NOTICES

                         DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

                     International Trade Administration

                                [C-274-002]

        Carbon Steel Wire Rod From Trinidad and Tobago Preliminary Affirmative
                      Countervailing Duty Determination

                          Thursday, October 20, 1983

 AGENCY: International Trade Administrastion, Commerce.

 ACTION: Notice.

 SUMMARY: We preliminarily determined that certain benefits which constitute bounties or
 grants within the meaning of the countervailing duty law are being provided to
 manufacturers, producers or exporters in Trinidad and Tobago of carbon steel wire rod,
 as described in the "Scope of Investigation" section of this notice. Therefore, we are
 directing the U.S. Customs Service to suspend liquidation of all entries of the merchandise
 subject to this determination which are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
 consumption, and to require a cash deposit or bond on this merchandise in an amount
 equal to 12.29 percent of the ad valorem value of the subject merchandise. If this
 investigation proceeds normally, we will make our final determination by December 27,
 1983.

 EFFECTIVE DATE: October 20, 1983.

 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Andrew Debicke, Office of Investigations, Import
 Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230, telephone (202)
 377-5403.

 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

 Preliminary Determination

 Based upon our investigation, we preliminarily determine that there is reason to believe
 that benefits which constitute bounties or grants within the meaning of section 303 of the
 Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), are being provided to producers or exporters in
 Trinidad and Tobago of carbon steel wire rod, as described in the "Scope of Investigation"
 section of this notice.
 For purposes of this investigation, we preliminarily determine that government guaranteed
 loans confer a benefit to manufacturers, producers, or exporters in Trinidad and Tobago
 of wire rod. The estimated bounty or grant is 12.29 percent ad valorem.

 Case History

 On May 16, 1983, we received a petition from counsel for Atlanic Steel Company,
 Continental Steel Corporation, Georgetown Steel Corportion, Georgetown Texas Steel
 Corporation and Raritan River Steel Company on behalf of the U.S. industry producing
 carbon steel wire rod. The petition alleged that producers, manufacturers, or exporters in
 Trinidad and Tobago of steel wire rod receive, directly or indirectly, bounties or grants
 within the meaning of section 303 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
 We found the petition to contain sufficient grounds upon which to initiate a
 countervailing duty investigation and, on June 6, 1983, we initiated a countervailing
 duty investigation (48 FR. 27415). We stated that we would issue a preliminary
 determination on or before August 9, 1983. We subsequently determined that the
 investigation is "extraordinarily complicated," as defined in section 703(C) or the Act, and
 postponed our preliminary determination until October 13, 1983 (48 FR 43206).
 Trinidad and Tobago is not a "country under the Agreement" within the meaning of section
 701(b) of the Act, and, therefore, section 303 of the Act applies to this investigation. Under
 this section, since the merchandise being investigated is dutiable, the domestic industry is
 not required to allege that, and the U.S. International Trade Commission is not required to
 determine whether, imports of this product cause or threaten material injury to a U.S.
 industry.
 On April 18, 1983, we presented questionnaires concerning the allegations in the petition to
 the 

*48695

 government of Trinidad and Tobago and to counsel for the Iron and Steel
 Company of Trinidad and Tobago (ISCOTT) in Washington, D.C. On August 12, 1983, we
 received the responses to our questionnaire from the government of Trinidad and Tobago
 and ISCOTT.

 Scope of Investigation 

 The product covered by this investigation is carbon steel wire rod, a coiled semi-finished,
 hot-rolled carbon steel product of approximately round solid cross section, not under 0.20
 inch nor over 0.74 inch in diameter, not tempered, not treated, not partly manufactured,
 and valued over 4 cents per pound. The merchandise is currently classified under item
 number 607.17 of the Tariff Schedules of the United States.
 ISCOTT is the sole producer and exporter of carbon steel wire rod from Trinidad and
 Tobago.
 The period for which we are measuring subsidization is January 1, 1982 to April 30, 1983.

 Analysis of Programs 

 In their responses, the government of Trinidad and Tobago and ISCOTT provided data for
 the applicable period. Based upon our analysis of the petition, the response to our
 questionnaire, and legal briefs submitted by counsel for the ISCOTT and the petitioners, we
 determine the following:

 I. Programs Preliminarily Determined To Confer Bounties or Grants

 We preliminarily determine that a bounty or grant is provided to manufactuers, producers,
 or exporters in Trinidad and Tobago of carbon steel wire rod under the program listed
 below.

 A. Government Guarantees of Debt Service 

 Section 401, article I of the Completion and Cash Deficiency Agreement (CCDA), a financing
 contract entered into by the Government of Trinidad and Tobago (GOTT), ISCOTT and
 several external private and government-sponsored lenders, states "if, for any reason
 whatsoever, ISCOTT shall fail to pay or to pay in full any debt service amount on any debt
 service date with respect thereto, the Government, in consideration for the loans made by
 the lenders to ISCOTT, shall, and hereby covenants and agrees with each of the lenders to,
 pay to the lenders or the lender entitled to such debt service amount the cash deficiency in
 respect thereof . . . within 10 days after the applicable debt service date, unless prior
 thereto ISCOTT shall have paid such cash deficiency in full."
 During the period 1978-1981, ISCOTT obtained several medium-term loans from private
 lenders and other government loan agencies in the United States and elsewhere. Petitioners
 allege that the guarantees provided for in Article IV of the CCDA enabled ISCOTT to obtain
 these loans at interest rates several points below those charged for comparable commercial
 loans. They contend that ISCOTT would have had to pay a substantial premium over the
 commercial rate charged (estimated by petitioner as 5 percent) if the loan financing had not
 been backed by a government guarantee.
 Regarding the inclusion of a risk premium in the calculation of the benchmarks for
 measuring potential benefits to ISCOTT resulting from the GOTT's guarantees, the
 Department generally avoids such adjustments. Without substantial evidence on the record
 to support the use of a specific primium amount, we run the risk of substituting speculative
 and debatable assumptions as to the value of a guarantee for the recorded, independent
 judgment of the financial marketplace. In the absence of a sound basis upon which to fix the
 value of a risk premium, we have calculated the benefit to ISCOTT of the GOTT's guarantees
 by estimating the value of its not having to pay loan guarantee fees otherwise payable by a
 borrower in a comparable commercial transaction.
 Similarly, we have made no adjustment in the rates paid by ISCOTT to reflect the company's
 payment of withholding taxes on foreign loans. Respondents contend that these tax
 liabilities result in a higher effective rate on such loans. The Department's long-standing
 administrative practice has been to consider the entire bounty or grant. Under section
 771(6) of the Act the tax consequencies of countervailable benefits do not constitute an
 allowable offset.
 On the basis of our understanding of standard commercial banking practice in comparable
 transactions, we have determined the normal guarantee fees payable in this situation. To
 calculate the subsidy value we compared the interest rates actually paid by ISCOTT with an
 adjusted rate reflecting the additional value of a government guarantee. After calculating
 the payment differential in each year of the loan, we then calculated the present value of
 this stream of benfits using the risk free rate, the secondary market rate of interest for
 long-term government debt in Trinidad and Tobago, as the discount rate. This amount was
 then allocated evenly over the life of the appropriate loan to yield the annual subsidy
 amount. The estimated net bounty or grant is 12.29 percent ad valorem.

 II. Programs Preliminarily Determined Not To Be Used

 We preliminarily determine that the following programs have not been used by producers
 or exporters in Trinidad and Tobago of carbon steel wire rod.

 A. Tax Benefits 

 Petitioners allege that ISCOTT benefits from preferential tax treatment accorded under the
 Fiscal Incentives Act and other provisions of the tax laws of Trinidad and Tobago.
 The responses of both ISCOTT and the GOTT indicate that ISCOTT has not received any
 benefits or allowances available under the Fiscal Incentives Act or other provisions of the
 tax laws of Trinidad and Tobago. We will, however, seek additional information regarding
 the possibility that potential tax benefits arising out these provisions may be carried
 forward to later years.

 B. Worker Training

 Petitioners allege ISCOTT has benefitted from worker training subsidies provided through
 the Industrial Development Corporation.
 The responses of both ISCOTT and the GOTT indicate the company has received no
 assistance for employee training under this program during the period of investigation. The
 responses do indicate, however, that some ISCOTT employees received training from the
 Management Development Centre (MDC). The MDC is a statutory body governed by a board
 of directors composed of individuals from both the public and private sectors. Courses
 offered and fees charged are approved by the board. Fees for the training of ISCOTT workers
 under this program were paid by the company. We will seek additional information
 regarding the MDC during verification.

 C. Marketing Assistance 

 Petitioners allege ISCOTT has benefitted from marketing assistance provided by the GOTT
 through the International Marketing Organization Fund. The responses of both the GOTT
 and ISCOTT indicate ISCOTT has received no assistance under this program.

 D. Preferential Export Insurance 

 Petitioners allege ISCOTT has benefitted from preferential export insurance provided
 through the Export Insurance Company, Ltd. The responses 

*48696

 of both ISCOTT and
 the GOTT indicate ISCOTT did not purchase any export credit insurance during the period
 for which we are measuring subsidization.

 E. Export Shipping Rates 

 Petitioners allege ISCOTT has benefitted from preferential shipping rates provided at
 government direction or with government financial assistance.
 The Shipping Corporation of Trinidad and Tobago (SCOTT) acts as a broker for ISCOTT in
 locating private vessel owners and negotiating shipping fees. As such, SCOTT is not
 responsible for setting rates, nor does it own any vessels. It is reimbursed for its services on
 a commission basis.
 During the period of investigation, ISCOTT has used both SCOTT and a private concern
 based in New York as its agents for locating vessels and negotiating shipping rates. Rates
 have varied with each shipment, and ISCOTT has received no direct assistance from the
 GOTT for purposes of paying export freight charges. We have no evidence to indicate
 ISCOTT has benefitted from preferential shipping rates as the result of direct or indirect
 action by the GOTT.

 F. Preferential Loans 

 In our initiation notice, we stated that we would investigate the allegation that ISCOTT
 received loans from the GOTT at preferential interest rates. Information now available to
 the Department indicates that private lending institutions served as the sources of ISCOTT's
 debt financing. Therefore, we preliminarily determine that no countervailable benefit exists
 with respect to this allegation. Regarding the GOTT guarantees of ISCOTT's debt financing,
 see the section of this notice entitled "Government Guarantees of Debt Service."

 III. Programs for Which Additional Information Is Needed

 A. Government Equity Participation in ISCOTT 

 The Iron and Steel Company of Trinidad and Tobago was incorporated June 20, 1975 to
 serve as the vehicle for a joint venture between the Government of Trinidad and Tobago
 and three private investors--Hoogovens Igmuiden, B.V.; Kawasaki Steel Corporation and
 Mitsui & Company. As originally conceived, the venture would involve the parties in the
 ownership and construction of a greenfield steel mill dedicated primarily to billet
 production. In 1976-77, changing market conditions led to reevaluation of the project. The
 GOTT purchased the equity interests of its partners and redefined the project to envisage
 construction of a scaled down mini-mill oriented primarily towards finished products.
 Specifically wire rod. After additional feasibility study, the GOTT determined to proceed
 with the redefined project. A financing package put together by a private concern was
 proposed and, on December 1, 1978, ISCOTT the GOTT, Barclays Bank, Ltd. (as Trustee) and
 several external private and government-sponsored lenders entered into a financing
 contract, the Completion and Cash Deficiency Agreement. Under the terms of the CCDA, the
 lenders committed to a total of approximately U.S. $243 million in capital financing. For its
 part, the GOTT agreed to provide equity investment in ISCOTT at a level which maintained a
 60/40 debt to equity ratio for the company. Construction commenced on this basis, and
 ISCOTT began commercial wire rod production in August 1981. Completion of construction,
 as defined in the CCDA, is now scheduled for November 1983. Throughout this period the
 GOTT has made equity contributions to ISCOTT in accordance with its obligations under the
 CCDA.
 It is well established that government equity participation in a commercial enterprise is not
 a subsidy per se. In assessing whether such participation gives rise to subsidies within the
 meaning of the countervailing duty law, the Department applies the standard of whether
 a government's investment is not inconsistent with commercial considerations. The issue is
 whether the investment, analyzed in terms of objective business or investment criteria
 operative at the time the investment was made, , may be deemed commercially reasonable
 in that, from the perspective of a commercial investor making the same decision in the same
 circumstance, there is a reasonable expectation of return within an acceptable period of
 time.
 The test whether a particular investment is not inconsistent with commercial
 considerations is based on a case-by-case analysis of the commercial context in which the
 investment decision is made. In the case of ISCOTT, an assessment of commercial
 reasonableness must take into account the special circumstances of a start-up project in a
 developing country.
 Factors ordinarily applied in the case of investment in an established industry or enterprise
 in a developed country may require adjustment or prove inappropriate. For example,
 investments in developing countries pose a variety of special problems which may include
 scarcity of capital, lack of complementary infrastructure, shortages of skilled labor,
 insufficient managerial experience and other "learning curve" costs. While these may, in
 some senses, increase the element of risk in such investments, the increased risk which may
 be present does not of itself become dispositive of the issue of whether a particular
 investment in a developing economy may be viewed as inconsistent with commercial
 considerations.
 On the basis of preliminary analysis, the GOTT's decision to proceed with the ISCOTT project
 and its subsequent actions to maintain its commitment to it do not appear to contradict the
 requirements of commercial reasonableness. First, as originally conceived and later
 redefined, the ISCOTT mill was designed to make use of certain natural advantages.
 Trinidad and Tobago has ample natural gas reserves. The direct reduction of iron (DRI)
 process employed in ISCOTT's mill is particularly well suited to capitalize on the availability
 of natural gas. Trinidad and Tobago also enjoys a strategic geographic location close to
 plentiful sources of iron ore and to potential Caribbean, North American and South
 American markets. Second, the decision to install state of the art technology such as DRI,
 electric arc furnaces, continuous casters and high speed rolling equipment builds upon
 natural advantages by providing long-term cost efficiencies and producing consistent
 qualities of steel. Third, at the time the ISCOTT venture was initially conceived, the
 consensus among steel industry analysts was that projected demand would require
 installation of considerable new worldwide capacity by 1985. Moreover, as market
 conditions changed, the scope and purpose of the project were altered in response.
 GOTT's commitments to the ISCOTT project were undertaken on the basis of at least three
 independent feasibility studies prepared by private consultants. The original concept of an
 integrated mini-mill emerged from both engineering and economic studies. The subsequent
 adaptation of the project to emphasize wire rod production was also based on a study which
 assessed the potential viability of the redefined project in a changed market. Finally,
 preparation of the financing package which formed the basis of the CCDA entailed a third,
 independent assessment of the project's financial prospects. All these studies drew tentative
 conclusions that the project was feasible and would be profitable. In our view, the GOTT's
 decision to supplement its own evaluation of the commercial viability of the ISCOTT project
 with independent 

*48697

 analyses by private consultants indicates a careful approach
 consistent with a prudent investment policy.
 Independent confirmation of favorable projections made in the studies noted may be
 discerned from the decisions of several private commercial lenders to participate in the
 debt financing of the ISCOTT project. Participants include private lenders in the U.S., Japan,
 Canada and the Federal Republic of Germany. In addition to reviewing the feasibility studies
 commissioned by the GOTT, these lenders were also in a position to draw on their own
 internal resources and experience to assess the project's viability. That they chose to lend
 to the project is further indication of its commercial reasonableness. Moreover, while we do
 not question that guarantees provided by the GOTT served as an inducement to private
 lenders to finance the ISCOTT project, it is our understanding of commercial banking
 practice that any decision to lend would also have been based on additional consideration
 of the underlying project's viability and potential apart from the presence of governmental
 guarantees or backing. In these circumstances, the participation of private lenders should
 not be discounted as having no bearing on the central issue of whether investment in
 ISCOTT is consistent with commercial considerations.
 If the GOTT's decision to commence the ISCOTT project appears to have been carried out on
 a sound commercial basis, its continued commitment through the period of construction
 and beginning of commerical production poses somewhat different questions. In this stage,
 fundamental assumptions supporting the commercial reasonableness of the decision to
 initiate the project must be measured against actual development and operating
 experience. The issue is whether that experience raises fundamental questions about the
 commercial reasonableness of the GOTT's maintaining its commitment to the ISCOTT
 project.
 As noted supra, the terms of the CCDA included a commitment by the GOTT to maintain a
 60/40 debt-to-equity ratio for ISCOTT. In addition, under Article III of the CCDA, the GOTT
 may provide funds necessary to achieve completion of the project. The GOTT's equity
 investments in ISCOTT are triggered by either a report or request by the company. The
 amount of capital sought is determined by deducting the cash surplus on hand or projected
 and available loan capital from total cash liabilities. The amount of the difference is invested
 by the GOTT in either working or fixed asset capital. In return for its payments, the GOTT is
 issued stock at the established price of TT $100 per share. Funds received in this manner
 are charged against ISCOTT's authorized share capital.
 The GOTT has continued to make heavy equity investments in ISCOTT during a period in
 which the company has encountered significant difficulties associated with construction,
 start-up and initial commercial operation. Unanticipated construction delays have resulted
 in substantially higher than projected costs which have been compounded by the effects of
 inflation. Breakdowns in key plant components and delays in obtaining replacements have
 also hampered the project. Shortages of adequately trained operations, maintenance and
 management personnel present continuing problems. The plant has yet to approach full
 rated capacity, an engineering performance tests for all production units have not been
 completed. As a consequence, ISCOTT has not begun to achieve significant production
 levels or earnings on its products. It cash flow per-ton of capactiy figures remain negative.
 All of this has occurred against the bankground of a severely deteriorated world market for
 steel.
 The fact construction delays and other difficulties have occurred during the course of
 ISCOTT's start-up phase does not, however, necessarily lead to the conclusion that the
 assumptions and expectations which arguably supported to GOTT's decision to embark
 upon the project are no longer tenable. First, natural advantages such as reliable and
 plentiful sources of basic inputs and location appear to continue to support ISCOTT's
 long-term prospects. Second, particularly in a developing country, the learning curve costs
 associated with the installation of a technologically advanced industrial facility may
 reasonably be expected to be higher than those in a more developed economy. Similarly,
 shortages of adequately trained manpower needed for the construction and maintenance of
 a major industrial plant make it more likely there will be delays in both construction and the
 achievement of fully operational status. In this respect it is significant that the CCDA made
 specific allowance for the possibility of delay, and that its final deadline for the certification
 of completion has not, as yet, been exceeded. Third, while ISCOTT's cash flow per-ton of
 capacity figures are negative, they nevertheless compare favorably with available estimates
 of expected per-ton development costs for new steel mills in both developing and
 developed countries. Fourth, while ISCOTT is not profitable, it has been conducting limited
 commercial operations for a period of only 24 months. Regardless of location in a
 developed or developing country, the Department has preliminarily found no indication in
 any of the sources available to it that a new industrial facility requiring large capital
 investment should be expected to show a positive rate of return within so short a time from
 the commencement of production. To the contrary, it appears the reasonable commercial
 expectation is that the project would normally be expected to operate at a loss for several
 years before beginning to earn a positive return on the initial investment. Fifth, lenders who
 participated in ISCOTT's debt financing arrangement do not appear to have withdrawn their
 support and have continued to make funds available to the company. Sixth, despite
 problems with start-up, ISCOTT has made some shipments to unrelated buyers, thereby
 demonstrating the existence of at least a potential market for its products.
 In sum, while ISCOTT may not yet have unquestionably proven itself as a viable,
 self-sustaining venture, nothing in its experience to date establishes a compelling argument
 that the considerations or expectations which led the GOTT to begin the project have, in
 light of subsequent developments, lost all measure of commercial reasonableness. Though
 difficulties encountered during start-up have led to substantial cost increases not
 contemplated in the original projections, the GOTT's continuing commitment to the project,
 a commitment seconded by independent lenders, does not at this juncture appear wholly
 inconsistent with commerical considerations as we perceive them to operate within the
 context of establishing a technologically advanced greenfield industrial facility in a
 developing country.
 Nevertheless, we are not unmindful of petitioner's contention that the withdrawal of Dutch
 and Japanese co-venturers at an early stage of the project raises questions as to its
 feasibility. We note, however, that the project underwent a basic alteration in concept
 following this withdrawal. The original plan had been for a mill to produce over a million
 metric tons of billets annually. A substantial portion of this capacity was to be committed to
 "off-take" by the co-venturers. Changing market conditions led to a reorientation of the

 *48698

 project towards the production of a specific finished product, wire rod. In addition
 to raising the possibility of direct competition with the co-venturers, this reorientation
 substantially removed their interest indications that, in at least one case, the co-venturers'
 own financial difficulties may have been an element in the decision to withdraw.
 Finally, we also note the Mitsui resurfaced as a lender to the project.
 As evidenced by its continuing and expanding equity commitment to ISCOTT, the GOTT has
 chosen to stay with the project in the apparent belief that, start-up problems
 notwithstanding, the company's long-term prospects justify continued support which will
 eventually pay off. On the basis of the information currently available to us, we are not in a
 position to preliminarily determine that assessment is not consistent with commercial
 considerations. We will, however, seek additional information regarding this program.

 B. Loss Coverage or Absorption

 Petitioners allege that at least a portion of the funds which the GOTT has committed to the
 ISCOTT project since the commencement of commercial operations should be treated as
 loss coverage or absorption. In effect, they maintain that ISCOTT has been the beneficiary
 of sublstantial operating studies without which the company could not remain viable.
 As discussed in the section of this notice titled "Equity Participation by the Government",
 the GOTT's continued commitment to getting ISCOTT off the ground does not appear to
 represent an investment inconsistent with commercial considerations as we view then
 within the context of the start-up of a new industry in a developing country. While ISCOTT
 has begun to market its products on an intermittent basis, it is not yet a fully operational
 enterprise. From this perspective, equity infusions by the GOTT which may in some
 instances serve to offset initial operating losses may still be viewed primarily as
 investsments in the capitalization and establishment of ISCOTT rather than as operating
 subsidies. As such, they remain within the realm of commercial reasonableness which
 governs with respect to investment in the start-up of an enterprise. We will seek additional
 information regarding this issue during verification.

 C. Point Lisas Development Zone

 Petitioners allege the Point Lisas Development Zone, in which ISCOTT's steel mill is located,
 represents the GOTT's effort to establish an infrastruture specifically designed to support
 the company's operations. They allege that ISCOTT is the beneficiary of preferential rental
 or lease terms, that the Zone's Marine Bulk and Export Terminal was specially designed for
 use by ISCOTT and that roads, power lines and a natural gas pipeline have been provided to
 ISCOTT on terms which do not reflect their true cost.
 The responses state that services similar to those provided in the zone do not exist in any
 other part of Trinidad and Tobago. Information currently available indicates rates paid by
 ISCOTT for the use of developed land within the Point Lisas Development Zone are paid
 according to a formula applied to all lessees in the area. The presence of other lessees within
 the Zone is also an indication that its facilities are not dedicated to sole use by ISCOTT. We
 will seek additional information regarding the Point Lisas Development Zone during
 verification to determine whether a specific or regional bounty or grant is being provided.

 D. Import Duty Exemptions

 Under the laws of Trinidad & Tobago imports may or may not be subject to duties under
 any one of three tariff schedules. Products on the First Schedule are assigned duties ranging
 from zero to some precentage of value. Those on the Second Schedule benefit from a general
 exemption. The Third Schedule establishes conditional exemptions for approved industries.
 The First and Second Schedules are general enactments apparently applicable to all
 industries in Trinidad and Tobago. Section 49A of the Customs Act of 1973 empowers the
 Government to grant duty exemptions on any merchandise imported by a company which
 is within the approved industry list of the Third Schedule. ISCOTT has applied for and
 received exemptions under this provision.
 On its face, the grant of duty exemptions to "approved industries" listed in the Third
 Schedule appears to establish a countervailable element of preferentiality. Examination of
 the Third Schedule, however, shows that approximately 76 industries in Trinidad and
 Tobago are apparently able to qualify for a Third Schedule exemption. In addition, a
 substantial portion of the items subject to a conditional exemption under the Third
 Schedule already qualify for a general Second Schedule exemption. Other items are assessed
 a duty free rate under the First Schedule. Finally, in a number of instances, individual
 construction contractors on the ISCOTT project have sought Third Schedule exemptions on
 their own behalf, and the direct or indirect benefit to ISCOTT cannot be calculated with any
 reasonable degree of certitude. Consequently, we will seek additional information regarding
 this program during verification.

 E. Preferential Prices for Natural Gas

 The petitioners allege that ISCOTT benefits from the provision of natural gas through
 government owned entities at preferential prices.
 On the basis of information currently available, it appears that the price paid by ISCOTT for
 natural gas is established through negotiations between ISCOTT and the National Gas
 Company and/or the National Energy Company. There is no evidence on the record to
 indicate that these negotiations are not conducted at arm's length. Typical contracts
 between ISCOTT and its suppliers provide for a base price MMBTU with per annum escalator
 clauses and pass-through provisions to cover increases in the prices charged ISCOTT's
 suppliers by the AMCO Trinidad Oil Company, and independent, non-government owned
 entity. Since the prices ISCOTT pays for natural gas are negotiated at arm's length and
 ultimately based on the prices paid by its suppliers to an independent producer, we
 preliminarily determine ISCOTT receives no benefits from the provision of natural gas at
 perferential prices. We will, however, seek additional information regarding this program
 during verification.

 F. Short Term Loans

 ISCOTT indicates the receipt of several short-term loans from private sources during the
 period of investigation. Some of these loans have been repaid and others have been
 rolled-over. At this time, we have no evidence to indicate that these loans were made on a
 preferential basis, nor whether a guarantee fee was levied. We will seek additional
 information on these short-term loans.

 Verification

 In accordance with section 776(a) of the Act, we will verify all the information used in
 reaching our final determination.

 Suspension of Liquidation

 In accordance with section 703 of the Act, we are directing the U.S. Customs Service to
 suspend liquidation on all entries of Carbon steel wire rod from Trinidad and Tobago
 which are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of
 publication of this notice in the Federal 

*48699

 Register, and to require a cash deposit or
 the posting of a bond for each such entry of the merchandise in an amount equal to 12.29
 percent of the ad valorem value of the subject merchandise.

 Public Comment

 In accordance with § 355.35 of the Commerce Department Regulations, if requested, we will
 hold a public hearing to afford interested parties an opportunity to comment on this
 preliminary determination at 10:00 a.m. on November 14, 1983, Room 3078 at the U.S.
 Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.
 20230. Individuals who wish to participate in the hearing must submit a request to the
 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Room 3099B, at the above address
 within 10 days of this notice's publication. Requests should contain: (1) The party's name,
 address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; (3) the reason for
 attending; and (4) a list of the issues to be discussed. In addition, prehearing briefs must be
 submitted to the Deputy Assistant Secretary by November 7, 1983. Oral presentations will
 be limited to issues raised in the briefs. All written views should be filed in accordance with
 19 CFR 355.46 within 30 days of this notice's publication, at the above address and in at
 least 10 copies.

 Alan F. Holmer,

 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

 October 13, 1983.

 [FR Doc. 83-28563 Filed 10-19-83; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M