[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