52 FR 48732
NOTICES
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-475-702]
Preliminary Negative Countervailing Duty Determination; Certain Granite
Products From Italy
Thursday, December 24, 1987
*48732
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: We preliminarily determine that no benefits which constitute subsidies
within the meaning of the countervailing duty law are being provided to
manufacturers, producers or exporters in Italy of certain granite products as
described in the "Scope of Investigation" section of this notice. The estimated net
subsidy is 0.36 percent ad valorem for Granitex S.p.A. and for all non-respondent
manufacturers, producers and exporters in Italy of certain granite products.
This rate is de minimis. The rate for all other
*48733
respondent companies is either de minimis or zero.
We have notified the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) of our
determination. If this investigation proceeds normally, we will make a final
determination by March 3, 1988.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 24, 1987.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Mark Linscott, Lori Cooper or Barbara
Tillman, Office of Investigation, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 377-8330, 377-8320 or
377-2438.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preliminary Determination
Based on our investigation, we preliminary determine that no benefits which
constitute subsidies within the meaning of section 701 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), are being provided to manufacturers, producers or exporters in
Italy of certain granite products. For purpose of this investigation, the following
programs are preliminarily found to be countervailable:
- Reduction of Social Security Payments for Companies Located in the Mezzogiorno
Region.
- Regional Loan Program under Law 902.
- Local Tax Concessions under Law 614.
We preliminarily determine the estimated net subsidy to be 0.36 percent ad
valorem for Granitex S.p.A. and for all non-respondent manufacturers, producers
and exporters in Italy of certain granite products. This rate is de minimis and, as
such, does not constitute a subsidy.
Case History
Since the last Federal Register publication pertaining to this investigation [the
Notice of Initiation (52 FR 31651, August 21, 1987)], the following events have
occurred. On August 27, 1987, we presented a questionnaire to the Government of
Italy in Washington, DC, concerning petitioner's allegations. Due to the large
number of Italian producers and exporters of the subject merchandise, we followed
our practice of requesting the government to identify the largest producers and
exporters in rank order comprising 60 percent of the value of the subject
merchandise exported to the United States in 1986, and to forward questionnaires
to them.
On September 21, 1987, all of the companies identified by the Italian government as
comprising the top 60 percent filed timely requests for exclusion from any
countervailing duty order (See section on exclusion requests, below). On
September 27, 1987, the following firms submitted responses to our questionnaire,
which included responses on behalf of their related companies: Campolonghi Italia
S.p.A., Euromarble S.p.A., Formai & Mariani S.R.L., Fratelli Guarda S.p.A., Henraux
S.p.A., Pisani Brothers S.p.A., and Savema S.p.A. On September 30, 1987, we
received a response from the Government of Italy.
Because the largest firms accounting for 60 percent requested exclusion, thereby
setting themselves on a separate investigative track from those Italian companies
that did not request exclusion, we chose a new representative group of companies
and requested questionnaire responses from them. In accordance
with our standard practice, we selected the largest producers and exporters
accounting for at least 60 percent of the value of the remaining pool of the subject
merchandise exported to the United States after deducting from total exports of
subject merchandise to the United States and value of exports of the companies
requesting exclusion.
Based on our analysis, we determined that responses from the following ten
additional companies were necessary to ensure that our investigation covered a
group of companies that is representative of all Italian companies which export the
subject merchandise to the United States: Alimonti Fratelli S.p.A., Antolini Luigi &
Company S.p.A., Cremar S.p.A., Granitex S.p.A., Guglielmo & Alberto Bonotti S.n.C.,
Marcolini Marmi S.p.A., Margraf S.p.A., Porcelli Marmi S.p.A., Serio Carlo &
Company S.p.A., and Valsega Marmi S.n.C.
On October 30, 1987, we informed the Italian government that we would seek
questionnaire responses from the ten additional companies listed above, and on
November 2, 1987, we presented a questionnaire to the Government of Italy
concerning these companies. Responses from the additional companies and from
the government were received on December 3, 1987. In addition, on November 18,
1987, we delivered supplemental/deficiency questionnaires to the Government of
Italy and all companies requesting exclusion. This questionnaire included
questions concerning programs that were not alleged by petitioner but which we
discovered in reviewing the original responses. We received supplemental
responses on December 4, 1987.
On September 23, 1987, the petitioner requested that the preliminary
determination be postponed for 21 days. Pursuant to section 703(c)(1)(A) of the
Act, we postponed the preliminary determination to no later than November 12,
1987. On November 4, 1987, the petitioner requested that we further postpone the
preliminary determination by an additional 36 days. Accordingly, we extended the
date of the preliminary determination to December 18, 1987.
Exclusion Requests
On September 21, 1987, in accordance with § 355.38 of the Commerce regulations
(19 CFR 355.38) and § 355.14 of the proposed regulations (50 FR 24207, June 10,
1985), the largest companies comprising 60 percent of the value of exports of the
subject merchandise to the United States in 1986 requested exclusion from any
possible countervailing duty order which might result from this
investigation, claiming not to have benefited from any subsidies. On September 29,
1987, we sent the Italian embassy a letter explaining the requirements for
government certification of the exclusion requests, as required under the proposed
regulations. We confirmed that a company would be eligible for exclusion if it either
did not participate, or participated only at a de minimis level overall, in the
programs under investigation. We also
informed the Italian government that it was required to certify either non-use by
the companies of these programs, or that the overall net benefit received under
these programs during the review period was de minimis. In addition, we requested
that the government provide information on the amounts of benefits received and a
calculation of any net benefits for each company requesting exclusion. Finally, we
confirmed that only those companies which produce and export the subject
merchandise to the United States are eligible for exclusion. We received the
government certifications on November 9, 1987.
Based upon our analysis of the responses submitted by the companies requesting
exclusion and of the government certification, we have determined preliminarily
that those companies producing and exporting the subject merchandise would
qualify for exclusion. Only two of these companies used any of the countervailable
programs and the estimated net subsidy for each is de minimis (See sections I.A. and
B.). However, exclusion is only
*48734
relevant within the context of an affirmative determination for which there would be
an estimated net subsidy rate and corresponding provisional measures from which
to be excluded. Here, we have preliminarily found the estimated net subsiody for
respondent companies that did not request exclusion to be de minimis. Therefore,
for purposes of this preliminary negative determination, the exclusion provision
does not apply. If our final determination is affirmative, we will exclude companies
only if verification
confirms the accuracy of the company responses and of the government
certification.
Scope of Investigation
The products covered by this investigation are certain granite products from
Italy. Certain granite products are 3/8 inch (1 cm) to 2 1/2 inches (6.34 cm) in
thickness and include the following: rough sawed granite slabs; face- finished granite
slabs; and finished dimensional granite including, but not limited to, building facing,
flooring, wall and floor tiles, paving, and crypt front. Certain granite products do not
include monumental stones, crushed grranite, or curbing. Certain granite products
are currently classified under TSUSA item number 513.7400 and under HS item
numbers 2516.12.00, 6802.23.00 and 6802.93.00.
Analysis of Programs
Throughout this notice, we refer to certain principles applied to the facts of the
current investigation. These general principles are described in the "Subsidies
Appendix" attached to the notice of Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat- Rolled Products
from Argentina: Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination and Countervailing Duty Order (49 FR 18006, April 26, 1984).
Consistent with our practice in preliminary determinations, when a response to an
allegation denies the existence of a program, receipt of benefits under a program, or
eligibility of a company or industry under a program, and the Department has no
persuasive evidence showing that the response is incorrect, we accept the response
for purposes of the preliminary determination. All such responses however, are
subject to verification. If the responses cannot be supported at verification, and a
program is otherwise countervailable, it will be considered a subsidy in the final
determination.
For those respondent companies that requested exclusion yet received benefits
under countervailable programs, we calculated individual company subsidy rates
(See sections I.A. and B. of this notice). When we receive exclusion requests, we
calculate rates company by company to determine whether each firm does in fact
qualify for exclusion.
For respondent companies that did not request exclusion, we would typically
calculate a country-wide rate. This calculation would not include companies that
did not participate in any of the countervailable programs. Of those respondent
companies that did not request exclusion, only one actually participated in a
countervailable program. We have calculated the estimated net subsidy based on
the benefits received by the one additional company that did participate in a
countervailable program. This benefit is divided by that
company's sales to yield a country-wide rate that applies to this company and to all
non-respondent companies (See section I.C. of this notice). As stated above, this
rate is de minimis; therefore, our preliminary determination is negative.
For purposes of this preliminary determination, the period for which we are
measuring subsidization ("the review period") is calendar year 1986. This period
coincides with the most recently completed fiscal year of all but one of the
respondent companies.
Based upon our analysis of the petition, the responses to our questionaires, and the
government certification of exclusion requests, we preliminarily determine the
following:
I. Programs Preliminary Determined to Confer Subsidies
We preliminarily determine that subsidies are being provided to manufacturers,
producers or exporters in Italy of certain granite products under the following
programs:
A. Reductions in Social Security Payments for Companies Located in the
Mezzogiorno Region
According to the government responses, all Italian companies that operate facilities
in the Mezzogiorno region of southern Italy are entitled to a reduction in social
security payments owed to the National Social Security Institute (INPS) equivalent
to ten percent of the wages subject to the INPS contribution for all workers
employed in this region. The reduction may be increased to 20 percent of wages for
all employees hired after September 30, 1968, over and above the number of
individuals employed by the company on that date. For staff hired after July 1,
1976, but before December 31, 1980, qualifying companies can receive a total
exemption from payments owed to the INPS.
According to the company response, only Henraux owns facilities in the
Mezzogiorno. The company response states that Henraux owns five stockyards in
the Mezzogiorno. Henraux received reductions in social security payments during
the review period for employees at these stockyards.
Because benefits under this program are available only to firms that locate facilities
in the Mezzogiorno, we preliminarily determine that this program is limited to a
specific enterprise or industry, or group of enterprises or industries and, therefore,
is countervailable.
Henraux filed a timely request for exclusion and was certified by the Government of
Italy as having received only de minimis benefits under this program during the
review period. According to the responses, Henraux did not
participate in any other Mezzogiorno program (See section III.D. of this notice).
We calculated a company-specific rate for Henraux under this program because it
requested exclusion from any countervailing duty order that may be
imposed through this investigation. A company-specific rate is necessary to
determine preliminarily whether Henraux qualifies for exclusion. To calculate the
benefit under this program, we divided the total value of the social security
reductions Henraux received the review period by its total sales of all products
during the review period and arrived at an estimated net subsidy of 0.08 percent ad
valorem for Henraux. The rate is zero for all others.
B. Regional Loan Program Under Law 902
According to the responses, Italian Law 902 authorizes loans at less than prevailing
market rates to small- and medium-sized businesses located in northern and central
Italy. Firms participating in this program must use the financing for plant
modernization. These loans carry fixed interest rates with terms of seven to ten
years.
Loans pursuant to Law 902 may be given for up to 60 percent of the total cost of the
project. The total project cost upon which the 60 percent calculation is based may
include up to 40 percent of the value of the raw materials
necessary to begin production using the intended facility. The interest rates are 50
to 60 percent of a "reference rate" periodically set by the Ministry of the Treasury,
plus a commission charge to cover the lending institution's expenses and profits.
Giuseppe Furrer, a related company of Henraux, was the only
*48735
company with a 902 loan outstanding during the review period.
Because only firms that have facilities located in designated regions in Italy are
eligible to receive loans under Law 902, we preliminarily determine that they are
limited to a specific enterprise or industry, or group of enterprises or industries. To
determine whether 902 loans are inconsistent with commercial considerations, we
compared the interest rate on the 902 loan to the appropriate benchmark.
For long-term loans, it is our practice to use a company-specific benchmark, based
on the company's cost of long-term financing from commercial sources in the year
in which the terms of the loan in question were agreed upon. Because the responses
contained insufficient information to establish a company- specific benchmark, we
used as our benchmark the national average long-term interest rate for the
stone-processing industry in 1983, the year in which the terms of the loan were
agreed upon, as reported in the government response. Because the interest rate on
the 902 loan received by Giuseppe Furrer was below the benchmark rate, we
preliminarily determine that the loan was provided on terms inconsistent with
commercial considerations.
Giuseppe Furrer filed a timely request for exclusion and was certified by the
Government of Italy as having received only de minimis benefits under this
program during the review period. Because Giuseppe Furrer requested an exclusion
in this investigation, we calculated a company-specific rate under this program. A
company-specific rate is necessary to determine preliminarily whether Giuseppe
Furrer qualifies for exclusion.
To calculate the benefit from the 902 loan received by Giuseppe Furrer, we used our
long-term fixed-rate loan methodology, as set forth in the Subsidies Appendix. For
the discount rate, we used the benchmark interest rate. The benefit allocated to the
review period was divided by Giuseppe Furrer's total sales of all products during this
review period. We calculated an estimated net subsidy of 0.07 percent ad valorem
for Giuseppe Furrer. The rate is zero for all others.
C. Local Tax Concessions Under Law 614
Under Article 30 of Law 614, Italian companies that establish or expand facilities in
designated depressed territories in northern and central Italy are entitled to
reductions in local corporate income tax rates. Reductions may be claimed for ten
years following the establishment or expansion of a facility. According to the
government response, this program expired on
December 31, 1985, although it was extended until December 31, 1990, exclusively
for depressed territories in the regions of Friuli-Venezia Giulia and Marches.
Residual bendits under this program may continue for ten years following
expiration.
Because this program is available only to firms that invest in designated areas in
northern and central Italy, we preliminarily determine that it is limited to a
specific enterprise or industry, or group of enterprises or industries and, therefore,
is countervailable.
Of the respondent companies, only Granitex received a reduction in corporate
income taxes under this program for the tax return filed during the review period.
We calculated the benefit under this program based on the company's overall
corporate tax liability, which includes national corporate tax and local corporate
tax, for the tax return filed during the review period. We first determined the
difference between what Granitex paid in total corporate income taxes during the
review period and what it would have paid absent this program. We then divided
this amount by Granitex's total sales of all products during this period. Based on this
calculation, we arrived at an estimated net subsidy of 0.36 percent ad valorem for
Granitex and for all-nonrespondent producers, manufacturers and exporters in
Italy of certain granite products. The rate is zero for all others.
II. Programs Preliminarily Determined not to Confer A Subsidy
We preliminarily determine that subsidies are not being provided to manufacturers,
producers or exporters in Italy of certain granite products under the following
programs. These programs were discovered in the course of our review of the
company responses and were alleged by petitioner.
A. Reinvestment Fund Under Article 54 of DPR 597/73
According to the responses, Italian firms are permitted to claim a tax exemption for
any capital gains earned on the sale of fixed assets, provided that the gains are
reinvested in capital assets. Article 54 of Presidential Decree (DPR) 597/73 states
that firms must establish a special liability fund for capital gains, and reinvest these
tax-exempt gains in depreciable assets in the second fiscal year following the one in
which the gains were realized.
According to the government response, this provision of Italian tax law is available
to all entities in Italy, regardless of geographic location or type of industry.
Receipt of this exemption is only contingent upon a company's subsequent use of
the gains for reinvestment in capital assets. Because benefits under Article 54 of
DPR/73 are available to all Italian firms, we preliminarily detemine that this
provision is not limited to a specific
enterprise or industry, or group of enterprises or industries.
B. Accelerated Depreciation
According to the responses, Articles 68 of DPR 597 sets forth rules governing the
depreciation of assets under Italian tax law. The normal deductible depreciation of a
company's assets is dependent upon how the asset is classified in the Italian
government's depreciation schedule. The deduction may be increased during each
fiscal year if assets are used more intensely than is normal for that particular
production activity. In addition, accelerated depreciation above the normal rate
can be claimed for the first three years after the asset is acquired.
The government response states that these rates of depreciation under Article 68 of
DPR 597, including the accelerated rate, are available to all Italian companies
regardless of geographic location or type of industry. Therefore, we preliminarily
determine that this program is not limited to a specific enterprise or industry, or
group of enterprises or industries.
C. Revaluation of Assets under Law 72 of 1983 and Law 576 of 1975
According to the responses, the Italian government allowed all companies to
revalue assets in 1975 and again in 1983 to reflect market value rather than book
value. The revaluations were necessary to account for periods of high inflation
which preceded these years. Because all Italian firms, regardless of geographic
location or type of industry, were permitted to revalue assets, we preliminarily
determine that these revaluations were not limited to a specific enterprise or
industry, or group of enterprises or industries.
D. Contributions Under Article 55 of DPR 597
According to the responses, Article 55 of DPR 597, relating to "contingent assets,"
authorizes all Italian companies to establish a reserve fund which postpones the
payment of taxes on certain monies received by a company until such funds are
distributed as profits to that company's shareholders. Funds received from the
government in the form of a reimbursement, for
*48736
example, would be included on the asset side of a company's balance sheet. Article
55 permits the company to preserve the tax-exemption by establishing an offsetting
reserve fund on the debit side of its balance sheet, such that the money held on
reserve becomes taxable only when distributed as profits.
Because Article 55 applies to all taxpayers regardless of geographic location or type
of industry, we preliminarily determine that this program is not
limited to a specific enterprise or industry, or group of enterprises or industries.
III. Programs Preliminarily Determined Not to be Used
We primarily determine that the following programs were not used by
manufacturers, producers or exporters in Italy of certain granite products
during the review period.
A. Rebates of Indirect Taxes Under Law 639
Italian Law 639 authorizes the rebate of customs duties and certain indirect taxes
upon the export of products containing certain raw materials. According to the
responses, the respondent companies were not eligible to receive benefits under
this program because it is available only to mechanical industries which do not
include the stone-processing industry.
B. Export Credit Financing
Under Italian Law 227, a medium-term export credit line is available to foreign
purchasers that import Italian goods and services. Administered by
Mediocredito Centrale, this program applies only to export credits of greater than
18 months. According to the responses, no U.S. purchasers of the subject
merchandise produced or exported by the respondent companies had outstanding
credit lines under this program during the review period.
C. Preferential Transportation Rates
Under Italian State Act 210/85, Italian firms may apply for and receive preferential
transportation rates from the State-owned railroad of Italy. Rate reductions are
provided to companies agreeing to ship a certain amount of freight within a certain
period of time. According to the responses, none of the respondent companies
claimed or received preferential transportation rates under this program during the
review period.
Italian State Act 877/84 provides a 30 percent reduction in state-owned railroad
rates for shipments of raw mineral substances produced in the Italian islands. For
raw mineral substances produced and processed in the Italian islands, the rate is
reduced by 60 percent. The responses indicate that none of the companies under
investigation received benefits under this program.
D. Mezzogiorno Regional Assistance Programs
According to the responses, companies with facilities located in the Mezzogiorno
region of southern Italy are eligible for certain goernment programs aimed at
the economic development of this region. The programs alleged by the petitioner
under this regional development plan are: (1) National corporate tax exemptions;
(2) local corporate tax exemptions; (3) capital grants; (4) interest rate reductions;
and (5) reductions in social payments. According to the responses, the first four
programs were not used by the respondent companies during the review period.
The last program, reductions in the social security payments, is described in section
I.A. of this notice.
IV. Program Preliminarily Determined Not To Exist
We preliminarily determine that the following program does not exist.
Loans Under Law 908
Petitioner alleged that, under Italian Law 908, manufacturers, producers and
exporters in Italy of certain granite products receive subsidized loans at below
market rates and on preferential terms for certain industrial projects in northern
and central Italy. According to the government and company responses, Law 908 does not exist.
V. Programs for Which Additional Information Is Needed
We preliminarily determine that we need additional information in order to
determine whether the following programs confer subsidies on the manufacture,
production or exportation of certain granite products from Italy.
A. Sabatini Law
Although this program was not alleged by the petitioner, the company responses
indicate that several firms received assistance under the Sabatini Law during the
review period. In our supplemental questionnaire, we requested information on the
purpose and administration of the law.
According to the supplemental responses, the Sabatini Law was enacted to stimulate
investments in machine tools and production machinery in order to modernize and
revitalize Italian industry. Manufacturers of capital equipment may sell equipment
in exhcnage for notes payable within five years. These five-year notes, in turn, can
be discounted with medium-term Italian credit institutions at less than prevailing
market rates. Since 1985, the Sabatini Law has been extended to capital equipment
of foreign origin. In addition, the
government response indicates that purchasers of equipment may receive
discounts on interest rates that are charged on the notes payable to the
manufacturer of the equipment.
The government's response raised several questions concerning the operation and
administration of the Sabitini Law. Although the response indicates that purchasers
of capital equipment may benefit from reduced interest rates on the notes payable,
it does not describe to what degree these interest rates are reduced nor whether any
other terms of purchase are affected.
Furthermore, although the government and company responses state that all
companies, regardless of region or industry, are eligible to participate in this
program, it is not clear whether benefits under the Sabatini Law have in fact been
provided to more than a specific enterprise or industry or group of enterprises or
industries. To determine whether benefits granted under the Sabatini Law are
limited in any way, we are requesting the following information: (1) Further
information on the process through which purchasers of capital equipment apply
for and receive assistance under this law; (2) a translated copy of all provisions of
the Sabatini Law; and (3) a complete list of the Italian industries which have
received loans or assistance under this program.
B. Law 696/83
Although this program was not alleged by the petitioner, the company responses
indicate that several firms received assistance under Law 696/83 during the review
period. In our supplemental questionnaire, we requested information on the
purpose and operation of this program.
According to the supplemental responses, Law 696/83 provides an incentive for
Italian companies to invest in high technology equipment. All Italian companies
with a net worth below a specified level that are engaged in mining or manufacturing
are eligible under Law 696/83 to receive a refund of 25 percent of the purchase
price for purchases of certain highly sophisticated electronic equipment. Orders for
such equipment made before
*48737
May 31, 1984, are eligible for the 25 percent refund.
The government's response does not identify specific classes of electronic
equipment that are eligible for treatment under Law 696/83. Absent such
information, we cannot determine whether eligibility criteria are drawn so narrowly
as to preclude many industries from taking advantage of benefits offered under this
program. Furthermore, although the government and company responses state that
all small- and medium-sized companies operating in the mining and manufacturing
sectors are eligible for benefits under Law 696/83, it is not clear whether these
benefits have in fact been provided to more than a specific enterprise or industry or
group of enterprises or industries.
To determine whether benefits granted under Law 696/83 are limited to a specific
enterprise or industry, or group of enterprises or industries, we are requesting the
following information: (1) A full explanation of all criteria that determine what types
of equipment qualify under this program; (2) a translated copy of all provisions of
Law 696/83; and (3) a complete list of industries which have received benefits
under this program.
Verification
In accordance with section 776(a) of the Act, we will verify the information used in
making our final determination.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 703(f) of the Act, we will notify the ITC or our
determination. In addition, we are making available to the ITC all nonprivileged and
nonproprietary information relating to this investigation. We will allow the ITC
access to all privileged and business proprietary information in our files, provided
the ITC confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or under
an administrative protective order, without the written consent of the Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration.
If our final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine whether these
imports materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry within 75
days after the Department makes its final determination.
Public Comment
In accordance with 19 CFR 355.35, we will hold a public hearing, if requested, to
afford interested parties an opportunity to comment on this preliminary
determination on February 2, 1988, at 2:00 p.m. at the U.S. Department of
Commerce, Room 3708, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC
20230. Individuals who wish to participate in the hearing must submit a request to
the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Room B-099, at the above
address within ten days of the publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
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, ten copies of the business proprietary version and seven
copies of the nonproprietary version of the pre-hearing briefs must be submitted to
the Assistant Secretary by January 26, 1988. Oral presentations will be limited to
issues raised in the briefs.
In accordance with 19 CFR 355.33(d) and 355.34, written views will be considered if
received not less than 30 days before the final determination is due or, if a hearing is
held, within seven days after the hearing transcript is available.
This determination is published pursuant to section 703(f) of the Act (19 U.S.C.
1671b(f)).
December 18, 1987.
Gilbert B. Kaplan,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 87-29534 Filed 12-23-87 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M