Silicomanganese From Brazil, the People's Republic of China, and Ukraine: Final Results of the Expedited Third Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders, 73587-73589 [2011-30767]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 29, 2011 / Notices Dated: November 22, 2011 Gwellnar Banks, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. O. Felix Obi, Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Room 7019, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC, 20230, telephone: (202) 482–3688, email: fobi@eda.doc.gov. Please reference, ‘‘NACIE December 13, 2011’’ in the subject line of your email. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 2011–30573 Filed 11–28–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–FP–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Economic Development Administration The National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Meeting of the National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship [FR Doc. 2011–30750 Filed 11–28–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–03–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE U.S. Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of an open meeting. AGENCY: The National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship will hold a meeting on Tuesday, December 13, 2011. The open meeting will be conducted from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m., and will be open to the public via a listen-only conference number (888) 989–4718, passcode NACIE. The Council was chartered on November 10, 2009, to advise the Secretary of Commerce on matters relating to innovation and entrepreneurship in the United States. DATES: December 13, 2011. Time: 10 a.m.–12 p.m. (EST). ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230–0002. For audio participation, please specify any requests for reasonable accommodation of auxiliary aids at least five business days in advance of the meeting. Last minute requests will be accepted, but may be impossible to fill. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of this meeting is for Secretary Bryson to discuss NACIE’s earlier work, review its priorities, and offer his charge to the members. Specific topics for discussion include NACIE’s current focus on issues related to implementing the America Invents Act and supporting development of regional economic frameworks. The agenda may change to accommodate NACIE business. The final agenda will be posted on the NACIE Web site at https://www.eda.gov/ nacie. Any member of the public may submit pertinent written comments concerning the Council’s affairs at any time before and after the meeting. Comments may be submitted to O. Felix Obi at the contact information indicated below. Copies of meeting minutes will be available within 90 days of the meeting at https://www.eda.gov/NACIE mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:20 Nov 28, 2011 Jkt 226001 Dated: November 23, 2011. Paul J. Corson, Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, U.S. Department of Commerce. Foreign-Trade Zones Board Foreign-Trade Zone 183—Austin, Tx; Site Renumbering Notice Foreign-Trade Zone 183 was approved by the Foreign-Trade Zones Board on December 23, 1991 (Board Order 550), and expanded on March 16, 1998 (Board Order 964), on July 10, 1998 (Board Order 994), on April 7, 1999 (Board Order 1035), on March 15, 2001 (Board Order 1143), and on January 27, 2005 (Board Order 1366). FTZ 183 currently consists of 8 ‘‘sites’’ totaling some 2,818 acres in the Austin area. The current updates does not alter the physical boundaries that have previously been approved, but instead involves an administrative renumbering of the existing sites (with the exception of Sites 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8) to separate unrelated, non-contiguous sites for record-keeping purposes. Under this revision, the site list for FTZ 183 will be as follows: Site 1 (33 acres)—Interchange w/n the Austin Enterprise Zone, located at Bolm Road and Gardner Road, Austin; Site 2 (50 acres)—Balcones Research site located in north central Austin at the intersection of Burnett Road and Longhorn Boulevard; Site 3 (449.9 acres)—Corridor Park II (Dell), Dell Way/IH 35, Round Rock; Site 4 (47 acres)—Cedar Park site, some 8 miles northwest of the Austin city limits, in Williamson County; Site 5 (100 acres)— Borroughs, Chandler Road/Cypress Boulevard, Round Rock; Site 6 (246 acres)—Georgetown site, located along I–35 and U.S. 81, south of downtown Georgetown; Site 7 (40 acres)—San Marcos site, located within the San Marcos Municipal Airport facility in eastern San Marcos, adjacent to State Highway 21, on the Hays County/ Caldwell County line; Site 8 (200 acres)—MET Center industrial park located between U.S. Highway 183 South and State Highway 71 East in PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 73587 southeast Austin, some 5 miles northwest of the Austin Bergstrom International Airport; Site 9 (56.4 acres)—Data Products/Nature Conservancy, Montopolis Drive/East Riverside Drive, Austin; Site 10 (22.6 acres)—Ben White Business Park, South Industrial Drive/Business Center Drive, Austin; Site 11 (64.5 acres)—Walnut Business Park, US 290/US 183, Austin; Site 12 (100 acres)—Harris Branch, Harris Branch Parkway/Parmer Lane, Austin; Site 13 (15 acres)—Hill Partners w/n Global Business Park, Rutherford Lane/Cameron Road, Austin; Site 14 (91 acres)—Corridor Park I (Wayne Dresser), Jarrett Way, Round Rock; Site 15 (108.5 acres)—Vista Business Park/Bratton, Wells Port Drive/Grand Avenue Parkway, Round Rock; Site 16 (72.6 acres)—North Park, Grand Avenue Parkway/IH 35, Round Rock; Site 17 (40 acres)—Harvard, Glenn Drive, Round Rock; Site 18 (574 acres)—Parmer Lane, E. Parmer Lane/McCallen Pass, Round Rock; Site 19 (217.9 acres)—Tech Ridge, McCallen Pass/Howard Lane, Round Rock; Site 20 (58.5 acres)—Wells Branch Industrial Park, Howard Lane/McNielMeriltown Road, Round Rock; Site 21 (45.5 acres)—Metric Center, Metric Boulevard, Round Rock; Site 22 (38.5 acres)—Crystal Park, E. Old Settlers Boulevard, Round Rock; Site 23 (116.3 acres)—Westinghouse, Westinghouse Drive/IH 35, Round Rock; and, Site 24 (30 acres)—Coop Smith & Park Central, County Road 116/111, Round Rock. For further information, contact Camille Evans at Camille.Evans@trade.gov or (202) 482– 2350. Dated: November 22, 2011. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2011–30758 Filed 11–28–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–351–824, A–570–828, A–823–805] Silicomanganese From Brazil, the People’s Republic of China, and Ukraine: Final Results of the Expedited Third Sunset Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Orders Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 1, 2011, the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) initiated the third sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on silicomanganese from Brazil, AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM 29NON1 73588 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 29, 2011 / Notices the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’), and Ukraine 1 pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘Act’’). The Department received a notice of intent to participate in all three reviews from the domestic interested party, Eramet Marietta, Inc. (‘‘Eramet’’), within the time specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i).2 On August 31, 2011, the Department received substantive responses from Eramet. Based on the receipt of the substantive responses filed by the domestic interested party within the 30-day deadline as specified by 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i) and the lack of response from any respondent interested party, the Department conducted expedited sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). As a result of these sunset reviews, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping, at the levels indicated in the ‘‘Final Results of Sunset Reviews’’ section of this notice. DATES: Effective Date: November 29, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin Begnal; AD/CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1442. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On August 1, 2011, the Department initiated sunset reviews of the orders on silicomanganese from Brazil, the PRC, and Ukraine pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act. See Initiation of Five-year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 76 FR 45778 (August mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 1 See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Silicomanganese From Brazil, 59 FR 66003 (December 22, 1994), Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Silicomanganese From the People’s Republic of China (PRC), 59 FR 66003 (December 22, 1994), and Suspension Agreement on Silicomanganese From Ukraine; Termination of Suspension Agreement and Notice of Antidumping Duty Order, 66 FR 43838 (August 21, 2001). 2 On August 19, 2011, the Department received a notice of intent to participate from Felman Production Inc. (‘‘Felman’’), a producer of the domestic like product. On August 22, 2011, Felman requested an extension of the deadline to submit its notice of intent to participate, as the deadline for domestic interested parties to submit notices of intent to participate in the sunset reviews was August 16, 2011, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(d)(l)(i) (‘‘the deadline for filing a ‘Notice of Intent’ to participate by domestic interested parties in a sunset review is ‘no later than 15 days after the date of publication of the initiation notice.’ ’’). In light of the compressed timelines for conducting the sunset review under section 751(c) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.218(d), the Department denied Felman’s request for an extension. VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:20 Nov 28, 2011 Jkt 226001 1, 2011). On August 31, 2011, the Department received substantive responses from Eramet, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). In accordance with 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(ii)(A), Eramet claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act as a producer of the domestic like product. In its substantive responses, Eramet indicated that Elkem Metals Company (‘‘Elkem’’) was the petitioner in the original investigation but that since Eramet purchased Elkem’s silicomanganese operations in 1999, it has participated actively in all administrative reviews and sunset reviews. The Department did not receive a substantive response from any respondent interested party in these sunset reviews. As a result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the Department conducted expedited sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders. Scope of the Orders The merchandise covered by the orders is silicomanganese. Silicomanganese, which is sometimes called ferrosilicon manganese, is a ferroalloy composed principally of manganese, silicon and iron, and normally contains much smaller proportions of minor elements, such as carbon, phosphorus, and sulfur. Silicomanganese generally contains by weight not less than 4 percent iron, more than 30 percent manganese, more than 8 percent silicon, and not more than 3 percent phosphorous. All compositions, forms, and sizes of silicomanganese are included within the scope of the order, including silicomanganese slag, fines, and briquettes. Silicomanganese is used primarily in steel production as a source of both silicon and manganese. Silicomanganese is currently classifiable under subheading 7202.30.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). Some silicomanganese may also currently be classifiable under HTSUS subheading 7202.99.5040. The orders cover all silicomanganese, regardless of its tariff classification. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the orders remain dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received A complete discussion of all issues raised in these sunset reviews is addressed in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (‘‘I&D Memo’’), which is hereby adopted by this notice. See the Department’s memorandum entitled, ‘‘Issues and PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Decision Memorandum for the Final Results in the Expedited Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Silicomanganese from Brazil, the People’s Republic of China, and Ukraine’’ concurrently dated with this notice. The issues discussed in the accompanying I&D Memo include the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the dumping margins likely to prevail if the antidumping orders were revoked. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this full sunset review and the corresponding recommendation in this public memorandum which is on file electronically via Import Administration’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Services System (‘‘IA ACCESS’’). Access to IA ACCESS is available in the Central Records Unit room 7046 of the main Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The signed Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Final Results of Sunset Reviews The Department determines that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on silicomanganese from Brazil, the PRC, and Ukraine would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping. The Department also determines that the dumping margins likely to prevail if the orders were revoked are as follows: MANUFACTURERS/EXPORTERS/PRODUCERS WEIGHTED-AVERAGE MARGIN [Percent] Brazil RDM/CPFL .................... All Others ....................... The PRC All Manufacturers/Producers/Exporters ........ Ukraine All Manufacturers/Producers/Exporters ........ 64.93 17.60 150.00 163.00 Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM 29NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 29, 2011 / Notices conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in accordance with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: November 22, 2011. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. timely allegation of a ministerial error contained in the Department’s Preliminary Determination.4 After reviewing the allegation, we have determined that the Preliminary Determination included a significant ministerial error. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(e), we have made a change, as described below, to the Preliminary Determination. Period of Investigation The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is July 1, 2010, through December 31, 2010. This period corresponds to the two most recent fiscal quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition (March 31, 2011).5 [FR Doc. 2011–30767 Filed 11–28–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Scope of Investigation [A–570–975] The scope of this investigation covers galvanized steel wire which is a colddrawn carbon quality steel product in coils, of solid, circular cross section with an actual diameter of 0.5842 mm (0.0230 inch) or more, plated or coated with zinc (whether by hot-dipping or electroplating). Steel products to be included in the scope of this investigation, regardless of Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) definitions, are products in which: (1) Iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements; (2) the carbon content is two percent or less, by weight; and (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, respectively indicated: —1.80 percent of manganese, or —1.50 percent of silicon, or —1.00 percent of copper, or —0.50 percent of aluminum, or —1.25 percent of chromium, or —0.30 percent of cobalt, or —0.40 percent of lead, or —1.25 percent of nickel, or —0.30 percent of tungsten, or —0.02 percent of boron, or —0.10 percent of molybdenum, or —0.10 percent of niobium, or —0.41 percent of titanium, or —0.15 percent of vanadium, or —0.15 percent of zirconium. Specifically excluded from the scope of this investigation is galvanized steel wire in coils of 15 feet or less which is pre-packed in individual retail packages. The products subject to this investigation are currently classified in subheadings 7217.20.30 and 7217.20.45 Galvanized Steel Wire From the People’s Republic of China: Amended Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: November 29, 2011. SUMMARY: On November 4, 2011, the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) published the preliminary determination of sales at less than fair value in the antidumping investigation of galvanized steel wire from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).1 We are amending our Preliminary Determination to correct certain ministerial errors with respect to the antidumping duty margin calculation for the Baozhang entity.2 The corrections to the Baozhang entity’s margin also affect the margin assigned to companies receiving a separate rate. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katie Marksberry, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–7906. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 4, 2011, Petitioners 3 filed a mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: 1 See Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: Galvanized Steel Wire from the People’s Republic of China, 76 FR 68407 (November 4, 2011) (‘‘Preliminary Determination’’). 2 The Baozhang entity consists of Shanghai Bao Zhang Industry Co., Ltd. and Anhui Bao Zhang Metal Products Co., Ltd. (‘‘Anhui Baozhang’’), See Preliminary Determination at 68413. 3 Davis Wire Corporation, Johnstown Wire Technologies, Inc., Mid-South Wire Company, Inc., National Standard, LLC and Oklahoma Steel & Wire Company, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’). VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:20 Nov 28, 2011 Jkt 226001 4 See Letter to the Department from Petitioners Re: Antidumping Investigation of Galvanized Steel Wire from the People’s Republic of China— Petitioners’ Ministerial Error Comment Regarding Preliminary Determination for Bao Zhang Companies, dated November 4, 2011. 5 See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1). PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 73589 of the HTSUS which cover galvanized wire of all diameters and all carbon content. Galvanized wire is reported under statistical reporting numbers 7217.20.3000, 7217.20.4510, 7217.20.4520, 7217.20.4530, 7217.20.4540, 7217.20.4550, 7217.20.4560, 7217.20.4570, and 7217.20.4580. These products may also enter under HTSUS subheadings 7229.20.0015, 7229.20.0090, 7229.90.5008, 7229.90.5016, 7229.90.5031, and 7229.90.5051. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise is dispositive. Significant Ministerial Error Ministerial errors are defined in 19 CFR 351.224(f) as ‘‘an error in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical error resulting from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any other similar type of unintentional error which the Secretary considers ministerial.’’ 19 CFR 351.224(e) provides that the Department ‘‘will analyze any comments received and, if appropriate, correct any significant ministerial error by amending the preliminary determination.’’ A significant ministerial error is defined as a ministerial error, the correction of which, singly or in combination with other errors, would result in: (1) A change of at least five absolute percentage points in, but not less than 25 percent of, the weighted-average dumping margin calculated in the original (erroneous) preliminary determination; or (2) a difference between a weighted-average dumping margin of zero or de minimis and a weighted-average dumping margin of greater than de minimis or vice versa.6 Ministerial Error Allegation Truck Freight for Baozhang Petitioners argue that the Department incorrectly applied the surrogate value for truck freight on a per-kilogram basis, rather than on a per-metric ton basis, because the Baozhang entity reported its factors of production (‘‘FOPs’’) on a permetric ton basis and the Department calculated the Baozhang entity’s margin on a per-metric ton basis. Petitioners request that the Department correct this error by converting the surrogate value for truck freight to a per-metric ton basis. Further, Petitioners contend that correcting this error would result in a significantly higher weight-averaged 6 See E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM 19 CFR 351.224(g). 29NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 229 (Tuesday, November 29, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73587-73589]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-30767]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-351-824, A-570-828, A-823-805]


Silicomanganese From Brazil, the People's Republic of China, and 
Ukraine: Final Results of the Expedited Third Sunset Reviews of the 
Antidumping Duty Orders

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 1, 2011, the Department of Commerce (``Department'') 
initiated the third sunset reviews of the antidumping duty orders on 
silicomanganese from Brazil,

[[Page 73588]]

the People's Republic of China (``PRC''), and Ukraine \1\ pursuant to 
section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``Act''). The 
Department received a notice of intent to participate in all three 
reviews from the domestic interested party, Eramet Marietta, Inc. 
(``Eramet''), within the time specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i).\2\ 
On August 31, 2011, the Department received substantive responses from 
Eramet. Based on the receipt of the substantive responses filed by the 
domestic interested party within the 30-day deadline as specified by 19 
CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i) and the lack of response from any respondent 
interested party, the Department conducted expedited sunset reviews of 
the antidumping duty orders pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act 
and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). As a result of these sunset 
reviews, the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping duty 
orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping, at 
the levels indicated in the ``Final Results of Sunset Reviews'' section 
of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Silicomanganese From 
Brazil, 59 FR 66003 (December 22, 1994), Notice of Antidumping Duty 
Order: Silicomanganese From the People's Republic of China (PRC), 59 
FR 66003 (December 22, 1994), and Suspension Agreement on 
Silicomanganese From Ukraine; Termination of Suspension Agreement 
and Notice of Antidumping Duty Order, 66 FR 43838 (August 21, 2001).
    \2\ On August 19, 2011, the Department received a notice of 
intent to participate from Felman Production Inc. (``Felman''), a 
producer of the domestic like product. On August 22, 2011, Felman 
requested an extension of the deadline to submit its notice of 
intent to participate, as the deadline for domestic interested 
parties to submit notices of intent to participate in the sunset 
reviews was August 16, 2011, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(d)(l)(i) 
(``the deadline for filing a `Notice of Intent' to participate by 
domestic interested parties in a sunset review is `no later than 15 
days after the date of publication of the initiation notice.' ''). 
In light of the compressed timelines for conducting the sunset 
review under section 751(c) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.218(d), the 
Department denied Felman's request for an extension.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: November 29, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin Begnal; AD/CVD Operations, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; 
telephone: (202) 482-1442.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On August 1, 2011, the Department initiated sunset reviews of the 
orders on silicomanganese from Brazil, the PRC, and Ukraine pursuant to 
section 751(c) of the Act. See Initiation of Five-year (``Sunset'') 
Review, 76 FR 45778 (August 1, 2011). On August 31, 2011, the 
Department received substantive responses from Eramet, pursuant to 19 
CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). In accordance with 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(ii)(A), 
Eramet claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the 
Act as a producer of the domestic like product. In its substantive 
responses, Eramet indicated that Elkem Metals Company (``Elkem'') was 
the petitioner in the original investigation but that since Eramet 
purchased Elkem's silicomanganese operations in 1999, it has 
participated actively in all administrative reviews and sunset reviews. 
The Department did not receive a substantive response from any 
respondent interested party in these sunset reviews. As a result, 
pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the Department conducted expedited sunset 
reviews of the antidumping duty orders.

Scope of the Orders

    The merchandise covered by the orders is silicomanganese. 
Silicomanganese, which is sometimes called ferrosilicon manganese, is a 
ferroalloy composed principally of manganese, silicon and iron, and 
normally contains much smaller proportions of minor elements, such as 
carbon, phosphorus, and sulfur. Silicomanganese generally contains by 
weight not less than 4 percent iron, more than 30 percent manganese, 
more than 8 percent silicon, and not more than 3 percent phosphorous. 
All compositions, forms, and sizes of silicomanganese are included 
within the scope of the order, including silicomanganese slag, fines, 
and briquettes. Silicomanganese is used primarily in steel production 
as a source of both silicon and manganese.
    Silicomanganese is currently classifiable under subheading 
7202.30.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(``HTSUS''). Some silicomanganese may also currently be classifiable 
under HTSUS subheading 7202.99.5040. The orders cover all 
silicomanganese, regardless of its tariff classification. Although the 
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, 
the written description of the orders remain dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    A complete discussion of all issues raised in these sunset reviews 
is addressed in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (``I&D 
Memo''), which is hereby adopted by this notice. See the Department's 
memorandum entitled, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final 
Results in the Expedited Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on 
Silicomanganese from Brazil, the People's Republic of China, and 
Ukraine'' concurrently dated with this notice. The issues discussed in 
the accompanying I&D Memo include the likelihood of continuation or 
recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the dumping margins likely 
to prevail if the antidumping orders were revoked. Parties can find a 
complete discussion of all issues raised in this full sunset review and 
the corresponding recommendation in this public memorandum which is on 
file electronically via Import Administration's Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Services System (``IA 
ACCESS''). Access to IA ACCESS is available in the Central Records Unit 
room 7046 of the main Commerce building. In addition, a complete 
version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web 
at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The signed Decision Memorandum and the 
electronic versions of the Decision Memorandum are identical in 
content.

Final Results of Sunset Reviews

    The Department determines that revocation of the antidumping duty 
orders on silicomanganese from Brazil, the PRC, and Ukraine would 
likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping. The Department 
also determines that the dumping margins likely to prevail if the 
orders were revoked are as follows:

        Manufacturers/Exporters/Producers Weighted-Average Margin
                                [Percent]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brazil
    RDM/CPFL............................................           64.93
    All Others..........................................           17.60
The PRC
    All Manufacturers/Producers/Exporters...............          150.00
Ukraine
    All Manufacturers/Producers/Exporters...............          163.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely 
notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or

[[Page 73589]]

conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to 
comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is 
subject to sanction.
    We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: November 22, 2011.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-30767 Filed 11-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.