[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 201 (Friday, October 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54085-54087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27631]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-351-820]
Ferrosilicon from Brazil: Amended Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Amended final results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On August 14, 1997, the Department of Commerce published the
final results of the second administrative review of the antidumping
duty order or ferrosilicon from Brazil. The review covered Companhia
Ferroligas Minas Gerais-Minasligas and Companhia Brasileria Carbureto
de Calcio manufacturers/exporters of the subject merchandise to the
United States. The period of review is March 1, 1995 through February
29, 1996. Interested parties submitted ministerial error allegations
with respect to the final results of administrative review for
Minasligas on August 20, 1997. Based on the correction of certain
ministerial errors made in the final results of review, we are amending
our final results of review with respect to Minasligas and the All
Others rate.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 17, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sal Tauhidi or Irene Darzenta, AD/CVD
Enforcement Group II, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-
4851 or (202) 482-6320, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Applicable Statute and Regulations
The Department of Commerce (the Department) has now amended the
final results of this administrative review in accordance with section
751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Unless otherwise
indicated, all citations to the Act are references to the provisions
effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to
the Act by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. In addition, unless
otherwise indicated, all references to the Department's regulations are
to the regulations set forth at 19 CFR part 353 (April 1996).
Background
On August 14, 1997, the Department published the final results of
the second administrative review of the antidumping duty order or
ferrosilcon from Brazil (62 FR 43504), covering the period March 1,
1995 through February 29, 1996. The respondents are Companhia
Ferroligas Minas Gerais-Minasligas (Minasligas) and Companhia
Brasileria Carbureto de Calcio (CBCC). The petitioners are Aimcor and
SKW Metals & Alloys, Inc.
On August 20, 1997, the petitioners and Minasligas filed
allegations that the Department had made certain ministerial errors in
this administrative review with respect to Minasligas. Specifically,
the petitioners alleged three ministerial errors with respect to the
following issues: (1) the use of Brazilian reais-denominated gross unit
prices instead of U.S. dollar-denominated gross unit prices for U.S.
sales; (2) the treatment of marine insurance expenses for certain U.S.
sales; and (3) the date of sale for one U.S. sale. Minasligas alleged
two ministerial errors with respect to the following issues: (1) the
adjustment to U.S. price for insurance revenue applicable to one U.S.
sale; and (2) the treatment of value-added taxes (VAT) on U.S. sales.
On August 27, 1997, both parties submitted comments on these
allegations. For a complete discussion of the allegations, see the
Department's October 6, 1997, Decision Memorandum Re: Alleged
Ministerial Errors in the Calculation of the Final Antidumping Duty
Margin for Companhia Ferroligas Minas-Gerais-Minasligas.
As discussed below, in accordance with 19 CFR 353.28(d), we have
determined that certain ministerial errors were made in our margin
calculations for Minasligas. In addition, the Department also
determined that a clerical error was made regarding the
[[Page 54086]]
``All Others'' rate as stated in the notice of the final results.
Scope of Review
The merchandise subject to this review is ferrosilicon, a ferro
alloy generally containing, by weight, not less than four percent iron,
more than eight percent but not more than 96 percent silicon, not more
than 10 percent chromium, not more than 30 percent manganese, not more
than three percent phosphorous, less than 2.75 percent magnesium, and
not more than 10 percent calcium or any other element. Ferrosilicon is
a ferro alloy produced by combining silicon and iron through smelting
in a submerged-arc furnace. Ferrosilicon is used primarily as an
alloying agent in the production of steel and cast iron. It is also
used in the steel industry as a deoxidizer and a reducing agent, and by
cast iron producers as an inoculant. Ferrosilicon is differentiated by
size and by grade. The sizes express the maximum and minimum dimensions
of the lumps of ferrosilicon found in a given shipment. Ferrosilicon
grades are defined by the percentages by weight of contained silicon
and other minor elements. Ferrosilicon is most commonly sold to the
iron and steel industries in standard grades of 75 percent and 50
percent ferrosilicon. Calcium silicon, ferrocalcium silicon, and
magnesium ferrosilcon are specifically excluded from the scope of this
review. Calcium silicon is an alloy containing, by weight, not more
than five percent iron, 60 to 65 percent silicon, and 28 to 32 percent
calcium. Ferrocalcium silicon is a ferro alloy containing, by weight,
not less than four percent iron, 60 to 65 percent silicon, and more
than 10 percent calcium. Magnesium ferrosilicon is a ferro alloy
containing, by weight, not less than four percent iron, not more than
55 percent silicon, and not less than 2.75 percent magnesium.
Ferrosilicon is currently classifiable under the following
subheadings of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS): 7202.21.1000, 7202.21.5000, 7202.21.7500, 7202.21.9000,
7202.29.0010, and 7202.29.0050. Although the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description
of the scope of this review is dispositive. Ferrosilicon in the form of
slag is included within the scope of this order if it meets, in
general, the chemical content definition stated above and is capable of
being used as ferrosilicon. Parties that believe their importations of
ferrosilicon slag do not meet these definitions should contact the
Department and request a scope determination.
Alleged Ministerial Errors
Issue 1: The Use of Brazilian Reais-denominated Gross Unit Prices
Instead of U.S. Dollar-denominated Gross Unit Prices for U.S. Sales
The petitioners contend that because the Department believed that
Minasligas' U.S. dollar prices were not on the record, it used
Brazilian reais-denominated gross unit prices instead of U.S. dollar-
denominated gross unit prices for U.S. sales in its margin analysis.
The Department thus mistakenly converted the U.S. sales prices reported
in Brazilian currency to U.S. dollars on the date of sale. However, the
petitioners assert that in Exhibit 6 of Minasligas' October 11, 1996
supplemental response, Minasligas reported the gross unit prices for
its U.S. sales in U.S. dollars. The petitioners argue that the
Department should have used the U.S. dollar-denominated gross unit
prices for Minasligas' U.S. sales, as reported in Exhibit 6 of
Minasligas' October 11, 1996 supplemental response, instead of the
Brazilian reais-denominated gross unit prices in its margin analysis.
Minasligas contends that because the Department was able to verify
the accuracy of the Brazilian reais-denominated prices by examining
relevant commercial invoices for selected U.S. sales at verification,
it should reject petitioners' request to use the U.S. dollar-
denominated gross unit prices reported in Exhibit 6. In this respect,
Minasligas argues that the Department did not make a clerical error but
applied an appropriate methodology.
DOC Position
We agree with the petitioners. In the final results of review, the
Department mistakenly concluded that Minasligas' U.S. dollar-
denominated gross unit prices for U.S. sales were not on the record
and, therefore, used the Brazilian reais-denominated U.S. prices in its
final margin analysis. Upon further review of the record, we find that
Minasligas reported U.S. dollar-denominated prices in Exhibit 6 of its
October 11, 1996 supplemental response and that these prices were
consistent with sales documentation obtained at verification. Thus, we
inadvertently omitted the U.S. dollar-denominated price data contained
in Exhibit 6 from our original final margin analysis. For complete
discussion and analysis see the Department's October 6, 1997, Decision
Memorandum Re: Alleged Ministerial Errors in the Calculation of the
Final Antidumping Duty Margin for Companhia Ferroligas Minas-Gerais-
Minasligas. Therefore, for these amended final results, we have used
the U.S. dollar-denominated gross unit prices for U.S. sales as
reported in Exhibit 6 of Minasligas' October 11, 1996 supplemental
response.
Issue 2: Clerical Error Allegations Regarding the Treatment of Marine
Insurance Expenses for Certain U.S. Sales, the Date of Sale for One
U.S. Sale, and the Adjustment to U.S. Price for Insurance Revenue
Applicable to One U.S. Sale
The petitioners and Minasligas contend that the Department failed
to correctly input certain data for certain U.S. sales in its final
margin calculations. Specifically, the petitioners contend that the
Department made input errors with respect to marine insurance expenses
for certain U.S. sales and the date of sale for one U.S. sale.
Minasligas contends that the Department made an input error with
respect to the adjustment to U.S. price for insurance revenue
applicable to one U.S. sale.
DOC Position
We agree with both the petitioners and Minasligas' allegations and
have corrected these clerical errors. For complete discussion and
analysis, see the Department's October 6, 1997, Decision Memorandum Re:
Alleged Ministerial Errors in the Calculation of the Final Antidumping
Duty Margin for Companhia Ferroligas Minas-Gerais-Minasligas.
Issue 3: Value-added Taxes Collected on U.S. Sales
Minasligas asserts that the Department stated in its final results
that Minasligas was unable to substantiate its claim that VAT charges
are passed along to U.S. customers and are included in the reported
U.S. prices. Minasligas maintains that for purposes of making price-to-
price comparisons, however, the Department treated VAT on U.S. export
sales as if it had been passed along to U.S. customers and included it
in the U.S. price. According to Minasligas, there is a contradiction
between the Department's finding of fact (i.e., that Minasligas was
unable to substantiate its claim that VAT charges are passed along to
U.S. customers and are included in the reported prices) and the
Department's calculation methodology. Minasligas maintains that if the
Department's finding of fact is correct, it was a mistake to deduct VAT
from the U.S. price or to account for it
[[Page 54087]]
in price-to-price comparisons. However, if the Department's finding of
fact is not correct, Minasligas maintains that it is the Department's
practice to calculate U.S. imputed credit expenses based on a U.S.
price exclusive of VAT.
The petitioners contend that the Department did not subtract VAT
taxes on U.S. sales from the U.S. price. Instead, petitioners argue
that the Department determined the difference between the weighted-
average per unit VAT taxes collected on home market sales and the per-
unit VAT taxes owed by Minasligas on each U.S. sale, and then
subtracted this difference from normal value (NV) which included VAT
taxes collected on home market sales, in accordance with its normal
practice.
Department's Position
We agree with Minasligas that this adjustment was inappropriate.
For complete discussion and analysis, see the Department's October 6,
1997, Decision Memorandum Re: Alleged Ministerial Errors in the
Calculation of the Final Antidumping Duty Margin for Companhia
Ferroligas Minas-Gerais-Minasligas. Therefore, for these amended final
results, we have not made an adjustment to NV for VAT on U.S. sales.
Issue 4: All Others Rate
The Department erroneously reported an ``All Others Rate'' of 91.06
percent in the notice of final results. The correct ``All Others Rate''
is 35.95 percent. (See Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value (LTFV): Ferrosilicon from Brazil, 59 FR 8599, February
23, 1995.) Thus, we are amending the final results to replace the
incorrect rate of 91.06 percent with the correct rate of 35.95 percent.
Amended Final Results
As a result of our correction of the ministerial errors for
Minasligas, we have determined the following amended margin exists for
Minasligas for the period covering March 1, 1995 through February 29,
1996:
Amended
Weighted-
Manufacturer/Exporter Average
Margin
(percent)
Minasligas................................................. 2.54
The Department shall determine, and the U.S. Customs Service shall
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department
will issue appraisement instructions concerning the respondent directly
to the U.S. Customs Service.
Furthermore, the following cash deposit requirements will be
effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication
date of these amended final results of administrative review, as
provided for by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate
for the reviewed company named above will be the rate as stated above;
(2) for previously investigated or reviewed companies not listed above,
the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate
published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm
covered in this review, or the original LTFV investigation, but the
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for
the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4)
if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this
review, the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters
will be 35.95 percent, the All Others rate established in the amended
final LTFV investigation. These deposit requirements, when imposed,
shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the
next administrative review.
This notice services as the final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 to file a certificate regarding the
reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the
relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 353.34(d). Timely written notification of
return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with
regulations and the terms of the APO is an sanctionable violation.
These amended final results of administrative review and notice are
in accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C.
1675(a)(1) and 19 CFR 353.28(c)).
Dated: October 10, 1997.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-27631 Filed 10-14-97; 3:02 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M
