[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 188 (Thursday, September 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49351-49353]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-24232]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-508-810]


Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Pure 
Magnesium From Israel

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

ACTION: Notice of final affirmative determination in a countervailing 
duty investigation.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) has made a final

[[Page 49352]]

determination that countervailable subsidies are being provided to 
producers and exporters of pure magnesium from Israel. For information 
on the estimated countervailing duty rates, please see the ``Suspension 
of Liquidation'' section of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 27, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Annika O'Hara or Melanie Brown, Office 
of AD/CVD Enforcement 1, Import Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, Room 3096, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3798 or 482-4987, 
respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute and Regulations

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (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 (URAA). In addition, unless 
otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are 
to 19 CFR part 351 (April 2000).

Petitioners

    The petitioners in this investigation are the Magnesium Corporation 
of America (Magcorp), the United Steel Workers of America (USWA), USWA 
Local 8319, and Concerned Employees of Northwest Alloys, Inc. 
(collectively, petitioners).

Case History

    Since the publication of the preliminary determination in the 
Federal Register (see Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty 
Determination: Pure Magnesium from Israel, 66 FR 11144 (February 22, 
2001) (Preliminary Determination)), the following events have occurred:
    On March 13, 2001, we aligned the countervailing duty investigation 
of pure magnesium from Israel with the companion antidumping duty 
investigation at the request of the petitioners, in accordance with 
section 705(a)(1) of the Act. See Notice of Postponement of Preliminary 
Determinations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Pure Magnesium From 
Israel, the Russian Federation, and the People's Republic of China and 
Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty Determination With Final 
Antidumping Duty Determinations: Pure Magnesium From Israel, 66 FR 
14546 (March 13, 2001).
    We conducted verification of the questionnaire responses submitted 
by the only responding company in this investigation, Dead Sea 
Magnesium Ltd. (DSM) from May 6-8, 2001.
    On May 14, 2001, based on a request from DSM (which is also the 
respondent in the companion antidumping duty investigation), we 
postponed the final antidumping determination until September 12, 2001. 
Because of the alignment of the countervailing duty investigation with 
the antidumping duty investigation, the final determination in the 
countervailing duty investigation was also postponed until September 
12, 2001. See Notice of Postponement of Final Antidumping Determination 
and Extension of Provisional Measures and Postponement of Final 
Countervailing Duty Determination: Pure Magnesium From Israel; and 
Notice of Postponement of Final Antidumping Determination: Pure 
Magnesium From the Russian Federation, 66 FR 24324 (May 14, 2001).
    On June 21 and 22, 2001, we received case briefs from DSM, the 
petitioners, and Rossborough Manufacturing Co. L.P. (Rossborough), an 
interested party in this investigation. Rebuttal briefs were filed by 
DSM and the petitioners on June 28 and 29, 2001. No hearing was held 
because the parties withdrew their earlier requests for a hearing.
    Although the deadline for this determination was originally 
September 12, 2001, in light of the events of September 11, 2001 and 
the subsequent closure of the Federal Government for reasons of 
security, the timeframe for issuing this determination has been 
extended by two days.

Scope of Investigation

    The scope of this investigation includes imports of pure magnesium 
products, regardless of chemistry, form, or size, including, without 
limitation, ingots, raspings, granules, turnings, chips, powder, and 
briquettes.
    Pure magnesium includes: (1) Products that contain at least 99.95 
percent primary magnesium, by weight (generally referred to as ``ultra-
pure'' magnesium); (2) products that contain less than 99.95 percent 
but not less than 99.8 percent primary magnesium, by weight (generally 
referred to as ``pure'' magnesium); (3) chemical combinations of pure 
magnesium and other material(s) in which the pure magnesium content is 
50 percent or greater, but less than 99.8 percent, by weight, that do 
not conform to an ``ASTM Specification for Magnesium Alloy'' \1\ 
(generally referred to as ``off-specification pure'' magnesium); and 
(4) physical mixtures of pure magnesium and other material(s) in which 
the pure magnesium content is 50 percent or greater, but less than 99.8 
percent, by weight. Excluded from this order are mixtures containing 90 
percent or less pure magnesium by weight and one or more of certain 
non-magnesium granular materials to make magnesium-based reagent 
mixtures. The non-magnesium granular materials which the Department is 
aware are used to make such excluded reagents are: lime, calcium metal, 
calcium silicon, calcium carbide, calcium carbonate, carbon, slag 
coagulants, fluorspar, nephaline syenite, feldspar, aluminum, alumina 
(Al2O3), calcium aluminate, soda ash, 
hydrocarbons, graphite, coke, silicon, rare earth metals/mischmetal, 
cryolite, silica/fly ash, magnesium oxide, periclase, ferroalloys, 
dolomitic lime, and colemanite. A party importing a magnesium-based 
reagent which includes one or more materials not on this list is 
required to seek a scope clarification from the Department before such 
a mixture may be imported free of countervailing duties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The meaning of this term is the same as that used by the 
American Society for Testing and Materials in its Annual Book of 
ASTM Standards: Volume 01.02 Aluminum and Magnesium Alloys.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The merchandise subject to this investigation is classifiable under 
items 8104.11.00, 8104.19.00, and 8104.30.00 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings 
are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written 
description of the merchandise under investigation is dispositive.
    For a full discussion of scope comments and determinations, see the 
accompanying September 14, 2001 memorandum from Richard W. Moreland, 
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to Faryar 
Shirzad, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, entitled 
``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Determination in the 
Countervailing Duty Investigation of Pure Magnesium from Israel 
(``Decision Memorandum''), Comments 9 and 10.

Injury Test

    Because Israel is a ``Subsidies Agreement Country'' within the 
meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, the International Trade 
Commission (ITC) is required to determine whether imports of the 
subject merchandise from Israel materially injure, or threaten material 
injury to, a U.S. industry. On December 13, 2000, the ITC published its 
preliminary determination finding that there is a reasonable indication 
that an industry in the United States is being materially injured by 
reason of imports from Israel of the subject merchandise (see Pure 
Magnesium from China, Israel,

[[Page 49353]]

and Russia; Determinations, 65 FR 77910).

Period of Investigation

    The period for which we are measuring subsidies (the POI) is 
calendar year 1999.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this administrative review are addressed in the Decision Memorandum, 
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 this review and the 
corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on 
file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099 of the main Department 
building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum 
can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/ 
under the heading ``Israel.'' The paper copy and electronic version of 
the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we have 
calculated an individual rate for DSM. Because DSM is the only 
respondent in this case, its rate serves as the all-others rate. We 
determine that the total estimated net subsidy rate is 16.52 percent ad 
valorem for DSM and for all other producers and exporters of the 
subject merchandise.
    In accordance with our Preliminary Determination, we instructed the 
Customs Service to suspend liquidation of all entries of pure magnesium 
from Israel, which were entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after February 14, 2001, the date of the publication 
of our Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register. In accordance 
with section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed Customs to discontinue 
the suspension of liquidation for merchandise entered on or after June 
22, 2001, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of entries made 
between February 14, 2001 and June 21, 2001.
    We will issue a countervailing duty order and reinstate the 
suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act if the ITC 
issues a final affirmative injury determination and will require a cash 
deposit of estimated countervailing duties for such entries of 
merchandise in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC determines that 
material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this 
proceeding will be terminated and all estimated duties deposited or 
securities posted as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be 
refunded or canceled.

ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the 
ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the 
ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information related to this 
investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and 
business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC 
confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or 
under an Administrative Protective Order (APO), without the written 
consent of the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information

    In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury 
determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties 
subject to an APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction of 
proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.305(a)(3). Failure to comply is a violation of the APO.
    This determination is published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 
777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: September 14, 2001.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix

List of Comments and Issues in the Decision Memorandum

Comment 1: The Department failed to take into account the effects of 
the privatization of ICL.
Comment 2: The Department should change the AUL used to allocate 
non-recurring subsidies over time.
Comment 3: The infrastructure grant is not countervailable.
Comment 4: The Department should treat DSM's ECIL grant as multiple 
grants.
Comment 5: The Department should use uncreditworthy discount rates 
to allocate benefits.
Comment 6: Use of variable discount rates.
Comment 7: The Department should correct DSW's 1993 interest rate
Comment 8: The Department should change its calculation of the 
benefits conveyed by the EIRD grants
Comment 9: Reconsideration of industry standing
Comment 10: Scope

[FR Doc. 01-24232 Filed 9-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P