[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 28 (Monday, February 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9668-9669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03083]
[[Page 9668]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-533-824]
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From Taiwan:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 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 Taiwan.\1\ This review covers two respondents, Shinkong Synthetic
Fibers Corporation and its subsidiary Shinkong Materials Technology Co.
Ltd. (collectively, Shinkong), and Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, Ltd.
(Nan Ya), producers and exporters of PET Film from Taiwan. Based on the
results of our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes
to the Preliminary Results. For the final weighted-average dumping
margins, see the ``Final Results of Review'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From
Taiwan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 77 FR 46704 (August 6, 2012) (Preliminary Results).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: February 11, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Carey or Milton Koch, 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-
3964 or (202) 482-2584, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Since the Preliminary Results, the following events have taken
place. Between August and October 2012, the Department issued several
supplemental questionnaires to both Shinkong and Nan Ya requesting
additional information. All responses were timely submitted. On
September 28, 2012, Wilmer Hale withdrew its representation of DuPont
Teijin Films, one of the petitioners. As explained in the memorandum
from the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, the Department
has exercised its discretion to toll deadlines for the duration of the
closure of the Federal Government from October 29, through October 30,
2012. Thus all deadlines in this segment of the proceeding have been
extended by two days.\2\ On November 8, 2012, the Department extended
the deadline of the final results from December 6, 2012 to February 4,
2013.\3\ On December 19, 2012, Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc., SKC,
Inc., and Toray Plastics (America), Inc. (collectively, Petitioners)
filed comments on Nan Ya's supplemental questionnaire responses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See 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.
\3\ 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 Taiwan: Extension
of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department issued a post preliminary analysis to address
Petitioners' targeted dumping allegation for both Shinkong and Nan Ya
on December 20, 2012.\4\ Shinkong and Petitioners filed timely case
briefs on January 3, 2013. We rejected Nan Ya's January 3, 2013 case
brief because it contained untimely filed new factual information.
NanYa re-filed its case brief on January 9, 2013 and filed its rebuttal
brief on January 10, 2013. Petitioners timely filed a rebuttal brief on
January 10, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, ``2010-
2011 Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from Taiwan: Post-
Preliminary Analysis and Calculation Memorandum of Nan Ya Plastics
Corporation, Ltd. and Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Corporation and its
subsidiary Shinkong Materials Technology Co. Ltd.'' dated December
20, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the antidumping duty order are all gauges
of raw, pretreated, or primed polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet,
and strip, whether extruded or coextruded. Excluded are metalized 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
polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip 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.\5\ 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). Access to IA ACCESS is available
to all registered users at http://iaaccess.trade.gov, and is available
to all parties in the Central Records Unit, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 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 Taiwan,'' dated February
4, 2013 (Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of the comments received and information
gathered after the Preliminary Results, we have made adjustments to our
margin calculations for both Shinkong and Nan Ya. For Shinkong, the
Department has modified the calculations of credit expenses, direct
selling expenses, and the adjustment for the provision of free samples.
For Nan Ya, the Department has modified the date of sale and the
targeted dumping analysis.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Because the details of these changes include business
proprietary information, see Memorandum to Dana S. Mermelstein,
Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, ``Final Results of the
2010-2011 Administrative Review of Polyethylene Terephthalate Film
Sheet and Strip from Taiwan: Calculations for Shinkong Synthetic
Fibers Corporation and its subsidiary Shinkong Materials Technology
Co. Ltd.,'' dated February 4, 2013 and Memorandum to Dana S.
Mermelstein, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, ``Final
Results of the 2010-2011 Administrative Review of Polyethylene
Terephthalate Film Sheet and Strip from Taiwan: Calculations for Nan
Ya Plastics Corporation,'' dated February 4, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of Review
As a result of our review, we determine that the following
weighted-average dumping margins exist for the
[[Page 9669]]
period July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
Average
Manufacturer/exporter dumping
margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Corporation/Shinkong Materials 0.75
Technology Co. Ltd.........................................
Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, Ltd............................ 8.99
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate
entries. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP
15 days after the date of publication of the final results of review.
For any individually examined respondents whose weighted-average
dumping margin is above de minimis (i.e., 0.5 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 those 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 below de
minimis or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis,
we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without
regard to antidumping duties.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 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, 2012)
(Final Modification for Reviews). In the Preliminary 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.
\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 POR 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 Taiwan 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 below
de minimis, i.e., 0.5 percent, 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, 2.40 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 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
List of Comments
Comment 1: Whether to Apply an Alternative Comparison Method to Nan
Ya and Shinkong
Comment 2: Whether the Department Should Modify the Calculations of
Certain Adjustments for Shinkong
Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Use Nan Ya's Revised U.S.
Sales Database
Comment 4: Whether the Department Should Change Nan Ya's Date of
Sale from Invoice Date to Sales Confirmation Date
Comment 5: Whether the Department Should Use Entry Date To Define
Nan Ya's Universe of Sales and Consequently To Exclude Nan Ya Sales
That Are Outside The POR
[FR Doc. 2013-03083 Filed 2-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P