(Cite as: 61 FR 39949)

NOTICES

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[C-351-406]

Certain Agricultural Tillage Tools From Brazil; Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review

Wednesday, July 31, 1996

*39949

(Cite as: 61 FR 39949, *39949)

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 agricultural tillage tools from Brazil. For information on the net subsidy for the reviewed company, as well for all non-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 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: July 31, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gayle Longest or Anne D'Alauro, Office of CVD/AD Enforcement, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14^th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3338 or (202) 482-2786.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On October 22, 1985, the Department published in the Federal Register (57 FR 10885) the countervailing duty order on certain agricultural tillage tools from Brazil. On October 5, 1995, the Department published a notice of "Opportunity to Request an Administrative Review" (60 FR 52149) of this countervailing duty order. We received a timely request for review, and we initiated the review, covering the period January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1994 on November 16, 1995 (60 FR 57573). In accordance with section 355.22(a) of the Department's Interim Regulations, this review covers only those producers or exporters of the subject merchandise for which a review was specifically requested (see Antidumping and Countervailing Duties: Interim Regulations; Request for Comments, 60 FR 25130 (May 11, 1995)) (Interim Regulations). Accordingly, this review covers Marchesan Implementos Argicolas, S.A. This review also covers 5 programs. As explained in the memoranda from the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration dated November 22, 1995, and January 11, 1996 (on file in the public file of the Central Records Unit, Room B-099 of the Department of Commerce), all deadlines were 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 July 31, 1996 and the deadline for the final results of this review is no later than 120 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 Act). The Department is conducting this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act.

Scope of the Review

Imports covered by this review are shipments of certain round shaped agricultural tillage tools (discs) with plain or notched edge, such as colters and furrow-opener blades. During the review period, such merchandise was classifiable under item numbers 8432.21.00, 8432.29.00, 8432.80.00 and 8432.90.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS). 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 by the Government of Brazil and Marchesan. We followed standard verification procedures, including meeting with government and company officials and examination of relevant accounting and financial records and other original source documents. Our verification results are outlined in the public versions of the verification reports, which are on file in the Central Records Unit (Room B-099 of the Main Commerce Building).

Analysis of Programs

I. Programs Preliminarily Determined To Be Not Used

We examined the following programs and preliminarily determine that the producer and/or exporter of the subject merchandise did not apply for or receive benefits under these programs during the period of review:

A. Accelerated Depreciation for Brazilian-Made Capital Goods

B. Preferencial Financing for Industrial Enterprises by Banco do Brasil (FST and

EGF loans)

C. SUDENE Corporate Income Tax Reduction for Companies Located in the

Northeast of Brazil

D. Preferencial Financing under PROEX (formerly under Resolution 68 and 509

through FINEX)

E. Preferencial Financing under FINEP

Preliminary Results of Review

In accordance with section 355.22(c)(4)(ii) of the Department's Interim Regulations, we calculated an individual subsidy rate for each producer/exporter subject to this administrative review. For the period January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1994, we preliminarily determine the net subsidy for Marchesan to be zero percent ad valorem. As provided for in the Act, any rate less than 0.5 percent ad valorem in an administrative review is de minimis. Accordingly, no countervailing duties will be assessed. If the final results of this review remain the same as these preliminary results, the Department intends to instruct the U.S. Customs Service to liquidate, without regard to countervailing duties, shipments of the subject merchandise from Marchesan *39950

exported on or after January 1, 1994, and on or before December 31, 1994. Also, the cash deposit required for this company will be zero. 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. Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. §355.22(g), 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) and Floral Trade Council v. United States, 822 F.Supp. 766 (CIT 1993) (interpreting 19 C.F.R. §353.22(e), the antidumping regulation on automatic assessment, which is identical to 19 C.F.R. § 355.22(g)). 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. See Certain Round-Shaped Agricultural Tillage Tools from Brazil; Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 57 FR 22461. 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, 1994 through December 31, 1994, 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

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 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 C.F.R. §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 C.F.R. §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: July 19, 1996.

Robert S. LaRussa,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.