68 FR 48599, August 14, 2003
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-475-819]
Certain Pasta from Italy: Final Results of the Sixth
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 9, 2003, the Department of Commerce published in the
Federal Register its preliminary results of the sixth administrative
review of the countervailing duty order on certain pasta from Italy for
the period January 1 through December 31, 2001.
Based on information received since the preliminary results and our
analysis of the comments received, the Department has revised the net
subsidy rate for F.lli De Cecco di Fillipo Fara S. Martino S.p.A.
Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The
final net subsidy rates for the reviewed companies are listed below in
the section entitled ``Final Results of Review.''
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 14, 2003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Cho or John Brinkmann, AD/CVD
Enforcement, Group I, Office 1, Import Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC
20230; telephone (202) 482-3798 or 482-4126, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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
Fillipo Fara S. Martino S.p.A. (``De Cecco'') and Italian American
Pasta Company, S.r.L. (``IAPC'').
Based on withdrawal of the request for review, we rescinded this
administrative review for Labor S.r.L., F. Divella, S.p.A., and
Delverde, S.p.A. (See Certain Pasta from Italy: Preliminary Results and
Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 68 FR
17346 (April 9, 2003) (``Preliminary Results'').
Since the publication of the Preliminary Results, a case brief was
submitted on May 8, 2003, by De Cecco. 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, 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
[[Page 48600]]
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, 2001.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case brief by the interested party to this
administrative review are addressed in the August 7, 2003, Issues and
Decision Memorandum (``Decision Memorandum'') from Jeffrey May, Deputy
Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, to James J. Jochum,
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
Based on information received subsequent to the Preliminary Results
and our analysis of the comment submitted in the case brief, we have
made changes in our calculation of the net subsidies for De Cecco.
These changes are discussed in the relevant section of the Decision
Memorandum.
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,
2001, we determine the net subsidy rates for producers/exporters under
review to be those specified in the chart shown below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ad valorem
Company rate
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.lli De Cecco di Filippo Fara San Martino, S.p.A.......... 2.01
Italian American Pasta Company, S.r.L...................... 0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We will instruct the U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
(``BCBP'') to assess countervailing duties as indicated above. The
Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to
the BCBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of
review. The Department will also instruct the BCBP 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
BCBP to continue to collect cash deposits for non-reviewed companies,
except Barilla G. e R. F.lli S.p.A. and Gruppo Agricoltura Sana S.r.L.
(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, 2001, 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 Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C.
1675(a)(1)).
Dated: August 7, 2003.
James J. Jochum,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I--Issues Discussed in the Decision Memorandum
I. Subsidies Valuation Methodology
1. Benchmarks for Long-term Loans and Discount Rates
2. Allocation Period
3. 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 Consolidation Loans
5. Social Security Reductions and Exemptions--Sgravi
6. IRAP Exemptions
7. Export Restitution Payments
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'')
18. Corporate Income Tax (IRPEG) Exemptions
[[Page 48601]]
19. Export Marketing Grants under Law 304/90
III. Analysis of Comments
Comment: Clerical Error (De Cecco)
[FR Doc. 03-20782 Filed 8-13-03; 8:45 am]