[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 175 (Friday, September 8, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54498-54499]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-23128]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-122-815]


Pure Magnesium and Alloy Magnesium From Canada: Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews

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

ACTION: Notice of final results of countervailing duty administrative 
reviews.

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

SUMMARY: On May 4, 2000, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') published in the Federal Register the preliminary results 
of the administrative reviews of the countervailing duty orders on pure 
magnesium and alloy magnesium from Canada for the period January 1, 
1998 through December 31, 1998.
    Our analysis of the comments received on the preliminary results 
did not lead to any changes of the net subsidy rate. Therefore, these 
final results are identical to the preliminary results. The final net 
subsidy rate for the reviewed company is listed below in the section 
entitled ``Final Results of Reviews.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 8, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Annika O'Hara or Craig Matney, AD/CVD 
Enforcement, Office 1, Group I, Import Administration, U.S. Department 
of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20230; telephone (202) 482-3798 or (202) 482-1778, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute and Regulations

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are 
references to the provisions of section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''), 
effective January 1, 1995 (``the Act''). In addition, unless otherwise 
indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are to 19 CFR 
part 351 (1999).

Background

    On May 4, 2000, the Department published the preliminary results of 
these administrative reviews (see Pure Magnesium and Alloy Magnesium 
From Canada: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Reviews, 65 FR 25910 (May 4, 2000)) (``Preliminary Results''). We 
received a case brief from the petitioner, the Magnesium Corporation of 
America, on June 5, 2000. Norsk Hydro Canada, Inc. (``NHCI''), the sole 
producer or exporter of the subject merchandise for which a review was 
requested, and the Government of Quebec filed rebuttal briefs on June 
12, 2000. The Department did not conduct a hearing for these reviews 
because none was requested.

Scope of the Reviews

    The products covered by these reviews are shipments of pure 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 pure and alloy magnesium subject to review is currently 
classifiable under items 8104.11.0000 and 8104.19.0000, respectively, 
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). 
Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes, the written descriptions of the merchandise subject to the 
orders are dispositive.
    Secondary and granular magnesium are not included in the scope of 
these orders. Our reasons for excluding granular magnesium are 
summarized in Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Pure and Alloy Magnesium From Canada, 57 FR 6094 (February 20, 
1992).

Period of Review

    The period of review for which we are measuring subsidies is from 
January 1, 1998 through December 31, 1998.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
these administrative reviews are addressed in the September 1, 2000, 
Issues and Decision Memorandum (``Decision Memorandum'') from Richard 
W. Moreland, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, to Troy 
H. Cribb, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, which 
is hereby adopted by this notice. Attached to this notice as Appendix I 
is a list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have 
responded in the Decision Memorandum. Parties can find a complete 
discussion of all issues raised in these reviews and the corresponding 
recommendations in this public memorandum which is on file in the 
Central Records Unit, Room B-099

[[Page 54499]]

of the Department. In addition, a complete version of the Decision 
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://www.ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/ under the heading ``Canada.'' The paper copy 
and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in 
content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of the record and comments received, we have 
made no changes to the preliminary net subsidy rate.

Final Results of Reviews

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated an 
individual subsidy rate for each producer/exporter subject to these 
reviews. We will instruct the U.S. Customs Service (''Customs'') to 
assess countervailing duties as indicated below on all appropriate 
entries. For the period January 1, 1998 through December 31, 1998, we 
determine the net subsidy rate for the reviewed company to be as 
follows:

                            Net Subsidy Rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Manufacturer/exporter                       Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norsk Hydro Canada, Inc....................................         1.38
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department will also instruct Customs to collect cash deposits 
of estimated countervailing duties in the percentage detailed above on 
the f.o.b. invoice price on all shipments of the subject merchandise 
from NHCI entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or 
after the date of publication of the final results of these reviews.
    Because the URAA replaced the general rule in favor of a country-
wide rate with a general rule in favor of individual rates for 
investigated and reviewed companies, the procedures for establishing 
countervailing duty rates, including those for non-reviewed companies, 
are now essentially the same as those in antidumping cases, except as 
provided for in section 777A(e)(2)(B) of the Act. The requested review 
will normally cover only those companies specifically named (see 19 CFR 
351.213(b)). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(c), for all companies for which 
a review was not requested, duties must be assessed at the cash deposit 
rate, and cash deposits must continue to be collected at the rate 
previously ordered. As such, the countervailing duty cash deposit rate 
applicable to a company can no longer change, except pursuant to a 
request for a review of that company. See Federal-Mogul Corporation and 
The Torrington Company v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 782 (CIT 1993) 
and Floral Trade Council v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 766 (CIT 1993). 
Therefore, the cash deposit rates for all companies except NHCI will be 
unchanged by the results of these reviews.
    Accordingly, we will instruct Customs to continue to collect cash 
deposits for non-reviewed companies at the most recent company-specific 
or country-wide rate applicable to the company. Except for Timminco 
Limited, which was excluded from the orders in the original 
investigations, these rates were established in the first 
administrative proceeding conducted under the URAA. See Final Results 
of the Second Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews: Pure 
Magnesium and Alloy Magnesium from Canada, 62 FR 48607 (September 16, 
1997).
    In addition, for the period January 1, 1998 through December 31, 
1998, the assessment rates applicable to all non-reviewed companies 
covered by these orders are the cash deposit rates in effect at the 
time of entry, except for Timminco Limited (which was excluded from the 
order in the original investigations).
    This notice 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 351.305(a)(3). Timely written 
notification of return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to 
judicial protective order is hereby requested.
    Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a 
sanctionable violation.
    These administrative reviews and notice are in accordance with 
section 751(a)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: September 1, 2000.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I--Issues Discussed in the Decision Memorandum

I. Methodology and background information
    1. Subsidies valuation information
    A. Allocation period
    A. Discount rates
II. Analysis of programs
    1. Program conferring subsidies
    A. Article 7 grant from the Quebec Industrial Development 
Corporation (``SDI'')
    2. Programs determined to be not used
    A. St. Lawrence River Environment Technology Development Program
    B. Program for Export Market Development
    C. The Export Development Corporation
    D. Canada-Quebec Subsidiary Agreement on the Economic 
Development of the Regions of Quebec
    E. Opportunities to Stimulate Technology Programs
    F. Development Assistance Program
    G. Industrial Feasibility Study Assistance Program
    H. Export Promotion Assistance Program
    I. Creation of Scientific Jobs in Industries
    J. Business Investment Assistance Program
    K. Business Financing Program
    L. Research and Innovation Activities Program
    M. Export Assistance Program
    N. Energy Technologies Development Program
    O. Transportation Research and Development Assistance Program
    3. Program from which NHCI no longer derives a countervailable 
benefit
    A. Exemption from payment of water bills
III. Analysis of comments
    Comment 1: Description of a program as ``terminated''

[FR Doc. 00-23128 Filed 9-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P