSA initiated an investigation pursuant to subsection 31(1) of SIMA, respecting the dumping of certain hot-rolled steel plate originating in or exported from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania.

[15] On December 9, 2003, pursuant to subsection 41(1) of SIMA, the Commissioner of Customs and Revenue made a final determination of dumping concerning the goods from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania.

[16] On January 9, 2004, pursuant to subsection 43(1) of SIMA, the CITT found in NQ 2003 002 that the dumping of certain hot-rolled steel plate originating in or exported from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania had caused injury to the domestic industry in Canada.

[17] On April 24, 2008, pursuant to subsection 76.03(3) of SIMA, the CBSA initiated an expiry review concerning certain hot-rolled steel plate. On August 21, 2008, pursuant to paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA, the CBSA determined that the expiry of the order was likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping of the goods from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania.

[18] On January 8, 2009, in Expiry Review No. RR-2008-002, the CITT issued an order to continue its finding in respect of certain hot-rolled steel plate originating in or exported from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania.

[19] On July 16, 2010, the CBSA completed its last re-investigation to update the normal values and export prices of certain hot-rolled steel plate.^{Footnote 15} No exporters cooperated. As a result, all imports of subject goods are subject to anti-dumping duty equal to 74.6% of the declared export price in accordance with a ministerial specification.

[20] On April 25, 2013, pursuant to subsection 76.03(3) of SIMA, the CBSA initiated an expiry review concerning certain hot-rolled steel plate. On August 22, 2013, pursuant to paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA, the CBSA determined that the expiry of the order was likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping of the goods from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania.

[21] On January 7, 2014, in Expiry Review No. RR-2013-002, the CITT issued an order to continue its order in respect of certain hot-rolled steel plate originating in or exported from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania.

[22] On June 22, 2018, the CITT informed parties to the proceedings of Expiry Review No. RR-2013-002, Expiry Review No. RR-2014-002, and Inquiry No. NQ-2013-005 that an interim review would commence in order to assess the importance and performance of service centres in the Canadian market during the years between 2012 and 2013. The CITT’s primary concern was whether the volume of production by service centres during those years was of a magnitude other than what was estimated in the aforementioned proceedings, and if so, whether that impacted the appropriateness of the CITT’s injury determinations in these proceedings.

[23] On December 27, 2018, in the matter of the interim review, the CITT, pursuant to paragraph 76.01(5)(a) of SIMA, continued its orders and finding in the aforementioned proceedings without amendment.^{Footnote 16}

[24] On November 7, 2018, pursuant to subsection 76.03(2) of SIMA, the CITT issued a notice concerning the expiry of its order, which was scheduled to expire on January 6, 2019. Based on the information filed during the expiry process, the CITT decided that a review of the order was warranted.

[25] On December 27, 2018, the CITT initiated an expiry review of its order pursuant to subsection 76.03(3) of SIMA.

[26] On December 28, 2018, the CBSA initiated an expiry review investigation to determine whether the expiry of the order was likely to result in continued or resumed dumping of the subject goods from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania.

[32] Liquid steel, for use in the production of certain hot-rolled steel plate, is produced using blast furnaces, basic oxygen furnaces and electric arc furnaces. While details may vary from mill to mill, the process by which certain hot-rolled steel plate is produced from liquid steel is essentially the same for all integrated steel producers and entails producing a slab, heating the slab, descaling it, rolling it, levelling it, cutting it to size, inspecting it and testing it. Certain hot-rolled steel plate may be heat-treated, which may include annealing, normalizing, stress relieving, quenching, tempering or combinations of these treatments.

[33] Certain hot-rolled steel plate can also be produced by unwinding plate that has been formed into coils and cutting it into separate lengths. Such plate is referred to as “plate from coil” or “cut-to-length plate” and is typically produced by the service centres.

[34] The subject goods are normally classified under the following tariff classification numbers:

1. 7208.51.00.10
2. 7208.51.00.91
3. 7208.51.00.92
4. 7208.51.00.93
5. 7208.51.00.94
6. 7208.51.00.95
7. 7208.52.00.10
8. 7208.52.00.91
9. 7208.52.00.92
10. 7208.52.00.93
11. 7208.52.00.96

[35] Prior to January 1, 2017, the subject goods were normally classified under the following tariff classification numbers:

1. 7208.51.00.10
2. 7208.51.00.91
3. 7208.51.00.92
4. 7208.51.00.93
5. 7208.51.00.94
6. 7208.51.00.95
7. 7208.52.00.10
8. 7208.52.00.91
9. 7208.52.00.92
10. 7208.52.00.93
11. 7208.52.00.94
12. 7208.52.00.95

[36] This listing of tariff numbers is for convenience of reference only. The tariff numbers may include non-subject goods. Also, subject goods may fall under tariff numbers that are not listed. Refer to the product definition for authoritative details regarding the subject goods.

[37] The period of review (POR) for the CBSA’s expiry review investigation is from January 1, 2015, to October 31, 2018.

[38] The Canadian industry for certain hot-rolled steel plate production includes the following two integrated steel mills:

• Algoma Steel Inc. of Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario
• Evraz Inc. NA Canada of Regina, Saskatchewan

Algoma Steel Inc.

[39] Algoma is a primary iron and steel producer. As of 2018, it has a capacity to produce approximately 3.7 million metric tonnes (MMT) of raw steel and approximately 3.4 MMT of finished steel annually. The first hot-rolled steel plate produced by Algoma was in 1959. On its “166 Plate Mill and 106” Wide Strip Mill, Algoma produces carbon steel plate in widths up to 152 in. (3,860 mm) and in thicknesses up to 4.0 inches (101 mm) and other non-like carbon steel plate and hot-rolled sheet. Algoma also produces cold-rolled sheet at its facility.

[40] The company was incorporated on June 1, 1992. On January 29, 2002 the company was re-organized under a Plan of Arrangement and Reorganization pursuant to the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”). The company became part of Essar Steel Holdings Limited in June 2007. On May 8, 2008 the company name was changed to Essar Steel Algoma Inc.

[41] Essar Steel Algoma Inc. commenced court-supervised restructuring proceedings under the CCAA on November 9, 2015. On November 30, 2018, a group of creditors purchased the company’s assets, with the company emerging from CCAA protection as “Algoma Steel Inc.”^{Footnote 17}

Evraz Inc. NA Canada

[42] Evraz produces steel plates, steel sheets, tubular products, and processes coils in four locations across Canada, including, Calgary, Red Deer and Regina. Evraz’s facilities in Alberta produce tubular products. Evraz’s Regina facility is the largest steel industrial complex in Western Canada, and produces steel plates, steel sheets, and tubular products. It is also the sole producer of steel plates out of the four manufacturing locations.

[43] Evraz’s facility in Regina was formerly known as IPSCO Inc. (IPSCO), which was incorporated in 1956 under the name of Prairie Pipe Manufacturing Co. Ltd. It commenced operations in 1957 with the completion of an electric resistance weld pipe mill in Regina. In 1959, the company acquired assets of Interprovincial Steel Corp. Ltd. and began production of flat rolled steel in 1960, including the subject goods. Since then, the company expanded its manufacturing capabilities and established scrap companies in Canada as well as in the US through acquisitions and plant constructions.

[44] On July 17, 2007, SSAB, a wholly owned subsidiary of SSAB Svenkst Stahl of Sweden, acquired IPSCO and its subsidiaries through a 100 percent share acquisition. Under SSAB’s direction, IPSCO was reorganized to own only the Regina facility and the facilities in Calgary, Camrose, Red Deer, and the formerly owned facility in Surrey including through a wholly owned subsidiary IPSCO Canada Inc.

[45] On June 12, 2008, Evraz Group S.A., now a wholly owned subsidiary of Evraz plc., acquired IPSCO and its subsidiaries from SSAB through a share acquisition.

[46] On October 15, 2008, the names of IPSCO and IPSCO Canada Inc. were changed to Evraz Canada and Evraz Inc. NA Canada West respectively. On January 1, 2009, Evraz Inc. NA Canada West was amalgamated into Evraz Canada.^{Footnote 18}

Steel Service Centres

[47] Although steel service centres’ production processes differ to some extent from those of Algoma and Evraz, steel service centres produce and sell the same products in the Canadian market, to the same end-users, for essentially the same applications.^{Footnote 19} Therefore, the Canadian industry for certain hot-rolled steel plate production is also comprised of the following steel service centres:

• Acier Nova Inc.
• Alliance Steel Corporation
• Coilex Inc.
• Del Metals
• Janco Steel
• Russel Metals Ltd.
• Samuel, Son & Co., Limited
• SSAB Central Inc.^{Footnote 20}
• Varsteel Ltd.

[48] The apparent Canadian market for certain hot-rolled steel plate during the POR is presented in Table 1 below.

[52] In the enforcement of the CITT’s order during the POR, as detailed in Table 2 below, no anti-dumping duty was collected, as there were no imports of subject goods from the subject countries during that period.^{Footnote 22}

[53] On December 28, 2018, the CBSA sent a notice concerning the initiation of the expiry review investigation and ERQs to known Canadian producers, importers and exporters.

[54] The ERQs requested information needed to consider the expiry review factors, as found in subsection 37.2(1) of the Special Import Measures Regulations (SIMR), relevant to this expiry review investigation.

[55] Five Canadian producers (two integrated steel mills and three service centres) and four importers participated in the expiry review investigation and responded to the ERQs. None of the exporters contacted for purposes of this expiry review investigation provided a response to the ERQs sent out by the CBSA at initiation.

[56] Case briefs were received on behalf of the complainants Algoma and Evraz. No other case briefs or reply submissions were received by the CBSA from any other parties notified by the CBSA at the initiation of this expiry review investigation.

Administrative Record

[57] The information considered by the CBSA for purposes of this expiry review investigation is contained on the administrative record. The administrative record includes the information on the CBSA’s exhibit listing, which is comprised of the CITT’s administrative record relating to the initiation of the expiry review, the CBSA’s exhibits and information submitted by interested persons, including information which the interested parties feel is relevant to the decision as to whether dumping is likely to continue or resume, if the order is rescinded. This information may consist of expert analyst reports, excerpts from trade magazines and newspapers, orders and findings issued by authorities of Canada or of a country other than Canada, documents from international trade organizations such as the World Trade Organization and responses to the ERQs submitted by domestic producers, importers, exporters and foreign governments.

[58] For purposes of an expiry review investigation, the CBSA sets a date after which no new information submitted by interested parties may be placed on the administrative record or considered as part of the CBSA’s investigation. This is referred to as the closing of the record date. This allows participants time to prepare their case briefs and reply submissions based on the information that is on the record as of the date the record closed. For this expiry review investigation, the record closed on February 25, 2019.

[110] In making a determination under paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA whether the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping of the goods, the CBSA may consider the factors identified in subsection 37.2(1) of the SIMR, as well as any other factors relevant under the circumstances.

[111] Before presenting the specific analysis with respect to Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania concerning the likelihood of the continuation or resumption of dumping in absence of the CITT’s order, there are certain issues that relate to the goods on a broader scale that need to be addressed. These issues are as follows:

• commodity nature of steel plate;
• capital-intensive nature of steel production;
• steel market developments and trends; and
• tariffs and safeguard measures on steel imports and diversion of steel plate into Canada.

Commodity nature of steel plate

[112] In general, hot-rolled steel plate produced to a given specification by a producer in a given country is physically interchangeable with steel plate produced to the same specification in any other country. As such, goods compete amongst themselves regardless of origin and share the same channels of distribution and the same potential customers. This characteristic means that steel plate must compete in a market that is extremely price sensitive, where price is one of the primary factors affecting purchasing decision from customers. Furthermore, because of this high degree of price sensitivity, prices in a given market have historically tended to converge over time towards the lowest available price offering.

[113] Given the commodity nature of the subject goods, when measures are in place for one country, other sources of steel plate emerge. This is evident from the number of measures in place in Canada outlined below, both historically and currently, with respect to steel plate.

[114] The first finding regarding certain hot-rolled steel plate dates back to 1983. On December 7, 1983, in Inquiry No. ADT-10-83, the Anti-dumping Tribunal (now the CITT) found that the dumping of certain hot-rolled steel plate from ten countries, which included Czechoslovakia and Romania, had caused, was causing and was likely to cause material injury to domestic production. On January 26, 1984, in Inquiry No. ADT-13-83, the Anti-dumping Tribunal extended its 1983 material injury finding to include the Netherlands. The finding made by the Anti-dumping Tribunal against the eleven countries was rescinded by the CITT on May 1, 1990 in Review No. RR-89-006.^{Footnote 76}

[115] Since 1992, there have been five other inquiries concerning similar steel plate products, each resulting in the imposition of either anti-dumping measures or both anti-dumping and countervailing measures against imports from various countries. The measures resulting from two of the five investigations are still in force. The five steel plate cases are informally referred to as Plate I, Plate II, Plate III (which is still in force against China), Plate IV and Plate 5 (which is the subject of this expiry review).^{Footnote 77}

[116] On February 2, 2010, in Inquiry No. NQ-2009-003, the CITT found that the dumping of steel plate originating in or exported from Ukraine was threatening to cause injury to the domestic industry. Additionally, on May 20, 2014, in Inquiry No. NQ-2016-005, the CITT found that the dumping of steel plate originating in or exported from Brazil, Chinese Taipei, Denmark, Indonesia, Italy, Japan and South Korea has caused injury to the domestic industry.^{Footnote 78} The history of steel plate being dumped into Canada supports the opinion that steel plate is a commodity product and that measures in place preventing one country to export steel plate into Canada, provides an opportunity for other sources of steel plate to emerge.

Capital-intensive nature of steel production

[117] As previously noted by the CITT, “Steel mills are capital intensive with high fixed costs. In order to recover fixed expenses, steel mills must run at high levels of production capacity. When home market demand drops, producers will search out foreign markets to maintain capacity utilization to ensure that these fixed costs are recovered.”^{Footnote 79} This is often referred to as the “economics of steel production.” Conditions of overcapacity exacerbates this characteristic as a producer may find it more feasible to sell excess production in foreign markets at depressed prices rather than reduce production, as long as the producer’s variable costs are covered.

Steel market developments and trends

[118] According to the World Steel Association, global steel demand faces uncertainty due to the ongoing tensions in the global economic environment. While the strength of steel demand seen in 2017 was carried over in 2018, it is noted that global risks have also increased due to rising trade tensions and volatile currency movements.^{Footnote 80}

[119] Global steel demand in 2017 reached 1,587 MMT, representing a 4.7% increase compared to 2016.^{Footnote 81} Although steel demand in the developed world remains healthy, growth is expected to become more moderate with forecasts anticipating an increase of 1% in 2018 and 1.9% in 2019.^{Footnote 82} According to the World Steel Association, slowed demand in steel is expected in China as continued economic rebalancing efforts and stricter environmental regulations are expected, while the US will experience modest growth in its auto manufacturing and construction sectors. Meanwhile in the EU, despite a relatively healthy economy, steel demand in 2019 is likely to decelerate due to uncertainties resulting from global trade tensions.^{Footnote 83}

[120] As reported by the OECD, global steel exports declined by 9% year-on-year in the first three months of 2018 with a significant portion of the decline taking place in China and India, declining 27.3% and 35.4% respectively. The EU and the US also experienced declining exports of 1.3% and 3.2% respectively during the same period. With respect to steel imports, the EU saw an increase of 3.9% year-on-year in the first three months of 2018 compared to the corresponding time period one year earlier. During the same period, the US, which recorded a significant increase in steel imports in 2017 of 14.7%, recorded a decline of 3.8%.^{Footnote 84}

[121] With respect to excess steel capacity, given that the Chinese steel market accounts for half of the world’s total, the conditions in the Chinese market play an important role in managing the excess global steel capacity. According to the Ministerial Report published by the G20 Global Forum, improvements in the Chinese market have been significant as China has made reductions to bring capacity closer to domestic demand.^{Footnote 85}

[122] Despite of the improvement seen in China’s excess steel capacity, in 2017, global crude steelmaking capacity exceeded steel demand by approximately 595 million tonnes.^{Footnote 86} In addition new capacity investment projects continue to take place around the world, thereby further exacerbating the excess capacity issue. According to the OECD, “nearly 52 MMT of gross capacity additions are currently underway and could come on stream during the three-year period of 2018-20, while an additional 39 MMT of capacity additions are currently in the planning stages for possible start-up during the same time period.”^{Footnote 87}

[123] Based on the foregoing factors, the global steel industry continues to show growth amidst the persistent concerns of excess supply and unused steel-making capacity. Although the steel industry has made improvements with the challenge of confronting excess capacity, risks associated with trade imbalances still exist due to the rise of restrictive trade measures such as those imposed by the US and other countries, in the form of tariffs and safeguards discussed below.

Tariffs and safeguard measures on steel imports and diversion of steel plate into Canada

[124] On March 8, 2018, the US issued a proclamation regulating imports of steel into the US under section 232 of the US Trade Expansion Act of 1962, imposing tariffs of 25% on imports of steel into the US.^{Footnote 88}

[125] Canadian Producer, Algoma, provided evidence on the record demonstrating the reduction of imports to the US following the 232 measures. Import volumes for all steel mill products and steel plates cut-to-length are provided in the table below.

[126] As indicated in the table above, overall steel mill products imported into the US declined by 10.5% (3,393,932 MT) in January to November 2018 relative to the same period in 2017. With respect to steel plate, imports have been declining prior to 2016 and have continued to decline into 2017 with a drop of 34.9% (364,541 MT). After the imposition of the 232 measures in 2018, steel plate imports have declined again in the US by 20.6% (132,549 MT) in January to November 2018 relative to the same period in 2017.

[127] These section 232 measures created a ripple effect as the EU also announced their own provisional tariff measures in the form of tariff-rate quotas on July 19, 2018, which included non-alloy and other alloy quarto plate products.^{Footnote 90} In the Official Journal of the Europe Union, the EU cited several unforeseen developments creating imbalances in the international trade of the products concerned. It was noted that the increased use of trade restrictive practices throughout the world, in particular the US section 232 measures adopted in March 2018, has resulted in the EU taking action in the form of implementing provisional safeguards.^{Footnote 91} The EU later replaced the provisional tariffs with definitive safeguard measures effective February 2, 2019. Steel plate is specifically covered under item 7 of those measures and countries importing within the target quotas are subject to an additional duty rate of 25%.^{Footnote 92}

[128] On April 27, 2018, Turkey initiated its own safeguard investigation on the imports of iron and steel products which includes steel plate products. According to the notification filed under Article 12.1(A) to the WTO, Turkey has initiated a safeguard investigation to determine the potential injury and/or threat thereof to domestic producers due to the import taxes imposed by the US, the safeguard investigation initiated by the EU and the increasing tendency towards protectionist measures against steel products worldwide.^{Footnote 93}

[129] On July 1, 2018, in response to the US’ imposition of a 25% tariff against steel imports, including those originating in Canada, Canada imposed its own 25% surtax on imports of certain steel products from the US to Canada.

[130] Furthermore, with the threat of divergence of exports from the US to Canada due to the 232 measures, the Government of Canada imposed provisional safeguards in the form of tariff rate quotas (TRQs) on seven classes of steel goods. The provisional safeguards took effect on October 25, 2018. The TRQ’s are administered by Global Affairs Canada by way of shipment specific imports permits. On April 3, 2019, the CITT recommended that final safeguards only should be applied on two classes of steel goods. Goods that are not covered by a valid import permit at time of accounting are subject to a 25% surtax.^{Footnote 94} On April 26, 2019, the Government of Canada announced its intent to enact final safeguards on these two categories of steel.^{Footnote 95} Heavy plate is one of the categories covered by these provisional measures but only a portion of the product definition is covered in this proceeding.

[131] Due to the geographic proximity of the US to Canada and the size of the US market for steel, compounded with the effect of global safeguard measures against steel plate imports, the imposition of these measures will likely cause steel plate to be diverted to Canada and price pressures already created by existing non-subject sources noted earlier in this report by the Canadian producers are likely to result in dumping.

[132] The CBSA did not receive any ERQ responses, case briefs, or reply submissions from exporters in Bulgaria. The CBSA, therefore, relied on information submitted from participating parties, as well as other information on the administrative record, for the purposes of the expiry review investigation with respect to Bulgaria.

[133] Guided by the factors in the SIMR and based on the documentation on the administrative record, the following list represents a summary of the CBSA’s analysis conducted in this expiry review investigation:

• high export dependency on steel plate products;
• pricing data suggesting Bulgarian exporters are selling at prices lower than European domestic benchmark prices and well below Canadian import prices;
• inability to compete in Canada at non-dumped prices; and
• the presence of low-priced imports of certain hot-rolled steel plate in Canada from other countries with which Bulgaria would likely have to compete to secure sales in the Canadian market.

[134] In the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency’s (CCRA), original investigation in 2003, Stomana Industry s.a. (Stomana) was the only known producer/exporter to have shipped subject goods to Canada during the POI.^{Footnote 96} Stomana did not participate in the original investigation nor has it participated in the last three re-investigations which concluded in 2006, 2008, and 2010.^{Footnote 97} As a result of the non-cooperation by exporters in the original investigation and in the three subsequent re-investigations, normal values for Bulgaria were determined pursuant to a ministerial specification, on the basis of an advance of 74.6% over the export price.

[135] During the first three years of the CBSA’s POR (2015, 2016 and 2017), Bulgaria’s production of hot-rolled steel plate experienced an increase, along with increased exports of flat steel products. According to the World Steel Association’s Steel Statistical Yearbook issued in 2018, Bulgarian production of hot-rolled steel plate (≥3mm) increased by 30% (210,000 MT to 274,000 MT) between 2015 and 2017 which coincided with a 15% increase (267,000 MT to 307,000 MT) in exports of flat products during the same period.^{Footnote 98} It should be noted that during the same period, Bulgaria was faced with a 10% increase (808,000 MT to 888,000 MT) in the imports of flat products.^{Footnote 99}

[136] Data was also provided by the Canadian Producer, Algoma, from the UN Comtrade database recognizing a similar trend with exports of steel plate under HS Codes 7208.51 and 7208.52. According to the database, Bulgarian exports grew from 209,006 MT in 2015 to 257,230 MT in 2017.^{Footnote 100} Given the production of hot-rolled steel plate in 2017 provided above, this would indicate over 90% of Bulgarian steel plate produced is for export markets, signifying the high export dependency of steel plate products.

[137] Furthermore, Sidenor Group, the parent company of Stomana, indicates directly on the company website that “Stomana has been one of the most export-oriented companies of Sidenor Group, as it exports more than 90% of its production in plates outside Bulgaria, to more than 30 countries spanning over a wide geographical area (the Balkans, Europe, North Africa, America), and occupies consistently top positions in the suppliers’ list of many major international groups of steel products’ distribution.”^{Footnote 101} This statement supports the data above indicating that a significant portion of Bulgarian steel plate is exported.

[138] In reviewing the pricing data available on the administrative record, the information suggests that exports of steel plate from Bulgaria to other markets during the POR could be below domestic selling prices in Europe, making them potentially dumped prices.

[139] Since pricing data for domestic steel plate was not available for Bulgarian producers, historical steel plate pricing information available for three European countries (Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom) from CRU was averaged in order to determine a European pricing benchmark.^{Footnote 102} In comparing the European benchmark pricing for steel plate to Bulgaria’s export price as reported by UN Comtrade data, the Bulgarian steel plate export price falls below the European average price after 2015 and remains below through to October 2018.^{Footnote 103}

[140] Furthermore, the annual Bulgarian export price as reported by the UN Comtrade data for the two HS codes, 7208.51 and 7208.52, were compared to the annual weighted average import price for certain hot-rolled steel plate imported into Canada during the POR. Information on the confidential record supports that the annual average export prices from Bulgaria fall well below the weighted average Canadian import price for certain hot-rolled steel plate throughout the POR.^{Footnote 104}

[141] Based on the pricing analysis above, it is evident that Bulgarian export prices are well below Canadian import prices and that Bulgarian exporters are selling at low and potentially dumped prices in other markets. As such, in the event that the current order were rescinded, it is likely that steel plate exported from Bulgaria to Canada would be at prices lower than European domestic benchmark prices and well below Canadian import prices.

[142] During the original investigation, import volumes of certain hot-rolled steel plate from Bulgaria represented 3.1% if total imports into Canada from all countries. During the POR for this expiry review, there were no shipments of certain hot-rolled steel plate from Bulgaria to Canada.^{Footnote 105} The absence of shipments as well as the lack of cooperation from Stomana in the various anti-dumping proceedings mentioned above suggests an inability on behalf of the Bulgarian steel plate producers to compete in Canada at non-dumped prices.

[143] Lastly, previous proceedings by the CITT have concluded that steel plate is a commodity product and competes on the basis of price. As observed during the course of the POR, the Canadian steel plate market has experienced increasing competition from several foreign sources. The record indicates that during the POR, steel plate from certain countries was imported into Canada at prices significantly lower than the average price of the domestic producers. As price is a major factor for commodity products such as steel plate, Bulgarian exporters will likely have to compete against these low-priced imports in Canada to regain their volumes and market share achieved when they were selling at dumped prices.

Determination Regarding Likelihood of Continued or Resumed Dumping for Bulgaria

[144] Based on evidence on the administrative record in respect of: the commodity nature of steel plate; the capital intensive nature of steel production; steel market developments and trends; the current tariff and safeguard measures on steel imports and the diversion of steel plate into Canada; the high export dependency of Bulgarian exporters on steel plate products; pricing data suggesting Bulgarian exporters are selling at prices lower than European domestic benchmark prices and well below Canadian import prices; the inability of exporters in Bulgaria to compete in Canada at non-dumped prices; and, the presence of low-priced imports of certain hot-rolled steel plate in Canada from other countries with which Bulgaria would likely have to compete, to secure sales in the Canadian market, the CBSA determined that the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping into Canada of certain hot-rolled steel plate originating in or exported from Bulgaria.

[145] The CBSA did not receive any ERQ responses, case briefs, or reply submissions from exporters in the Czech Republic. The CBSA, therefore, relied on information submitted from participating parties, as well as other information on the administrative record, for the purposes of the expiry review investigation with respect to the Czech Republic.

[146] Guided by the factors in the SIMR and based on the documentation on the administrative record, the following list represents a summary of the CBSA’s analysis conducted in this expiry review investigation:

• high export dependency in the Czech Republic in order to maintain capacity utilization rates;
• pricing data suggesting Czech exporters are selling at prices below Canadian import prices;
• propensity to dump subject goods into Canada;
• inability to compete in Canada at non-dumped prices; and
• the presence of low-priced imports of certain hot-rolled steel plate in Canada from other countries in which the Czech Republic would likely have to compete to secure sales in the Canadian market.

[147] In the CCRA’s original investigation in 2003, Vitkovice Steel a.s.^{Footnote 106} (Vitkovice) was the only known producer/exporter to have shipped subject goods to Canada during the POI.^{Footnote 107} Although Vitkovice participated in the investigation, the CCRA found that the costing data was not reliable and normal values for the Czech Republic were determined pursuant to a ministerial specification, on the basis of an advance of 74.6% over the export price.

[148] There was no cooperation by exporters in the two subsequent re-investigations concluded in 2006 and 2008. Vitkovice was the sole responder for the 2010 re-investigation, where it submitted a letter indicating that it had not shipped subject goods to Canada during the period of investigation and had no intention of doing so in the near future.^{Footnote 108}

[149] Vitkovice did participate in the CBSA’s 2013 Expiry Review investigation and contended that continued dumping of subject goods from the Czech Republic was unlikely. At the time, Vitkovice and Evraz Canada were under common direct ownership and it was argued by Vitkovice that any new potential sales into Canada would be fully coordinated with its affiliate Evraz Canada.^{Footnote 109} In 2014, Vitkovice was acquired by a group of private investors and is no longer associated with Evraz Canada.^{Footnote 110}

[150] According to the European Steel Association (Eurofer), the Czech steel industry experienced a downward trend in its crude steel production levels, decreasing from 5,262,000 MT in 2015 to 4,686,000 MT in 2017 representing a 10.9% decrease.^{Footnote 111} At 4.6 MMT, the Czech Republic ranked 33rd in the world for the largest producer of crude steel, representing 0.27% of the global output.^{Footnote 112} In 2018, the Czech Republic production reached 4.9 MMT, an increase of over 6% compared to 2017.^{Footnote 113}

[151] In terms of capacity utilization, based on the figures above and capacity numbers published in the Global Steel Trade Monitor and on Vitkovice’s website, during 2017 and 2018 the Czech Republic steelmakers operated at a rate of 74% and 77% respectively.^{Footnote 114} According to Vitkovice’s website, Vitkovice is the leading European manufacturer of rolled steel products and the largest manufacturer of steel plates in the Czech Republic with a production capacity of 755,000 MT.^{Footnote 115} The Prague Business Journal reported in May 2018 that Vitkovice had sold 401,000 MT of steel plate and cut shapes in 2017, up from 328,000 the previous year, and 146,000 MT of sheet piles, up from 136,000 MT.^{Footnote 116} Based on these figures, capacity utilization Vitkovice in 2016 and 2017 would be 61.5% and 72.5% respectively.

[152] Although no sales information was available for Vitkovice during the POR, historical data from previous proceedings indicated that in 2007, export sales represented 64% of Vitkovice’s total sales of steel plate. In addition, after an analysis of Vitkovice’s sales information in the 2013 Expiry Review investigation, the CBSA concluded that Vitkovice is very dependent on its steel plate export sales in order to sustain its production level and to maintain its capacity utilization rates.^{Footnote 117}

[153] Furthermore, the Czech Republic continues to see a significant increase in imports of steel mill products. According to the Global Steel Trade Monitor in May of 2018, imports of steel mill products into the Czech Republic increased by 68% between 2009 and 2017. As mentioned above, domestic production in the Czech Republic fell by 14% to 4.6 MMT in 2017 as compared to the 5.3 MMT produced in 2015. Apparent consumption, a measure of steel demand, was estimated to be 7.0 million MT in 2017, exceeding domestic production by more than 52%, compared to 2015 when steel demand exceeded domestic production by only 28%. The import penetration level, the amount of imports expressed as a percentage of total apparent consumption, had increased by more than 10 percentage points in 2017, as compared to 2015, to reach 99.3%. Consequently, the demand for crude steel products in the Czech Republic is almost entirely fulfilled by steel imports, placing significant pressure on domestic producers to find purchasers outside the domestic market in order to maintain production levels. In the context of flat products, in 2017 flat products accounted for the largest share of the Czech Republic’s steel imports at 58%, or 4.1 MMT.^{Footnote 118} The quantity of flat products being imported into the Czech Republic is more than five times the production capacity of Vitkovice which would suggest that Vitkovice would have to remain an export-oriented producer and rely on exports of steel plate in order to maintain its high capacity utilization.

[154] Since pricing data for domestic steel plate was not available for Czech producers, historical steel plate pricing information available for three European countries (Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom) from CRU was averaged in order to determine a European pricing benchmark.^{Footnote 119} In comparing the European benchmark pricing for steel plate to the Czech Republic’s export price as reported by UN Comtrade data, Czech steel plate export price fell slightly below the European average price in 2016 and then returned to selling above the European average through to October 2018.^{Footnote 120}

[155] The annual Czech Republic export price as reported by the UN Comtrade data provided above was compared to the annual weighted average import price for certain hot-rolled steel plate imported into Canada during the POR. Information on the confidential record supports that the annual average export price from the Czech Republic fell well below the weighted average Canadian import price for certain hot-rolled steel plate in 2016 and remained below throughout the POR.^{Footnote 121}

[156] Based on the pricing analysis above, it appears that the Czech Republic export prices are comparable to the average annual selling prices in Europe. However, despite this, these export prices are still well below the average Canadian import prices throughout the POR. As such, in the event that the current order were rescinded, it is likely that certain hot-rolled steel plate exported from the Czech Republic to Canada would be at lower prices than current imports into Canada.

[157] There is no evidence on the record indicating that there are currently countries that have anti-dumping findings against the Czech Republic for steel plate or any other steel products. However, the Czech Republic has exhibited a strong history of dumping steel plate into Canada. The Czech Republic^{Footnote 122} was previously subject to a 1983 finding (ADT-10-83) which was rescinded in 1990 (RR-89-006) and to a 1993 finding (NQ-92-007) which was rescinded in 1998 (RR-97-006). In 2003, five years following the rescinded finding in 1998, the Czech Republic was again subject to a finding (NQ-2003-002) with respect to dumping steel plate into Canada. This pattern of dumping steel plate into Canada is indicative of the likely future behaviour of steel plate producers in the Czech Republic if the order is rescinded.

[158] During the POI of the original investigation, import volumes of certain hot-rolled steel plate from the Czech Republic represented 3.4% of total imports into Canada from all Countries.^{Footnote 123} During the POR, aside from an insignificant amount reported by an importer in 2015, there were no other shipments of certain hot-rolled steel plate from the Czech Republic to Canada.^{Footnote 124} The absence of shipments as well as the lack of participation from Czech producers/exporters in the various anti-dumping proceedings mentioned above suggests an inability on behalf of the Czech steel plate producers to compete in Canada at non-dumped prices.

[159] A final point to observe is that previous proceedings by the CITT have concluded that steel plate is a commodity product and competes on the basis of price. As observed during the course of the POR, the Canadian steel plate market has experienced increasing competition from several foreign sources. The record indicates that, during the POR, certain hot-rolled steel plate from certain countries was imported into Canada at prices significantly lower than the average price of the domestic producers.^{Footnote 125} As price is a major factor for commodity products such as steel plate, Czech exporters will likely have to compete against these low-priced imports in Canada to regain their volumes and market share achieved when they were selling at dumped prices.

Determination Regarding Likelihood of Continued or Resumed Dumping for the Czech Republic

[160] Based on evidence on the administrative record in respect of: the commodity nature of steel plate; the capital intensive nature of steel production; steel market developments and trends; the current tariff and safeguard measures on steel imports and the diversion of steel plate into Canada; the high export dependency of Czech exporters in order to maintain capacity utilization rates; pricing data suggesting Czech exporters are selling at prices below Canadian import prices; exporters in the Czech Republic having a propensity to dump subject goods into Canada; an inability of exporters in the Czech Republic to compete in Canada at non-dumped prices; and, the presence of low-priced imports of certain hot-rolled steel plate in Canada from other countries with which the Czech Republic would likely have to compete to secure sales in the Canadian market, the CBSA determined that the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping into Canada of certain hot-rolled steel plate originating in or exported from the Czech Republic.

[161] The CBSA did not receive any ERQ responses, case briefs, or reply submissions from exporters in Romania. The CBSA, therefore, relied on information submitted from participating parties, as well as other information on the administrative record, for the purposes of the expiry review investigation with respect to Romania.

[162] Guided by the factors in the SIMR and based on the documentation on the administrative record, the following list represents a summary of the CBSA’s analysis conducted in this expiry review investigation:

• high export dependency in Romania in order to maintain capacity utilization rates;
• pricing data suggesting Romania exporters are selling at prices lower than European domestic benchmark prices and well below Canadian import prices;
• trade measures in place against Romania;
• inability to compete in Canada at non-dumped prices; and
• the presence of low-priced imports of certain hot-rolled steel plate in Canada from other countries with which Romania would likely have to compete to secure sales in the Canadian market.

[163] In the CCRA’s original investigation in 2003, Ispat Sidex S.A. (now ArcelorMittal Galati (AMG)) was the only known producer/exporter to have shipped subject goods to Canada during the POI. AMG participated in the investigation as well as in the subsequent two re-investigations concluded in 2006 and 2008. However, no exporter participated in the last re-investigation, which concluded in 2010.^{Footnote 126}

[164] With the most recent re-investigation that was concluded on July 16, 2010, due to no cooperation from exporters from Romania, normal values for Romania were determined pursuant to a ministerial specification, on the basis of an advance of 74.6% over the export price.^{Footnote 127}

[165] In respect to crude steel production levels, Eurofer reports that from 2015 to 2017, the Romanian steel industry has remained consistent with production of 3,352,000 MT in 2015 and 3,361,000 MT in 2017, representing a 2% share of the EU total production.^{Footnote 128} At 3.4 MMT, Romania sits 37th in the world in terms of largest crude steel producers, representing 0.20% of the global output.^{Footnote 129}

[166] As reported in the ArcelorMittal Galati 2016-2017 Sustainability Report, AMG is the largest integrated steel plant in the country and leader in manufacturing products with a production capacity of 3 MMT of steel.^{Footnote 130} The production capacity of AMG alone would represent more than 88% of Romania’s total steel production in 2017.

[167] According to AMG’s 2016-2017 Sustainability Report, AMG is highly export oriented as more than 70% of its output is exported from Romania. Furthermore, AMG has an important role in the Romanian economy as its operations represents 55% of the city of Galati’s gross domestic product (GDP), 25% of the GDP of the Galati County, and 0.5% of Romania’s total GDP.^{Footnote 131}

[168] AMG has made several investments in updating machinery and completing maintenance during the POR. On March 13, 2017 a press release from AMG revealed a €12.5 million investment in its Heavy Plate Mill no. 2 to install a hot leveller, which according to the report, ensures a higher range of thicknesses and quality with respect to steel plate production. On March 5, 2018, AMG announced an additional investment of €10 million in the restarting of the continuous casting machine no. 4 to allow production through less technical stoppages and breakdowns, producing higher casting speeds while reducing quality defects.^{Footnote 132}

[169] In October 2018, Britain’s Liberty Group (Liberty) announced plans to purchase four steel plants from ArcelorMittal, including one in Romania that produces subject goods. The deal is subject to approval by the European Commission as Arcelor Mittal seeks to bid for Europe’s largest steel plant, Ilva in Italy. In order to do so, ArcelorMittal is required to divest a portion of its current steel making facilities in order to satisfy anti-trust concerns raised by the European Commission.^{Footnote 133} Subsequently, Liberty publicised that it has plans to increase the AMG plant’s production by over 50%, to 3 MMT, in the next three-five years with an investment plan of €330 million. Liberty plans to build its presence in Romania as it believes the production at the AMG plant can increase over the 3 million MT level.^{Footnote 134}

[170] Despite the proposed investments in Romania’s steel industry, current reports indicate that Romania could be facing a recession. A report from UniCredit indicates that Romania’s economy could be facing two consecutive quarters of contraction at the end of 2019 and the beginning of 2020. The report notes government failure to attract and absorb European funds means that the government is increasingly forced to borrow at high interest rates.^{Footnote 135} As well, construction companies in Romania warn the government that the market crisis could drag the economy into a recession.^{Footnote 136}

[171] Furthermore, according to the Energy World Magazine, Romania’s metallurgical industry has been in strong decline in recent years due to sustained absence of demand from the local market and increased pressure from foreign imports.^{Footnote 137} Weakening demand in the domestic market coupled with the high export dependency of producers in Romania will have producers looking to foreign markets in order to maintain capacity utilization rates and to fulfill the future production increases as proposed by the new potential AMG plant owners.

[172] Since pricing data for domestic steel plate was not available for Romanian producers, historical steel plate pricing information available for three European countries (Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom) from CRU was averaged in order to determine a European pricing benchmark.^{Footnote 138} In comparing the European benchmark pricing for steel plate to Romanian’s export price as reported by UN Comtrade data, the Romanian steel plate export price is slightly below the European average price in 2015, then falls further below in 2016 and remains below through to October 2018.^{Footnote 139}

[173] Furthermore, the annual Romanian export price as reported by the UN Comtrade data provided above, was compared to the annual weighted average import price for certain hot-rolled steel plate imported into Canada during the POR. Information on the confidential record supports that the annual average export prices from Romania fall well below the weighted average Canadian import price for certain hot-rolled steel plate throughout the POR.^{Footnote 140}

[174] Based on the pricing analysis above, it is evident that Romanian export prices are well below Canadian import prices and that Romanian exporters are selling at low and potentially dumped prices in other markets. As such, in the event that the current order was rescinded, it is likely that certain hot-rolled steel plate exported from Romania to Canada would be at prices lower than European domestic benchmark prices and well below Canadian import prices.

[175] Evidence on the record documents several anti-dumping measures put in place by authorities in other jurisdictions respecting steel plate and other steel products with respect to Romania. A list of these measures is provided in the table below and is separated into two sections, measures specifically relating to steel plate and measures pertaining to other steel products. These measures demonstrate that Romanian exports have a propensity to dump steel plate and other steel products.

[176] It should be noted that in January 2007 the US rescinded an anti-dumping finding against Romania with regards to steel plate.^{Footnote 142} Although Romania has not been subject to an anti-dumping finding in the US since 2007 with respect to steel plate, there is a threat that actions taken by the US through the section 232 measures may cause a diversion of subject goods from Romania into Canada.

[177] During the period before the original investigation, import volumes of certain hot-rolled steel plate from Romania represented 14.2% of total imports into Canada from all countries. However, during the POR for this expiry review, there were no imports of certain hot-rolled steel plate from Romania into Canada. This would suggest an inability on behalf of the Romanian steel plate producers to compete in the Canadian market at non-dumped prices.

[178] A final point to observe is that steel plate is a commodity product whose market is highly price sensitive. The Canadian steel plate market is marked by increasing competition from several foreign sources. The record indicates that, during the POR, certain hot-rolled steel plate from certain countries were imported into Canada at prices significantly lower than the average price of domestic producers.^{Footnote 143} As price is a major factor for commodity products such as steel plate, Romanian exporters will likely have to compete against these low-priced imports in Canada to regain their volumes and market share achieved when they were selling at dumped prices.

Determination Regarding Likelihood of Continued or Resumed Dumping for Romania

[179] Based on evidence on the administrative record in respect of: the commodity nature of steel plate; the capital intensive nature of steel production; steel market developments and trends; the current tariff and safeguard measures on steel imports and the diversion of steel plate into Canada; the high export dependency in Romania in order to maintain capacity utilization rates; exporters in Romania are selling at prices lower than European domestic benchmark prices and well below Canadian import prices; trade measures in place against Romania by other countries; the inability of exporters in Romania to compete in Canada at non-dumped prices; and, the presence of low-priced imports of certain hot-rolled steel plate in Canada from other countries with which Romania would likely have to compete to secure sales in the Canadian market, the CBSA determined that the expiry of the order is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping into Canada of certain hot-rolled steel plate originating in or exported from Romania.

[180] For the purpose of making a determination in this expiry review investigation, the CBSA conducted its analysis within the scope of the factors found under subsection 37.2(1) of the SIMR. Based on the foregoing consideration of pertinent factors and analysis of the information on the administrative record, on May 24, 2019, the CBSA made a determination pursuant to paragraph 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA that the expiry of the CITT’s order made on January 7, 2014, in Expiry Review No. RR-2013-002, in respect of certain hot-rolled steel plate originating in or exported from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping of the goods.

[181] On May 27, 2019, the CITT commenced its inquiry to determine whether the expiry of the order with respect to the dumping of certain hot-rolled steel plate originating in or exported from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania is likely to result in injury. The CITT’s Expiry Review schedule indicates that it will make its decision by October 31, 2019.

[182] If the CITT determines that the expiry of the order with respect to the goods is likely to result in injury, the CITT will make an order continuing the order in respect of those goods, with or without amendment. If this is the case, the CBSA will continue to levy anti-dumping duties on dumped importations of the subject goods.

[183] If the CITT determines that the expiry of the order with respect to the goods is not likely to result in injury, the CITT will make an order rescinding the order in respect of those goods. Anti-dumping duties would then no longer be levied on importations of the subject goods, and any anti-dumping paid in respect of goods that were released after the date that the order was scheduled to expire will be returned to the importer.

[184] For further information, please contact the officer listed below: