Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2011 / Notices 15941 

1See Certain Frozen Fish Fillets From the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Notice of 

Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of the 

Sixth Antidumping Duty Administrative Review 

Continued 

France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the 

United Kingdom for the period May 1, 

2009, through April 30, 2010. See 

Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative 

Reviews and Requests for Revocation in 

Part, 75 FR 37759 (June 30, 2010). On 

November 12, 2010, we rescinded in 

part the administrative reviews of the 

antidumping duty orders on ball 

bearings and parts thereof from France, 

Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United 

Kingdom. See Ball Bearings and Parts 

Thereof From France, Germany, Italy, 

Japan, and the United Kingdom: Partial 

Rescission of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 75 FR 69402 

(November 12, 2010). On January 14, 

2011, we extended the due date for the 

completion of the preliminary results of 

reviews by 45 days. See Ball Bearings 

and Parts Thereof From France, 

Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United 

Kingdom: Extension of Time Limit for 

Preliminary Results of Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Reviews, 76 FR 

2647 (January 14, 2011). On February 

24, 2011, we also initiated the changedcircumstances review of the 

antidumping duty order on ball bearings 

and parts thereof from Germany and 

announced our intent to conduct the 

changed-circumstances review in the 

context of the administrative review. 

See Ball Bearings and Parts Thereof 

From Germany: Initiation of 

Antidumping Duty ChangedCircumstances Review, 76 FR 10335 

(February 24, 2011). The preliminary 

results of the reviews are currently due 

no later than March 17, 2011. 

Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary 

Results 

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

of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires 

the Department to complete the 

preliminary results within 245 days 

after the last day of the anniversary 

month of an order for which a review 

is requested and the final results within 

120 days after the date on which the 

preliminary results are published. If it is 

not practicable to complete the review 

within these time periods, section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the 

Department to extend the time limit for 

the preliminary results to a maximum of 

365 days after the last day of the 

anniversary month. 

We determine that it is not practicable 

to complete the preliminary results of 

these reviews within the current time 

limit because of the number of 

companies and complexity of various 

issues. Therefore, we are extending the 

time period for issuing the preliminary 

results of these reviews by 32 days until 

April 18, 2011. 

This notice is published in 

accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of 

the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2). 

Dated: March 16, 2011. 

Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6746 Filed 3–21–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–809] 

Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe 

From the Republic of Korea: Extension 

of the Final Results of the Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 22, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew Jordan and Joshua Morris, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–1540 and (202) 

482–1779, respectively. 

Background 

On December 14, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce (‘‘the 

Department’’) published its preliminary 

results of the antidumping duty 

administrative review of circular 

welded non-alloy steel pipe from the 

Republic of Korea, covering the period 

November 1, 2008, through October 31, 

2009. See Circular Welded Non-Alloy 

Steel Pipe From the Republic of Korea: 

Preliminary Results of the Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 

77838 (December 14, 2010) 

(‘‘Preliminary Results’’). Currently, the 

final results are due no later than April 

13, 2011. 

Extension of Time Limit for Final 

Results 

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

of 1930, as amended (‘‘Act’’), requires 

that the Department issue the final 

results of an administrative review 

within 120 days after the date on which 

the preliminary results are published. If 

it is not practicable to complete the 

review within that time period, section 

751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the 

Department to extend the deadline for 

the final results to a maximum of 180 

days after the date on which the 

preliminary results are published. 

The Department has determined that 

it requires additional time to complete 

this review. A significant issue has been 

raised after the Preliminary Results and 

the Department needs to allow time for 

parties to provide information on the 

issue, brief the issue, and provide 

rebuttal comments. Thus, it is not 

practicable to complete this review by 

April 13, 2011, and the Department is 

extending the time limit for completion 

of the final results by an additional 60 

days to June 12, 2011, in accordance 

with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. 

However, June 12, 2011, falls on a 

Sunday, and it is the Department’s longstanding practice to issue a 

determination the next business day 

when the statutory deadline falls on a 

weekend, federal holiday, or any other 

day when the Department is closed. See 

Notice of 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 final results is now no 

later than June 13, 2011. 

We are issuing and publishing this 

notice in accordance with sections 

751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i) of the Act. 

Dated: March 16, 2011. 

Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping 

and Countervailing Duty Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6726 Filed 3–21–11; 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: Final 

Results of the Sixth Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and Sixth New 

Shipper Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On September 15, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Department’’) published the 

Preliminary Results of the sixth 

administrative review and sixth new 

shipper review of the antidumping duty 

order on certain frozen fish fillets 

(‘‘frozen fish fillets’’) from the Socialist 

Republic of Vietnam (‘‘Vietnam’’).1 We 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
15942 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2011 / Notices 

and Sixth New Shipper Review, 75 FR 56062 

(September 15, 2010) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). 

2See Memorandum to the file, from Julia 

Hancock, Special Assistant, Import Administration, 

dated September 21, 2010; see also Memorandum 

to the file, from James Doyle, Office Director, Import 

Administration, dated January 25, 2011. 

3See Letter from Alex Villanueva, Program 

Manager, Office 9, to Interested Parties: Extending 

Surrogate Value Submission & Briefing Schedule for 

6th New Shipper and 6th Antidumping 

Administrative Reviews of Certain Frozen Fish 

Fillets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam 

(September 21, 2010). See also Letter from Alex 

Villanueva, Program Manager, Office 9, to 

Interested Parties: Extending Surrogate Value 

Submission for 6th New Shipper and 6th 

Antidumping Administrative Reviews of Certain 

Frozen Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam. (October 13, 2010). See also Memorandum 

For: All Interested Parties, from Emeka 

Chukwudebe, Case Analyst, Import Administration, 

dated October 22, 2010. See also Memorandum For: 

All Interested Parties, from Javier Barrientos, Case 

Analyst, Import Administration, dated November 

22, 2010. 

4See Memorandum to the file, Re: sixth 

Administrative Review of Frozen Fish Fillets from 

the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (‘‘Vietnam’’), 

dated October 18, 2010. 

5See Dorbest Limited v. United States, 604 F.3d 

1363, 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (‘‘Dorbest’’). 

6See Memorandum to the file through James C. 

Doyle, Office 9 Director, and Alex Villanueva, 

Office 9 Program Manager, from Emeka 

Chukwudebe, Office 9 Case Analyst, Sixth 

Antidumping Duty Administrative and New 

Shipper Review of Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from 

the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (‘‘Vietnam’’): 

Industry-Specific Wage Rate Selection (November 5, 

2010). 

7See Certain Frozen Fish Fillets From the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Notice of Extension 

of Time Limit for the Final Results of the Sixth 

Antidumping Duty Administrative and New 

Shipper Reviews, 75 FR 80795 (December 23, 2010). 

8See Letter to Interested Parties from James C. 

Doyle, Office 9 Office Director, Sixth Antidumping 

Duty Administrative Review and Sixth New 

Shipper Review of Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from 

the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Consolidated 

Public Hearing Schedule (January 26, 2011). 

9Catfish Farmers of America and the following 

individual U.S. catfish processors: America’s Catch, 

Consolidated Catfish Companies, LLC dba Country 

Select Catfish, Delta Pride Catfish, Inc., Harvest 

Select Catfish, Inc., Heartland Catfish Company, 

Pride of the Pond, and Simmons Farm Raised 

Catfish, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’). 

10See Memorandum to the file, from Alex 

Villanueva, Program Manager, Import 

Administration, dated September 21, 2010. 

11These companies include: Vinh Hoan; Vinh 

Quang Fisheries Corporation (‘‘Vinh Quang’’); and 

CUU Long Fish Joint Stock Company (‘‘CL–Fish’’). 

12See Memorandum to the file, from Alex 

Villanueva, Program Manager, Import 

Administration, dated February 21, 2011. 

13These companies include: (1) An Giang 

Fisheries Import and Export Joint Stock Company 

(aka Agifish or AnGiang Fisheries Import and 

Export); (2) Anvifish Co., Ltd.; (3) Anvifish Joint 

Stock Company (‘‘Anvifish JSC’’), (4) East Sea 

Seafoods Limited Liability Company (formerly 

known as East Sea Seafoods Joint Venture Co., Ltd.) 

(‘‘ESS LLC’’); and (5) East Sea Seafoods Joint 

Venture Co., Ltd. 

14These include: (1) Richwell Group, Inc.; and 2) 

Vietnam Association of Seafood Exports and 

Producers. 

15At the Department’s request, interested parties 

submitted additional comments regarding 

information placed on the record as a result of the 

Department’s January 24, 2011, meeting with 

officials from the Government of Vietnam. 

16See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Certain 

Frozen Fish Fillets From the Socialist Republic of 

Vietnam, 68 FR 47909 (August 12, 2003) (‘‘Order’’). 

17Until July 1, 2004, these products were 

classifiable under tariff article codes 0304.20.60.30 

(Frozen Catfish Fillets), 0304.20.60.96 (Frozen Fish 

Fillets, NESOI), 0304.20.60.43 (Frozen Freshwater 

Fish Fillets) and 0304.20.60.57 (Frozen Sole Fillets) 

of the HTSUS. Until February 1, 2007, these 

products were classifiable under tariff article code 

0304.20.60.33 (Frozen Fish Fillets of the species 

Pangasius including basa and tra) of the HTSUS. 

gave interested parties an opportunity to 

comment on the Preliminary Results 

and, based upon our analysis of the 

comments and information received, we 

made changes to the margin calculations 

for the final results of these reviews. 

The final weighted-average margins are 

listed below in the ‘‘Final Results of the 

Reviews’’ section of this notice. The 

period of review (‘‘POR’’) is August 1, 

2008, through July 31, 2009. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 22, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emeka Chukwudebe or Javier 

Barrientos, 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) 482–0219 or 

(202) 482–2243, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Case History 

As noted above, on September 15, 

2010, the Department published the 

Preliminary Results of this 

administrative and new shipper review. 

On September 16, 2010, and January 24, 

2011, officials from the Government of 

Vietnam met with officials from the 

Department.2 We extended the 

deadlines for submission of surrogate 

value comments and case briefs.3 On 

October 7, 2010, majority staff members 

from the Senate Finance Committee met 

with officials from the Department.4 On 

November 5, 2010, following the recent 

decision in Dorbest,5 the Department 

placed wage rate data on the record for 

comments.6 Between November 25, 

2010, and November 30, 2010, we 

conducted verification of Vinh Hoan 

Corporation (‘‘Vinh Hoan’’). On 

December 23, 2010, the Department 

fully extended the time limit for 

completion of the final results of this 

administrative review and new shipper 

review.7 On January 24, 2011, the 

Department placed new information on 

the record and invited comments from 

interested parties. 

On January 26, 2011, the Department 

held a public hearing.8 On February 8, 

2011, counsel for Petitioners 9 met with 

officials from the Department.10 On 

February 17, 2011, counsel for the 

respondents 11 met with officials from 

the Department.12 We invited interested 

parties to comment on the Preliminary 

Results. Between November 22, 2010, 

and February 14, 2011, we received case 

and rebuttal briefs from Petitioners, the 

respondents, separate rate 

respondents,13 as well as other 

interested parties 14 in these reviews.15

As a result of our analysis, we have 

made changes to the Preliminary 

Results. 

Scope of the Order 16

The product covered by the order is 

frozen fish fillets, including regular, 

shank, and strip fillets and portions 

thereof, whether or not breaded or 

marinated, of the species Pangasius 

Bocourti, Pangasius Hypophthalmus 

(also known as Pangasius Pangasius), 

and Pangasius Micronemus. Frozen fish 

fillets are lengthwise cuts of whole fish. 

The fillet products covered by the scope 

include boneless fillets with the belly 

flap intact (‘‘regular’’ fillets), boneless 

fillets with the belly flap removed 

(‘‘shank’’ fillets), boneless shank fillets 

cut into strips (‘‘fillet strips/finger’’), 

which include fillets cut into strips, 

chunks, blocks, skewers, or any other 

shape. Specifically excluded from the 

scope are frozen whole fish (whether or 

not dressed), frozen steaks, and frozen 

belly-flap nuggets. Frozen whole 

dressed fish are deheaded, skinned, and 

eviscerated. Steaks are bone-in, crosssection cuts of dressed fish. Nuggets are 

the belly-flaps. The subject merchandise 

will be hereinafter referred to as frozen 

‘‘basa’’ and ‘‘tra’’ fillets, which are the 

Vietnamese common names for these 

species of fish. These products are 

classifiable under tariff article codes 

1604.19.4000, 1604.19.5000, 

0305.59.4000, 0304.29.6033 (Frozen 

Fish Fillets of the species Pangasius 

including basa and tra) of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (‘‘HTSUS’’).17 The order 

covers all frozen fish fillets meeting the 

above specification, regardless of tariff 

classification. Although the HTSUS 

subheading is provided for convenience 

and customs purposes, our written 

description of the scope of the order is 

dispositive. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties are addressed 

in ‘‘Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam 

(‘‘Vietnam’’): Issues and Decision 

Memorandum for the Final Results,’’ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2011 / Notices 15943 

18Asia Commerce Fisheries Joint Stock Company 

(aka Acomfish JSC) (‘‘Acomfish’’) and Binh An 

Seafood Joint Stock Co. (‘‘Binh An’’). 

19See Preliminary Results. 

(March 14, 2011) (‘‘I&D Memo’’). A list 

of the issues which parties raised, and 

to which we responded in the I&D 

Memo, is attached to this notice as an 

Appendix. The I&D Memo is a public 

document and is on file in the Central 

Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’), Main Commerce 

Building, Room 7046, and is accessible 

on the Department’s Web site at 

http://www.trade.gov/ia. The paper 

copy and electronic version of the 

memorandum are identical in content. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on a review of the record, 

verification, the hearing, as well as 

comments received from interested 

parties regarding our Preliminary 

Results, we have made certain revisions 

to the margin calculation for Vinh Hoan, 

Vinh Quang, and CL-Fish for the final 

results. For the reasons explained in the 

I&D Memo at Comment I, we have 

changed our surrogate country selection 

from the Philippines to Bangladesh. For 

all other changes to the calculations of 

Vinh Hoan, Vinh Quang, and CL-Fish, 

see the I&D Memo and company specific 

analysis memorandum. For changes to 

the surrogate values, see the I&D Memo 

and ‘‘Memorandum to the File, through 

Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, AC/ 

CVD Operations, Office 9, from Javier 

Barrientos, Senior Case Analyst, and 

Emeka Chukwudebe, Case Analyst, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 9, Sixth 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review and Sixth New Shipper Review 

of Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Surrogate 

Values for the Final Results,’’ (March 14, 

2011). 

Use of Facts Available (‘‘FA’’) and 

Adverse Facts Available (‘‘AFA’’) 

Section 776(a) of the Tariff Act of 

1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’) provides 

that the Department shall apply FA if (1) 

necessary information is not on the 

record, or (2) an interested party or any 

other person (A) withholds information 

that has been requested, (B) fails to 

provide information within the 

deadlines established, or in the form 

and manner requested by the 

Department, subject to subsections (c)(1) 

and (e) of section 782 of the Act, (C) 

significantly impedes a proceeding, or 

(D) provides information that cannot be 

verified as provided by section 782(i) of 

the Act. 

Section 776(b) of the Act further 

provides that the Department may use 

an adverse inference in applying FA 

when a party has failed to cooperate by 

not acting to the best of its ability to 

comply with a request for information. 

Such an adverse inference may include 

reliance on information derived from 

the petition, the final determination, a 

previous administrative review, or other 

information placed on the record. 

Based on findings at verification, we 

are applying partial AFA to Vinh Hoan’s 

freight distances because the 

Department finds that the information 

necessary to calculate an accurate and 

otherwise reliable margin is not 

available on the record. Specifically, the 

Department could not verify the 

distances to transport fish from some of 

Vinh Hoan’s farms to its processing 

facilities. Consequently, in accordance 

with 776(b) of the Act, we find that an 

adverse inference is necessary because 

Vinh Hoan did not act to the best of its 

ability to provide the Department with 

verifiable data within its exclusive 

control. Therefore, for the final results, 

pursuant to 776(a)(2)(D) of the Act, we 

applied partial AFA to Vinh Hoan’s 

freight distances. See Comment 9A of 

the I&D Memo. 

Final Partial Rescission 

In the Preliminary Results, the 

Department preliminarily rescinded the 

review with respect to Acomfish and 

Binh An.18 These companies reported 

that they had no shipments of subject 

merchandise to the United States during 

the POR. As we stated in the 

Preliminary Results, our examination of 

shipment data from U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) for these 

companies confirmed that there were no 

entries of subject merchandise from 

them during the POR.19 The Department 

did not receive any comments regarding 

the preliminary rescission of these 

companies claiming no shipments. 

Therefore, we are rescinding the 

administrative review with respect to 

Acomfish and Binh An. In addition, as 

explained in Comment VII of the I&D 

Memo, we are rescinding the review 

with respect to Anvifish JSC. Finally, 

we note that as Anvifish JSC was the 

only company receiving the VietnamWide entity rate in the Preliminary 

Results, but is no longer under review, 

the Vietnam-Wide entity is also no 

longer under review. 

Separate Rates 

The statute and the Department’s 

regulations do not directly address the 

establishment of a rate to be applied to 

individual companies not selected for 

individual examination where the 

Department limited its examination in 

an administrative review pursuant to 

section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. The 

Department’s practice in this regard, in 

cases involving limited selection based 

on exporters accounting for the largest 

volumes of trade, has been to weightaverage the rates for the selected 

companies excluding zero and de 

minimis rates and rates based entirely 

on AFA. Generally we have looked to 

section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which 

provides instructions for calculating the 

all-others rate in an investigation, for 

guidance when calculating the rate for 

respondents we did not individually 

examine in an administrative review. 

Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act instructs 

that we are not to calculate an all-others 

rate using any zero or de minimis 

margins or any margins based on total 

facts available. Section 735(c)(5)(B) of 

the Act also provides that, where all 

margins are zero, de minimis, or based 

on total FA, we may use ‘‘any reasonable 

method’’ for assigning the rate to nonselected respondents. One method that 

section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act 

contemplates as a possibility is 

‘‘averaging the estimated weighted 

average dumping margins determined 

for the exporters and producers 

individually investigated.’’ 

In the Preliminary Results, the 

Department applied to the separate rate 

companies the rate calculated for the 

single mandatory respondent in the 

administrative review. For these final 

results, the rate calculated for the single 

mandatory respondent is zero. While 

the statute contemplates that we may 

use an average of the zero, de minimis 

and AFA rates determined in an 

investigation, we have available in these 

reviews information that would not be 

available in an investigation, namely 

rates from prior proceedings. We have 

determined that it is more appropriate 

in these reviews to use a calculated rate 

from a previous segment to apply to the 

separate rate companies as this method 

does not rely on zero, de minimis or FA 

margins and there is no reason to find 

that it is not reasonably reflective of 

potential dumping margins for the nonselected companies. See Statement of 

Administrative Action (‘‘SAA’’) 

accompanying the Uruguay Round 

Agreements Act, H. Doc. 316, 103d 

Cong., Vol. 1 (1994) at 873. In these 

reviews, we have three companies that 

qualify for a separate rate: Agifish, ESS 

LLC and Southern Fishery Industries 

Company (‘‘South Vina’’). 

For the three separate rate 

respondents, Agifish, ESS LLC and 

South Vina, the most recent calculated 

rate from a previous administrative 

review that is not zero, de minimis or 

based on FA is $0.02 per kilogram, 

which was based on the calculated rate 

for QVD Food Company in the fourth 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
15944 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 55 / Tuesday, March 22, 2011 / Notices 

20CL-Fish is a new shipper review, aligned with, 

but not part of the administrative review. 

administrative review. See Certain 

Frozen Fish Fillets from the Socialist 

Republic of Vietnam: Amended Final 

Results of the Fourth Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 74 FR 17816 

(April 17, 2009). This is similar to the 

method applied in the most recently 

completed administrative review. See 

Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Final 

Results of the Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and New 

Shipper Reviews, 75 FR 12726 (March 

17, 2010) and accompanying Issues and 

Decision Memorandum. 

Final Results of the Reviews 

The weighted-average dumping 

margins for the POR are as follows: 

Exporter 

Weighted-average 

margin 

(dollars per kilogram) 

(1) Vinh Hoan ....................................................................................................................................................................... $0.00 

(2) Vinh Quang ..................................................................................................................................................................... 0.00 

(3) Agifish ............................................................................................................................................................................. 0.02 

(4) ESS LLC ......................................................................................................................................................................... 0.02 

(5) South Vina ...................................................................................................................................................................... 0.02 

(6) CL-Fish 20 ....................................................................................................................................................................... 0.00 

Assessment 

Upon issuance of the final results, the 

Department will determine, and CBP 

shall assess, antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries. The Department 

intends to issue assessment instructions 

to CBP 15 days after the date of 

publication of the final results of 

review. Pursuant to 19 CFR 

351.212(b)(1), we will calculate 

importer-specific (or customer) per unit 

duty assessment rates based on the ratio 

of the total amount of the dumping 

margins calculated for the examined 

sales to the total entered value of those 

same sales. We will instruct CBP to 

assess antidumping duties on all 

appropriate entries covered by these 

reviews if any importer-specific 

assessment rate is above or de minimis. 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash-deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of the final results of these 

administrative and new shipper reviews 

for all shipments of the subject 

merchandise entered, or withdrawn 

from warehouse, for consumption on or 

after the publication date, as provided 

for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) 

For the exporters listed above, the cash 

deposit rate will be the rate established 

in these final results of review (except, 

if the rate is zero or de minimis, i.e., less 

than 0.5 percent, a zero cash deposit 

rate will be required for that company); 

(2) for previously investigated or 

reviewed Vietnamese and nonVietnamese exporters not listed above 

that have separate rates, the cash 

deposit rate will continue to be the 

exporter-specific rate published for the 

most recent period; (3) for all 

Vietnamese exporters of subject 

merchandise which have not been 

found to be entitled to a separate rate, 

the cash deposit rate will be the 

Vietnamese-wide rate of $2.11 per 

kilogram; and (4) for all non-Vietnamese 

exporters of subject merchandise which 

have not received their own rate, the 

cash deposit rate will be the rate 

applicable to the Vietnamese exporters 

that supplied that non-Vietnamese 

exporter. These deposit requirements, 

when imposed, shall remain in effect 

until further notice. 

Reimbursement of Duties 

This notice also serves as a final 

reminder to importers of their 

responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 

to file a certificate regarding the 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

prior to liquidation of the relevant 

entries during this POR. Failure to 

comply with this requirement could 

result in the Department’s presumption 

that reimbursement of antidumping 

duties has occurred and the subsequent 

assessment of doubled antidumping 

duties. 

Administrative Protective Orders 

This notice also serves as a final 

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 written 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 these 

administrative and new shipper reviews 

and notice in accordance with sections 

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

Dated: March 14, 2011. 

Kim Glas, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I—Issues & Decision 

Memorandum 

General Issues 

COMMENT I: SELECTION OF SURROGATE 

COUNTRY 

A. Economic Comparability 

B. Significant Producer of the Comparable 

Merchandise 

C. Data Considerations 

COMMENT II: ZEROING 

COMMENT III: LABOR RATE 

METHODOLOGY 

COMMENT IV: SURROGATE VALUES 

A. Financial Ratios 

B. Salt 

C. Water 

D. STPP, CO Gas, PE bags, Carton, Tape, 

Label, Plastic Sheet, Banding, and Diesel 

E. Electricity 

F. Truck Freight 

G. Brokerage and Handling 

H. Containerization 

I. By-Products 

i. Fish Waste 

ii. Broken Meat 

iii. Fish Skins 

J. Adjustment for Finished Goods 

Inventory 

Company-Specific Issues 

COMMENT V: RATE FOR SOUTH VINA 

COMMENT VI: RATE FOR VINH QUANG 

A. Indirect Selling Expenses 

B. Movement Expenses 

C. Packing Labor 

COMMENT VII: RESCISSION OF ANVIFISH 

JSC 

COMMENT VIII: CASH DEPOSIT 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ESS LLC 

COMMENT IX: RATE FOR VINH HOAN 

A. Freight Distances for Fish 

B. Farming Factors 

C. Electricity and Coal for Byproducts 

[FR Doc. 2011–6564 Filed 3–21–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES