Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Ferrosilicon From Brazil

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-351-820]

Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair

Value: Ferrosilicon From Brazil

Agency: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 23, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Hardin, Office of Antidumping

Investigations, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,

14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;

telephone (202) 482-0371.

Amendment of Final Determination

In accordance with 19 CFR 353.28(c)(1993), we are amending the

final determination of the antidumping duty investigation of

ferrosilicon from Brazil (59 FR 732, January 6, 1994) to announce the

Department's correction of ministerial errors in the calculations.

Case History

Since publication of the notice of final determination on January

6, 1994 (59 FR 732), the following events have occurred.

On January 21, 1994, petitioners and one of the respondents,

Companhia Ferroligas Minas Gerais (Minasligas), alleged that the

Department made several ministerial errors in its final determination.

On January 24, 1994, respondent Companhia Brasileira Carbureto de

Calcio (CBCC) also alleged that the Department made ministerial errors

in its final determination. On January 31, 1994, petitioners submitted

comments on the ministerial error allegations submitted by CBCC. Also

on January 31, 1994, Minasligas submitted comments on the ministerial

error allegations submitted by petitioners. All allegations and

comments were timely.

Scope of Investigation

The merchandise subject to this investigation is ferrosilicon

(FeSi), a ferroalloy generally containing, by weight, not less than

four percent iron, more than eight percent but not more than 96 percent

silicon, not more than 10 percent chromium, not more than 30 percent

manganese, not more than three percent phosphorous, less than 2.75

percent magnesium, and not more than 10 percent calcium of any other

element. For a complete description of the merchandise covered by this

investigation, see Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair

Value: Ferrosilicon from Brazil (59 FR 732, January 6, 1994).

Ministerial Error Allegations

On January 21, 1994, petitioners alleged that the Department made

several ministerial errors in its final determination. First,

petitioners state that the Department improperly included home market

``credit expenses'' reported by two respondents, Minasligas and CBCC,

in the price that was compared to the monthly cost of production (COP)

for purposes of the COP test.

We agree with petitioners that this constitutes a ministerial error

and have recalculated accordingly. In this investigation, we intended

to make contemporaneous comparisons by comparing the price at the time

of shipment to the replacement cost in the month of shipment. However,

our comparisons were not contemporaneous because the COP in one month

was compared to a price charged in the same month which included an

adjustment for anticipated inflation. We thus determine that this

constitutes an unintentional ministerial error as defined at 19 CFR

353.28(d). As a result of our recalculation, U.S. sales for both

companies are now being compared to constructed value (CV). For the one

U.S. sale made by Minasligas for which Minasligas did not report CV

information, we indexed period of investigation (POI) average costs to

February 1993 using International Monetary Fund's Brazilian wholesale

price index. For two U.S. sales made by CBCC shipped outside the POI,

CBCC incorrectly reported direct selling expenses. We calculated the

direct selling expenses for these sales as a percentage of cost of

manufacture based on CBCC's actual experience for each month of the

POI.

Second, petitioners claim the Department erroneously imputed

negative U.S. credit expenses for Minasligas by treating the first date

on which Minasligas borrowed from U.S. advance exchange contracts as

the date of payment by the purchaser (Minasligas received the first

draw from the advance exchange contract prior to the date of shipment).

In addition, petitioners claim we incorrectly used a cruzeiro-

denominated interest rate to calculate Minasligas' negative U.S. credit

figures.

We disagree with petitioners. We note that we accounted for actual

expenses associated with the advance exchange contracts by making a

circumstance of sale adjustment to foreign market value (FMV).

Regarding the use of the first versus the second advance exchange

contract payment date as well as the use of the monthly cruzeiro-

denominated interest rate for calculating U.S. credit, these decisions

are discussed in the final determination concurrence memorandum.

Accordingly, we do not consider these issues to constitute ministerial

errors, as defined in 19 CFR 353.28.

Third, petitioners claim the Department inaccurately imputed home

market credit expenses by assuming Minasligas had reported 30 day

interest rates for each transaction. We agree with petitioners that

this is a ministerial error. We recalculated home market imputed credit

expenses to accurately reflect the actual interest rate for each

transaction.

Finally, petitioners claim we wrongly allowed a monetary correction

offset of loans in our calculation of interest expenses for COP. We

disagree with petitioners. We followed our normal practice of adjusting

financial expenses to compensate for the effects of hyperinflation so

that only the actual interest expenses are reflected. Therefore,

petitioners' claim does not constitute a ministerial error as defined

by 19 CFR 353.28.

On January 21, 1994, respondent Minasligas alleged that the

Department made a ministerial error in its final determination.

Minasligas claims that, because we used incorrect figures in two

instances, we erroneously calculated Minasligas' general and

administrative (G&A) expenses. We agree with Minasligas that this is a

ministerial error and have recalculated Minasligas' G&A expenses

accordingly.

On January 24, 1994, respondent CBCC alleged that the Department

made several ministerial errors in its final determination. First, CBCC

claims that we failed to use the correct interest expense ratio for CV

purposes. We agree with CBCC that the incorrect interest expense ratio

was used for CV purposes, and have changed our calculation accordingly.

Second, CBCC claims that we double-counted inventory holding gain/

loss in our calculation of the CV related to a December U.S. sale. We

disagree with CBCC. Inventory holding gain/loss was appropriately

accounted for in the calculation of CV. However, we have removed

inventory carrying costs from our analysis as it is not our policy to

include this element in purchase price calculations.

Third, CBCC argues that we used an incorrect monthly ``Unidade

Fiscal de Referencia'' figure in our depreciation calculation. CBCC

claims we did not consider the ``special depreciation'' which was

mandated by the Brazilian Government to compensate for the period in

which Brazilian companies were prohibited from recognizing

depreciation. CBCC claims the result is that we used an incorrect

multiplier, thus overstating depreciation expense. We disagree with

CBCC that we used an incorrect multiplier and that our depreciation

expense calculation was overstated. Thus, we find that the calculation

does not contain a ministerial error.

Finally, CBCC alleges that we failed to make proper adjustments to

a U.S. price (USP) converted to cruzeiros because USP is compared to

costs which are expressed in cruzeiros at a later date. CBCC claims the

CV should be adjusted for the lag between the cost calculation and the

conversion of the sales price into cruzeiros. We note that we did not

convert USP into cruzeiros. Moreover, we followed our normal

methodology for hyperinflationary economies of using the CV in the

month of shipment of the U.S. sale. Accordingly, we find that this is

not a ministerial error.

Therefore, pursuant to section 735(e) of the Act, we are correcting

the above ministerial errors made in our final determination of sales

at less than fair value.

See memorandum to Barbara R. Stafford from David L. Binder,

February 8, 1994, for a detailed explanation of the decisions noted

above.

Inclusion of Minasligas

In the final determination, the Department found that Minasligas

had a zero dumping margin. In consequence, the Department excluded

Minasligas from the results of the investigation, and instructed the

Customs Service to terminate suspension of liquidation for all entries

of FeSi from Minasligas and to release any bond or other security and

to refund any cash deposits with respect to these entries in accordance

with section 735(c)(2) of the statute.

However, as noted above, the Department has determined that

ministerial errors exist with respect to the calculation of Minasligas'

dumping margin. The recalculation of Minasligas' margin results in the

finding of sales at less than fair value. Accordingly, we are directing

the Customs Service to reinstitute suspension of liquidation of all

remaining entries of FeSi from Minasligas, entered or withdrawn from

warehouse, for consumption on or after August 16, 1993, which is the

date of the publication of our affirmative preliminary determination in

the Federal Register (58 FR 43323) and before January 6, 1994, which is

the date of publication of our final determination in the Federal

Register. For all unliquidated entries made during the period from

August 16, 1993, to January 6, 1994, the Customs Service shall retain

the cash deposits collected, or bonds posted, as a result of the

preliminary determination.

In addition, as a result of the amended final determination, we are

directing the Customs Service to suspend liquidation of all entries of

FeSi from Minasligas, entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for

consumption on or after the date of the publication of this notice in

the Federal Register. The Customs Service shall require a cash deposit

or posting of a bond equal to the estimated margin amount by which the

FMV of the subject merchandise exceeds the USP as shown in the

``Suspension of Liquidation'' section below.

Suspension of Liquidation

In accordance with section 735(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we are

directing the U.S. Customs Service to continue to retroactively suspend

liquidation of all entries of FeSi from Italmagnesio S.A. Industria e

Comercio. Retroactive suspension applies to entries of FeSi, that are

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after May

18, 1993, which is the date 90 days prior to the date of the

publication of our preliminary determination in the Federal Register.

For CBCC and ``All Other Exporters,'' we are directing the Customs

Service to continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of FeSi from

Brazil, that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption

on or after August 16, 1993.

The Customs Service shall require a cash deposit or posting of a

bond equal to the estimated margin amount by which the FMV of the

subject merchandise exceeds the USP as shown below.

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

Margin

Manufacturer/producer/exporter percent Critical

circumstances

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

Italmagnesio S.A. Industria e Comercio......... 88.86 Yes.

Companhia Brasileira Carbureto de Calcio....... 15.53 No.

Companhia Ferroligas Minas Gerais.............. 3.46 No.

All Others..................................... 35.95 No.

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

ITC Notification

In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we have notified the

ITC of our determination.

This amended final determination is published pursuant to section

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

Dated: February 15, 1994.

Joseph A. Spetrini,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 94-4059 Filed 2-22-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P