[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 17 (Friday, January 25, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5416-5421]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01579]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-570-988, C-331-803, C-533-854, C-560-825, C-557-814, C-549-828, and 
C-552-815]


Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp From the People's Republic of 
China, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and the Socialist 
Republic of Vietnam: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations

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

DATES: Effective Date: January 25, 2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dustin Ross, AD/CVD Operations, Import 
Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230; telephone: (202) 482-0747.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Petitions

    On December 28, 2012, the Department of Commerce (``Department'') 
received petitions filed in proper form by the Coalition of Gulf Shrimp 
Industries (``the petitioner''),\1\ a trade or business association 
whose members manufacture, produce, or wholesale a domestic like 
product in the United States.\2\ In response to the Department's 
requests, the petitioner provided timely information supplementing the 
Petitions on January 9, 2013, January 10, 2013, January 11, 2013, and 
January 14, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The members of the Coalition of Gulf Shrimp Industries are: 
Bayou Shrimp Processors, Inc.; Bluewater Shrimp Company, Inc.; 
Carson & Co., Inc.; C.F. Gollott & Sons Seafood, Inc.; Dean 
Blanchard Seafood, Inc.; Dominick Seafood; Fisherman's Reef Packing 
Plant; Golden Gulf Coast Pkg. Co., Inc. (and Gollott's Oil Dock & 
Ice House); Graham Fisheries, Inc.; Graham Shrimp, Inc.; Gulf Crown 
Seafood Co., Inc.; Gulf Fish Inc.; Gulf Island Shrimp & Seafood, 
LLC; Gulf Pride Enterprises, Inc.; Hi-Seas of Dulac, Inc.; Indian 
Ridge Shrimp Co.; JBS Packing Co., Inc.; Lafitte Frozen Foods Corp.; 
M&M Shrimp (Biloxi Freezing and Processing); Ocean Springs Seafood 
Market, Inc.; Paul Piazza & Sons, Inc.; R.A. Lesso Brokerage Co., 
Inc.; Sea Pearl Seafood Co., Inc.; Smith and Sons Seafood; Tidelands 
Seafood Co., Inc.; Tommy's Seafood; Vincent Piazza & Sons Seafood, 
Inc.; Wood's Fisheries; Mariah Jade Shrimp Company LLC; David 
Chauvin's Seafood Company, LLC; and Rountree Enterprises, Inc. (dba 
Leonard & Sons Shrimp Co. and R&R Fisheries).
    \2\ See Petitions for the Imposition of Countervailing Duties on 
Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China, 
Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and the Socialist 
Republic of Vietnam, dated December 28, 2012, (``the Petitions'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (``the Act''), the petitioner alleges that manufacturers, 
producers, or importers of certain frozen warmwater shrimp from the 
People's Republic of China (``China''), Ecuador, India, Indonesia, 
Malaysia, Thailand, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam 
(``Vietnam''), receive countervailable subsidies within the meaning of 
sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, and that such imports are 
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic 
industry producing frozen shrimp in the United States.
    The Department finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because they are an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act, and the petitioner has 
demonstrated sufficient industry support, pursuant to section 771(4)(E) 
of the Act, with respect to the investigations that it requests the 
Department initiate.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See ``Determination of Industry Support for the Petition'' 
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Period of Investigation

    The period of investigation is January 1, 2011, through December 
31, 2011.

Scope of the Investigations

    The products covered by these investigations are certain frozen 
warmwater shrimp (``frozen shrimp'') from China, Ecuador, India, 
Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam. For a full description of 
the scope of each of these investigations, please see the ``Scope of 
the Investigations'' in Appendix I to this notice.

Comments on Scope of Investigations

    During our review of the Petitions, the Department had discussions 
pertaining to the proposed scope with the petitioner to ensure that the 
scope language in the Petitions was an accurate reflection of the 
products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief. The 
petitioner determined the proposed scope should be clarified, and it 
filed a modification to the language of the scope described in the 
Petitions to reflect those clarifications.\4\ Moreover, as discussed in 
the preamble to the regulations,\5\ we are setting aside a period of 
time for interested parties to raise issues regarding product coverage. 
This period for scope comments is intended to provide the Department 
with ample opportunity to consider all issues and to consult with 
parties prior to the issuance of the preliminary determinations. The 
Department encourages interested parties to submit such comments by 
5:00 p.m. EST on Wednesday, February 6, 2013, which is 20 calendar days 
from the signature date of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from China, Ecuador, 
India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam--Petitioner's 
Response To The Department's January 4, 2013 Supplemental Questions 
to the Petition, dated January 9, 2013 at Exhibit I-SQ-3.
    \5\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties, 62 FR 27296, 
27323 (May 19, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Filing Requirements

    All submissions to the Department must be filed electronically 
using Import Administration's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Centralized Electronic Service System (``IA ACCESS''). An 
electronically filed document must be received successfully in its 
entirety by the Department's

[[Page 5417]]

electronic records system, IA ACCESS, by the time and date set by the 
Department. Documents excepted from the electronic submission 
requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in paper form) with the 
Import Administration's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230, and stamped with the date and time of receipt by the deadline 
established by the Department.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-07-06/pdf/2011-16352.pdf for details of the Department's Electronic Filing 
Requirements, which went into effect on August 5, 2011. Information 
on help using IA ACCESS can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help.aspx and a handbook can be found at https://iaaccess.trade.gov/help/Handbook%20on%20Electronic%20Filing%20Procedures.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations

    Pursuant to section 702(b)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act, the Department 
invited representatives of the Governments of China, Ecuador, India, 
Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam for consultations with 
respect to the Petitions.
    Consultations were held with the government of China via 
teleconference on January 10, 2013.\7\ Consultations were held in 
Washington, DC, with the Royal Thai Government on January 11, 2013; \8\ 
with the governments of India, Indonesia, and Malaysia on January 14, 
2013; \9\ with the government of Vietnam on January 15, 2013; \10\ and 
with the government of Ecuador on January 16, 2013.\11\ All memoranda 
are on file electronically via IA ACCESS. Access to IA ACCESS is 
available in the Central Records Unit (``CRU''), Room 7046, of the main 
Department of Commerce Building.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Ex-Parte Memorandum, ``Consultations with Officials from 
the Government of the PRC'' (January 14, 2013).
    \8\ See Ex-Parte Memorandum, ``Consultations with Officials from 
the Royal Thai Government on the Countervailing Duty Petition 
regarding Frozen Warmwater Shrimp'' (January 11, 2013) (``Thailand 
Consultation Memorandum'').
    \9\ See Ex-Parte Memorandum, ``Consultations with Officials from 
the Government of India (``GOI'') on the Countervailing Duty 
Petition on Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from India'' (January 
17, 2013) (``India Consultation Memorandum''), Ex-Parte Memorandum, 
``Consultations with the Officials from the Government of the 
Republic of Indonesia on the Countervailing Duty Petition regarding 
Frozen Warmwater Shrimp'' (January 15, 2013), and Ex-Parte 
Memorandum, ``Consultations with Officials from the Government of 
the Malaysia,'' (January 15, 2013), respectively.
    \10\ See Ex-Parte Memorandum, ``Consultations with Officials 
from the Government of Vietnam on the Countervailing Duty Petition 
on Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Vietnam'' (January 17, 2013) 
(``Vietnam Consultation Memorandum'').
    \11\ See Ex-Parte Memorandum, ``Consultations with Officials 
from the Government of Ecuador (``GOE'') on the Countervailing Duty 
Petition on Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Ecuador,'' (January 
16, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Determination of Industry Support for the Petitions

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act 
provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic 
producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) at least 
25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and 
(ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like 
product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support 
for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of 
the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of 
domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of 
the total production of the domestic like product, the Department 
shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to 
determine if there is support for the petition, as required by 
subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a 
statistically valid sampling method to poll the industry.
    Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the ``industry'' as the 
producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine 
whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute 
directs the Department to look to producers and workers who produce the 
domestic like product. The U.S. International Trade Commission 
(``ITC''), which is responsible for determining whether ``the domestic 
industry'' has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a 
domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both the 
Department and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition 
regarding the domestic like product (see section 771(10) of the Act), 
they do so for different purposes and pursuant to a separate and 
distinct authority. In addition, the Department's determination is 
subject to limitations of time and information. Although this may 
result in different definitions of the like product, such differences 
do not render the decision of either agency contrary to law.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See USEC, Inc. v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8 (CIT 
2001) (citing Algoma Steel Corp., Ltd. v. United States, 688 F. 
Supp. 639, 644 (CIT 1988), aff'd 865 F.2d 240 (Fed. Cir. 1989)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as ``a 
product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in 
characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation 
under this title.'' Thus, the reference point from which the domestic 
like product analysis begins is ``the article subject to an 
investigation'' (i.e., the class or kind of merchandise to be 
investigated, which normally will be the scope as defined in the 
petition).
    With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioner does not 
offer a definition of domestic like product distinct from the scope of 
the investigations. Based on our analysis of the information submitted 
on the record, we have determined that certain frozen warmwater shrimp, 
as defined in the scope of the investigations, constitutes a single 
domestic like product and we have analyzed industry support in terms of 
that domestic like product.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For a discussion of the domestic like product analysis in 
these cases, see ``Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's 
Republic of China'' (``China Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment 
II, Analysis of Industry Support for the Petitions Covering Certain 
Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the People's Republic of China, 
Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam 
(``Attachment II''); ``Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation 
Checklist: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Ecuador'' (``Ecuador 
Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment II; ``Countervailing Duty 
Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp 
from India'' (``India Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment II; 
``Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain 
Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Indonesia'' (``Indonesia Initiation 
Checklist''), at Attachment II; ``Countervailing Duty Investigation 
Initiation Checklist: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from 
Malaysia'' (``Malaysia Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment II; 
``Countervailing Duty Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain 
Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand'' (``Thailand Initiation 
Checklist''), at Attachment II; ``Countervailing Duty Investigation 
Initiation Checklist: Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Vietnam'' 
(``Vietnam Initiation Checklist''), at Attachment II. These 
checklists are on file via IA ACCESS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In determining whether the petitioner has standing under section 
702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data 
contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product 
as defined in the ``Scope of the Investigations'' section above. To 
establish industry support, the petitioner provided its production of 
the domestic like product in 2011 and compared this to the total 
production of the domestic like product by the entire domestic 
industry.\14\ The petitioner calculated total 2011 production of the 
domestic like product based on data on the volume of frozen shrimp 
produced in the United States in 2011 from the

[[Page 5418]]

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (``NOAA''). The 
Department contacted NOAA officials with respect to these data on 
January 11, 2013, to learn the means by which NOAA derived these 
production amounts.\15\ The petitioner noted in the Petitions that the 
data from NOAA included both warmwater and coldwater frozen shrimp 
processed in 2011. To adjust the NOAA data to reflect only the 
processing of warmwater shrimp, the petitioner used data on landings of 
coldwater shrimp from the National Marine Fisheries Service, a division 
of NOAA. The petitioner explained that this is the same methodology and 
data used by the Department in prior antidumping investigations on 
frozen warmwater shrimp.\16\ We contacted NOAA with respect to the data 
relied upon by the petitioner, and are satisfied with the quality and 
accuracy of that data. However, during our communications with NOAA, 
NOAA provided us with updated 2011 figures. Accordingly, we have relied 
upon the updated NOAA data for purposes of measuring industry 
support.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at I-6, I-7, and Exhibits I-
5 through I-7 and I-21; see also the petitioner's January 9, 2013, 
``Response To The Department's January 4, 2013 Supplemental 
Questions to the Petition,'' at 2-6 and Exhibits I-SQ-4 through I-
SQ-11.
    \15\ See Memorandum to the File from Vicki Flynn, Office of 
Policy, Regarding National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
Statistics (January 11, 2013).
    \16\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at I-6, I-7, and Exhibit I-4 
(which contains the ``AD Investigation Initiation Checklist: Certain 
Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand'' (Public Version) 
(January 20, 2004)).
    \17\ For further discussion, see Memorandum to the File, 
``National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (``NOAA'') 
Statistics,'' (January 15, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 11, 2013, the Government of Thailand raised concerns 
about industry support during its consultations with the 
Department.\18\ On January 14, 2013, the Government of India (``GOI'') 
also raised concerns about industry support during its consultations 
with the Department.\19\ The GOI reiterated those same concerns in a 
letter filed on January 16, 2013.\20\ On January 14, 2013, Marine Gold 
Products Limited, Thai Union Frozen Products Public Co., Ltd., Thai 
Union Seafood Co., Ltd., Pakfood Public Company Limited, and Thai Royal 
Frozen Food Co., Ltd. (collectively, ``Thai Exporters''), self-
identified foreign producers and exporters of subject merchandise, also 
filed a submission challenging industry support. On January 15, 2013, 
the Government of Vietnam commented on industry support during its 
consultations with the Department.\21\ On January 15, 2013, the 
petitioner filed a response to the Thai Exporters' industry support 
challenge. On January 16, 2013, the Seafood Exports Association of 
India, an association of foreign producers and exporters of subject 
merchandise, also filed a submission challenging industry support. On 
January 17, 2013, the petitioner filed a response to the GOI's 
letter.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Thailand Consultation Memorandum.
    \19\ See India Consultation Memorandum.
    \20\ See Letter from the GOI dated January 16, 2013, ``Petition 
filed by the Coalition of Gulf Shrimp Industries on 28 December 2012 
seeking initiation of a countervailing duty investigation against 
imports of Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from, inter alia, 
India.''
    \21\ See Vietnam Consultation Memorandum.
    \22\ For further discussion of these submissions, see China 
Initiation Checklist, Ecuador Initiation Checklist, India Initiation 
Checklist, Indonesia Initiation Checklist, Malaysia Initiation 
Checklist, Thailand Initiation Checklist, and Vietnam Initiation 
Checklist, at Attachment II.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on information provided in the Petitions, supplemental 
submissions, and other information readily available to the Department, 
we determine that the petitioner has met the statutory criteria for 
industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the 
domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for 
at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like 
product.\23\ Based on information provided in the Petitions and 
supplemental submissions, the domestic producers and workers have met 
the statutory criteria for industry support under section 
702(c)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) 
who support the Petitions account for more than 50 percent of the 
production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the 
industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the Petitions. 
Accordingly, the Department determines that the Petitions were filed on 
behalf of the domestic industry within the meaning of section 702(b)(1) 
of the Act.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See China Initiation Checklist, Ecuador Initiation 
Checklist, India Initiation Checklist, Indonesia Initiation 
Checklist, Malaysia Initiation Checklist, Thailand Initiation 
Checklist, and Vietnam Initiation Checklist, at Attachment II.
    \24\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department finds that the petitioner filed the Petitions on 
behalf of the domestic industry because it is an interested party as 
defined in section 771(9)(E) of the Act and it has demonstrated 
sufficient industry support, pursuant to section 771(4)(E) of the Act, 
with respect to the CVD investigations that it is requesting the 
Department initiate.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Injury Test

    Because China, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and 
Vietnam are ``Subsidies Agreement Countries'' within the meaning of 
section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to 
these investigations. Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether 
imports of the subject merchandise from China, Ecuador, India, 
Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam materially injure, or 
threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.

Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and Causation

    The petitioner alleges that imports of the subject merchandise are 
benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports are 
causing, or threaten to cause, material injury to the U.S. industry 
producing the domestic like product. The petitioner alleges that 
subject imports from China and Vietnam exceed the negligibility 
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act. In 
addition, the petitioner alleges that subject imports from Ecuador, 
India, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand exceed the negligibility 
threshold provided for under section 771(24)(B) of the Act, which 
states that in countervailing duty petitions, imports of subject 
merchandise from developing countries must exceed the negligibility 
threshold of 4 percent.
    The petitioner contends that the industry's injured condition is 
illustrated by reduced market share; underselling and price depression 
or suppression; lost sales and revenue; reduced shipments and 
production; increased inventories; decline in financial performance; 
and reduction in employment data and wages paid.\26\ We have assessed 
the allegations and supporting evidence regarding material injury, 
threat of material injury, and causation, and we have determined that 
these allegations are properly supported by adequate evidence and meet 
the statutory requirements for initiation.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See Volume I of the Petitions, at I-11 through I-57 and 
Exhibits I-11, I-13 through I-32, and General Issues Supplement, at 
1, 6-7 and Exhibits I-SQ-1, I-SQ-2, I-SQ-12, and I-SQ-13.
    \27\ See China Initiation Checklist, Ecuador Initiation 
Checklist, India Initiation Checklist, Indonesia Initiation 
Checklist, Malaysia Initiation Checklist, Thailand Initiation 
Checklist, and Vietnam Initiation Checklist, at Attachment III, 
Analysis of Allegations and Evidence of Material Injury and 
Causation for the Petitions Covering Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp 
from the People's Republic of China, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, 
Malaysia, Thailand, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

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

[[Page 5419]]

Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations

    Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires the Department to initiate a 
CVD investigation whenever an interested party files a CVD petition on 
behalf of an industry that: (1) alleges the elements necessary for an 
imposition of a duty under section 701(a) of the Act; and (2) is 
accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioner 
supporting the allegations.
    In the Petitions, the petitioner alleges that producers of frozen 
shrimp in China, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and 
Vietnam benefited from countervailable subsidies bestowed by their 
respective governments. In addition to subsidies allegedly provided to 
processors of frozen shrimp, the Petitions include subsidies allegedly 
provided to producers of fresh shrimp. According to the petitioner, the 
producers of frozen shrimp often have their own integrated aquaculture 
operations or are cross-owned with farming operations that supply fresh 
shrimp.\28\ In these situations, the petitioner states that subsidies 
tied to the production of fresh shrimp will be attributed to the 
processed product, citing 19 CFR 351.525(b)(5)(ii) and 
351.525(b)(6)(iv). (With respect to cross-owned suppliers of fresh 
shrimp and the requirements of 19 CFR 351.525(b)(6)(iv), the petitioner 
points to the ITC's finding that fresh shrimp is overwhelmingly used to 
produce frozen shrimp \29\ in support of its claim that fresh shrimp is 
``primarily dedicated'' to the frozen product.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ The petitioner has provided supporting information for 
these claims in each of the petitions. For a full discussion, see 
the Initiation Checklist for each country.
    \29\ U.S. International Trade Commission, Frozen Warmwater 
Shrimp from Brazil, China, India, Thailand, and Vietnam, Inv. Nos. 
731-TA-1063, 1064, 1066-1068 (Review), USITC Pub. 4221 (March 2011) 
(Shrimp AD Sunset) at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Alternatively, the petitioner claims that the Department should 
investigate subsidies to producers of fresh shrimp and deem such 
subsidies to be provided with respect to the frozen product under 
section 771B of the Act, which addresses processed agricultural 
products (including fishery products). In support, the petitioner 
claims that: (i) The demand for fresh shrimp is substantially dependent 
on the demand for frozen shrimp and (ii) the processing of the fresh 
shrimp into frozen shrimp adds limited value and the essential 
character of the raw product is not changed. In support, the petitioner 
refers to the above-cited finding by the ITC and to its finding that 
processing adds 19-24 percent of the final value.\30\ According to the 
petitioner, the Department has previously found this level of value 
added to be limited.\31\ Moreover, the petitioner states that the 
essential character of the fresh shrimp is not changed with processing. 
Based on the petitioner's allegation in each of the Petitions regarding 
the relationship between fresh and frozen shrimp, the Department is 
including in its investigations programs that allegedly provide 
subsidies to producers of fresh shrimp as well as programs that 
allegedly provide subsidies to producers of frozen shrimp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Shrimp AD Sunset at Table III-11.
    \31\ The petitioner cites, Rice From Thailand; Final Results of 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 56 FR 68, 69 (January 2, 
1991) and Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: 
Fresh, Chilled, and Frozen Pork from Canada, 54 FR 30774, 30775 
(July 24, 1989).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department has examined the Petitions on frozen shrimp from 
China, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam and 
finds that they comply with the requirements of section 702(b)(1) of 
the Act. Therefore, in accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Act, we 
are initiating CVD investigations to determine whether manufacturers, 
producers, or exporters of frozen shrimp from the China, Ecuador, 
India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam receive 
countervailable subsidies.

The People's Republic of China

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 25 alleged 
programs. For the other five programs, we have determined that the 
requirements for initiation have not been met. For a full discussion of 
the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, 
see China Initiation Checklist.

Ecuador

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of seven alleged 
programs. For the other two programs, we have determined that the 
requirements for initiation have not been met. For a full discussion of 
the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, 
see Ecuador Initiation Checklist.

India

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 21 alleged 
programs. For one other program, we find that there is sufficient 
evidence to initiate on part of the allegation but that there is not 
sufficient evidence to initiate on another part of the allegation. For 
one program, we have determined that the requirements for initiation 
have not been met. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision 
to initiate or not initiate on each program, see India Initiation 
Checklist.

Indonesia

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 14 alleged 
programs. The petitioner also made a sufficient allegation of debt 
forgiveness and uncreditworthiness regarding a certain Indonesian 
producer/exporter of subject merchandise. We intend to investigate 
these allegations if this company is selected as a mandatory company 
respondent in the investigation. For one program, we have determined 
that the requirements for initiation have not been met. For a full 
discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on 
each program, see Indonesia Initiation Checklist.

Malaysia

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 16 alleged 
programs. For the other two programs, we have determined that the 
requirements for initiation have not been met. For a full discussion of 
the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, 
see Malaysia Initiation Checklist.

Thailand

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 12 alleged 
programs. For the other three programs, we have determined that the 
requirements for initiation have not been met. For a full discussion of 
the basis for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, 
see Thailand Initiation Checklist.

Vietnam

    Based on our review of the Petition, we find that there is 
sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation of 20 alleged 
programs. For two programs, we have determined that the requirements 
for initiation have not been met. For a full discussion of the basis 
for our decision to initiate or not initiate on each program, see 
Vietnam Initiation Checklist.

[[Page 5420]]

    A public version of the initiation checklists for each 
investigation is available at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ia-highlights-and-news.html).

Respondent Selection

    For these investigations, the Department expects to select 
respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for 
U.S. imports of subject merchandise during the period of investigation 
under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(HTSUS) numbers: 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.
    We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective 
Order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO 
shortly after the announcement of these case initiations. Interested 
parties may submit comments regarding the CBP data and respondent 
selection within seven calendar days of publication of this notice. 
Comments must be filed electronically using IA ACCESS. An 
electronically filed document must be received successfully in its 
entirety by the Department's electronic records system, IA ACCESS, by 5 
p.m. Eastern time by the date noted above. Documents excepted from the 
electronic submission requirements must be filed manually (i.e., in 
paper form) with the Import Administration's APO/Dockets Unit, Room 
1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue 
NW., Washington, DC 20230, and stamped with the date and time of 
receipt by the deadline noted above. We intend to make our decision 
regarding respondent selection within 20 days of publication of this 
Federal Register notice. Interested parties must submit applications 
for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). 
Instructions for filing such applications may be found on the 
Department's Web site at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/apo.

Distribution of Copies of the Petitions

    In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A)(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 
351.202(f), copies of the public version of the Petitions have been 
provided to the representatives of the Governments of China, Ecuador, 
India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam. Because of the 
particularly large number of producers/exporters identified in the 
Petitions, the Department considers the service of the public version 
of the Petitions to the foreign producers/exporters satisfied by the 
delivery of the public versions of the Petitions to the Governments of 
China, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam, 
consistent with 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).

ITC Notification

    We have notified the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 
702(d) of the Act.

Preliminary Determinations by the ITC

    The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date 
on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable 
indication that imports of subsidized frozen shrimp from China, 
Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam are 
materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. 
industry.\32\ Negative ITC determinations with respect to any country 
will result in the investigation being terminated for that country; 
otherwise, these investigations will proceed according to statutory and 
regulatory time limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See section 703(a)(2) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notification to Interested Parties

    Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under 
protective orders in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 
2008, the Department published Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures, 73 FR 
3634. Parties wishing to participate in this investigation should 
ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g., the 
filing of letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).
    Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding 
must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.\33\ 
Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are 
in effect for company/government officials, as well as their 
representatives, in all segments of any AD or CVD proceedings initiated 
on or after March 14, 2011.\34\ The formats for the revised 
certifications are provided at the end of the Interim Final Rule. 
Foreign governments and their officials may continue to submit 
certifications in either the format that was in use prior to the 
effective date of the Interim Final Rule, or in the format provided in 
the Interim Final Rule.\35\ The Department intends to reject factual 
information submissions if the submitting party does not comply with 
the revised certification requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ See section 782(b) of the Act.
    \34\ See Certification of Factual Information for Import 
Administration during Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings: Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 7491 (February 10, 2011) 
(Interim Final Rule), amending 19 CFR 351.303(g)(1) and (2).
    \35\ See Certification of Factual Information to Import 
Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 
Proceedings: Supplemental Interim Final Rule, 76 FR 54697 (September 
2, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 777(i) of 
the Act.

     Dated: January 17, 2013.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I

Scope of the Investigations

    The scope of these investigations is 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,\36\ deveined or not deveined, cooked or 
raw, or otherwise processed in frozen form, regardless of size.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ ``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, regardless of definitions in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule 
of the United States (``HTSUS''), 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, whiteleg 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. In addition, food preparations 
(including dusted shrimp), which are not ``prepared meals,'' that 
contain more than 20 percent by weight of shrimp or prawn are also 
included in the scope.
    Excluded from the scope are: (1) Breaded shrimp and prawns; (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; 
(4) shrimp and prawns in prepared meals; (5) dried shrimp and 
prawns; (6)

[[Page 5421]]

canned warmwater shrimp and prawns; and (7) certain ``battered 
shrimp'' (see below).
    ``Battered 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. When dusted in accordance with the definition of 
dusting above, the battered shrimp product is also coated with a wet 
viscous layer containing egg and/or milk, and par-fried.
    The products included in the scope of these investigations are 
currently classified under the following HTSUS subheadings: 
0306.17.00.03, 0306.17.00.06, 0306.17.00.09, 0306.17.00.12, 
0306.17.00.15, 0306.17.00.18, 0306.17.00.21, 0306.17.00.24, 
0306.17.00.27, 0306.17.00.40, 1605.21.10.30 and 1605.29.10.10. These 
HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and for customs 
purposes only and are not dispositive, but rather the written 
description of the scope is dispositive.

[FR Doc. 2013-01579 Filed 1-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P