[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 29 (Tuesday, February 12, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6488-6490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-3384]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION

[A-351-806]


Silicon Metal from Brazil; Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review

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

ACTION: Notice of final results of antidumping duty administrative 
review.

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

SUMMARY: On August 6, 2001, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published the preliminary results of administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on silicon metal from Brazil. The merchandise 
covered by this order is silicon metal from Brazil. The review covers 
four manufacturers/exporters, Rima Industrial SA (Rima), Companhia 
Ferroligas Minas Gerais - Minasligas (Minasligas), Ligas de Aluminia 
S.A. (LIASA) and Companhia Carbureto de Calcio (CBCC). The period of 
review (POR) is July 1, 1999, through June 30, 2000.
    Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made 
changes in the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ 
from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping 
margins for the reviewed firm is listed below in the section entitled 
``Final Results of the Review.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 12, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maisha Cryor, telephone: (202) 482-
5831, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Applicable Statute

    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 (2000).

Background

    On August 6, 2001, the Department published the preliminary results 
of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on silicon metal 
from Brazil. See Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review and Notice of Intent Not To Revoke Order in Part, 66 FR 40980 
(August 6, 2001). The review covers four manufacturers/exporters, RIMA, 
Minasligas, LIASA and CBCC. The POR is July 1, 1999, through June 30, 
2000. We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results of 
review. We received comments on November 21, 2001, from Rima, 
Minasligas, and CBCC (collectively respondents), and from American 
Silicon Technologies and Elkem Metals Company (collectively 
petitioners). On December 4, 2001, we received a rebuttal brief from 
petitioners and Rima, Minasligas and CBCC. On December 31, 2001, we 
received comments from petitioners concerning the Department's 
application of section 772(e) of the Act to CBCC's further manufactured 
sales in the preliminary results. On January 10, 2002, we received 
rebuttal comments from CBCC. In response to requests by petitioners, we 
issued a series of supplemental questionnaires to CBCC on January 2, 25 
and 29 of 2002. We received supplemental responses from CBCC on January 
10, 28 and 30 of 2002. We received comments from petitioners on CBCC's 
responses on February 1, 2002. We received comments from CBCC on 
petitioners comments on February 4, 2002. The Department has conducted 
this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Act.

Scope of Review

    The merchandise covered by this administrative review is silicon 
metal from Brazil containing at least 96.00 percent but less than 99.99 
percent silicon by weight. Also covered by this administrative review 
is silicon metal from Brazil containing between 89.00 and 96.00 percent 
silicon by weight but which contains more aluminum than the silicon 
metal containing at least 96.00 percent but less than 99.99 percent 
silicon by weight. Silicon metal is currently provided for under 
subheadings 2804.69.10 and 2804.69.50 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
(HTS) as a chemical product, but is commonly referred to as a metal. 
Semiconductor grade silicon (silicon metal containing by weight not 
less than 99.99 percent silicon and provided for in subheading 
2804.61.00 of the HTS) is not subject to the order. Although the HTS 
item numbers are provided for convenience and for U.S. Customs 
purposes, the written description remains dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this administrative review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum'' (``Decision Memorandum'') from Bernard T. Carreau, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, to Faryar Shirzad, 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated February 4, 2002, 
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which 
parties have raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in 
the Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an Appendix. 
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 (``B-099'') of 
the main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the 
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at 
www.ita.doc.gov/import--admin/records/frn/. The paper copy and 
electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

[[Page 6489]]

Changes Since the Preliminary Results
    Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made certain 
changes in the margin calculations. These changes are discussed in the 
relevant sections of the ``Decision Memorandum,'' accessible in B-099 
and on the Web at www.ita.doc.gov/import  admin/records/frn/.
1. We recalculated Minasligas' home market imputed credit expense using 
a corrected formula.
2. We corrected the conversion of Minasligas' U.S. inland freight 
expense.
3. We recalculated Minasligas' home market credit expense using a 
surrogate interest rate.
4. We recalculated Minasligas' imputed U.S. credit expense using the 
date of liquidation as the date of payment.
5. We set Minasligas' negative imputed U.S. credit expenses equal to 
zero.
6. We recalculated the financial expense ratio in CBCC's cost of 
production (COP) using total financial expenses without any reduction 
for ``financial income.''
7. We included interest revenue in the calculation of CBCC's net home 
market price.
8. We corrected the margin program to properly calculate CBCC's margin 
pursuant to the special rule.
9. We recalculated CBCC's home market credit expense using a surrogate 
interest rate.
10. We recalculated CBCC's home market imputed credit expense using the 
date of shipment from the factory as the date of shipment.
11. We recalculated Rima's general and administrative (G&A) expense 
ratio using its G&A expenses and annual cost of goods sold as reported 
on its financial statements.
12. We recalculated Rima's financial expense ratio using its financial 
expenses and annual cost of goods sold as reported on its financial 
statements.
13. We recalculated Rima's CV to include an amount for profit.
14. We converted Rima's gross unit price into the proper currency to 
calculate net U.S. price.
15. We recalculated Rima's home market selling expenses to divide by 
total cost.
16. We converted CBCC and Rima's U.S. packing costs into U.S. dollars.
17. We recalculated LIASA's home market credit expense using a 
surrogate interest rate.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following percentage weighted-average margin 
exists for the period July 1, 1999, through June 30, 2000:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                    Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
RIMA........................................................        0.35
MINASLIGAS..................................................        1.23
LIASA.......................................................        0.00
CBCC........................................................        0.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department shall determine, and Customs shall assess, 
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 
CFR 351.212(b), we have calculated exporter/importer-specific 
assessment rates. Where the importer-specific assessment rate is above 
de minimis, we will instruct Customs to assess antidumping duties on 
that importer's entries of subject merchandise. To calculate assessment 
rates, we divided the total dumping margins for the reviewed sales by 
the total entered value of those reviewed sales for each importer. We 
will direct Customs to assess the resulting percentage margins against 
the entered Customs values for the subject merchandise on each of that 
importer's entries under the order during the review period.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review 
for all shipments of silicon metal from Brazil entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as 
provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for 
the reviewed companies will be the rate shown above; (2) for previously 
reviewed or investigated 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, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair-value (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) the cash deposit rate for all other 
manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 8.10 percent. This rate 
is the ``All Others'' rate from the LTFV investigation. These deposit 
requirements shall remain in effect until publication of the final 
results of the next administrative review.
    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 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 doubled 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 351.305. Timely 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.
    We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in 
accordance with sections section 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

    February 4, 2002
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix Issues in Decision Memorandum

Minasligas
Comment 1: Short-Term Interest Rate
Comment 2: Advanced Exchange Contracts (ACCs) and Payment Dates
Comment 3: Duty Drawback
Comment 4: Offset to Financial Expense
Comment 5: Calculation of Home Market Imputed Credit Expense
Comment 6: Double Conversion of Inland Freight
Comment 7: COS Adjustment for PIS/COFINS
Comment 8: Duty Drawback and ICMS and IPI Taxes
CBCC
Comment 9: Shipment Date
Comment 10: Consolidated Financial Statement
Comment 11: Financial Expense Ratio
Comment 12: Short-Term Income Offset
Comment 13: Interest Revenue
Comment 14: Nature of Sales to an Unaffiliated Customer for Purposes of 
Determining anAppropriate and Reasonable Surrogate for Purposes of 
Section 772(e) of the Act

[[Page 6490]]

Comment 15: Related-party Transactions and Failure to Examine Documents 
at Verification
Comment 16: Calculation of EP for Use As a Surrogate Price Under 
Section 772(e) of the Act
Comment 17: Application of Special Rule in Margin Program
Comment 18: Calculation of Home Market Imputed Credit Expenses
Comment 19: Constructed Export Price (CEP) Profit
Rima
Comment 20: Major Input Rule
Comment 21: G&A Expenses
Comment 22: Net Financial Expenses
Comment 23: ICMS, IPI and CV
Comment 24: CV Profit
Comment 25: Currency
Comment 26: Home Market Selling Expenses
Comment 27: Commercial Quantities
Comment 28: Unreviewed and Intervening Years
Comment 29: Aggregate Sales and Commercial Quantities
Comment 30: Impermissible Rule Making and Violation of the APA with 
Respect toCommercial Quantities
Rima and CBCC
Comment 31: Home Market Credit and ICMS
Comment 32: Conversion of U.S. Packing Costs
[FR Doc. 02-3384 Filed 2-11-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S