[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 22, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25623-25627]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12871]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[C-533-063]


Certain Iron Metal Castings From India: Preliminary Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an 
administrative review of the countervailing duty order on certain iron 
metal castings from India. We preliminarily determine the net subsidy 
to be zero or de minimis for Delta Enterprises and Super Iron Foundry, 
and 5.45 percent ad valorem for all other companies for the period 
January 1, 1993 through December 31, 1993. If the final results remain 
the same as these preliminary results of administrative review, we will 
instruct the U.S. Customs Service to assess countervailing duties as 
indicated above. Interested parties are invited to comment on these 
preliminary results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 22, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Cassel 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 October 16, 1980, the Department published in the Federal 
Register (45 FR 50739) the countervailing duty order on certain iron-
metal castings from India. On October 7, 1994, the Department published 
a notice of ``Opportunity to Request an Administrative Review'' (59 FR 
51166) of this countervailing duty order. We received a timely request 
for review from the Municipal Castings Fair Trade Council and 
individually-named members on October 24, 1994.
    We initiated the review, covering the period January 1, 1993 
through December 31, 1993, on November 14, 1994 (59 FR 56549). The 
review covers 14 manufacturers/exporters of the subject merchandise and 
six programs.

Applicable Statute and Regulations

    The Department is conducting this administrative review in 
accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(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

    Imports covered by the review are shipments of Indian manhole 
covers and frames, clean-out covers and frames, and catch basin grates 
and frames. These articles are commonly called municipal or public 
works castings and are used for access or drainage for public utility, 
water, and sanitary systems. During the review period, such merchandise 
was classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item 
numbers 7325.10.0010 and 7325.10.0050. The HTS item numbers are 
provided for convenience and Customs purposes. The written description 
remains dispositive.

Verification

    As provided in section 776(b) of the Act, we verified information 
provided by the Government of India and, six producers/exporters of the 
subject merchandise. We followed standard verification procedures, 
including meeting with government and company officials, and 
examination of relevant accounting and original source documents. Our 
verification results are outlined in the public versions of the 
verification reports, which are on file in the Central Records Unit 
(Room B-099 of the Main Commerce Building).

Calculation Methodology for Assessment and Cash Deposit Purposes

    In accordance with Ceramica Regiomontana, S.A. v. United States, 
853 F. Supp. 431 (CIT 1994), 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 Indian 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 355.22(d)(3). Two companies (Delta Enterprises and Super Iron 
Foundry) had significantly different net subsidy rates during the 
review period pursuant to 19 CFR 355.22(d)(3). The rate for these 
companies was zero. These companies are treated separately for 
assessment and cash deposit purposes. All other companies are assigned 
the country-wide rate.

Analysis of Programs

I. Programs Conferring Subsidies

A. Programs Previously Determined to Confer Subsidies
    1. Pre-Shipment Export Financing. The Reserve Bank of India (RBI),

[[Page 25624]]

through commercial banks, provides pre-shipment financing, or ``packing 
credits,'' to exporters. Upon presentation of a confirmed order or 
letter of credit, exporters may receive pre-shipment loans for working 
capital purposes, i.e., for the purchase of raw materials and for 
packing, warehousing, and transporting of export merchandise. Exporters 
may also establish pre-shipment credit lines upon which they may draw 
as needed. Credit line limits are established by commercial banks, 
based upon the company's creditworthiness and past export performance. 
Companies that have pre-shipment credit lines typically pay interest on 
these loans on a quarterly basis on the outstanding balance of the 
account at the end of each period. In general, packing credits are 
granted for a period of up to 180 days.
    In prior administrative reviews of this order, the Department found 
this program to be de jure specific, and thus countervailable, because 
receipt of pre-shipment export financing was contingent upon export 
performance and the interest rates were preferential. (See e.g., Final 
Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain Iron-
Metal Castings From India, 56 FR 41658 (August 22, 1991); Final Results 
of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain Iron-Metal 
Castings From India, 56 FR 52515 (October 21, 1991 (1987 and 1988 
Indian Castings Final Results). No new information or evidence of 
changed circumstances has been submitted in this proceeding to warrant 
reconsideration of this finding. During the POR, the rate of interest 
charged on pre-shipment export loans ranged from 13.0 percent to 15.5 
percent, depending on the length and date of receipt of the loan.
    The Government of India (GOI) classifies the companies under review 
as small-scale industry companies. Therefore, as we have done in past 
relevant cases, we used the small-scale industry short-term interest 
rates published in the August 1994 Reserve Bank of India Annual Report 
1993-94 as our benchmark. This rate was 15 percent during the POR for 
all categories of advances. We compared this benchmark to the interest 
rate charged on pre-shipment loans and found that for certain loans 
granted under this program, the interest rate charged was lower than 
the benchmark. The use of this benchmark rate is consistent with prior 
reviews of this order. (See Final Results of Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review: Certain Iron-Metal Castings From India, 60 FR 
44843 (August 29, 1995) (1991 Indian Castings Final Results)).
    Eight of the fourteen respondent companies used pre-shipment export 
loans for shipments of subject castings to the United States during the 
POR. To calculate the benefit from the pre-shipment loans to these 
eight companies, we compared the actual interest paid on these loans 
with the amount of interest that would have been paid using the 
benchmark interest rate of 15 percent. If the benchmark rate exceeded 
the program rate, the difference between those amounts is the benefit. 
If a company was able to segregate pre-shipment financing applicable to 
subject merchandise exported to the United States, we divided the 
benefit derived from only those loans by total exports of subject 
merchandise to the United States. If a firm was unable to segregate 
pre-shipment financing, we divided the benefit from all pre-shipment 
loans by total exports. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the 
net subsidy from this program to be 0.13 percent ad valorem for all 
manufacturers and exporters in India of certain iron-metal castings, 
except for those firms listed below which have significantly different 
total subsidies from all programs combined. The net subsidy for those 
firms is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Rate   
                   Manufacturer/Exporter                      (percent) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta Enterprises..........................................         0.00
Super Iron Foundry.........................................         0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Post-Shipment Export Financing and Post-Shipment Credit 
Denominated in Foreign Currency (PSCFC). The Reserve Bank of India, 
through commercial banks, provides post-shipment rupee denominated 
loans to exporters upon presentation of export documents. Post-shipment 
financing also consists of bank discounting of foreign customer 
receivables. In general, post-shipment loans are granted for a period 
of up to 180 days. The interest rate for post-shipment financing ranged 
from 13 to 18 percent during the POR. In the 1987 and 1988 Indian 
Castings Final Results, the Department found this program to be 
specific, and thus countervailable, because receipt of the post-
shipment export financing in rupees was contingent upon export 
performance and the interest rates were preferential. No new 
information or evidence of changed circumstances has been submitted in 
this proceeding to warrant reconsideration of this finding.
    On January 1, 1992, the GOI amended the original post-shipment 
financing scheme and introduced the ``Scheme for Post-Shipment Credit 
Denominated in Foreign Currency (PSCFC).'' Under the amended scheme, 
exporters may discount foreign currency export bills at interest rates 
linked to the London Interbank Offering Rate (LIBOR). These loans are 
not provided to the borrower in the foreign currency, but allow the 
post-shipment credit liability of the exporter to be denominated in 
foreign currency, which is then liquidated with foreign currency export 
proceeds.
    Upon presentation of the export bill, the bank will discount the 
bill for a period of up to 180 days at an interest rate determined by 
the RBI. The interest amount, calculated at the applicable foreign 
currency interest rate, will be deducted from the total amount of the 
bill, and the exporter's account will be credited for the rupee 
equivalent of the net foreign currency amount. Commercial banks are 
required to convert the net amount of the export bill drawn or 
expressed in U.S. dollars into rupees at a contracted exchange rate (if 
the exporter takes forward cover) or at the rate prevailing on the date 
of negotiation or discount by the bank. The exporter's credit liability 
will continue to be shown in U.S. dollars. If payment from the overseas 
customer is received within the due date for the loan, the exporter's 
account is considered fully liquidated or ``crystallized''. Where 
payment by the overseas customer is made beyond the due date, 
additional interest will be recovered from the exporter for the number 
of days payment is overdue. The additional interest amount is 
calculated in U.S. dollars for the delayed period at the overdue 
foreign currency interest rate set by the RBI. This amount is then 
converted into rupees at the commercial bank's prevailing selling rate 
of the U.S. dollar and deducted from the exporter's account.
    Any exchange rate risk on the dollar amount of the bill (i.e., gain 
or loss due to the change in value of the rupee vis-a-vis the dollar) 
will be borne by the commercial bank. If the overseas customer 
defaults, the exporter must repay the rupee equivalent of the export 
bill at the exchange rate prevailing on the date the payment of the 
export bill would have been due. During the POR, the discount rate 
charged on these bills ranged from 6.5 percent to 6.75 percent, while 
the overdue foreign currency interest rate was 8.5 percent. For overdue 
bills repaid beyond 180 days, the normal rupee interest rates apply. 
These rates ranged from 15 to 22 percent during the POR.
    For reasons stated in the prior section for pre-shipment financing 
above, we are using the small-scale industry short-term interest rates 
published in the

[[Page 25625]]

August 1994 Reserve Bank of India Annual Report 1993-94 as our 
benchmark for short-term rupee denominated post-shipment loans. 
However, because loans under this program are discounted, and the 
effective rate paid by exporters on these loans is a discounted rate, 
we derived a benchmark discount rate of 13.04 percent for the POR.
    Where loans are denominated in foreign currency, as is the case for 
PSCFC loans, our normal practice is to use a foreign currency 
benchmark, which would be the interest rate on alternative dollar-
indexed loans in India. However, we have not been able to find such a 
benchmark, and must, therefore, use as a benchmark a rupee-denominated 
interest rate, adjusted to take into account movements in the rupee-
dollar exchange rate over the term of the loan. In this situation, our 
preference would be to adjust the benchmark by the ``expected'' 
movement in the rupee/dollar exchange rate by comparing the spot rate 
on the day the bill was discounted with the forward exchange rate. 
Because we were unable to find forward exchange rates for the POR, we 
adjusted the benchmark used for rupee denominated post-shipment loans 
described above, by the actual movement in the rupee/dollar exchange 
rate over the period for which the export bill was discounted. 
Therefore, the adjusted benchmark varied for each PSCFC loan.
    During the POR, 11 of the 14 respondent companies made payments on 
post-shipment export or PSCFC loans for shipments of subject castings 
to the United States. To calculate the benefit from these loans we 
followed the same short-term loan methodology discussed above for pre-
shipment financing. We divided the benefit by either total exports or 
exports of the subject merchandise to the United States, depending on 
whether the company was able to segregate the post-shipment financing 
on the basis of destination of the exported good. On this basis, we 
preliminarily determine the net subsidy from this program to be 1.25 
percent ad valorem for all manufacturers and exporters in India of 
certain iron-metal castings, except for those firms listed below which 
have significantly different total subsidies from all programs 
combined. The net subsidy for those firms is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Rate   
                   Manufacturer/Exporter                      (percent) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta Enterprises..........................................         0.00
Super Iron Foundry.........................................         0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Income Tax Deductions Under Section 80HHC. Under section 80HHC 
of the Income Tax Act, the GOI allows exporters to deduct profits 
derived from the export of goods and merchandise from taxable income. 
In the 1987 and 1988 Indian Castings Final Results, the Department 
found this program to de jure specific, and thus countervailable, 
because receipt of benefits was contingent upon export performance. No 
new information or evidence of changed circumstances has been submitted 
in this proceeeding to warrant reconsideration of this finding.
    To calculate the benefit to each company, we subtracted the total 
amount of income tax the company actually paid during the review period 
from the amount of tax the company would have paid during the review 
period had it not claimed any deductions under section 80HHC. We then 
divided this difference by the value of the company's total exports. On 
this basis, we preliminarily determine the net subsidy from this 
program to be 3.64 percent for all manufacturers and exporters in India 
of certain iron-metal castings, except for those firms listed below 
which have significantly different total subsidies from all programs 
combined. The net subsidy for those firms is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Rate   
                   Manufacturer/Exporter                      (percent) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta Enterprises..........................................         0.00
Super Iron Foundry.........................................         0.04
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. Import Mechanisms. The GOI allows companies to transfer certain 
types of import licenses to other companies in India. During the POR, 
producers/exporters of subject castings sold Additional Licenses, 
Replenishment Licenses, and Special Import Licenses. In prior 
administrative reviews of this order, we determined that the sale of 
these licenses by exporters is countervailable. See the 1987 and 1988 
Indian Castings Final Results and the 1991 Indian Castings Final 
Results. No new information or evidence of changed circumstances has 
been submitted in this proceeding to warrant reconsideration of this 
finding.
    Because the sale of Special Import Licenses and Additional Licenses 
could not be tied to specific shipments, we calculated the subsidies by 
dividing the total amount of proceeds a company received from sales of 
these licenses by the total value of its exports of all products to all 
markets. Also, because sales of Replenishment Licenses can be tied to 
specific exports, we calculated the subsidies by dividing the amount of 
proceeds a company received from sales of Replenishment Licenses that 
was attributable to shipments of subject castings to the United States 
by the total value of the company's exports of subject castings to the 
United States. We do not consider the sale of Replenishment Licenses 
issued for non-subject merchandise to have benefitted exports of the 
subject merchandise.
    We preliminarily determine the net subsidy from the sale of 
Additional, Special Import, and Replenishment Licenses to be 0.04 
percent ad valorem for all manufacturers and exporters in India of 
certain iron-metal castings, except for those firms listed below which 
have significantly different aggregate benefits. The net subsidies for 
those firms are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Rate   
                   Manufacturer/Exporter                      (percent) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta Enterprises..........................................         0.00
Super Iron Foundry.........................................         0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. New Programs Preliminarily Found to Confer Subsidies
    1. Exemption of Export Credit from Interest Taxes. At verification, 
the GOI and commercial bank officials explained that starting from 
September, 1991, commercial banks were required to pay a 3 percent tax 
on all interest accrued from borrowers. This tax is passed on to 
borrowers in its entirety. As of April 1, 1993, the GOI exempted from 
the interest tax all interest accruing or arising to any commercial 
bank on loans and advances made to any exporter as export credit. See 
the 1993 GOI Verification Report at 6-7 and Exhibits EEPC-8, 9, 10 and 
11 (October 30, 1995) (Public Document). Because only interest accruing 
or arising on loans and advances made to exporters in the form of 
export credit is exempt from the interest tax, we preliminarily 
determine this exemption to provide countervailable benefits to 
exporters. During the POR, eleven of the fourteen respondent companies 
made interest payments on export related loans, through the pre- and 
post-shipment financing schemes.
    To calculate the benefit to each company, we first determined the 
total amount of interest paid by each producer/exporter of subject 
castings from April 1 to December 31, 1993, by adding all interest 
payments made on pre- and post-shipment loans after April 1, 1993. For 
the two companies that reported aggregate interest on pre- and post-
shipment loans for the POR, and for which we were unable to determine 
what portion of the reported interest was paid after April 1, 1993, we

[[Page 25626]]

assumed that the company's interest payments were evenly distributed 
over each quarter of 1993, and, therefore, that 75 percent of the 
interest reported was paid in the last three quarters of 1993, i.e., 
from April 1 through December 31. Next, we multiplied this amount by 
three percent, the amount of tax that the interest would have been 
subject to without the exemption. We then divided the benefit by the 
value of the company's total exports or exports of subject merchandise 
to the United States, depending on whether the export financing was on 
total exports or only exports of subject castings to the U.S. On this 
basis, we preliminarily determine the net subsidy from this program to 
be 0.06 percent ad valorem for all manufacturers and exporters in India 
of certain iron-metal casting, except for those firms listed below 
which have significantly different total subsidies from all programs 
combined. The net subsidy for those firms is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Rate   
                   Manufacturer/Exporter                      (percent) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta Enterprises..........................................         0.00
Super Iron Foundry.........................................         0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. Imports Made Under an Advance License through the Liberalized 
Exchange Rate Management System (LERMS). The Liberalized Exchange Rate 
Management System or LERMS, in effect from March 1, 1992 through 
February 28, 1993, was part of the GOI's economic liberalization 
efforts, aimed in part at achieving full convertibility of the rupee. 
Under the LERMS, the importation of goods under the Duty Exemption 
Scheme (with Advance Licences), was financed at two rates: 40 percent 
at the official RBI rate and 60 percent at the (higher) market 
determined rate. We verified that the LERMS was terminated effective 
February 28, 1993, after which all foreign exchange earnings and the 
financing of all imports was at the full market exchange rate. (See 
section II.1. below for a discussion of foreign exchange earnings under 
the LERMS).
    While the LERMS was in effect, purchases of most imports are made 
at the market exchange rate. This applied to both exporters and non-
exporters. An exception to this were goods imported under the Duty 
Exemption Scheme which permitted exporters holding an Advance License 
to purchase imports at dual exchange rates through February 28, 1993. 
Sixty percent of the value of the import was charged at the market rate 
and forty percent at the Reserve Bank determined official dollar/rupee 
exchange rate. The Advance License was the only license under which 
imports were charged at the 60/40 ratio. These licenses allow exporters 
to import products duty free, that are subsequently consumed in the 
production of exported goods. Castings exporters used Advance Licenses 
by the importation of pig iron consumed in the production of the 
subject merchandise.
    The receipt of these licenses was previously determined to be not 
countervailable, because the Advance License operates as duty drawback 
scheme, and the drawback of import duties on raw materials consumed in 
the production of exported goods was found to be not excessive. See the 
1991 Indian Castings Final Results. However, Advance Licenses are 
issued to companies based on their status as exporters. As such, 
provisions under the LERMS which allow exporters to import goods at 
exchange rates more favorable than those available to non-exporters 
constitutes an export subsidy within the meaning of Sec. 355.43(a)(1) 
of the Department's Proposed Regulations. Therefore, because the 
official rupee/dollar exchange rate was lower than the market rate 
during the POR, thereby lowering the cost of goods imported under an 
Advance License during January and February of 1993, we preliminarily 
determine the importation of goods under an Advance License at the 60/
40 ratio to provide countervailable benefits to producers/exporters of 
the subject merchandise.
    During the POR, three of the fourteen respondent companies made 
imports against an Advance License while the LERMS was still in effect. 
To calculate the benefit to each company, we subtracted the total 
amount the company paid in rupees for the imported goods from the 
amount they would have paid if the imports had been paid for at the 
higher market exchange rate. We then divided the benefit by the value 
of the company's total exports. On this basis, we preliminarily 
determine the net subsidy from this program to be 0.33 percent ad 
valorem for all manufacturers and exporters in India of certain iron-
metal castings, except for those firms listed below which have 
significantly different total subsidies from all programs combined. The 
net subsidy for those firms is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Rate   
                   Manufacturer/Exporter                      (percent) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta Enterprises..........................................         0.00
Super Iron Foundry.........................................         0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because we verified that this program was terminated as of February 
28, 1993, and there are no residual benefits, for cash deposit 
purposes, in accordance with section Sec. 355.50 of the Department's 
Proposed Regulations, the deposit rate for this program will be zero.

II. Programs Preliminarily Found Not to Confer Subsidies

    1. Inward Exchange Remittances under the Liberalized Exchange Rate 
Management System (LERMS). The Liberalized Exchange Rate Management 
System or LERMS, in effect from March 1, 1992 through February 28, 
1993, was part of the GOI's economic liberalization efforts, partly 
aimed at achieving full convertibility of the rupee. Under the LERMS, 
all inward exchange remittances, i.e., foreign exchange earnings, were 
converted into rupees either at the market exchange rate or at dual 
exchange rates: 40 percent at the official RBI rate and 60 percent at 
the (higher) market determined rate. We verified that the LERMS was 
terminated effective February 28, 1993, after which all foreign 
exchange remittances and the financing of all imports was at the full 
market exchange rate. (For a discussion of import financing under the 
LERMS, see I.B.2. above.) During January and February of 1993, while 
the LERMS was in effect, castings exporters converted all of their 
export earnings at the 60/40 exchange rate ratio described above.
    Because all transactions by which Indian companies or individuals 
exchanged foreign currency into rupees while the LERMS was in effect 
were converted at the 60/40 exchange rate ratio or at the higher market 
exchange rate, we preliminarily determine that the export earnings of 
castings producers, converted at the dual exchange rates under LERMS, 
do not confer countervailable benefits with respect to the subject 
merchandise.

III. Programs Preliminarily Found Not To Be Used

    We examined the following programs and preliminarily find that the 
producers/exporters of the subject merchandise did not apply for or 
receive benefits under these programs during the period of review:

1. Market Development Assistance (MDA)
2. Rediscounting of Export Bills Abroad
3. International Price Reimbursement Scheme (IPRS)
4. Cash Compensatory Support Program (CCS)
5. Pre-Shipment Financing in Foreign Currency (PSFC)

[[Page 25627]]

Preliminary Results of Review

    For the period January 1, 1993 through December 31, 1993, we 
preliminarily determine the net subsidy to be zero or de minimis for 
Delta Enterprises and Super Iron Foundry, and 5.45 percent ad valorem 
for all other companies. In accordance with 19 CFR 355.7, any rate less 
than 0.5 percent ad valorem is de minimis.
    If the final results of this review remain the same as these 
preliminary results, the Department intends to instruct the U.S. 
Customs Service to assess the following countervailing duties:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Rate   
                   Manufacturer/Exporter                      (percent) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delta Enterprises..........................................         0.00
Super Iron Foundry.........................................         0.00
All Other Companies........................................         5.45
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department also intends to 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 Delta Enterprises and Super Iron Foundry, and 5.13 
percent of the f.o.b. invoice price on all shipments of the subject 
merchandise from all other companies.

Public Comment

    Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure of the calculation 
methodology and interested parties may request a hearing not later than 
10 days after the date of publication of this notice. Interested 
parties may submit written arguments in case briefs on these 
preliminary results within 30 days of the date of publication. Rebuttal 
briefs, limited to arguments raised in case briefs, may be submitted 
seven days after the time limit for filing the case brief. Parties who 
submit argument in this proceeding are requested to submit with the 
argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary of the 
argument. Any hearing, if requested, will be held seven days after the 
scheduled date for submission of rebuttal briefs. Copies of case briefs 
and rebuttal briefs must be served on interested parties in accordance 
with 19 CFR 355.38(e).
    Representatives of parties to the proceeding may request disclosure 
of proprietary information under administrative protective order no 
later than 10 days after the representative's client or employer 
becomes a party to the proceeding, but in no event later than the date 
the case briefs, under 19 CFR Sec. 355.38(c), are due. The Department 
will publish the final results of this administrative review including 
the results of its analysis of issues raised in any case or rebuttal 
brief or at a hearing.
    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 
Sec. 355.22.

    Dated: May 14, 1996.
Paul L. Joffe,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-12871 Filed 5-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P