Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip from India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 7252-7254 [E8-2270]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
7252
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2008 / Notices
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Orders, 65 FR 26179 (May 5, 2000). On
September 19, 2003, we published an
affirmative finding of the anticircumvention inquiry. See AntiCircumvention Inquiry of the
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Orders on Certain Pasta from Italy:
Affirmative Final Determinations of
Circumvention of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Orders, 68 FR
54888 (September 19, 2003).
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
There has been one change since the
Preliminary Results which affects De
Matteis’ rate. All issues raised in this
review are addressed in the
accompanying ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Results of
the Tenth (2005) Administrative Review
of the Countervailing Duty Order on
Certain Pasta from Italy’’ from Stephen
J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration, to David M.
Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration (January 31, 2008),
which is hereby adopted by this notice
(‘‘Decision Memo’’). Parties can find a
complete discussion of all issues raised
in this review and the corresponding
recommendations in this public
memorandum which is on file in room
B–099 of the main Department building.
In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memo can be accessed directly
on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn.
The paper copy and electronic version
of the Decision Memo are identical in
content.
Final Results of Review
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated an
individual subsidy rate for Pallante and
De Matteis. See Memorandum to the
File, ‘‘Calculations for the Final Results
for De Matteis Agroalimentare S.p.A.’’
(January 31, 2008) for the revised rate
calculation for De Matteis. Pallente’s
rate did not change from the
preliminary results and Atar had no
countervailable subsidies. We did not
calculate an individual rate for Agritalia
because a review was not requested for
Agritalia. Agritalia was only asked to
participate because of the possible effect
of subsidies it received on its suppliers
who are included in this review. We
have found that Agritalia did not receive
any subsidies which affected any
suppliers’ rates. Listed below are the
programs we examined in the review
and our findings with respect to each of
these programs. For a complete analysis
of the programs found to be
countervailable, and the basis for the
Department’s determination, see the
Decision Memo. For the period January
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:01 Feb 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
shall apply to all non-reviewed
companies until a review of a company
assigned these rates is requested.
This notice serves as a reminder to
parties subject to administrative
protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their
Net subsidy responsibility concerning the
Producer/Exporter
rate
disposition of proprietary information
(percent)
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
De Matteis Agroalimentare
S.p.A .....................................
1.83 written notification of return or
Pastificio Antonio Pallante S.r.L
2.02 destruction of APO materials or
Atar S.r.l ....................................
0.00 conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
The calculations will be disclosed to
with the regulations and the terms of an
the interested parties in accordance
APO is a sanctionable violation.
with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
We are issuing and publishing these
Because the countervailing duty rate
results in accordance with sections
for Atar is zero, we will instruct U.S.
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’)
Dated: January 31, 2008.
to liquidate entries for Atar during the
David M. Spooner,
period January 1, 2005, through
Assistant Secretary for Import
December 31, 2005, without regard to
Administration.
countervailing duties in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.106(c). For Pallante
APPENDIX
and De Matteis, the Department will
List of Comments and Issues in the Decision
instruct CBP to assess countervailing
Memorandum
duties at these net subsidy rates. The
Comment 1: De Matteis Received
Department will issue appropriate
Additional Subsidies Under Law 662/96 and
instructions directly to CBP 15 days
after publication of these final results of Law 488/92.
Comment 2: The Department Should
this review.
Countervail Subsidies Received by Agritalia’s
For all other companies that were not
Cross-Owned Companies.
reviewed (except Barilla G. e R. F.lli
Comment 3: The Benefits Under Law 488/
S.p.A. and Gruppo Agricoltura Sana
92 Received by De Matteis Should be
S.r.l., which are excluded from the
Allocated Over Total Sales.
order, and Pasta Lensi S.r.l. which was
revoked from the order), the Department [FR Doc. E8–2280 Filed 2–6–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
has directed CBP to assess
countervailing duties on all entries
between January 1, 2005, and December
31, 2005, at the rates in effect at the time DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
of entry. Agritalia has been reviewed
International Trade Administration
previously and has its own exporterspecific rate of 2.92 percent.
[A–533–824]
The Department also intends to
instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of
Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate
estimated countervailing duties. Since
Film, Sheet and Strip from India: Final
the countervailable subsidy rate for Atar Results of Antidumping Duty
is zero, the Department will instruct
Administrative Review
CBP to continue to suspend liquidation
AGENCY: Import Administration,
of entries, but to collect no cash
International Trade Administration,
deposits of estimated countervailing
Department of Commerce.
duties for Atar on all shipments of the
subject merchandise that are entered, or SUMMARY: On August 7, 2007, the
Department of Commerce (Department)
withdrawn from warehouse, for
published in the Federal Register its
consumption on or after the date of
preliminary results of the administrative
publication of the final results of this
review of the antidumping duty order
administrative review.
For all non-reviewed firms (except
on polyethylene terephthalate film,
Barilla G. e R. F.lli S.p.A. and Gruppo
sheet and strip (PET film) from India.
Agricoltura Sana S.r.l., which are
See Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate
excluded from the order, and Pasta
Film, Sheet and Strip From India:
Lensi S.r.l. which was revoked from the Preliminary Results of Antidumping
order), we will instruct CBP to collect
Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR
cash deposits of estimated
44086 (August 7, 2007) (Preliminary
countervailing duties at the most recent Results).
company-specific or all-others rate
The review covers one respondent,
applicable to the company. These rates
MTZ Polyfilms, Ltd. (MTZ).
1, 2005, through December 31, 2005, we
find the net subsidy rates for the
producers/exporters under review to be
those specified in the chart shown
below:
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM
07FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2008 / Notices
Based on our analysis of comments
received on the Preliminary Results, we
have made changes to our calculations
for MTZ. Therefore, the final results
differ from the preliminary results of
review. The final weighted-average
dumping margin for MTZ is listed in the
‘‘Final Results of the Review’’ section
below.
EFFECTIVE DATES:
February 7, 2007.
Jun
Jack Zhao or Martha Douthit, AD/CVD
Operations, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1396 or
(202) 482–5050, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Background
On August 7, 2007, the Department
published the preliminary results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on PET film
from India. In accordance with 19 CFR.
351.309(c)(ii), we invited parties to
comment on our Preliminary Results.
On September 6, 2007, MTZ, the sole
respondent in this administrative
review, submitted a case brief relating to
one issue: Adjustment of export price by
the amount of countervailing duties
imposed on PET film. No rebuttal brief
was filed by any other interested party,
and no hearing was requested. We have
now completed the administrative
review in accordance with section 751
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
(the Act).
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Period of Review
The period of review (POR) is July 1,
2005 through June 30, 2006.
Scope of the Order
For purposes of this administrative
review, the products covered 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. Since the order
was published, there has been one scope
determination, dated August 25, 2003.
In this determination, requested by
International Packaging Films, Inc., the
Department determined that tracing and
drafting film is outside of the scope of
the order. Imports of PET Film are
classifiable under 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:02 Feb 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
7253
written scope of this proceeding is
dispositive.
after the date of publication of these
final results of review.
Analysis of Comments Received
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 PET Film from India entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the date of
publication, as provided by section
751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit
rate for MTZ will be the rate shown
above; (2) for previously reviewed or
investigated companies not covered in
this review, 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 lessthan-fair-value (LTFV) investigation, but
the manufacturer is a firm covered in
this review, the cash deposit rate will be
the rate established for the most recent
period for the manufacturer of the
subject merchandise; and (4) if neither
the exporter nor the manufacturer is a
firm covered in this or any previous
proceeding conducted by the
Department, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be 5.71 percent, which is
the all others rate established in the less
than fair value investigation (24.14
percent), adjusted for the export subsidy
rate found in the companion
countervailing duty investigation. These
cash deposit requirements, when
imposed, shall remain in effect until
further notice.
All issues raised by interested parties
in the case briefs are listed in the
Appendix to this notice, and addressed
in the Memorandum from Stephen J.
Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration, to David M.
Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order
on PET Film from India (Decision
Memorandum), which is hereby
adopted by this notice. Parties can find
a complete discussion of all issues
raised in this administrative review in
this public memorandum, which is on
file in the Central Records Unit, Room
B–099 of the main Department building.
In addition, a complete version of the
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the Internet at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/. The paper copy and
electronic version of the Decision
Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of comments
received from MTZ, we have made
changes to the margin calculation used
in the Preliminary Results, taking into
consideration the amount of
countervailing duties imposed on
subject merchandise to offset export
subsidies, in accordance with section
772(c)(1)(C)of the Act.
Final Results of Review
We determine that the following
percentage margin exists for the period
July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006:
Manufacturer/Exporter
Weightedaverage
margin
(%)
MTZ Polyfilms, Ltd ................
0.00
Duty Assessment
The Department shall determine, and
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries. The Department
will issue appraisement instructions
directly to U.S. Customs and Border
Protection. For duty-assessment
purposes, we calculated importerspecific assessment rates by dividing the
dumping margins calculated for each
importer by the total entered value of
sales for each importer during the
period of review.
The Department intends to issue
assessment instructions to CBP 15 days
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Reimbursement of Duties
This notice also 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 or countervailing
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 the antidumping
duties or countervailing duties occurred
and the subsequent assessment of
double antidumping duties or
countervailing duties.
Notification of Interested Parties
This notice also serves as a 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, which continues
to govern business proprietary
information in this segment of the
E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM
07FEN1
7254
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2008 / Notices
proceeding. 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) of the Act.
Dated: January 31, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Issues in the Decision Memorandum
Appendix 1
1. Adjustment of Export Price (EP) by the
countervailing duties imposed on PET Film.
[FR Doc. E8–2270 Filed 2–6–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–909]
Certain Steel Nails From the People’s
Republic of China: Amended
Preliminary Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATES: February 7, 2008.
SUMMARY: On January 23, 2008, the
Department of Commerce (the
‘‘Department’’) published the
preliminary determination of sales at
less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’) in the
antidumping investigation of certain
steel nails from the People’s Republic of
China (‘‘PRC’’). See Certain Steel Nails
From the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value and Partial
Affirmative Determination of Critical
Circumstances and Postponement of
Final Determination, 73 FR 3928
(January 23, 2008) (‘‘Preliminary
Determination’’). We are amending our
preliminary determination to correct
certain ministerial errors with respect to
the antidumping duty margin
calculation for Illinois Tool Works Inc.
and Paslode Fasteners (Shanghai) Co.,
Ltd. (collectively, ‘‘Paslode’’). The
corrections to Paslode’s margin also
affect the margin applied to companies
granted separate-rate status.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nicole Bankhead, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 9, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:02 Feb 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
Washington, DC, 20230; telephone:
(202) 482–9068.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
January 23, 2008, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
preliminary determination that certain
steel nails (‘‘nails’’) from the PRC are
being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at LTFV, as provided in
section 733 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (‘‘the Act’’). See Preliminary
Determination.
On January 22, 2008, Paslode and
Petitioners1 filed timely allegations of
ministerial errors contained in the
Department’s Preliminary
Determination. After reviewing the
allegations, we have determined that the
Preliminary Determination included
significant ministerial errors. Therefore,
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(e),
we have made changes, as described
below, to the Preliminary
Determination.
Period of Investigation
The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is
October 1, 2006, through March 31,
2007. This period corresponds to the
two most recent fiscal quarters prior to
the month of the filing of the petition,
May 2007. See 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
Scope of Investigation
The merchandise covered by this
investigation includes certain steel nails
having a shaft length up to 12 inches.
Certain steel nails include, but are not
limited to, nails made of round wire and
nails that are cut. Certain steel nails may
be of one piece construction or
constructed of two or more pieces.
Certain steel nails may be produced
from any type of steel, and have a
variety of finishes, heads, shanks, point
types, shaft lengths and shaft diameters.
Finishes include, but are not limited to,
coating in vinyl, zinc (galvanized,
whether by electroplating or hotdipping one or more times), phosphate
cement, and paint. Head styles include,
but are not limited to, flat, projection,
cupped, oval, brad, headless, double,
countersunk, and sinker. Shank styles
include, but are not limited to, smooth,
barbed, screw threaded, ring shank and
fluted shank styles. Screw-threaded
nails subject to this proceeding are
driven using direct force and not by
turning the fastener using a tool that
engages with the head. Point styles
1Mid Continent Nail Corporation, Davis Wire
Corporation, Gerdau Ameristeel Corporation (Atlas
Steel & Wire Division), Maze Nails (Division of
W.H. Maze Company), Treasure Coast Fasteners,
Inc., and the United Steel, Paper and Forestry,
Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial
and Service Workers International Union
(collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
include, but are not limited to,
diamond, blunt, needle, chisel and no
point. Finished nails may be sold in
bulk, or they may be collated into strips
or coils using materials such as plastic,
paper, or wire. Certain steel nails
subject to this proceeding are currently
classified under the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’) subheadings 7317.00.55,
7317.00.65 and 7317.00.75.
Excluded from the scope of this
proceeding are roofing nails of all
lengths and diameter, whether collated
or in bulk, and whether or not
galvanized. Steel roofing nails are
specifically enumerated and identified
in ASTM Standard F 1667 (2005
revision) as Type I, Style 20 nails. Also
excluded from the scope of this
proceeding are corrugated nails. A
corrugated nail is made of a small strip
of corrugated steel with sharp points on
one side. Also excluded from the scope
of this proceeding are fasteners suitable
for use in powder-actuated hand tools,
not threaded and threaded, which are
currently classified under HTSUS
7317.00.20 and 7317.00.30. Also
excluded from the scope of this
proceeding are thumb tacks, which are
currently classified under HTSUS
7317.00.10.00. Also excluded from the
scope of this proceeding are certain
brads and finish nails that are equal to
or less than 0.0720 inches in shank
diameter, round or rectangular in cross
section, between 0.375 inches and 2.5
inches in length, and that are collated
with adhesive or polyester film tape
backed with a heat seal adhesive.
While the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the
scope of these investigations is
dispositive.
Significant Ministerial Error
Ministerial errors are defined in
section 735(e) of the Act as ‘‘errors in
addition, subtraction, or other
arithmetic function, clerical errors
resulting from inaccurate copying,
duplication, or the like, and any other
type of unintentional error which the
administering authority considers
ministerial.’’ Section 351.224(e) of the
Department’s regulations provides that
the Department ‘‘will analyze any
comments received and, if appropriate,
correct any significant ministerial error
by amending the preliminary
determination* * *.’’ A significant
ministerial error is defined as an error,
the correction of which, singly or in
combination with other errors, would
result in (1) a change of at least five
absolute percentage points in, but not
less than 25 percent of, the weighted-
E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM
07FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 26 (Thursday, February 7, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7252-7254]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2270]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 7, 2007, the Department of Commerce (Department)
published in the Federal Register its preliminary results of the
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on polyethylene
terephthalate film, sheet and strip (PET film) from India. See Certain
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India:
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 72 FR
44086 (August 7, 2007) (Preliminary Results).
The review covers one respondent, MTZ Polyfilms, Ltd. (MTZ).
[[Page 7253]]
Based on our analysis of comments received on the Preliminary
Results, we have made changes to our calculations for MTZ. Therefore,
the final results differ from the preliminary results of review. The
final weighted-average dumping margin for MTZ is listed in the ``Final
Results of the Review'' section below.
EFFECTIVE DATES: February 7, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jun Jack Zhao or Martha Douthit, AD/
CVD Operations, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1396 or (202)
482-5050, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 7, 2007, the Department published the preliminary results
of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on PET film
from India. In accordance with 19 CFR. 351.309(c)(ii), we invited
parties to comment on our Preliminary Results. On September 6, 2007,
MTZ, the sole respondent in this administrative review, submitted a
case brief relating to one issue: Adjustment of export price by the
amount of countervailing duties imposed on PET film. No rebuttal brief
was filed by any other interested party, and no hearing was requested.
We have now completed the administrative review in accordance with
section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Period of Review
The period of review (POR) is July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006.
Scope of the Order
For purposes of this administrative review, the products covered
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. Since the order was published, there
has been one scope determination, dated August 25, 2003. In this
determination, requested by International Packaging Films, Inc., the
Department determined that tracing and drafting film is outside of the
scope of the order. Imports of PET Film are classifiable under 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 scope of this proceeding is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised by interested parties in the case briefs are
listed in the Appendix to this notice, and addressed in the Memorandum
from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on PET Film from India (Decision
Memorandum), which is hereby adopted by this notice. Parties can find a
complete discussion of all issues raised in this administrative review
in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records
Unit, Room B-099 of the main Department building. In addition, a
complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on
the Internet at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/. The paper copy and electronic
version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of comments received from MTZ, we have made
changes to the margin calculation used in the Preliminary Results,
taking into consideration the amount of countervailing duties imposed
on subject merchandise to offset export subsidies, in accordance with
section 772(c)(1)(C)of the Act.
Final Results of Review
We determine that the following percentage margin exists for the
period July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2006:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
Manufacturer/Exporter average margin
(%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MTZ Polyfilms, Ltd..................................... 0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duty Assessment
The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border
Protection shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.
The Department will issue appraisement instructions directly to U.S.
Customs and Border Protection. For duty-assessment purposes, we
calculated importer-specific assessment rates by dividing the dumping
margins calculated for each importer by the total entered value of
sales for each importer during the period of review.
The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15
days after the date of publication of these final results of review.
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 PET Film from India entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as
provided by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for
MTZ will be the rate shown above; (2) for previously reviewed or
investigated companies not covered in this review, 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 less-than-fair-value (LTFV)
investigation, but the manufacturer is a firm covered in this review,
the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent
period for the manufacturer of the subject merchandise; and (4) if
neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or
any previous proceeding conducted by the Department, the cash deposit
rate will continue to be 5.71 percent, which is the all others rate
established in the less than fair value investigation (24.14 percent),
adjusted for the export subsidy rate found in the companion
countervailing duty investigation. These cash deposit requirements,
when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.
Reimbursement of Duties
This notice also 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 or countervailing
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 the antidumping duties or
countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double
antidumping duties or countervailing duties.
Notification of Interested Parties
This notice also serves as a 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, which continues
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the
[[Page 7254]]
proceeding. 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) of the Act.
Dated: January 31, 2008.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Issues in the Decision Memorandum
Appendix 1
1. Adjustment of Export Price (EP) by the countervailing duties
imposed on PET Film.
[FR Doc. E8-2270 Filed 2-6-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
