Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Notice of Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review.
On September 8, 1999, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published in the Federal Register its preliminary results of the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate (CTL Plate) from Mexico for the period January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1997.
Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes to the net subsidy rate. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The final net subsidy rate for the reviewed company is listed below in the section entitled “Final Results of Review.”
March 13, 2000.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Norbert Gannon or Eric B. Greynolds, Office of AD/CVD Enforcement VI, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 4012, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone (202) 482-2786.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
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 is conducting this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act. All citations to the Department's regulations reference 19 CFR Part 351(April 1998), unless otherwise indicated. Because the request for this administrative review was filed before January 1, 1999, the Department's substantive countervailing duty regulations, which were published in the Federal Register on November 25, 1998 (63 FR 65348), do not govern this review.
On September 8, 1999, the Department published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate from Mexico. See Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Mexico: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 64 FR 48796 (September 8, 1999) (Preliminary Results). This review covers one manufacturer/exporter, Altos Hornos de Mexico, S.A. (AHMSA). The review covers the period January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1997, and twenty-one programs.
Scope of the Review
The products covered by this administrative review are certain cut-to-length carbon steel plates. These products include hot-rolled carbon steel universal mill plates (i.e., flat-rolled products rolled on four faces or in a closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 millimeters but not exceeding 1,250 millimeters and of a thickness of not less than 4 millimeters, not in coils and without patterns in relief), of rectangular shape, neither clad, plated nor coated with metal, whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances; and certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat-rolled products in straight lengths, of rectangular shape, hot rolled, neither clad, plated, nor coated with metal, whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances, 4.75 millimeters or more in thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters and measures at least twice the thickness, as currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers 7208.31.0000, 7208.32.0000, 7208.33.1000, 7208.33.5000, 7208.41.0000, 7208.42.0000, 7208.43.0000, 7208.90.0000, 7210.70.3000, 7210.90.9000, 7211.11.0000, 7211.12.0000, 7211.21.0000, 7211.22.0045, 7211.90.0000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, and 7212.50.0000. Included in this administrative review are flat-rolled products of nonrectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process (i.e., products which have been “worked after rolling”)—for example, products which have been bevelled or rounded at the edges. Excluded from this administrative review is grade X-70 plate. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs purposes. Start Printed Page 13369The written description of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive.
Analysis of Comment Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this administrative review are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum” (Decision Memorandum) from Holly Kuga, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, to Robert S. LaRussa, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated March 6, 2000, which is hereby adopted and incorporated by reference into this notice. A list of issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in the Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as Appendix I. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum which is on file in room B-099 of the Main Commerce Building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the World Wide Web at www.ita.doc.gov/import_admin/records/frn, under the heading “Mexico.” The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made certain changes to the net subsidy rate. Any changes are discussed in the relevant sections of the Decision Memorandum.
Final Results of Review
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated an individual subsidy rate for each producer/exporter subject to this review. We will instruct the U.S. Customs Service (Customs) to assess countervailing duties as indicated below on all appropriate entries. For the period January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1997, we determine the net subsidy rate for the reviewed company to be as follows:
We will instruct Customs to assess countervailing duties as indicated above. The Department will also instruct Customs to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties in the percentages detailed above of the f.o.b. invoice price on all shipments of the subject merchandise from reviewed companies, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this review.
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. 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); Floral Trade Council v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 766 (CIT 1993). Therefore, the cash deposit rates for all companies except those covered by this review will be unchanged by the results of this review.
We will instruct Customs to continue to collect cash deposits for non-reviewed companies 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 this order will be the rate for that company established in the most recently completed administrative proceeding conducted under the Act, as amended by the URAA. If such a review has not been conducted, the rate established in the most recently completed administrative proceeding pursuant to the statutory provisions that were in effect prior to the URAA amendments is applicable. See Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain Steel Products from Mexico, 58 FR 37352 (July 9, 1993) (Certain Steel 1993). These rates shall apply to all non-reviewed companies until a review of a company assigned these rates is requested. In addition, for the period January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1997, the assessment rates applicable to all non-reviewed companies covered by this order are the cash deposit rates in effect at the time of entry.
This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written notification of return/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.
This administrative review and notice are in accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)).Start Signature
Dated: March 6, 2000.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I—Issues in Discussed in Decision Memorandum
[www.ita.doc.gov/import_admin/records/frn, under the heading (“Mexico”)]
Methodology and Background Information
I. Subsidies Valuation Information
A. Allocation Period
B. Discount Rates
II. Change in Ownership
B. Change in Ownership Calculation Methodology
III. Inflation Methodology
Analysis of Programs
I. Programs Conferring Subsidies
A. GOM Equity Infusions
B. 1986 Assumption of AHMSA's Debt
C. 1988 and 1990 Debt Restructuring of AHMSA Debt and the Resulting Discounted Prepayment in 1996 of AHMSA's Restructured Debt Owed to the GOM
D. IMIS Research and Development Grants
E. Pre-privatization Lay-off Financing from the GOM and the 1991 Equity Infusion in Connection with the Debt-to-Equity Swap of PROCARSA Shares
F. Bancomext Export Loans
G. PITEX Duty-Free Imports for Companies That Export
H. Immediate Deduction
II. Programs Determined To Be Not Countervailable
A. Committed Investment
B. The Mexican Corporation of Materials Research, S.A. de C.V. (COMIMSA)
C. Waiver of Taxes on AHMSA Purchase of Fundadora de Monterrey, S.A. de C.V. (FMSA)
D. Discounted Freight Rates
E. Promotion of Highly Exportable Companies (ALTEX)
III. Other Programs Examined
A. Nafinsa Long-Term Loans
IV. Programs Not Used
A. Bancomext Short-Term Import Financing
B. FONEI Long-Term Financing
C. Export Financing Restructuring
D. Bancomext Trade Promotion Services and Technical Support Start Printed Page 13370
F. Article 15 & 94 Loans
V. Analysis of Comments
Comment 1: Requested Use of Facts Available
Comment 2: The 1988 and 1990 Debt Restructuring of AHMSA Debt and the Resulting Discounted Prepayment in 1996 of AHMSA's Restructured Debt Owed to the GOM
Comment 3: Discount Rates Used by the Department as Part of Its Significant Inflation Methodology
Comment 4: Use of Certain Company-Specific Loans in the Derivation of Short-Term and Long-Term Benchmark Interest Rates
Comment 5: Committed Investment
Comment 6: Value-Added Taxes (VAT) Under the Program for Temporary Import for Producing Products for Export (PITEX)
Comment 7: Machinery and Auxiliary Materials Imported Under PITEX
Comment 8: Immediate Deduction
Comment 9: Nafinsa Long-Term Loans
Comment 10: The Department's Compliance With the SCM Agreement Regarding Its Initiation of Investigations of New Subsidies Alleged During the POREnd Supplemental Information
[FR Doc. 00-6088 Filed 3-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P