81_FR_89293 81 FR 89056 - Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014

81 FR 89056 - Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From India: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2014

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 237 (December 9, 2016)

Page Range89056-89057
FR Document2016-29570

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.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 237 (Friday, December 9, 2016) 
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 237 (Friday, December 9, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 89056-89057]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[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

89056 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 237 / Friday, December 9, 2016 / Notices a firm covered in this or any previous DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE rebuttal briefs. The issues are identified review or in the original less-than-fair- in the Appendix to this notice. The value (LTFV) investigation but the International Trade Administration Issues and Decision Memorandum is a manufacturer is, the cash-deposit rate [C–533–825] public document and is on file will be the rate established for the most electronically via Enforcement and recent period for the manufacturer of Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Compliance’s Antidumping and the merchandise; and (4) if neither the Sheet, and Strip From India: Final Countervailing Duty Centralized exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm Results of Countervailing Duty Electronic Service System (ACCESS). covered in this or any previous review Administrative Review; 2014 ACCESS is available to registered users or the investigation, the cash-deposit at http://access.trade.gov and in the AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of rate will continue to be the all-others International Trade Administration, rate of 2.40 percent which is the all- the main Department of Commerce Department of Commerce. building. In addition, a complete others rate established by the SUMMARY: On August 3, 2016, the version of the Issues and Decision Department in the LTFV investigation.5 Department published the preliminary Memorandum can be accessed directly These cash deposit requirements, when results of the administrative review of on the Internet at http://trade.gov/ imposed, shall remain in effect until the countervailing duty order on enforcement/frn/index.html. The signed further notice. polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, Issues and Decision Memorandum and Reimbursement of Duties and strip (PET film) from India. This electronic versions of the Issues and review covers two companies: Jindal Decision Memorandum are identical in This notice also serves as a final Poly Films Limited (Jindal), and SRF content. reminder to importers of their Limited. The period of review (POR) is Changes Since the Preliminary Results responsibility under 19 CFR January 1, 2014, through December 31, 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 2014. Based on an analysis of the The Department published the regarding the reimbursement of comments received, the Department has preliminary results of this antidumping duties prior to liquidation made changes to the subsidy rate administrative review of PET film from of the relevant entries during this determined for Jindal. The final subsidy India on August 3, 2016.3 Based on the review period. Failure to comply with rates are listed in the ‘‘Final Results of comments received from Petitioners, in this requirement could result in the Administrative Review’’ section below. these final results, we corrected a Secretary’s presumption that DATES: Effective December 9, 2016. ministerial error made in the context of reimbursement of antidumping duties FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi our analysis of the Export Promotion occurred and the subsequent assessment Blum, AD/CVD Operations, Office VII, Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS).4 of double antidumping duties. Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Methodology Department of Commerce, 1401 Administrative Protective Order Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, The Department conducted this This notice also serves as a reminder DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0197. review in accordance with section to parties subject to administrative 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as Scope of the Order protective order (APO) of their amended (the Act). For each of the For the purposes of the order, the subsidy programs found responsibility concerning the return or products covered are all gauges of raw, countervailable, we find that there is a destruction of proprietary information pretreated, or primed polyethylene subsidy, i.e., a government-provided disclosed under APO in accordance terephthalate film, sheet and strip, financial contribution that gives rise to with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which whether extruded or coextruded. a benefit to the recipient, and that the continues to govern business Excluded are metallized films and other subsidy is specific.5 For a description of proprietary information in this segment finished films that have had at least one the methodology underlying all of the of the proceeding. Timely written of their surfaces modified by the Department’s conclusions, see the Issues notification of the return/destruction of application of a performance-enhancing and Decision Memorandum. APO materials or conversion to judicial resinous or inorganic layer of more than protective order is hereby requested. 0.00001 inches thick. Imports of PET Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for Failure to comply with the regulations film are classifiable in the Harmonized the Final Results of Countervailing Duty and terms of an APO is a violation, Tariff Schedule of the United States Administrative Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India; 2013,’’ dated which is subject to sanction. (HTSUS) under item number concurrently with this notice and herein We are issuing and publishing this 3920.62.00.90. HTSUS subheadings are incorporated by reference (Issues and Decision notice in accordance with sections provided for convenience and customs Memorandum). 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 purposes. The written description of the 3 See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and scope of the order is dispositive. Strip From India: Preliminary Results And Partial CFR 351.213(h). Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Analysis of Comments Received Review; 2014, 81 FR 51186 (August 3, 2016) Dated: December 5, 2016. (Preliminary Results 2014). Paul Piquado, The issues raised by Petitioners 1 and 4 For a discussion of these issues, see the Issues Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Jindal in their case briefs are addressed and Decision Memorandum, and Memorandum to in the Issues and Decision the File from Elfi Blum, International Trade mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Compliance. Compliance Analyst, titled ‘‘Final Results of 2014 [FR Doc. 2016–29568 Filed 12–8–16; 8:45 am] Memorandum.2 Neither party submitted Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 1 DuPont Teijin Films, Inc., Mitsubishi Polyester from India—Jindal Polyfilms Limited,’’ each dated Film, Inc. and SKC, Inc. (collectively, Petitioners). concurrently with these final results. 2 See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy 5 See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act 5 See PET Film from Taiwan Amended Final Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) Determination, 67 FR at 44175, unchanged in Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, of the Act regarding benefit; and, section 771(5A) Correction Notice, 67 FR at 46566. Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and of the Act regarding specificity. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Dec 08, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM 09DEN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 237 / Friday, December 9, 2016 / Notices 89057 Final Results of Administrative Review These final results are issued and covers two producers/exporters of published in accordance with sections subject merchandise that the In accordance with section 777A(e)(1) 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Department selected for individual of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we Dated: December 1, 2016. examination: Icdas Celik Enerji Tersane determine the total estimated net Paul Piquado, ve Ulasim Sanayi A.S. (Icdas) and countervailable subsidy rates for the Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve period January 1, 2014, through Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Ticaret A.S. and Kaptan Metal Dis December 31, 2014 to be: Ticaret ve Nakliyat A.S. (Kaptan Demir Appendix I Companies) (collectively, the mandatory Subsidy rate Manufacturer/exporter (percent ad Issues and Decision Memorandum respondents). This review also covers valorem) the following firms that were not I. Summary II. Scope of the Order individually examined: 3212041 Canada Jindal Poly Films of India Inc.; Acemar International Limited; As Limited ............................... 5.52 III. Period of Review IV. Subsidies Valuation Information Gaz Sinai ve Tibbi Azlar A.S.; Colakoglu SRF Limited .......................... 2.16 A. Allocation Period Dis Ticaret A.S. (also known as B. Attribution of Subsidies Colakoglu Disticaret AS); Colakoglu Assessment and Cash Deposit C. Benchmarks Interest Rates Metalurji A.S.; Del Industrial Metals; Requirements D. Denominator Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal In accordance with 19 CFR V. Analysis of Programs Endustrisi A.S. (also known as Habas A. Programs Determined To Be Sinai 199, Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar, 351.212(b)(2), the Department intends to Countervailable issue appropriate instructions to U.S. B. Programs Determined To Be Not Used or and/or Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15 to Provide No Benefit During the POR Istihsal); Izmir Demir Celik Sanayi A.S.; days after publication of the final results VI. Final Results of Review Ozkan Demir Celik Sanayi A.S.; Tata of this review. The Department will VII. Analysis of Comments Steel International (Hong Kong) Limited instruct CBP to liquidate shipments of Comment 1: Whether the Department should (also known as Tata Steel International subject merchandise produced and/or calculate a benefit for the Status Holder (Hong Kong)); and Tata Steel UK. exported by the companies listed above, Incentive Scheme (SHIS) when Jindal We preliminarily find that the entered or withdrawn from warehouse, did not report any benefits received mandatory respondents each received a during the POR. de minimis net subsidy rate during the for consumption from January 1, 2014, Comment 2: Whether the Value Added Tax through December 31, 2014, at the POR. See ‘‘Preliminary Results of (VAT) and Central Sales Tax (CST) percent rates, as listed above for each of Refunds Under the Industrial Promotion Review’’ section of this notice below for the respective companies, of the entered Subsidy (IPS) of the State Government of the preliminary rates calculated for the value. Maharashtra’s (SGOM) Package Scheme companies covered in this review. The Department intends also to of Incentives (PSI) Are Countervailable DATES: Effective December 9, 2016. instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of Comment 3: Whether the Department should FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: estimated countervailing duties, in the countervail benefits received under the Kristen Johnson (Icdas) and Samuel State and Union Territory Sales Tax amounts shown above for each of the Incentive Program Brummitt (Kaptan Demir), AD/CVD respective companies shown above, on Comment 4: Whether the Department Operations, Office III, Enforcement and shipments of subject merchandise erroneously omitted one sub-program in Compliance, International Trade entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, its summation of the Export Promotion Administration, U.S. Department of for consumption on or after the date of Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS) sub- Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution publication of the final results of this programs Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; review. For all non-reviewed firms, we [FR Doc. 2016–29570 Filed 12–8–16; 8:45 am] telephone (202) 482–4793, and (202) will instruct CBP to continue to collect BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 482–7851, respectively. cash deposits at the most-recent SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: company-specific or all-others rate applicable to the company, as DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Scope of the Order appropriate. These cash deposit The scope of the order consists of requirements, when imposed, shall International Trade Administration steel concrete reinforcing bar imported remain in effect until further notice. [C–489–819] in either straight length or coil form (rebar) regardless of metallurgy, length, Administrative Protective Order Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar From diameter, or grade. The subject This notice also serves as a final the Republic of Turkey: Preliminary merchandise is classifiable in the reminder to parties subject to an Results of Countervailing Duty Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the administrative protective order (APO) of Administrative Review and Intent To United States (HTSUS) primarily under their responsibility concerning the Rescind the Review in Part; 2014 item numbers 7213.10.0000, return or destruction of proprietary 7214.20.0000, and 7228.30.8010. The information disclosed under APO in AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, subject merchandise may also enter accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), International Trade Administration, under other HTSUS numbers including which continues to govern business Department of Commerce. 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.5000, proprietary information in this segment SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 7221.00.0015, 7221.00.0030, mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES of proceeding. Timely written (the Department) is conducting an 7221.00.0045, 7222.11.0001, notification of the return/destruction of administrative review of the 7222.11.0057, 7222.11.0059, APO materials or conversion to judicial countervailing duty (CVD) order on steel 7222.30.0001, 7227.20.0080, protective order is hereby requested. concrete reinforcing bar (rebar) from the 7227.90.6085, 7228.20.1000, and Failure to comply with the regulations Republic of Turkey (Turkey). The period 7228.60.6000. While HTSUS and terms of an APO is a violation of review (POR) is September 15, 2014, subheadings are provided for which is subject to sanction. through December 31, 2014. This review convenience and customs purposes, the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:13 Dec 08, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09DEN1.SGM 09DEN1


Document Created: 2018-02-14 09:03:57
Document Modified: 2018-02-14 09:03:57
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
DatesEffective December 9, 2016.
ContactElfi 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.
FR Citation81 FR 89056 
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR