[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 69 (Friday, April 10, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17815-17820]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-9546]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-588-054 and A-588-604]


Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, 
and Components Thereof, from Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings, 
Finished and Unfinished, and Parts Thereof, From Japan: Final Court 
Decisions and Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Reviews

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

ACTION: Notice of final court decisions and amended final results of 
antidumping duty administrative reviews.

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

SUMMARY: Since the publication of the August 18, 1976, antidumping 
finding on tapered roller bearings (TRBs), four inches or less in 
outside diameter, and components thereof, from Japan (41 FR 34974) (the 
A-588-054 TRBs case), and the October 6, 1987, antidumping duty order 
on TRBs, finished and unfinished, and parts thereof, from Japan (52 FR 
37352) (the A-588-604 TRBs case), the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) has published final results in the TRBs cases as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Date of publication                   Periods reviewed         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         For the A-588-054 Case                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6/15/82, 3/9/84, and 6/1/90.........  1974-79.                          
11/10/94............................  1979-86.                          
9/20/90.............................  1986-87.                          
6/6/91..............................  1987-88.                          
12/16/91............................  1988-89.                          
2/11/92.............................  1989-90.                          
3/16/92.............................  1989-90 (amended).                
12/9/93.............................  1990-92.                          
1/18/94.............................  1990-92 (amended).                
11/7/96.............................  1992-93.                          
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         For the A-588-604 Case                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8/21/91.............................  1987-88.                          
2/11/92.............................  1988-89.                          
2/11/92.............................  1989-90.                          
3/16/92.............................  1989-90 (amended).                
12/9/93.............................  1990-92.                          
1/18/94.............................  1990-92 (amended).                
11/7/96.............................  1992-93.                          
3/13/97.............................  1994-95.                          
3/13/97.............................  1994-95.                          
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsequent to our publication of each of the above final results of 
administrative reviews, parties to the proceedings challenged certain 
aspects of our final results determinations before the Court of 
International Trade (CIT) and, in certain instances, before the United 
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) (collectively, 
the Court).
    With respect to the 1974-79 A-588-054 final results and the 1987-88 
A-588-054 final results, we have already issued instructions to the 
U.S. Customs Service (Customs) to liquidate entries of TRBs within the 
scope of the A-588-054 finding during these periods as a result of 
final and conclusive court decisions made with respect to the 
litigation for these proceedings at earlier dates.
    With respect to the 1988-89 final results for the A-588-054 case 
and the 1992-93 and 1994-95 final results for both TRBs cases, the 
Court has not yet issued final and conclusive decisions. Therefore, we 
are unable at this time to publish amended final results for these 
periods and we are unable to instruct Customs to liquidate entries of 
subject merchandise made by certain manufacturers/exporters during 
these periods.
    The Court, however, recently affirmed final remand results 
affecting final assessment rates for certain manufacturers/exporters 
for the 1979-86 A-588-054, 1986-87 A-588-054, 1987-88 A-588-604, 1988-
89 A-588-604, 1989-90 A-588-054, 1989-90 A-588-604, and the 1990-92 A-
588-054 and A-588-604 proceedings. As there are now final and 
conclusive court decisions with respect to certain litigation for these 
final results, where applicable, we are amending our final results of 
review and will subsequently instruct Customs to liquidate entries 
subject to these reviews.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 10, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ilissa Kabak or John Kugelman, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 
20230; telephone (202) 482-0145 or (202) 482-0649, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Below is a summary of the litigation for each of the TRBs final 
results for which the Court has issued final and conclusive decisions. 
The summary highlights those court orders/decisions which were not in 
harmony with the Department's original final results and/or required a 
recalculation of a respondent's final results margin. It is important 
to note that, due to the fact that litigation for each TRBs final 
results was unconsolidated, often the Court issued two or more orders 
throughout the course of litigation for a given final results which 
required us to recalculate a respondent's final results margin several 
times. To ensure the accurate calculation of amended final results, any 
recalculation we performed for a given respondent pursuant to a 
specific order reflected all recalculations we performed for that 
respondent pursuant to earlier orders. As a result, our recalculation 
pursuant to the last order requiring a recalculation of a respondent's 
final results margin reflects the final amended margin for the 
respondent, provided that final and conclusive decisions have been made 
by the Court with respect to each segment of litigation which impacted 
the respondent's final results.

[[Page 17816]]

A. The 1979-86 Period for A-588-054

Summary

    On November 10, 1994, we published in the Federal Register our 
notice of the final results of administrative reviews for the 1979-86 
periods of review (POR) in the A-588-054 TRBs case (59 FR 56035). This 
notice covered the administrative reviews for 1) Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. 
(Koyo) for the 1979-86 PORs, 2) NSK Ltd. (NSK) for the 1980-86 PORs, 3) 
Mitsubishi Corporation and Sumitomo Yale Co., Ltd. for the 1980-85 
PORs, and 4) Sumitomo Corporation, Nachi-Fujikoshi, Niigata Converter, 
Toyosha, Toyota, Yamaha, Suzuki, Maekawa Bearing Manufacturer, Nissan, 
Mazda, and MC International for the 1985-86 POR. Subsequent to the 
publication of these final results NSK and Koyo challenged certain 
issues before the CIT (Court Nos. 94-12-00771 and 94-12-00779, 
respectively). The CIT has issued final and conclusive decisions with 
respect to the 94-12-00771 (NSK) litigation and the 94-12-00779 (Koyo) 
litigation.
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court with respect to Koyo's 
final results which were not in harmony with and/or required a 
recalculation of Koyo's final results were:
     Koyo v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-122 (August 5, 1996) (The CIT 
ruled in favor of the Department on all issues and dismissed the case).
     Koyo v. U.S., CAFC Appeal No. 97-1031 (July 22, 1997 
decision and September 12, 1997 mandate) (The CAFC overturned the CIT's 
decision in Slip Op. 96-122 and ordered the Department to reconsider 
the treatment of Koyo's U.S. sample sales).
     Koyo v. U.S., Slip Op. 97-134 (September 18, 1997) (The 
CIT's remand in light of the CAFC's July 22 decision and September 12 
mandate) affirmed/dismissed, Slip Op. 97-169 (December 8, 1997).

Status

    All Other Firms: All firms except NSK and Koyo did not pursue 
litigation and the existing litigation had no impact on their final 
results. Because the Department has not yet issued instructions to 
Customs to liquidate entries made by these firms during the applicable 
periods, where appropriate, we will issue instructions to Customs to 
liquidate entries of A-588-054 merchandise made by these firms pursuant 
to our November 10, 1994, 1979-86 final results.
    NSK: The CIT issued only one order with respect to the 94-12-00771 
(NSK) litigation (NSK v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-157 September 12, 1996). 
Because this order was in harmony with the Department's final results 
for NSK and there was no other segment of litigation for these periods 
which impacted NSK's 1980-86 final results, Slip Op. 96-157 stands as 
the final and conclusive court decision with respect to NSK's final 
results. Because this order did not require a recalculation of NSK's 
1980-86 final results margins, we will instruct Customs to liquidate 
entries of A-588-054 merchandise made by NSK during the 1980-86 PORs 
pursuant to our November 10, 1994 final results.
    Koyo: The CIT issued one order with respect to the 94-12-00779 
(Koyo) litigation (Koyo v. U.S., Slip Op. 97-134 September 18, 1997). 
Because this order did not require a recalculation of Koyo's 1979-86 
final results margins, we will instruct Customs to liquidate entries of 
A-588-054 merchandise made by Koyo during the 1979-86 PORs pursuant to 
our November 10, 1994 final results.

B. The 1986-87 Period for A-588-054

Summary

    On September 20, 1990, we published in the Federal Register our 
final results of administrative review for the 1986-87 POR in the A-
588-054 TRBs case (55 FR 38720). This notice covered the administrative 
reviews for Koyo, Isuzu Motors, Toyota, Nissan Motor Company, and Nachi 
Fujikoshi. Subsequent to our publication of these final results, Koyo 
(with Isuzu as plaintiff-intervenor), NSK, and the Timken Company 
(Timken), the petitioner in both cases, challenged aspects of our final 
results before the CIT (Court Nos. 90-10-00546, 90-10-00543, and 90-10-
00548, respectively). The CIT has issued final and conclusive decisions 
with respect to each segment of the litigation for these final results.
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court with respect to Koyo's 
final results which were not in harmony with and/or required a 
recalculation of Koyo's final results were:
     Koyo and Isuzu v. U.S., Slip Op. 93-3 (January 8, 1993).
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 92-209 (November 25, 1992), 
affirmed/dismissed, Slip Op. 93-100 (June 8, 1993).
     Koyo and Isuzu v. U.S., CAFC No. 93-1525, 1534 (September 
30, 1994 decision and October 21, 1994 mandate) (The CAFC overturned 
the CIT's order in Slip Op. 93-3 to add U.S. direct expenses to foreign 
market value in exporter's sales price calculations).
     Koyo and Isuzu v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-177 (November 14, 
1994) (The CIT's remand in light of the CAFC's September 30 decision 
and October 21 mandate) affirmed/dismissed, Slip Op. 95-41 (March 14, 
1995).
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court with respect to NSK's 
final results which were not in harmony with and/or required a 
recalculation of NSK's final results were:
     NSK v. U.S., Slip Op. 92-205 (November 19, 1992).
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 92-209 (November 25, 1992) 
affirmed/dismissed, Slip Op. 93-100 (June 8, 1993).
     NSK v. U.S., Slip Op. 93-47 (March 30, 1993) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 93-100 (June 8, 1993).
    While Timken appealed an issue to the CAFC which affected both NSK 
and Koyo (Timken v. U.S., CAFC Appeal No. 92-1312, 1955), the CAFC's 
September 27, 1994 decision did not require any further recalculation 
of NSK's or Koyo's margins and affirmed the CIT's determinations with 
respect to the 90-10-00543, -00546, and -00548 litigation.

Status

    All Other Firms: All firms noted above, except Koyo and NSK, did 
not pursue litigation and none of the existing litigation had any 
effect on their final results. Because the Department has not yet 
issued instructions to Customs with respect to these firms, where 
appropriate, we will instruct Customs to liquidate entries of A-588-054 
merchandise made by these firms during the 1986-87 period pursuant to 
our September 20, 1990 final results.
    NSK: As there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to the 90-10-00543 (NSK) and 90-10-00548 (Timken) litigation, 
we are amending our final results of review for NSK based on the last 
court order which required a recalculation of NSK's rate (NSK v. U.S., 
Slip Op. 93-47). Because the margin we calculated for NSK pursuant to 
this order reflected all prior recalculations made to NSK's margin 
pursuant to earlier orders, the amended final results margin for NSK 
for the 1986-87 period for A-588-054 merchandise is that which we 
calculated pursuant to Slip Op. 93-47 (15.41 percent). We will 
subsequently issue instructions to Customs to liquidate entries of A-
588-054 merchandise made by NSK pursuant to these amended final 
results.
    Koyo: As there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to the 90-10-00546 (Koyo) and 90-10-00548 (Timken) litigation, 
we are amending our final results of review for Koyo based on the last 
court order which required a recalculation of Koyo's rate (Koyo v. 
U.S., Slip Op. 94-177).

[[Page 17817]]

Because the margin we calculated for Koyo pursuant to this order 
reflected all prior recalculations made to Koyo's margin pursuant to 
earlier orders, the amended final results margin for Koyo for the 1986-
87 period for A-588-054 merchandise is that which we calculated 
pursuant to Slip Op. 92-47 (40.89 percent). We will subsequently issue 
instructions to Customs to liquidate entries of A-588-054 merchandise 
made by Koyo pursuant to these amended final results.

C. The 1987-88 Period for A-588-604

Summary

    On August 21, 1991, we published in the Federal Register our final 
results for the 1987-88 review of the A-588-604 TRBs case (56 FR 
41508). This notice contained our final results for NTN Corporation 
(NTN) and Koyo. Subsequent to our publication of these final results 
Koyo, NTN, and Timken challenged certain aspects of our final results 
before the CIT (Court Nos. 91-09-00704, 91-09-00695, and 91-09-00697, 
respectively). The CIT has issued final and conclusive decisions with 
respect to each segment of litigation for these final results.
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court with respect to NTN's 
final results which were not in harmony with and/or required a 
recalculation of NTN's final results margin were:
     NTN v. U.S., Slip Op. 93-204 (October 22, 1993) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 94-95 (February 11, 1994).
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-87 (May 27, 1994) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 95-55 (March 31, 1995).
    While NTN appealed to the CAFC in NTN v. U.S., CAFC Appeal No. 94-
1271, the CAFC's November 7, 1994 decision required no recalculation of 
NTN's margin and dismissed the 91-09-00695 proceeding.

Status

    NTN: As there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to the 91-09-00695 (NTN) and 91-09-00697 (Timken) litigation, 
we are amending our final results of review for NTN based on the last 
court order which required a recalculation of NTN's rate (Timken v. 
U.S., Slip Op. 94-87). Because the margin we calculated for NTN 
pursuant to Slip Op. 94-87 reflected previous recalculations of NTN's 
rate we made pursuant to earlier orders, the amended final results 
margin for NTN is that which we calculated pursuant to Slip Op. 94-87 
(10.19%). We will subsequently issue instructions to Customs to 
liquidate entries of A-588-604 merchandise made by NTN during this 
period pursuant to these amended final results.
    Koyo: Although there are now final and conclusive court decisions 
with respect to each segment of the litigation which affects Koyo's 
1987-88 A-588-604 final results, we cannot amend our final results of 
review for Koyo based on the last court order (Koyo v. U.S., Slip Op. 
95-193) at this time due to pending litigation regarding the forgings 
case (Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 97-109). Upon completion of the forgings 
litigation at the CIT, we will publish an amended final results of this 
review.

D. The 1988-89 Period for A-588-604

Summary

    On February 11, 1992, we published in the Federal Register the 
final results of our 1988-89 review of the A-588-604 case (57 FR 4951). 
These final results covered Koyo, NSK, NTN, and Nachi. Subsequent to 
the publication of these final results Timken, NTN, Koyo, and NSK 
challenged certain aspects of our final results before the CIT (Court 
numbers 92-03-00162, 92-03-00167, 92-03-00169, and 92-03-00158, 
respectively). The CIT has issued final and conclusive decisions with 
respect to each segment of the litigation for these final results.
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court with respect to NTN's 
final results which were not in harmony with and/or required a 
recalculation of NTN's final results margin were:
     NTN v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-123 (June 8, 1994) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 95-52 (March 27, 1995).
     NTN v. U.S., Slip Op 94-108 (July 6, 1994) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 95-52 (March 27, 1995).
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-150 (September 20, 1994) 
affirmed/dismissed, Slip Op. 95-26 (February 24, 1995).
     NTN v. U.S., CAFC No. 95-1356 (March 19, 1996 decision and 
March 20, 1996 mandate) (The CAFC overturned the CIT's order in Slip 
Op. 94-108 and ordered the Department to remove the 10-percent cap from 
the Department's sum-of-the-deviations TRBs model-match methodology).
     NTN v. U.S., Slip Op 96-93 (June 12, 1996) (The CIT's 
remand to the Department in light of the CAFC's March 19th decision and 
March 20th mandate) affirmed/dismissed, Slip Op. 96-155 (September 6, 
1996).
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court with respect to NSK's 
final results which were not in harmony with and/or required a 
recalculation of NSK's final results margin were:
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-150 (September 20, 1994) 
affirmed/dismissed, Slip Op. 95-26 (February 24, 1995).
     NSK v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-182 (November 28, 1994) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 95-43 (March 14, 1995).

Status

    NTN: As there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to the 92-03-00167 (NTN) and 92-03-00162 (Timken) litigation, 
we are amending our final results of review for NTN based on the last 
court order which required a recalculation of NTN's rate (NTN v. U.S., 
Slip Op. 96-93). Because the margin we calculated for NTN pursuant to 
this order reflected previous recalculations of NTN's rate we made 
pursuant to earlier orders, the amended final results margin for NTN is 
that which we calculated pursuant to Slip Op. 96-93 (7.08%). We will 
subsequently issue instructions to Customs to liquidate NTN's entries 
of subject merchandise during this period pursuant to these amended 
final results.
    NSK: As there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to the 92-03-00158 (NSK) and 92-03-00162 (Timken) litigation, 
we are amending our final results of review for NSK based on the last 
court order which required a recalculation of NSK's rate (NSK v. U.S., 
Slip Op. 94-182). Because the margin we calculated for NSK pursuant to 
this order reflected previous recalculations of NSK's rate we made 
pursuant to earlier orders, the amended final results margin for NSK is 
that which we calculated pursuant to Slip Op. 94-182 (15.59%). We will 
subsequently issue instructions to Customs to liquidate NSK's entries 
of subject merchandise during this period pursuant to these amended 
final results.
    Koyo: Although there are now final and conclusive court decisions 
with respect to each segment of the litigation which affects Koyo's 
1988-89 A-588-604 final results, we cannot amend our final results of 
review for Koyo based on the last court order (Koyo v. U.S., Slip Op. 
95-193) at this time due to pending litigation regarding the forgings 
case (Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 97-109). Upon completion of the forgings 
litigation at the CIT, we will publish an amended final results of this 
review.

F. The 1989-90 Period for A-588-054

Summary

    On February 11, 1992, we published in the Federal Register the 
1989-90 final results for the A-588-054 case (57 FR 4975), and on March 
16, 1992, we published an amendment to these final results (57 FR 
9105). Subsequent to the

[[Page 17818]]

publication of these final and amended final results, Timken, Koyo, and 
NSK challenged various aspects of our final results before the CIT 
(Court Nos. 92-03-00163, 92-03-00170, and 92-03-00159, respectively). 
The CIT has issued final and conclusive decisions with respect to each 
segment of the litigation for these final results.
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court which were not in 
harmony with and/or required a recalculation of Koyo's final results 
margin were:
     Koyo v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-127 (August 11, 1995) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 95-63 (April 13, 1995).
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-157 (October 7, 1994).
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-127 (August 7, 1996) (On April 
13, 1995 the CIT granted a stay in the Timken proceedings pending a 
decision by the CAFC with respect to the Japanese value added tax (VAT) 
issue in Koyo v. U.S., CAFC Nos. 94-1097, -1044. Based on a motion by 
plaintiff (Timken), in Slip Op. 96-127 the CIT lifted the stay in these 
proceedings and remanded the case to the Department to apply the tax-
neutral VAT adjustment methodology approved by the CAFC in Koyo v. 
U.S., 63 F.3d 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1995). We filed our final remand results 
pursuant to Slip Op. 96-127 on September 7, 1996. These results were 
affirmed and the CIT dismissed the 92-03-00163 litigation on October 
18, 1996).
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court which were not in 
harmony with and/or required a recalculation of NSK's final results 
margin were:
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-157 (October 7, 1994).
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-127 (August 7, 1996) (As 
explained above for Koyo, the CIT granted a stay in the Timken 
proceedings pending a decision by the CAFC with respect to the Japanese 
VAT issue in Koyo v. U.S., CAFC Nos. 94-1097, -1044. Based on a motion 
by plaintiff (Timken), in Slip Op. 96-127 the CIT lifted the stay in 
these proceedings and remanded the case to the Department to apply the 
tax-neutral VAT adjustment methodology approved by the CAFC in Koyo v. 
U.S., 63 F.3d 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1995). However, it was not until after 
the CIT affirmed our September 7, 1996 remand results on October 18, 
1996 that we realized that we inadvertently excluded NSK from our 
September 7, 1996 recalculations pursuant to Slip Op. 96-127. We sought 
to amend our September 7, 1996 final remand results to include NSK's 
recalculation but, based on the extremely small effect the 
recalculation had on NSK's final results margin, and the fact that the 
CIT had already affirmed our remand results and dismissed the 92-03-
00163 litigation, NSK agreed that amended remand results were 
unnecessary).
    While the CIT also issued an order in the 92-03-00159 (NSK) 
litigation (NSK v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-22, February 8, 1994), the CIT's 
opinion in this order was in harmony with the Department's final 
results and did not require a recalculation of NSK's margin. As a 
result, it stands as the Court's final and conclusive decision with 
respect to the 92-03-00159 litigation.

Status

    Koyo: As there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to both the 92-03-00163 (Timken) and 92-03-00170 (Koyo) 
litigation, we are amending our final results of review for Koyo based 
on the last court order which required a recalculation of Koyo's rate 
(Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-127). Because the margin we calculated for 
Koyo pursuant to Slip Op. 96-127 reflected previous recalculations of 
Koyo's rate we made pursuant to earlier orders, the amended final 
results margin for Koyo is that which we calculated pursuant to Slip 
Op. 96-127 (15.96%). We will subsequently issue instructions to Customs 
to liquidate entries of subject merchandise made by Koyo during this 
period pursuant to these amended final results.
    NSK: As there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to each segment of the litigation affecting NSK's final 
results, we are amending our final results of review for NSK based on 
that which we calculated pursuant to Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-157. 
As indicated in our summary above, while Slip Op. 96-127 is technically 
the last order which called for a recalculation of NSK's final results 
margin, we inadvertently did not include NSK in our recalculations 
pursuant to this order and did not amend these remand results with 
NSK's agreement. Therefore, the last calculated rate for NSK for this 
period is that which we calculated pursuant to Slip Op. 94-157 (2.76%). 
We will subsequently issue instructions to Customs to liquidate entries 
of subject merchandise made by NSK during this period pursuant to these 
amended final results.

G. The 1989-90 Final Results for A-588-604

Summary

    On February 11, 1992, we published in the Federal Register the 
final results of our 1989-90 review of the A-588-604 TRBs case (57 FR 
4960). On March 16, 1992, we published amended final results for this 
same period (57 FR 9104). These final results covered the 
administrative reviews for Koyo, NTN, NSK, and Nachi. Subsequent to the 
publication of these final results, Timken, Koyo, NTN, and NSK 
challenged certain aspects of our final results before the CIT (Court 
numbers 92-03-00161, 93-03-00156, 92-03-00168, -00257, and 92-03-00157, 
respectively). While the CIT has issued final and conclusive decisions 
with respect to the 92-03-00161 (Timken), 93-03-00156 (NSK), and 92-03-
00157 (Koyo) litigation, it has yet to issue a final and conclusive 
decision for the NTN segment of the litigation for these final results.
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court which were not in 
harmony with and/or required a recalculation of NSK's final results 
margin were:
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-141 (September 14, 1994) 
affirmed/dismissed, Slip Op. 95-26 (February 10, 1995).
    While the CIT also issued an order with respect to the 92-03-00157 
(NSK) litigation (Slip Op. 93-89, June 1, 1993), the order was in 
harmony with the Department's final results for NSK, did not require a 
recalculation of NSK's final results margin, and dismissed the NSK 
litigation. As a result, Slip Op. 93-89 stands as the final and 
conclusive court decision with respect to the 92-03-00157 (NSK) 
litigation.

Status

    NSK: As there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to each segment of the litigation affecting NSK's final 
results, we are amending our final results of review for NSK based on 
that which we calculated pursuant to Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 94-141. 
Because the margin we calculated for NSK pursuant to Slip Op. 94-141 
reflects our only recalculation of NSK's margin, the amended final 
results margin for NSK is that which we calculated pursuant to Slip Op. 
94-141 (1.54%). We will subsequently issue instructions to Customs to 
liquidate entries of subject merchandise made by NSK during this period 
pursuant to these amended final results.
    NTN: Because the Court has not yet issued a final and conclusive 
decision with respect to the NTN segment of litigation for these final 
results, we are unable at this time to instruct Customs to liquidate 
entries of subject merchandise made by NTN during the 1989-90 period. 
Upon the issuance of a final and conclusive Court decision with respect 
to this litigation, we will publish amended final results for NTN

[[Page 17819]]

and will subsequently issue instructions to Customs to liquidate 
entries of A-588-604 merchandise made by NTN during this period.
    Koyo: Although there are now final and conclusive court decisions 
with respect to both the 92-03-00161 (Timken) and 92-03-00156 (Koyo) 
litigation, we cannot amend our final results of review for Koyo based 
on the last court order (Koyo v. U.S., Slip Op. 95-193) at this time 
due to pending litigation regarding the forgings case (Timken v. U.S., 
Slip Op. 97-109). Upon completion of the forgings litigation at the 
CIT, we will publish an amended final results of this review.

H. The 1990-92 Period for A-588-054 and A-588-604

Summary

    On December 9, 1993, we published in the Federal Register the 1990-
92 final results for the A-588-054 and A-588-604 reviews (58 FR 64720). 
Subsequent to the publication of these final results, Timken, Koyo, 
NSK, and NTN challenged various aspects of our final results before the 
CIT (Court Nos. 94-01-00008, 93-12-00795, 93-12-00831, and 93-12-
000793, respectively). The CIT has issued final and conclusive 
decisions with respect to each segment of the litigation for these 
final results.
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court which were not in 
harmony with and/or required a recalculation of Koyo's final results 
margin were:
     Koyo v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-101 (June 19, 1996) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 96-173 (October 25, 1996).
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-86 (May 31, 1996) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 97-87 (July 3, 1997).
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court which were not in 
harmony with and/or required a recalculation of NSK's final results 
margin were:
     NSK v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-53 (March 13, 1996) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 96-174 (October 25, 1996).
     NSK v. U.S., Slip Op. 95-204 (December 18, 1995) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 96-118 (July 26, 1996).
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-86 (May 31, 1996) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 97-87 (July 3, 1997).
    The opinions/decisions issued by the Court which were not in 
harmony with and/or required a recalculation of NTN's final results 
margin were:
     Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-86 (May 31, 1996) affirmed/
dismissed, Slip Op. 97-87 (July 3, 1997).

Status

    Nachi: Nachi did not pursue litigation and the existing litigation 
had no impact on its final results. Because the Department has not yet 
issued instructions to Customs to liquidate entries made by this firm 
during the applicable periods, where appropriate, we will issue 
instructions to Customs to liquidate entries of A-588-054 and A-588-604 
merchandise made by Nachi pursuant to our January 18, 1994 amended 
final results.
    Koyo: As there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to each segment of the litigation affecting Koyo's final 
results, we are amending our final results of review for Koyo based on 
that which we calculated pursuant to Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-86. 
Because the margin we calculated for Koyo pursuant to Slip Op. 96-86 
reflected all prior recalculations made to Koyo's margin pursuant to 
earlier orders, the amended final results margin for Koyo for the 1990-
91 and 1991-92 periods for A-588-054 merchandise is that which we 
calculated pursuant to Slip Op. 96-86 (23.97% for 1990-91 and 35.37% 
for 1991-92). We will subsequently issue instructions to Customs to 
liquidate entries of A-588-054 merchandise made by Koyo during these 
periods pursuant to these amended final results.
    Although there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to both the 94-01-00008 (Timken) and 93-12-00795 (Koyo) 
litigation, at this time we cannot amend our final results of review 
for Koyo for A-588-604 merchandise based on the last court order (Koyo 
v. U.S., Slip Op. 95-193) due to pending litigation regarding the 
forgings case (Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 97-109). Upon completion of the 
forgings litigation at the CIT, we will publish an amended final 
results of this review for A-588-604 merchandise.
    NSK: As there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to each segment of the litigation affecting NSK's final 
results, we are amending our final results of review for NSK based on 
that which we calculated pursuant to Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-86. 
Because the margin we calculated for NSK pursuant to Slip Op. 96-86 
reflected all prior recalculations made to NSK's margin pursuant to 
earlier orders, the amended final results margin for NSK for the 1990-
91 and 1991-92 periods for A-588-054 and A-588-604 merchandise is that 
which we calculated pursuant to Slip Op. 96-86. The margins for the A-
588-054 merchandise are 17.87% for 1990-91 and 12.66% for 1991-92, 
while the margins for the A-588-604 merchandise are 12.17% for 1990-91 
and 8.40% for 1991-92. We will subsequently issue instructions to 
Customs to liquidate entries of subject merchandise made by NSK during 
this period pursuant to these amended final results.
    NTN: As there are now final and conclusive court decisions with 
respect to each segment of the litigation affecting NTN's final 
results, we are amending our final results of review for NTN based on 
the that which we calculated pursuant to Timken v. U.S., Slip Op. 96-
86. Because the margin we calculated for NTN pursuant to Slip Op. 96-86 
reflected all prior recalculations made to NTN's margin pursuant to 
earlier orders, the amended final results margin for NTN for the 1990-
91 and 1991-92 periods for A-588-604 merchandise is that which we 
calculated pursuant to Slip Op. 96-86 (16.03% for 1990-91 and 19.25% 
for 1991-92). We will subsequently issue instructions to Customs to 
liquidate entries of A-588-604 merchandise made by NTN during this 
period pursuant to these amended final results.

Amendment to Final Determinations

    Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1516a(e), we are now amending the final 
results of administrative reviews of the antidumping duty order and 
finding on TRBs from Japan. The weighted-average margins are as 
follows.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Final  
                                                                results 
               Period                  Manufacturer/exporter     margin 
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         For the A-588-054 Case                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8/1/79-7/31/80......................  Koyo...................     (\1\).
8/1/80-7/31/81......................  NSK....................     (\1\).
8/1/80-7/31/81......................  Koyo...................     (\1\).
8/1/80-7/31/81......................  Mitsubishi Corp........     (\1\).
8/1/80-7/31/81......................  Sumitomo Yale..........     (\1\).
8/1/81-7/31/82......................  NSK....................     (\1\).
8/1/81-7/31/82......................  Koyo...................     (\1\).
8/1/81-7/31/82......................  Mitsubishi Corp........     (\1\).
8/1/81-7/31/82......................  Sumitomo Yale..........     (\1\).
8/1/82-7/31/83......................  NSK....................     (\1\).
8/1/82-7/31/83......................  Koyo...................     (\1\).
8/1/82-7/31/83......................  Mitsubishi Corp........     (\1\).
8/1/82-7/31/83......................  Sumitomo Yale..........     (\1\).
8/1/83-7/31/84......................  NSK....................     (\1\).
8/1/83-7/31/84......................  Koyo...................     (\1\).
8/1/83-7/31/84......................  Mitsubishi Corp........     (\1\).
8/1/83-7/31/84......................  Sumitomo Yale..........     (\1\).
8/1/84-7/31/85......................  NSK....................     (\1\).
8/1/84-7/31/85......................  Koyo...................     (\1\).
8/1/84-7/31/85......................  Mitsubishi Corp........     (\1\).
8/1/84-7/31/85......................  Sumitomo Yale..........     (\1\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  NSK....................     (\1\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  Koyo...................     (\1\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  Sumitomo Corp..........     (\2\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  Nachi..................     (\2\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  Toyosha................     (\1\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  Toyota.................     (\1\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  Yamaha.................     (\1\).

[[Page 17820]]

                                                                        
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  Suzuki.................     (\1\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  Maekawa................     (\1\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  Nissan.................     (\3\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  Mazda..................     (\4\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  MC International.......     (\3\).
8/1/85-7/31/86......................  Niigata Converter......     (\2\).
8/1/86-7/31/87......................  Koyo...................  \5\ 40.89
                                                                       .
8/1/86-7/31/87......................  NSK....................  \5\ 15.41
                                                                       .
8/1/86-7/31/87......................  Toyota.................     (\1\).
8/1/86-7/31/87......................  Nissan.................     (\1\).
8/1/86-7/31/87......................  Nachi..................     (\2\).
8/1/86-7/31/87......................  Isuzu..................  \6\ 40.89
                                                                       .
8/1/89-7/31/90......................  Koyo...................  \5\ 15.96
                                                                       .
8/1/89-7/31/90......................  NSK....................  \5\ 2.76.
8/1/89-7/31/90......................  Nachi..................     (\2\).
8/1/90-7/31/91......................  Nachi..................  \1\ 18.07
                                                                       .
8/1/90-7/31/91......................  Koyo...................  \5\ 23.97
                                                                       .
8/1/90-7/31/91......................  NSK....................  \5\ 17.87
                                                                       .
8/1/91-7/31/92......................  Nachi..................  \1\ 18.07
                                                                       .
8/1/91-7/31/92......................  Koyo...................  \5\ 35.37
                                                                       .
8/1/91-7/31/92......................  NSK....................  \5\ 12.66
                                                                       .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         For the A-588-604 Case                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3/27/87-9/30/88.....................  NTN/Caterpillar........  \5\ 10.19
                                                                       .
10/1/88-9/30/89.....................  NSK....................  \5\ 15.59
                                                                       .
10/1/88-9/30/89.....................  NTN/Caterpillar........  \5\ 7.08.
10/1/89-9/30/90.....................  NSK....................  \5\ 1.54.
10/1/89-9/30/90.....................  Nachi..................     (\2\).
10/1/90-9/30/91.....................  Nachi..................  \7\ 40.37
                                                                       .
10/1/90-9/30/91.....................  NSK....................  \5\ 12.17
                                                                       .
10/1/90-9/30/91.....................  NTN....................  \5\ 16.03
                                                                       .
10/1/91-9/30/92.....................  Nachi..................  \7\ 40.37
                                                                       .
10/1/91-9/30/92.....................  NSK....................  \5\ 8.40.
10/1/91-9/30/92.....................  NTN....................  \5\ 19.25
                                                                       .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Litigation for period did not result in a change in the final       
  results margin for the firm. The Department will instruct Customs to  
  assess duties pursuant to the final results notice published for the  
  corresponding review period.                                          
\2\ The firm had no entries of subject merchandise during the period.   
\3\ The review for this firm was terminated. The Department will assess 
  duties using the rate in effect at the time of entry.                 
\4\ The review for the firm was terminated. The Department will assess  
  duties using the rate in effect at the time of entry and in the manner
  explained in our 11/10/94 notice of final results for the 1979-86     
  period.                                                               
\5\ This is an amended final results margin resulting from              
  recalculations pursuant to Court orders.                              
\6\ In our 1986-87 final results for Isuzu we applied a total BIA margin
  equal to the highest rate we calculated for any firm for the final    
  results. Because that rate was Koyo's final results margin, and       
  because Koyo's final results margin has been amended pursuant to      
  litigation, we are accordingly amending the BIA rate applied to Isuzu.
\7\ Litigation for period did not result in a change in the final       
  results margin for the firm. The Department will instruct Customs to  
  assess duties pursuant to the amended final results notice published  
  for the corresponding review period.                                  

    The above rates will become the antidumping duty deposit rates for 
those firms that have not had a deposit rate established for them in 
subsequent reviews.
    Accordingly, the Department will determine and Customs will assess 
appropriate antidumping duties on entries of the subject merchandise 
made by firms covered by the reviews of the periods listed above. 
Individual differences between United States price and foreign market 
value may vary from the percentages listed above. The Department will 
issue appraisement instructions directly to Customs.

    Dated: April 2, 1998.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 98-9546 Filed 4-9-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P