Pure Magnesium and Alloy Magnesium From Canada: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-122-815]

Pure Magnesium and Alloy Magnesium From Canada: Final Results of

Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of countervailing duty administrative

reviews.

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

SUMMARY: On May 7, 1999, the Department of Commerce published in the

Federal Register its preliminary results of the administrative reviews

of the countervailing duty orders on pure magnesium and alloy magnesium

from Canada for the period January 1, 1997, through December 31, 1997.

The Department has now completed these reviews in accordance with

section 751(a) of the Act. For information on the net subsidy rate for

the reviewed company, as well as for all non-reviewed companies, see

the Final Results of Reviews section of this notice. We will instruct

the U.S. Customs Service to assess countervailing duties accordingly.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 8, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Annika O'Hara or Blanche Ziv, AD/CVD

Enforcement, Group I, Office 1, Import Administration, International

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

Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202)

482-3798 or (202) 482-4207, respectively.

Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are

references to the provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by

the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''), effective January 1, 1995

(``the Act''). The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') is

conducting these administrative reviews in accordance with section

751(a) of the Act. In addition, unless otherwise indicated, all

citation to the Department's regulations are to the regulations

codified at 19 CFR Part 351 (1998).

Background

On August 31, 1992, the Department published in the Federal

Register the countervailing duty orders on pure magnesium and alloy

magnesium from Canada (57 FR 39392).

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), the reviews of these orders

cover those producers or exporters of the subject merchandise for which

a review was specifically requested. Accordingly, these reviews cover

only Norsk Hydro Canada, Inc. (``NHCI''), the sole producer or exporter

of the subject merchandise for which a review was requested. The

petitioner in these reviews is the Magnesium Corporation of America.

These reviews cover 17 programs.

In the preliminary results of these reviews, the Department invited

interested parties to comment on the results (See Pure Magnesium and

Alloy Magnesium From Canada: Preliminary Results of the Sixth

Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 64 FR 24585 (May 7, 1999)

(``Preliminary Results'')). However, no case briefs or rebuttal briefs

were filed by interested parties. The Department did not conduct a

hearing for these reviews because none was requested.

Scope of the Reviews

The products covered by these reviews are shipments of pure

magnesium and alloy magnesium from Canada. Pure magnesium contains at

least 99.8 percent magnesium by weight and is sold in various slab and

ingot forms and sizes. Magnesium alloys contain less than 99.8 percent

magnesium by weight with magnesium being the largest metallic element

in the alloy by weight, and are sold in various ingot and billet forms

and sizes.

The merchandise under review is currently classifiable under items

8104.11.0000 and 8104.19.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided

for

[[Page 48806]]

convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope

of these reviews is dispositive.

Secondary and granular magnesium are not included in the scope of

these orders. Our reasons for excluding granular magnesium are

summarized in the Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair

Value: Pure and Alloy Magnesium From Canada, 57 FR 6094 (February 20,

1992).

Period of Review

The period of review (``POR'') for which we are measuring subsidies

is from January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1997.

Analysis of Programs

I. Programs Conferring Subsidies

I. Programs Conferring Subsidies

A. Exemption from Payment of Water Bills

In the Preliminary Results, we found that this program conferred a

countervailable benefit on the subject merchandise. We also

preliminarily determined that the program was terminated during the

POR, that no residual benefits were being provided or received, and

that no substitute program had been implemented. We have not received

any new information or comments which would lead us to change our

preliminary findings. On this basis, we determine that the net subsidy

rate for this program during the POR is 0.18 percent for NHCI.

Moreover, because this program was terminated during the POR, we do not

intend to examine it in the future and the cash deposit rate will be

zero for this program.

B. Article 7 Grants from the Quebec Industrial Development Corporation

In the Preliminary Results, we found that this program conferred a

countervailable benefit on the subject merchandise. We have not

received any new information or comments which would lead us to change

our preliminary findings. On this basis, we determine that the net

subsidy rate for this program during the POR is 1.84 percent for NHCI.

II. Programs Found Not to be Used

In the Preliminary Results, we found that NHCI did not apply for or

receive benefits under the following programs during the POR:

St. Lawrence River Environment Technology Development Program

Program for Export Market Development

Export Development Corporation

Canada-Quebec Subsidiary Agreement on the Economic Development

of the Regions of Quebec

Opportunities to Stimulate Technology Programs

Development Assistance Program

Industrial Feasibility Study Assistance Program

Export Promotion Assistance Program

Creation of Scientific Jobs in Industries

Business Investment Assistance Program

Business Financing Program

Research and Innovation Activities Program

Export Assistance Program

Energy Technologies Development Program

Transportation Research and Development Assistance Program.

We have not received any new information or comments on these

programs which would lead us to change our findings from the

Preliminary Results.

Final Results of Reviews

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we calculated an

individual subsidy rate for each producer or exporter subject to these

administrative reviews. For the period January 1, 1997, through

December 31, 1997, we determine the net subsidy rate for NHCI, the only

producer or exporter subject to these reviews, to be 2.02 percent ad

valorem. We will instruct the U.S. Customs Service (``Customs'') to

assess countervailing duties in this amount for all entries of the

subject merchandise produced and/or exported by NHCI during this

period. The Department will also instruct Customs to collect cash

deposits of estimated countervailing duties (exclusive of the net

subsidy rate calculated for the water program; see section I.A. above)

at the rate of 1.84 percent of the f.o.b. invoice prices on all

shipments of the subject merchandise from NHCI, entered, or withdrawn

from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of

the final results of these administrative reviews.

Because the URAA replaced the general rule in favor of a country-

wide rate with a general rule in favor of individual rates for

investigated and reviewed companies, the procedures for establishing

countervailing duty rates, including those for non-reviewed companies,

are now essentially the same as those in antidumping cases, except as

provided for in section 777A(e)(2)(B) of the Act. Consequently, the

requested review will normally cover only those companies specifically

named (see 19 CFR 351.213(b)). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(c), for all

companies for which a review was not requested, duties must be assessed

at the cash deposit rate, and cash deposits must continue to be

collected at the rate previously ordered. As such, the countervailing

duty cash deposit rate applicable to a company can no longer change,

except pursuant to a request for a review of that company. See Federal-

Mogul Corporation and The Torrington Company v. United States, 822 F.

Supp. 782 (CIT 1993) and Floral Trade Council v. United States, 822 F.

Supp. 766 (CIT 1993) (interpreting 19 CFR 353.22(e), the antidumping

regulation on automatic assessment, which parallels 19 CFR 355.22(g),

the predecessor to 19 CFR 351.212(c)). Therefore, the cash deposit

rates for all companies except NHCI are unchanged by the results of

these reviews.

We will instruct Customs to continue to collect cash deposits for

non-reviewed companies (except for Timminco Limited, which was excluded

from the order in the original investigations) at the most recent

company-specific or country-wide rate applicable to the company.

Accordingly, the cash deposit rates that will be applied to non-

reviewed companies covered by these orders are those established in the

most recently completed administrative proceeding. See Final Results of

the Second Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews: Pure Magnesium

and Alloy Magnesium from Canada, 62 FR 48607 (September 16, 1997).

These rates shall apply to all non-reviewed companies until a review of

a company assigned these rates is completed. In addition, for the

period January 1, 1997, through December 31, 1997, the assessment rates

applicable to all non-reviewed companies covered by these orders are

the cash deposit rates in effect at the time of entry, except for

Timminco Limited (which was excluded from the order in the original

investigations).

This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to an

administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility

concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under

APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.301. Timely written notification of

return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial

protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the

regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

These administrative reviews and notice are in accordance with

sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

[[Page 48807]]

Dated: August 31, 1999.

Richard W. Moreland,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 99-23329 Filed 9-7-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M