[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 195 (Friday, October 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62343-62349]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-26065]



[[Page 62343]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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, 2009, 
through August 31, 2010, we have preliminarily determined that Navneet 
Publications (India) Limited (Navneet) and Riddhi Enterprises (Riddhi) 
have made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value (NV).
    In addition, based on the preliminary results for the respondents 
selected for individual examination, we have preliminarily determined a 
margin for those companies that were not selected for individual 
examination. 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 assess antidumping duties on all 
appropriate entries of subject merchandise during the period of review 
(POR). See ``Preliminary Results of Review'' section of this notice. 
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results.

DATES: Effective Date: October 7, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Moore (Navneet) or George 
McMahon (Riddhi) 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) 482-1167, respectively.

Background

    On September 1, 2010, the Department issued a notice of opportunity 
to request an administrative review of this order for the POR of 
September 1, 2009, through August 31, 2010. See Antidumping or 
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; 
Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 75 FR 53635 (September 1, 
2010).
    Pursuant to a request from the Association of American School Paper 
Suppliers, (AASPS or petitioner), the Department published in the 
Federal Register the notice of initiation of this antidumping duty 
administrative review with respect to 35 companies,\1\ including 
Navneet and Riddhi, for the period September 1, 2009, through August 
31, 2010. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Administrative Reviews, 75 FR 66349 (October 28, 2010. (Initiation 
Notice).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Abhinav Paper Products Pvt. Ltd.; American Scholar, Inc. 
and/or I-Scholar; Ampoules & Vials Mfg. Co. Ltd.; AR Printing & 
Packaging (India) Pvt.; Bafna Exports; Cello International Pvt. Ltd. 
(M/S Cello Paper Products); Corporate Stationery Pvt. Ltd.; Creative 
Divya; D.D International; Exel India (Pvt.) Ltd.; Exmart 
International Pvt. Ltd.; Fatechand Mahendrakumar; FFI International; 
Freight India Logistics Pvt. Ltd.; International Greetings Pvt. 
Ltd.; Kejriwal Paper Ltd., and Kejriwal Exports; Lodha Offset 
Limited; Magic International Pvt Ltd.; Marigold ExIm Pvt. Ltd.; 
Marisa International; Navneet Publications (India) Ltd.; Orient 
Press Ltd.; Paperwise Inc.; Pioneer Stationery Pvt. Ltd.; Premier 
Exports; Rajvansh International; Riddhi Enterprises; SAB 
International; Sar Transport Systems; Seet Kamal International; 
Sonal Printers Pvt Ltd; Super Impex; Swati Growth Funds Ltd.; V & M; 
and Yash Laminates.
    \2\ In the Initiation Notice, the Department incorrectly spelled 
a company name for which the petitioner requested a review. 
Specifically, the Initiation Notice listed the requested company, 
``Exel India (Pvt.) Ltd.'' as ``Excel India (Pvt.) Ltd.'' We have 
corrected this typographical error in this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 9, 2010, 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 16, 2010, we received comments from AASPS. On December 
7, 2010, the Department selected Navneet and Riddhi as companies to be 
individually examined in this administrative review. 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 December 7, 2010.
    On December 8, 2010, the Department issued an antidumping 
questionnaire (original questionnaire) to Navneet and Riddhi with a 
response due date of January 14, 2011. After granting an extension to 
Navneet, the original questionnaire response was submitted on February 
10, 2011. On March 1, 2011, petitioner submitted deficiency comments 
regarding Navneet's February 10, 2011, questionnaire response. The 
Department issued several supplemental questionnaires to Navneet and 
the responses were received on April 28, 2011, July 28, 2011, and on 
September 9, 2011.
    With respect to Riddhi, we received the Sections A-C questionnaire 
response on February 6, 2011. The Department issued a Sections A-C 
supplemental questionnaire to Riddhi on March 7, 2011, and Riddhi's 
response was received on April 12, 2011. Petitioner submitted a sales 
below the cost of production (COP) allegation regarding Riddhi on May 
2, 2011. Based on the allegation submitted by petitioner, the 
Department determined that there are reasonable grounds to believe or 
suspect that Riddhi made sales of the subject merchandise in the third 
country market, Panama, at prices below its COP, pursuant to section 
773(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). On May 17, 
2011, the Department initiated a sales below the COP investigation with 
respect to Riddhi and issued a Section D questionnaire to Riddhi on May 
17, 2011. Riddhi responded to the Section D questionnaire on June 28, 
2011. The Department issued several supplemental questionnaires to 
Riddhi and we received timely responses from Riddhi.
    On May 27, 2011, the Department extended the time limit for the 
preliminary results. See Certain Lined Paper Products From India: 
Extension of Time Limit for the Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 76 FR 30908 (May 27, 2011).

Period of Review

    The POR is September 1, 2009, through August 31, 2010.

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 8\3/4\ inches to 15 inches 
(inclusive). Page dimensions are

[[Page 62344]]

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:
     Fly \TM\ lined paper products: A notebook, notebook 
organizer, loose or glued note paper, with papers that are printed with 
infrared reflective inks and readable only by a Fly \TM\ pen-top 
computer. The product must bear the valid trademark Fly \TM\ (products 
found to be bearing an invalidly licensed or used trademark are not 
excluded from the scope).
     Zwipes \TM\: A notebook or notebook organizer made with a 
blended polyolefin writing surface as the cover and pocket surfaces of 
the notebook, suitable for writing using a specially-developed 
permanent marker and erase system (known as a Zwipes \TM\ pen). This 
system allows the marker portion to mark the writing surface with a 
permanent ink. The eraser portion of the marker dispenses a solvent 
capable of solubilizing the permanent ink allowing the ink to be 
removed. The product must bear the valid trademark Zwipes \TM\ 
(products found to be bearing an invalidly licensed or used trademark 
are not excluded from the scope).
     FiveStar[supreg]Advance \TM\: A notebook or notebook 
organizer bound by a continuous spiral, or helical, wire and with 
plastic front and rear covers made of a blended polyolefin plastic 
material joined by 300 denier polyester, coated on the backside with 
PVC (poly vinyl chloride) coating, and extending the entire length of 
the spiral or helical wire. The polyolefin plastic covers are of 
specific thickness; front cover is 0.019 inches (within normal 
manufacturing tolerances) and rear cover is 0.028 inches (within normal 
manufacturing tolerances). Integral with the stitching that attaches 
the polyester spine covering, is captured both ends of a 1'' wide 
elastic fabric band. This band is located 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]Advance \TM\ (products found to be bearing an invalidly 
licensed or used trademark are not excluded from the scope).
     FiveStar Flex \TM\: 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 Flex \TM\ (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 4811.90.9035, 4811.90.9080, 4820.30.0040, 4810.22.5044, 
4811.90.9050, 4811.90.9090, 4820.10.2010, 4820.10.2020,

[[Page 62345]]

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).\3\ The HTSUS headings are provided for convenience and customs 
purposes; however, the written description of the scope of the order is 
dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Based on requests from National Import Specialist, A. Gamble 
of CBP, the Department added headings 4811.90.9035, 4811.90.9080, 
4820.30.0040 to the scope of this review. See Memorandum from Gayle 
Longest, Case Analyst, through James Terpstra to the File, dated 
July 6, 2011 and July 11, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Product Comparisons

    In accordance with section 771(16) of 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. Because Riddhi did not have home 
market sales of subject merchandise during the POR, all products 
produced by Riddhi covered by the description in the ``Scope of the 
Order'' section above and sold in Panama 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 (or the third country 
market reported by Riddhi) 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 and Riddhi to the 
United States were made at less than NV, we compared Export Price (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 Riddhi, 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 CLPP from 
India CVD segment \4\ to which the respondent was subject, in 
accordance with section 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ For the most recently completed CVD segment for Navneet, see 
Certain Lined Paper Products from India: Notice of Preliminary 
Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 73 FR 58121 at 
58124-58125 (October 6, 2008), unchanged in the Final Results, 74 FR 
6573 (February 10, 2009). For the most recently completed CVD 
segment for Riddhi, see Notice of Final Affirmative Countervailing 
Duty Determination and Final Negative Critical Circumstances 
Determination: Certain Lined Paper Products from India, 71 FR 45034, 
45035 (August 8, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Normal Value

A. 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 Riddhi'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.
    Riddhi reported that it ``does not have any sales of the foreign 
like product in the home market.'' See Riddhi's Section A questionnaire 
response (Sec. AQR), dated February 6, 2011, at page A-4 and Exhibit A-
1. Riddhi reported the quantity and value of sales of foreign like 
product made to its three largest third country markets; Panama, 
Nicaragua, and Venezuela. Id. Based on this data, we find that Riddhi's 
third country sales to Panama meet the Department's five percent 
threshold for viability because its sales of the foreign like product 
are of sufficient quantity to form the basis of normal value. See 19 
CFR 351.404(b)(2). In selecting a third country market, the Department 
also considers whether ``the foreign like product exported to a 
particular third country is more similar to the subject merchandise 
exported to the United States than is the foreign like product exported 
to other third countries.'' See 19 CFR 351.404(e)(1). Riddhi reported 
that, among its three largest third country markets, Riddhi's sales of 
products also exported to the United States are highest to Panama. Id. 
at A-5. Based on the Department's examination of the sales data and 
Riddhi's reporting we find that, among the three third countries 
reported, Riddhi's third country sales to Panama are the most 
comparable to its sales to the United States. The Department also 
examines whether ``{t{time} he volume of sales to a particular third 
country is larger than the volume of sales to other third countries.'' 
See 19 CFR 351.404(e)(2). Riddhi reported that Panama represents 
Riddhi's largest third country market. See Riddhi's Sec. AQR, dated 
February 6, 2011, at page A-4. Based on the product comparability and 
the viability of Riddhi's sales in Panama, we find that Panama is an 
appropriate third country market to form the basis for the Department's 
calculation of NV.
    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. The Department has examined Riddhi's 
reported third country sales quantity and volume and preliminarily 
finds that Riddhi has satisfied the aforementioned criteria.

[[Page 62346]]

Therefore, we have used Riddhi's third country sales to Panama as the 
basis for calculating NV, in accordance with section 773(a)(4) of the 
Act.

B. Cost of Production Analysis

    In regard to Navneet, because the Department disregarded below cost 
sales in the most recently completed segment of the proceeding in which 
Navneet participated,\5\ we had reasonable grounds to believe or 
suspect that home market sales of the foreign like product by the 
respondents were made at prices below the COP during the POR, in 
accordance with section 773(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act. Therefore, we 
required Navneet to submit a response to Section D of the Department's 
questionnaire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Certain Lined Paper Products from India: Notice of Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 7563 
(February 22, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to Riddhi, the Department initiated a sales-below-cost 
of production investigation based on petitioner's sales-below-cost of 
production allegation.
1. Calculation of COP
    In accordance with section 773(b)(3) of the Act, we calculated a 
weighted-average COP by model based on the sum of the cost of materials 
and fabrication for the foreign like product, plus amounts for general 
and administrative expenses (G&A). We relied on the COP data submitted 
by both Navneet and Riddhi except the following adjustments. For these 
preliminary results, we 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. See Preliminary Calculation Memorandum 
for Navneet, dated September 30, 2011.
    Consistent with the Department's methodology in the Third 
Administrative Review,\6\ for Navneet, we calculated the COP and 
constructed value (CV) of all control numbers (CONNUMs) sold in the 
home market to exclude the central excise tax on raw material inputs. 
See Preliminary Results.\7\ We have made no adjustments to Riddhi's 
reported costs for these preliminary results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Certain Lined Paper Products From India: Notice of Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Partial 
Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 10876 
(February 28, 2011) (Third Administrative Review).
    \7\ See Certain Lined Paper Products From India: Notice of 
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 
64988, 64992 (October 21, 2010) (Preliminary Results), unchanged in 
the final results of the Third Administrative Review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the review of record evidence, Riddhi and Navneet did not 
appear to experience significant changes in cost of materials (COM) 
during the POR. Therefore, for both Navneet and Riddhi, we followed our 
normal methodology of calculating an annual weighted-average cost.
2. Test of Comparison Market Prices
    As required under section 773(b)(2) of the Act, we compared the 
weighted-average COP for the respondents to their home market (or third 
country market) sales prices of the foreign like product, as required 
under section 773(b) of the Act, to determine whether these sales had 
been made at prices below the COP within an extended period of time 
(i.e., normally a period of one year) in substantial quantities and 
whether such prices were sufficient to permit the recovery of all costs 
within a reasonable period of time. On a model-specific basis, we 
compared the COP to the home market (or third country) prices, less any 
applicable movement charges, discounts, rebates, and direct and 
indirect selling expenses.
3. Results of COP Test
    We disregard below-cost sales where: (1) 20 percent or more of the 
respondent's sales of a given product during the POR were made at 
prices below the COP in accordance with sections 773(b)(2)(B) and (C) 
of the Act; and (2) based on comparisons of price to weighted-average 
COPs for the POR, we determine that the below-cost sales of the product 
were at prices that would not permit recovery of all costs within a 
reasonable time period, in accordance with section 773(b)(2)(D) of the 
Act. We found that Navneet and Riddhi made sales below cost and we 
disregarded such sales where appropriate. See Preliminary Calculation 
Memorandum for Navneet, and Preliminary Calculation Memorandum for 
Riddhi, both dated September 30, 2011.

C. Calculation of Normal Value Based on Comparison Market Prices

    For Navneet, we based home market prices on packed prices to 
unaffiliated purchasers in India. For Riddhi, we based third country 
market prices on packed prices to unaffiliated purchasers in Riddhi's 
third country market, Panama. 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 made deductions from 
the starting price, when appropriate, for discounts and rebates. 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. We 
also deducted home market movement expenses pursuant to section 
773(a)(6)(B) of the Act. 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). 
Specifically, we made adjustments to normal value for comparison to 
Navneet and Riddhi's EP transactions by deducting direct selling 
expenses incurred for home market sales (i.e., credit expenses) and 
adding U.S. direct selling expenses (i.e., credit expenses) and U.S. 
commissions. See section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act, and 19 CFR 
351.410(c). We also made adjustments for Navneet and Riddhi, in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.410(e), for indirect selling expenses 
incurred in the home market or the United States where commissions were 
granted on sales in one market but not in the other, i.e., the 
``commission offset.'' Specifically, where commissions are incurred in 
one market, but not in the other, we will limit the amount of such 
allowance to the amount of either the selling expenses incurred in the 
one market or the commissions allowed in the other market, whichever is 
less.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 19 CFR 351.410(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    When comparing U.S. sales with comparison market sales of similar, 
but not identical, merchandise, we also made adjustments for physical 
differences in the merchandise in accordance with section 
773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.411. We based this 
adjustment on the difference in the VCOM for the foreign like product 
and subject merchandise, using weighted-average costs.
    Finally, consistent with section 773(a)(6)(B)(iii) of the Act, with 
respect to Navneet, 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 sold in India. See Navneet's questionnaire response dated 
February 10, 2011, at page B-50. In addition, the excise tax that 
Navneet paid on inputs into school supplies was not refunded and was 
not otherwise recovered by Navneet. Id. See also Preliminary Results, 
75 FR at 64992, unchanged in the final results of the Third 
Administrative Review. Therefore,

[[Page 62347]]

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. See Preliminary Calculation 
Memorandum for Navneet, dated September 30, 2011.

D. 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(c)(2), 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's-
length) 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
    Navneet has identified eight channels of distribution.\9\ Seven 
channels are in the home market (HM): (1) Full service Navneet brand 
distributor, (2) limited service Boss brand, (3) chain store ``key-
account,'' (4) institutional end-users who purchase materials for their 
own use; (5) schools that purchase customized products for their own 
use and for reselling to students, (6) full service Navneet brand 
directed to super stockists who then sell to distributors; and (7) 
limited service Boss brand directed to super stockists who then sell to 
distributors. One channel of distribution exists for the U.S. market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ We note that Navneet refers to channel 6 as ``sales to the 
U.S. market'' and channel 7 as ``Boss brand sales directed to super 
stockists'' in the home market. See Navneet questionnaire response, 
dated February 10, 2011, at page A-11. However, for purposes of 
discussion in this notice, we changed the numbers to sequential 
order in the home market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Only two of Navneet's distribution channels are full service 
channels. In channel 1 (distributors with full-service merchandising) 
Navneet claims that it designs and produces products on its own 
account; maintains the products in regional and C&F warehouses 
nationwide; delivers products to distributors from local warehouses and 
issues invoices to distributors; and actively participates in 
advertising at the retail and consumer levels. See Navneet 
questionnaire response, dated February 10, 2011, at page A-14. In 
channel 6 (full service Navneet brand directed to super stockists who 
then sell to distributors) Navneet states that it designs and produces 
products on its own account; sells to super stockists, which maintains 
the products in its own warehouse; and actively participates in 
advertising at the retail and consumer levels. As a result, the levels 
of selling activities for channels 1 and 6 in the home market are at a 
different level of intensity than the levels of selling activities in 
the other channels of distribution in the home market. Thus, we find 
that the home market channels of distribution constitute two LOTs: (1) 
LOT1, which consists of channels 1 and 6, and (2) a combined LOT2, 
which consists of channels 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7, as reported by Navneet in 
its database. See Exhibit A.6.
    In the U.S. market, Navneet made only EP sales of the subject 
merchandise. There was one channel of distribution for U.S. sales, 
importers/distributors, who distribute the products to retailers. 
Navneet produces products for the U.S. market to order, and ships them 
directly from the factory to the port for export, without being held in 
an intermediate warehouse. After shipment, Navneet has no further 
involvement in the sale. All marketing, selling and distribution 
activities are carried out by the importers/distributors for the U.S. 
market. See id. at A-23 through A-25, and Exhibit A.6. The selling 
activities that Navneet performs for its U.S. customers are business 
proprietary information. See id. at Exhibit A.6.
    Based on our analysis of the selling activities in the home market 
and in the U.S. market, we find that Navneet's HM sales in LOT2 are at 
the same stage of marketing as the U.S. sales. Therefore, we have 
compared U.S. sales to Navneet's reported LOT2 sales in its HM sales 
database.
Riddhi
    Riddhi reports that it has only one channel of distribution and one 
LOT in the third country market, Panama. Riddhi sold to one customer 
category, trading companies, in Panama. Riddhi reports that it performs 
the following selling functions for its sales to Panama: Packing, order 
input/processing, direct sales personnel, rebates, pays commissions, 
and provides freight and delivery. See Riddhi's Sec. AQR, dated 
February 6, 2011, at Exhibit A-5.
    In the U.S. market, Riddhi reports that its sales were made through 
one channel of distribution and one LOT. Riddhi sold to one customer 
category, trading companies, in the United States. Riddhi does not 
claim any level of trade adjustment and the petitioner has not claimed 
that multiple levels of trade existed for Riddhi. See Riddhi's Section 
B and C questionnaire responses, dated February 6, 2011, at pages B-30 
and C-28. Riddhi reports that it performs the following selling 
functions for its sales to the United States: Packing, order input/
processing, direct sales personnel, provides cash discounts, pays 
commissions, and provides freight and delivery. See Riddhi's Sec. AQR, 
dated February 6, 2011, at Exhibit A-5. Riddhi reports that it performs 
the same selling functions for all of its U.S. customers, with the 
exception of one customer that has its containers filled at the Indian 
port rather than Riddhi's factory. See id. at Exhibits A-17, A-18. For 
more details, see Preliminary Calculation Memorandum for Riddhi, dated 
September 30, 2011.
    Based on our analysis of the selling activities in the home market 
and in the U.S. market, we find that that there is one single level of 
trade for all sales in both the third country market and the U.S. 
market. Therefore, no basis exists for a level of trade adjustment.

E. Date of Sale

    The Department normally uses the date of invoice as the date of 
sale. However, the Department may use a date other than the date of 
invoice (e.g., the date of contract in the case of a long-term 
contract) if satisfied that a different date better reflects the date 
on which the exporter or producer establishes the material terms of 
sale (e.g., price, quantity). See 19 CFR 351.401(i) of the regulations. 
For Navneet, based on the information on the record and consistent with 
the prior review, we preliminarily find that the purchase order date 
better reflects the date on which the exporter or producer established 
the material terms of sale for Navneet's U.S. sales. See Navneet's Sec.

[[Page 62348]]

AQR, at page A-31. We have relied on invoice date as the date of sale 
for Navneet's home market, as this represents the date in which the 
material terms of sale are finalized.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Certain Lined Paper Products from India: Notice of 
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 7563 
(February 22, 2010), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum 
at Comment 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Riddhi reports ``both for U.S. market and third country market 
sales, there are no further changes to the agreed price and quantity 
once the commercial invoice is issued. Hence, the commercial invoice 
date sets out the final terms of sale.'' \11\ Accordingly, we have 
relied on invoice date as the sale date for both the U.S. market and 
Riddhi's third country market, Panama.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Riddhi's Sec. AQR at page A-23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Currency Conversion
    For purposes of these preliminary results, we made currency 
conversions in accordance with section 773A(a) of the Act, based on the 
official exchange rates published by the Federal Reserve Bank. See 
Preliminary Calculation Memorandum for Navneet, and Preliminary 
Calculation Memorandum for Riddhi, both dates September 30, 2011.
Preliminary Results of the Review
    As a result of our review, we preliminarily determine that 
weighted-average dumping margins exist for the following respondents 
for the period September 1, 2009, through August 31, 2010:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Weighted
                                                                average
                    Manufacturer/exporter                       margin
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Navneet Publications (India) Ltd............................        2.65
Riddhi Enterprises, Ltd.....................................        3.58
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Review-Specific Average Rate \12\ Applicable to the 33 Non-Selected 
Companies Subject to This Review:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ This rate is a weighted-average percentage margin 
(calculated based on the publicly ranged U.S. quantities of the two 
reviewed companies with an affirmative dumping margin) for the 
period September 1, 2009, through August 31, 2010. See Memorandum to 
the File, titled, ``Certain Lined Paper Products from India: Margin 
for Respondents Not Selected for Individual Examination,'' from 
George McMahon and Stephanie Moore, Case Analysts, through James 
Terpstra, Program Manager, dated September 30, 2011.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Weighted
                                                                average
                    Manufacturer/Exporter                       margin
                                                               (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abhinav Paper Products Pvt. Ltd.............................        3.02
American Scholar, Inc. and/or I-Scholar.....................        3.02
Ampoules & Vials Mfg. Co. Ltd...............................        3.02
AR Printing & Packaging (India) Pvt.........................        3.02
Bafna Exports...............................................        3.02
Cello International Pvt. Ltd. (M/S Cello Paper Products)....        3.02
Corporate Stationary Pvt. Ltd...............................        3.02
Creative Divya..............................................        3.02
D.D International...........................................        3.02
Exel India (Pvt.) Ltd.......................................        3.02
Exmart International Pvt. Ltd...............................        3.02
Fatechand Mahendrakumar.....................................        3.02
FFI International...........................................        3.02
Freight India Logistics Pvt. Ltd............................        3.02
International Greetings Pvt. Ltd............................        3.02
Kejriwal Paper Ltd., and Kejriwal Exports...................        3.02
Lodha Offset Limited........................................        3.02
Magic International.........................................        3.02
Marigold ExIm Pvt. Ltd......................................        3.02
Marisa International........................................        3.02
Orient Press Ltd............................................        3.02
Paperwise Inc...............................................        3.02
Pioneer Stationery Pvt. Ltd.................................        3.02
Premier Exports.............................................        3.02
Rajvansh International......................................        3.02
SAB International...........................................        3.02
Sar Transport Systems.......................................        3.02
Seet Kamal International....................................        3.02
Super Impex.................................................        3.02
Sonal Printers Pvt Ltd......................................        3.02
Swati Growth Funds Ltd......................................        3.02
V & M.......................................................        3.02
Yash Laminates..............................................        3.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Comment
    The Department intends to disclose calculations performed for these 
preliminary results 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 cd-rom. 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. 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 importer-specific 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

[[Page 62349]]

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 rates for Navneet and Riddhi, we 
divided their total dumping margins by the total net value of each of 
their sales during the review period. For the companies which were not 
selected for individual review, we have calculated a cash deposit 
weighted-average rate based on the publicly ranged U.S. quantities of 
Navneet's and Riddhi's affirmative dumping margins for the period 
September 1, 2009, through August 31, 2010.
    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 all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation. See 
Lined Paper Orders.\13\ These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, 
shall remain in effect until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 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) 
(Lined Paper Orders).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 and/or countervailing 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 and/or countervailing 
duties occurred and the subsequent increase in antidumping duties by 
the amount of antidumping and/or countervailing duties reimbursed. 
These preliminary results of administrative review are issued and 
published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the 
Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

    Dated: September 30, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-26065 Filed 10-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P