[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 194 (Friday, October 6, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52380-52381]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-24932]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[C-357-404]
Certain Apparel From Argentina; Final Results of Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of final results of countervailing duty administrative
review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On August 16, 1995, the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published in the Federal Register its preliminary results
of administrative review of the countervailing duty order on certain
apparel from Argentina for the period January 1, 1991 through December
31, 1991. We have completed this review and determine the net subsidy
to be zero for Agrest, S.A. (Agrest), Comercio Internacional, S.A.
(Comercio), IVA, S.A. (IVA), and Leger, S.A. (Leger), 15.87 percent ad
valorem for Pulloverfin, S.A. (Pulloverfin) and 0.76 percent ad valorem
for all other companies. We will instruct the U.S. Customs Service to
assess countervailing duties as indicated above.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 6, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy Kornfeld or Lorenza Olivas,
Office of Countervailing Compliance, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-2786.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 16, 1995, the Department published in the Federal
Register (60 FR 42530) the preliminary results of its administrative
review of the countervailing duty order on certain apparel from
Argentina. The Department has now completed this administrative review
in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act). We invited interested parties to comment on the preliminary
results. We received no comments. The review covers the period January
1, 1991 through December 31, 1991. The review involves 5 companies and
10 programs.
Applicable Statute and Regulations
The Department is conducting this administrative review in
accordance with section 751(a) of the Act. Unless otherwise indicated,
all citations to the statute and to the Department's regulations are in
reference to the provisions as they existed on December 31, 1994.
However, references to the Department's Countervailing Duties; Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking and Request for Public Comments, 54 FR 23366
(May 31, 1989) (Proposed Regulations), are provided solely for further
explanation of the Department's countervailing duty practice. Although
the Department has withdrawn the particular rulemaking proceeding
pursuant to which the Proposed Regulations were issued, the subject
matter of these regulations is being considered in connection with an
ongoing rulemaking proceeding which, among other things, is intended to
conform the Department's regulations to the Uruguay Round Agreements
Act. See 60 FR 80 (Jan. 3, 1995).
Scope of the Review
The subject merchandise is certain apparel from Argentina. During
the review period, this merchandise was classifiable under the
following HTS numbers, which are based on the amended conversion of the
scopes of the countervailing duty order. See Certain Textile Mill
Products From Mexico, Certain Apparel From Argentina, and Certain
Apparel From Thailand (58 FR 4151; January 13, 1993).
6104.41.00, 6104.43.10, 6104.44.10, 6104.51.00, 6104.53.10, 6104.61.00,
6104.63.15, 6105.10.00, 6105.20.20, 6106.10.00, 6106.20.10, 6106.90.10,
6109.90.20, 6110.10.20, 6110.20.20, 6111.10.00, 6112.41.00, 6112.49.00,
6115.20.00, 6115.91.00, 6115.93.10, 6115.99.14, 6116.91.00, 6116.93.15,
6201.12.20, 6202.11.00, 6202.13.30, 6202.91.10, 6202.91.20, 6202.92.20,
6202.93.40, 6203.22.30, 6203.42.40, 6204.11.00, 6204.13.10, 6204.19.10,
6204.21.00, 6204.31.20, 6204.33.40, 6204.39.20, 6204.41.20, 6204.42.30,
6204.43.30, 6204.44.30, 6204.51.00, 6204.53.20, 6204.59.20, 6204.61.00,
6204.63.25, 6204.69.20, 6205.10.20, 6206.20.30, 6206.40.25, 6209.10.00,
6209.20.10, 6209.20.50, 6209.90.30, 6211.12.30, 6211.41.00, 6214.30.00,
6214.40.00.
Best Information Available (BIA) for Pulloverfin
Section 776(c) of the Act requires the Department to use BIA
``whenever a party or any other person refuses or is unable to produce
information requested in a timely manner and in the form required, or
otherwise significantly impedes an investigation.''
In determining what rate to use as BIA, the Department follows a
two-tiered methodology. The Department normally assigns lower BIA rates
for those respondents who cooperated in an
[[Page 52381]]
administrative review (tier two) and rates based on more adverse
assumptions for respondents who do not cooperate in the review, or who
significantly impede the proceeding (tier one). Cf. Allied Signal
Aerospace Co. v. United States, 996 F. 2d 1185 (Fed. Cir. 1993), aff'd,
28 F. 3d 1188, cert. denied, 1995 U.S. lexis 100 (1995) (Allied-
Signal). See also Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative
Review: AFBs from Singapore (58 FR 47122; September 7, 1993).
In this review, Pulloverfin did not respond to the Department's two
requests for information; therefore, we are assigning Pulloverfin a
tier one rate based on BIA. The rate we are applying is 15.87 percent
ad valorem. This rate reflects the rate Pulloverfin received in the
investigation (see Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determinations
and Countervailing Orders: Certain Textile Mill Products and Apparel
from Argentina (50 FR 9846; March 12, 1985)).
Calculation Methodology for Assessment and Cash Deposit Purposes
We calculated the net subsidy on a country-wide basis by first
calculating the subsidy rate for each company subject to the
administrative review. We then weight-averaged the rate received by
each company using as the weight its share of total Argentine exports
to the United States of subject merchandise, including all companies,
even those with de minimis and zero rates. We then summed the
individual companies' weight-averaged rates to determine the subsidy
rate from all programs benefitting exports of subject merchandise to
the United States.
Since the country-wide rate calculated using this methodology was
above de minimis, as defined by 19 CFR Sec. 355.7 (1994), we proceeded
to the next step, and examined the net subsidy rate calculated for each
company to determine whether individual company rates differed
significantly from the weighted-average country-wide rate, pursuant to
19 CFR Sec. 355.22(d)(3). All companies subject to the review had
significantly different net subsidy rates during the review period
pursuant to 19 CFR Sec. 355.22(d)(3). These companies are treated
separately for assessment and cash deposit purposes. All other
companies are assigned the country-wide rate. See Ceramica Regiomontana
S.A. v. United States, 853 F Supp. 431, 439 (CIT 1994).
Analysis of Programs
Based upon our analysis of the questionnaire response we determine
the following:
I. Programs Conferring Bounties or Grants
Rebate of Indirect Taxes (Reembolso/Reintegro)
In the preliminary results we found this program to be
countervailable. However, the program conferred no benefits on the
subject merchandise during the period of review (POR). Since we
received no comments on our preliminary results, our findings remain
unchanged in these final results.
II. Programs Found Not to be Used
In the preliminary results we found that the producers and/or
exporters of the subject merchandise did not apply for or receive
benefits under the following programs during the period of review:
A. Tax Deduction Under Decree 173/85
B. Exemption from Stamp Taxes Under Decree 186/74
C. Industrial Parks
D. Low Cost Loans for Projects Outside Buenos Aires
E. Tucaman Regional Tax Incentives
F. Patagonion Regional Tax Incentives
G. Incentives for Exports from Southern Ports
H. Corrientes Regional Tax Incentive
I. Export Financing
Since we received no comments on our preliminary results, our findings
remain unchanged in these final results.
Final Results of Review
For the period January 1, 1991 through December 31, 1991, we
determine the net subsidy to be zero for Agrest, Comercio, IVA and
Leger, 15.87 percent ad valorem for Pulloverfin and 0.76 percent ad
valorem for all other companies.
The Department will instruct the U.S. Customs Service to assess the
following countervailing duties:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer/exporter Rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agrest, Comercio, IVA and Leger............................... 0.00
Pulloverfin................................................... 15.87
All other companies........................................... 0.76
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department will instruct the U.S. Customs Service to collect a
cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties of zero percent of the
F.O.B. invoice price on all shipments of the subject merchandise from
Agrest, Comercio, IVA and Leger, and to collect a cash deposit of 15.87
percent ad valorem of the F.O.B. invoice price on all shipments of the
subject merchandise from Pulloverfin and 0.76 percent ad valorem of the
F.O.B. invoice price on shipments of the subject merchandise from all
other companies entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption
on or after the date of publication of the final results of this
administrative review.
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 C.F.R. 355.34(d). 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)) and 19 CFR 355.22.
Dated: September 29, 1995.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 95-24932 Filed 10-5-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P