Notice2024-19393
Ferrosilicon From the Russian Federation: Preliminary Affirmative Critical Circumstances Determinations
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
August 28, 2024
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentInternational Trade Administration
Abstract
The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily determines that that critical circumstances exist, with respect to imports of ferrosilicon in the antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) investigations of ferrosilicon from the Russian Federation (Russia). The AD period of investigation is July 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023, and the CVD period of investigation is January 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 167 (Wednesday, August 28, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 167 (Wednesday, August 28, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68860-68862]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-19393]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-821-838, C-821-839]
Ferrosilicon From the Russian Federation: Preliminary Affirmative
Critical Circumstances Determinations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily
determines that that critical circumstances exist, with respect to
imports of ferrosilicon in the antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing
duty (CVD) investigations of ferrosilicon from the Russian Federation
(Russia). The AD period of investigation is July 1, 2023, through
December 31, 2023, and the CVD period of investigation is January 1,
2023, through December 31, 2023.
DATES: Applicable August 28, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Hoadley AD/CVD Operations, Office
VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482- 3148.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
These preliminary determinations are made in accordance with
sections 703(e) and 733(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act). Commerce published the notices of initiation of these AD and CVD
investigations on April 24, 2024.\1\ On August 9, 2024, CC Metals and
Alloys, LLC and Ferroglobe USA, INC. (collectively, the petitioners)
filed timely allegations, pursuant to sections 703(e)(1) and 733(e)(1)
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206, that critical circumstances exist with
respect to ferrosilicon from Russia.\2\ On August 19,
[[Page 68861]]
2024, the Government of Russia (GOR) submitted comments in response to
the petitioners' CVD critical circumstances allegation.\3\ Commerce
published its preliminary AD and CVD determinations on June 28,
2024.\4\ In the CVD Preliminary Determination, we applied adverse facts
available (AFA) to the mandatory respondent, Russian Ferro Alloys Inc./
RFA International LP (RFA) and determined an all-others rate based on
the rate for RFA.\5\ In the AD Preliminary Determination, we assigned
the Russia-wide entity an AFA rate as no individual producers/exporters
participated in the investigation.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Ferrosilicon from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and the
Russian Federation: Initiation of Countervailing Duty
Investigations, 89 FR 31133 (April 24, 2024) (CVD Initiation
Notice); see also Ferrosilicon from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia,
and the Russian Federation: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value
Investigations, 89 FR 31137 (April 24, 2024) (AD Initiation Notice).
\2\ See Petitioners' Letter, ``Petitioners' Critical
Circumstances Allegation,'' dated August 9, 2024 (AD Critical
Circumstances Allegation); also see Petitioners' Letter,
``Petitioners' Critical Circumstances Allegation,'' dated August 9,
2024 (CVD Critical Circumstances Allegation).
\3\ See GOR's Letter, ``Response to the Petitioners' Critical
Circumstances Allegation,'' dated August 19, 2024.
\4\ See Ferrosilicon from the Russian Federation: Preliminary
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination, 89 FR 53949 (June 28,
2024) (CVD Preliminary Determination), and accompanying Preliminary
Decision Memorandum (PDM); see also Ferrosilicon from the Russian
Federation: Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value, 89 FR 53953 (June 28, 2024) (AD Preliminary
Determination), and accompanying PDM.
\5\ See CVD Preliminary Determination PDM at 6-14.
\6\ See AD Preliminary Determination PDM at 6-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with sections 703(e)(1) and 733(e)(1) of the Act and
19 CFR 351.206(c)(1) and (2)(ii), because the petitioners submitted the
critical circumstances allegations more than 30 days before the
scheduled date of the final determinations, Commerce will make
preliminary findings as to whether there is a reasonable basis to
believe or suspect that critical circumstances exist and will issue
preliminary critical circumstances determinations within 30 days after
the allegations are filed.
Critical Circumstances Allegations
The petitioners allege that imports of ferrosilicon from Russia
were massive over a relatively short period, and provided monthly
import data comparing a base period of January 2024 through March 2024,
to a comparison period of April 2024 through June 2024.\7\ The
petitioners allegation of massive imports utilizes base and comparison
periods established in accordance with 19 CFR 351.206(i) and reflects
an increase from 0 to 5,744.922 metric tons, which is ``massive'' under
19 CFR 351.206(h)(2) and under sections 703(e)(1)(b) and 733(e)(1)(b)
of the Act.\8\ For the CVD investigation, the petitioners also allege
that there is a reasonable basis to believe that there are subsidies in
this investigation which are inconsistent with the World Trade
Organization Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM
Agreement).\9\ For the AD investigation, the petitioners also allege
that there is reason to believe there is history of dumping and
material injury by reason of dumped imports in the United States or
elsewhere of ferrosilicon and a reason to believe importers knew or
should have known that Russian producers and/or exporters were selling
ferrosilicon at less than fair value (LTFV) and that material injury
was likely.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See AD Critical Circumstance Allegation at 6; see also CVD
Critical Circumstances Allegation at 5.
\8\ Id.
\9\ See section 771(8)(A) of the Act.
\10\ See section 733(e)(1) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis
CVD Allegation: Alleged Countervailable Subsidies Are Inconsistent With
the SCM Agreement
Section 703(e)(1) of the Act provides that Commerce will determine
that critical circumstances exist in CVD investigations if there is a
reasonable basis to believe or suspect that the alleged countervailable
subsidy is inconsistent with the SCM Agreement.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Commerce limits its critical circumstances findings to
those subsidies contingent upon export performance or use of
domestic over imported goods (i.e., those prohibited under Article 3
of the SCM Agreement). See, e.g., Final Affirmative Countervailing
Duty Determination and Final Negative Critical Circumstances
Determination: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire from Germany, 67
FR 55808, 55809-10 (August 30, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine whether an alleged countervailable subsidy is
inconsistent with the SCM Agreement, in accordance with section
703(e)(1)(A) of the Act, Commerce considered the evidence currently on
the record of this investigation. As determined in the CVD Preliminary
Determination, we found, based on AFA, that the non-cooperating
mandatory respondent RFA used the Import Substitution Loans program.
Record evidence indicates that this program is contingent on the use of
domestic over imported goods, rendering it inconsistent with Article 3
of the SCM Agreement.\12\ Therefore, Commerce preliminarily determines,
for purposes of this critical circumstances' determination, that there
are subsidies in this investigation that are inconsistent with the SCM
Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Checklist, ``Enforcement and Compliance, Countervailing
Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist,'' dated April 17, 2024, at
8-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AD Allegation: History of Dumping and Material Injury by Reason of
Dumped Imports in the United States or Elsewhere of the Subject
Merchandise
In determining whether there is a history of dumping pursuant to
section 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, Commerce generally considers
current or previous AD orders on subject merchandise from the country
in question in the United States and current orders in any other
country with regard to imports of subject merchandise.\13\ On May 4,
2021, Egypt imposed an antidumping duty order on imports of
ferrosilicon from Russia.\14\ This third-country antidumping duty order
remains in effect and constitutes evidence of a history of dumping and
material injury by reason of LTFV sales.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See, e.g., Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from the
People's Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Affirmative Preliminary Determination
of Critical Circumstances and Postponement of Final Determination,
74 FR 59117, 59120 (November 17, 2009) (OCTG China Preliminary
Determination), unchanged in Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from
the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value, Affirmative Final Determination of Critical
Circumstances and Final Determination of Targeted Dumping, 75 FR
20335 (April 19, 2010) (OCTG China Final Determination).
\14\ See AD Critical Circumstances Allegation at 3 and Exhibit
1.
\15\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AD Allegation: The Importer Knew or Should Have Known That the Exporter
Was Selling at Less Than Fair Value and That There Was Likely To Be
Material Injury
In determining whether importers knew or should have known that
exporters were selling subject merchandise at LTFV and that there was
likely to be material injury by reason of such sales, pursuant to
section 733(e)(1)(A)(ii), Commerce must rely on the facts before it at
the time the determination is made. Commerce generally bases its
decision with respect to knowledge on the margins calculated in the
preliminary determination and the U.S. International Trade Commission's
(ITC) preliminary injury determination.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See, e.g., OCTG China Preliminary Determination, unchanged
in OCTG China Final Determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commerce normally considers margins of 25 percent or more for
export price sales and 15 percent or more for constructed export price
sales sufficient to impute importer knowledge of sales at LTFV.\17\ In
this investigation, we preliminarily assigned a dumping margin of
283.27 percent to the Russia-wide entity, which exceeds the minimum
margin required to impute
[[Page 68862]]
knowledge of dumping to U.S. importers.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See, e.g., Certain Uncoated Paper from Australia: Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final
Determination of Critical Circumstances, In Part, 81 FR 3108
(January 20, 2016) (Uncoated Paper from Australia), and accompanying
Issues and Decision Memorandum at 13.
\18\ See AD Preliminary Determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In assessing importers' knowledge of likely material injury,
Commerce relies on a preliminary affirmative determination by the ITC
to impute the requisite knowledge to U.S. importers.\19\ Thus, Commerce
finds that U.S. importers knew or should have known that imports of
ferrosilicon from Russia were being sold at LTFV and were likely to
cause injury, which is sufficient to satisfy the first requirement for
an affirmative critical circumstances determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See Ferrosilicon from Brazil, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, and
Russia; Determinations, 89 FR 43435 (May 17, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Massive Imports
In determining whether there have been ``massive imports'' over a
``relatively short period,'' pursuant to sections 703(e)(1)(B) and
733(e)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206(h), Commerce normally
compares the import volumes of the subject merchandise for at least
three months immediately preceding the filing of the petition (i.e.,
the ``base period'') to a comparable period of at least three months
following the filing of the petition (i.e., the ``comparison period'').
Imports normally will be considered massive when imports during the
comparison period have increased by 15 percent or more compared to
imports during the base period.\20\ The regulations also provide,
however, that if Commerce finds that importers, or exporters or
producers, had reason to believe, at some time prior to the beginning
of the proceeding, that a proceeding was likely, Commerce may consider
a period of not less than three months from that earlier time.\21\ In
this case, Commerce compared the import volumes of subject merchandise,
as provided by the petitioners,\22\ for the three months immediately
preceding and three months following the filing of the petition, ending
with the month prior to the AD Preliminary Determination and the CVD
Preliminary Determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See 19 CFR 351.206(h)(2).
\21\ See 19 CFR 351.206(i).
\22\ See AD Critical Circumstances Allegation at 5-6; and CVD
Critical Circumstances Allegation at 4-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the petitions were filed on March 28, 2024, to determine
whether there was a massive surge in imports for the cooperating
mandatory respondent, Commerce compared the total volume of shipments
during the period January 2024 through March 2024 with the volume of
shipments during the following three-month period of April 2024 through
June 2024. Based on this analysis, we preliminarily determine that
there was a massive surge in imports from RFA and ``all other''
producers/exporters from Russia (for CVD) and for the Russia-wide
entity (for AD).
Conclusion
For the CVD investigation, based on the criteria and findings
discussed above, we preliminarily determine that critical circumstances
exist with respect to imports of ferrosilicon from Russia produced or
exported by RFA and all other producers/exporters. For the AD
investigation, based on the criteria and findings discussed above, we
preliminarily determine that critical circumstances exist with respect
to all imports of ferrosilicon from Russia produced or exported by the
Russia-wide entity.
Final Critical Circumstances Determinations
We will make final critical circumstances determinations concerning
critical circumstances in the final AD and CVD determinations, which
are currently due no later than September 11, 2024.
Public Comment
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary
critical circumstances determinations no later than five days after the
date on which this notice is published in the Federal Register. Given
that the final determinations for the AD and CVD investigations are due
no later than September 11, 2024, Commerce will allow two days for
parties to submit rebuttal comments.
We request that interested parties provide at the beginning of
their briefs a public, executive summary for each issue raised in their
briefs.\23\ Further, we request that interested parties limit their
executive summary of each issue to no more than 450 words, not
including citations. We intend to use the executive summaries as the
basis of the comment summaries included in the issues and decision
memoranda that will accompany the final determinations in these
investigations. We request that interested parties include footnotes
for relevant citations in the executive summary of each issue. Note
that Commerce has amended certain of its requirements pertaining to the
service of documents in 19 CFR 351.303(f).\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ We use the term ``issue'' here to describe an argument that
Commerce would normally address in a comment of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum.
\24\ See Administrative Protective Order, Service, and Other
Procedures in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, 88 FR
67069, 67077 (September 29, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 703(e)(2)(A) of the Act, for all
entries, we will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
suspend liquidation of any unliquidated entries of subject merchandise
from Russia entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or
after March 30, 2024, which is 90 days prior to the date of publication
of the AD Preliminary Determination and CVD Preliminary Determination
in the Federal Register. For such entries, CBP shall require a cash
deposit equal to the estimated weighted-average dumping margin
established in the AD Preliminary Determination and CVD Preliminary
Determination. This suspension of liquidation will remain in effect
until further notice.
U.S. International Trade Commission Notification
In accordance with sections 703(f) and 733(f) of the Act, we will
notify the ITC of these preliminary determinations of critical
circumstances.
Notification to Interested Parties
This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections
703(f), 733(f), and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.206.
Dated: August 22, 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.
[FR Doc. 2024-19393 Filed 8-26-24; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on August 28, 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.