Color Television Receivers From the Republic of Korea; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-580-008]

Color Television Receivers From the Republic of Korea; Final

Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: International Trade Administration/Import Administration/

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of antidumping duty administrative

review.

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

SUMMARY: On April 11, 1994, the Department of Commerce published a

notice of preliminary results of administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on color television receivers from the Republic

of Korea. The review covers exports of this merchandise to the United

States during the period April 1, 1992, through March 31, 1993. Three

companies failed to respond to our questionnaire and received a rate

based on the best information available. For the remaining four

companies, we determined that there were no known shipments of the

subject merchandise during the period of review.

We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the

preliminary results. Only one party submitted comments. The final

results remain unchanged from the preliminary results of review.

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 9, 1994.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zev Primor or Wendy Frankel, 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 April 30, 1993, the Independent Radionic Workers of America, the

United Electrical Workers of America, the International Brotherhood of

Electrical Workers, the International Union of Electronic, Electrical,

Salaried, Machine and Furniture Workers, AFL-CIO, and Industrial Union

Department, AFL-CIO (the Unions), the petitioners in this proceeding,

requested an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on

color television receivers (CTVs), complete or incomplete, from the

Republic of Korea (ROK) (49 FR 18336, April 30, 1984) in accordance

with 19 CFR 353.22(a). On May 27, 1993, the Department of Commerce (the

Department) published a notice of initiation of this review which

covered seven manufacturer/exporters for the period April 1, 1992,

through March 31, 1993 (58 FR 30,767).

Four respondents, Daewoo Electronics Co., Ltd. (Daewoo), Goldstar

Electronics Co., Ltd. (Goldstar), Samwon Electronics, Inc. (Samwon),

and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Samsung), indicated that they had no

sales during the period of review (POR). The companies, Quantronics

Manufacturing Korea, Ltd. (Quantronics), Tongkook General Electronics,

Inc., and Cosmos Electronics Manufacturing Korea, Ltd., did not respond

to our requests for information. Thus, in accordance with section

776(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Tariff Act), the Department was

required to use the best information available (BIA). Standard

Department practice dictates that when a company fails to provide the

information requested in a timely manner, the Department considers the

company uncooperative and generally assigns to that company the higher

of (a) the highest rate assigned to any company in any previous review

or the less-than-fair-value investigation (LTFV), or (b) the highest

rate for a responding company with shipments during the POR. See

Allied-Signal Aerospace Co. v. United States. 996 F. 2nd. 1195, 1191-92

(Fed. Cir. 1993). See also Krupp Stahl AG et al v. United States, 822

F. Supp 789 (CIT May 26, 1993). Therefore, we have used the highest

rate from the LTFV investigation, which was 16.57 percent, in

determining the margins for these three companies for this review.

Because Daewoo, Goldstar, Samwon, and Samsung stated they had no

sales during the POR, on June 24, 1993, the Department requested the

U.S. Customs Service (Customs) to confirm that there was no record of

entries of the subject merchandise, manufactured by these four

respondents, from the ROK during the POR. We received no affirmative

responses from Customs.

On July 23, 1993, petitioners provided the Department with import

data from the Port Import-Export Reporting Service (PIERS) (a private

for-profit computerized data bank) and alleged that Samsung, Daewoo and

Goldstar ``exported'' to the United States CTVs from the ROK.

In light of the petitioners' allegations, on February 25, 1994, the

Department again requested information from Customs as to whether any

entries of the subject merchandise, manufactured by these four

companies, had been made during the POR. On March 21, 1994, Customs

responded with a list of entries indicating that certain merchandise

under the covered HTS item numbers manufactured by respondents, had

entered the United States. The Department provided this information to

the respondents with a request for an explanation as to the nature of

these entries. On March 28, 1994, we received information from each of

the respondents supporting their claims that the entries in question

were of merchandise which is not subject to the antidumping duty order

on CTVs from the ROK. Respondents certified that the entries consisted

either of merchandise destined for third country markets or contained

television parts not covered by the antidumping duty order.

On April 11, 1994, the Department published a notice of preliminary

results of review (59 FR 17086). We gave interested parties an

opportunity to comment on the preliminary results. Only one respondent,

Goldstar, submitted comments, concurring with the Department's

preliminary results.

Subsequent to publication of the preliminary results, on May 23,

1994, the petitioners requested a withdrawal of their request for

review of Goldstar. Because Goldstar had no shipments during the POR,

we accepted the withdrawal request and are terminating the review with

regard to Goldstar in accordance with 19 CFR 353.22(a)(5). Goldstar's

rate from the prior review will remain in effect. The final results

with regard to all other respondents have not changed from our

preliminary results.

The Department has now completed this administrative review

pursuant to section 751 of the Tariff Act, as amended.

Scope of Review

The products covered by this review include color television

receivers, complete and incomplete, from the ROK. The order covers all

CTVs regardless of tariff classification. During the POR, the subject

merchandise was classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) item

numbers 8528.10.60, 8529.90.15, 8529.90.20 and 8540.11.00. The HTS item

numbers are provided for convenience and Customs purposes only. The

written description remains dispositive as to the scope of the product

coverage.

Final Results of Review

We have not changed the final results from those presented in the

preliminary results of review. The final results for the reviewed firms

are as follows:

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

Margin

Manufacturer/exporter percentage

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

Daewoo Electronics Co., Ltd................................. \1\0.90

Samwon Electronics, Inc..................................... \1\0.53

Cosmos Electronics Manufacturing Korea...................... 16.57

Quantronics Manufacturing Korea, Ltd........................ 16.57

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd................................ \1\0.37

Tangkook General Electronics, Inc........................... 16.57

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

\1\No shipments; rate from previous review.

The following deposit requirements will be effective for all

shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from

warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the

final results of this administrative reivew, as provided by section

751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for the reviewed

companies will be the rates established above; (2) for previously

reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit

rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the

most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this

review, a prior review, or the original LTFV investigation, but the

manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for

the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4)

if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this

or any previous review, the cash deposit rate will be 13.90 percent,

which is the ``all others'' rate established in the LTFV investigation,

as discussed below.

On March 25, 1993, the Court of International Trade (CIT), in

Floral Trade Council v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 766 (1993), and

Federal-Mogul Corporation v. United States, 822 F. Supp. 782 (1993),

decided that once an ``all others'' rate is established for a company,

it can only be changed through an administrative review. The Department

has determined that in order to implement these decisions, it is

appropriate to reinstate the original ``all others'' rate from the LTFV

investigation (or that rate as amended for correction of clerical

errors or as a result of litigation) in proceedings governed by

antidumping duty orders. Therefore, the ``all others'' rate for this

case will be 13.90 percent, the ``all others'' rate established in the

LTFV investigation (49 FR 7620, March 1, 1984).

These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication

of the final results of the next administrative review.

This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their

responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 to file a certificate regarding the

reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the

relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this

requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that

reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent

assessment of double antidumping duties.

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to

administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility

concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under

APO in accordance with 19 CFR 353.34.(d). Timely written notification

of the 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 administrative review and notice are in accordance with

section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act, as amended, and 19 CFR

353.22(c)(1993).

Dated: July 30, 1994.

Susan G. Esserman,

Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 94-19420 Filed 8-8-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M