62386 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 6, 1995 / Notices

Goldstar), and Hyundai Electronics

Industries Co., Ltd. and Hyundai

Electronics America (collectively

Hyundai), filed lawsuits with the Court

challenging this determination.

Thereafter, the Court issued an Order

and Opinion dated June 12, 1995, in

Micron Technologies, Inc. v. United

States, Cons. Ct. No. 93–06–00318, Slip

Op. 95–107, remanding six issues to the

Department. The Court instructed the

Department to: (1) recalculate

respondents’ cost of production by

allocating research and development

(R&D) costs on a product-specific basis;

(2) use amortized rather than current

R&D expenses in its calculations; (3)

reopen the record in order to afford

Hyundai and Samsung an opportunity

to present complete and actual fixed

asset data and use this data to allocate

interest expenses; (4) recalculate

Hyundai’s lag period; (5) recalculate

Semicon’s production costs without

reclassifying Semicon’s capitalized costs

of facility construction and testing as

costs of production; and (6) reexamine

its conclusion that foreign currency

translation losses of Samsung and

Semicon are related to production of

subject merchandise.

The Department filed its remand

results on August 24, 1995. In the

remand results, the Department: (1)

recalculated respondents— cost of

production by allocating R&D on a

product-specific basis; (2) used

amortized rather than current R&D

expenses in its calculations; (3)

reopened the record to afford Hyundai

and Samsung an opportunity to

introduce actual data regarding

semiconductor fixed assets, and used

such data in its allocation of interest

expense; (4) recalculated Hyundai’s lag

periods utilizing the same methodology

that it employed for Samsung and

Semicon; (5) determined a new lag

period for Hyundai’s model HY514400

which accurately matches costs to the

sales in question; (6) calculated

Semicon’s production costs for certain

DRAMs without reclassifying as costs of

production Semicon’s capitalized costs

of facility construction and testing; and

(7) identified what evidence on the

record supports the conclusion that the

translation losses of Samsung and

Semicon are related to production of the

subject merchandise and, having

determined that there is sufficient

evidence on the record to support such

a conclusion, included translation

losses in the calculation of COP for

Samsung and Semicon.

On October 27, 1995, the Court

sustained the Department’s remand

results. See Micron Technologies, Inc. v.

United States, Cons. Ct. No. 93–06–

00318, Slip Op. 95–175 (CIT October 27,

1995).

Suspension of Liquidation

In its decision in Timken, the Federal

Circuit held that, pursuant to 19 U.S.C.

1516a(e), the Department must publish

notice of a decision of the Court or

Federal Circuit which is ‘‘not in

harmony’’ with the Department’s

determination. Publication of this notice

fulfills this obligation. The Federal

Circuit also held that in such a case, the

Department must suspend liquidation

until there is a ‘‘conclusive’’ decision in

the action. A ‘‘conclusive’’ decision

cannot be reached until the opportunity

to appeal expires or any appeal is

decided by the Federal Circuit.

Therefore, the Department will continue

to suspend liquidation pending the

expiration of the period to appeal or

pending a final decision of the Federal

Circuit if Micron is appealed.

Dated: November 29, 1995.

Susan G. Esserman,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 95–29583 Filed 12–5–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

[A–588–054]

Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches

or Less In Outside Diameter, and

Components Thereof, From Japan;

Amendment to the Final Results of

Review

AGENCY: Import Administration/

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On June 15, 1995, the United

States Court of International Trade (CIT)

remanded 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 (41 FR 34974,

August 18, 1976) (Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd.

and Koyo Corp. of U.S.A. v. United

States and NSK Ltd. And NSK Corp., v.

United States (Slip Op. 95–111 (June 15,

1995)) (Koyo)). The CIT ordered the

Department to correct two computer

programming errors in the calculation of

margins for Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd., and,

following the corrections, affirmed the

redetermination in all respects. The

results covered the period April 1, 1974,

through March 31, 1979, for TRBs

produced by Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd., and

distributed by its subsidiary, Koyo

Corporation of U.S.A. (collectively,

Koyo), and April 1, 1974 through July

31, 1980, for TRBs produced by NSK

Ltd., and distributed by its subsidiary,

NSK Corporation (collectively, NSK).

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 25, 1995.

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, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230,

telephone: (202) 482–5253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On June 15, 1995, the CIT issued an

order remanding to the Department the

redetermination on remand of the final

results of administrative review of the

antidumping finding on TRBs from

Japan to correct two computer

programming errors, and affirmed the

redetermination in all other respects.

The Department’s final results of

review covering Koyo for the period

April 1, 1974 through March 31, 1979,

and NSK for the period April 1, 1974

through July 31, 1980, were published

on June 1, 1990 (55 FR 22369). Koyo,

NSK, and petitioner in this proceeding,

the Timken Company (Timken),

challenged those results to the CIT. The

CIT issued four remand orders covering

the review: on issues concerning Koyo

in Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. and Koyo

Corporation of U.S.A. v. United States

(Slip Op. 92–72 (May 15, 1992)

(KCUSA)); on issues concerning NSK in

NSK Ltd. v. United States (Slip Op. 92–

79 (May 21, 1992) (NSK)); on issues

relating to both Koyo and NSK in The

Timken Company v. United States (Slip

Op. 92–83 (May 22, 1992) (Timken));

and finally in Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. and

Koyo Corporation of U.S.A. v. United

States (Slip Op. 92–139 (August 21,

1992) (Koyo Cost)) the CIT allowed the

Department to conduct an investigation

of sales made below the cost of

production by Koyo.

In KCUSA and NSK the CIT ordered

the Department to recalculate margins

for entries pursuant to the three-criteria

methodology for determining ‘‘such or

similar’’ merchandise; to examine all

possible similar home market models of

approximately equal commercial value

to calculate foreign market value (FMV);

to include Koyo’s data for net weights

of certain TRBs in the calculation of

U.S. customs duties; to add only thirty

days to Koyo’s shipping time when

calculating an adjustment for U.S.

inventory expenses; and to liquidate

Koyo’s entries between April 1, 1974

and September 30, 1977, and NSK’s

entries between June 6, 1974 and July

31, 1977, according to master lists
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 234 / Wednesday, December 6, 1995 / Notices 62387

prepared by the Treasury Department

(Treasury). In addition, in Timken the

CIT remanded the same final results to

the Department to use the verified perunit export department expenses as best

information available when calculating

the adjustment to exporter’s sales price

(ESP) for Koyo’s export selling

expenses.

In Koyo Cost the CIT allowed Timken

to submit supplemental sales-below-cost

information and directed the

Department to consider the

supplemental information in order to

determine whether the dumping

margins for the April 1, 1978 to March

31, 1979 period should be calculated

without reference to the investigation of

below-cost-of-production sales. That

allegation, and the Department’s finding

of sales below the cost of production,

were not relevant to time periods prior

to April 1, 1978. Consequently, no

investigation of sales made below the

cost of production was conducted for

those periods.

The Department submitted its

remanded results for NSK pursuant to

NSK and Timken to the CIT in August

1992. Results for Koyo pursuant to

KCUSA, Timken, and Koyo Cost were

submitted to the CIT in October 1992.

The CIT affirmed those results in their

entirety on March 4, 1993 (Slip Op. 93–

28). Koyo, NSK, and Timken appealed

various issues in those orders to the

United States Court of Appeals for the

Federal Circuit (the Federal Circuit). In

its ruling of March 28, 1994 (Koyo Seiko

Co., Ltd. and Koyo Corporation USA. v.

United States (93–1310, 1341), and NSK

Ltd. And NSK Corporation v. United

States (93–1311), (CAFC decision)), the

Federal Circuit affirmed the CIT’s

decision in Koyo Cost to allow the

Department to conduct an investigation

of sales made below the cost of

production by Koyo. However, the

Federal Circuit reversed the decision of

the CIT in KCUSA and NSK to liquidate

TRB entries made by Koyo between

April 1, 1974 and September 30, 1977,

and TRB entries made by NSK between

June 6, 1974 and March 31, 1978,

according to Treasury master lists.

Pursuant to the CAFC decision, the CIT

ordered a redetermination of the final

dumping margins for 1974–1978 TRB

entries (Koyo Seiko Co., v. United States

and NSK Ltd. v. United States, Slip Op.

94–75 (May 10, 1994) (Koyo/NSK)). The

Koyo/NSK order stipulated that the

margins be determined based upon the

complete record of the administration

review conducted by the Department

and on the CIT’s prior rulings in

KCUSA, NSK, and Timken. No other

issues were raised before the Federal

Circuit.

The Department submitted its results

pursuant to Koyo/NSK on July 18, 1994.

On June 15, 1995, the CIT issued its

decision in Koyo remanding those

results to the Department to correct two

computer programming errors alleged

by Timken and affirming the

redetermination in all other respects.

The margin calculations on entries

made by NSK from April 1, 1978,

through July 31, 1980, and by Koyo from

October 1, 1977, through March 31,

1979, were not challenged in these

actions, and were affirmed by the CIT.

Consequently, those calculations remain

unchanged from the Department’s

August 1992 and October 1992

remanded results.

The Department has addressed the

two programming errors identified by

the CIT in Koyo. Based upon an

examination of the record in the final

results of review we determined that

there was no programming or clerical

error regarding model matching. The

Department reviewed and emended the

programming error regarding exchange

rates. We disclosed the results to Koyo

and Timken consistent with 19 CFR

353.28. We received no comments on

our results from either party. The

Department is therefore amending 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 calculated

for Koyo and NSK in the Department’s

redetermination on remand, and

affirmed by the CIT.

The Department will issue liquidation

instructions to the Customs Service

based on the following amended

margins:

Firm Period Percent margin

Koyo .......................................................... 04/01/1974 to 07/31/1976 ............................................................................................ 20.56

08/01/1976 to 09/30/1977 ............................................................................................ 5.99

10/01/1977 to 93/31/1978 ............................................................................................ 24.64

04/01/1978 to 03/31/1979 ............................................................................................ 17.96

NSK ........................................................... 06/06/1974 to 06/30/1976 ............................................................................................ 17.42

07/01/1976 to 07/31/1977 ............................................................................................ 17.42

08/01/1977 to 03/31/1978 ............................................................................................ 18.63

04/01/1978 to 07/31/1978 ............................................................................................ 39.60

08/01/1978 to 07/31/1979 ............................................................................................ 19.75

08/01/1979 to 07/31/1980 ............................................................................................ 9.82

Dated: November 22, 1995.

Susan G. Esserman,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 95–29727 Filed 12–5–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–M

[A–588–028]

Notice of Final Results of Antidumping

Duty Administrative Review: Roller

Chain, Other Than Bicycle, From Japan

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: In response to a request from

the American Chain Association, the

petitioner in this proceeding, the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) has conducted an

administrative review of the

antidumping finding on roller chain,

other than bicycle, from Japan. The

review covers four manufacturers/

exporters of this merchandise to the

United States during the period of April

1, 1992, through March 31, 1993.

We gave interested parties the

opportunity to comment on our

preliminary results. Based on our

analysis of the comments received, we

have revised the results from those

presented in our preliminary results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 6, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg

Thompson or Donna Berg, Office of

Antidumping Investigations, Import