Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2010-2011, 35245-35248 [2013-13985]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2013 / Notices
Administration’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (‘‘IA
ACCESS’’). IA ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://
iaaccess.trade.gov, and is available to all
parties in the Central Records Unit,
Room 7046, of the main Department of
Commerce building.
In addition, a complete version of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum can
be accessed directly on the Web at
https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The paper
copy and electronic version of the Issues
and Decision Memorandum are
identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
We revised our preliminary margin
calculations for Golden Dragon and
Nacobre to use the home market sales
data they reported in their postpreliminary submissions to the
Department. We made no other changes
to the calculation of Golden Dragon’s
and Nacobre’s weighted-average
dumping margins in these final results.
Period of Review
The period of review is May 1, 2011,
through October 31, 2011, for Golden
Dragon and November 22, 2010, through
October 31, 2011, for Nacobre.
Final Results of the Review
As a result of our review, we
determine that sales of the subject
merchandise have not been made at
prices below normal value for the
period May 1, 2011, and October 31,
2011, for Golden Dragon and November
22, 2010, through October 31, 2011, for
Nacobre.
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations
performed within five days of the date
of publication of this notice to parties in
this proceeding in accordance with 19
CFR 351.224(b).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Assessment Rate
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), the
Department has determined, and U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
shall assess, antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries of subject
merchandise and deposits of estimated
duties, where applicable, in accordance
with the final results of this review. The
Department intends to issue appropriate
assessment instructions directly to CBP
15 days after publication of the final
results of this administrative review.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:32 Jun 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
Pursuant to the Final Modification for
Reviews,6 because the respondents’
weighted-average dumping margins are
zero, we will instruct CBP to liquidate
the appropriate entries without regard to
antidumping duties.7
The Department clarified its
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
May 6, 2003.8 This clarification will
apply to entries of subject merchandise
during the POR produced by Golden
Dragon and Nacobre for which these
companies did not know that the
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.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following deposit requirements
will be effective upon publication of the
notice of these final results for all
shipments of seamless refined copper
pipe and tube from Mexico entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication
date as provided by section 751(a)(2) of
the Act: (1) The cash deposit rates for
Golden Dragon and Nacobre will be
equal to the weighted-average dumping
margins established in the final results
of this administrative review (i.e., zero
percent); (2) for merchandise exported
by manufacturers or exporters not
covered in this review but covered in a
completed prior segment of the
proceeding, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the company-specific rate
published for the most recently
completed segment; (3) if the exporter is
not a firm covered in this review, a prior
review, or the original investigation but
the manufacturer is, the cash deposit
rate will be the rate established for the
most recently completed segment for the
manufacturer of the merchandise; (4)
the cash deposit rate for all other
manufacturers or exporters will
continue to be 26.03 percent, the allothers rate established in the Amended
Final and Order. These cash deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall
remain in effect until further notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers of their
6 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, 2012) (Final Modification for
Reviews).
7 Id. at 8102.
8 For a full discussion of this clarification, see
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954
(May 6, 2003).
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35245
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 POR.
Failure to comply with this requirement
could result in the Department’s
presumption that reimbursement of
antidumping duties has occurred and
the subsequent assessment of doubled
antidumping duties.
Administrative Protective Order
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.305(a)(3), this notice also serves as
a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of
their responsibility concerning the
return or destruction of proprietary
information disclosed under the APO,
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
subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing this
notice in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: June 5, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
Appendix—Issues and Decision
Memorandum
Comment 1: Targeted Dumping Analysis
Comment 2: Date of Sale for Nacobre’s
‘‘Fixed Price’’ Sales
Comment 3: Nacobre’s Indirect Selling
Expenses
Comment 4: Nacobre’s General and
Administrative Expenses
Comment 5: Adjustment to U.S. Price for
Golden Dragon
[FR Doc. 2013–13983 Filed 6–11–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–570–924]
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film,
Sheet, and Strip 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 December 10, 2012, the
Department of Commerce
(‘‘Department’’) published its
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM
12JNN1
35246
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2013 / Notices
Preliminary Results of the third
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on
polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet,
and strip (‘‘PET film’’) from the People’s
Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’).1 We gave
interested parties an opportunity to
comment on the Preliminary Results.
After reviewing interested parties’
comments and information received, we
have made changes for the final results
of this review. The final antidumping
duty margins for this review are listed
below in the ‘‘Final Results of the
Review’’ section of this notice. The
period of review (‘‘POR’’) is November
1, 2010, through October 31, 2011.
DATES: Effective Date: June 12, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Martin or Jonathan Hill, 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) 482–3936 and (202)
482–3518 respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Background
The Department published the
Preliminary Results on December 10,
2012. In accordance with 19 CFR
351.309(c)(1)(ii), we invited parties to
comment on our Preliminary Results.2
On January 28, 2013, the following
interested parties filed timely case
briefs: Bemis Company, Inc., and its
affiliate Curwood Inc.; Shaoxing
Xiangyu Green Packing Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Green Packing’’); Terphane Inc.;
Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd. (‘‘Wanhua’’),3
Fuwei Films (Shandong) Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Fuwei Films’’), and Sichuan Dongfang
Insulating Material Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Dongfang’’) 4 (collectively, ‘‘Wanhua
et al.’’); Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc.,
SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics (America),
Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’); DuPont
Teijin Films China Limited,5 DuPont
1 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and
Strip From the People’s Republic of China:
Preliminary Results of Administrative Review;
2010–2011, 77 FR 73428 (December 10, 2012), and
accompanying Decision Memorandum
(‘‘Preliminary Results’’).
2 See id., 77 FR at 73429.
3 In the Preliminary Results, Tianjin Wanhua Co.,
Ltd. was erroneously referred to in the rate table as
‘‘Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd. Sichuan’’ The correct
name of Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd. is shown in the
rate table in this notice.
4 In the Preliminary Results, Sichuan Dongfang
Insulating Material Co., Ltd. was erroneously
referred to in the rate table as ‘‘Dongfang Insulating
Material Co., Ltd.’’ The correct name of Sichuan
Dongfang Insulating Material Co., Ltd. is shown in
the rate table in this notice.
5 In the Preliminary Results, DuPont Teijin Films
China Limited was erroneously referred to in the
rate table as ‘‘DuPont Teijin China Limited.’’ The
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:32 Jun 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
Hongji Films Foshan Co., Ltd., and
DuPont Teijin Hongji Films Ningbo Co.,
Ltd. (‘‘DuPont Group’’). On February 4,
2013, the following interested parties
filed timely rebuttal briefs: Terphane
Inc., Petitioners, Green Packing, DuPont
Group, and Wanhua et al.6
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties are addressed
in the ‘‘Polyethylene Terephthalate
Film, Sheet, and Strip from the People’s
Republic of China: Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Final Results of
the 2010–2011 Administrative Review,’’
dated concurrently with this notice
(‘‘Issues & Decision Memo’’). A list of
the issues raised by interested parties is
attached to this notice as an Appendix.
The Issues & Decision Memo 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 registered users at https://
iaaccess.trade.gov, and it is available to
all parties in the Central Records Unit,
Room 7046 of the main Department of
Commerce building. In addition, a
complete version of the Issues &
Decision Memo can be accessed directly
on the Internet at https://www.trade.gov/
ia. The signed Issues & Decision Memo
and the electronic versions of the Issues
& Decision Memo are identical in
content.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the order are
all gauges of raw, pre-treated, or primed
PET film, whether extruded or coextruded.7 PET film is classifiable under
subheading 3920.62.00.90 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the
HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, our
written description of the scope of the
order is dispositive. A full description
of the scope of the order is contained in
the Issues & Decision Memo.
correct name of DuPont Teijin Films China Limited
is shown in the rate table in this notice.
6 The Department removed the rebuttal brief of
Wanhua et al. from the administrative record
because it contained untimely filed new factual
information. The Department permitted the
resubmission of a redacted version of the rebuttal
brief, with the untimely factual information
removed, on February 12, 2013.
7 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and
Strip From Brazil, the People’s Republic of China
and the United Arab Emirates: Antidumping Duty
Orders and Amended Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value for the United Arab
Emirates, 73 FR 66595 (November 10, 2008).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on the comments received from
the interested parties, we have made the
following changes from the Preliminary
Results:
1. We are including the reported
reintroduced PET chip factor of
production in the DuPont Group’s
normal value;
2. We are excluding the DuPont
Group’s reported billing adjustments
from the calculation of U.S. net price;
3. We are correcting a clerical error in
the calculation of surrogate selling,
general, and administrative expenses,
interest expenses, and profit for the
DuPont Group and Green Packing;
4. Due to the changes in the dumping
margins for DuPont Group, the rate
calculated for the separate rate
companies has also changed.
For a discussion of the issues, see the
Issues & Decision Memo.
Non-Market Economy Country
The PRC has been treated as a nonmarket economy (‘‘NME’’) in every
proceeding conducted by the
Department. In accordance with section
771(18)(C)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the ‘‘Act’’), any determination
that a foreign country is an NME shall
remain in effect until revoked by the
administering authority. The
Department has not revoked the PRC’s
status as an NME. Therefore, the
Department continues to treat the PRC
as an NME for purposes of these final
results and, accordingly, applied the
NME methodology.
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving NMEs, the
Department maintains a rebuttable
presumption that all companies within
the NME are subject to government
control and, therefore, should be
assessed a single weighted-average
dumping margin.8 The Department’s
policy is to assign all exporters of
merchandise subject to review in an
NME country this single rate unless an
exporter can demonstrate that it is
sufficiently independent so as to be
entitled to a separate rate.9 The
Department analyzes whether each
entity exporting the merchandise under
consideration is sufficiently
independent under a test established in
Sparklers 10 and further developed in
8 See, e.g., Polyethylene Terephthalate Film,
Sheet, and Strip from the People’s Republic of
China: Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value, 73 FR 55039, 55040 (September 24,
2008).
9 See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Sparklers From the People’s Republic of
China, 56 FR 20588, 20589 (May 6, 1991)
(‘‘Sparklers’’).
10 See id.
E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM
12JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2013 / Notices
Silicon Carbide.11 According to this
separate rate test, the Department will
assign a separate rate in NME
proceedings if a respondent can
demonstrate the absence of both de jure
and de facto government control over its
export activities. If, however, the
Department determines that a company
is wholly foreign owned, then a separate
rate analysis is not necessary to
determine whether that company is
independent from government control
and eligible for a separate rate.
In the Preliminary Results, the
Department found that Dongfang,
DuPont Group, Green Packing, Fuwei
Films, and Wanhua demonstrated their
eligibility for separate-rate status.12 No
party commented on these preliminary
results. For the final results, the
Department continues to find that the
evidence placed on the record of this
administrative review by Dongfang,
DuPont Group, Green Packing, Fuwei
Films, and Wanhua demonstrate both a
de jure and de facto absence of
government control and, therefore, are
eligible for separate-rate status.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Rate for Non-Selected Companies
The statute and the Department’s
regulations do not address the
establishment of a rate to be applied to
individual respondents not selected for
examination when the Department
limits its examination in an
administrative review pursuant to
section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. Generally,
the Department looks to section
735(c)(5) of the Act, which provides
instructions for calculating the allothers rate in an investigation, for
guidance when calculating the rate for
respondents which we did not examine
in an administrative review. Section
735(c)(5)(A) of the Act articulates a
preference that we are not to calculate
an all-others rate using rates which are
zero, de minimis, or based entirely on
facts available. Accordingly, the
Department’s usual practice has been to
average the weighted-average dumping
margins for the selected companies,
excluding rates that are zero, de
minimis, or based entirely on facts
available.13 Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the
Act also provides that, where all rates
11 See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide From the
People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2,
1994) (‘‘Silicon Carbide’’).
12 See Preliminary Results, and accompanying
Decision Memorandum at 3.
13 See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From
France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United
Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Reviews and Rescission of Reviews
in Part, 73 FR 52823, 52824 (September 11, 2008),
and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum at Comment 16.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:32 Jun 11, 2013
Jkt 229001
are zero, de minimis, or based entirely
on facts available, we may use ‘‘any
reasonable method’’ for assigning the
all-others rate, including ‘‘averaging the
estimated weighted-average dumping
margins determined for the exporters
and producers individually
investigated.’’
In this instance, consistent with our
practice, we have established a margin
for the separate rate applicants based on
the rate we calculated for the mandatory
respondents whose rates were not zero,
de minimis, or based entirely on facts
available. Therefore, for the final results,
we have excluded Green Packing’s rate,
and assigned DuPont’s rate as the
separate rate, i.e., 12.80 percent.
Surrogate Country
In the Preliminary Results, we treated
the PRC as an NME country and,
therefore, we calculated normal value in
accordance with section 773(c) of the
Act. We selected Indonesia as the
surrogate country, pursuant to section
773(c)(4) of the Act, because it is a
significant producer of merchandise
comparable to subject merchandise and
is at a level of economic development
comparable to the PRC.14 For the final
results of review, we have continued to
treat the PRC as an NME country and
have used the same primary surrogate
country, Indonesia.
35247
results of review. Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), the Department will
calculate importer (or customer)
-specific assessment rates based on the
ratio of the total amount of the dumping
margins calculated for the examined
sales to the total entered value of those
same sales.15 The Department will
instruct CBP to assess antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries covered
by this review if any importer-specific
assessment rate is above de minimis.
The Department recently announced a
refinement to its assessment practice in
NME cases. Pursuant to this refinement
in practice, for entries that were not
reported in the U.S. sales databases
submitted by companies individually
examined during this review, the
Department will instruct CBP to
liquidate such entries at the NME-wide
rate. In addition, if the Department
determines that an exporter under
review had no shipments of the subject
merchandise, any suspended entries
that entered under that exporter’s case
number (i.e., at that exporter’s rate) will
be liquidated at the NME-wide rate.16
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this
administrative review for all shipments
of the subject merchandise from the PRC
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
Final Results of the Review
for consumption on or after the
The dumping margins for the POR are publication date, as provided by section
as follows:
751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For the
exporter listed above, the cash deposit
Weighted— rate will be established in the final
average
results of this review (except, if the rate
Exporter
dumping
is zero or de minimis, i.e., less than 0.5
margin
(percent)
percent, no cash deposit will be
required for that company); (2) for
DuPont Teijin Films China Limpreviously investigated or reviewed PRC
ited ........................................
12.80
and non-PRC exporters not listed above
Shaoxing Xiangyu Green Packing Co., Ltd ...........................
0.00 that have separate rates, the cash
deposit rate will continue to be the
Fuwei Films (Shandong) Co.,
Ltd .........................................
12.80 exporter-specific rate published for the
Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd ...........
12.80 most recent period; (3) for all PRC
Sichuan Dongfang Insulating
exporters of subject merchandise which
Material Co., Ltd ...................
12.80 have not been found to be entitled to a
separate rate, the cash deposit rate will
Assessment Rates
be that for the PRC-wide entity; and (4)
for all non-PRC exporters of subject
Consistent with these final results,
merchandise which have not received
and pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of
their own rate, the cash deposit rate will
the Act, and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the
be the rate applicable to the PRC
Department will direct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to assess exporter that supplied that non-PRC
antidumping duties on all appropriate
15 In these final results, the Department applied
entries of subject merchandise in
the assessment rate calculation method adopted in
accordance with the final results of this
Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the
review. The Department intends to issue Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and
Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping
assessment instructions to CBP 15 days
Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101
after the date of publication of the final
(February 14, 2012).
14 See
Preliminary Results, and accompanying
Decision Memorandum at 7.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16 See Non-Market Economy Antidumping
Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 76
FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM
12JNN1
35248
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 113 / Wednesday, June 12, 2013 / Notices
exporter. These deposit requirements,
when imposed, shall remain in effect
until further notice.
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations
performed within five days of the date
of publication of this notice to parties in
this proceeding in accordance with 19
CFR 351.224(b).
This notice 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 POR. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
Department’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
has occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping
duties.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder
to parties subject to administrative
protective orders (‘‘APO’’) of their
responsibility concerning the return or
destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which
continues to govern business
proprietary information in this segment
of the proceeding. 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
violation which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing this
administrative review and notice in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and
777(i) of the Act.
Dated: June 5, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
I. General Issues
Issue 1: Respondent Selection
Issue 2: Surrogate Country Selection
Issue 3: Calculation of the Surrogate
Financial Ratios
Issue 4: Calculation of a Separate Rate
II. Company-Specific Issues
Issue 5: Treatment of the DuPont Group’s
Reintroduced PET Chip
Issue 6: Calculation of the DuPont Group’s
U.S. Indirect Selling Ratio
Issue 7: Calculation of the DuPont Group’s
Foreign Brokerage and Handling Expenses
Jkt 229001
Scope of the Order
The merchandise subject to the order
is circular welded non-alloy steel pipe
and tube. For a full description of the
scope of the order, see Issues and
Decision Memorandum,3 which is
hereby adopted by this notice. The
written description is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
International Trade Administration
[A–580–809]
Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe
From the Republic of Korea: Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2010–2011
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 7, 2012, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of the administrative review of
the antidumping duty order on circular
welded non-alloy steel pipe (CWP) from
the Republic of Korea (Korea) for the
period November 1, 2010, through
October 31, 2011.1 For these final
results, we find that subject
merchandise has been sold at less than
normal value.
DATES: Effective Date: June 12, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mary Kolberg or Jennifer Meek, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 1, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone (202) 482–1785 or (202) 482–
2778, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
Appendix—Issues & Decision
Memorandum
16:32 Jun 11, 2013
[FR Doc. 2013–13985 Filed 6–11–13; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Notification to Importers Regarding
The Reimbursement of Duties
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Issue 8: Calculation of the DuPont Group’s
Margin Using the Average-to-Transaction
Method
Issue 9: The DuPont Group’s Billing
Adjustments
Issue 10: Green Packing’s By-Product Offsets
Issue 11: Assessment Rate to Curwood
On December 7, 2012, the Department
published the preliminary results of the
administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on CWP from
Korea.2
On February 19, 2013, we received
case briefs from Husteel Co., Ltd.
(Husteel), Hyundai HYSCO (HYSCO),
United States Steel Corporation, and
Wheatland Tube Company. On February
28, 2013, we received rebuttal briefs
from these four interested parties.
1 See Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From
the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2010–
2011, 77 FR 73015 (December 7, 2012) (Preliminary
Results).
2 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The comments received in the case
and rebuttal briefs are addressed in the
Issues and Decision Memorandum. A
list of the issues raised and to which we
have responded in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum, is attached to
this notice as an Appendix. The Issues
and 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). Access to IA ACCESS is
available to registered users at https://
iaaccess.trade.gov and is available to all
parties in the Central Records Unit,
Room 7046 of the main Department of
Commerce building. In addition, a
complete version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the Internet at https://
www.trade.gov/ia. The signed Issues
and Decision Memorandum and the
electronic version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Changes From the Preliminary Results
Based on our analysis of the
comments received from interested
parties, we have changed our
calculation methodology for Husteel’s
and HYSCO’s dumping margins, by
reallocating certain costs and revising
the targeted dumping analysis,
conversion factors, and general and
administrative and financial expenses.
See the Issues and Decision
Memorandum and the company-specific
calculation memoranda dated
concurrently with this notice.
Final Results of the Review
As a result of this review, we
determine that the following weightedaverage dumping margins exist for the
period November 1, 2010, through
October 31, 2011:
3 See Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Senior
Advisor for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for
Import Administration, entitled ‘‘Issues and
Decision Memorandum for the Administrative
Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Circular
Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from the Republic of
Korea,’’ (Issues and Decision Memorandum) dated
concurrently with this notice.
E:\FR\FM\12JNN1.SGM
12JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 113 (Wednesday, June 12, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35245-35248]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13985]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-924]
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From the
People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review; 2010-2011
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On December 10, 2012, the Department of Commerce
(``Department'') published its
[[Page 35246]]
Preliminary Results of the third administrative review of the
antidumping duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and
strip (``PET film'') from the People's Republic of China (``PRC'').\1\
We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Preliminary
Results. After reviewing interested parties' comments and information
received, we have made changes for the final results of this review.
The final antidumping duty margins for this review are listed below in
the ``Final Results of the Review'' section of this notice. The period
of review (``POR'') is November 1, 2010, through October 31, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From
the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of
Administrative Review; 2010-2011, 77 FR 73428 (December 10, 2012),
and accompanying Decision Memorandum (``Preliminary Results'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: June 12, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Martin or Jonathan Hill, 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-
3936 and (202) 482-3518 respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department published the Preliminary Results on December 10,
2012. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii), we invited parties
to comment on our Preliminary Results.\2\ On January 28, 2013, the
following interested parties filed timely case briefs: Bemis Company,
Inc., and its affiliate Curwood Inc.; Shaoxing Xiangyu Green Packing
Co., Ltd. (``Green Packing''); Terphane Inc.; Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd.
(``Wanhua''),\3\ Fuwei Films (Shandong) Co., Ltd. (``Fuwei Films''),
and Sichuan Dongfang Insulating Material Co., Ltd. (``Dongfang'') \4\
(collectively, ``Wanhua et al.''); Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc.,
SKC, Inc., and Toray Plastics (America), Inc. (collectively,
``Petitioners''); DuPont Teijin Films China Limited,\5\ DuPont Hongji
Films Foshan Co., Ltd., and DuPont Teijin Hongji Films Ningbo Co., Ltd.
(``DuPont Group''). On February 4, 2013, the following interested
parties filed timely rebuttal briefs: Terphane Inc., Petitioners, Green
Packing, DuPont Group, and Wanhua et al.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See id., 77 FR at 73429.
\3\ In the Preliminary Results, Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd. was
erroneously referred to in the rate table as ``Tianjin Wanhua Co.,
Ltd. Sichuan'' The correct name of Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd. is shown
in the rate table in this notice.
\4\ In the Preliminary Results, Sichuan Dongfang Insulating
Material Co., Ltd. was erroneously referred to in the rate table as
``Dongfang Insulating Material Co., Ltd.'' The correct name of
Sichuan Dongfang Insulating Material Co., Ltd. is shown in the rate
table in this notice.
\5\ In the Preliminary Results, DuPont Teijin Films China
Limited was erroneously referred to in the rate table as ``DuPont
Teijin China Limited.'' The correct name of DuPont Teijin Films
China Limited is shown in the rate table in this notice.
\6\ The Department removed the rebuttal brief of Wanhua et al.
from the administrative record because it contained untimely filed
new factual information. The Department permitted the resubmission
of a redacted version of the rebuttal brief, with the untimely
factual information removed, on February 12, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties are
addressed in the ``Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip
from the People's Republic of China: Issues and Decision Memorandum for
the Final Results of the 2010-2011 Administrative Review,'' dated
concurrently with this notice (``Issues & Decision Memo''). A list of
the issues raised by interested parties is attached to this notice as
an Appendix. The Issues & Decision Memo 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 registered users at https://iaaccess.trade.gov, and it is available to all parties in the Central
Records Unit, Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In
addition, a complete version of the Issues & Decision Memo can be
accessed directly on the Internet at https://www.trade.gov/ia. The
signed Issues & Decision Memo and the electronic versions of the Issues
& Decision Memo are identical in content.
Scope of the Order
The products covered by the order are all gauges of raw, pre-
treated, or primed PET film, whether extruded or co-extruded.\7\ PET
film is classifiable under subheading 3920.62.00.90 of the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our
written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. A full
description of the scope of the order is contained in the Issues &
Decision Memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From
Brazil, the People's Republic of China and the United Arab Emirates:
Antidumping Duty Orders and Amended Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value for the United Arab Emirates, 73 FR 66595
(November 10, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
Based on the comments received from the interested parties, we have
made the following changes from the Preliminary Results:
1. We are including the reported reintroduced PET chip factor of
production in the DuPont Group's normal value;
2. We are excluding the DuPont Group's reported billing adjustments
from the calculation of U.S. net price;
3. We are correcting a clerical error in the calculation of
surrogate selling, general, and administrative expenses, interest
expenses, and profit for the DuPont Group and Green Packing;
4. Due to the changes in the dumping margins for DuPont Group, the
rate calculated for the separate rate companies has also changed.
For a discussion of the issues, see the Issues & Decision Memo.
Non-Market Economy Country
The PRC has been treated as a non-market economy (``NME'') in every
proceeding conducted by the Department. In accordance with section
771(18)(C)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the ``Act''), any
determination that a foreign country is an NME shall remain in effect
until revoked by the administering authority. The Department has not
revoked the PRC's status as an NME. Therefore, the Department continues
to treat the PRC as an NME for purposes of these final results and,
accordingly, applied the NME methodology.
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving NMEs, the Department maintains a
rebuttable presumption that all companies within the NME are subject to
government control and, therefore, should be assessed a single
weighted-average dumping margin.\8\ The Department's policy is to
assign all exporters of merchandise subject to review in an NME country
this single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is
sufficiently independent so as to be entitled to a separate rate.\9\
The Department analyzes whether each entity exporting the merchandise
under consideration is sufficiently independent under a test
established in Sparklers \10\ and further developed in
[[Page 35247]]
Silicon Carbide.\11\ According to this separate rate test, the
Department will assign a separate rate in NME proceedings if a
respondent can demonstrate the absence of both de jure and de facto
government control over its export activities. If, however, the
Department determines that a company is wholly foreign owned, then a
separate rate analysis is not necessary to determine whether that
company is independent from government control and eligible for a
separate rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See, e.g., Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip
from the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value, 73 FR 55039, 55040 (September 24, 2008).
\9\ See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value:
Sparklers From the People's Republic of China, 56 FR 20588, 20589
(May 6, 1991) (``Sparklers'').
\10\ See id.
\11\ See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Silicon Carbide From the People's Republic of China, 59
FR 22585 (May 2, 1994) (``Silicon Carbide'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Preliminary Results, the Department found that Dongfang,
DuPont Group, Green Packing, Fuwei Films, and Wanhua demonstrated their
eligibility for separate-rate status.\12\ No party commented on these
preliminary results. For the final results, the Department continues to
find that the evidence placed on the record of this administrative
review by Dongfang, DuPont Group, Green Packing, Fuwei Films, and
Wanhua demonstrate both a de jure and de facto absence of government
control and, therefore, are eligible for separate-rate status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Preliminary Results, and accompanying Decision
Memorandum at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rate for Non-Selected Companies
The statute and the Department's regulations do not address the
establishment of a rate to be applied to individual respondents not
selected for examination when the Department limits its examination in
an administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act.
Generally, the Department looks to section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which
provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in an
investigation, for guidance when calculating the rate for respondents
which we did not examine in an administrative review. Section
735(c)(5)(A) of the Act articulates a preference that we are not to
calculate an all-others rate using rates which are zero, de minimis, or
based entirely on facts available. Accordingly, the Department's usual
practice has been to average the weighted-average dumping margins for
the selected companies, excluding rates that are zero, de minimis, or
based entirely on facts available.\13\ Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act
also provides that, where all rates are zero, de minimis, or based
entirely on facts available, we may use ``any reasonable method'' for
assigning the all-others rate, including ``averaging the estimated
weighted-average dumping margins determined for the exporters and
producers individually investigated.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof From France, Germany,
Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Reviews and Rescission of Reviews in Part, 73 FR
52823, 52824 (September 11, 2008), and accompanying Issues and
Decision Memorandum at Comment 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this instance, consistent with our practice, we have established
a margin for the separate rate applicants based on the rate we
calculated for the mandatory respondents whose rates were not zero, de
minimis, or based entirely on facts available. Therefore, for the final
results, we have excluded Green Packing's rate, and assigned DuPont's
rate as the separate rate, i.e., 12.80 percent.
Surrogate Country
In the Preliminary Results, we treated the PRC as an NME country
and, therefore, we calculated normal value in accordance with section
773(c) of the Act. We selected Indonesia as the surrogate country,
pursuant to section 773(c)(4) of the Act, because it is a significant
producer of merchandise comparable to subject merchandise and is at a
level of economic development comparable to the PRC.\14\ For the final
results of review, we have continued to treat the PRC as an NME country
and have used the same primary surrogate country, Indonesia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Preliminary Results, and accompanying Decision
Memorandum at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of the Review
The dumping margins for the POR are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted--average
Exporter dumping margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DuPont Teijin Films China Limited.................... 12.80
Shaoxing Xiangyu Green Packing Co., Ltd.............. 0.00
Fuwei Films (Shandong) Co., Ltd...................... 12.80
Tianjin Wanhua Co., Ltd.............................. 12.80
Sichuan Dongfang Insulating Material Co., Ltd........ 12.80
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
Consistent with these final results, and pursuant to section
751(a)(2)(A) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department will
direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to assess
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in
accordance with the final results of this review. The Department
intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date
of publication of the final results of review. Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), the Department will calculate importer (or customer) -
specific assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of the
dumping margins calculated for the examined sales to the total entered
value of those same sales.\15\ The Department will instruct CBP to
assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this
review if any importer-specific assessment rate is above de minimis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ In these final results, the Department applied the
assessment rate calculation method adopted in Antidumping
Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and
Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Proceedings: Final
Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department recently announced a refinement to its assessment
practice in NME cases. Pursuant to this refinement in practice, for
entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales databases submitted by
companies individually examined during this review, the Department will
instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the NME-wide rate. In
addition, if the Department determines that an exporter under review
had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that
entered under that exporter's case number (i.e., at that exporter's
rate) will be liquidated at the NME-wide rate.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Non-Market Economy Antidumping Proceedings: Assessment
of Antidumping Duties, 76 FR 65694 (October 24, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all
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 the exporter
listed above, the cash deposit rate will be established in the final
results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis,
i.e., less than 0.5 percent, no cash deposit will be required for that
company); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC
exporters not listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit
rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the
most recent period; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise
which 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
[[Page 35248]]
exporter. These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in
effect until further notice.
Disclosure
We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the
date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
Notification to Importers Regarding The Reimbursement of Duties
This notice 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 POR. Failure to comply with this
requirement could result in the Department's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties has occurred and the subsequent
assessment of doubled antidumping duties.
Administrative Protective Orders
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which
continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of
the proceeding. 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 violation which is subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing this administrative review and notice
in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: June 5, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix--Issues & Decision Memorandum
I. General Issues
Issue 1: Respondent Selection
Issue 2: Surrogate Country Selection
Issue 3: Calculation of the Surrogate Financial Ratios
Issue 4: Calculation of a Separate Rate
II. Company-Specific Issues
Issue 5: Treatment of the DuPont Group's Reintroduced PET Chip
Issue 6: Calculation of the DuPont Group's U.S. Indirect Selling
Ratio
Issue 7: Calculation of the DuPont Group's Foreign Brokerage and
Handling Expenses
Issue 8: Calculation of the DuPont Group's Margin Using the Average-
to-Transaction Method
Issue 9: The DuPont Group's Billing Adjustments
Issue 10: Green Packing's By-Product Offsets
Issue 11: Assessment Rate to Curwood
[FR Doc. 2013-13985 Filed 6-11-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
