[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 15, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68976-68978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29256]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

INTERNATIONAL TRADE ADMINISTRATION

[A-580-812]


Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors of One Megabit or 
Above 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 June 6, 2000, the Department of Commerce (the 
``Department'') published the preliminary results of administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on dynamic random access memory 
semiconductors of one megabit or above (``DRAMs'') from the Republic of 
Korea. The merchandise covered by this order are DRAMs from the 
Republic of Korea. The review covers two manufacturers, Hyundai 
Electronics Industries Co., Ltd. and Hyundai Electronics America 
(collectively ``Hyundai''), and LG Semicon Co., Ltd. and LG Semicon 
America (collectively ``LG''), and four exporters, G5 Corporation 
(``G5''), Kim's Marketing, Jewon Trading (``Jewon''), and Wooyang 
Industry Co., Ltd. (``Wooyang''). The period of review (``POR'') is May 
1, 1998, through April 30, 1999.
    Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made 
changes in the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ 
from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping 
margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled 
``Final Results of the Review.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 15, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Conniff or Alexander Amdur, AD/
CVD Enforcement, Office 4, Group II, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: 
(202) 482-1009 or 482-5346, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Applicable Statute

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (the ``Act''), are references to the provisions 
effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to 
the Act by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''). In addition, 
unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department's 
regulations are to 19 CFR Part 351 (1999).

Background

    On June 6, 2000, the Department published the preliminary results 
of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on DRAMs from 
Korea. See Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors of One Megabit 
or Above From the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Intent Not to Revoke Order in 
Part, 65 FR 35886 (June 6, 2000). We invited parties to comment on our 
preliminary results of review. On September 5, 2000, we received case 
briefs from Micron Technology, Inc. (``Micron''), the petitioner, 
Hyundai, and LG. On September 12, 2000, we received rebuttal briefs 
from Micron, Hyundai, and LG. The petitioner requested a public hearing 
on June 12, 2000, and a public hearing was held on September 20, 2000. 
The Department has conducted this administrative review in accordance 
with section 751 of the Act.
    Effective January 1, 2000, the Department revoked the antidumping 
duty order on dynamic random access memory semiconductors of one 
megabit and above (``DRAMs'') from the

[[Page 68977]]

Republic of Korea, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.222(i)(1). See DRAMs from the Republic of Korea; Final Results of 
Full Sunset Review and Revocation of Order, 65 FR 5939 (October 5, 
2000). Therefore, we will not issue cash deposit instructions to the 
U.S. Customs Service (``Customs'') based on the results of this review. 
We are conducting a truncated administrative review for the May 1, 
1999, through December 30, 1999 period. Since the revocation is 
currently in effect, current and future imports of DRAMs from Korea 
will be entered into the United States without regard to antidumping 
duties. We have instructed Customs to liquidate all entries as of 
January 1, 2000 without regard to antidumping duties.

Scope of Review

    Imports covered by the review are shipments of DRAMs from Korea. 
Included in the scope are assembled and unassembled DRAMs. Assembled 
DRAMs include all package types. Unassembled DRAMs include processed 
wafers, uncut die, and cut die. Processed wafers produced in Korea, but 
packaged or assembled into memory modules in a third country, are 
included in the scope; wafers produced in a third country and assembled 
or packaged in Korea are not included in the scope.
    The scope of this review includes memory modules. A memory module 
is a collection of DRAMs, the sole function of which is memory. Modules 
include single in-line processing modules (``SIPs''), single in-line 
memory modules (``SIMMs''), or other collections of DRAMs, whether 
unmounted or mounted on a circuit board. Modules that contain other 
parts that are needed to support the function of memory are covered. 
Only those modules which contain additional items which alter the 
function of the module to something other than memory, such as video 
graphics adapter (``VGA'') boards and cards, are not included in the 
scope. The scope of this review also includes video random access 
memory semiconductors (``VRAMS''), as well as any future packaging and 
assembling of DRAMs; and, removable memory modules placed on 
motherboards, with or without a central processing unit (``CPU''), 
unless the importer of motherboards certifies with the Customs Service 
that neither it nor a party related to it or under contract to it will 
remove the modules from the motherboards after importation. The scope 
of this review does not include DRAMs or memory modules that are 
reimported for repair or replacement.
    The DRAMS and modules subject to this review are currently 
classifiable under subheadings 8471.50.0085, 8471.91.8085, 
8542.11.0024, 8542.11.8026, 8542.13.8034, 8471.50.4000, 8473.30.1000, 
8542.11.0026, 8542.11.8034, 8471.50.8095, 8473.30.4000, 8542.11.0034, 
8542.13.8005, 8471.91.0090, 8473.30.8000, 8542.11.8001, 8542.13.8024, 
8471.91.4000, 8542.11.0001, 8542.11.8024 and 8542.13.8026 of the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Although 
the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes, the Department's written description of the scope of this 
review remains dispositive.

Facts Available (``FA'')

    In accordance with section 776(a) of the Act, we have determined 
that the use of adverse FA is warranted for G5, Kim's Marketing, Jewon, 
and Wooyang for these final results of review.

1. Application of FA

    Section 776(a) of the Act provides that, if an interested party 
withholds information that has been requested by the Department, fails 
to provide such information in a timely manner or in the form or manner 
requested, significantly impedes a proceeding under the antidumping 
statute, or provides information which cannot be verified, the 
Department shall use, subject to sections 782(d) and (e), facts 
otherwise available in reaching the applicable determination. In this 
review, as described in detail below, the above-referenced companies 
failed to provide the necessary information in the form and manner 
requested, and, in some instances, the submitted information could not 
be verified. Thus, pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act, the 
Department is required to apply, subject to section 782(d), facts 
otherwise available.
    Section 782(d) of the Act provides that, if the Department 
determines that a response to a request for information does not comply 
with the request, the Department will inform the person submitting the 
response of the nature of the deficiency and shall, to the extent 
practicable, provide that person the opportunity to remedy or explain 
the deficiency. If that person submits further information that 
continues to be unsatisfactory, or this information is not submitted 
within the applicable time limits, the Department may, subject to 
section 782(e), disregard all or part of the original and subsequent 
responses, as appropriate.
    Pursuant to section 782(e) of the Act, notwithstanding the 
Department's determination that the submitted information is 
``deficient'' under section 782(d) of the Act, the Department shall not 
decline to consider such information if all of the following 
requirements are satisfied: (1) The information is submitted by the 
established deadline; (2) the information can be verified; (3) the 
information is not so incomplete that it cannot serve as a reliable 
basis for reaching the applicable determination; (4) the interested 
party has demonstrated that it acted to the best of its ability; and 
(5) the information can be used without undue difficulties.
    The Department has concluded that, because G5, Kim's Marketing, 
Jewon, and Wooyang failed to respond to the Department's questionnaire, 
a determination based on a total FA is warranted for these companies. 
See the Preliminary Results for a detailed discussion of this analysis.

2. Selection of FA

    In selecting from among the facts otherwise available, section 
776(b) of the Act authorizes the Department to use an adverse inference 
if the Department finds that an interested party failed to cooperate by 
not acting to the best of its ability to comply with the request for 
information. See, e.g., Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes 
From Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 
62 FR 53808, 53819-20 (October 16, 1997). In the Preliminary Results, 
the Department determined that by not responding to the Department's 
questionnaire, each of these four companies did not act to the best of 
its respective abilities, and therefore an adverse inference is 
warranted in applying facts available for these companies.
    For the final results, no interested party comments were submitted 
regarding this issue and we continue to find that the failure of G5, 
Kim's Marketing, Jewon, and Wooyang to respond to the Department's 
questionnaire in this review demonstrates that these entities failed to 
cooperate by not acting to the best of their ability. Thus, consistent 
with the Department's practice in cases where a respondent fails to 
respond to the Department's questionnaire, in selecting FA for G5, 
Kim's Marketing, Jewon, and Wooyang in this review, an adverse 
inference is warranted. Therefore, we are assigning G5, Kim's 
Marketing, Jewon, and Wooyang an adverse FA rate of 10.44 percent, the 
rate calculated for Hyundai in a previous review and the

[[Page 68978]]

highest margin from any segment of the proceeding related to DRAMS from 
Korea.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this administrative review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision 
Memorandum'' (``Decision Memorandum'') from Holly A. Kuga, Acting 
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, to Troy H. Cribb, 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated November 3, 2000, 
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which 
parties have raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in 
the Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an Appendix. 
Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this 
review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum 
which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room B-099 of the main 
Department building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision 
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/summary/list.htm. The paper copy and electronic 
version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made certain 
changes in the margin calculations. These changes are discussed in the 
relevant sections of the ``Decision Memorandum.''

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following percentage weighted-average margins 
exist for the period April 1, 1998 through, May 30, 1999:

 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Margin
                    Manufacturer/exporter                      (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LG...........................................................       1.18
Hyundai......................................................       2.30
G5...........................................................      10.44
Wooyang......................................................      10.44
Jewon........................................................      10.44
Kim's Marketing..............................................      10.44
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment

    The Department shall determine, and the Customs Service shall 
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department 
will issue appraisement instructions directly to the Customs Service. 
Where the importer-specific assessment rate is above de minimis, we 
will instruct Customs to assess antidumping duties on that importer's 
entries of subject merchandise.
    These final results of review shall be the basis for the assessment 
of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by this review. 
For duty-assessment purposes, we calculated importer-specific 
assessment rates by aggregating the dumping margins calculated for all 
U.S. sales to each importer and dividing this amount by the total 
estimated entered value reported for those sales. Hyundai and LG, in 
accordance with the Department's questionnaire, estimated the entered 
value of their respective sales by calculating the average of the 
entered value of each control number for the POR. For all other 
respondents, we based assessment rate on the facts available margin 
percentage.

Notification

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 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 doubled antidumping duties.
    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 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.
    We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

    Dated: November 3, 2000.
Richard W. Moreland,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix--Issues in Decision Memorandum

Comments and Responses

1. Currency Conversions
2. Calculation of Foreign Currency Transaction Gains
3. Offset to Foreign Currency Translation Losses
4. Calculation of Foreign Currency Translation Gains
5. Allocation of Foreign Currency Translation Gains and Losses
6. Foreign Exchange Translation Losses in Construction in Progress 
(``CIP'') Account
7. Offset for Long-Term Interest Income
8. Unspecified Foreign Exchange Gains and Losses
9. Research and Development (``R&D'')
10. Cross-Fertilization of R&D
11. Use of Cost of Goods Sold (``COGS'') to Calculate R&D Ratio
12. Calculation of LG's R&D Ratio
13. Calculation of LG's G&A Ratio
14. Increase in Useful Lives
15. Adjustment to Depreciation
16. Programming Error in LG's Depreciation Adjustment
17. Adjustment for Special Depreciation for LG
18. Level of Trade (``LOT'')/Constructed Export Price (``CEP'') 
Offset
19. LG's Interest Expense
20. Calculation of CEP Profit for LG
21. Correction of LG's Concordance Program
22. Overstatement of LG's Duty Assessment Rate

[FR Doc. 00-29256 Filed 11-14-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P