[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 218 (Wednesday, November 12, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60688-60690]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-29765]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-588-068]
Steel Wire Strand for Prestressed Concrete From Japan; Notice of
Final Court Decision and Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of final court decision and amended final results of
antidumping duty administrative reviews.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 22, 1997, the Court of International Trade (the
Court) affirmed the Department of Commerce's (the Department) second
remand determination arising out of the administrative reviews of the
antidumping finding on steel wire strand for prestressed concrete (``PC
Strand'') from Japan. See Mitsui & Co., Ltd. v. United States, Slip Op.
97-49 (CIT April 22, 1997). As there is now a final and conclusive
court decision in this action, we are amending the final results of
review in this matter and will instruct the U.S. Customs Service to
liquidate Mitsui's entries covered by these amended final results at
the rates assigned to each of Mitsui's suppliers for the periods April
1, 1978 through
[[Page 60689]]
March 31, 1979; April 1, 1979 through November 30, 1980; December 1,
1980 through November 30, 1981; December 1, 1981 through November 30,
1982; and December 1, 1982 through November 30, 1983.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 12, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mike Heaney or Linda Ludwig, Office Eight, Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Enforcement Group III, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
4475.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On March 11, 1994, the Court issued an order remanding to the
Department the final results of the administrative reviews of the
antidumping finding on PC Strand from Japan, covering exports by Mitsui
& Co. (Mitsui) during the period April 1, 1978 through November 30,
1985.\1\ Mitsui & Co. v. United States, Slip Op. 94-44 (CIT March 11,
1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the period December 1, 1983 through November 30, 1985,
Mitsui had no shipments of merchandise subject to the order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 5, 1994, in accordance with the Court's remand order, the
Department filed its final results of redetermination. (See Final
Redetermination Pursuant to the Court Remand, August 5, 1994, Mitsui &
Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 90-12-00633 (Remand Results 1)).
In this determination, to determine whether Mitsui had engaged in
middleman dumping during each period of review (POR), the Department
considered whether a substantial portion of Mitsui's sales were at
prices that were substantially below its acquisition costs. Based on
our analysis of the number of sales made at prices below acquisition
costs and the magnitude of resulting losses, the Department determined
that Mitsui had engaged in middleman dumping because Mitsui made a
``substantial number of sales at prices substantially below its
acquisition cost'' (See Final Remand Results 1 at 9).
In response to comments on the redetermination submitted by the
plaintiffs and the defendant intervener, the Department requested a
remand to address clerical errors and methodological questions raised
by both parties concerning the existence or absence of middleman
dumping. (See Defendant's Response to the Comments Filed by Plaintiffs
and the Intervenor to the Redetermination Upon Remand Filed by the
Department of Commerce, Nov. 30, 1994 Mitsui & Co., Ltd. v. United
States.)
On June 10, 1996, the Court issued an order remanding the
Department's Final Redetermination of August 1994. The Court directed
the Department to: (1) Correct clerical errors noted by the plaintiffs
and the defendant intervener relating to currency conversion, average
movement charges, and acquisition costs; (2) consider the
methodological questions raised by plaintiffs relating to (a) the use
of number of transactions as opposed to the relative quantity or value
of PC strand, (b) the calculation of ``value'' in determining the
extent of below-cost sales, (c) the calculation of the cost of
acquisition, and (d) the need for information from Mitsui's suppliers
in order to review the existence or absence of middleman dumping; and
(3) consider the intervenor's claim that the Department failed to
include certain expenses reported by Mitsui in its sales listings.
On October 9, 1996, the Department filed its second redetermination
with the Court. (See Prestressed Concrete Strand from Japan, Final
Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, October 9, 1996,
Court No. 90-12-00633 (Remand Results 2).) In this redetermination, the
Department corrected clerical errors identified by both parties. With
respect to the methodological issues, the Department determined that
because a value-based methodology provides a more meaningful
understanding of the extent to which merchandise has been sold below
acquisition costs, a value-based methodology was appropriate to
determine whether Mitsui had engaged in middleman dumping during the
PORs. Accordingly, we determined whether a substantial portion of
Mitsui's sales were below acquisition costs by comparing the total
value of PC strand sales below acquisition costs to the total value of
PC strand sales. Based on our examination of Mitsui's sales, we
determined that Mitsui did not make a substantial portion of sales
below acquisition costs during each POR. Because the portion of below-
acquisition-cost sales during each POR was not substantial, and
examination of whether prices were substantially below acquisition cost
was unnecessary. See Remand Results 2 at 6.
We also determined that (1) reexamining our methodology for
calculating ``value'' was unnecessary because we did not need to
determine whether Mitsui's sales were substantially below acquisition
cost, (2) Mitsui's acquisition costs should be calculated using
currency conversions based on the exchange rate in effect on the date
of shipment, (3) we did not require additional information from
Mitsui's suppliers during the PORs, and (4) we included all actual
expenses incurred and reported by Mitsui in comparing Mitsui's resale
prices to its acquisition costs. See Remand Results 2 at 7. Finally,
because we had determined that Mitsui did not engaged in middleman
dumping during the periods covered by the redetermination, we concluded
that it was appropriate to instruct the U.S. Customs Service to
liquidate Mitsui's entries according to the rates determined for reach
of Mitsui's suppliers for the relevant periods. We noted that this was
the methodology followed in the relevant administrative reviews of the
antidumping finding on PC Strand from Japan for other exporters. See
Steel Wire Strand for Prestressed Concrete from Japan; Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 48 FR 45586 (Oct. 6, 1983)
(1978-1979; 1979-1980 POR); and Steel Wire Strand for Prestressed
Concrete from Japan; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 51 FR 30894 (Aug. 29, 1986) (1980-1981; 1981-1982 POR) Steel
Wire Strand for Prestressed Concrete from Japan; Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 52 FR 4373 (Feb. 11, 1987)
(1982-1983 POR).
On April 22, 1997, the Court upheld the Department's second
redetermination on remand. Mitsui & Co., Ltd. v. United States, Slip
Op. 97-49 (CIT April 22, 1997). The period to appeal has expired and no
appeal was filed. Therefore, as there is now a final and conclusive
court decision in this action, we are amending our final results of
review.
Amended Final Results of Reviews
Pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Act, we are now amending the
final results of the administrative reviews of the antidumping finding
on PC strand from Japan with respect to exports by Mitsui and determine
that the following margins exist:
[[Page 60690]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Manufacturer/exporter Period (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shrinko Wire Company, Ltd./Mitsui & Co., Ltd................................. 04/01/78-03/31/79 0
04/01/79-11/30/80 0
12/01/80-11/30/81 0
12/01/81-11/30/82 0
12/01/82-11/30/83 0
Sumitomo Electric Ind., Ltd./Mitsui & Co., Ltd............................... 04/01/78-03/31/79 0
04/01/79-11/30/80 0
12/01/80-11/30/81 0
12/01/81-11/30/82 0
12/01/82-11/30/83 0
Suzuki Metal Ind. Co., Ltd./Mitsui & Co., Ltd................................ 04/01/78-03/31/79 0
04/01/79-11/30/80 0
12/01/80-11/30/81 0
12/01/81-11/30/82 0
12/01/82-11/30/83 0
Teikoku Sangyo Co., Ltd./Mitsui & Co., Ltd................................... 04/01/78-03/31/79 0
04/01/79-11/30/80 0
12/01/80-11/30/81 0
12/01/81-11/30/82 0
12/01/82-11/30/83 0
Tokyo Rope Mfg. Co. Ltd./Mitsui & Co., Ltd................................... 04/01/78-03/31/79 0
04/01/79-11/30/80 0
12/01/80-11/30/81 4.5
12/01/81-11/30/82 4.5
12/01/82-11/30/83 \1\ 4.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No shipments during the POR.
The Department will instruct the U.S. Customs Service to assess
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. We will issue
appraisement instructions directly to the U.S. Customs Service.
Further, for any shipments form the remaining known manufacturers and/
or exporters not covered by these reviews, the current cash deposit
shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the
next administrative review.
This notice is published in accordance with section 751(a)(1) of
the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR 353.22(c)(8).
Dated: November 3, 1997.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-29765 Filed 11-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M
