Certain Iron Metal Castings From India: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[C-533-063]

Certain Iron Metal Castings From India: Preliminary Results of

Countervailing Duty Administrative Review

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 iron

metal castings from India. We preliminarily determine the net subsidy

to be zero or de minimis for Delta Enterprises and Super Iron Foundry,

and 5.45 percent ad valorem for all other companies for the period

January 1, 1993 through December 31, 1993. 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

indicated above. Interested parties are invited to comment on these

preliminary results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 22, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Cassel or Lorenza Olivas,

Office of Countervailing Compliance, Import Administration,

International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202) 482-2786.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On October 16, 1980, the Department published in the Federal

Register (45 FR 50739) the countervailing duty order on certain iron-

metal castings from India. On October 7, 1994, the Department published

a notice of ``Opportunity to Request an Administrative Review'' (59 FR

51166) of this countervailing duty order. We received a timely request

for review from the Municipal Castings Fair Trade Council and

individually-named members on October 24, 1994.

We initiated the review, covering the period January 1, 1993

through December 31, 1993, on November 14, 1994 (59 FR 56549). The

review covers 14 manufacturers/exporters of the subject merchandise and

six programs.

Applicable Statute and Regulations

The Department is conducting this administrative review in

accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended

(the Act). Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute and

to the Department's regulations are in reference to the provisions as

they existed on December 31, 1994. However, references to the

Department's Countervailing Duties; Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and

Request for Public Comments, 54 FR 23366 (May 31, 1989) (Proposed

Regulations), are provided solely for further explanation of the

Department's countervailing duty practice. Although the Department has

withdrawn the particular rulemaking proceeding pursuant to which the

Proposed Regulations were issued, the subject matter of these

regulations is being considered in connection with an ongoing

rulemaking proceeding which, among other things, is intended to conform

the Department's regulations to the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. See

60 FR 80 (Jan. 3, 1995).

Scope of the Review

Imports covered by the review are shipments of Indian manhole

covers and frames, clean-out covers and frames, and catch basin grates

and frames. These articles are commonly called municipal or public

works castings and are used for access or drainage for public utility,

water, and sanitary systems. During the review period, such merchandise

was classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item

numbers 7325.10.0010 and 7325.10.0050. The HTS item numbers are

provided for convenience and Customs purposes. The written description

remains dispositive.

Verification

As provided in section 776(b) of the Act, we verified information

provided by the Government of India and, six producers/exporters of the

subject merchandise. We followed standard verification procedures,

including meeting with government and company officials, and

examination of relevant accounting and 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).

Calculation Methodology for Assessment and Cash Deposit Purposes

In accordance with Ceramica Regiomontana, S.A. v. United States,

853 F. Supp. 431 (CIT 1994), we calculated the net subsidy on a

country-wide basis by first calculating the subsidy rate for each

company subject to the administrative review. We then weight-averaged

the rate received by each company using as the weight its share of

total Indian exports to the United States of subject merchandise,

including all companies, even those with de minimis and zero rates. We

then summed the individual companies' weight-averaged rates to

determine the subsidy rate from all programs benefitting exports of

subject merchandise to the United States.

Since the country-wide rate calculated using this methodology was

above de minimis, as defined by 19 CFR Sec. 355.7 (1994), we proceeded

to the next step and examined the net subsidy rate calculated for each

company to determine whether individual company rates differed

significantly from the weighted-average country-wide rate, pursuant to

19 CFR 355.22(d)(3). Two companies (Delta Enterprises and Super Iron

Foundry) had significantly different net subsidy rates during the

review period pursuant to 19 CFR 355.22(d)(3). The rate for these

companies was zero. These companies are treated separately for

assessment and cash deposit purposes. All other companies are assigned

the country-wide rate.

Analysis of Programs

I. Programs Conferring Subsidies

A. Programs Previously Determined to Confer Subsidies

1. Pre-Shipment Export Financing. The Reserve Bank of India (RBI),

[[Page 25624]]

through commercial banks, provides pre-shipment financing, or ``packing

credits,'' to exporters. Upon presentation of a confirmed order or

letter of credit, exporters may receive pre-shipment loans for working

capital purposes, i.e., for the purchase of raw materials and for

packing, warehousing, and transporting of export merchandise. Exporters

may also establish pre-shipment credit lines upon which they may draw

as needed. Credit line limits are established by commercial banks,

based upon the company's creditworthiness and past export performance.

Companies that have pre-shipment credit lines typically pay interest on

these loans on a quarterly basis on the outstanding balance of the

account at the end of each period. In general, packing credits are

granted for a period of up to 180 days.

In prior administrative reviews of this order, the Department found

this program to be de jure specific, and thus countervailable, because

receipt of pre-shipment export financing was contingent upon export

performance and the interest rates were preferential. (See e.g., Final

Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain Iron-

Metal Castings From India, 56 FR 41658 (August 22, 1991); Final Results

of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Certain Iron-Metal

Castings From India, 56 FR 52515 (October 21, 1991 (1987 and 1988

Indian Castings Final Results). No new information or evidence of

changed circumstances has been submitted in this proceeding to warrant

reconsideration of this finding. During the POR, the rate of interest

charged on pre-shipment export loans ranged from 13.0 percent to 15.5

percent, depending on the length and date of receipt of the loan.

The Government of India (GOI) classifies the companies under review

as small-scale industry companies. Therefore, as we have done in past

relevant cases, we used the small-scale industry short-term interest

rates published in the August 1994 Reserve Bank of India Annual Report

1993-94 as our benchmark. This rate was 15 percent during the POR for

all categories of advances. We compared this benchmark to the interest

rate charged on pre-shipment loans and found that for certain loans

granted under this program, the interest rate charged was lower than

the benchmark. The use of this benchmark rate is consistent with prior

reviews of this order. (See Final Results of Countervailing Duty

Administrative Review: Certain Iron-Metal Castings From India, 60 FR

44843 (August 29, 1995) (1991 Indian Castings Final Results)).

Eight of the fourteen respondent companies used pre-shipment export

loans for shipments of subject castings to the United States during the

POR. To calculate the benefit from the pre-shipment loans to these

eight companies, we compared the actual interest paid on these loans

with the amount of interest that would have been paid using the

benchmark interest rate of 15 percent. If the benchmark rate exceeded

the program rate, the difference between those amounts is the benefit.

If a company was able to segregate pre-shipment financing applicable to

subject merchandise exported to the United States, we divided the

benefit derived from only those loans by total exports of subject

merchandise to the United States. If a firm was unable to segregate

pre-shipment financing, we divided the benefit from all pre-shipment

loans by total exports. On this basis, we preliminarily determine the

net subsidy from this program to be 0.13 percent ad valorem for all

manufacturers and exporters in India of certain iron-metal castings,

except for those firms listed below which have significantly different

total subsidies from all programs combined. The net subsidy for those

firms is as follows:

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

Rate

Manufacturer/Exporter (percent)

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

Delta Enterprises.......................................... 0.00

Super Iron Foundry......................................... 0.00

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

2. Post-Shipment Export Financing and Post-Shipment Credit

Denominated in Foreign Currency (PSCFC). The Reserve Bank of India,

through commercial banks, provides post-shipment rupee denominated

loans to exporters upon presentation of export documents. Post-shipment

financing also consists of bank discounting of foreign customer

receivables. In general, post-shipment loans are granted for a period

of up to 180 days. The interest rate for post-shipment financing ranged

from 13 to 18 percent during the POR. In the 1987 and 1988 Indian

Castings Final Results, the Department found this program to be

specific, and thus countervailable, because receipt of the post-

shipment export financing in rupees was contingent upon export

performance and the interest rates were preferential. No new

information or evidence of changed circumstances has been submitted in

this proceeding to warrant reconsideration of this finding.

On January 1, 1992, the GOI amended the original post-shipment

financing scheme and introduced the ``Scheme for Post-Shipment Credit

Denominated in Foreign Currency (PSCFC).'' Under the amended scheme,

exporters may discount foreign currency export bills at interest rates

linked to the London Interbank Offering Rate (LIBOR). These loans are

not provided to the borrower in the foreign currency, but allow the

post-shipment credit liability of the exporter to be denominated in

foreign currency, which is then liquidated with foreign currency export

proceeds.

Upon presentation of the export bill, the bank will discount the

bill for a period of up to 180 days at an interest rate determined by

the RBI. The interest amount, calculated at the applicable foreign

currency interest rate, will be deducted from the total amount of the

bill, and the exporter's account will be credited for the rupee

equivalent of the net foreign currency amount. Commercial banks are

required to convert the net amount of the export bill drawn or

expressed in U.S. dollars into rupees at a contracted exchange rate (if

the exporter takes forward cover) or at the rate prevailing on the date

of negotiation or discount by the bank. The exporter's credit liability

will continue to be shown in U.S. dollars. If payment from the overseas

customer is received within the due date for the loan, the exporter's

account is considered fully liquidated or ``crystallized''. Where

payment by the overseas customer is made beyond the due date,

additional interest will be recovered from the exporter for the number

of days payment is overdue. The additional interest amount is

calculated in U.S. dollars for the delayed period at the overdue

foreign currency interest rate set by the RBI. This amount is then

converted into rupees at the commercial bank's prevailing selling rate

of the U.S. dollar and deducted from the exporter's account.

Any exchange rate risk on the dollar amount of the bill (i.e., gain

or loss due to the change in value of the rupee vis-a-vis the dollar)

will be borne by the commercial bank. If the overseas customer

defaults, the exporter must repay the rupee equivalent of the export

bill at the exchange rate prevailing on the date the payment of the

export bill would have been due. During the POR, the discount rate

charged on these bills ranged from 6.5 percent to 6.75 percent, while

the overdue foreign currency interest rate was 8.5 percent. For overdue

bills repaid beyond 180 days, the normal rupee interest rates apply.

These rates ranged from 15 to 22 percent during the POR.

For reasons stated in the prior section for pre-shipment financing

above, we are using the small-scale industry short-term interest rates

published in the

[[Page 25625]]

August 1994 Reserve Bank of India Annual Report 1993-94 as our

benchmark for short-term rupee denominated post-shipment loans.

However, because loans under this program are discounted, and the

effective rate paid by exporters on these loans is a discounted rate,

we derived a benchmark discount rate of 13.04 percent for the POR.

Where loans are denominated in foreign currency, as is the case for

PSCFC loans, our normal practice is to use a foreign currency

benchmark, which would be the interest rate on alternative dollar-

indexed loans in India. However, we have not been able to find such a

benchmark, and must, therefore, use as a benchmark a rupee-denominated

interest rate, adjusted to take into account movements in the rupee-

dollar exchange rate over the term of the loan. In this situation, our

preference would be to adjust the benchmark by the ``expected''

movement in the rupee/dollar exchange rate by comparing the spot rate

on the day the bill was discounted with the forward exchange rate.

Because we were unable to find forward exchange rates for the POR, we

adjusted the benchmark used for rupee denominated post-shipment loans

described above, by the actual movement in the rupee/dollar exchange

rate over the period for which the export bill was discounted.

Therefore, the adjusted benchmark varied for each PSCFC loan.

During the POR, 11 of the 14 respondent companies made payments on

post-shipment export or PSCFC loans for shipments of subject castings

to the United States. To calculate the benefit from these loans we

followed the same short-term loan methodology discussed above for pre-

shipment financing. We divided the benefit by either total exports or

exports of the subject merchandise to the United States, depending on

whether the company was able to segregate the post-shipment financing

on the basis of destination of the exported good. On this basis, we

preliminarily determine the net subsidy from this program to be 1.25

percent ad valorem for all manufacturers and exporters in India of

certain iron-metal castings, except for those firms listed below which

have significantly different total subsidies from all programs

combined. The net subsidy for those firms is as follows:

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

Rate

Manufacturer/Exporter (percent)

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

Delta Enterprises.......................................... 0.00

Super Iron Foundry......................................... 0.00

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

3. Income Tax Deductions Under Section 80HHC. Under section 80HHC

of the Income Tax Act, the GOI allows exporters to deduct profits

derived from the export of goods and merchandise from taxable income.

In the 1987 and 1988 Indian Castings Final Results, the Department

found this program to de jure specific, and thus countervailable,

because receipt of benefits was contingent upon export performance. No

new information or evidence of changed circumstances has been submitted

in this proceeeding to warrant reconsideration of this finding.

To calculate the benefit to each company, we subtracted the total

amount of income tax the company actually paid during the review period

from the amount of tax the company would have paid during the review

period had it not claimed any deductions under section 80HHC. We then

divided this difference by the value of the company's total exports. On

this basis, we preliminarily determine the net subsidy from this

program to be 3.64 percent for all manufacturers and exporters in India

of certain iron-metal castings, except for those firms listed below

which have significantly different total subsidies from all programs

combined. The net subsidy for those firms is as follows:

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

Rate

Manufacturer/Exporter (percent)

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

Delta Enterprises.......................................... 0.00

Super Iron Foundry......................................... 0.04

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

4. Import Mechanisms. The GOI allows companies to transfer certain

types of import licenses to other companies in India. During the POR,

producers/exporters of subject castings sold Additional Licenses,

Replenishment Licenses, and Special Import Licenses. In prior

administrative reviews of this order, we determined that the sale of

these licenses by exporters is countervailable. See the 1987 and 1988

Indian Castings Final Results and the 1991 Indian Castings Final

Results. No new information or evidence of changed circumstances has

been submitted in this proceeding to warrant reconsideration of this

finding.

Because the sale of Special Import Licenses and Additional Licenses

could not be tied to specific shipments, we calculated the subsidies by

dividing the total amount of proceeds a company received from sales of

these licenses by the total value of its exports of all products to all

markets. Also, because sales of Replenishment Licenses can be tied to

specific exports, we calculated the subsidies by dividing the amount of

proceeds a company received from sales of Replenishment Licenses that

was attributable to shipments of subject castings to the United States

by the total value of the company's exports of subject castings to the

United States. We do not consider the sale of Replenishment Licenses

issued for non-subject merchandise to have benefitted exports of the

subject merchandise.

We preliminarily determine the net subsidy from the sale of

Additional, Special Import, and Replenishment Licenses to be 0.04

percent ad valorem for all manufacturers and exporters in India of

certain iron-metal castings, except for those firms listed below which

have significantly different aggregate benefits. The net subsidies for

those firms are as follows:

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

Rate

Manufacturer/Exporter (percent)

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

Delta Enterprises.......................................... 0.00

Super Iron Foundry......................................... 0.00

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

B. New Programs Preliminarily Found to Confer Subsidies

1. Exemption of Export Credit from Interest Taxes. At verification,

the GOI and commercial bank officials explained that starting from

September, 1991, commercial banks were required to pay a 3 percent tax

on all interest accrued from borrowers. This tax is passed on to

borrowers in its entirety. As of April 1, 1993, the GOI exempted from

the interest tax all interest accruing or arising to any commercial

bank on loans and advances made to any exporter as export credit. See

the 1993 GOI Verification Report at 6-7 and Exhibits EEPC-8, 9, 10 and

11 (October 30, 1995) (Public Document). Because only interest accruing

or arising on loans and advances made to exporters in the form of

export credit is exempt from the interest tax, we preliminarily

determine this exemption to provide countervailable benefits to

exporters. During the POR, eleven of the fourteen respondent companies

made interest payments on export related loans, through the pre- and

post-shipment financing schemes.

To calculate the benefit to each company, we first determined the

total amount of interest paid by each producer/exporter of subject

castings from April 1 to December 31, 1993, by adding all interest

payments made on pre- and post-shipment loans after April 1, 1993. For

the two companies that reported aggregate interest on pre- and post-

shipment loans for the POR, and for which we were unable to determine

what portion of the reported interest was paid after April 1, 1993, we

[[Page 25626]]

assumed that the company's interest payments were evenly distributed

over each quarter of 1993, and, therefore, that 75 percent of the

interest reported was paid in the last three quarters of 1993, i.e.,

from April 1 through December 31. Next, we multiplied this amount by

three percent, the amount of tax that the interest would have been

subject to without the exemption. We then divided the benefit by the

value of the company's total exports or exports of subject merchandise

to the United States, depending on whether the export financing was on

total exports or only exports of subject castings to the U.S. On this

basis, we preliminarily determine the net subsidy from this program to

be 0.06 percent ad valorem for all manufacturers and exporters in India

of certain iron-metal casting, except for those firms listed below

which have significantly different total subsidies from all programs

combined. The net subsidy for those firms is as follows:

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

Rate

Manufacturer/Exporter (percent)

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

Delta Enterprises.......................................... 0.00

Super Iron Foundry......................................... 0.00

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

2. Imports Made Under an Advance License through the Liberalized

Exchange Rate Management System (LERMS). The Liberalized Exchange Rate

Management System or LERMS, in effect from March 1, 1992 through

February 28, 1993, was part of the GOI's economic liberalization

efforts, aimed in part at achieving full convertibility of the rupee.

Under the LERMS, the importation of goods under the Duty Exemption

Scheme (with Advance Licences), was financed at two rates: 40 percent

at the official RBI rate and 60 percent at the (higher) market

determined rate. We verified that the LERMS was terminated effective

February 28, 1993, after which all foreign exchange earnings and the

financing of all imports was at the full market exchange rate. (See

section II.1. below for a discussion of foreign exchange earnings under

the LERMS).

While the LERMS was in effect, purchases of most imports are made

at the market exchange rate. This applied to both exporters and non-

exporters. An exception to this were goods imported under the Duty

Exemption Scheme which permitted exporters holding an Advance License

to purchase imports at dual exchange rates through February 28, 1993.

Sixty percent of the value of the import was charged at the market rate

and forty percent at the Reserve Bank determined official dollar/rupee

exchange rate. The Advance License was the only license under which

imports were charged at the 60/40 ratio. These licenses allow exporters

to import products duty free, that are subsequently consumed in the

production of exported goods. Castings exporters used Advance Licenses

by the importation of pig iron consumed in the production of the

subject merchandise.

The receipt of these licenses was previously determined to be not

countervailable, because the Advance License operates as duty drawback

scheme, and the drawback of import duties on raw materials consumed in

the production of exported goods was found to be not excessive. See the

1991 Indian Castings Final Results. However, Advance Licenses are

issued to companies based on their status as exporters. As such,

provisions under the LERMS which allow exporters to import goods at

exchange rates more favorable than those available to non-exporters

constitutes an export subsidy within the meaning of Sec. 355.43(a)(1)

of the Department's Proposed Regulations. Therefore, because the

official rupee/dollar exchange rate was lower than the market rate

during the POR, thereby lowering the cost of goods imported under an

Advance License during January and February of 1993, we preliminarily

determine the importation of goods under an Advance License at the 60/

40 ratio to provide countervailable benefits to producers/exporters of

the subject merchandise.

During the POR, three of the fourteen respondent companies made

imports against an Advance License while the LERMS was still in effect.

To calculate the benefit to each company, we subtracted the total

amount the company paid in rupees for the imported goods from the

amount they would have paid if the imports had been paid for at the

higher market exchange rate. We then divided the benefit by the value

of the company's total exports. On this basis, we preliminarily

determine the net subsidy from this program to be 0.33 percent ad

valorem for all manufacturers and exporters in India of certain iron-

metal castings, except for those firms listed below which have

significantly different total subsidies from all programs combined. The

net subsidy for those firms is as follows:

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

Rate

Manufacturer/Exporter (percent)

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

Delta Enterprises.......................................... 0.00

Super Iron Foundry......................................... 0.00

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

Because we verified that this program was terminated as of February

28, 1993, and there are no residual benefits, for cash deposit

purposes, in accordance with section Sec. 355.50 of the Department's

Proposed Regulations, the deposit rate for this program will be zero.

II. Programs Preliminarily Found Not to Confer Subsidies

1. Inward Exchange Remittances under the Liberalized Exchange Rate

Management System (LERMS). The Liberalized Exchange Rate Management

System or LERMS, in effect from March 1, 1992 through February 28,

1993, was part of the GOI's economic liberalization efforts, partly

aimed at achieving full convertibility of the rupee. Under the LERMS,

all inward exchange remittances, i.e., foreign exchange earnings, were

converted into rupees either at the market exchange rate or at dual

exchange rates: 40 percent at the official RBI rate and 60 percent at

the (higher) market determined rate. We verified that the LERMS was

terminated effective February 28, 1993, after which all foreign

exchange remittances and the financing of all imports was at the full

market exchange rate. (For a discussion of import financing under the

LERMS, see I.B.2. above.) During January and February of 1993, while

the LERMS was in effect, castings exporters converted all of their

export earnings at the 60/40 exchange rate ratio described above.

Because all transactions by which Indian companies or individuals

exchanged foreign currency into rupees while the LERMS was in effect

were converted at the 60/40 exchange rate ratio or at the higher market

exchange rate, we preliminarily determine that the export earnings of

castings producers, converted at the dual exchange rates under LERMS,

do not confer countervailable benefits with respect to the subject

merchandise.

III. Programs Preliminarily Found Not To Be Used

We examined the following programs and preliminarily find that the

producers/exporters of the subject merchandise did not apply for or

receive benefits under these programs during the period of review:

1. Market Development Assistance (MDA)

2. Rediscounting of Export Bills Abroad

3. International Price Reimbursement Scheme (IPRS)

4. Cash Compensatory Support Program (CCS)

5. Pre-Shipment Financing in Foreign Currency (PSFC)

[[Page 25627]]

Preliminary Results of Review

For the period January 1, 1993 through December 31, 1993, we

preliminarily determine the net subsidy to be zero or de minimis for

Delta Enterprises and Super Iron Foundry, and 5.45 percent ad valorem

for all other companies. In accordance with 19 CFR 355.7, any rate less

than 0.5 percent ad valorem is de minimis.

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 assess the following countervailing duties:

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

Rate

Manufacturer/Exporter (percent)

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

Delta Enterprises.......................................... 0.00

Super Iron Foundry......................................... 0.00

All Other Companies........................................ 5.45

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

The Department also intends to instruct the U.S. Customs Service to

collect a cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties of zero

percent of the f.o.b. invoice price on all shipments of the subject

merchandise from Delta Enterprises and Super Iron Foundry, and 5.13

percent of the f.o.b. invoice price on all shipments of the subject

merchandise from all other companies.

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 CFR 355.38(e).

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 Sec. 355.38(c), 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)) and 19 CFR

Sec. 355.22.

Dated: May 14, 1996.

Paul L. Joffe,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 96-12871 Filed 5-21-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P