Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from Taiwan: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 7236-7244 [2010-3133]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 32 (Thursday, February 18, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7236-7244]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3133]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-583-844]


Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from Taiwan: Preliminary 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of 
Final Determination

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 18, 2010.
SUMMARY:  The Department of Commerce (the Department) preliminarily 
determines that narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge (narrow woven 
ribbons) from Taiwan 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 dumping 
margins are listed in the ``Suspension of Liquidation'' section of this 
notice. Interested parties are invited to comment on this preliminary 
determination.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hector Rodriguez or Holly Phelps, 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-
0629 and (202) 482-0656, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Since the initiation of this investigation (see Narrow Woven 
Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from the

[[Page 7237]]

People's Republic of China and Taiwan: Initiation of Antidumping Duty 
Investigations, 74 FR 39291 (Aug. 6, 2009) (Initiation Notice)), the 
following events have occurred.
    On August 18, 2009, we received comments on the scope of the 
investigation from various importers of subject merchandise. 
Specifically, we received requests that the Department clarify the 
existing scope language to explicitly exclude formed rosettes and 
narrow woven ribbons affixed to non-subject merchandise for a 
functional purpose, both of which are covered by one of the scope 
exclusions. We also received two requests that the Department modify 
the existing scope to exclude two products that include merchandise 
which falls within the scope (i.e., de minimis amounts of narrow woven 
ribbons included within a kit or set and pre-cut, hand-finished narrow 
woven ribbons for retail packaging in lengths of 72 inches or less). 
For further discussion, see the ``Scope Comments'' section of this 
notice, below.
    On August 24, 2009, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) 
preliminarily determined that there is a reasonable indication that 
imports of narrow woven ribbons from Taiwan are materially injuring the 
U.S. industry, and on August 31, 2009, the ITC notified the Department 
of its findings. See Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from 
China and Taiwan; Determinations, Investigation Nos. 701 TA 467 and 731 
TA 1164-1165 (Preliminary), 74 FR 46224 (Sept. 8, 2009).
    Also on August 31, 2009, we selected the following companies as the 
mandatory respondents in this investigation and issued antidumping duty 
questionnaires to them: Dear Year Brothers Mfg. Co., Ltd. (Dear Year), 
Roung Shu Industry Corporation (Roung Shu), and Shienq Huong Enterprise 
Co., Ltd. (Shienq Huong). See Memorandum from James Maeder, Office 
Director, to John M. Andersen, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary, 
entitled, ``Antidumping Duty Investigation of Narrow Woven Ribbons with 
Woven Selvedge from Taiwan: Selection of Respondents for Individual 
Review,'' dated August 31, 2009 (Respondent Selection Memo). In the 
Respondent Selection Memo, we indicated that the Department intended to 
solicit information to determine if it is appropriate to ``collapse'' 
Shienq Huong with two affiliated exporters of subject merchandise, 
Hsien Chan Enterprise Co., Ltd. (Hsien Chan) and Novelty Handicrafts 
Co., Ltd. (Novelty), such that these three companies would be treated 
as a single entity.
    In September 2009, we issued a supplemental questionnaire to Shienq 
Huong regarding the nature of its relationship with its affiliates, as 
well as the affiliates' involvement in the production and sale of 
narrow woven ribbons during the period of investigation (POI). Also in 
this month, each of the respondents notified the Department that it did 
not have a viable home market during the POI, and each provided 
information on its largest third country comparison markets. On 
September 21, the petitioner\1\ submitted comments regarding third 
country market selection with respect to Shienq Houng. On September 29 
and 30, 2009, respectively, we issued supplemental questions to Shienq 
Houng and Roung Shu regarding their third country markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The petitioner in this investigation is Berwick Offray LLC 
and its wholly-owned subsidiary Lion Ribbon Company, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In September and October 2009, we received responses to section A 
of the antidumping duty questionnaire (i.e., the section covering 
general information about the company) from each of the respondents, 
and we issued them supplemental section A questionnaires. In these 
months, we also requested additional information from each respondent 
regarding its selling practices. We received the responses to the 
supplemental questionnaires covering section A and the questionnaires 
regarding each respondents' selling practices in September and October 
2009.
    In October 2009, we received Shienq Huong's response to the 
September supplemental questionnaire on affiliation. We issued an 
additional supplemental questionnaire on this topic, and received 
Shienq Huong's response, in this month.
    Also in October 2009, we received responses to the market selection 
supplemental questionnaires from Shienq Houng and Roung Shu, as well as 
additional comments from the petitioner on this issue. Also in this 
month, we received responses to sections B (i.e., the section covering 
comparison market sales) and C (i.e., the section covering U.S. sales) 
of the antidumping duty questionnaire from each of the respondents.
    On October 30, 2009, the petitioner 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 February 4, 2010. 
See Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven Selvedge From the People's Republic 
of China and Taiwan: Postponement of Preliminary Determinations of 
Antidumping Duty Investigations, 74 FR 59962 (Nov. 19, 2009).
    In November 2009, we issued supplemental questionnaires related to 
sections B and C to each respondent.
    Also in November 2009, the petitioner alleged that Dear Year, Roung 
Shu, and Shienq Houng made third country sales below the cost of 
production (COP) and, therefore, requested that the Department initiate 
a sales-below-cost investigation of these respondents. In December 
2009, the Department initiated a sales-below-cost investigation for 
Dear Year, Roung Shu, and Shienq Houng. See the December 8, 2009, 
Memoranda to James Maeder, Director Office 2, from the Team entitled: 
``Antidumping Duty Investigation of Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven 
Selvedge from Taiwan: The Petitioner's Allegation of Sales Below the 
Cost of Production for Dear Year Brothers Mfg. Co.'' (Dear Year Cost 
Allegation Memo), ``Antidumping Duty Investigation of Narrow Woven 
Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from Taiwan: The Petitioner's Allegation of 
Sales Below the Cost of Production for Roung Shu Industry Corporation'' 
(Roung Shu Cost Allegation Memo), and ``Antidumping Duty Investigation 
of Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from Taiwan: The 
Petitioner's Allegation of Sales Below the Cost of Production for 
Shienq Huong Enterprise Co., Ltd.'' (Shienq Huong Cost Allegation 
Memo). On that same date, we instructed Dear Year, Roung Shu, and 
Shienq Houng to respond to section D (i.e., the section covering COP 
and constructed value (CV)) of the questionnaire.
    In December 2009, we received responses to our sections B and C 
supplemental questionnaires from Dear Year, Roung Shu, and Shienq 
Houng. We also issued additional supplemental questions to Dear Year 
and Shienq Houng regarding their manufacturing processes, as well as 
their purchases of ribbons from unaffiliated suppliers.
    Also in December 2009, we received comments from the petitioner 
(including revised scope language) on the two scope clarification, as 
well as the two scope exclusion, requests submitted in August 2009. For 
further discussion, see the ``Scope Comments'' section below.
    On December 29, 2009 and January 14, 2010, Roung Shu and Shienq 
Huong, respectively, requested that in the event of an affirmative 
preliminary

[[Page 7238]]

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.
    In January 2010, we determined that it is appropriate to 
``collapse'' Shienq Huong with its two affiliates, Hsien Chan and 
Novelty. See Memorandum to James Maeder, Director, Office 2, AD/CVD 
Operations, from the Team entitled, ``Whether to Collapse Shieng Houng 
Enterprise Co., Hsien Chan Enterprise Co., and Novelty Handicrafts Co., 
Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Narrow Woven Ribbons with 
Woven Selvedge from Taiwan,'' dated January 8, 2010 (Collapsing Memo). 
In addition, we determined that Roung Shu and Shienq Huong correctly 
reported sales to Mexico, and Dear Year correctly reported sales to 
Canada, as the basis for normal value. See Memorandum to James Maeder, 
Director, Office 2, AD/CVD Operations, from the Team entitled, 
``Antidumping Duty Investigation of Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven 
Selvedge from Taiwan - Selection of the Appropriate Third Country 
Markets,'' dated January 13, 2010 (Market Selection Memo); see also the 
``Home Market Viability and Selection of Comparison Markets'' section 
of this notice, below, for further discussion. In this month, Shienq 
Huong submitted a letter permitting the Department to treat the names 
of its affiliates, Hsien Chan and Novelty, as public information for 
the remainder of this proceeding.
    Also in January 2010, we received responses to section D of the 
antidumping duty questionnaire from each of the respondents. We issued 
supplemental questionnaires regarding section D of the questionnaire 
during this month, as well additional supplemental questionnaires 
regarding each respondent's sales. The responses to the Department's 
additional sales supplemental questionnaires for each respondent were 
received in January 2010. However, because the responses to the 
Department's section D supplemental questionnaires were not received 
before the date of the preliminary determination, we are unable to 
consider them in our preliminary determination. We will consider this 
information in our final determination.
    Also in January 2010, we received additional comments from 
Essential Ribbons, Inc., responding to the petitioner's December 2009 
scope comments, as well as additional comments from the petitioner 
regarding the scope of this investigation. For further discussion, see 
the ``Scope Comments'' section below.
    Finally in January 2010, we received a request from the petitioner 
that the Department collect cost data from the unaffiliated suppliers 
of narrow woven ribbons purchased by each of the respondents. For 
further discussion, see the ``Cost of Production Analysis'' section of 
this notice, below. In this same month, Shienq Huong responded to the 
petitioner's request to collect additional cost data.
    In February 2010, Dear Year 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. On the same date, Dear Year also responded to the 
petitioner's January 2010 request to collect additional cost data.
    Finally, in February 2010 we issued a final supplemental sales 
questionnaire to each of the respondents. In addition, we requested 
cost information from one of Dear Year's and two of Shienq Huong's 
unaffiliated suppliers of purchased ribbon. This information is due in 
March 2010. For further discussion, see the ``Cost of Production 
Analysis'' section of this notice, below.

Period of Investigation

    The POI is July 1, 2008, to June 30, 2009. 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).

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 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 December 29, 2009, January 14, 2010, and February 1, 2010, Roung 
Shu, Shienq Huong, and Dear Year, respectively, 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, Roung Shu, Shienq Huong, and Dear Year 
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 exporters account 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.

Scope of Investigation

    The merchandise subject to the investigation is narrow woven 
ribbons with woven selvedge, in any length, but with a width (measured 
at the narrowest span of the ribbon) less than or equal to 12 
centimeters, composed of, in whole or in part, man-made fibers (whether 
artificial or synthetic, including but not limited to nylon, polyester, 
rayon, polypropylene, and polyethylene teraphthalate), metal threads 
and/or metalized yarns, or any combination thereof. Narrow woven 
ribbons subject to the investigation may:
     also include natural or other non-man-made fibers;
     be of any color, style, pattern, or weave construction, 
including but not limited to single-faced satin, double-faced satin, 
grosgrain, sheer, taffeta, twill, jacquard, or a combination of two or 
more colors, styles, patterns, and/or weave constructions;
     have been subjected to, or composed of materials that have 
been subjected to, various treatments, including but not limited to 
dyeing, printing, foil stamping, embossing, flocking, coating, and/or 
sizing;

[[Page 7239]]

     have embellishments, including but not limited to 
appliqu[eacute], fringes, embroidery, buttons, glitter, sequins, 
laminates, and/or adhesive backing;
     have wire and/or monofilament in, on, or along the 
longitudinal edges of the ribbon;
     have ends of any shape or dimension, including but not 
limited to straight ends that are perpendicular to the longitudinal 
edges of the ribbon, tapered ends, flared ends or shaped ends, and the 
ends of such woven ribbons may or may not be hemmed;
     have longitudinal edges that are straight or of any shape, 
and the longitudinal edges of such woven ribbon may or may not be 
parallel to each other;
     consist of such ribbons affixed to like ribbon and/or cut-
edge woven ribbon, a configuration also known as an ``ornamental 
trimming;''
     be wound on spools; attached to a card; hanked (i.e., 
coiled or bundled); packaged in boxes, trays or bags; or configured as 
skeins, balls, bateaus or folds; and/or
     be included within a kit or set such as when packaged with 
other products, including but not limited to gift bags, gift boxes and/
or other types of ribbon.
    Narrow woven ribbons subject to the investigation include all 
narrow woven fabrics, tapes, and labels that fall within this written 
description of the scope of this investigation.
    Excluded from the scope of the investigation are the following:
    (1) formed bows composed of narrow woven ribbons with woven 
selvedge;
    (2) ``pull-bows'' (i.e., an assemblage of ribbons connected to one 
another, folded flat and equipped with a means to form such ribbons 
into the shape of a bow by pulling on a length of material affixed to 
such assemblage) composed of narrow woven ribbons;
    (3) narrow woven ribbons comprised at least 20 percent by weight of 
elastomeric yarn (i.e., filament yarn, including monofilament, of 
synthetic textile material, other than textured yarn, which does not 
break on being extended to three times its original length and which 
returns, after being extended to twice its original length, within a 
period of five minutes, to a length not greater than one and a half 
times its original length as defined in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States (HTSUS), Section XI, Note 13) or rubber thread;
    (4) narrow woven ribbons of a kind used for the manufacture of 
typewriter or printer ribbons;
    (5) narrow woven labels and apparel tapes, cut-to-length or cut-to-
shape, having a length (when measured across the longest edge-to-edge 
span) not exceeding 8 centimeters;
    (6) narrow woven ribbons with woven selvedge attached to and 
forming the handle of a gift bag;
    (7) cut-edge narrow woven ribbons formed by cutting broad woven 
fabric into strips of ribbon, with or without treatments to prevent the 
longitudinal edges of the ribbon from fraying (such as by merrowing, 
lamination, sono-bonding, fusing, gumming or waxing), and with or 
without wire running lengthwise along the longitudinal edges of the 
ribbon;
    (8) narrow woven ribbons comprised at least 85 percent by weight of 
threads having a denier of 225 or higher;
    (9) narrow woven ribbons constructed from pile fabrics (i.e., 
fabrics with a surface effect formed by tufts or loops of yarn that 
stand up from the body of the fabric) ;
    (10) narrow woven ribbon affixed (including by tying) as a 
decorative detail to non-subject merchandise, such as a gift bag, gift 
box, gift tin, greeting card or plush toy, or affixed (including by 
tying) as a decorative detail to packaging containing non-subject 
merchandise;
    (11) narrow woven ribbon that is (a) affixed to non-subject 
merchandise as a working component of such non-subject merchandise, 
such as where narrow woven ribbon comprises an apparel trimming, book 
marker, bag cinch, or part of an identity card holder, or (b) affixed 
(including by tying) to non-subject merchandise as a working component 
that holds or packages such non-subject merchandise or attaches 
packaging or labeling to such non-subject merchandise, such as a 
``belly band'' around a pair of pajamas, a pair of socks or a blanket; 
and
    (12) narrow woven ribbon(s) comprising a belt attached to and 
imported with an item of wearing apparel, whether or not such belt is 
removable from such item of wearing apparel.
    The merchandise subject to this investigation is classifiable under 
the HTSUS statistical categories 5806.32.1020; 5806.32.1030; 
5806.32.1050 and 5806.32.1060. Subject merchandise also may enter under 
subheadings 5806.31.00; 5806.32.20; 5806.39.20; 5806.39.30; 5808.90.00; 
5810.91.00; 5810.99.90; 5903.90.10; 5903.90.25; 5907.00.60; and 
5907.00.80 and under statistical categories 5806.32.1080; 5810.92.9080; 
5903.90.3090; and 6307.90.9889. The HTSUS statistical categories and 
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; however, 
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.
    On August 18, 2009, we received timely comments on the scope of the 
investigation from the following interested parties: 1) Costco 
Wholesale, Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., Jo-Ann Stores, Inc., Michael 
Stores, Inc., and Target Corporation (collectively, the ``Ribbons 
Retailers''); 2) Papillon Ribbon and Bow, Inc. (Papillon); and 3) 
Essential Ribbons, Inc. (Essential Ribbons). Specifically, we received 
two requests that the Department modify the scope to clarify that 
certain products are outside the scope, and two additional requests 
that the Department narrow the scope to exclude two products that 
include merchandise which falls within the scope. These requests are as 
follows:
    1) The Ribbons Retailers requested that the Department modify 
exclusions 10 (i.e., narrow woven ribbons affixed as a decorative 
detail to non-subject merchandise) and 11 (i.e., narrow woven ribbons 
affixed to non-subject merchandise as a working component) to clarify 
that narrow woven ribbons affixed to non-subject merchandise for a 
functional purpose (such as ``belly bands'' around a pair of pajamas 
and stationery packaged together by means of a ribbon) is excluded from 
the scope;
    2) Papillon requested that the Department modify the scope to 
explicitly exclude formed rosettes, which Papillon argued is a subset 
of exclusions 1 (i.e., formed bows) and 11;
    3) The Ribbons Retailers requested that the Department narrow the 
scope to exclude narrow woven ribbons included within a kit or set in 
de minimis amounts (such as narrow woven ribbons in holiday ornament 
sets, which are of small, pre-cut lengths and are used to tie ornaments 
to a tree); and
    4) Essential Ribbons requested that the Department narrow the scope 
to exclude pre-cut, hand-finished narrow woven ribbons for retail

[[Page 7240]]

packaging in lengths of 72 inches or less.
    On December 22, 2009, and January 29, 2010, the petitioner 
submitted comments on each of the above scope requests. Specifically, 
the petitioner agreed in concept with both requests made by the Ribbons 
Retailers (i.e., items one and three, above), although the petitioner 
disagreed with the Ribbons Retailers' request to modify exclusion 10. 
Moreover, while the petitioner also agreed with Papillon that rosettes 
are not covered by the scope of the investigation (i.e., item two, 
above), it contended that the existing language of the scope at 
exclusions 1 and 11 is sufficiently clear on this point, given that 
rosettes are bows. Finally, the petitioner opposed Essential Ribbon's 
request that the Department narrow the scope to exclude pre-cut, hand-
finished ribbon (i.e., item four, above) because the petitioner 
intended that such ribbon fall within the scope. Regarding this latter 
item, the petitioner asserts that it has in the past produced this 
product and may well produce it in the future, as it requires only a 
very minor finishing operation to cut and seal the ends of the ribbon. 
Further, the petitioner notes that it currently sells narrow woven 
ribbons in similar lengths (i.e., of three feet or less), and it prices 
these products in the same manner.
    On January 19, 2010, Essential Ribbons submitted comments opposing 
the petitioner's assertion that it wishes to have pre-cut, hand-
finished ribbon (i.e., item four, above) covered by the scope of this 
investigation. Essential Ribbons asserts that the petitioner does not 
currently produce this product and thus it should be excluded from the 
scope of this investigation.
    We have carefully considered each of the requests noted above, as 
well as the petitioner's responsive comments. While the Department does 
have the authority to define or clarify the scope of an investigation, 
the Department must exercise this authority in a manner which reflects 
the intent of the petition and the Department generally should not use 
its authority to define the scope of an investigation in a manner that 
would thwart the statutory mandate to provide the relief requested in 
the petition. See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than 
Fair Value: Certain Softwood Lumber Products From Canada, 67 FR 15539 
(April 2, 2002), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum under 
Scope Issues (after Comment 49). Thus, absent an overarching reason to 
modify the scope in the petition, the Department accepts it. Id. See 
also Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless Pressure Pipe from the 
People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination, 73 FR 51788, 
51789 (Sept., 5 2008); Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Not 
Less Than Fair Value: Pure Magnesium from the Russian Federation, 66 FR 
49347 (Sept. 27, 2001), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum 
at Comment 12; and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. v. U.S., 986 F. 
Supp. 1428 (CIT 1997).
    In this case, the petitioner has no objection to modifying the 
scope with respect to items one and three described above (i.e., narrow 
woven ribbons affixed to non-subject merchandise for a functional 
purpose and narrow woven ribbons included in kits or sets in de minimis 
amounts). Accordingly, we have modified the scope to incorporate the 
petitioner's revised language with respect to item one because this 
modification is consistent with the intent of the petition. See the 
``Scope of the Investigation'' section above. However, regarding item 
number three, we have concerns over whether the proposed scope 
exclusion would be administrable. Therefore, we have not modified the 
scope to exclude narrow woven ribbons included in kits or sets in ``de 
minimis'' amounts, as described by the petitioner, for purposes of the 
preliminary determination. We intend to work with the Ribbons Retailers 
and the petitioner to determine whether this exclusion could be 
administrable and will consider modifying the scope for purposes of the 
final determination.
    Regarding item two (i.e., rosettes), the petitioner also agrees 
that this product is excluded. However, we have not modified the scope 
language with respect to rosettes because we find that the scope is 
sufficiently clear that rosettes are not covered by this investigation, 
and, thus, no modification is necessary. Finally, we have made no 
change to the scope with respect to item four (i.e., pre-cut, hand-
finished ribbons) because: 1) these products are clearly within the 
scope; and 2) the petitioner intended that these products be covered.

Fair Value Comparisons

    To determine whether sales of narrow woven ribbons from Taiwan to 
the United States were made at LTFV, we compared the export price (EP) 
to the normal value (NV), as described in the ``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 to weighted-average NVs.
    For this preliminary determination, we have determined that none of 
the respondents had a viable home market during the POI. Therefore, as 
the basis for NV, we used third country sales to Canada for Dear Year, 
and Mexico for Roung Shu and Shienq Huong, when making comparisons in 
accordance with section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Act. For further 
discussion, see the Market Selection Memo.

Product Comparisons

    In accordance with section 771(16) of the Act, we considered all 
products produced by the same manufacturer and sold by Dear Year in 
Canada, and Roung Shu and Shienq Huong in Mexico, during the POI that 
fit the description in the ``Scope of Investigation'' section of this 
notice to be foreign like products for purposes of determining 
appropriate product comparisons to U.S. sales. We compared U.S. sales 
to sales made in the third country, where appropriate. Where there were 
no sales of identical merchandise in the third country made in the 
ordinary course of trade and produced by the same manufacturer to 
compare to U.S. sales, we compared U.S. sales to sales of the most 
similar foreign like product, or CV.
    In making the product comparisons, we matched foreign like products 
based on the physical characteristics reported by the respondents in 
the following order of importance: width, type, number of ends in the 
warp, number of weft picks, spool capacity, yarn composition, metal 
percentage, selvedge construction, dye process, surface finish, 
embellishments, dyed color, pattern type, selvedge contour, product 
unit packaging, and treatments. In addition, we confined our product 
comparisons to products produced by the same manufacturer. See the 
``Cost of Production Analysis'' section, below, for further discussion.
    In certain instances, the respondents reported the physical 
characteristics at a greater level of detail than that requested in the 
questionnaire. Where appropriate, we reclassified these physical 
characteristics using the categories listed in the questionnaire.
    Finally, Dear Year reported that some of its sales were made in 
either lengths of: 1) less than one yard; or 2) feet which did not 
equal whole yards. We note that we have required all respondents to 
report the spool capacities of their products in whole yards and thus 
have accepted Dear Year's reported spool capacities for purposes of the 
preliminary determination. The Department invites interested parties to 
submit comments in their case briefs on whether the

[[Page 7241]]

Department should revise its reporting requirements for the spool 
capacity product characteristic.

Export Price

    We used EP methodology for each respondent, 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 
constructed export price (CEP) methodology was not otherwise warranted 
based on the facts on the record.

A. Dear Year

    We based EP on the packed price to an unaffiliated purchaser in the 
United States. Where appropriate, we made adjustments for handling fees 
charged to the customer, price adjustments tied to exchange rates, and 
relabeling fees. We capped relabeling revenue by the amount of packing 
expenses incurred, in accordance with our practice. See Certain Orange 
Juice from Brazil: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 74 FR 40167 (Aug. 11, 2009), and accompanying Issues and 
Decision Memorandum at Comment 3.
    We made deductions for movement expenses in accordance with section 
772(c)(2)(A) of the Act; these included, where appropriate, foreign 
inland freight and foreign brokerage and handling expenses.

B. Roung Shu

    We based EP on the packed price to an unaffiliated purchaser in the 
United States. Where appropriate, we made adjustments for post-invoice 
price markdowns and rebates (including both volume rebates and certain 
post-sale price adjustments classified by Roung Shu as 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 and foreign brokerage and handling expenses.

C. Shienq Huong

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

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 each respondent'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 each respondent'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. We used sales to each respondent's largest third 
country market as the basis for comparison-market sales in accordance 
with section 773(a)(1)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.404, as no other 
comparison market(s) offered grea ter product similiarity. As discussed 
above, we used Canada for Dear Year, and Mexico for Roung Shu and 
Shienq Houng. For further discussion, see the Market Selection Memo.

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. 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.
    To determine whether NV sales are at a different LOT than EP 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.
    In this investigation, we obtained information from each respondent 
regarding the marketing stages involved in making the reported third 
country and U.S. sales, including a description of the selling 
activities performed by each respondent for each channel of 
distribution. We analyzed this data and found that each respondent made 
direct sales to distributors and/or retailers in both the U.S. and 
comparison markets. According to the information in their questionnaire 
responses, these respondents perform essentially the same selling 
functions in the United States and the relevant third country market 
(i.e., for Dear Year, strategic/economic planning, inventory 
maintenance, provision of guarantees, and packing; for Roung Shu, color 
trend advice, provision of rebates, provision of warranties and 
guarantees, provision of samples, and packing; and for Shienq Huong, 
inventory maintenance, freight and delivery arrangements, and packing). 
Therefore, we find that, for each respondent, the sales channels in 
each market are at the same LOT. Accordingly, all comparisons are at 
the same LOT for Dear Year, Roung Shu, and Shienq Huong and an 
adjustment pursuant to section 773(a)(7)(A) of the Act is not 
warranted.

C. Cost of Production Analysis

    Based on our analysis of the petitioner's allegations, we found 
that there were reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that Dear 
Year's, Roung Shu's, and Shienq Huong's sales of narrow woven ribbons 
in their third country markets were made at prices below their COP. 
Accordingly, pursuant to section 773(b) of the Act, we initiated sales-
below-cost investigations to determine whether the respondents' sales 
were made at prices below their respective COPs. See the Dear Year Cost 
Allegation Memo, the Roung Shu Cost Allegation Memo, and the Shieng 
Huong Cost Allegation Memo, for further discussion.
    In their sections A and D questionnaire responses, the respondents 
reported that they subcontracted the production of some or all of the 
narrow woven ribbons manufactured during the POI using unaffiliated 
suppliers. Moreover, both Dear Year and Shienq Huong also reported that 
they purchased undyed (or ``greige'') ribbon from unaffiliated 
companies, which they then further processed (e.g., dyed, leveled, and/
or printed) into the finished products sold in the United States and 
their comparison markets. Finally, Dear Year reported that it purchased 
piece-dyed narrow woven ribbons from unaffiliated

[[Page 7242]]

suppliers which it cut into final lengths and packed in individual 
spools before sale. In each of these instances, the respondents claimed 
that they were the manufacturers of the narrow woven ribbons, arguing 
that the value added during their own production operations was 
significant.
    On January 26, 2010, the petitioner submitted comments on this 
topic, in which it argued that the unaffiliated suppliers of the 
purchased ribbon are the manufacturers and thus should be required to 
submit cost data in this proceeding. After analyzing the data on the 
record, we preliminarily determine that the company which weaves the 
ribbon is the manufacturer because the essential characteristics of the 
ribbon are established at this stage and because the foreign exporter/
producer that further processes the ribbon does not control and direct 
the production of the basic ribbon which it then further processes. In 
accordance with our past practice, we are collecting cost data from 
certain of these unaffiliated suppliers. See, e.g., Ball Bearings and 
Parts Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United 
Kingdom: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and 
Rescission of Reviews in Part, 73 FR 52823 (Sept. 11, 2008), and 
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 15; and SKF USA 
Inc. v. United States, Ct. No. 08-322 (Slip Op. 09-148) (CIT 2009). 
However, because we currently do not have cost information for the 
unaffiliated weavers, as facts available, we are determining COP based 
on acquisition prices for purchased ribbon for purposes of the 
preliminary determination.
    Section 776(a) of the Act provides that the Department shall apply 
``facts otherwise available'' if (1) necessary information is not on 
the record, or (2) an interested party or any other person (A) 
withholds information that has been requested, (B) fails to provide 
information within the deadlines established, or in the form and manner 
requested by the Department, subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of 
section 782 of the Act, (C) significantly impedes a proceeding, or (D) 
provides information that cannot be verified as provided by section 
782(i) of the Act. Here, we lack information necessary to determine the 
unaffiliated suppliers' actual costs and must, therefore, rely upon 
facts available. The acquisition prices for purchased ribbon constitute 
reasonable facts available because they are product-specific and the 
only data available on the record at this time with respect to 
purchased ribbon.
    We plan to examine the issue of whether the weaver is the producer 
further at our verifications of Dear Year, Roung Shu, and Shienq Huong 
and we will reconsider this issue for the final determination, if 
necessary.

1. Calculation of COP

    In accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the Act, we calculated COP 
based on the sum of the cost of materials and fabrication for the 
foreign like product, plus an amount for general and administrative 
expenses (G&A), interest expenses, and third country packing costs. See 
``Test of Third Country Sales Prices'' section below for treatment of 
third country selling expenses. We relied on the COP data submitted by 
the respondents except, for Dear Year and Roung Shu, we revised the G&A 
and financial expense ratios to exclude packing expenses from the cost 
of sales denominator. See the February 4, 2010, Memoranda from Heidi 
Schriefer, Senior Accountant, to Neal M. Halper, Director, Office of 
Accounting, entitled, ``Cost of Production and Constructed Value 
Calculation Adjustments for the Preliminary Determination - Dear Year 
Manufacturing Co., Ltd.,'' and Kristin Case, Accountant, to Neal M. 
Halper, Director, Office of Accounting, entitled, ``Cost of Production 
and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Preliminary 
Determination - Roung Shu Industry Corporation,'' for further 
discussion.

2. Test of Third Country Sales Prices

    On a product-specific basis, we compared the adjusted weighted-
average COP to the third country sales of the foreign like product, as 
required under section 773(b) of the Act, in order to determine whether 
the sale prices were below the COP. The prices were exclusive of any 
applicable billing adjustments, discounts, rebates, movement charges, 
and direct and indirect selling expenses. In determining whether to 
disregard third country market sales made at prices less than their 
COP, we examined, in accordance with sections 773(b)(1)(A) and (B) of 
the Act, whether such sales were made (1) within an extended period of 
time in substantial quantities, and (2) at prices which permitted the 
recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time.

3. Results of the COP Test

    Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C) of the Act, where less than 20 
percent of the respondent's sales of a given product during the POI are 
at prices less than the COP, we do not disregard any below-cost sales 
of that product, because we determine that in such instances the below-
cost sales were not made in substantial quantities. Where 20 percent or 
more of the respondent's sales of a given product during the POI are at 
prices less than the COP, we determine that the below-cost sales 
represent substantial quantities within an extended period of time, in 
accordance with section 773(b)(1)(A) of the Act. In such cases, we also 
determine whether such sales were made at prices which would not permit 
recovery of all costs within a reasonable period of time, in accordance 
with section 773(b)(1)(B) of the Act.
    We found that, for certain specific products, more than 20 percent 
of Dear Year's, Roung Shu's, and Shienq Huong's third country sales 
during the POI were at prices less than the COP and, in addition, the 
below-cost sales did not provide for the recovery of costs within a 
reasonable period of time. We therefore excluded these sales and used 
the remaining sales, if any, as the basis for determining NV, in 
accordance with section 773(b)(1) of the Act. Where there were no sales 
of any comparable product at prices above the COP, we used CV as the 
basis for determining NV.

4. Calculation of Normal Value Based on Comparison Market Prices

a. Dear Year
    For Dear Year, we calculated NV based on delivered prices to 
unaffiliated customers. Where appropriate, we made adjustments for 
discounts. We made deductions for movement expenses, including foreign 
inland freight expenses and foreign brokerage and handling expenses.
    We made adjustments under section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and 
19 CFR 351.410 for differences in circumstances of sale for credit 
expenses, display unit costs, warranty expenses, and bank charges. We 
recalculated Dear Year's U.S. warranty expenses to base them on Dear 
Year's historical experience. See Memorandum from Holly Phelps to the 
file entitled, ``Calculations Performed for Dear Year Brothers Mfg. 
Co., Ltd. for the Preliminary Results in the 08-09 Antidumping Duty 
Investigation of Narrow Woven Ribbon with Woven Selvedge from Taiwan,'' 
dated February 4, 2010, for further discussion.
    Regarding display unit costs, Dear Year reported that it sold 
certain narrow woven ribbons in combinations in displays with other 
products. However, it did not report the cost of the display units for 
all products sold in this fashion in its U.S. sales listing. Therefore, 
we have based the cost of

[[Page 7243]]

these displays on the average cost of display units reported in the 
U.S. sales listing, as facts available. We have afforded Dear Year an 
opportunity to provide the missing data, and we will consider this 
information for purposes of the final determination.
    We made no adjustment to NV for testing fees incurred by Dear Year 
because we determined that these expenses were more appropriately 
classified as indirect selling expenses, in accordance with the 
Department's practice. See, e.g., Honey from Argentina: Final Results 
of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Determination to Revoke 
Order in Part, 74 FR 32107 (July 7, 2009), and accompanying Issues and 
Decision Memorandum at Comment 5.
    We made adjustments for differences in costs attributable to 
differences in the physical characteristics of the merchandise in 
accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.411. 
We also deducted third country packing costs and added U.S. packing 
costs in accordance with sections 773(a)(6)(A) and (B) of the Act.
b. Roung Shu
    For Roung Shu, we calculated NV based on delivered prices to 
unaffiliated customers. Where appropriate, we made adjustments for 
post-invoice price markdowns and rebates (including both volume rebates 
and certain post-sale price adjustments classified by Roung Shu as 
discounts). We made no adjustment to NV for the cost of contributions 
made by Roung Shu toward the opening on new retail outlets by one of 
the company's customers, because we determined that these expenses were 
more appropriately classified as indirect selling expenses.
    We made deductions for movement expenses, including foreign inland 
freight expenses, foreign brokerage and handling expenses, 
international freight expenses, and marine insurance. In addition, we 
made adjustments under section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.410 for differences in circumstances of sale for credit expenses, 
the cost of display units, advertising expenses, U.S. warranty 
expenses, and bank charges. We recalculated Roung Shu's third country 
and U.S. credit expenses to use the simple average of the POI U.S. 
Federal Reserve interest rates, as well as to base the expense on gross 
unit price. See Memorandum from Miriam Eqab to the file entitled, 
``Calculations Performed for Roung Shu Industry Corporation (Roung Shu) 
for the Preliminary Results in the 08-09 Antidumping Duty Investigation 
of Narrow Woven Ribbon with Woven Selvedge from Taiwan,'' dated 
February 4, 2010, for further discussion. In addition, we denied Roung 
Shu's claim for third country warranty expenses because the company's 
response contained conflicting information related to this adjustment, 
and thus we preliminarily found that it was not adequately supported. 
Nonetheless, we intend to request additional information from Roung Shu 
related to its third country warranties and will consider this 
information for purposes of the final determination.
    We made adjustments for differences in costs attributable to 
differences in the physical characteristics of the merchandise in 
accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.411. 
We also deducted third country packing costs and added U.S. packing 
costs in accordance with sections 773(a)(6)(A) and (B) of the Act.
c. Shienq Huong
    For Shienq Huong, we calculated NV based on delivered prices to 
unaffiliated customers. We made deductions for movement expenses, 
including foreign inland freight expenses and foreign brokerage and 
handling expenses. In addition, we made adjustments under section 
773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.410 for differences in 
circumstances of sale for credit expenses, the cost of display units, 
U.S. warranty expenses, and bank charges. We recalculated Shienq 
Huong's third country and U.S. credit expenses for sales denominated in 
U.S. dollars to use the simple average of the POI U.S. Federal Reserve 
interest rates. We also recalculated Shienq Huong's U.S. warranty 
expenses to base them on Shienq Huong's historical experience. See 
Memorandum from Hector Rodriguez to the file entitled, ``Calculations 
Performed for Shienq Huong Enterprise Co., Ltd. (Shieng Huong) for the 
Preliminary Determination in the Antidumping Duty Investigation of 
Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge from Taiwan,'' dated February 
4, 2010, for further discussion.
    We made adjustments for differences in costs attributable to 
differences in the physical characteristics of the merchandise in 
accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.411. 
We also deducted third country packing costs and added U.S. packing 
costs in accordance with sections 773(a)(6)(A) and (B) of the Act.

5. Calculation of Normal Value Based on Constructed Value

    Section 773(a)(4) of the Act provides that, where NV cannot be 
based on comparison market sales, NV may be based on CV. Accordingly, 
for those narrow woven ribbons for which we could not determine the NV 
based on comparison market sales, we based NV on CV.
    Section 773(e) of the Act provides that CV shall be based on the 
sum of the cost of materials and fabrication for the imported 
merchandise, plus amounts for SG&A expenses, profit, and U.S. packing 
costs. For each respondent, we calculated the cost of materials and 
fabrication based on the methodology described in the ``Cost of 
Production Analysis'' section, above. We based SG&A and profit for each 
respondent on the actual amounts incurred and realized by it in 
connection with the production and sale of the foreign like product in 
the ordinary course of trade for consumption in the comparison market, 
in accordance with section 773(e)(2)(A) of the Act.
    We made adjustments to CV for differences in circumstances of sale 
in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(iii) and (a)(8) of the Act and 19 
CFR 351.410. For comparisons to EP, we made circumstance-of-sale 
adjustments by deducting direct selling expenses incurred on comparison 
market sales from, and adding U.S. direct selling expenses to, CV. See 
19 CFR 351.410(c).

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.

Suspension of Liquidation

    In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we will direct 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation of all 
entries of narrow woven ribbons from Taiwan 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. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect 
until further notice.
    The weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

[[Page 7244]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Weighted-
                 Manufacturer/Exporter                    Average Margin
                                                            (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Year Brothers Mfg. Co., Ltd.......................           0.00
Roung Shu Industry Corporation.........................           4.54
Shienq Huong Enterprise Co., Ltd./Hsien Chan Enterprise           0.00
 Co., Ltd./Novelty Handicrafts Co., Ltd................
All Others.............................................           4.54
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For Dear Year and Shienq Huong, because their estimated weighted-
average preliminary dumping margins are zero, we are not directing CBP 
to suspend liquidation of either company's entries.

``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.

Disclosure

    We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the 
date of publication of this notice 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 of sales 
at LTFV. 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 narrow woven ribbons from Taiwan are materially 
injuring, or threatening material injury to, the U.S. industry (see 
section 735(b)(2) of the Act). As we are postponing the deadline for 
our final determination to 135 days from the date of the publication of 
this preliminary determination, 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 related to sales issues no later than seven days after the 
date of the issuance of the last sales verification report issued in 
this proceeding; the case briefs related to cost of production issues 
may be submitted no later than seven days after the date of issuance of 
the last cost verification report issued 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.
    This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 
733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: February 4, 2010.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010-3133 Filed 2-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S