[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 89 (Monday, May 10, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25014-25015]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-11724]



[[Page 25014]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration
[A-580-807]


Polyethylene Terephthalate Film From Korea: Preliminary Results 
of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of antidumping duty new shipper 
review.

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

SUMMARY: In response to a request from one respondent, the Department 
of Commerce (the Department) is conducting a new shipper review of the 
antidumping duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and 
strip (PET film) from the Republic of Korea. The review covers one 
manufacturer/exporter of the subject merchandise to the United States 
and the period June 1, 1997 through May 31, 1998. We preliminarily 
determine that HSI Industries (HSI) did not sell subject merchandise 
below normal value (NV) during the period of review. If these 
preliminary results are adopted in our final results of review, we will 
instruct the U.S. Customs Service to assess no antidumping duties for 
HSI for the period covered by this new shipper review.
    Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary 
results. Parties who submit argument in this proceeding are requested 
to submit with the argument: (1) a statement of issues and (2) a 
summary of the arguments (no longer than five pages, including 
footnotes).

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 10, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Heaney or John Kugelman, 
AD/CVD Enforcement Group III, Office 8, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone 
(202) 482-4475/0649.

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. In addition, unless otherwise 
indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are to the 
regulations codified at 19 CFR part 351 (1998).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 30, 1998 and July 1, 1998, the Department received requests 
from HSI and Kohap, Ltd. (Kohap) for new shipper reviews pursuant to 
section 751(a)(2) of the Act and Sec. 351.214(b) of the Department's 
regulations. On July 16, 1998, we published the notice of initiation 
for this new shipper review (63 FR 38371). On August 12, 1998, Kohap, 
Ltd. (Kohap) withdrew its request for a new shipper review. On December 
7, 1998, we postponed the preliminary results until May 12, 1999, and 
rescinded the review with respect to Kohap (63 FR 67455).

Scope of the Review

    Imports covered by this review are shipments of all gauges of raw, 
pretreated, or primed polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and 
strip, whether extruded or coextruded. The films excluded from this 
review 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 (0.254 micrometers) thick. Roller transport cleaning film which 
has at least one of its surfaces modified by the application of 0.5 
micrometers of SBR latex has also been ruled as not within the scope of 
the order.
    PET film is currently classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
(HTS) subheading 3920.62.00.00. The HTS subheading is provided for 
convenience and for U.S. Customs purposes. The written description 
remains dispositive as to the scope of the product coverage.
    The review covers the period June 1, 1997 through May 31, 1998. The 
Department is conducting this review in accordance with section 
751(a)(2)(B) of the Act, as amended.

Fair Value Comparisons

    To determine whether sales of PET film in the United States were 
made at less than fair value, we compared USP to the NV, as described 
in the ``United States Price'' and ``Normal Value'' sections of this 
notice. In accordance with section 777A(d)(2) of the Act, we calculated 
monthly weighted-average prices for NV and compared these to individual 
U.S. transactions.

United States Price (USP)

    In calculating USP, the Department treated HSI's sales as export 
price (EP) sales, because the merchandise was sold to unaffiliated U.S. 
purchasers prior to the date of importation and constructed export 
price (CEP) methodology was not otherwise indicated. See section 772(a) 
of the Act.
    EP was based on the delivered price to unaffiliated purchasers in 
the United States. We made adjustments, where applicable, for Korean 
inland freight, Korean brokerage charges, ocean freight, U.S. brokerage 
charges, U.S. inland freight, and U.S. customs duties. We made an 
addition to EP for duty drawback pursuant to section 772(c)(1)(B) of 
the Act.

Normal Value (NV)

    In order to determine whether there were sufficient sales of PET 
film in the home market (HM) to serve as a viable basis for calculating 
NV, we compared the volume of home market sales of PET film to the 
volume of PET film sold in the United States, in accordance with 
section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Act. HSI's aggregate volume of HM sales of 
the foreign like product was greater than five percent of its 
respective aggregate volume of U.S. sales of the subject merchandise. 
Therefore, we have based NV on HM sales.
    In accordance with section 773(a)(6) of the Act, we adjusted NV, 
where appropriate, by deducting home market packing expenses and adding 
U.S. packing expenses. We also adjusted NV for differences in credit 
expenses and deducted inland freight.

Level of Trade

    In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, to the 
extent practicable, we determine NV based on sales in the comparison 
market at the same level of trade (LOT) as the EP or CEP transaction. 
The NV LOT is that of the starting price sales in the comparison market 
or, when NV is based on CV, that of the sales from which we derive SG&A 
expenses and profit. For EP, the U.S. LOT is also the level of the 
starting price sale, which is usually from the exporter to the 
importer. For CEP, it is the level of the constructed sale from the 
exporter to the importer.
    To determine whether NV sales are at a different LOT than EP or CEP 
sales, we examine stages in the marketing process and selling functions 
along the chain of distribution between the producer and the 
unaffiliated customer. If the comparison market sales are at a 
different LOT, and the difference affects price comparability, as 
manifested in a pattern of consistent price differences between the 
sales on which NV is based and comparison market sales at the LOT of 
the export transaction, we make a LOT adjustment under section 
773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. Finally, for CEP sales, if the NV level is 
more remote

[[Page 25015]]

from the factory than the CEP level and there is no basis for 
determining whether the differences in the levels between NV and CEP 
affects price comparability, we adjust NV under section 773(A)(7)(B) of 
the Act (the CEP offset provision). (See e.g., Certain Carbon Steel 
Plate from South Africa, Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value, 62 FR 61731 (November 19, 1997).)
    In implementing these principles in this review, we asked HSI to 
identify the specific differences and similarities in selling functions 
and/or support services between all phases of marketing in the home 
market and the United States. HSI identified two channels of 
distribution in the home market: (1) Wholesalers/distributors and (2) 
end-users. For both channels, HSI performs similar selling functions 
such as order processing, delivery arrangement, and customer liaison. 
Because channels of distribution do not qualify as separate levels of 
trade when the selling functions performed for each customer class are 
sufficiently similar, we determined that there exists one LOT for HSI's 
home market sales.
    For the U.S. market HSI reported one LOT: EP sales made directly to 
its U.S. customers. When we compared EP sales to home market sales, we 
determined that sales in both markets were made at the same LOT. For 
both EP and home market transactions HSI sold directly to the customer 
and provided similar levels of order processing, delivery arrangement, 
and customer liaison. Based upon the foregoing, we determined that HSI 
sold at the same LOT in the U.S. as it did in the home market, and 
consequently no LOT adjustment is warranted.

Preliminary Results of Review

    We preliminarily determine that a margin of 0.00 percent exists for 
HSI for the period June 1, 1997 through May 31, 1998. We will disclose 
calculations performed in connection with this preliminary results of 
review within 10 days after the date of any public announcement, or if 
there is no public announcement within 5 days of publication of this 
notice. Interested parties may submit case briefs and/or written 
comments no later than 30 days after the date of publication. Rebuttal 
briefs and rebuttals to written comments, limited to issues raised in 
such briefs or comments, may be filed no later than 5 days after the 
deadline for filing case briefs. Any interested party may request a 
hearing within 30 days of publication. Any hearing, if requested, will 
be held 2 days after the deadline for filing rebuttal briefs unless the 
Secretary alters the date. The Department will issue the final results 
of this administrative review, which will include the results of its 
analysis of issues raised in any such written comments or at a hearing, 
within 90 days after the date of these preliminary results.
    Upon completion of this new shipper administrative review, the 
Department shall determine, and Customs shall assess, antidumping 
duties on all appropriate entries. We have calculated importer-specific 
ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the total amount of 
antidumping duties calculated for the examined sales as a percentage of 
the total value of subject merchandise entered during the POR. These 
rates will be assessed uniformly on all entries made during the POR. 
The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to 
Customs. The final results of this review shall be the basis for the 
assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by 
the determination and for future deposits of estimated duties.
    Upon completion of this review, the posting of a bond, or security 
in lieu of cash deposit, pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the 
Act and Sec. 351.214(e) of the Department's regulations will no longer 
be permitted and, should the final results yield a margin of dumping, a 
cash deposit will be required for each entry of the merchandise.
    Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective 
upon completion of the final results of this new shipper review for all 
shipments of PET film from the Republic of Korea entered, or withdrawn 
from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the 
final results of this new shipper review, as provided by section 
751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for HSI will be the 
rate established in the final results of this new shipper review; (2) 
for merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not covered in 
this review but covered in the less than fair value (LTFV) 
investigation or a previous review, the cash deposit will continue to 
be the most recent rate published in the final determination or final 
results for which the manufacturer or exporter received a company-
specific rate; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review 
or the original investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash 
deposit rate will be that established for the manufacturer of the 
merchandise in the final results of this review or the LTFV 
investigation; and (4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is 
a firm covered in this or any previous reviews, the cash deposit rate 
will be 21.5%, the ``all others'' rate established in the LTFV 
investigation.
    This notice also serves as a preliminary 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 double antidumping duties.
    This new shipper review and notice are in accordance with section 
751(a)(2)(B) of the Act 19 CFR 351.214(d).

    Dated: May 3, 1999.
Robert S. LaRussa,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 99-11724 Filed 5-7-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P