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: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of final results of antidumping duty administrative

review.

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

SUMMARY: On December 23, 1994, the Department of Commerce (the

Department) published a notice of preliminary results of administrative

review of the antidumping duty order on color television receivers

(CTVs) from the Republic of Korea. The review covers four

manufacturers/exporters of the subject merchandise and the period April

1, 1993, through March 31, 1994. Based on petitioners' withdrawal of

requests for review, the Department previously terminated the review of

three additional manufacturers/exporters.

We have determined that one of the four manufacturers/exporters

being reviewed made no shipments of subject merchandise to the United

States during the period of review. The remaining three manufacturers/

exporters failed to respond to our request for information.

Although we gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on

the preliminary results, no comments were submitted. However, these

final results reflect a change in the margin we assigned Samsung in the

preliminary results of review. Because Samsung had no shipments of

subject merchandise during the period of review, we preliminarily

assigned Samsung the margin (0.37 percent) calculated for the most

recent period (1990-91) in which it had shipments of subject

merchandise to the United States. However, pursuant to a remand ordered

by the Court of International Trade (CIT) (see United Electronic

Workers of America, et al. v. United States, Consolidated Court No. 93-

11-00719, July 5, 1994), we have determined that Samsung's margin for

the last administrative review (1990-91) in which it had shipments of

subject merchandise to the United States was 0.47 percent. See, Color

Television Receivers from the Republic of Korea; Amended Final Results

of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 60 FR 35895 (July 12, 1995).

While these final results reflect the change in Samsung's margin from

0.37 to 0.47 percent, Samsung's current cash deposit rate remains

unchanged at zero percent, reflecting the fact that Samsung's margin

remains de minimis.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 31, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Hanley or Zev Primor, 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 7, 1994, the Department published (59 FR 16615) a notice

of ``Opportunity to Request an Administrative Review'' of the

antidumping duty order on CTVs from the Republic of Korea (49 FR 18336,

April 30, 1984) for the period April 1, 1993, through March 31, 1994

(eleventh review). We received a timely request for review from the

United Electronic Workers of America, Independent (formerly the

Independent Radionic Workers of America), the International Brotherhood

of Electrical Workers, the International Union of Electronic,

Electrical, Salaried, Machine and Furniture Workers, AFL-CIO, and the

Industrial Union Department, AFL-CIO, petitioners in this proceeding.

On May 12, 1994, the Department published a notice of initiation (59 FR

24683) covering the following seven manufacturers/exporters: Samsung

Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung

International, Inc. (Samsung); Cosmos Electronics Manufacturing, Ltd.

(Cosmos); Quantronics Manufacturing, Ltd. (Quantronics); Tongkook

General Electronics, Inc. (Tongkook); Daewoo Electronics Co., Ltd., and

Daewoo Electronics Corp. of America, Inc. (Daewoo); Goldstar

Electronics International, Inc., Goldstar Co., Ltd., and Goldstar of

America, Inc. (Goldstar); and Samwon Electronics, Ltd (Samwon). On May

23, 1994, petitioners submitted a timely withdrawal of their request

for review of Goldstar. Pursuant to 19 CFR 353.22(a)(5) the Department

terminated the review of Goldstar on June 29, 1994 (59 FR 33486). On

June 29, and August 22, 1994, petitioners submitted additional requests

to terminate the reviews of Daewoo and Samwon, respectively. Pursuant

to 19 CFR 353.22(a)(5), the Department terminated the reviews of Daewoo

and Samwon on December 23, 1994 (59 FR 66292). The Department has now

completed this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Tariff Act).

Scope of the Review

Imports covered by this review include CTVs, complete and

incomplete, from the Republic of Korea. This merchandise is currently

classified under item numbers 8528.10.80, 8529.90.15, 8529.90.20, and

8540.11.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS). Since the order

covers all CTVs regardless of HTS classification, the HTS subheading is

provided for convenience and for the U.S. Customs Service purposes. Our

written description of the scope of the order remains dispositive. The

period of review is April 1, 1993 through March 31, 1994.

Final Results of Review

Samsung reported, and the Department verified through the U.S.

Customs Service, that Samsung made no shipments of subject merchandise

to the United States during the period of review. Therefore, Samsung's

current cash deposit rate will remain unchanged. This rate is zero

percent because the margin assigned to Samsung in the most recent

administrative review in which it had shipments of subject merchandise

(0.47 percent) was a de minimis rate.

Since Cosmos, Quantronics, and Tongkook failed to respond to our

questionnaire, we have determined that, in accordance with section

776(c) of the Tariff Act, the use of best information available (BIA)

is appropriate. Our regulations provide that we may consider whether a

party refuses to provide information in determining what is the best

information available (19 CFR 353.37(b)). 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 that company the higher of (a) the highest rate

assigned to any company in any previous review or the less-than-fair-

value (LTFV) investigation, or (b) the highest rate for a responding

company with shipments during the period of review. See Final Results

of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Antifriction Bearings (Other

Than Tapered Roller Bearings) and Parts Thereof From the

[[Page 38988]]

Federal Republic of Germany, et al., 56 FR 31692 (July 11, 1994). See

also Allied-Signal Aerospace Co. v. United States, 996 F.2d 1195, 1191-

92 (Fed. Cir. 1993), 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.

Therefore, consistent with the preliminary results, the final

results for the period April 1, 1993, through March 31, 1994, are as

follows:

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

Percent

Manufacturer/exporter margin

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

Samsung....................................................... \1\ 0.47

Cosmos........................................................ 16.57

Quantronics................................................... 16.57

Tongkook...................................................... 16.57

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

\1\ No shipments or sales subject to this review. Rate from last segment

of the proceeding in which the firm had shipments/sales.

The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall

assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department

will issue appraisement instructions on each exporter directly to the

U.S. Customs Service.

Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective

for all shipments of CTVs entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for

consumption on or after the publication date of these final results as

provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act: (1) The cash deposit

rates for the reviewed companies will be those 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 conducted by the

Department, the cash deposit rates will be the ``all others'' rate of

13.90 percent established in the LTFV investigation (49 FR 18336).

These deposit requirements will remain in effect until publication of

the final results of the next administrative review.

This notice 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 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 (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR

353.22.

Dated: July 20, 1995.

Paul L. Joffe,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 95-18741 Filed 7-28-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P