[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 227 (Monday, November 27, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68550-68554]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-20008]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-489-502]


Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: 
Certain Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe From Turkey

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') is conducting 
an administrative review of the countervailing duty (``CVD'') order on 
certain welded carbon steel standard pipe from Turkey for the period 
January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005. We preliminarily find that 
the net subsidy rate for the company under review is de minimis. See 
the ``Preliminary Results of Review'' section of this notice, infra. 
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results. 
(See the ``Public Comment'' section, infra.)

[[Page 68551]]


EFFECTIVE DATE: November 27, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristen Johnson, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4793.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 7, 1986, the Department published in the Federal Register 
the CVD order on certain welded carbon steel pipe and tube products 
from Turkey. See Countervailing Duty Order: Certain Welded Carbon Steel 
Pipe and Tube Products from Turkey, 51 FR 7984 (March 7, 1986). On 
March 2, 2006, the Department published a notice of opportunity to 
request an administrative review of this CVD order. See Antidumping or 
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; 
Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 71 FR 10642 (March 2, 
2006). On March 23, 2006, we received a timely request for review from 
the Borusan Group (``Borusan''), a Turkish producer and exporter of the 
subject merchandise. On April 28, 2006, the Department initiated an 
administrative review of the CVD order on certain welded carbon steel 
standard pipe from Turkey, covering the period January 1, 2005, through 
December 31, 2005. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Administrative Reviews, 71 FR 25145 (April 28, 2006).
    On May 2, 2006, the Department issued a questionnaire to Borusan 
and the Government of the Republic of Turkey (``the GOT''); we received 
the GOT's questionnaire response on July 14, 2006, and Borusan's 
response on July 17, 2006. On September 20, 2006, we issued 
supplemental questionnaires to Borusan and the GOT. We received the 
supplemental questionnaire response from Borusan and the GOT on October 
4, 2006. On October 25, 2006, we issued a second supplemental 
questionnaire to Borusan and received the company's response on October 
31, 2006.
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), this review covers only those 
producers or exporters of the subject merchandise for which a review 
was specifically requested. The only company subject to this review is 
Borusan. During the period of review (``the POR''), Borusan was 
comprised of Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (``BMB'') 
and Borusan Istikbal Ticaret T.A.S. (``Istikbal''). This review covers 
11 programs.

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are certain welded carbon steel 
pipe and tube with an outside diameter of 0.375 inch or more, but not 
over 16 inches, of any wall thickness (pipe and tube) from Turkey. 
These products are currently provided for under the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS'') as item numbers 7306.30.10, 
7306.30.50, and 7306.90.10. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided 
for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the 
merchandise is dispositive.

Period of Review

    The period for which we are measuring subsidies is January 1, 2005, 
through December 31, 2005.

Company History

    As noted above, Borusan is composed of BMB and Istikbal. BMB was 
previously known as Borusan Birlesik Boru Fabrikalari A.S. (``BBBF''). 
On December 13, 2004, BBBF changed its name to BMB subsequent to its 
merger with Mannesmann Boru Endustrisi T.A.S. (``MB'') on November 30, 
2004.\1\ See Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review 
Certain Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe from Turkey, 71 FR 43111 
(July 31, 2006) (``2004 Pipe Final''), and accompanying Issues and 
Decision Memorandum, at ``Calculation of Ad Valorem Rate'' under 
``Subsidies Valuation Information'' (``2004 Pipe Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As of November 30, 2004, MB ceased to exist as a separate 
company. However, during the POR, MB filed its 2004 income tax 
return for the period January 1, 2004, through November 30, 2004. 
With regard to its 2004 income taxes, MB utilized the ``Deduction 
from Taxable Income for Export Revenue'' program. For more 
information, see ``Deduction from Taxable Income for Export 
Revenue'' under ``Programs Preliminarily Determined To Be 
Countervailable,'' infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During the POR, BMB produced the subject merchandise, which was 
first sold to Istikbal, an affiliated export sales company, and then 
resold to unaffiliated customers in the United States. BMB's shares are 
held by Borusan Mannesmann Boru Yatirim Holding A.S., a holding company 
owned by Borusan Holding A.S.\2\ and Mannesmannrohren-Werke, A.G., a 
publicly traded company in Germany. Istikbal is majority-owned by 
Borusan Holding A.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Borusan Holding A.S. is owned by the family of Asim 
Kocabiyik, the company's founder.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subsidies Valuation Information

Benchmark Interest Rates

    To determine whether government-provided loans under review 
conferred a benefit, the Department uses, where possible, company-
specific interest rates for comparable commercial loans. See 19 CFR 
351.505(a). Borusan provided the interest rates it paid on short-term 
U.S. dollar (``US$'')-denominated commercial loans. We preliminarily 
find that the company-specific US$-denominated short-term loans are 
comparable to the export credit US$-denominated loans, provided by the 
Export Credit Bank of Turkey (``Export Bank''), against which Borusan 
paid interest during the POR. During the POR, Borusan, however, did not 
pay interest against short-term Turkish Lira (``YTL'')-denominated 
commercial loans, which are comparable to the maturity of the export 
financing loans provided by the Export Bank.
    Where no company-specific benchmark interest rates are available, 
the Department's regulations direct us to use a national average 
interest rate as the benchmark. See 19 CFR 351.505(a)(3)(ii). According 
to the GOT, however, there is no official national average short-term 
interest rate available.\3\ Therefore, we have calculated the benchmark 
interest rate for short-term YTL-denominated loans based on short-term 
interest rate data for 2005, as reported by The Economist.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See GOT's Questionnaire Response, at 20 (July 14, 2006).
    \4\ In each issue, The Economist reports short-term interest 
data on a percentage per annum basis for select countries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To calculate the benchmark, we sourced short-term interest rates to 
represent quarterly rates for Turkey in 2005. Specifically, we sourced 
the interest rate reported in the last weekly publication of The 
Economist for each quarter of 2005, i.e., the March 26, 2005, June 25, 
2005, September 24, 2005, and December 24, 2005 editions. We then 
simple averaged those rates to calculate an annual short-term interest 
rate for Turkey.\5\ We then compared the nominal average interest rate 
with the interest rates that the company paid against the YTL-
denominated Foreign Trade Companies Short-Term Export Credits and Pre-
Export Credits. See Memorandum to the File concerning the Calculations 
for the Preliminary Results of the 2005 Review of the Countervailing 
Duty Order on Certain Welded Carbon Steel Standard Pipe from Turkey, at 
2 (November 17, 2006).

[[Page 68552]]

This methodology is consistent with the Department's practice. See 2004 
Pipe Memorandum, at ``Benchmark Interest Rates'' under ``Subsidies 
Valuation Information'' and ``Comment 1: Benchmark Interest Rate for 
Turkish Lira Loans.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The short-term TL interest rates sourced from The Economist 
do not include commissions or fees paid to commercial banks, i.e., 
they are nominal rates. See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod 
from Turkey; Final Negative Countervailing Duty Determination, 67 FR 
55815 (August 30, 2002) (``Wire Rod''), and accompanying Issues and 
Decision Memorandum, at ``Benchmark Interest Rates'' (``Wire Rod 
Memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Programs

I. Programs Preliminarily Determined To Be Countervailable

A. Deduction From Taxable Income for Export Revenue
    Addendum 4108 of Article 40 of the Income Tax Law allows companies 
that operate internationally to claim, directly on their corporate 
income tax returns, a tax deduction equal to 0.5 percent of the foreign 
exchange revenue earned from exports and other international 
activities.\6\ The income tax deduction for export earnings may either 
be taken as a lump sum or be used to cover certain undocumented 
expenses, which were incurred through international activities, that 
would otherwise be non-deductible for tax purposes (e.g., expenses paid 
in cash, such as for lodging, gasoline, and food).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ These actions include construction, repair, installation, 
and transportation activities that occur abroad.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the 2004 Pipe Final, we preliminarily find that 
this tax deduction is a countervailable subsidy. See 2004 Pipe 
Memorandum, at ``Deduction from Taxable Income for Export Revenue'' 
under ``Programs Determined To Be Countervailable.'' The deduction 
provides a financial contribution within the meaning of section 
771(5)(D)(ii) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), 
because it represents revenue forgone by the GOT. The deduction 
provides a benefit in the amount of the tax savings to the company 
pursuant to section 771(5)(E) of the Act. It is specific under section 
771(5A)(B) of the Act because its receipt is contingent upon export 
performance. In this review, no new information or evidence of changed 
circumstances has been submitted to warrant reconsideration of the 
Department's prior findings.
    During the review period, BMB, MB,\7\ and Istikbal filed separate 
corporate income tax returns for tax year 2004. Each company utilized 
the deduction for export earnings with respect to its 2004 income 
taxes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See ``Company History'' section, supra, for MB's company 
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department typically treats a tax deduction as a recurring 
benefit in accordance with 19 CFR 351.524(c)(1). To calculate the 
countervailable subsidy rate for this program, we calculated the tax 
savings realized by BMB, MB, and Istikbal in 2005, as a result of the 
deduction for export earnings. We then divided that benefit by 
Borusan's total export sales for 2005. On this basis, we preliminarily 
determine the net countervailable subsidy for this program to be 0.21 
percent ad valorem.
B. Foreign Trade Companies Short-Term Export Credits
    The Foreign Trade Company (``FTC'') loan program was implemented to 
assist large export trading companies with their export financing 
needs. This program is specifically designed to benefit Foreign Trade 
Corporate Companies (``FTCC'') and Sectoral Foreign Trade Companies 
(``SFTC'').\8\ An FTCC is a company whose export performance was at 
least US$75 million in the previous year. For eligible companies, the 
Export Bank will provide short-term export credits based on their past 
export performance. Under this credit program, the Export Bank extends 
short-term export credits directly to exporters in Turkish Lira and 
foreign currency (``FX''), up to 100 percent of the FOB export 
commitment. The program's interest rates are set by the Export Bank and 
the maturity of the loans is usually 180 days for YTL-denominated loans 
and 360 days for FX-denominated loans. To qualify for a FTC loan, in 
addition to submitting the necessary application documents, a company 
must provide a bank letter of guarantee, equivalent to the loan's 
principal and interest amount.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ An SFTC is a grouping of small- and medium-sized companies 
that operate together in a similar sector.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Istikbal, whose FTCC status was renewed in March 2005, was the only 
Borusan company to receive FTC credits during the POR. Istikbal paid 
interest against FTC loans denominated in Turkish Lira.
    Consistent with previous determinations, we preliminarily find that 
these loans confer a countervailable subsidy within the meaning of 
section 771(5) of the Act. See, e.g., 2004 Pipe Memorandum at ``Foreign 
Trade Companies Short-Term Export Credits'' under ``Programs Determined 
To Be Countervailable.'' The loans constitute a financial contribution 
in the form of a direct transfer of funds from the GOT, under section 
771(5)(D)(i) of the Act. A benefit exists under section 771(5)(E)(ii) 
of the Act in the amount of the difference between the payments of 
interest that Istikbal made on its loans during the POR and the 
payments the company would have made on comparable commercial loans. 
The program is also specific in accordance with section 771(5A)(B) of 
the Act because receipt of the loans is contingent upon export 
performance. Further, the FTC loans are not tied to a particular export 
destination. Therefore, we have treated this program as an untied 
export loan program which renders it countervailable regardless of 
whether the loans were used for exports to the United States. See id.
    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.505(a)(1), we have calculated the benefit as 
the difference between the payments of interest that Istikbal made on 
its FTC loans during the POR and the payments the company would have 
made on comparable commercial loans.\9\ In accordance with section 
771(6)(A) of the Act, we subtracted from the benefit amount the fees 
which Istikbal paid to commercial banks for the required letters of 
guarantee. We then divided the resulting benefit by Borusan's total 
export value for 2005. On this basis, we preliminarily find that the 
net countervailable subsidy for this program is 0.01 percent ad 
valorem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See ``Benchmark Interest Rates,'' supra, (discussing the 
benchmark rates used in these preliminary results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Pre-Export Credits

    This program is similar to the FTC credit program described above; 
however, companies classified as either FTC or SFTC are not eligible 
for pre-export loans. Under the pre-export credit program, a company's 
past export performance is considered in evaluating a company's 
eligibility and establishing the company's credit limit. Like FTC 
loans, the Export Bank directly extends to companies pre-export loans, 
which are denominated in either Turkish Lira or foreign currency and 
have a maximum maturity of 360 and 540 days, respectively.\10\ To 
quality for a pre-export loan, in addition to submitting the necessary 
application documents, a company must provide a bank letter of 
guarantee, equivalent to the loan's principal and interest amount. 
During the POR, BMB paid interest against pre-export loans that were 
denominated in both Turkish Lira and U.S. dollars.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The Export Bank also sets the interest rates for this 
export loan program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with previous determinations, we preliminarily find that 
these loans confer a countervailable subsidy within the meaning of 
section 771(5) of the Act. See, e.g., 2004 Pipe Memorandum at ``Pre-
Export Credits'' under ``Programs Determined To Be Countervailable.'' 
The loans constitute a financial contribution in the form of a direct 
transfer of funds from the GOT, under section 771(5)(D)(i) of the Act. 
A

[[Page 68553]]

benefit exists under section 771(5)(E)(ii) of the Act in the amount of 
the difference between the payments of interest that BMB made on its 
loans during the POR and the payments the company would have made on 
comparable commercial loans. The program is also specific in accordance 
with section 771(5A)(B) of the Act because receipt of the loans is 
contingent upon export performance.
    Further, like the FTC loans, these loans are not tied to a 
particular export destination. Therefore, we have treated this program 
as an untied export loan program rendering it countervailable 
regardless of whether the loans were used for exports to the United 
States.
    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.505(a)(1), we have calculated the benefit as 
the difference between the payments of interest that BMB made on its 
pre-export loans during the POR and the payments the company would have 
made on comparable commercial loans.\11\ In accordance with section 
771(6)(A) of the Act, we subtracted from the benefit amount the fees 
which BMB paid to commercial banks for the required letters of 
guarantee. We then divided the resulting benefit by Borusan's total 
export value for 2005. On this basis, we preliminarily find that the 
net countervailable subsidy for this program is 0.01 percent ad 
valorem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See ``Benchmark Interest Rates,'' supra (discussing the 
benchmark rates used in these preliminary results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Program Preliminary Determined To Not Confer Countervailable 
Benefits

A. Inward Processing Certificate Exemption Under the Inward Processing 
Certificate (``IPC'') \12\ program, companies are exempt from paying 
customs duties and value added taxes (``VAT'') on raw material imports 
to be used in the production of exported goods. Companies may choose 
whether to be exempted from the applicable duties and taxes or have 
them refunded upon export. Under the exemption system, companies 
provide a letter of guarantee that is returned to the companies upon 
fulfillment of the committed export.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The IPC program is governed by the following Turkish 
provisions: Customs Code No. 4458 (Articles 80, 108, 111, 115, and 
121), IPC Council of Ministers' Decree No. 2005/8391, and Communique 
of IPR No. Export 2005/1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To participate in this program, a company must hold an IPC, which 
lists the amount of raw materials to be imported and the amount of 
product to be exported. There are two types of IPCs: A D-1 certificate 
and D-3 certificate. During the POR, Borusan utilized D-1 certificates 
associated with imports of raw materials for use in the production of 
carbon steel pipe and tube. Borusan did not utilize any D-3 
certificates during the POR.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For more information on D-3 certificates, see 2004 Pipe 
Memorandum, at ``Inward Processing Certificate Exemption'' under 
``Programs Determined To Not Confer Countervailable Benefits,'' and 
GOT's Questionnaire Response, at 45-48 (July 14, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An IPC specifies the maximum quantity of inputs that can be 
imported under the program. Under the IPC program, the value of 
imported inputs may not exceed the value of the exported products. 
Input/output usage rates listed on an IPC are set by the GOT working in 
conjunction with Turkey's Exporter Associations, which are quasi-
governmental organizations, whose leadership are subject to GOT 
approval. The input/output usage rates vary by product and industry and 
are determined using data from capacity reports submitted by companies 
that apply for IPCs. The input/output usage rates are subject to 
periodic review and verification by the GOT. The GOT uses the input/
output usage rates to ensure that a company's expected export 
quantities are sufficient to cover the quantity of inputs imported 
duty-free under the program.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For more information on how waste/usage rates are set by 
the GOT, see 2004 Pipe Memorandum, at ``Inward Processing 
Certificate Exemption'' under ``Programs Determined To Not Confer 
Countervailable Benefits'' and GOT's Questionnaire Response, at 
Exhibit 5, pages 10-11 (July 14, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.519(a)(1)(ii), a benefit exists to the 
extent that the exemption extends to inputs that are not consumed in 
the production of the exported product, making normal allowances for 
waste, or if the exemption covers charges other than imported charges 
that are imposed on the input. In regard to the VAT exemption granted 
under this program, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.517(a), in the case of the 
exemption upon export of indirect taxes, a benefit exists to the extent 
that the Department determines that the amount exempted exceeds the 
amount levied with respect to the production and distribution of like 
products when sold for domestic consumption.
    In the 2004 Pipe Final, the Department found that, in accordance 
with 19 CFR 351.519(a)(4)(i), the GOT has a system in place to confirm 
which inputs are consumed in the production of the exported product and 
in what amounts, and that the system is reasonable for the purposes 
intended. See 2004 Pipe Memorandum, at ``Inward Processing Certificate 
Exemption'' under ``Programs Determined To Not Confer Countervailable 
Benefits.'' During the POR, under D-1 certificates, Borusan received 
duty and VAT exemptions on certain imported inputs used in the 
production of steel pipes and tubes and not duty or VAT refunds. There 
is no evidence on the record of this review that indicates the amount 
of exempted inputs imported under the program were excessive or that 
Borusan used the imported inputs for any other product besides those 
exported.
    Therefore, consistent with the 2004 Pipe Final, we preliminarily 
determine that the tax and duty exemptions, which Borusan received on 
imported inputs under D-1 certificates of the IPC program, did not 
confer countervailable benefits as Borusan consumed the imported inputs 
in the production of the exported product, making normal allowance for 
waste. We further preliminarily find that the VAT exemption did not 
confer countervailable benefits on Borusan because the exemption does 
not exceed the amount levied with respect to the production and 
distribution of like products when sold for domestic consumption. 
Further, because Borusan did not import any goods under a D-3 
certificate during the POR, we preliminarily determine that this aspect 
of the IPC program was not used.

 III. Programs Preliminarily Determined To Not Be Used

    We examined the following programs and preliminarily determine that 
Borusan did not apply for or receive benefits under these programs 
during the POR:
    A. VAT Support Program (Incentive Premium on Domestically Obtained 
Goods) \15\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Although we found this program to be terminated in Wire 
Rod, residual payments for purchases made prior to the program's 
termination were permitted. See Wire Rod Memorandum, at ``VAT 
Support Program'' under ``Programs Determined To Be 
Countervailable.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    B. Pre-Shipment Export Credits.
    C. Post-Shipment Export Loans.
    D. Pre-Shipment Rediscount Loans.
    E. Subsidized Turkish Lira Credit Facilities.
    F. Subsidized Credit for Proportion of Fixed Expenditures.
    G. Regional Subsidies.

Preliminary Results of Review

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we have calculated a 
subsidy rate for Borusan for the period January 1, 2005, through 
December 31, 2005. We preliminarily determine that the total net 
countervailable subsidy rate is 0.23 percent ad valorem, which

[[Page 68554]]

is de minimis, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c).
    The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') 15 days after the date of 
publication of the final results of this review. If the final results 
remain the same as these preliminary results, the Department will 
instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to countervailing duties all 
shipments of subject merchandise produced by Borusan entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption from January 1, 2005, through 
December 31, 2005. The Department will also instruct CBP not to collect 
cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties on all shipments of 
the subject merchandise produced by Borusan, entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the 
final results of this review.
    We will also 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 companies covered by this order, but not 
examined in this review, are those established in the most recently 
completed administrative proceeding for each company. These rates shall 
apply to all non-reviewed companies until a review of a company 
assigned these rates is requested.

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. 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. 
Parties who submit argument in this proceeding are requested to submit 
with the argument: (1) A statement of the issues, 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, 37 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. See 19 CFR 
351.305(b)(3). The Department will publish the final results of this 
administrative review, including the results of its analysis of 
arguments made in any case or rebuttal briefs.
    This administrative review is issued and published in accordance 
with section 751(a)(1), 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: November 17, 2006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
 [FR Doc. E6-20008 Filed 11-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P