Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 235 / Thursday, December 7, 1995 / Notices 62825

On January 30, 1995, the Department

submitted to the CIT the final results of

redetermination of the fourth

administrative review.

On March 15, 1995, the CIT issued a

second order remanding to the

Department the January 30, 1995, final

results of redetermination. In its

opinion, the CIT ordered the

Department to treat home market

warranty expenses as direct selling

expenses for the purposes of the

circumstance-of-sale adjustment. As a

result of our recalculations, we have

determined that the following

percentage weighted-average margin

exists for the period April 1, 1986

through March 31, 1987:

Manufacturer/exporter Percent

margin

Samsung ..................................... 0.29

Because the CIT’s decision affirming

our redetermination has become final

and conclusive, the Department will

order the immediate lifting of the

suspension of liquidation and instruct

the U.S. Customs Service to assess

antidumping duties on entries subject to

this review, as appropriate. Individual

differences between foreign market

value and U.S. price may vary from the

percentage stated above. The

Department will issue appraisement

instructions concerning these entries

directly to the U.S. Customs Service.

This notice serves as a 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 the 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 amendment of final results of

review and notice are in accordance

with section 751(f) of the Tariff Act (19

U.S.C. 1673(d)(1994)) and 19 CFR

353.28(c).

Dated: November 21, 1995.

Susan G. Esserman,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 95–29892 Filed 12–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

[A–580–008]

Color Television Receivers From the

Republic of Korea; Amended Final

Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of amended final results

of antidumping duty administrative

review.

SUMMARY: On March 27, 1991, the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) published the final results

of the fifth administrative review of the

antidumping duty order on color

television receivers (CTVs) from the

Republic of Korea (Korea) (56 FR

12701). The review covered the period

April 1, 1987, through March 31, 1988.

On September 21, 1994, the Court of

International Trade (CIT) remanded to

the Department for redetermination the

final results of the fifth administrative

review of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

(Samsung)(Slip Op. 94–149). On January

30, 1995, the Department submitted to

the CIT the final results of

redetermination. On March 16, 1995,

the CIT issued a second order (Slip Op.

95–48) remanding to the Department the

January 30, 1995, final results of

redetermination. On April 14, 1995, the

Department submitted a second final

results of redetermination to the CIT. On

May 31, 1995, the CIT affirmed the

Department’s second redetermination

(Slip Op. 95–101). Since the CIT’s ruling

was not appealed, and the CIT’s

decision affirming our redetermination

has therefore become final and

conclusive, we are amending our final

results of the fifth administrative review

of the antidumping duty order on CTVs

from Korea with respect to Samsung.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 7, 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, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230;

telephone: (202) 482–5253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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, 1987 through March

31, 1988.

Amended Final Results of Review

On September 21, 1994, the CIT

ordered the Department to: (1)

Recalculate the value added tax (VAT)

adjustment according to its new

methodology, (2) treat bad debt as a

direct selling expense if sufficient data

exists, (3) reconsider its treatment of

home market warranty expenses, and (4)

reconsider the classification of

forwarding expenses. On January 30,

1995, the Department submitted to the

CIT the final results of redetermination

of the fifth administrative review.

On March 16, 1995, the CIT issued a

second order remanding to the

Department the January 30, 1995, final

results of redetermination. In its

opinion, the CIT ordered the

Department to treat home market

warranty expenses as direct selling

expenses for the purposes of the

circumstance-of-sale adjustment. As a

result of our recalculations, we have

determined that the following

percentage weighted-average margin

exists for the period April 1, 1987

through March 31, 1988:

Manufacturer/exporter Percent

margin

Samsung ..................................... 0.10

Because the CIT’s decision affirming

our redetermination has become final

and conclusive, the Department will

order the immediate lifting of the

suspension of liquidation and instruct

the U.S. Customs Service to assess

antidumping duties on entries subject to

this review, as appropriate. Individual

differences between foreign market

value and U.S. price may vary from the

percentage stated above. The

Department will issue appraisement

instructions concerning these entries

directly to the U.S. Customs Service.

This notice serves as a 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 the 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.
62826 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 235 / Thursday, December 7, 1995 / Notices

This amendment of final results of

review and notice are in accordance

with section 751(f) of the Tariff Act (19

U.S.C. 1673(d)(1994)) and 19 CFR

353.28(c).

Dated: November 21, 1995.

Susan G. Esserman,

Assistant Secretary for Import

Administration.

[FR Doc. 95–29893 Filed 12–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

Minority Business Development

Agency

Solicitation of Business Development

Center Applications for Oklahoma City

and San Diego

AGENCY: Minority Business

Development Agency, Commerce.

SUMMARY: In accordance with Executive

Order 11625 and 15 U.S.C. 1512, the

Minority Business Development Agency

(MBDA) is soliciting competitive

applications from organizations to

operate the Minority Business

Development Center (MBDC) listed in

this document.

The purpose of the MBDC Program is

to provide business development

services to the minority business

community to help establish and

maintain viable minority businesses. To

this end, MBDA funds organizations to

identify and coordinate public and

private sector resources on behalf of

minority individuals and firms; to offer

a full range of client services to minority

entrepreneurs; and to serve as a conduit

of information and assistance regarding

minority business.

Proper Identification Is Required for

Entrance Into Any Federal Building

DATES: The closing date for applications

for each MBDC is listed below:

ADDRESSES: Completed application

packages should be submitted on or

before the closing date to the U.S.

Department of Commerce, Minority

Business Development Agency, MBDA

Executive Secretariat, 14th and

Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room 5073,

Washington, D.C. 20230.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

following are MBDCs for which

applications are solicited:

1. MBDC Application: Oklahoma City.

Metropolitan Area Serviced:

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

Award Number: 06–10–96001–01.

Closing Date for Applications: January

8, 1996.

For Further Information and an

Application Package, Contact:

Demetrice Jenkins, (214) 767–8001.

Pre-APPLICATION Conference:

December 22, 1995, at 10:00 a.m., at the

Dallas Regional Office, 1100 Commerce

Street, Room 7B23, Dallas, Texas 75242,

(214) 767–8001.

Cost of Performance Information:

Contingent upon the availability of

Federal funds, the cost of performance

for the first budget period (13 months)

from April 1, 1996 to April 30, 1997, is

estimated at $198,971. The total Federal

amount is $169,125 and is composed of

$165,000 plus the Audit Fee amount of

$4,125. The application must include a

minimum cost share of 15%, $29,846 in

non-federal (cost-sharing) contributions

for a total project cost of $198,971. Costsharing contributions may be in the

form of cash, client fees, third party inkind contributions, non-cash applicant

contributions or combinations thereof.

2. MBDC Application: San Diego.

Metropolitan Area Serviced: San

Diego, California.

Award Number: 09–10–96003–01.

Closing Date for Applications: January

8, 1996.

For Further Information and An

Application Package, Contact: Steven

Saho, (415) 744–3001.

Pre-Application Conference:

December 28, 1995—call the San

Francisco Regional Office for time and

location:(415) 744–3001.

Cost of Performance Information:

Contingent upon the availability of

Federal funds, the cost of performance

for the first budget period (13 months)

from April 1, 1996 to April 30, 1997, is

estimated at $333,125. The total Federal

amount is $283,156 and is composed of

$276,250 plus the Audit Fee amount of

$6,906. The application must include a

minimum cost share of 15%, $49,969 in

non-federal (cost-sharing) contributions

for a total project cost of $333,125. Costsharing contributions may be in the

form of cash, client fees, third party inkind contributions, non-cash applicant

contributions or combinations thereof.

Standard Paragraphs—The following

information and requirements are

applicable to the above-listed MBDCs.

The funding instrument for this

project will be a cooperative agreement.

If the recommended applicant is the

current incumbent organization, the

award will be for 12 months. For those

applicants who are not incumbent

organizations or who are incumbents

that have experienced closure due to a

break in service, a 30-day start-up

period will be added to their first budget

period, making it a 13-month award.

Competition is open to individuals,

non-profit and for-profit organizations,

state and local governments, American

Indian tribes and educational

institutions.

Applications will be evaluated on the

following criteria: The knowledge,

background and/or capabilities of the

firm and its staff in addressing the needs

of the business community in general

and, specifically, the special needs of

minority businesses, individuals and

organizations (45 points), the resources

available to the firm in providing

business development services (10

points); the firm’s approach (techniques

and methodologies) to performing the

work requirements included in the

application (25 points); and the firm’s

estimated cost for providing such

assistance (20 points). An application

must receive at least 70% of the points

assigned to each evaluation criteria

category to be considered

programmatically acceptable and

responsive. Those applications

determined to be acceptable and

responsive will then be evaluated by the

Director of MBDA. Final award

selections shall be based on the number

of points received, the demonstrated

responsibility of the applicant, and the

determination of those most likely to

further the purpose of the MBDA

program. Negative audit findings and

recommendations and unsatisfactory

performance under prior Federal awards

may result in an application not being

considered for award. The applicant

with the highest point score will not

necessarily receive the award. Periodic

reviews culminating in year-to-date

evaluations will be conducted to

determine if funding for the project

should continue. Continued funding

will be at the total discretion of MBDA

based on such factors as the MBDC’s

performance, the availability of funds

and Agency priorities.

The MBDC shall be required to

contribute at least 15% of the total

project cost through non-federal

contributions. To assist in this effort, the

MBDC may charge client fees for

services rendered. Fees may range from

$10 to $60 per hour based on the gross

receipts of the client’s business.

Anticipated processing time of this

award is 120 days. Executive order

12372, ‘‘Intergovernmental Review of

Federal Programs,’’ is not applicable to

this program. Federal funds for this

project include audit funds for non-CPA

recipients. In event that a CPA firm

wins the competition, the funds

allocated for audits are not applicable.

Questions concerning the preceding

information can be answered by the

contact person indicated above, and

copies of application kits and applicable

regulations can be obtained at the above

address. The collection of information

requirements for this project have been

approved by the Office of Management