Commodity Matchbooks from India: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 70965-70968 [E8-27893]
Download as PDF
70965
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 227 / Monday, November 24, 2008 / Notices
Period to be reviewed
Antidumping Duty Proceedings
India: Certain Lined Paper Products,1 A–533–843 .................................................................................................................
The People’s Republic of China: Certain Helical Spring Lock Washers 2 A–570–822
Hangzhou Spring Washer, Co., Ltd. ................................................................................................................................
Trinidad and Tobago: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod,
A–274–804
ArcelorMittal Point Lisas Limited ......................................................................................................................................
9/1/07–8/31/08
10/1/07–9/30/08
10/1/07–9/30/08
Countervailing Duty Proceedings
None ........................................................................................................................................................................................
Suspension Agreements
1 We note that the Department erred by inadvertently including the manufacturer/exporter name: ‘‘Ria ImpEx Pvt. Ltd.’’ in the prior initiation notice under case number A–533–843 for the period of review: 9/1/07–8/31/08. See 73 FR 64305 (October 29, 2008). The Department did not receive a timely request to review Ria ImpEx Pvt. Ltd. for case number A–533–843, therefore, the Department retracts its initiation of an administrative review of the antidumping order with respect to Ria ImpEx Pvt. Ltd. for the period of review 9/1/07–8/31/08.
2 If the above-named company does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Certain Helical Spring Lock Washers from the People’s Republic of China who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of
which the named exporter is a part.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
None.
During any administrative review
covering all or part of a period falling
between the first and second or third
and fourth anniversary of the
publication of an antidumping duty
order under section 351.211 or a
determination under section
351.218(f)(4) to continue an order or
suspended investigation (after sunset
review), the Secretary, if requested by a
domestic interested party within 30
days of the date of publication of the
notice of initiation of the review, will
determine, consistent with FAG Italia v.
United States, 291 F.3d 806 (Fed Cir.
2002), as appropriate, whether
antidumping duties have been absorbed
by an exporter or producer subject to the
review if the subject merchandise is
sold in the United States through an
importer that is affiliated with such
exporter or producer. The request must
include the name(s) of the exporter or
producer for which the inquiry is
requested.
Interested parties must submit
applications for disclosure under
administrative protective orders in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305.
These initiations and this notice are
in accordance with section 751(a) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19
U.S.C. 1675(a)), and 19 CFR
351.221(c)(1)(i).
Dated: November 17, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–27885 Filed 11–21–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 21, 2008
Jkt 217001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A–533–848)
Commodity Matchbooks from India:
Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Investigation
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 24, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elizabeth Eastwood, AD/CVD
Operations, Office 2, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230;
telephone: (202) 482–3874.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
The Petition
On October 29, 2008, the Department
of Commerce (the Department) received
a petition concerning imports of
commodity matchbooks from India (the
petition) filed in proper form by D.D.
Bean & Sons Inc. (the petitioner). See
the Petition on Commodity Matchbooks
from India filed on October 29, 2008. On
November 3, 2008, the Department
issued requests for additional
information and clarification of certain
areas of the petition, including the
scope. Further, on November 6, 2008,
the Department also requested
additional information regarding
constructed export price (CEP) profit.
Based on the Department’s requests, the
petitioner filed two supplements to the
petition on November 6, 2008, and an
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
additional supplement on November 10,
2008. On November 17, 2008, the
Government of India, an interested party
to this proceeding as defined in section
771(9)(B) of the Act, submitted a letter
challenging the definition of the
domestic like product as well as the
completeness of the industry as reported
by the petitioner. The petitioner filed its
reply to this challenge on November 18,
2008.
In accordance with section 732(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act), the petitioner alleges that imports
of commodity matchbooks from India
are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value,
within the meaning of section 731 of the
Act, and that such imports materially
injure, or threaten material injury to, an
industry in the United States.
The Department finds that the
petitioner filed this petition on behalf of
the domestic industry because the
petitioner is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act,
and it has demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the
antidumping duty investigation that the
petitioner is requesting that the
Department initiate (see ‘‘Determination
of Industry Support for the Petition’’
section, below).
Scope of Investigation
The merchandise covered by this
investigation is commodity matchbooks.
See Attachment I to this notice for a
complete description of the
merchandise covered by this
investigation.
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
70966
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 227 / Monday, November 24, 2008 / Notices
Comments on Scope of Investigation
During our review of the petition, we
discussed the scope with the petitioner
to ensure that it is an accurate reflection
of the products for which the domestic
industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as
discussed in the preamble to the
regulations (Antidumping Duties;
Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR
27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)), we are
setting aside a period for interested
parties to raise issues regarding product
coverage. The Department encourages
all interested parties to submit such
comments within 20 calendar days of
the publication of this notice.
Comments should be addressed to
Import Administration’s Central
Records Unit (CRU), Room 1117, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street
and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230. The period of
scope consultations is intended to
provide the Department with ample
opportunity to consider all comments
and to consult with parties prior to the
issuance of the preliminary
determination.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Comments on Product Characteristics
for Antidumping Duty Questionnaire
We are requesting comments from
interested parties regarding the
appropriate physical characteristics of
commodity matchbooks to be reported
in response to the Department’s
antidumping duty questionnaire. This
information will be used to identify the
key physical characteristics of the
subject merchandise in order to more
accurately report the relevant factors
and costs of production, as well as to
develop appropriate product
comparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide any
information or comments that they feel
are relevant to the development of an
accurate listing of physical
characteristics. Specifically, they may
provide comments as to which
characteristics are appropriate to use as:
1) general product characteristics; and
2) the product comparison criteria. We
note that it is not always appropriate to
use all product characteristics as
product comparison criteria. We base
product comparison criteria on
meaningful commercial differences
among products. In other words, while
there may be some physical product
characteristics utilized by
manufacturers to describe commodity
matchbooks, it may be that only a select
few product characteristics take into
account commercially meaningful
physical characteristics. In addition,
interested parties may comment on the
order in which the physical
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 21, 2008
Jkt 217001
characteristics should be used in
product matching. Generally, the
Department attempts to list the most
important physical characteristics first
and the least important characteristics
last.
In order to consider the suggestions of
interested parties in developing and
issuing the antidumping duty
questionnaire, we must receive
comments at the above–referenced
address by December 1, 2008.
Additionally, rebuttal comments must
be received by December 8, 2008.
Determination of Industry Support for
the Petition
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires
that a petition be filed on behalf of the
domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A)
of the Act provides that a petition meets
this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the
petition account for: (i) at least 25
percent of the total production of the
domestic like product; and (ii) more
than 50 percent of the production of the
domestic like product produced by that
portion of the industry expressing
support for, or opposition to, the
petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D)
of the Act provides that, if the petition
does not establish support of domestic
producers or workers accounting for
more than 50 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product,
the Department shall: (i) poll the
industry or rely on other information in
order to determine if there is support for
the petition, as required by
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine
industry support using a statistically
valid sampling method.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines
the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a
whole of a domestic like product. Thus,
to determine whether a petition has the
requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to
producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The U.S.
International Trade Commission (ITC),
which is responsible for determining
whether ‘‘the domestic industry’’ has
been injured, must also determine what
constitutes a domestic like product in
order to define the industry. While both
the Department and the ITC must apply
the same statutory definition regarding
the domestic like product (section
771(10) of the Act), they do so for
different purposes and pursuant to a
separate and distinct authority. In
addition, the Department’s
determination is subject to limitations of
time and information. Although this
may result in different definitions of the
like product, such differences do not
render the decision of either agency
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
contrary to law. See USEC, Inc. v.
United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT
2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v.
United States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644
(CIT 1988), aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir.
1989), cert. denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989).
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the
domestic like product as ‘‘a product
which is like, or in the absence of like,
most similar in characteristics and uses
with, the article subject to an
investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the
reference point from which the
domestic like product analysis begins is
‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’
(i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to
be investigated, which normally will be
the scope as defined in the petition).
With regard to the domestic like
product, the petitioner does not offer a
definition of domestic like product
distinct from the scope of the
investigation. On November 17, 2008,
the Government of India, an interested
party to this proceeding as defined in
section 771(9)(B) of the Act, submitted
a letter challenging the definition of the
domestic like product. On November 18,
2008, the petitioner filed its reply to this
challenge. We have analyzed these
comments, and based on our analysis of
the information submitted on the
record, we have determined that
commodity matchbooks as defined by
the petitioner constitute a single
domestic like product and we have
analyzed industry support in terms of
that domestic like product. For a
discussion of the domestic like product
analysis in this case, see Antidumping
Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist:
Commodity Matchbooks from India
(Initiation Checklist), at Attachment II
(Analysis of Industry Support for the
Petition), on file in the CRU, Room 1117
of the main Department of Commerce
building.
With regard to section 732(c)(4)(A) of
the Act, in determining whether the
petitioner has standing (i.e., the
domestic workers and producer
supporting the petition account for: (1)
at least 25 percent of the total
production of the domestic like product;
and (2) more than 50 percent of the
production of the domestic like product
produced by that portion of the industry
expressing support for, or opposition to,
the petition), we considered the
industry support data contained in the
petition with reference to the domestic
like product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of
Investigation’’ section, above. According
to the petitioner, there are three
producers of the domestic like product:
itself; Bradley Industries, LLC; and Atlas
Match Corp., LLC. (Atlas Match Corp. is
owned by Bradley Industries, LLC.) To
establish industry support, the
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 227 / Monday, November 24, 2008 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
petitioner provided its production of the
domestic like product for calendar year
2007. In addition, Bradley Industries,
LLC provided a letter of support for the
petition and included its production
figures for calendar year 2007. See
Petition at 3; see also Letter of Support
filed by Bradley Industries, LLC, on
October 31, 2008. We have relied upon
data provided by the petitioner and
supporters of the petition for purposes
of measuring industry support. For
further discussion, see Initiation
Checklist at Attachment II.
The Department’s review of the data
provided in the petition, and other
information readily available to the
Department, indicates that the petitioner
has established industry support. First,
the petition establishes support from
domestic producers (or workers)
accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like
product and, as such, the Department is
not required to take further action in
order to evaluate industry support (e.g.,
polling). See section 732(c)(4)(D) of the
Act and Initiation Checklist at
Attachment II. Second, the domestic
producers (or workers) have met the
statutory criteria for industry support
under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act
because the domestic producers (or
workers) who support the petition
account for at least 25 percent of the
total production of the domestic like
product. See Initiation Checklist at
Attachment II. Finally, the domestic
producers (or workers) have met the
statutory criteria for industry support
under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act
because the domestic producers (or
workers) who support the petition
account for more than 50 percent of the
production of the domestic like product
produced by that portion of the industry
expressing support for, or opposition to,
the petition. Accordingly, the
Department determines that the petition
was filed on behalf of the domestic
industry within the meaning of section
732(b)(1) of the Act. See Initiation
Checklist at Attachment II.
The Department finds that the
petitioner filed the petition on behalf of
the domestic industry because it is an
interested party as defined in section
771(9)(C) of the Act and has
demonstrated sufficient industry
support with respect to the antidumping
investigation that it is requesting the
Department initiate. See Initiation
Checklist at Attachment II.
Allegations and Evidence of Material
Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that the U.S.
industry producing the domestic like
product is being materially injured, or is
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 21, 2008
Jkt 217001
threatened with material injury, by
reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at less than normal
value (NV). In addition, the petitioner
alleges that subject imports exceed the
negligibility threshold provided for
under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
The petitioner contends that the
industry’s injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share,
underselling and price depressing and
suppressing effects, lost sales and
revenue, reduced production and
capacity utilization, reduced shipments,
reduced employment, and an overall
decline in financial performance. We
have assessed the allegations and
supporting evidence regarding material
injury, threat of material injury, and
causation, and we have determined that
these allegations are properly supported
by adequate evidence and meet the
statutory requirements for initiation. See
Initiation Checklist at Attachment III
(Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of
Material Injury and Causation for the
Petition).
Period of Investigation
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.204(b)(1), because this petition was
filed on October 29, 2008, the period of
investigation (POI) is October 1, 2007,
through September 30, 2008.
Allegation of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value
The following is a description of the
allegation of sales at less than fair value
upon which the Department has based
its decision to initiate an investigation.
The sources of data for the deductions
and adjustments relating to U.S. price
and NV are discussed in greater detail
in the Initiation Checklist. Should the
need arise to use any of this information
as facts available under section 776 of
the Act, we may reexamine the
information and revise the margin
calculations, if appropriate.
Constructed Export Price
The petitioner calculated CEP based
on actual POI sales prices obtained from
a U.S. distributor for Indian–produced
commodity matchbooks sold by an
Indian producer through its U.S.
affiliate. The petitioner made
adjustments to the starting price, where
applicable, for foreign inland freight,
ocean freight, and marine insurance.
The petitioner calculated foreign inland
freight, ocean freight, and marine
insurance based on price quotes
obtained from service providers.
Because the petitioner’s calculation of
CEP excluded CEP profit, we requested
further information from the petitioner
on this issue. On November 10, 2008,
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
70967
the petitioner stated that the
information necessary to calculate CEP
profit was not reasonably available to it.
Therefore, to be conservative, the
Department has not made an adjustment
for CEP profit in our calculation of CEP.
See Initiation Checklist and ‘‘Fair Value
Comparisons’’ section, below, for the
CEP–to-NV margins.
Normal Value
With respect to NV, the petitioner
stated that home market prices were not
reasonably available to it. The petitioner
made a reasonable attempt to determine
the existence of a viable home market
for commodity matchbooks in India.
According to the petitioner, it was
unsuccessful in obtaining such pricing
information, despite its best efforts. See
the Petition at Exhibit 32. Therefore, the
petitioner based NV on third country
prices.
The petitioner calculated NV based on
a purchase of Indian–made commodity
matchbooks from a Canadian matchbook
retailer. The petitioner deducted a series
of standard markups to estimate the
price at the importer level. The
petitioner made additional adjustments
to the starting third country price,
where applicable, for foreign inland
freight, ocean freight, marine insurance,
and Canadian customs duties. See the
Petition at page 42 and Exhibit 36.
Fair–Value Comparison
Based on the data provided by the
petitioner, there is reason to believe that
imports of commodity matchbooks from
India are being, or are likely to be, sold
in the United States at less than fair
value. Based on a comparison of CEP to
NV, the estimated dumping margin is
135.95 percent.
Initiation of Antidumping Investigation
Based upon the examination of the
petition on commodity matchbooks
from India and other information
reasonably available to the Department,
the Department finds that this petition
meets the requirements of section 732 of
the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an
antidumping duty investigation to
determine whether imports of
commodity matchbooks from India are
being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value. In
accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of
the Act, unless postponed, we will make
our preliminary determination no later
than 140 days after the date of this
initiation.
Respondent Selection
The Department intends to select
respondents based on U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S.
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
70968
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 227 / Monday, November 24, 2008 / Notices
imports during the POI. We intend to
release the CBP data under
Administrative Protective Order (APO)
to all parties with access to information
protected by APO within five days of
publication of this Federal Register
notice, and make our decision regarding
respondent selection within 20 days of
publication of this notice. The
Department invites comments regarding
the CBP data and respondent selection
within 10 days of publication of this
Federal Register notice.
Interested parties must submit
applications for disclosure under APO
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305.
Instructions for filing such applications
may be found on the Department’s
Website at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/apo.
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section
732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version
of the petition have been provided to
the representatives of the Government of
India. We will attempt to provide a copy
of the public version of the petition to
all known foreign producers/exporters,
consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
International Trade Commission (ITC)
Notification
We have notified the ITC of our
initiation, as required by section 732(d)
of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the
International Trade Commission
The ITC will preliminarily determine,
no later than December 13, 2008,
whether there is a reasonable indication
that imports of commodity matchbooks
from India materially injure, or threaten
material injury to, a U.S. industry. A
negative ITC determination covering all
classes or kinds of merchandise covered
by the petition would result in the
investigation being terminated.
Otherwise, this investigation will
proceed according to statutory and
regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published
pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: November 18, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Operations.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Attachment I
Scope of the Investigation Covering
Commodity Matchbooks from the India
The scope of this investigation covers
commodity matchbooks, also known as
commodity book matches, paper
matches or booklet matches.1
1 Such commodity matchbooks are also referred
to as ‘‘for resale’’ because they always enter into
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:32 Nov 21, 2008
Jkt 217001
Commodity matchbooks typically, but
do not necessarily, consist of twenty
match stems which are usually made
from paperboard or similar material
tipped with a match head composed of
any chemical formula. The match stems
may be stitched, stapled or otherwise
fastened into a matchbook cover of any
material, on which a striking strip
composed of any chemical formula has
been applied to assist in the ignition
process.
Commodity matchbooks included in
the scope of this investigation may or
may not contain printing. For example,
they may have no printing other than
the identification of the manufacturer or
importer. Commodity matchbooks may
also be printed with a generic message
such as ‘‘Thank You’’ or a generic image
such as the American Flag, with store
brands (e.g., Kroger, 7–Eleven, Shurfine
or Giant); product brands for national or
regional advertisers such as cigarettes or
alcoholic beverages; or with corporate
brands for national or regional
distributors (e.g., Penley Corp. or
Diamond Brands). They all enter retail
distribution channels. Regardless of the
materials used for the stems of the
matches and regardless of the way the
match stems are fastened to the
matchbook cover, all commodity
matchbooks are included in the scope of
this investigation.
All matchbooks, including
commodity matchbooks, typically
comply with the United States
Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC) Safety Standard for Matchbooks,
codified at 16 CFR § 1202.1 et seq.
The scope of this investigation
excludes promotional matchbooks, often
referred to as ‘‘not for resale,’’ or
‘‘specialty advertising’’ matchbooks, as
they do not enter into retail channels
and are sold to businesses that provide
hospitality, dining, drinking or
entertainment services to their
customers, and are given away by these
businesses as promotional items. Such
promotional matchbooks are
distinguished by the physical
characteristic of having the name and/
or logo of a bar, restaurant, resort, hotel,
´
club, cafe/coffee shop, grill, pub, eatery,
lounge, casino, barbecue or individual
establishment printed prominently on
the matchbook cover. Promotional
matchbook cover printing also typically
includes the address and the phone
number of the business or establishment
being promoted.2 Also excluded are all
retail channels, meaning businesses that sell a
general variety of tangible merchandise, e.g.
convenience stores, supermarkets, dollar stores,
drug stores and mass merchandisers.
2 The gross distinctions between commodity
matchbooks and promotional matchbooks may be
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
other matches that are not fastened into
a matchbook cover such as wooden
matches, stick matches, box matches,
kitchen matches, pocket matches, penny
matches, household matches, strike–
anywhere matches (aka ‘‘SAW’’
matches), strike–on-box matches (aka
‘‘SOB’’ matches), fireplace matches,
barbeque/grill matches, fire starters, and
wax matches.
The merchandise subject to this
investigation is properly classified
under subheading 3605.00.0060 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS). Subject
merchandise may also enter under
subheading 3605.00.0030 of the HTSUS.
Although the HTSUS subheadings are
provided for convenience and customs
purposes, the written description of the
merchandise under investigation is
dispositive.
[FR Doc. E8–27893 Filed 11–21–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–533–849]
Commodity Matchbooks From India:
Initiation of Countervailing Duty
Investigation
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective Date: November 24,
2008.
AGENCY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sean Carey or Paul Matino, 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) 482–3964 and (202)
482–4146, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On October 29, 2008, the Department
of Commerce (the Department) received
a petition on commodity matchbooks
from India filed in proper form by D.D.
Bean & Sons Co. (Petitioner), a domestic
producer of commodity matchbooks. On
November 3, 2008, the Department
summarized as follows: (1) if it has no printing, or
is printed with a generic message such as ‘‘Thank
You’’ or a generic image such as the American Flag,
or printed with national or regional store brands or
corporate brands, it is commodity; (2) if it has
printing, and the printing includes the name of a
´
bar, restaurant, resort, hotel, club, cafe/coffee shop,
grill, pub, eatery, lounge, casino, barbecue, or
individual establishment prominently displayed on
the matchbook cover, it is promotional.
E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM
24NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 227 (Monday, November 24, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70965-70968]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-27893]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A-533-848)
Commodity Matchbooks from India: Initiation of Antidumping Duty
Investigation
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 24, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Eastwood, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3874.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Petition
On October 29, 2008, the Department of Commerce (the Department)
received a petition concerning imports of commodity matchbooks from
India (the petition) filed in proper form by D.D. Bean & Sons Inc. (the
petitioner). See the Petition on Commodity Matchbooks from India filed
on October 29, 2008. On November 3, 2008, the Department issued
requests for additional information and clarification of certain areas
of the petition, including the scope. Further, on November 6, 2008, the
Department also requested additional information regarding constructed
export price (CEP) profit. Based on the Department's requests, the
petitioner filed two supplements to the petition on November 6, 2008,
and an additional supplement on November 10, 2008. On November 17,
2008, the Government of India, an interested party to this proceeding
as defined in section 771(9)(B) of the Act, submitted a letter
challenging the definition of the domestic like product as well as the
completeness of the industry as reported by the petitioner. The
petitioner filed its reply to this challenge on November 18, 2008.
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of commodity
matchbooks from India are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value, within the meaning of section
731 of the Act, and that such imports materially injure, or threaten
material injury to, an industry in the United States.
The Department finds that the petitioner filed this petition on
behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioner is an interested
party as defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act, and it has
demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the
antidumping duty investigation that the petitioner is requesting that
the Department initiate (see ``Determination of Industry Support for
the Petition'' section, below).
Scope of Investigation
The merchandise covered by this investigation is commodity
matchbooks. See Attachment I to this notice for a complete description
of the merchandise covered by this investigation.
[[Page 70966]]
Comments on Scope of Investigation
During our review of the petition, we discussed the scope with the
petitioner to ensure that it is an accurate reflection of the products
for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as
discussed in the preamble to the regulations (Antidumping Duties;
Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)),
we are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise issues
regarding product coverage. The Department encourages all interested
parties to submit such comments within 20 calendar days of the
publication of this notice. Comments should be addressed to Import
Administration's Central Records Unit (CRU), Room 1117, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC
20230. The period of scope consultations is intended to provide the
Department with ample opportunity to consider all comments and to
consult with parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary
determination.
Comments on Product Characteristics for Antidumping Duty Questionnaire
We are requesting comments from interested parties regarding the
appropriate physical characteristics of commodity matchbooks to be
reported in response to the Department's antidumping duty
questionnaire. This information will be used to identify the key
physical characteristics of the subject merchandise in order to more
accurately report the relevant factors and costs of production, as well
as to develop appropriate product comparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide any information or comments that
they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate listing of
physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to
which characteristics are appropriate to use as: 1) general product
characteristics; and 2) the product comparison criteria. We note that
it is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as
product comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on
meaningful commercial differences among products. In other words, while
there may be some physical product characteristics utilized by
manufacturers to describe commodity matchbooks, it may be that only a
select few product characteristics take into account commercially
meaningful physical characteristics. In addition, interested parties
may comment on the order in which the physical characteristics should
be used in product matching. Generally, the Department attempts to list
the most important physical characteristics first and the least
important characteristics last.
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in
developing and issuing the antidumping duty questionnaire, we must
receive comments at the above-referenced address by December 1, 2008.
Additionally, rebuttal comments must be received by December 8, 2008.
Determination of Industry Support for the Petition
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department
shall: (i) poll the industry or rely on other information in order to
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a
statistically valid sampling method.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC),
which is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry''
has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like
product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic
like product (section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different
purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In
addition, the Department's determination is subject to limitations of
time and information. Although this may result in different definitions
of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of
either agency contrary to law. See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F.
Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v. United
States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir.
1989), cert. denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989).
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not
offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of
the investigation. On November 17, 2008, the Government of India, an
interested party to this proceeding as defined in section 771(9)(B) of
the Act, submitted a letter challenging the definition of the domestic
like product. On November 18, 2008, the petitioner filed its reply to
this challenge. We have analyzed these comments, and based on our
analysis of the information submitted on the record, we have determined
that commodity matchbooks as defined by the petitioner constitute a
single domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in
terms of that domestic like product. For a discussion of the domestic
like product analysis in this case, see Antidumping Duty Investigation
Initiation Checklist: Commodity Matchbooks from India (Initiation
Checklist), at Attachment II (Analysis of Industry Support for the
Petition), on file in the CRU, Room 1117 of the main Department of
Commerce building.
With regard to section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, in determining
whether the petitioner has standing (i.e., the domestic workers and
producer supporting the petition account for: (1) at least 25 percent
of the total production of the domestic like product; and (2) more than
50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by
that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to,
the petition), we considered the industry support data contained in the
petition with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the
``Scope of Investigation'' section, above. According to the petitioner,
there are three producers of the domestic like product: itself; Bradley
Industries, LLC; and Atlas Match Corp., LLC. (Atlas Match Corp. is
owned by Bradley Industries, LLC.) To establish industry support, the
[[Page 70967]]
petitioner provided its production of the domestic like product for
calendar year 2007. In addition, Bradley Industries, LLC provided a
letter of support for the petition and included its production figures
for calendar year 2007. See Petition at 3; see also Letter of Support
filed by Bradley Industries, LLC, on October 31, 2008. We have relied
upon data provided by the petitioner and supporters of the petition for
purposes of measuring industry support. For further discussion, see
Initiation Checklist at Attachment II.
The Department's review of the data provided in the petition, and
other information readily available to the Department, indicates that
the petitioner has established industry support. First, the petition
establishes support from domestic producers (or workers) accounting for
more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like
product and, as such, the Department is not required to take further
action in order to evaluate industry support (e.g., polling). See
section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act and Initiation Checklist at Attachment
II. Second, the domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory
criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act
because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the petition
account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic
like product. See Initiation Checklist at Attachment II. Finally, the
domestic producers (or workers) have met the statutory criteria for
industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the
domestic producers (or workers) who support the petition account for
more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product
produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or
opposition to, the petition. Accordingly, the Department determines
that the petition was filed on behalf of the domestic industry within
the meaning of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. See Initiation Checklist
at Attachment II.
The Department finds that the petitioner filed the petition on
behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and has demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the antidumping investigation that it
is requesting the Department initiate. See Initiation Checklist at
Attachment II.
Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation
The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened
with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject
merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). In addition, the
petitioner alleges that subject imports exceed the negligibility
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share, underselling and price depressing
and suppressing effects, lost sales and revenue, reduced production and
capacity utilization, reduced shipments, reduced employment, and an
overall decline in financial performance. We have assessed the
allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, threat
of material injury, and causation, and we have determined that these
allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet the
statutory requirements for initiation. See Initiation Checklist at
Attachment III (Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury
and Causation for the Petition).
Period of Investigation
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1), because this petition was
filed on October 29, 2008, the period of investigation (POI) is October
1, 2007, through September 30, 2008.
Allegation of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
The following is a description of the allegation of sales at less
than fair value upon which the Department has based its decision to
initiate an investigation. The sources of data for the deductions and
adjustments relating to U.S. price and NV are discussed in greater
detail in the Initiation Checklist. Should the need arise to use any of
this information as facts available under section 776 of the Act, we
may reexamine the information and revise the margin calculations, if
appropriate.
Constructed Export Price
The petitioner calculated CEP based on actual POI sales prices
obtained from a U.S. distributor for Indian-produced commodity
matchbooks sold by an Indian producer through its U.S. affiliate. The
petitioner made adjustments to the starting price, where applicable,
for foreign inland freight, ocean freight, and marine insurance. The
petitioner calculated foreign inland freight, ocean freight, and marine
insurance based on price quotes obtained from service providers.
Because the petitioner's calculation of CEP excluded CEP profit, we
requested further information from the petitioner on this issue. On
November 10, 2008, the petitioner stated that the information necessary
to calculate CEP profit was not reasonably available to it. Therefore,
to be conservative, the Department has not made an adjustment for CEP
profit in our calculation of CEP. See Initiation Checklist and ``Fair
Value Comparisons'' section, below, for the CEP-to-NV margins.
Normal Value
With respect to NV, the petitioner stated that home market prices
were not reasonably available to it. The petitioner made a reasonable
attempt to determine the existence of a viable home market for
commodity matchbooks in India. According to the petitioner, it was
unsuccessful in obtaining such pricing information, despite its best
efforts. See the Petition at Exhibit 32. Therefore, the petitioner
based NV on third country prices.
The petitioner calculated NV based on a purchase of Indian-made
commodity matchbooks from a Canadian matchbook retailer. The petitioner
deducted a series of standard markups to estimate the price at the
importer level. The petitioner made additional adjustments to the
starting third country price, where applicable, for foreign inland
freight, ocean freight, marine insurance, and Canadian customs duties.
See the Petition at page 42 and Exhibit 36.
Fair-Value Comparison
Based on the data provided by the petitioner, there is reason to
believe that imports of commodity matchbooks from India are being, or
are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value.
Based on a comparison of CEP to NV, the estimated dumping margin is
135.95 percent.
Initiation of Antidumping Investigation
Based upon the examination of the petition on commodity matchbooks
from India and other information reasonably available to the
Department, the Department finds that this petition meets the
requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating an
antidumping duty investigation to determine whether imports of
commodity matchbooks from India are being, or are likely to be, sold in
the United States at less than fair value. In accordance with section
733(b)(1)(A) of the Act, unless postponed, we will make our preliminary
determination no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.
Respondent Selection
The Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S.
[[Page 70968]]
imports during the POI. We intend to release the CBP data under
Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties with access to
information protected by APO within five days of publication of this
Federal Register notice, and make our decision regarding respondent
selection within 20 days of publication of this notice. The Department
invites comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within
10 days of publication of this Federal Register notice.
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Instructions for filing such
applications may be found on the Department's Website at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/apo.
Distribution of Copies of the Petition
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the petition have been
provided to the representatives of the Government of India. We will
attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the petition to all
known foreign producers/exporters, consistent with 19 CFR
351.203(c)(2).
International Trade Commission (ITC) Notification
We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(d) of the Act.
Preliminary Determination by the International Trade Commission
The ITC will preliminarily determine, no later than December 13,
2008, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of
commodity matchbooks from India materially injure, or threaten material
injury to, a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination covering all
classes or kinds of merchandise covered by the petition would result in
the investigation being terminated. Otherwise, this investigation will
proceed according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act.
Dated: November 18, 2008.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
Attachment I
Scope of the Investigation Covering Commodity Matchbooks from the India
The scope of this investigation covers commodity matchbooks, also
known as commodity book matches, paper matches or booklet matches.\1\
Commodity matchbooks typically, but do not necessarily, consist of
twenty match stems which are usually made from paperboard or similar
material tipped with a match head composed of any chemical formula. The
match stems may be stitched, stapled or otherwise fastened into a
matchbook cover of any material, on which a striking strip composed of
any chemical formula has been applied to assist in the ignition
process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Such commodity matchbooks are also referred to as ``for
resale'' because they always enter into retail channels, meaning
businesses that sell a general variety of tangible merchandise, e.g.
convenience stores, supermarkets, dollar stores, drug stores and
mass merchandisers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commodity matchbooks included in the scope of this investigation
may or may not contain printing. For example, they may have no printing
other than the identification of the manufacturer or importer.
Commodity matchbooks may also be printed with a generic message such as
``Thank You'' or a generic image such as the American Flag, with store
brands (e.g., Kroger, 7-Eleven, Shurfine or Giant); product brands for
national or regional advertisers such as cigarettes or alcoholic
beverages; or with corporate brands for national or regional
distributors (e.g., Penley Corp. or Diamond Brands). They all enter
retail distribution channels. Regardless of the materials used for the
stems of the matches and regardless of the way the match stems are
fastened to the matchbook cover, all commodity matchbooks are included
in the scope of this investigation.
All matchbooks, including commodity matchbooks, typically comply
with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Safety
Standard for Matchbooks, codified at 16 CFR Sec. 1202.1 et seq.
The scope of this investigation excludes promotional matchbooks,
often referred to as ``not for resale,'' or ``specialty advertising''
matchbooks, as they do not enter into retail channels and are sold to
businesses that provide hospitality, dining, drinking or entertainment
services to their customers, and are given away by these businesses as
promotional items. Such promotional matchbooks are distinguished by the
physical characteristic of having the name and/or logo of a bar,
restaurant, resort, hotel, club, caf[eacute]/coffee shop, grill, pub,
eatery, lounge, casino, barbecue or individual establishment printed
prominently on the matchbook cover. Promotional matchbook cover
printing also typically includes the address and the phone number of
the business or establishment being promoted.\2\ Also excluded are all
other matches that are not fastened into a matchbook cover such as
wooden matches, stick matches, box matches, kitchen matches, pocket
matches, penny matches, household matches, strike-anywhere matches (aka
``SAW'' matches), strike-on-box matches (aka ``SOB'' matches),
fireplace matches, barbeque/grill matches, fire starters, and wax
matches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The gross distinctions between commodity matchbooks and
promotional matchbooks may be summarized as follows: (1) if it has
no printing, or is printed with a generic message such as ``Thank
You'' or a generic image such as the American Flag, or printed with
national or regional store brands or corporate brands, it is
commodity; (2) if it has printing, and the printing includes the
name of a bar, restaurant, resort, hotel, club, caf[eacute]/coffee
shop, grill, pub, eatery, lounge, casino, barbecue, or individual
establishment prominently displayed on the matchbook cover, it is
promotional.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The merchandise subject to this investigation is properly
classified under subheading 3605.00.0060 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Subject merchandise may also
enter under subheading 3605.00.0030 of the HTSUS. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the merchandise under investigation is
dispositive.
[FR Doc. E8-27893 Filed 11-21-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S