Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 6530-6531 [E7-2367]
Download as PDF
6530
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 28 / Monday, February 12, 2007 / Notices
assess the resulting percentage margin
against the entered customs values for
the subject merchandise on each of that
importer’s entries during the review
period. See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Cash–Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements
will be effective upon publication of
this notice of final results of
administrative review for all shipments
of the subject merchandise entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the date of
publication, consistent with section
751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the cash–deposit
rates for the reviewed company will be
the rate shown above; (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 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; (4) the cash–deposit
rate for all other manufacturers or
exporters will continue to be 5.19
percent, the ‘‘All Others’’ rate from the
amended final determination of the
LTFV investigation published on
September 15, 1998. See Notice of
Amendment of Final Determination of
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Antidumping Duty Order: Stainless
Steel Wire Rod From Korea, 63 FR
49331 (September 15, 1998).
These deposit requirements shall
remain in effect until publication of the
final results of the next administrative
review.
This notice serves as a 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 these
review periods. 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.
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
notification of the return or destruction
of APO materials or conversion to
judicial protective order is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:52 Feb 09, 2007
Jkt 211001
regulations and the terms of an APO is
a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these
final results of review in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the
Act.
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0197,
(202) 482–1395, or (202) 482–1398,
respectively.
Dated: February 1, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
Background
Appendix
Comments and Responses
1. Offsetting of Negative Margins
2. Model Match
3. Inland–Freight Expenses
4. Affiliated–Party Inputs
5. General and Administrative Expenses
[FR Doc. E7–2227 Filed 2–9–03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(C–533–825)
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film,
Sheet, and Strip from India: Final
Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 8, 2006, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published in the Federal
Register its preliminary results of
administrative review of the
countervailing duty order on
polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet,
and strip (PET–Film) from India for the
period January 1, 2004, through
December 31, 2004. See Notice of
Preliminary Results and Rescission, in
Part, of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review: Polyethylene
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip
from India, 71 FR 45037 (August 8,
2006) (Preliminary Results). Based on
the results of our verification and our
analysis of the comments received, the
Department has revised the net subsidy
rates for the respondents: Jindal
Polyester Limited/Jindal Poly Films
Limited of India (Jindal) and Polyplex
Corporation Ltd. (Polyplex). The final
net subsidy rates for the reviewed
companies are listed below in the
section entitled ‘‘Final Results of
Review.’’
AGENCY:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
February 12, 2007.
Elfi
Blum, Nicholas Czajkowski, or Toni
Page, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6,
Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Since the publication of the
Preliminary Results, the following
events have occurred. As provided in
782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the Department
conducted a verification of the
questionnaire responses submitted by
the Government of India (GOI),
Polyplex, and Jindal from October 3
through October 13, 2006. We used
standard verification procedures,
including on–site examination of
relevant records and original source
documents. Our verification results are
outlined in the public and proprietary
versions of the verification memoranda,
which are on file in the Central Records
Unit (CRU), room B–099 of the Main
Commerce Building. See ‘‘Verification
of the Questionnaire Responses
Submitted by the Government of India
(GOI)’’(December 13, 2006) (GOI
Verification Report); ‘‘Verification of the
Questionnaire Responses Submitted by
Polyplex Corporation Ltd. (Polyplex)’’
(December 13, 2006) (Polyplex
Verification Report); and ‘‘Verification
of the Questionnaire Responses
Submitted by Jindal Polyester Ltd.
(Jindal)’’ (December 13, 2006) (Jindal
Verification Report). On December 28,
2006, Dupont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi
Polyester Film of America, and Toray
Plastics (America), Inc. (collectively, the
Petitioners), Polyplex and Jindal, filed
case briefs. Polyplex, Jindal, and
Petitioners filed rebuttal briefs on
January 4, 2006.
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.
E:\FR\FM\12FEN1.SGM
12FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 28 / Monday, February 12, 2007 / Notices
Analysis of Comments Received
We gave interested parties an
opportunity to comment on our
Preliminary Results following the
release of our verification reports for the
GOI, Polyplex, and Jindal. The issues
raised in all case and rebuttal briefs by
parties to this administrative review are
addressed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the 2004
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Review of Polyethylene Terephthalate
Film, Sheet, and Strip from India, from
Stephen J. Claeys to David M. Spooner,
dated February 5, 2007 (Issues and
Decision Memorandum), which is
hereby adopted by this notice. The
Issues and Decision Memorandum also
contains a complete analysis of the
programs covered by this review and the
methodologies used to calculate the
subsidy rates. A list of the comments
raised in the briefs and addressed in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum is
appended to this notice. The Issues and
Decision Memorandum is on file in the
CRU, and can be accessed directly on
the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our verification and analysis
of comments received, we have made
some adjustments in the methodology
that was used in the Preliminary Results
for calculating both Jindal’s and
Polyplex’s subsidy rates under several
programs, and adjusted the cash deposit
rate to reflect the termination of the
80HHC Program. All changes are
discussed in detail in the Issues and
Manufacturer/Exporter
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
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
final results of review. The Department
will instruct CBP to collect cash
deposits of estimated countervailing
duties as detailed above, based upon the
f.o.b. invoice price on all shipments of
the subject merchandise from the
producers/exporters under review,
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the date of
publication of the final results of this
administrative review.
We will also instruct CBP to continue
to collect cash deposits for non–
reviewed companies at the most recent
company–specific rate applicable to the
company. Accordingly, the cash deposit
rate that will be applied to non–
reviewed companies covered by this
order will be the rate for that company
established in the investigation. See
Notice of Final Affirmative
Countervailing Duty Determination:
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet,
and Strip (PET Film) From India, 67 FR
34905 (May 16, 2002). The ‘‘all others’’
rate shall apply to all non–reviewed
companies until a review of a company
assigned this rate is requested.
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:52 Feb 09, 2007
Jkt 211001
Decision Memorandum. In addition, the
Department finds that the 80HHC Tax
Exemption program was terminated in
accordance with the provisions of 19
CFR 351.526. Therefore, the Department
will include the subsidy rate from the
80HHC Tax Exemption program in the
assessment rate but exclude it from the
cash deposit rate.
Final Results of Review
In accordance with sections
777A(e)(1) and 751(a)(I)(A) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we calculated
individual ad valorem subsidy rates for
the producers/exporters, Jindal and
Polyplex, the only producers/exporters
subject to this review for the calendar
year 2004, which is the POR for this
administrative review.
Net Subsidy Rate
Jindal ............................................................................................
Polyplex .......................................................................................
Dated: February 5, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
Appendix I
List Of Issues Addressed In The Issues
And Decision Memorandum
Comment 1: Inclusion of Deemed Export
Sales in the Total Value of Export Sales
Comment 2: Inclusion of Non–Subject
Merchandise in the Subsidy
Calculations
Comment 3: Countervailibility of the
Advance License Program(ALP)
Comment 4: Export Promotion Capital
Goods Scheme Calculations
Comment 5: Sale of the DFRC License
Comment 6: Loans from Government–
Owned Special Purpose Banks
Comment 7: State Sales Tax Incentive
Programs
Comment 8: Target Plus Scheme(TPS)
[FR Doc. E7–2367 Filed 2–9–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Cash Deposit Rate
14.28 %
9.20 %
written notification of return/
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.
This administrative review and notice
are issued and published in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of
the Act.
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6531
13.99 %
7.60 %
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[I.D. 013007B]
Endangered and Threatened Species;
Take of Anadromous Fish
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NOAA Fisheries), National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), U. S.
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of receipt of a permit
application; request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
NOAA Fisheries has received an
application for a permit to conduct
research for scientific purposes from
Freddy Otte, City of San Luis Obispo,
California. The requested permit would
affect the South Central California Coast
Distinct Population Segment of
threatened steelhead trout
(Oncorhynchus mykiss). The public is
hereby notified of the availability of the
permit application for review and
comment before NOAA Fisheries either
approves or disapproves the
application.
DATES: Written comments on the permit
application must be received at the
appropriate address or fax number (see
ADDRESSES) on or before March 14,
2007.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the
permit application should be sent to
Matt McGoogan, Protected Resources
Division, NOAA Fisheries, 501 W.
E:\FR\FM\12FEN1.SGM
12FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 28 (Monday, February 12, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6530-6531]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-2367]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(C-533-825)
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India:
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 8, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
published in the Federal Register its preliminary results of
administrative review of the countervailing duty order on polyethylene
terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (PET-Film) from India for the
period January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2004. See Notice of
Preliminary Results and Rescission, in Part, of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and
Strip from India, 71 FR 45037 (August 8, 2006) (Preliminary Results).
Based on the results of our verification and our analysis of the
comments received, the Department has revised the net subsidy rates for
the respondents: Jindal Polyester Limited/Jindal Poly Films Limited of
India (Jindal) and Polyplex Corporation Ltd. (Polyplex). The final net
subsidy rates for the reviewed companies are listed below in the
section entitled ``Final Results of Review.''
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 12, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi Blum, Nicholas Czajkowski, or
Toni Page, 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, (202) 482-1395, or (202) 482-1398, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Since the publication of the Preliminary Results, the following
events have occurred. As provided in 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (the Act), the Department conducted a verification of the
questionnaire responses submitted by the Government of India (GOI),
Polyplex, and Jindal from October 3 through October 13, 2006. We used
standard verification procedures, including on-site examination of
relevant records and original source documents. Our verification
results are outlined in the public and proprietary versions of the
verification memoranda, which are on file in the Central Records Unit
(CRU), room B-099 of the Main Commerce Building. See ``Verification of
the Questionnaire Responses Submitted by the Government of India
(GOI)''(December 13, 2006) (GOI Verification Report); ``Verification of
the Questionnaire Responses Submitted by Polyplex Corporation Ltd.
(Polyplex)'' (December 13, 2006) (Polyplex Verification Report); and
``Verification of the Questionnaire Responses Submitted by Jindal
Polyester Ltd. (Jindal)'' (December 13, 2006) (Jindal Verification
Report). On December 28, 2006, Dupont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi
Polyester Film of America, and Toray Plastics (America), Inc.
(collectively, the Petitioners), Polyplex and Jindal, filed case
briefs. Polyplex, Jindal, and Petitioners filed rebuttal briefs on
January 4, 2006.
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.
[[Page 6531]]
Analysis of Comments Received
We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on our
Preliminary Results following the release of our verification reports
for the GOI, Polyplex, and Jindal. The issues raised in all case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this administrative review are addressed
in the Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 2004 Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review of Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and
Strip from India, from Stephen J. Claeys to David M. Spooner, dated
February 5, 2007 (Issues and Decision Memorandum), which is hereby
adopted by this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum also
contains a complete analysis of the programs covered by this review and
the methodologies used to calculate the subsidy rates. A list of the
comments raised in the briefs and addressed in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum is appended to this notice. The Issues and Decision
Memorandum is on file in the CRU, and can be accessed directly on the
Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our verification and analysis of comments received, we
have made some adjustments in the methodology that was used in the
Preliminary Results for calculating both Jindal's and Polyplex's
subsidy rates under several programs, and adjusted the cash deposit
rate to reflect the termination of the 80HHC Program. All changes are
discussed in detail in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. In addition,
the Department finds that the 80HHC Tax Exemption program was
terminated in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 351.526.
Therefore, the Department will include the subsidy rate from the 80HHC
Tax Exemption program in the assessment rate but exclude it from the
cash deposit rate.
Final Results of Review
In accordance with sections 777A(e)(1) and 751(a)(I)(A) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we calculated individual ad valorem subsidy
rates for the producers/exporters, Jindal and Polyplex, the only
producers/exporters subject to this review for the calendar year 2004,
which is the POR for this administrative review.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacturer/Exporter Net Subsidy Rate Cash Deposit Rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jindal................................ 14.28 [percnt] 13.99 [percnt]
Polyplex.............................. 9.20 [percnt] 7.60 [percnt]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 final results of review. The Department will
instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing
duties as detailed above, based upon the f.o.b. invoice price on all
shipments of the subject merchandise from the producers/exporters under
review, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or
after the date of publication of the final results of this
administrative review.
We will also instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits for
non-reviewed companies at the most recent company-specific rate
applicable to the company. Accordingly, the cash deposit rate that will
be applied to non-reviewed companies covered by this order will be the
rate for that company established in the investigation. See Notice of
Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Polyethylene
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip (PET Film) From India, 67 FR 34905
(May 16, 2002). The ``all others'' rate shall apply to all non-reviewed
companies until a review of a company assigned this rate is requested.
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written
notification of return/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.
This administrative review and notice are issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: February 5, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
Appendix I
List Of Issues Addressed In The Issues And Decision Memorandum
Comment 1: Inclusion of Deemed Export Sales in the Total Value of
Export Sales
Comment 2: Inclusion of Non-Subject Merchandise in the Subsidy
Calculations
Comment 3: Countervailibility of the Advance License Program(ALP)
Comment 4: Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme Calculations
Comment 5: Sale of the DFRC License
Comment 6: Loans from Government-Owned Special Purpose Banks
Comment 7: State Sales Tax Incentive Programs
Comment 8: Target Plus Scheme(TPS)
[FR Doc. E7-2367 Filed 2-9-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S