6634 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 10, 2010 / Notices 

this administrative review, as provided 

by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: 1) the 

cash deposit rates for each specific 

company listed above will be the rates 

shown above, except if the rate is less 

than 0.50 percent, and therefore, de 

minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 

351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash 

deposit rate will be zero; 2) for 

previously reviewed or investigated 

companies not participating in this 

review, the cash deposit rate will 

continue to be the company–specific 

rate published for the most recent 

period; 3) if the exporter is not a firm 

covered in this review, a prior review, 

or the original 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) the cash 

deposit rate for all other manufacturers 

or exporters will be 40.18 percent, the 

all–others rate established in the LTFV 

investigation. These requirements, when 

imposed, shall remain in effect until 

further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

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 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. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This notice serves as the only 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective order (APO) of 

their responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

written notification of return/ 

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and the terms of an 

APO is a sanctionable violation. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

final results of review in accordance 

with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of 

the Act. 

Dated: February 3, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix Issues in Decision Memo 

Hitachi 

Comment 1: Bona Fides of Hitachi 

Cable’s U.S. Sale 

NKKN 

Comment 2: Sample Sales in the U.S. 

Database 

Comment 3: SAS Programming Errors 

[FR Doc. 2010–2985 Filed 2–9–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–533–825] 

Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, 

Sheet, and Strip from India: Final 

Results of Countervailing Duty 

Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On July 31, 2009, the 

Department of Commerce (Department) 

issued the preliminary results of 

administrative review of the 

countervailing duty order on 

polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, 

and strip (PET film) from India for the 

period January 1, 2007 through 

December 31, 2007. See Polyethylene 

Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip 

from India: Preliminary Results of 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Review, 74 FR 39631 (August 7, 2009) 

(Preliminary Results). Based on the 

results of our analysis of the comments 

received, the Department has made 

certain revisions to the subsidy rates for 

the respondent, Jindal Poly Films 

Limited of India (Jindal), formerly 

named Jindal Polyester Limited (Jindal). 

The final subsidy rate for the reviewed 

company is listed below in the section 

entitled ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’ 

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 10, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elfi 

Blum, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, 

Import Administration, International 

Trade Administration, U.S. Department 

of Commerce, 14th Street and 

Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–0197. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Since the issuance of the Preliminary 

Results, the following events have 

occurred. The Department issued its 

third supplemental questionnaire to the 

Government of India (GOI) and to Jindal 

on August 6, 2009. The GOI and Jindal 

filed their responses on September 3, 

2009, and on September 2, 2009, 

respectively. The Department set an 

initial briefing schedule on September 

3, 2003, and revised it on September 8, 

2009. Jindal filed a case brief on 

December 22, 2009, and the petitioners, 

Dupont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi 

Polyester Film of America, and Toray 

Plastics (America), Inc., filed a rebuttal 

brief on January 4, 2010. 

The Department issued its Post– 

Preliminary Determination on 

Invalidated Licenses under the Advance 

License Program (ALP) on December 23, 

2009. See Memorandum To Ronald K. 

Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary 

for Import Administration, from Barbara 

E. Tillman, Director, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 6: Polyethylene 

Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip 

(PET film) from India: 2007 

Administrative Review of the 

Countervailing duty Order; Post– 

Preliminary Determination (December 

23, 2009) (Post–Preliminary 

Determination Memorandum). Although 

the Department invited interested 

parties to comment, no comments were 

filed on the Post–Preliminary 

Determination Memorandum. 

Scope of the Order 

For 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 

All issues raised in the case brief and 

rebuttal brief by parties to this 

administrative review are addressed in 

the Issues and Decision Memorandum 

in the Final Results of the 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Review of Polyethylene Terephthalate 

Film, Sheet, and Strip (PET Film) from 

India, from John M. Anderson, Acting 

Deputy Assistant Secretary to Ronald K. 

Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary 

for Import Administration (February 3, 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 10, 2010 / Notices 6635 

2010) (Issues and Decision 

Memorandum), which is hereby 

adopted by this notice. The Issues and 

Decision Memorandum also contains a 

complete analysis of the programs 

covered by this review, the 

methodologies used to calculate the 

subsidy rates, and discusses any 

changes to the subsidy rates. A list of 

the comments raised in the briefs and 

addressed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum is appended to this 

notice. The Issues and Decision 

Memorandum is on file in the Central 

Records Unit, Room 1117 of the main 

Department building, and can be 

accessed directly on the Web at http:// 

ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on our analysis of comments 

received, we have revised the 

calculations with respect to the benefit 

amount calculated with respect to on 

certain Export Promotion Capital Goods 

Scheme (EPCGS) licenses that the GOI 

issued prior to 2005. Specifically, we 

deducted the relevant application fees 

(as an offset) from the unpaid duty 

amounts that we use in our benefit 

calculations. For those EPCGS licenses 

treated as contingent liability loans, we 

will deducted the relevant application 

fees from the ‘‘principal’’ (i.e., unpaid 

duties). For those EPCGS licenses for 

which the GOI has formally waived the 

duties, we will deduct the relevant 

application fees from the amount of 

unpaid duties that is allocated. All 

changes are discussed in detail in the 

Issues and Decision Memorandum. 

Final Results of Review 

In accordance with section 

751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (Act) and 19 CFR 

351.221(b)(5), we calculated individual 

ad valorem subsidy rates for Jindal, the 

only producer/exporter subject to 

review for the calendar year 2007, the 

period of review for this administrative 

review. 

Manufacturer/Exporter Net Subsidy Rate 

Jindal Poly Films Limited of India. .............. 7.17 % 

Assessment and Cash Deposit 

Instructions 

The Department intends to issue 

assessment instructions to U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days 

after the date of publication of these 

final results of review to liquidate 

shipments of subject merchandise by 

Jindal entered, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption on or after 

January 1, 2007 through December 31, 

2007. We will also instruct CBP to 

collect cash deposits of estimated 

countervailing duties, at the above rate, 

on shipments of the subject 

merchandise by Jindal entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after the date of 

publication of these final results of 

review. The cash deposit rates for all 

companies not covered by this review 

are not changed by the results of this 

review. 

Return or Destruction of Proprietary 

Information 

This notice serves as a reminder to 

parties subject to the administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

disposition of proprietary information 

disclosed under the APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely 

written notification of return or 

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and the terms of an 

APO is a sanctionable violation. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: February 3, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

APPENDIX I 

LIST OF ISSUES ADDRESSED IN THE 

ISSUES AND DECISION 

MEMORANDUM 

Benefit Calculation For the Export 

Promotion Capital Goods Scheme 

(EPCGS) 

Comment 1: Allocation of Benefit for 

License Number P/J/3092819 

Comment 2: EPCGS Benefits on Capital 

Goods Used for Non–Subject 

Merchandise 

Comment 3: Deduction of Certain 

Application Fees Paid on EPCGS 

Licenses 

Value Added Tax (VAT) 

Comment 4: Benefits Through Refunds 

of the VAT 

Advanced License Program (ALP) 

Comment 5: Countervailability of the 

ALP under the GOI’s New Monitoring 

Procedures 

[FR Doc. 2010–2986 Filed 2–9–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Foreign–Trade Zones Board 

[Docket 9–2010] 

Foreign–Trade Zone 33—Pittsburgh, 

Pennsylvania, Expansion of 

Manufacturing Authority, Subzone 

33E—DNP IMS America Corporation 

(Thermal Transfer Ribbon Printer 

Rolls), Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania 

An application has been submitted to 

the Foreign–Trade Zones Board (the 

Board) by the Regional Industrial 

Development Corporation of 

Southwestern Pennsylvania, grantee of 

FTZ 33, requesting an expansion of the 

scope of manufacturing authority 

approved within Subzone 33E, on 

behalf of DNP IMS America Corporation 

(DNP) in Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania. 

The application was submitted pursuant 

to the provisions of the Foreign–Trade 

Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a– 

81u), and the regulations of the Board 

(15 CFR part 400). It was formally filed 

on February 4, 2010. 

Subzone 33E (123 employees, 360 

million square meters coating capacity) 

currently has authority for the 

manufacture of thermal transfer ribbon 

(TTR) (A(27f)-68–2009, 11/12/2009). 

The subzone (135,985 sq. ft., 3.12 acres) 

is located at 1001 Technology Drive, 

Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania. 

The current request involves the 

production of monochrome TTR printer 

rolls (some 336 million square meters 

capacity), using foreign–sourced master 

rolls of TTR, representing 71–87% of 

the value of the finished product. The 

scope otherwise would remain 

unchanged. 

FTZ procedures could exempt DNP 

from customs duty payments on the 

foreign TTR master rolls used in export 

production. The company anticipates 

that some 10 percent of the plant’s 

shipments will be exported. On its 

domestic sales, DNP would be able to 

choose the duty rate during customs 

entry procedures that apply to the 

finished TTR printer rolls (duty–free) 

for the foreign TTR master rolls (3.7%). 

FTZ procedures would further allow 

DNP to realize logistical benefits 

through the use of certain customs 

procedures and duty savings on scrap 

and waste for the new activity. The 

request indicates that the savings from 

FTZ procedures help improve the 

plant’s international competitiveness. 

In accordance with the Board’s 

regulations, Diane Finver of the FTZ 

Staff is designated examiner to evaluate 

and analyze the facts and information 

presented in the application and case 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES