Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2011 / Notices 12939 

1See Certain Frozen Fish Fillets From the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Preliminary Results 

of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews, 76 FR 

4292 (January 25, 2011) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). 

2See Letter from Alex Villanueva, Program 

Manager, Office 9, to Interested Parties: Extending 

Surrogate Value Submission & Briefing Schedule for 

New Shipper Reviews of Certain Frozen Fish Fillets 

from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (February 

10, 2011). 

Clarification: Application of ‘‘Next 

Business Day’’ Rule for Administrative 

Determination Deadlines Pursuant to 

the Tariff Act of 1930, As Amended, 70 

FR 24533 (May 10, 2005). Accordingly, 

the deadline for completion of the 

preliminary results is now May 2, 2011. 

This notice is published in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) 

and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: March 3, 2011. 

Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2011–5374 Filed 3–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–552–801] 

Certain Frozen Fish Fillets From the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam: 

Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary 

Results of the Seventh Antidumping 

Duty New Shipper Reviews 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce 

DATES: Effective Date: March 9, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alan Ray, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, 

Import Administration, International 

Trade Administration, U.S. Department 

of Commerce, 14th Street and 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–5403. 

Background 

On January 25, 2011, the Department 

of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) published 

in the Federal Register the Preliminary 

Results of the seventh new shipper 

reviews of certain frozen fish fillets from 

the Socialist Republic of Vietnam 

covering the period August 1, 2009, 

through February 15, 2010.1 Subsequent 

to the publication of the Preliminary 

Results, the Department extended the 

deadlines for submission of surrogate 

values, case briefs, and rebuttal 

comments.2 The final results are 

currently due no later than April 14, 

2011. 

Extension of Time Limit for the Final 

Results 

Section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘Act’’), and 19 

CFR 351.214(i)(1) require the 

Department to issue the final results in 

a new shipper review of an antidumping 

duty order 90 days after the date on 

which the preliminary results are 

issued. The Department may, however, 

extend the deadline for completion of 

the final results of a new shipper review 

to 150 days if it determines that the case 

is extraordinarily complicated. See 

section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.214(i)(2). 

The Department finds this case to be 

extraordinarily complicated because 

there is voluminous new material on the 

record regarding the surrogate value of 

whole fish that has not yet been 

considered in a completed review. The 

Department will need more time to 

analyze the data. Therefore, in 

accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) 

of the Act, we are extending the time for 

the completion of the final results of 

this review by 60 days to June 13, 2011. 

We are issuing and publishing this 

notice in accordance with sections 

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

Dated: March 3, 2011. 

Gary Taverman, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2011–5385 Filed 3–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–475–703] 

Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin 

From Italy: Final Results of Expedited 

Sunset Review of the Antidumping 

Duty Order 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 9, 2011. 

SUMMARY: On November 1, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Department’’) initiated the third sunset 

review of the antidumping duty order 

on granular polytetrafluoroethylene 

resin (‘‘PTFE resin’’) from Italy. The 

Department has conducted an expedited 

sunset review of this order. As a result 

of this review, the Department finds that 

revocation of the antidumping duty 

order would be likely to lead to 

continuation or recurrence of dumping 

at the margins identified in the Final 

Results of Review section of this notice. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph Shuler or Nancy Decker, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 1, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–1293 or (202) 482– 

0196, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On November 1, 2010, the Department 

published the notice of initiation of the 

third sunset review of the antidumping 

duty order on PTFE resin from Italy 

pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). See 

Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) 

Review, 75 FR 67082 (November 1, 

2010) (‘‘Initiation Notice’’). On January 

12, 2011, the Federal Register published 

a correction to that notice, indicating 

that an incorrect product name for this 

case was listed in the Initiation Notice. 

See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) 

Review: Correction, 76 FR 2083 (January 

12, 2011) (‘‘Correction Notice’’). We 

allowed interested parties an extension 

of time in which to file a notice of intent 

to participate and substantive responses. 

On January 13, 2011, we also notified 

the International Trade Commission 

(‘‘ITC’’) of these new deadlines. On 

January 12, 2011, the Department 

received a notice of intent to participate 

from a domestic interested party, E.I. 

DuPont de Nemours & Co. (‘‘DuPont’’ or 

‘‘domestic interested party’’). 

Submission of the notice of intent to 

participate was filed by DuPont within 

the deadline specified in 19 CFR 

351.218(d)(1)(i), as extended due to the 

Correction Notice. DuPont claimed 

interested party status under section 

771(9)(C) of the Act, as a producer of 

PTFE resin in the United States. On 

February 11, 2011, the Department 

received a substantive response from the 

domestic interested party within the 

deadline specified in 19 CFR 

351.218(d)(3)(i), as extended due to the 

Correction Notice. We received no 

substantive responses from any 

respondent interested parties. As a 

result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) 

of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), the Department is 

conducting an expedited sunset review 

of the antidumping duty order. 

Scope of the Order 

The product covered by the order is 

PTFE resin, filled or unfilled. The order 

also covers PTFE wet raw polymer 

exported from Italy to the United States. 

See Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene 

Resin From Italy; Final Affirmative 

Determination of Circumvention of 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
12940 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 9, 2011 / Notices 

1Solvay Solexis S.p.A. and Solvay Solexis, Inc. 

are successors-in-interest to Ausimont S.p.A. and 

Ausimont U.S.A. Inc. See Granular 

Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin from Italy; Final 

Results of Changed Circumstances Review, 68 FR 

25327 (May 12, 2003). 

Antidumping Duty Order, 58 FR 26100 

(April 30, 1993). The order excludes 

PTFE dispersions in water and fine 

powders. During the period covered by 

this review, such merchandise was 

classified under item number 

3904.61.00 of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States 

(‘‘HTSUS’’). We are providing this 

HTSUS number for convenience and 

customs purposes only. The written 

description of the scope remains 

dispositive. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in this review are 

addressed in the Issues and Decision 

Memorandum (‘‘Decision 

Memorandum’’) from Gary Taverman, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, dated March 1, 2011, 

which is hereby adopted by this notice. 

The issues discussed in the Decision 

Memorandum include the likelihood of 

continuation or recurrence of dumping 

and the magnitude of the margins likely 

to prevail if the order were revoked. 

Parties can find a complete discussion 

of all issues raised in this review and 

the corresponding recommendations in 

this public memorandum, which is on 

file in the Central Records Unit in room 

7046 of the main Commerce building. In 

addition, a complete version of the 

Decision Memorandum can be accessed 

directly on the Internet at http:// 

ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and 

electronic version of the Decision 

Memorandum are identical in content. 

Final Results of Review 

Pursuant to sections 752(c)(1) and (3) 

of the Act, we determine that revocation 

of the antidumping duty order on PTFE 

resin from Italy would be likely to lead 

to continuation or recurrence of 

dumping at the following percentage 

margins: 

Manufacturer/exporter 

Weightedaverage 

margin 

(percent) 

Montefluos S.p.A./Ausimont 

U.S.A.1 .................................. 46.46 

All Others .................................. 46.46 

This notice also serves as the only 

reminder to parties subject to 

administrative protective order (‘‘APO’’) 

of their responsibility concerning the 

return or destruction of proprietary 

information disclosed under APO in 

accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 

Timely notification of the return or 

destruction of APO materials or 

conversion to judicial protective order is 

hereby requested. Failure to comply 

with the regulations and terms of an 

APO is a violation which is subject to 

sanction. We are issuing and publishing 

the results and notice in accordance 

with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 

777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: March 1, 2011. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2011–5373 Filed 3–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–863] 

Honey from the People’s Republic of 

China: Partial Rescission of 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 9, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Catherine Bertrand, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 9, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482–3207. 

Background 

On January 28, 2011, the Department 

of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) published 

a notice of initiation of an 

administrative review of the 

antidumping duty order on honey from 

the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) 

covering the period December 1, 2009, 

through November 30, 2010. See 

Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Reviews, 76 FR 5137 (January 28, 2011). 

On February 24, 2011, the American 

Honey Producers Association and Sioux 

Honey Association (collectively 

‘‘Petitioners’’) withdrew their request for 

an administrative review for the 

following companies: Ahcof Industrial 

Development Corp., Ltd.; Alfred L. 

Wolff (Beijing) Co., Ltd.; Anhui Honghui 

Foodstuff (Group) Co., Ltd.; Anhui 

Honghui Import & Export Trade Co., 

Ltd.; Anhui Cereals Oils and Foodstuffs 

I/E (Group) Corporation; Anhui 

Hundred Health Foods Co., Ltd.; Anhui 

Native Produce Imp & Exp Corp.; APM 

Global Logistics (Shanghai) Co.; Baiste 

Trading Co., Ltd.; Cheng Du Wai Yuan 

Bee Products Co., Ltd.; Chengdu Stone 

Dynasty Art Stone; Damco China 

Limited Qingdao Branch; Eurasia Bee’s 

Products Co., Ltd.; Feidong Foreign 

Trade Co., Ltd.; Fresh Honey Co., Ltd. 

(formerly Mgl. Yun Shen); Golden 

Tadco Int’l; Hangzhou Golden Harvest 

Health Industry Co., Ltd.; Haoliluck Co., 

Ltd.; Hengjide Healthy Products Co. 

Ltd.; Hubei Yusun Co., Ltd.; Inner 

Mongolia Altin Bee-Keeping; Inner 

Mongolia Youth Trade Development 

Co., Ltd.; Jiangsu Cereals, Oils 

Foodstuffs Import Export (Group) Corp.; 

Jiangsu Kanghong Natural Healthfoods 

Co., Ltd.; Jiangsu Light Industry 

Products Imp & Exp (Group) Corp.; Jilin 

Province Juhui Import; Maersk Logistics 

(China) Company Ltd.; Nefelon Limited 

Company; Ningbo Shengye Electric 

Appliance; Ningbo Shunkang Health 

Food Co., Ltd.; Ningxia Yuehai Trading 

Co., Ltd.; Product Source Marketing 

Ltd.; Qingdao Aolan Trade Co., Ltd.; 

QHD Sanhai Honey Co., Ltd.; 

Qinhuangdao Municipal Dafeng 

Industrial Co., Ltd.; Renaissance India 

Mannite; Shaanxi Youthsun Co., Ltd.; 

Shanghai Bloom International Trading 

Co., Ltd.; Shanghai Foreign Trade Co., 

Ltd.; Shanghai Hui Ai Mal Tose Co., 

Ltd.; Shanghai Taiside Trading Co., Ltd.; 

Shine Bal Co., Ltd.; Sichuan-Dujiangyan 

Dubao Bee Industrial Co., Ltd.; 

Silverstream International Co., Ltd.; 

Sunnice Honey; Suzhou Aiyi IE Trading 

Co., Ltd.; Suzhou Shanding Honey 

Product Co., Ltd.; Tianjin Eulia Honey 

Co., Ltd.; Tianjin Weigeda Trading Co., 

Ltd.; Wanxi Haohua Food Co., Ltd.; 

Wuhan Bee Healthy Co., Ltd.; Wuhan 

Shino-Food Trade Co., Ltd.; Wuhu Anjie 

Food Co., Ltd.; Wuhu Deli Foods Co. 

Ltd.; Wuhu Fenglian Co., Ltd.; Wuhu 

Qinshi Tangye; Xinjiang Jinhui Food 

Co., Ltd.; Youngster International 

Trading Co., Ltd.; and, Zhejiang Willing 

Foreign Trading Co. 

Petitioners were the only party to 

request a review of these companies. 

Partial Rescission 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), the 

Secretary will rescind an administrative 

review, in whole or in part, if a party 

who requested the review withdraws 

the request within 90 days of the date 

of publication of notice of initiation of 

the requested review. Petitioners’ 

request was submitted within the 90- 

day period and, thus, is timely. Because 

Petitioners’ withdrawal of requests for 

review is timely and because no other 

party requested a review of the 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES