97-a27

NOTICES

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-357-403]

Oil Country Tubular Goods From Argentina; Final Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review

Monday, October 27, 1997

*55589

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review

SUMMARY: On June 13, 1997, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published
in the Federal Register the preliminary results of its 1991 administrative review of the
countervailing duty order on oil country tubular goods (OCTG) from Argentina. We
have now completed this review and determine the total net subsidy to be 0.49 percent
ad valorem, which is de minimis. For further information, see the Final Results of Review
section of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 27, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Herring, Office of CVD/AD
Enforcement VI, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.
20230; Telephone: (202) 482-4149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On June 13, 1997, the Department published in the Federal Register (62 FR 32307) the
preliminary results of its 1991 administrative review of the countervailing duty order
on OCTG from Argentina (49 FR 46564; November 27, 1984). The Department has now
completed this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended (the Act). This review involves one producer/exporter, Siderca, which
accounts for all exports of the subject merchandise during the review period and 19
programs.
We invited interested parties to comment on the preliminary results. On July 14, 1997, a
case brief was submitted by Siderca.
On August 1, 1997, the Department published in the Federal Register the final results of
changed circumstances countervailing duty reviews covering the orders on leather,
wool, oil country tubular goods, and cold-rolled steel from Argentina (see Leather
From

*55590

Argentina, Wool From Argentina, Oil Country Tubular Goods From
Argentina, and Carbon Steel Cold-Rolled Flat Products From Argentina; Final Results
of Changed Circumstances Countervailing Duty Reviews (62 FR 41361)). In these
changed circumstances reviews, the Department determined that, based upon the ruling
of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Ceramica Regiomontana v. United
States, 64 F.3d 1579, 1582 (Fed. Cir. 1995), it does not have the authority to assess
countervailing duties on entries of merchandise covered by this order occurring on
or after September 20, 1991. As a result, the countervailing duty order on OCTG was
revoked effective September 20, 1991. Therefore, the results of this administrative review
will only apply to entries of the subject merchandise made between January 1, 1991 and
September 19, 1991. (See Final Results of Review section of this notice).

Applicable Statute

The Department is conducting this administrative review in accordance with section
751(a) of 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.

Scope of Review

Imports covered by this review are shipments of Argentine oil country tubular goods.
These products include finished and unfinished oil country tubular goods, which are
hollow steel products of circular cross section intended for use in the drilling of oil or gas,
and oil well casing, tubing and drill pipe of carbon or alloy steel, whether welded or
seamless, manufactured to either American Petroleum Institute (API) or proprietary
specifications. During the review period this merchandise was classifiable under item
numbers 7304.20.20, 7304.20.40, 7304.20.50, 7304.20.60, 7304.20.70, 7304.20.80,
7304.39.00, 7304.51.50, 7304.59.60, 7304.59.80, 7304.90.70, 7305.20.40,
7305.20.60, 7305.20.80, 7305.31.40, 7305.31.60, 7305.39.10, 7305.39.50,
7305.90.10, 7305.90.50, 7306.20.20, 7306.20.30, 7306.20.40, 7306.20.60,
7306.20.80, 7306.30.50, 7306.50.50, 7306.60.70, and 7306.90.10 of the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule (HTS). The HTS numbers are provided for convenience and Customs
purposes. The written description of the scope remains dispositive.

Calculation Methodology for Assessment and Cash Deposit Purposes

Because Siderca accounted for virtually all exports of OCTG from Argentina during the
period of review, the subsidy calculated for Siderca constitutes the country-wide rate.

Analysis of Programs

I. Programs Conferring Subsidies

A. Programs Previously Determined To Confer Subsidies

1. Government Counterguarantees. In the preliminary results, we found that this program
conferred countervailable benefits on the subject merchandise. We did not receive any
comments on this program from the interested parties, and our review of the record has
not led us to change our findings from the preliminary results. Accordingly, the net
subsidy for this program is:

-------------------------------------
Manufacturer/exporter Rate percent
-------------------------------------
Program Rate ........... 0.05
-------------------------------------

2. Pre-shipment Export Financing. In the preliminary results, we found that this program
conferred countervailable benefits on the subject merchandise. We did not receive any
comments on this program from the interested parties, and our review of the record has
not led us to change our findings from the preliminary results. Accordingly, the net
subsidy for this program is:

-------------------------------------
Manufacturer/exporter Rate percent
-------------------------------------
Program Rate ............... 0.18
-------------------------------------

3. Rebate of Indirect Taxes (Reembolso/Reintegro). In the preliminary results, we found
that there was no benefit from this program during the review period. Our analysis of the
comments submitted by the interested parties, summarized below, has not led us to
change our findings from the preliminary results.

B. New Program Found To Confer Subsidies

Preferential Electricity Tariff Rates

In the preliminary results, we found that this program conferred countervailable benefits
on the subject merchandise. We did not receive any comments on this program from the
interested parties, and our review of the record has not led us to change our findings from
the preliminary results. Accordingly, the net subsidy for this program is:

-------------------------------------
Manufacturer/exporter Rate percent
-------------------------------------
Program rate ........... 0.26
-------------------------------------

II. Program Found Not To Confer Subsidies

In the preliminary results, we found the following program to be non- countervailable:

Preferential Natural Gas Tariffs

We did not receive any comments on this program from the interested parties, and our
review of the record has not led us to change our findings from the preliminary results.

III. Programs Found To Be Not Used

In the preliminary results, we found that the producers and/or exporters of the subject
merchandise did not apply for or receive benefits under the following programs:
1. Medium-And Long-Term Loans
2. Capital Grants
3. Income and Capital Tax Exemptions
4. Government Trade Promotion Programs
5. Exemption from Stamp Taxes Under Decree 186/74
6. Incentives for Trade (Stamp Tax Exemption Under Decree 716)
7. Incentive for Export
8. Export Financing Under OPRAC 1, Circular RF-21
9. Pre-Financing of Exports Under Circular RF-153
10. Loan Guarantees
11. Post-Export Financing Under OPRAC 1-9
12. Debt Forgiveness
13. Tax Deduction Under Decree 173/85
We did not receive any comments on these programs from the interested parties, and our
review of the record has not led us to change our findings from the preliminary results.

IV. Program Found Not To Exist

In the preliminary results, we found the following program not to exist:

Tax Concessions for the Steel Industry

We did not receive any comments on this program from the interested parties, and our
review of the record has not led us to change our findings from the preliminary results.

Analysis of Comments Received

Comment

The respondent argues that, in calculating the allowable tax rebate under the
Reembolso/Reintegro program, the Department failed to exclude the taxes on gas used in
the direct reduction process. It claims that,

*55591

while the Department correctly
recognized in its preliminary determination and supporting documents that Siderca
consumes gas at its production plant for general use in the plant and for use in the direct
reduction of iron ore, the Commerce Department incorrectly excluded the taxes on the
portion of the gas used for the direct reduction process. This, according to the
respondent, is contrary to the Department's finding in the previous administrative
reviews.

Department's Position

We determined that this program did not provide a countervailable benefit during this
review period. Thus, the issue of whether the Department should exclude taxes on the
portion of gas that Siderca used for the direct reduction process would have no impact on
the Department's determination. As such, the issue is moot.

Final Results of Review

As discussed above in the Background section , the Department has revoked this
countervailing duty order on OCTG effective September 20, 1991. Therefore, the
results of this administrative review will only apply to entries of the subject merchandise
made between January 1, 1991 and September 19, 1991. Since the net subsidy of 0.49
percent ad valorem for this review is de minimis (see 19 CFR 355.7), the Department will
instruct the U.S. Customs Service to liquidate, without regard to countervailing
duties, all entries of subject merchandise made between January 1, 1991 and September
19, 1991. Separate instructions regarding entries made on or after September 20, 1991
have already been sent to Customs. Because this countervailing duty order has been
revoked, no further instructions will be sent to Customs regarding cash deposits.
This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order
(APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 355.34(d). Timely written notification of
return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a
sanctionable violation.
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 355.22.
Dated: October 16, 1997.

Robert S. LaRussa,

Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 97-28309 Filed 10-24-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P