American Porcelain-on-Steel Cookware Industry Letter to the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate Transmitting a Report.

Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

In accordance with section 203 (b) (1) of the Trade Act of 1974, enclosed is a report to the Congress setting forth my determination that import relief for the U.S. porcelain-on-steel cookware industry in the form of increased tariffs is in the national economic interest, and explaining the reasons for my decision.

Sincerely,

JIMMY CARTER

IMPORT RELIEF ACTION

PORCELAIN-ON-STEEL COOKWARE

As required under section 203(b) (1) of the Trade Act of 1974, I am transmitting this report to Congress setting forth the actions I will take with respect to porcelain-on-steel cookware covered by the affirmative finding on November 5, 1979 of the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) under section 201 (d) (1) of the Trade Act. As my action differs from that recommended by the USITC, I have included the reasons for my decision.

I have determined that imposition of increased tariffs for a four-year period on porcelain-on-steel cookware imports is in the national economic interest. These increased tariffs will apply to all U.S. imports of porcelain-on-steel cookware except teakettles and imports valued over $2.25 per pound. The additional duties will be 20, 20, 15 and 10 cents per pound, respectively, in the first, second, third, and fourth years of the relief period.

I have decided to modify the USITC remedy by: (1) excluding teakettles; (2) reducing by one year the duration of import relief; and (3) imposing additional specific tariffs that are somewhat smaller than those recommended by the USITC. My decision to exclude teakettles is based on the fact that they are not produced domestically in a wide range of shapes and styles.

This four-year relief program should be sufficient to enable the sole remaining domestic producer of porcelain-on-steel cookware to adjust to import competition during the relief period. At the same time, the less-restrictive relief that I will proclaim will reduce the adverse effects of providing relief on U.S. consumers of porcelain-on-steel cookware and on our international economic interests.

In conjunction with providing import relief, I have directed the U.S. Trade Representative to request that the USITC advise me of the probable economic effect on the domestic porcelain-on-steel cookware industry of the termination of import relief after two years. This advice will include a review of the progress and specific efforts being made by the domestic producer of porcelain-on-steel cookware to adjust to import competition. The U.S. Trade Representative will also request, on my behalf, advice regarding termination of relief from the Secretaries of Commerce and Labor. This USITC, Commerce, and Labor advice is to be provided to me, through the U.S. Trade Representative, three months prior to the expiration of the second year of relief. It is my intention to continue relief for the entire four-year period if the domestic producer has begun to make reasonable progress toward adjustment to import competition during the first and second years of import relief and if a continuation of relief is necessary to further this adjustment process.