Notice2024-08674
Ferrosilicon From Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and the Russian Federation: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
April 24, 2024
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentInternational Trade Administration
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 80 (Wednesday, April 24, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 80 (Wednesday, April 24, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31137-31142]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-08674]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-351-860, A-834-812, A-557-828, A-821-838]
Ferrosilicon From Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and the Russian
Federation: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable April 17, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jaron Moore (Brazil) at (202) 482-
3640; Samantha Kinney (Kazakhstan) at (202) 482-2285; Peter Farrell
(Malaysia) at (202) 482-2104; and Jacob Saude (the Russian Federation
(Russia)) at (202) 482-0981, AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petitions
On March 28, 2024, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce)
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of
ferrosilicon from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and Russia filed in
proper form on behalf of CC Metals and Alloys, LLC and Ferroglobe USA,
Inc. (the petitioners).\1\ These AD Petitions were accompanied by
countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of ferrosilicon
from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and Russia.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Petitioners' Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,'' dated March 28, 2024 (the
Petitions).
\2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 1, 2024, Commerce requested supplemental information
pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions in supplemental
questionnaires.\3\ The petitioners responded to Commerce's supplemental
questionnaires on April 3 and 4, 2024.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Commerce's Letter, ``Supplemental Questions,'' dated
April 1, 2024 (General Issues Questionnaire); see also Country-
Specific Supplemental Questionnaires: Brazil Supplemental,
Kazakhstan Supplemental, Malaysia Supplemental, and Russia
Supplemental, dated April 1, 2024.
\4\ See Petitioners' Letters, ``Petitioner's Responses to
Supplemental Questions--General Issues,'' dated April 3, 2024
(General Issues Supplement); see also Country-Specific AD
Supplemental Responses: Brazil AD Supplement, Kazakhstan AD
Supplement, Malaysia AD Supplement, and Russia AD Supplement, dated
April 4, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of ferrosilicon
from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and Russia are being, or are likely
to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV) within
the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that imports of such
products are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to,
the ferrosilicon industry in the United States. Consistent with section
732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions were accompanied by information
reasonably available to the petitioners supporting their allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf
of the domestic industry, because the petitioners are interested
parties, as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act. Commerce also
finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support for
the initiation of the requested LTFV investigations.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See section on ``Determination of Industry Support for the
Petitions,'' infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Periods of Investigation
Because the Petitions were filed on March 28, 2024, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) for the Brazil,
Kazakhstan, and Malaysia LTFV investigations is January 1, 2023,
through December 31, 2023. Because Russia is a non-market economy (NME)
country, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), the POI for the Russia LTFV
investigation is July 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023.
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these investigations is ferrosilicon from
Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and Russia. For a full description of the
scope of these investigations, see the appendix to this notice.
Comments on the Scope of the Investigations
As discussed in the Preamble to Commerce's regulations, we are
setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues regarding
product coverage (i.e., scope).\6\ Commerce will consider all scope
comments received from interested parties and, if necessary, will
consult with interested parties prior to the issuance of the
preliminary determinations. If scope comments include factual
information,\7\ all such factual information should be limited to
public information. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires,
Commerce requests that scope comments be submitted by 5:00 p.m. Eastern
Time (ET) on May 7, 2024, which is 20 calendar days from the signature
date of this notice.\8\ Any rebuttal comments, which may include
factual information, and should also be limited to public information,
must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on May 17, 2024, which is 10 calendar
days from the initial comment deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble); see also 19 CFR
351.312.
\7\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual
information'').
\8\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce requests that any factual information that parties
consider relevant to the scope of these investigations be submitted
during that period. However, if a party subsequently finds that
additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the
investigations may be relevant, the party
[[Page 31138]]
must contact Commerce and request permission to submit the additional
information. All scope comments must be filed simultaneously on the
records of the concurrent LTFV and CVD investigations.
Filing Requirements
All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically via
Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), unless an exception
applies.\9\ An electronically filed document must be received
successfully in its entirety by the time and date it is due.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order
Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011); see also Enforcement and
Compliance: Change of Electronic Filing System Name, 79 FR 69046
(November 20, 2014) for details of Commerce's electronic filing
requirements, effective August 5, 2011. Information on using ACCESS
can be found at <a href="https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx">https://access.trade.gov/help.aspx</a> and a handbook
can be found at <a href="https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook_on_Electronic_Filing_Procedures.pdf">https://access.trade.gov/help/Handbook_on_Electronic_Filing_Procedures.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on Product Characteristics
Commerce is providing interested parties an opportunity to comment
on the appropriate physical characteristics of ferrosilicon to be
reported in response to Commerce's AD questionnaires. This information
will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the
subject merchandise in order to report the relevant factors of
production (FOP) or cost of production (COP) accurately, as well as to
develop appropriate product comparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide any information or comments that
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) general product
characteristics; and (2) product comparison criteria. We note that it
is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product
comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on meaningful
commercial differences among products. In other words, although there
may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers
to describe ferrosilicon, it may be that only a select few product
characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical
characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the
order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching
products. Generally, Commerce attempts to list the most important
physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics
last.
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in
developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product
characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on May 7, 2024,
which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice.\10\
Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on May 17, 2024,
which is 10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline. All
comments and submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using
ACCESS, as explained above, on the record of each of the LTFV
investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See 19 CFR 351.303(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i)
poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if
there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or
(ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling
method to poll the ``industry.''
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute
directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC),
which is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry''
has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like
product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the
ITC apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like
product,\11\ they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In addition, Commerce's determination
is subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may
result in different definitions of the like product, such differences
do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\12\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F.
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United
States, 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic-
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not
offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope
of the investigations.\13\ Based on our analysis of the information
submitted on the record, we have determined that ferrosilicon, as
defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and
we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like
product.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 15-18 and Exhibits I-1 and
I-9).
\14\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support,
see Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklists:
Ferrosilicon from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and the Russian
Federation, dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this
notice (Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists), at Attachment
II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Petitions Covering Ferrosilicon from Brazil,
Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and the Russian Federation (Attachment II).
These checklists are on file electronically via ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the appendix to
this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioners provided
their own production of the domestic like product in 2023.\15\ The
petitioners stated that there are no other known producers of
ferrosilicon in the United States and provided information to support
their claim; therefore, the Petitions are supported by 100 percent of
the U.S. industry.\16\ We have relied
[[Page 31139]]
on the data provided by the petitioners for purposes of measuring
industry support.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 3 and Exhibit I-4); see
also General Issues Supplement at 5.
\16\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 2-3 and Exhibit I-3); see
also General Issues Supplement at 4 and Attachment 2.
\17\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 2-3 and Exhibits I-3 and
I-4); see also General Issues Supplement at 4-5 and Attachment 2.
For further discussion, see Attachment II of the Country-Specific AD
Initiation Checklists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the General
Issues Supplement, and other information readily available to Commerce
indicates that the petitioners have established industry support for
the Petitions.\18\ First, the Petitions established support from
domestic producers (or workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product and, as such,
Commerce is not required to take further action in order to evaluate
industry support (e.g., polling).\19\ Second, the domestic producers
(or workers) have met the statutory criteria for industry support under
section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or
workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product.\20\ Finally, the
domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for
industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the
domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for
more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product
produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or
opposition to, the Petitions.\21\ Accordingly, Commerce determines that
the Petitions were filed on behalf of the domestic industry within the
meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 2-3 and Exhibits I-3 and
I-4); see also General Issues Supplement at 4-5 and Attachment 2.
For further discussion, see Attachment II of the Country-Specific AD
Initiation Checklists.
\19\ See Attachment II of the Country-Specific AD Initiation
Checklists; see also section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
\20\ See Attachment II of the Country-Specific AD Initiation
Checklists.
\21\ Id.
\22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at LTFV. In addition, the petitioners allege that
subject imports from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and Russia exceed
the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of
the Act.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 20 and Exhibit I-10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by the significant and increasing volume of subject
imports; underselling and price depression and/or suppression; low
capacity utilization rates; lost sales and revenues; and adverse impact
on financial performance.\24\ We assessed the allegations and
supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat of material
injury, causation, as well as negligibility, and we have determined
that these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and
meet the statutory requirements for initiation.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Id. at 20-47 and Exhibits I-1, I-2, I-4, I-8 through I-44;
see also General Issues Supplement at 5-6.
\25\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists at Attachment
III, Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and
Causation for the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Petitions
Covering Ferrosilicon from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and the
Russian Federation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegations of Sales at LTFV
The following is a description of the allegations of sales at LTFV
upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate LTFV investigations
of imports of ferrosilicon from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and
Russia. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating
to U.S. price and normal value (NV) are discussed in greater detail in
the Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
U.S. Price
For Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and Russia, the petitioners based
export price (EP) on the POI average unit values derived from official
U.S. import statistics for imports of ferrosilicon produced in and
exported from each country.\26\ For each country, the petitioners made
certain adjustments to U.S. price to calculate a net ex-factory U.S.
price, where applicable.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
\27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value <SUP>28</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ In accordance with section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for the
Brazil, Kazakhstan, and Malaysia investigations, Commerce will
request information necessary to calculate the constructed value
(CV) and COP to determine whether there are reasonable grounds to
believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like product have been
made at prices that represent less than the COP of the product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Brazil, the petitioners based NV on home market prices obtained
through market research for ferrosilicon produced in and sold, or
offered for sale, in Brazil during the applicable time period.\29\ The
petitioners made certain adjustments to home market price to calculate
a net ex-factory home market price, where applicable.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Brazil AD Initiation Checklist.
\30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Kazakhstan and Malaysia, the petitioners stated that they were
unable to obtain home market or third country pricing information for
ferrosilicon to use as a basis for NV.\31\ Therefore, for Kazakhstan
and Malaysia, the petitioners calculated NV based on CV.\32\ For
further discussion of CV, see the section ``Normal Value Based on
Constructed Value,'' below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist; see also Malaysia
AD Initiation Checklist.
\32\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce considers Russia to be an NME country.\33\ In accordance
with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any determination that a foreign
country is an NME country shall remain in effect until revoked by
Commerce. Therefore, we continue to treat Russia as an NME country for
purposes of the initiation of the Russia LTFV investigation.
Accordingly, we base NV on FOPs valued in a surrogate market economy
country in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See, e.g., Emulsion Styrene-Butadiene Rubber from the
Russian Federation: Final Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value and Classification of the Russian Federation as a
Non-Market Economy, 87 FR 69002 (November 17, 2022), and
accompanying ``Reconsideration of Russia's Status as a Market
Economy'' Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioners claim that Malaysia is an appropriate surrogate
country for Russia because it is a market economy that is at a level of
economic development comparable to that of Russia and is a significant
producer of comparable merchandise.\34\ The petitioner provided
publicly available information from Malaysia to value all FOPs except
labor.\35\ Consistent with Commerce's recent practice in cases
involving Malaysia as a surrogate country,\36\ to value labor, the
petitioner provided labor statistics from another surrogate country,
Romania.\37\ Based on the information provided by the petitioner, we
believe it is appropriate to use Malaysia as a surrogate country
[[Page 31140]]
for Russia to value all FOPs except labor and to value labor using
labor statistics from Romania for initiation purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See Russia AD Initiation Checklist.
\35\ Id.
\36\ See, e.g., Certain Collated Steel Staples from the People's
Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review; and Final Determination of No Shipments; 2021-2022, 88 FR
85242 (December 7, 2023), and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum (IDM) at Comment 2; and Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and
Tube from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 88 FR 15671 (March 14,
2023), and accompanying IDM at Comment 2.
\37\ See Russia AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties will have the opportunity to submit comments
regarding surrogate country selection and, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly
available information to value FOPs within 30 days before the scheduled
date of the preliminary determination.
Factors of Production
Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by
Russian producers/exporters was not reasonably available, the
petitioners used product-specific consumption rates from a U.S.
producer of ferrosilicon as a surrogate to value Russian manufacturers'
FOPs (except labor).\38\ Additionally, the petitioners calculated
factory overhead, selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) expenses,
and profit based on the experience of a Malaysian producer of identical
merchandise.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Id.
\39\ Id. As noted above, the petitioner calculated labor using
information specific to Romania.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value Based on Constructed Value
As noted above for Kazakhstan and Malaysia, the petitioners stated
that they were unable to obtain home market or third-country prices for
ferrosilicon to use as a basis for NV. Therefore, for Kazakhstan and
Malaysia, the petitioners calculated NV based on CV.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See Kazakhstan AD Initiation Checklist; see also Malaysia
AD Initiation Checklist.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, the petitioners calculated
CV as the sum of the cost of manufacturing, SG&A expenses, financial
expenses, and profit.\41\ For Kazakhstan and Malaysia, in calculating
the cost of manufacturing, the petitioners relied on the production
experience and input consumption rates of a U.S. producer of
ferrosilicon, valued using publicly available information applicable to
the respective countries.\42\ In calculating SG&A expenses, financial
expenses, and profit ratios, the petitioners relied on the fiscal year
2022 financial statements of producers of identical merchandise
domiciled in Kazakhstan and Malaysia, respectively.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Id.
\42\ Id.
\43\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Value Comparisons
Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to
believe that imports of ferrosilicon from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia,
and Russia are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at
LTFV. Based on comparisons of EP to NV in accordance with sections 772
and 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for ferrosilicon for
each of the countries covered by this initiation are as follows: (1)
Brazil--21.78 percent; (2) Kazakhstan--237.75 percent; (3) Malaysia--
162.66 percent; and (4) Russia--283.27 percent.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initiation of LTFV Investigations
Based upon the examination of the Petitions and supplemental
responses, we find that they meet the requirements of section 732 of
the Act. Therefore, we are initiating LTFV investigations to determine
whether imports of ferrosilicon from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and
Russia are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at
LTFV. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary
determinations no later than 140 days after the date of these
initiations.
Respondent Selection
Brazil, Kazakhstan, and Malaysia
In the Petitions, the petitioner identified 11 companies in Brazil,
five companies in Kazakhstan, and two companies in Malaysia as
producers/exporters of ferrosilicon.\45\ With respect to Malaysia, the
Government of Malaysia provided comments on the record of the companion
CVD case, which have been placed on the record of the Malaysia AD case,
in which it stated that there are four producers of ferrosilicon in
Malaysia.\46\ Following standard practice in LTFV investigations
involving market economy countries, in the event Commerce determines
that the number of companies is large, and it cannot individually
examine each company based upon Commerce's resources, where
appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents based on
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for imports under the
appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)
subheading(s) listed in the ``Scope of the Investigations,'' in the
appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 10 and Exhibit I-6); see
also General Issues Supplement at 3-4.
\46\ See Memorandum, ``Antidumping Duty Petition on Ferrosilicon
from Malaysia: Placement of Document on the Record,'' dated April
16, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 12, 2024, Commerce released CBP data on imports of
ferrosilicon from Brazil, Kazakhstan, and Malaysia under administrative
protective order (APO) to all parties with access to information
protected by APO and indicated that interested parties wishing to
comment on CBP data and/or respondent selection must do so within three
business days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of
these investigations.\47\ Comments must be filed electronically using
ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully
in its entirety via ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. ET on the specified deadline.
Commerce will not accept rebuttal comments regarding the CBP data or
respondent selection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See Memoranda, ``Antidumping Duty Investigation of
Ferrosilicon from Brazil AD Petition: Release of U.S. Customs and
Border Protection Data,'' dated April 12, 2024; ``Antidumping Duty
Petition on Ferrosilicon from Kazakhstan: Release of Data from U.S.
Customs and Border Protection,'' dated April 12, 2024; and
``Antidumping Duty Petition on Ferrosilicon from Malaysia: Release
of Data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection,'' dated April 12,
2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such
applications may be found on Commerce's website at <a href="https://www.trade.gov/administrative-protective-orders">https://www.trade.gov/administrative-protective-orders</a>.
Russia
In the Petitions, the petitioner named 11 companies in Russia as
producers and/or exporters of ferrosilicon.\48\ Our standard practice
for respondent selection in AD investigations involving NME countries
is to select respondents based on quantity and value (Q&V)
questionnaires in cases where Commerce has determined that the number
of companies is large and it cannot individually examine each company
based upon its resources. Therefore, considering the number of
producers and/or exporters identified in the Petitions, Commerce will
solicit Q&V information that can serve as a basis for selecting
exporters for individual examination in the event that Commerce
determines that the number is large and decides to limit the number of
respondents individually examined pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the
Act. Because there are 11 Russian producers and/or exporters identified
in the Petitions, Commerce has determined that it will issue Q&V
questionnaires to each potential respondent for which the petitioners
have provided a complete address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See Petitions at Volume I (page 10 and Exhibit I-6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce will post the Q&V questionnaires along with filing
instructions on Commerce's website at
[[Page 31141]]
<a href="https://www.trade.gov/ec-adcvd-case-announcements">https://www.trade.gov/ec-adcvd-case-announcements</a>. Producers/exporters
of ferrosilicon from Russia that do not receive Q&V questionnaires may
still submit a response to the Q&V questionnaire and can obtain a copy
of the Q&V questionnaire from Commerce's website. Responses to the Q&V
questionnaire must be submitted by the relevant Russian producers/
exporters no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on May 1, 2024, which is two weeks
from the signature date of this notice. All Q&V questionnaire responses
must be filed electronically via ACCESS. An electronically filed
document must be received successfully, in its entirety, by ACCESS no
later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the deadline noted above.
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). As stated above, instructions
for filing such applications may be found on Commerce's website at
<a href="https://www.trade.gov/administrative-protective-orders">https://www.trade.gov/administrative-protective-orders</a>.
Separate Rates
In order to obtain separate rate status in an NME investigation,
exporters and producers must submit a separate rate application. The
specific requirements for submitting a separate rate application in an
NME investigation are outlined in detail in the application itself,
which is available on Commerce's website at <a href="https://access.trade.gov/Resources/nme/nme-sep-rate.html">https://access.trade.gov/Resources/nme/nme-sep-rate.html</a>. The separate rate application will be
due 30 days after publication of this initiation notice. Exporters and
producers must file a timely separate rate application if they want to
be considered for individual examination. Exporters and producers who
submit a separate rate application and have been selected as mandatory
respondents will be eligible for consideration for separate rate status
only if they respond to all parts of Commerce's AD questionnaire as
mandatory respondents. Commerce requires that companies from Russia
submit a response both to the Q&V questionnaire and to the separate
rate application by the respective deadlines to receive consideration
for separate rate status. Companies not filing a timely Q&V
questionnaire response will not receive separate rate consideration.
Use of Combination Rates
Commerce will calculate combination rates for certain respondents
that are eligible for a separate rate in an NME investigation. The
Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin states:
{w{time} hile continuing the practice of assigning separate
rates only to exporters, all separate rates that {Commerce{time}
will now assign in its NME investigation will be specific to those
producers that supplied the exporter during the period of
investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the
exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise
to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both
to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated
separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms
receiving the {weighted average{time} of the individually
calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the application of
``combination rates'' because such rates apply to specific
combinations of exporters and one or more producers. The cash-
deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply only to merchandise
both exported by the firm in question and produced by a firm that
supplied the exporter during the period of investigation.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ See Enforcement and Compliance's Policy Bulletin No. 05.1,
regarding, ``Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination
Rates in Antidumping Investigation involving NME Countries,'' (April
5, 2005), at 6 (emphasis added), available on Commerce's website at
<a href="https://access.trade.gov/Resources/policy/bull05-1.pdf">https://access.trade.gov/Resources/policy/bull05-1.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution of Copies of the Petitions
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been
provided to the governments of Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and Russia
via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a
copy of the public version of the Petitions to each exporter named in
the Petitions, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
ITC Notification
Commerce will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by
section 732(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determinations by the ITC
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable
indication that imports of ferrosilicon from Brazil, Kazakhstan,
Malaysia, and/or Russia are materially injuring, or threatening
material injury to, a U.S. industry.\50\ A negative ITC determination
for any country will result in the investigation being terminated with
respect to that country.\51\ Otherwise, these LTFV investigations will
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
\51\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submission of Factual Information
Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i)
evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence
submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available
information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the
adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence
placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual
information described in (i)-(iv). Section 351.301(b) of Commerce's
regulations requires any party, when submitting factual information, to
specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information
is being submitted \52\ and, if the information is submitted to rebut,
clarify, or correct factual information already on the record, to
provide an explanation identifying the information already on the
record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or
correct.\53\ Time limits for the submission of factual information are
addressed in 19 CFR 351.301, which provides specific time limits based
on the type of factual information being submitted. Interested parties
should review the regulations prior to submitting factual information
in these investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
\53\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particular Market Situation Allegation
Section 773(e) of the Act addresses the concept of particular
market situation (PMS) for purposes of CV, stating that ``if a
particular market situation exists such that the cost of materials and
fabrication or other processing of any kind does not accurately reflect
the cost of production in the ordinary course of trade, the
administering authority may use another calculation methodology under
this subtitle or any other calculation methodology.'' When an
interested party submits a PMS allegation pursuant to section 773(e) of
the Act (i.e., a cost-based PMS allegation), Commerce will respond to
such a submission consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v). If Commerce
finds that a cost-based PMS exists under section 773(e) of the Act,
then it will modify its dumping calculations appropriately.
Neither section 773(e) of the Act, nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v),
sets a deadline for the submission of cost-based PMS allegations and
supporting factual information. However, in order to administer section
773(e) of the Act, Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting
factual information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus,
should an interested party wish to submit a cost-based PMS allegation
and supporting new factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of
the Act, it must do so no later than 20 days after submission of a
respondent's initial section D questionnaire response.
[[Page 31142]]
We note that a PMS allegation filed pursuant to sections
773(a)(1)(B)(ii)(III) or 773(a)(1)(C)(iii) of the Act (i.e., a sales-
based PMS allegation) must be filed within 10 days of submission of a
respondent's initial section B questionnaire response, in accordance
with 19 CFR 301(c)(2)(i) and 19 CFR 351.404(c)(2).
Extensions of Time Limits
Parties may request an extension of time limits before the
expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as
otherwise specified by Commerce. In general, an extension request will
be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time
limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by
Commerce.\54\ For submissions that are due from multiple parties
simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it
is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. Under certain
circumstances, Commerce may elect to specify a different time limit by
which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions
which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we
will inform parties in a letter or memorandum of the deadline
(including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed
to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a
separate, standalone submission; under limited circumstances we will
grant untimely filed requests for the extension of time limits, where
we determine, based on 19 CFR 351.302, that extraordinary circumstances
exist. Parties should review Commerce's regulations concerning the
extension of time limits and the Time Limits Final Rule prior to
submitting factual information in these investigations.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See 19 CFR 351.301; see also Extension of Time Limits;
Final Rule, 78 FR 57790 (September 20, 2013) (Time Limits Final
Rule), available at <a href="https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm">https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-09-20/html/2013-22853.htm</a>.
\55\ See 19 CFR 351.302; see also, e.g., Time Limits Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certification Requirements
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\56\
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR
351.303(g).\57\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\57\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Proceedings, 78 FR 42678 (July 17, 2013) (Final Rule). Additional
information regarding the Final Rule is available at <a href="https://access.trade.gov/Resources/filing/index.html">https://access.trade.gov/Resources/filing/index.html</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Parties wishing to participate
in these investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements
of 19 CFR 351.103(d) (e.g., by filing the required letter of
appearance). Note that Commerce has amended certain of its requirements
pertaining to the service of documents in 19 CFR 351.303(f).\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ See Administrative Protective Order, Service, and Other
Procedures in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 88 FR
67069 (September 29, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2)
and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
Dated: April 17, 2024.
Ryan Majerus,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Negotiations, performing the
non-exclusive functions and duties of the Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
Scope of the Investigations
The scope of these investigations covers all forms and sizes of
ferrosilicon, regardless of grade, including ferrosilicon
briquettes. Ferrosilicon is a ferroalloy containing by weight four
percent or more iron, more than eight percent but not more than 96
percent silicon, three percent or less phosphorus, 30 percent or
less manganese, less than three percent magnesium, and 10 percent or
less any other element. The merchandise covered also includes
product described as slag, if the product meets these
specifications.
Subject merchandise includes material matching the above
description that has been finished, packaged, or otherwise processed
in a third country, including by performing any grinding or any
other finishing, packaging, or processing that would not otherwise
remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigations if
performed in the country of manufacture of the ferrosilicon.
Ferrosilicon is currently classifiable under subheadings
7202.21.1000, 7202.21.5000, 7202.21.7500, 7202.21.9000,
7202.29.0010, and 7202.29.0050 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States (HTSUS). While the HTSUS numbers are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the
scope remains dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2024-08674 Filed 4-23-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on April 24, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.