As with the previous three countervailing cases, prior to their implementation and throughout the first months following, not only were rumors and speculations the norm, we were faced with ever changing definitions, restrictions, allowances and as to what circumstances each were applicable.

You are all aware of the view Jones & Jones has adopted with regard to the U.S. Trade Office and Customs’ legal and moral accountability when it comes to lumber from Canada. Informed government and private sources on both sides of the border are trying to assure us that our published concern, with regard to the U.S. Trade Office’s re-defining "Critical Circumstances" to fit the U.S.’s political agenda, is not warranted. They all cite Section 351.206 of the U.S. Tariff Act of 1930 Annotated, and excerpts from pages 27387 and 27388 of the May 1997 Federal Register, they say should ease our mind. They further stress, as we were already aware, that even during past cases of "flooding" or "surging" - "CC" retroactivity has never been invoked. Of course, we caution - "Never say never!" – particularly with the U.S.’s mindset in recent years.

These sources, well versed in "CC" rules and methodology of petition, are advising that, due to the petitions’ filing process (twenty days minimum plus a week to allow publication in the Federal Register), even if retroactivity for a "CC" petition filed April 2^nd was granted, because "CC" actions cannot impact entries effected prior to publication of the granting, the first three weeks of April, at the very least, could not possibly be captured retroactively. They further emphasize that their informed "best guess" estimate of the earliest date that a Preliminary CVD Determination could be published in the Federal Register - is sometime in August, and that those same "CC" actions, if granted, limit retroactivity to ninety-days from that date. If the Preliminary CVD Determination were published August 22^nd, entries up until May 17^th could not be captured.

The 1992 CVD required exporters to show both "FOB Mill" and "Delivered" prices - qualifying an "FOB Mill" price by working backwards from a "Delivered Price" – reporting and deducting non-dutiable charges, such as, but not limited to international freight, insurance, duty and taxes. Notwithstanding the positive impact of Nissho-Iwai -vs- the United States, we advise immediate development of a data base, as well as rail EDI templates, demonstrating "FOB Mill" pricing.

We don’t mean to inundate you with Notices, but from our experience with pending CVD actions and their devastating impact on your businesses, we know that our clients must possess as much information as possible, as soon as possible, so that they can adequately prepare themselves. We only hope that these Notices, however trying, sometimes confusing, contradictory and conveying too little information - will be of some assistance. This information is being shared with the understanding that it is given as an "advisory" only, and that J&J will not be held liable for injury suffered as a result of any party’s reliance on the information or any recommendations provided.