[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 32 (Thursday, February 17, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8072-8074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-658]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-824]


Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip from 
India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 12, 2004, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the preliminary results of the administrative 
review of the antidumping duty order on polyethylene terephthalate 
film, sheet and strip (PET film) from India. The review covers PET film 
exported to the United States by Jindal Polyester Ltd. (Jindal) during 
the period from December 21, 2001, through June 30, 2003. We provided 
interested parties with an opportunity to comment on the preliminary 
results of review. After analyzing the comments received, we have made 
changes to the margin calculation. The final weighted-average dumping 
margin for the reviewed firm is listed below in the section entitled, 
``Final Results of Review.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 17, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Pedersen or Drew Jackson, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution 
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2769 or (202) 
482-4406, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 12, 2004, the Department published in the Federal 
Register the preliminary results of the administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on PET film from India. See Certain

[[Page 8073]]

Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India: 
Preliminary Results and Rescission in Part of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 69 FR 49872 (August 12, 2004) (Preliminary 
Results). In response to the Department's invitation to comment on the 
Preliminary Results, Jindal, the sole respondent, Valencia Specialty 
Films (Valencia), a U.S. importer, and the petitioners filed \1\ case 
briefs on September 13, 2004. Jindal, Valencia, and the petitioners 
filed rebuttal briefs on September 23, 2004. In response to requests 
from Valencia and Jindal, a hearing was held on September 30, 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The petitioners in this review are Dupont Teijin Films, 
Mitsubishi Polyester Film of America, Toray Plastics (America) and 
SKC America, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 14, 2004, the Department published in the Federal 
Register a notice of extension of the final results of review. See 
Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip from India: 
Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 69 FR 74495.
    The Department has conducted this administrative review in 
accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 
Act).

Scope of the Review

    The products covered by the order are all gauges of 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. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and 
customs purposes. The written description of the scope of this order is 
dispositive.

Period of Review

    The period of review (POR) is December 21, 2001, through June 30, 
2003.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised by interested parties in their case briefs are 
addressed in the ``Issues and Decision Memorandum'' from Barbara E. 
Tillman, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, 
to Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 
Administration (Issues and Decision Memorandum). The Issues and 
Decision Memorandum is dated concurrently with this notice and is 
hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which the parties 
have raised is attached to this notice as an appendix. Parties can find 
a complete discussion of all issues raised in this administrative 
review, and the corresponding recommendations, in the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room 
B-099 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a 
complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed 
directly on the Web at ``http://ia.ita.doc.gov.'' The paper copy and 
the electronic version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are 
identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of comments received, we made the following 
changes in the comparison and margin calculation programs.
    1. Based on import data supplied by U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP), we have found that certain importers did not deposit 
countervailing duties (CVDs) on their imports of PET film. The entries 
that we examined correspond with the U.S. sales reported to the 
Department by Jindal. Because the evidence on the record indicates no 
CVDs will be ``imposed'' for these entries, for the final results of 
review, we will not increase the U.S. prices of particular sales in 
accordance with the export subsidy offset provision, section 
772(c)(1)(C) of the Act.
    2. We corrected ministerial errors related to the treatment of 
excise duties, billing adjustments and the application of exchange 
rates to marine insurance and inland freight to the Indian port.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following weighted-average percentage margin 
exists for the period December 21, 2001, through June 30, 2003:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Manufacturer/Exporter                  Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jindal Polyester Ltd................................                6.28
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of this notice of final results of administrative review 
for all shipments of PET film from India entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this 
notice, as provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash 
deposit rate for Jindal will be the rate shown above; (2) for 
previously investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit 
rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published in the 
investigation; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this 
review, or the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) 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 by 
any segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will be the ``all 
others'' rate of 24.14 percent established in the LTFV investigation, 
adjusted for the export subsidy rate found in the CVD investigation, 
which results in a cash deposit rate of 5.71 percent. These deposit 
requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of 
the final results of the next administrative review.

Assessment

    The Department will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping 
duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with 19 C.F.R. Sec.  
351.212(b)(1), the Department has calculated importer/customer-specific 
assessment rates for merchandise subject to this review. Where the 
importer/customer-specific assessment rate is above de minimis, we will 
instruct CBP to assess the calculated assessment rate against the 
entered customs value (or quantity if we do not have entered value) of 
the subject merchandise on each of the importer's/customer's entries 
during the POR. The Department will issue the appropriate assessment 
instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of these 
final results of review.

Reimbursement of Duties

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 C.F.R. Sec.  351.402(f)(2) to file a 
certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties or CVDs 
prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. 
Failure to comply with this requirement may result in the Secretary's 
presumption that reimbursement of antidumping and/or CVDs occurred and 
the subsequent increase in antidumping duties by the full amount of the 
antidumping and/or CVDs reimbursed.

Administrative Protective Orders

    This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility 
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information 
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305.

[[Page 8074]]

Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials 
or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure 
to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which 
is subject to sanction.
    We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: February 8, 2005.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix Issues in Decision Memorandum

Comment 1: Whether Jindal Polyester Limited and Valencia Specialty 
Films Were Affiliated During the First Three Months of the Period of 
Review

Comment 2: Whether Jindal and Valencia Were Affiliated During the 
Remainder of the Period of Review

Comment 3: Whether it is Appropriate to Apply Partial Adverse Facts 
Available

Comment 4: Whether the Department Applied the Appropriate Adverse Facts 
Available Rate

Comment 5: Whether Jindal Polyester Limited Properly Classified Certain 
Merchandise as Non-prime Merchandise

Comment 6: Whether the Department Incorrectly Converted the Currency of 
Certain Movement Expenses

Comment 7: Whether the Department Incorrectly Calculated Home Market 
Billing Adjustments

Comment 8: Whether the Department Incorrectly Calculated the Net Home 
Market Price

Comment 9: Whether the Department Should Offset its Calculations for 
Negative Dumping Margins

Comment 10: Whether to Increase the Price of Certain U.S. Sales by 
Countervailing Duties Imposed to Offset Export Subsidies

[FR Doc. E5-658 Filed 2-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S