[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 1, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5464-5466]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01959]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-533-825]


Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India: 
Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and 
Rescission, in Part; 2019

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) determines certain 
producers/exporters of polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and 
strip (PET film) from India received countervailable subsidies during 
the period of review (POR), January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019. 
Additionally, we are rescinding the review for one company with no 
shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR.

DATES: Applicable February 1, 2022.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicholas Czajkowski or Richard 
Roberts, AD/CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1395 
or (202) 482-3464, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Commerce published the Preliminary Results of this review on August 
2, 2021, and invited comments from interested parties.\1\ On November 
1, 2021, Commerce extended the deadline for the final results of this 
review until January 28, 2022.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from 
India: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Review, Rescission in Part, and Intent To Rescind in Part; 2019; 86 
FR 41450 (August 8, 2021) (Preliminary Results), and accompanying 
Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM).
    \2\ See Memorandum, ``Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and 
Strip from India: Extension of Deadline for Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2019,'' dated November 1, 
2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For a complete description of the events that occurred since the 
Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Memorandum, ``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 
Results of the Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 2019: 
Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India,'' 
dated concurrently with, and hereby adopted by, this notice (Issues 
and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    The products covered by this order are all gauges of raw, 
pretreated, or primed polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet and strip, 
whether extruded or coextruded from India. For a complete description 
of the scope of this order, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised by the interested parties in their case and 
rebuttal briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A 
list of these issues is provided in Appendix I to this notice. The 
Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file 
electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and CVD 
Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to 
registered users at http://

[[Page 5465]]

access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on the comments received from interested parties, we revised 
the calculation of the net countervailable subsidy rates for all 
companies. For a discussion of these issues, see the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum.

Methodology

    Commerce 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 determine 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.\4\ For a description of the methodology underlying all of 
Commerce's conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rescission of Administrative Review, in Part

    It is Commerce's practice to rescind an administrative review of a 
countervailing duty order, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), when there 
are no reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR for 
which liquidation is suspended.\5\ Normally, upon completion of an 
administrative review, the suspended entries are liquidated at the 
countervailing duty assessment rate calculated for the review 
period.\6\ Therefore, for an administrative review of a company to be 
conducted, there must be a reviewable, suspended entry that Commerce 
can instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to liquidate at 
the calculated countervailing duty assessment rate calculated for the 
review period.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, e.g., Lightweight Thermal Paper from the People's 
Republic of China: Notice of Rescission of Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Review; 2015, 82 FR 14349 (March 20, 2017); see also 
Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic 
of China: Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; 
2017, 84 FR 14650 (April 11, 2019).
    \6\ See 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2).
    \7\ See 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the CBP import data, one company subject to this 
review, Vacmet India Limited, did not have reviewable entries of 
subject merchandise during the POR for which liquidation is suspended. 
Because there is no evidence on the record of this segment of the 
proceeding to indicate that this company had entries, exports, or sales 
of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR, we are 
rescinding the administrative review with respect to this company 
consistent with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).

Rate for Non-Selected Companies Under Review

    There are three companies for which a review was requested and not 
rescinded, and which were not selected as mandatory respondents. For 
these companies, because the rates calculated for the sole mandatory 
respondent, SRF, was above de minimis and not based entirely on facts 
available, we are applying to the non-selected companies SRF's rate. 
This methodology to establish the all-others subsidy rate is consistent 
with our practice and section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, which governs 
the calculation of the all-others rate in investigations.

Final Results of Review

    We determine the following net countervailable subsidy rate for the 
POR January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Subsidy rate
                  Manufacturer/exporter                     (percent ad
                                                             valorem)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SRF Limited \8\.........................................            5.39
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Review-Specific Average Rate Applicable to the Following Companies \9\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ester Industries Limited................................            5.39
Garware Polyester Ltd...................................            5.39
Jindal Poly Films Ltd \10\..............................            5.39
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure

    We intend to disclose to interested parties the calculations and 
analysis performed for these final results of review within five days 
of the date of publication of this notice, in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.224(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ SRF Limited is also known as SRF Limited of India.
    \9\ This rate is based on the rate for the respondent that was 
selected for individual review, excluding rates that are zero, de 
minimis, or based entirely on facts available. See section 
735(c)(5)(A) of the Act.
    \10\ This company is also known as Jindal Poly Films Ltd. 
(India). This company was incorrectly identified in the Preliminary 
Results as Jindal Polyester Ltd. The name has been corrected in 
these final results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment

    In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.212(b)(2), Commerce shall determine, and CBP shall assess, 
countervailing duties on all appropriate entries covered by this 
review. Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no 
earlier than 35 days after 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).
    With respect to the company for which this administrative review is 
rescinded (i.e., Vacmet India Limited), countervailing duties shall be 
assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit rate required at the time 
of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, during the 
period January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, in accordance with 
19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i).

Cash Deposit Requirements

    In accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce also 
intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated 
countervailing duties in the amounts shown above for the above-listed 
companies with regard to shipments of subject merchandise entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of 
publication of these final results of review. For all non-reviewed 
firms, CBP will continue to collect cash deposits of estimated 
countervailing duties at the all-others rate or the most recent 
company-specific 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 disposition 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

    The final results are issued and published in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).


[[Page 5466]]


    Dated: January 26, 2022.
Lisa W. Wang,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix--List of Topics Discussed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order Information
IV. Subsidies Valuation
V. Analysis of Programs
VI. Analysis of Comments
    Comment 1: Whether Commerce Correctly Calculated SRF's Benefits 
Received for the Special Economic Zones (SEZ) Program
    Comment 2: Whether Commerce Used the Correct Denominator to 
Calculate Benefits for the SEZ Program
VII. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2022-01959 Filed 1-31-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P