[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 67 (Thursday, April 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18067-18069]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-8556]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-201-810]


Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate From Mexico; Final 
Results of Countervailing Duty Expedited Sunset Review

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

ACTION: Notice of final results of countervailing duty expedited sunset 
review: certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate from Mexico.

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

SUMMARY: On September 1, 1999, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') published the notice of

[[Page 18068]]

initiation of the sunset review of the countervailing duty order on 
certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate (``cut-to-length plate'') from 
Mexico. On the basis of a notice of intent to participate and adequate 
substantive comments filed on behalf of domestic interested parties and 
inadequate response (in this case, no response) from respondent 
interested parties, we determined to conduct an expedited review. As a 
result of this review, the Department finds that revocation of the 
countervailing duty order would be likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of a countervailable subsidy. The net countervailable 
subsidy is identified in the Final Results of Review section of this 
notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 6, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark D. Young, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6397.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Statute and Regulations

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (``the Act''), are references to the provisions 
effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to 
the Act by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''). In addition, 
unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department of 
Commerce's (``the Department's'') regulations are to 19 CFR part 351 
(1999). Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to the 
Department's conduct of sunset reviews is set forth in the Department's 
Policy Bulletin 98:3--Policies Regarding the Conduct of Five-year 
(``Sunset'') Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders; 
Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 1998) (``Sunset Policy 
Bulletin'').

Background

    On September 1, 1999, the Department published the notice of 
initiation of the sunset review of the countervailing duty order on 
cut-to-length plate from Mexico (64 FR 47767). The Department received 
a Notice of Intent to Participate on behalf of Bethlehem Steel 
Corporation and U.S. Steel Group, a unit of USX Corporation (``the 
domestic interested parties''), within the deadline specified in 
section 351.218(d)(1)(i) of the Sunset Regulations. The domestic 
interested parties claimed interested party status under section 
771(9)(C) of the Act, as U.S. manufacturers of cut-to-length plate. We 
received a complete substantive response from the domestic interested 
parties on October 1, 1999, within the 30-day deadline specified in the 
Sunset Regulations under section 351.218(d)(3)(i). In their substantive 
response, the domestic interested parties stated that they were the 
petitioners in the original investigation of cut-to-length plate from 
Mexico. Furthermore, the domestic interested parties stated that they 
had participated in each subsequent segment of the case. We did not 
receive a substantive response from any respondent interested party to 
these proceedings. As a result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the 
Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C), the Department determined to 
conduct an expedited, 120-day, review of this order.
    In accordance with section 751(c)(5)(C)(v) of the Act, the 
Department may treat a review as extraordinarily complicated if it is a 
review of a transition order (i.e., an order in effect on January 1, 
1995). The review at issue concerns a transition order within the 
meaning of section 751(c)(6)(C)(i) of the Act. Therefore, the 
Department determined that the sunset review of the countervailing duty 
order on cut-to-length plate from Mexico is extraordinarily complicated 
and extended the time limit for completion of the final results of this 
review until not later than March 29, 2000, in accordance with section 
751(c)(5)(B) of the Act.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Five-Year 
Reviews, 64 FR 71726 (December 22, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of Reviews

    The products covered by this countervailing duty order constitute 
one ``class or kind'' of merchandise: certain cut-to-length carbon 
steel plate. These products include hot-rolled carbon steel universal 
mill plates (i.e., flat-rolled products rolled on four faces or in a 
closed box pass, of a width exceeding 150 millimeters but not exceeding 
1,250 millimeters and of a thickness of not less than 4 millimeters, 
not in coils and without patterns in relief), of rectangular shape, 
neither clad, plated, nor coated with metal, whether or not painted, 
varnished, or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances; and 
certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat-rolled products in straight 
lengths, of rectangular shape, hot rolled, neither clad, plated, nor 
coated with metal, whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with 
plastics or other nonmetallic substances, 4.75 millimeters or more in 
thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters and measures at 
least twice the thickness, as currently classifiable in the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') under item numbers 
7208.31.0000, 7208.32.0000, 7208.33.1000, 7208.33.5000, 7208.41.0000, 
7208.42.0000, 7208.43.0000, 7208.90.0000, 7210.70.3000, 7210.90.9000, 
7211.11. 0000, 7211.12.0000, 7211.21.0000, 7211.22.0045, 7211.90.0000, 
7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, and 7212.50.0000. Included within the scope 
are flat-rolled products of non-rectangular cross-section where such 
cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process (i.e., 
products which have been ``worked after rolling''); for example, 
products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges. Excluded is 
grade X-70 plate. These HTSUS item numbers are provided for convenience 
and customs purposes. The Department's written description remains 
dispositive. There has not been a scope review of the subject 
merchandise from Mexico.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ However, The Department has made one scope ruling on the 
subject merchandise from Brazil. The following product was 
determined to be within the scope of the order: Profile Slabs 
manufactured by Companhia Siderurgica Tubarao, 62 FR 30569 (June 4, 
1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This review covers all imports from all manufacturers and exporters 
of cut-to-length plate from Mexico.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in this case by parties to this sunset review are 
addressed in the ``Issues and Decision Memorandum'' (``Decision Memo'') 
from Jeffrey A. May, Director, Office of Policy, Import Administration, 
to Robert S. LaRussa, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, 
dated March 29, 2000, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The 
issues discussed in the Decision Memo include the likelihood of 
continuation or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy, the net 
countervailable subsidy, and the nature of the subsidy. Parties can 
find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the 
corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on 
file in room B-099 of the main Commerce Building.
    In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be 
accessed directly on the Web at www.ita.doc.gov/import__admin/records/
frn/. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are 
identical in content.

Final Results of Reviews

    We determine that revocation of the countervailing duty order on 
cut-to-

[[Page 18069]]

length plate from Mexico would be likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of a countervailable subsidy at the rates listed below:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Net
                                                                subsidy
               Mexican manufacturers/exporters                    rate
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Altos Hornos de Mexico S.A...................................      25.87
All Others...................................................      20.25
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Among the benefits provided by the GOM's countervailable programs 
the Department determined that those provided by the Bancomext Export 
Loans and PITEX Duty-Free Imports for Companies That Export were 
contingent upon export performance;\3\ therefore, both programs fall 
within the purview of Article 3.1(a). Because receipt of a benefit 
under the 1986 Assumption of AHMSA's Debt program, the 1988 and 1990 
Debt Restructuring of AHMSA Debt and the Resulting Discounted 
Prepayment in 1996 of AHMSA's Restructuring Debt Owed to the GOM 
program, and the Pre-privatization Lay-off Financing from the GOM and 
the 1991 Equity Infusion in Connection with the Debt to Equity Swap of 
PROCARSA program are types of debt forgiveness, these programs fall 
within the definition ``direct forgiveness of debt'' for purposes of 
Article 6.1(d) of the Subsidies Agreement. The GOM Equity Infusions 
program, the Immediate Deduction program, and IMIS Research and 
Development Grants program are not contingent on exports, nor are they 
``direct forgiveness of debt.'' Therefore, these programs could be 
found inconsistent with Article 6.1 \4\ of the Subsidies Agreement if 
the net subsidy exceeds 5 percent ad valorem as measured in accordance 
with Annex IV of the Subsidies Agreement. However, the Department does 
not have enough information to calculate or determine whether the total 
ad valorem subsidization of the subject merchandise from these programs 
exceeds five-percent or whether they were meant to cover operating 
losses or to be used as direct forgiveness of debt. Nor does the 
Department believe such a calculation or determination would be 
appropriate in the course of a sunset review. Instead, we are providing 
the Commission with the program descriptions listed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Certain Cut-To-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Mexico: 
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 65 FR 
13368 (March 13, 2000).
    \4\ We note that as of January 1, 2000, Article 6.1 has ceased 
to apply (see Article 31 of the Subsidies Agreement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Equity Infusions

    This program enabled AHMSA to receive equity infusions from the GOM 
in 1977, each year from 1979 to 1987, in 1990, and in 1991. We 
determined that equity infusions by the GOM into AHMSA in these years 
were specific and made on terms inconsistent with commercial 
considerations.

IMIS Research and Development Grants

    Under this program IMIS performed joint venture research and did 
not make the results of the joint venture publicly available, therefore 
the Department was not able to determine the exact value of IMIS's 
contributions to the joint venture.

Immediate Deduction

    This program promotes investment by allowing the future deduction 
of fixed assets, at their present value, at the time of the investment. 
This program only applied to property used permanently within Mexico 
but outside of the metropolitan areas of Mexico City, Guadalajara, and 
Monterey. With respect to small firms (i.e., firms with a gross income 
of 7 million pesos or less), the location restriction does not apply.
    This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 of the 
Department's regulations. Timely notification of the return or 
destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order 
is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms 
of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.
    We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: March 29, 2000.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-8556 Filed 4-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P