[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 28 (Monday, February 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9670-9672]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03082]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-533-824]
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India:
Final Results of Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order;
2010-2011
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 6, 2012, the Department of Commerce (Department)
published the preliminary results of administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film (PET Film)
from India.\1\ This review covers three respondents, Jindal Poly Films
Ltd (Jindal), Polyplex Corporation Ltd. (Polyplex), and SRF Limited
(SRF), producers and exporters of PET Film from India. Based on the
results of our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes
to the preliminary results. For the final weight-averaged dumping
margins, see the ``Final Results of Review'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From
India: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 77 FR 46687 (August 6, 2012) (Preliminary Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: February 11, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi Blum or Toni Page, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 428-
0197 or (202) 482-1398, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Since the Preliminary Results, the following events have taken
place. The Department extended the final results of review from
December 6, 2012 to February 4, 2013.\2\ Jindal and Polyplex submitted
timely case briefs on December 5, 2012. DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi
Polyester Film, Inc., SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics (America), Inc.
(collectively, Petitioners) filed a timely rebuttal brief on December
13, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Memorandum from Barbara Tillman, Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations Office 6 Director, to Christian
Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Operations, ``Polyethylene Terephthalate Film from India:
Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review,'' dated November 9, 2012. See also Memorandum
to the Record from Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, regarding ``Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As a
Result of the Government Closure During Hurricane Sandy,'' dated
October 31, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department issued a post-preliminary analysis to address
Petitioners' targeted dumping allegations for both Jindal and Polyplex
on December 20, 2012.\3\ Petitioners filed timely comments regarding
the Department's post-preliminary analysis on January 3, 2013. In
response, Jindal and Polyplex filed timely rebuttal comments on January
8, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,:
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip (PET film) from
India: Post-Preliminary Analysis and Calculation Memorandum, dated
December 20, 2012 (Post-Prelim Analysis and Calculation Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the antidumping duty order are all gauges
of
[[Page 9671]]
raw, pretreated, or primed PET film, whether extruded or coextruded.
Excluded are metallized films and other finished films that have had at
least one of their surfaces modified by the application of a
performance-enhancing resinous or inorganic layer of more than 0.00001
inches thick. Imports of PET film are currently classifiable in the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item
number 3920.62.00.90. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience
and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of the
antidumping duty order is dispositive.
Period of Review
The period of review is July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by parties
are addressed in the Decision Memorandum.\4\ A list of these issues is
attached to this notice in the Appendix. The Decision Memorandum is a
public document and is on file electronically via Import
Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to all
registered users at http://iaaccess.trade.gov, and is available to all
parties in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046 of the main
Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://www.trade.gov/ia/. The signed Decision Memorandum and electronic
versions of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,
``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2010-
2011 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India,'' dated February 4,
2013 (Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of the comments received and information
received after the Preliminary Results, we have made adjustments to our
margin calculations for Jindal and Polyplex in accordance with our
post-preliminary analysis.\5\ For these final results, we made no other
changes to Jindal's margin calculations. Polyplex's margin calculations
were adjusted to account for the company's expenditures for its sample
sales and its sales of secondary merchandise in the U.S. The
adjustments for Polyplex did not change its weighted-average dumping
margin calculated for the Preliminary Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For our detailed analysis, see Post-Prelim Analysis and
Calculation Memorandum; see also Analysis Memorandum for the Post-
Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India: Jindal
Poly Films Limited and Polyplex Corporation Ltd., dated December 20,
2012, at 2, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of Review
As a result of our review, we determine that the following
weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period July 1, 2010,
through June 30, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ SRF is a non-selected respondent in this review. For
additional information regarding the calculation of SRF's rate,
which remains unchanged from the Preliminary Results, see
Preliminary Results, 77 FR at 46692.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Manufacturer/ exporter dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jindal Poly Films Limited............................... 0.00
Polyplex Corporation Limited............................ 0.00
SRF Limited \6\......................................... 0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries. We will instruct CBP to liquidate entries of merchandise
produced and/or exported by Jindal, Polyplex, and SRF. The Department
intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date
of publication of the final results of review. For individually
examined respondents whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de
minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent) in the final results, we will calculate
importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio
of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined
sales to the total entered value of the sales in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1).\7\ We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on
all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-
specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review
is above de minimis. Where either the respondent's weighted-average
dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific
assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to
liquidate without regard to antidumping duties any entries.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ In these final results, the Department applied the
assessment rate calculation method adopted in Final Modification for
Reviews, i.e. on the basis of monthly average-to-average comparisons
using only the transactions associated with that importer with
offsets being provided for non-dumped comparisons. See Antidumping
Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and
Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final
Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 1012) (Final Modificationfor
Reviews).
\8\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003. This clarification will apply to entries of subject
merchandise during the period of review produced by each respondent for
which they did not know that their merchandise was destined for the
United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate
unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the
intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full
discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6,
2003).
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements will be effective for all
shipments of PET Film from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final
results of this administrative review, as provided for by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (Act): (1) The cash
deposit rate for company under review will be the rate established in
the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de
minimis, then no cash deposit will be required); (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 less-than-fair-value 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 the all
others rate for this proceeding, 5.71 percent. These deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further
notice.
Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders
This notice is the only reminder to parties subject to the
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under the APO in accordance
[[Page 9672]]
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or
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.
Notification to Importers
This notice also 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 Department's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
We are issuing and publishing these final results and this notice
in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: February 4, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix
Comment 1: Targeted Dumping
Comment 2: Polyplex's Transparent Film Other Grade (TFOG) Sales
Comment 3: Jindal's Date of Sale
Comment 4: Jindal's Export Quantities
[FR Doc. 2013-03082 Filed 2-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P