[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 53 (Thursday, March 19, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13391-13393]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-7170]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-588-054, A-588-604]
Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and
Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or
Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, From Japan; Amended
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of amended final results of administrative reviews.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is amending its
final results of the administrative reviews, published on January 15,
1998, of the antidumping duty order on tapered roller bearings (TRBs)
and parts thereof, finished and unfinished, from Japan (A-588-604), and
the antidumping finding on TRBs, four inches or less in outside
diameter, and components thereof, from Japan (A-588-054), to reflect
the correction of ministerial errors in those final results.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 19, 1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Ranado, Stephanie Arthur, or
John Kugelman, Office of AD/CVD Enforcement III, Office 8, Import
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.
20230, telephone: (202) 482-3518, 6312, and 0649, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Applicable Statute and Regulations
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are in
reference to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective
date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise
indicated, all citations are to the Department's regulations, 19 CFR
part 353 (1997).
Background
On January 15, 1998, the Department published its final results of
administrative review of the antidumping duty order (A-588-604) on TRBs
and parts thereof, finished and unfinished, from Japan, and the
antidumping finding (A-588-054) on TRBs, four inches or less in outside
diameter, and components thereof, from Japan (63 FR 2558). The
Department has now amended the final results of these reviews in
accordance with section 751 of the Act.
On January 15, 1998, the petitioner filed clerical error
allegations with respect to two of the respondents, NSK and NTN. On
January 21, 1998, we received clerical error allegations from NSK, and
on January 26, 1998, we received clerical error comments from NTN. None
of the parties submitted rebuttal comments. The Department agreed that
certain of the allegations constituted ministerial errors.
Scope of the Review
Imports covered by the A-588-054 finding are sales or entries of
TRBs, four inches or less in outside diameter when assembled, including
inner race or cone assemblies and outer races or cups, sold either as a
unit or separately. This merchandise is classified under the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule (HTS) item numbers 8482.20.00 and 8482.99.30. Imports
covered by the A-588-604 order include TRBs and parts thereof, finished
and unfinished, which are flange, take-up cartridge, and hanger units
incorporating TRBs, and tapered roller housings (except pillow blocks)
incorporating tapered rollers, with or without spindles, whether or not
for automotive use. Products subject to the A-588-054 finding are not
included within the scope of the A-588-604 order, except for those
manufactured by NTN Corporation (NTN). This merchandise is currently
classifiable under HTS item numbers 8482.99.30, 8483.20.40, 8482.20.20,
8483.20.80, 8482.91.00, 8484.30.80, 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30, and
8483.90.60. These HTS item numbers and those for the A-588-054 finding
are provided for convenience and Customs purposes. The written
description remains dispositive.
The A-588-054 review covers TRB sales by two TRB manufacturers/
exporters (Koyo Seiko Ltd. (Koyo) and NSK Ltd. (NSK)), and two
resellers/exporters (Fuji Heavy Industries (Fuji) and MC International
(MC)). The review of the A-588-604 case covers TRB sales by three
manufacturers/exporters (Koyo, NSK and NTN Corporation (NTN)), and two
resellers/exporters (Fuji and MC). Because Fuji and MC had no shipments
in the A-588-604 review, and for the reasons explained in our notice of
preliminary results, we have not assigned a rate to these firms for
these amended final results. The period of review (POR) for both cases
is October 1, 1995, through September 30, 1996.
Clerical Error Allegations
Comment 1: NTN asserts that the Department erroneously attempted to
correct the currency conversion error related to the calculation of CEP
profit which is mentioned in the final results memorandum. The
respondent claims that as the program is currently written, EP sales
are divided by the exchange rate, which is incorrect since EP sales are
already reported correctly. The respondent maintains that this error
has distortive effects on the calculation of the total cost of goods
sold and total revenue.
[[Page 13392]]
Department's Position: We disagree with NTN. The final results
computer program for NTN properly converts all of NTN's sales while
calculating CEP profit. NTN's allegations regarding the calculation of
the total costs of goods sold and total revenue is discussed in Comment
2.
Comment 2: NTN maintains that the Department made a clerical error
in its calculation of revenue for EP and CEP sales. The respondent
claims that the final program calculates an EP and CEP revenue amount
for all transactions, and that these two amounts are then added
together to yield a total revenue amount.
Department's Position: We agree with NTN. Our final program for NTN
incorrectly calculates both an EP revenue (EPREV) and a CEP revenue
(CEPREV) amount for each U.S. sale. Therefore, for this amended final,
we have changed our programming language such that each transaction is
assigned only one revenue variable (CEPREV or EPREV), as appropriate.
Because transaction-specific revenue amounts affect the calculation of
total cost of goods sold and total revenue, the correction of this
error addresses NTN's concerns from comment 1. This change ensures that
the total cost of goods sold and total revenue calculations are
correct.
Comment 3: Timken claims that in the final results computer program
for NTN, the Department made a clerical error while attempting to
adjust NTN's normal value (NV) billing adjustments. Timken maintains
that the language added to the computer program for the final results
failed to adjust NTN's billing adjustments as intended by the
Department.
Department's Position: We agree with the petitioner that the
programming language added to correct NTN's home market billing
adjustments was not executing correctly and have revised our margin
program accordingly.
Comment 4: Timken alleges that the Department made a ministerial
error while attempting to correct the calculation of NSK's home market
revenue (i.e., by deducting home market post-sale price adjustments).
The computer output log, Timken claims, indicates that there were
missing values generated as a result of missing values in the variable
fields used to adjust home market prices when calculating revenue.
Timken suggests that the Department failed to identify these missing
variables earlier in the program.
Department's Position: We agree with Timken that the missing values
generated while calculating home market revenue resulted from our
failure to identify the post-sale price adjustment variables earlier in
the computer program. We have revised our final margin program as
described in our Amended Final Results Analysis Memorandum.
Comment 5: NSK asserts that language in the Department's computer
program which attempts to match negative quantity sales to the original
sales for which the adjustment was made operates incorrectly.
Department's Position: We agree with NSK and have made the
appropriate changes to our final results program. For further
information, refer to the Department's Amended Final Results Memorandum
for NSK.
Comment 6: NSK maintains that the Department calculated direct and
indirect constructed value (CV) selling expense ratios based on imputed
expenses (credit and inventory carrying costs (ICC)), multiplied these
ratios by COP/CV to derive a direct and indirect selling expense
amount, then added these amounts to other cost data to derive total CV.
NSK asserts, however, that because total CV already includes imputed
interest expenses, the Department double counted imputed expenses.
Department's Position: We agree with NSK that imputed expenses were
double counted in the CV calculation. We have modified our program to
calculate separate CV expense ratios for imputed credit and ICCs,
deduct the credit expense from CV, and add ICCs to the home market
indirect selling expenses used for the CEP offset (which effectively
increases the CEP offset deduction by the ICC expense amount). In
addition, because our CV calculation language for Koyo and NTN is
identical to NSK's, we have likewise modified the margin programs for
these firms.
Comment 7: NSK asserts that while the Department correctly added
home market billing adjustments to calculate net home market price, it
erroneously subtracted billing adjustments from gross unit price when
calculating home market revenue.
Department's Position: We agree with NSK and have modified our
program accordingly such that home market billing adjustments are
properly added to, rather than deducted from, gross unit price when
calculating home market revenue.
Amended Final Results of Review
Based on our review of the comments presented above, for these
amended final results we have made changes in our final margin
calculation programs. We determine that the following percentage
weighted-average margins exist for the period October 1, 1995 through
September 30, 1996:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Manufacturer/exporter/reseller (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the A-588-054 Case:
Koyo Seiko............................................... 9.58
Fuji..................................................... .34
NSK...................................................... 1.64
MC International......................................... 1.92
For the A-588-604 Case:
Fuji..................................................... \1\
MC International......................................... \2\
Koyo Seiko............................................... 28.65
NTN...................................................... 21.41
NSK...................................................... 10.17
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No shipments or sales subject to this review. These firms have no
rate from any prior segment of this proceeding.
The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. We will
calculate importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates for the
merchandise based on the ratio of the total amount of antidumping
duties calculated for the examined sales made during the POR to the
total customs value of the sales used to calculate those duties. This
rate will be assessed uniformly on all entries that a particular
importer made during the POR. (This is equivalent to dividing the total
amount of antidumping duties, which are calculated by taking the
difference between NV and U.S. price, by the total U.S. price of the
sales compared and adjusting the result by the average difference
between U.S. price and customs value for all merchandise examined
during the POR.) While the Department is aware that the entered value
of sales during the POR is not necessarily equal to the entered value
of entries during the POR, use of entered value of sales as a basis of
the assessment rate permits the Department to collect a reasonable
approximation of antidumping duties which would have been determined if
the Department had reviewed those sales of merchandise during the POR.
The Department will issue appropriate appraisement instructions
directly to the Customs Service.
Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective
after the publication date of these amended final results for all
shipments of TRBs from Japan entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication date of these amended final
results of these administrative reviews, as provided by section
751(a)(1) of the Act:
(1) The cash deposit rates for the reviewed companies will be those
rates established in the amended final results of these reviews;
[[Page 13393]]
(2) For previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed
above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific
rate published for the most recent period;
(3) If the exporter is not a firm covered in these reviews, a prior
review, or the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigations, but the
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for
the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and
(4) If neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered
in these or any previous reviews conducted by the Department, the cash
deposit rate for the A-588-054 case will be 18.07 percent, and 36.52
percent for the A-588-604 case (see Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Reviews; Tapered Roller Bearings, Finished and
Unfinished, and Parts Thereof, from Japan and Tapered Roller Bearings,
Four Inches or less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, From
Japan, 58 FR 51061 (September 30, 1993)).
The cash deposit rate has been determined on the basis of the
selling price to the first unaffiliated U.S. customer. For appraisement
purposes, where information is available, the Department will use the
entered value of the merchandise to determine the assessment rate.
This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during
this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could
result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping
duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping
duties. These administrative reviews and this notice are in accordance
with section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR
353.22.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 353.34(d) or conversion
to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is
subject to sanction.
These administrative reviews and this notice are in accordance with
section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1) and 19 CFR 353.22.
Dated: March 10, 1998.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-7170 Filed 3-18-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
