7684 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices 

9See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 

10 Id. 

11 Id. 

12See 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). 

13For a full discussion of this practice, see 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 

(May 6, 2003). 

14See Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires 

from the Republic of Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand: 

Antidumping Duty Orders and Amended Final 

Affirmative Antidumping Duty Determination for 

Thailand, 86 FR 38011 (July 19, 2021). 

statutory injunction has expired (i.e., 

within 90 days of publication). 

Where the respondent reported 

reliable entered values, we calculated 

importer—(or customer-) specific ad 

valorem rates by aggregating the 

dumping margins calculated for all U.S. 

sales to each importer (or customer) and 

dividing this amount by the total 

entered value of the sales to each 

importer (or customer).9 Where 

Commerce calculated a weightedaverage dumping margin by dividing the 

total amount of dumping for reviewed 

sales to that party by the total sales 

quantity associated with those 

transactions, Commerce will direct CBP 

to assess importer—(or customer-) 

specific assessment rates based on the 

resulting per-unit rates.10 Where an 

importer—(or customer-) specific ad 

valorem or per-unit rate is greater than 

de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent), 

Commerce will instruct CBP to collect 

the appropriate duties at the time of 

liquidation.11 Where an importer—(or 

customer-) specific ad valorem or perunit rate is zero or de minimis, 

Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate 

appropriate entries without regard to 

antidumping duties.12

For the company not selected for 

individual review, we will assign an 

assessment rate based on the 

methodology described in the ‘‘Rates for 

Non-Examined Companies’’ section, 

above. 

Consistent with Commerce’s 

assessment practice, for entries of 

subject merchandise during the POR 

produced by Hankook, Nexen, or the 

non-examined companies for which the 

producer did not know that its 

merchandise was destined for the 

United States, we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate unreviewed entries at the allothers rate if there is no rate for the 

intermediate company(ies) involved in 

the transaction.13

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective for all 

shipments of subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date of the final results of 

this administrative review, as provided 

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

the cash deposit rates for the companies 

listed in these final results will be equal 

to the weighted-average dumping 

margins established in the final results 

of this review; (2) for merchandise 

exported by producers or exporters not 

covered in this review but covered in a 

prior segment of this proceeding, the 

cash deposit rate will continue to be the 

company-specific rate published for the 

most recently completed segment in 

which the company was reviewed; (3) if 

the exporter is not a firm covered in this 

review or the original less-than-fairvalue (LTFV) investigation, but the 

producer is, the cash deposit rate will be 

the rate established for the most recently 

completed segment of this proceeding 

for the producer of the subject 

merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit 

rate for all other producers or exporters 

will continue to be 21.74 percent,14 the 

all-others rate established in the LTFV 

investigation. These cash deposit 

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 POR. Failure to comply with 

this requirement could result in the 

presumption that reimbursement of 

antidumping duties occurred and the 

subsequent assessment of double 

antidumping duties. 

Administrative Protective Order 

This notice also serves as a reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

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

written notification of the return or 

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and terms of an 

APO is a sanctionable violation. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.213(h) and 351.221(b)(5) of 

Commerce’s regulations. 

Dated: January 30, 2024. 

Abdelali Elouaradia, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

Appendix I 

List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum 

I. Summary 

II. Background 

III. Scope of the Order 

IV. Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

V. Discussion of the Issues 

Comment 1: Hankook’s Inventory Carrying 

Cost Adjustment 

Comment 2: Hankook’s Freight Revenue 

Offset 

Comment 3: Hankook’s Affiliated-Party 

Sales in the Home Market 

Comment 4: Hankook’s Beginning Sale 

Dates in the U.S. Market 

Comment 5: Hankook’s U.S. Commissions 

Comment 6: Hankook’s Tire & Technology 

Co., Ltd.’s Name 

Comment 7: Nexen’s Beginning Sales Dates 

in the Home Market and U.S. Market 

Comment 8: Nexen’s Home Market 

Physical Characteristics 

Comment 9: Nexen’s Levels of Trade 

Comment 10: Nexen’s Home Market 

Logistics Revenue 

VI. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2024–02235 Filed 2–2–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–533–824] 

Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, 

Sheet, and Strip From India: Final 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; Second 

Correction 2021–2022 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Commerce (Commerce) determines that 

SRF Limited/SRF Limited of India/SRF 

Limited Packaging Films (SRF) did not 

make sales of subject merchandise to the 

United States at less than normal value 

during the period of review (POR) July 

1, 2021, through June 30, 2022. We will 

apply SRF’s rate to Jindal Poly Films 

Ltd. (India) (Jindal) and Polyplex 

Corporation Ltd. (Polyplex) for these 

final results. 

DATES: Applicable February 5, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jacqueline Arrowsmith, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office VII, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–5255. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices 7685 

1See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and 

Strip from India: Preliminary Results and Partial 

Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Reviews; 2021–2022, 88 FR 51298 (August 3, 2023) 

(Preliminary Results), and accompanying 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM). 

2See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and 

Strip from India: Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and 

Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; 2021–2022; Correction, 88 

FR 82321 (November 24, 2023) (Preliminary Results 

Correction); see also ‘‘Analysis of Comments 

Received,’’ below. 

3See Commerce’s Letter, ‘‘Second Supplemental 

Questionnaire,’’ dated September 26, 2023. 

4See SRF’s Letter, ‘‘Submission of 2nd 

Supplemental response of Anti-Dumping Admin 

Review Questionnaire,’’ dated October 16, 2023. 

5See SRF’s Letter, ‘‘Cost Data,’’ dated February 9, 

2023. 

6See SRF’s Letter, ‘‘Submission of 3rd 

Supplemental response of Anti-Dumping Admin 

Review Questionnaire,’’ dated November 29, 2023 

(SRF 3rd SQR). 

7See Commerce’s Letter, ‘‘Supplemental 

Questionnaire,’’ dated November 22, 2023. 

8See SRF 3rd SQR at S3–1. 

9 Id. 

10See Notice of Amended Final Antidumping 

Duty Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 

Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Polyethylene 

Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India, 67 

FR 44175 (July 1, 2002) (Order). 

11See Polyplex USA’s Letter, ‘‘Polyplex USA 

LLC’s Letter in Lieu of Case Brief,’’ dated August 

31, 2023 (Polyplex USA’s Letter). 

12See Polyplex USA’s Letter at 2; see also 

Preliminary Results at 51299. 

13See Preliminary Results Correction. 

14See Memorandum, ‘‘SRF’s Final Analysis 

Memorandum,’’ dated concurrently with this 

Federal Register notice. 

15See Preliminary Results, 88 FR at 51299; see 

also Preliminary Results Correction, 88 FR at 82321. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On August 3, 2023, Commerce 

published the Preliminary Results and 

invited interested parties to comment on 

those results.1 This review originally 

covered eight respondents: SRF; Jindal; 

Ester Industries Ltd.; Garware Polyester 

Ltd.; MTZ Polyesters, Ltd.; Polyplex; 

Uflex Ltd.; and Vacmet India Limited 

(Vacmet). We rescinded the review for 

six of these companies: Ester Industries 

Ltd.; Garware Polyester Ltd.; MTZ 

Polyesters, Ltd.; Polyplex; Uflex Ltd.; 

and Vacmet. We erroneously rescinded 

the review with respect to Polyplex, 

which we corrected in the Preliminary 

Results Correction on November 24, 

2023.2

On September 26, 2023, Commerce 

issued a second supplemental 

questionnaire to SRF regarding sections 

B and C of the original questionnaire.3

SRF submitted its response along with 

new home market and U.S. sales 

datasets on October 16, 2023.4 We used 

these data sets for the final results along 

with SRF’s original cost data set, 

submitted on February 9, 2023.5

On November 29, 2023, SRF 

submitted its response to the third 

supplemental questionnaire 6 in which 

Commerce requested further 

clarifications about the company name.7

In its supplemental questionnaire 

response, SRF stated that ‘‘SRF 

Limited’’ is the official name of the 

company and that going forward, SRF 

Limited will use only that name.8 In 

addition, SRF stated that ‘‘SRF Limited’’ 

is the official name of the company 

while ‘‘Packaging Film’’ is one division 

within the legal entity of SRF Limited.9

Given that SRF Limited may have used 

all three of these names on subject 

merchandise, the company has been 

reviewed as SRF Limited/SRF Limited 

of India/SRF Limited Packaging Films. 

Scope of the Order 10

The products covered by the Order 

are all gauges of raw, pretreated, or 

primed PET film, whether extruded or 

coextruded. Excluded are metalized 

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 polyethylene 

terephthalate film, sheet, and strip are 

currently classifiable in the Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States 

(HTSUS) under item number 

3920.62.00.90. HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes. The written description of the 

scope of the Order is dispositive. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

On August 31, 2023, Polyplex USA 

LLC (Polyplex USA) submitted a letter 

in lieu of a case brief.11 In the letter, 

Polyplex USA explained that although 

Commerce ‘‘recognizes in the 

Preliminary Determination {sic} 

{Results} that it ‘initiated a review of 

eight companies,’ it erroneously stat{e}s 

that the review request for Polyplex was 

‘timely withdrawn.’ ’’ 12 We agreed with 

Polyplex USA and, on November 24, 

2023, Commerce published a correction 

notice.13 In the Correction to the 

Preliminary Results, we correctly 

assigned SRF’s rate of zero percent to 

Polyplex. 

Commerce received no comments on 

the Preliminary Results beyond the 

request to amend the Preliminary 

Results to include a review of Polyplex 

and apply the rate calculated for SRF. 

Moreover, the data SRF submitted in its 

supplemental questionnaire responses 

did not change the rate we calculated 

for SRF in the Preliminary Results, and 

we have not otherwise modified our 

analysis. Thus, although we are issuing 

a final calculation memorandum in 

these final results,14 no issues and 

decision memorandum accompanies 

this Federal Register notice. We are 

adopting the analysis contained in the 

Preliminary Results as the final results 

of this review. 

Second Correction to Partial Rescission 

In the Preliminary Results and 

Preliminary Results Correction, we 

stated that we were rescinding the 

antidumping duty (AD) administrative 

review with respect to Vacmet India 

instead of Vacmet India Limited.15 With 

the publication of this notice, 

Commerce is clarifying that we 

rescinded the AD administrative review 

with respect to Vacmet India Limited. 

Final Results of Review 

As a result of this review, Commerce 

determines that the following weightedaverage dumping margin exists for the 

period July 1, 2021, through June 30, 

2022: 

Exporter/producer 

Weightedaverage 

dumping 

margin 

(percent) 

Jindal Poly Films Ltd .................. 0.00 

SRF Limited/SRF Limited of 

India/SRF Limited Packaging 

Films ........................................ 0.00 

Polyplex Corporation Ltd ............ 0.00 

Disclosure and Public Comment 

Commerce intends to disclose the 

calculations performed in connection 

with these final results of review to 

interested parties within five days after 

public announcement of the final results 

or, if there is no public announcement, 

within five days of the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.224(b). 

Assessment Rates 

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), 

and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce 

has determined, and U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, 

ADs on all appropriate entries covered 

by this review. Because we calculated a 

zero percent margin in the final results 

of this review for SRF and assigned a 

zero percent rate to Jindal and Polyplex, 

in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212, we 

will instruct CBP to liquidate the 

appropriate entries without regard to 

ADs. 

Commerce intends to issue 

assessment instructions to CBP no 

earlier than 35 days after the date of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
7686 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 24 / Monday, February 5, 2024 / Notices 

16See Order at 44176 (showing the dumping 

margin computed for all other producers/exporters 

as 24.14 percent); and Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 

Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip 

from India, 67 FR 34899, 34901 (May 16, 2002) 

(showing an adjustment of 18.43 percent for export 

subsidies found in the companion countervailing 

duty investigation). The cash deposit rate for all 

other exporters is the net of these figures (i.e., 5.71 

percent). 

1See Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet from 

Bahrain, Brazil, Croatia, Egypt, Germany, India, 

Indonesia, Italy, Oman, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, 

South Africa, Spain, Taiwan and the Republic of 

Turkey: Antidumping Duty Orders, 86 FR 22139 

(April 27, 2021) (CAAS AD Germany Order or 

Order). 

2See Kodak’s Letter, ‘‘Request for Expedited 

Changed Circumstances Review,’’ dated May 9, 

2023 (CCR Request); see also Kodak’s Letter, 

‘‘Supplemental Questionnaire Response,’’ dated 

June 9, 2023 (Kodak’s Supplemental Questionnaire 

Response). 

3See Memorandum, ‘‘Proposed Exclusion 

Language,’’ dated July 24, 2023. 

4See Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet from 

Germany: Notice of Initiation of Changed 

Circumstances Review, and Consideration of 

Revocation, in Part, of the Antidumping Duty 

Order, 88 FR 49446 (July 31, 2023) (Initiation 

Notice). 

5 Id., 88 FR at 49448. 

6See Aluminum Association’s Letter, 

‘‘Petitioners’ Response to Department’s Initiation 

Notice,’’ dated August 30, 2023 (Aluminum 

Association’s Comments) and Kodak’s Letter, 

‘‘Comments on Changed Circumstances Review,’’ 

dated August 30, 2023 (Kodak’s Comments). 

7See Kodak’s Letter, ‘‘Rebuttal Comments on 

Changed Circumstances Review,’’ dated September 

6, 2023. 

publication of the final results of this 

review in the Federal Register. If a 

timely summons is filed at the U.S. 

Court of International Trade, the 

assessment instructions will direct CBP 

not to liquidate relevant entries until the 

time for parties to file a request for a 

statutory injunction has expired (i.e., 

within 90 days of publication). 

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 entered, or 

withdrawn from warehouse, for 

consumption on or after the publication 

date, as provided for by section 

751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash 

deposit rate for SRF, Jindal, and 

Polyplex will be zero, the rate 

established in the final results of this 

review; (2) for previously reviewed or 

investigated companies not covered 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 or any previous review or in the 

original less-than-fair-value (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 LTFV investigation, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be the allothers rate of 5.71 percent, which is the 

all-others rate established by Commerce 

in the LTFV investigation.16 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 

responsibility under 19 CFR 

351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 

regarding the reimbursement of ADs 

prior to liquidation of the relevant 

entries during this review period. 

Failure to comply with this requirement 

could result in the Commerce’s 

presumption that reimbursement of ADs 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double ADs. 

Administrative Protective Order 

This notice also serves as a final 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective order (APO) of 

their responsibility concerning the 

return or destruction of proprietary 

information disclosed under 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 the terms of an APO is 

a sanctionable violation. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

These results are being issued and 

published in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 

CFR 351.221(b)(5) and 19 CFR 

351.213(h)(2). 

Dated: January 29, 2024. 

Abdelali Elouaradia, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2024–02181 Filed 2–2–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–428–849] 

Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet From 

Germany: Preliminary Results of 

Changed Circumstances Review, and 

Intent To Revoke the Antidumping 

Duty Order, in Part 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Commerce (Commerce) preliminarily 

intends to revoke, in part, the 

antidumping duty (AD) order on 

common alloy aluminum sheet (CAAS) 

from Germany with respect to certain 

lithographic-grade aluminum sheet. 

Interested parties are invited to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

DATES: Applicable February 5, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephanie Trejo, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office IV, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4390. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On April 27, 2021, Commerce 

published the AD order on common 

alloy aluminum sheet from Germany.1

On May 9, 2023, Eastman Kodak 

Company (Kodak), a U.S. importer of 

subject merchandise, requested that 

Commerce conduct a changed 

circumstances review (CCR), and 

revoke, in part, the CAAS AD Germany 

Order with respect to certain 

lithographic-grade aluminum sheet 

pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), 

and 19 CFR 351.216(b).2 On July 24, 

2023, Commerce issued proposed 

partial revocation language for the scope 

in which it omitted references to enduse certificates which had been 

included by Kodak and solicited 

interested parties comments on that 

language.3 On July 31, 2023, Commerce 

initiated the requested CCR.4 In the 

Initiation Notice, Commerce invited 

interested parties to provide comments 

and/or factual information regarding the 

CCR, including comments on industry 

support and the proposed partial 

revocation language.5 On August 30, 

2023, the Aluminum Association 

Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet Trade 

Enforcement Working Group and its 

individual members (Aluminum 

Association) and Kodak commented on 

the CCR.6 On September 6, 2023, Kodak 

responded to the Aluminum 

Association’s comments.7

Scope of the CAAS AD Germany Order 

The products covered by the Order 

are common alloy aluminum sheet, 

which is a flat-rolled aluminum product 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1