[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 13, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1972-1973]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-697]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-201-810]


Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Mexico: Final 
Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review

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

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

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

SUMMARY: On September 8, 2003, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published in the Federal Register its preliminary results 
of administrative review of the countervailing duty order on certain 
cut-to-length carbon steel plate (CTL Plate) from Mexico for the period 
January 1, 2001, through December 31, 2001. We are now issuing the 
final results.
    Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made no 
changes to the net subsidy rate. Therefore, the final results do not 
differ from the preliminary results. The final net subsidy rate for the 
reviewed company is listed below in the section entitled ``Final 
Results of Review.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 13, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric B. Greynolds at (202) 482-6071 or 
Lyman Armstrong at (202) 482-3601, Office of AD/CVD Enforcement VI, 
Group II, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 4012, 14th Street and Constitution 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On September 8, 2003, the Department published the preliminary 
results of the administrative review of the countervailing duty order 
on certain cut-to-length carbon steel plate from Mexico. See Certain 
Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Mexico: Preliminary Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 68 FR 52895 (September 8, 
2003) (Preliminary Results). This review covers one manufacturer/
exporter, Altos Hornos de Mexico, S.A. (AHMSA). The review covers the 
period January 1, 2001, through December 31, 2001, and 17 programs.

Scope of the Review

    The products covered by this administrative review are certain cut-
to-length carbon steel plates. 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 Schedules 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 in 
this administrative review are flat-rolled products of nonrectangular 
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 bevelled or rounded 
at the edges. Excluded from this administrative review is grade X-70 
plate. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes. The written description of the scope of this proceeding is 
dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this administrative review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum'' (Decision Memorandum) dated January 6, 2004, which is 
hereby adopted by this notice. A list of issues which parties have 
raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in the Decision 
Memorandum, is attached to this notice as Appendix I. 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 Memorandum can be accessed directly on 
the World Wide Web at http://www.ia.ita.doc.gov, under the heading 
``Federal Register Notices.'' The paper copy and electronic version of 
the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made no 
changes to the net subsidy rate.

Final Results of Review

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(I), we calculated an 
individual subsidy rate for the producer/exporter subject to this 
review. We will instruct the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 
to assess countervailing duties as indicated below on all appropriate 
entries. For the period January 1, 2001, through December 31, 2001, we 
determine the net subsidy rate for the reviewed company to be as 
follows:

[[Page 1973]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Net Subsidy
                  Manufacturer/Exporter                        Rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AHMSA...................................................         13.37 %
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department will also instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of 
estimated countervailing duties in the percentage detailed above of the 
f.o.b. invoice price on all shipments of the subject merchandise from 
the reviewed company, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of 
this review.
    Because the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (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 Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (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 ordered. 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); 
Floral Trade Council v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 766 (CIT 1993). 
Therefore, the cash deposit rates for all companies except that covered 
by this review will be unchanged by the results of this review.
    We will instruct CBP 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 
will be the rate for each such company established in the most recently 
completed administrative review segment conducted under the Act. 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. See Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: 
Certain Steel Products from Mexico, 58 FR 37352 (July 9, 1993). 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, 2001, through December 31, 2001, 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.
    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written notification of 
return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial 
protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the 
regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
    This administrative review and notice are in accordance with 
section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 USC 1675(a)(1)).

    Dated: January 6, 2004.
James J. Jochum,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.

Appendix I--Issues Discussed in Decision Memorandum

    http://www.ia.ita.doc.gov, under the heading (``Federal Register 
Notices'').

Methodology and Background Information

I. Subsidies Valuation Information
    A. Allocation Period
    B. Creditworthiness and Calculation of Discount Rate
II. Change-in-Ownership
III. Inflation Methodology
IV. Analysis of Programs
A. Programs Conferring Subsidies
    1. Government of Mexico (GOM) Equity Infusions
    2. 1988 and 1990 Debt Restructuring of AHMSA Debt and the Resulting 
Discounted Prepayment in 1996 of AHMSA's Restructured Debt Owed to the 
GOM
    3. Grants from the Mexican Institute for Steel Research (IMIS)
    4. Lay-off Financing from the GOM Bestowed in 1994
    5. Bancomext Export Loans
    6. Committed Investment
    7. Immediate Deduction
B. Programs Determined Not to Confer Subsidies
    1. Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) Guaranteed Provision of Natural Gas 
for Less Than Adequate Remuneration
    2. PITEX Duty-Free Imports for Companies That Export
    3. GOM Assumption of AHMSA Debt in 1986
C. Program Determined Not to Exist
    1. NAFIN/Coahuila State Government Supplier Relief
D. Programs Determined To Be Not Used
    1. FONEI Long-Term Financing
    2. Export Financing Restructuring
    3. Bancomext Trade Promotion Services and Technical Support
    4. Empresas de Comercio Exterior or Foreign Trade Companies Program
    5. Article 15 and Article 94 Loans
    6. NAFIN Long-Term Loans
V. Total Ad Valorem Rate
VI. Analysis of Comments
Comment 1: Whether the Department Correctly Countervailed the Benefit 
Attributable to Committed Investment in AHMSA by the Grupo Acerero del 
Norte (GAN)
Comment 2: Whether the Department Correctly Investigated and 
Countervailed Benefits Conferred Under the Immediate Deduction Program
Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Have Found AHMSA 
Uncreditworthy in 2000
Comment 4: Whether AHMSA's May 2, 2000 Renegotiated Bancomext Loans and 
the Corresponding Renegotiated Penalty Rate Are Countervailable
Comment 5: Whether the Department Used an Appropriate Benchmark 
Interest Rate When Calculating the Benefit Attributable to the May 2, 
2000 Renegotiated Bancomext Loans
Comment 6: Whether the Department Used an Appropriate Benchmark Penalty 
Rate When Calculating the Benefit Attributable to AHMSA's May 2, 2000 
Renegotiated Bancomext Loans
Comment 7: Whether the Department Should Continue to Use the Same 
Person Test in Determining Whether Non-Recurring Pre-Privatization 
Subsidies Continue to Provide a Countervailable Benefit to AHMSA
[FR Doc. 04-697 Filed 1-12-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S