[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 52 (Monday, March 18, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11979-11980]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-6473]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-351-806]


Silicon Metal from Brazil: Amended Final Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review

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

ACTION: Notice of Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review.

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

SUMMARY: We are amending our final results of the 1999-2000 
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on silicon metal 
from Brazil, published on February 12, 2002 (67 FR 6488), to reflect 
the correction of ministerial errors made in the final results. The 
period covered by these amended final results of review is July 1, 1999 
through June 30, 2000.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 18, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maisha Cryor, AD/CVD Enforcement, 
Office 4, Group II, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
5831.

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 of Commerce (the Department) 
published the preliminary results of the 1999-2000 administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on silicon metal from Brazil. The 
Department published the final results of review on February 12, 2002. 
See Silicon Metal from Brazil; Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 67 FR 6488 (February 12, 2002) (Final Results).
    On February 25, 2002, we received timely allegations from Companhia 
Brasileira Carbureto de Calcio (CBCC) (a respondent) that the 
Department made ministerial errors in the final results of review 
regarding CBCC. On February 25, 2002, we received timely allegations 
from American Silicon Technologies and Elkem Metals Company 
(collectively petitioners) that the Department made ministerial errors 
in the final results of review regarding the ``all others'' rate. On 
March 4, 2002, we received a timely reply from petitioners regarding 
CBCC's ministerial error comments.

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.

Amendment of Final Results

    Comment 1: CBCC states that the Department erroneously applied 
adverse facts available (AFA) to the shipment date of one of its U.S. 
sales. CBCC contends that although the Department intended to use the 
date of the invoice to calculate the imputed U.S. credit expense for 
this sale, the Department erroneously applied AFA to the shipment date. 
CBCC urges the Department to correct this ministerial error.
    Department's Position: After a review of CBCC's allegation, we 
agree with CBCC and have corrected this matter in the margin 
calculation program. See Memorandum to The File through Thomas F. 
Futtner from Maisha Cryor: Companhia Brasileira Carbureto De Calcio: 
Calculations for the Amended Final Results of the 1999-2000 Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review of Silicon Metal From Brazil, March 11, 
2002. We note that correcting this error has no effect on the outcome 
of CBCC's margin.
    Comment 2: CBCC contends that the Department mistakenly used a 
simple interest formula to calculate CBCC's imputed credit expense in 
the home market. CBCC notes that although it is making this allegation, 
the comment is also applicable to the margin calculations of Rima 
Industrial SA (Rima), Companhia Ferroligas Minas Gerais - Minasligas 
(Minasligas) and Ligas de Aluminia S.A. (LIASA), the other respondents 
in this review. CBCC contends that where interest is calculated on a 
daily basis, a compound, not simple, interest formula should be used. 
CBCC argues that where the interest rate is high, such as in Brazil, 
only the compound interest formula yields the true cost of money and is 
the only method used in day-to-day commercial transactions. CBCC urges 
the Department to correct this matter in CBCC's, as well as the other 
respondents, home market credit calculations.
    Petitioners disagree with CBCC. Petitioners argue that because the 
Department had no intention of applying a compound interest formula, 
the Department's use of a simple interest formula was a deliberate 
choice of methodology and not a ministerial error.
    Department's Position: After a careful review of CBCC's allegation, 
we have concluded that it does not merit treatment as a ministerial 
error under sections 19 CFR 351.224(f) and (g) of the

[[Page 11980]]

Department's regulations. Section 351.224(f) of the Department's 
regulations defines ministerial error as ``* * * an error in addition, 
subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting 
from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other 
similar type of unintentional error which the Secretary considers 
ministerial.'' Because the formula used in the Department's calculation 
of home market credit expense in the Final Results was intentional, 
CBCC's allegation does not fall under sections 19 CFR 351.224(f) and 
(g) of the Department's regulations. See Memorandum to The File through 
Thomas F. Futtner from Maisha Cryor: Companhia Brasileira Carbureto De 
Calcio: Calculations for the Final Results of the 1999-2000 Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review of Silicon Metal From Brazil, February 4, 
2002. Therefore, we have not amended the interest formula that was used 
to calculate home market credit expense in the Final Results.

Comment 3:

    Petitioners contend that the Department published the wrong ``all 
others'' rate in the Final Results. Petitioners state that in the Final 
Results, the ``all others'' rate is 8.10%, while the ``all others'' 
rate in the antidumping duty order on silicon metal from Brazil is 
91.06%. Petitioners assert that, pursuant to Policy Bulletin 93.1, the 
Department's policy holds that the ``all others rate shall be the all 
others rate contained in the order.''
    Department's Position: We agree with petitioners that we mistakenly 
referred to the ``all others'' rate as 8.10 percent in the Final 
Results. Therefore, we have corrected the ``all others'' rate to 
reflect 91.06 percent, which is the ``all others'' rate from the less 
than fair value investigation.

Amended Final Results

    We are amending the final results of the antidumping duty 
administrative review of silicon metal from Brazil to reflect the 
corrections of the above-cited ministerial errors. These corrections 
are in accordance with section 751(h) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224 of 
the Department's regulations. These corrections did not change any of 
the company-specific margins published in the Final Results. We are 
also correcting the stated ``all others'' rate which is 91.06 percent.
    We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

    March 11, 2002.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 02-6473 Filed 3-15-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S