[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 241 (Tuesday, December 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65843-65844]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32794]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Docket No. WTO/D-22]


WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding--U.S. Anti-Dumping Duties on 
Color Televisions From Korea

AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 127(b)(1) of the Uruguay Round Agreements 
Act (URAA) (19 U.S.C. 3537(b)(1)), the Office of the United States 
Trade Representative (USTR) is providing notice that the Government of 
Korea has requested the establishment of a dispute settlement panel 
under the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization 
(WTO) to examine the continuing maintenance by the United States with 
respect to Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Samsung) of an antidumping 
order on color television receivers (CTVs) from the Republic of Korea 
(Korea). According to the Government of Korea, Samsung's dumping 
margins for CTVs exported from Korea to the United States from 1985-
1991 were de minimis, and Samsung has not exported CTVs from Korea to 
the United States since 1991. The Department of Commerce has initiated 
a changed circumstances review to determine whether the antidumping 
order should be revoked in part, i.e., with respect to Samsung. The 
Department of Commerce has also initiated anti-circumvention inquiries 
to determine whether Samsung is circumventing the antidumping order by 
exporting CTVs assembled in Mexico and Thailand to the United States. 
The Government of Korea is challenging the Department of Commerce's 
failure to revoke with respect to Samsung the antidumping order on CTVs 
from Korea, as well as its initiation of the circumvention inquiries.

DATES: Although USTR will accept any comments received during the 
course of the dispute settlement proceedings, comments should be 
submitted on or before January 12, 1998 to be assured of timely 
consideration by USTR in preparing its first written submission to the 
panel.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted to Litigation Assistant, Office of 
Monitoring and Enforcement, Room 501, Attn: Korea Color Televisions 
Dispute, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, 
N.W., Washington, DC 20508.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Audrey Winter, Office of the General 
Counsel, (202) 395-7305.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By letter dated November 6, 1997, the 
government of Korea requested the establishment of a panel to examine 
the continued imposition of anti-dumping measures on color television 
receivers from Korea. The WTO Dispute Settlement Body is likely to 
establish the panel no later than December 1997. Under normal 
circumstances, the panel, which will hold its meetings in Geneva, 
Switzerland, would be expected to issue a report detailing its findings 
and recommendations within six to nine months after it is established.

Major Issues Raised by the Government of Korea and Legal Basis of 
Complaint

    In its request for the establishment of a panel, the Government of 
Korea challenges the Department of Commerce's continuing imposition of 
antidumping duties on Samsung's CTV exports from Korea pursuant to the 
Department's April 30, 1984 antidumping order. The Government of Korea 
also challenges the Department's initiation and conduct of the anti-
circumvention inquiries. The Government of Korea alleges that these 
actions are inconsistent with several provisions of the WTO agreements, 
including the following specific allegations:

--The failure of the United States to review, on its own initiative, 
dumping and injury respectively and to revoke the order constitutes a 
violation of Article 11.1 combined with Article 11.2, as well as 
Article 5.8 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (Antidumping Agreement).
--The United States' rejection of Samsung's request for revocation 
review on the ground of the U.S. concern about lack of current data as 
a result of ``no shipment'' violates Article 11.2 of the Antidumping 
Agreement, which does not provide such a standard.
--The failure of the United States to revoke the order, coupled with 
the U.S. position that the outcome of the revocation review is 
dependent on the outcome of the anti-circumvention investigation, is in 
violation of Article 11.1 combined with Article 11.2 and Article 11.4 
of the Antidumping Agreement because it introduces considerations not 
mentioned in Articles 11.1 and 11.2, and because the review exceeds the 
Article 11.4 time limit and the requirement that review investigations 
must be carried out expeditiously.
--The United States' requirement (19 C.F.R. 353.25(b)) that applicants 
file revocation requests only in ``the third and subsequent anniversary 
months'' is in violation of Article 11.2, which stipulates no time 
limit whatsoever for such requests.
--The conduct of the United States of the anti-circumvention inquiries 
violates Article VI of GATT 1994 and several provisions of the 
Antidumping Agreement.
--The initiation of the anti-circumvention inquiries violates Article 
VI of GATT 1994 and Articles

[[Page 65844]]

1, 2.1 and 3.1 of the Antidumping Agreement, because it may lead to the 
imposition of antidumping duties on imports of CTVs from Mexico and 
Thailand without findings of dumping and resulting injury ever having 
been made.
--The refusal by the United States to conduct a standing inquiry before 
initiating its anti-circumvention investigation violates Article 3.1, 
3.6, 4.1 and 5.6 of the Antidumping Agreement.
--Failure by the United States to make a determination in the anti-
circumvention inquiries for more than 22 months violates Article 5.10 
of the Antidumping Agreement.
--The conduct of the United States in the revocation review and the 
anti-circumvention inquiries, when examined and compared, violates 
Article X.3 of GATT 1994 and Article 17.6(i) of the Antidumping 
Agreement because the United States has not established the facts 
properly nor has it evaluated the facts in an unbiased and objective 
manner.

Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments 
concerning the issues raised in the dispute. Comments must be in 
English and provided in fifteen copies. A person requesting that 
information contained in a comment submitted by that person be treated 
as confidential business information must certify that such information 
is business confidential and would not customarily be released to the 
public by the commenter. Confidential business information must be 
clearly marked ``Business Confidential'' in a contrasting color ink at 
the top of each page of each copy.
    Information or advice contained in a comment submitted, other than 
business confidential information, may be determined by USTR to be 
confidential in accordance with section 135(g)(2) of the Trade Act of 
1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155(g)(2)). If the submitter believes that information 
or advice may qualify as such, the submitter--
    (1) Must so designate that information or advice;
    (2) Must clearly mark the material as ``Submitted in Confidence'' 
in a contrasting color ink at the top of each page of each copy; and
    (3) Is encouraged to provide a non-confidential summary of the 
information or advice.
    Pursuant to section 127(e) of the URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR 
will maintain a file on this dispute settlement proceeding, accessible 
to the public, in the USTR Reading Room: Room 101, Office of the United 
States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, N.W., Washington DC 
20408. The public file will include a listing of any comments received 
by USTR from the public with respect to the proceeding; the U.S. 
submissions to the panel in the proceeding; the submissions, or non-
confidential summaries of submissions, to the panel received from other 
participants in the dispute, as well as the report of the dispute 
settlement panel and, if applicable, the report of the Appellate Body. 
An appointment to review the public file (Docket WTO/D-22, ``U.S.--
Anti-Dumping Duties on Color Televisions from Korea'') may be made by 
calling Brenda Webb, (202) 395-6186. The USTR Reading Room is open to 
the public from 9:30 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday.
A. Jane Bradley,
Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 97-32794 Filed 12-15-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-01-M