FR Doc E7-21710

[Federal Register: November 5, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 213)]
[Notices]
[Page 62430-62435]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05no07-20]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-428-840, A-580-860, A-570-920]

Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations:
Lightweight Thermal Paper from Germany, the Republic of Korea, and the
People's Republic of China

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 5, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dmitry Vladimirov at (202) 482-0665
(Republic of Korea), Blanche Ziv at (202) 482-4207 or Hallie Zink at
(202) 482-6907 (People's Republic of China), Victoria Cho at (202) 482-
5075 or Christopher Hargett at (202) 482-4161 (Germany), Import
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14\th\ Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC
20230.

INITIATION OF INVESTIGATION

The Petition

On September 19, 2007, the Department of Commerce (Department)
received an antidumping petition concerning lightweight thermal paper
from Germany, the Republic of Korea (Korea), and the People's Republic
of China (PRC), filed by Appleton Papers, Inc. (the petitioner) on
behalf of the domestic industry producing

[[Page 62431]]

lightweight thermal paper. See Antidumping Duty Petition on Lightweight
Thermal Paper from Germany, the Republic of Korea, and the People's
Republic of China and Countervailing Duty Petition on Lightweight
Thermal Paper from the People's Republic of China (September 19, 2007)
(Petition).
The petitioner is a domestic producer of lightweight thermal paper
(LWTP). On September 24, 2007, the Department issued a request for
additional information and clarification of certain areas of the
Petition. On September 28, 2007, in response to the Department's
request, the petitioner filed a supplement to the Petition. See
Lightweight Thermal Paper from Germany, the Republic of Korea, and the
People's Republic of China; Petitioner's Response to the Department's
September 24, 2007 Request for Clarification of Certain Items Contained
in the Petition (September 28, 2007) (Supplement to the Petition).
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (the Act), the petitioner alleges that imports of LWTP from
Germany, Korea, and the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the
United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 731
of the Act and that such imports are materially injuring, or
threatening material injury to, an industry in the United States. The
petitioner also alleges that sales of LWTP from Germany and Korea have
been made at prices below the cost of production (COP).
The Department finds that the petitioner filed this Petition on
behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as
defined in section 771(9)(C) of the Act and has demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the initiation of the antidumping duty
investigations that the petitioner is requesting. See the
``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition'' section below.

Period of Investigation

Because the Petition was filed on September 19, 2007, the
anticipated period of investigation (POI) for Germany and Korea is July
1, 2006, through June 30, 2007. The anticipated POI for the PRC is
January 1, 2007, through June 30, 2007. See 19 CFR 351.204(b).

Scope of the Investigations

The merchandise covered by each of these investigations includes
certain lightweight thermal paper, which is thermal paper with a basis
weight of 70 grams per square meter (g/m\2\) (with a tolerance of
4.0 g/m\2\) or less; irrespective of dimensions;\1\ with
or without a base coat\2\ on one or both sides; with thermal active
coating(s)\3\ on one or both sides that is a mixture of the dye and the
developer that react and form an image when heat is applied; with or
without a top coat;\4\ and without an adhesive backing. Certain
lightweight thermal paper is typically (but not exclusively) used in
point-of-sale applications such as ATM receipts, credit card receipts,
gas pump receipts, and retail store receipts. The merchandise subject
to these investigations may be classified in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under subheadings 4811.90.8040
and 4811.90.9090.\5\ Although HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope
of these investigations are dispositive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ LWTP is typically produced in jumbo rolls that are slit to
the specifications of the converting equipment and then converted
into finished slit rolls. Both jumbo rolls and converted rolls (as
well as LWTP in any other forms, presentations, or dimensions) are
covered by the scope of these investigations.
\2\ A base coat, when applied, is typically made of clay and/or
latex and like materials and is intended to cover the rough surface
of the paper substrate and to provide insulating value.
\3\ A thermal active coating is typically made of sensitizer,
dye, and co-reactant.
\4\ A top coat, when applied, is typically made of polyvinyl
acetone, polyvinyl alcohol, and/or like materials and is intended to
provide environmental protection, an improved surface for press
printing, and/or wear protection for the thermal print head.
\5\ HTSUS subheading 4811.90.8000 was a classification used for
LWTP until January 1, 2007. Effective that date, subheading
4811.90.8000 was replaced with 4811.90.8020 (for gift wrap, a non-
subject product) and 4811.90.8040 (for ``other,'' including LWTP).
HTSUS subheading 4811.90.9000 was a classification for LWTP until
July 1, 2005. Effective that date, subheading 4811.90.9000 was
replaced with 4811.90.9010 (for tissue paper, a non-subject product)
and 4811.90.9090 (for ``other,'' including LWTP). Petitioner
indicated that, from time to time, LWTP also may have been entered
under HTSUS subheading 3703.90, HTSUS heading 4805, and perhaps
other subheadings of the HTSUS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments on Scope of Investigations

We are setting aside a period for interested parties to raise
issues regarding product coverage. See, e.g., Antidumping Duties;
Countervailing Duties; Final Rule, 62 FR 27296, 27323 (May 19, 1997).
The Department encourages all interested parties to submit such
comments within 20 calendar days of signature of this notice. Comments
should be addressed to Import Administration's Central Records Unit
(CRU), Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. The period of scope
consultations is intended to provide the Department with ample
opportunity to consider all comments and to consult with parties prior
to the issuance of the preliminary determinations.

Determination of Industry Support for the Petition

Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed by
or on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department
shall: (i) poll the industry or rely on other information in order to
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by
subparagraph (A), or (ii) determine industry support using a
statistically valid sampling method.
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the
domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which
is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic industry'' has
been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like
product in order to define the industry. While both the Department and
the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic
like product (section 771(10) of the Act), they do so for different
purposes and pursuant to a separate and distinct authority. In
addition, the Department's determination is subject to limitations of
time and information. Although this may result in different definitions
of the like product, such differences do not render the decision of
either agency contrary to law. See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F.
Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 2001), citing Algoma Steel Corp. Ltd. v. United
States, 688 F. Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir.
1989), cert. denied 492 U.S. 919 (1989).
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a
product which is like, or in the absence of like,

[[Page 62432]]

most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to
an investigation under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from
which the domestic like product analysis begins is ``the article
subject to an investigation,'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise
to be investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the
petition).
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not
offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of
the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted
on the record, we have determined that lightweight thermal paper, both
jumbo rolls and converted slit rolls, constitute a single domestic like
product, which is defined further in the ``Scope of the
Investigations'' section above, and we have analyzed industry support
in terms of that domestic like product. For a discussion of the
domestic like product analysis in this case, see the Antidumping Duty
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Lightweight Thermal Paper from
Germany (Germany Initiation Checklist) at Attachment II, Antidumping
Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Lightweight Thermal Paper from
Korea (Korea Initiation Checklist) at Attachment II, and the
Antidumping Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Lightweight
Thermal Paper from the People's Republic of China (PRC Initiation
Checklist) at Attachment II, on file in the CRU, Room B-099 of the main
Department of Commerce building.
On October 9, 2007, the Department extended the initiation deadline
by 20 days to poll the domestic industry in accordance with section
702(c)(4)D) of the Act, because it was ``not clear from the petitions
whether the industry support criteria have been met...'' See Notice of
Extension of the Deadline for Determining the Adequacy of the
Antidumping Duty Petitions: Lightweight Thermal Paper from Germany, the
Republic of Korea, and the People's Republic of China; and the
Countervailing Duty Petition: Lightweight Thermal Paper from the
People's Republic of China, 72 FR 58639 (October 16, 2007).
On October 12 and 15, 2007, we issued polling questionnaires to all
known producers of jumbo rolls and converted slit rolls of lightweight
thermal paper identified in the petitions, submissions from other
interested parties, and by the ITC. The questionnaires are on file in
the CRU in room B-099 of the main Department of Commerce building. We
requested that each company complete the polling questionnaire and
certify their responses by faxing their responses to the Department by
the due date. For a detailed discussion of the responses received see
the Germany Initiation Checklist, Korea Initiation Checklist, and PRC
Initiation Checklist (collectively, ``Initiation Checklists'') at
Attachment II.
Our analysis of the data indicates that the domestic producers of
lightweight thermal paper who support the petitions account for at
least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product
and more than 50 percent of the production (by quantity and U.S. dollar
sales value) of the domestic like product produced by that portion of
the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petitions.
See Initiation Checklists at Attachment II. Accordingly, the Department
determines that the industry support requirements of section
732(c)(4)(A) of the Act have been met. Therefore, the Department
determines that the petitioner filed these petitions on behalf of the
domestic industry because it is an interested party as defined in
section 771(9)(C) of the Act and it has demonstrated sufficient
industry support with respect to the antidumping investigations that it
is requesting the Department initiate. See Initiation Checklists at
Attachment II.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

The petitioner alleges that the U.S. industry producing the
domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened
with material injury, by reason of the individual and cumulated imports
of the subject merchandise sold at less than normal value (NV). The
petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is
illustrated by reduced market share, increased inventories, lost sales,
reduced production, reduced capacity and capacity utilization rate,
reduced shipments, underselling and price depression or suppression,
lost revenue, and a decline in financial performance. We have assessed
the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury and
causation, and we have determined that these allegations are properly
supported by adequate evidence and meet the statutory requirements for
initiation. See Initiation Checklists at Attachment III (Injury).

Allegations of Sales at Less Than Fair Value

The following is a description of the allegations of sales at less
than fair value upon which the Department based its decision to
initiate these investigations on imports of LWTP from Germany, Korea,
and the PRC. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments
relating to the U.S. price as well as NV for Germany and Korea are
discussed in greater detail in the Initiation Checklists. We corrected
certain information in the petitioner's margin calculations for the
PRC. The corrections are provided in detail in the PRC Initiation
Checklist. Should the need arise to use any of this information as
facts available under section 776 of the Act in our preliminary or
final determinations, we will re-examine the information and revise the
margin calculations, if appropriate.

Alleged U.S. Price and Normal Value: Germany

The petitioner calculated export price (EP) using information from
Koehler and Mitsubishi Hi-Tec, two manufacturers of LWTP in Germany.
The price data are based on the same products used as the basis for the
cost model, as well as the basis for NV. The petitioner's calculation
of EP starts with the gross price. The petitioner then calculated net
price by deducting the amount for U.S. inland freight, ocean freight
and insurance to arrive at an ex-factory price. See Petition Volume III
at 9 and Exhibits 12, 13, 14, and 15. The petitioner did not deduct
foreign inland freight because the manufacturer's plants are located
near waterways in Germany. However, the petitioner estimated U.S.
inland freight charges by using freight charges from the most likely
port of entry to the respective delivery points. See Petition, Volume
III at Exhibit 15.

Normal Value: Germany

The petitioner was able to determine domestic German prices for
LWTP by obtaining pricing data for Mitsubishi Hitec, through a market
researcher. See memorandum entitled, ``Telephone Call to Market
Research Firm Regarding the Antidumping Petition on Lightweight Thermal
Paper (LWTP) from Germany,'' dated October 5, 2007. The petitioner
deducted freight and other appropriate items from the gross price to
obtain the NV. See Germany Petition, Volume III at page 2 and Exhibits
2-4. The petitioner then converted the Euro per metric ton (MT) amount
to U.S. dollar per MT amount by applying the POI exchange rate.

Cost of Production: Germany

[[Page 62433]]

section 773(b) of the Act, and requested that the Department conduct a
sales-below-cost investigation. Pursuant to section 773(b)(3) of the
Act, COP consists of the cost of manufacturing (COM); selling, general
and administrative (SG&A) expenses; financial expenses; and packing
expenses. The petitioner calculated COM and packing expenses using
input quantities based on the production experience of a U.S. LWTP
manufacturer during the POI, multiplied by the costs incurred to
manufacture LWTP in Germany using publicly available data. To calculate
average factory overhead, SG&A and financial expense rates, petitioner
relied on the 2006 financial statements of Koehler Holding GmbH & Co.,
KG.
Based upon a comparison of the prices of the foreign-like product
in the home market to the calculated COP of the product, we find
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like
product were made below the COP, within the meaning of section
773(b)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. Accordingly, the Department is initiating a
country-wide cost investigation. If we determine during the course of
the investigation that the home market (i.e., Germany) is not viable,
our initiation of a country-wide cost investigation with respect to
sales in Germany will be rendered moot. See Germany Initiation
Checklist.

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value: Germany

Pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, the
petitioner calculated NV based on constructed value (CV). The
petitioner calculated CV using the same average COM, SG&A, financial
and packing figures used to compute the COP. The petitioner then added
profit based on the profit rate calculated based on the 2006 financial
statements of Koehler Holding GmbH & Co., KG. See Germany Initiation
Checklist.

Alleged U.S. Price and Normal Value: Korea

The petitioner calculated export price using pricing data in the
United States provided by a Korean manufacturer of the subject
merchandise. The petitioner adjusted U.S. prices for international
freight and insurance and U.S. inland freight. See Petition, Volume IV
at pages 8-9.

Normal Value: Korea

The petitioner was able to determine domestic Korean prices for
lightweight thermal paper by obtaining pricing data, through an
economic consultant, from a Korean manufacturer of lightweight thermal
paper. See Memorandum entitled, ``Telephone Call to Market Research
Firm Regarding the Antidumping Petition on Lightweight Thermal Paper
from Korea,'' dated October 1, 2007. The pricing data did not identify
specific sales and payment terms associated with it. The petitioner
claims that a Korean manufacturer made it known to an economic
consultant that, with one exception, all pricing data are on a
delivered basis. The petitioner did not make an adjustment to home-
market price for foreign inland freight because it did not make a
similar adjustment to U.S. price. See Petition, Volume IV at pages 2-3.

Cost of Production: Korea

The petitioner has provided information demonstrating reasonable
grounds to believe or suspect that sales of thermal paper in the home
market were made at prices below the fully absorbed COP, within the
meaning of section 773(b) of the Act, and requested that the Department
conduct a sales-below-cost investigation. Pursuant to section 773(b)(3)
of the Act, COP consists of the COM, SG&A expenses, financial expenses,
and packing expenses. The petitioner calculated COM and packing
expenses using input quantities based on the production experience of a
U.S. LWTP producer during the POI, multiplied by the costs incurred to
manufacture LWTP in Korea using publicly available data. To calculate
average factory overhead, SG&A, and financial expense rates, the
petitioner relied on the most current financial statements of Hansol, a
thermal paper producer in Korea.
Based upon a comparison of the prices of the foreign-like product
in the home market to the calculated COP of the product, we find
reasonable grounds to believe or suspect that sales of the foreign like
product were made below the COP, within the meaning of section
773(b)(2)(A)(I) of the Act. Accordingly, the Department is initiating a
country-wide cost investigation. See Korea Initiation Checklist.

Normal Value Based on Constructed Value: Korea

Pursuant to sections 773(a)(4), 773(b) and 773(e) of the Act, the
petitioner calculated NV based on CV. The petitioner calculated CV
using the same average COM, SG&A, financial and packing figures used to
compute the COP. The petitioner did not include profit because Hansol
incurred a loss during 2006. See Korea Initiation Checklist.

Alleged U.S. Price and Normal Value: The People's Republic of China

The petitioner calculated EP based upon an affidavit describing an
actual offer for sale to the U.S. market of converted jumbo rolls from
Shanghai Hanhong Paper Co., Ltd. (Hanhong), a non-integrated converter
of jumbo rolls in the PRC. The petitioner then demonstrated, using Port
Import Export Reporting Service (PIERS) data, that the overwhelming
percentage of the imports of subject LWTP into the United States from
the PRC were made by Hanhong. The petitioner notes that while
approximately half of all shipments reported in the PIERS data set do
not identify the producer or exporter of the merchandise, of the data
set observations that do identify the exporters, almost 97 percent of
such shipments were made by Hanhong. See Petition, Volume II at pages 4
and 8 and Exhibits 3, 10 and 11. See also Supplement to the Petition at
page 3 and Exhibit 3. The petitioner adjusted the U.S. price to account
for foreign brokerage and handling charges on a free on board (FOB)
basis. The Department valued brokerage and handling charges using two
sources: (1) data from the January 9, 2006, public version of the
Section C questionnaire response from Kejriwal Paper Ltd.
(Kejriwal);\6\ and (2) data from Agro Dutch Industries Ltd. for the
period of review February 1, 2004, through January 31, 2005 (see
Certain Preserved Mushrooms From India: Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR 37757 (June 30, 2005). The Department
used a simple average of the data adjusted for inflation. See PRC
Initiation Checklist. The petitioner did not adjust export price for
foreign inland freight charges because it could not determine the
distance between Hanhong's mill and the port of exit delivery location.
See PRC AD Petition at page 8 and Exhibits II-11 and 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ Kejriwal was a respondent in the certain lined paper
products from India investigation for which the period of
investigation was July 1, 2004, to June 30, 2005. See Notice of
Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value,
Postponement of Final Determination, and Affirmative Preliminary
Determination of Critical Circumstances in Part: Certain Lined Paper
Products From India, 71 FR 19706 (April 17, 2006) (unchanged in
final determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Because the Department considers the PRC to be a non-market economy
(NME) country, the petitioner constructed NV based on the factors-of-
production methodology pursuant to section 773(c) of the Act. Recently,
the Department examined the PRC's market status and determined that NME
status should continue for the PRC. See

[[Page 62434]]

Memorandum from the Office of Policy to David M. Spooner, Assistant
Secretary for Import Administration, Regarding the People's Republic of
China Status as a Non-Market Economy, dated August 30, 2006. This
document is available on-line at: < http://ia.ita.doc.gov/download/prc-nme-status/prc-lined-paper-memo-08302006.pdf
>. In addition, in two

recent investigations, the Department also determined that the PRC is
an NME country. See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value: Certain Activated Carbon from the People's Republic of China, 72
FR 9508 (March 2, 2007), and Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of Critical
Circumstances: Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's
Republic of China, 72 FR 19690 (April 19, 2007). In accordance with
section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, the NME status remains in effect
until revoked by the Department. The presumption of the NME status of
the PRC has not been revoked by the Department and, therefore, remains
in effect for purposes of the initiation of this investigation.
Accordingly, the NV of the product is based appropriately on factors of
production valued in a surrogate market economy country in accordance
with section 773(c) of the Act. During the course of this
investigation, all parties will have the opportunity to provide
relevant information related to the issues of the PRC's NME status and
the granting of separate rates to individual exporters.
The petitioner asserts that India is the most appropriate surrogate
country for the PRC because India is a significant producer of
comparable merchandise and at a level of economic development
comparable to the PRC. See Petition, Volume II at page 2. Based on the
information provided by the petitioner, we believe that the
petitioner's use of India as a surrogate country is appropriate for
purposes of initiating this investigation. After the initiation of the
investigation, we will solicit comments regarding surrogate-country
selection. Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), interested
parties will be provided an opportunity to submit publicly available
information to value the factors of production within 40 calendar days
after the date of publication of the preliminary determination.
The petitioner provided dumping margin calculations using the
Department's NME methodology as required by 19 CFR 351.202(b)(7)(i)(C)
and 19 CFR 351.408. The petitioner bases its estimates of antidumping
margins from the PRC on the CV and offers for sale to the U.S. market
by Hanghong, a non-integrated converter of jumbo rolls. Therefore, the
petitioner calculated NV based on a cost model specific to a non-
integrated converter of subject LWTP. Specifically, the petitioner
relied upon the consumption rates, for the period covering July 1,
through December 31, 2006, of one of the largest non-integrated U.S.
converters of subject LWTP, which the petitioner stated should be
similar to the consumption rates of Hanhong. See Petition, Volume II at
pages 4-5 and Exhibits II-3 and II-7. See also, Petitioner's Response
to the Department's September 24, 2007 Request for Clarification of
Certain Items Contained in the Petition: PRC (September 28, 2007)
(Supplement to the Petition: PRC) at page 4. The petitioner stated that
it did not make any adjustments to NV because no known material
differences exist between the non-integrated U.S. converter's
production experience and Hanhong's production experience. See
Supplement to the Petition: PRC at pages 5-6. Thus, the petitioner has
assumed, for purposes of the Petition, that Hanhong, a non-integrated
converter of subject LWTP in the PRC, uses the same inputs in the same
quantities as those used by one of the largest non-integrated
converters of subject LWTP in the United States.
With respect to the calculation of NV, pursuant to section
773(c)(4) of the Act, the petitioner valued all direct materials using
Indian import data obtained from the Monthly Statistics of the Foreign
Trade of India (MSFTI), as published by the Directorate General of
Commercial Intelligence and Statistics of the Ministry of Commerce and
Industry, Government of India and used in the World Trade Atlas (WTA),
available at: <http://www.gtis.com/wta.htm>, for August 1, 2006,

through January 31, 2007. Because the Department was able to obtain
more contemporaneous information from the WTA for the same inputs
provided by the petitioner, i.e., September 1, 2006, through February
28, 2007, we used this data where applicable in the NV calculations.
The petitioner converted the inputs valued in Indian rupees to U.S.
dollars based on the average rupee/U.S. dollar exchange rate for the
POI, as reported on the Department's website at < http://ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/index.html
>. See PRC AD Petition at page 6 and Exhibit II-6.

The petitioner relied upon the non-integrated U.S. converter's labor
usage rates for production and packing and used the Department's latest
NME Wage Rate for the PRC, as reported on the Department's website at
<http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/index.html>. Id. The petitioner did not

include energy and other utility cost inputs in its calculated NV
because the non-integrated U.S. converter did not allocate any energy
costs to the specific product level. Id. at pages 5-6 and Exhibits II-6
and 7.
In regard to the NV calculations, the petitioner derived the
figures for factory overhead (FOH), SG&A, and profit for the fiscal
year ending March 31, 2006, from the financial statements of Parag
Copigraph Pvt. Ltd. (Parag), a non-integrated Indian converter of
subject LWTP. See PRC AD Petition at page 7 and Exhibits II-6 and PRC
AD Supplemental Response at pages 6-7 and Exhibit 2. We did not make
any other adjustment to the NV, as calculated by the petitioner. See
PRC Initiation Checklist for further details on these calculations and
the adjustments the Department made to these calculations.

Fair-Value Comparisons

Based on the data provided by petitioners, there is reason to
believe that imports of LWTP from Germany, Korea, and the PRC are
being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair
value. Based on comparisons of export price to NV that we revised with
respect to the PRC, as discussed above, and calculated in accordance
with section 773(c) of the Act, these are the estimated dumping margins
for LWTP: 1) the estimated dumping margin for Germany based on a price-
to-price comparison is 29.79 percent; the estimated dumping margins for
Germany based on a price-to-CV comparison range from 59.80 percent to
75.36 percent; 2) the estimated dumping margin for Korea based on a
price-to-price comparison is 40.30 percent; the estimated dumping
margin for Korea based on a price-to-CV comparison is 65.63 percent;
and 3) the estimated dumping margin for the PRC is 108.25 percent.

Initiation of Antidumping Investigations

Based upon the examination of the Petition on LWTP from Germany,
Korea, and the PRC, we find that the Petition meet the requirements of
section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating antidumping duty
investigations to determine whether imports of LWTP from Germany,
Korea, and the PRC are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United
States at less than fair value. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A)
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205((b)(1),

[[Page 62435]]

unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later
than 140 days after the date of this initiation.

Separate Rates

The Department modified the process by which exporters and
producers may obtain separate-rate status in NME investigations. See
Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and Application of
Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market
Economy Countries (April 5, 2005) (Separate Rates and Combination Rates
Bulletin), available on the Department's website at < http://ia.ita.doc.gov/policy/bull05-1.pdf
>. The process requires the

submission of a separate-rate status application. Based on our
experience in processing the separate-rate applications in the
following antidumping duty investigations, we have modified the
application for this investigation to make it more administrable and
easier for applicants to complete. See, e.g., Initiation of Antidumping
Duty Investigation: Certain New Pneumatic Off-the-Road Tires from the
People's Republic of China, 72 FR 43591, 43594-95 (August 6, 2007)
(Tires from the PRC). The specific requirements for submitting the
separate-rate application in this investigation are outlined in detail
in the application itself, which will be available on the Department's
website at <http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia highlights and news.html> on the

date of publication of this initiation notice in the Federal Register.
The separate-rate application is due no later than December 10, 2007.

Respondent Selection

For this investigation, the Department intends to select
respondents based on CBP data for U.S. imports during the POI. We
intend to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 20
days of publication of this Federal Register notice. The Department
invites comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within
seven calendar days of publication of this Federal Register notice.

Use of Combination Rates in an NME Investigation

The Department will calculate combination rates for certain
respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this
investigation. The ``Separate Rates and Combination Rates Bulletin'' at
page 6 explains that, while continuing the practice of assigning
separate rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the
Department will now assign in its NME investigations will be specific
to those producers that supplied the exporter during the POI. Note,
however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the
producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the POI. This
practice applies both to mandatory respondents receiving an
individually calculated separate rate as well as the pool of non-
investigated firms receiving the weighted-average of the individually
calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the application of
``combination rates'' because such rates apply to specific combinations
of exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned
to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the firm
in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during
the POI.

Distribution of Copies of the Petition

In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act, a copy of the
public version of the Petition has been provided to representatives of
the governments of Germany, Korea, and the PRC. We will attempt to
provide a copy of the public version of the Petition to all exporters
named in the Petition, as provided for in 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section
732(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determinations by the ITC

The ITC will preliminarily determine no later than November 23,
2007, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of LWTP
from Germany, Korea, and the PRC are materially injuring or threatening
material injury to a U.S. industry. A negative ITC determination for
any country will result in the investigation being terminated with
respect to that country; otherwise, these investigations will proceed
according to statutory and regulatory time limits.
This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of
the Act.

Dated: October 29, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-21710 Filed 11-2-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S