36662 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 141 / Friday, July 24, 2009 / Notices 

1See 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). 

Dated: July 20, 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I—Changes From the 

Preliminary Determination 

General Issues 

Comment 1: Double Remedy: Antidumping 

Duties and CVD Duties 

Comment 2: New King Shan’s Antidumping 

Duty Margin 

Comment 3: Filing Issues Concerning 

Petitioners’ Submissions 

Comment 4: Rejection of New King Shan’s 

Minor Corrections 

Comment 5: Rejection of New Information in 

New King Shan’s Surrogate Value 

Rebuttal Submission 

Surrogate Values 

Comment 6: Wire Rod 

Comment 7: Hydrochloric Acid 

Comment 8: Sodium Triphosphate 

Comment 9: Nickel Anode 

Surrogate Financial Ratios 

Comment 10: Surrogate Financial Companies 

Comment 11: Treatment of Gratuity Benefits 

Comment 12: Treatment of Commissions 

Comment 13: Treatment of Advertising 

Comment 14: Treatment of Job Work Charges 

Comment 15: Treatment of Labor Expenses 

Company-Specific Issues 

Comment 16: Wireking 

A. Total Adverse Facts Available (‘‘AFA’’) 

for Wireking 

B. Partial AFA for Factors of Production 

(‘‘FOPs’’) 

C. Partial AFA for Labor 

D. Partial AFA for Underreported Weightper-Piece FOPs 

E. Partial AFA for Yield Loss 

F. Partial AFA for Market Economy 

Movement Expenses 

G. Facts Available (‘‘FA’’) for PVC Buffer 

H. Water 

I. Unreported U.S. Sales 

J. Distance from Factory to Port 

K. Name Correction 

Comment 17: New King Shan 

A. Total AFA for New King Shan 

B. Partial AFA for FOPs 

C. Yield Loss and Steel Scrap 

D. Allocation of Stainless Steel and Steel 

Plate Products 

E. Date of Sale 

F. Verification of Quantity and Value of 

U.S. Sales 

G. Interest Rate for Sale Expenses 

H. U.S. Warehousing 

I. U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses 

J. Credit Expenses 

K. U.S. Customs Duty 

L. Reporting of Ocean Freight 

M. Affiliate’s Market Economy (‘‘ME’’) 

Purchases 

N. Period for Credit Expenses 

[FR Doc. E9–17717 Filed 7–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–901] 

Certain Lined Paper Products From the 

People’s Republic of China: Notice of 

Preliminary Results of the 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(‘‘the Department’’) is conducting the 

second administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on certain lined 

paper products (‘‘CLPP’’) from the 

People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) 

with respect to two companies: the 

Watanabe Group, which consists of 

Watanabe Paper Products (‘‘Shanghai’’) 

Co., Ltd., Watanabe Paper Products 

(‘‘Lingqing’’) Co., Ltd., and Hotrock 

Stationery (‘‘Shenzhen’’) Co., Ltd. 

(collectively, ‘‘the Watanabe Group’’) 

and Shanghai Lian Li Paper Products 

Co., Ltd. (‘‘Lian Li’’). The period of 

review (‘‘POR’’) is September 1, 2007, 

through August 31, 2008. See Initiation 

of Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duty Administrative Reviews and 

Deferral of Administrative Review, 73 

FR 64305 (October 29, 2008) (‘‘Notice of 

Initiation’’). On June 4, 2009, the 

Department published its intent to 

rescind this administrative review in 

part with respect to Lian Li. See Certain 

Lined Paper Products From the People’s 

Republic of China: Notice of Intent to 

Rescind, In Part, Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and Extension of 

Time Limits for Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review, 74 FR 26840 (June 4, 2009) 

(‘‘Notice of Intent to Rescind and Prelim 

Extension’’). If these preliminary results 

are adopted in our final results of this 

review, we will instruct U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to assess 

antidumping duties on all appropriate 

entries of subject merchandise during 

the POR. 

Interested parties are invited to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

We intend to issue the final results no 

later than 120 days from the date of 

publication of this notice, pursuant to 

section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). 

DATES: Effective Date: July 24, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joy 

Zhang or Victoria Cho, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 3, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–1168 or (202) 482– 

5075, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On September 28, 2006, the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register an antidumping duty order on 

CLPP from the PRC.1 On September 2, 

2008, the Department published a notice 

of opportunity to request an 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on CLPP from 

the PRC. See Antidumping or 

Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or 

Suspended Investigation; Opportunity 

To Request Administrative Review, 73 

FR 51272 (September 2, 2008). On 

September 30, 2008, the Association of 

American School Paper Suppliers, a 

domestic interested party and the 

petitioner in the underlying 

investigation (‘‘Petitioner’’), requested 

that the Department conduct an 

administrative review of the Watanabe 

Group and Lian Li. 

On October 29, 2008, the Department 

initiated this review with respect to 

both requested companies. See Notice of 

Initiation. On November 13, 2008, Lian 

Li submitted a letter certifying that it 

did not have any shipments of subject 

merchandise during the POR. On 

January 29, 2009, Lian Li submitted 

product samples of the merchandise it 

exported to the United States during the 

POR, which Lian Li claimed were nonsubject merchandise. On March 4, 2009, 

counsel for petitioner inspected Lian 

Li’s product samples. See Memorandum 

to the File from Joy Zhang titled 

‘‘Inspecting the Product Samples by 

Counsel for the Association of American 

School Paper Supplies,’’ dated March 4, 

2009. 

On June 4, 2009, the Department 

published a notice extending the 

deadline for the preliminary results for 

120 days to September 30, 2009. In this 

notice the Department also published its 

intent to rescind this administrative 

review in part with respect to Lian Li. 

See Notice of Intent to Rescind and 

Prelim Extension, 74 FR 26840 (June 4, 

2009). 

On December 2, 2008, the Department 

issued an antidumping questionnaire to 

the Watanbe Group. On January 8, 2009, 

the Watanbe Group submitted a letter 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 141 / Friday, July 24, 2009 / Notices 36663 

stating that it did not export for 

consumption in the United States lined 

paper products subject to the scope of 

the antidumping order of CLPP during 

the POR. See the Watanabe Group’s 

January 8, 2009, submission at 1. The 

Department conducted a CBP data query 

on December 3, 2008. On February 2, 

2009, the Department released the 

results of the Department’s internal CBP 

data query with respect to the Watanabe 

Group’s shipments of subject 

merchandise to the United States during 

the POR to the interested parties under 

the Department’s December 18, 2008, 

administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) 

in this segment of the proceeding, and 

requested that the Watanabe Group 

respond to the Department’s 

antidumping questionnaire. On March 

11, 2009, the Department released to the 

interested parties under APO CBP entry 

documentation covering the Watanabe 

Group’s shipments, which indicated 

entries of subject merchandise during 

the POR for which the Watanabe Group 

was the producer and/or exporter. On 

March 18, 2009, the Watanabe Group 

submitted a letter to the Department, 

claiming that the shipments in question 

are either outside the scope of the 

antidumping order, outside of the POR 

based on the Department’s date of sale 

methodology, or both, and therefore not 

subject to the administrative review. See 

the Watanabe Group’s March 18, 2009, 

submission at 3. 

In a letter to the Watanabe Group on 

March 26, 2009, the Department 

explained that the Department’s 

antidumping questionnaire requires 

respondents to report sales of subject 

merchandise entered for consumption 

during the POR, and that because there 

were entries of the Watanabe Group’s 

merchandise during the POR, the 

Watanabe Group is required to fully 

respond to the Department’s 

antidumping questionnaire. See Letter 

from James Terpstra, Program Manager, 

AD/CVD, Office 3, Import 

Administration to the Watanabe Group, 

dated March 26, 2009. The Watanabe 

Group submitted a response on April 9, 

2009, which only answered three 

questions of Section C of the 

Department’s multi-faceted 

antidumping questionnaire with respect 

to the date of sales, claiming that the 

Watanabe Group ‘‘is responding to the 

best of its ability for the relevant parts 

of the antidumping questionnaire.’’ The 

Watanabe Group reiterated that it did 

not export subject merchandise to the 

United States during the POR. See the 

Watanabe Group’s April 9, 2009, 

submission at 2. The Watanabe Group 

stated that its certification of no sales 

was based on the date of the invoice for 

export sales. Id. at 2–3. 

On April 22, 2009, the Department 

sent a letter to the Watanabe Group 

reiterating its request that the Watanabe 

Group respond fully to the Department’s 

antidumping questionnaire. The letter 

explained again the authority under 

which the Department is requiring 

responses. Namely, section 351.213(e) of 

the Department’s regulations gives the 

Department flexibility by stating that the 

review ‘‘will cover, as appropriate, 

entries, exports, or sales * * *’’ Section 

751(a)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (‘‘the Act’’) provides that 

where a request for review has been 

received and a review has been 

initiated, the Department shall perform 

a dumping calculation for each entry 

during the POR. See Letter from James 

Terpstra, Program Manager, AD/CVD, 

Office 3, Import Administration to the 

Watanabe Group, dated April 22, 2009, 

(the Department’s April 22, 2009 letter) 

at 1. The letter instructed that for sales 

based on export price (‘‘EP’’), if the 

Watanabe Group did not know the entry 

dates, the Watanabe Group should 

report each transaction involving 

merchandise sold and/or shipped 

during the period June 1, 2007, through 

August 31, 2008. Id. at 2. The letter 

further advised the Watanabe Group 

that information submitted after the 

deadline may result in the use of facts 

available pursuant to section 776(c) of 

the Act. On May 1, 2009, the Watanabe 

Group requested an extension of time to 

respond to the Department’s 

questionnaire. See the Watanabe 

Group’s May 1, 2009, submission at 1. 

On May 5, 2009, the Department granted 

the Watanabe Group’s request in full; 

specifically, an extension until May 20, 

2009, to file its Section A response and 

an extension until June 3, 2009, to file 

its Sections C and D response. 

On May 20, 2009, counsel for the 

Watanabe Group informed the 

Department that the Watanabe Group 

had decided that it would not submit a 

response to the Department’s 

questionnaire. See Memorandum to the 

File from James Terpstra titled 

‘‘Watanabe Telephone Call,’’ dated June 

1, 2009. On June 3, 2009, the Watanabe 

Group notified the Department in 

writing that it was not responding to 

Sections A, C and D of the antidumping 

questionnaire because it had explained 

and certified on the record that it did 

not sell subject merchandise for export 

to the United States during the POR 

based on its understanding of the term 

‘‘sales’’ as defined under the 

antidumping law. See the Watanabe 

Group’s June 3, 2009, submission at 2. 

On June 10, 2009, Petitioner filed 

comments on the Watanabe Group’s 

June 3, 2009, letter, urging the 

Department to respond to the Watanabe 

Group’s failure to cooperate by 

expediting the preliminary results and 

base the Watanabe Group’s margin on 

adverse facts available (‘‘AFA’’). On 

June 10, 2009, Petitioner also filed a 

letter requesting that the Department 

expedite the preliminary and final 

results for this administrative review. 

Petitioner stated that the Department 

extended the period of time for 

completion of the preliminary results of 

this review until no later than 

September 30, 2009, to accommodate 

the Watanabe Group’s extension request 

and to permit sufficient time to analyze 

its forthcoming response. See Notice of 

Intent to Rescind and Prelim Extension. 

Petitioner contends that because the 

Watanabe Group has affirmatively stated 

that it would not respond to the 

questionnaire, the Department should 

immediately issue a preliminary 

determination based on adverse 

inferences. 

Period of Review 

The POR covered by this review is 

September 1, 2007, through August 31, 

2008. 

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 

looseleaf filler paper) 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 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
36664 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 141 / Friday, July 24, 2009 / Notices 

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 

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 4820.10.2020, 

4820.10.2030, 4820.10.2040, 

4820.10.2050, 4820.10.2060, 

4810.22.5044, 4811.90.9090, 

4820.10.2010 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. 

Separate Rates 

In the Notice of Initiation, the 

Department notified parties of its policy 

on separate-rate eligibility in 

proceedings involving non-market 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 141 / Friday, July 24, 2009 / Notices 36665 

economy (NME) countries. See Notice of 

Initiation. 

In proceedings involving NME 

countries, the Department has a 

rebuttable presumption that all 

companies within the country are 

subject to government control and thus 

should be assessed a single antidumping 

duty rate. It is the Department’s policy 

to assign all exporters of subject 

merchandise in an NME country this 

single rate unless an exporter can 

demonstrate that it is sufficiently 

independent so as to be entitled to a 

separate rate. Exporters can demonstrate 

this independence through the absence 

of both de jure and de facto 

governmental control over export 

activities. The Department analyzes 

each entity exporting the subject 

merchandise under a test arising from 

the Notice of Final Determination of 

Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers 

from the People’s Republic of China, 56 

FR 20588 (May 6, 1991), as further 

developed in Notice of Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the 

People’s Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 

(May 2, 1994). However, if the 

Department determines that a company 

is wholly foreign-owned or located in a 

market economy, then a separate rate 

analysis is not necessary to determine 

whether it is independent from 

government control. It is the 

Department’s practice to require a party 

to submit evidence that it operates 

independently of the State-controlled 

entity in each segment of a proceeding 

in which it requests separate rate status. 

The process requires exporters to submit 

a separate-rate status application. See 

Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts 

Thereof, Finished or Unfinished, from 

the People’s Republic of China: Final 

Results of 2005–2006 Administrative 

Review and Partial Rescission of 

Review, 72 FR 56724 (October 4, 2007), 

Peer Bearing Co. Changshan v. United 

States, 587 F.Supp. 2d 1319, 1324–25 

(CIT 2008) (affirming the Department’s 

determination in that review). The 

Watanabe Group, which was selected as 

a mandatory respondent, did not 

respond to the Department’s request for 

a separate rate certification on the 

record of this review, nor did it respond 

to the Department’s questionnaire. 

Thus, the Watanabe Group has not 

demonstrated that it operates free from 

government control. Thus, we find that 

for purposes of this review, the 

Watanabe Group is part of the PRC-wide 

entity. 

Use of Adverse Facts Available 

Section 776(a) of the Act provides 

that, the Department shall apply ‘‘facts 

otherwise available’’ if (1) necessary 

information is not on the record, or (2) 

an interested party or any other person 

(A) withholds information that has been 

requested, (B) fails to provide 

information within the deadlines 

established, or in the form and manner 

requested by the Department, subject to 

subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 

of the Act, (C) significantly impedes a 

proceeding, or (D) provides information 

that cannot be verified as provided by 

section 782(i) of the Act. 

Where the Department determines 

that a response to a request for 

information does not comply with the 

request, section 782(d) of the Act 

provides that the Department will so 

inform the party submitting the 

response and will, to the extent 

practicable, provide that party the 

opportunity to remedy or explain the 

deficiency. If the party fails to remedy 

the deficiency within the applicable 

time limits and subject to section 782(e) 

of the Act, the Department may 

disregard all or part of the original and 

subsequent responses, as appropriate. 

Section 782(e) of the Act provides that 

the Department ‘‘shall not decline to 

consider information that is submitted 

by an interested party and is necessary 

to the determination but does not meet 

all applicable requirements established 

by the administering authority’’ if the 

information is timely, can be verified, is 

not so incomplete that it cannot be used, 

and if the interested party acted to the 

best of its ability in providing the 

information. Where all of these 

conditions are met, the statute requires 

the Department to use the information 

supplied if it can do so without undue 

difficulties. 

Section 776(b) of the Act further 

provides that the Department may use 

an adverse inference in applying the 

facts otherwise available when a party 

has failed to cooperate by not acting to 

the best of its ability to comply with a 

request for information. Such an adverse 

inference may include reliance on 

information derived from the petition, 

the final determination, a previous 

administrative review, or other 

information placed on the record. 

Section 776(c) of the Act provides 

that, when the Department relies on 

secondary information rather than on 

information obtained in the course of an 

investigation or review, it shall, to the 

extent practicable, corroborate that 

information from independent sources 

that are reasonably at its disposal. 

Secondary information is defined as 

‘‘{i}nformation derived from the 

petition that gave rise to the 

investigation or review, the final 

determination concerning the subject 

merchandise, or any previous review 

under section 751 concerning the 

subject merchandise.’’ See Statement of 

Administrative Action, reprinted in H.R. 

Doc. No. 103–216, at 870 (1994) 

(‘‘SAA’’). Corroborate means that the 

Department will satisfy itself that the 

secondary information to be used has 

probative value. Id. To corroborate 

secondary information, the Department 

will, to the extent practicable, examine 

the reliability and relevance of the 

information to be used. 

Application of Total Adverse Facts 

Available 

The Watanabe Group 

As discussed above, the Watanabe 

Group submitted an incomplete 

response to the Department’s original 

questionnaire, claiming it did not sell 

subject merchandise to the United 

States during the POR, and therefore, it 

would not respond additionally to 

Sections A, C and D of the Department’s 

questionnaire. See the Watanabe 

Group’s June 3, 2009, submission at 1. 

As noted above, the Department 

explained in its March 26, and April 22, 

2009, letters the scope of the review and 

the Department’s legal authority to 

require responses covering entries 

during the POR. In response to the 

Watanabe Group’s request, the 

Department extended its deadline for 

the Watanabe Group’s response. 

However, the Watanabe Group reported 

to the Department that it did not intend 

to submit additional responses. 

By failing to respond to the 

Department’s requests for information, 

the Watanabe Group has not 

demonstrated its eligibility for a 

separate rate; i.e., the Watanabe Group 

has not proven it is free from the 

government control. Therefore, the 

Watanabe Group is considered part of 

the PRC-wide entity. Additionally, 

because the Watanabe Group is now 

part of the PRC-wide entity, the PRCwide entity is now under review. 

The PRC-Wide Entity 

As explained above, the PRC-wide 

entity, which includes the Watanabe 

Group, withheld necessary information 

by failing to supply the requested 

information on its shipments of subject 

merchandise to the United States in a 

timely manner. Therefore, it is 

appropriate to apply a dumping margin 

for the PRC-wide entity using facts 

available on the record. See section 

776(a) of the Act. In addition, because 

the PRC-wide entity failed to cooperate 

to the best of its ability, we find that an 

adverse inference is appropriate. See 

section 776(b) of the Act. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
36666 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 141 / Friday, July 24, 2009 / Notices 

Selection of Adverse Facts Available 

Rate 

In deciding which facts to use as 

AFA, section 776(b) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.308(c)(1) provide that the 

Department may rely on information 

derived from (1) the petition, (2) a final 

determination in the investigation, (3) 

any previous review or determination, 

or (4) any other information placed on 

the record. In selecting a rate for AFA, 

the Department selects a rate that is 

sufficiently adverse ‘‘as to effectuate the 

purpose of the facts available rule to 

induce respondents to provide the 

Department with complete and accurate 

information in a timely manner.’’ See 

Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless 

Pressure Pipe from the People’s 

Republic of China: Final Determination 

of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, 74 FR 

4913 (January 28, 2009)). Further, it is 

the Department’s practice to select a rate 

that ensures ‘‘that the party does not 

obtain a more favorable result by failing 

to cooperate than if it had cooperated 

fully.’’ See SAA at 870; see also Brake 

Rotors From the People’s Republic of 

China: Final Results and Partial 

Rescission of the Seventh 

Administrative Review; Final Results of 

the Eleventh New Shipper Review, 70 

FR 69937, 69939 (November 18, 2005). 

Generally, the Department finds that 

selecting the highest rate from any 

segment of the proceeding as AFA is 

appropriate. See, e.g., Certain Cased 

Pencils from the People’s Republic of 

China; Notice of Preliminary Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review and Intent to Rescind in Part, 70 

FR 76755, 76761 (December 28, 2005). 

The CIT and the Court of Appeals for 

the Federal Circuit (‘‘Federal Circuit’’) 

have affirmed decisions to select the 

highest margin from any prior segment 

of the proceeding as the AFA rate on 

numerous occasions. See Rhone 

Poulenc, Inc. v. United States, 899 F.2d 

1185, 1190 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Rhone 

Poulenc); NSK Ltd. v. United States, 346 

F. Supp. 2d 1312, 1335 (CIT 2004) 

(upholding the application of an AFA 

rate which was the highest available 

dumping margin from a different 

respondent in an investigation); see also 

Kompass Food Trading Int’l v. United 

States, 24 CIT 678, 689 (July 31, 2000) 

(upholding the application of an AFA 

rate which was the highest available 

dumping margin from a different, fully 

cooperative respondent); and Shanghai 

Taoen International Trading Co., Ltd. v. 

United States, 360 F. Supp 2d 1339, 

1348 (CIT 2005) (upholding the 

application of an AFA rate which was 

the highest available dumping margin 

from a different respondent in a 

previous administrative review). 

As AFA, we have preliminarily 

assigned to the PRC-wide entity a rate 

of 258.21 percent, from the investigation 

of CLPP from the PRC, which is the 

highest rate on the record of all 

segments of this proceeding. 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). As 

explained below, this rate has been 

corroborated. 

Corroboration of Secondary 

Information 

Section 776(c) of the Act provides 

that, when the Department relies on 

secondary information rather than on 

information obtained in the course of an 

investigation or review, it shall, to the 

extent practicable, corroborate that 

information from independent sources 

that are reasonably at its disposal. 

Secondary information is defined as 

information derived from the petition 

that gave rise to the investigation or 

review, the final determination 

concerning the subject merchandise, or 

any previous review under section 751 

of the Act concerning the subject 

merchandise. See SAA at 870. 

Corroborate means that the Department 

will satisfy itself that the secondary 

information to be used has probative 

value. Id. To corroborate secondary 

information, the Department will, to the 

extent practicable, examine the 

reliability and relevance of the 

information to be used. See Preliminary 

Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Reviews and Partial 

Termination of Administrative Reviews: 

Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts 

Thereof, Finished and Unfinished from 

Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings 

Four Inches or Less in Outside 

Diameter, and Components Thereof, 

from Japan, 61 FR 57391, 57392 

(November 6, 1996) (unchanged in the 

final determination), Final Results of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Reviews and Termination in Part: 

Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts 

Thereof, Finished and Unfinished from 

Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings 

Four Inches or Less in Outside 

Diameter, and Components Thereof, 

from Japan, 62 FR 11825 (March 13, 

1997). Independent sources used to 

corroborate such evidence may include, 

for example, published price lists, 

official import statistics and customs 

data, and information obtained from 

interested parties during the particular 

investigation. See Notice of Preliminary 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: High and Ultra-High Voltage 

Ceramic Station Post Insulators from 

Japan, 68 FR 35627 (June 16, 2003) 

(unchanged in final determination) 

Notice of Final Determination of Sales 

at Less Than Fair Value: High and Ultra 

High Voltage Ceramic Station Post 

Insulators from Japan, 68 FR 62560 

(November 5, 2003); and Notice of 

Final Determination of Sales at Less 

Than Fair Value: Live Swine From 

Canada, 70 FR 12181, 12183–84 (March 

11, 2005). 

The AFA rate selected here is from 

the investigation. This rate was 

calculated based on information 

contained in the petition, which was 

corroborated for the final determination. 

No additional information has been 

presented in the current review which 

calls into question the reliability of the 

information. Therefore, the Department 

finds that the information continues to 

be reliable. 

Preliminary Results of Review 

We preliminarily determine that the 

following margin exists for the period 

September 1, 2007, through August 31, 

2008: 

Producer/manufacturer 

Weightedaverage 

margin 

PRC-Wide Rate (which includes 

the Watanabe Group) ............. 258.21% 

Disclosure 

The Department will disclose these 

preliminary results to the parties within 

five days of the date of publication of 

this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 

351.224(b). 

Comments 

Interested parties are invited to 

comment on the preliminary results and 

may submit case briefs and/or written 

comments within 30 days of the date of 

publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 

351.309(c)(ii). Rebuttal briefs, limited to 

issues raised in the case briefs, will be 

due five days later, pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.309(d). Parties who submit case or 

rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are 

requested to submit with each argument 

(1) a statement of the issue, and (2) a 

brief summary of the argument. Parties 

are requested to provide a summary of 

the arguments not to exceed five pages 

and a table of statutes, regulations, and 

cases cited. Additionally, parties are 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 141 / Friday, July 24, 2009 / Notices 36667 

requested to provide their case brief and 

rebuttal briefs in electronic format (e.g., 

Microsoft Word, pdf, etc.). Interested 

parties, who wish to request a hearing 

or to participate 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: (1) The party’s 

name, address, and telephone number; 

(2) the number of participants; and (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 case and rebuttal briefs. The 

Department will issue the final results 

of this 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. 

Assessment Rates 

Upon issuance of the final results, the 

Department will determine, and CBP 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries covered by this 

review. The Department intends to issue 

assessment instructions to CBP 15 days 

after the publication date of the final 

results of this review. We will instruct 

CBP to liquidate the Watanabe Group’s 

appropriate entries at the PRC-wide rate 

of 258.21 percent. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of the notice of final results 

of the administrative review for all 

shipments of CLPP from the PRC 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the date of 

publication, as provided by section 

751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For 

previously reviewed or investigated 

companies not listed above that have 

separate rates, the cash-deposit rate will 

continue to be the company-specific rate 

published for the most recent period; (2) 

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 258.21 percent; and (3) for all 

non-PRC exporters of subject 

merchandise, the cash-deposit rate will 

be the rate applicable to the PRC 

exporter that supplied that non-PRC 

exporter. These deposit requirements, 

when imposed, shall remain in effect 

until further notice. 

Notification to Importers 

This notice serves as a preliminary 

reminder to importers of their 

responsibility under 19 CFR 

351.402(f)(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 notice 

are in accordance with sections 

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

CFR 351.221(b)(4). 

Dated: July 20, 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E9–17716 Filed 7–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

U.S. Travel and Tourism Advisory 

Board 

AGENCY: International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of an Opportunity To 

Apply for Membership on the U.S. 

Travel and Tourism Advisory Board. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

is currently seeking applications for 

membership on the U.S. Travel and 

Tourism Advisory Board (Board). The 

purpose of the Board is to advise the 

Secretary of Commerce on matters 

relating to the travel and tourism 

industry. 

ADDRESSES: Please submit application 

information to J. Marc Chittum, Office of 

Advisory Committees, U.S. Travel and 

Tourism Advisory Board Executive 

Secretariat, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, Room 4043, 1401 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230. 

DATES: All applications must be 

received by the Office of Advisory 

Committees by close of business on 

August 20, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. 

Marc Chittum, U.S. Travel and Tourism 

Advisory Board, Room 4043, 1401 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230, telephone: 202–482–4501, email: Marc.Chittum@mail.doc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office 

of Advisory Committees is accepting 

applications for Board members for the 

upcoming two-year charter term 

beginning September 2009. Members 

shall serve until the Board’s charter 

expires on September 20, 2011. 

Members will be selected, in accordance 

with applicable Department of 

Commerce guidelines, based on their 

ability to advise the Secretary of 

Commerce on matters relating to the 

U.S. travel and tourism industries, to act 

as a liaison among the stakeholders 

represented by the membership and to 

provide a forum for those stakeholders 

on current and emerging issues in the 

travel and tourism industry. Members of 

the Board shall be selected in a manner 

that ensures that the Board is balanced 

in terms of points of view, industry 

sector or subsector, range of products 

and services, demographics, geographic 

locations, and company size. Additional 

factors which may be considered in the 

selection of Board members include 

candidates’ proven experience in 

promoting, developing, and 

implementing advertising and 

marketing programs for travel-related or 

tourism-related industries; or the 

candidates’ proven abilities to manage 

tourism-related or other service-related 

organizations. 

Each Board member shall serve as the 

representative of a U.S. entity or U.S. 

organization in the travel and tourism 

sector. For the purposes of eligibility, a 

U.S. entity shall be defined as a firm 

incorporated in the United States (or an 

unincorporated firm with its principal 

place of business in the United States) 

that is controlled by U.S. citizens or by 

another U.S. entity. An entity is not a 

U.S. entity if 50 percent plus one share 

of its stock (if a corporation, or a similar 

ownership interest of an unincorporated 

entity) is controlled, directly or 

indirectly, by non-U.S. citizens or nonU.S. entities. For the purposes of 

eligibility, a U.S. organization shall be 

defined as an organization, including a 

trade association or government unit or 

body, established under the laws of the 

United States that is controlled by U.S. 

citizens or by another U.S. organization 

or entity, as determined based on board 

of directors (or comparable governing 

body), membership, and revenue 

sources. 

Priority may be given to a Chief 

Executive Officer or President (or 

comparable level of responsibility) of a 

U.S. organization or U.S. entity in the 

travel and tourism sector. Priority may 

also be given to individuals with 

international tourism marketing 

experience. 

Officers or employees of state and 

regional tourism marketing entities are 

eligible for consideration for Board 

membership as representatives of U.S. 

organizations. A state and regional 

tourism marketing entity may include, 

but is not limited to, state government 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES