[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 63 (Monday, April 2, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19745-19747]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-7605]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Dispute No. WTO/DS429]


WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding United States; Anti-
Dumping Measures on Certain Shrimp from Viet Nam

AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of the United States Trade Representative (AUSTR@) 
is providing notice that on February 21, 2012, the Socialist Republic 
of Vietnam (``Vietnam'') requested consultations with the United States 
under the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization 
(AWTO Agreement@) concerning certain antidumping administrative reviews 
and a sunset review conducted by the Department of Commerce on imports 
of certain frozen warmwater shrimp from Vietnam (Investigation A-552-
802), and various U.S. laws, regulations, administrative procedures, 
practices, and methodologies. That request may be found at www.wto.org 
contained in a document designated as WT/DS429/1. USTR invites written 
comments from the public concerning the issues raised in this dispute.

DATES: Although USTR will accept any comments received during the 
course of the dispute settlement proceedings, comments should be 
submitted on or before April 13, 2012, to be assured of timely 
consideration by USTR.

ADDRESSES: Public comments should be submitted electronically using 
www.regulations.gov, docket number USTR-2012-0003. If you are unable to 
provide submissions using www.regulations.gov, please contact Sandy 
McKinzy at (202) 395-9483 to arrange for an alternative method of 
transmission.
    If (as explained below) the comment contains confidential 
information, then the comment should be submitted by fax only to Sandy 
McKinzy at (202) 395-3640.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    J. Daniel Stirk, Associate General Counsel, Office of the United 
States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20508, 
(202) 395-3150.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: USTR is providing notice that consultations 
have been requested pursuant to the WTO Understanding on Rules and 
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (``DSU''). If such 
consultations should fail to resolve the matter and a dispute 
settlement panel is established pursuant to the DSU, such panel, which 
would hold its meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, would be expected to 
issue a report on its findings and recommendations within nine months 
after it is established.

Major Issues Raised by Vietnam

    On February 21, 2012, Vietnam requested consultations regarding 
certain antidumping administrative reviews and a sunset review 
conducted by the Department of Commerce on certain frozen warmwater 
shrimp from Vietnam, referring in particular to the use of what it 
describes as ``zeroing'' in those reviews. Specifically, Vietnam 
challenges (1) the imposition of antidumping duties and cash deposit 
requirements pursuant to the final results of the fourth administrative 
review for the period from February 1, 2008, to January 31, 2009, in 
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: 
Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review, 75 FR 47771 (August 9, 2010); (2) the fourth administrative 
review of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the Socialist Republic 
of Vietnam insofar as it did not revoke the antidumping duty order with 
respect to certain respondents requesting such revocation; (3) the 
imposition of antidumping duties and cash deposit requirements pursuant 
to the final results of the fifth administrative review

[[Page 19746]]

for the period from February 1, 2009, through January 31, 2010, in 
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: 
Final Results and Final Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 76 FR 56158 (September 12, 2011); (4) the fifth 
administrative review of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the 
Socialist Republic of Vietnam insofar as it did not revoke the 
antidumping duty order with respect to certain respondents requesting 
such revocation; (5) any other ongoing or future antidumping 
administrative reviews, and the preliminary and final results thereof, 
related to the imports of certain frozen warmwater shrimp from Vietnam 
(DOC case A-552-802), as well as any assessment instructions, cash 
deposit requirements, and revocation determinations issued pursuant to 
such reviews; (6) the final results of the sunset review in which the 
Department of Commerce determined that revocation of the antidumping 
duty order would be likely to lead to the continuation or recurrence of 
dumping, Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the Socialist Republic of 
Vietnam: Final Results of the First Five-Year ``Sunset'' Review of the 
Antidumping Duty Order, 75 FR 75965 (December 7, 2010); and (7) Section 
129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA'') and the Statement of 
Administrative Action accompanying the URAA, H.R. Doc. No. 103-316 
(1994), reprinted in 1994 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4040.
    With regard to these measures, Vietnam also has indicated it would 
like to consult regarding various U.S. laws, regulations, 
administrative procedures, practices, and methodologies, including (1) 
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, in particular sections 731, 751, 
752, 771(7), 771(35)(A), 771(35)(B), and 777A(d); (2) Section 129 of 
the URAA; (3) the Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the 
URAA, H.R. Doc. No. 103-316 (1994), reprinted in 1994 U.S.C.C.A.N. 
4040; (4) Department of Commerce regulations set forth in part 351 of 
Title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations, in particular sections 
351.218 and 351.414; (5) the Import Administration Antidumping Manual 
(2009 ed.), including the computer programs referenced therein; (6) the 
Department of Commerce's Policy Bulletin 98.3, ``Policies Governing the 
Conduct of Five-Year (`Sunset') Reviews of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Orders'' (April 16, 1998), 63 FR 18871 (April 16, 
1998); (7) the Department of Commerce's methodology for determining 
margins of dumping in administrative reviews; (8) the practice of 
requiring submission of a separate rate application or certification in 
original investigations and periodic reviews concerning Vietnamese 
producers in order to qualify for the all others--or ``separate''--
rate; (9) the practice of limiting the number of respondents selected 
for individual examination to only a small fraction of the total number 
of companies seeking individual review and the accompanying failure to 
provide alternative methods for non-investigated respondents to 
demonstrates that they are no longer dumping; (10) the application of a 
so-called Vietnam-wide entity rate based on adverse facts available to 
respondents not individually investigated who fail to provide a 
separate rate application or certification to demonstrate the absence 
of government control; (11) the practice of denying individually 
examined and non-individually examined respondents the opportunity to 
demonstrate the absence of dumping, which would allow for the dumping 
order to be revoked as to individual respondents that cease dumping 
behavior; (12) the Department of Commerce's practice and methodology in 
five-year (``sunset'') reviews for determining whether revocation of 
antidumping orders would be likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of dumping; and (13) the practice of implementing adverse 
Dispute Settlement Body rulings, pursuant to Section 129 of the URAA, 
such that unliquidated entries entered or withdrawn from the warehouse 
for consumption prior to the date of a Section 129 determination remain 
subject to assessment of duties pursuant to the original antidumping 
duty determination.
    Vietnam alleges that these laws, regulations, administrative 
procedures, practices, and methodologies are, as such and as applied in 
the determinations by the Department of Commerce and actions by U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection in the shrimp administrative reviews and 
the sunset review, inconsistent with Articles I:1, VI:1, VI:2, and 
X:3(a) of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994; Articles 1, 
2.1, 2.4, 2.4.2, 6, 9, 11, 17.6(i), and Annex II of the Agreement on 
Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and 
Trade 1994 (the Antidumping Agreement); Article XVI:4 of the WTO 
Agreement; Articles 3.7, 19.1, 21.1, 21.3, and 21.5 of the DSU; and 
Vietnam's Protocol of Accession to the WTO.
    Vietnam alleges that the United States acted inconsistently with 
the WTO Agreement obligations identified above by applying so-called 
``zeroing'' in the determination of the margins of dumping in the 
reviews identified above, by limiting the selection of Vietnamese 
respondents seeking a review such that non-reviewed companies were 
denied an opportunity to demonstrate the absence of dumping, by 
treating the Vietnam-wide entity as a single entity and applying to 
that entity a dumping rate determined on the basis of facts available, 
the continued use of these practices, the use of dumping margins 
calculated using ``zeroing'' to make the final determination in the 
sunset review, and the use of WTO-inconsistent antidumping duty 
assessment rates applied to unliquidated entries that are assessed 
following a Section 129 determination that implements an adverse WTO 
Dispute Settlement Body ruling.

Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments 
concerning the issues raised in this dispute. Persons may submit public 
comments electronically using www.regulations.gov docket number USTR-
2012-0003. If you are unable to provide submissions using 
www.regulations.gov, please contact Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395-9483 to 
arrange for an alternative method of transmission.
    To submit comments via www.regulations.gov, enter docket number 
USTR-2012-0003 on the home page and click ``search''. The site will 
provide a search-results page listing all documents associated with 
this docket. Find a reference to this notice by selecting ``Notice'' 
under ``Document Type'' on the left side of the search-results page, 
and click on the link entitled ``Submit a Comment.'' (For further 
information on using the www.regulations.gov Web site, please consult 
the resources provided on the Web site by clicking on ``Help'' at the 
top of the home page.)
    The www.regulations.gov site provides the option of providing 
comments by filling in a ``Type Comments'' field, or by attaching a 
document using an ``upload file'' field. It is expected that most 
comments will be provided in an attached document. If a document is 
attached, it is necessary and sufficient to type ``See attached'' in 
the ``Type Comments'' field. A person requesting that information 
contained in a comment submitted by that person be treated as 
confidential business information must certify that such information is 
business confidential and would not customarily be released to

[[Page 19747]]

the public by the submitter. Confidential business information must be 
clearly designated as such and the submission must be marked ``BUSINESS 
CONFIDENTIAL'' at the top and bottom of the cover page and each 
succeeding page. Any comment containing business confidential 
information must be submitted by fax to Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395-
3640. A non-confidential summary of the confidential information must 
be submitted to www.regulations.gov. The non-confidential summary will 
be placed in the docket and open to public inspection.
    Information or advice contained in a comment submitted, other than 
business confidential information, may be determined by USTR to be 
confidential in accordance with section 135(g)(2) of the Trade Act of 
1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155(g)(2)). If the submitter believes that information 
or advice may qualify as such, the submitter--
    (1) Must clearly so designate the information or advice;
    (2) Must clearly mark the material as ``SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE'' 
at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page; and
    (3) Must provide a non-confidential summary of the information or 
advice.
    Any comment containing confidential information must be submitted 
by fax. A non-confidential summary of the confidential information must 
be submitted to www.regulations.gov. The non-confidential summary will 
be placed in the docket and open to public inspection. Pursuant to 
section 127(e) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), 
USTR will maintain a docket on this dispute settlement proceeding 
accessible to the public at www.regulations.gov, docket number USTR-
2012-0003.
    The public file will include non-confidential comments received by 
USTR from the public with respect to the dispute. If a dispute 
settlement panel is convened or in the event of an appeal from such a 
panel, the U.S. submissions, any non-confidential submissions, or non-
confidential summaries of submissions, received from other participants 
in the dispute, will be made available to the public on USTR's Web site 
at www.ustr.gov, and the report of the panel, and, if applicable, the 
report of the Appellate Body, will be available on the Web site of the 
World Trade Organization, www.wto.org. Comments open to public 
inspection may be viewed on the www.regulations.gov Web site.

Bradford L. Ward,
Acting Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and 
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2012-7605 Filed 3-30-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-W2-P