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

Download as PDF 26366 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Notices Suite 357 5th Floor, Syracuse, New York 13202, (315) 477–6453, TDD (315) 477–6447, Kathryn Boerner. North Carolina State Office, 4405 Bland Road, Suite 260, Raleigh, North Carolina 27609, (919) 873–2062, TDD (919) 873–2003, Rebecca Dillard. North Dakota State Office, Federal Building, Room 208, Post Office Box 1737, Bismarck, North Dakota 58502, (701) 530–2046, TDD (701) 530–2113, Barry Borstad. Utah State Office, Wallace F. Bennett Federal Building, 125 South State Street, Room 4311, Salt Lake City, Utah 84138, (801) 524–4308, TDD (801) 524–3309, Janice Kocher. Vermont State Office, City Center, 3rd Floor, 89 Main Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05602, (802) 828–6021, TDD (802) 223–6365, Heidi Setien. Virgin Islands, Served by Florida State Office. Ohio State Office, Federal Building, Room 507, 200 North High Street, Columbus, Ohio 43215–2477, (614) 255–2409, TDD (614) 255–2554, Cathy Simmons. Virginia State Office, Culpeper Building, Suite 238, 1606 Santa Rosa Road, Richmond, Virginia 23229, (804) 287– 1596, TDD (804) 287–1753, CJ Michels. Oklahoma State Office, 100 USDA, Suite 108, Stillwater, Oklahoma 74074– 2654, (405) 742–1076, TDD (405) 742– 1007, Tim Henderson. Washington State Office, 1835 Black Lake Boulevard, Suite B, Olympia, Washington 98512, (360) 704–7706, TDD (360) 704–7760, Bill Kirkwood. Oregon State Office, 1201 NE Lloyd Boulevard, Suite 801, Portland, Oregon 97232–1274, (503) 414–3340, TDD (503)414–3387, Barb Brandon. Western Pacific Territories, Served by Hawaii State Office. Pennsylvania State Office, One Credit Union Place, Suite 330, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17110–2996, (717) 237– 2282, TDD (717) 237–2261, Martha E. Hanson. Puerto Rico State Office, IBM Building, Suite 601, Munoz Rivera Ave., #654, San Juan, Puerto Rico 00918, (787) 766–5095 (ext. 256), TDD (787) 766– 5332, Jan Vargas. Rhode Island, Served by Massachusetts State Office. West Virginia, Parkersburg West Virginia County Office, 91 Boyles Lane, Parkersburg, West Virginia 26104, (304) 422–9070, TDD (304) 284–4836, Penny Thaxton. Wisconsin State Office, 4949 Kirschling Court, Stevens Point, Wisconsin 54481, (715) 345–7608 (ext.111), TDD (715) 345–7614, Sara Kendall. Wyoming State Office, Post Office Box 82601, Casper, Wyoming 82602–5006, (307) 233–6716, TDD (307) 233–6733, Alan Brooks. South Carolina State Office, Strom Thurmond Federal Building, 1835 Assembly Street, Room 1007, Columbia, South Carolina 29201, (803) 765–5870, TDD (803) 765–5697, Lila Moses. [FR Doc. Z9–10645 Filed 6–1–09; 8:45 am] South Dakota State Office, Federal Building, Room 210, 200 Fourth Street, SW., Huron, South Dakota 57350, (605) 352–1132, TDD (605) 352–1147, Roger Hazuka or Pam Reilly. [A–533–848] Tennessee State Office, Suite 300, 3322 West End Avenue, Nashville, Tennessee 37203–1084, (615) 783– 1300, TDD (615) 783–1397, Abby Boggs. 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 16:43 Jun 01, 2009 Jkt 217001 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Commodity Matchbooks From India: Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination Texas State Office, Federal Building, Suite 102, 101 South Main, Temple, Texas 76501, (254) 742–9769, TDD (254) 742–9712, Olivia Pinon. VerDate Nov<24>2008 BILLING CODE 1505–01–D PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM 02JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Notices 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). 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 1 The petitioner in this investigation is D.D. Bean and Sons Co. VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:43 Jun 01, 2009 Jkt 217001 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. 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 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. PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 26367 (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.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, strikeanywhere 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. 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 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, cafe/coffee shop, grill, pub, eatery, lounge, casino, barbecue, or individual establishment prominently displayed on the matchbook cover, it is promotional. E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM 02JNN1 26368 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Notices 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 recordkeeping 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 VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:43 Jun 01, 2009 Jkt 217001 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). PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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. E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM 02JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Notices 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), VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:43 Jun 01, 2009 Jkt 217001 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, PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 26369 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. E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM 02JNN1 26370 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Notices 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 VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:43 Jun 01, 2009 Jkt 217001 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: 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 Manufacturer/exporter determination. Interested parties may submit case briefs to the Department no Triveni Safety Matches Pvt. Ltd. 91.71 later than seven days after the date of All Others .................................... 91.71 the issuance of the last verification report in this proceeding. See 19 CFR 351.309(c). Rebuttal briefs, the content ‘‘All Others’’ Rate of which is limited to the issues raised Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act in the case briefs, must be filed within provides that the estimated ‘‘All Others’’ five days from the deadline date for the rate shall be an amount equal to the submission of case briefs. See 19 CFR weighted average of the estimated 351.309(d). A list of authorities used, a weighted-average dumping margins table of contents, and an executive established for exporters and producers summary of issues should accompany individually investigated, excluding any any briefs submitted to the Department. zero or de minimis margins, and any Executive summaries should be limited margins determined entirely under to five pages total, including footnotes. section 776 of the Act. Triveni is the In accordance with section 774 of the only respondent in this investigation. Act, the Department will hold a public Therefore, for purposes of determining hearing, if timely requested, to afford the ‘‘All Others’’ rate and pursuant to interested parties an opportunity to section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, we are comment on arguments raised in case or using the weighted-average dumping rebuttal briefs, provided that such a margin calculated for Triveni, as hearing is requested by an interested referenced above. See, e.g., Notice of party. If a timely request for a hearing Final Determination of Sales at Less is made in this investigation, we intend Than Fair Value: Stainless Steel Sheet to hold the hearing two days after the and Strip in Coils From Italy, 64 FR rebuttal brief deadline date at the U.S. 30750, 30755 (June 8, 1999); and Notice Department of Commerce, 14th Street of Preliminary Determination of Sales at and Constitution Avenue, NW., Less Than Fair Value and Postponement Washington, DC 20230, at a time and in of Final Determination: Coated Free a room to be determined. See 19 CFR Sheet Paper from Indonesia, 72 FR 351.310. Parties should confirm by 30753, 30757 (June 4, 2007), unchanged telephone, the date, time, and location in Notice of Final Determination of of the hearing 48 hours before the Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Coated scheduled date. Free Sheet Paper from Indonesia, 72 FR Interested parties who wish to request 60636 (Oct. 25, 2007). a hearing, or to participate in a hearing if one is requested, must submit a Disclosure written request to the Assistant We will disclose the calculations Secretary for Import Administration, performed in our preliminary analysis U.S. Department of Commerce, Room to parties to this proceeding in 1870, within 30 days of the publication accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) The party’s name, address, and ITC Notification telephone number; (2) the number of In accordance with section 733(f) of participants; and (3) a list of the issues the Act, we have notified the ITC of the to be discussed. At the hearing, oral Department’s preliminary affirmative presentations will be limited to issues determination. If the Department’s final raised in the briefs. determination is affirmative, the ITC Postponement of Final Determination will determine before the later of 120 and Extension of Provisional Measures days after the date of this preliminary determination or 45 days after our final Section 735(a)(2) of the Act provides determination whether imports of that a final determination may be commodity matchbooks from India are postponed until not later than 135 days materially injuring, or threatening after the date of the publication of the material injury to, the U.S. industry (see preliminary determination if, in the section 735(b)(2) of the Act). Because we event of an affirmative preliminary PO 00000 Weightedaverage margin (percent) Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM 02JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 104 / Tuesday, June 2, 2009 / Notices 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 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–846] Brake Rotors From the People’s Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of the 2007 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On March 20, 2009, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results and partial rescission of the 2007 administrative review of the VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:43 Jun 01, 2009 Jkt 217001 antidumping duty order on brake rotors from the People’s Republic of China covering the period April 1, 2007, through August 13, 2007. No interested party commented on the preliminary results or the partial rescission. We have made no changes to the margin calculations. Therefore, the final results do not differ from the preliminary results. The final weighted-average dumping margins for the reviewed firms are listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’ DATES: Effective Date: June 2, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Smith or Terre Keaton Stefanova, 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) 482–1766 or (202) 482– 1280, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background This administrative review of the antidumping duty order on brake rotors from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) covers one mandatory respondent (Yantai Winhere Auto-Part Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Winhere)) and the following 11 respondents not selected for individual review: Laizhou Auto Brake Equipment Co., Ltd. (LABEC); Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts Co., Ltd. (Laizhou Hongda); Longkou Jinzheng Machinery Co., Ltd. (Jinzheng); Longkou TLC Machinery Co., Ltd. (Longkou TLC); Qingdao Gren (Group) Co. (Gren); Qingdao Meita Automotive Industry Co., Ltd. (Meita); Xianghe Zichen Casting Company, Ltd. (Xianghe Zichen); Zibo Botai Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Zibo Botai); Laizhou Luda Sedan Fittings Company, Ltd. (Luda); Laizhou Sanli (Sanli); and Zibo Golden Harvest Machinery Limited Company (ZGOLD). We are rescinding this review with respect to China National Automotive Industry Import & Export Corporation or National Automotive Industry Import & Export Corporation (CAIEC) and Shandong Laizhou CAPCO Industry (Laizhou CAPCO). See ‘‘Final Partial Rescission of 2007 Administrative Review’’ section below. On March 20, 2009, the Department published the preliminary results and partial rescission of this administrative review. See Brake Rotors From the People’s Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the 2007 Administrative Review and Partial Rescission, 74 FR 11911 (Preliminary Results). We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. Comments were PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 26371 due April 20, 2009, however, no interested party submitted comments. We have conducted this administrative review in accordance with sections 751 and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and sections 19 CFR 351.213 and 19 CFR 351.221 of the Department’s regulations. Period of Review The period of review (POR) is April 1, 2007, through August 13, 2007. Scope of the Order The products covered by this order are brake rotors made of gray cast iron, whether finished, semifinished, or unfinished, ranging in diameter from 8 to 16 inches (20.32 to 40.64 centimeters) and in weight from 8 to 45 pounds (3.63 to 20.41 kilograms). The size parameters (weight and dimension) of the brake rotors limit their use to the following types of motor vehicles: Automobiles, all-terrain vehicles, vans and recreational vehicles under ‘‘one ton and a half,’’ and light trucks designated as ‘‘one ton and a half.’’ Finished brake rotors are those that are ready for sale and installation without any further operations. Semifinished rotors are those on which the surface is not entirely smooth, and have undergone some drilling. Unfinished rotors are those which have undergone some grinding or turning. These brake rotors are for motor vehicles, and do not contain in the casting a logo of an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) which produces vehicles sold in the United States, (e.g., General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, Volvo). Brake rotors covered in this order are not certified by OEM producers of vehicles sold in the United States. The scope also includes composite brake rotors that are made of gray cast iron, which contain a steel plate, but otherwise meet the above criteria. Excluded from the scope of this order are brake rotors made of gray cast iron, whether finished, semifinished, or unfinished, with a diameter less than 8 inches or greater than 16 inches (less than 20.32 centimeters or greater than 40.64 centimeters) and a weight less than 8 pounds or greater than 45 pounds (less than 3.63 kilograms or greater than 20.41 kilograms). Brake rotors are currently classifiable under subheading 8708.39.5010 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).1 Although the 1 As of January 1, 2005, the HTSUS classification for brake rotors (discs) changed from 8708.39.5010 to 8708.39.5030. As of January 1, 2007, the HTSUS classification for brake rotors (discs) changed from 8708.39.5030 to 8708.30.5030. See Harmonized E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM Continued 02JNN1

Agencies

[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