[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