[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 18, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3624-3625]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-1216]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-588-054]
Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter,
and Components Thereof, From Japan; Affirmation of the Results of
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand
AGENCY: Import Administration/International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On June 8, 1994, the United States Court of International
Trade (CIT) affirmed the Department of Commerce's (the Department's)
redetermination on remand of the final results of administrative review
of the antidumping finding on tapered roller bearings, four inches or
less in outside diameter, and certain components thereof (TRBs) from
Japan (56 FR 26054, June 6, 1991) (The Timken Company v. United States
(Slip Op. 94-41 (March 7, 1994)) (Timken). The results covered the
period August 1, 1987, through July 31, 1988, and TRBs produced by Koyo
Seiko Co., Ltd., and distributed by its subsidiary, Koyo Corporation of
U.S.A. (collectively, Koyo), and by NSK Ltd., and distributed by its
subsidiary, NSK Corporation (collectively, NSK).
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 18, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chip Hayes or John Kugelman, Office of
Antidumping Compliance, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-
5253.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 7, 1994, the CIT issued an order remanding to the
Department the final results of administrative review of the
antidumping finding on TRBs from Japan (56 FR 26054, June 6, 1991).
In its decision in Timken, the CIT remanded the final results to
the Department to allow the Department to determine whether it has
statutory authority to adjust foreign market value (FMV) for pre-sale
inland freight in light of the decision of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) in Ad Hoc Comm. of
AZ-NM-TX-FL Producers of Gray Portland Cement v. United States, No. 93-
1239 (Fed. Cir., January 5, 1994) (Ad Hoc Comm.). In response to that
order, we explained that we adjust FMV for post-sale movement expenses
as differences in circumstances of sale (19 CFR Sec. 353.56(a)) and we
consider pre-sale freight to be appropriate expenses to include in the
exporter's sales price (ESP) offset under 19 CFR Sec. 353.56(b)(2),
because they are post-production expenses borne in preparation to sell
the merchandise. We further clarified that Sec. 353.56(b)(2) of the
Department's regulations allows the Department to deduct from FMV all
expenses, other than direct selling expenses enumerated in
Sec. 353.56(a), incurred in selling such or similar merchandise up to
the amount of expenses incurred in selling the merchandise in the
United States. Consequently, the Department has determined it will
evaluate claims of pre-sale inland freight expenses for home market (or
third-country) sales using the ESP offset provision in the regulations.
Subsequent to the Department's explanation of the treatment of pre-
sale freight expenses in Timken, we have determined that there are
circumstances when pre-sale movement expenses may be direct expenses.
Since direct expenses are adjusted for under the circumstance-of-sale
provision, the Department evaluates whether the pre-sale movement
expenses are direct expenses by examining each respondent's pre-sale
warehousing expenses, since the pre-sale movement charges incurred in
positioning the merchandise at the warehouse are, for analytical
purposes, linked to pre-sale warehousing expenses. If the pre-sale
warehousing expenses constitute indirect expenses, the expenses
involved in getting the merchandise to the warehouse also must be
indirect.
In its affirmation of June 8, 1994 (Slip Op. 94-95), the CIT
accepted the Department's explanation of its methodology and ordered
its implementation for this review period.
In its decision in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed.
Cir. 1990) (Timken I), the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to 19
U.S.C. 1516a(e), the Department must publish a notice of a court
decision which is not ``in harmony'' with a Departmental determination,
and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court
decision. The CIT's decision in Timken constitutes a decision not in
harmony with the Department's final results of review. This notice
fulfills the publication requirements of Timken I.
Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of
liquidation of the subject merchandise. [[Page 3625]] Furthermore,
absent an appeal, or, if appealed, upon a ``conclusive'' court decision
affirming the CIT's opinion, the Department will amend the final
results of the administrative review of the antidumping finding on
tapered roller bearings, four inches or less in outside diameter, and
certain components thereof from Japan to reflect the amended margins of
49.63 percent for Koyo and 16.28 percent for NSK for the period August
1, 1987 through July 31, 1988, in the Department's redetermination on
remand, as affirmed by the CIT.
Dated: January 9, 1995.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 95-1216 Filed 1-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
