[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 40 (Monday, March 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11160-11161]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04273]



[[Page 11160]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-824]


Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) published its 
preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping 
duty (AD) order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip 
(PET Film) from India on August 25, 2014.\1\ The period of review is 
July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2013. This review covers respondents 
Jindal Poly Films Limited (Jindal) and SRF Limited (SRF). For the final 
results, we continue to find that Jindal did, and that SRF did not, 
make sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From 
India: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 79 FR 50620 (August 25, 2014) 
(Preliminary Results).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: March 2, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myrna Lobo, AD/CVD Operations, Office 
VII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-2371.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On August 25, 2014, the Department published the Preliminary 
Results. We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary 
Results. Jindal submitted a case brief on October 1, 2014. SRF 
submitted a letter in lieu of a case brief on the same day, stating 
that it agrees with the Preliminary Results.
    On September 5, 2014, the Department issued a supplemental 
questionnaire to Jindal,\2\ and received a response from Jindal on 
September 12, 2014.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Department letter to Jindal, ``2012-2013 Administrative 
Review of Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film Sheet and Strip from 
India, Second Supplemental Questionnaire,'' dated September 5, 2014.
    \3\ See Letter from Jindal Poly Films Ltd., ``Polyethylene 
Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip from India/Antidumping Duty/
Jindal Poly Films Ltd./Response to Second Supplemental 
Questionnaire,'' dated September 12, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 18, 2014, the Department extended the deadline for 
issuance of these final results from December 23, 2014 to February 23, 
2015.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Memorandum to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Operations, 
``Polyethylene Terphthalate Film, Sheet and Strip from India: 
Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review--2012-2013'' (November 18, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the AD 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 3920.62.00.90. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience 
and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of the 
antidumping duty order is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case brief are addressed in the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum. A list of issues raised and to which we respond in 
the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as an 
Appendix. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and 
is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System 
(ACCESS).\5\ ACCESS is available to 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 Issues and Decision Memorandum can 
be accessed directly on the Internet at http://trade.gov/enforcement/. 
The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions 
of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and Compliance changed the 
name of Enforcement and Compliance's AD and CVD Centralized 
Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS'') to ACCESS. The Web site 
location was changed from http://iaaccess.trade.gov to http://access.trade.gov. The Final Rule changing the references to the 
Regulations can be found at 79 FR 69046 (November 20, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on a review of the record and comments received from 
interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we have made no 
changes to SRF's or Jindal's calculations. However, both SRF's and 
Jindal's final rate in the companion countervailing duty administrative 
review has changed since the preliminary results of that review.\6\ 
Since the changes in the countervailing duty rates are partially 
attributable to changes in their export subsidies, we have adjusted 
SRF's and Jindal's reported U.S. prices and, accordingly, recalculated 
the weighted-average dumping margins for Jindal and SRF for these final 
results.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From 
India: Preliminary Results and Partial Recission of Countervailing 
Duty Administrative Reivew; 2012, 79 FR 50616, 50617 (August 25, 
2014).
    \7\ See Memoranda to Thomas Gilgunn, Program Manager ``Analysis 
Memorandum for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review of Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and 
Strip from India: Jindal Poly Films Limited, and ``Analysis 
Memorandum for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review of Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and 
Strip from India: SRF Limited,'' both dated concurrently with these 
final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Results of Review

    As a result of our review, we determine the following weighted-
average dumping margins exist for the period July 1, 2012, through June 
30, 2013.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Weighted-
                                                                average
                    Producer or exporter                        dumping
                                                                margin
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jindal Poly Films Limited...................................        1.89
SRF Limited.................................................        0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment Rates

    The Department determines, 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 and SRF. The Department will issue assessment 
instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final 
results of review. Where a respondent's weighted-average dumping margin 
is not zero or de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent), the Department 
will calculate importer-specific assessment rates. Where the respondent 
reported the entered value for its sales, we calculated importer-
specific ad valorem assessment rates based on the ratio of the total 
amount of dumping calculated for the examined sales to the total 
entered value of those same sales.\8\ However, where the respondent did 
not report the entered value for its sales, we

[[Page 11161]]

will calculate importer-specific per-unit duty assessment rates. We 
will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries covered by this review where the actual or estimated ad valorem 
assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is not 
zero or de minimis. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct 
CBP to liquidate without regard to antidumping duties any entries for 
which the assessment rate is zero or de minimis.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b).
    \9\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for the company 
under review will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin 
established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is 
de minimis, i.e., less than 0.5 percent, then the cash deposit rate 
will be zero); (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies 
not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the 
company-specific rate published in the completed segment for the most 
recent period for that company; (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 in the completed segment 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 other 
completed segment of this proceeding, then 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 to Importers

    This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) 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.

Notifications to Interested Parties

    This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility 
concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under 
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 terms of an APO is a sanctionable 
violation.
    The Department is issuing and publishing these final results of 
administrative review in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 
777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: February 22, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

I. Summary
II. Background
    Scope of the Order
III. Discussion of the Issues
    Comment 1: Quantity Discount Adjustment
    Comment 2: Consideration of an Alternative Comparison Method in 
Administrative Reviews
    Comment 3: Differential Pricing Analysis

[FR Doc. 2015-04273 Filed 2-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P