[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 67 (Monday, April 8, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16718-16722]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-8444]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-535-001]


Cotton Shop Towels from Pakistan: Preliminary Results and Partial 
Rescission 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 
cotton shop towels from Pakistan for the period January 1, 2000, 
through December 31, 2000. For information on the net subsidy for the 
reviewed companies, please 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 (Customs) 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. 
(See the ``Public Comment'' section of this notice). In accordance with 
19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Department is also rescinding this review 
with regard to Aqil Textile Industries (Aqil), Bita Textile Corporation 
(Bita), Jawad Brothers, Pakistan Textile Corporation (Pvt.)(Pakistan 
Textile), Salimah International (Salimah), Shaheen Textiles, Nisar 
(Textiles) Corporation (Nisar), Khaksar Impex (Pvt.) Ltd. (Khaksar), 
Saasoah Textile Corporation (Saasoah), and Shaheen International.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 8, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gayle Longest at (202) 482-3338, AD/
CVD Enforcement Office VI, Import Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, Room 4012, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20230

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 9, 1984, the Department published in the Federal Register 
the countervailing duty order on certain cotton shop towels from 
Pakistan (49 FR 8974). On March 5, 2001, the Department published a 
notice of ``Opportunity to Request an Administrative Review'' of this 
countervailing duty order (66 FR 13283). We received a timely request 
for review from Aqil, Bita, Fine Fabrico (Fabrico), Iftikhar 
Corporation (Iftikhar), Ishaq Towel Factory (Ishaq), Jawad Brothers, 
Jawwad Industries, Mehtabi Towel Mills Ltd. (Mehtabi), Pakistan 
Textile, Quality Linen Supply Corp. (Quality), R.I. Weaving (R.I.), 
Salimah, Shaheen, Shahi Textiles (Shahi), Silver Textile Factory 
(Silver), Sultex Industries, United Towel Exporters (United), Universal 
Linen (Universal), Nisar, Khaksar, Saasoh, Faisalabed Cotton Product 
(Pvt) Ltd. (Faislabed), Shaheen International, and Ranjha Linen 
(Ranjha). On April 30, 2001, the Department published a notice of 
initiation of administrative review of the countervailing duty on 
cotton shop towels from Pakistan, covering the period January 1, 2000 
through December 31, 2000 (66 FR 21310).
    On November 7, 2001, we extended the period for completion of the 
preliminary results pursuant to section 751(a)(3) of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (the Act). See Certain Cotton Shop Towels From 
Pakistan: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 66 FR 56276 (November 7, 
2001).
    On September 17, 2001, we received a request to withdraw from the 
administrative review from Aqil, Bita, Jawad Brothers, Pakistan 
Textile, Salimah, Shaheen Textiles, Nisar, Khaksar, Saasoah, and 
Shaheen International. The applicable regulation, 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), 
states that if a party that requested an administrative review 
withdraws the request within 90 days of the date of publication of the 
notice of initiation of the requested review, the Secretary will 
rescind the review. Although the request for recession was made after 
the 90 day deadline, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the 
Secretary may extend this time limit if the Secretary decides it is 
reasonable to do so. Each of the aforementioned parties was the only 
party to make a request for its administrative review. Moreover, we 
have received no other comments by any other parties regarding these 
requests for withdrawal from the administrative review. Therefore, we 
are rescinding this review of the countervailing duty order on cotton 
shop towels for these companies covering the period January 1, 2000, 
through December 31, 2000.
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), this review covers only those 
producers or exporters for which a review was specifically requested. 
The companies subject to this review are the companies listed above, 
with the exception of Aqil, Bita, Jawad Brothers, Pakistan Textile, 
Salimah, Shaheen Textiles, Nisar, Khaksar, Saasoah, Shaheen 
International. This review covers seven programs.

Applicable Statute and Regulations

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to 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's regulations are references to the provisions codified at 
19 CFR part 351 (2001).

Scope of Review

    The merchandise subject to this review is cotton shop towels. The 
product covered in this review is provided for under item number 
6307.10.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS). The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and Customs 
purposes. The written description of the scope of this proceeding is 
dispositive.

[[Page 16719]]

Attribution of Subsidies

    Section 351.525 of the Department's regulations states that the 
Department will attribute subsidies received by two or more 
corporations to the products produced by those corporations where 
cross-ownership exists. According to section 351.525(b)(6)(vi) of the 
Department's regulations, cross-ownership exists between two or more 
corporations where one corporation can use or direct the individual 
assets of the other corporation(s) in essentially the same ways it can 
use its own assets. In this review, we found that several of the 
respondent firms belonged to family-owned company-groups (i.e., the 
same family owns companies A, B, and C). All of these family companies 
produce and export the subject merchandise. Moreover, in most cases 
these firms share the same physical facilities, administrative 
services, and marketing services.
    On the basis of the above facts, combined with the fact that these 
family-owned and controlled companies all produce the subject 
merchandise, we preliminarily determine that loans under the export 
financing scheme and the sales tax rebates, programs previously found 
countervailable by the Department, are attributable to the total sales 
of exports to the United States of that group of family-related firms 
and to the total export sales of that group of family-owned firms, 
respectively. This conforms with section 351.525(b)(6)(ii) of the 
Department's regulations, which explicitly states that if two (or more) 
corporations with cross-ownership produce the subject merchandise, the 
Secretary will attribute the subsidies received by either or both 
corporations to the products produced by both corporations.
    We preliminarily determine that cross-ownership exists between the 
following family related companies: (1) Mehtabi/Quality/Fabrico/Ranjha/
Ifitkhar/Faislamabad and (2) United/R.I./Universal/Ishaq. Therefore, we 
have calculated one rate for each of these family-owned corporate 
groups and have applied that rate to each of the member companies. This 
finding is consistent with our cross-ownership determination in the 
administrative review of this order covering the period January 1, 1999 
through December 31, 1999. See Cotton Shop Towels From Pakistan: 
Preliminary Results and Partial Recission of Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review 66 FR 18444 (April 9, 2001) (1999 Shop Towels 
Preliminary) and Cotton Shop Towels From Pakistan: Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 66 FR 42514 (August 13, 
2001) (1999 Shop Towels Final).

Use of Facts Available

    Two of the respondents, Jawwad Industries and Sultex responded to 
the Department's initial questionnaire but failed to respond to the 
supplemental questionnaire with respect to the Sales Tax Rebate 
Program. Jawwad Industries also did not respond to the Department's 
initial questionnaire and supplemental questionnaire with respect to 
short-term loans received under the Export Financing Scheme (EFS). 
Sections 776(a)(2)(A) and 776(a)(2)(B) of the Act provide for the use 
of facts available when an interested party withholds information that 
has been requested by the Department, or when an interested party fails 
to provide the information requested in a timely manner and in the form 
required. These two respondents failed to provide information 
explicitly requested by the Department; therefore, we must resort to 
the facts otherwise available. Because Jawwad Industries and Sultex did 
not respond to the supplemental questionnaire, sections 782(d) and (e) 
of the Act are not applicable.
    Section 776(b) of the Act provides that in selecting from among the 
facts available, the Department may use an inference that is adverse to 
the interests of a party if it determines that a party has failed to 
cooperate to the best of its ability. In applying the facts otherwise 
available, the Department has determined that an adverse inference is 
warranted pursuant to 776(b) of the Act because the Department has 
determined that these respondents failed to cooperate to the best of 
their ability. In this review, the Department requested additional 
information in a supplemental questionnaire from all producers/
exporters covered by this administrative review. However, Jawwad 
Industries and Sultex did not respond to the supplemental 
questionnaire.
    The Department finds that by not providing the necessary responses 
to the supplemental questionnaire issued by the Department, Jawwad 
Industries and Sultex have failed to cooperate to the best of their 
ability. Neither company cited any reason for their failure to respond. 
Therefore, in selecting facts available, the Department determines that 
an adverse inference is warranted.
    Section 776(b) of the Act indicates that, when employing an adverse 
inference, the Department may rely upon information derived from (1) 
the petition; (2) a final determination in a countervailing duty or an 
antidumping duty investigation; (3) any previous administrative review, 
new shipper review, expedited antidumping review, section 753 review; 
or (4) any other information placed on the record. See also 19 CFR 
section 351.308(c). As discussed further below, as adverse facts 
available, we are applying the highest calculated rate for the Sales 
Tax Rebate Program and the EFS program. Therefore, we preliminarily 
determine the ad valorem rate for Jawwad Industries and Sultex for the 
Sales Tax Rebate Program to be 1.72 percent ad valorem. We also 
preliminarily determine the ad valorem rate for Jawwad Industries for 
the EFS program to be 1.11 percent ad valorem.
    These two respondents did not provide the Department with any 
information to calculate a subsidy rate for the Sales Tax Rebate 
Program. Under the Sales Tax Rebate program, the Central Bureau of 
Revenue provides a rebate of sales taxes on domestic inputs, in this 
case cotton yarn, used in the production of exported products. See 
Cotton Shop Towels From Pakistan; Preliminary Results of Countervailing 
Duty Administrative Reviews, 61 FR 50273, 50275 (September 25 1996) 
(1996 Shop Towels) and Cotton Shop Towels From Pakistan; Final Results 
of Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 62 FR 24082, 24084 (May 
2, 1997) (1997 Shop Towels).
    Jawwad Industries and Sultex did not provide the amount of sales 
tax rebate that they received during the period of review (POR) under 
this program, however both did acknowledge that they received a sales 
tax rebate in their initial response. Therefore, we had to use facts 
available to determine the benefit provided to the respondent under 
this program. In applying the facts otherwise available, the Department 
has determined that an adverse inference is warranted pursuant to 
section 776(b) of the Act because the Department determined these 
respondents failed to cooperate to the best of their ability. As 
adverse facts available, we used the highest subsidy rate calculated 
for this program in these preliminary results of administrative review 
which is 1.72 percent ad valorem.
    In addition, Jawwad Industries acknowledged in the initial 
questionnaire response that it received short-term financing under the 
EFS program, however, it did not provide any information regarding EFS 
loans received or outstanding during the POR. The Export Finance 
Scheme, which is administered by the State Bank of Pakistan, grants 
short-term loans at below-market interest rates to exporters.

[[Page 16720]]

 The Department found this program countervailable in the investigation 
(see Cotton Shop Towels from Pakistan: Final Affirmative Countervailing 
Duty Determination, 49 FR 1408, 1410 (January 11, 1984)) and in all 
subsequent reviews. Therefore, we had to use facts available to 
determine the benefit provided to Jawwad Industries under this program. 
In applying the facts otherwise available, the Department has 
determined that an adverse inference is warranted pursuant to section 
section 776(b) of the Act because the Department has determined that 
this respondent failed to cooperate to the best of its ability. As 
adverse facts available, we used the highest subsidy rate calculated 
for this program in these preliminary results of administrative review 
which is 1.11 percent ad valorem.
    The rates do not constitute secondary information and the 
corroboration requirement of section 776(c) of the Act is not 
applicable.

Analysis of Programs

I. Programs Preliminarily Determined to Confer Subsidies
A. Export Finance Scheme
    The Export Finance Scheme (EFS), which is administered by the State 
Bank of Pakistan, grants short-term loans at below-market interest 
rates to exporters. The EFS has two parts. Under Part I, exporters may 
obtain financing on irrevocable letters of credit or firm export 
orders. Under Part II, exporters may obtain financing in the form of a 
credit line based upon the value of the previous year's eligible 
exports. The Department found this program countervailable in the 
investigation (see Cotton Shop Towels from Pakistan: Final Affirmative 
Countervailing Duty Determination, 49 FR 1408, 1410 (January 11, 1984)) 
and in all subsequent reviews. There has been no new information or 
evidence of changed circumstances in this review to warrant 
reconsideration of this program's countervailability.
    During the current review period, cotton shop towel exporters made 
interest payments on loans obtained under the EFS. The interest rates 
ranged between 7 percent and 8 percent. Loan terms require payment 
within a maximum of 180 days. As our benchmark, we used the national 
average commercial rate for short-term credit which was reported by the 
Government of Pakistan (GOP). This rate was 13 percent during the 
period of review (POR). We used a national average interest rate 
because we could not calculate company-specific benchmark rates because 
none of the respondents received short-term loans from commercial 
sources during the POR.
    To calculate the benefit, we took the difference between the actual 
interest paid and the interest that would have been paid at the rates 
charged on comparable commercial loans. (See 1999 Shop Towels 
Preliminary, 66 FR at 18445). We then divided the benefit derived from 
the EFS loans by the respective companies' export sales values. Jawwad 
Industries did not provide information regarding its short-term loans. 
Therefore, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A) and 776(b) of the Act, we 
are using as facts available the highest rate calculated for this 
program in these preliminary results. On this basis, we preliminarily 
determine the net subsidy from this program during the period of review 
to be the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Company                          Ad Valorem Rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mehtabi..............................................             0.15 %
Quality..............................................             0.15 %
Fabrico..............................................             0.15 %
Ranjha...............................................             0.15 %
Ifitkhar.............................................              0.15%
Faislamabad..........................................              0.15%
Shahi................................................              0.00%
United...............................................              1.11%
R.I..................................................              1.11%
Univeral.............................................              1.11%
Ishaq................................................              1.11%
Jawwad...............................................              1.11%
Silver...............................................              0.00%
Sultex...............................................              0.00%
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Shahi, Silver, and Sultex did not use this program during the 
period of review.
B. Sales Tax Program
    The Central Bureau of Revenue administers the rebate of sales taxes 
on both domestic and imported inputs used in exported products. The 
sales tax rebate is on the f.o.b. value of the total exports. In the 
investigation and subsequent reviews, we found this program 
countervailable because the GOP failed to establish the requisite 
linkage and comparison between taxes paid and rebates provided. See 
Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: 
Cotton Shop Towels from Pakistan, 58 32104, 32105 (June 8, 1993) and 
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Cotton Shop 
Towels from Pakistan, 58 FR 48038 (September 14, 1993), and 1999 Shop 
Towels Preliminary, 66 FR at 18445. In this review, the GOP did not 
provide new information to establish the required linkage between the 
rebates given and the indirect tax incurred.
    To calculate the benefit for the sales tax rebate program, we 
divided the amount of sales tax rebated to each exporter/manufacturer 
by their total exports during the 2000 review period. Two companies, 
Jawwad Industries and Sultex, did not provide information regarding 
their sales tax rebate. Therefore, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(A) 
and 776(b) of the Act, we are using as facts available the highest rate 
calculated for this program in these preliminary results. On this 
basis, we preliminarily determine the benefit from the sales tax rebate 
to be the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Company                          Ad Valorem Rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mehtabi..............................................              1.72%
Quality..............................................              1.72%
Fabrico..............................................              1.72%
Ranjha...............................................              1.72%
Ifitkhar.............................................              1.72%
Faislamabad..........................................              1.72%
Shahi................................................              0.53%
United...............................................              0.00%
R.I..................................................              0.00%
Univeral.............................................              0.00%
Ishaq................................................              0.00%
Jawwad Industries....................................              1.72%
Silver...............................................              0.05%
Sultex...............................................              1.72%
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Customs Duty Rebate Program
    The Central Bureau of Revenue administers this program and provides 
a customs duty rebate on imported inputs used in exported products. The 
customs duty rebate applicable to cotton shop towels during the review 
period was 1.70 percent ad valorem on all exports of this merchandise. 
All rebates are calculated on the f.o.b. value of the total exports. In 
the investigation and subsequent reviews, we found these programs 
countervailable because the GOP failed to establish the requisite 
linkage and comparison between the duties paid and the rebates 
provided. In this review, the GOP did not provide new information to 
establish the required linkage between the rebates given and the 
indirect tax incurred. Therefore, we preliminarily determine that the 
GOP provides the custom duty rebates without regard to specific duties 
incurred in the production of shop towels and that the full amount of 
these rebates are countervailable because these rebates are contingent 
upon export performance. See Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review: Cotton Shop Towels from Pakistan, 58 FR at 32105 
(June 8, 1993), and Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Review: Cotton Shop Towels from Pakistan, 58 FR at 48038 (September 14, 
1993), and 1999 Shop Towels, 66 FR at 18446.

[[Page 16721]]

    For the customs duty rebate program, the cash rebates are earned on 
a sale-by-sale basis, and a firm can precisely calculate the amount of 
rebate it will receive for each export sale at the moment the sale is 
made. Because the amount of these rebates is known at the time of 
export, we calculate the benefit from this rebate program on an ``as-
earned'' basis for all exporters.
    For the customs duty rebate program, we used the rate applicable to 
cotton shop towels as shown in The Gazette of Pakistan the official GOP 
publication of standard duty drawback notification (SRO-172(I)/99 dated 
March 1999), which was 1.70 percent ad valorem during the POR. 
Therefore, the benefit for the customs duty rebate during the 2000 
review period for exporters of shop towels is the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Company                          Ad Valorem Rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All companies........................................              1.70%
------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Program Preliminarily Determined Not to Confer A Benefit
A.Income Tax Reductions on Export Income
    Section 80CC of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1979, as amended by 
Finance Act, 1999, requires commercial banks to withhold income tax on 
all foreign exchange proceeds earned by exporters. The amount withheld 
becomes the company's final tax liability irrespective of whether the 
company is profitable. This tax is paid by the exporters in lieu of 
yearly corporate income taxes. For shop towel exporters, the tax rate 
was 0.50 percent of total export earnings through June 30, 2000. As of 
July 1, 2000, this tax rate increased to 0.75 percent of total export 
earnings. This program was found countervailable in 1997 Shop Towels, 
(62 FR at 24084) and 1999 Shop Towels Preliminary, 66 FR at 18446. As 
noted above, the shop towel exporters pay this ``export'' tax instead 
of paying yearly corporate income taxes. Under the Department's 
standard tax methodology, the benefit from the Income Tax Reduction 
Program would be the difference in the amount of income taxes the 
company would have paid absent this program. This amount would be the 
difference in income taxes the company would have paid under Pakistan's 
corporate tax law and the actual amount of taxes the company paid under 
the Income Tax Reduction Program. To determine whether the respondents 
benefitted from this program, we first calculated the income tax which 
would have been paid using the corporate tax rate of 35 percent which 
is levied on a company's net profit. We then compared what the company 
would have paid in income taxes to the actual amount of taxes which 
they paid under this program. Using this methodology, we determined 
that the actual amount of taxes paid under this program was higher than 
the amount the respondents would have paid in income taxes. Thus, the 
companies did not receive a reduction in income taxes under this 
program during the POR. Therefore, we preliminarily determine that this 
program did not confer a benefit during the POR.
III. Programs Preliminarily Determined To Be Not Used
A. Rebate of Excise Duty
B. Export Credit Insurance
C. Import Duty Rebates

Preliminary Results of Review

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated an 
individual subsidy rate for each producer/exporter subject to this 
administrative review. For the period January 1, 2000, through December 
31, 2000, we preliminarily determine the net subsidy to be the 
following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Company                          Ad Valorem Rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mehtabi..............................................              3.57%
Quality..............................................              3.57%
Fabrico..............................................              3.57%
Ranjha...............................................              3.57%
Ifitkhar.............................................              3.57%
Faislamabad..........................................              3.57%
Shahi................................................              2.23%
United...............................................              2.81%
R.I..................................................              2.81%
Univeral.............................................              2.81%
Ishaq................................................              2.81%
Jawwad Industries....................................              4.53%
Silver...............................................              1.75%
Sultex...............................................              3.42%
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If the final results of this review remain the same as these 
preliminary results, the Department intends to instruct Customs to 
assess countervailing duties at the rates listed above, as a percentage 
of the f.o.b. invoice price on shipments from the above companies 
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the 
date of publication of the final results of this review.
    Because the URAA replaced the general rule in favor of a country-
wide rate with a general rule in favor of individual rates for 
investigated and reviewed companies, the procedures for establishing 
countervailing duty rates, including those for non-reviewed companies, 
are now essentially the same as those in antidumping cases, except as 
provided for in section 777A(e)(2)(B) of the Act. The requested review 
will normally cover only those companies specifically named. See 19 CFR 
351.213(b). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(c), for all companies for which 
a review was not requested, duties must be assessed at the cash deposit 
rate, and cash deposits must continue to be collected, at the rate 
previously determined. As such, the countervailing duty cash deposit 
rate applicable to a company can no longer change, except pursuant to a 
request for a review of that company. See Federal-Mogul Corporation and 
The Torrington Company v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 782 (CIT 1993) 
and Floral Trade Council v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 766 (CIT 1993). 
Therefore, the cash deposit rates for all companies except those 
covered by this review will be unchanged by the results of this review.
    We will instruct Customs to continue to collect cash deposits for 
non-reviewed companies at the most recent company-specific or country-
wide rate applicable to the company. Accordingly, the cash deposit 
rates that will be applied to non-reviewed companies covered by this 
order are those established in the most recently completed 
administrative proceeding conducted under the URAA. If such a review 
has not been conducted, the rate established in the most recently 
completed administrative proceeding pursuant to the statutory 
provisions that were in effect prior to the URAA amendments is 
applicable. These rates shall apply to all non-reviewed companies until 
a review of a company assigned these rates is requested. In addition, 
for the period January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2000, the 
assessment rates applicable to all non-reviewed companies covered by 
this order are the cash deposit rates in effect at the time of entry.

Public Comment

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(b), the Department will disclose to 
parties to the proceeding any calculations performed in connection with 
these preliminary results within five days after the date of the public 
announcement of this notice. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309, interested 
parties may submit written comments in response to these preliminary 
results. Unless otherwise indicated by the Department, case briefs must 
be submitted within 30 days after the date of publication of this 
notice, and rebuttal briefs, limited to arguments raised in case 
briefs, must be submitted no later than five days after the time limit 
for filing case briefs, unless otherwise specified by the Department.

[[Page 16722]]

 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. Parties submitting case and/or rebuttal briefs 
are requested to provide the Department copies of the public version on 
disk. Case and rebuttal briefs must be served on interested parties in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f). Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310, 
within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice, interested 
parties may request a public hearing on arguments to be raised in the 
case and rebuttal briefs. Unless the Secretary specifies otherwise, the 
hearing, if requested, will be held two days after the date for 
submission of rebuttal briefs, that is, thirty-seven days after the 
date of publication of these preliminary results.
    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 351.309(c)(ii), 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 is issued and published in accordance 
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act (19 USC 1675(a)(1) and 
19 USC 1677f(i)(1)).

    Dated: April 1, 2002.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 02-8444 Filed 4-5-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S