Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014, 89056-89057 [2016-29570]

Download as PDF 89056 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 237 / Friday, December 9, 2016 / Notices a firm covered in this or any previous review or in the original less-than-fairvalue (LTFV) 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 or the investigation, the cash-deposit rate will continue to be the all-others rate of 2.40 percent which is the allothers rate established by the Department in the LTFV investigation.5 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Reimbursement of Duties This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties. Administrative Protective Order mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES 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 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/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 notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h). Dated: December 5, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2016–29568 Filed 12–8–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 5 See PET Film from Taiwan Amended Final Determination, 67 FR at 44175, unchanged in Correction Notice, 67 FR at 46566. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Dec 08, 2016 Jkt 241001 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–533–825] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 3, 2016, the Department published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (PET film) from India. This review covers two companies: Jindal Poly Films Limited (Jindal), and SRF Limited. The period of review (POR) is January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014. Based on an analysis of the comments received, the Department has made changes to the subsidy rate determined for Jindal. The final subsidy rates are listed in the ‘‘Final Results of Administrative Review’’ section below. DATES: Effective December 9, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi Blum, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0197. AGENCY: Scope of the Order For the purposes of the order, the products covered are all gauges of raw, pretreated, or primed polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet and strip, 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 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 order is dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received The issues raised by Petitioners 1 and Jindal in their case briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.2 Neither party submitted 1 DuPont Teijin Films, Inc., Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc. and SKC, Inc. (collectively, Petitioners). 2 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 rebuttal briefs. The issues are identified in the Appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 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 http://trade.gov/ enforcement/frn/index.html. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results The Department published the preliminary results of this administrative review of PET film from India on August 3, 2016.3 Based on the comments received from Petitioners, in these final results, we corrected a ministerial error made in the context of our analysis of the Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS).4 Methodology The Department conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we find that there is a subsidy, i.e., a government-provided financial contribution that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific.5 For a description of the methodology underlying all of the Department’s conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India; 2013,’’ dated concurrently with this notice and herein incorporated by reference (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 3 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From India: Preliminary Results And Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014, 81 FR 51186 (August 3, 2016) (Preliminary Results 2014). 4 For a discussion of these issues, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum, and Memorandum to the File from Elfi Blum, International Trade Compliance Analyst, titled ‘‘Final Results of 2014 Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India—Jindal Polyfilms Limited,’’ each dated concurrently with these final results. 5 See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) of the Act regarding benefit; and, section 771(5A) of the Act regarding specificity. E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM 09DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 237 / Friday, December 9, 2016 / Notices Final Results of Administrative Review In accordance with section 777A(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we determine the total estimated net countervailable subsidy rates for the period January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014 to be: Manufacturer/exporter Subsidy rate (percent ad valorem) Jindal Poly Films of India Limited ............................... SRF Limited .......................... 5.52 2.16 Assessment and Cash Deposit Requirements In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), the Department intends to issue appropriate instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days after publication of the final results of this review. The Department will instruct CBP to liquidate shipments of subject merchandise produced and/or exported by the companies listed above, entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption from January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014, at the percent rates, as listed above for each of the respective companies, of the entered value. The Department intends also to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties, in the amounts shown above for each of the respective companies shown above, on shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits at the most-recent company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Administrative Protective Order This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to an 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(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of 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. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Dec 08, 2016 Jkt 241001 These final results are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: December 1, 2016. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix I Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Scope of the Order III. Period of Review IV. Subsidies Valuation Information A. Allocation Period B. Attribution of Subsidies C. Benchmarks Interest Rates D. Denominator V. Analysis of Programs A. Programs Determined To Be Countervailable B. Programs Determined To Be Not Used or to Provide No Benefit During the POR VI. Final Results of Review VII. Analysis of Comments Comment 1: Whether the Department should calculate a benefit for the Status Holder Incentive Scheme (SHIS) when Jindal did not report any benefits received during the POR. Comment 2: Whether the Value Added Tax (VAT) and Central Sales Tax (CST) Refunds Under the Industrial Promotion Subsidy (IPS) of the State Government of Maharashtra’s (SGOM) Package Scheme of Incentives (PSI) Are Countervailable Comment 3: Whether the Department should countervail benefits received under the State and Union Territory Sales Tax Incentive Program Comment 4: Whether the Department erroneously omitted one sub-program in its summation of the Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS) subprograms [FR Doc. 2016–29570 Filed 12–8–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–489–819] Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar From the Republic of Turkey: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and Intent To Rescind the Review in Part; 2014 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on steel concrete reinforcing bar (rebar) from the Republic of Turkey (Turkey). The period of review (POR) is September 15, 2014, through December 31, 2014. This review AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 89057 covers two producers/exporters of subject merchandise that the Department selected for individual examination: Icdas Celik Enerji Tersane ve Ulasim Sanayi A.S. (Icdas) and Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S. and Kaptan Metal Dis Ticaret ve Nakliyat A.S. (Kaptan Demir Companies) (collectively, the mandatory respondents). This review also covers the following firms that were not individually examined: 3212041 Canada Inc.; Acemar International Limited; As Gaz Sinai ve Tibbi Azlar A.S.; Colakoglu Dis Ticaret A.S. (also known as Colakoglu Disticaret AS); Colakoglu Metalurji A.S.; Del Industrial Metals; Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S. (also known as Habas Sinai 199, Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar, and/or Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal); Izmir Demir Celik Sanayi A.S.; Ozkan Demir Celik Sanayi A.S.; Tata Steel International (Hong Kong) Limited (also known as Tata Steel International (Hong Kong)); and Tata Steel UK. We preliminarily find that the mandatory respondents each received a de minimis net subsidy rate during the POR. See ‘‘Preliminary Results of Review’’ section of this notice below for the preliminary rates calculated for the companies covered in this review. DATES: Effective December 9, 2016. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristen Johnson (Icdas) and Samuel Brummitt (Kaptan Demir), AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–4793, and (202) 482–7851, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scope of the Order The scope of the order consists of steel concrete reinforcing bar imported in either straight length or coil form (rebar) regardless of metallurgy, length, diameter, or grade. The subject merchandise is classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) primarily under item numbers 7213.10.0000, 7214.20.0000, and 7228.30.8010. The subject merchandise may also enter under other HTSUS numbers including 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.5000, 7221.00.0015, 7221.00.0030, 7221.00.0045, 7222.11.0001, 7222.11.0057, 7222.11.0059, 7222.30.0001, 7227.20.0080, 7227.90.6085, 7228.20.1000, and 7228.60.6000. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM 09DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 237 (Friday, December 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 89056-89057]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-29570]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-825]


Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: 
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On August 3, 2016, the Department published the preliminary 
results of the administrative review of the countervailing duty order 
on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (PET film) from 
India. This review covers two companies: Jindal Poly Films Limited 
(Jindal), and SRF Limited. The period of review (POR) is January 1, 
2014, through December 31, 2014. Based on an analysis of the comments 
received, the Department has made changes to the subsidy rate 
determined for Jindal. The final subsidy rates are listed in the 
``Final Results of Administrative Review'' section below.

DATES: Effective December 9, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi Blum, AD/CVD Operations, Office 
VII, Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0197.

Scope of the Order

    For the purposes of the order, the products covered are all gauges 
of raw, pretreated, or primed polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet 
and strip, 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 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 order is dispositive.

Analysis of Comments Received

    The issues raised by Petitioners \1\ and Jindal in their case 
briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\2\ Neither 
party submitted rebuttal briefs. The issues are identified in the 
Appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public 
document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service 
System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 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 http://trade.gov/enforcement/frn/index.html. The signed 
Issues and Decision Memorandum and electronic versions of the Issues 
and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ DuPont Teijin Films, Inc., Mitsubishi Polyester Film, Inc. 
and SKC, Inc. (collectively, Petitioners).
    \2\ See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to 
Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, 
``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene 
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India; 2013,'' dated 
concurrently with this notice and herein incorporated by reference 
(Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    The Department published the preliminary results of this 
administrative review of PET film from India on August 3, 2016.\3\ 
Based on the comments received from Petitioners, in these final 
results, we corrected a ministerial error made in the context of our 
analysis of the Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip From 
India: Preliminary Results And Partial Rescission of Countervailing 
Duty Administrative Review; 2014, 81 FR 51186 (August 3, 2016) 
(Preliminary Results 2014).
    \4\ For a discussion of these issues, see the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum, and Memorandum to the File from Elfi Blum, 
International Trade Compliance Analyst, titled ``Final Results of 
2014 Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene 
Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India--Jindal Polyfilms 
Limited,'' each dated concurrently with these final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Methodology

    The Department conducted this review in accordance with section 
751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each 
of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we find that there is a 
subsidy, i.e., a government-provided financial contribution that gives 
rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is 
specific.\5\ For a description of the methodology underlying all of the 
Department's conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act regarding 
financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) of the Act regarding 
benefit; and, section 771(5A) of the Act regarding specificity.

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

[[Page 89057]]

Final Results of Administrative Review

    In accordance with section 777A(e)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.221(b)(5), we determine the total estimated net countervailable 
subsidy rates for the period January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014 
to be:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Subsidy rate
                  Manufacturer/exporter                     (percent ad
                                                             valorem)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jindal Poly Films of India Limited......................            5.52
SRF Limited.............................................            2.16
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment and Cash Deposit Requirements

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), the Department intends to 
issue appropriate instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(CBP) 15 days after publication of the final results of this review. 
The Department will instruct CBP to liquidate shipments of subject 
merchandise produced and/or exported by the companies listed above, 
entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption from January 1, 
2014, through December 31, 2014, at the percent rates, as listed above 
for each of the respective companies, of the entered value.
    The Department intends also to instruct CBP to collect cash 
deposits of estimated countervailing duties, in the amounts shown above 
for each of the respective companies shown above, on shipments of 
subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of 
this review. For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to 
continue to collect cash deposits at the most-recent company-specific 
or all-others rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These 
cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until 
further notice.

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to 
an 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(a)(3), which 
continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of 
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.
    These final results are issued and published in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: December 1, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix I

Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Scope of the Order
III. Period of Review
IV. Subsidies Valuation Information
    A. Allocation Period
    B. Attribution of Subsidies
    C. Benchmarks Interest Rates
    D. Denominator
V. Analysis of Programs
    A. Programs Determined To Be Countervailable
    B. Programs Determined To Be Not Used or to Provide No Benefit 
During the POR
VI. Final Results of Review
VII. Analysis of Comments
Comment 1: Whether the Department should calculate a benefit for the 
Status Holder Incentive Scheme (SHIS) when Jindal did not report any 
benefits received during the POR.
Comment 2: Whether the Value Added Tax (VAT) and Central Sales Tax 
(CST) Refunds Under the Industrial Promotion Subsidy (IPS) of the 
State Government of Maharashtra's (SGOM) Package Scheme of 
Incentives (PSI) Are Countervailable
Comment 3: Whether the Department should countervail benefits 
received under the State and Union Territory Sales Tax Incentive 
Program
Comment 4: Whether the Department erroneously omitted one sub-
program in its summation of the Export Promotion Capital Goods 
Scheme (EPCGS) sub-programs

[FR Doc. 2016-29570 Filed 12-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P