[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 56 (Wednesday, March 23, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-6846]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: March 23, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-588-802]

 

3.5 Inch Microdisks and Coated Media Thereof From Japan; Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration/International Trade Administration 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of antidumping duty administrative 
review.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On December 30, 1993, the Department of Commerce published the 
preliminary results of its administrative review of the antidumping 
duty order on 3.5 inch microdisks and coated media thereof (microdisks) 
from Japan. The review covers one manufacturer/exporter of this 
merchandise to the United States, Hitachi Maxell, Ltd. (HML), and the 
period April 1, 1992 through March 31, 1993.
    We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the 
preliminary results. Based on our analysis of comments received, we 
have changed the final results from those presented in our preliminary 
results of review.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 23, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arthur N. DuBois or Thomas F. Futtner, 
Office of Antidumping Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-6312/3814.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On December 30, 1993, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published in the Federal Register (58 FR 69339) the preliminary results 
of its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on 
microdisks (54 FR 13406, April 3, 1989). The Department has now 
completed that administrative review in accordance with section 751 of 
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Tariff Act), and 19 CFR 353.22.

Scope of the Review

    Imports covered by the review are shipments of 3.5 inch microdisks 
and coated media thereof from Japan, currently classifiable under 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item number 8523.20.0000. The HTS item 
number is provided for convenience and for Customs purposes only. The 
written descriptions remain dispositive.
    A 3.5 inch microdisk is a tested or untested magnetically coated 
polyester disk with a steel hub enclosed in a hard plastic jacket. 
These microdisks are used to record and store encoded digital computer 
information for access by a 3.5 inch floppy disk drive. The 3.5 inch 
microdisk includes single-sided, double-sided, or high-density formats. 
The 3.5 inch microdisk is intended for use specifically in a 3.5 inch 
floppy disk drive.
    Coated media is the flexible recording material used in the 
finished microdisk. Media consists of a polyester base film to which a 
coating of magnetically charged particles is bonded.
    This review covers one Japanese manufacturer/exporter of this 
merchandise to the United States, HML, and the period April 1, 1992 
through March 31, 1993.

Analysis of Comments Received

    The Department gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on 
the preliminary results of this administrative review as provided by 
section 353.38 of the Commerce Regulations. We received comments from 
the respondent, HML. We have corrected the clerical errors noted by the 
respondents, and have addressed them specifically in this notice.
    Comment 1: HML commented that rebates and discounts should not be 
included in constructed value because they are price adjustments and 
not expenses. It cites Antifriction Bearings (Other than Tapered Roller 
Bearings) and Parts Thereof from The Federal Republic of Germany, Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review (55 FR 31692, 31732, 
July 11, 1991), as an example of the Department's practice.
    Department's Position: We agree. Our preliminary analysis 
memorandum may have made it seem as if we included rebates and 
discounts in constructed value. However, we did not include rebates and 
discounts in our preliminary constructed value calculation because it 
is not our policy to do so. Therefore, no change in our calculations 
was necessary.
    Comment 2: HML commented that in comparing U.S. sales to 
constructed value, the Department made an error regarding home market 
inventory carrying costs of coated media. HML asserts that the 
Department should include these costs when determining the total amount 
of home market indirect expenses to deduct from constructed value just 
as it did in calculating the deduction from home market prices.
    Department's Position: We agree. It was our intention as we stated 
in our preliminary notice that inventory carrying costs be included in 
the pool of indirect home market selling expenses.
    Therefore, we have corrected our calculations. In accordance with 
our practice, we have limited the adjustment to constructed value of 
home market indirect expenses to the amount of indirect expenses HML 
incurred on its exporter's sales price transactions.
    Comment 3: HML pointed out two clerical errors in the model match 
table used in the computer program which caused no matching FMV sales 
to be found for two of the models sold in the United States.
    Department's Position: We agree and have corrected the our 
calculations accordingly.

Final Results of the Review

    As a result of this administrative review, the Department 
determines that the following margin exists for the period April 1, 
1992, through March 31, 1993: 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Margin 
                Manufacturer/producer/exporter                  percent 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HML...........................................................     0.96 
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department will instruct the U.S. Customs Service to assess 
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department will 
issue appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service.
    Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective 
upon publication of these final results of this administrative review 
for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as 
provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act: (1) For subject 
merchandise exported by HML, a cash deposit of 0.96 percent; (2) For 
subject merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not covered 
in this review, but covered in previous reviews or the original less-
than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, a cash deposit based on the most 
recently published rate in a final result or determination for which 
the manufacturer or exporter received a company-specific rate; (3) If 
the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or 
the original LTFV investigation, 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 review reviews conducted by the Department, the cash deposit 
rate will be 42.85 percent, the ``all other'' rate established in the 
LTFV investigation, as discussed below.
    On March 25, 1993, the Court of International Trade (CIT), in 
Floral Trade Council v. United States, Slip Op. 93-79, and Federal-
Mogul Corporation v. United States, Slip Op. 93-83, decided that once 
an ``all others'' rate is established for a company, it can only be 
changed through an administrative review.
    The Department has determined that in order to implement these 
decisions, it is appropriate to reinstate the original ``all others'' 
rate from the LTFV investigation (or that rate as amended for 
correction of clerical errors or as a result of litigation) in a 
proceeding governed by an antidumping duty order.
    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 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.
    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 353.34(d). Timely written 
notification of return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to 
judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with 
the regulations and the terms of APO is a sanctionable violation.
    This administrative review and notice are in accordance with 
section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR 
353.22.

    Dated: March 10, 1994.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 94-6846 Filed 3-22-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-05-P