Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From the Republic of Korea; Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[A-580-807]

Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From the

Republic of Korea; Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of amended final results of Antidumping Duty

Administrative Review.

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

SUMMARY: On August 17, 1995, the Department of Commerce (the

Department) published the final results of its administrative review of

the antidumping duty order on polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet,

and strip from the Republic of Korea (60 FR 42835). Clerical errors

which were timely filed by the parties were not corrected by the

Department prior to the time the parties filed suit with the Court of

International Trade (CIT). Therefore, leave was requested to correct

the clerical errors in this case. Pursuant to orders issued by the CIT

on November 16, 1995, and November 27, 1995, granting leave to the

Department to correct ministerial errors, we have corrected several

ministerial errors with respect to sales of subject merchandise by four

Korean manufacturers/exporters. The errors were present in our final

results of review. The review covers the period November 30, 1990,

through May 31, 1992. We are publishing this amendment to the final

results of review in accordance with 19 C.F.R. 353.28(c) and the orders

issued by the CIT.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 12, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roy F. Unger, Jr. or Thomas F.

Futtner, Office of Antidumping Compliance, Import Administration, U.S.

Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20230, telephone: (202) 482-0651/3814.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The review covers four manufacturers/exporters of polyethylene

terephthalate (PET) film from the Republic of Korea (Korea): Cheil

Synthetics, Inc. (Cheil), SKC Limited (SKC), Kolon Industries, Inc.

(Kolon), and STC Corporation (STC), and the period November 30, 1990

through May 31, 1992. The Department published the preliminary results

of review on July 8, 1994 (59 FR 35098), and the final results of

review on August 17, 1995 (60 FR 42835).

[[Page 5376]]

Clerical errors which were timely filed by the parties were not

corrected by the Department prior to the time the parties filed suit

with the CIT. Therefore, leave was requested to correct the clerical

errors in this case. On November 16, 1995, and November 27, 1995, the

CIT issued orders granting leave to the Department to correct

ministerial errors in these final results.

Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute and to the

Department's regulations are references to the provisions as they

existed on December 31, 1994.

Scope of Review

Imports covered by the review are shipments of all gauges of raw,

pretreated, or primed polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and

strip, whether extruded or coextruded. The films excluded from this

review 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 (0.254 micrometers) thick. Roller transport cleaning film which

has at least one of its surfaces modified by the application of 0.5

micrometers of SBR latex has also been ruled as not within the scope of

the order.

PET film is currently classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule

(HTS) subheading 3920.62.00.00. The HTS subheading is provided for

convenience and for U.S. Customs purposes. The written description

remains dispositive as to the scope of the product coverage.

For most of the respondents the period of review (POR) covers

November 30, 1990 through May 31, 1992. Because Cheil was determined to

have a de minimis margin in the Preliminary Determination of Sales at

Less Than Fair Value (56 FR 16305) (LTFV), Cheil's POR begins on April

22, 1991, when suspension of its merchandise was first ordered, and

runs through May 31, 1992.

Ministerial Errors in Final Results of Review

The CIT granted leave to the Department to correct ministerial

errors. The Department determined that it made the following clerical

errors in the final results:

All Respondents

In the final calculations, the Department's cost of production

(COP) test for all respondents inadvertently retained products sold

below the COP in less than three months. We corrected the COP test

calculations for all respondents by revising the COP test to exclude

those products from our dumping analysis which were sold in less than

three months during the period of review (POR) and were also sold below

COP for those months (i.e., a product sold in two months would be

excluded from analysis if that product was sold below COP for two

months).

Cheil

In our final calculations we inadvertently failed to add Cheil's

duty drawback for local export sales (a type of home market sale) to

Cheil's net home market price before conducting the COP test. We

corrected this clerical error by adding duty drawback to Cheil's net

home market price before conducting the COP test.

In our final calculations we inadvertently included packing and

imputed credit expenses twice in the calculation of constructed value

(CV). We corrected this by re-writing the CV program to include these

expenses only once.

Our final calculations contained a typographical error in the

product code variable in the difference-in-merchandise section. We

corrected this error by re-writing this section of the calculations

with the correct product code variable.

SKC

The final calculations contained a typographical error in the

variable name for two models of PET film in SKC's model-matching

section. We corrected this error by inserting the correct variable name

for these two models of PET film.

In our final calculations, we inadvertently re-calculated SKC's

imputed U.S. credit expense using date of sale for unpaid sales to

Anacomp instead of the date of payment. We corrected this error by re-

calculating SKC's U.S. credit expense using the date of payment.

Our final results calculations failed to use the proper data set

containing SKC's further-processed sales in the United States in

calculating SKC's exporter's sales price (ESP) transactions. We

corrected this error by using the proper data set for SKC's ESP

calculations. In our final calculations we incorrectly computed profit

attributable to further-processed sales by inadvertently deducting

SKC's U.S. movement expenses twice from this calculation. We corrected

this error by re-writing the further-processed sales program to deduct

these expenses only once.

Kolon

In the final calculations for Kolon we re-calculated Kolon's U.S.

inland insurance expense based upon revised data gathered at

verification. These calculations contained a typographical error. We

corrected the typographical error in the final calculations of Kolon's

U.S. inland insurance expense.

STC

For our final calculations we inadvertently re-calculated STC's

home market credit expense based upon a shorter payment period than its

actual payment period. We corrected our final calculations by computing

STC's home market credit expense based upon the actual payment period.

Amended Final Results of Review

Upon correction of the ministerial errors listed above, the

Department has determined that the following margins exist for the

periods indicated:

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

Percent

Manufacturer/exporter margin

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

November 30, 1990 through May 31, 1992:

SKC Limited................................................. 0.11

Kolon Industries............................................ 0.60

STC Corporation............................................. 11.41

April 22, 1991 through May 31, 1992:

Cheil Synthetics............................................ 0.07

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

The Customs Service shall assess antidumping duties on all

appropriate entries. Individual differences between USP and FMV may

vary from the percentages stated above. The Department will issue

appraisement instructions concerning each respondent directly to the

U.S. Customs Service.

Furthermore, the following deposit requirements will be effective

for all shipments of the subject merchandise, entered, or withdrawn

from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of

these amended final results of administrative review, as provided for

by section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for

the reviewed firms will be the rates outlined above, except for Cheil

and SKC, which, because their weighted-average margins were de minimis,

will be zero percent; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated

companies not listed above, 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

in the original LTFV investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash

deposit rate will be the rate established for the most

[[Page 5377]]

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 conducted by the Department in the LTFV

investigation, the cash deposit rate will be 4.82%, the all others rate

established in the LTFV investigation.

These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until publication

of the final results of the next administrative review.

This notice serves as the final reminder to importers of their

responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 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.

This notice also serves as a 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 353.34(d). Timely written notification or

conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to

comply with the regulations and the terms of the APO is a sanctionable

violation.

This amendment of final results of review and notice are in

accordance with section 751(f) of the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(f))

and 19 CFR 353.28(c).

Dated: Janaury 31,1 996.

Susan G. Esserman,

Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

[FR Doc. 96-3065 Filed 2-9-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P