[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 18, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3624-3625]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-1216]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[A-588-054]


Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, 
and Components Thereof, From Japan; Affirmation of the Results of 
Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand

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

SUMMARY: On June 8, 1994, the United States Court of International 
Trade (CIT) affirmed the Department of Commerce's (the Department's) 
redetermination on remand of the final results of administrative review 
of the antidumping finding on tapered roller bearings, four inches or 
less in outside diameter, and certain components thereof (TRBs) from 
Japan (56 FR 26054, June 6, 1991) (The Timken Company v. United States 
(Slip Op. 94-41 (March 7, 1994)) (Timken). The results covered the 
period August 1, 1987, through July 31, 1988, and TRBs produced by Koyo 
Seiko Co., Ltd., and distributed by its subsidiary, Koyo Corporation of 
U.S.A. (collectively, Koyo), and by NSK Ltd., and distributed by its 
subsidiary, NSK Corporation (collectively, NSK).

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 18, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chip Hayes or John Kugelman, Office of 
Antidumping Compliance, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-
5253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On March 7, 1994, the CIT issued an order remanding to the 
Department the final results of administrative review of the 
antidumping finding on TRBs from Japan (56 FR 26054, June 6, 1991).
    In its decision in Timken, the CIT remanded the final results to 
the Department to allow the Department to determine whether it has 
statutory authority to adjust foreign market value (FMV) for pre-sale 
inland freight in light of the decision of the United States Court of 
Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) in Ad Hoc Comm. of 
AZ-NM-TX-FL Producers of Gray Portland Cement v. United States, No. 93-
1239 (Fed. Cir., January 5, 1994) (Ad Hoc Comm.). In response to that 
order, we explained that we adjust FMV for post-sale movement expenses 
as differences in circumstances of sale (19 CFR Sec. 353.56(a)) and we 
consider pre-sale freight to be appropriate expenses to include in the 
exporter's sales price (ESP) offset under 19 CFR Sec. 353.56(b)(2), 
because they are post-production expenses borne in preparation to sell 
the merchandise. We further clarified that Sec. 353.56(b)(2) of the 
Department's regulations allows the Department to deduct from FMV all 
expenses, other than direct selling expenses enumerated in 
Sec. 353.56(a), incurred in selling such or similar merchandise up to 
the amount of expenses incurred in selling the merchandise in the 
United States. Consequently, the Department has determined it will 
evaluate claims of pre-sale inland freight expenses for home market (or 
third-country) sales using the ESP offset provision in the regulations.
    Subsequent to the Department's explanation of the treatment of pre-
sale freight expenses in Timken, we have determined that there are 
circumstances when pre-sale movement expenses may be direct expenses. 
Since direct expenses are adjusted for under the circumstance-of-sale 
provision, the Department evaluates whether the pre-sale movement 
expenses are direct expenses by examining each respondent's pre-sale 
warehousing expenses, since the pre-sale movement charges incurred in 
positioning the merchandise at the warehouse are, for analytical 
purposes, linked to pre-sale warehousing expenses. If the pre-sale 
warehousing expenses constitute indirect expenses, the expenses 
involved in getting the merchandise to the warehouse also must be 
indirect.
    In its affirmation of June 8, 1994 (Slip Op. 94-95), the CIT 
accepted the Department's explanation of its methodology and ordered 
its implementation for this review period.
    In its decision in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. 
Cir. 1990) (Timken I), the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to 19 
U.S.C. 1516a(e), the Department must publish a notice of a court 
decision which is not ``in harmony'' with a Departmental determination, 
and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ``conclusive'' court 
decision. The CIT's decision in Timken constitutes a decision not in 
harmony with the Department's final results of review. This notice 
fulfills the publication requirements of Timken I.
    Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of 
liquidation of the subject merchandise. [[Page 3625]] Furthermore, 
absent an appeal, or, if appealed, upon a ``conclusive'' court decision 
affirming the CIT's opinion, the Department will amend the final 
results of the administrative review of the antidumping finding on 
tapered roller bearings, four inches or less in outside diameter, and 
certain components thereof from Japan to reflect the amended margins of 
49.63 percent for Koyo and 16.28 percent for NSK for the period August 
1, 1987 through July 31, 1988, in the Department's redetermination on 
remand, as affirmed by the CIT.

    Dated: January 9, 1995.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 95-1216 Filed 1-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P