[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 126 (Thursday, July 1, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35626-35629]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-16815]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-588-045]


Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review: Steel Wire Rope From 
Japan

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

ACTION: Notice of final results of expedited sunset review: Steel wire 
rope from Japan

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

SUMMARY: On January 4, 1999, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') initiated a sunset review of the antidumping finding on 
steel wire rope from Japan (64 FR 364) pursuant to section 751(c) of 
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). On the basis of a 
notice of intent to participate and substantive comments filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry and inadequate response (in this case, 
no response) from respondent interested parties, the Department 
determined to conduct an expedited review. As a result of this review, 
the Department finds that revocation of the antidumping finding would 
be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the 
levels indicated in the Final Results of Review section of this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Smith or Melissa G. Skinner, 
Office of Policy for Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
3207 or (202) 482-1560, respectively.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 1999.

Statute and Regulations

    This review was conducted pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752 of 
the Act. The Department's procedures for the conduct of sunset reviews 
are set forth in Procedures for Conducting Five-year (``Sunset'') 
Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 FR 13516 
(March 20, 1998) (``Sunset Regulations''). Guidance on methodological 
or analytical issues relevant to the Department's conduct of sunset 
reviews is set forth in the Department's Policy Bulletin 98:3--Policies 
Regarding the Conduct of Five-year (``Sunset'') Reviews of Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Orders; Policy Bulletin, 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 
1998) (``Sunset Policy Bulletin'').

Scope

    The merchandise subject to this antidumping finding is steel wire 
rope, except brass electroplated steel truck tire cord of cable 
construction specially packaged for protection against moisture and 
atmosphere. Such merchandise is currently classifiable under Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule (HTS) item numbers 7312.109030, 7312.109060, and 
7312.109090. The HTS item numbers are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes. The written description remains dispositive.
    This review covers imports from all known manufacturers and 
exporters of steel wire rope from Japan.

Background

    On January 4, 1999, the Department initiated a sunset review of the 
antidumping finding on steel wire rope from Japan (64 FR 364), pursuant 
to section 751(c) of the Act. The Department received a Notice of 
Intent to Participate on behalf of the Committee of Domestic Steel Wire 
Rope and Specialty Cable Manufacturers (the ``Committee'') and M & G 
Industries, Inc., on January 19, 1999, and January 7, 1999, 
respectively, both within the deadline specified in section 
351.218(d)(1)(i) of the Sunset Regulations. We received a complete 
substantive response on behalf of the Committee on February 3, 1999, 
within the 30-day deadline specified in the Sunset Regulations under 
section 351.218(d)(3)(i). However, no substantive response was received 
from M & G Industries. The Committee claimed interested-party status 
under section 771(9)(C) and (F) as U.S. manufacturers of a domestic 
like product and an association, a majority of whose members is 
composed of interested parties described in subparagraph (C). We did 
not receive a substantive response from any respondent interested party 
to this proceeding. As a result, pursuant to section 
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C) of the Sunset Regulations, the Department 
determined to conduct an expedited review of this finding.

Determination

    In accordance with section 751(c)(1) of the Act, the Department 
conducted this review to determine whether revocation of the 
antidumping finding would be likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of dumping. Section 752(c) of the Act provides that, in 
making this determination, the Department shall consider the weighted-
average dumping margins determined in the investigation and subsequent

[[Page 35627]]

reviews and the volume of imports of the subject merchandise for the 
period before and the period after the issuance of the antidumping 
finding, and it shall provide to the International Trade Commission 
(``the Commission'') the magnitude of the margin of dumping likely to 
prevail if the finding is revoked.
    The Department's determinations concerning continuation or 
recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margin are discussed 
below. In addition, the Committee's comments with respect to 
continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margin 
are addressed within the respective sections below.

Continuation or Recurrence of Dumping

    Drawing on the guidance provided in the legislative history 
accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''), specifically 
the Statement of Administrative Action (``the SAA''), H.R. Doc. No. 
103-316, vol. 1 (1994), the House Report, H.R. Rep. No. 103-826, pt.1 
(1994), and the Senate Report, S. Rep. No. 103-412 (1994), the 
Department issued its Sunset Policy Bulletin providing guidance on 
methodological and analytical issues, including the bases for 
likelihood determinations. In its Sunset Policy Bulletin, the 
Department indicated that determinations of likelihood will be made on 
an order-wide basis (see section II.A.2). In addition, the Department 
indicated that normally it will determine that revocation of an 
antidumping finding is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of 
dumping where (a) dumping continued at any level above de minimis after 
the issuance of the order, (b) imports of the subject merchandise 
ceased after the issuance of the order, or (c) dumping was eliminated 
after the issuance of the order and import volumes for the subject 
merchandise declined significantly (see section II.A.3).
    In addition to considering the guidance on likelihood 
determinations cited above, section 751(c)(4)(B) of the Act provides 
that the Department shall determine that revocation of the order would 
be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping when a 
respondent interested party waives its participation in the sunset 
review. In this instant review, the Department did not receive a 
substantive response from any respondent interested party. Pursuant to 
section 351.218(d)(2)(iii) of the Sunset Regulations, this constitutes 
a waiver of participation.
    On October 15, 1973, the Department of Treasury (``Treasury'') 
issued its Final Affirmative Antidumping Duty Determination, T.D. 73-
296 (38 FR 28571). Since that time, the Department has conducted 
several administrative reviews.1 The finding remains in 
effect for all manufacturers and exporters of the subject merchandise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Steel Wire Rope from Japan; Final Results of 
Administrative Review of Antidumping Finding, 47 FR 3395 (January 
25, 1982); Steel Wire Rope from Japan; Final Results of 
Administrative Review of Antidumping Finding, 48 FR 8524 (March 1, 
1983); Steel Wire Rope from Japan; Final Results of Administrative 
Review of Antidumping Finding, 49 FR 12294 (March 29, 1984); Steel 
Wire Rope from Japan; Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 52 FR 28585 (July 31, 1987); Steel Wire Rope 
from Japan; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 
54 FR 6737 (February 14, 1989); Steel Wire Rope from Japan; Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 54 FR 38541 
(September 19, 1989).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its substantive response, the Committee argued that actions 
taken by producers and exporters of Japanese steel wire rope during the 
life of the finding, including the dramatic decline in imports from 
Japan consequent to the antidumping finding and the subsequent 
administrative reviews, particularly in combination with the fact that 
a substantial number of Japanese producers/exporters continued to dump 
after the finding was issued, are a strong indication that dumping is 
likely to recur should the finding be revoked (see Substantive Response 
of the Committee, February 3, 1999, at 4). With respect to whether 
dumping continued at any level above de minimis after the issuance of 
the finding, the Committee argued that, as documented in several final 
determinations reached by the Department, dumping levels have varied 
greatly for respective Japanese producers/exporters during the life of 
the finding (see id. at 3).
    With respect to whether imports of the subject merchandise ceased 
after the issuance of the finding, the Committee, citing U.S. 
Department of Commerce reports and U.S. Census Bureau statistics for 
U.S. imports (IM146 reports), asserted that the antidumping finding on 
steel wire rope from Japan has resulted in a steady decline in the 
volume of imports of subject merchandise from that country (see id. at 
3).2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Committee provided information on U.S. imports of steel 
wire rope from Japan, on an annual basis, in net tons, from 1985 
through November 1998.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its substantive response, the Committee also argued that the 
dramatic appreciation of the Japanese yen vis-a-vis the U.S. dollar in 
the recent months indicates that revocation of the antidumping finding 
is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping (see id. at 
3).
    In conclusion, the Committee argued that the Department should 
determine that there is a likelihood that dumping would continue were 
the finding revoked because (1) dumping margins above de minimis 
continue to exist for several companies, and (2) imports of the subject 
merchandise decreased significantly after the imposition of the 
finding, although there were some later fluctuations. The Committee 
argued moreover that, as a direct result of the antidumping finding, 
Japan was reduced from being a leading supplier of the subject 
merchandise to the U.S. market in the early and mid-1980s to a supplier 
of negligible volume of imports over the past decade (see Substantive 
Response of the Committee, February 3, 1999, at 3).
    As discussed in Section II.A.3 of the Sunset Policy Bulletin, the 
SAA at 890, and the House Report at 63-64, if companies continue 
dumping with the discipline of an order in place, the Department may 
reasonably infer that dumping would continue if the discipline were 
removed. The Department, after examining the final results of 
administrative reviews, can confirm that dumping margins above de 
minimis continue to exist for shipments of the subject merchandise from 
several Japanese producers/exporters.
    Consistent with section 752(c) of the Act, the Department also 
considered the volume of imports before and after issuance of the 
finding. The statistics provided by the Committee on imports of the 
subject merchandise between 1985 and 1998, confirmed through the 
Department's examination of U.S. Census data (IM146 reports), 
demonstrate that imports of the subject merchandise have decreased 
almost every year since the finding. However, it must be noted that, 
while shipments of steel wire rope from Japan did fall steadily 
throughout most of the life of the finding, in the 1990s shipments from 
Japan began to fluctuate and in some cases actually increased. For 
example, import volumes increased from 1996 to 1997 and almost doubled 
in the period from 1997 to 1998.3 However, these statistics 
also establish that imports of steel wire rope from Japan have not 
surpassed 1000 net tons per year since 1990. This is consistent with 
the Department's findings of no shipments by several of the reviewed 
companies in many of the

[[Page 35628]]

administrative reviews conducted by the Department.4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 
Report IM146 and Substantive Response of the Committee, February 3, 
1999, at 3.
    \4\ See Steel Wire Rope from Japan; Final Results of 
Administrative Review of Antidumping Finding, 47 FR 3395 (January 
25, 1982); Steel Wire Rope from Japan; Final Results of 
Administrative Review of Antidumping Finding, 48 FR 8524 (March 1, 
1983); Steel Wire Rope from Japan; Final Results of Administrative 
Review of Antidumping Finding, 49 FR 12294 (March 29, 1984); Steel 
Wire Rope from Japan; Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 52 FR 28585 (July 31, 1987); Steel Wire Rope 
from Japan; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 
54 FR 6737 (February 14, 1989); Steel Wire Rope from Japan; Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 54 FR 38541 
(September 19, 1989).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on this analysis, the Department finds that the existence of 
dumping margins after the issuance of the finding along with declining 
import volumes is highly probative of the likelihood of continuation or 
recurrence of dumping. A deposit rate above de minimis continues in 
effect for exports of the subject merchandise by at least one known 
Japanese manufacturer/exporter. Therefore, given that dumping has 
continued since the issuance of the finding, respondent interested 
parties waived participation, and absent argument and evidence to the 
contrary, the Department determines that dumping is likely to continue 
if the finding were revoked.
    Because the Department based this determination on the fact that 
dumping continued at levels above de minimis, it is not necessary to 
address the Committee's arguments concerning Japanese yen appreciation 
and its affect on this finding.

Magnitude of the Margin

    In the Sunset Policy Bulletin, the Department stated that it 
normally will provide to the Commission the margin that was determined 
in the final determination in the original investigation. Further, for 
companies not specifically investigated or for companies that did not 
begin shipping until after the order was issued, the Department 
normally will provide a margin based on the ``all others'' rate from 
the investigation. (See section II.B.1 of the Sunset Policy Bulletin.) 
Exceptions to this policy include the use of a more recently calculated 
margin, where appropriate, and consideration of duty absorption 
determinations. (See sections II.B.2 and 3 of the Sunset Policy 
Bulletin.)
    Further, in the Sunset Policy Bulletin the Department stated that, 
in a sunset review of an antidumping finding where the original 
investigation was conducted by Treasury and no company-specific margin 
or ``all others'' rate was included in the Treasury finding, the 
Department normally will provide to the Commission the company-specific 
margin from the first administrative review published in the Federal 
Register by the Department. For any company not covered in the first 
administrative review, the Department normally will provide to the 
Commission, as the margin for any new company not reviewed by Treasury, 
the first ``new shipper'' rate established by the Department for that 
order (see section II.B.1). We note, that, to date, the Department has 
not issued any duty absorption findings in this case.
    Treasury, in its original final determination, did not publish any 
dumping margins. Therefore, the Department normally will select the 
margin from the first administrative review conducted by the Department 
as the magnitude of the margin of dumping likely to prevail if the 
finding is revoked.
    The Committee stated that, because Treasury did not publish a 
specific dumping margin in its original finding, the Department must 
select a rate calculated during one of the administrative reviews. It 
recommended that the Department select the highest rate determined by 
the Department for a Japanese producer/exporter of the subject 
merchandise for the most recent period reviewed--at least 17.18 
percent, the dumping margin established by the Department for Tokyo 
Rope/Ataka for the period January 1, 1974, through September 30, 1984 
(54 FR 6737) (see Substantive Response of the Committee, February 3, 
1999, at 6).
    As for Japanese companies not reviewed in the original 
investigation, the Committee did not recommend a specific margin to be 
applied; however, it seemed to suggest that the Department also assign 
these companies a rate of at least 17.18 percent.
    The Department agrees with the Committee's observation that because 
Treasury issued no margins in its original final determination the 
Department must select dumping margins from an administrative review 
conducted by the Department. However, the Department disagrees with the 
Committee's assertion that it should report to the Commission the 
company-specific margins published in one of the later administrative 
reviews. While the Sunset Policy Bulletin does state that the 
Department may provide to the Commission a more recently calculated 
margin for a particular company where, for that particular company, 
dumping margins increased after the issuance of the finding or order, 
in this case, there has been no consistent pattern of increasing 
margins.
    The Department finds no reason to deviate from the above-stated 
policy of utilizing the margins from the first administrative review. 
Therefore, the Department has selected the rates from the April 1, 
1978, through September 30, 1980, administrative review of steel wire 
rope from Japan, published in the Federal Register on January 25, 1982 
(47 FR 3395). The Department will report to the Commission the company-
specific and ``all others'' rates from the original investigation as 
contained in the Final Results of Review section of this notice.

Final Results of Review

    As a result of this review, the Department finds that revocation of 
the antidumping finding would likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of dumping at the margins listed in the attached Appendix.
    This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with section 351.305 of the Department's regulations. 
Timely 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 an APO is a sanctionable 
violation.
    This five-year (``sunset'') review and notice are in accordance 
with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: Jule 25, 1999.
Richard W. Moreland,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Margin
                   Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ace Industrial Co., Ltd....................................        11.88
Ako Rope & Wire Mfg. Co., Ltd..............................        11.88
Asahii Mini Rope Co., Ltd/Dia Enterprises Ltd..............        11.88
Chrysanthemum Nippon Wire Rope Co., Ltd./Watanabe Trading           0.77
 Co........................................................
Chrysanthemum Nippon Wire Rope Co., Ltd,/Kent-Moore Japan           0.00
 Ltd.......................................................
Chrysathemum Nippon Wire Rope Co., Ltd/C. Itoh & Co., Ltd..        11.88
Chuo Seisakusho Ltd./Kinyo Co., Ltd........................         0.00
Chuo Seisakusho Ltd./Koh-shin Co...........................         0.00
Chuo Seisakusho Ltd./Other Trading Companies...............        11.88
Daido Corp.................................................         5.68
Daisen Kogyo...............................................         5.68

[[Page 35629]]

 
Daishin Shoji Co., Ltd.....................................        11.88
Daishin Shoji Co., Ltd/Vanguard Steel Ltd. (transshipper)..         0.00
Daiwa Steel Co., Ltd.......................................        11.88
Daiwa Kogyo, K.K...........................................        11.88
Dia Enterprises, Ltd.......................................        11.88
Godo Tessen Co., Ltd.......................................        11.88
Hakko Sangyo K.K./Mitsui and Co............................         0.00
Hannan Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./Far East Industrial Co.,            9.68
 Ltd.......................................................
Hannan Wire Rope Mfg. Ltd./Higashishiba & Co...............        11.88
Igeta Wire Rope Co., Ltd./Mitsui & Co., Ltd................         3.81
Igeta Wire Rope Co., Ltd/Kimura Shorten, Ltd...............         3.81
Ito-Ume and Co., Inc.......................................        11.88
Iwata Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./Mitsui and Co., Ltd.........         0.47
Kasuga Seiko Co., Ltd./Higashishiba & Co...................         0.00
Kasuga Seiko Co., Ltd./Kohshin Co..........................         0.00
Kasuga Seiko Co., Ltd./Nissho-Iwai.........................         0.12
Kasuga Seiko Co., Ltd./Sumitomo Shoji Kaisha, Ltd..........         1.89
Kawashma Trading Co., Ltd..................................        11.88
Kawatertsu Wire Products Co., Ltd./Mitsui and Co...........         0.00
K-M International..........................................        11.88
Kinki Steel Wire Rope Mfg. Co. Ltd/S.M. Industries.........         0.00
Kinki Steel Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./Yutoko and Co.........        11.88
Kobayashi Metals, Ltd......................................        11.88
Kokoku Steel Wire Ltd./Nichimen Co., Ltd...................         0.28
Kokoku Steel Wire Ltd./Nissho-Iwai.........................         0.33
Kokoku Steel Wire Ltd/Itotaka International................         0.31
Kokoku Steel Wire Ltd./Shinko Shoji Kaisha.................         1.76
Kokoku Steel Wire Ltd./Mitsui and Co.......................         1.01
Kokoku Steel Wire Ltd./Sumitomo Shoji Kaisha Ltd...........        11.88
Kokoku Steel Wire Ltd./Kanematsu-Gosho Ltd.................        11.88
Kokoku Steel Wire Ltd./Yutoko & Co., Ltd...................        11.88
Kondo Iron Works Co., Ltd..................................        11.88
Koshihara Iron Works Co., Ltd..............................        11.88
Kyosei Industry Co., Ltd...................................         0.00
Kyowa Bussan, K.K..........................................        11.88
Kyowa Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./Mitsui and Co...............         0.07
Maruka Machinery Co., Ltd..................................        11.88
Marusen Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./S.M. Industries...........        11.88
Meiji Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./Mitsui and Co....................         0.00
Mill Wire Industries/F.A. Industries.......................         0.00
Misawa Trading Co., Ltd./S.M...............................        11.88
Naigai Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./Mitani Kogyo Co.................         0.00
Naniwa Wire Rope Mfg. Co. Ltd/Mitsui and Co................         0.00
Naniwa Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./Higashishiba & Co..........        11.88
Naniwa Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./other than Mitsui or               11.88
 Higashishiba..............................................
Nankai Senshu Steel Wire & Rope Co., Ltd./Sumitomo Shoji            0.00
 Kaisha....................................................
Nanri Trading Co., Ltd.....................................        11.88
Nihon Miniature Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./ S.M. Industries.......         0.00
Nihon Minature Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./Yutoko and Co., Ltd.....         0.00
Nikko Steel Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./Union Co..............        11.88
Nippon Miniature Rope Co., Ltd./Kinyo Co., Ltd.............         0.00
Nippon Steel Wire Rope Co., Ltd./Mitsui and Co.............         0.00
Nishimura Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd/Kinyo Co., Ltd...........         0.35
Nishimura Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./K-M International.......         0.00
Nisshi-Nippon Fujikara Co., Ltd............................        11.88
Nishiya Wire Rope Co., Ltd./Mitsui and Co..................         0.06
Nobuhara Mfg. & Supply Co..................................         5.68
Oriental Corp./F.A. Industries Corp........................         0.00
Osaka Wire Rope Mfrs. Assn./Mitsui and Co..................         0.00
Rope Service K.K...........................................        11.88
Ryoei Shoji Co., Ltd.......................................        11.88
Sakai & Co., Ltd...........................................        11.88
Sanko Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./Tokyo Trading Co............         0.00
Sanwa Seiko Co., Ltd./J. Gerber & Co., Ltd.................        11.88
Sanyo Shokai K.K./J. Gerber & Co., Ltd.....................         0.00
Sasaki Kogyo Co., Ltd......................................         9.68
Seiko Wire Rope Co., Ltd./Okura Trading Co., Ltd...........        11.88
Seiko Wire Rope Co., Ltd/Kinyo Co., Ltd....................         0.00
Seiko Wire Rope Co., Ltd./Kohshin Co., Ltd.................        11.88
Seiko Wire Rope Co., Ltd./Syuto Co., Ltd...................        11.88
Shibamoto & Co., Ltd.......................................         5.68
Shigeyama & Co., Ltd.......................................        11.88
Shinko Wire Rope Co./Mitsui and Co.........................         0.00
Shinko Wire Rope Co./Shinko Shoji Kaisha...................         0.00
Shinko Wire Rope Co./Nissho-Iwai...........................         0.00
Shinko Wire Rope Co./Kanematsu-Gosho Ltd...................         0.00
Shinko Wire Rope Co., Ltd..................................         0.00
Shinyo Ropes Mfg. Co., Ltd./Higashishiba & Co..............         0.00
Shinyo Ropes Mfg. Co., Ltd./Mitsui and Co..................         0.08
Shinyo Ropes Mfg. Co., Ltd./ S. M. Industries, Inc.........        11.88
Shinyo Ropes Mfg. Co., Ltd./Vanguard Steel Ltd.                     0.00
 (transshipper)............................................
Shinyo Ropes Mfg. Co., Ltd./Yutoko and Co., Ltd............        11.88
Shinyo Ropes Mfg. Co., Ltd./Other Trading Companies........         0.80
Showa Boeki Co., Ltd.......................................        11.88
Sumiyoshi Kinzoku Kogyo....................................        11.88
Taiho Seiko/Kinyo Co.......................................         0.00
Taisei International Corp..................................        11.88
Y. Takeuchi and Co.........................................        11.88
Tanaka Metals Corp.........................................        11.88
Teikoku Sangyo Co., Ltd./Sumitomo-Shoji Kaisha, Ltd........         0.00
Teikoku Sangyo Co., Ltd./The Tosho Co., Ltd................         0.00
Teikoku Sangyo Co., Ltd./Mitsui and Co.....................         0.00
Teikoku Sangyo Co., Ltd./Nissho-Iwai.......................         1.09
Teikoku Sangyo Co., Ltd./Watanabe Trading Co., Ltd.........         1.00
Teikoku Sangyo Co., Ltd./Mitsubishi Corporation............         0.00
Toyo Sangyo Co., Ltd.......................................        11.88
Union Wire Rope Mfg. Co./Sanyo Bussan Kaisha, Ltd..........         0.04
Nikko Steel Wire Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./The Yamasho Co., Ltd..         9.68
Yamato Industries Co., Ltd.................................        11.88
Yuasa Sangyo K.K...........................................         5.68
C.T. Takahashi & Co........................................         5.68
Daimyo Bussan..............................................         9.68
IBA Steel Rope Mfg. Co., Ltd./Hori Trading Co., Ltd........         9.68
Izumi Trading Co., Ltd.....................................         9.68
Japan Steel Wire Rope/Kohshin Co., Ltd.....................         9.68
Kanto Steel Wire Co., Ltd..................................         5.68
Kiku Steel and Wire Rope Co./Watanabe Trading Co., Ltd.....         0.00
Liberty Shokai, Ltd........................................         5.68
Nan Rope Co., Ltd..........................................         5.68
Nissei Sangyo Co...........................................         5.68
Seo Hardware Corp..........................................         9.68
Taiyo Seiki Iron Works.....................................         5.68
Taiyo Iron Works...........................................         9.68
Tokyo Special Wire Co., Mfg. Ltd...........................         5.68
Yasada and Co..............................................         9.68
Taiyo Sunco Inc............................................         5.68
All Others.................................................        11.88
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 99-16815 Filed 6-30-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P