Commodity Matchbooks From India: Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 26366-26371 [E9-12826]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 104 (Tuesday, June 2, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26366-26371]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12826]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-533-848]


Commodity Matchbooks From India: Notice of Preliminary 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of 
Final Determination

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: We preliminarily determine that commodity matchbooks from 
India are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less 
than fair value (LTFV), as provided in section 733(b) of the Tariff Act 
of 1930, as amended (the Act). The estimated margins of sales at LTFV 
are listed in the ``Suspension of Liquidation'' section of this notice. 
Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary 
determination. Pursuant to a request from the respondent, we are 
postponing for 60 days the final determination and extending 
provisional measures from a four-month period to not more than six 
months. Accordingly, we will make our final determination not later 
than 135 days after publication of the preliminary determination in the 
Federal Register.

DATES: Effective Date: June 2, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Holly Phelps or 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-
0656 and (202) 482-3874, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Background

    Since the initiation of this investigation (see Commodity 
Matchbooks from India: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 73 
FR 70965 (Nov. 24, 2008) (Initiation Notice)), the following events 
have occurred.
    On December 12, 2008, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) 
preliminarily determined that there is a reasonable indication that 
imports of commodity matchbooks from India are materially injuring the 
U.S. industry, and on December 15, 2008, the ITC notified the 
Department of its findings. See Commodity Matchbooks from India; 
Determinations, Investigation Nos. 701-TA-459 and 731-TA-1155 
(Preliminary), 73 FR 77840 (Dec. 19, 2008).
    In January 2009, we selected Triveni Safety Matches Pvt. Ltd. 
(Triveni) as the sole mandatory respondent in this investigation and 
issued Triveni an antidumping duty questionnaire. See Memorandum from 
James Maeder, Office Director, to Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary, entitled, ``Antidumping Duty Investigation of Commodity 
Matchbooks from India: Selection of Respondents for Individual 
Review,'' dated January 6, 2009.
    In February 2009, we received Triveni's response to section A of 
the questionnaire (i.e., the section covering general information about 
the company). Also in February 2009, Triveni informed the Department 
that all the information submitted in its response to section A of the 
questionnaire may be treated as public information. In February and 
March

[[Page 26367]]

2009, we issued supplemental section A questionnaires to Triveni. In 
March 2009, we received Triveni's responses to these supplemental 
questionnaires.
    Also in March 2009, Triveni submitted a response to sections B 
(i.e., the section covering comparison market sales), C (i.e., the 
section covering U.S. sales), and D (i.e., the section covering 
constructed value (CV)) of the questionnaire. Because these submissions 
were so incomplete as to be unusable, we afforded Triveni an 
opportunity to correct the deficiencies in its responses. At that time, 
we informed Triveni that it was not currently required to submit a 
response to section B of the questionnaire in light of the fact that 
Triveni reported that it had no viable comparison market for commodity 
matchbooks.
    Also in March 2009, we received Triveni's revised response to 
section C of the questionnaire, as well as a revised response to 
section D. At that time, we informed Triveni that its revised section C 
response was unusable in its submitted form because it consisted of a 
U.S. sales listing, unaccompanied by a narrative response. Therefore, 
we afforded Triveni a final opportunity to submit a response to section 
C of the questionnaire.
    Also in March 2009, the petitioner \1\ made a timely request 
pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(e) for a 
50-day postponement of the preliminary determination. Therefore, 
pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, the Department postponed 
the preliminary determination of this investigation until May 27, 2009. 
See Commodity Matchbooks from India: Notice of Extension of Time Limits 
for Preliminary Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation, 74 FR 
12112 (Mar. 23, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The petitioner in this investigation is D.D. Bean and Sons 
Co.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In April 2009, we received Triveni's properly-filed response to 
section C of the questionnaire, and we issued supplemental 
questionnaires covering sections C and D to Triveni. In April and May 
2009, we received Triveni's responses to these supplemental 
questionnaires.
    On May 19, 2009, the petitioner requested that in the event of a 
negative preliminary determination in this investigation, the 
Department postpone the final determination by 60 days. On May 26, 
2009, Triveni requested that in the event of an affirmative preliminary 
determination in this investigation, the Department: (1) Postpone its 
final determination by 60 days in accordance with 735(a)(2)(A) of the 
Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(2)(ii); and 2) extend the application of the 
provisional measures prescribed under 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) from a four-
month period to a six-month period. For further discussion, see the 
``Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional 
Measures'' section of this notice, below.

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation (POI) is October 1, 2007, to September 
30, 2008. This period corresponds to the four most recent fiscal 
quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition. See 19 CFR 
351.204(b)(1).

Scope of Investigation

    The scope of this investigation covers commodity matchbooks, also 
known as commodity book matches, paper matches or booklet matches.\2\ 
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 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 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.\3\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 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.

Scope Comments

    In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations 
(see Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 
19, 1997)), in our Initiation Notice we set aside a period of time for 
parties to raise issues regarding product coverage, and encouraged all 
parties to submit comments within 20 calendar days of publication of 
the Initiation Notice. We

[[Page 26368]]

did not receive any comments from parties concerning the scope of this 
investigation.

Fair Value Comparisons

    To determine whether sales of commodity matchbooks from India to 
the United States were made at LTFV, we compared the export price (EP) 
or constructed export price (CEP) to the normal value (NV), as 
described in the ``Export Price/Constructed Export Price'' and ``Normal 
Value'' sections of this notice, below. In accordance with section 
777A(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, we compared POI weighted-average EPs and 
CEPs to weighted-average NVs.
    For this preliminary determination, we have determined that Triveni 
did not have a viable home or third country market during the POI. 
Therefore, as the basis for NV, we used CV when making comparisons for 
Triveni in accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the Act.

Export Price/Constructed Export Price

    For one U.S. sale made by Triveni, we used EP methodology, in 
accordance with section 772(a) of the Act, because the subject 
merchandise was sold to the first unaffiliated purchaser in the United 
States prior to importation by the exporter or producer outside the 
United States and CEP methodology was not otherwise warranted based on 
the facts on the record. For the remaining U.S. sales made by Triveni, 
we calculated CEP, in accordance with section 772(b) of the Act, 
because the subject merchandise was sold for the account of Triveni by 
its subsidiary in the United States to unaffiliated purchasers.
    Triveni reported that it sold approximately 900 cartons of Triveni 
Brand matchbooks (non-white printed matchbooks) to a U.S. customer as 
part of one of its CEP sales of plain white commodity matchbooks. 
Triveni stated that it is unable to link the 900 cartons of non-white 
printed matchbooks to a specific sale or customer. Therefore, as facts 
available, we have accepted Triveni's data as reported in the U.S. 
sales listing, and we have assigned these 900 cartons the same control 
number as plain white matchbooks. However, we intend to examine 
Triveni's record-keeping practices at verification to confirm that 
Triveni is unable to provide the missing sales and product 
characteristic information. In the event that we find that Triveni is 
able to link these printed matchbooks to a specific U.S. sale, we will 
revisit this issue in our final determination.

A. Export Price

    We based EP on the packed price to an unaffiliated purchaser in the 
United States. We made deductions for movement expenses in accordance 
with section 772(c)(2)(A) of the Act; these included, where 
appropriate, foreign inland freight, foreign brokerage and handling 
expenses, ocean freight, and marine insurance.

B. Constructed Export Price

    In its May 14, 2009, submission, Triveni stated that it reported as 
the date of shipment the date that its U.S. freight provider or its 
U.S. clearing agent issued an invoice to Triveni's U.S. affiliate, 
Triveni International LLC (TILLC). According to the documents contained 
in this submission, however, it appears that Triveni reported the date 
that the merchandise was shipped from India as the date of shipment for 
U.S. sales. Because we do not have accurate shipment information on the 
record, as facts available, we have used the earlier of the date that 
Triveni's U.S. freight provider issued an invoice to TILLC, or the date 
that Triveni's U.S. clearing agent issued an invoice to TILLC as the 
date of shipment for purposes of the preliminary determination. We will 
examine TILLC's shipping documents at verification to determine which 
of these dates is appropriate for use as the date of shipment for 
purposes of the final determination.
    In accordance with our practice, we used the earlier of the 
shipment date calculated above, or the U.S. affiliate's invoice date, 
as the date of sale for CEP sales. See, e.g., Notice of Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Structural Steel Beams 
from Germany, 67 FR 35497 (May 20, 2002), and accompanying Issues and 
Decision Memorandum at Comment 2.
    We based CEP on the packed delivered prices to unaffiliated 
purchasers in the United States. Where appropriate, we made adjustments 
for discounts. We made deductions for movement expenses, in accordance 
with section 772(c)(2)(A) of the Act; these included, where 
appropriate, foreign inland freight, foreign brokerage and handling 
expenses, ocean freight, marine insurance, U.S. brokerage and handling, 
U.S. customs duties, U.S. inland insurance, U.S. inland freight 
expenses (i.e., freight from warehouse to the customer), and U.S. 
warehousing expenses. In accordance with section 772(d)(1) of the Act 
and 19 CFR 351.402(b), we deducted those selling expenses associated 
with economic activities occurring in the United States, including 
direct selling expenses (i.e., imputed credit expenses and bank 
charges), and indirect selling expenses (including inventory carrying 
costs and other indirect selling expenses).
    Because Triveni reported that it had no U.S. dollar borrowings 
during the POI, we recalculated U.S. credit expenses using the short-
term interest rate published by the Federal Reserve, in accordance with 
our practice. See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales 
at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: 
Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From Venezuela, 67 FR 
31273 (May 9, 2002), unchanged in Notice of Final Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 
Products From Venezuela, 67 FR 62119 (Oct. 3, 2002). In addition, we 
computed the credit period used in our credit recalculation using the 
revised dates of shipment noted above. Finally, because Triveni did not 
report an amount for U.S. indirect selling expenses, we computed these 
expenses using the total expenses and sales value shown in TILLC's 2007 
financial statements, less any direct expenses reported in Triveni's 
responses, as facts available. For further discussion of these 
adjustments, see the memorandum from Holly Phelps, Analyst, to the 
File, entitled, ``Calculations Performed for Triveni Safety Matches 
Pvt. Ltd. for the Preliminary Determination in the 2007-2008 
Antidumping Duty Investigation of Commodity Matchbooks from India,'' 
dated May 27, 2009.
    Pursuant to section 772(d)(3) of the Act, we further reduced the 
starting price by an amount for profit to arrive at CEP. In accordance 
with section 772(f) of the Act, we calculated the CEP profit rate using 
the expenses incurred by Triveni and its U.S. affiliate on their sales 
of the subject merchandise in the United States and the profit 
associated with those sales.

Normal Value

A. Home Market Viability and Comparison-Market Selection

    To determine whether there is a sufficient volume of sales in the 
home market to serve as a viable basis for calculating NV (i.e., the 
aggregate volume of home market sales of the foreign like product is 
equal to or greater than five percent of the aggregate volume of U.S. 
sales), we compared Triveni's volume of home market sales of the 
foreign like product to its volume of U.S. sales of the subject 
merchandise. See section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Act.
    Based on this comparison, we determined that Triveni's aggregate 
volume of home market sales of the foreign like product was 
insufficient to permit a proper comparison with U.S. sales of the 
subject merchandise.

[[Page 26369]]

Moreover, we determined that Triveni's volume of sales to each third 
country was also insufficient to permit proper comparisons. Therefore, 
we used CV as the basis for calculating NV for Triveni, in accordance 
with section 773(a)(4) of the Act.

B. Level of Trade

    In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to the extent 
practicable, we determine NV based on sales in the comparison market at 
the same level of trade (LOT) as the EP or CEP. Pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.412(c)(1), the NV LOT is that of the starting-price sales in the 
comparison market or, when NV is based on CV, that of the sales from 
which we derive selling, general, and administrative (SG&A) expenses 
and profit. For EP, the U.S. LOT is also the level of the starting-
price sale, which is usually from exporter to importer. For CEP, it is 
the level of the constructed sale from the exporter to the importer.
    To determine whether NV sales are at a different LOT than EP or CEP 
sales, we examine stages in the marketing process and selling functions 
along the chain of distribution between the producer and the 
unaffiliated customer. See 19 CFR 351.412(c)(2). If the comparison-
market sales are at a different LOT, and the difference affects price 
comparability, as manifested in a pattern of consistent price 
differences between the sales on which NV is based and comparison 
market sales at the LOT of the export transaction, we make an LOT 
adjustment under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. Finally, for CEP 
sales, if the NV level is more remote from the factory than the CEP 
level and there is no basis for determining whether the difference in 
levels between NV and CEP affects price comparability, we adjust NV 
under section 773(a)(7)(B) of the Act (the CEP-offset provision). See 
Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Canada: Notice of 
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Postponement of Final Determination, 73 FR 70324 (Nov. 20, 2008), 
unchanged in Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Citric Acid and Certain Citrate Salts from Canada, 74 FR 16843 
(Apr. 13, 2009).
    In this investigation, we found that Triveni had no viable home or 
third country market. When NV is based on CV, the NV LOT is that of the 
sales from which we derive SG&A expenses and profit. See Notice of 
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 
Postponement of Final Determination: Fresh Atlantic Salmon from Chile, 
63 FR 2664 (Jan. 16, 1998), unchanged in Notice of Final Determination 
of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Fresh Atlantic Salmon from Chile, 63 
FR 31411 (June 9, 1998). In accordance with 19 CFR 351.412(d), the 
Department will make its LOT determination under paragraph (d)(1) of 
this section on the basis of sales of the foreign like product by the 
producer or exporter. Because it is not possible in the instant case to 
make an LOT determination on the basis of sales of the foreign like 
product in the home or third country market, the Department may use 
sales of different or broader product lines, sales by other companies, 
or any other reasonable basis. Because we based the selling expenses 
and profit for Triveni on the weighted-average selling expenses 
incurred and profits earned by another Indian producer of comparable 
merchandise who was not party to this investigation, there is 
insufficient information on the record in this investigation to allow 
the Department to make an LOT adjustment or grant a CEP offset to the 
CV reported by Triveni.

C. Calculation of Normal Value Based on CV

    In accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the Act, for Triveni we 
based NV on CV because there was no viable home or third country 
market. In accordance with section 773(e) of the Act, we calculated CV 
based on the sum of Triveni's cost of materials and fabrication for the 
foreign like product, plus amounts for SG&A expenses, profit, and U.S. 
packing costs. We relied on the data reported by Triveni, except in the 
following instances:
    i. We revised the numerator of Triveni's reported G&A expense ratio 
to include fringe benefits taxes and to exclude selling and 
transportation expenses as well as foreign exchange losses.
    ii. We revised the numerator of Triveni's financial expense ratio 
to include foreign exchange losses. In addition, we disallowed the 
reported offset for interest income.

For further discussion of these adjustments, see the memorandum from 
LaVonne Clark, Accountant, to Neal Halper, Director, Office of 
Accounting, entitled, ``Cost of Production and Constructed Value 
Calculation Adjustments for the Preliminary Determination--Triveni 
Safety Matches Pvt. Ltd.,'' dated May 27, 2009 (Cost Calculation Memo).
    Because Triveni does not have a viable comparison market, the 
Department cannot determine profit under section 773(e)(2)(A) of the 
Act, which requires sales by the respondent in question in the ordinary 
course of trade in a comparison market. Likewise, because Triveni does 
not have sales of any product in the same general category of products 
as the subject merchandise, we are unable to apply alternative (i) of 
section 773(e)(2)(B) of the Act. Further, the Department cannot 
calculate profit based on alternative (ii) of this section because 
Triveni is the sole respondent in this investigation and 19 CFR 
351.405(b) requires that a profit ratio under this alternative be based 
on home market sales. Therefore, we calculated Triveni's CV profit and 
selling expenses based on the third alternative, any other reasonable 
method, in accordance with section 773(e)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act. As a 
result, as a reasonable method, we calculated Triveni's CV profit and 
selling expenses using the contemporaneous financial statements of 
Seshasayee Paper and Boards Limited, an Indian producer/exporter of 
merchandise in the same general category as commodity matchbooks (i.e., 
paper products). For further discussion, see the Cost

Calculation Memo

    Pursuant to alternative (iii), the Department has the option of 
using any other reasonable method, as long as the amount allowed for 
profit is not greater than the amount realized by exporters or 
producers ``in connection with the sale, for consumption in the foreign 
country, of merchandise that is in the same general category of 
products as the subject merchandise,'' the ``profit cap.'' We are 
unable to calculate the profit cap in this case because, as we noted 
above, we do not have information allowing us to calculate the amount 
normally realized by exporters or producers (other than the respondent) 
in connection with the sale, for consumption in the foreign country, of 
the merchandise in the same general category. Therefore, as facts 
available we are applying option (iii), without quantifying a profit 
cap. This decision is consistent with the Department's decision in 
previous cases involving similar circumstances. See, e.g., Frozen 
Concentrated Orange Juice from Brazil; Final Results and Partial 
Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 66 FR 51008 (Oct. 
5, 2001), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 3; 
and Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Pure Magnesium From Israel, 66 FR 49349 (Sept. 27, 2001), and 
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 8. See Cost 
Calculation Memo.

[[Page 26370]]

    We made no adjustments to CV for differences in circumstances of 
sale in accordance with sections 773(a)(6)(B)(iii) and 773(a)(8) of the 
Act and 19 CFR 351.410 because we had inadequate information to do so.

Currency Conversion

    We made currency conversions into U.S. dollars in accordance with 
section 773A(a) of the Act based on the exchange rates in effect on the 
dates of the U.S. sales as certified by the Federal Reserve Bank.

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i)(1) of the Act, we intend to verify 
the information relied upon in making our final determination for 
Triveni.

Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we will direct 
Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all 
entries of commodity matchbooks from India that are entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of 
publication of this notice in the Federal Register. We will also 
instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond equal 
to the weighted-average dumping margins, as indicated in the chart 
below, adjusted for export subsidies found in the preliminary 
determination of the companion countervailing duty investigation. See 
Commodity Matchbooks from India: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing 
Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty 
Determination with Final Antidumping Duty Determination, 74 FR 15444 
(Apr. 6, 2009), (CVD Preliminary Notice).
    Specifically, consistent with our longstanding practice, where the 
product under investigation is also subject to a concurrent 
countervailing duty investigation, we instruct CBP to require a cash 
deposit or posting of a bond equal to the amount by which the normal 
value exceeds the EP or CEP, as indicated below, less the amount of the 
countervailing duty determined to constitute an export subsidy. See, 
e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 From India, 69 FR 67306, 67307 (Nov. 17, 
2007). Accordingly, for cash deposit purposes, we are subtracting from 
the applicable cash deposit rate that portion of the rate attributable 
to the export subsidies found in the affirmative countervailing duty 
determination for each respondent (i.e., 11.23 percent for Triveni, and 
11.23 percent for ``All Others''). After the adjustment for the cash 
deposit rates attributed to export subsidies, the resulting cash 
deposit rates will be 80.48 percent for Triveni and 80.48 percent for 
``All Others.'' These instructions suspending liquidation will remain 
in effect until further notice.
    The weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Weighted-
                                                                average
                    Manufacturer/exporter                       margin
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Triveni Safety Matches Pvt. Ltd.............................       91.71
All Others..................................................       91.71
------------------------------------------------------------------------

``All Others'' Rate

    Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the estimated ``All 
Others'' rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the 
estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters 
and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero or de 
minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 
of the Act. Triveni is the only respondent in this investigation. 
Therefore, for purposes of determining the ``All Others'' rate and 
pursuant to section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, we are using the weighted-
average dumping margin calculated for Triveni, as referenced above. 
See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair 
Value: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils From Italy, 64 FR 
30750, 30755 (June 8, 1999); and Notice of Preliminary Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: 
Coated Free Sheet Paper from Indonesia, 72 FR 30753, 30757 (June 4, 
2007), unchanged in Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value: Coated Free Sheet Paper from Indonesia, 72 FR 60636 (Oct. 
25, 2007).

Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed in our preliminary 
analysis to parties to this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.224(b).

ITC Notification

    In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we have notified the 
ITC of the Department's preliminary affirmative determination. If the 
Department's final determination is affirmative, the ITC will determine 
before the later of 120 days after the date of this preliminary 
determination or 45 days after our final determination whether imports 
of commodity matchbooks from India are materially injuring, or 
threatening material injury to, the U.S. industry (see section 
735(b)(2) of the Act). Because we are postponing the deadline for our 
final determination to 135 days from the date of the publication of 
this preliminary determination (see below), the ITC will make its final 
determination no later than 45 days after our final determination.

Public Comment

    Interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary 
determination. Interested parties may submit case briefs to the 
Department no later than seven days after the date of the issuance of 
the last verification report in this proceeding. See 19 CFR 351.309(c). 
Rebuttal briefs, the content of which is limited to the issues raised 
in the case briefs, must be filed within five days from the deadline 
date for the submission of case briefs. See 19 CFR 351.309(d). A list 
of authorities used, a table of contents, and an executive summary of 
issues should accompany any briefs submitted to the Department. 
Executive summaries should be limited to five pages total, including 
footnotes. In accordance with section 774 of the Act, the Department 
will hold a public hearing, if timely requested, to afford interested 
parties an opportunity to comment on arguments raised in case or 
rebuttal briefs, provided that such a hearing is requested by an 
interested party. If a timely request for a hearing is made in this 
investigation, we intend to hold the hearing two days after the 
rebuttal brief deadline date at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time 
and in a room to be determined. See 19 CFR 351.310. Parties should 
confirm by telephone, the date, time, and location of the hearing 48 
hours before the scheduled date.
    Interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or to participate 
in a hearing if one is requested, must submit a written request to the 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, Room 1870, within 30 days of the publication of this notice. 
Requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone 
number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues to 
be discussed. At the hearing, oral presentations will be limited to 
issues raised in the briefs.

Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional 
Measures

    Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides that a final determination 
may be postponed until not later than 135 days after the date of the 
publication of the preliminary determination if, in the event of an 
affirmative preliminary

[[Page 26371]]

determination, a request for such postponement is made by exporters, 
who account for a significant proportion of exports of the subject 
merchandise, or in the event of a negative preliminary determination, a 
request for such postponement is made by the petitioner. The 
Department's regulations, at 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2), require that 
requests by respondents for postponement of a final determination be 
accompanied by a request for extension of provisional measures from a 
four-month period to not more than six months.
    On May 26, 2009, Triveni requested that in the event of an 
affirmative preliminary determination in this investigation, the 
Department postpone its final determination by 60 days. At the same 
time, Triveni requested that the Department extend the application of 
the provisional measures prescribed under section 733(d) of the Act and 
19 CFR 351.210(e)(2), from a four-month period to a six-month period. 
In accordance with section 735(a)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.210(b)(2), because (1) our preliminary determination is 
affirmative, (2) the requesting exporter accounts for a significant 
proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, and (3) no compelling 
reasons for denial exist, we are granting this request and are 
postponing the final determination until no later than 135 days after 
the publication of this notice in the Federal Register. Suspension of 
liquidation will be extended accordingly.
    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 
733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: May 27, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-12826 Filed 6-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P