Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 17, 2009 / Notices 11349 

ITC of the margins likely to prevail were 

the order revoked. See Barium 

Carbonate from the People’s Republic of 

China: Final Results of the Expedited 

Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty 

Order, 74 FR 882 (January 9, 2009). On 

January 21, 2009, the ITC determined, 

pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, 

that revocation of the AD order on 

barium carbonate from the PRC would 

likely lead to continuation or recurrence 

of material injury to an industry in the 

United States within a reasonably 

foreseeable time. See Barium Carbonate 

From China, 74 FR 10278 (March 10, 

2000); and Barium Carbonate from 

China: Investigation No. 731–TA–1020 

(Review), ITC Publication 4060 (January 

2009). 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise covered by this 

order is barium carbonate, regardless of 

form or grade. The product is currently 

classifiable under subheading 

2836.60.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States 

(‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the HTSUS 

subheading is provided for convenience 

and customs purposes, the written 

description of the scope of this 

proceeding is dispositive. 

Continuation of Order 

As a result of the determinations by 

the Department and the ITC that 

revocation of the AD order on barium 

carbonate from the PRC would likely 

lead to continuation or recurrence of 

dumping and material injury to an 

industry in the United States, pursuant 

to section 751(d)(2) of the Act, the 

Department hereby orders the 

continuation of the AD order on barium 

carbonate from the PRC. U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection will continue to 

collect AD cash deposits at the rates in 

effect at the time of entry for all imports 

of subject merchandise. This review 

covers imports from all manufacturers 

and exporters of barium carbonate from 

the PRC. 

The effective date of continuation of 

this AD order will be the date of 

publication in the Federal Register of 

this notice. Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) 

of the Act, the Department intends to 

initiate the next five-year review of 

these orders not later than February 

2013. See also 19 CFR 351.218(c)(2). 

This five-year (‘‘sunset’’) review and 

notice are in accordance with section 

751(c) of the Act and published 

pursuant to section 777(i)(1) of the Act. 

Dated: March 10, 2009. 

John M. Andersen, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations. 

[FR Doc. E9–5743 Filed 3–16–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–552–801] 

Certain Frozen Fish Fillets From the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Final 

Results of the Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and New 

Shipper Reviews 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Department’’) is conducting an 

administrative review and two new 

shipper reviews of the antidumping 

duty order on certain frozen fish fillets 

from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam 

(‘‘Vietnam’’). See Notice of 

Antidumping Duty Order: Certain 

Frozen Fish Fillets from the Socialist 

Republic of Vietnam, 68 FR 47909 

(August 12, 2003) (‘‘Order’’). The 

administrative review and new shipper 

reviews includes three companies, 

including QVD Food Company Ltd. 

(‘‘QVD’’), the mandatory respondent, 

and the two new shipper review 

companies are Binh An Seafood Joint 

Stock Co. (‘‘Binh An’’) and Southern 

Fishery Industries Company, Ltd. 

(‘‘South Vina’’). We preliminarily found 

that Binh An and QVD did not sell 

subject merchandise at less than normal 

value (‘‘NV’’) and thus received zero 

margins during the period of review 

(‘‘POR’’), August 1, 2006, through July 

31, 2007. We also preliminarily 

rescinded South Vina. See Certain 

Frozen Fish Fillets From the Socialist 

Republic of Vietnam: Notice of 

Preliminary Results of the New Shipper 

Review and Fourth Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review and Partial 

Rescission of the Fourth Administrative 

Review, 73 FR 52015 (September 8, 

2008) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). We 

conducted verifications of Binh An and 

South Vina and subsequently issued a 

post-preliminary calculation for South 

Vina. See New Shipper Review of 

Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam: PostPreliminary Results Analysis for 

Southern Fishery Industries Co., Ltd. 

dated January 13, 2009. We gave 

interested parties an opportunity to 

comment on the Preliminary Results 

and the Post-preliminary results for 

South Vina. Based upon our analysis of 

the comments and information received, 

we made changes to the dumping 

margin calculations for the final results. 

See Memorandum to the File from Alan 

Ray, Case Analyst, through Alex 

Villanueva, Program Manager, Final 

Results Analysis for QVD and its 

Affiliates (March 9, 2009); 

Memorandum to the File from Matthew 

Renkey, Senior Case Analyst, through 

Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, 

Final Results Analysis for Binh An 

Seafood Joint Stock Company (‘‘Binh 

An’’) (March 9, 2009); and 

Memorandum to the File from Javier 

Barrientos, Senior Case Analyst, through 

Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, 

Final Results Analysis for Southern 

Fishery Industries Co., Ltd. (‘‘South 

Vina’’) (March 9, 2009). The final 

dumping margins are listed below in the 

section entitled ‘‘Final Results of the 

Reviews.’’ 

DATES: Effective Date: March 17, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alan Ray 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) 482–5403 and (202) 

482–2243, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Case History 

On September 8, 2008, the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register the preliminary results of this 

new shipper and administrative review 

of the antidumping duty order on 

certain frozen fish fillets from Vietnam. 

Since the Preliminary Results, the 

following events have occurred. 

From September 17–19, 2008, the 

Department conducted the verification 

of Binh An Binh An in Can Tho City, 

Vietnam. From September 22–24, 2008, 

the Department verified South Vina in 

Can Tho City, Vietnam. 

South Vina and An Xuyen Company 

Ltd. (‘‘An Xuyen’’) submitted case briefs 

on January 5 and 23, 2009, respectively. 

On February 3, 2009, Petitioners, Catfish 

Farmers of America and individual U.S. 

catfish processors, and QVD Food 

Company (‘‘QVD’’) submitted case 

briefs. On February 10, 2009, 

Petitioners, South Vina, Binh An, and 

QVD submitted rebuttal briefs. 

On October 20, 2008, the Department 

extended the time limit for completion 

of the final results of this administrative 

review by 60 days. See Certain Frozen 

Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic 

of Vietnam: Extension of Time Limit for 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
11350 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 17, 2009 / Notices 

1Until July, 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. 

2This rate is applicable to the QVD Single Entity 

which includes QVD, QVD Dong Thap, and Thuan 

Hung Co. Ltd. 

3For the exporters subject to review that are 

determined to be eligible for separate-rate status, 

but were not selected as mandatory respondents, 

the Department normally establishes a weightedaverage margin based on an average of the rates it 

calculated for the mandatory respondents, 

excluding any rates that are zero, de minimis, or 

based entirely on facts available. In this proceeding, 

there is only one such mandatory respondent, QVD. 

Accordingly, the rate calculated for QVD is applied 

as the rate for Agifish and Anvifish. 

4This includes An Xuyen. 

Final Results of the New Shipper and 

Fourth Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 73 FR 63435 

(October 24, 2008). 

On February 25, 2009, the Department 

conducted a public and a closed 

hearing. On March 3, 2009, the 

Department placed additional 

information on the record. Petitioners 

and QVD submitted comments 

regarding this additional information on 

March 5, 2009. 

Scope of the Order 

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’’).1 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 to this 

proceeding and to which we have 

responded are listed in the Appendix to 

this notice and addressed in the Issues 

and Decision Memorandum (‘‘Final 

Decision Memo’’), which is hereby 

adopted by this notice. Parties can find 

a complete discussion of the issues 

raised in this administrative review and 

the corresponding recommendations in 

this public memorandum which is on 

file in the Central Records Unit 

(‘‘CRU’’), room 1117 of the main 

Department building. In addition, a 

copy of the Final Decision Memo can be 

accessed directly on our Web site at 

http://ia.ita.doc.gov/. The paper copy 

and electronic version of the Final 

Decision Memo are identical in content. 

Verification 

As provided in section 782(i) of the 

Tariff Act, as amended (‘‘Act’’), we 

conducted verification of the 

information submitted by Binh An and 

South Vina for use in our final results. 

See Memorandum to the File, through 

Alex Villanueva, Program Manager, AD/ 

CVD Operations, Office 9, from Matthew 

Renkey, Senior Case Analyst, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 9, Certain Frozen 

Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic 

of Vietnam: Verification of Binh An 

Seafood Joint Stock Company, dated 

December 9, 2008 and Memorandum to 

the File, through Alex Villanueva, 

Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 9, from Javier Barrientos, Senior 

Case Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office 9, Certain Frozen Fish Fillets 

from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: 

Verification of Southern Fishery 

Industries Co., Ltd., dated December 10, 

2008. For all companies, we used 

standard verification procedures, 

including examination of relevant 

accounting and production records, as 

well as original source documents 

provided by the respondents. 

Changes Since the Preliminary Results 

Based on a review of the record as 

well as comments received from parties 

regarding our Preliminary Results, we 

have made revisions to the margin 

calculation for QVD, South Vina, and 

Binh An for the final results. For all 

changes to the calculations of QVD, 

Binh An and South Vina, see the Final 

Decision Memo and company specific 

analysis memoranda. For changes to the 

surrogate values see Memorandum to 

the File, through Alex Villanueva, 

Program Manager, AC/CVD Operations, 

Office 9, from Alan Ray, case analyst, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, New 

Shipper Review and Fourth 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review of Certain Frozen Fish Fillets 

from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: 

Surrogate Values for the Final Results. 

Final Results of the Reviews 

The weighted-average dumping 

margins for the POR are as follows: 

CERTAIN FROZEN FISH FILLETS FROM

VIETNAM

Manufacturer/exporter 

Weightedaverage 

margin 

QVD 2 ........................................ 0.52 

South Vina ................................ 0.00 

Binh An ..................................... 0.00 

Agifish 3 ..................................... 0.52 

Anvifish 3 ................................... 0.52 

Vietnam-Wide Entity 4 ............... 63.88 

Assessment 

The Department will determine, and 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(‘‘CBP’’) shall assess, antidumping 

duties on all appropriate entries, 

pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b). We have 

calculated importer-specific duty 

assessment rates on a per-unit basis. 

Specifically, we divided the total 

dumping margins (calculated as the 

difference between normal value and 

export price or constructed export price) 

for each importer by the total quantity 

of subject merchandise sold to that 

importer during the POR to calculate a 

per-unit assessment amount. In this and 

future reviews, we will direct CBP to 

assess importer-specific assessment 

rates based on the resulting per-unit 

(i.e., per-kilogram) rates by the weight in 

kilograms of each entry of the subject 

merchandise during the POR. The 

Department intends to issue appropriate 

assessment instructions directly to CBP 

15 days after publication of the final 

results of these administrative and new 

shipper reviews. 

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 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 17, 2009 / Notices 11351 

5Bionic Sea Food (‘‘Bionic’’). 

6 Gemini Sea Food Ltd. (‘‘Gemini’’). 

from warehouse, for consumption on or 

after the publication date, as provided 

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

The cash deposit rate for each of the 

reviewed companies that received a 

separate rate in this review will be the 

rate listed in the final results of review 

(except that if the rate for a particular 

company is de minimis, i.e., less than 

0.5 percent, no cash deposit will be 

required for that company); (2) for 

previously investigated companies not 

listed above, the cash deposit rate will 

continue to be the company-specific rate 

published for the most recent period of 

review; (3) if the exporter is not a firm 

covered in this review, a prior review, 

or the original less than fair value 

investigation, but the manufacturer is, 

the cash deposit rate will be the rate 

established for the most recent period 

for the manufacturer of the 

merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit 

rate for all other manufacturers or 

exporters will be the Vietnam-wide rate 

of 63.88 percent. 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 reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective orders (‘‘APO’’) of their 

responsibility concerning the return or 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues 

to govern business proprietary 

information in this segment of the 

proceeding. Timely written notification 

of the return/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 

final results of these administrative and 

new shipper reviews and notice in 

accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 

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

Dated: March 9, 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

Appendix I—Decision Memorandum 

COMMENT 1: SURROGATE FINANCIAL 

RATIOS 

A. Bionic 5

B. Gemini 6

COMMENT 2: SURROGATE VALUE FOR 

WHOLE LIVE FISH 

COMMENT 3: SURROGATE VALUE FOR 

BROKEN FILLETS 

COMMENT 4: INFLATORS FOR CERTAIN 

FACTORS OF PRODUCTION 

COMMENT 5: QVD 

A. QVD’S U.S. SALES DATA 

B. INTERNATIONAL FREIGHT 

CALCULATION 

C. DUTY ABSORPTION 

D. COLLAPSING QVD/DONG THAP AND 

THUAN HUNG 

E. LABELS SURROGATE VALUE 

F. DIESEL FUEL SURROGATE VALUE 

COMMENT 6: AGIFISH SEPARATE RATE 

MARGIN 

COMMENT 7: AN XUYEN SEPARATE RATE 

MARGIN 

COMMENT 8: SOUTH VINA 

A. BONA FIDE SALES 

B. SURROGATE VALUE FOR 

HYDRATECH 

C. SURROGATE VALUE FOR WHITECH 

COMMENT 9: BINH AN 

A. BONA FIDE SALES 

B. INTERNATIONAL FREIGHT 

C. DIESEL 

D. ELECTRICITY 

[FR Doc. E9–5744 Filed 3–16–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

A–570–930 

Antidumping Duty Order: Circular 

Welded Austenitic Stainless Pressure 

Pipe from the People’s Republic of 

China 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 17, 2009. 

SUMMARY: Based on affirmative final 

determinations by the Department of 

Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’) and the 

International Trade Commission 

(‘‘ITC’’), the Department is issuing an 

antidumping duty order on circular 

welded austenitic stainless pressure 

pipe from the People’s Republic of 

China (‘‘PRC’’). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Melissa Blackledge or Howard Smith, 

AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–3518 and 482– 

5193, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

In accordance with sections 735(d) 

and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 

as amended (the ‘‘Act’’), on January 28, 

2009, the Department published its final 

determination in the antidumping duty 

investigation of circular welded 

austenitic stainless pressure pipe from 

the PRC. See Circular Welded Austenitic 

Stainless Pressure Pipe from the 

People’s Republic of China: Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value, 74 FR 4913 (January 28, 

2009). On March 12, 2009, the ITC 

notified the Department of its 

affirmative final determination of 

material injury to a U.S. industry. See 

Welded Stainless Steel Pressure Pipe 

from China, Investigation Nos. 701–TA– 

454 and 731–TA–1144 (Final), USITC 

Publication, 4064 (March 2009). 

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise covered by this 

order is circular welded austenitic 

stainless pressure pipe not greater than 

14 inches in outside diameter. This 

merchandise includes, but is not limited 

to, the American Society for Testing and 

Materials (‘‘ASTM’’) A–312 or ASTM 

A–778 specifications, or comparable 

domestic or foreign specifications. 

ASTM A–358 products are only 

included when they are produced to 

meet ASTM A–312 or ASTM A–778 

specifications, or comparable domestic 

or foreign specifications. Excluded from 

the scope are: (1) welded stainless 

mechanical tubing, meeting ASTM A– 

554 or comparable domestic or foreign 

specifications; (2) boiler, heat 

exchanger, superheater, refining 

furnace, feedwater heater, and 

condenser tubing, meeting ASTM A– 

249, ASTM A–688 or comparable 

domestic or foreign specifications; and 

(3) specialized tubing, meeting ASTM 

A–269, ASTM A–270 or comparable 

domestic or foreign specifications. 

The subject imports are normally 

classified in subheadings 7306.40.5005; 

7306.40.5040, 7306.40.5062, 

7306.40.5064, and 7306.40.5085 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). They may 

also enter under HTSUS subheadings 

7306.40.1010; 7306.40.1015; 

7306.40.5042, 7306.40.5044, 

7306.40.5080, and 7306.40.5090. The 

HTSUS subheadings are provided for 

convenience and customs purposes 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES