Amendment of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Calcium Aluminate Flux From France

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-427-812]

Amendment of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair

Value: Calcium Aluminate Flux From France

Agency: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 16, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: V. Irene Darzenta or Katherine

Johnson, Office of Antidumping Duty Investigations, Import

Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-6320

or (202) 482-4929, respectively.

Amendment to the Final Determination

We are amending the final determination of sales at less than fair

value of calcium aluminate (CA) flux from France to reflect the

correction of a ministerial error made in the margin calculations in

that determination. We are publishing this amendment to the final

determination in accordance with 19 CFR 353.28(c).

Scope of Investigation

The merchandise subject to this investigation is CA flux, other

than white, high purity CA flux. This product contains by weight more

than 32 percent but less than 65 percent alumina and more than one

percent each of iron and silica.

CA flux is currently classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule

of the United States (HTSUS) subheading 2523.10.0000. Although the

HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the

written description of the scope of this investigation remains

dispositive.

Case History and Amendment of Final Determination

In accordance with section 735(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as

amended (the Act), on March 25, 1994, the Department of Commerce (the

Department) published its final determinations that CA cement, cement

clinker and flux from France were being sold at less than fair value

(59 FR 14136). Subsequent to the final determinations, we received

ministerial error allegations by both petitioner and respondent in

these investigations.

On April 8, 1994, Lafarge Fondu International and its U.S.

subsidiary Lafarge Calcium Aluminates, Inc. (collectively Lafarge), the

sole respondent in these investigations, alleged that the Department

made a ministerial error in the final margin calculation for CA cement

and clinker. Respondent alleged that the Department ``inadvertently''

used the wrong fixed costs for the period of investigation (POI) to

calculate the constructed value (CV) of CA clinker and the foreign

manufacturing cost of CA clinker used to allocate profit on U.S. sales

of further manufactured CA clinker (i.e., U.S. sales of CA cement).

Specifically, respondent claimed that the Department ``inadvertently''

used the POI fixed costs that Lafarge reported in its initial response

to Section D of the Department's questionnaire submitted on August 19,

1994, for its clinker CV and further manufacturing profit calculation.

Respondent argued that the Department should have used the revised POI

costs that were submitted in a subsequent supplemental questionnaire

response dated September 28, 1993, and ultimately verified by the

Department after some minor corrections were made based on the

information contained in a relevant cost verification exhibit.

On April 20, 1994, we rejected respondent's allegation on the

grounds that the alleged error did not constitute a ``ministerial

error'' as defined in the Department's regulations. (See April 20,

1994, Memorandum to Barbara R. Stafford from The Team Re. Ministerial

Error Allegations.) We stated in the Federal Register notice announcing

our final determinations that we were ``us[ing] only the reported fixed

costs for the POI as [best information available] BIA.'' (emphasis

added) (See 59 FR 14136, March 25, 1994.) That is, we explicitly chose

the cost data that we used. Moreover, respondent alleged a

``ministerial'' error based on our choice of fixed costs used in the

final determination. These are not ``ministerial'' actions. 19 CFR

353.28(d) defines ``ministerial error'' as ``an error in addition,

subtraction or other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting from

inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other type of

unintentional error which the Secretary considers ministerial.''

Contrary to respondent's allegation, the alleged error was neither

``clerical'' nor ``unintentional'' in nature. As our choice of BIA is a

methodological issue, this is not an issue of ministerial error

properly raised under 19 CFR 353.28. On April 12, 1994, we received an

allegation from the petitioner, Lehigh Portland Cement Company

(Lehigh), that the Department made a ministerial error in the final

margin calculation for CA flux. Lehigh alleged that the Department

erred by double counting the cost of raw materials used to calculate

the foreign manufacturing cost of CA flux for purposes of allocating

profit on U.S. sales of further manufactured flux. Specifically, Lehigh

alleged that the Department's computer program for calculating the

weighted-average dumping margin for CA flux contained an instruction

which overstated the cost of foreign manufacture used to calculate

profit associated with U.S. further manufacturing because it double

counted the cost of raw materials. Petitioner requested that the

Department correct this clerical error by deleting the extraneous field

from the computer program.

We agree that this alleged error is a ministerial one. Upon re-

examination of the final computer program relevant to CA flux, we noted

that raw material costs had indeed been inadvertently double counted in

the manner described above. Therefore, we have corrected the data in

question, and have recalculated the margin in our final determination

for CA flux to reflect this correction in accordance with 19 CFR

353.28(c). The corrected margin is 37.93 percent.

Based on the foregoing, the cash deposit or bonding rate for

Lafarge is now 37.93 percent. The cash deposit or bonding rate for the

``All Others'' category is also now 37.93 percent.

Suspension of Liquidation

We are directing the Customs Service to suspend liquidation of all

entries of CA flux from France that are entered, or withdrawn from

warehouse, for consumption on or after March 25, 1994, at the revised

cash deposit or bonding rates specified above.

Notification of International Trade Commission (ITC)

In accordance with section 735(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as

amended (the Act), we have notified the ITC of our amended final

determination.

This amended determination is published pursuant to section 735(d)

of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673d(d)) and 19 CFR 353.28(c).

Dated: May 9, 1994.

Susan G. Esserman,

Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 94-11870 Filed 5-13-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P