Notice2025-09027
Silicon Metal From Angola, Australia, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, and Norway: 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
May 21, 2025
Issuing agencies
Commerce DepartmentInternational Trade Administration
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 97 (Wednesday, May 21, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 97 (Wednesday, May 21, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21741-21746]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-09027]
[[Page 21741]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-762-001, A-602-813, A-553-001, A-403-806]
Silicon Metal From Angola, Australia, the Lao People's Democratic
Republic, and Norway: Initiation of Less-Than-Fair-Value Investigations
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Applicable May 14, 2025.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Doyle at (202) 482-5882
(Angola), Jacob Waddell at (202) 482-1369 (Australia), Caroline Caroll
at (202) 482-4948 (the Lao People's Democratic Republic (Laos)), and
Brittany Bauer at (202) 482-3860 (Norway), 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 April 24, 2025, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce)
received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of silicon
metal from Angola, Australia, Laos, and Norway filed in proper form on
behalf of Ferroglobe USA, Inc. and Mississippi Silicon LLC (the
petitioners), domestic producers of silicon metal.\1\ The AD Petitions
were accompanied by countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning
imports of silicon metal from Australia, Laos, Norway, and Thailand.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Petitioners' Letter, ``Petitions for the Imposition of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duties,'' dated April 24, 2025
(Petitions).
\2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between April 29 and May 6, 2025, Commerce requested supplemental
information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions in
supplemental questionnaires.\3\ Between May 1 and 9, 2025, the
petitioners filed timely responses to these requests for additional
information.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Commerce's Letters, ``First Country-Specific
Supplemental Questionnaires: Angola Supplemental, Australia
Supplemental, Laos Supplemental, and Norway Supplemental,'' dated
April 29, 2025; ``Supplemental Questions,'' dated April 30, 2025
(First General Issues Questionnaire); ``Second Supplemental
Questions,'' dated May 5, 2025 (Second General Issues
Questionnaire); and ``Second Country-Specific Supplemental
Questionnaires: Second Angola Supplemental, Second Australia
Supplemental, Second Laos Supplemental, and Second Norway
Supplemental,'' dated May 6, 2025.
\4\ See Petitioners' Letters, ``Petitioners' Response to
Supplemental Questions--General Issues,'' dated May 1, 2025 (First
General Issues Supplement); ``First Country-Specific AD Supplemental
Responses: Angola AD Supplement, Australia AD Supplement, Laos AD
Supplement, and Norway AD Supplement,'' dated May 5, 2025;
``Petitioners' Response to Second General Issues Questionnaire,''
dated May 6, 2025 (Second General Issues Supplement); and ``Second
Country-Specific AD Supplemental Responses: Second Angola AD
Supplement, Second Australia AD Supplement, Second Laos AD
Supplement, and Second Norway AD Supplement,'' dated May 8 and 9,
2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of silicon metal
from Angola, Australia, Laos, and Norway 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 silicon
metal 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 its 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 Investigations (POI)
Because the Petitions were filed on April 24, 2025, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.204(b)(1), the period of investigation (POI) for the Angola,
Australia, Laos, and Norway LTFV investigations is April 1, 2024,
through March 31, 2025. The petitioners argued that Commerce should
determine in these investigations that Angola and Laos are non-market
economies (NMEs) within the meaning of section 771(18)(A) of the Act
and should calculate normal value (NV) for both countries in accordance
with its NME methodology.\6\ Under the NME methodology for the Angola
and Laos LTFV investigations, the appropriate POI is October 1, 2024,
through March 31, 2025, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Petitions at Volume II at 1-2 and Exhibit II-1; see also
Petitions at Volume V at 1-2 and Exhibit V-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Investigations
The product covered by these investigations is silicon metal from
Angola, Australia, Laos, and Norway. 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).\7\ 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,\8\ all such factual information should be limited to
public information. Commerce requests that interested parties provide
at the beginning of their scope comments a public executive summary for
each comment or issue raised in their submission. Commerce further
requests that interested parties limit their public executive summary
of each comment or issue to no more than 450 words, not including
citations. Commerce intends to use the public executive summaries as
the basis of the comment summaries included in the analysis of scope
comments. To facilitate preparation of its questionnaires, Commerce
requests that scope comments be submitted by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time
(ET) on June 3, 2025, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date
of this notice. 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 June 13, 2025, which is 10 calendar days from
the initial comment deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997) (Preamble); see also 19 CFR
351.312.
\8\ See 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) (defining ``factual
information'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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),
[[Page 21742]]
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 silicon metal 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 silicon metal, 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 June 3, 2025,
which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any
rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on June 13, 2025, 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 the each of the LTFV investigations.
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 must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic
like product,\10\ 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.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See section 771(10) of the Act.
\11\ 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 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.\12\ Based on our analysis of the information
submitted on the record, we have determined that silicon metal, as
defined in the scope, constitutes a single domestic like product, and
we have analyzed industry support in terms of that domestic like
product.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 16-19 and Exhibits I-1,
and I-9 through I-12).
\13\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis as
applied to these cases and information regarding industry support,
see Checklists, ``Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation
Checklists: Silicon Metal from Angola, Australia, the Lao People's
Democratic Republic, and Norway,'' 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 Silicon Metal
from Angola, Australia, the Lao People's Democratic Republic,
Norway, and Thailand (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 2024.\14\ The
petitioners identified themselves as the only two producers of silicon
metal in the United States; therefore, the Petitions are supported by
100 percent of the U.S. industry.\15\ We relied on data provided by the
petitioners for purposes of measuring industry support.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ For further discussion, see Attachment II of the Country-
Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
\15\ Id.
\16\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our review of the data provided in the Petitions, the First General
Issues Supplement, Second General Issues Supplement, and other
information readily available to Commerce indicates that the
petitioners have established industry support for the Petitions.\17\
First, the Petitions established support from domestic producers (or
workers) accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of
the domestic like
[[Page 21743]]
product and, as such, Commerce is not required to take further action
in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling).\18\ 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.\19\ 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.\20\
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.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Id.
\18\ Id.; see also section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act.
\19\ See Attachment II of the Country-Specific AD Initiation
Checklists.
\20\ Id.
\21\ 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 Australia, Laos, and Norway exceed the
negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the
Act.\22\ With respect to Angola, while the allegedly dumped imports do
not exceed the statutory requirements for negligibility,\23\ the
petitioners allege and provide supporting evidence that there is the
potential that imports from Angola will imminently exceed the
negligibility threshold and, therefore, are not negligible for purposes
of a threat determination.\24\ The petitioners' arguments regarding the
potential for imports to imminently exceed the negligibility threshold
are consistent with the statutory criteria for ``negligibility in
threat analysis'' under section 771(24)(A)(iv) of the Act, which
provides that imports shall not be treated as negligible if there is a
potential that subject imports from a country will imminently exceed
the statutory requirements for negligibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ For further discussion, 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 Silicon Metal from Angola,
Australia, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, Norway, and
Thailand (Attachment III).
\23\ Id.
\24\ Id.; see also section 771(24)(A)(iv) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by the significant increase in the volume of subject
imports; reduced market share; underselling and price depression and/or
suppression; lost sales and revenues; and adverse impact on financial
performance.\25\ We assessed the allegations and supporting evidence
regarding material injury, threat of material injury, causation,
cumulation, as well as negligibility, and we have determined that these
allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence, and meet the
statutory requirements for initiation.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Attachment III of the Country-Specific AD Initiation
Checklists.
\26\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 silicon metal from Angola, Australia, Laos, and Norway.
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 all countries, the petitioners based export price (EP) on the
POI average unit values (AUVs) derived from official import statistics
for imports of silicon metal from each country.\27\ For each country,
the petitioners made certain adjustments to U.S. price to calculate a
net ex-factory U.S price, where applicable.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
\28\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value \29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ In accordance with section 773(b)(2) of the Act, for these
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 Australia and Norway, the petitioners stated that they were
unable to obtain home market or third-country pricing information for
silicon metal in Australia or Norway to use a basis for NV.\30\
Therefore, for Australia and Norway, the petitioners calculated NV
based on CV. For further discussion of CV, see the section ``Normal
Value Based on Constructed Value.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Angola and Laos, the petitioners provided NV calculations using
both the NME and market economy (ME) methodologies.\31\ Under the ME
methodology, for Angola and Laos, the petitioners stated that they were
unable to obtain home market or third-country pricing information for
silicon metal in Angola or Laos to use a basis for ME NV.\32\
Therefore, under the ME methodology for Angola and Laos, the
petitioners calculated ME NV based on CV.\33\ For further discussion of
CV, see the section ``Normal Value Based on Constructed Value.'' Under
the NME methodology, the petitioners calculated the NME NV based on
factors of production (FOPs) valued in a surrogate market country
economy country in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.\34\ The
petitioners claim that India is an appropriate surrogate country for
Angola and Laos because India is a market economy country that is at a
level of economic development comparable to that of Angola and Laos and
is a significant producer of comparable merchandise.\35\ The
petitioners provided publicly available information from India to value
all FOPs, where applicable.\36\ We relied on the petitioners' selection
of India as a surrogate country for Angola and Laos to value FOPs for
initiation purposes under the NME methodology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Id.
\32\ Id.
\33\ Id.
\34\ Id.
\35\ Id.
\36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 determinations.
Factors of Production
Because information regarding the volume of inputs consumed by
Angolan and Lao producers/exporters was not reasonably available, under
the NME methodology, the petitioners used the production experience and
product-specific consumption rates of a U.S. producer of silicon metal
as a surrogate to value Angolan and Lao manufacturers' FOPs.\37\
Additionally, for Angola and Laos, the petitioners calculated factory
overhead, selling, general, and administrative expenses
[[Page 21744]]
(SG&A), and profit based on the experience of an Indian producer of
comparable merchandise.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See Country-Specific AD Initiation Checklists.
\38\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal Value Based on Constructed Value
As noted above for Australia and Norway, the petitioners stated
that they were unable to obtain home market or third-country prices for
silicon metal to use as a basis for NV. Therefore, for Australia and
Norway, the petitioners calculated NV based on CV.\39\ Additionally,
under the ME methodology for Angola and Laos, the petitioners stated
they were also unable to obtain home market or third-country prices for
silicon metal to use as a basis for ME NV. Therefore, under the ME
methodology for Angola and Laos, the petitioners calculated ME NV based
on CV.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Id.
\40\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Australia and Norway as well as for the
ME methodology for Angola and Laos, in calculating the cost of
manufacturing, the petitioners relied on the production experience and
input consumption rates of a U.S. producer of silicon metal, valued
using publicly available information applicable to Angola, Australia,
Laos, and Norway.\42\ For calculating SG&A expenses, financial
expenses, and profit ratios, the petitioners relied on the 2023
financial statements of a producer of identical merchandise domiciled
in Norway for Norway, and the 2023 financial statements of Ferroglobe
UPLC, the parent company of Ferroglobe USA, for Angola, Australia, and
Laos.\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 silicon metal from Angola, Australia, Laos, and
Norway 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 silicon metal
from Australia and Norway are 328.89 and 102.08 percent,
respectively.\44\ Under the ME methodology, the estimated dumping
margins for silicon metal from Angola and Laos are 68.45 and 94.44
percent, respectively, for purposes of initiation.\45\ In light of the
petitioners' allegations in the Petitions that Angola and Laos are
NMEs, under the NME methodology, the estimated dumping margins for
silicon metal from Angola and Laos are 207.28 and 231.63 percent,
respectively, for purposes of initiation.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ Id.
\45\ Id.
\46\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 silicon metal from Angola, Australia, Laos, and
Norway 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
Angola and Norway
In the Petitions, the petitioners identified three companies in
Angola and three companies in Norway as producers and/or exporters of
silicon metal.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 10-11 and Exhibit I-6);
see also First General Issues Supplement at 4-5 and Attachments 1
and 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 resource, 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.
On May 12, 2025, Commerce released CBP data on imports of silicon
metal from Angola and Norway 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.\48\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See Country-Specific Memoranda, ``Release of U.S. Customs
and Border Protection Entry Data,'' dated May 12, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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>.
Australia and Laos
In the Petitions, the petitioners identified one company in
Australia (i.e., Simcoa Operations (Silicon Metal Company of
Australia)) and one company in Laos (i.e., Lao Silicon Co., Ltd.) as
producers and/or exporters of silicon metal and provided independent
third-party information as support.\49\ We currently know of no
additional producers/exporters of silicon metal from Australia and
Laos.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ See Petitions at Volume I (pages 10-11 and Exhibit 6); see
also First General Issues Supplement at 3 and Attachment 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, Commerce intends to individually examine all known
producers/exporters in the investigations from Australia and Laos
(i.e., the companies mentioned above). We invite interested parties to
comment on this issue. Such comments may include factual information
within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21). Parties wishing to comment
must do so within three business days of the publication of this notice
in the Federal Register. 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.
Because we intend to examine all known producers/exporters in Australia
and Laos, if no comments are received, or if comments received further
support the existence of only these producers/exporters, we do not
intend to conduct respondent selection and will proceed to issuing the
initial AD questionnaires to the companies identified. However, if
comments are received which create a need for a respondent selection
process, we intend to finalize our decision regarding respondent
selection for Australia and Laos within 20 days of publication of this
notice.
Separate Rates
Upon applying an NME methodology for Angola and Laos, Commerce will
consider assigning separate rates to exporters and producers. In order
to
[[Page 21745]]
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>. Note that Commerce recently
promulgated new regulations pertaining to separate rates, including the
separate rate application deadline and eligibility for separate rate
status, in 19 CFR 351.108.\50\ Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.108(d)(1), the
separate rate application will be due 21 days after publication of this
initiation notice.\51\ Exporters and producers must file a timely
separate rate application if they want to be considered for individual
examination. In addition, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.108(e), 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 fully respond to all parts of
Commerce's AD questionnaire and participate in the LTFV proceeding as
mandatory respondents.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ See Regulations Enhancing the Administration of the
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Trade Remedy Laws, 89 FR 101694,
101759-60 (December 16, 2024).
\51\ See 19 CFR 351.108(d)(1).
\52\ See 19 CFR 351.108(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of Combination Rates
Upon applying an NME methodology, 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.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ 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), a copy of the public version of the Petitions has been
provided to the governments of Angola, Australia, Laos, and Norway 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 silicon metal from Angola, Australia, Laos,
and Norway are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to,
a U.S. industry.\54\ A negative ITC determination for any country will
result in the investigation being terminated with respect to that
country.\55\ Otherwise, these LTFV investigations will proceed
according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See section 733(a) of the Act.
\55\ 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 \56\ 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.\57\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ See 19 CFR 351.301(b).
\57\ 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), the submission must be
filed in accordance with the requirements of 19 CFR 351.416(b), and
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.
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 351.301(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
[[Page 21746]]
Commerce.\58\ 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.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ 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>.
\59\ 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.\60\
Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR
351.303(g).\61\ Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the
submitting party does not comply with the applicable certification
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
\61\ 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).\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ 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: May 14, 2025.
Christopher Abbott,
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
silicon metal, including silicon metal powder. Silicon metal
contains at least 85.00 percent but less than 99.99 percent silicon,
and less than 4.00 percent iron, by actual weight. Semiconductor
grade silicon (merchandise containing at least 99.99 percent silicon
by actual weight and classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule
of the United States (HTSUS) subheading 2804.61.0000) is excluded
from the scope of these investigations.
Silicon metal is currently classifiable under subheadings
2804.69.1000 and 2804.69.5000 of the HTSUS. While the HTSUS numbers
are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written
description of the scope remains dispositive.
[FR Doc. 2025-09027 Filed 5-20-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on May 21, 2025.
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.