[Federal Register: April 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 62)]
[Notices]
[Page 15653-15655]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02ap07-21]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-552-801]
Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam: Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: April 2, 2007.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``Department'') has determined
that three requests for a new shipper review of the antidumping duty
order on certain frozen fish fillets from the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam (``Vietnam''), received on January 31, February 18 and February
28, 2007, respectively, meet the statutory and regulatory requirements
for initiation. For reasons discussed below, the Department also
determined that a fourth request for a new shipper review does not meet
the requirements for
[[Page 15654]]
initiation. The period of review (``POR'') for the three new shipper
reviews which the Department is initiating is August 1, 2006, through
January 31, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Lai Robinson and Michael Holton,
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-
3797, and (202) 482-1324, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The notice announcing the antidumping duty order on certain frozen
fish fillets from Vietnam was published in the Federal Register on
August 12, 2003.\1\ See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Certain
Frozen Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, 68 FR 47909
(August 12, 2003). On January 31, February 21, and February 28, 2007,
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(c), the Department received four new shipper
review requests from Vinh Quang Fisheries Corporation (``Vinh Quang''),
Ngoc Thai Company, Ltd. (``Ngoc Thai''), Anvifish Co., Ltd.,
(``Anvifish''), and Southern Fishery Industries Company, Ltd. (``South
Vina''), respectively. Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish certified
that they are both the producer and exporter of the subject merchandise
upon which the request for a new shipper review is based. In its new
shipper review request dated February 28, 2007 (``original request''),
South Vina claimed that it is an exporter of frozen fish fillets from
Vietnam; however, it did not provide any information or documents
supporting its request for a new shipper review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Therefore, a request for a new shipper review based on the
semiannual anniversary month, February, was due to the Department by
the final day of February 2007. See 19 CFR 351.214(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 8, 2007, Catfish Farmers of America and individual U.S.
catfish processors (``Petitioners'') submitted comments requesting that
the Department reject South Vina's original request because it failed
to provide any of the required certifications or documents set forth in
19 CFR 351.214.\2\ On March 9, 2007, South Vina submitted a
certification and other supporting documents alleging that the
certification was not available, and that the new shipper regulation
does not require that the certification and accompanying documentation
be submitted with the original request. Furthermore, South Vina claimed
that the pertinent regulation merely requires that the request for
review be made within one year of the date referred to in 19 CFR
351.214(b)(2)(iv)(A). On March 15, 2007, Petitioners submitted
additional comments urging the Department to reject both South Vina's
original new shipper review request and its March 9, 2007, submission.
Petitioners reiterated their arguments that South Vina's original
request failed to meet any of the submission requirements and should
therefore be rejected. Petitioners also argued that South Vina's March
9, 2007, submission was untimely filed and should therefore also be
rejected. Citing 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2), Petitioners argued that the
Department's regulations unequivocally require applicants to include
the necessary certifications and documentation with their new shipper
review request. In support of their arguments, Petitioners also
referred to the Department's ``standard initiation checklist'' for new
shipper reviews which indicates that, if an application does not
satisfy the regulatory requirements, the applicant may only correct
such deficiencies ``{i{time} if sufficient time remains ... prior to
the end of the appropriate anniversary month or semi-annual anniversary
month.''\3\ Petitioners contended that the submission deadline in this
case was February 28, 2007. In other words, Petitioners argued that
South Vina should have submitted all of the regulatory requirements,
including the submission of the certifications and supporting
documentation, by the deadline, February 28, 2007. Because South Vina
failed to do so in its original request, Petitioners argued that South
Vina's submissions should be rejected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See below in Section Initiation of New Shipper Reviews at B.
South Vina for the requirements specified in 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2).
\3\ See Petitioners' March 15, 2007, submission at pages 2 and
3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 22, 2007, South Vina submitted a response to Petitioners'
objections of March 15, 2007, comments. Citing several cases in which
the Department sent supplemental questionnaires prior to initiation,
South Vina argued that the Department should keep South Vina's March 9,
2007, supporting documentation and initiate a new shipper review.
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as
amended (``the Act''), and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i), Vinh Quang, Ngoc
Thai, and Anvifish certified that they did not export certain frozen
fish fillets to the United States during the period of investigation
(``POI''). In addition, pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A), Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and
Anvifish certified that, since the initiation of the investigation,
they have never been affiliated with any Vietnamese exporter or
producer who exported certain frozen fish fillets to the United States
during the POI, including those not individually examined during the
investigation. As required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(B), Vinh Quang,
Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish also certified that their export activities
were not controlled by the central government of Vietnam.
In addition to the certifications described above, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv), Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish submitted
documentation establishing the following: (1) The date on which Vinh
Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish first shipped certain frozen fish
fillets for export to the United States and the date on which the
frozen fish fillets were first entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption; (2) the volume of their first shipment;\4\ and (3) the
date of their first sale to an unaffiliated customer in the United
States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Vinh Quang made no subsequent shipments to the United
States, while Ngoc Thai made one subsequent shipment during the POR,
which the Department corroborated using data from U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (``CBP''). On page 2 of its submission, Anvifish
claimed no subsequent shipments to the United States after its first
sale; however, the CBP data indicates that there were subsequent
shipments made by Anvifish.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department conducted CBP database queries to confirm that Vinh
Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish's shipments of subject merchandise had
entered the United States for consumption and that liquidation of such
entries had been properly suspended for antidumping duties.
Initiation of New Shipper Reviews
A. Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and Anvifish
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.214(d)(1), the Department finds that Vinh Quang, Ngoc Thai, and
Anvifish's requests meet the threshold requirements for initiation of a
new shipper review for the shipment of certain frozen fish fillets from
Vietnam they produced and exported. See Memorandum to File from Cindy
Lai Robinson, Senior Analyst, through Alex Villanueva, Program Manager,
Office 9, Initiaion of AD New Shipper Review: Certain Frozen Fish
Fillets from Vietnam (A-552-801), dated March 26, 2007.
B. South Vina
The Department finds that South Vina's original review request
dated
[[Page 15655]]
February 28, 2007, did not provide any required supporting documents
and therefore, it does not meet the threshold requirements for
initiation of a new shipper review for the shipment of certain frozen
fish fillets from Vietnam, pursuant to sections 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) and
(II) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(i), 351.214(b)(2)(iii)(A) and
(B), and 351.214(b)(2)(iv). With respect to South Vina's submission on
March 9, 2007, the Department agrees with Petitioners that it was
submitted untimely for this semi-annual anniversary month because it
was received nine days after the deadline, February 28, 2007, which is
the last day of the semi-annual anniversary month. The Department
disagrees with South Vina's arguments that: (1) the new shipper
regulation does not require that the certification and accompanying
documentation be submitted with the original request; and (2) the
pertinent regulation merely requires that the request for review be
made ``within one year of the date referred to'' in paragraph 19 CFR
351.214(b)(2)(iv)(A). To the contrary, 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2) clearly
specifies the ``contents of request,'' which includes: (1) A
certification from the requester or its producer stating that no
subject merchandise was exported to the United States (``U.S.'') during
the POI; (2) a certification stating that since the initiation of the
investigation, the requester has never been affiliated with any
exporter or producer who exported subject merchandise to the U.S.
during the POI; (3) a certification stating no government control over
the requester's export activities in a nonmarket economy case; and (4)
information regarding the date of the requester's first entry or
shipment of subject merchandise, the volume of the first and all
subsequent shipments of subject merchandise to the U.S., and the date
of requester's first sale to an unaffiliated U.S. customer.
Furthermore, 19 CFR 351.214(a) points out that the purpose of the URAA
to establish a new shipper review procedure is to allow new shippers
the opportunity to attain their own individual dumping margin on an
expedited basis. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.214(d), the Department
is required to initiate the new shipper review within a month
immediately following the semi-annual anniversary month or the
anniversary month depending on the date of the request. Accordingly,
the Department must have all required supporting documents on the
record by the submission deadline in order to initiate a new shipper
review in a timely manner.
As noted above, on March 22, 2007, South Vina submitted a list of
cases where the Department sent supplemental questionnaires prior to
initiation and therefore, South Vina argues, the Department should
accept its March 9, 2007, supporting documentation and initiate a new
shipper review. However, in each case cited by South Vina, the
requestor included the documents required by section 351.214(b)(2) in
its original request, which South Vina did not include in its February
28, 2007, request. Because South Vina did not provide any of the
``contents of request'' in its original request, and its submission on
March 9, 2007, is untimely, the Department has determined that South
Vina's request does not meet the statutory and regulatory requirements
for initiation. Therefore, the Department has removed South Vina's
February 28, 2007, and its March 9, 2007, submissions from the record,
and rejected South Vina's new shipper review request, in accordance
with sections 751(a)(2)(B)(i)(I) and (II) of the Act, and 19 CFR
351.214.
The POR for the three new shipper reviews is August 1, 2006,
through January 31, 2007. See 19 CFR 351.214(g)(1)(ii)(A). The
Department intends to issue the preliminary results of these reviews no
later than 180 days from the date of initiation, and final results of
these reviews no later than 270 days from the date of initiation. See
section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act. Interested parties requiring
access to proprietary information in this new shipper review should
submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective
order in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305 and 351.306. This initiation
and notice are published in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.214 and 351.221(c)(1)(i).
Dated: March 26, 2007.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-6063 Filed 3-30-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S