Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: Final Results of Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order; 2010-2011, 9670-9672 [2013-03082]

Download as PDF 9670 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 28 / Monday, February 11, 2013 / Notices based on a request by GBC Metals, LLC, of Global Brass and Copper, Inc., doing business as Olin Brass; Heyco Metals, Inc.; Aurubis Buffalo, Inc.; PMX Industries, Inc.; and Revere Copper Products, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’). See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part, 77 FR 59168 (September 26, 2012). The review covers 22 companies: Dowa Metals & Mining Co., Ltd.; Fujisawa Co., Ltd.; Furukawa Electric Co., Ltd.; Harada Metal Industry; Hitachi Alloy, Ltd.; Hitachi Cable, Ltd.; Kicho Shindosho Co., Ltd.; Kitz Metal Works Corp.; Kobe Steel, Ltd.; Mitsubishi Materials Corp.; Mitsubishi Electric Metecs Co., Ltd.; Mitsubishi Shindoh Co., Ltd.; Mitsui Mining & Smelting Co., Ltd. (Mitsui Kinzoku); Mitsui Sumitomo Metal Mining Brass & Copper Co., Ltd.; NGK Insulators (NGK Metals); Nippon Mining & Metals Co., Ltd.; Ohki Brass & Copper Co., Ltd.; Sambo Copper Alloy Co., Ltd.; Sugino Metal Industry Co., Ltd.; Sumitomo Metal Mining Brass & Copper Co., Ltd.; Uji Copper & Alloy Co., Ltd.; and YKK Corporation. On December 20, 2012, Petitioners withdrew their request for an administrative review on all 22 producers/exporters. erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Rescission of Review Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the Secretary will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the parties that requested a review withdraw the request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. In this case, Petitioners withdrew their request within the 90-day deadline and no other parties requested an administrative review of the antidumping duty order. Therefore, we are rescinding the administrative review of brass sheet and strip from Japan covering the period August 1, 2011, through July 31, 2012. Assessment The Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to assess antidumping duties on all suspended entries subject to the AD Order for the period August 1, 2011 to July 31, 2011. 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 to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of this notice. VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:26 Feb 08, 2013 Jkt 229001 Notification to Importers 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 prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. Notification Regarding Administrative Protective Order This notice 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 an APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4). (Jindal), Polyplex Corporation Ltd. (Polyplex), and SRF Limited (SRF), producers and exporters of PET Film from India. Based on the results of our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes to the preliminary results. For the final weight-averaged dumping margins, see the ‘‘Final Results of Review’’ section below. DATES: Effective Date: February 11, 2013. Elfi Blum 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) 428–0197 or (202) 482– 1398, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Background International Trade Administration Since the Preliminary Results, the following events have taken place. The Department extended the final results of review from December 6, 2012 to February 4, 2013.2 Jindal and Polyplex submitted timely case briefs on December 5, 2012. DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc., SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics (America), Inc. (collectively, Petitioners) filed a timely rebuttal brief on December 13, 2012. The Department issued a postpreliminary analysis to address Petitioners’ targeted dumping allegations for both Jindal and Polyplex on December 20, 2012.3 Petitioners filed timely comments regarding the Department’s post-preliminary analysis on January 3, 2013. In response, Jindal and Polyplex filed timely rebuttal comments on January 8, 2013. [A–533–824] Scope of the Order Dated: February 5, 2013. Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. [FR Doc. 2013–03080 Filed 2–8–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: Final Results of Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order; 2010– 2011 Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 6, 2012, the Department of Commerce (Department) published the preliminary results of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film (PET Film) from India.1 This review covers three respondents, Jindal Poly Films Ltd AGENCY: 1 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 46687 (August 6, 2012) (Preliminary Results). PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 The products covered by the antidumping duty order are all gauges of 2 See Memorandum from Barbara Tillman, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations Office 6 Director, to Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, ‘‘Polyethylene Terephthalate Film from India: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,’’ dated November 9, 2012. See also 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,’’ dated October 31, 2012. 3 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip (PET film) from India: Post-Preliminary Analysis and Calculation Memorandum, dated December 20, 2012 (Post-Prelim Analysis and Calculation Memorandum). E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM 11FEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 28 / Monday, February 11, 2013 / Notices raw, pretreated, or primed PET film, whether extruded or coextruded. Excluded are metallized films and other finished films that have had at least one of their surfaces modified by the application of a performance-enhancing resinous or inorganic layer of more than 0.00001 inches thick. Imports of PET film are currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item number 3920.62.00.90. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of the antidumping duty order is dispositive. results, we made no other changes to Jindal’s margin calculations. Polyplex’s margin calculations were adjusted to account for the company’s expenditures for its sample sales and its sales of secondary merchandise in the U.S. The adjustments for Polyplex did not change its weighted-average dumping margin calculated for the Preliminary Results. Final Results of Review As a result of our review, we determine that the following weightedaverage dumping margins exist for the period July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011. Period of Review The period of review is July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by parties are addressed in the Decision Memorandum.4 A list of these issues is attached to this notice in the Appendix. The Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Import Administration’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to all registered users at http:// iaaccess.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http:// www.trade.gov/ia/. The signed Decision Memorandum and electronic versions of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Weightedaverage dumping margin (percent) Manufacturer/ exporter Jindal Poly Films Limited ...... Polyplex Corporation Limited SRF Limited 6 ........................ 0.00 0.00 0.00 erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of the comments received and information received after the Preliminary Results, we have made adjustments to our margin calculations for Jindal and Polyplex in accordance with our postpreliminary analysis.5 For these final 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 Jindal, Polyplex, and SRF. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of review. For individually examined respondents whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent) in the final results, we will calculate importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer’s examined sales to the total entered value of the sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).7 We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above de minimis. Where either the respondent’s 4 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2010–2011 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India,’’ dated February 4, 2013 (Decision Memorandum). 5 For our detailed analysis, see Post-Prelim Analysis and Calculation Memorandum; see also Analysis Memorandum for the Post-Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India: Jindal Poly Films Limited and Polyplex Corporation Ltd., dated December 20, 2012, at 2, respectively. 6 SRF is a non-selected respondent in this review. For additional information regarding the calculation of SRF’s rate, which remains unchanged from the Preliminary Results, see Preliminary Results, 77 FR at 46692. 7 In these final results, the Department applied the assessment rate calculation method adopted in Final Modification for Reviews, i.e. on the basis of monthly average-to-average comparisons using only the transactions associated with that importer with offsets being provided for non-dumped comparisons. See Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 1012) (Final Modificationfor Reviews). VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:26 Feb 08, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 9671 weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importerspecific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to antidumping duties any entries.8 The Department clarified its ‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on May 6, 2003. This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the period of review produced by each respondent for which they did not know that their merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the allothers rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). Cash Deposit Requirements The following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of PET Film from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (Act): (1) The cash deposit rate for company under review will be the rate 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 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 less-than-fair-value 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; and, (4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previous review, the cash deposit rate will be the all others rate for this proceeding, 5.71 percent. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Notification 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 8 See E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1). 11FEN1 9672 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 28 / Monday, February 11, 2013 / Notices 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. 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 Department’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. 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 4, 2013. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix Comment 1: Targeted Dumping Comment 2: Polyplex’s Transparent Film Other Grade (TFOG) Sales Comment 3: Jindal’s Date of Sale Comment 4: Jindal’s Export Quantities [FR Doc. 2013–03082 Filed 2–8–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE [A–489–805] Certain Pasta From Turkey; 2010–2011; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain pasta (pasta) from Turkey. The period of review (POR) is July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011, and covers TAT Makarnacilik Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (TAT), and Marsan Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S (Marsan) and its claimed affiliates Birlik Pazarlama Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (Birlik), Bellini Gida Sanayi A.S. (Bellini), and Marsa Yag Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (Marsa Yag). Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have not made any changes in the erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:26 Feb 08, 2013 Jkt 229001 flavorings, and up to two percent egg white. The pasta covered by this scope is typically sold in the retail market, in fiberboard or cardboard cartons, or polyethylene or polypropylene bags of varying dimensions. Excluded from the scope of this review are refrigerated, frozen, or canned pastas, as well as all forms of egg pasta, with the exception of non-egg dry pasta containing up to two percent egg white. The merchandise subject to review is currently classifiable under item 1902.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise subject to the order is dispositive. Background On August 6, 2012, the Department published the Preliminary Results,1 and invited interested parties to comment. On October 19, 2012, Marsan Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S., (Marsan) filed a case brief, and the petitioners 2 filed a case brief with respect to TAT. On October 24, 2012, petitioners filed a rebuttal brief. On December 21, 2012, the Department issued a postpreliminary analysis decision memorandum of the targeting dumping allegation with respect to Marsan.3 At that time, we invited parties to comment on the Department’s analysis in addressing the petitioners’ targeted dumping allegation in this review. The Department did not receive any comments on its post-preliminary decision memorandum. Analysis of Comments Received Period of Review The POR covered by this review is July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011. International Trade Administration AGENCY: margin calculation for Marsan. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’ DATES: Effective Date: February 11, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Moore (Marsan, Birlik, Bellini, and Marsan Yag), Victoria Cho (TAT) or Robert James, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3692, (202) 482– 5075, or (202) 482–0649, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scope of the Order The merchandise covered by this order are certain non-egg dry pasta in packages of five pounds (2.27 kilograms) or less, whether or not enriched or fortified or containing milk or other optional ingredients such as chopped vegetables, vegetable purees, milk, gluten, diastases, vitamins, coloring and 1 See Certain Pasta From Turkey: Notice of Preliminary Results of the 2010–2011 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 77 FR 46694 (August 6, 2012) (Preliminary Results). 2 New World Pasta Company, Dakota Growers Pasta Company & American Italian Pasta Company (petitioners). 3 See Memorandum to Lynn Fischer Fox, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations titled ‘‘2010/2011 Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Pasta (pasta) from Turkey: PostPreliminary Analysis Memorandum’’, dated December 21, 2012. PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this proceeding and to which we have responded are listed in Appendix I to this notice and addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice.4 The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce Building, as well as electronically via Import Administration’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http://iaacess.trade.gov and is available to all parties in the CRU. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at http://www.trade.gov/ia/frn/index.html. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Final Results of Review As a result of this review, we determine that the following weightedaverage dumping margins exist for the period July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011: 4 See Issues and Decision Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, titled ‘‘Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Pasta from Turkey; 2010–2011,’’ dated February 4, 2013. 5 The Department has found Marsan not to be affiliated with Birlik or Bellini, prior to June 2, 2011. Birlik ceased operation of the pasta production facility in October 2010 and at the same time Bellini took over operation of the pasta production facility from Birlik. See the Issues and E:\FR\FM\11FEN1.SGM 11FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 28 (Monday, February 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9670-9672]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03082]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-824]


Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: 
Final Results of Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order; 
2010-2011

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On August 6, 2012, the Department of Commerce (Department) 
published the preliminary results of administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film (PET Film) 
from India.\1\ This review covers three respondents, Jindal Poly Films 
Ltd (Jindal), Polyplex Corporation Ltd. (Polyplex), and SRF Limited 
(SRF), producers and exporters of PET Film from India. Based on the 
results of our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes 
to the preliminary results. For the final weight-averaged dumping 
margins, see the ``Final Results of Review'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From 
India: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 77 FR 46687 (August 6, 2012) (Preliminary Results).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: February 11, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi Blum 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) 428-
0197 or (202) 482-1398, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Since the Preliminary Results, the following events have taken 
place. The Department extended the final results of review from 
December 6, 2012 to February 4, 2013.\2\ Jindal and Polyplex submitted 
timely case briefs on December 5, 2012. DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi 
Polyester Film, Inc., SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics (America), Inc. 
(collectively, Petitioners) filed a timely rebuttal brief on December 
13, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See Memorandum from Barbara Tillman, Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Operations Office 6 Director, to Christian 
Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Operations, ``Polyethylene Terephthalate Film from India: 
Extension of Deadline for Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review,'' dated November 9, 2012. See also 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,'' dated 
October 31, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department issued a post-preliminary analysis to address 
Petitioners' targeted dumping allegations for both Jindal and Polyplex 
on December 20, 2012.\3\ Petitioners filed timely comments regarding 
the Department's post-preliminary analysis on January 3, 2013. In 
response, Jindal and Polyplex filed timely rebuttal comments on January 
8, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to 
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,: 
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip (PET film) from 
India: Post-Preliminary Analysis and Calculation Memorandum, dated 
December 20, 2012 (Post-Prelim Analysis and Calculation Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by the antidumping duty order are all gauges 
of

[[Page 9671]]

raw, pretreated, or primed PET film, whether extruded or coextruded. 
Excluded are metallized films and other finished films that have had at 
least one of their surfaces modified by the application of a 
performance-enhancing resinous or inorganic layer of more than 0.00001 
inches thick. Imports of PET film are currently classifiable in the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item 
number 3920.62.00.90. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience 
and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of the 
antidumping duty order is dispositive.

Period of Review

    The period of review is July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by parties 
are addressed in the Decision Memorandum.\4\ A list of these issues is 
attached to this notice in the Appendix. The Decision Memorandum is a 
public document and is on file electronically via Import 
Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized 
Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to all 
registered users at http://iaaccess.trade.gov, and is available to all 
parties in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046 of the main 
Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the 
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://www.trade.gov/ia/. The signed Decision Memorandum and electronic 
versions of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to 
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, 
``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 2010-
2011 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene 
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India,'' dated February 4, 
2013 (Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of the comments received and information 
received after the Preliminary Results, we have made adjustments to our 
margin calculations for Jindal and Polyplex in accordance with our 
post-preliminary analysis.\5\ For these final results, we made no other 
changes to Jindal's margin calculations. Polyplex's margin calculations 
were adjusted to account for the company's expenditures for its sample 
sales and its sales of secondary merchandise in the U.S. The 
adjustments for Polyplex did not change its weighted-average dumping 
margin calculated for the Preliminary Results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For our detailed analysis, see Post-Prelim Analysis and 
Calculation Memorandum; see also Analysis Memorandum for the Post-
Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of 
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India: Jindal 
Poly Films Limited and Polyplex Corporation Ltd., dated December 20, 
2012, at 2, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Results of Review

    As a result of our review, we determine that the following 
weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period July 1, 2010, 
through June 30, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ SRF is a non-selected respondent in this review. For 
additional information regarding the calculation of SRF's rate, 
which remains unchanged from the Preliminary Results, see 
Preliminary Results, 77 FR at 46692.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Weighted-
                                                              average
                 Manufacturer/ exporter                       dumping
                                                              margin
                                                             (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jindal Poly Films Limited...............................            0.00
Polyplex Corporation Limited............................            0.00
SRF Limited \6\.........................................            0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Jindal, Polyplex, and SRF. The Department 
intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date 
of publication of the final results of review. For individually 
examined respondents whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de 
minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent) in the final results, we will calculate 
importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio 
of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined 
sales to the total entered value of the sales in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.212(b)(1).\7\ We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on 
all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-
specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review 
is above de minimis. Where either the respondent's weighted-average 
dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific 
assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to 
liquidate without regard to antidumping duties any entries.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In these final results, the Department applied the 
assessment rate calculation method adopted in Final Modification for 
Reviews, i.e. on the basis of monthly average-to-average comparisons 
using only the transactions associated with that importer with 
offsets being provided for non-dumped comparisons. See Antidumping 
Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and 
Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final 
Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 1012) (Final Modificationfor 
Reviews).
    \8\ See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on 
May 6, 2003. This clarification will apply to entries of subject 
merchandise during the period of review produced by each respondent for 
which they did not know that their merchandise was destined for the 
United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate 
unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the 
intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full 
discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 
2003).

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective for all 
shipments of PET Film from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 
for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final 
results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 
751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (Act): (1) The cash 
deposit rate for company under review will be the rate 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 
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 less-than-fair-value 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; 
and, (4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered 
in this or any previous review, the cash deposit rate will be the all 
others rate for this proceeding, 5.71 percent. These deposit 
requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further 
notice.

Notification 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

[[Page 9672]]

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.

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 Department's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
    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 4, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix

Comment 1: Targeted Dumping
Comment 2: Polyplex's Transparent Film Other Grade (TFOG) Sales
Comment 3: Jindal's Date of Sale
Comment 4: Jindal's Export Quantities

[FR Doc. 2013-03082 Filed 2-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P