[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 141 (Friday, July 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36662-36667]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17716]


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

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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value: Certain Lined Paper Products from the People's 
Republic of China; Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Lined 
Paper Products from India, Indonesia and the People's Republic of 
China; and Notice of Countervailing Duty Orders: Certain Lined Paper 
Products from India and Indonesia, 71 FR 56949 (September 28, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On 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 non-subject 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

[[Page 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 8\3/4\ 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

[[Page 36664]]

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 specially-developed 
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[supreg]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 2\3/8\ 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[supreg]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

[[Page 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{time} 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 PRC-wide 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.

[[Page 36666]]

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:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Weighted-
                    Producer/manufacturer                       average
                                                                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

[[Page 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