Aluminum powder -- Section 232 Inclusion Rebuttal Comment Template

Company: [Company legal name] Address: [Company registered address] EIN: [Federal Employer Identification Number] Primary contact: [Primary contact name], [Primary contact title] Email: [Primary contact email] · Phone: [Primary contact phone] Filed via regulations.gov Docket BIS-2026-15961 pursuant to the FR 2026-15961 public-comment framework.

HTSUS subheading: [HTSUS 8-10 digit subheading] [Detailed product description] Provide the following for the specific product to which this rebuttal comment relates: HTSUS subheading (8-10 digit precision -- 4 digits is insufficient for a the FR 2026-15961 public-comment framework filing), chemical composition (target purity, allowable impurity max), physical specifications (D10, D50, D90 particle-size distribution ranges, morphology - spherical vs flake vs irregular), and end-use qualification standard (specific AS9100 clause, ISO 9001 certification number, or customer-specific process spec). Include a copy of the mill test report or certificate of analysis format the supplier provides on each shipment.

Document each domestic aluminum-powder producer contacted, the date of contact, the specification requested, and the producer's response (capacity available at requested volume, capacity unavailable, capacity available at longer lead time, capacity available at higher price, no response). BIS methodology (as documented in the Commerce Department steel report of January 11, 2018 and the aluminum report of January 17, 2018) evaluates domestic capacity at the specific product-specification level, not at the aggregate metal level -- generic 'domestic aluminum is available' is insufficient if the specific particle-size and purity spec is not produced domestically at commercial volume. Cite specific U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Commodity Summaries for aluminum-powder domestic production data.

Aerospace and defense end uses of the specific specification requested: cite specific defense-related programs, DoD prime-contractor or Tier 1 supplier relationships (with contract number where public), and the extent to which alternate sourcing from tariff-covered origin would impact defense-adjacent production schedules. If the end use is NOT defense-adjacent (e.g., commercial coatings, consumer additive-manufacturing feedstock), state so directly -- BIS has historically declined inclusion for both defense-adjacent and non-defense-adjacent applications, but the analysis section differs, and misrepresenting a defense nexus is treated as a material misstatement under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (false statements to a federal agency).

[Domestic suppliers contacted with dates] Complete a documented check of every U.S.-registered aluminum-powder producer capable of the specific specification requested. Registered producers are listed in the U.S. International Trade Commission's Harmonized Tariff Schedule commodity descriptions and in the Commerce Department Bureau of Industry and Security's own Section 232 inclusion-rebuttal public docket at regulations.gov (Docket BIS-2026-15961) (prior grants and denials are searchable). Contact must include: (i) written inquiry to each domestic producer at the specification, quantity, and required delivery timeline; (ii) 30-day minimum response window; (iii) copy of each response retained in the inclusion-rebuttal file. Counter-commenters may file responsive comments in the regulations.gov docket within 30 days to file competing statements.

Quantify the projected cost impact of a 25% tariff applied to [Annual customs value USD] of imports at HTSUS [HTSUS 8-10 digit subheading]. Reference existing fixed-price contracts of 12-24 months' duration and the ability (or inability) to renegotiate downstream pricing within the rulemaking-comment window. Include supporting exhibits: (i) 12-month import records (CBP entry summaries, redacted for competitive sensitivity as needed); (ii) downstream contract pricing (redacted); (iii) employment impact projection at [Company legal name]'s facility and at directly dependent customer facilities.

Analyze whether the specific specification is available from producers in any country not subject to the proposed Section 232 rate. Include: (i) each alternate-country producer contacted, date, specification requested; (ii) response received; (iii) landed-cost comparison showing whether alternate sourcing is commercially viable at the specification and volume required; (iv) qualification timeline for the alternate producer's material (typically the same 9-18 months as any new supplier under AS9100 or ISO 9001).

1. BIS Section 232 Exclusion Portal, historical determinations addressing aerospace-grade aluminum powder at 99.7%+ purity and controlled particle-size distributions where domestic production could not meet spec at commercial volume (searchable public docket, regulations.gov (Docket BIS-2026-15961)). 2. Presidential Proclamation 9704 of March 8, 2018 (Adjusting Imports of Aluminum into the United States), 83 Fed. Reg. 11619 (establishing the initial Section 232 aluminum action); Presidential Proclamations 10895 and 10896 of February 10, 2025, which together terminated the 15 CFR § 705.5 product-specific exclusion process and established the current derivative-article rulemaking mechanism under which Federal Register notice 2026-15961 was issued. 3. Commerce Department Bureau of Industry and Security, 'The Effect of Imports of Aluminum on the National Security,' January 17, 2018, at 20-31 (methodology for evaluating downstream specialty-grade aluminum inputs at the product-specification level). 4. the public comment mechanism established by Federal Register notice 2026-15961 (August 6, 2026), operative under the notice-and-comment rulemaking framework of 5 U.S.C. § 553(c); 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (false statements to a federal agency) (material-misstatement provisions). 5. Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section 232, 19 U.S.C. § 1862. 6. U.S. Geological Survey, Mineral Commodity Summaries: Aluminum (published annually) -- data on domestic aluminum-powder production capacity.

This public comment is submitted in opposition to the proposed Section 232 derivative-article inclusion of aluminum powder (HTSUS heading 7603) contemplated by Federal Register notice 2026-15961. [Company legal name] requests a product-specific exclusion for aerospace-grade and additive-manufacturing-feedstock aluminum powder at the specific particle-size distributions and 99.7%+ purity grades that are qualified into downstream production processes under AS9100 and ISO 9001 certifications. No domestic supplier currently produces this specification at the volumes and lead times required, and the qualification process for an alternative supplier requires 9-18 months of process-qualification testing before substituted material can be used in production. For the reasons set forth below, [Company legal name] respectfully urges BIS to decline inclusion of this subheading in the final Section 232 derivative-article coverage. Should BIS proceed with inclusion notwithstanding this comment, [Company legal name] requests that BIS incorporate a 24-month transition and adjustment period covering the specific HTSUS subheading identified below. Requested transition-and-adjustment period if BIS proceeds with inclusion: [Requested transition-and-adjustment period if BIS proceeds with inclusion - typically 12 months] months.

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (false statements to a federal agency) and the identification requirements of 5 U.S.C. § 553(c), I attest that the statements in this comment are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge, and that I am authorized to submit this comment on behalf of [Company legal name]. _________________________________ [Primary contact name], [Primary contact title] [Company legal name] [Primary contact email] · [Primary contact phone] Submitted via regulations.gov Docket BIS-2026-15961: 2026-08-26 --- **Draft Status: v0 -- attorney-review-pending.** This template was auto-generated by TariffWatch from Federal Register notice 2026-15961, Presidential Proclamations 10895 and 10896 (Feb 10, 2025 -- terminating the 15 CFR § 705.5 exclusion-request process), and publicly available BIS Section 232 rulemaking materials. Not legal advice, not customs classification advice under 19 CFR 111. Consult qualified counsel or a licensed customs broker before submitting to regulations.gov Docket BIS-2026-15961. Every substantive claim in this request that is factual to your business -- HTSUS subheading, annual quantity, annual customs value, cost-impact projections, sourcing country, domestic-supplier contacts -- must be verified by the submitter before filing. TariffWatch (Digital Empire Holdings LLC) makes no representation as to the sufficiency of this request for any specific regulatory outcome.