Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From Taiwan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 9745-9747 [2011-3892]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2011 / Notices
For more information, call Yvette
Springer at (202) 482–2813.
Dated: February 16, 2011.
Yvette Springer,
Committee Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2011–3914 Filed 2–18–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–JT–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–583–837]
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film,
Sheet, and Strip From Taiwan: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 16, 2010, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on
polyethylene terephthalate film (PET
Film) from Taiwan. See Polyethylene
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip
From Taiwan: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 75 FR 49902 (August 16, 2010)
(Preliminary Results). The review was
requested by DuPont Teijin Films,
Mitsubishi Polyester Film of America,
SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics (America),
Inc. (collectively, Petitioners). This
review covers the following producers/
exporters of the subject merchandise:
Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, Ltd. (Nan
Ya), and Shinkong Synthetic Fibers
Corporation (SSFC) and Shinkong
Materials Technology Co., Ltd. (SMTC)
(collectively, Shinkong). The period of
review (POR) is July 1, 2008, through
June 30, 2009. Based on the results of
our analysis of the comments received,
we have made changes to the
preliminary results, which are discussed
in the ‘‘Changes Since the Preliminary
Results’’ section, below. For the final
dumping margins, see the ‘‘Final Results
of Review’’ section, below.
DATES: Effective Date: February 22,
2011.
AGENCY:
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gene Calvert or Jun Jack Zhao, 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) 428–3586 or (202) 428–
1396, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Feb 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Background
On August 16, 2010, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
Preliminary Results. In the Preliminary
Results, the Department preliminarily
determined that, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.401(f), SSFC and SMTC should be
treated as a single entity for purposes of
calculating an antidumping margin. The
Department also found that despite the
passing of a single family member, Nan
Ya was still affiliated with three U.S.
customers through a family grouping.
Subsequent to the publication of the
Preliminary Results, these affiliated U.S.
customers submitted revised sales
datasets, as requested by the
Department, to correct information
regarding their reported product
matching information, and to correct
problems preventing the accurate
consolidation of their sales data with
Nan Ya’s datasets. As a result, Nan Ya’s
margin has changed for these final
results.
On December 10, 2010, the
Department extended the deadline for
issuing the final results until no later
than February 14, 2011. See
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet,
and Strip From Taiwan: Extension of
Time Limit for Final Results of the
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review, 75 FR 76954 (December 10,
2010).
On December 22, 2010, the
Department determined that amorphous
polyethylene terephthalate (APET) film
products that are not biaxially-oriented,
such as the APET products produced by
Nan Ya, are not covered by the scope of
the antidumping order on PET Film
from Taiwan. See Memorandum from
Barbara E. Tillman, Director, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 6, to Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, ‘‘Polyethylene
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip
from Taiwan: Final Scope Ruling on
Amorphous Polyethylene Terephthalate
Film,’’ December 22, 2010 (Scope
Memorandum). The Department
reached this conclusion after analyzing
findings of the U.S. International Trade
Commission regarding the delimiting
nature of biaxial-orientation as a
product characteristic of subject PET
Film, as well as the Department’s
previous determination that biaxiallyoriented APET is not within the scope
of the antidumping duty (AD) order on
PET Film from the People’s Republic of
China (PRC), for which the scope is
essentially identical to the scope in the
subject case, except for language
excluding Roller transport cleaning film,
and tracing and drafting film from the
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9745
PRC AD order. See Memorandum to
John M. Andersen, ‘‘Polyethylene
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip
from the People’s Republic of China:
Final Scope Ruling on Amorphous
Polyethylene Terephthalate Sheet,
Glycol-modified Polyethylene
Terephthalate Sheet, and Co-extruded
Amorphous Polyethylene Terephthalate
Sheet with Glycol-modified
Polyethylene Terephthalate Sheets on
the Outer Surfaces,’’ January 7, 2010. As
we noted in the Scope Memorandum,
the exclusionary language referenced
above was not relevant to the scope
ruling with respect to the instant
proceeding. Both Nan Ya and Shinkong
informed the Department that they did
not report sales of any merchandise
within the scope ruling. Thus, no
adjustments were needed to the
Preliminary Results as a result of the
scope ruling for either company.
The Department noted in the
Preliminary Results that additional
supplemental questions regarding
quarterly cost information had been
issued to both Nan Ya and Shinkong to
determine whether it was appropriate to
use shorter cost averaging periods in
calculating cost of production and
constructed value. After reviewing
responses to these questionnaires, on
December 23, 2010, the Department
issued post-preliminary results of
review and determined that the use of
an alternative cost averaging
methodology (i.e., quarterly cost) was
not warranted. Thus, the postpreliminary results of review resulted in
no changes to either respondent’s AD
margin. See Memorandum from Mark
Hoadley, Program Manager, Office 6, to
Christian Marsh, Acting Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, ‘‘2008–2009
Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Duty Order on
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film
from Taiwan: Post-Preliminary Analysis
and Calculation Memorandum for Nan
Ya Plastics Corporation, Ltd. (Nan Ya)
and Shinkong Synthetic Fibers
Corporation (Shinkong)’’ (PostPreliminary Analysis Memorandum),
December 23, 2010.
With the release of the PostPreliminary Analysis Memorandum, the
Department notified interested parties
that they were to file their case briefs
with the Department by January 7, 2011,
and rebuttal briefs were to be filed by
January 13, 2011, in accordance with 19
CFR 351.309(d)(1). See Memorandum
from Gene Calvert, International Trade
Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 6 to All Interested
Parties, ‘‘Deadlines for the Submission
of Case Briefs and Rebuttal Briefs for the
E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM
22FEN1
9746
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2011 / Notices
Final Results in the Administrative
Review,’’ December 27, 2010. The
Department received a timely case brief
on January 7, 2011 from Petitioners
raising certain issues with regard to
Shinkong. Shinkong filed a rebuttal
brief with the Department on January
13, 2011. Based on our analysis of the
comments received, the weighted
average margin for Shinkong has
changed from the calculated margin in
the Preliminary Results.
Period of Review
The POR is July 1, 2008, through June
30, 2009.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the
antidumping order are all gauges of raw,
pretreated, or primed polyethylene
terephthalate 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 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 proceeding is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
The issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this
administrative review are addressed in
the Memorandum from Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, ‘‘Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review of Polyethylene
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip
from Taiwan: Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Results’’
(Decision Memorandum), dated
concurrently with this notice, which is
hereby adopted by this notice. A list of
the issues addressed in the Decision
Memorandum is appended to this
notice. The Decision Memorandum is
on file in the Department’s Central
Records Unit (Room 7046 in the main
Department of Commerce building), and
can be accessed directly on the Internet
at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper
copy and electronic version of the
Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of the
comments received, we have made
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Feb 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
adjustments to our margin calculations
for Shinkong. Specifically, we have
recalculated Shinkong’s general and
administrative (G&A) expenses,
including certain costs associated with
the sale of supplies, and excluding
packing costs. We have also altered the
manner in which we combined the G&A
expenses of SSFC and SMTC (i.e., the
two companies collapsed to form
‘‘Shinkong’’). Finally, we limited
Shinkong’s sales date to no later than
shipment date. These adjustments are
discussed in detail in the Decision
Memorandum referenced above.
their merchandise was destined for the
United States. In such instances, we will
instruct CBP to liquidate non-reviewed
entries at the all-others rate of 2.40
percent from the investigation if there is
no rate for the intermediate
company(ies) involved in the
transaction. See Notice of Amended
Final Antidumping Duty Determination
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Antidumping Duty Order: Polyethylene
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip
(PET Film) from Taiwan, 67 FR 44174
(July 1, 2002) (Investigation Final
Determination).
Final Results of Review
As a result of our review, we
determine that the following weightedaverage margins exist for the period of
July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009:
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements
will be effective upon publication of the
final results of this administrative
review for all shipments of subject
Weighted- merchandise entered, or withdrawn
from warehouse, for consumption on or
Average
Manufacturer/exporter
Margin
after the publication date of these final
(percent)
results, as provided by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the
Nan Ya Plastics Corporation,
companies covered by this review, the
Ltd. ..........................................
20.76
cash deposit rate will be the rates listed
Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Corabove; (2) for merchandise exported by
poration and Shinkong Materials Technology Co., Ltd. .......
6.38 producers or exporters not covered in
this review but covered in a previous
segment of this proceeding, the cash
Assessment Rates
deposit rate will continue to be the
The Department shall determine, and
company-specific rate published in the
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
most recent final results in which that
(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties
producer or exporter participated; (3) if
on all appropriate entries. We will
the exporter is not a firm covered in this
instruct CBP to liquidate entries of
merchandise produced and/or exported review or in any previous segment of
this proceeding, but the producer is, the
by Nan Ya and Shinkong. For
cash deposit rate will be that established
assessment purposes, where the
for the producer of the merchandise in
respondents reported the entered value
these final results of review or in the
for their sales, we calculated importermost recent final results in which that
specific (or customer-specific) ad
producer participated; and, (4) if neither
valorem assessment rates based on the
ratio of the total amount of the dumping the exporter nor the producer is a firm
duties calculated for the examined sales covered in this review or in any
previous segment of this proceeding, the
to the total entered value of those same
cash deposit rate will be 2.40 percent,
sales. See 19 CFR 351.212(b). However,
the all-others rate established in the less
where the respondents did not report
the entered value for their sales, we will than fair value investigation. See
calculate importer-specific (or customer- Investigation Final Determination.
specific) per unit duty assessment rates. These deposit requirements shall
remain in effect until further notice.
The Department intends to issue
appropriate assessment instructions
Notification to Importers
directly to CBP 15 days after the date of
This notice also serves as a final
publication of these final results of
reminder to importers of their
review.
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)
The Department clarified its
to file a certificate regarding the
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
reimbursement of antidumping duties
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and
prior to liquidation of the relevant
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
entries during this review period.
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This
Failure to comply with this requirement
clarification will apply to entries of
could result in the Secretary’s
subject merchandise during the POR
presumption that reimbursement of
produced by the companies included in antidumping duties occurred, and in the
these final results of review for which
subsequent assessment of double
the reviewed companies did not know
antidumping duties.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM
22FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 22, 2011 / Notices
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Orders
This notice is the only reminder to
parties subject to the administrative
protective order (APO) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under the 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 the terms of an
APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing these
final results and this notice in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: February 14, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I—Issues in Decision
Memorandum Polyethylene
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip
From Taiwan Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review for the Period: 07/01/2008–06/
30/2009
Comment 1: Shinkong’s Cost Data do
not Account for the Physical
Characteristics of the Subject
Merchandise
Comment 2: Shinkong Understates its
Adjustment for General and
Administrative Expenses
Comment 3: The Date of Sale for
Shinkong’s U.S. Sales
[FR Doc. 2011–3892 Filed 2–18–11; 8:45 am]
Period of Review
The period of review (‘‘POR’’) is
January 1, 2009, through December 31,
2009.
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–890]
Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the
People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty New
Shipper Reviews
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: February 22,
2011.
SUMMARY: On November 26, 2010, the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) published the
preliminary results of the new shipper
reviews of the antidumping duty order
on wooden bedroom furniture (‘‘WBF’’)
from the People’s Republic of China
(‘‘PRC’’) covering sales of subject
merchandise made by Dongguan
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Feb 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Huansheng Furniture Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Huansheng’’); Hangzhou Cadman
Trading Co., Ltd. (‘‘Cadman’’); and
Wanvog Furniture (Kunshan) Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Wanvog’’).1 In accordance with 19 CFR
351.309(c)(ii), we gave interested parties
an opportunity to comment on the
Preliminary Results. Based on our
analysis of the comments received, the
Department has made changes to the
Preliminary Results. The final dumping
margins are listed below in the section
entitled ‘‘Final Results of the New
Shipper Reviews.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rebecca Pandolph or Jeffrey Pedersen,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3627 and (202)
482–2769, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We
published the Preliminary Results for
these new shipper reviews on November
26, 2010. In the Preliminary Results, the
Department stated that interested parties
were to submit case briefs within 30
days of publication of the Preliminary
Results and rebuttal briefs within five
days after the due date for filing case
briefs.2 On December 9, 2010, the
Department extended the deadlines for
the case briefs and rebuttal briefs until
January 3, 2011 and January 10, 2011,
respectively.3 On January 3, 2011, the
Department received case briefs from
Huansheng and Wanvog. On January 10,
2011, the Department received a letter
in lieu of a rebuttal brief from Cadman.
Scope of the Order
The product covered by the order is
WBF. WBF is generally, but not
exclusively, designed, manufactured,
and offered for sale in coordinated
groups, or bedrooms, in which all of the
individual pieces are of approximately
the same style and approximately the
same material and/or finish. The subject
merchandise is made substantially of
wood products, including both solid
wood and also engineered wood
1 See Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the
People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews, 75 FR
72794 (November 26, 2010) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’).
2 See Preliminary Results, 75 FR at 72800.
3 See Memorandum to All Interested Parties
regarding, ‘‘Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review of Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the
People’s Republic of China,’’ dated December 9,
2010.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9747
products made from wood particles,
fibers, or other wooden materials such
as plywood, strand board, particle
board, and fiberboard, with or without
wood veneers, wood overlays, or
laminates, with or without non-wood
components or trim such as metal,
marble, leather, glass, plastic, or other
resins, and whether or not assembled,
completed, or finished.
The subject merchandise includes the
following items: (1) Wooden beds such
as loft beds, bunk beds, and other beds;
(2) wooden headboards for beds
(whether stand-alone or attached to side
rails), wooden footboards for beds,
wooden side rails for beds, and wooden
canopies for beds; (3) night tables, night
stands, dressers, commodes, bureaus,
mule chests, gentlemen’s chests,
bachelor’s chests, lingerie chests,
wardrobes, vanities, chessers,
chifforobes, and wardrobe-type cabinets;
(4) dressers with framed glass mirrors
that are attached to, incorporated in, sit
on, or hang over the dresser; (5) chestson-chests,4 highboys,5 lowboys,6 chests
of drawers,7 chests,8 door chests,9
chiffoniers,10 hutches,11 and armoires;12
(6) desks, computer stands, filing
cabinets, bookcases, or writing tables
that are attached to or incorporated in
the subject merchandise; and (7) other
bedroom furniture consistent with the
above list.
The scope of the order excludes the
following items: (1) Seats, chairs,
4 A chest-on-chest is typically a tall chest-ofdrawers in two or more sections (or appearing to be
in two or more sections), with one or two sections
mounted (or appearing to be mounted) on a slightly
larger chest; also known as a tallboy.
5 A highboy is typically a tall chest of drawers
usually composed of a base and a top section with
drawers, and supported on four legs or a small chest
(often 15 inches or more in height).
6 A lowboy is typically a short chest of drawers,
not more than four feet high, normally set on short
legs.
7 A chest of drawers is typically a case containing
drawers for storing clothing.
8 A chest is typically a case piece taller than it
is wide featuring a series of drawers and with or
without one or more doors for storing clothing. The
piece can either include drawers or be designed as
a large box incorporating a lid.
9 A door chest is typically a chest with hinged
doors to store clothing, whether or not containing
drawers. The piece may also include shelves for
televisions and other entertainment electronics.
10 A chiffonier is typically a tall and narrow chest
of drawers normally used for storing undergarments
and lingerie, often with mirror(s) attached.
11 A hutch is typically an open case of furniture
with shelves that typically sits on another piece of
furniture and provides storage for clothes.
12 An armoire is typically a tall cabinet or
wardrobe (typically 50 inches or taller), with doors,
and with one or more drawers (either exterior below
or above the doors or interior behind the doors),
shelves, and/or garment rods or other apparatus for
storing clothes. Bedroom armoires may also be used
to hold television receivers and/or other audiovisual entertainment systems.
E:\FR\FM\22FEN1.SGM
22FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9745-9747]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-3892]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-583-837]
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From Taiwan:
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 16, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary results of administrative review
of the antidumping duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film (PET
Film) from Taiwan. See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and
Strip From Taiwan: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 75 FR 49902 (August 16, 2010) (Preliminary
Results). The review was requested by DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi
Polyester Film of America, SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics (America),
Inc. (collectively, Petitioners). This review covers the following
producers/exporters of the subject merchandise: Nan Ya Plastics
Corporation, Ltd. (Nan Ya), and Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Corporation
(SSFC) and Shinkong Materials Technology Co., Ltd. (SMTC)
(collectively, Shinkong). The period of review (POR) is July 1, 2008,
through June 30, 2009. Based on the results of our analysis of the
comments received, we have made changes to the preliminary results,
which are discussed in the ``Changes Since the Preliminary Results''
section, below. For the final dumping margins, see the ``Final Results
of Review'' section, below.
DATES: Effective Date: February 22, 2011.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gene Calvert or Jun Jack Zhao, 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) 428-
3586 or (202) 428-1396, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On August 16, 2010, the Department published in the Federal
Register the Preliminary Results. In the Preliminary Results, the
Department preliminarily determined that, pursuant to 19 CFR
351.401(f), SSFC and SMTC should be treated as a single entity for
purposes of calculating an antidumping margin. The Department also
found that despite the passing of a single family member, Nan Ya was
still affiliated with three U.S. customers through a family grouping.
Subsequent to the publication of the Preliminary Results, these
affiliated U.S. customers submitted revised sales datasets, as
requested by the Department, to correct information regarding their
reported product matching information, and to correct problems
preventing the accurate consolidation of their sales data with Nan Ya's
datasets. As a result, Nan Ya's margin has changed for these final
results.
On December 10, 2010, the Department extended the deadline for
issuing the final results until no later than February 14, 2011. See
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From Taiwan:
Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 75 FR 76954 (December 10, 2010).
On December 22, 2010, the Department determined that amorphous
polyethylene terephthalate (APET) film products that are not biaxially-
oriented, such as the APET products produced by Nan Ya, are not covered
by the scope of the antidumping order on PET Film from Taiwan. See
Memorandum from Barbara E. Tillman, Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office
6, to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, ``Polyethylene Terephthalate Film,
Sheet, and Strip from Taiwan: Final Scope Ruling on Amorphous
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film,'' December 22, 2010 (Scope
Memorandum). The Department reached this conclusion after analyzing
findings of the U.S. International Trade Commission regarding the
delimiting nature of biaxial-orientation as a product characteristic of
subject PET Film, as well as the Department's previous determination
that biaxially-oriented APET is not within the scope of the antidumping
duty (AD) order on PET Film from the People's Republic of China (PRC),
for which the scope is essentially identical to the scope in the
subject case, except for language excluding Roller transport cleaning
film, and tracing and drafting film from the PRC AD order. See
Memorandum to John M. Andersen, ``Polyethylene Terephthalate Film,
Sheet, and Strip from the People's Republic of China: Final Scope
Ruling on Amorphous Polyethylene Terephthalate Sheet, Glycol-modified
Polyethylene Terephthalate Sheet, and Co-extruded Amorphous
Polyethylene Terephthalate Sheet with Glycol-modified Polyethylene
Terephthalate Sheets on the Outer Surfaces,'' January 7, 2010. As we
noted in the Scope Memorandum, the exclusionary language referenced
above was not relevant to the scope ruling with respect to the instant
proceeding. Both Nan Ya and Shinkong informed the Department that they
did not report sales of any merchandise within the scope ruling. Thus,
no adjustments were needed to the Preliminary Results as a result of
the scope ruling for either company.
The Department noted in the Preliminary Results that additional
supplemental questions regarding quarterly cost information had been
issued to both Nan Ya and Shinkong to determine whether it was
appropriate to use shorter cost averaging periods in calculating cost
of production and constructed value. After reviewing responses to these
questionnaires, on December 23, 2010, the Department issued post-
preliminary results of review and determined that the use of an
alternative cost averaging methodology (i.e., quarterly cost) was not
warranted. Thus, the post-preliminary results of review resulted in no
changes to either respondent's AD margin. See Memorandum from Mark
Hoadley, Program Manager, Office 6, to Christian Marsh, Acting Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, ``2008-2009
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Polyethylene
Terephthalate (PET) Film from Taiwan: Post-Preliminary Analysis and
Calculation Memorandum for Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, Ltd. (Nan Ya)
and Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Corporation (Shinkong)'' (Post-
Preliminary Analysis Memorandum), December 23, 2010.
With the release of the Post-Preliminary Analysis Memorandum, the
Department notified interested parties that they were to file their
case briefs with the Department by January 7, 2011, and rebuttal briefs
were to be filed by January 13, 2011, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.309(d)(1). See Memorandum from Gene Calvert, International Trade
Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6 to All Interested
Parties, ``Deadlines for the Submission of Case Briefs and Rebuttal
Briefs for the
[[Page 9746]]
Final Results in the Administrative Review,'' December 27, 2010. The
Department received a timely case brief on January 7, 2011 from
Petitioners raising certain issues with regard to Shinkong. Shinkong
filed a rebuttal brief with the Department on January 13, 2011. Based
on our analysis of the comments received, the weighted average margin
for Shinkong has changed from the calculated margin in the Preliminary
Results.
Period of Review
The POR is July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the antidumping order are all gauges of
raw, pretreated, or primed polyethylene terephthalate 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
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 proceeding is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
The issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this administrative review are addressed in the Memorandum from
Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, ``Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review of Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and
Strip from Taiwan: Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final
Results'' (Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with this notice,
which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues addressed
in the Decision Memorandum is appended to this notice. The Decision
Memorandum is on file in the Department's Central Records Unit (Room
7046 in the main Department of Commerce building), and can be accessed
directly on the Internet at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy
and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made
adjustments to our margin calculations for Shinkong. Specifically, we
have recalculated Shinkong's general and administrative (G&A) expenses,
including certain costs associated with the sale of supplies, and
excluding packing costs. We have also altered the manner in which we
combined the G&A expenses of SSFC and SMTC (i.e., the two companies
collapsed to form ``Shinkong''). Finally, we limited Shinkong's sales
date to no later than shipment date. These adjustments are discussed in
detail in the Decision Memorandum referenced above.
Final Results of Review
As a result of our review, we determine that the following
weighted-average margins exist for the period of July 1, 2008, through
June 30, 2009:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
Average
Manufacturer/exporter Margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, Ltd............................ 20.76
Shinkong Synthetic Fibers Corporation and Shinkong Materials 6.38
Technology Co., Ltd........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
The Department shall determine, 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 Nan Ya and Shinkong. For assessment
purposes, where the respondents reported the entered value for their
sales, we calculated importer-specific (or customer-specific) ad
valorem assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of the
dumping duties calculated for the examined sales to the total entered
value of those same sales. See 19 CFR 351.212(b). However, where the
respondents did not report the entered value for their sales, we will
calculate importer-specific (or customer-specific) per unit duty
assessment rates. The Department intends to issue appropriate
assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after the date of
publication of these final results of review.
The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This
clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the
POR produced by the companies included in these final results of review
for which the reviewed companies did not know their merchandise was
destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP
to liquidate non-reviewed entries at the all-others rate of 2.40
percent from the investigation if there is no rate for the intermediate
company(ies) involved in the transaction. See Notice of Amended Final
Antidumping Duty Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and
Antidumping Duty Order: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and
Strip (PET Film) from Taiwan, 67 FR 44174 (July 1, 2002) (Investigation
Final Determination).
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all
shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the publication date of these final
results, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the
companies covered by this review, the cash deposit rate will be the
rates listed above; (2) for merchandise exported by producers or
exporters not covered in this review but covered in a previous segment
of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the
company-specific rate published in the most recent final results in
which that producer or exporter participated; (3) if the exporter is
not a firm covered in this review or in any previous segment of this
proceeding, but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be that
established for the producer of the merchandise in these final results
of review or in the most recent final results in which that producer
participated; and, (4) if neither the exporter nor the producer is a
firm covered in this review or in any previous segment of this
proceeding, the cash deposit rate will be 2.40 percent, the all-others
rate established in the less than fair value investigation. See
Investigation Final Determination. These deposit requirements shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final 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 this review period. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred, and in the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
[[Page 9747]]
Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders
This notice is the only reminder to parties subject to the
administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under the 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable
violation.
We are issuing and publishing these final results and this notice
in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: February 14, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I--Issues in Decision Memorandum Polyethylene Terephthalate
Film, Sheet, and Strip From Taiwan Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review for the Period: 07/01/2008-06/30/2009
Comment 1: Shinkong's Cost Data do not Account for the Physical
Characteristics of the Subject Merchandise
Comment 2: Shinkong Understates its Adjustment for General and
Administrative Expenses
Comment 3: The Date of Sale for Shinkong's U.S. Sales
[FR Doc. 2011-3892 Filed 2-18-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
