Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 194 / Monday, October 6, 2008 / Notices 58121 

1Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(e)(2)(ii), because the 

Department received Navneet’s request during the 

first anniversary month after publication of the 

order, this administrative review covers entries 

from February 15, 2006, the date of suspension of 

liquidation through December 31, 2006, the end of 

the most recently completed calendar year. (The 

date of suspension of liquidation corresponds to the 

publication in the Federal Register of the Notice of 

Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty 

Determination and Preliminary Negative Critical 

Circumstances Determination: Certain Lined Paper 

Products from India, 71 FR 7916 (February 15, 

2006) (Preliminary Determination of Lined Paper 

Investigation). However, for purposes of this 

administrative review, we will analyze data 

corresponding to calendar year 2006 (January 1, 

2006, through December 31, 2006) to determine the 

subsidy rate for exports of subject merchandise 

made during the period in which liquidation of 

entries was suspended. 

affiliated producers pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.401(f)(2). Therefore, we have treated 

Hi-King and the affiliated entities in 

question as a single entity for purposes 

of this review. 

Preliminary Results of the Review 

As a result of our review, we 

preliminarily determine that the 

following percentage weighted-average 

dumping margin exists for the period 

September 1, 2006, through August 31, 

2007: 

Manufacturer/Exporter Percent 

Margin 

Yancheng Hi-King Agriculture 

Developing Co., Ltd. ............... 0.00 

Comments 

We will disclose the calculations used 

in our analysis to parties in this review 

within five days of the date of 

publication of this notice in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested 

parties may submit publicly available 

information to value factors no later 

than 20 days after the date of 

publication of these preliminary results 

of review. See 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(ii). 

Any interested party may request a 

hearing within 30 days of the date of 

publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 

351.310. 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 

within 30 days of the date of publication 

of this notice. Requests should contain 

the following: (1) the party’s name, 

address, and telephone number; (2) the 

number of participants; (3) a list of 

issues to be discussed. See 19 CFR 

351.310(c). 

Issues raised in the hearing will be 

limited to those raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). 

Case briefs from interested parties may 

be submitted not later than 30 days after 

the date of publication of this notice of 

preliminary results of review. See 19 

CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii). Rebuttal briefs 

from interested parties, limited to the 

issues raised in the case briefs, may be 

submitted not later than five days after 

the time limit for filing the case briefs 

or comments. See 19 CFR 351.309(d)(1). 

If requested, any hearing will be held 

two days after the scheduled date for 

submission of rebuttal briefs. See 19 

CFR 351.310(d). Parties who submit 

case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this 

proceeding are requested to submit with 

each argument a statement of the issue, 

a summary of the arguments not 

exceeding five pages, and a table of 

statutes, regulations, and cases cited. 

See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2). 

The Department will issue the final 

results of this administrative review, 

including the results of its analysis of 

issues raised in any such written briefs 

or at the hearing, if held, not later than 

120 days after the date of publication of 

this notice. See section 751(a)(3)(A) of 

the Act. 

Assessment Rates 

Upon issuance of the final results, the 

Department will determine, and CBP 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries. The Department 

intends to issue assessment instructions 

to CBP 15 days after the date of 

publication of the final results of 

review. If these preliminary results are 

adopted in our final results of review, 

because we calculated a margin of zero 

percent for Hi-King, we will instruct 

CBP to liquidate the entries of 

merchandise exported by Hi-King 

without regard to antidumping duties. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of the final results of this 

review for all shipments of the subject 

merchandise 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) for 

subject merchandise exported by HiKing, the cash-deposit rate will be that 

established in the final results of review; 

(2) for previously reviewed or 

investigated companies not listed above 

that have separate rates, the cashdeposit rate will continue to be the 

company-specific rate published for the 

most recent period; (3) for all other PRC 

exporters of subject merchandise which 

have not been found to be entitled to a 

separate rate, the cash-deposit rate will 

be PRC-wide rate of 223.01 percent; (4) 

for all non-PRC exporters of subject 

merchandise the cash-deposit rate will 

be the rate applicable to the PRC entity 

that supplied that exporter. These 

deposit requirements, when imposed, 

shall remain in effect until further 

notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice also serves as a 

preliminary reminder to importers of 

their responsibility under 19 CFR 

351.402(f)(2) 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 the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping duties. 

This administrative review and this 

notice are in accordance with sections 

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

Dated: September 29, 2008. 

David M. Spooner, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E8–23572 Filed 10–3–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–533–844] 

Certain Lined Paper Products From 

India: Notice of Preliminary Results of 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) is conducting an 

administrative review of the 

countervailing duty (CVD) order on 

certain lined paper products from India 

for the period February 15, 2006, 

through December 31, 2006, the period 

of review (POR).1 For information on 

the net subsidy rate for the reviewed 

company, Navneet Publications (India) 

Limited (Navneet), see the ‘‘Preliminary 

Results of Review’’ section of this 

notice. Interested parties are invited to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

See the ‘‘Public Comment’’ section of 

this notice. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 6, 2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jolanta Lawska or John Conniff, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 3, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, Room 4014, 14th Street and 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
58122 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 194 / Monday, October 6, 2008 / Notices 

2On October 1, 2007, we published a correction 

to the Opportunity to Request Review to correct the 

POR. See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty 

Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; 

Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 72 

FR 55741 (October 1, 2007). 

3 In the notice of initiation published October 31, 

2007, we listed the POR for certain lined paper 

products from India incorrectly. The correct POR is 

listed above. 

4Petitioners are the Association of American 

School Paper Suppliers and its members Mead 

Westvaco Corporation, Top Flight Inc., and Norcom 

Inc. 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–8362 or 

(202) 482–1009, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On September 28, 2006, the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register the CVD order on certain lined 

paper products from India. See Notice of 

Amended Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Lined 

Paper Products from the People’s 

Republic of China; Notice of 

Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain 

Lined Paper Products from India, 

Indonesia and the People’s Republic of 

China; and Notice of Countervailing 

Duty Orders: Certain Lined Paper 

Products from India and Indonesia, 71 

FR 56949 (September 28, 2006). On 

September 4, 2007, the Department 

published a notice of opportunity to 

request an administrative review of this 

CVD order. See Antidumping or 

Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or 

Suspended Investigation; Opportunity 

to Request Administrative Review, 72 

FR 50657 (September 4, 2007) 

(Opportunity to Request Review).2 On 

September 21, 2007, we received a 

timely request for review from Navneet, 

an Indian producer and exporter of 

subject merchandise. 

On October 31, 2007, the Department 

initiated an administrative review of the 

CVD order on certain lined paper 

products from India, covering the period 

February 15, 2006, through December 

31, 2006. See Initiation of Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Reviews, 72 FR 61621 (October 31, 

2007).3

The Department issued a 

questionnaire to the Government of 

India (GOI) and Navneet (collectively, 

the respondents) on November 6, 2007. 

We received a questionnaire response 

from Navneet on December 8, 2007, and 

from the GOI on December 13, 2007. 

Between March 31, 2008, and July 9, 

2008, we issued supplemental 

questionnaires to the respondents 

regarding programs addressed in the 

initial CVD questionnaire and received 

responses. Between April 8, 2008, and 

July 17, 2008 we received supplemental 

questionnaire responses from the GOI 

and Navneet. 

On January 17, 2008, petitioners 4

submitted information on a new subsidy 

allegation. On April 30, 2008, the 

Department initiated an investigation of 

the new subsidy allegation. See the 

Memorandum to Melissa G. Skinner, 

Director, Office 3, from Jolanta Lawska, 

Case Analyst, entitled, ‘‘New Subsidy 

Allegations for Navneet Publications 

(India), Ltd. (Navneet),’’ a public 

document on file in the Central Records 

Unit (CRU), room 1117 of the main 

Department building. On May 6, 2008, 

we issued a questionnaire on this new 

subsidy allegation to Navneet and the 

GOI. On May 19, 2008, and June 3, 

2008, we received responses to the new 

subsidy questionnaires from the GOI 

and Navneet, respectively. On July 8, 

2008, we issued a supplemental 

questionnaire to Navneet. On July 17, 

2008, we received a Navneet’s response. 

On May 16, 2008, the Department 

published in the Federal Register an 

extension of the deadline for the 

preliminary results of this review to no 

later than September 29, 2008. See 

Certain Lined Paper Products from 

India: Extension of Time Limit for 

Preliminary Results of Countervailing 

Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR 

28431 (May 16, 2008). 

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.213(b), this review covers only 

those producers or exporters for which 

a review was specifically requested. The 

company subject to this review is 

Navneet. This review covers 15 federal 

programs and 7 state programs. 

Scope of Order 

The scope of this order includes 

certain lined paper products, typically 

school supplies, composed of or 

including paper that incorporates 

straight horizontal and/or vertical lines 

on ten or more paper sheets, including 

but not limited to such products as 

single- and multi-subject notebooks, 

composition books, wireless notebooks, 

looseleaf or glued filler paper, graph 

paper, and laboratory notebooks, and 

with the smaller dimension of the paper 

measuring 6 inches to 15 inches 

(inclusive) and the larger dimension of 

the paper measuring 83⁄4 inches to 15 

inches (inclusive). Page dimensions are 

measured size (not advertised, stated, or 

‘‘tear-out’’ size), and are measured as 

they appear in the product (i.e., stitched 

and folded pages in a notebook are 

measured by the size of the page as it 

appears in the notebook page, not the 

size of the unfolded paper). However, 

for measurement purposes, pages with 

tapered or rounded edges shall be 

measured at their longest and widest 

points. Subject lined paper products 

may be loose, packaged or bound using 

any binding method (other than case 

bound through the inclusion of binders 

board, a spine strip, and cover wrap). 

Subject merchandise may or may not 

contain any combination of a front 

cover, a rear cover, and/or backing of 

any composition, regardless of the 

inclusion of images or graphics on the 

cover, backing, or paper. Subject 

merchandise is within the scope of the 

order whether or not the lined paper 

and/or cover are hole punched, drilled, 

perforated, and/or reinforced. Subject 

merchandise may contain accessory or 

informational items including but not 

limited to pockets, tabs, dividers, 

closure devices, index cards, stencils, 

protractors, writing implements, 

reference materials such as 

mathematical tables, or printed items 

such as sticker sheets or miniature 

calendars, if such items are physically 

incorporated, included with, or attached 

to the product, cover and/or backing 

thereto. Specifically excluded from the 

scope of this order are: 

• Unlined copy machine paper; 

• Writing pads with a backing 

(including but not limited to products 

commonly known as ‘‘tablets,’’ ‘‘note 

pads,’’ ‘‘legal pads,’’ and ‘‘quadrille 

pads’’), provided that they do not have 

a front cover (whether permanent or 

removable). This exclusion does not 

apply to such writing pads if they 

consist of hole-punched or drilled filler 

paper; 

• Three-ring or multiple-ring binders, 

or notebook organizers incorporating 

such a ring binder provided that they do 

not include subject paper; 

• Index cards; 

• Printed books and other books that 

are case bound through the inclusion of 

binders board, a spine strip, and cover 

wrap; 

• Newspapers; 

• Pictures and photographs; 

• Desk and wall calendars and 

organizers (including but not limited to 

such products generally known as 

‘‘office planners,’’ ‘‘time books,’’ and 

‘‘appointment books’’); 

• Telephone logs; 

• Address books; 

• Columnar pads & tablets, with or 

without covers, primarily suited for the 

recording of written numerical business 

data; 

• Lined business or office forms, 

including but not limited to: Preprinted 

business forms, lined invoice pads and 

paper, mailing and address labels, 

manifests, and shipping log books; 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 194 / Monday, October 6, 2008 / Notices 58123 

5 ‘‘Gregg ruling’’ consists of a single- or doublemargin vertical ruling line down the center of the 

page. For a six-inch by nine-inch stenographic pad, 

the ruling would be located approximately three 

inches from the left of the book. 

6Products found to be bearing an invalidly 

licensed or used trademark are not excluded from 

the scope. 

7Products found to be bearing an invalidly 

licensed or used trademark are not excluded from 

the scope. 

8Products found to be bearing an invalidly 

licensed or used trademark are not excluded from 

the scope. 

9Products found to be bearing an invalidly 

licensed or used trademark are not excluded from 

the scope. 

10 In these preliminary results we are examining 

a countervailable program that requires the use of 

long-term benchmarks. 

• Lined continuous computer paper; 

• Boxed or packaged writing 

stationery (including but not limited to 

products commonly known as ‘‘fine 

business paper,’’ ‘‘parchment paper,’’ 

and ‘‘letterhead’’), whether or not 

containing a lined header or decorative 

lines; 

• Stenographic pads (‘‘steno pads’’), 

Gregg ruled,5 measuring 6 inches by 9 

inches; 

Also excluded from the scope of this 

order are the following trademarked 

products: 

• Fly TM lined paper products: A 

notebook, notebook organizer, loose or 

glued note paper, with papers that are 

printed with infrared reflective inks and 

readable only by a Fly TM; 

• Pen-top computer. The product 

must bear the valid trademark Fly TM; 6

• Zwipes TM: A notebook or 

notebook organizer made with a 

blended polyolefin writing surface as 

the cover and pocket surfaces of the 

notebook, suitable for writing using a 

specially-developed permanent marker 

and erase system (known as a Zwipes 

TM pen). This system allows the marker 

portion to mark the writing surface with 

a permanent ink. The eraser portion of 

the marker dispenses a solvent capable 

of solubilizing the permanent ink 

allowing the ink to be removed. The 

product must bear the valid trademark 

Zwipes TM.7

• FiveStar R Advance TM: A 

notebook or notebook organizer bound 

by a continuous spiral, or helical, wire 

and with plastic front and rear covers 

made of a blended polyolefin plastic 

material joined by 300 denier polyester, 

coated on the backside with PVC (poly 

vinyl chloride) coating, and extending 

the entire length of the spiral or helical 

wire. The polyolefin plastic covers are 

of specific thickness; front cover is 

0.019 inches (within normal 

manufacturing tolerances) and rear 

cover is 0.028 inches (within normal 

manufacturing tolerances). Integral with 

the stitching that attaches the polyester 

spine covering, is captured both ends of 

a 1′′ wide elastic fabric band. This band 

is located 23⁄8′′ from the top of the front 

plastic cover and provides pen or pencil 

storage. Both ends of the spiral wire are 

cut and then bent backwards to overlap 

with the previous coil but specifically 

outside the coil diameter but inside the 

polyester covering. During construction, 

the polyester covering is sewn to the 

front and rear covers face to face 

(outside to outside) so that when the 

book is closed, the stitching is 

concealed from the outside. Both free 

ends (the ends not sewn to the cover 

and back) are stitched with a turned 

edge construction. The flexible 

polyester material forms a covering over 

the spiral wire to protect it and provide 

a comfortable grip on the product. The 

product must bear the valid trademarks 

FiveStar R Advance TM.8

• FiveStar Flex TM: A notebook, a 

notebook organizer, or binder with 

plastic polyolefin front and rear covers 

joined by a 300 denier polyester spine 

cover extending the entire length of the 

spine and bound by a 3-ring plastic 

fixture. The polyolefin plastic covers are 

of a specific thickness; front cover is 

0.019 inches (within normal 

manufacturing tolerances) and rear 

cover is 0.028 inches (within normal 

manufacturing tolerances). During 

construction, the polyester covering is 

sewn to the front cover face to face 

(outside to outside) so that when the 

book is closed, the stitching is 

concealed from the outside. During 

construction, the polyester cover is 

sewn to the back cover with the outside 

of the polyester spine cover to the inside 

back cover. Both free ends (the ends not 

sewn to the cover and back) are stitched 

with a turned edge construction. Each 

ring within the fixture is comprised of 

a flexible strap portion that snaps into 

a stationary post which forms a closed 

binding ring. The ring fixture is riveted 

with six metal rivets and sewn to the 

back plastic cover and is specifically 

positioned on the outside back cover. 

The product must bear the valid 

trademark FiveStar Flex TM.9

Merchandise subject to this order is 

typically imported under headings 

4820.10.2050, 4810.22.5044, 

4811.90.9090, 4820.10.2010, 

4820.10.2020, and 4820.10.4001 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS). The HTSUS 

headings are provided for convenience 

and customs purposes; however, the 

written description of the scope of this 

order is dispositive. 

Subsidies Valuation Information 

I. Benchmarks for Loans and Discount 

Rates 

In these preliminary results, we 

require the use of rupee-denominated 

long-term loans for purposes of our 

benchmark discount rate and long-term 

benchmark rate. Pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.524(d)(3)(i), the Department will 

use, when available, the companyspecific cost of long-term, fixed-rate 

loans (excluding loans deemed to be 

countervailable subsidies) as a discount 

rate for allocating non-recurring benefits 

over time. Similarly, pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.505(a), the Department will 

normally use the actual cost of 

comparable commercial borrowing by a 

company as a loan benchmark, when 

available. According to 19 CFR 

351.505(a)(2)(i), a comparable 

commercial loan is defined as one that, 

when compared to the loan being 

examined, has similarities in the 

structure of the loan (e.g., fixed interest 

rate vs. variable interest rate), the 

maturity of the loan (e.g., short-term vs. 

long-term), and the currency in which 

the loan is denominated. 

However, when there are no 

comparable commercial loans, the 

Department may use a national average 

interest rate as a benchmark discount 

rate and long-term benchmark rate, 

pursuant to 19 CFR 351.524(d)(3)(i)(B) 

and 19 CFR 351.505(a)(3)(ii), 

respectively. In addition, 19 CFR 

351.505(a)(2)(ii) states that the 

Department will not consider a loan 

provided by a government-owned 

special purpose bank for purposes of 

selecting a benchmark rate. 

Navneet reported rupee-denominated 

and dollar-denominated commercial 

short-term loans that were outstanding 

during the POR.10 However, Navneet 

did not report any comparable long-term 

loans from commercial banks during the 

years under consideration that the 

Department could use for our 

benchmark discount rate and long-term 

benchmark rate. Therefore, in 

accordance with 19 CFR 

351.524(d)(3)(i)(B) and 19 CFR 

351.505(a)(3)(ii), we used India’s prime 

lending rate (PLR) as published by the 

Reserve Bank of India (RBI), as our longterm benchmark interest rate. The use of 

the PLR is consistent with the 

Department’s practice in prior Indian 

proceedings. See, e.g., Final Results of 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Review: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel 

Flat Products from India, 69 FR 26549 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
58124 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 194 / Monday, October 6, 2008 / Notices 

11A crore is equal to 10,000,000 rupees. 

(May 13, 2004) (Final Results of First 

HRC Review), and accompanying Issues 

and Decision Memorandum (Final 

Results of First HRC Review Decision 

Memorandum) at I.B. ‘‘Benchmarks for 

Loans and Discount Rate.’’ 

II. Allocation Period 

Under 19 CFR 351.524(d)(2)(i), we 

presume the allocation period for nonrecurring subsidies to be the average 

useful life (AUL) of renewable physical 

assets for the industry concerned, as 

listed in the Internal Revenue Service’s 

1977 Class Life Asset Depreciation 

Range System (IRS tables), as updated 

by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. 

This presumption will apply unless a 

party claims and establishes that the IRS 

tables do not reasonably reflect the AUL 

of the renewable physical assets for the 

company or industry under review, and 

the party can establish that the 

difference between the companyspecific or country-wide AUL for the 

industry under review is significant, 

pursuant to 19 CFR 351.524(d)(2)(i). For 

assets used to manufacture products 

such as lined paper products, the IRS 

tables prescribe an AUL of 15 years. 

In its questionnaire responses, 

Navneet did not rebut the regulatory 

presumption of a 15-year AUL. We, 

therefore, used a 15-year AUL to 

allocate any non-recurring subsidies for 

purposes of these preliminary results. 

Further, for non-recurring subsidies, 

we have applied the ‘‘0.5 percent test’’ 

described in 19 CFR 351.524(b)(2). 

Under this test, we compare the amount 

of subsidies approved under a given 

program in a particular year to sales 

(total sales or total export sales, as 

appropriate) for the same year. If the 

amount of subsidies is less than 0.5 

percent of the relevant sales, then the 

benefits are allocated to the year of 

receipt rather than allocated over the 

AUL period. 

Analysis Of Programs 

I. Programs Preliminarily Determined To 

Be Countervailable 

1. Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme 

(DEPS) 

India’s DEPS was enacted on April 1, 

1997, as a successor program to the 

Passbook Scheme (PBS). DEPS enables 

exporting companies to earn import 

duty exemptions in the form of 

passbook credits rather than cash. All 

exporters are eligible to earn DEPS 

credits on a post-export basis, provided 

that the GOI has established a standard 

input/output norm (SION) for the 

exported product. DEPS credits can be 

used for any subsequent imports, 

regardless of whether they are 

consumed in the production of an 

export product. DEPS credits are valid 

for 12 months and are transferable after 

the foreign exchange is realized from the 

export sales on which the DEPS credits 

are earned. With respect to subject 

merchandise, the GOI has established a 

SION for the lined paper industry. 

The Department has previously 

determined that DEPS is a 

countervailable program. See, e.g., 

Notice of Final Affirmative 

Countervailing Duty Determination and 

Final Negative Critical Circumstances 

Determination: Certain Lined Paper 

Products from India, 71 FR 45034 

(August 8, 2006) (Final Determination of 

Lined Paper Investigation), and 

accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum (Final Determination of 

Lined Paper Investigation Decision 

Memorandum) at IV. A.3. ‘‘Duty 

Entitlement Passbook Scheme.’’ 

Specifically, we determined that under 

DEPS, a financial contribution, as 

defined under section 771(5)(D)(ii) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act), is provided because (1) the GOI 

provides credits for the future payment 

of import duties, and (2) the GOI does 

not have in place and does not apply a 

system that is reasonable and effective 

for determining what imports are 

consumed in the production of the 

exported product and in what amounts. 

Id. Therefore, under section 771(5)(E) of 

the Act and 19 CFR 351.519(a)(4), we 

determined that the entire amount of 

import duty exemption earned during 

the POR constitutes a benefit. We also 

found DEPS to be specific under section 

771(5A)(A) of the Act because the 

program is limited to exporters. See 

Final Determination of Lined Paper 

Investigation Decision Memorandum at 

IV.A.3. ‘‘Duty Entitlement Passbook 

Scheme.’’ No new information or 

evidence of changed circumstances has 

been presented in this review to warrant 

reconsideration of the Department’s 

finding. 

We have previously determined that 

this program provides a recurring 

benefit under 19 CFR 351.519(c). See, 

e.g., Preliminary Determination of Lined 

Paper Investigation, 71 FR 7916, 7920 

(unchanged in Final Determination of 

Lined Paper Investigation). See also 19 

CFR 351.524(c). In accordance with past 

practice and pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.519(b)(2), we preliminarily find that 

benefits from the DEPS program are 

conferred as of the date of exportation 

of the shipment for which the DEPS 

credits are earned. See, e.g., Final 

Affirmative Countervailing Duty 

Determination: Certain Cut-to-Length 

Carbon-Quality Steel Plate from India, 

64 FR 73131 (December 29, 1999) (Final 

Determination of CTL Plate 

Investigation), at Comment 4 

(explaining that for programs such as 

the DEPS, ‘‘We calculate the benefit on 

an ‘earned’ basis (that is upon export) 

where it is provided as a percentage of 

the value of the exported merchandise 

on a shipment-by-shipment basis and 

the exact amount of the exemption is 

known’’). 

To calculate the benefit, we summed 

the credits that Navneet earned during 

the POR on each export shipment to the 

United States during the POR. We then 

subtracted as an allowable offset the 

actual amount of application fees paid 

for each license in accordance with 

section 771(6) of the Act. 

Because DEPS credits are earned on a 

shipment-by-shipment basis, in 

calculating the net subsidy rate under 

the DEPS program, we normally divide 

the DEPS credits, or benefits, earned on 

exports of subject merchandise to the 

United States during the POR by the 

total sales of subject merchandise to the 

United States during the POR. However, 

in the case of Navneet, the U.S. sales on 

which the company earned the DEPS 

credits during the POR pertained to both 

subject and non-subject merchandise. 

Therefore, in these preliminary results, 

we calculated the net subsidy rate by 

dividing the benefit by Navneet’s total 

export sales to the United States during 

the POR. See, e.g., Final Determination 

of Lined Paper Investigation Decision 

Memorandum at IV.A.3. ‘‘Duty 

Entitlement Passbook Scheme.’’ 

On this basis, we preliminarily 

calculate the net countervailable 

subsidy from the DEPS program to be 

6.93 percent ad valorem. 

2. Export Promotion Capital Goods 

Scheme (EPCGS) 

The EPCGS provides for a reduction 

or exemption of customs duties and an 

exemption from excise taxes on imports 

of capital goods. Under this program, 

producers may import capital 

equipment at a reduced customs duty, 

subject to an export obligation equal to 

eight times the duty saved to be fulfilled 

over a period of eight years (12 years 

where the CIF value is Rs. 100 Crore) 11

from the date the license was issued. 

For failure to meet the export obligation, 

a company is subject to payment of all 

or part of the duty reduction, depending 

on the extent of the export shortfall, 

plus penalty interest. 

The Department has previously 

determined that the import duty 

reductions provided under the EPCGS 

constitute a countervailable export 

subsidy. See, e.g., Polyethylene 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 194 / Monday, October 6, 2008 / Notices 58125 

12 ‘‘Industrially backward’’ states are states and 

union territories specified in the Eight Schedule of 

the Indian tax code. 

Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip 

from India: Final Results of 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Review, 72 FR 6530 (February 12, 2007) 

(Final Results of 3rd PET Film Review), 

and accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum (Final Results of 3rd PET 

Film Review Decision Memorandum) at 

‘‘Export Promotion Capital Good 

Scheme.’’ See also Final Determination 

of Lined Paper Investigation Decision 

Memorandum at IV.A.2. ‘‘Export 

Promotion Capital Goods Scheme.’’ 

Specifically, the Department has 

found that under the EPCGS program, 

the GOI provides a financial 

contribution under section 771(5)(D)(ii) 

of Act, in the form of revenue foregone 

that otherwise would be due. See, e.g., 

Final Determination of Lined Paper 

Investigation Decision Memorandum at 

IV.A.2. ‘‘Export Promotion Capital 

Goods Scheme.’’ The Department also 

found this program to be specific under 

section 771(5A)(A) of the Act because it 

is contingent upon export performance. 

We further found that the EPCGS 

conferred a benefit under section 

771(5)(E) of the Act. Id. No new 

information or evidence of changed 

circumstances has been provided with 

respect to this program. Therefore, we 

continue to find that import duty 

reductions provided under the EPCGS 

are countervailable export subsidies. 

Navneet reported that it received 

import duty exemptions under the 

EPCGS program. For these preliminary 

results, we have determined the benefit 

for Navneet in accordance with our 

findings and treatment of this program 

in other Indian CVD proceedings. See, 

e.g., Final Results of 3rd PET Film 

Review Decision Memorandum at 

‘‘Export Promotion Capital Good 

Scheme;’’ See also Final Determination 

of Lined Paper Investigation and Final 

Determination of Lined Paper 

Investigation Decision Memorandum at 

IV.A.2. ‘‘Export Promotion Capital 

Goods Scheme.’’ Under the 

Department’s approach, there are two 

types of benefits under the EPCGS 

program. The first benefit is the amount 

of unpaid duties that would have to be 

paid to the GOI if the export 

requirements are not met. The 

repayment of this liability is contingent 

on subsequent events, and in such 

instances, it is the Department’s practice 

to treat any balance on an unpaid 

liability as an interest-free loan. See 19 

CFR 351.505(d)(1). 

Further, consistent with our policy, 

absent acknowledgment in the form of 

an official letter from the GOI that the 

liability has been eliminated, we treat 

benefits from these licenses as 

contingent liabilities. See, e.g., Final 

Results of 3rd PET Film Review Decision 

Memorandum at ‘‘Export Promotion 

Capital Goods Scheme;’’ see also Final 

Determination of Lined Paper 

Investigation Decision Memorandum at 

IV.A.2. ‘‘Export Promotion Capital 

Goods Scheme.’’ 

For those EPCGS licenses for which 

Navneet has not yet met the export 

obligations specified in the licenses by 

the end of the POR, we preliminarily 

find that the company had outstanding 

contingent liabilities during the POR. 

We further determine that the amount of 

the contingent liability will be treated as 

an interest-free loan in the amount of 

the import duty reduction or exemption. 

Accordingly, for those unpaid duties 

for which Navneet has yet to fulfill their 

export obligations, we preliminarily 

find the benefit to be the interest that 

Navneet would have paid during the 

POR had it borrowed the full amount of 

the duty reduction at the time of import. 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.505(d)(1), we 

used a long-term interest rate as our 

benchmark to calculate the benefit of a 

contingent liability interest-free loan 

because the event upon which 

repayment of the duties depends (i.e., 

the date of expiration of the time period 

for the company to fulfill its export 

commitments) occurs at a point in time 

more than one year after the date the 

capital goods were imported. 

Specifically, we used the long-term 

benchmark interest rates as described in 

the ‘‘Subsidies Valuation’’ section, 

supra. The rate used corresponds to the 

year in which Navneet imported the 

items under the program. 

The second benefit is the waiver of 

duty on imports of capital equipment 

covered by those EPCGS licenses for 

which the export requirement has been 

met. For certain licenses, Navneet 

reported that it had completed its export 

obligation under the EPCGS program, 

thereby eliminating the outstanding 

contingent liabilities on the 

corresponding duty exemptions. 

However, as explained above, in 

keeping with our practice, we have only 

accepted those claims that are 

accompanied by official letters from the 

GOI indicating that the company met its 

export obligation. Thus, for purposes of 

calculating the benefit, we treated 

licenses without accompanying letters 

from the GOI demonstrating satisfaction 

of the company’s export obligations as 

contingent liabilities. 

For those licenses for which Navneet 

demonstrated that it had fulfilled the 

export obligations, we followed our 

methodology set forth in the Final 

Determination of Lined Paper 

Investigation and treated the import 

duty savings as grants received in the 

year in which the GOI waived the 

contingent liability on the import duty 

exemptions. See, e.g., Final 

Determination of Lined Paper 

Investigation Decision Memorandum. In 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.524(b)(2), 

for each of the grant amounts related to 

the particular license, we performed the 

‘‘0.5 percent test’’ to determine whether 

the benefit should be fully expensed in 

the year of receipt or allocated over the 

AUL used in this proceeding pursuant 

to the grant allocation methodology set 

forth in 19 CFR 351.524(d)(1). In all 

cases, the grant amounts of the licenses 

exceeded 0.5 percent of Navneet’s 

relevant sales. Therefore, we allocated 

the grant amounts over time using the 

methodology set forth under 19 CFR 

351.524(d)(i). 

To calculate the subsidy rate for this 

program, we summed the benefits from 

the waived licenses, which we 

determined confer a benefit in the form 

of a grant, and from those licenses that 

have yet to be waived, which we 

determined confer a benefit in the form 

of contingent liability loans. We then 

divided the total benefits received by 

Navneet’s total export sales for the POR. 

On this basis, we preliminarily 

determine the net countervailable 

subsidy from this program to be 1.35 

percent ad valorem. 

3. The Government of India’s Income 

Deduction Program (80IB Tax Program) 

Pursuant to the Income Tax Act of 

1961, as amended by the Finance Act 

2007, Chapter VIA, 80IB(4) (India) 

(2007), the GOI has implemented a tax 

policy to foster economic development 

of certain ‘‘industrially backward’’ 

regions in India. The tax exemptions 

allowed under the 80IB Tax Program are 

only available to companies located in 

designated geographical areas (referred 

to as ‘‘backward areas’’ by the GOI) 

within India.12 Under the 80IB Tax 

Program, the GOI allows domestic 

companies that invest in economically 

less developed areas of India to reduce 

their corporate taxable income by up 

100 percent of profit gained at 

production facilities located in 

designated geographical areas for a 

period of five years and by up to 30 

percent for the next five years. The 

benefit is applied to the gross total 

income of the tax payer and is claimed 

when a company files its income tax 

return at the end of every financial year. 

We preliminarily determine that the 

80IB Tax Program is a countervailable 

program. Specifically, we preliminarily 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
58126 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 194 / Monday, October 6, 2008 / Notices 

determine that a financial contribution 

is provided under this program, in the 

form of foregone tax revenue, within the 

meaning of section 771(5)(D)(ii) of the 

Act. We further preliminarily determine 

that the GOI provided a benefit under 

this program in an amount equal to the 

tax savings under section 771(5)(E) of 

the Act. In addition, we preliminarily 

determine that the program is limited to 

enterprises in geographically limited 

areas and, therefore, is specific within 

the meaning of section 771(5A)(D)(iv) of 

the Act. 

One of Navneet’s manufacturing 

plants operates in a region that is 

designated by the GOI as an 

‘‘industrially backward’’ territory of 

India and therefore, the company is 

eligible for the tax incentives described 

above. Navneet reported that it received 

tax deductions under this program 

during the POR on its 2006 corporate 

income tax return, which was the return 

filed by the company during the POR. 

The Department typically treats a tax 

deduction as a recurring benefit in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.524(c)(1). 

Under 19 CFR 351.509(a), the benefit is 

equal to the difference between the 

income tax that the company would 

have paid absent the program and the 

income tax the company paid under the 

program. Therefore, to calculate the 

benefit, we subtracted the amount of 

2006 income tax Navneet paid under the 

program from the amount of income tax 

Navneet would have paid absent the 

program. 

To calculate the net subsidy rate, we 

divided the benefit by Navneet’s total 

sales for POR. On this basis, we 

preliminarily calculated an ad valorem 

rate of 0.47 percent. 

II. Programs Preliminarily Determined 

Not To Be Used 

A. Programs Administered by the 

Government of India 

1. Duty Replenishment Certificate 

Scheme. 

2. Advance License Program. 

3. Export Processing Zones and 

Export Oriented Units. 

4. Target Plus Scheme. 

5. Export Processing Zones. 

6. Income Tax Exemption Scheme 

(Sections 10A, 10B, and 80HHC). 

7. Market Development Assistance. 

8. Status Certificate Program. 

9. Market Access Initiative. 

10. Loan guarantees from the GOI. 

11. Exemption of Export Credit from 

Interest Taxes. 

12. Pre and Post-shipment Export 

Financing. 

B. Programs Administered by the State 

Governments 

State Government of Gujarat 

Programs: 

1. State Government of Gujarat 

Provided Tax Incentives. 

State Government of Maharashtra 

Programs: 

2. Sales Tax Program from 

Maharashtra. 

3. Electricity Duty Exemptions Under 

the State Government of Mahatrashtra’s 

(SGM) Package Scheme of Incentives of 

1993. 

4. Refunds of Octroi Under the PSI of 

1993, Maharashtra Industrial Policy 

(MIP of 2001) and Maharashtra 

Industrial Policy (MIP of 2006). 

5. Infrastructure Subsidies to Mega 

Projects. 

6. Land for Less than Adequate 

Remuneration (for firms operating in 

areas outside of the Bombay and Pune 

metropolitan areas). 

7. Loan Guarantees Based on Octroi 

Refunds by the SGM. 

Preliminary Results of Review 

In accordance with 19 CFR 

351.221(b)(4)(i), we have calculated a 

subsidy rate for Navneet for the period 

February 15, 2006, through December 

31, 2006. We preliminarily determine 

the total estimated net countervailable 

subsidy rate for Navneet is 8.75 percent 

ad valorem for 2006. 

If the final results of this review 

remain the same as these preliminary 

results, the Department intends to issue 

assessment instructions to U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days 

after the date of publication of the final 

results of review. We will instruct CBP 

to collect cash deposits for Navneet at 

the CVD rate indicated above of the Free 

On Board (F.O.B.) invoice price on all 

shipments of the subject merchandise 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the date of 

publication of the final results of this 

review. We will also instruct CBP to 

continue to collect cash deposits for 

non-reviewed companies at the most 

recent company-specific or countrywide rate applicable to the company. 

These deposit requirements, when 

imposed, shall remain in effect until 

further notice. 

Public Comment 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(b), the 

Department will disclose to parties to 

the proceeding any calculations 

performed in connection with these 

preliminary results not later than ten 

days after the public announcement of 

this notice. Pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.309(c)(ii), interested parties may 

submit written comments in response to 

these preliminary results within 30 days 

after the publication date of these 

preliminary results. Rebuttal briefs, 

limited to arguments raised in case 

briefs, must be submitted no later than 

five days after the time limit for filing 

case briefs, unless otherwise specified 

by the Department, pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.309(d)(1). Parties who submit 

argument in this proceeding are 

requested to submit with the argument: 

(1) A statement of the issues, (2) a brief 

summary of the argument, and (3) a 

table of statutes, regulations and case 

citied. Parties submitting case and/or 

rebuttal briefs are requested to provide 

the Department copies of the public 

version on disk. Case and rebuttal briefs 

must be served on interested parties in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f). 

Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), 

within 30 days of the date of publication 

of this notice, interested parties may 

request a public hearing on arguments 

to be raised in the case and rebuttal 

briefs. Unless the Secretary specifies 

otherwise, the hearing, if requested, will 

be held two days after the date for 

submission of rebuttal briefs, that is, 37 

days after the date of publication of 

these preliminary results. 

Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h), the 

Department will publish the final 

results of this administrative review 

within 120 days after the publication 

date of preliminary results including the 

results of its analysis of arguments made 

in any case or rebuttal briefs. 

These preliminary results of 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: September 29, 2009. 

David M. Spooner, 

Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E8–23565 Filed 10–3–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

Notice of Indirect Cost Rates for the 

Office of National Marine Sanctuaries 

for Fiscal Year 2006 

AGENCY: National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of indirect cost rates for 

the Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries for Fiscal Year 2006. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES