the list of bills, as that list is included in the press release of the subcommittee for April 13. I would note that we will not be receiving testimony on H.R. 5594 since that bill is not being included in this hearing at the request of the sponsor, Mr. Meeds.

It is my understanding that the executive branch agencies have agreed to have one spokesman indicate the position of the agency on each bill, except that if any agency's position departs from the general position or there are special factors or circumstances of which the subcommittee should be aware, the representative of that agency will so indicate,

To the extent that the committee has received written reports on the bills, a very brief statement of position will suffice.

Before proceeding, I ask unanimous consent to include in the record at this point the press release announcing this hearing. I also ask unanimous consent to include in the record at the appropriate place the agency reports on the bills before us. [The press release follows:]

[Press release of Wednesday, Apr. 13, 1977) CHAIRMAN CHARLES A. VANIK (D. OHIO) SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRADE, COMMITTEE

ON WAYS AND MEANS, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, ANNOUNCES PUBLIC HEARINGS ON APRIL 26 THROUGH APRIL 28, 1977, ON CERTAIN MISCELLANEOUS TARIFF AND TRADE BILLS

The Honorable Charles A. Vanik (D., Ohio), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Trade of the Committee on Ways and Means, U.S. House of Representatives, today announced that the Subcommittee on Trade would conduct public hearings on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday, April 26 through April 28, 1977, on cer. tain miscellaneous tariff and trade bills. These hearings will be held in the Main Committee Hearing Room, across from Room 1102 Longworth House Office Building, beginning at 10:00 a.m. each day.

It will be recalled that on March 4 Chairman Vanik, in announcing the Subcommittee's hearing agenda indicated that public hearings on miscellaneous tariff bills which the Subcommittee intend to conduct during 1977 would be scheduled in April 1977.

The bills on which testimony will be received are limited to miscellaneous tariff and trade bills involving duty suspension, duty-free entry, import classification, and other miscellaneous trade measures. Testimony will not he received on bills relating to custom administration, articles assembled abroad from U.S. component, trade adjustment assistance, and other proposals which do not fall within the category of miscellaneous tariff and trade bills. A list of miscellaneous tariff and trade bills on which testimony will be received which are pending before the Subcommittee on Trade as of April 18th, is included at the end of this release.

Officials from interested Executive branch agencies will be the first witnesses. Testimony will be received by the Subcommittees from the interested public following the appearances of the Executive branch witnesses.

Witnesses are on notice that in order to cover all of the bills to be considered, and to provide more time for questioning and discussion, the oral presentation of written statements will be limit to three (3) minutes strictly, to be followed immediately by questions. The full statement will be included in the record. Also, in lieu of a personal appearance, any interested persons or organizations may find a written statement for inclusion in the printed record.

Requests to be heard must be received by the Committee by the close of business, Friday, April 22, 1977. The request should address to John M. Martin, Jr., Chief Counsel, Committee on Ways and Means, U.S. House of Representatives, Room 1102 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20515; telephone (202) 225–3625. Notification to those scheduled to appear and testify will be made, by telephone as soon as possible after the filing deadline.

In this instance, it is requested that persons scheduled to appear and testify submit 30 copies of their prepared statements to Committee office, Room 1102 Longworth House Office Building, 24. hours in advance of the scheduled appearance.

Persons submitting a written statement in lieu of a personal appearance should submit at least three (3) copies of their statement by the close of business, Thursday, April 28, 1977. If those filing statements for the record of the printed hearing wish to have their statements distributed to the press and the interested public, they may submit 30 additional copies for this purpose if provided to the Committee during the course of the public hearings.

Each statement to be presented to the Subcommittee or any written statement submitted for the record must contain the following information:

1. The name, address, and capacity in which the witness appears.

2. A list of any clients (or the firm or association he represents) at whose behest or in whose employ the witness appears.

3. The bill or bills on which the witness will be testifying and whether the testimony will be in support or opposition to it.

4. A summary statement, if applicable, of the likely revenue impact of the bill, the potential effects on domestic production, employment and consumers, if any, the foreign source of imports and the location and identity of beneficiaries of the legislation.

5. A topical outline or summary of the comments and recommendations the witness will make.

MISCELLANEOUS TARIFF AND TRADE BILLS TO BE CONSIDERED AT HEARINGS ON

APRIL 26 THROUGH APRIL 28, 1977
H.R. 139Mr. Annunzio, hand tools (increase duty).
H.R. 208. Mr. Boland
H.R. 2267—Mr. Annunzio, et al.
H.R. 5233—Mr. Annunzio, et al.

H.R. 492—Mr. Lent, menadione dimethylpyrimidinol bisulphite (MPB) (suspension).

H.R. 706.-Mr. White, animals, domesticated, pasturing abroad duty-free reentry.

H.R. 1550Mr. Charles Wilson (Texas), ceramic insulators used in spark plugs (duty reduction).

H.R. 1856–Mr. Mathis, palm oil (increase duty).
H.R. 3674-Mr. Mathias, et al.
H.R. 1904—Mr. Stark, intravenous fat emulsions (duty-free).

H.R. 2048_Messrs. Emery and Cohen, fish netting and fish nets (duty reduction).

H.R. 2646—Mr. Roncalio, twine/manmade fibers (duty-free).
H.R. 2692—Mr. Drinan, wood excelsior from Canada (suspension).
H. R. 2850—Messrs. Ottinger and Richmond, latex sheets (suspension).
H.R. 2982—Mr. Drinan, tantalum/columbium concentrates (suspension).
H.R. 3093—Mr. Burke (Mass.), shoe lasts (duty-free).
H.R. 3387–Mr. Waggonner, rutile (suspension).

H.R. 3388—Mr. Waggonner, rutile as titanium source material (amend TSUS item 603.70).

H.R. 3790—Mr. Schulze, poppy straw used in codeine (suspension).
H.R. 3946—Messrs. Quie and Frenzel, wool, not finer than 46s (suspension).

H.R. 4018Mr. Evans (Delaware), doxorubician hydrochloride antibiotics (suspension).

H.R. 4654—Mr. Bob Wilson, unmounted underwater lenses (reduction, temporary).

H.R. 4788Mr. Yatron, tricot and Raschel warp knitting machine (duty-free). H.R. 5037—Mr. Kemp, for the relief of Jack R. Misner (Panda).

H.R. 5044-Messrs. Bauman, Findley, and Hillis, strontium nitrate (duty suspension).

H.R. 5052—Messrs. Frenzel and Holland, color coupler and coupler intermediates (duty suspension).

H.R. 5146—Messrs. McEwen, Young of Alabama, Rangel, and Pike, competition bobsleds and luges (duty-free).

H.R. 5176—Messrs. Corman and Stark, levulose (lower duty).

H.R. 5203—Mr. Mikva, field glasses, opera glasses, binoculars, other telescopes (suspension).

H.R. 5231—Mr. Breckinridge, chlorendic acid (duty-free).

H.R. 5263—Mr. Rostenkowski, bicycle parts (suspension).

H.R. 5265_Messrs. Rostenkowski, Conable, and Archer, fluorspar (temporary suspension).

H.R. 5270_Mr. Steiger, aspen wood for wood particle board (duty reduction). H.R. 5285—Mr. Lederer, sheets manufactured from acrylic resin materials (classification).

H.R. 5286—Mr. Lederer, acetone !classification).

H.R. 5289~Mr. Gibbons, for the relief of Joe Cortina (customs on musical instruments).

H.R. 5322—Mr. Frenzel, istle (suspension).
H.R. 5551—Mr. Flowers, 2-Methyl, 4-chlorophenol (suspension).
H.R. 5594—Mr. Meeds, calcined petroleum coke (suspension).
H.S. 5643—Mr. Mikva, cultural property (classification).
H.R. 5858Mr. Quie, Canadian Petroleum (duty-free).

Mr. VANIK. I would like the representatives of the various departments and the U.S. International Trade Commission to come forward to the witness table and identify yourselves for the record.

I would again urge your cooperation in being concise in your statements in order that we may complete this phase of the hearing this morning.

Mr. Pounds, I understand by agreement you will indicate the general position of the administration on each bill.

Mr. Rosengarden, of the Trade Commission, if you have comments or suggestions not covered in your reports or which should be emphasized, I hope you will speak up.

H.R. 139, H.R. 208, H.R. 2267, AND H.R. 5233 The first bill is H.R. 139, and similar bills, introduced by Mr. Annunzio and cosponsored by a number of members, would provide tariff relief to the domestic hand tool industry by increasing the duty for a 5 year period with a three-stage phasedown of the increased rates. The domestic industry alleges and Treasury has found that certain hand tools produced in Japan have been dumped in the United States. Imports have increased in recent years.

We would be pleased to hear from the administration.

а.

A PANEL CONSISTING OF BILL DIROLL AND ELI MAURER, DEPART

MENT OF STATE; WILLIAM POUNDS, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, ACCOMPANIED BY LEONARD A. MOBLEY, DIRECTOR, TRADE ANALYSIS DIVISION; DICK ABBEY, CUSTOMS SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY; JO ANN NORDLIE, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; NORVAL FRANCIS, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; AND EUGENE ROSENGARDEN, HOLM KAPPLER, AND GEORGE WEISE, U.S. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

Mr. POUNDS. Mr. Chairman, the subcommittee has not received a letter cleared through OMB on this bill yet, but there is a cleared administration position that I am authorized to present.

Mr. VANIK. We will be pleased to have the administration position. Speak up. Mr. Pounds. The administration opposes this bill.

It does not have available to it evidence that increased protection from import competition for the domestic industry producing hand tools covered in this bill is needed. Data necessary to determine whether the domestic industry is being injured by increased imports would, the administration believes require a thorough investigation of competitive conditions in the industry of the type that the U.S. International Trade Commission pursues.

With respect to situations in which a domestic industry believes it is experiencing serious import injury or threat of injury, as the committee knows, Congress has provided liberalized trade remedies in the Trade Act of 1974. Only through this process, the administration believes, can proper attention be given to the competitive situation with respect to each of the numerous separate products included in the coverage of the bill.

Tariffs on the items in this bill are subject to concessions made by the United States and any increase in the duties on these items would render this country subject to claims for compensation or retaliation, thus disadvantaging other U.S. industries.

The administration believes, therefore, that it is inappropriate to jeopardize our trading interests in a case in which injury has not been determined.

Mr. VANIK. Does the administration have any figures or records with respect to the extent of these imports?

Mr. Pounds. We have 1976 import figures. According to industry sources, imports during 1976 rose to $95.3 million for the items covered in the bill with most of the increase due to pipe tools, which increased in import value from $30 million in 1975 to $57 million in 1976.

Mr. VANIK. Is that administration in a position to give the committee any information as to what percentage that is of total demand in the United States?

Mr. Pounds. We believe that it is approximately 11 percent of consumption.

Mr. VANIK. That is of both the pipe tools and the hand tools or the combination ?

Mr. Pounds. That is hand tools taken all together.
Mr. VANIK. The combination including the pipe tools?
Mr. POUNDS. Yes.

Mr. VANIK. Is there any comment from the International Trade Commission?

You may proceed.

Mr. ROSENGARDEN. Our information is that U.S. imports from all countries of the hand tools covered by this bill total in 1976 $151 million. Of the trade in those articles which were subject to the two dumping investigations, that trade in 1976 would be, we estimate, $97 million, and these tools which were not the subject of the dumping investigations and which are covered by the bill in 1976, the trade was $54 million, an increase of 20 percent from the 1975 total.

Mr. VANIK. You are watching dramatic increases, aren't you? You consider that a dramatic increase, 20 percent within 1 year?

Mr. ROSENGARDEN. I would think this is a significant increase. I might also add, Mr. Chairman, that the U.S. imports from all countries of the hand tools covered by this bill of $151 million represents an increase of about 45 percent above the 1975 trade.

Mr. VANIK. The total world impact is a 45 percent increase ?
Mr. ROSENGARDEN. Yes, sir.
Mr. VANIK. Are there any questions by members of the committee?
Mr. Steiger?
Mr. STEIGER. No: Mr. Chairman.
Mr. VANIK. Mr. Jones?
All right, we will move on to the next bill.

H.R. 492

H.R. 492, introduced by Mr. Lent, would suspend the duty on imports of menadione dimethylpyrimidinol bisulphite (MPB), a vitamin K active feed supplement, until January 3, 1979.

What is the code name or the generic name for what we are talking about?

Mr. Pounds. It is MPB, which is vitamin K. It is a vitamin K food additive.

Mr. VANIK. We will be pleased to have the administration give its position on this bill.

Mr. Pounds. The administration opposes enactment of this bill.

Mr. VANIK. Is this an additive for human consumption or animal consumption?

Mr. Pounds. No, sir, it is for animal feed, laregly poultry and swine.

The administration points out there is U.S. domestic production of a product which is directly competitive with MPB and which meets a substantial part of domestic demand. There is no indication of a shortage which would warrant extraordinary removal of the tariff to ease prices. Accordingly, we believe that any consideration of reduction of duties can more properly be taken up in the multilateral trade negotiations in order that our negotiators may seek reciprocal reductions for U.S. exports.

Mr. VANIK. Who is the principal American supplier of this product?

Mr. POUNDS. It is a New York firm called Heterochemical Corp. It imports it from Ireland.

Mr. VANIK. What is the importing firm ? Mr. Pounds. Heterochemical Corp. Mr. VANIK. What is the principal domestic producer? Mr. Pounds. There is no domestic production of this particular type of vitamin K. There is another vitamin K that is directly competitive and that is largely produced in this country by Abbot Laboratories.

Mr. VANIK. What is the difference in price of the import product and the American alternative? Is there one principal manufacturer of the alternative in the United States ?

Mr. Pounds. Yes; Abbot Laboratories.

Mr. VANIK. What is the price variation between the imported product and the domestic product?

Mr. POUNDS. Mr. Chairman, we do not have data on price differences.