[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 46 (Friday, March 9, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10645-10658]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1132]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-893]


Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the People's Republic of 
China: Preliminary Results and Partial Rescission of the 2004/2006 
Administrative Review and Preliminary Intent To Rescind 2004/2006 New 
Shipper Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Commerce (``the Department'') is 
currently conducting the 2004/2006 administrative review and a 2004/
2006 new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on certain frozen 
warmwater shrimp from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''). The 
period of review (``POR'') for both the administrative and new shipper 
reviews is July 14, 2004, through January 31, 2006. We preliminarily 
determine that sales have not been made below normal value (``NV'') 
with respect to certain exporters subject to the administrative review. 
We also have preliminarily found that the single sales made by Asian 
Seafoods (Zhanjiang) Co., Ltd. (``Asian Seafoods'') and Hai Li Aquatic 
Co., Ltd. Zhao An, Fujian (``Hai Li''), the new shipper, were not bona 
fide. Further, we are preliminarily applying adverse facts available to 
Meizhou Aquatic Products Quick-Frozen Industry Co., Ltd. (``Meizhou'') 
and Shantou Red Garden Foodstuff/Shantou Red Garden Food Processing Co. 
(collectively, ``Red Garden''). If these preliminary results are 
adopted in our final results of these reviews, we will instruct U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to assess antidumping duties on 
entries of subject merchandise during the period of review (``POR'') 
for which the importer-specific assessment rates are above de minimis.
    Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary 
results. We will issue the final results no later than 120 days from 
the date of publication of this notice.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 9, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin Begnal or Scot Fullerton, 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-
1442 or (202) 482-1386, respectively.

Background

    On February 1, 2005, the Department published in the Federal 
Register the antidumping duty order on certain frozen warmwater shrimp 
from the PRC. See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Frozen 
Warmwater Shrimp From the People's Republic of China, 70 FR 5149 
(February 1, 2005).
    On February 22, 2006, Hai Li, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.214(c), 
requested a new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on certain 
frozen warmwater shrimp from the PRC, which has a February anniversary 
month. On March 23, 2006, the Department initiated a new shipper review 
of Hai Li covering the period July 16, 2004, through January 31, 2006. 
See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of 
China: Initiation of New Shipper Review, 71 FR 14681 (March 23, 2006).
    On February 1, 2006, the Department published a notice of 
opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty 
order on certain frozen warmwater shrimp from the PRC. See Antidumping 
or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; 
Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 71 FR 5239 (February 1, 
2006).
    The Department received timely requests from the Ad Hoc Shrimp 
Trade Action Committee and certain individual companies, in accordance 
with 19 CFR 351.213(b), during the anniversary month of February, for 
administrative reviews of the antidumping duty orders on certain frozen 
warmwater shrimp from the PRC covering 164 companies. However, on March 
1, 2006, the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee withdrew its request 
for administrative review on one company. The Department, therefore, 
initiated an administrative review on the remaining 163 companies. See 
Notice of Initiation of Administrative Reviews of the Antidumping Duty 
Orders on Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the Socialist Republic of 
Vietnam and the People's Republic of China, 71 FR 17813 (April 7, 2006) 
(``Initiation Notice'').
    The Initiation Notice specified that responses to the Department's 
quantity and value (``Q&V'') questionnaire were due by April 28, 2006. 
Additionally, the Department has a rebuttable presumption that a single 
dumping margin is appropriate for all exporters in a non-market economy 
(``NME'') country. However, the Department stated that it would 
consider information submitted in response to the Department's separate 
rate certifications/applications in order to determine whether or not 
respondents qualify for a separate rate. The Initiation Notice 
indicated that responses to the Department's separate rate 
certification were due on April 28, 2006, and responses to the 
Department's separate rate application were due May 19, 2006.
    On March 17, 2006, the Department received copies of CBP documents 
pertaining to the entry of certain frozen warmwater shrimp from the 
PRC, exported by Hai Li during the POR, from CBP. See Memorandum to the 
File through Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office 9, from Michael Quigley, Case Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 
9, regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic 
of China: Entry Package(s) from U.S. Customs and Border Protection 
(``CBP'') (December 11, 2006). On March 21, 2006, the Department issued 
Hai Li its antidumping duty questionnaire sections A, C, and D.
    On April 14, 2006, Hai Li agreed to waive the time limits of its 
new shipper review of certain frozen warmwater shrimp from the PRC, 
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(j)(3), and agreed to have its

[[Page 10646]]

review conducted concurrently with the 2004/2006 administrative review. 
See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of 
China: Notice of Postponement of Time Limits for New Shipper 
Antidumping Duty Reviews in Conjunction with Administrative Review, 71 
FR 26454 (May 5, 2006). On April 25, 2006, Hai Li submitted its 
response to section A of the Department's questionnaire. On May 11, 
2006, Hai Li submitted its response to section C and D of the 
Department's questionnaire, and the Department issued Hai Li its 
supplemental section A questionnaire. Hai Li responded to the 
Department's supplemental section A questionnaire on June 1, 2006.
    Of the 163 named firms for which the Department initiated an 
administrative review, and consistent with the guidelines established 
in the Initiation Notice, on April 28, 2006, 28 firms responded to the 
Department's Q&V questionnaire. Of these 28 firms, 16 indicated they 
had shipments of subject merchandise during the POR that were subject 
to review and 14 firms submitted their separate rate certification. 
Also, on May 19, 2006, three firms submitted their separate rate 
application. One of the three, Fuqing Minhua Trade Co., Ltd., an 
affiliate of Yelin, was not listed in the Initiation Notice; however it 
submitted a separate rate application. Furthermore, on May 19, 2006, 
the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee withdrew its request for an 
administrative review of one company: Polypro Plastics.
    On May 22, 2006, the Department sent a letter to the remaining 
firms that did not respond to the Department's Q&V questionnaire and 
separate rate certification/application providing them with another 
opportunity to submit the requested information (i.e., by June 5, 
2006). See Memorandum to the File, from Christopher D. Riker, Program 
Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, regarding Administrative Review 
of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China: 
Letters to Interested Parties Regarding Final Opportunity to Submit 
Quantity and Value Questionnaire Response and Separate Rate 
Applications/Certifications (May 22, 2006); see also Letter to Whom It 
May Concern, from Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, Office 9, 
Import Administration, regarding 2004-2006 Administrative Review of the 
Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the 
People's Republic of China (May 22, 2006) (``Q&V Follow-up Letter''). 
On May 1, 2006, and May 10, 2006, one company and 14 companies, 
respectively, filed a letter with the Department indicating they had no 
shipments during the POR. On June 5, 2006, in response to the 
Department's May 22, 2006, letter, eight more companies filed letters 
indicating they had no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR 
for a total of 44 responses (including statements of no shipments) to 
the Department's Q&V questionnaire.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The following 44 companies/corporate groupings (i.e., 52 
individual firms) responded to the Department's Q&V questionnaire: 
Meizhou Aquatic Products Quick-Frozen Industry Co., Ltd., Shantou 
Red Garden Foodstuff/Shantou Red Garden Food Processing Co., Yelin 
Enterprise Co., Ltd. Hong Kong, Yangjiang City Yelin Hoitat Quick 
Frozen Seafood Co., Ltd., Shantou Yelin Frozen Seafood Co. Ltd., 
Fuqing Yihua Aquatic Products Co., Ltd., Savvy Seafood Inc., Hai Li 
Aquatic Co., Ltd. Zhao An, Fujian, Asian Seafoods (Zhanjiang) Co., 
Allied Pacific Aquatic Products (Zhangjiang) Co., Ltd. (``Allied 
Pacific (Zhanjiang)''), Allied Pacific (H.K.) Co. Ltd. (``Allied 
Pacific HK''), Zhanjiang Allied Pacific Aquaculture Co., Ltd., 
Allied Pacific Food (Dalian) Co. Ltd., King Royal Investments, Ltd. 
(collectively ``Allied Pacific''), Zhanjiang Evergreen Aquatic 
Product Science and Technology Co., Ltd., Zhoushan Huading Seafood 
Co., Ltd., Dalian FTZ Sea-Rich International Trading Co., Ltd., 
Beihai Zhengwu Industry Co., Ltd., Shantou Long Feng Foodstuffs Co., 
Shantou Yuexing Enterprise Company, Shantou Ruiyuan Industry Co., 
Ltd., Shantou Freezing Aquatic Product Food Stuffs Co., Shantou 
Ocean Freezing Industry and Trade General Corporation, Shantou 
Jinhang Aquatic Industry Co., Ltd., Dongri Aquatic Products Freezing 
Plants, Chaoyang Qiaofeng Group Co., Ltd. (Shantou Qiaofeng (Group) 
Co., Ltd.) (Shantou/ Chaoyang Qiaofeng)/Shantou City Qiaofeng Group, 
Shantou Wanya Food Factory Co., Ltd., Shantou Shengping Oceanstar 
Business Co., Ltd., Pingyang Xinye Aquatic Products Co., Ltd., 
Taizhou Zhonghuan Industrial Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Cereals, Oils & 
Foodstuff Import & Export Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Daishan Baofa Aquatic 
Products Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Evernew Seafood Co., Ltd., Zhejiang 
Zhenlong Foodstuffs Co., Ltd., Zhoushan Cereals, Oils, and 
Foodstuffs Import and Export Co., Ltd., Zhoushan Diciyuan Aquatic 
Products, Zhoushan Haichang Food Co., Zhoushan Industrial Co., Ltd., 
Zhoushan Putuo Huafa Sea Products Co., Ltd., Zhoushan Xifeng Aquatic 
Co., Ltd., Zhoushan Zhenyang Developing Co., Ltd., Zhoushan Guotai 
Fisheries Co., Ltd., Yanti Wei-Cheng Food Co., Ltd., Hainan Fruit 
Vegetable Food Allocation Co. Ltd., Zhanjiang Bobogo Ocean Co., 
Ltd., Baofa Aquatic Products Co., Ltd., Guangzhou Lingshan Aquatic 
Products Co. Ltd., Spectrum Plastics, Ruin Huasheng Aquatic 
Products, and Sealord North America. Two additional companies, 
Fuqing Minhua Trade Co., Ltd., and Ocean Duke Corporation, responded 
to the Department's Q&V questionnaire as affiliates of companies 
named in the Initiation Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Respondents

    Of the 163 named firms for which the Department initiated an 
administrative review, nine companies/corporate groupings (which 
consisted of sixteen individually initiated companies, some of which 
are affiliated, yielding nine potential respondents) had both an active 
request for review, an appropriately submitted Q&V questionnaire 
response, and shipments of subject merchandise. Thus, nine companies/
corporate groupings were considered in the selection of respondents for 
this review. On June 16, 2006, the Department selected Meizhou, Red 
Garden, and Yelin Enterprise Co. Hong Kong and its affiliates 
(collectively ``Yelin'') as mandatory respondents. See Memorandum to 
Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 
Administration, from James C. Doyle, Office Director, Office 9, AD/CVD 
Operations, Import Administration, regarding Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the 
People's Republic of China: Selection of Respondents (June 16, 2006).
    The Department sent its antidumping questionnaire to Meizhou, Red 
Garden, and Yelin on June 20, 2006. In the questionnaire, the 
Department requested that the three firms provide a response to section 
A of the Department's questionnaire by July 11, 2006, and sections C 
and D of the questionnaire by July 27, 2006.
    On July 6, 2006, the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee withdrew 
its request for an administrative review of the following 36 companies: 
Beihai Zhengwu Industry Co., Ltd.; Chaoyang Qiaofeng Group Co., Ltd. 
(Shantou Qiaofeng (Group) Co., Ltd.) (Shantou/Chaoyang Qiaofeng); 
Chengai Nichi Lan Foods Co., Ltd.; Citic Heavy Machinery; Dalian Ftz 
Sea-Rich International Trading Co., Ltd.; Dongri Aquatic Products 
Freezing Plants; Fuqing Dongwei Aquatic Products Industry Co. Ltd.; 
Gallant Ocean (Liangjiang) Co. Ltd.; Hainan Fruit Vegetable Food 
Allocation Co., Ltd.; Hainan Golden Spring Foods Co., Ltd/Hainan Brich 
Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; Jinfu Trading Co., Ltd.; Kaifeng Ocean Sky 
Industry Co., Ltd.; Leizhou Zhulian Frozen Food Co., Ltd.; Pingyang 
Xinye Aquatic Products Co. Ltd.; Savvy Seafood Inc.; Shanghai Taoen 
International Trading Co., Ltd.; Shantou Freezing Aquatic Product Food 
Stuff Co.; Shantou Jinhang Aquatic Industry Co., Ltd.; Shantou Jinyuan 
District Mingfeng Quick-Frozen Factory; Shantou Long Feng Foodstuffs 
Co., Ltd. (Shantou Longfeng Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.); Shantou Ruiyaun 
Industry Co., Ltd.; Shantou Shengping Oceanstar Business Co. Ltd.; 
Shantou Wanya Food Factory Co. Ltd.; Shantou Yuexing Enterprise 
Company; Xuwen Hailang Breeding Co., Ltd.; Yantai Wei-Cheng Food Co., 
Ltd.; Zhangjiang Bobogo Ocean Co., Ltd.; Zhangjiang Newpro Food Co., 
Ltd.; Zhanjiang Go-Harvest Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; Zhanjiang Runhai 
Foods Co., Ltd.; Zhanjiang Universal Seafood Corp; Zhejiang Cereals, 
Oils, & Foodstuffs Import & Export Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Cereals, Oils, 
and Foodstuffs Import and

[[Page 10647]]

Export Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Diciyuan Aquatic Products; Zhoushan Lizhou 
Fishery Co., Ltd.; and Zhoushan Xifeng Aquatic Co., Ltd.
    In turn, on July 31, 2006, the Department issued a notice of 
partial rescission for the 36 above-referenced companies, as well as 
Polypro Plastics, for whom the Department initiated, in part, the first 
administrative review of certain frozen warmwater shrimp from the PRC. 
See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of 
China: Partial Rescission of the First Administrative Review, 71 FR 
43107 (July 31, 2006) (``Rescission Notice'').
    On July 10, 2006, Meizhou submitted its response to section A of 
the Department's questionnaire. On July 11, 2006, Asian Seafoods 
submitted a voluntary response to section A of the Department's 
questionnaire.
    On July 12, 2006, Zhanjiang Regal Integrated Marine Resources Co., 
Ltd. (``Zhanjiang Regal'') submitted a letter indicating it had only 
one POR shipment of subject merchandise which was already subject to a 
new shipper review. See, e.g., Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the 
People's Republic of China: Final Results of the Antidumping Duty New 
Shipper Review, 71 FR 70362 (December 4, 2006) (``Zhanjiang Regal New 
Shipper Final Results'').
    On July 17, 2006, counsel for Red Garden filed a letter, in lieu of 
its section A response, stating that it had decided not to answer the 
questionnaires in this administrative review. See Letter to the U.S. 
Department of Commerce, from Red Garden, regarding Frozen Warmwater 
Shrimp from the People's Republic of China (July 17, 2006) (``Red 
Garden Withdrawal''). Because Red Garden indicated that it did not 
intend to respond to the Department's questionnaires in this 
administrative review, we determined to individually review Asian 
Seafoods in its stead, pursuant to section 782(a) of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (``the Act''). See Memorandum to James C. Doyle, 
Director, Office 9, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, through Christopher D. 
Riker, Program Manager, Office 9, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, from 
Erin C. Begnal, Senior Case Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, 
regarding Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Certain Frozen 
Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China: Selection of 
Additional Mandatory Respondent (July 26, 2006).
    On July 18, 2006, Yelin submitted its response to section A of the 
Department's questionnaire. On July 25, 2006, Zhanjiang Regal submitted 
a letter requesting the administrative review of the company's sales be 
rescinded as they were already subject to an ongoing new shipper 
review. On July 25, 2006, Hai Li responded to the Department's July 6, 
2006, second supplemental questionnaire. On July 27, 2006, Asian 
Seafoods submitted its response to sections C and D of the Department's 
questionnaire.
    On August 3, 2006, and September 5, 2006, the Department invited 
parties to submit comments on the selection of a surrogate country and 
to submit publicly available information for purposes of calculating 
normal value. See Letter to ``All Interested Parties'' from Christopher 
D. Riker, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, regarding 2004/
2006 Administrative and New Shipper Reviews of Certain Frozen Warmwater 
Shrimp from the People's Republic of China (``PRC'') (August 3, 2006); 
see also Letter to ``All Interested Parties'' from Christopher D. 
Riker, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import 
Administration, regarding Antidumping Duty New Shipper and 
Administrative Reviews of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the 
People's Republic of China (7/16/04-1/31/06) (September 5, 2006) 
(collectively, ``PAI/Surrogate Country Letters'').
    On August 10, 2006, Meizhou submitted its response to sections C 
and D of the Department's questionnaire. On August 11, 2006, the 
Department issued a supplemental section A questionnaire to Asian 
Seafoods and Yelin. On August 14, 2006, Yelin submitted its response to 
sections C and D of the Department's questionnaire.
    On August 16, 2006, the Department issued a memorandum which 
indicated that data from CBP corroborated the statements of certain 
companies which reported making no shipments of subject merchandise 
during the POR. See Memorandum to the File, from Christopher D. Riker, 
Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, regarding 2004/2006 
Administrative review of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the 
People's Republic of China: Intent to Rescind Administrative Review, in 
Part (August 16, 2006) (``Intent to Rescind Memo''). Therefore, 
pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), the Department indicated that it 
intended to rescind this administrative review with respect to: Baofa 
Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; Guangzhou Lingshan Aquatic Products; Ruian 
Huasheng Aquatic Products; Sealord North America; Shantou City Qiaofeng 
Group; Shantou Ocean Freezing Industry and Trade General Corporation; 
Spectrum Plastics; Taizhou Zhonghuan Industrial Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang 
Daishan Baofa Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang Evernew Seafood Co., 
Ltd.; Zhejiang Zhenlong Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Guotai Aquatic 
Products Co., Ltd. (AKA Zhoushan Guotai Fisheries Co., Ltd.); Zhoushan 
Haichang Food Co.; Zhoushan Industrial Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Putuo Huafa 
Sea Products Co., Ltd.; and Zhoushan Zhenyang Developing Co., Ltd. 
Yantai Xinlai Trade also submitted a letter of no shipments, on July 
13, 2006, to the Department. As we found no information to contradict 
this statement, we intend to rescind the administrative review with 
respect to Yantai Xinlai Trade as well.
    The Department also indicated that it was unable to directly serve 
certain companies with the Q&V Follow-up Letter. Id. The Department 
contacted petitioners in order to ascertain accurate addresses, but 
petitioners were unable to provide additional contact information. See, 
Letter to the Department of Commerce, from the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade 
Action Committee, regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from 
Brazil, China, Ecuador, India, Thailand, and Vietnam: Request for 
Administrative Reviews (March 21, 2006). Therefore, the Department 
informed parties that it intended to rescind the review with respect to 
these companies, in accordance with our practice. See, e.g., Certain 
Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey: Preliminary results and 
Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 
26455, 26457 (May 5, 2006) (``Rebar from Turkey''). These companies 
were: Allied Pacific Food; Allied Pacific Aquatic Products (Zhongshan) 
Co., Ltd.; Dhin Foong Trdg; Dongri Aquatic Products Freezing Plants 
Shengping; Dongshan Xinhefa Food; Evergreen Aquatic Product Science and 
Technology; Formosa Plastics; Fuchang Trdg; Fuqing City Dongyi Trdg; 
Fuqing Dongyi Trading; Fuqing Fuchang Trading; Fuqing Longwei Aquatic 
Foodstuff; Fuqing Xuhu Aquatic Food Trdg; Gaomi Shenyuan Foodstuff; 
Guangxi Lian Chi Home Appliance Co; I T Logistics; Juxian Zhonglu 
Foodstuffs; Logistics Harbour Dock; Longwei Aquatic Foodstuff; Master 
International Logistics; Nichi Lan Food Co. Ltd. Chen Hai; P&T 
International Trading; Perfection Logistics Service; Phoenix Seafood; 
Putuo Fahua Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; Qingdao Dayang Jian Foodstuffs; 
Qinhuangdao Jiangxin Aquatic Food; Seatrade International; Second 
Aquatic Food; Second Aquatic Foodstuffs Fty; Shandong Chengshun

[[Page 10648]]

Farm Produce Trd; Shandong Sanfod Group; Shantou Junyuan Pingyuan 
Foreign Trading; South Bay Intl; Taizhou Lingyang Aquatic Products Co., 
Ltd.; Tianhe Hardware & Rigging; Xiamen Sungiven Imports & Exports; 
Yantai Guangyuan Foods Co; Yantai Xuehai Foodstuffs; Yelin Frozen 
Seafood Co.; Zhanjiang CNF Sea Products Engineering Ltd; Zhanjiang 
Shunda Aquatic Products; Zhejiang Zhongda; Zhejiang Taizhou Lingyang 
Aquatic Products Co.; Zhoushan Guangzhou Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; 
Zhoushan International Trade Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Provisions & Oil Food 
Export and Import Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Xi'an Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; 
and ZJ CNF Sea Products Engineering Ltd. The Department was also unable 
to directly serve the following companies with the Q&V Follow-up 
Letter, which were not included in the Intent to Rescind Memo: Fuqing 
Chaohui Aquatic Food Co. Ltd., Fuqing Chaohui Aquatic Food Trdg., 
Hainan Jiadexin Aquatic Products Co., Ltd., Meizhou Aquatic 
Products,\2\ Round the Ocean Logistics, Shantou Sez Xuhoa Fastness 
Freeze Aquatic Factory, Zhanjiang Fuchang Aquatic Products, and 
Zhanjiang Jebshin Seafood Limited. Despite further research, the 
Department was unable to ascertain viable address information for these 
companies. Therefore, the Department also intends to rescind the review 
with respect to these companies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ On August 18, 2006, the Department was informed by Meizhou 
that it was doing business as Meizhou Aquatic Products, Meizhou 
Aquatic, and Meizhou Aquatic Products Quick-Frozen Industry Co., 
Ltd., and that the companies were one-and-the-same. See Letter to 
the Department, from Meizhou, regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater 
Shrimp from the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) (August 18, 2006). 
However, because Meizhou withdrew from the administrative review, 
Meizhou did not substantiate that these companies were the same 
entity. Therefore, the Department considers these three companies to 
be independent entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 16, 2006, Shantou City Qiaofeng Group submitted a letter 
indicating that it is the same company as Chaoyang Qiaofeng Group Co., 
Ltd., a company for which the Department rescinded the administrative 
review. See Rescission Notice.
    On August 17, 2006, the Department issued a supplemental section A 
questionnaire to Meizhou.
    On August 25, 2006, the Department extended the deadline for the 
preliminary results of review by 120 days, until February 28, 2007. See 
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Brazil, Ecuador, India, the 
Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the People's Republic of China, and 
Thailand: Notice of Extension of Time Limits for the Preliminary 
Results of the First Administrative Reviews and New Shipper Reviews, 71 
FR 50387 (August 25, 2006).
    On September 1, 2006, Yelin and Asian Seafoods responded to the 
Department's supplemental section A questionnaires. On September 6, 
2006, Meizhou submitted its response to the Department's supplemental 
section A questionnaire.
    On September 14, 2006, the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee 
submitted criteria for invoking the multinational corporation (``MNC'') 
provision for Yelin, and on September 26, 2006, Yelin submitted a 
response.
    On October 6, 2006, the Department issued a supplemental section C 
and D questionnaire response to Meizhou, and on October 12, 2006, the 
Department issued a supplemental questionnaire to Yelin. On October 26, 
2006, the Department issued its second supplemental questionnaire to 
Asian Seafoods. On October 27, 2006, the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action 
Committee responded to Yelin's September 26, 2006, MNC submission.
    On November 1, 2006, the Department rejected Meizhou's October 27, 
2006, questionnaire response pursuant to 19 CFR 351.304(b). The 
Department, however, provided Meizhou with an opportunity to correct 
the filing and to submit the requested information. On November 9, 
2006, Yelin submitted its response to the Department's October 12, 
2006, questionnaire. On November 6, 2006, Meizhou withdrew from the 
administrative review. See Letter to the U.S. Department of Commerce, 
from Meizhou, regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the 
People's Republic of China: Meizhou Aquatic Products Quick-Frozen 
Industry Co., Ltd., Shantou (November 6, 2006) (``Meizhou 
Withdrawal''). On November 24, 2006, Asian Seafoods submitted its 
response to the Department's second supplemental questionnaire. On 
November 27, 2006, Hai Li submitted its response to the Department's 
third supplemental questionnaire dated November 3, 2006.
    On November 30, 2006, Asian Seafoods, Allied Pacific, and Hai Li 
submitted publicly available information for use in the calculation of 
normal value in the administrative and new shipper reviews. Also, 
Yelin, on November 30, 2006, and the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action 
Committee, on December 1, 2006, December 21, 2006, and January 19, 
2007, submitted publicly available information for use in the 
calculation of normal value in the administrative review.
    On December 1, 2006, and December 6, 2006, the Department issued 
its verification outlines to Asian Seafoods and Hai Li, respectively. 
The Department conducted verification of the responses of Asian 
Seafoods from December 8 through 10, 2006, and Hai Li from December 13 
through 15, 2006. On December 8, 2006, Asian Seafoods submitted its 
minor corrections presented at the commencement of verification.
    On December 13, 2006, the Department requested documentation 
supporting Zhanjiang Evergreen Aquatic Product Science and Technology 
Co., Ltd.'s (``Evergreen'') and Zhoushan Huading Seafood Co., Ltd.'s 
(``Huading'') April 28, 2006, separate rate certifications. On December 
29, 2006, Evergreen submitted its separate rate supporting 
documentation.
    On January 8, 2007, the Department issued a verification outline to 
Yelin, Fuqing Yihua Aquatic Products Co., Ltd. (``Fuqing Yihua''), and 
Ocean Duke Corporation (``Ocean Duke''), affiliates of Yelin. The 
Department conducted verification of Yelin's responses from January 15 
through 16, 2007, at Fuqing Yihua, from January 22 through 23, 2007, at 
Yelin, and from January 25 through 26, 2007, at Ocean Duke. On January 
11, 2007, the Department issued a verification outline to Huading, and 
began verification of its separate rate responses on January 18, 2007. 
See Memorandum to the File, through Christopher D. Riker, Program 
Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, from Erin Begnal, Trade 
Compliance Analysts, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, regarding 
Verification of the Sales and Factors Response of Zhoushan Huading 
Seafood Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of 
Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the People's Republic of China (February 
28, 2007). However, on January 18, 2007, Huading withdrew from 
verification and the administrative review.
    On January 23, 2007, the Department published a correction to the 
scope of the order in which it clarified that the scope does not cover 
warmwater shrimp in non-frozen form. See Certain Frozen Warmwater 
Shrimp from Brazil, Ecuador, India, Thailand, the People's Republic of 
China and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam; Amended Orders, 72 FR 2857 
(Jan. 23, 2007). On February 13, 2006, the Department issued a separate 
rate supplemental questionnaire to Evergreen. On February 20, 2007, 
Evergreen submitted its response to the Department's separate rate 
supplemental questionnaire.
    On February 28, 2007, the Department released the verification 
reports for Asian Seafoods, Hai Li, Zhoushan Huading and Yelin and its 
affiliates

[[Page 10649]]

Fuqing Yihua Aquatic Food Co., Ltd. and Ocean Duke Corporation. See 
Memorandum to the File, through Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, 
AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, from Scot T. Fullerton and Prentiss Lee 
Smith, Trade Compliance Analysts, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, 
regarding Verification of the Sales and Factors Response of Asian 
Seafoods (Zhanjiang) Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the People's Republic of 
China (February 28, 2007) (``Asian Seafoods Verification Report''); 
Memorandum to the File, through Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, 
AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, from Scot T. Fullerton and Prentiss Lee 
Smith, Trade Compliance Analysts, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, 
regarding Verification of the Sales and Factors Response of Hai Li 
Aquatic Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Certain 
Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the People's Republic of China (February 
28, 2007) (``Hai Li Verification Report''); Memorandum to the File, 
from Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 
9, and Erin C. Begnal, Senior International Trade Analyst, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 9, regarding Verification of the Separate Rate 
Certification of Zhoushan Huading Seafood Co., Ltd. in the 2004/2006 
Administrative Review of the Antidumping Duty Order of Certain Frozen 
Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China (February 28, 
2007) (``Huading Verification Report''); see also Memorandum to the 
File, from Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, Office 9, and Erin 
Begnal, Senior International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 9, 
regarding Verification of the Questionnaire Responses of Yelin 
Enterprise Co., Ltd., Hong Kong in the Antidumping Administrative 
Review of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of 
China (February 28, 2007); Memorandum to the File, from Christopher D. 
Riker, Program Manager, Office 9, and Erin Begnal, Senior International 
Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 9, regarding Verification of the 
Factors of Production Responses of Fuqing Yihua Aquatic Products Co., 
Ltd., in the Antidumping Administrative Review of Certain Frozen 
Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China (February 28, 
2007); Memorandum to the File, from Christopher D. Riker, Program 
Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, and Erin Begnal, Senior 
International Trade Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9 
regarding Verification of the Sales Response of Ocean Duke Corporation 
in the Antidumping Administrative Review of Certain Frozen Warmwater 
Shrimp from the People's Republic of China (February 28, 2007) 
(collectively, ``Yelin Group Verification Reports'').

Surrogate Country and Factors

    As previously stated, on August 3, 2006, and September 5, 2006, the 
Department provided parties an opportunity to submit publicly available 
information (``PAI'') on surrogate countries and values for 
consideration in these preliminary results. As previously indicated, 
the Department received comments on November 30, 2006, December 1, 
2006, December 21, 2006, and January 19, 2007.

Scope of the Order

    The scope of this 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,\3\ deveined or not deveined, cooked or raw, or 
otherwise processed in frozen form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Tails in this context means the tail fan, which includes the 
telson and the uropods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The frozen warmwater shrimp and prawn products included in the 
scope of this investigation, regardless of definitions in the 
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``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 this investigation. 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 this investigation.
    Excluded from the scope are: (1) Breaded shrimp and prawns ( HTS 
subheading 1605.20.10.20); (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 0306.23.00.20 and 0306.23.00.40); (4) 
shrimp and prawns in prepared meals (HTS subheading 1605.20.05.10); (5) 
dried shrimp and prawns; (6) Lee Kum Kee's shrimp sauce; (7) canned 
warmwater shrimp and prawns (HTS subheading 1605.20.10.40); (8) certain 
dusted shrimp; and (9) certain battered shrimp. Dusted shrimp is a 
shrimp based 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 non-shrimp 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. Battered shrimp is a shrimp-
based product that, when dusted in accordance with the definition of 
dusting above, is coated with a wet viscous layer containing egg and/or 
milk, and par-fried.
    The products covered by this investigation are currently classified 
under the following HTS subheadings: 0306.13.00.03, 0306.13.00.06, 
0306.13.00.09, 0306.13.00.12, 0306.13.00.15, 0306.13.00.18, 
0306.13.00.21, 0306.13.00.24, 0306.13.00.27, 0306.13.00.40, 
1605.20.10.10, and 1605.20.10.30. These HTS subheadings are provided 
for convenience and for customs purposes only and are not dispositive, 
but rather the written description of the scope of this investigation 
is dispositive.

Verification

    On July 17, 2006, the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee 
requested that the Department conduct verification of the data 
submitted by all of the firms for which the Department initiated an 
administrative review, as well as Hai Li. However, due to the 
Department's

[[Page 10650]]

resource constraints in conducting these reviews, we only selected 
Asian Seafoods, Hai Li, Yelin, and Huading for verification, pursuant 
to section 782(i)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.307.
    For the administrative and new shipper review respondents that we 
did verify, we used standard verification procedures, including on site 
inspection of the manufacturers' and exporters' facilities, and 
examination of relevant sales and financial records. Our verification 
results are outlined in the verification report for each company. For a 
further discussion, see the Asian Seafoods Verification Report, the Hai 
Li Verification Report, the Yelin Group Verification Reports, and the 
Huading Verification Report.

Preliminary Partial Rescission of 2004/2006 Administrative Review

    Several companies indicated they did not export certain frozen 
warmwater shrimp to the United States during the POR. In order to 
corroborate these submissions, we reviewed PRC certain frozen warmwater 
shrimp shipment data maintained by CBP, and found no discrepancies with 
the statements made by these firms.
    Therefore, for the reasons mentioned above, we are preliminarily 
rescinding the administrative review with respect to: Baofa Aquatic 
Products Co., Ltd.; Guangzhou Lingshan Aquatic Products; Ruian Huasheng 
Aquatic Products; Sealord North America; Shantou Ocean Freezing 
Industry and Trade General Corporation; Spectrum Plastics; Taizhou 
Zhonghuan Industrial Co., Ltd.; Yantai Xinlai Trade; Zhejiang Daishan 
Baofa Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang Evernew Seafood Co., Ltd.; 
Zhejiang Zhenlong Foodstuffs Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Guotai Aquatic 
Products Co., Ltd. (AKA Zhoushan Guotai Fisheries Co., Ltd.); Zhoushan 
Haichang Food Co.; Zhoushan Industrial Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Putuo Huafa 
Sea Products Co., Ltd.; and Zhoushan Zhenyang Developing Co., Ltd. 
because each reported having made no shipments of subject merchandise 
during the POR, and the Department found no information to indicate 
otherwise.
    The Department is also preliminarily rescinding the administrative 
review with respect to: Allied Pacific Food; Allied Pacific Aquatic 
Products (Zhongshan) Co., Ltd.; \4\ Dhin Foong Trdg; Dongri Aquatic 
Products Freezing Plants Shengping; Dongshan Xinhefa Food; Evergreen 
Aquatic Product Science and Technology; Formosa Plastics; Fuchang Trdg; 
Fuqing City Dongyi Trdg; Fuqing Chaohui Aquatic Food Co. Ltd., Fuqing 
Chaohui Aquatic Food Trdg.; Fuqing Dongyi Trading; Fuqing Fuchang 
Trading; Fuqing Longwei Aquatic Foodstuff; Fuqing Xuhu Aqautic Food 
Trdg; Gaomi Shenyuan Foodstuff; Guangxi Lian Chi Home Appliance Co; 
Hainan Jiadexin Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; I T Logistics; Juxian 
Zhonglu Foodstuffs; Logistics Harbour Dock; Longwei Aquatic Foodstuff; 
Master International Logistics; Meizhou Aquatic Products; Nichi Lan 
Food Co. Ltd. Chen Hai; P&T International Trading; Perfection Logistics 
Service; Phoenix Seafood; Putuo Fahua Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; 
Qingdao Dayang Jian Foodstuffs; Qinhuangdao Jiangxin Aquatic Food; 
Round the Ocean Logistics; Seatrade International; Second Aquatic Food; 
Second Aquatic Foodstuffs Fty; Shandong Chengshun Farm Produce Trd; 
Shandong Sanfod Group; Shantou Junyuan Pingyuan Foreign Trading; 
Shantou Sez Xuhoa Fastness Freeze Aquatic Factory; South Bay Intl; 
Taizhou Lingyang Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; Tianhe Hardware & Rigging; 
Xiamen Sungiven Imports & Exports; Yantai Guangyuan Foods Co; Yantai 
Xuehai Foodstuffs; Yelin Frozen Seafood Co.; Zhanjiang CNF Sea Products 
Engineering Ltd; Zhanjiang Fuchang Aquatic Products; Zhanjiang Jebshin 
Seafood Limited; Zhanjiang Shunda Aquatic Products; Zhejiang Zhongda; 
Zhejiang Taizhou Lingyang Aquatic Products Co.; Zhoushan Guangzhou 
Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan International Trade Co., Ltd.; 
Zhoushan Provisions & Oil Food Export and Import Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan 
Xi'an Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; and ZJ CNF Sea Products Engineering 
Ltd. because the Department was unable to directly serve these 
companies with the Q&V Follow-up Letter. Therefore, the Department is 
rescinding the review with respect to these companies, in accordance 
with our practice. See Rebar from Turkey.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Allied Pacific Group indicated this company is no longer 
operational, and also made no shipments of subject merchandise 
during the POR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, consistent with section 351.214(j) of the 
Department's regulations, the Department is rescinding the 
administrative review of Zhanjiang Regal because the Department has 
already reviewed all of the company's sales which were made during the 
POR in the context of a new shipper review. See Zhanjiang Regal New 
Shipper Final Results. Furthermore, the Department is rescinding the 
administrative review of Shantou City Qiaofeng Group as this is the 
same company, but with a different name, as a company for which the 
administrative review has already been rescinded (i.e., Chaoyang 
Qiaofeng Group Co., Ltd.). See Memorandum to the File, through 
Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, AD/CVD Enforcement, Office 9, 
from Michael Quigley, Case Analyst, AD/CVD Enforcement, Office 9, 
regarding 2004/2006 Administrative Review of Certain Frozen Warmwater 
Shrimp from the People's Republic of China: Shantou City Qiaofeng Group 
(August 16, 2006).

Bona Fide Sale Analysis--Hai Li & Asian Seafoods

    For the reasons stated below, we preliminarily find that Hai Li's 
reported U.S. sale during the POR does not appear to be a bona fide 
sale, based on the totality of the facts on the record. See, e.g., 
Glycine From The People's Republic of China: Rescission of Antidumping 
Duty New Shipper Review of Hebei New Donghua Amino Acid Co., Ltd., 69 
FR 47405, 47406 (August 5, 2004). Specifically, we find that: (1) The 
difference in the sales price of Hai Li's single POR sale as compared 
to the average unit value of suspended entries derived from CBP data; 
(2) the involvement of unaffiliated parties in Hai Li's single POR 
sale; (3) irregularities relating to packing materials, and finally, 
(4) other indicia of a non-bona fide transaction, all demonstrate that 
the single sale under review was not bona fide. Therefore, this sale 
does not provide a reasonable or reliable basis for calculating a 
dumping margin.
    Additionally, for the reasons stated below, we preliminarily find 
that Asian Seafood's reported U.S. sale during the POR does not appear 
to be a bona fide sale, based on the totality of the facts on the 
record. See, e.g., Glycine From The People's Republic of China: 
Rescission of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review of Hebei New Donghua 
Amino Acid Co., Ltd., 69 FR 47405, 47406 (August 5, 2004). 
Specifically, we find that: (1) The difference in the sales price of 
Asian Seafoods' single POR sale as compared to the prices of its 
subsequent sales and the average unit value of suspended entries 
derived from CBP data; (2) irregularities relating to its customer 
correspondence; (3) atypical terms for the POR sale, and finally; (4) 
other indicia of a non-bona fide transaction, all demonstrate that the 
single sale under review was not bona fide. Therefore, this sale does 
not provide a reasonable or reliable basis for calculating a dumping 
margin.
    For the reasons mentioned above, the Department preliminarily finds 
that Hai Li's and Asian Seafood's single U.S. sales during the POR were 
not bona fide

[[Page 10651]]

commercial transactions and is preliminarily rescinding the new shipper 
review of Hai Li, and the administrative review of Asian Seafoods. For 
a more detailed analysis, see Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Director, 
AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, through Christopher 
D. Riker, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, from P. Lee 
Smith, Case Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, and Scot Fullerton, 
Case Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9 and regarding Bona Fides 
Analysis and Intent to Rescind New Shipper Review of Certain Frozen 
Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China for Hai Li Aquatic 
Co., Ltd. Zhao An, Fujian (February 28, 2007), and Memorandum to James 
C. Doyle, Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, 
through Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office 9, from Scot Fullerton, Case Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 
9, regarding Bona Fides Analysis and Intent to Rescind New Shipper 
Review of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of 
China for Asian Seafoods (February 28, 2007).

Non-Market Economy Country

    In every case conducted by the Department involving the PRC, the 
PRC has been treated as a non-market economy (``NME'') country. See, 
e.g., Honey from the People's Republic of China: Final Results and 
Final Rescission, in Part, of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 
71 FR 34893 (June 16. 2006). Pursuant to section 771(18)(C)(i) of the 
Act, any determination that a foreign country is a NME country shall 
remain in effect until revoked by the administering authority. See, 
e.g., Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of 
China: Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 71 FR 7013 (February 10, 2006); and Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 
from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping 
Duty Administrative Review and Rescission in Part, 71 FR 65073, 65074 
(November 7, 2006). None of the parties to this proceeding have 
contested such treatment. Accordingly, we calculated NV in accordance 
with section 773(c) of the Act, which applies to NME countries.

Surrogate Country

    Section 773(c)(4) of the Act requires the Department to value an 
NME producer's factors of production, to the extent possible, in one or 
more market-economy countries that (1) are at a level of economic 
development comparable to that of the NME country, and (2) are 
significant producers of comparable merchandise. India and Indonesia 
are among the countries comparable to the PRC in terms of overall 
economic development. See PAI/Surrogate Country Letters. In addition, 
based on publicly available information placed on the record (e.g., 
production data), India and Indonesia are significant producers of the 
subject merchandise. See Memorandum to The File, through James C. 
Doyle, Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, 
and Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, 
from Michael J. Quigley, Case Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, 
from Michael J. Quigley, Case Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, 
regarding Antidumping Duty Administrative and New Shipper Reviews of 
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China: 
Selection of a Surrogate Country (February 28, 2007). Accordingly, we 
have selected India as the primary surrogate country, and Indonesia as 
a secondary surrogate where applicable, for purposes of valuing the 
factors of production because they meet the Department's criteria for 
surrogate-country selection. See Id.

Facts Available

    For the reasons outlined below, we have applied total adverse facts 
available to: Ammon International; Aquatic Foodstuffs FTY; Dafu Foods 
Industry; Dalian Shanhai Seafood; Dalian Shan Li Food; Fuchang Aquatic 
Products; Gallant Ocean International; Gallant Seafoods; Go Harvest 
Aquatic Products; Guolian Aquatic Products; Hainan Jiadexin Foodstuff; 
Jinhang Aquatic Industry; Laiyang Hengrun Foodstuff; Laiyang Luhua 
Foodstuffs; Longsheng Aquatic Product; Luk Ka Paper Industry; Marnex; 
Meizhou Aquatic; Meizhou; North Supreme Seafood (Zhejiang) Co., Ltd.; 
Ocean Freezing Industry & Trade General; Power Dekor Group Co., Ltd.; 
Red Garden; Red Garden Food, Red Garden Foodstuff, Rongcheng Tongda 
Aquatic Food; Shanghai Linghai Fisheries Economic and Trading Co.; 
Shantou Longshen Aquatic Product; Silvertie Holding; The Second Aquatic 
food; Weifang Taihua Food; Weifang Yongqiang Food Ind; Wenling Xingdi 
Aquatic Products; Zhejiang Xintianjiu Sea Products Co., Ltd.; Zhejiang 
Xingyang Import & Export; Zhenjaing Evergreen Aquatic Products Science 
and Technology Co., Ltd.; Zhoushan Jingzhou Aquatic Products Co., Ltd.; 
and Huading.
    In the Initiation Notice, the Department established the deadline 
for Q&V questionnaire responses (i.e., April 28, 2006). However, the 
Department did not receive responses from: Ammon International; Aquatic 
Foodstuffs FTY; Dafu Foods Industry; Dalian Shanhai Seafood; Dalian 
Shan Li Food; Fuchang Aquatic Products; Gallant Ocean International; 
Gallant Seafoods; Go Harvest Aquatic Products; Guolian Aquatic 
Products; Hainan Jiadexin Foodstuff; Jinhang Aquatic Industry; Laiyang 
Hengrun Foodstuff; Laiyang Luhua Foodstuffs; Longshen Aquatic Product; 
Luk Ka Paper Industry; Marnex; Meizhou Aquatic; North Supreme Seafood 
(Zhejiang) Co., Ltd.; Ocean Freezing Industry & Trade General; Power 
Dekor Group Co., Ltd.; Red Garden Food; Red Garden Foodstuff; Rongcheng 
Tongda Aquatic Food; Shanghai Linghai Fisheries Economic and Trading 
Co.; Shantou Longshen Aquatic Product; Silvertie Holding; The Second 
Aquatic Food; Weifang Taihua Food; Weifang Yongqiang Food Ind; Wenling 
Xingdi Aquatic Products; Zhejiang Xintianjiu Sea Products Co., Ltd.; 
Zhejiang Xingyang Import & Export; Zhenjaing Evergreen Aquatic Products 
Science and Technology Co., Ltd.; and Zhoushan Jingzhou Aquatic 
Products Co., Ltd. The Department sent a Q&V Follow-up Letter to each 
of the above-referenced firms. See Q&V Follow-up Letter, see also 
Intent to Rescind Memo. Although each of the above-referenced companies 
received the letter, which included the Q&V questionnaire, they did not 
reply to the Department.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Laiyang Luhua Foodstuffs refused to accept the Q&V Follow-up 
Letter. See Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    By not responding to the Department's Q&V questionnaire, the above-
referenced companies failed to provide critical information to be used 
for the Department's respondent selection process. Pursuant to sections 
776(a) and (b) of the Act, the Department may apply adverse facts 
available if it finds a respondent has failed to cooperate by not 
acting to the best of its ability to comply with a request for 
information from the Department. By failing to respond to the 
Department's Q&V questionnaire, the above-referenced companies have 
failed to act to the best of their ability in this segment of the 
proceeding.
    In addition, because the above-referenced companies did not submit 
a separate rate application or certification, the Department was unable 
to determine whether or not they qualified for a

[[Page 10652]]

separate rate. Therefore, they are not eligible to receive a separate 
rate and will be part of the PRC-wide entity, subject to the PRC-wide 
rate. Pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act, we have applied total 
adverse facts available with respect to the PRC-wide entity, including, 
among others, the above-referenced companies.
    For the reasons outlined below, we have applied total adverse facts 
available to Red Garden, Meizhou, and Huading. Section 776(a)(2) of the 
Act provides that, if an interested party: (A) Withholds information 
that has been requested by the Department; (B) fails to provide such 
information in a timely manner or in the form or manner requested 
subject to sections 782(c)(1) and (e) of the Act; (C) significantly 
impedes a proceeding under the antidumping statute; or (D) provides 
such information but the information cannot be verified, the Department 
shall, subject to section 782(d) of the Act, use facts otherwise 
available in reaching the applicable determination.
    On July 17, 2006, Red Garden submitted a letter to the Department 
indicating it would not comply with the Department's requests for 
information. See Red Garden Withdrawal. Additionally, on November 6, 
2006, Meizhou submitted a letter indicating it would no longer 
cooperate with the Department in the administrative review. See Meizhou 
Withdrawal. On January 18, 2007, Huading also withdrew from the 
administrative review. See Letter to the U.S. Department of Commerce, 
from Huading, regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the 
People's Republic of China: Zhoushan Huading Seafood Co., Ltd. 
(November 6, 2006).
    As noted above, Red Garden, Meizhou, and Huading submitted letters 
to the Department withdrawing their participation from the 
administrative review, in lieu of responding to a request for 
information. By not responding to the Department's request for 
information, Red Garden, Meizhou, and Huading failed to provide 
critical information to be used for the Department's margin 
calculation, significantly impeded the review, and provided 
unverifiable information. See Memorandum to Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, from James C. Doyle, 
Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, regarding 
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China: 
Preliminary Application of Adverse Facts Available to Shantou Red 
Garden Foodstuff/Shantou Red Garden Food Processing Co., (February 28, 
2007) and Memorandum to Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary 
for Import Administration, from James C. Doyle, Director, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, regarding Certain Frozen 
Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary 
Application of Adverse Facts Available to Meizhou Aquatic Products 
Quick-Frozen Industry Co. Ltd. Shantou, (February 28, 2007) for further 
discussion on the application of adverse facts available to Red Garden 
and Meizhou; see also Memorandum to the File, from Christopher D. 
Riker, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import 
Administration, regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the 
People's Republic of China: Zhoushan Huading Seafood Co., Ltd. Analysis 
for the Preliminary Results of the Administrative Review (February 28, 
2007) (``Huading Analysis Memorandum''). Therefore, pursuant to 
sections 776(a)(2)(A), (C), and (D) of the Act, the Department must 
apply facts available.
    By failing to respond to the Department's requests for information 
and by not allowing the Department to conduct verification, Red Garden, 
Meizhou, and Huading, respectively, have not proven they are free of 
government control and are therefore not eligible to receive a separate 
rate. In the Initiation Notice, the Department stated that if one of 
the companies on which we initiated a review does not qualify for a 
separate rate, all other exporters of frozen warmwater shrimp from the 
PRC who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered 
by this review as part of the single PRC-wide entity of which the named 
exporter is a part. See Initiation Notice at n.1. For these preliminary 
results, Red Garden, Meizhou, and Huading will be part of the PRC-wide 
entity, subject to the PRC-wide rate.
    According to section 776(b) of the Act, if the Department finds 
that an interested party ``has failed to cooperate by not acting to the 
best of its ability to comply with a request for information,'' the 
Department may use information that is adverse to the interests of the 
party as facts otherwise available. Adverse inferences are appropriate 
``to ensure that the party does not obtain a more favorable result by 
failing to cooperate than if it had cooperated fully.'' See Statement 
of Administrative Action (``SAA'') accompanying the Uruguay Round 
Agreements Act (``URAA''), H.R. Rep. No. 103-316 at 870 (1994).
    As explained above, the PRC-wide entity (including Red Garden, 
Meizhou, and Huading) would either not permit the Department to verify 
information placed on the record or informed the Department that it 
would not participate further in this review and did not respond to the 
Department's requests for information. Therefore, the PRC-wide entity 
did not cooperate to the best of its ability. Because the PRC-wide 
entity did not cooperate to the best of its ability in the proceeding, 
the Department finds it necessary, pursuant to sections 776(a)(2)(D) 
and 776(b) of the Act, to use adverse facts available (``AFA'') as the 
basis for these preliminary results of review for the PRC-wide entity.
    In this segment of the proceeding, in accordance with Department 
practice (see, e.g., Brake Rotors from the People's Republic of China: 
Rescission of Second New Shipper Review and Final Results and Partial 
Rescission of First Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 64 FR 
61581, 61584 (November 12, 1999), as adverse facts available, we have 
assigned to exports of the subject merchandise by the above referenced 
companies a rate of 112.81 percent, which is the rate established for 
the PRC-wide entity in the LTFV investigation.
    However, as discussed in the Huading Analysis Memorandum, because 
Huading terminated verification and we found reimbursement of 
antidumping duties, it is appropriate to assign Zhoushan Huading a rate 
inclusive of the PRC-wide entity rate and the reimbursement adjustment. 
See Huading Analysis Memorandum. This is consistent with the 
Department's past practice. See, e.g., 19 CFR 351.402, see also, 
Certain Frozen Fish Fillets From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: 
Final Results of the First Administrative Review, 71 FR 14170 (March 
21, 2006).
    Therefore, in accordance with our regulations and past practice, in 
this unique situation in which the Department found evidence of 
reimbursement at verification, the cash deposit rate assigned to 
Huading for these preliminary results is double that of the PRC-wide 
entity, or 225.62 percent. See Huading Analysis Memorandum.

Corroboration of Facts Available

    Section 776(c) of the Act requires that the Department corroborate, 
to the extent practicable, a figure which it applies as facts 
available. To be considered corroborated, information must be found to 
be both reliable and relevant. We are applying as AFA the highest rate 
from any segment of this administrative proceeding, which is the rate 
currently applicable to all exporters subject to the PRC-wide rate. The 
AFA

[[Page 10653]]

rate in the current review (i.e., the PRC-wide rate of 112.81 percent) 
represents the highest rate from the petition in the LTFV 
investigation. See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at 
Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Frozen 
Warmwater Shrimp From the People's Republic of China, 70 FR 5149 
(February 1, 2005).
    For purposes of corroboration, the Department will consider whether 
that margin is both reliable and relevant. The AFA rate we are applying 
for the current review was corroborated in the LTFV investigation. See, 
e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: 
Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp From the People's Republic 
of China, 69 FR 70997 (December 8, 2004). No information has been 
presented in the current review that calls into question the 
reliability of this information.
    With respect to the relevance aspect of corroboration, the 
Department will consider information reasonably at its disposal to 
determine whether a margin continues to have relevance. Where 
circumstances indicate that the selected margin is not appropriate as 
AFA, the Department will disregard the margin and determine an 
appropriate margin. For example, in Fresh Cut Flowers from Mexico; 
Final Results of Antidumping Administrative Review, 61 FR 6812, 6814 
(February 22, 1996), the Department disregarded the highest margin in 
that case as adverse best information available (the predecessor to 
facts available) because the margin was based on another company's 
uncharacteristic business expense resulting in an unusually high 
margin. The information used in calculating this margin was based on 
sales and production data submitted by the petitioner in the LTFV 
investigation, together with the most appropriate surrogate value 
information available to the Department chosen from submissions by the 
parties in the LTFV investigation, as well as information gathered by 
the Department itself. Furthermore, the calculation of this margin was 
subject to comment from interested parties in the proceeding. Moreover, 
there were no previous reviews of this antidumping duty order. As there 
is no information on the record of this review that demonstrates that 
this rate is not appropriately used as AFA, we determine that this rate 
has relevance.
    As the 112.81 percent rate is both reliable and relevant, we 
determine that it has probative value. Accordingly, we determine that 
the calculated rate of 112.81 percent, which is the current PRC-wide 
rate, is in accord with the requirement of section 776(c) that 
secondary information be corroborated to the extent practicable (i.e., 
that it have probative value). We have assigned this AFA rate to 
exports of the subject merchandise by the PRC-wide entity.

Separate Rates

    In proceedings involving NME countries, the Department begins with 
a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are 
subject to government control and thus should be assessed a single 
antidumping duty deposit rate (i.e., a PRC-wide rate).
    Of the 163 companies initiated upon, 16 companies filed separate 
rate certifications or applications. Allied Pacific Group (i.e., Allied 
Pacific Food (Dalian) Co., Ltd. and its affiliates, Allied Pacific 
Aquatic Products (Zhanjiang) Co., Ltd., Zhanjiang Allied Pacific 
Aquaculture Co., Ltd., Allied Pacific (H.K.) Co., Ltd., and King Royal 
Investments Ltd.), Red Garden, Yelin and its affiliates (i.e., 
Yangjiang City Yelin Hoitat Quick Frozen Seafood Co., Ltd., Shantou 
Yelin Frozen Seafood Co., Ltd., Fuqing Yihua Aquatic Food Co., Ltd., 
Fuqing Minhua Trade Co. Ltd.,\6\ Asian Seafoods, Savvy Seafood Inc., 
Evergreen, Huading, Meizhou, and Hai Li each filed a separate rate 
certification or application. Because Petitioners withdrew its request 
for review of Savvy Seafoods Inc. (See Rescission Notice), and we 
rescinded the review, its separate rate status remains unchanged from 
the investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Although Fuqing Minhua Trade Co. Ltd. submitted a separate 
rate application, the company was not listed in the Department's 
notice of initiation of the administrative review. See Initiation 
Notice. As no review was requested of this entity, and the firm is 
therefore not subject to the review, it is not entitled to a 
separate rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Six of the companies listed above (i.e., Zhanjiang Allied Pacific 
Aquaculture Co., Ltd.; Allied Pacific Food (Dalian) Co., Ltd.; King 
Royal Investments Ltd.; Yangjiang City Yelin Hoitat Quick Frozen 
Seafood Co., Ltd.; Shantou Yelin Frozen Seafood Co., Ltd.; and Fuqing 
Yihua Aquatic Food Co., Ltd. had no shipments or exports of subject 
merchandise to the United States during this POR and are therefore not 
eligible for a separate rate in this proceeding.
    As referenced above, Red Garden, Meizhou, and Huading failed to 
establish that they qualify for a separate rate. See Memorandum to 
Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 
Administration, from James C. Doyle, Director, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office 9, Import Administration, regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater 
Shrimp from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Application of 
Adverse Facts Available to Red Garden, (February 28, 2007), Memorandum 
to Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 
Administration, from James C. Doyle, Director, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office 9, Import Administration, regarding Certain Frozen Warmwater 
Shrimp from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Application of 
Adverse Facts Available to Meizhou Aquatic Products Quick-Frozen 
Industry Co. Ltd. Shantou, (February 28, 2007), and Huading Analysis 
Memorandum.
    Further, as discussed above, because we are preliminarily 
rescinding the administrative review for Asian Seafoods, and the new 
shipper review for Hai Li, because their sales are not bona fide, they 
are ineligible for a separate rate.
    Finally, although Fuqing Minhua Trade Co. Ltd. submitted a separate 
rate application, the company was not listed in the Department's notice 
of initiation of the administrative review. See Initiation Notice. As 
no review was requested of this entity, and the firm did not export 
subject merchandise to the United States, it is therefore not entitled 
to a separate rate. See Letter to the Department, from Yelin Enterprise 
Co., Ltd. Hong Kong, ant is affiliates, regarding Yelin Group: Response 
to Section A-D Supplemental: First Administrative Review of Certain 
Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp from China (November 9, 2006).
    The remaining respondents (i.e., Yelin, Allied Pacific (Hong Kong), 
Allied Pacific (Zhanjiang), and Evergreen ) are either entities wholly 
foreign owned and/or limited liability companies in the PRC. Thus, for 
these four respondents, a separate rates analysis is necessary to 
determine whether the export activities of each above-mentioned 
respondent is independent from government control. See, e.g. Notice of 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Bicycles From the 
People's Republic of China, 61 FR 19026, 19027 (April 30, 1996) 
(``Bicycles''). To establish whether a firm is sufficiently independent 
in its export activities from government control to be entitled to a 
separate rate, the Department utilizes a test arising from the Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers from the 
People's Republic of China, 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991) (``Sparklers''); 
See also Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon 
Carbide from the People's Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994) 
(``Silicon Carbide''), where the Department adapted and amplified the 
separate rates

[[Page 10654]]

test set out in Sparklers. Under the separate-rates criteria, the 
Department assigns separate rates in NME cases only if the respondent 
can demonstrate the absence of both de jure and de facto governmental 
control over its export activities.

1. De Jure Control

    Evidence supporting, though not requiring, a finding of de jure 
absence of government control over export activities includes: (1) An 
absence of restrictive stipulations associated with the individual 
exporter's business and export licenses; (2) any legislative enactments 
decentralizing control of companies; and (3) any other formal measures 
by the government decentralizing control of companies. See id.
    Yelin, Allied Pacific (Hong Kong), Allied Pacific (Zhanjiang), and 
Evergreen have each placed on the administrative record documents to 
demonstrate an absence of de jure control (e.g., the 1994 ``Foreign 
Trade Law of the People's Republic of China,'' and the 1999 ``Company 
Law of the People's Republic of China'').
    As in prior cases, we have analyzed the laws presented to us and 
have found them to establish sufficiently an absence of de jure control 
over joint ventures between the PRC and foreign companies, and limited 
liability companies in the PRC. See, e.g., Final Determination of Sales 
at Less than Fair Value: Furfuryl Alcohol from the People's Republic of 
China, 60 FR 22544 (May 8, 1995) (``Furfuryl Alcohol''); Preliminary 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Partial-
Extension Steel Drawer Slides with Rollers from the People's Republic 
of China, 60 FR 29571 (June 5, 1995). We have no new information in 
this proceeding which would cause us to reconsider this determination 
with regard to Yelin, Allied Pacific (Hong Kong), Allied Pacific 
(Zhanjiang), and Evergreen.

2. De Facto Control

    As stated in previous cases, there is evidence that certain 
enactments of the PRC central government have not been implemented 
uniformly among different sectors and/or jurisdictions in the PRC. See 
Silicon Carbide; see also Furfuryl Alcohol. Therefore, the Department 
has determined that an analysis of de facto control is critical in 
determining whether the respondents are, in fact, subject to a degree 
of governmental control which would preclude the Department from 
assigning separate rates.
    The Department typically considers four factors in evaluating 
whether each respondent is subject to de facto governmental control of 
its export functions: (1) Whether the export prices are set by, or 
subject to the approval of, a governmental authority; (2) whether the 
respondent has authority to negotiate and sign contracts and other 
agreements; (3) whether the respondent has autonomy from the government 
in making decisions regarding the selection of management; and (4) 
whether the respondent retains the proceeds of its export sales and 
makes independent decisions regarding the disposition of profits or 
financing of losses. See Silicon Carbide; see also Furfuryl Alcohol.
    Yelin, Allied Pacific (Hong Kong), Allied Pacific (Zhanjiang), and 
Evergreen have each asserted the following: (1) It establishes its own 
export prices; (2) it negotiates contracts without guidance from any 
governmental entities or organizations; (3) it makes its own personnel 
decisions; and (4) it retains the proceeds of its export sales, uses 
profits according to its business needs, and has the authority to sell 
its assets and to obtain loans. Additionally, each of these companies' 
questionnaire responses indicates that its pricing during the POR does 
not suggest coordination among exporters.
    Consequently, we have preliminarily determined that Yelin, Allied 
Pacific (Hong Kong), Allied Pacific (Zhanjiang), and Evergreen have 
each met the criteria for the application of separate rates based on 
the documentation each of these respondents has submitted on the record 
of these reviews. See Memorandum to James C. Doyle, Director, AD/CVD 
Enforcement, Office 9, through Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, 
AD/CVD Enforcement, Office 9, from Michael Quigley, Case Analyst, AD/
CVD Enforcement, Office 9, regarding 2004/2006 Administrative Review of 
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China: 
Separate Rates Analysis for Respondents (Including Exporters Not Being 
Individually Reviewed) (February 28, 2007).

Separate Rate Calculation

    Based on timely requests from individual exporters and petitioners, 
the Department originally initiated this review with respect to 163 
companies. During the course of the review, however, the Department 
employed a limited examination methodology, as it did not have the 
resources to examine all companies for which a review request was made. 
As stated previously, the Department selected three exporters, Yelin, 
Red Garden (which ultimately withdrew and was replaced by Asian 
Seafoods), and Meizhou (which also later withdrew) as mandatory 
respondents in this review. Three additional companies (Allied Pacific 
HK, Allied Pacific (Zhanjiang) and Evergreen) submitted timely 
information as requested by the Department and remain subject to review 
as cooperative separate rate respondents.
    Yelin participated fully in this review and is receiving a 
preliminary antidumping duty rate of zero. As noted above, however, the 
mandatory respondents either withdrew from the administrative review 
(i.e., Miezhou and Red Garden) or made a non bona fide transaction 
(i.e., Asian Seafoods). As a result, these three entities are not 
entitled to a separate rate in this review and we are either rescinding 
the review of the company (i.e., Asian Seafoods) or the company is 
being considered to be part of the PRC-wide entity (i.e., Miezhou and 
Red Garden). As part of the PRC-wide entity, Meizhou and Red Garden are 
receiving a preliminary antidumping duty rate of 112.81 percent.
    The Department must also assign a rate to the remaining three 
cooperative separate rate respondents not selected for individual 
examination. We note that 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 examination where the Department 
limited its examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 
777(A)(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 weight-average the rates for the 
selected companies excluding zero and de minimis rates and rates based 
entirely on adverse facts available. In the instant review, however, 
the rates for the mandatory respondents include only a single zero rate 
and a rate for the PRC-wide entity based on total AFA.
    While the statute does not specifically address this particular set 
of circumstances, section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act does specify the 
methodology to be followed when a similar fact pattern arises in the 
context of the all-others rate established in an investigation. While 
not entirely analogous to the determination of a rate to be applied to 
responsive separate rate respondents in the context of a NME review, we 
find it to be instructive in these circumstances.

[[Page 10655]]

    Section 735(c)(5)(B) of the Act states that in situations where the 
estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for all 
exporters and producers individually investigated are zero or de 
minimis, or are determined entirely under section 776 (facts available 
section), ``the administering authority may use any reasonable method 
to establish the estimated all-others rate for exporters and producers 
not individually investigated, including averaging the weighted-average 
dumping margins determined for the exporters and producers individually 
investigated.''
    The Statement of Administrative Action (``SAA'') states that in 
using any reasonable method to calculate the all-others rate, ``the 
expected method in such cases will be to weight-average the zero and de 
minimis margins and margins determined pursuant to the facts available, 
provided that volume data is available.'' See SAA accompanying the 
Uruguay Round Agreements Act, H.Doc. 316, Vol. 1., 103rd Cong (1994) 
(SAA) at 203. However, the SAA also provides that: {I{time}  this 
method is not feasible, or if it results in an average that would not 
be reasonably reflective of potential dumping margins for non-
investigated exporters or producers, Commerce may use other reasonable 
means.'' Id.
    In this case, because of the nature of the shrimp industry, the 
Department preliminarily concludes that it cannot accurately determine 
a margin based on information provided by the separate rate entities. 
Furthermore, we preliminarily find that we cannot employ such 
alternative methods as weight-averaging AFA, de minimis and zero rates 
or partial use of the information on the record. Specifically, while 
the separate rates entities have given us total volume and value 
information with respect to subject merchandise, we note that shrimp 
prices vary dramatically, principally due to count-size. Thus margins 
calculated on the basis of average prices without regard to count size 
and other factors do not reflect a meaningful, accurate comparison. 
Because the Department does not have comparable information with 
respect to the count sizes sold by the separate entities, we find we 
must look to other reasonable means to determine an appropriate margin 
for the separate rate entities subject to this review. In the case of 
Allied Pacific HK and Allied Pacific (Zhanjiang), we received voluntary 
questionnaire responses, but we have not examined these submissions 
because of the Department's resource constraints and its decision to 
review only three exporters.
    The Department has therefore preliminarily determined to apply the 
margin calculated for cooperative separate rate respondents in the 
immediately preceding segment of this proceeding, i.e., the margin of 
53.68 percent assigned to such companies in the LTFV investigation. We 
believe this methodology constitutes a reasonable method by which to 
calculate such rate. The rate of 53.68 percent calculated in the LTFV 
was based on the Department's thorough examination of several 
cooperative companies accounting for a majority of exports during the 
period of investigation. We believe, therefore, that this rate is 
reflective of the range of commercial behavior demonstrated by 
exporters of the subject merchandise during a very recent period in 
time. Therefore, we find it a reasonable means by which to determine a 
rate for non-examined cooperative separate entities and have employed 
this methodology for purposes of these preliminary results.

Fair Value Comparisons

    To determine whether sales of the subject merchandise by Yelin to 
the United States were made at prices below normal value (``NV''), we 
compared each company's constructed export prices (``CEPs'') to NV, as 
described in the ``Constructed Export Price'' and ``Normal Value'' 
sections of this notice, below.

Constructed Export Price

    For Yelin, we used CEP methodology in accordance with section 
772(b) of the Act for sales in which the subject merchandise was first 
sold in the United States before or after the date of importation by a 
seller affiliated with the producer or exporter to an unaffiliated 
purchaser in the United States. We made the following company-specific 
adjustments:
A. Yelin
    We calculated CEP based on packed U.S. prices to the first 
unaffiliated purchaser in the United States. Where appropriate, we made 
deductions from the starting price (gross unit price) for foreign 
inland freight, foreign brokerage and handling charges in the PRC, 
international ocean freight, in accordance with section 772(c) of the 
Act, as well as imputed inventory carrying costs, commissions, credit 
expenses, indirect selling expenses, and profit, in accordance with 
section 772(d) of the Act. For additional discussion on these, and 
other specifics pertaining to Yelin's margin calculation, see 
Memorandum to the File, through Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, 
AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, from Erin Begnal, Senior International 
Trade Compliance Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, regarding 
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the People's Republic of China--
Analysis Memorandum for the Preliminary Results of Administrative 
Review of Yelin Enterprise Co., Hong Kong (February 28, 2007). Because 
some foreign inland freight and foreign brokerage and handling fees 
were provided by PRC service providers or paid for in renminbi, we 
based those charges on surrogate rates from India. See ``Surrogate 
Country'' section above for further discussion of our surrogate-country 
selection.
    To value foreign brokerage and handling expenses, we used publicly 
summarized or ``ranged'' expense data submitted during the past year by 
Indian companies in connection with other antidumping duty 
administrative reviews conducted by the Department.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ We used data from the public version of the February 28, 
2005, section C response of Essar Steel Limited in the antidumping 
duty administrative review of certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat 
products from India, which covers the period December 1, 2003, 
through November 30, 2004. We also used information from Agro Dutch 
Industries Ltd., taken from the administrative review of preserved 
mushrooms from India, for which the POR was February 1, 2004 through 
January 31, 2005. See Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products 
From India: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 71 FR 2018 (January 12, 2006); see also Certain Preserved 
Mushrooms From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 71 FR 10646 (March 2, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining the most appropriate surrogate values to use in a 
given case, the Department's stated practice is to use investigation or 
review period-wide price averages, prices specific to the input in 
question, prices that are net of taxes and import duties, prices that 
are contemporaneous with the period of investigation or review, and 
publicly available data. The data we used for brokerage and handling 
expenses fulfill all of the foregoing criteria except that they are not 
specific to the subject merchandise: there is no information of that 
type on the record of this review.
    We used a simple average of two companies' brokerage expense data 
in order to achieve a more representative value than a single source 
would provide. Both sources are of equal quality and are 
contemporaneous with the POR. See Bicycles, 61 FR at 19039 (on using a 
simple, as opposed to a weighted, average in the calculation of 
financial ratios).

[[Page 10656]]

Normal Value

    Section 773(c)(1) of the Act provides that the Department shall 
determine NV using a factors of production methodology if the 
merchandise is exported from an NME country and the information does 
not permit the calculation of NV using home market prices, third 
country prices, or constructed value under section 773(a) of the Act. 
The Department will base NV on the factors of production because the 
presence of government controls on various aspects of these economies 
renders price comparisons and the calculation of production costs 
invalid under its normal methodologies.
    For purposes of calculating NV, we valued the PRC factors of 
production in accordance with section 773(c)(1) of the Act. Factors of 
production include, but are not limited to, hours of labor required, 
quantities of raw materials employed, amounts of energy and other 
utilities consumed, and representative capital costs, including 
depreciation. See section 773(c)(3) of the Act. In examining surrogate 
values, we selected, where possible, the publicly available value which 
was an average non-export value, representative of a range of prices 
within the POR or most contemporaneous with the POR, product-specific, 
and tax-exclusive. See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: 
Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China, 69 FR 
75294, 75300 (December 16, 2004) (``Chlorinated Isocyanurates''). We 
used the usage rates reported by the respondents for materials, energy, 
labor, by-products, and packing. For a detailed explanation of the 
methodology used to calculate surrogate values, see Memorandum to the 
File, through Christopher D. Riker, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, 
Office 9, from Michael Quigley, Case Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 
9, regarding Antidumping Duty Administrative and New Shipper Reviews of 
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China: 
Selection of Factor Values (February 28, 2007) (``Factor Valuation 
Memo'').

Factor Valuations

    In accordance with section 773(c) of the Act, we calculated NV 
based on the factors of production reported by the respondents for the 
POR. We relied on the factor specification data submitted by the 
respondents for the above-mentioned inputs in their questionnaire and 
supplemental questionnaire responses, where applicable, for purposes of 
selecting surrogate values.
    To calculate NV, we multiplied the reported per unit factor 
quantities by publicly available Indian surrogate values (except where 
noted below). In selecting the surrogate values, we considered the 
quality, specificity, and contemporaneity of the data. As appropriate, 
we adjusted input prices by including freight costs to make them 
delivered prices. Specifically, we added to Indian import surrogate 
values a surrogate freight cost using the shorter of the reported 
distance from the domestic supplier to the factory or the distance from 
the nearest seaport to the factory, where appropriate. This adjustment 
is in accordance with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's 
decision in Sigma Corp. v. United States, 117 F. 3d 1401 (Fed. Cir. 
1997). Due to the extensive number of surrogate values in this 
administrative review, we present a discussion of the main factors. For 
a detailed description of all surrogate values used for respondents, 
see Factor Valuation Memo.
    Except where discussed below, we valued raw material inputs using 
July 2004-January 2006 weighted-average Indian import values derived 
from the World Trade Atlas online (``WTA'') (see also Factor Valuation 
Memo). The Indian import statistics we obtained from the WTA were 
published by the DGCI&S, Ministry of Commerce of India, which were 
reported in rupees. Indian surrogate values denominated in foreign 
currencies were converted to U.S. dollars using the applicable average 
exchange rate for India for the POR. The average exchange rate was 
based on exchange rate data from the Department's Web site. See http://ia.ita.doc.gov/exchange/index.html. Where we could not obtain PAI 
contemporaneous with the POR with which to value factors, we adjusted 
the surrogate values for inflation using Indian wholesale price indices 
(``WPIs'') as published in the International Monetary Fund's 
International Financial Statistics. See Factor Valuation Memo.
    Furthermore, with regard to the Indian import-based surrogate 
values, we have disregarded prices from NME countries and those that we 
have reason to believe or suspect may be subsidized (i.e., Indonesia, 
South Korea, and Thailand). We have found in other proceedings that 
these countries maintain broadly available, non-industry-specific 
export subsidies. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe or suspect all 
exports to all markets from these countries are subsidized. See, e.g., 
Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Helical 
Spring Lock Washers From The People's Republic of China, 58 FR 48833 
(September 20, 1993), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum 
at Comment 1.
    Finally, we excluded imports that were labeled as originating from 
an ``unspecified'' country from the average value, because the 
Department could not be certain that they were not from either an NME 
or a country with general export subsidies.
    We valued these factors of production based on Indian WTA data: 
shrimp feed; antiseptic; anti virus; nutriment; sodium; and salt. 
Additionally, we valued these packing factors of production based on 
Indian WTA data: cardboard boxes; plastic bags; and adhesive tape. See 
Factor Valuation Memo, at Exhibit 5.
    To value raw shrimp, we used Indonesian data from an October 2006 
report on shrimp farming in South and South-East Asia from the Network 
of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific (http://library.enaca.org/shrimp/publications/NACAStudy/pdf). We extrapolated three additional 
count size groups based on the average percentage change between the 
five groups of data given in the study. See Id. at Exhibit 2.
    To value shrimp larvae, we used the audited 2004-2005 financial 
statements of Sharat Industries Limited, an Indian shrimp producer. 
Trade Pacific, PLLC placed this data on the record of this review. See 
Id. at Exhibit 3.
    To value by-products, we used a public price quote from an 
Indonesian company that has been used in the investigation of this 
proceeding. See Memorandum to Barbara E. Tillman from Christian Hughes 
and Adina Teodorescu through Maureen Flannery, regarding Surrogate 
Valuation of Shell Scrap: Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the 
People's Republic of China, Administrative Review 9/1/00-8/31/01 and 
New Shipper Reviews 9/1/00-8/31/01 and 9/1/00-10/15/01 (August 5, 
2002). See Id. at Exhibit 4.
    We valued electricity using the 2000 total average price per 
kilowatt hour for ``Electricity for Industry'' as reported in the 
International Energy Agency's publication, Energy Prices and Taxes, 
Second Quarter, 2003. We adjusted this rate for inflation. See Id. at 
Exhibit 6.
    We valued heavy oil using the 2005 first quarter ``Heavy Fuel Oil 
for Industry'' price as reported in the International Energy Agency's 
publication, Key World Energy Statistics 2005. See Id. at Exhibit 7.
    To value water, the Department used the industrial water rates 
within the

[[Page 10657]]

Maharashtra Province of India from June 2003. To achieve comparability 
of water prices to the factors reported for the POR, we adjusted this 
factor value to reflect inflation to the POR. See Id. at Exhibit 8.
    To value diesel fuel, we used the 2005 first quarter ``Automotive 
Diesel Oil'' price as reported in the International Energy Agency's 
publication, Key World Energy Statistics 2005. See Id. at Exhibit 9.
    The Department revised its calculation of expected wages of 
selected NME countries. See http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/index.html. The 
Department's revised calculation of expected NME wages, consistent with 
its normal methodology and with section 351.408(c)(3) of the 
Department's regulations, is based on the most current data available 
as of January 2007. The Department's expected NME wage rate for the PRC 
is USD $0.83 per hour. We used this wage rate in valuing labor.
    To value PRC inland freight for inputs shipped by truck, we used 
Indian freight rates from the following Web site: http://www.infreight.com. See Id. at Exhibit 11.
    For the domestic ground transport of shrimp, we used an Indian 
refrigerated truck freight rate based on price quotations provided by 
Petitioners in the investigation of certain frozen warmwater shrimp 
from the PRC from CTC Freight Carriers of Delhi, India. See 
Petitioners' May 21, 2004 surrogate value submission at Attachment 6. 
Since the rate was not contemporaneous with the POR, we adjusted the 
rate for inflation. See Id. at Exhibit 12.
    To value factory overhead and selling, general and administrative 
(``SG&A'') expenses, and profit, we used data from the 2004-2005 
financial reports of Falcon Marine Exports Limited and Nakkanti Sea 
Foods Limited. These Indian companies are shrimp producers based on 
data contained in each Indian company's financial reports. We averaged 
the ratios for the two companies. See Id. at Exhibit 10.

Preliminary Results of Reviews

    We preliminarily determine that the following margins exist during 
the period July 16, 2004, through January 31, 2006:

   Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the PRC Individually Reviewed
                                Exporters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yelin Enterprise Co., Hong Kong............................         0.00
Allied Pacific Aquatic Products (Zhanjiang) Co., Ltd.......        53.68
Allied Pacific (H.K.) Co., Ltd.............................        53.68
Zhanjiang Evergreen Aquatic Product Science and Technology         53.68
 Co., Ltd..................................................
Zhoushan Huading Seafood Co., Ltd..........................       225.62
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              PRC-Wide Rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-Wide Rate \8\..........................................       112.81
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We will disclose the calculations used in our analysis to parties 
to these proceedings within five days of the date of publication of 
this notice. Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days 
of publication of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ PRC-Wide Rate includes, among others, Red Garden and 
Meizhou.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested parties who wish to request a hearing or to participate 
if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant 
Secretary for Import Administration within 30 days of the date of 
publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) The party's 
name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; 
and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. See 19 CFR 351.310(c).
    Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in 
case and rebuttal briefs. Case briefs from interested parties may be 
submitted not later than 30 days of the date of publication of this 
notice, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c). Rebuttal briefs, limited to 
issues raised in the case briefs, will be due five days later, pursuant 
to 19 CFR 351.309(d). Parties who submit case or rebuttal briefs in 
this proceeding are requested to submit with each argument (1) a 
statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary of the argument. Parties 
are also encouraged to provide a summary of the arguments not to exceed 
five pages and a table of statutes, regulations, and cases cited.
    The Department will issue the final results of these reviews, 
including the results of its analysis of issues raised in any such 
written briefs or at the hearing, if held, not later than 120 days 
after the date of publication of this notice.

Assessment Rates

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department will determine, and 
CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The 
Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to 
CBP within 15 days of publication of the final results of this review. 
For assessment purposes, where possible, we calculated importer-
specific assessment rates for certain frozen warmwater shrimp from the 
PRC via ad valorem 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 this 
review if any assessment rate calculated in the final results of this 
review is above de minimis. The final results of this review shall be 
the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of 
merchandise covered by the final results of these reviews and for 
future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this administrative review 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 established in the final 
results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, 
i.e., less than 0.5 percent, no cash deposit will be required for that 
company); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC 
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 PRC exporters of subject merchandise 
which have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash 
deposit rate will be the PRC-wide rate of 112.81 percent; and (4) for 
all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received 
their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to 
the

[[Page 10658]]

PRC exporters that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit 
requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of 
the final results of the next administrative review.

Notification to Importers

    This notice serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply 
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.
    These administrative and new shipper reviews and notice are in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1), 751(a)(2)(B), and 777(i) of the Act 
and 19 CFR 351.213 and 351.214.

    Dated: February 28, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 07-1132 Filed 3-8-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P