[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 56 (Friday, March 21, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15135-15136]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-5601]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-825]


Amended Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film, Sheet, and Strip from 
India

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On February 11, 2008, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the final results of the administrative review of 
the countervailing duty order on polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film 
from India for the period January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005. 
See Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film, Sheet, and Strip from India: 
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR 7708 
(February 11, 2008). On February 12, 2008, in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.224(c)(2), we received timely filed ministerial error allegations 
from respondent MTZ Polyfilms, Ltd. (MTZ). No other party to the 
proceeding filed a ministerial error allegation or rebuttal comments. 
Based on our analysis of the comments, the Department has revised the 
countervailing duty rate for MTZ. Accordingly, we are amending our 
final results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 21, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi Blum or Sean Carey, 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) 482-
0197, or (202) 482-3964, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Scope of the Order

    For purposes of the order, the products covered are all gauges of 
raw, pretreated, or primed Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and 
Strip, 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 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 the order is dispositive.

Legal Authority

    The statute governing the correction of ministerial errors directs 
the Department to establish a procedure for the correction of 
ministerial errors in determinations within a reasonable period of 
time. See Section 751(h) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act). The 
regulations promulgated pursuant to the statute provide procedures for 
the correction of ministerial errors, which allow parties to submit 
comments and the Department to analyze the comments and correct any 
ministerial errors by amendment of the determination. See 19 CFR 
351.224(e). The definition of a ministerial error in a countervailing 
duty determination is contained in section 751(h) of the Act. 
Specifically, the Act states that a ministerial error includes ``errors 
in addition, subtraction, or other arithmetic function, clerical error 
resulting from inaccurate copying, duplication, or the like, and any 
other type of unintentional error which the {Secretary{time}  considers 
ministerial.'' Thus, any issue raised by interested parties as a 
ministerial error which is, in fact, the result of a methodological 
decision by the Department will not be considered a ministerial error 
as it would not meet the statutory definition of the term. See, e.g., 
Tianjin Mach. Imp. & Exp. Corp. v. United States, 353 F. Supp. 2d 1294, 
1304 (CIT 2004).

Allegations of Ministerial Errors

    On February 12, 2008, MTZ timely filed, pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.224(c)(2), an allegation that the Department made two ministerial 
errors in its final results of review for MTZ. First, with respect to 
the Union Territories Central Sales Tax (CST) program, MTZ alleges that 
the Department miscalculated the benefit by using the excise tax and 
the Education CESS, which is an excise duty, on the excise tax paid, 
instead of the four percent CST not paid. We determine that this is a 
ministerial error that should be corrected in accordance with 19 CFR 3 
5l.224( e) of the Department's regulations. In the benefit calculations 
for Union Territories CST program, the Department erroneously based the 
benefit on the excise tax and the Education CESS on the excise tax paid 
on MTZ's purchases of the input, instead of the four percent CST not 
paid on the purchases of the input. We have now revised our 
calculations and calculated the benefit from the Union Territories CST 
program by calculating four percent of the basic value, as reported to 
the Department. See Memorandum to Barbara E. Tillman Through Dana 
Mermelstein From Elfi Blum: Analysis of Ministerial Error Allegations 
in Final Results of Countervailing Duty Review on Polyethylene 
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India (March 12, 2008) 
(Ministerial Error Memo).
    Second, MTZ states that, for the Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme 
(DEPS/DEPB), the Department's calculation memorandum states that the 
benefits are conferred as of the date of exportation of the shipments 
for which the DEPS/DEPB credits are earned. MTZ alleges that the 
Department erred in calculating the benefits by including the value of 
credits earned on shipments made in 2004 for which the license was 
issued in 2005. Thus, according to MTZ, the calculation of the rate for 
this program does not reflect the method stated in the analysis 
memorandum, and therefore, constitutes a ministerial error. See 
Memorandum to The File Through Dana Mermelstein From Elfi Blum: 
Administrative Review of the Countervailing Duty Order on Polyethylene 
Terephthalate Film from India: Revisions to the Rate Calculations for 
MTZ Polyfilms Ltd. (MTZ) (February 4, 2008) (Calculation Memo).
    MTZ correctly notes the Department's practice to treat benefits 
received under DEPSIDEPB as conferred as of the date of exportation of 
the shipment for which the relevant DEPS/DEPB credits are earned 
because it is at this point where the amount of the benefit in the form 
of an exemption is known. See, e.g., Final Results of Countervailing 
Duty Administrative Review: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 
Products from India, 69 FR 26549 (May 13, 2004), and accompanying 
Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 2; and Final Affirmative 
Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon-Quality 
Steel Plate from India, 64 FR 73131, 73140 (December 29, 1999).

[[Page 15136]]

    However, we disagree with MTZ that our inclusion in the benefit 
calculation of all the DEPB credits MTZ reported constitutes a 
ministerial error. In the original questionnaire and in the first and 
second supplemental questionnaires we asked MTZ to report the date of 
shipment for all exports on which the benefits from its DEPS/DEPB 
licenses were earned, and to report such information for all credits 
earned during the period of review (POR). In MTZ's first supplemental 
response, MTZ reported the date of all licenses issued within the POR. 
MTZ also reported all credits earned under those licenses. However, MTZ 
did not report, for all of these credits, the dates of shipment for the 
related exports. In the second supplemental response, MTZ provided data 
for the DEPS/DEPB in the format requested by the Department, but did 
not include all previously reported licenses. At verification, MTZ 
noted as a minor correction and clarification, that it had erroneously 
omitted some licenses from the data set, and provided the verifiers 
with the information for those licenses identified to the Department. 
Although MTZ provided shipment data, including date, for some of the 
licenses at verification, it failed to do so for all of the licenses 
originally reported to the Department in its first supplemental 
response. Thus, there remained several licenses for which there was no 
shipment date reported. Based on the conclusion that MTZ reported its 
DEPS/DEPB licenses and credits earned as we had instructed, we 
considered that the credits were earned based on shipments made during 
the POR. Therefore, we included in our benefit calculations all of the 
DEPS/DEPB credits earned that MTZ reported.
    During the course of the administrative review, MTZ failed to 
identify reported DEPS/DEPB credits that were earned outside the POR. 
Accordingly, without the information necessary for the Department to 
identify when the benefit was conferred, we appropriately relied on the 
date of the license to calculate the benefit. In conclusion, MTZ has 
not established that the Department made a ministerial error in its 
calculation of MTZ's DEPS/DEPB benefits. As such, no changes to the 
calculations for the Final Results are warranted. See Ministerial Error 
Memo.
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(e), we have amended the final 
results of the countervailing duty administrative review of PET Film, 
Sheet, and Strip from India, for the period January 1, 2005 to December 
31, 2005, and the respondent MTZ, as noted above. As a result of these 
corrections, MTZ's rate has changed as shown below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Manufacturer/exporter                   Net subsidy rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MTZ Polyfilms, Ltd.......................  31.25%.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment and Cash Deposit Instructions

    The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days after the date of 
publication of these amended final results of review to liquidate 
shipments of subject merchandise by MTZ entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after January 1, 2005 through December 
31, 2005, at 31.25 percent ad valorem. We will also instruct CBP to 
collect cash deposits of the amended estimated countervailing duties, 
at this rate, on shipments of the subject merchandise by MTZ entered, 
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of 
publication of these amended final results of review.
    We are issuing and publishing these amended final results in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(e) of the Department's regulations.

    Dated: March 12, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-5601 Filed 3-20-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M