Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India: Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2011-2012, 2365-2366 [2013-00469]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 8 / Friday, January 11, 2013 / Notices
extended the deadline), the applicable
deadline for submission of such factual
information, an interested party may
submit factual information to rebut,
clarify, or correct the factual
information no later than ten days after
such factual information is served on
the interested party. However, the
Department generally will not accept in
the rebuttal submission additional or
alternative surrogate value information
not previously on the record, if the
deadline for submission of surrogate
value information has passed.7
Furthermore, the Department generally
will not accept business proprietary
information in either the surrogate value
submissions or the rebuttals thereto, as
the regulation regarding the submission
of surrogate values allows only for the
submission of publicly available
information.8
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
Assessment Rates
Upon issuance of the final results, the
Department will determine, and U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’)
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries covered by this
review.9 For assessment purposes, we
calculated exporter/importer- (or
customer-) specific assessment rates for
merchandise subject to this review.
Dixon reported that its U.S. affiliate was
the importer of record for all U.S. sales.
Thus, we calculated an ad valorem rate
by dividing the total dumping margins
for reviewed sales by the total entered
values associated with those
transactions. If Dixon’s antidumping
duty rate exceeds 0.5 percent ad
valorem for the final results of this
review, we will instruct CBP to assess
duties on all of Dixon’s entries. See 19
CFR 351.106(c)(2). The Department
intends to issue appropriate assessment
instructions directly to CBP 15 days
after publication of the final results of
this review.
For companies for which this review
is rescinded, antidumping duties shall
be assessed at rates equal to the cash
deposit of estimated antidumping duties
required at the time of entry, or
withdrawal from warehouse, for
consumption, in accordance with 19
CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department
intends to issue appropriate assessment
instructions regarding entries of the
rescinded companies directly to CBP 15
days after publication of this notice.
7 See, e.g., Glycine from the People’s Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Final Rescission, in
Part, 72 FR 58809 (October 17, 2007), and
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at
Comment 2.
8 See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3).
9 See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:38 Jan 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this
administrative review for shipments of
the subject merchandise from the PRC
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication date, as provided by section
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For Dixon,
which has a separate rate, the cash
deposit rate will be that established in
the final results of this review (except,
if the rate is zero or de minimis, then no
cash deposit will be required); (2) for
previously investigated or reviewed PRC
and non-PRC exporters not listed above
that received a separate rate in a prior
segment of this proceeding, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the
existing exporter-specific rate; (3) for all
PRC exporters of subject merchandise
that have not been found to be entitled
to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate
will be that for the PRC-wide entity; and
(4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject
merchandise which have not received
their own rate, the cash deposit rate will
be the rate applicable to the PRC
exporter that supplied that non-PRC
exporter. These deposit requirements,
when imposed, shall remain in effect
until further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a
preliminary 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
Department’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of double antidumping duties.
We are issuing and publishing these
results in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.213.
Dated: January 2, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix I—List of Topics Discussed in
the Preliminary Decision Memorandum
1. Scope of the Order
2. Non-Market Economy Country
3. Separate Rates
4. Surrogate Country and Surrogate Value
Data
5. Economic Comparability
6. Significant Producers of Identical or
Comparable Merchandise
7. Data Availability
8. Date of Sale
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2365
9. Fair Value Comparisons
10. U.S. Price
11. Normal Value
12. Factor Valuations
13. Currency Conversion
Appendix II
Separate rate companies for which we are
rescinding this administrative review:
China First Pencil Co., Ltd. Orient
International Holding Shanghai Foreign
Trade Co., Ltd. Shandong Rongxin Import
and Export Co., Ltd.
[FR Doc. 2013–00452 Filed 1–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–533–824]
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet
and Strip From India: Partial
Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2011–2012
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: January 11, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni
Page, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202)
482–1398.
AGENCY:
Background
On July 2, 2012, the Department of
Commerce (Department) published a
notice of opportunity to request an
administrative review of the
antidumping duty (AD) order on
polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet
and strip from India covering the period
July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2012.1
The Department received a timely
request from Petitioners 2 for an AD
administrative review of five
companies: Ester Industries Limited
(Ester), Garware Polyester Ltd.
(Garware), Polyplex Corporation Ltd.
(Polyplex), SRF Limited (SRF), and
Jindal Poly Films Limited of India
(Jindal).3 In addition, the Department
1 See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order,
Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity
To Request Administrative Review, 77 FR 39216,
39217 (July 2, 2012).
2 Petitioners are DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi
Polyester Film, Inc., SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics
(America), Inc.
3 See Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film,
Sheet, and Strip from India: Request for
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review:
Petitioners’ Request for an Administrative Review
(July 31, 2012).
E:\FR\FM\11JAN1.SGM
11JAN1
2366
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 8 / Friday, January 11, 2013 / Notices
received timely requests for an AD
review from SRF and Jindal.4 On August
30, 2012, the Department published a
notice of initiation of administrative
review with respect to Ester, Garware,
Jindal, Polyplex, and SRF.5 On
September 26, 2012, one of the
petitioners (DuPont Teijin Films)
withdrew its request for an AD
administrative review of all the
companies for which reviews were
initiated.6 Finally, on November 30,
2012, the remaining petitioners
(Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc., SKC,
Inc., and Toray Plastics (America), Inc.)
submitted a withdrawal request for Ester
and Garware only.7
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with
Rescission, in Part
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the
Secretary will rescind an administrative
review, in whole or in part, if a party
that requested the review withdraws the
request within 90 days of the date of
publication of the notice of initiation of
the requested review. Petitioners’
September 26, 2012, and November 30,
2012, withdrawal requests were
submitted within the 90-day period and
thus are timely.8 Because Petitioners’
withdrawals of their requests for review
are timely and because no other party
requested a review of Ester and
Garware, we are rescinding this review
with respect to these companies, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1).
The requests from Mitsubishi Polyester
Film, Inc., SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics
(America), Inc. for an administrative
review of Jindal, Polyplex, and SRF
have not been withdrawn. As such, we
4 See Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film from
India/Request for Antidumping Admin Review/
Jindal Poly Films Limited (July 30, 2012) and
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film from India/
Request for Antidumping Admin Review/SRF
Limited (July 30, 2012).
5 See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and
Requests for Revocation in Part, 77 FR 52688
(August 30, 2012).
6 See Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film,
Sheet, and Strip from India: Withdrawal of DuPont
Teijin Films’ Request for Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review (September 26, 2012).
7 See Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film,
Sheet, and Strip from India: Partial Withdrawal of
Request for Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review (November 30, 2012).
8 The 90th day fell on November 28, 2012;
however, as explained in the memorandum from
the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,
the Department has exercised its discretion to toll
deadlines for the duration of the closure of the
Federal Government from October 29, through
October 30, 2012. Thus, all deadlines in this
segment of the proceeding have been extended by
two days. The revised deadline for filing a
withdrawal request was November 30, 2012. See
Memorandum to the Record from Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,
regarding ‘‘Tolling of Administrative Deadlines As
a Result of the Government Closure During
Hurricane Sandy’’ (October 31, 2012).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:38 Jan 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
are not rescinding the review with
respect to these three companies. For
the review, the Department will proceed
with individual examination of the two
previously selected mandatory
respondents, Jindal and SRF.
Assessment
The Department will instruct U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to
assess ADs on all appropriate entries.
Subject merchandise of Ester and
Garware will be assessed ADs at rates
equal to the cash deposit of estimated
ADs required at the time of entry, or
withdrawal from warehouse, for
consumption, in accordance with 19
CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department
intends to issue assessment instructions
to CBP 15 days after the date of
publication of this notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder
to importers for whom this review is
being rescinded, as of the publication
date of this notice, of their
responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of ADs
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
ADs occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double ADs.
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) 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 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.
This notice is issued and published in
accordance with section 777(i)(1) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19
CFR 351.213(d)(4).
Dated: January 7, 2013.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
[FR Doc. 2013–00469 Filed 1–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–905]
Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From
the People’s Republic of China: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2010–2011
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On July 6, 2012, the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) published in the
Federal Register the Preliminary Results
of the fourth administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on certain
polyester staple fiber (‘‘PSF’’) from the
People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).1
We gave interested parties an
opportunity to comment on the
Preliminary Results. Based upon our
analysis of the comments and
information received, we made changes
to the margin calculations for the final
results. Further, we determine that
Huvis Sichuan Co., Ltd. (‘‘Huvis
Sichuan’’) had no reviewable entries of
subject merchandise during the period
of review (‘‘POR’’).
DATES: Effective January 11, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steven Hampton or Susan Pulongbarit,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–0116 and (202)
482–4031 respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On July 6, 2012, the Department
published the Preliminary Results.
Between August 8, 2012, and August 20,
2012, interested parties submitted
surrogate value information and rebuttal
surrogate value comments. Interested
parties were further provided an
opportunity to comment on the
Preliminary Results. On September 21,
2012, the Department received a case
brief from Zhaoqing Tifo New Fiber Co.,
Ltd. On September 28, 2012, the
Department received a rebuttal brief
from DAK Americas LLC.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this review
are addressed in the memorandum
1 See Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From the
People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of
the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77
FR 39990 (July 6, 2012) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’).
E:\FR\FM\11JAN1.SGM
11JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 8 (Friday, January 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2365-2366]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-00469]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-533-824]
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India:
Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2011-2012
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: January 11, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni Page, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482-1398.
Background
On July 2, 2012, the Department of Commerce (Department) published
a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the
antidumping duty (AD) order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet
and strip from India covering the period July 1, 2011, through June 30,
2012.\1\ The Department received a timely request from Petitioners \2\
for an AD administrative review of five companies: Ester Industries
Limited (Ester), Garware Polyester Ltd. (Garware), Polyplex Corporation
Ltd. (Polyplex), SRF Limited (SRF), and Jindal Poly Films Limited of
India (Jindal).\3\ In addition, the Department
[[Page 2366]]
received timely requests for an AD review from SRF and Jindal.\4\ On
August 30, 2012, the Department published a notice of initiation of
administrative review with respect to Ester, Garware, Jindal, Polyplex,
and SRF.\5\ On September 26, 2012, one of the petitioners (DuPont
Teijin Films) withdrew its request for an AD administrative review of
all the companies for which reviews were initiated.\6\ Finally, on
November 30, 2012, the remaining petitioners (Mitsubishi Polyester
Film, Inc., SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics (America), Inc.) submitted a
withdrawal request for Ester and Garware only.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity To Request Administrative
Review, 77 FR 39216, 39217 (July 2, 2012).
\2\ Petitioners are DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi Polyester
Film, Inc., SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics (America), Inc.
\3\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film, Sheet, and Strip
from India: Request for Antidumping Duty Administrative Review:
Petitioners' Request for an Administrative Review (July 31, 2012).
\4\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film from India/Request
for Antidumping Admin Review/Jindal Poly Films Limited (July 30,
2012) and Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film from India/Request
for Antidumping Admin Review/SRF Limited (July 30, 2012).
\5\ See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part, 77 FR
52688 (August 30, 2012).
\6\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film, Sheet, and Strip
from India: Withdrawal of DuPont Teijin Films' Request for
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review (September 26, 2012).
\7\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Film, Sheet, and Strip
from India: Partial Withdrawal of Request for Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review (November 30, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rescission, in Part
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Secretary will rescind an
administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party that requested
the review withdraws the request within 90 days of the date of
publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review.
Petitioners' September 26, 2012, and November 30, 2012, withdrawal
requests were submitted within the 90-day period and thus are
timely.\8\ Because Petitioners' withdrawals of their requests for
review are timely and because no other party requested a review of
Ester and Garware, we are rescinding this review with respect to these
companies, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1). The requests from
Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc., SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics
(America), Inc. for an administrative review of Jindal, Polyplex, and
SRF have not been withdrawn. As such, we are not rescinding the review
with respect to these three companies. For the review, the Department
will proceed with individual examination of the two previously selected
mandatory respondents, Jindal and SRF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The 90th day fell on November 28, 2012; however, as
explained in the memorandum from the Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, the Department has exercised its discretion to toll
deadlines for the duration of the closure of the Federal Government
from October 29, through October 30, 2012. Thus, all deadlines in
this segment of the proceeding have been extended by two days. The
revised deadline for filing a withdrawal request was November 30,
2012. See Memorandum to the Record from Paul Piquado, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, regarding ``Tolling of
Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Government Closure
During Hurricane Sandy'' (October 31, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment
The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) to assess ADs on all appropriate entries. Subject merchandise of
Ester and Garware will be assessed ADs at rates equal to the cash
deposit of estimated ADs required at the time of entry, or withdrawal
from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR
351.212(c)(1)(i). The Department intends to issue assessment
instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of this
notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder to importers for whom this
review is being rescinded, as of the publication date of this notice,
of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a
certificate regarding the reimbursement of ADs 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 ADs occurred and the subsequent assessment of
double ADs.
Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) 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
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.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with section
777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR
351.213(d)(4).
Dated: January 7, 2013.
Christian Marsh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2013-00469 Filed 1-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P