31696 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 126 / Thursday, July 2, 2009 / Notices 

plated (e.g., chrome, zinc or nickel coated), 

coated (e.g., with paint, epoxy, or plastic), or 

uncoated (‘‘raw’’). The wire may be drawn or 

rolled and may have a round, square or other 

profile. Wire decking is sold in a variety of 

wire gauges. The wire diameters used in the 

decking mesh are 0.105 inches or greater for 

round wire. For wire other than round wire, 

the distance between any two points on a 

cross-section of the wire is 0.105 inches or 

greater. Wire decking reinforced with 

structural supports is designed generally for 

industrial and other commercial storage rack 

systems. 

Wire decking is produced to various 

profiles, including, but not limited to, a flat 

(‘‘flush’’) profile, an upward curved back 

edge profile (‘‘backstop’’) or downward 

curved edge profile (‘‘waterfalls’’), depending 

on the rack storage system. The wire decking 

may or may not be anchored to the rack 

storage system. The scope does not cover the 

metal rack storage system, comprised of 

metal uprights and cross beams, on which 

the wire decking is ultimately installed. Also 

excluded from the scope is wire mesh 

shelving that is not reinforced with structural 

supports and is designed for use without 

structural supports. 

Wire decking enters the United States 

through several basket categories in the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United 

States (‘‘HTSUS’’). U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection has issued a ruling (NY F84777) 

that wire decking is to be classified under 

HTSUS 9403.90.8040. Wire decking has also 

been entered under HTSUS 7217.10, 7217.20, 

7326.20, 7326.90, 9403.20.0020 and 

9403.20.0030. While HTSUS subheadings are 

provided for convenience and Customs 

purposes, the written description of the 

scope of the investigations is dispositive. 

Appendix II 

Where it is not practicable to examine all 

known exporters/producers of subject 

merchandise, section 777A(c)(2) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended, permits us to 

investigate (1) a sample of exporters, 

producers, or types of products that is 

statistically valid based on the information 

available at the time of selection, or (2) 

exporters and producers accounting for the 

largest volume of the subject merchandise 

that can reasonably be examined. 

In the chart below, please provide the total 

quantity and total value of all your sales of 

merchandise covered by the scope of this 

investigation (see ‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ 

section of this notice), produced in the PRC, 

and exported/shipped to the United States 

during the period October 1, 2008, through 

March 31, 2009. 

Market Total quantity 

in metric tons Terms of sale Total value 

United States: 

1. Export Price Sales ................................................................................................

2. a. Exporter Name .................................................................................................

b. Address ................................................................................................................

c. Contact .................................................................................................................

d. Phone No. ............................................................................................................

e. Fax No. .................................................................................................................

3. Constructed Export Price Sales ...........................................................................

4. Further Manufactured ...........................................................................................

Total Sales ........................................................................................................

Total Quantity 

• Please report quantity on a metric ton 

basis. If any conversions were used, please 

provide the conversion formula and source. 

Terms of Sales 

• Please report all sales on the same terms 

(e.g., free on board at port of export). 

Total Value 

• All sales values should be reported in 

U.S. dollars. Please indicate any exchange 

rates used and their respective dates and 

sources. 

Export Price Sales 

• Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as an 

export price sale when the first sale to an 

unaffiliated customer occurs before 

importation into the United States. 

• Please include any sales exported by 

your company directly to the United States. 

• Please include any sales exported by 

your company to a third-country market 

economy reseller where you had knowledge 

that the merchandise was destined to be 

resold to the United States. 

• If you are a producer of subject 

merchandise, please include any sales 

manufactured by your company that were 

subsequently exported by an affiliated 

exporter to the United States. 

• Please do not include any sales of subject 

merchandise manufactured in Hong Kong in 

your figures. 

Constructed Export Price Sales 

• Generally, a U.S. sale is classified as a 

constructed export price sale when the first 

sale to an unaffiliated customer occurs after 

importation. However, if the first sale to the 

unaffiliated customer is made by a person in 

the United States affiliated with the foreign 

exporter, constructed export price applies 

even if the sale occurs prior to importation. 

• Please include any sales exported by 

your company directly to the United States; 

• Please include any sales exported by 

your company to a third-country market 

economy reseller where you had knowledge 

that the merchandise was destined to be 

resold to the United States. 

• If you are a producer of subject 

merchandise, please include any sales 

manufactured by your company that were 

subsequently exported by an affiliated 

exporter to the United States. 

• Please do not include any sales of subject 

merchandise manufactured in Hong Kong in 

your figures. 

Further Manufactured 

• Sales of further manufactured or 

assembled (including re-packaged) 

merchandise is merchandise that undergoes 

further manufacture or assembly in the 

United States before being sold to the first 

unaffiliated customer. 

• Further manufacture or assembly costs 

include amounts incurred for direct 

materials, labor and overhead, plus amounts 

for general and administrative expense, 

interest expense, and additional packing 

expense incurred in the country of further 

manufacture, as well as all costs involved in 

moving the product from the U.S. port of 

entry to the further manufacturer. 

[FR Doc. E9–15703 Filed 7–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–475–818] 

Certain Pasta From Italy: Initiation and 

Preliminary Results of Changed 

Circumstances Review, and Intent To 

Revoke Order in Part 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce 

DATES: Effective Date: July 2, 2009. 

SUMMARY: On May 26, 2009, the 

Department of Commerce 

(‘‘Department’’) received a request for a 

changed circumstances review and a 

request to revoke, in part, the 

antidumping duty order on certain pasta 

from Italy with respect to gluten-free 

pasta. The Department confirmed that 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 126 / Thursday, July 2, 2009 / Notices 31697 

1New World Pasta Company, Dakota Growers 

Pasta Company, and American Italian Pasta 

Company. 

2See Memo from Christopher Hargett, Case 

Analyst, AD/CVD Operations 3, to Melissa Skinner, 

Office Director, AD/CVD Operations 3 entitled 

‘‘Phone Conversation with Counsel for Petitioners,’’ 

dated June 2, 2009. 3See id. 

petitioners 1 have no interest in 

antidumping duty relief from imports of 

gluten-free pasta. Therefore, we are 

notifying the public of our intent to 

revoke, in part, the antidumping duty 

order as it relates to imports of glutenfree pasta as described below. The 

Department invites interested parties to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher Hargett, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20230; 

telephone (202) 482–4161. 

Background 

On July 24, 1996, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

antidumping duty order on pasta from 

Italy. See Notice of Antidumping Duty 

Order and Amended Final 

Determination of Sales at Less Than 

Fair Value: Certain Pasta From Italy, 61 

FR 38547 (July 24, 1996). 

On February 3, 2009, the Department 

received a request on behalf of Pasta 

Lensi S.r.L. (‘‘Lensi’’) for a changed 

circumstances review to revoke, in part, 

the antidumping duty order on certain 

pasta from Italy with respect to glutenfree pasta. We did not receive comments 

from any other party. 

Scope of the Order 

Imports covered by this order are 

shipments of certain non-egg dry pasta 

in packages of five pounds four ounces 

or less, whether or not enriched or 

fortified or containing milk or other 

optional ingredients such as chopped 

vegetables, vegetable purees, milk, 

gluten, diastasis, vitamins, coloring and 

flavorings, and up to two percent egg 

white. The pasta covered by this scope 

is typically sold in the retail market, in 

fiberboard or cardboard cartons, or 

polyethylene or polypropylene bags of 

varying dimensions. 

Excluded from the scope of this order 

are refrigerated, frozen, or canned 

pastas, as well as all forms of egg pasta, 

with the exception of non-egg dry pasta 

containing up to two percent egg white. 

Also excluded are imports of organic 

pasta from Italy that are accompanied by 

the appropriate certificate issued by the 

Instituto Mediterraneo Di Certificazione, 

by Bioagricoop Scrl, by QC&I 

International Services, by Ecocert Italia, 

by Consorzio per il Controllo dei 

Prodotti Biologici, by Associazione 

Italiana per l’Agricoltura Biologica, or 

by Instituto per la Certificazione Etica e 

Ambientale (‘‘ICEA’’) are also excluded 

from this order. See Memorandum from 

Audrey Twyman to Susan Kuhbach, 

dated February 28, 2006, ‘‘Recognition 

of Instituto per la Certificazione Etica e 

Ambientale.’’ 

The merchandise subject to this order 

is currently classifiable under 

subheadings 1901.90.95 and 1902.19.20 

of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 

the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). Although 

the HTSUS subheadings are provided 

for convenience and customs purposes, 

the written description of the 

merchandise subject to the order is 

dispositive. 

Initiation and Preliminary Results of 

Changed Circumstances Review, and 

Intent To Revoke Order in Part 

At the request of Lensi, and in 

accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 

(d)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended (‘‘Act’’), and 19 CFR 351.216, 

the Department is initiating a changed 

circumstances review of certain pasta 

from Italy to determine whether partial 

revocation of the antidumping duty 

order is warranted with respect to 

gluten-free pasta. Section 782(h)(2) of 

the Act and 19 CFR 351.222(g)(1)(i) 

provide that the Department may revoke 

an order (in whole or in part) if it 

determines that producers accounting 

for substantially all of the production of 

the domestic like product have no 

further interest in the order, in whole or 

in part. In addition, in the event the 

Department determines that expedited 

action is warranted, 19 CFR 

351.221(c)(3)(ii) permits the Department 

to combine the notices of initiation and 

preliminary results. 

In accordance with section 751(b) of 

the Act, and 19 CFR 351.222(g)(l)(i) and 

351.221(c)(3), we are initiating this 

changed circumstances review and have 

determined that expedited action is 

warranted. Lensi stated in its May 26, 

2009, request that petitioners support 

the request for changed circumstances 

review as filed. The certificate of service 

for Lensi’s May 26, 2009, request 

indicates that the request was served on 

counsel for petitioners in the current 

review of this proceeding. On June 1, 

2009, the Department spoke with 

counsel for petitioners who stated that 

they had knowledge of the request 

before it was filed, and supported the 

request.2 In accordance with section 

751(b) of the Act and 19 CFR 

351.222(g)(1)(i), and absent any 

evidence to the contrary, we find 

petitioners comprise substantially all of 

the production of the domestic like 

product. See Pasta Lensi May 26, 2009, 

letter to the Department. Petitioners 

have expressed a lack of interest in the 

order, in part, with respect to gluten-free 

pasta.3 Based on the expression of no 

interest by petitioners, and absent any 

objection by any other interested 

parties, we have preliminarily 

determined that the domestic producers 

of the like product have no interest in 

the continued application of the 

antidumping duty order on certain pasta 

from Italy to the merchandise that is 

subject to this request. Accordingly, we 

are notifying the public of our intent to 

revoke, in part, the antidumping duty 

order with respect to gluten-free pasta. 

Therefore, we intend to change the 

scope of the order on certain pasta from 

Italy to include the following exclusion: 

Excluded from the scope is gluten-free 

pasta. 

Public Comment 

Interested parties are invited to 

comment on these preliminary results. 

Written comments may be submitted no 

later than 14 days after the date of 

publication of these preliminary results. 

Rebuttals to written comments, limited 

to issues raised in such comments, may 

be filed no later than 21 days after the 

date of publication of these preliminary 

results. The Department will issue the 

final results of this changed 

circumstances review, which will 

include its analysis of any written 

comments, no later than 270 days after 

the date on which this review was 

initiated, or within 45 days if all parties 

agree to our preliminary results. See 19 

CFR 351.216(e). 

If final revocation occurs, we will 

instruct U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection to end the suspension of 

liquidation for the merchandise covered 

by the revocation on the effective date 

of the notice of revocation and to release 

any cash deposit or bond. See 19 CFR 

351.222(g)(4). The current requirement 

for a cash deposit of estimated 

antidumping duties on all subject 

merchandise will continue unless and 

until it is modified pursuant to the final 

results of this changed circumstances 

review. 

This initiation and preliminary results 

of review and notice are in accordance 

with sections 751(b) and 777(i) of the 

Act and 19 CFR 351.216, 351.221, and 

351.222. 

31698 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 126 / Thursday, July 2, 2009 / Notices 

1See STAPIMEX JSC’s submission to the 

Department regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater 

Shrimp from Vietnam: Request for Changed 

Circumstances Review, January 26, 2009 

(‘‘STAPIMEX JSC’s CCR Request’’). 

2See UTXI Corp.’s submission to the Department 

regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from 

Vietnam: Request for Changed Circumstances 

Review, January 27, 2009 (‘‘UTXI Corp.’s CCR 

Request’’). 

3See Cadovimex-Vietnam’s submission to the 

Department regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater 

Shrimp from Vietnam: Request for Changed 

Circumstances Review, February 4, 2009 

(‘‘Cadovimex-Vietnam’s CCR Request’’). 

4See Thuan Phuoc JSC’s submission to the 

Department regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater 

Shrimp from Vietnam: Request for Changed 

Circumstances Review, February 5, 2009 (‘‘Thuan 

Phuoc JSC’s CCR Request’’). 

5See Bac Lieu JSC’s submission to the 

Department regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater 

Shrimp from Vietnam: Request for Changed 

Circumstances Review, February 6, 2009 (‘‘Bac Lieu 

JSC’s CCR Request’’). 

6See CATACO’s submission to the Department 

regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from 

Vietnam: Request for Changed Circumstances 

Review, March 14, 2009 (‘‘CATACO’s CCR 

Request’’). 

Dated: June 26, 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E9–15707 Filed 7–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–552–802] 

Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From 

Vietnam: Notice of Preliminary Results 

of Antidumping Duty Changed 

Circumstances Reviews 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On March 18, 2009, the 

Department of Commerce (‘‘the 

Department’’) published in the Federal 

Register a notice of initiation of changed 

circumstances reviews of the 

antidumping duty order on frozen 

warmwater shrimp from Vietnam in 

order to determine whether five 

companies, Bac Lieu Fisheries Joint 

Stock Company (‘‘Bac Lieu JSC’’), 

Cadovimex Seafood Import-Export and 

Processing Joint Stock Company 

(‘‘Cadovimex Vietnam’’), Soc Trang 

Seafood Joint Stock Company 

(‘‘STAPIMEX JSC’’), Thuan Phuoc 

Seafoods and Trading Corporation 

(‘‘Thuan Phuoc JSC’’), and UTXI 

Aquatic Products Processing 

Corporation (‘‘UTXI Corp.’’) 

(collectively, ‘‘Five CCR Companies’’) 

are successors-in-interest, respectively, 

to Bac Lieu Fisheries Company Limited 

(‘‘Bac Lieu Limited’’), Cai Doi Vam 

Seafood Import-Export Company 

(‘‘Cadovimex’’), Soc Trang Aquatic 

Products and General Import Export 

Company (‘‘STAPIMEX’’), Thuan Phuoc 

Seafoods and Trading Corporation 

(‘‘Thuan Phuoc SOE’’), and UTXI 

Aquatic Products Processing Company 

(‘‘UTXI’’) (collectively, ‘‘Five Original 

Companies’’) for purposes of 

determining antidumping duty liability. 

Similarly, on April 14, 2009, the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register a notice of initiation of changed 

circumstances review of the 

antidumping order in order to 

determine whether Can Tho Import 

Export Fishery Limited Company 

(‘‘CAFISH’’) is the successor-in-interest 

to Can Tho Agricultural and Animal 

Products Import Export Company 

(‘‘CATACO’’). We have preliminarily 

determined that Bac Lieu JSC, 

Cadovimex Vietnam, STAPIMEX JSC, 

Thuan Phuoc JSC, and UTXI Corp. are 

the successors-in-interest to the 

respective Five Original Companies for 

purposes of determining antidumping 

duty liability. However, we have 

preliminarily determined that CAFISH 

is not the successor-in-interest to 

CATACO for purposes of determining 

antidumping duty liability. Interested 

parties are invited to comment on these 

preliminary results. 

DATES: Effective Date: July 2, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry 

Huang or Scot T. Fullerton, AD/CVD 

Operations, Office 9, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 

202–482–4047 or 202–482–1386, 

respectively. 

Background 

The Department published in the 

Federal Register the antidumping duty 

order for frozen warmwater shrimp from 

Vietnam on February 1, 2005. See 

Notice of Amended Final Determination 

of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and 

Antidumping Duty Order: Certain 

Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the 

Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 70 FR 

5152, 5154–55 (February 1, 2005) 

(‘‘Order’’). As part of the Order, all six 

companies, Bac Lieu Limited, 

Cadovimex, STAPIMEX, Thuan Phuoc 

SOE, UTXI, and CATACO received a 

separate antidumping duty cash deposit 

rate of 4.57 percent. Id. 

On January 26, 2009, STAPIMEX JSC, 

and on January 27, 2009, UTXI Corp., 

filed submissions requesting that the 

Department conduct changed 

circumstances reviews of the 

antidumping duty order on frozen 

warmwater shrimp from Vietnam 

claiming, respectively, that STAPIMEX 

JSC is the successor-in-interest to 

STAPIMEX,1 and that UTXI Corp. is the 

successor-in-interest to UTXI,2 in 

accordance with section 751(b) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the 

Act’’) and 19 CRF 351.216. Then on 

February 4, 2009, Cadovimex-Vietnam, 

on February 5, 2009, Thuan Phuoc JSC, 

and on February 6, 2009, Bac Lieu JSC, 

filed submissions requesting that the 

Department conduct changed 

circumstances reviews of the 

antidumping duty order claiming, 

respectively, that Cadovimex-Vietnam is 

the successor-in-interest to Cadovimex,3

that Thuan Phuoc JSC is the successorin-interest to Thuan Phuoc SOE,4 and 

that Bac Lieu JSC is the successor-ininterest to Bac Lieu Limited.5 In their 

submissions, the Five CCR Companies 

provided information regarding the 

events leading to each company’s 

transition from the Five Original 

Companies. Specifically, CadovimexVietnam, STAPIMEX JSC, and Thuan 

Phuoc JSC provided documentation 

relating to their change from Stateowned enterprises (‘‘SOEs’’) to joint 

stock companies (‘‘JSCs’’), while Bac 

Lieu JSC and UTXI Corp. provided 

documentation relating to their change 

from limited liability companies 

(‘‘LLCs’’) to JSCs. In addition, all five 

companies provided documentation 

relating to their ownership structures 

and management, production facilities, 

supplier relationships, and customer 

bases, among other things. In response 

to these requests, the Department 

initiated changed circumstances reviews 

of the Five CCR Companies on March 

18, 2009. See Certain Frozen 

Warmwater Shrimp from Socialist 

Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of 

Changed Circumstances Reviews, 74 FR 

11527 (March 18, 2009) (‘‘Initiation 

Notice’’). 

On March 13, 2009, CATACO filed a 

submission requesting that the 

Department conduct a changed 

circumstances review of the 

antidumping duty order claiming that 

CAFISH is the successor-in-interest to 

CATACO’s shrimp processing 

operation.6 In its submission, CATACO 

provided information regarding the 

formation of its seafood factory as a 

separate JSC, Cantho Import-Export 

Seafood Joint Stocks Company 

(‘‘CASEAMEX’’). CATACO provided 

additional information regarding the 

subsequent further separation of 

CASEAMEX’s shrimp processing 

operation which formed a joint venture 

with an unaffiliated shrimp processing