Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 150 / Thursday, August 6, 2009 / Notices 39291 

comments, or at a hearing, if requested, 

within 120 days of publication of these 

preliminary results. 

Assessment Rate 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b), the 

Department calculated an assessment 

rate for each importer of the subject 

merchandise. Upon issuance of the final 

results of this administrative review, if 

any importer-specific assessment rates 

calculated in the final results are above 

de minimis (i.e., at or above 0.5 percent), 

the Department will issue appraisement 

instructions directly to CBP to assess 

antidumping duties on appropriate 

entries by applying the assessment rate 

to the entered value of the merchandise. 

For assessment purposes, we calculated 

importer-specific assessment rates for 

the subject merchandise by aggregating 

the dumping margins for all U.S. sales 

to each importer and dividing the 

amount by the total entered value of the 

sales to that importer. Where 

appropriate, to calculate the entered 

value, we subtracted international 

movement expenses (e.g., international 

freight) from the gross sales value. For 

the responsive companies which were 

not selected for individual review, we 

have calculated an assessment rate 

based on the simple average of the cash 

deposit rates calculated for the 

companies selected for individual 

review. 

The Department clarified its 

‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on 

May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This 

clarification will apply to entries of 

subject merchandise during the POR 

produced by companies included in 

these preliminary results of review for 

which the reviewed companies did not 

know their merchandise was destined 

for the United States. In such instances, 

we will instruct CBP to liquidate 

unreviewed entries at the all-others rate 

if there is no rate for the intermediate 

company(ies) involved in the 

transaction. For a full discussion of this 

clarification, see Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

To calculate the cash deposit rate for 

PAM and Garofalo, we divided its total 

dumping margin by the total net value 

of its sales during the review period. For 

the responsive companies which were 

not selected for individual review, we 

have calculated a cash deposit rate 

based on the simple average of the cash 

deposit rates calculated for the 

companies selected for individual 

review. 

The following deposit rates will be 

effective upon publication of the final 

results of this administrative review for 

all shipments of pasta from Italy 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date, as provided by section 

751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash 

deposit rate for companies subject to 

this review will be the rate established 

in the final results of this review, except 

if the rate is less than 0.5 percent and, 

therefore, de minimis, no cash deposit 

will be required; (2) for previously 

reviewed or investigated companies not 

listed above, the cash deposit rate will 

continue to be the company-specific rate 

published for the most recent final 

results for a review in which that 

manufacturer or exporter participated; 

(3) if the exporter is not a firm covered 

in this review, a prior review, or the 

original less-than-fair-value (‘‘LTFV’’) 

investigation, but the manufacturer is, 

the cash deposit rate will be the rate 

established for the most recent final 

results for the manufacturer of the 

merchandise; and (4) if neither the 

exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm 

covered in this or any previous review 

conducted by the Department, the cash 

deposit rate will be 15.45 percent, the 

all-others rate established in the LTFV 

investigation. See Implementation of the 

Findings of the WTO Panel in U.S.— 

Zeroing (EC): Notice of Determination 

Under Section 129 of the Uruguay 

Round Agreements Act and Revocations 

and Partial Revocations of Certain 

Antidumping Duty Orders, 72 FR 25261 

(May 4, 2007). These cash deposit 

requirements, when imposed, shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice serves as a preliminary 

reminder to importers of their 

responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 

to file a certificate regarding the 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

prior to liquidation of the relevant 

entries during this review period. 

Failure to comply with this requirement 

could result in the Secretary’s 

presumption that reimbursement of 

antidumping duties occurred and 

increase the subsequent assessment of 

the antidumping duties by the amount 

of antidumping duties reimbursed. 

These preliminary results of 

administrative review are issued and 

published in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.221(b)(4). 

Dated: July 31, 2009. 

John M. Andersen, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. E9–18884 Filed 8–5–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–952, A–583–844)] 

Narrow Woven Ribbons with Woven 

Selvedge from the People’s Republic 

of China and Taiwan: Initiation of 

Antidumping Duty Investigations 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 6, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elizabeth Eastwood at (202) 482–3874 or 

Miriam Eqab at (202) 482–3693 

(Taiwan), AD/CVD Operations, Office 2; 

Maisha Cryor at (202) 482–5831 or 

Zhulieta Willbrand at (202) 482–3147 

(the People’s Republic of China (the 

‘‘PRC’’)), AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, 

Import Administration, International 

Trade Administration, U.S. Department 

of Commerce, 14th Street and 

Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, 

DC 20230. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petitions 

On July 9, 2009, the Department of 

Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’) received 

petitions concerning imports of narrow 

woven ribbons with woven selvedge 

(‘‘narrow woven ribbon’’) from the PRC 

and Taiwan filed in proper form by 

Berwick Offray LLC and its wholly– 

owned subsidiary Lion Ribbon 

Company, Inc. (collectively, the 

‘‘Petitioner’’). See Petitions for the 

Imposition of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duties on Narrow 

Woven Ribbons with Woven Selvedge 

from the People’s Republic of China and 

Taiwan dated July 9, 2009 (the 

‘‘Petitions’’). On July 14, 2009, the 

Department contacted the Petitioner by 

telephone seeking additional 

information and clarification regarding 

the Petition. See Memo to the File from 

Matthew Glass, ‘‘Scope Call with the 

Petitioner,’’ dated July 14, 2009. On July 

15, 2009, and July 22, 2009, the 

Department issued a request for 

additional information and clarification 

of certain areas of the Petitions. Also, on 

July 23, 2009, the Department contacted 

the Petitioner by telephone seeking 

additional information and clarification 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
39292 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 150 / Thursday, August 6, 2009 / Notices 

regarding the Petitions. See Memo to the 

File from Meredith A.W. Rutherford, 

‘‘General Issues Discussion with the 

Petitioner,’’ dated July 23, 2009. Based 

on the Department’s requests, the 

Petitioner filed additional information 

on July 21, 2009 (hereinafter, 

Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, 

dated July 21, 2009) and July 27, 2009 

(hereinafter, Second Supplement to the 

AD/CVD Petitions, dated July 27, 2009). 

On July 28, 2009, the Department again 

contacted the Petitioner by telephone 

seeking additional information and 

clarification regarding certain general 

issues of the Petitions. See Memo to the 

File from Meredith A.W. Rutherford, 

‘‘Phone Call with the Petitioner,’’ dated 

July 28, 2009, and Memo to the File 

from Elizabeth Eastwood, ‘‘Scope Calls 

with the Petitioner,’’ dated July 29, 

2009. Based on the Department’s 

requests, the Petitioner timely filed 

additional information pertaining to the 

Petition on July 29, 2009 (hereinafter, 

Third Supplement to the AD/CVD 

Petitions, dated July 29, 2009). The 

period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) for the 

PRC is January 1, 2009, through June 30, 

2009. The POI for Taiwan is July 1, 

2008, through June 30, 2009. See 19 CFR 

351.204(b)(1). 

In accordance with section 732(b) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

‘‘Act’’), the Petitioner alleges that 

imports of narrow woven ribbon from 

the PRC and Taiwan are being, or are 

likely to be, sold in the United States at 

less than fair value, within the meaning 

of section 731 of the Act, and that such 

imports are materially injuring, or 

threatening material injury to, an 

industry in the United States. 

The Department finds that the 

Petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of 

the domestic industry because the 

Petitioner is an interested party as 

defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act 

and has demonstrated sufficient 

industry support with respect to the 

antidumping duty investigations that 

the Petitioner is requesting that the 

Department initiate (see ‘‘Determination 

of Industry Support for the Petitions’’ 

section below). 

Scope of Investigations 

The products covered by these 

investigations are narrow woven ribbons 

with woven selvedge from the PRC and 

Taiwan. For a full description of the 

scope of the investigations, please see 

the ‘‘Scope of Investigations,’’ in 

Appendix I of this notice. 

Comments on Scope of Investigations 

During our review of the Petitions, we 

discussed the scope with the Petitioner 

to ensure that it is an accurate reflection 

of the products for which the domestic 

industry is seeking relief. Moreover, as 

discussed in the preamble to the 

regulations (Antidumping Duties; 

Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 

27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997)), we are 

setting aside a period for interested 

parties to raise issues regarding product 

coverage. The Department encourages 

all interested parties to submit such 

comments by August 18, 2009, twenty 

calendar days from the signature date of 

this notice. Comments should be 

addressed to Import Administration’s 

APO/Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S. 

Department of Commerce, 14th Street 

and Constitution Avenue, NW, 

Washington, DC 20230. The period of 

scope consultations is intended to 

provide the Department with ample 

opportunity to consider all comments 

and to consult with parties prior to the 

issuance of the preliminary 

determinations. 

Comments on Product Characteristics 

for Antidumping Duty Questionnaires 

We are requesting comments from 

interested parties regarding the 

appropriate physical characteristics of 

narrow woven ribbon to be reported in 

response to the Department’s 

antidumping questionnaires. This 

information will be used to identify the 

key physical characteristics of the 

subject merchandise in order to more 

accurately report the relevant factors 

and costs of production, as well as to 

develop appropriate product 

comparison criteria. 

Interested parties may provide any 

information or comments that they feel 

are relevant to the development of an 

accurate listing of physical 

characteristics. Specifically, they may 

provide comments as to which 

characteristics are appropriate to use as 

1) general product characteristics and 2) 

the product comparison criteria. We 

note that it is not always appropriate to 

use all product characteristics as 

product comparison criteria. We base 

product comparison criteria on 

meaningful commercial differences 

among products. In other words, while 

there may be some physical product 

characteristics utilized by 

manufacturers to describe narrow 

woven ribbon, it may be that only a 

select few product characteristics take 

into account commercially meaningful 

physical characteristics. In addition, 

interested parties may comment on the 

order in which the physical 

characteristics should be used in 

product matching. Generally, the 

Department attempts to list the most 

important physical characteristics first 

and the least important characteristics 

last. 

In order to consider the suggestions of 

interested parties in developing and 

issuing the antidumping duty 

questionnaires, we must receive 

comments at the above–referenced 

address by August 18, 2009. 

Additionally, rebuttal comments must 

be received by August 25, 2009. 

Determination of Industry Support for 

the Petitions 

Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires 

that a petition be filed on behalf of the 

domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) 

of the Act provides that a petition meets 

this requirement if the domestic 

producers or workers who support the 

petition account for: (i) at least 25 

percent of the total production of the 

domestic like product; and (ii) more 

than 50 percent of the production of the 

domestic like product produced by that 

portion of the industry expressing 

support for, or opposition to, the 

petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) 

of the Act provides that, if the petition 

does not establish support of domestic 

producers or workers accounting for 

more than 50 percent of the total 

production of the domestic like product, 

the Department shall: (i) poll the 

industry or rely on other information in 

order to determine if there is support for 

the petition, as required by 

subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine 

industry support using a statistically 

valid sampling method to poll the 

industry. 

Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines 

the ‘‘industry’’ as the producers as a 

whole of a domestic like product. Thus, 

to determine whether a petition has the 

requisite industry support, the statute 

directs the Department to look to 

producers and workers who produce the 

domestic like product. The International 

Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’), which is 

responsible for determining whether 

‘‘the domestic industry’’ has been 

injured, must also determine what 

constitutes a domestic like product in 

order to define the industry. While both 

the Department and the ITC must apply 

the same statutory definition regarding 

the domestic like product (see section 

771(10) of the Act), they do so for 

different purposes and pursuant to a 

separate and distinct authority. In 

addition, the Department’s 

determination is subject to limitations of 

time and information. Although this 

may result in different definitions of the 

like product, such differences do not 

render the decision of either agency 

contrary to law. See USEC, Inc. v. 

United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (Ct. 

Int’l Trade 2001), citing Algoma Steel 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 150 / Thursday, August 6, 2009 / Notices 39293 

Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 

Supp. 639, 644 (Ct. Int’l Trade 1988), 

aff’d 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989), cert. 

denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989). 

Section 771(10) of the Act defines the 

domestic like product as ‘‘a product 

which is like, or in the absence of like, 

most similar in characteristics and uses 

with, the article subject to an 

investigation under this title.’’ Thus, the 

reference point from which the 

domestic like product analysis begins is 

‘‘the article subject to an investigation’’ 

(i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to 

be investigated, which normally will be 

the scope as defined in the petition). 

With regard to the domestic like 

product, the Petitioner does not offer a 

definition of domestic like product 

distinct from the scope of the 

investigations. Based on our analysis of 

the information submitted on the 

record, we have determined that narrow 

woven ribbon constitutes a single 

domestic like product and we have 

analyzed industry support in terms of 

that domestic like product. For a 

discussion of the domestic like product 

analysis in this case, see Antidumping 

Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: 

Narrow woven ribbon from the PRC 

(‘‘PRC Initiation Checklist’’) at 

Attachment II, Industry Support, and 

Antidumping Duty Investigation 

Initiation Checklist: Narrow woven 

ribbon from Taiwan (‘‘Taiwan Initiation 

Checklist’’) at Attachment II, Industry 

Support, dated concurrently with this 

notice and on file in the Central Records 

Unit (‘‘CRU’’), Room 1117 of the main 

Department of Commerce building. 

In determining whether the Petitioner 

has standing under section 732(c)(4)(A) 

of the Act, we considered the industry 

support data contained in the Petitions 

with reference to the domestic like 

product as defined in the ‘‘Scope of 

Investigations’’ section above. To 

establish industry support, the 

Petitioner provided its production of the 

domestic like product for the year 2008, 

and compared this to the estimated total 

production of the domestic like product 

for the entire domestic industry. See 

Volume I of the Petition, at 7, and 

Exhibits 2, 4, and 5, Supplement to the 

AD/CVD Petitions, dated July 21, 2009, 

at A–9–11, Second Supplement to the 

AD/CVD Petitions, dated July 27, 2009, 

at A–1–2 and Exhibit 117, and Third 

Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, 

dated July 29, 2009, at Attachment II. To 

estimate 2008 production of the 

domestic like product, the Petitioner 

used its own data and industry specific 

knowledge. The Petitioner calculated 

total domestic production based on its 

own production plus estimates from the 

nine other producers of the domestic 

like product in the United States. See 

id.; see also PRC Initiation Checklist at 

Attachment II, and Taiwan Initiation 

Checklist at Attachment II. 

Our review of the data provided in the 

Petitions, supplemental submissions, 

and other information readily available 

to the Department indicates that the 

Petitioner has established industry 

support. First, the Petitions established 

support from domestic producers (or 

workers) accounting for more than 50 

percent of the total production of the 

domestic like product and, as such, the 

Department is not required to take 

further action in order to evaluate 

industry support (e.g., polling). See 

section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act; see also 

PRC Initiation Checklist at Attachment 

II, and Taiwan Initiation Checklist at 

Attachment II. Second, the domestic 

producers (or workers) have met the 

statutory criteria for industry support 

under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act 

because the domestic producers (or 

workers) who support the Petitions 

account for at least 25 percent of the 

total production of the domestic like 

product. See PRC Initiation Checklist at 

Attachment II, and Taiwan Initiation 

Checklist at Attachment II. Finally, the 

domestic producers (or workers) have 

met the statutory criteria for industry 

support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(ii) of 

the Act because the domestic producers 

(or workers) who support the Petitions 

account for more than 50 percent of the 

production of the domestic like product 

produced by that portion of the industry 

expressing support for, or opposition to, 

the Petitions. Accordingly, the 

Department determines that the 

Petitions were filed on behalf of the 

domestic industry within the meaning 

of section 732(b)(1) of the Act. See id. 

The Department finds that the 

Petitioner filed the Petitions on behalf of 

the domestic industry because it is an 

interested party as defined in section 

771(9)(C) of the Act and it has 

demonstrated sufficient industry 

support with respect to the antidumping 

duty investigations that it is requesting 

the Department initiate. See id. 

Allegations and Evidence of Material 

Injury and Causation 

The Petitioner alleges that the U.S. 

industry producing the domestic like 

product is being materially injured, or is 

threatened with material injury, by 

reason of the imports of the subject 

merchandise sold at less than normal 

value (‘‘NV’’). In addition, the Petitioner 

alleges that subject imports exceed the 

negligibility threshold provided for 

under section 771(24)(A) of the Act. 

The Petitioner contends that the 

industry’s injured condition is 

illustrated by reduced market share, 

underselling and price depressing and 

suppressing effects, increased import 

penetration, lost sales and revenue, 

reduced production, reduced capacity, 

reduced capacity utilization, reduced 

shipments, reduced employment, and 

an overall decline in financial 

performance. We have assessed the 

allegations and supporting evidence 

regarding material injury, threat of 

material injury, and causation, and we 

have determined that these allegations 

are properly supported by adequate 

evidence and meet the statutory 

requirements for initiation. See PRC 

Initiation Checklist at Attachment III, 

Injury, and Taiwan Initiation Checklist 

at Attachment III, Injury. 

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair 

Value 

The following is a description of the 

allegations of sales at less than fair value 

upon which the Department based its 

decision to initiate these investigations 

of imports of narrow woven ribbon from 

the PRC and Taiwan. The sources of 

data for the deductions and adjustments 

relating to the U.S. price, the factors of 

production (for the PRC) and 

constructed value (‘‘CV’’) (for Taiwan) 

are also discussed in the country– 

specific initiation checklists. See PRC 

Initiation Checklist and Taiwan 

Initiation Checklist. Should the need 

arise to use any of this information as 

facts available under section 776 of the 

Act in our preliminary or final 

determinations, we will reexamine the 

information and revise the margin 

calculations, if appropriate. 

Export Price 

The PRC 

For the PRC, the Petitioner calculated 

export price (‘‘EP’’) based on a price 

quote made during the POI for narrow 

woven ribbon products by a Chinese 

producer, sale term free on board 

(‘‘FOB’’). See PRC Initiation Checklist; 

see also Volume I of the Petitions at 24. 

To be conservative, the Petitioner did 

not make specific adjustments to the EP 

for domestic inland freight from the 

plant to the Chinese port. Id. However, 

the Petitioner did make an adjustment 

for foreign brokerage and handling. Id. 

Specifically, the Petitioner calculated 

PRC brokerage and handling by using 

the brokerage and handling surrogate 

value from Certain Steel Grating from 

the People’s Republic of China: 

Initiation of Antidumping Duty 

Investigation, 74 FR 30273 (June 25, 

2009) (‘‘Steel Grating From China’’), and 

adjusted it for inflation for the POI. See 

Steel Grating From China, 74 FR at 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
39294 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 150 / Thursday, August 6, 2009 / Notices 

30276; see also Supplement to the AD/ 

CVD Petitions, dated July 21, 2009, at 4 

and Exhibit 93; and PRC Initiation 

Checklist. In addition, the Petitioner 

converted brokerage and handling 

expenses into U.S. dollars based on the 

POI–average rupee/U.S. dollar exchange 

rate, as reported on the Department’s 

website. See Volume II of the Petitions, 

at Exhibit 42, and Supplement to the 

AD/CVD Petitions, dated July 21, 2009, 

at Exhibit 98. 

Taiwan 

For Taiwan, the Petitioner calculated 

EP based on price quotes made during 

the POI for narrow woven ribbon 

products from a Taiwan producer/ 

exporter, sale term FOB. See Taiwan 

Initiation Checklist; see also Volume I of 

the Petitions at 28–29 and Volume II of 

the Petitions at Exhibits 58, 59, and 60. 

To be conservative, the Petitioner did 

not make specific adjustments to the EP 

for domestic inland freight from the 

plant to the Taiwanese port. See id. 

However, the Petitioner did make an 

adjustment for foreign brokerage and 

handling. See id. Specifically, the 

Petitioner calculated Taiwanese 

brokerage and handling using Taiwan– 

specific brokerage and handling 

expenses. See Volume II of the Petitions, 

at Exhibit 59; see also Supplement to 

the AD/CVD Petitions, dated July 21, 

2009, at Exhibit 108 and Taiwan 

Initiation Checklist. 

Normal Value 

The PRC 

The Petitioner states that the PRC is 

a non–market economy (‘‘NME’’) 

country and no determination to the 

contrary has been made by the 

Department. See Volume I of the 

Petitions, at 19. The Petitioner states 

that the Department has treated the PRC 

as an NME country in every 

administrative proceeding in which the 

PRC has been involved, and has 

continued to do so in recent months. 

See id.; see also Citric Acid and Certain 

Citrate Salts From the People’s Republic 

of China: Final Affirmative 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value, 74 FR 16838 (April 13, 

2009); see also Certain Circular Welded 

Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from the 

People’s Republic of China: Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value, 74 FR 14514 (March 31, 

2009). 

In accordance with section 

771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the 

presumption of NME status remains in 

effect until revoked by the Department. 

The presumption of NME status for the 

PRC has not been revoked by the 

Department and, therefore, remains in 

effect for purposes of the initiation of 

this investigation. Accordingly, the NV 

of the product for the PRC investigation 

is appropriately based on factors of 

production valued in a surrogate 

market–economy country in accordance 

with section 773(c) of the Act. In the 

course of the PRC investigation, all 

parties, including the public, will have 

the opportunity to provide relevant 

information related to the issue of the 

PRC’s NME status and the granting of 

separate rates to individual exporters. 

Citing section 773(c)(4) of the Act, the 

Petitioner contends that India is the 

appropriate surrogate country for the 

PRC because: 1) it is at a level of 

economic development comparable to 

that of the PRC; and 2) it is a significant 

producer of narrow woven ribbon. See 

Volume I of the Petitions at 19–21, and 

Volume II of the Petitions, at Exhibit 32. 

Based on the information provided by 

the Petitioner, we believe that it is 

appropriate to use India as a surrogate 

country for initiation purposes. After 

initiation of the investigation, interested 

parties will have the opportunity to 

submit comments regarding surrogate– 

country selection and, pursuant to 19 

CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), will be provided 

an opportunity to submit publicly 

available information to value factors of 

production within 40 days after the date 

of publication of the preliminary 

determination. 

The Petitioner calculated the NV and 

dumping margins for the U.S. price, 

discussed above, using the Department’s 

NME methodology as required by 19 

CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C) and 19 CFR 

351.408. The Petitioner calculated NV 

based on its own consumption rates for 

producing narrow woven ribbon in 

2009. See Volume I of the Petitions at 

18, and Volume II of the Petitions, at 

Exhibit 29, and Supplement to the AD/ 

CVD Petitions, dated July 21, 2009, at 

Exhibit 95. In calculating NV, the 

Petitioner based the quantity of each of 

the inputs used to manufacture and 

pack narrow woven ribbon in the PRC 

based on an analysis of Chinese narrow 

woven ribbon samples obtained by the 

Petitioner, as well as on its own 

production experience during the POI. 

See id. The Petitioner states that the 

actual usage rates of the foreign 

manufacturers of narrow woven ribbon 

are not reasonably available to it; 

however, the Petitioner notes that the 

production of narrow woven ribbon 

relies on the same basic technology 

worldwide. See Volume I of the 

Petitions at 18. The Petitioner asserts 

that the Chinese producers of narrow 

woven ribbon use largely the same 

production equipment, material inputs, 

and production processes as the 

Petitioner itself. See Volume I of the 

Petitions at 18, and Exhibit 27, and 

Volume II of the Petitions, at Exhibit 29. 

Raw materials (e.g., yarn) are 

significant inputs used in the 

production of narrow woven ribbon. 

The Petitioner determined the 

consumption of all raw materials and 

packing materials based on examination 

and analysis of samples of white single 

face satin narrow woven ribbon and 

black single face satin narrow woven 

ribbon from the PRC as well as its own 

production experience. See Volume I of 

the Petitions at 18, and Volume II of the 

Petitions at Exhibit 29, and Supplement 

to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated July 21, 

2009, at Exhibit 95. The Petitioner 

valued the factors of production based 

on reasonably available, public 

surrogate–country data, including 

Indian import statistics from the World 

Trade Atlas (‘‘WTA’’). See Volume I of 

the Petitions, at 21, and Volume II of the 

Petitions, at Exhibit 34. The Petitioner 

excluded from these import statistics 

imports from countries previously 

determined by the Department to be 

NME countries and from Indonesia, the 

Republic of Korea, and Thailand as the 

Department has previously excluded 

prices from these countries because they 

maintain broadly available, non– 

industry-specific export subsidies. See 

Volume I of the Petition at 22. In 

addition, the Petitioner made currency 

conversions, where necessary, based on 

the POI–average rupee/U.S. dollar 

exchange rate, as reported on the 

Department’s website. See Volume I of 

the Petitions, at 23, and Volume II of the 

Petitions, at Exhibit 42. Further, the 

Petitioner inflated certain factors of 

production, where necessary, on a POI 

basis. See Volume I of the Petitions, at 

23, and Volume II of the Petitions, at 

Exhibit 41. The Petitioner determined 

labor costs using the labor consumption, 

in hours, derived from its own 

experience. See Volume II of the 

Petitions, at Exhibit 29, and Supplement 

to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated July 21, 

2009, at Exhibit 95. The Petitioner 

valued labor costs using the 

Department’s NME Wage Rate for the 

PRC at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/ 

05wages/05wages–051608.html. See 

Volume I of the Petitions, at 22, and 

Volume II of the Petitions, at Exhibit 35. 

For purposes of initiation, the 

Department determines that the 

surrogate values used by the Petitioner 

are reasonably available and, thus, 

acceptable for purposes of initiation. 

The Petitioner determined electricity 

costs using the electricity consumption, 

in kilowatt hours, derived from its own 

experience. See Volume I of the 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 150 / Thursday, August 6, 2009 / Notices 39295 

Petitions, at 22, and Volume II of the 

Petitions, at Exhibits 29 and 43, and 

Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, 

dated July 21, 2009, at Exhibit 95. The 

Petitioner valued electricity using the 

Indian electricity rate reported by the 

Central Electric Authority of the 

Government of India. See Volume I of 

the Petitions, at 22, and Volume II of the 

Petitions, at Exhibit 36. 

The Petitioner determined natural gas 

costs using the natural gas consumption 

derived from its own experience. See 

Volume I of the Petitions, at 22, and 

Volume II of the Petitions, at Exhibit 29. 

The Petitioner valued natural gas using 

the Indian rate reported by the Gas 

Authority of India, Ltd. See Volume I of 

the Petitions, at 22, and Volume II of the 

Petitions, at Exhibit 38. The Petitioner 

adjusted the Indian natural gas rates to 

make them contemporaneous with the 

POI using Indian wholesale price 

indices as published by the 

International Monitory Fund. See 

Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, 

dated July 21, 2009, at Exhibit 97. 

The Petitioner determined water costs 

using the water consumption derived 

from its own experience. See Volume I 

of the Petitions, at 22, and Volume II of 

the Petitions, at Exhibit 29. The 

Petitioner valued water based on 

information from the Maharastra 

Industrial Development Corporation, 

which is contemporaneous with the 

POI. See Volume I of the Petitions, at 22, 

and Volume II of the Petitions at 22, and 

Exhibit 37. 

The Petitioner based factory overhead, 

selling, general and administrative 

(‘‘SG&A’’), and profit on data from Ratan 

Glitter Industries Ltd. (‘‘Ratan’’), a 

ribbon producer, for the fiscal year April 

2007 through March 2008. See Volume 

I of the Petitions, at 23, and Volume II 

of the Petitions, at Exhibit 39. The 

Petitioner states that Ratan is an Indian 

producer of in–scope ribbon. See 

Volume I of the Petitions at 23. 

Therefore, for purposes of the initiation, 

the Department finds the Petitioner’s 

use of Ratan’s financial ratios 

appropriate. 

Taiwan 

With respect to NV for the Taiwan 

investigation, the Petitioner states that 

neither home–market prices nor third– 

country POI prices of narrow woven 

ribbon produced in Taiwan were 

reasonably available. According to the 

Petitioner, it was unsuccessful in 

obtaining Taiwanese POI pricing 

information despite its best efforts. See 

Volume I of the Petitions at 16–17, and 

Exhibit 2. Further, the Petitioner claims 

it was unable to base NV on publicly 

available information covering 

Taiwanese third–country export prices 

because exports of narrow woven ribbon 

from Taiwan are classified in Taiwan’s 

export schedule under Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule (‘‘HTS’’) number 

5806.32.1000. According to the 

Petitioner, this HTS category includes 

both in–scope and out–of-scope ribbons 

including typewriter ribbons, ribbons 

exceeding 12 centimeters in width, and 

ribbons without woven selvedge. 

Therefore, the Petitioner based NV on 

CV. 

Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, 

CV consists of the cost of manufacturing 

(‘‘COM’’), SG&A expenses, packing 

expenses, and profit. In calculating 

COM and packing, the Petitioner based 

the quantity of each of the inputs used 

to manufacture and pack narrow woven 

ribbon in Taiwan based on an analysis 

of Taiwanese narrow woven ribbon 

samples obtained by the Petitioner, as 

well as on its own production 

experience during the POI. See Volume 

I of the Petitions, at 18, Volume II of the 

Petitions, at Exhibit 29, and Supplement 

to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated July 21, 

2009, at Exhibit 95. The Petitioner states 

that the actual usage rates of the foreign 

manufacturers of narrow woven ribbon 

are not reasonably available to it; 

however, the Petitioner notes that the 

production of narrow woven ribbon 

relies on the same basic technology 

worldwide. The Petitioner asserts that 

the Taiwanese producers of narrow 

woven ribbon use largely the same 

production equipment, material inputs, 

and production processes as the 

Petitioner itself. See Volume I of the 

Petitions at 18 and Exhibit 27. 

The Petitioner multiplied the usage 

quantities of the inputs used to 

manufacture and pack narrow woven 

ribbon by the Taiwanese values based 

on publicly available data. See Volume 

I of the Petitions, at 25–28 and 

Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, 

dated July 21, 2009, at Exhibits 105, 

106, and 107. 

Raw materials (e.g., yarn) are 

significant inputs used in the 

production of narrow woven ribbon. 

The Petitioner determined the 

consumption of all raw materials and 

packing materials based on examination 

and analysis of samples of white single 

face satin narrow woven ribbon and 

black single face satin narrow woven 

ribbon from Taiwan, as well as its own 

production experience. See Volume I of 

the Petitions at 18, Volume II of the 

Petitions, at Exhibit 29, and Supplement 

to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated July 21, 

2009, at Exhibit 95. The Petitioner 

valued all raw materials and packing 

materials using Taiwanese import 

statistics as reflected in the WTA data 

for the POI. The Petitioner excluded 

from these import statistics imports 

from countries previously determined 

by the Department to be NME countries 

and from India, Indonesia, the Republic 

of Korea, and Thailand as the 

Department has previously excluded 

prices from these countries because they 

maintain broadly available, non– 

industry-specific export subsidies. See 

Volume I of the Petitions at 26 and 

Volume II of the Petitions, at Exhibit 48. 

Because Taiwanese import statistics 

report import values in Taiwanese 

dollars, the Petitioner converted the 

import values into U.S. dollars using the 

Department’s POI exchange rates. See 

Volume I of the Petitions at 28 and 

Volume II of the Petitions, at Exhibit 56. 

The Petitioner determined labor costs 

using the labor consumption in hours 

derived from its own experience. As the 

Petitioner did not have access to the 

cost of labor inputs in the production of 

narrow woven ribbon in Taiwan, it 

relied on data available from the 

International Labour Organization’s 

database at http://laborsta.ilo.org to 

determine the average wage rate in 

Taiwan. See Volume I of the Petitions at 

34 and Volume II of the Petitions, at 

Exhibit 49. The Petitioner adjusted 

Taiwanese labor rates to make them 

contemporaneous with the POI using 

Taiwanese wholesale price indices as 

published by the Directorate General of 

Budget, Accounting and Statistics, 

Republic of China. The Petitioner 

converted the Taiwanese labor rates into 

U.S. dollars using the Department’s POI 

exchange rates. See Volume I of the 

Petitions at 26, Volume II of the 

Petitions, at Exhibit 49, and Supplement 

to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated July 21, 

2009, at Exhibit 106. 

The Petitioner determined the costs of 

electricity, water, and natural gas using 

consumption amounts derived from its 

own experience. The Petitioner valued 

electricity and natural gas using the 

Taiwanese electricity and natural gas 

rates for the industry reported by the 

Energy Information Administration at 

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/ 

international/. Because Taiwanese 

electricity and natural gas rates are 

reported in U.S. dollars, the Petitioner 

did not make currency conversions. The 

Petitioner adjusted the Taiwanese 

electricity and natural gas rates to make 

them contemporaneous with the POI 

using Taiwanese wholesale price 

indices as published by the Directorate 

General of Budget, Accounting and 

Statistics, Republic of China. See 

Volume I of the Petitions at 26; Volume 

II of the Petitions, at Exhibits 50, 52, and 

55, and Supplement to the AD/CVD 

Petitions, dated July 21, 2009, at Exhibit 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
39296 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 150 / Thursday, August 6, 2009 / Notices 

106. The Petitioner valued water using 

the Taiwanese rates published by 

Taiwan Water Corporation, which are 

contemporaneous with the POI. The 

Petitioner converted the Taiwanese 

water rates into U.S. dollars using the 

Department’s POI exchange rates. See 

Volume I of the Petitions at 26; Volume 

II of the Petitions at Exhibit 51, and 

Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, 

dated July 21, 2009, at C 2. 

To calculate factory overhead, SG&A, 

interest expenses, and a profit rate, the 

Petitioner relied on financial statements 

of a Taiwanese producer of textile 

products, Far Eastern Textile Ltd. See 

Supplement to the AD/CVD Petitions, 

dated July 21, 2009, at C 3, and Exhibits 

103 and 104. See also Taiwan Initiation 

Checklist. 

Fair–Value Comparisons 

Based on the data provided by the 

Petitioner, there is reason to believe that 

imports of narrow woven ribbon from 

the PRC and Taiwan are being, or are 

likely to be, sold in the United States at 

less than fair value. Based on a 

comparison of EPs and NV calculated in 

accordance with section 773(c) of the 

Act, the estimated dumping margins for 

narrow woven ribbon from the PRC 

range from 208.80 percent to 231.40 

percent. See PRC Initiation Checklist. 

Based on a comparison of EPs and CV 

calculated in accordance with section 

773(a)(4) of the Act, the estimated 

dumping margins for narrow woven 

ribbon from Taiwan range from 116.60 

percent to 137.20 percent. See Taiwan 

Initiation Checklist. 

Initiation of Antidumping 

Investigations 

Based upon the examination of the 

Petitions on narrow woven ribbon from 

the PRC and Taiwan, the Department 

finds that the Petitions meet the 

requirements of section 732 of the Act. 

Therefore, we are initiating 

antidumping duty investigations to 

determine whether imports of narrow 

woven ribbon from the PRC and Taiwan 

are being, or are likely to be, sold in the 

United States at less than fair value. In 

accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of 

the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), 

unless postponed, we will make our 

preliminary determinations no later 

than 140 days after the date of this 

initiation. 

Targeted–Dumping Allegations 

On December 10, 2008, the 

Department issued an interim final rule 

for the purpose of withdrawing 19 CFR 

351.414(f) and (g), the regulatory 

provisions governing the targeteddumping analysis in antidumping duty 

investigations, and the corresponding 

regulation governing the deadline for 

targeted–dumping allegations, 19 CFR 

351.301(d)(5). See Withdrawal of the 

Regulatory Provisions Governing 

Targeted Dumping in Antidumping 

Duty Investigations, 73 FR 74930 

(December 10, 2008). The Department 

stated that ‘‘{w}ithdrawal will allow the 

Department to exercise the discretion 

intended by the statute and, thereby, 

develop a practice that will allow 

interested parties to pursue all statutory 

avenues of relief in this area.’’ See id. at 

74931. 

In order to accomplish this objective, 

if any interested party wishes to make 

a targeted- dumping allegation in any of 

these investigations pursuant to section 

777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act, such 

allegations are due no later than 45 days 

before the scheduled date of the 

country–specific preliminary 

determination. 

Respondent Selection 

The PRC 

For this investigation, the Department 

will request quantity and value 

information from all known exporters 

and producers identified with complete 

contact information in the Petitions. The 

quantity and value data received from 

NME exporters/producers will be used 

as the basis to select the mandatory 

respondents. 

The Department requires that the 

respondents submit a response to both 

the quantity and value questionnaire 

and the separate–rate application by the 

respective deadlines in order to receive 

consideration for separate–rate status. 

See Circular Welded Austenitic 

Stainless Pressure Pipe from the 

People’s Republic of China: Initiation of 

Antidumping Duty Investigation, 73 FR 

10221, 10225 (February 26, 2008); 

Initiation of Antidumping Duty 

Investigation: Certain Artist Canvas 

From the People’s Republic of China, 70 

FR 21996, 21999 (April 28, 2005). The 

Department will post the quantity and 

value questionnaire along with the filing 

instructions on the Import 

Administration website at http:// 

ia.ita.doc.gov/ia–highlights-and– 

news.html and a response to the 

quantity and value questionnaire is due 

no later than August 19, 2009. Also, the 

Department will send the quantity and 

value questionnaire to those PRC 

companies identified in the Supplement 

to the AD/CVD Petitions, dated July 21, 

2009, at Exhibit 116, and Second 

Supplemental to the AD/CVD Petitions, 

dated July 27, 2009, at B1–B4. 

Taiwan 

For this investigation, the Department 

intends to select respondents based on 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(‘‘CBP’’) data for U.S. imports under the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) numbers 

5806.32.1020, 5806.32.1030, 

5806.32.1050, and 5806.32.1060, the 

four HTSUS categories most specific to 

the subject merchandise, during the 

POI. We intend to release the CBP data 

under Administrative Protective Order 

(‘‘APO’’) to all parties with access to 

information protected by APO within 

five days of publication of this Federal 

Register notice and make our decision 

regarding respondent selection within 

20 days of publication of this notice. 

The Department invites comments 

regarding the CBP data and respondent 

selection within ten days of publication 

of this Federal Register notice. 

Interested parties must submit 

applications for disclosure under APO 

in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 

Instructions for filing such applications 

may be found on the Department’s 

website at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/apo. 

Separate Rates 

In order to obtain separate–rate status 

in NME investigations, exporters and 

producers must submit a separate–rate 

status application. See Policy Bulletin 

05.1: Separate–Rates Practice and 

Application of Combination Rates in 

Antidumping Investigations involving 

Non–Market Economy Countries (April 

5, 2005) (Separate Rates and 

Combination Rates Bulletin), available 

on the Department’s website at http:// 

ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/bull05–1.pdf. 

Based on our experience in processing 

the separate–rate applications in 

previous antidumping duty 

investigations, we have modified the 

application for this investigation to 

make it more administrable and easier 

for applicants to complete. See, e.g., 

Initiation of Antidumping Duty 

Investigation: Certain New Pneumatic 

Off–the-Road Tires From the People’s 

Republic of China, 72 FR 43591, 43594– 

95 (August 6, 2007). The specific 

requirements for submitting the 

separate–rate application in this 

investigation are outlined in detail in 

the application itself, which will be 

available on the Department’s website at 

<http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia–highlights-and– 

news.html> on the date of publication 

of this initiation notice in the Federal 

Register. The separate–rate application 

will be due 60 days after publication of 

this initiation notice. For exporters and 

producers who submit a separate–rate 

status application and subsequently are 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 150 / Thursday, August 6, 2009 / Notices 39297 

selected as mandatory respondents, 

these exporters and producers will no 

longer be eligible for consideration for 

separate rate status unless they respond 

to all parts of the questionnaire as 

mandatory respondents. As noted in the 

‘‘Respondent Selection’’ section above, 

the Department requires that 

respondents submit a response to both 

the quantity and value questionnaire 

and the separate–rate application by the 

respective deadlines in order to receive 

consideration for separate–rate status. 

The quantity and value questionnaire 

will be available on the Department’s 

website at <http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia– 

highlights-and–news.html> on the date 

of the publication of this initiation 

notice in the Federal Register. 

Use of Combination Rates in an NME 

Investigation 

The Department will calculate 

combination rates for certain 

respondents that are eligible for a 

separate rate in this investigation. The 

Separate Rates and Combination Rates 

Bulletin states: 

{w}hile continuing the practice of 

assigning separate rates only to 

exporters, all separate rates that the 

Department will now assign in its 

NME investigations will be specific 

to those producers that supplied the 

exporter during the period of 

investigation. Note, however, that 

one rate is calculated for the 

exporter and all of the producers 

which supplied subject 

merchandise to it during the period 

of investigation. This practice 

applies both to mandatory 

respondents receiving an 

individually calculated separate 

rate as well as the pool of non– 

investigated firms receiving the 

weighted–average of the 

individually calculated rates. This 

practice is referred to as the 

application of ‘‘combination rates’’ 

because such rates apply to specific 

combinations of exporters and one 

or more producers. The cash– 

deposit rate assigned to an exporter 

will apply only to merchandise 

both exported by the firm in 

question and produced by a firm 

that supplied the exporter during 

the period of investigation. 

See Separate Rates and Combination 

Rates Bulletin at 6 (emphasis added). 

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions 

In accordance with section 

732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.202(f), copies of the public versions 

of the Petitions have been provided to 

the representatives of the Governments 

of the PRC and Taiwan. Because of the 

large number of producers/exporters 

identified in the Petition, the 

Department considers the service of the 

public version of the Petition to the 

foreign producers/exporters satisfied by 

the delivery of the public version to the 

Government of the PRC, consistent with 

19 CFR 351.203(c)(2). 

ITC Notification 

We have notified the ITC of our 

initiations, as required by section 732(d) 

of the Act. 

Preliminary Determinations by the ITC 

The ITC will preliminarily determine, 

no later than August 24, 2009, whether 

there is a reasonable indication that 

imports of narrow woven ribbon from 

the PRC and Taiwan are materially 

injuring, or threatening material injury 

to a U.S. industry. A negative ITC 

determination with respect to any 

country will result in the investigation 

being terminated for that country; 

otherwise, these investigations will 

proceed according to statutory and 

regulatory time limits. 

This notice is issued and published 

pursuant to section 777(i) of the Act. 

Dated: July 29, 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I 

Scope of the Investigations 

The merchandise subject to the 

investigations 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 investigations 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; 

• have embellishments, including but 

not limited to applique ́, 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 

investigations include all narrow woven 

fabrics, tapes, and labels that fall within 

this written description of the scope of 

the investigations. 

Excluded from the scope of the 

investigations 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; 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
39298 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 150 / Thursday, August 6, 2009 / Notices 

(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 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; 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 the 

investigations 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. 

[FR Doc. E9–18732 Filed 8–5–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board 

[Docket 31–2009] 

Foreign-Trade Zone 54—Clinton 

County, NY; Application for 

Reorganization Under Alternative Site 

Framework 

An application has been submitted to 

the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board 

(the Board) by Clinton County, New 

York, grantee of FTZ 54, requesting 

authority to reorganize the zone under 

the alternative site framework (ASF) 

adopted by the Board (74 FR 1170, 01/ 

12/09; correction 74 FR 3987, 01/22/09). 

The ASF is an option for grantees for the 

establishment or reorganization of 

general-purpose zones and can permit 

significantly greater flexibility in the 

designation of new ‘‘usage-driven’’ FTZ 

sites for operators/users located within 

a grantee’s ‘‘service area’’ in the context 

of the Board’s standard 2,000-acre 

activation limit for a general-purpose 

zone project. The application was 

submitted pursuant to the Foreign-Trade 

Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a– 

81u), and the regulations of the Board 

(15 CFR Part 400). It was formally filed 

on July 31, 2009. 

The grantee’s proposed service area 

under the ASF would be Clinton 

County, New York. If approved, the 

grantee would be able to serve sites 

throughout the service area based on 

companies’ needs for FTZ designation. 

The proposed service area is adjacent to 

the Champlain Customs and Border 

Protection port of entry. 

FTZ 54 was approved on February 14, 

1980 (Board Order 153, 45 FR 12469, 

02/26/80), and expanded on: September 

23, 1982 (Board Order 196, 47 FR 43012, 

09/30/82); May 29, 1996 (Board Order 

829, 61 FR 28840, 06/06/96); May 29, 

2001 (Board Order 1169, 66 FR 31612, 

06/12/01); and November 16, 2001 

(Board Order 1199, 66 FR 59235, 11/27/ 

01). The applicant is requesting to 

include its current sites in the 

reorganized zone as ‘‘magnet’’ sites. The 

applicant proposes that Site 4 be exempt 

from ‘‘sunset’’ time limits that otherwise 

apply to sites under the ASF. No usagedriven sites are being proposed at this 

time. Because the ASF only pertains to 

establishing or reorganizing a generalpurpose zone, the application would 

have no impact on FTZ 54’s authorized 

subzones. 

In accordance with the Board’s 

regulations, Kathleen Boyce of the FTZ 

Staff is designated examiner to evaluate 

and analyze the facts and information 

presented in the application and case 

record and to report findings and 

recommendations to the Board. 

Public comment is invited from 

interested parties. Submissions (original 

and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the 

Board’s Executive Secretary at the 

address below. The closing period for 

their receipt is October 5, 2009. Rebuttal 

comments in response to material 

submitted during the foregoing period 

may be submitted during the subsequent 

15-day period (to October 20, 2009). 

A copy of the application will be 

available for public inspection at the 

Office of the Executive Secretary, 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 2111, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230–0002, and in the ‘‘Reading 

Room’’ section of the Board’s Web site, 

which is accessible via http:// 

www.trade.gov/ftz. For further 

information, contact Kathleen Boyce at 

Kathleen_Boyce@ita.doc.gov or 202– 

482–1346. 

Dated: July 31, 2009. 

Andrew McGilvray, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–18874 Filed 8–5–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–570–953] 

Narrow Woven Ribbons With Woven 

Selvedge From the People’s Republic 

of China: Initiation of Countervailing 

Duty Investigation 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: August 6, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Copyak, Shelly Atkinson, or 

Justin Neuman, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 1, Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 

Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 

482–2209, (202) 482–0116, and (202) 

482–0486, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Petition 

On July 9, 2009, the Department of 

Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) received 

countervailing duty (‘‘CVD’’) and 

antidumping duty (‘‘AD’’) petitions 

concerning imports of narrow woven 

ribbons with woven selvedge (‘‘narrow 

woven ribbons’’) from the People’s 

Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). The 

petitions were filed in proper form by 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES