[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 189 (Monday, September 30, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61318-61319]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-24776]



[[Page 61318]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-351-806]


Antidumping Duty Investigation; Silicon Metal from Brazil: 
Amended Final Determination in Accordance with Court Decision.

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

ACTION: Notice of Amended Final Determination of Antidumping Duty 
Investigation in Accordance with Court Decision.

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

SUMMARY: On February 14, 2001, the United States Court of International 
Trade (``CIT'') sustained the final remand determination made by the 
Department of Commerce (``the Department'') pursuant to the Court's 
remand of the final determination of sales at less than fair value of 
silicon metal from Brazil. See Camargo Correa Metals, S.A., v. United 
States, Ct. No. 91-09-00641, Slip Op. 01-15 (Ct. Int'l Trade February 
14, 2001). As there is now a final and conclusive court decision in 
this case, we are amending our final determination of sales at less 
than fair value.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 30, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marlene Hewitt, Antidumping/
Countervailing Duty Enforcement, Import Administration, International 
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W.,Washington DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-
1385.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 12, 1991, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') 
published its final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Silicon Metal from Brazil. In its final determination, the Department 
also found that critical circumstances existed with respect to exports 
from Brazil by Companhia Brasileria Carbureto de Calcio (``CBCC''). See 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Metal 
from Brazil, 59 FR 26977 (June 12, 1991) (``Final Determination'').
    On July 24, 1991, the International Trade Commission (``ITC'') 
notified the Department that such imports materially injure an United 
States industry. The ITC also notified the Department that critical 
circumstances do not exist with respect to any imports from Brazil.
    On July 31, 1991, the Department issued its antidumping duty order 
on Silicon Metal from Brazil for two specific Brazilian manufacturers/
exporters, CBCC, and Camargo Correa Metais, S.A. (``CCM''), and for all 
other Brazilian manufacturers/exporters (``all others''). See 
Antidumping Duty Order: Silicon Metal from Brazil, 56 FR 36135 (July 
31, 1991).
    CCM challenged certain aspects of the Department's Final 
Determination at the CIT.
    On August 13, 1993, the CIT remanded the Department's Final 
Determination on the following issues: (1) to re-examine the 
circumstances of sale adjustment for letter of credit sales and explain 
why such sales constitute a bona fide difference in the circumstances 
of domestic sales; (2) to explain in greater detail the allocation of 
annual GS&A expenses to the merchandise produced during the period of 
investigation, and recalculate said allocation if it systematically 
overstates GS&A expenses; and (3) to announce a method and rationale 
for complying with 19 U.S.C. Sec. 1677a (d)(1)(C) and to calculate an 
amount equal to the sum of the amounts incurred and realized for the 
exporter in this review, that avoids double counting but accounts for 
the economic realty of the Brazilian value-added tax ``imposto sobre a 
circulacao de mercadorias e servicos'' (``ICMS'') paid on inputs to 
export production, and recovered from taxes otherwise due the Brazilian 
government which was not a cost of producing silicon metal for export 
in Brazil. See Camargo Correa Metals, S.A., v. United States, Ct. No. 
91-09-00641, Slip Op. 93-163 (Ct. Int'l Trade August 13, 1993).
    On December 13, 1993, the Department filed its redetermination 
pursuant to court remand. The Department recalculated the constructed 
value, excluding the ICMS paid by CBCC and CCM, pursuant to the CIT's 
instructions. See Silicon Metal from Brazil: Final Results of 
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand (December 12, 1993).
    On April 29, 1994, the CIT affirmed the Department's 
redetermination on remand, ruling that since all other issues have been 
decided, the case was dismissed. See Camargo Correa Metals, S.A., v. 
United States, Ct. No. 91-09-00641 (91-09-00645), Slip Op. 94-68 (Ct. 
Int'l Trade April 29, 1994).
    American producers of silicon metal, American Alloys, Inc., Globe 
Metallurgical, Inc., and American Silicon Technologies (collectively 
``domestic producers'' or ``appellants''), appealed the CIT's judgment 
to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 
(``CAFC''). The CAFC vacated the judgment of the CIT and remanded with 
directions to draft a judgment that complied with the relevant statute 
requiring findings of fact and conclusions of law or an opinion stating 
the facts in support of the judgment. See Camargo Correa Metals, S.A., 
v. United States, 52 F.3d 1040 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
    The Department sought a rehearing before the CIT to have its 
original methodology reinstated. The Department argued, contrary to the 
CIT's first ruling, that the ICMS is not remitted or refunded upon 
export, and is therefore a cost. The CIT held that it ``has found ICMS 
credit to be indistinguishable from a remittance or refund.'' See 
Camargo Correa Metals, S.A., v.United States, Ct. No. 91-09-00641, Slip 
Op. 97-159 (Ct. Int'l Trade November 25, 1997). Pursuant to the CAFC's 
directions, the CIT issued its opinion and remanded the case to the 
Department a second time with instructions to 1) consider the Brazilian 
ICMS credit to be a rebate or remittance for purposes of 19 U.S.C. 
Sec. 1677a(d)(1)(C) (1988); 2) propose a method to eliminate or account 
for the double counting problem between the same statutes; and 3) 
recalculate the dumping margin for CBCC. In the same opinion, the CIT 
affirmed the Department's Redetermination in all other respects. See 
Camargo Correa Metals, S.A., v. United States, Ct. No. 91-09-00641, 
Slip Op. 97-159 (Ct. Int'l Trade November 25, 1997).
    On March 25, 1998, the Department submitted its remand results. The 
Department excluded CBCC's ICMS liability from its constructed value 
calculations, consistent with the Department's findings in its 1993 
Final Remand Results. See Silicon Metal from Brazil: Results of 
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand (March 25, 1998).
    On November 5, 1998, the CIT affirmed the Department's final result 
of redetermination on remand. See Camargo Correa Metals, S.A., v. 
United States, Ct. No. 91-09-00641, Slip Op. 98-152 (Ct. Int'l Trade 
November 5, 1998).
    The United States and domestic producers, appealed the CIT's 
judgment to the CAFC. The CAFC reversed the CIT's judgment and remanded 
the case to the CIT to include the ICMS in the constructed value 
calculation. See Camargo Correa Metals, S.A., v. United States, 200 
F.3d 771 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
    On November 21, 2000, the Department issued its final results of 
redetermination pursuant to court remand. See Silicon Metal from 
Brazil: Final Results of Redetermination

[[Page 61319]]

Pursuant to Court Remand (November 21, 2000).
    On February 14, 2001, the CIT sustained the Department's 
redetermination on remand. See Camargo Correa Metals, S.A., v. United 
States, Ct. No. 91-09-00641, Slip Op. 01-15 (Ct. Int'l Trade February 
14, 2001).
    Litigation in this case is final and conclusive. We are therefore 
amending our final determination of sales at less than fair value.
    The weighted-average margins remain the same as in the antidumping 
duty order and are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Manufacturer/Exporter                   Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CCM..................................................              87.79
CBCC.................................................              93.20
All others...........................................              91.06
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CCM's and CBCC's current cash deposit rates are based upon an 
administrative review conducted subsequent to the investigation segment 
of the proceeding. Therefore, this amended final determination does not 
affect the cash deposit rates for CCM and CBCC currently in effect, 
which will continue to be based on the margins found to exist in the 
most recently completed review.
    This notice is published in accordance with Sec. Sec.  735(d) and 
777(i) of the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. Sec. Sec.  1675(a)(1) and 
1677f(i)).

    Dated: September 23, 2002.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 02-24776 Filed 9-27-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S