[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 40 (Tuesday, February 29, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10766-10768]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-4800]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-122-815 (alloy), C-122-815 (pure)]


Alloy Magnesium and Pure Magnesium From Canada; Preliminary 
Results of Full Sunset Reviews

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Preliminary Results of Full Sunset Reviews: Alloy 
Magnesium and Pure Magnesium from Canada.

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

SUMMARY: On August 2, 1999, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') initiated sunset reviews of the countervailing duty 
orders on alloy magnesium and pure magnesium from Canada (64 FR 41915) 
pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the 
Act''). On the basis of a notice of intent to participate filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry and substantive comments filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry and respondent interested parties, the 
Department is conducting a full review. As a result of this review, the 
Department preliminarily finds that revocation of the countervailing 
duty orders would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of a 
countervailable subsidy. The net countervailable subsidy and the nature 
of the subsidy are identified in the Preliminary Results of Reviews 
section of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 29, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Darla D. Brown or Melissa G. Skinner, 
Office of Policy for Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th & Constitution, 
Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3207 or (202) 482-1560, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Statute and Regulations

    This review is being conducted pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752 
of the Act. The Department's procedures for the conduct of sunset 
reviews are set forth in Procedures for Conducting Five-year 
(``Sunset'') Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 
FR 13516 (March 20, 1998) (``Sunset Regulations'') and in 19 CFR Part 
351 (1999) in general. Guidance on methodological or analytical issues 
relevant to the Department's conduct of sunset reviews is set forth in 
the Department's Policy Bulletin 98:3--Policies Regarding the Conduct 
of Five-year (``Sunset'') Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998) (``Sunset 
Policy Bulletin'').

Background

    On August 2, 1999, the Department initiated sunset reviews of the 
countervailing duty orders on alloy magnesium and pure magnesium from

[[Page 10767]]

Canada (64 FR 41915), pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act. The 
Department received a notice of intent to participate on behalf of the 
Magnesium Corporation of America (``Magcorp'') on August 13, 1999, 
within the deadline specified in section 351.218(d)(1)(i) of the Sunset 
Regulations. Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1677(9)(C), Magcorp claimed 
interested party status as a domestic producer of the subject 
merchandise. Moreover, Magcorp stated that it was a petitioner in the 
original countervailing duty investigations and has participated in all 
of the administrative reviews conducted by the Department. The 
Department received a complete substantive response from Magcorp on 
September 1, 1999, within the 30-day deadline specified in the Sunset 
Regulations under section 351.218(d)(3)(i).
    The Department also received a complete substantive response on 
behalf of NHCI on September 1, 1999, within the deadline specified in 
the Sunset Regulations under section 351.218(d)(3)(i). NHCI claimed 
interested party status under 19 U.S.C. 1677(9)(A) as a manufacturer 
and exporter of the subject merchandise to the United States. In its 
substantive response, NHCI stated that it participated in the original 
investigation and all of the subsequent administrative reviews.
    In addition, the Department received a substantive response on 
behalf of the Government of Quebec (``GOQ'') on September 1, 1999, 
within the deadline specified in the Sunset Regulations under section 
351.218(d)(3)(i). The GOQ claimed interested party status under 19 
U.S.C. 1677(9)(B) as a provincial government of the country in which 
the subject merchandise is produced and from which it is exported. The 
GOQ also claimed interested party status under 19 U.S.C. 1677(3), as a 
political subdivision of Canada and, therefore, the ``country'' of 
Canada, where the subject merchandise is produced and from which it is 
exported.
    The Department determined that NHCI's and the GOQ's responses 
constituted an adequate response to the notice of initiation. As a 
result, the Department determined, in accordance with section 
351.218(e)(2) of the Sunset Regulations, to conduct full (240 day) 
reviews.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Memorandum to Jeffrey A. May, RE: Sunset Reviews of 
Alloy Magnesium and Pure Magnesium from Canada: Adequacy of 
Respondent Interested Party Response to the Notice of Initiation, 
September 21, 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On September 13, 1999, the Department received rebuttal comments 
from Magcorp NHCI, and the GOQ.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ On September 3, 1999, the Department received and granted a 
request from Magcorp for a five working-day extension of the 
deadline for filing rebuttal comments in this sunset review. This 
extension was granted for all participants eligible to file rebuttal 
comments in this review. The deadline for filing rebuttals to the 
substantive comments therefore became September 13, 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 751(c)(5)(C)(v) of the Act, the 
Department may treat a sunset review as extraordinarily complicated if 
it is a review of a transition order (i.e., an order in effect on 
January 1, 1995). On November 30, 1999, the Department determined that 
the sunset reviews of the countervailing duty orders on alloy magnesium 
and pure magnesium from Canada are extraordinarily complicated pursuant 
to section 751(c)(5)(C)(v) of the Act, and extended the time limit for 
completion of the preliminary results of these reviews until not later 
than February 18, 2000, in accordance with section 751(c)(5)(B) of the 
Act.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Full 
Five-Year Reviews, 64 FR 66879 (November 30, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope

    The products covered by these orders are pure magnesium and alloy 
magnesium from Canada. Pure magnesium contains at least 99.8 percent 
magnesium by weight and is sold in various slab and ingot forms and 
sizes. Magnesium alloys contain less than 99.8 percent magnesium by 
weight with magnesium being the largest metallic element in the alloy 
by weight, and are sold in various ingot and billet forms and sizes. 
The merchandise is currently classifiable under items 8104.11.0000 and 
8104.19.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for 
convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope 
remains dispositive. Secondary and granular magnesium are not included 
in the scope of these orders.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
these sunset reviews are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum'' (``Decision Memo'') from Jeffrey A. May, Director, Office 
of Policy, Import Administration, to Robert S. LaRussa, Assistant 
Secretary for Import Administration, dated February 18, 2000, which is 
hereby adopted and incorporated by reference into this notice. The 
issues discussed in the attached Decision Memo include the likelihood 
of continuation or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy, the net 
countervailable subsidy likely to prevail were the orders revoked, and 
the nature of the subsidy. Parties can find a complete discussion of 
all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations 
in this public memorandum which is on file in B-099.
    In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be 
accessed directly on the Web at www.ita.doc.gov/import--admin/records/
frn/, under the heading ``Canada.'' The paper copy and electronic 
version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Preliminary Results of Reviews

    As a result of these reviews, the Department preliminarily finds 
that revocation of the countervailing duty orders would be likely to 
lead to continuation or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy. The 
net countervailable subsidy is 1.84 percent ad valorem for NHCI and 
4.48 percent ad valorem for ``all others.'' Timminco, which was found 
to have an estimated net subsidy of zero in the original 
investigations, remains excluded from the orders.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determinations: 
Pure Magnesium and Alloy Magnesium from Canada, 57 FR 30946 (July 
13, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the program included in our calculation of the net 
countervailable subsidy likely to prevail if the orders were revoked 
does not fall within the definition of an export subsidy under Article 
3.1(a) of the Subsidies Agreement, it may be a subsidy described in 
Article 6, if the net countervailable subsidy exceeds 5 percent, as 
measured in accordance with Annex IV of the Subsidies Agreement. The 
Department, however, has no information with which to make such a 
calculation, nor do we believe it appropriate to attempt such a 
calculation in the course of a sunset review.\5\ Rather, we are 
providing the Commission the following program description.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Moreover, we note that as of January 1, 2000, Article 6.1 
has ceased to apply (see Article 31 of the Subsidies Agreement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article 7 (``SDI'') Grants from the Quebec Industrial Development 
Corporation

    Acting on special mandates from the GOQ, the SDI provides 
assistance under Article 7 in the form of loans, loan guarantees, 
grants, assumptions of costs on loans, and equity investments.
    Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of 
publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR

[[Page 10768]]

351.310(c). Any hearing, if requested, will be held on April 19, 2000. 
Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than April 10, 2000, 
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(i). Rebuttal briefs, which must 
be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later 
than April 17, 2000. The Department will issue a notice of final 
results of this sunset review, which will include the results of its 
analysis of issues raised in any such comments, no later than June 27, 
2000.

    Dated: February 18, 2000.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-4800 Filed 2-28-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P