64988 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 

1On September 30, 2009, the Department 

received a timely request to conduct an 

administrative review of the following 32 

companies: Abhinav Paper Products Pvt. Ltd.; 

American Scholar, Inc., and/or I–Scholar; 

Ampoules & Vials Mfg. Co., Ltd.; Bafna Exports; 

Blue Bird India Ltd.; Cello International Pvt. Ltd 

(M/S Cello Paper Products); Creative Divya; 

Corporate Stationery Pvt. Ltd.; D.D International; 

Exmart International Pvt. Ltd.; Fatechand 

Mahendrakumar; FFI International; Freight India 

Logistics Pvt. Ltd.; International Greetings Pvt. Ltd.; 

Lodha Offset Limited; Magic International Pvt. Ltd.; 

Marigold ExIm Pvt. Ltd.; Marisa International; 

Navneet Publications (India) Ltd.; Paperwise Inc.; 

Pioneer Stationery Pvt. Ltd.; Premier Exports; 

Riddhi Enterprises; SAB International; SAR 

Transport Systems; Seet Kamal International; 

Solitaire Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (Eternity Int’l Freight, 

forwarder on behalf of Solitaire Logistics Pvt. Ltd.); 

Sonal Printers Pvt. Ltd.; Super Impex; Swati Growth 

Funds Ltd.; V & M; and Yash Laminates. 

transparency in enforcement, and more 

effectively protect natural resources. 

Under the proposed penalty policy, 

penalties and permit sanctions are based 

on three criteria: (1) A base penalty 

amount and permit sanction reflective 

of the seriousness of the violation; (2) an 

adjustment of the base penalty and 

permit sanction upward or downward to 

reflect particular circumstances of a 

specific violation; and (3) an additional 

amount added to the adjusted base 

penalty to recoup the economic benefit 

of noncompliance. We note that the new 

penalty policy is a departure from 

NOAA’s prior practice of developing 

detailed penalty schedules by region 

and by specific types of violations with 

broad ranges for both penalty and 

permit sanctions. The new policy uses 

a simplified approach of one penalty 

and permit sanction matrix for each 

major statute NOAA enforces, to be 

applied nationally, with narrower 

penalty and permit sanction ranges. 

This approach assures that NOAA 

attorneys are provided with greater 

guidance in recommending penalties, 

and should assure fairness and 

consistency of approach across NOAA 

statutes, across fisheries, and across the 

country. 

When finalized, this draft Penalty 

Policy will supersede previous guidance 

regarding assessment of penalties or 

permit sanctions and previous penalty 

and permit sanction schedules issued by 

the NOAA Office of the General 

Counsel. This Penalty Policy provides 

guidance for the NOAA Office of the 

General Counsel, but does not, nor is it 

intended to, create a right or benefit, 

substantive or procedural, enforceable at 

law or in equity, in any person or 

company. 

The full penalty policy, along with 

examples, matrixes, and schedules, can 

be found at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ 

ole/penaltypolicy.html. NOAA is 

seeking public comment on all portions 

of the penalty policy, but specifically 

asks for comment in the following areas: 

(1) The handling of recreational, versus 

commercial, activity in assessing 

penalties—specifically, whether to 

create separate matrixes and/or 

schedules for recreational activity in the 

penalty policy, or to leave such 

distinctions as an ‘‘adjustment’’ factor, as 

currently written; (2) the evaluation of 

prior violations in assessing penalties— 

specifically, whether to create upward 

penalty assessments based on prior 

charged conduct, or only to consider 

prior conduct that is fully adjudicated; 

(3) whether the proposed use of permit 

sanctions in the penalty policy is 

appropriate; (4) whether any additional 

upward or downward ‘‘adjustment’’ 

factors should be considered in 

assessing penalties under the penalty 

policy; (5) whether the matrixes and 

schedules in the penalty policy 

(Appendices 2 and 3), adequately reflect 

an appropriate range of penalties for 

particular violations; and (6) whether 

there should be any change in the 

proposed method of calculating 

economic benefit in the penalty policy. 

Dated: October 15, 2010. 

Lois J. Schiffer, 

General Counsel, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26417 Filed 10–15–10; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–12–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–533–843] 

Certain Lined Paper Products From 

India: Notice of Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) is conducting an 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on certain lined 

paper products (CLPP) from India. For 

the period September 1, 2008, through 

August 31, 2009, we have preliminarily 

determined that Navneet Publications 

(India) Limited (Navneet) did not make 

sales of subject merchandise at less than 

normal value (NV) (i.e., sales were made 

at de minimis dumping margins). If 

these preliminary results are adopted in 

the final results of this administrative 

review, we will instruct U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (CBP) to liquidate 

appropriate entries without regard to 

antidumping duties. For the same 

period, we have preliminarily 

determined that U.S. sales have been 

made below NV by Super Impex. If 

these preliminary results are adopted in 

our final results, we will instruct CBP to 

assess antidumping duties based on the 

difference between the export price (EP) 

and NV. See ‘‘Preliminary Results of 

Review’’ section of this notice. 

Interested parties are invited to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

DATES: Effective Date: October 21, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephanie Moore (Navneet) or Cindy 

Robinson (Super Impex) AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 3, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482–3692 or (202) 482– 

3797, respectively. 

Background 

On September 1, 2009, the 

Department issued a notice of 

opportunity to request an administrative 

review of this order for the period of 

review (POR) of September 1, 2008, 

through August 31, 2009. See 

Antidumping or Countervailing Duty 

Order, Finding, or Suspended 

Investigation; Opportunity to Request 

Administrative Review, 74 FR 45179 

(September 1, 2009). 

Pursuant to a request from the 

Association of American School Paper 

Suppliers, (petitioner),1 the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

notice of initiation of this antidumping 

duty administrative review with respect 

to 32 companies, including Navneet and 

Super Impex for the period September 

1, 2008, through August 31, 2009. See 

Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Reviews and Request for Revocation in 

Part, 74 FR 54956 (October 26, 2009). 

(Initiation Notice). On October 26, 2009, 

the petitioner timely withdrew its 

request for a review of Blue Bird (India) 

Limited (Blue Bird). 

On November 3, 2009, the Department 

notified interested parties of its intent to 

use CBP data for respondent selection. 

See Memorandum to The File, Through 

Melissa Skinner, Office Director, Office 

3 and Through James Terpstra, Program 

Manager, Office 3 from Stephanie 

Moore, Case Analyst titled ‘‘Customs 

and Border Patrol Data for Selection of 

Respondents for Individual Review.’’ 

On November 10 and December 3, 

2009, the Department received 

comments regarding respondent 

selection from the petitioner. On 

January 29, 2010, the Department 

selected Navneet and Super Impex as 

companies to be individually examined 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 64989 

in this administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on CLPP from 

India. See Memorandum to Melissa 

Skinner, Director, Office 3 Through 

James Terpstra, Program Manager, 

Office 3 from Stephanie Moore, Case 

Analyst titled ‘‘Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review of Certain Lined 

Paper Products from India: Selection of 

Respondents for Individual Review’’ 

(Respondent Selection Memo), dated 

January 29, 2010. 

On February 1, 2010, the Department 

issued an antidumping questionnaire 

(original questionnaire) to Navneet and 

Super Impex with a due date of March 

9, 2010. On March 12, 2010, we granted 

a three-week extension until April 6, 

2010, for Navneet to submit its response 

to the original questionnaire. On May 6, 

2010, petitioner submitted deficiency 

comments regarding Navneet’s April 6, 

2010, original questionnaire response. 

On May 14, 2010, the Department 

issued a supplemental questionnaire to 

Navneet with a due date of May 28, 

2010. On May 27, 2010, we granted a 

two-week extension until June 11, 2010, 

for Navneet to submit its response to the 

supplemental questionnaire. 

With respect to Super Impex, we 

received Super Impex’s sections A, C, 

and D responses to the Department’s 

original questionnaire on March 9, 

March 30, and April 14, 2010, 

respectively. On March 25 and April 30, 

2010, petitioner submitted deficiency 

comments on Super Impex’s sections A, 

C, and D questionnaire response. On 

May 10 and June 24, 2010, we issued 

the first and second supplemental 

questionnaires, respectively, to Super 

Impex, and Super Impex submitted its 

responses on June 2 and July 7, 2010, 

respectively. Petitioner submitted 

additional deficiency comments on 

Super Impex’s first supplemental 

response on July 17, 2010. On July 19, 

2010, petitioner provided preverification comments. On July 20, 

2010, petitioner provided comments on 

certain new factual information 

contained in Super Impex’s second 

supplemental questionnaire response. 

On May 18, 2010, the Department 

extended the time limits for the 

preliminary results. See Certain Lined 

Paper Products from India and People’s 

Republic of China: Extension of Time 

Limits for the Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Reviews, 75 FR 27706 (May 18, 2010). 

The Department conducted the sales 

and cost verification of Super Impex 

from August 2 through August 13, 2010, 

in Mumbai, India. At verification, the 

Department’s verification team 

requested that Super Impex provide 

updated sales and cost of production 

(COP) files to reflect the minor 

corrections presented to the verification 

team. On August 11, 2010, we received 

Super Impex’s minor correction 

provided at the outset of the 

verification, and on August 18, 2010, we 

received Super Impex’s revised U.S. 

sales and COP databases. 

Period of Review 

The period of review (POR) is 

September 1, 2008, through August 31, 

2009. 

Scope of the Order 

The scope of this order includes 

certain lined paper products, typically 

school supplies (for purposes of this 

scope definition, the actual use of or 

labeling these products as school 

supplies or non-school supplies is not a 

defining characteristic) composed of or 

including paper that incorporates 

straight horizontal and/or vertical lines 

on ten or more paper sheets (there shall 

be no minimum page requirement for 

loose leaf filler paper) including but not 

limited to such products as single- and 

multi-subject notebooks, composition 

books, wireless notebooks, loose leaf 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 this 

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: pre-printed 

business forms, lined invoice pads and 

paper, mailing and address labels, 

manifests, and shipping log books; 

• lined continuous computer paper; 

• boxed or packaged writing 

stationary (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 (‘‘Gregg ruling’’ consists of a 

single- or double-margin 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), measuring 6 inches by 9 

inches; 

Also excluded from the scope of this 

order are the following trademarked 

products: 

• FlyTM lined paper products: A 

notebook, notebook organizer, loose or 

glued note paper, with papers that are 

printed with infrared reflective inks and 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
64990 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 

readable only by a FlyTM pen-top 

computer. The product must bear the 

valid trademark FlyTM (products found 

to be bearing an invalidly licensed or 

used trademark are not excluded from 

the scope). 

• ZwipesTM: 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 speciallydeveloped permanent marker and erase 

system (known as a ZwipesTM 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 ZwipesTM

(products found to be bearing an 

invalidly licensed or used trademark are 

not excluded from the scope). 

• FiveStar®AdvanceTM: 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®AdvanceTM (products found to 

be bearing an invalidly licensed or used 

trademark are not excluded from the 

scope). 

• FiveStar FlexTM: A notebook, a 

notebook organizer, or binder with 

plastic polyolefin front and rear covers 

joined by 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 FlexTM (products 

found to be bearing an invalidly 

licensed or used trademark are not 

excluded from the scope). 

Merchandise subject to this order is 

typically imported under headings 

4810.22.5044, 4811.90.9050, 

4811.90.9090, 4820.10.2010, 

4820.10.2020, 4820.10.2030, 

4820.10.2040, 4820.10.2050, 

4820.10.2060, and 4820.10.4000 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 the 

order is dispositive. 

Verification 

As provided in section 782(i) of the 

Act, we have verified information 

provided by Super Impex in the 

administrative review of the order on 

subject merchandise from India using 

standard verification procedures, 

including the examination of relevant 

sales and cost information, financial 

records, and the selection and review of 

original documentation containing 

relevant information. Our verification 

results are outlined in the public 

version of our verification report dated 

October 7, 2010, which is on file in the 

Central Records Unit (CRU) in Room 

7046 of the Department’s main building. 

Product Comparisons 

In accordance with section 771(16) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act), all products produced by Navneet 

covered by the description in the ‘‘Scope 

of the Order’’ section above and sold in 

India during the POR are considered to 

be foreign like products for purposes of 

determining appropriate product 

comparisons to U.S. sales. We have 

relied on eight criteria to match U.S. 

sales of subject merchandise to 

comparison market sales of the foreign 

like product: (1) Form, (2) paper 

volume, (3) brightness, (4) binding type, 

(5) cover material, (6) back material, (7) 

number of inserts, and (8) insert 

material. Where there were no sales of 

identical merchandise in the home 

market made in the ordinary course of 

trade to compare to U.S. sales, we 

compared U.S. sales to the next most 

similar foreign like product on the basis 

of the characteristics listed above. 

For purposes of the preliminary 

results, where appropriate, we have 

calculated the adjustment for 

differences in merchandise based on the 

difference in the variable cost of 

manufacturing (VCOM) between each 

U.S. model and the most similar home 

market model selected for comparison. 

Normal Value Comparisons 

To determine whether sales of CLPP 

from Navneet to the United States were 

made at less than NV, we compared EP 

to the NV, as described in the ‘‘Export 

Price’’ and ‘‘Normal Value’’ sections of 

this notice. In accordance with section 

777A(d)(2) of the Act, we calculated 

monthly weighted-average prices for NV 

and compared these to individual U.S. 

transaction prices. 

Export Price 

For all U.S. sales made by Navneet 

and Super Impex, we used the EP 

methodology, in accordance with 

section 772(a) of the Act, because the 

subject merchandise was sold directly to 

the first unaffiliated purchaser in the 

United States prior to importation. We 

based EP on packed prices to the first 

unaffiliated purchaser in the United 

States. When appropriate, we reduced 

the EP prices to reflect discounts. 

In accordance with section 

772(c)(2)(A) of the Act, we made 

deductions, where appropriate, for 

movement expenses including foreign 

inland freight from plant/warehouse to 

the port of exportation, foreign 

brokerage and handling, and foreign bill 

of lading charges. We also increased EP 

by an amount equal to the 

countervailing duty (CVD) rate 

attributed to export subsidies in the 

most recently completed countervailing 

duty administrative review of CLPP 

from India, in accordance with section 

772(c)(1)(C) of the Act. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 64991 

2See Certain Lined Paper Products from India: 

Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 75 FR 7563 (February 22, 

2010). 

Normal Value 

Selection of Comparison Market 

To determine whether there was a 

sufficient volume of sales in the home 

market to serve as a viable basis for 

calculating NV, we compared Navneet’s 

and Super Impex’s volume of home 

market sales of the foreign like product 

to the volume of their U.S. sales of the 

subject merchandise. Pursuant to 

sections 773(a)(1)(B) and 773(a)(1)(C) of 

the Act, because Navneet had an 

aggregate volume of home market sales 

of the foreign like product that was 

greater than five percent of its aggregate 

volume of U.S. sales of the subject 

merchandise, we determined that the 

home market was viable. Super Impex 

reported that it made no sales to the 

home market and that its sales to third 

countries were not viable. See Super 

Impex’s Section A Response, dated 

March 9, 2010, at A–3 and A–4. 

Therefore, for Super Impex, we used 

constructed value (CV) as the basis for 

calculating NV, in accordance with 

section 773(a)(4) of the Act. 

Section 773(a)(1)(C)(i) of the Act 

applies to the Department’s 

determination of NV if the foreign like 

product is not sold (or offered for sale) 

for consumption in the exporting 

country. When sales in the home market 

are not viable, section 773(a)(1)(B)(ii) of 

the Act provides that sales to a 

particular third country market may be 

utilized if: (1) The prices in such market 

are representative; (2) the aggregate 

quantity of the foreign like product sold 

by the producer or exporter in the third 

country market is five percent or more 

of the aggregate quantity of the subject 

merchandise sold in or to the United 

States; and (3) the Department does not 

determine that a particular market 

situation in the third country market 

prevents a proper comparison with the 

U.S. price. 

Level of Trade 

In accordance with section 

773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, to the extent 

practicable, the Department determines 

NV based on sales in the comparison 

market at the same level of trade (LOT) 

as the EP or CEP transactions. In order 

to perform the LOT analysis, we 

examine the selling functions provided 

to different customer categories to 

evaluate the LOT in a particular market. 

Specifically, we compare the selling 

functions performed for home market 

sales with those performed with respect 

to the EP or CEP transactions, after 

deductions for economic activities 

occurring in the United States, pursuant 

to section 772(d) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.412, to determine if the home 

market LOT constituted a different LOT 

than the EP or CEP LOT. 

Consistent with 19 CFR 351.412, to 

determine whether comparison market 

sales were at a different LOT, we 

examined stages in the marketing 

process and selling functions along the 

chain of distribution between the 

producer and the unaffiliated (or arm’slength) customers. If the comparison 

market sales were at a different LOT and 

the differences affect price 

comparability, as manifested in a 

pattern of consistent price differences 

between the sales on which NV is based 

and comparison market sales at the LOT 

of the export transaction, we will make 

an LOT adjustment under section 

773(a)(7)(A) of the Act. 

Navneet reported that it has five 

channels of distribution or five LOTs in 

the home market (i.e., distributors with 

merchandising—full service; 

distributors with no merchandising— 

limited service; retail chain stores; 

institutional end-users who purchase 

materials for their own use; and schools 

that purchase customized products for 

their own use and for selling to 

students). 

Section 351.412(c)(2) of the 

Department’s regulations provides that 

the Department will determine that 

sales are made at different LOTs if they 

are made at different marketing stages 

(or their equivalent). Substantial 

differences in selling activities are a 

necessary, but not a sufficient, condition 

for determining that there is a difference 

in the stage of marketing. Some overlap 

in selling activities will not preclude a 

determination that sales are at different 

stages of marketing. 

Our analysis of the selling activities 

for Navneet shows that Navneet 

performs similar selling activities for 

different customer categories, although 

some of the activities were at different 

levels of intensity. Moreover, some 

selling activities within the claimed 

LOT1 are at a higher level of intensity 

than the same selling activities in the 

claimed LOT2 through LOT5. In 

addition, there is overlap among the 

channels of distribution for the different 

customer categories between LOT1 and 

LOT2 through LOT5 customers. 

Although there are differences in 

intensity of selling activities among 

LOT2 through LOT5 customers, this, in 

and of itself, does not show a substantial 

difference in selling activities that 

would form the basis for finding distinct 

LOTs. See, Certain Lined Paper 

Products From India: Notice of 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR 

51558, 51563 (October 7, 2009) 

(Preliminary Results), unchanged in the 

final results of the Second 

Administrative Review,2 and 

accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum at Comment 5. The 

differences in Navneet’s selling 

activities chart indicate that there are 

two LOTs in the home market: (1) LOT1 

and (2) a combined LOT2, which is 

comprised of Navneet’s reported LOT2 

through LOT5. The selling activities in 

the combined LOT2 in the home market 

are comparable to the selling activities 

in the LOT in the U.S. market. Due to 

the proprietary nature of this issue, 

please refer to Navneet’s Preliminary 

Calculation Memorandum for further 

discussion, dated October 7, 2010 

(Preliminary Calculation 

Memorandum). 

In the U.S. market, Navneet reported 

that its sales were made through one 

channel of distribution to one customer 

category, and therefore, at one LOT. The 

Department has determined that 

Navneet’s home market sales in the 

combined LOT2 are at the same stage of 

marketing as the U.S. sales. We only 

compared home market sales in the 

combined LOT2 to the U.S. sales and 

determined that no LOT adjustment for 

Navneet’s sales to the United States was 

necessary. 

Although Navneet reported that it has 

five channels of distribution or five 

LOTs in the home market, Navneet 

states that without intending to waive 

its right to make further argument on 

this point, it has acceded to the 

Department’s level of trade definitions 

in reporting its sales in this review. See 

Navneet’s Questionnaire Response, 

dated April 6, 2010, at page B–39. Thus, 

Navneet, in its home market database 

reported two LOTs: LOT1 sales to 

distributors with full-service 

downstream merchandising, and a 

combined LOT2, which consists of sales 

made through channels two through 

five. 

Cost of Production Analysis 

We are investigating Navneet’s costs 

because during the most recently 

completed segment of the proceeding in 

which Navneet participated (the Second 

Administrative Review), the Department 

found and disregarded sales that failed 

the cost test. 

In accordance with section 773(b)(3) 

of the Act, we calculated a weightedaverage cost of production (COP) based 

on the sum of the cost of materials and 

fabrication for the foreign like product, 

plus amounts for selling, general and 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
64992 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 

3On July 19, 2010, petitioner also placed on 

record the March 31, 2009, financial statements of 

Cello Writing Instruments & Containers Private 

Limited (Cello). However, we found that Cello is 

not a producer and seller of merchandise within the 

same general category of products as the foreign like 

product in the Indian market. Therefore, for 

purposes of these preliminary results, we have not 

included Cello’s data in the derivation of selling 

and profit ratios for Super Impex. See COP/CV 

Memo. 

administrative expenses (SG&A) and 

packing expenses. For these preliminary 

results, we have adjusted Navneet’s 

reported cost of manufacturing to 

include common production costs not 

allocated to divisions and other 

common production costs of the 

stationery division not allocated to 

subdivisions. 

Consistent with the Department’s 

methodology in the second 

administrative review, we calculated the 

COP and constructed value (CV) of all 

CONNUMs sold in the home market to 

exclude the central excise tax on raw 

material inputs. See Preliminary Results 

at 51564, unchanged in the final results 

of the Second Administrative Review. 

Test of Comparison Market Prices 

As required under section 773(b)(2) of 

the Act, we compared the weightedaverage COP to the per-unit price of the 

comparison market sales of the foreign 

like product, to determine whether 

these sales were made at prices below 

the COP within an extended period of 

time in substantial quantities, and 

whether such prices were sufficient to 

permit the recovery of all costs within 

a reasonable period of time. We 

determined the net comparison market 

prices for the below-cost test by 

subtracting from the gross unit price any 

applicable movement charges, 

discounts, rebates, direct and indirect 

selling expenses and packing expenses 

which were excluded from COP for 

comparison purposes. 

Results of COP Test 

Pursuant to section 773(b)(1) of the 

Act, we may disregard below-COP sales 

in the determination of NV if these sales 

have been made within an extended 

period of time in substantial quantities 

and were not at prices which permit 

recovery of all costs within a reasonable 

period of time. Where 20 percent or 

more of a respondent’s sales of a given 

product during the POR were at prices 

less than the COP for at least six months 

of the POR, we determined that sales of 

that model were made in ’’substantial 

quantities’’ within an extended period of 

time, in accordance with sections 

773(b)(2)(B) and (C) of the Act. Where 

prices of a respondent’s sales of a given 

product were below the per-unit COP at 

the time of sale and below the weightedaverage per-unit costs for the POR, we 

determined that sales were not at prices 

which would permit recovery of all 

costs within a reasonable period of time, 

in accordance with section 773(b)(2)(D) 

of the Act. In such cases, we disregarded 

the below-cost sales in accordance with 

section 773(b)(1) of the Act. 

Pursuant to section 773(b)(2)(C) of the 

Act, where less than 20 percent of a 

respondent’s sales of a given product 

were at prices less than the COP, we did 

not disregard any below-cost sales of 

that product because we determined 

that the below-cost sales were not made 

in ‘‘substantial quantities.’’ 

We tested and identified below-cost 

home market sales for Navneet. We 

disregarded individual below-cost sales 

of a given product and used the 

remaining sales as the basis for 

determining NV, in accordance with 

section 773(b)(1) of the Act. See 

Preliminary Calculation Memorandum. 

Calculation of Normal Value Based on 

Comparison Market Prices 

For Navneet, we based home market 

prices on packed prices to unaffiliated 

purchasers in India. Where appropriate, 

in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(B) 

of the Act, we deducted from the 

starting price inland freight. Pursuant to 

19 CFR 351.401(c), we deducted rebates 

and discounts. In accordance with 

sections 773(a)(6)(A) and (B) of the Act, 

we added U.S. packing costs and 

deducted comparison market packing, 

respectively. 

In addition, for comparisons made to 

EP sales, we made adjustments for 

differences in circumstances of sale 

(COS) pursuant to section 

773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.410(b) by deducting direct selling 

expenses incurred for home market 

sales (credit expense) and adding U.S. 

direct selling expenses (i.e., credit 

directly linked to sales transactions). In 

accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B)(i) 

of the Act, we based NV on LOT2 sales. 

See the ‘‘Level of Trade’’ section above. 

Finally, consistent with section 

773(a)(6)(B)(iii) of the Act, we made an 

adjustment for central excise taxes that 

Navneet paid on raw material inputs 

used to produce merchandise that was 

sold in the home market that were not 

paid on the same inputs used to 

produce merchandise that was exported 

from India. Under Indian law, Navneet 

was prohibited from charging this excise 

tax on sales of school supplies. In 

addition, the excise tax that Navneet 

paid on inputs into school supplies was 

not refunded and was not otherwise 

recovered by Navneet. Therefore, we 

find the tax is included in the price and 

adjustment is warranted. For products 

other than school supplies, Navneet 

reported home market selling prices net 

of the excise tax. 

Calculation of Normal Value Based on 

Constructed Value 

In accordance with section 773(a)(4) 

of the Act, we based Super Impex’s NV 

on CV. In accordance with section 

773(e) of the Act, we calculated CV 

based on the sum of Super Impex’s cost 

of materials and fabrication for the 

foreign like product, plus amounts for 

SG&A, profit, and U.S. packing costs. 

We calculated the cost of materials and 

fabrication based on the CV information 

provided by Super Impex in its section 

D response. Because Super Impex does 

not have Indian sales of the foreign like 

product or third country sales, the 

Department does not have comparison 

market selling expenses or profit to use 

in its calculations, as directed by section 

773(e) of the Act. As an alternative, the 

Department has used as selling expenses 

and profit for Super Impex, data from 

the March 31, 2009 financial statements 

of two Indian companies which are 

already on the records: Blue Bird and 

Navneet. We found that both Blue Bird 

and Navneet produce and sell 

merchandise within the same general 

category of products as the foreign like 

product in the Indian market.3 For 

purposes of these preliminary results, 

we calculated the selling expenses and 

profit for Super Impex based on the 

simple average ratios of the respective 

selling expenses and profit of Blue Bird 

and Navneet. See Memorandum from 

Cindy Robinson to Melissa Skinner, 

Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, 

Cost of Production and Constructed 

Value Calculation Adjustments for the 

Preliminary Results—Super Impex 

Paper Limited, dated October 7, 2010 

(COP/CV Memo). 

Currency Conversion 

We made currency conversions into 

U.S. dollars in accordance with section 

773A(a) of the Act based on exchange 

rates in effect on the dates of the U.S. 

sales, as certified by the Federal Reserve 

Bank. 

Non-Selected Rate 

The statute and the Department’s 

regulations do not directly address the 

establishment of rates to be applied to 

companies not selected for individual 

examination where the Department 

limited its examination in an 

administrative review pursuant to 

section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. However, 

the Department normally determines the 

rates for non-selected companies in 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 64993 

reviews in a manner that is consistent 

with section 735(c)(5) of the Act. 

Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act instructs 

the Department to calculate an all-others 

rate using the weighted average of the 

dumping margins established for the 

producers/exporters individually 

examined, excluding any zero or de 

minimis margins or any margins based 

on total facts available. 

In this review, Super Impex is the 

only respondent for which the 

Department has calculated a companyspecific rate that is not zero, de minimis, 

or based on total facts available. 

Therefore, for purposes of these 

preliminary results, the 29 remaining 

non-selected companies subject to this 

review will receive the rate calculated 

for Super Impex in this review. See also 

the ‘‘Suspension of Liquidation’’ section, 

below. 

Preliminary Results of the Review 

We preliminarily determine that 

weighted-average dumping margins 

exist for the following respondents for 

the period September 1, 2008, through 

August 31, 2009, as follows: 

Manufacturer/exporter 

Weighted 

average margin 

(percent) 

Navneet Publications (India) Ltd ..................................................................................................................................................... De minimis. 

Super Impex .................................................................................................................................................................................... 2.12. 

Review-Specific Average Rate 

Applicable to the 29 Non-Selected 

Companies Subject to This Review: 

Manufacturer/exporter Weighted average 

margin (percent) 

Abhinav Paper Products Pvt. Ltd ................................................................................................................................................ 2.12 

American Scholar, Inc. and/or I–Scholar ..................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Ampoules & Vials Mfg. Co. Ltd ................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Bafna Exports .............................................................................................................................................................................. 2.12 

Cello International Pvt. Ltd. (M/S Cello Paper Products) ............................................................................................................ 2.12 

Corporate Stationary Pvt. Ltd ...................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Creative Divya ............................................................................................................................................................................. 2.12 

D.D International .......................................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Exmart International Pvt. Ltd ....................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Fatechand Mahendrakumar ......................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

FFI International ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Freight India Logistics Pvt. Ltd .................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

International Greetings Pvt. Ltd ................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Lodha Offset Limited ................................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Magic International ...................................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Marigold ExIm Pvt. Ltd ................................................................................................................................................................ 2.12 

Marisa International ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Paperwise Inc .............................................................................................................................................................................. 2.12 

Pioneer Stationery Pvt. Ltd .......................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Premier Exports ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Riddhi Enterprises ....................................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

SAB International ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Sar Transport Systems ................................................................................................................................................................ 2.12 

Seet Kamal International ............................................................................................................................................................. 2.12 

Solitaire Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (Eternity Int’l Freight, forwarder on behalf of Solitaire Logistics Pvt. Ltd.) ..................................... 2.12 

Sonal Printers Pvt Ltd .................................................................................................................................................................. 2.12 

Swati Growth Funds Ltd .............................................................................................................................................................. 2.12 

V & M ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Yash Laminates ........................................................................................................................................................................... 2.12 

Public Comment 

The Department will disclose 

calculations performed within five days 

of the date of publication of this notice 

to the parties to this proceeding in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). 

Interested parties may submit case briefs 

no later than 30 days after the date of 

publication of these preliminary results 

of review. See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii). 

Rebuttal briefs are limited to issues 

raised in the case briefs and may be 

filed no later than five days after the 

time limit for filing the case briefs. See 

19 CFR 351.309(d). Parties submitting 

arguments in this proceeding are 

requested to submit with the argument: 

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

summary of the argument, and (3) a 

table of authorities, in accordance with 

19 CFR 351.309(d)(2). Further, parties 

submitting case and/or rebuttal briefs 

are requested to provide the Department 

with an additional electronic copy of 

the public version of any such 

comments on a computer diskette. Case 

and rebuttal briefs must be served on 

interested parties in accordance with 19 

CFR 351.303(f). 

An interested party may request a 

hearing within 30 days of publication of 

these preliminary results. See 19 CFR 

351.310(c). Any hearing, if requested, 

ordinarily will be held two days after 

the due date of the rebuttal briefs in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(d)(1). 

The Department will issue the final 

results of this administrative review, 

which will include the results of its 

analysis of issues raised in any such 

comments, or at a hearing, if requested, 

within 120 days of publication of these 

preliminary results, unless extended. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
64994 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 203 / Thursday, October 21, 2010 / Notices 

4See 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) (Lined Paper Orders). 

See section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, and 

19 CFR 351.213(h). 

Assessment Rate 

Upon completion of the final results 

of this administrative review, the 

Department shall determine, and CBP 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries. Pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.212(b)(1), the Department will 

calculate importer-specific assessment 

rates for each respondent based on the 

ratio of the total amount of antidumping 

duties calculated for the examined sales 

to the total entered value of those sales. 

Where the respondent did not report the 

entered value for U.S. sales, we have 

calculated importer-specific assessment 

rates for the merchandise in question by 

aggregating the dumping margins 

calculated for all U.S. sales to each 

importer and dividing this amount by 

the total quantity of those sales. To 

determine whether the duty assessment 

rates were de minimis, in accordance 

with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 

351.106(c)(2), we calculated importerspecific ad valorem rates based on the 

estimated entered value. Where the 

assessment rate is above de minimis, we 

will instruct CBP to assess duties on all 

entries of subject merchandise by that 

importer. Pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate without regard to antidumping 

duties any entries for which the 

assessment rate is de minimis (i.e., less 

than 0.50 percent). The Department 

intends to issue assessment instructions 

directly to CBP 15 days after publication 

of the final results of this review. 

The Department clarified its 

‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on 

May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This 

clarification will apply to entries of 

subject merchandise during the POR 

produced by the respondents subject to 

this review for which the reviewed 

companies did not know that the 

merchandise which it sold to an 

intermediary (e.g. a reseller, trading 

company, or exporter) 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 intermediary 

involved in the transaction. For a full 

discussion of this clarification, see id. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

To calculate the cash deposit rate for 

Navneet, 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. In this 

instance, there is only one non-AFA rate 

which we applied. 

The following deposit rates will be 

effective upon publication of the final 

results of this administrative review for 

all shipments of CLPP from India 

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 3.91 percent, the allothers rate established in the LTFV 

investigation. See Lined Paper Orders.4

These cash 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) 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. 

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: October 7, 2010. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26191 Filed 10–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XZ75 

Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; 

Advisory Panel 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; solicitation of 

nominations. 

SUMMARY: NMFS solicits nominations 

for the Atlantic Highly Migratory 

Species (HMS) Advisory Panel (AP). 

NMFS consults with and considers the 

comments and views of the HMS AP 

when preparing and implementing 

Fishery Management Plans (FMPs) or 

FMP amendments for Atlantic tunas, 

swordfish, sharks, and billfish. 

Nominations are being sought to fill 

one-third (11) of the seats on the HMS 

AP for a 3-year appointment. 

Individuals with definable interests in 

the recreational and commercial fishing 

and related industries, environmental 

community, academia, and nongovernmental organizations will be 

considered for membership in the HMS 

AP. 

DATES: Nominations must be received 

on or before November 22, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit 

nominations and requests for the 

Advisory Panel Statement of 

Organization, Practices, and Procedures 

by any of the following methods: 

• E-mail: 

HMSAP.Nominations@noaa.gov. 

Include in the subject line the following 

identifier: ‘‘HMS AP Nominations.’’ 

• Mail: Brian Parker, Highly 

Migratory Species Management 

Division, NMFS, 1315 East-West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. 

• Fax: 301–713–1917. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Craig Cockrell at (301) 713–2347 x128. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES