31280 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 111 / Friday, June 11, 2021 / Notices 

8 ‘‘Tails’’ in this context means the tail fan, which 

includes the telson and the uropods. 

9On April 26, 2011, Commerce amended the 

order to include dusted shrimp, pursuant to the CIT 

decision in Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action 

Committee v. United States, 703 F. Supp. 2d 1330 

(CIT 2010) and the U.S. International Trade 

Commission (ITC) determination, which found the 

domestic like product to include dusted shrimp. 

See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Brazil, 

India, the People’s Republic of China, Thailand, 

and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Amended 

Antidumping Duty Orders in Accordance with Final 

Court Decision, 76 FR 23277 (April 26, 2011); see 

also Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Brazil, China, 

India, Thailand, and Vietnam (Investigation Nos. 

731–TA–1063, 1064, 1066–1068 (Review), USITC 

Publication 4221, March 2011. 

1See Antidumping Duty Order; Barium Chloride 

from the People’s Republic of China, 49 FR 40635 

(October 17, 1984) (Order). 

2See Barium Chloride from China; Institution of 

a Five-Year Review, 85 FR 61984 (October 1, 2020). 

3See Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews, 85 

FR 61928 (October 1, 2020). 

4See Barium Chloride from the People’s Republic 

of China: Final Results of the Expedited Fifth 

Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order, 86 

FR 7257 (January 27, 2021). 

Foodstuff Co., Ltd. 

90. Shantou Ocean Best Seafood Corporation 

91. Shantou Ruiyuan Industry Co., Ltd. 

92. Shantou Wanya Foods Fty. Co., Ltd. 

93. Shantou Yuexing Enterprise Company 

94. Shengyuan Aquatic Food Co., Ltd. 

95. Suizhong Tieshan Food Co., Ltd. 

96. Thai Royal Frozen Food Zhanjiang Co., 

Ltd. 

97. Tongwei Hainan Aquatic Products Co., 

Ltd. 

98. Xiamen East Ocean Foods Co., Ltd. 

99. Xiamen Granda Import and Export Co., 

Ltd. 

100. Yangjiang Dawu Aquatic Products Co., 

Ltd. 

101. Yangjiang Guolian Seafood Co., Ltd. 

102. Yangjiang Haina Datong Trading Co. 

103. Yantai Longda Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. 

104. Yantai Tedfoods Co., Ltd. 

105. Yantai Wei Cheng Food Co., Ltd. 

106. Yantai Wei-Cheng Food Co., Ltd. 

107. Yixing Magnolia Garment Co., Ltd. 

108. Zhangzhou Donghao Seafoods Co., Ltd. 

109. Zhangzhou Xinhui Foods Co., Ltd. 

110. Zhangzhou Xinwanya Aquatic Product 

Co., Ltd. 

111. Zhangzhou Yanfeng Aquatic Product & 

Foodstuff Co., Ltd. 

112. Zhanjiang Evergreen Aquatic Product 

Science and Technology Co., Ltd. 

113. Zhanjiang Fuchang Aquatic Products 

Co., Ltd. 

114. Zhanjiang Fuchang Aquatic Products 

Freezing Plant 

115. Zhanjiang Longwei Aquatic Products 

Industry Co., Ltd. 

116. Zhanjiang Newpro Foods Co., Ltd. 

117. Zhanjiang Regal Integrated Marine 

Resources Co., Ltd. 

118. Zhanjiang Universal Seafood Corp. 

119. Zhaoan Yangli Aquatic Co., Ltd. 

120. Zhejiang Evernew Seafood Co. 

121. Zhejiang Xinwang Foodstuffs Co., Ltd. 

122. Zhoushan Genho Food Co., Ltd. 

123. Zhoushan Green Food Co., Ltd. 

124. Zhoushan Haizhou Aquatic Products 

125. Zhuanghe Yongchun Marine Products 

Appendix II 

Scope of the Order 

The scope of the order includes certain 

frozen warmwater shrimp and prawns, 

whether wild caught (ocean harvested) or 

farm raised (produced by aquaculture), head 

on or head off, shell on or peeled, tail on or 

tail off,8 deveined or not deveined, cooked or 

raw, or otherwise processed in frozen form. 

The frozen warmwater shrimp and prawn 

products included in the scope of the order, 

regardless of definitions in the harmonized 

tariff schedule (HTS), are products which are 

processed from warmwater shrimp and 

prawns through freezing and which are sold 

in any count size. 

The products described above may be 

processed from any species of warmwater 

shrimp and prawns. Warmwater shrimp and 

prawns are generally classified in, but are not 

limited to, the Penaeidae family. Some 

examples of the farmed and wild caught 

warmwater species include, but are not 

limited to, white-leg shrimp (Penaeus 

vannemei), banana prawn (Penaeus 

merguiensis), fleshy prawn (Penaeus 

chinensis), giant river prawn 

(Macrobrachium rosenbergii), giant tiger 

prawn (Penaeus monodon), redspotted 

shrimp (Penaeus brasiliensis), southern 

brown shrimp (Penaeus subtilis), southern 

pink shrimp (Penaeus notialis), southern 

rough shrimp (Trachypenaeus curvirostris), 

southern white shrimp (Penaeus schmitti), 

blue shrimp (Penaeus stylirostris), western 

white shrimp (Penaeus occidentalis), and 

Indian white prawn (Penaeus indicus). 

Frozen shrimp and prawns that are packed 

with marinade, spices or sauce are included 

in the scope of the order. In addition, food 

preparations, which are not ‘‘prepared 

meals,’’ that contain more than 20 percent by 

weight of shrimp or prawn are also included 

in the scope of the order. 

Excluded from the scope are: (1) Breaded 

shrimp and prawns (HTS subheading 

1605.20.1020); (2) shrimp and prawns 

generally classified in the Pandalidae family 

and commonly referred to as coldwater 

shrimp, in any state of processing; (3) fresh 

shrimp and prawns whether shell on or 

peeled (HTS subheadings 0306.23.0020 and 

0306.23.0040); (4) shrimp and prawns in 

prepared meals (HTS subheading 

1605.20.0510); (5) dried shrimp and prawns; 

(6) Lee Kum Kee’s shrimp sauce; (7) canned 

warmwater shrimp and prawns (HTS 

subheading 1605.20.1040); and (8) certain 

battered shrimp. Battered shrimp is a shrimpbased product: (1) That is produced from 

fresh (or thawed-from-frozen) and peeled 

shrimp; (2) to which a ‘‘dusting’’ layer of rice 

or wheat flour of at least 95 percent purity 

has been applied; (3) with the entire surface 

of the shrimp flesh thoroughly and evenly 

coated with the flour; (4) with the nonshrimp content of the end product 

constituting between four and 10 percent of 

the product’s total weight after being dusted, 

but prior to being frozen; and (5) that is 

subjected to individually quick frozen 

(‘‘IQF’’) freezing immediately after 

application of the dusting layer. When 

dusted in accordance with the definition of 

dusting above, the battered shrimp product is 

also coated with a wet viscous layer 

containing egg and/or milk, and par-fried. 

The products covered by this order are 

currently classified under the following HTS 

subheadings: 0306.17.00.03, 0306.17.00.06, 

0306.17.00.09, 0306.17.00.12, 0306.17.00.15, 

0306.17.00.18, 0306.17.00.21, 0306.17.00.24, 

0306.17.00.27, 0306.17.00.40, 1605.21.10.30, 

and 1605.29.10.10. These HTS subheadings 

are provided for convenience and for 

customs purposes only; the written 

description of the scope of this order is 

dispositive.9

[FR Doc. 2021–12317 Filed 6–10–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–570–007] 

Barium Chloride From the People’s 

Republic of China: Continuation of 

Antidumping Duty Order 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: As a result of the 

determinations by the Department of 

Commerce (Commerce) and the 

International Trade Commission (ITC) 

that revocation of the antidumping duty 

(AD) order on barium chloride from the 

People’s Republic of China (China) 

would likely lead to a continuation or 

recurrence of dumping and material 

injury to an industry in the United 

States, Commerce is publishing a notice 

of continuation of the AD order. 

DATES: Applicable June 11, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Eliza Siordia, Office V, AD/CVD 

Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

(202) 482–3878. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On October 17, 1984, Commerce 

issued the AD order on barium chloride 

from China.1 On October 1, 2020, the 

ITC instituted,2 and Commerce 

initiated,3 the fifth sunset review of the 

Order, pursuant to section 751(c) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930 as amended (the Act). 

As a result of its review, Commerce 

determined that a revocation of the 

Order would likely lead to continuation 

or recurrence of dumping and, therefore, 

notified the ITC of the magnitude of the 

margins likely to prevail should the 

Order be revoked.4

On June 7, 2021, the ITC published its 

determination, pursuant to sections 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 111 / Friday, June 11, 2021 / Notices 31281 

5See Barium Chloride from China, 86 FR 30332 

(June 7, 2021). 

6The scope reflects the HTSUS subheading 

currently in effect. 

1See Stainless Steel Bar from India: Final Results 

of Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty 

Order; 2017–2018, 84 FR 56179 (October 21, 2019) 

(Final Results), and accompanying Issues and 

Decision Memorandum (IDM). 

2See Final Results IDM at Comment 1. 

3 Id. 

4The petitioners are: Carpenter Technology 

Corporation; Crucible Industries LLC; Electralloy, a 

Division of G.O. Carlson, Inc.; North American 

Stainless; Universal Stainless Alloy Product, Inc.; 

and Valbruna Slater Stainless, Inc. 

5See Plaintiff’s Rule 56.2 Motion for Judgment 

upon the Agency Record, in Carpenter Technology 

Corporation, et al. v. United States, Court No. 19– 

00200 (filed May 5, 2020). 

6See Stainless Steel Bar from India: Preliminary 

Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review; 2017–2018, 84 FR 15582 (April 16, 2019) 

(Preliminary Results), and accompanying 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum (PDM). 

7See Government’s Response to Plaintiffs’ Motion 

for Judgment upon the Agency Record, in Carpenter 

Technology Corporation, et al. v. United States, 

Court No. 19–00200 (filed August 4, 2020). 

8See Carpenter Technology Corporation, et al. v. 

United States, 477 F. Supp. 3d 1356 (CIT 2020). 

9 Id. 

10See Results of Redetermination Pursuant to 

Court Remand, Carpenter Technology Corporation, 

et al. v. United States, Court No. 19–00200, Slip Op. 

20–158, dated January 27, 2021 (Remand 

Redetermination). 

11 Id. at 6 through 11. 

751(c) and 752(a) of the Act, that 

revocation of the Order would likely 

lead to continuation or recurrence of 

material injury to an industry in the 

United States within a reasonably 

foreseeable time.5

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise covered by the 

Order is barium chloride, a chemical 

compound having the formulas BaCl2 or 

BaCl2-2H20, currently classifiable under 

subheading 2827.39.4500 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States (HTSUS).6 Although the 

HTSUS subheading is provided for 

convenience and customs purposes, the 

written description of the scope of this 

Order is dispositive. 

Continuation of the Order 

As a result of the determinations by 

Commerce and the ITC that revocation 

of the Order would likely lead to a 

continuation or a recurrence of 

dumping, as well as material injury to 

an industry in the United States, 

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

and 19 CFR 351.218(a), Commerce 

hereby orders the continuation of the 

Order. 

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. The effective date of the 

continuation of the Order will be the 

date of publication in the Federal 

Register of this notice of continuation. 

Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act 

and 19 CFR 351.218(c)(2), Commerce 

intends to initiate the next five-year 

sunset review of the Order not later than 

30 days prior to the fifth anniversary of 

the effective date of continuation. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

This five-year sunset review and this 

notice are in accordance with sections 

751(c) and 751(d)(2) of the Act and 

published in accordance with section 

777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.218(f)(4). 

Dated: June 7, 2021. 

Christian Marsh, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2021–12314 Filed 6–10–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A 533–810] 

Stainless Steel Bar From India: Notice 

of Court Decision Not in Harmony With 

the Results of the Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review; Notice of 

Amended Final Results 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On June 2, 2021, the U.S. 

Court of International Trade (the CIT) 

issued its final judgment in Carpenter 

Technology Corporation, et al. v. United 

States, Court No. 19–00200, sustaining 

the Department of Commerce 

(Commerce)’s remand results pertaining 

to the administrative review of the 

antidumping duty (AD) order on 

stainless steel bar (SSB) from India 

covering the period February 1, 2017 

through January 31, 2018. Commerce is 

notifying the public that the CIT’s final 

judgment is not in harmony with 

Commerce’s final results of the 

administrative review, and that 

Commerce is amending the final results 

with respect to the dumping margins 

assigned to Venus Wire Industries Pvt. 

Ltd. and its affiliates Precision Metals, 

Sieves Manufacturers (India) Pvt. Ltd., 

and Hindustan Inox Ltd. (collectively, 

the Venus Group), Jindal Stainless 

(Hisar) Limited (Jindal), and Laxcon 

Steels Limited (Laxcon). 

DATES: Applicable June 12, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Hermes Pinilla, AD/CVD Operations, 

Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3477. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On October 21, 2019, Commerce 

published its Final Results in the 2017– 

2018 AD administrative review of SSB 

from India.1 In the Final Results, we 

determined that the Venus Group is not 

the manufacturer of the SSB that it 

purchased from unaffiliated suppliers 

and processed in India prior to 

exportation to the United States.2

Because most of the unaffiliated 

suppliers did not provide their costs, we 

applied partial adverse facts available 

(AFA) with respect to the Venus 

Group.3

The petitioners 4 appealed 

Commerce’s Final Results.5 On August 

4, 2020, Commerce requested a 

voluntary remand to reconsider or 

further explain the application of its 

partial AFA methodology to address 

missing cost of production data from the 

Venus Group’s unaffiliated suppliers, 

the change in the partial AFA 

methodology between the Preliminary 

Results 6 and the Final Results, and, if 

appropriate, to reconsider the 

appropriate AD rates assigned to Jindal 

and Laxcon.7

On November 4, 2020, the CIT granted 

Commerce’s motion for a voluntary 

remand finding that there was a 

compelling justification for the remand 

request, that the need to accurately 

calculate margins was not outweighed 

by the interest in finality, and that the 

scope of the requested remand was 

appropriate.8 Specifically, the CIT 

remanded the Final Results to 

Commerce to further explain or 

reconsider its partial AFA methodology 

in the Final Results.9

In its Remand Redetermination, 

issued in January 2021,10 Commerce 

further explained its revised partial 

AFA methodology, and made certain 

corrections in the Venus Group’s margin 

program. Specifically, Commerce 

included all of the Venus Group’s U.S. 

sales in its margin calculation; matched 

sales and costs by manufacturer; and 

made AFA adjustments not only to cost 

of production, but also other 

components of cost, including variable 

cost of manufacture and fixed and 

variable overhead.11 Accordingly, 

Commerce made changes to the margin 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES