[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 195 (Monday, October 7, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52426-52435]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-25649]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[C-122-404]
Live Swine From Canada; 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 live swine
from Canada. For information on the net subsidy for all producers
covered by this order, see the Preliminary Results of Review section of
this notice. 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 detailed in the Preliminary
Results of Review section of this notice. Interested parties are
invited to comment on these preliminary results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 7, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Moore, Cameron Cardozo,
Brian Albright or Norma Curtis, Office of Countervailing Duty/
Antidumping Enforcement VI, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
2849 or (202) 482-2786.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 15, 1985, the Department published in the Federal
Register (50 FR 32880) the countervailing duty order on live swine from
Canada. On August 1, 1995, the Department published a notice of
``Opportunity to Request Administrative Review'' (60 FR 39150) of this
countervailing duty order. We received timely requests for review and
we initiated the review, covering the period April 1, 1994 through
March 31, 1995, on September 15, 1995 (60 FR 47930).
As explained in the notice of initiation, the Department has
determined that it is not practicable to conduct a company-specific
review of this order because a large number of producers and exporters
requested the review. Therefore, pursuant to section 777(e)(2)(B) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), we are conducting a
review of all producers and exporters of subject merchandise covered by
this order on the basis of aggregate data. This review covers 33
programs.
On May 1, 1996, we extended the period for completion of the
preliminary and final results pursuant to section 751(a)(3) of the Act
(see Live Swine from Canada; Extension of Time Limit for Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review, 61 FR 19261). As explained in the memoranda
from the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration to the File,
dated November 22, 1995, and January 11, 1996 (on file in the Central
Records Unit (CRU), Room B-099 of the Main Commerce Building), all
deadlines were further extended to take into account the partial
shutdowns of the Federal Government from November 15 through November
21, 1995, and December 15, 1995, through January 6, 1996. Therefore,
the deadline for these preliminary results is no later than September
27, 1996, and the deadline for the final results of this review is no
later than 180 days from the date on which these preliminary results
are published in the Federal Register.
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 Department is conducting this administrative review in accordance
with section 751(a) of the Act. References to the Countervailing
Duties; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Request for Public Comments,
54 FR 23366 (May 31, 1989) (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 1989 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 URAA. See Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Request for
Public Comments, 60 FR 80 (January 3, 1995); Antidumping Duties;
Countervailing Duties: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Request for
Public Comments, 61 FR 7308 (February 27, 1996).
Scope of the Review
On August 29, 1996, the Final Results of Changed Circumstances
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, and Partial Revocation were
published (61 FR 45402), in which we revoked the order, in part,
effective
[[Page 52427]]
April 1, 1991, with respect to slaughter sows and boars and weanlings
(weanlings are swine weighing up to 27 kilograms or 59.5 pounds) from
Canada, because this portion of the order was no longer of interest to
domestic interested parties. As a result, the merchandise now covered
by this order is live swine, except U.S. Department of Agriculture-
certified purebred breeding swine, slaughter sows and boars, and
weanlings, as defined above, from Canada. The merchandise subject to
the order is classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS)
item numbers 0103.91.00 and 0103.92.00. The HTS item numbers are
provided for convenience and Customs purposes. The written description
remains dispositive.
Verification
As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we verified information
submitted in the questionnaire responses. We followed standard
verification procedures, including meeting with government officials
and examination of relevant accounting and financial records and other
original source documents. Our verification results are outlined in the
public version of the Verification Report, which is on file in the CRU.
Allocation Methodology
In the past, the Department has relied upon information from the
U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on the industry-specific average
useful life of assets in determining the allocation period for
nonrecurring grant benefits. See General Issues Appendix appended to
Final Countervailing Duty Determination; Certain Steel Products from
Austria (58 FR 37063, 37226; July 9, 1993). However, in British Steel
plc. v. United States, 879 F. Supp. 1254 (CIT 1995) (British Steel),
the U.S. Court of International Trade (the Court) ruled against this
allocation methodology. In accordance with the Court's remand order,
the Department calculated a company-specific allocation period for
nonrecurring subsidies based on the average useful life (AUL) of non-
renewable physical assets. This remand determination was affirmed by
the Court on June 4, 1996. British Steel, 929 F. Supp. 426, 439 (CIT
1996).
The Department has decided to acquiesce to the Court's decision
and, as such, we intend to determine the allocation period for
nonrecurring subsidies using company-specific AUL data where reasonable
and practicable. In this proceeding, the Department preliminarily
determines that it is not reasonable and practicable to allocate
nonrecurring grants using company-specific AUL data because it is not
possible to apply a company-specific AUL in an aggregate case (such as
the case at hand). On August 23, 1996, we requested comments on what
the appropriate allocation methodology should be in an aggregate case.
On September 3, 1996, we received one response from the National Pork
Producers Council, petitioners, which urged the Department to continue
using the three-year period set out in the IRS tax tables. Accordingly,
the Department is using the original allocation period assigned to each
grant. We invite the parties to comment on the selection of this
methodology and provide any other reasonable and practicable approaches
for complying with the Court's ruling.
Calculation Methodology for Assessment and Cash Deposit Purposes
For the period of review (POR), we calculated the net subsidy on a
country-wide basis by first calculating the subsidy rate for each
province subject to the administrative review. We then weight-averaged
the rate received by each province using as the weight the province's
share of total Canadian exports to the United States of subject
merchandise. We summed the individual provinces' weight-averaged rates
to determine the subsidy rate from all programs benefitting exports of
the subject merchandise to the United States.
Analysis of Programs
I. Programs Conferring Subsidies
A. Programs Previously Determined to Confer Subsidies
1. Federal Program
Feed Freight Assistance Program
The Feed Freight Assistance Program (FFA) is administered by the
Livestock Feed Board of Canada (the Board) under the Livestock Feed
Assistance Act of 1966 (LFA). The Board acts to ensure: (1) the
availability of feed grain to meet the needs of livestock feeders; (2)
the availability of adequate storage space in Eastern Canada to meet
the needs of livestock feeders; (3) reasonable stability in the price
of feed grain in Eastern Canada to meet the needs of livestock feeders;
and (4) equalization of feed grain prices to livestock feeders in
Eastern Canada, British Columbia, the Yukon Territory and the Northwest
Territories. Although this program is clearly designed to benefit
livestock feeders, FFA payments are also made to grain mills that
transform the feed grain into livestock feed whenever these mills are
the first purchasers of this grain. The Board makes payments related to
the cost of feed grain storage in Eastern Canada, and payments related
to the cost of feed grain transportation to, or for the benefit of,
livestock feeders in Eastern Canada, British Columbia, the Yukon
Territory and the Northwest Territories, in accordance with the
regulations of the LFA.
In Live Swine from Canada; Preliminary Results of Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review (55 FR 20812; May 21, 1990) and Live Swine
from Canada; Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review
(56 FR 10410; March 12, 1991) (Swine Second and Third Review Results),
the Department found this program de jure specific and thus
countervailable because, based on the language of the LFA, benefits are
only available to a specific group of enterprises or industries
(livestock feeders and feed mills). Subsequently, a U.S.-Canada Free
Trade Agreement (FTA) binational panel (See In the Matter of Live Swine
From Canada, USA-91-1904-04 (June 11, 1993) at 33-36)) affirmed the
Department's determination in Live Swine from Canada; Preliminary
Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review (56 FR 29224)
(June 26, 1991), and Live Swine from Canada; Final Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review (56 FR 50560; October 7,
1991) (Swine Fifth Review Results), regarding the countervailability of
this program. No new information or evidence of changed circumstances
has been submitted in this proceeding to warrant reconsideration of
this finding.
To determine the FFA benefit in the POR, we used the methodology
applied in Live Swine from Canada; Preliminary Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review (58 FR 54112, 54114; October
20, 1993)), and Live Swine from Canada; Final Results of Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review (59 FR 12243; March 16, 1994)) (Swine Sixth
Review Results). We first divided the amount of feed transportation
assistance to live swine producers by the total weight of live swine
produced in the FFA-eligible areas of Canada during the POR. We then
weight-averaged the benefit by the corresponding provinces' share of
total Canadian exports of live swine to the United States. On this
basis, we preliminarily determine the benefits from this program to be
Can$0.0006 per kilogram for the POR.
[[Page 52428]]
2. Federal/Provincial Programs
National Tripartite Stabilization Scheme for Hogs
The National Tripartite Stabilization Program (NTSP) was created in
1985 by an amendment to the Agricultural Stabilization Act (ASA). This
amendment, codified at section 10.1 of the ASA, provides for the
introduction of cost-sharing tripartite or bipartite stabilization
schemes involving the producer, the federal government, and the
provinces. Pursuant to this amendment, federal and provincial ministers
signed NTSP agreements covering specific commodities.
The general terms of the NTSP for Hogs are as follows: all
participating hog producers receive the same level of support per
market-hog unit; the cost of the scheme is shared equally between the
federal government, the provincial government, and the producers;
producer participation in the scheme is voluntary; the provinces may
not offer separate stabilization plans or other ad hoc assistance for
hogs (with the exception of Quebec's FISI program); the federal
government may not offer compensation to swine producers in a province
not party to an agreement; and the scheme must operate at a level that
limits losses but does not stimulate over-production.
Stabilization payments are made when the market price falls below
the calculated support price. The difference between the support price
and the market price is the amount of the stabilization payment. Hogs
eligible for stabilization payments under NTSP must index above 80 on a
hog carcass grading scale.
In Swine Sixth Review Results (58 FR 54115), the Department
determined that NTSP was de facto specific because benefits were being
provided to a specific enterprise or industry or group thereof. No new
information or evidence of changed circumstances has been submitted in
this proceeding to warrant reconsideration of this finding.
During the POR payouts were made to producers from sales that
occurred in earlier fiscal years. (See Verification Report dated
September 23, 1996, at page 4). To calculate the benefit, we first
divided two-thirds (representing the federal and provincial portions)
of the payments made during the POR to producers in each province by
the total weight of market hogs produced in that province during the
POR, and calculated a benefit per kilogram on a province-by-province
basis. We then weight-averaged each exporting province's per-kilo
benefit by that province's share of total Canadian exports of market
hogs to the United States.
NTSP Agreement Amendment No. 3 terminated the plan as of July 2,
1994, but allowed provinces to terminate their participation in the
plan effective April 2, 1994. The plan, which terminated prior to its
originally scheduled termination date of December 31, 1995, ended with
a surplus. Under the terms of the NTSP, this surplus was to be
distributed in equal shares (33.3 percent) among the federal and
provincial governments and the producers, because each was to have
contributed one-third of the funds.
During verification, we examined the NTSP--Hogs Schedule of
Operations (Schedule of Operations) which showed the federal and
provincial governments' and the producers' contributions to the NTSP
Hog Plan for the period January 1986 through May 29, 1996. This
Schedule of Operations showed that the federal government contributed
36.6 percent and the producers and provinces contributed 31.7 percent
each, of the total tripartite contributions during this ten-year
period. Thus, the producers received a share of the surplus which is in
excess of their actual contributions to the plan.
Accordingly, the Department preliminarily determines that the
retroactive surplus payments constitute a benefit conferred under NTSP
in the form of a grant to producers in the amount of the difference
between what the producers actually are receiving, 33.3 percent of the
surplus, and what they should have received, 31.7 percent of the
surplus (the percentage producers actually contributed to NTSP). During
the POR, producers received NTSP surplus payments in the following
provinces which exported live swine: New Brunswick, Ontario, Manitoba,
British Columbia, and Saskatchewan.
To calculate the subsidy, we subtracted the amount that the
producer should have received (31.7 percent) from the amount that they
actually received (33.3 percent). The difference is the amount of the
grant. The Department's policy with respect to grants is (1) to expense
recurring grants in the year of receipt, or (2) to allocate non-
recurring grants over the average useful life of assets in the
industry, unless the sum of grants provided under a particular program
is less than 0.50 percent of a firm's total or export sales (depending
on whether the program is a domestic or export subsidy) in the year in
which the grants were received. (See section 355.49(a) of the 1989
Proposed Regulations and the General Issues Appendix, at 37226). In
determining whether a grant is recurring or non-recurring, we apply a
test set out in the General Issues Appendix at 37226. We consider
grants to be non-recurring if the benefits are exceptional, the
recipient cannot expect to receive benefits on an ongoing basis from
POR to POR, and the provision of funds by the government must be
approved every year. In this case, while it is possible that some
producers may receive additional residual benefits during a subsequent
review period, these benefits would be exceptional rather than on an
ongoing basis. Therefore, the Department preliminarily determines that
this grant is non-recurring because the benefit is exceptional, and the
recipient cannot expect to receive benefits on an ongoing basis.
However, because the amount received by live swine producers is
less than 0.50 percent of the value of total live swine sales, we are
allocating the benefit to the year of receipt. Therefore, we divided
the benefit received by each province by the total weight of market
hogs produced in that province. We used only the weight of market hogs
because only market hogs were eligible to receive NTSP payments. We
then weight-averaged the benefits by these provinces' share of total
Canadian exports of market hogs to the United States during the POR. We
then summed the benefit calculated for the residual payments and for
the retroactive surplus. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the
total benefit for the NTSP program to be Can$0.0172 per kilogram.
While the termination of the NTSP for Hogs constitutes a program-
wide change, residual benefits may continue to be bestowed under this
terminated program. For this reason, the cash deposit rate will not be
adjusted as a result of the termination of this program. (19 CFR
355.50(1)(d) of the 1989 Proposed Regulations).
3. Provincial Income Stabilization Programs
a. British Columbia Farm Income Insurance Program (FIIP)
The FIIP was established in 1979 in accordance with the Farm Income
Insurance Act of 1973 (Farm Act) in order to assure income to farmers
when commodity market prices fluctuate below the basic costs of
production. Schedule B of the Farm Act lists the guidelines for the
individual commodities receiving benefits; Schedule B section 4 is the
guideline for swine producers.
The program is administered by the provincial Ministry of
Agriculture and Food and the British Columbia
[[Page 52429]]
Federation of Agriculture and is funded equally by producers and the
provincial government. Premiums are paid in all quarters regardless of
market returns.
In Swine Second and Third Review Results (55 FR 20814), the
Department found this program to be countervailable because the program
is limited to producers of commodities listed in Schedule B, a specific
group of enterprises or industries. No new information or evidence of
changed circumstances has been submitted in these proceedings to
warrant reconsideration of this finding.
Since the government of British Columbia funds one-half of this
program, we calculated the benefit for the POR by dividing one-half of
the total stabilization payments by the total weight of live swine
produced in British Columbia. We then weight-averaged the result by
British Columbia's share of total exports of live swine to the United
States. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the benefit from this
program to be less than Can$0.0001 per kilogram for the POR.
The FIIP was terminated effective July 2, 1994 to correspond with
the termination of the NTSP for hogs. The last date for which a
producer could claim benefits was June 30, 1994, and the last date by
which payments could be received was December 31, 1994. Therefore, we
consider this program terminated with no residual benefits and will not
examine this program in the future. The termination of FIIP constitutes
a program-wide change; and because there are no residual benefits, the
cash deposit rate will be adjusted to zero for this program. (See 19
CFR 355.50(1)(d) of the 1989 Proposed Regulations).
b. Saskatchewan Hog Assured Returns Program (SHARP)
SHARP was established in 1976, pursuant to the Saskatchewan
Agricultural Returns Stabilization Act which authorized provincial
governments to establish stabilization plans for any agricultural
commodity. SHARP provided income stabilization payments to hog
producers in Saskatchewan when market prices fell below a designated
``floor price,'' calculated quarterly. The program was administered by
the Saskatchewan Pork Producers' Marketing Board (the Board) on behalf
of the Saskatchewan Department of Agriculture. The program was funded
by levies from participating producers on the sale of hogs covered by
the program; they ranged from 1.5 to 4.5 percent of market returns and
were matched by the provincial government. When the balance in the
SHARP account was insufficient to cover payments to producers, the
provincial government provided financing on commercial terms. The
principal and interest on these loans was to be repaid by the Board
from the producer and provincial contributions. After the NTSP for Hogs
was implemented on July 1, 1986, SHARP payments were reduced by the
amount of the NTSP payments.
In Swine First Review Results (53 FR 22192, 22193), the Department
found the SHARP program to be de jure specific, and thus
countervailable, because the legislation expressly made the program
available only to a single industry (hog producers). No new information
or evidence of changed circumstances was submitted to warrant
reconsideration of these findings.
In accordance with the NTSP agreement, SHARP was terminated on
March 31, 1991. At the time of termination, the SHARP fund had a
sizeable deficit because of the cumulation over the operating years of
loans from the provincial government. During the 1993-94 POR, the
government canceled the outstanding SHARP deficit. To calculate the
benefit from the loan forgiveness, we treated one-half of the amount
written off, plus interest accrued during the 1993-94 POR, as a grant
in accordance with section 355.49(b)(1) of the 1989 Proposed
Regulations. We took into account only half of the amount because this
was the share of the outstanding loans that the producers were
responsible for repaying.
In Live Swine from Canada; Notice of Preliminary Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews; Initiation and Preliminary
Results of Changed Circumstances Review and Intent to Revoke Order in
Part (61 FR 26879; May 29, 1996) and Live Swine from Canada; Final
Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, which is being
published concurrently with this notice (Swine Seventh, Eighth, and
Ninth), the Department determined that the write-off of the SHARP
deficit is a non-recurring grant because debt forgiveness is
exceptional, and it is a one-time event. On this basis, we allocated
the benefit from this grant over three years, which is the average
useful life of depreciable assets used in the swine industry, as set
out in the U.S. Internal Revenue Service Class Life Asset Depreciation
Range System. We used, as a discount rate, the simple average of the
monthly medium-term corporate bond rates (for the ninth POR, during
which the write-off occurred) from the Bank of Canada Review (1993-
1994), published by the Bank of Canada.
To calculate the benefit for the POR, we divided the benefit
allocated to the POR under the grant allocation method by the total
weight of market hogs produced in Saskatchewan during the POR to obtain
the average benefit per kilogram. We then weight-averaged the per-
kilogram benefit by Saskatchewan's share of total Canadian exports of
market hogs to the United States during the POR. On this basis, we
preliminarily determine the benefit to be Can$0.0028 per kilogram for
the POR. While the termination of the SHARP constitutes a program-wide
change, benefits from this terminated program will continue. For this
reason, the cash deposit rate will not be adjusted as a result of the
termination of this program. (19 CFR 355.50(1)(d) of the 1989 Proposed
Regulations).
4. Other Provincial Programs
a. Alberta Crow Benefit Offset Program (ACBOP)
This program, administered by the Alberta Department of
Agriculture, is designed to compensate producers and users of feed
grain for market distortions in feed grain prices, created by the
federal government's policy on grain transportation. Assistance is
provided for feed grain produced in Alberta, feed grain produced
outside Alberta but sold in Alberta, and feed grain produced in Alberta
to be fed to livestock on the same farm. The government provides ``A''
certificates to registered feed grain users and ``B'' certificates to
registered feed grain merchants to use as partial payments for grain
purchased from grain producers. Feed grain producers who feed their
grain to their own livestock submit a Farm Fed Claim directly to the
government for payment.
Hog producers receive benefits in one of three ways: hog producers
who do not grow any of their own feed grain receive ``A'' certificates
which are used to cover part of the cost of purchasing grain; hog
producers who grow all of their own grain submit a Farm Fed Claim to
the government of Alberta for direct payment; and hog producers who
grow part of their own grain but also purchase grain receive both ``A''
certificates and direct payments.
In Swine Second and Third Review Results (56 FR 10412), the
Department found this program to be de jure specific, and thus
countervailable, because the legislation expressly makes it available
only to a specific group of enterprises or industries (producers and
users of feed grain). No new information or evidence of changed
circumstances has been submitted in this proceeding to warrant
reconsideration of this finding.
[[Page 52430]]
To determine the benefit to swine producers from this program, we
followed the methodology used in Swine Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Review
Results. Using the Alberta Supply and Disposition Tables, we first
estimated the quantity of grain consumed by livestock in Alberta during
the POR. Then, we multiplied the number of swine produced in Alberta
during the POR by the estimated average grain consumption per hog, and
divided the result by the amount of total grains used to feed livestock
during the POR. We thus calculated the percentage of total livestock
consumption of all grains in Alberta attributable to live swine during
the POR. We then multiplied this percentage by the total value of ``A''
certificates and farm-fed claim payments received by producers during
the POR. We divided this amount by the total weight of live swine
produced in Alberta during the POR. We then weight-averaged this per-
kilo benefit by Alberta's share of total Canadian exports of live swine
to the United States. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the
benefit to be Can$0.0009 per kilogram for the POR.
ACBOP was terminated on March 31, 1994. Benefits for ``A''
certificates had to be claimed by June 30, 1994, and benefits tied to
farm-fed grains had to be claimed by August 31, 1994. Most claims have
been paid, but there are some claims still outstanding. (See
Verification Report at page 41). While the termination of the ACBOP
program constitutes a program-wide change, residual benefits will
continue to be bestowed under this program. For this reason, the cash
deposit rate will not be adjusted as a result of the termination of
this program. (19 CFR 355.50(1)(d) of the 1989 Proposed Regulations).
b. Ontario Livestock and Poultry and Honeybee Compensation Program
This program, administered by the Farm Assistance Programs Branch
of the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs,
provides assistance in the form of grants which compensate producers
for livestock and poultry injured or killed by wolves, coyotes, or
dogs. Swine producers apply for and receive compensation through the
local municipal government. The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food,
and Rural Affairs reimburses the municipality.
In Swine Fifth Review Results (56 FR 29227), the Department found
this program to be de jure specific, and thus countervailable, because
the legislation expressly makes it available only to a specific group
of enterprises or industries (livestock and poultry farmers). No new
information or evidence of changed circumstances has been submitted in
this proceeding to warrant reconsideration of this finding.
To calculate the benefit, we used the methodology applied in Swine
Sixth Review Results (58 FR 54119) and subsequent reviews. We divided
the total payment to hog producers during the POR by the total weight
of live swine produced in Ontario. We then weight-averaged the result
by Ontario's share of Canadian exports of live swine to the United
States during the POR. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the
benefit from this program to be less than Can$0.0001 per kilogram for
the POR.
c. Ontario Bear Damage to Livestock Compensation Program
This program, administered by the Farm Assistance Programs Branch
of the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs,
provides compensation for the destruction of, or injury to, certain
types of livestock by bears. Swine producers apply for compensation
through their local Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural
Affairs office. Local personnel then evaluate the damage and prepare a
report. Based on this report and the farmer's application, the
Livestock Commissioner may pay a grant to compensate for the amount of
damage. Grants for damage to live swine cannot exceed Can$200 per head.
On January 14, 1991, during the fifth administrative review,
petitioners submitted allegations of new programs, including the Bear
Damage to Livestock Compensation Program, that may have provided
countervailable benefits with respect to the production of live swine.
However, in Swine Fifth Review Results, and subsequent reviews, the
Department found this program not used. During the instant review, this
program was used by producers of live swine. We preliminarily determine
that this program is de jure specific, and thus countervailable,
because the legislation expressly makes it available only to livestock
producers, a specific group of enterprises or industries (cattle,
goats, horses, sheep, swine, and poultry).
To calculate the benefit, we divided the total payment to hog
producers during the POR by the total weight of live swine produced in
Ontario. We then weight-averaged the result by Ontario's share of
Canadian exports of live swine to the United States during the POR. On
this basis, we preliminarily determine the benefit from this program to
be less than Can$0.0001 per kilogram for the POR.
d. Ontario Export Sales Aid Program
The Ontario Export Sales Aid Program was established in 1987 to
assist producers and processors of Ontario agricultural and food
products to develop their export markets. This program is administered
by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs which
reimburses producers or processors for the costs they incur in
developing their export marketing materials. Grants are made on a per-
project basis, limited to two projects per producer or company, per
fiscal year. The Ministry provides reimbursements for up to 50 percent
of the project costs, with a maximum dollar amount. Producers submit a
completed application form outlining the objectives of the market
development plan, anticipated costs, and forecasted benefits to a
review committee for approval. Upon approval, the producer or company
receives the grant and initiates the project.
In Swine Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Review Results, the Department
determined this program to be a countervailable subsidy because receipt
of benefits is contingent upon actual or anticipated exportation. The
Department has also determined that these are non-recurring grants
because the recipient cannot expect to receive benefits on an ongoing
basis from review period to review period. In this review, because the
amount received by live swine producers is less than 0.50 percent of
the value of live swine exports from this province, we are allocating
the benefit to the year of receipt.
To calculate the benefit received during the POR, we divided the
total grant amount by the total weight of exports of live swine from
Ontario during the POR. We then weight-averaged the result by Ontario's
share of total exports of live swine to the United States during the
POR. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the benefit from this
program to be Can$0.0001 per kilogram.
e. Saskatchewan Livestock Investment Tax Credit
Saskatchewan's 1984 Livestock Tax Credit Act provides tax credits
to individuals, partnerships, cooperatives, and corporations who owned
and fed livestock marketed or slaughtered by December 31, 1989.
Claimants had to be residents of Saskatchewan and pay Saskatchewan
income taxes. Eligible claimants received credits of Can$3 for each
hog. Although this program was terminated on December 31, 1989, tax
credits are carried forward for up to
[[Page 52431]]
seven years. In Swine First Review Results (53 FR 22198), the
Department found this program to be de jure specific, and thus
countervailable, because the program's legislation expressly made it
available only to livestock producers. No new information or evidence
of changed circumstances has been submitted in this proceeding to
warrant reconsideration of this finding.
To calculate the benefit for the POR, we used the methodology
applied in Swine Sixth Review Results (58 FR 54120) and subsequent
reviews. In the questionnaire responses, the GOC provided estimates of
the amount of tax credits used by hog producers in Saskatchewan during
the POR, since the actual amounts cannot be determined. At
verification, we reviewed the methodology used to calculate these
estimates and found it reasonable and consistent with that used in
prior reviews. (See Verification Report at page 37). We divided the
amount of benefit by the total weight of live swine produced in
Saskatchewan during the POR. We then weight-averaged the result by
Saskatchewan's share of total exports of live swine to the United
States. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the benefit from this
program to be Can$0.0001 per kilogram for the POR.
f. Saskatchewan Livestock Facilities Tax Credit
This program, which was terminated on December 31, 1989, provided
tax credits to livestock producers based on their investments in
livestock production facilities. The tax credits can only be used to
offset provincial taxes and may be carried forward for up to seven
years. Livestock covered by this program includes cattle, horses,
sheep, swine, goats, poultry, bees, fur-bearing animals raised in
captivity, or any other designated animals; covered livestock can be
raised for either breeding or slaughter. Investments covered under the
program include new buildings, improvements to existing livestock
facilities, and any stationary equipment related to livestock
facilities. The program pays 15 percent of 95 percent of project costs,
or 14.25 percent of total costs.
In Swine Second and Third Review Results (55 FR 20820), the
Department found this program to be de jure specific, and thus
countervailable, because the program's legislation expressly made it
available only to livestock producers. No new information or evidence
of changed circumstances has been submitted in this proceeding to
warrant reconsideration of this finding.
To calculate the benefit, we used the methodology applied in Swine
Sixth Review Results (58 FR 54121) and subsequent reviews. In the
questionnaire responses, the GOC provided estimates of the amount of
tax credits used by hog producers in Saskatchewan, since the actual
amounts cannot be determined. At verification, we reviewed the
methodology used to calculate these estimates and found it reasonable
and consistent with that used in prior reviews. (See Verification
Report at page 37). We divided the amount of benefit by the total
weight of live swine produced in Saskatchewan during the POR. We then
weight-averaged the result by Saskatchewan's share of total exports of
live swine to the United States. On this basis, we preliminarily
determine the benefit from this program to be Can$0.0001 per kilogram
for the POR.
g. Saskatchewan Interim Red Meat Production Equalization Program
The Saskatchewan Interim Red Meat Production Equalization Program
(IRMPEP), administered by the Saskatchewan Department of Agriculture
and Food, was established by the Government of Saskatchewan (GOS) in
November 1992. IRMPEP provides grants to livestock producers who raise
and feed their livestock in Saskatchewan. In order to qualify for
IRMPEP, producers must have sold a minimum number of the eligible
livestock which includes steers, heifers and virgin bulls, cull cows,
hogs, lambs, kid goats, and horses. Once the minimum number of eligible
livestock has been sold, the producer fills out an application and, if
the criteria are met, is automatically eligible to receive grants under
this program.
In Swine Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Review Results, the Department
found this program de jure specific, and thus countervailable, because
the program's legislation expressly limits its availability to a
specific group of enterprises or industries (livestock producers). No
new information or evidence of changed circumstances has been submitted
in this proceeding to warrant reconsideration of this finding.
The Department determined that these grants are recurring because
the recipient can expect to receive benefits on an ongoing basis from
POR to POR. (See General Issues Appendix (58 FR at 37226)). Therefore,
to calculate the benefit, we have allocated the amounts of the grants
to the year of receipt. Consequently, we divided the amount of IRMPEP
grants to live swine producers for the POR by the total weight of live
swine produced in Saskatchewan in the POR. We then weight-averaged the
result by Saskatchewan's share of total exports of live swine to the
United States during the POR. On this basis, we preliminarily determine
the benefit from this program to be Can$0.0010 per kilogram for the
POR.
Saskatchewan phased out the Interim Red Meat Production
Equalization Program. The last date producers could apply for or claim
benefits was November 30, 1994 and the last date that producers could
receive benefits was March 31, 1995. Because IRMPEP has been terminated
and there are no residual benefits being provided, the cash deposit
rate will be adjusted to zero to reflect a program-wide change. (19 CFR
355.50(1)(d) of the 1989 Proposed Regulations).
h. New Brunswick Livestock Incentives Program
This program, which operates under the Livestock Incentives Act,
provides loan guarantees to livestock producers purchasing cattle,
sheep, swine, foxes, and mink for breeding purposes, and for feeding
and finishing livestock for slaughter. Loans, in amounts ranging from
Can$1,000 to Can$90,000, are granted by commercial banks or credit
unions and guaranteed by the Government of New Brunswick (GONB) to an
individual, partnership, corporation or incorporated co-operative
association engaged in farming in New Brunswick. Swine producers submit
an application for a loan under this program to a bank. The bank
evaluates the loan application based upon standard loan criteria and
either approves or rejects the application. A consideration for
obtaining the loan is the presentation to the GONB of a farm plan
established at the time the loan is taken out. For loans given for the
purchase of animals for breeding purposes, the term of the loan is not
more than seven years and the first payment of the principal is due two
years after the date on which the loan was given. For loans given for
the purchase of animals for feeding purposes, the loan is due when the
animals have been sold which shall not exceed a period of eighteen
months. The interest rate for these loans is set at the prime rate plus
one percentage point.
At the end of three years after loans are issued, the GONB may give
20 percent of the loan amount to the farmer in the form of a grant. To
be eligible for this grant, the farmer had to have implemented, in a
satisfactory manner, the farm plan established at the time the loan was
taken out. The grant portion of
[[Page 52432]]
this program has been terminated. Grants are not provided for loans
given after July 15, 1992, but grants were still being provided during
the POR.
In Swine Second and Third Review Results (55 FR 20817), the
Department found this program to be specific because it is limited to
livestock producers. No new information or evidence of changed
circumstances has been submitted in this proceeding to warrant
reconsideration of this finding.
In accordance with section 771(5)(E)(iii) of the Act, a benefit
from a loan obtained with a government guarantee shall normally be
treated as conferred ``if there is a difference, after adjusting for
any difference in guarantee fees, between the amount the recipient of
the guarantee pays on the guaranteed loan and the amount the recipient
would pay for a comparable commercial loan if there were no guarantee
by the authority''. While there are no guarantee fees, the recipients
are paying interest at the rate of prime rate plus one percentage
point. As we learned at verification, the predominant lending rates in
Canada for comparable long-term variable-rate loans are based on the
prime rate plus a one or two-point spread. (See Verification Report at
pages 9 and 22.) Therefore, as our benchmark, we used the prime rate as
published by the Bank of Canada in the Bank of Canada Review, Winter
1995-96 plus one and one half percentage point. This rate represents
the simple average of the spread above prime charged by commercial
banks on comparable loans. Comparing the benchmark interest rate to the
interest rate charged on these loans, we preliminarily determine that
the amount the recipient paid on these loans is less than the recipient
would have paid on a comparable commercial loan.
We calculated the benefit from the loan portion of this program as
follows. For loans outstanding during the POR, either without
repayments or paid off during the POR, we followed the methodology
described in section 355.49 (d) (1) of the 1989 Proposed Regulations.
For outstanding loans on which partial repayments were made during the
POR, because no information was available on the timing of the
repayment, we estimated the benefit by taking half of the interest
amount that would have accrued during the POR, had no payment been made
on the principal. Next, we divided the benefit from all outstanding
loans by the total weight of live swine produced in New Brunswick
during the POR. We then weight-averaged the benefit by New Brunswick's
share of Canadian exports of live swine to the United States during the
POR.
During the POR loans to live swine producers were written-off by
the GONB under this program. We have added to the total amount of
written-off loans, the amount of interest accrued from the beginning of
the POR until the date on which the loans were written-off. (See
section 355.44(k) of the 1989 Proposed Regulations.) The Department
preliminarily determines that the amount written off and interest
accrued during the POR is a non-recurring grant because debt
forgiveness is exceptional, and it is a one-time event. In addition,
swine producers received grants under the grant portion of this
program. We preliminarily determine that the grants received under this
program are non-recurring because the recipient cannot expect to
receive benefits on an ongoing basis from year to year. We summed the
amount of the written-off loans and the amount of the grants. Because
the result is less than 0.50 percent of the value of live swine sales
from this province, we are allocating the benefit to the year of
receipt. (See General Issues Appendix 58 FR 37226.) Therefore, we
divided the total amount of the grants provided during the POR by the
total weight of live swine produced in New Brunswick during the POR. We
then weight-averaged the result by the New Brunswick's share of total
exports of live swine to the United States during the POR
To calculate the total benefit to live swine producers under this
program, we summed the weight-averaged benefit calculated for the loans
and grants. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the total benefit
from this program to be less than Can$0.0001 per kilogram for this POR.
i. New Brunswick Swine Industry Financial Restructuring and
Agricultural Development Act--Swine Assistance Program
The Swine Assistance program was established in fiscal year 1981-
82, by the Farm Adjustment Board, under the Farm Adjustment Act, to
provide interest subsidies on medium-term loans to hog producers. The
program was available only to hog producers who entered production or
underwent expansion after 1979. In 1985, the Farm Adjustment Act
changed to the Agricultural Development Act. In 1984-85, this program
was combined with the Swine Industry Financial Restructuring program
under the New Brunswick Regulation 85-19. At that time, all obligations
and outstanding loans under the Swine Assistance program were rolled
over into the Swine Industry Financial Restructuring program.
The Swine Industry Financial Restructuring program was created by
the Farm Adjustment Act (OC 85-98) and became effective April 1, 1985.
Under this program the Government of New Brunswick granted hog
producers indebted to the Board a rebate of the interest on that
portion of their total debt (the residual debt) that, on March 31,
1984, exceeded the ``standard debt load.'' The standard debt load is
defined in the program's regulations as the amount of debt which the
farmer, in the opinion of the Board, can reasonably be expected to
service. The residual debt does not begin to accrue interest again
until the debt load is no longer ``excessive.''
In Swine Second and Third Review Results (55 FR 20816, 20817), the
Department examined these two programs separately. The Department found
(1) the Swine Assistance program to be countervailable because loans
were provided to a specific industry on terms inconsistent with
commercial considerations, and (2) the New Brunswick Swine Industry
Financial Restructuring program to be countervailable because it was
limited to a specific industry and the government's rebate of interest
and the interest repayment holiday were loan terms inconsistent with
commercial considerations. No new information or evidence of changed
circumstances has been submitted in this proceeding to warrant
reconsideration of this finding.
At verification, we examined documentation that showed that no new
loans were provided for the past ten years, and that there was no
recent activity on the outstanding loans. The loans given to producers
were ``set aside'' in a provincial account and were not accruing any
interest. The Department preliminarily determines that interest not
accruing on the outstanding loan balance constitutes a benefit to live
swine producers.
To calculate the benefit from this program, we multiplied the total
outstanding debt at the beginning of the POR by the benchmark interest
rate. We used, as a benchmark interest rate, the prime rate, as
published by the Bank of Canada in the Bank of Canada Review, Winter
1994-95, plus one and one-half percentage point. This rate represents
the simple average of the commercially available rates for comparable
loans. (See Verification Report at page 22). Next, we divided the
benefit by the total weight of live swine produced in New Brunswick
during the POR. We then weight-averaged the benefit by New Brunswick's
share of Canadian exports
[[Page 52433]]
of live swine to the United States during the POR. On this basis, we
preliminarily determine the benefit to be less than Can$0.0001 per
kilogram for the POR.
j. New Brunswick Swine Assistance Policy on Boars
The New Brunswick Swine Assistance Policy on Boars program is
administered by the New Brunswick Department of Agriculture and Rural
Development, Animal Industry Branch, for the purpose of encouraging
breeding stock producers to produce quality boars at reasonable prices
for use in commercial swine herds. This program provides assistance in
the form of grants to swine producers for the purchases of boars.
Eligible producers are entitled to receive up to Can$110 for the
purchase of boars.
In Swine Second and Third Review Results (55 FR 20817), the
Department found this program to be countervailable because it is
limited to a specific industry. No new information or evidence of
changed circumstances has been submitted in this proceeding to warrant
reconsideration of this finding.
To calculate the benefit, we used the grant methodology applied in
Swine Sixth Review Results (58 FR 54119). The Department has
preliminarily determined that the grants received under this program
are non-recurring because the recipient cannot expect to receive
benefits on an ongoing basis from review period to review period.
However, because the amount received by live swine producers in this
POR is less than 0.50 percent of the value of live swine sales in this
province, we are allocating the benefit to the year of receipt. (See
General Issues Appendix 58 FR 37226). We divided the total payment to
hog producers during the POR by the total weight of live swine produced
in New Brunswick during the POR. We then weight-averaged the result by
New Brunswick's share of Canadian exports of live swine to the United
States during the POR. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the
benefit from this program to be less than Can$0.0001 per kilogram for
the POR.
B. New Programs Preliminarily Determined To Confer Subsidies
Federal/Provincial Programs
a. National Transition Scheme for Hogs
After termination of the NTSP for Hogs in July 1994, hog producers
became eligible to participate in the National Transition Scheme for
Hogs (Transition Scheme). This is a new program that provided for one-
time payments to producers of hogs marketed between April 3, 1994
through December 31, 1994. This program was a temporary support program
to encourage producers to join the Net Income Stabilization Account
program (NISA). The Transition Scheme provided payments to hog
producers of Can$1.50 per hog from the federal government and a
matching Can$1.50 from the provincial government.
Because the Transition Scheme Agreement expressly limits its
availability to a specific industry (swine), we preliminarily determine
that the benefits from this program are de jure specific in accordance
with section 771(5A)(D). The amounts provided by both the federal and
provincial governments to the hog producers during the POR under the
Transition Scheme represent a grant. Therefore, this program is
countervailable.
The Department preliminarily determines that these grants are non-
recurring because the transitional payments are exceptional, the
recipient cannot expect to receive benefits on an ongoing basis from
POR to POR, and the government has approved funding under the
Transition Scheme for one year only. However, because the amount
received by live swine producers is less than 0.50 percent of the value
of total live swine sales in Canada, we are allocating the benefit to
the year of receipt. Therefore, we divided the benefit provided during
the POR to hog producers by the total weight of market hogs produced in
that province, and calculated a benefit per-kilogram on a province-by-
province basis. We used only the weight of market hogs because only
market hogs were eligible to receive NTSP benefits. We then weight-
averaged each exporting province's per kilogram benefit by that
province's share of total Canadian exports of market hogs to the United
States during the POR. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the
benefit from this program to be Can$0.0042 per kilogram for the POR.
b. Technological Innovation Program Under the Canada/Quebec Subsidiary
Agreement on Agri-Food Development (Agri-Food Agreement)
On December 14, 1984, the Government of Canada entered into an
Economic and Regional Development Agreement (ERDA) with the Province of
Quebec. Pursuant to this ERDA, the initial Agri-Food Agreement was
signed on February 17, 1987 and remained in effect from 1987 to 1991.
On August 26, 1993 a new Agri-Food Agreement was enacted by the
governments of Canada and Quebec covering the period April 1, 1993
through March 31, 1998. Funding for this agreement is shared 50/50 by
the federal and provincial governments. Through this agreement, grants
are made to private businesses and academic organizations to fund
projects in the following areas:
(1) Research: The objectives of this program area are to increase
and diversify scientific and technical expertise, in both the industry
and universities, in the areas of food production, processing, storage
and marketing.
(2) Technological Innovation: The purpose of this program area is
to speed up the rate of adoption and dissemination of technologies and
innovation and the development of new products.
(3) Support for Strategic Alliances: The purpose of this program
area is to stimulate cooperation and strategic alliances among the
various stakeholders in an agri-food ``industry network'' (including
all participants from the producer of the raw material to the final
processor) through strategic activities intended to improve
competitiveness in domestic and foreign markets.
Although the Agri-Food Agreement provides the authority for the
three components, there are distinct differences in the purposes,
funding, eligibility requirements and application and approval
processes across the three components. Therefore, the Department
considers it appropriate to examine each of the three components
(Research, Technological Innovation, and Support for Strategic
Alliances) as separate programs. See Memorandum on Canada/Quebec
Subsidiary Agreement on Agri-Food Development, to Robert S. LaRussa
from CVD/AD Team dated September 25, 1996, which is on file in the CRU.
We verified that during the POR, producers of live swine received
grants under the Research Program and the Technological Innovation
program. For a discussion of our preliminary determination with respect
to the Research program, see Section II of this notice, ``New Programs
Preliminarily Determined Not to Confer Subsidies.''
Technological Innovation Program
The Technological Innovation program is administered by the GOQ.
This program has two components: testing and experimentation, and
testing networks. Although the legislation states that ``the two
governments will provide financial assistance and technical support to
agricultural enterprises,'' we verified that since its inception this
program has been funded solely by the federal government. Since
assistance under this program is
[[Page 52434]]
provided by the federal government to industries located within a
designated geographical region of Canada (i.e., Quebec), we
preliminarily determine that the federal contributions are
countervailable. See section 771(5A)(D)(iv); Statement of
Administrative Action accompanying the URAA, reprinted in H.R. Doc. No.
316, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. 932 (1994).
To calculate the benefit from this program, we preliminarily
determine that the grants received under this program are non-recurring
because they are exceptional, the government must approve the grants
every year, and the recipient cannot expect to receive benefits on an
ongoing basis. However, because the amount received by live swine
producers in this POR is less than 0.50 percent of the value of live
swine sales in this province, we are allocating the benefit to the year
of receipt (See General Issues Appendix 58 FR 37226). We divided the
total grant amount provided to swine producers during the POR by the
total weight of live swine produced in Quebec during the POR. We then
weight-averaged the results by Quebec's share of Canadian exports of
live swine to the United States during the POR. On this basis, we
preliminarily determine the benefit from the Technological Innovation
program to be less than Can$0.0001 per kilogram for the POR.
II. Programs Preliminarily Determined Not to Confer Subsidies Research
Program under the Canada/Quebec Subsidiary Agreement on Agri-Food
Development (Agri-Food Agreement)
The Research program under the Agri-Food Agreement is administered
by the Government of Quebec (GOQ) and grants are funded jointly by the
GOQ and Government of Canada (GOC). The objectives of this program are
to increase and diversify scientific and technical expertise, in both
the industry and universities, in the area of food production,
processing, storage and marketing. Under this program, grants are made
to private businesses and academic organizations to fund research
projects. During the POR, grants were provided for research projects
involving live swine.
In the Department's questionnaire for this review, respondents were
offered an opportunity to claim greenlight status under section 771(5B)
of the Act. (See Department's Questionnaire, September 25, 1995,
Section III.4 at III.4-2.) However, because the GOQ did not claim
greenlight status, we proceeded to examine whether the results of the
research are made publicly available. (See Section 355.44(l) of the
1989 Proposed Regulations.) In this case, the results of research are
usually made publicly available. We have verified that publication of
the results of the research is required by the Agri-Food Agreement,
which specifies that ``the Government of Canada and the Government of
Quebec agree to announce jointly all authorized projects, as well as
project and program reports and results.'' In addition, we have also
verified that the results are published in an annual report upon
completion. However, the Agreement also indicates, under Section 8 of
the Research program guidelines, that participants have the right to
patent protection for the results of the research if divulging the
information will reduce the commercial value of those results. (See
Verification Report at page 28.) Therefore, the determination of
whether benefits under this program are countervailable can only be
made at the completion of the projects. It is only upon completion that
it will be known whether the results of research have been made
publicly available. See e.g., Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determinations: Certain Steel Products from Sweden (58 FR 37385; July
9, 1993).
We verified that all projects involving live swine were still
ongoing during the POR. Therefore, we will continue to examine these
research grants in future reviews and upon completion will determine
whether they are countervailable. On this basis, we preliminarily
determine that the Research program did not confer countervailable
benefits on live swine during the POR.
III. Programs Preliminarily Determined to be Not Used
We also examined the following programs and preliminarily determine
that the producers and/or exporters of the subject merchandise did not
apply for or receive benefits under these programs during the POR:
a. Quebec Farm Income Stabilization Insurance Program (FISI)
We verified that during the POR the only FISI payments made to
producers were for live swine slaughtered in Canada. Because there were
no payments made for live swine exported to the United States during
the POR, we preliminarily determine that the FISI program was not used
during the POR. See Memorandum to File from Team A regarding the Farm
Income Stabilization Program dated September 25, 1996, which is on file
in CRU.
b. Other Programs
(1) Support for Strategic Alliances Program under the Canada/Quebec
Subsidiary Agreement on Agri-Food Development; (2) Western
Diversification Program; (3) Federal Atlantic Livestock Feed
Initiative; (4) Agricultural Products Board Program; (5) Ontario Rabies
Indemnification Program; (6) Ontario Swine Sales Assistance Policy; (7)
Newfoundland Hog Price Support Program; (8) Newfoundland Weanling Bonus
Incentive Policy; (9) Newfoundland Hog Price Stabilization Program;
(10) Nova Scotia Swine Herd Health Policy; (11) Nova Scotia Improved
Sire Policy.
IV. Programs Preliminarily Determined to be Terminated
We have examined the following programs and preliminarily determine
that they were terminated prior to April 1, 1994, and that no residual
benefits were provided during the POR: (1) Alberta Livestock and
Beeyard Compensation Program; (2) British Columbia Special Hog Payment
Program; (3) British Columbia Swine Herd Improvement Program.
Preliminary Results of Review
We preliminarily determine the total net subsidy on live swine from
Canada to be Can$0.0271 per kilogram for the period April 1, 1994
through March 31, 1995. If the final results of this review remain the
same as these preliminary results, the Department intends to instruct
the U.S. Customs Service (``Customs'') to assess countervailing duties
as indicated above.
The Department also intends to instruct Customs to collect cash
deposits of estimated countervailing duties of Can$0.0261 on all
shipments of the subject merchandise from Canada, entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of
the final results of this review. We have adjusted the cash deposit
rate to reflect program-wide changes.
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
[[Page 52435]]
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 Sec. 355.38.
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, 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)).
Dated: September 25, 1996.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-25649 Filed 10-04-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P