[Federal Register: August 12, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 155)]
[Page 52452-52454]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-475-819]
Certain Pasta from Italy: Final Results of the Fifth
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative
Review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 8, 2002, the Department of Commerce published in the
Federal Register its preliminary results of the fifth administrative
review of the countervailing duty order on certain pasta from Italy for
the period January 1 through December 31, 2000.
We have made no changes to our preliminary findings as a result of
either our analysis of the comments received or of any new information
or evidence of changed circumstances. Therefore, the final results do
not differ from the preliminary results of this review.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 12, 2002.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Matney, Audrey Twyman, or
Stephen Cho, AD/CVD Enforcement, Group I, Office 1, Import
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone (202) 482-
1778, 482-3534, or 482-3798, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Applicable Statute and Regulations
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are
references to the provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by
the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''), effective January 1, 1995
(``the Act''). In addition, unless otherwise indicated, all citations
to the Department's regulations are to the regulations codified at 19
CFR 351 et seq. (2002).
Background
On July 24, 1996, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'')
published in the Federal Register (61 FR 38544) the countervailing duty
order on certain pasta from Italy.
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), this review of the order
covers the following producers or exporters of the subject merchandise
for which a review was specifically requested: F.lli De Cecco di
Filippo Fara S. Martino S.p.A. (``De Cecco''); Delverde S.p.A.
(``Delverde''); Italian American Pasta Company, S.r.L. (``IAPC''); and
Labor S.r.L. (``Labor'').
Based on withdrawal of the request for review, we rescinded this
administrative review for N. Puglisi & F. Industria Paste Alimentari
S.p.A. (``Puglisi''). (See, Certain Pasta from Italy: Preliminary
Results and Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative
Review, 67 FR 16722 (April 8, 2002) (``Preliminary Results'').
Since the publication of the Preliminary Results, a case brief was
submitted on May 8, 2002, by Delverde. The Department did not conduct a
hearing in this review because none was requested.
Scope of Review
Imports covered by this review are shipments of certain non-egg dry
pasta in packages of five pounds (2.27 kilograms) or less, whether or
not enriched or fortified or containing milk or other optional
ingredients such as chopped vegetables, vegetable purees, milk, gluten,
diastases, vitamins,
[[Page 52453]]
coloring and flavorings, and up to two percent egg white. The pasta
covered by this scope is typically sold in the retail market, in
fiberboard or cardboard cartons, or polyethylene or polypropylene bags,
of varying dimensions.
Excluded from the scope of this review are refrigerated, frozen, or
canned pastas, as well as all forms of egg pasta, with the exception of
non-egg dry pasta containing up to two percent egg white. Also excluded
are imports of organic pasta from Italy that are accompanied by the
appropriate certificate issued by the Istituto Mediterraneo Di
Certificazione, Bioagricoop Scrl, QC&I International Services, Ecocert
Italia, Consorzio per il Controllo dei Prodotti Biologici, Associazione
Italiana per l'Agricoltura Biologica, or Codex S.r.L.
The merchandise subject to review is currently classifiable under
item 1902.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience
and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise
subject to the order is dispositive.
Scope Rulings
The Department has issued the following scope rulings to date:
(1) On August 25, 1997, the Department issued a scope ruling that
multicolored pasta, imported in kitchen display bottles of decorative
glass that are sealed with cork or paraffin and bound with raffia, is
excluded from the scope of the countervailing duty order.(See August
25, 1997, memorandum from Edward Easton to Richard Moreland, which is
on file in the Central Records Unit (``CRU'') in Room B-099 of the main
Commerce building.)
(2) On July 30, 1998, the Department issued a scope ruling, finding
that multipacks consisting of six one-pound packages of pasta that are
shrink-wrapped into a single package are within the scope of the
countervailing duty order. (See July 30, 1998, letter from Susan H.
Kuhbach, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration,
to Barbara P. Sidari, Vice President, Joseph A. Sidari Company, Inc.,
which is on file in the CRU.)
(3) On October 26, 1998, the Department self-initiated a scope
inquiry to determine whether a package weighing over five pounds as a
result of allowable industry tolerances may be within the scope of the
countervailing duty order. On May 24, 1999, we issued a final scope
ruling finding that, effective October 26, 1998, pasta in packages
weighing or labeled up to (and including) five pounds four ounces is
within the scope of the countervailing duty order. (See May 24, 1999,
memorandum from John Brinkmann to Richard Moreland, which is on file in
the CRU.)
Period of Review
The period of review (``POR'') for which we are measuring subsidies
is from January 1 through December 31, 2000.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case brief by the interested party to this
administrative review are addressed in the August 6, 2002, Issues and
Decision Memorandum (``Decision Memorandum'') from Richard W. Moreland,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, to Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, which is hereby adopted
by this notice. Attached to this notice as Appendix I is a list of the
issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded in the
Decision Memorandum. Parties can find a complete discussion of all
issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in
this public memorandum which is on file in the CRU, Room B-099 of the
Department. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum
can be accessed directly on the Internet at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/
under the heading ``Italy.'' The paper copy and electronic version of
the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Changes Since the Preliminary Results
We have made no changes to our preliminary findings as a result of
either our analysis of the comments received or of any new information
or evidence of changed circumstances. Therefore, the final results do
not differ from the preliminary results of this review.
Final Results of Review
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated an
individual subsidy rate for each producer/exporter subject to this
administrative review. For the period January 1 through December 31,
2000, we determine the net subsidy rates for producers/exporters under
review to be those specified in the chart shown below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ad valorem
Company rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.lli De Cecco di Filippo Fara San Martino, S.p.A.......... 1.90
percent
Delverde S.p.A............................................. 2.83
percent
Italian American Pasta Company, S.r.L...................... 0.00
percent
Labor, S.r.L............................................... 1.57
percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We will instruct the U.S. Customs Service (``Customs'') to assess
countervailing duties as indicated above. The Department will also
instruct Customs to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing
duties in the percentage detailed above of the f.o.b. invoice prices on
all shipments of the subject merchandise from the producers/exporters
under review, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on
or after the date of publication of the final results of this
administrative review.
The cash deposit rates for all companies not covered by this review
are not changed by the results of this review. Thus, we will instruct
Customs to continue to collect cash deposits for non-reviewed
companies, except Barilla G. e R. F.lli S.p.A. (``Barilla'') and Gruppo
Agricoltura Sana S.r.L. (``Gruppo'') (which were excluded from the
order during the investigation), at the most recent rate applicable to
the company. These rates shall apply to all non-reviewed companies
until a review of the companies assigned these rates is completed. In
addition, for the period January 1 through December 31, 2000, the
assessment rates applicable to all non-reviewed companies covered by
these orders are the cash deposit rates in effect at the time of entry.
This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.301. Timely written notification of
return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the
regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
This administrative review and notice are in accordance with
section 751(a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)).
DATED: August 6, 2002.
Faryar Shirzad,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
Appendix I Issues discussed in the Decision Memorandum
I. Subsidies Valuation Methodology
1. Change in Ownership
2. Benchmarks for Long-term Loans and Discount Rates
[[Page 52454]]
3. Allocation Period
4. Attribution
II. Analysis of Programs
A. Programs Previously Determined to Confer Subsidies
1. Law 64/86 Industrial Development Grants
2. Law 488/92 Industrial Development Grants
3. Industrial Development Loans Under Law 64/86
4. Law 341/95 Interest Contributions on Debt ConsolidationLoans
5. Social Security Reductions and Exemptions - Sgravi
6. IRAP Exemptions
7. Law 304/90 Export Marketing Grants
8. Export Restitution Payments
9. IRPEG Exemptions
B. Programs Determined to Be Not Used
1. Law 64/86 VAT Reductions
2. Export Credits under Law 227/77
3. Capital Grants under Law 675/77
4. Retraining Grants under Law 675/77
5. Interest Contributions on Bank Loans under Law 675/77
6. Interest Grants Financed by IRI Bonds
7. Preferential Financing for Export Promotion under Law 394/81
8. Urban Redevelopment under Law 181
9. Grant Received Pursuant to the Community Initiative Concerning
the Preparation of Enterprises for the Single Market (``PRISMA'')
10. Law 183/76 Industrial Development Grants
11. Law 598/94 Interest Subsidies
12. Law 236/93 Training Grants
13. European Regional Development Fund (``ERDF'')
14. Duty-Free Import Rights
15. Remission of Taxes on Export Credit Insurance Under Article 33
of Law 227/77
16. Law 1329/65 Interest Contributions (``Sabatini Law'')
17. European Social Fund (``ESF'')
III.Analysis of Comments
Comment 1: Application of the Department's privatization
methodology to Delverde (Delverde)
Comment 2: Presumption that subsidies continue after a change in
ownership (Delverde)
Comment 3: Privatization and the U.K. Lead Bar Panel (Delverde)
Comment 4: Sale of shares vs. assets (Delverde)
Comment 5: Continuity of business operations (Delverde)
[FR Doc. 02-20387 Filed 8-9-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S