Certain Pasta From Italy: Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 26777-26778 [2017-11995]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 110 / Friday, June 9, 2017 / Notices
subheadings are provided for
convenience and Customs purposes.
The written description of the scope of
this proceeding is dispositive.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in this sunset review,
including the likelihood of continuation
or recurrence of dumping and the
magnitude of the margin of dumping
likely to prevail if the Suspension
Agreement is terminated, are addressed
in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum.4 The Issues and Decision
Memorandum is a public document and
is on file electronically via Enforcement
and Compliance’s Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Centralized
Electronic Service System (ACCESS).
ACCESS is available to registered users
at https://access.trade.gov and is
available in the Central Records Unit,
room B8024 of the main Department of
Commerce building. In addition, a
complete version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the Internet at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/frn.
Final Results of Review
Pursuant to section 752(c) of the Act,
the Department determines that
termination of the Suspension
Agreement and suspended investigation
on uranium from the Russian Federation
would likely lead to continuation or
recurrence of dumping, and that the
magnitude of the margin of dumping
likely to prevail if the suspension
agreement is terminated would be
115.82 percent.
Notification Regarding Administrative
Protective Order
This notice also serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (APO)
of their responsibility concerning the
return or destruction of proprietary
information disclosed under APO in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305.
Timely written notification of the return
or destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and terms of an
APO is a violation subject to sanction.
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Notification to Interested Parties
We are issuing and publishing these
results and notice in accordance with
4 See Memorandum from Sally C. Gannon,
Director for Bilateral Agreements, to Ronald K.
Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for
Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Issues and Decision
Memorandum for the Fourth Sunset Review of the
Agreement Suspending the Antidumping
Investigation on Uranium from the Russian
Federation; Final Results,’’ (June 5, 2017) (Issues
and Decision Memorandum).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:25 Jun 08, 2017
Jkt 241001
sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of
the Act and 19 CFR 351.218.
Dated: June 5, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement
and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2017–11987 Filed 6–8–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–475–818]
Certain Pasta From Italy: Notice of
Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Changed Circumstances Review
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On March 17, 2017, the
Department of Commerce (Department)
published the preliminary results of the
changed circumstances review (CCR) of
the antidumping duty order on certain
pasta from Italy and preliminarily
determined that Francesco Tamma
S.p.A. (Tamma) is not the successor-ininterest to Tamma Industrie Alimentary
Capitanata S.r.l. (TIAC), the company
affiliated with Delverde, S.r.l.
(Delverde), which was excluded from
the order on pasta from Italy. We
received comments from interested
parties. Based on our analysis, for the
final results, the Department continues
to find that Tamma is not the successorin-interest to TIAC.
DATES: Effective June 9, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joy
Zhang, Office III, AD/CVD Operations,
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–1168.
AGENCY:
Background
On July 24, 1996, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
antidumping duty order on pasta from
Italy, which included Delverde and its
affiliate TIAC (collectively, Delverde/
TIAC).1 Pursuant to a decision by the
Court of International Trade, on remand,
the Department determined that
Delverde/TIAC had a de minimis
dumping margin and should be
excluded from the order on pasta from
Italy.2 In accordance with a decision
1 See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order and
Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Certain Pasta from Italy, 61 FR
38547 (July 24, 1996) (Pasta Order).
2 See Notice of Amendment of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26777
from the World Trade Organization
(WTO), the United States Trade
Representative subsequently directed
the Department to revise the all-others
rate for the Pasta Order to 15.45 percent
ad valorem.3
In 2014, the Department conducted a
CCR of Delverde Industrie Alimentari
S.p.A. (Delverde S.p.A.) and found that
Delverde S.p.A. was not the successorin-interest to Delverde based on aspects
of the bankruptcy of Delverde, changes
in management, changes in supplier
relationships, and changes in
production facilities.4 Thus, the
Department found that Delverde S.p.A.
was not entitled to the exclusion from
the Pasta Order that was originally
granted to Delverde, a defunct entity.5
On July 29, 2016, American Italian
Pasta Company, Dakota Growers Pasta
Company, and New World Pasta
Company (the petitioners) filed a
request for the Department to initiate a
CCR of Tamma to determine whether
Tamma is the successor-in-interest to
TIAC, the company excluded from the
Pasta Order that was previously
affiliated with the now defunct
Delverde.6 On September 13, 2016, we
initiated a CCR with respect to Tamma.7
On March 21, 2017, the Department
issued the Preliminary Results of this
CCR, in which it determined that
Tamma is not the successor-in-interest
to TIAC, the company in the Delverde/
TIAC entity, which was excluded from
the Pasta Order.8
Pursuant to Court Decision and Revocation in Part:
Certain Pasta from Italy, 66 FR 65889 (December
21, 2001).
3 See Implementation of the Findings of the WTO
Panel in US—Zeroing (EC): Notice of
Determinations Under Section 129 of the Uruguay
Round Agreements Act and Revocations and Partial
Revocations of Certain Antidumping Duty Orders,
72 FR 25261, 25263 (May 4, 2007) (Pasta Section
129 Implementation Determination).
4 See Certain Pasta from Italy: Notice of
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 79 FR 28481 (May 16, 2014);
unchanged in Certain Pasta from Italy: Notice of
Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 79 FR 76339 (September 19,
2014) and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum (Delverde CCR).
5 See Delverde CCR.
6 See Petitioners’ letter titled, ‘‘Request for 2015–
2016 Administrative Reviews of the Antidumping
Duty Order on Certain Pasta from Italy,’’ dated July
29, 2016. This letter requests an administrative
review and changed circumstances review of
Tamma. On August 11, 2016, the petitioners refiled
this review request to clarify the specific company
names requested for review.
7 See Certain Pasta from Italy: Initiation of
Changed Circumstances Review, 81 FR 62864
(September 13, 2016) (Initiation Notice).
8 See Certain Pasta from Italy: Notice of
Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed
Circumstances Review, 82 FR 14501 (March 21,
2017) (Preliminary Results) and the accompanying
Preliminary Decision Memorandum.
E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM
09JNN1
26778
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 110 / Friday, June 9, 2017 / Notices
On March 31, 2017, Tamma submitted
comments regarding the Preliminary
Results.9 On April 17, 2017, the
petitioners submitted their rebuttal
brief.10
Scope of the Order
Imports covered by the order are
shipments of certain non-egg dry pasta.
The merchandise subject to review is
currently classifiable under items
1901.90.90.95 and 1902.19.20 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS). Although the
HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, the
written description of the merchandise
subject to the order is dispositive.11
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs by parties to this changed
circumstances review are addressed in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum,
which is hereby adopted by this notice.
A list of the issues which parties have
raised, and to which we have responded
in the Issues and Decision
Memorandum, is attached to this notice
as an Appendix. The Issues and
Decision Memorandum is a public
document and is on file electronically
via Enforcement and Compliance’s
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Centralized Electronic Service System
(ACCESS). ACCESS is available to
registered users at https://
access.trade.gov, and it is available to
all parties in the Central Records Unit,
room B8024, of the main Department of
Commerce building. In addition, a
complete version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the internet at https://
enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed
Issues and Decision Memorandum and
the electronic version of the Issues and
Decision Memorandum are identical in
content.
Final Results of Changed
Circumstances Review
mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Based on the record evidence and our
analysis of the comments received, the
Department continues to find that
Tamma is not the successor-in-interest
to TIAC pursuant to section 751(b) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act) and 19 CFR 351.216.12
Tamma’s Case Brief, entitled ‘‘Certain Pasta
from Italy: Changed Circumstances Review Case
Brief of Francesco Tamma S.p.A.,’’ dated March 31,
2017.
10 See Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief, entitled
‘‘Certain Pasta from Italy: Petitioners’ Rebuttal Brief
for Francesco Tamma S.p.A.’’, dated April 17, 2017.
11 For a full description of the scope of the order,
see Issues and Decision Memorandum.
12 See Issues and Decision Memorandum.
Instructions to U.S. Customs and
Border Protection
As a result of this determination, the
Department will instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection to collect
estimated antidumping duties for all
shipments of subject merchandise
produced and/or exported by Tamma
and entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after
the publication date of this notice in the
Federal Register at the 15.45 percent
all-others rate established in the
antidumping duty investigation, as
modified by the section 129
determination.13 This cash deposit
requirement shall remain in effect until
further notice.
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice serves as a reminder to
parties subject to administrative
protective orders (APOs) of their
responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.306. Timely written
notification of the destruction of APO
materials or conversion to judicial
protective order is hereby requested.
Failure to comply with the regulations
and terms of an APO is a sanctionable
violation.
We are issuing and publishing this
final results notice in accordance with
sections 751(b) and 777(i) of the Act,
and 19 CFR 351.216 and 351.221(c)(3).
Dated: June 1, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement
and Compliance.
Appendix
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Discussion of Interested Party Comments
Comment: Whether a Successor-in-Interest
CCR Analysis Should Be Based on an
Event/Events or on the Totality of the
Circumstances on the Record
V. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2017–11995 Filed 6–8–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
9 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:25 Jun 08, 2017
Jkt 241001
13 See Pasta Section 129 Implementation
Determination, 72 FR at 25263.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–602–807, A–351–842, A–570–022, C–570–
023, A–560–828, C–560–829, A–471–807]
Certain Uncoated Paper From
Australia, Brazil, the People’s Republic
of China, Indonesia, and Portugal:
Affirmative Preliminary Determination
of Circumvention of the Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Orders
Enforcement and Compliance,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
DATES: Effective June 9, 2017.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(Department) preliminarily determines
that imports of uncoated paper with a
GE brightness of 83 +/¥1% (83 Bright
paper), otherwise meeting the
description of in-scope merchandise,
from Australia, Brazil, the People’s
Republic of China, Indonesia, and
Portugal constitute merchandise
‘‘altered in form or appearance in minor
respects’’ from in-scope merchandise
that should be considered subject to the
antidumping (AD) and countervailing
duty (CVD) Orders on certain uncoated
paper (uncoated paper).1
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William Miller at (202) 482–3906, AD/
CVD Operations, Enforcement and
Compliance, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Scope of the Orders
The merchandise covered by the
orders is uncoated paper. Uncoated
paper subject to the orders is currently
classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)
at subheadings 4802.56.1000,
4802.56.2000, 4802.56.3000,
4802.56.4000, 4802.56.6000,
4802.56.7020, 4802.56.7040,
4802.57.1000, 4802.57.2000,
4802.57.3000, and 4802.57.4000. Some
imports of subject merchandise may
also be classified under 4802.62.1000,
4802.62.2000, 4802.62.3000,
4802.62.5000, 4802.62.6020,
4802.62.6040, 4802.69.1000,
4802.69.2000, 4802.69.3000,
1 See Certain Uncoated Paper from Australia,
Brazil, Indonesia, the People’s Republic of China,
and Portugal: Amended Final Affirmative
Antidumping Determinations for Brazil and
Indonesia and Antidumping Duty Orders; 81 FR
11174 (March 3, 2016) and Certain Uncoated Paper
from Indonesia and the People’s Republic of China:
Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination and Countervailing Duty Order
(Indonesia) and Countervailing Duty Order
(People’s Republic of China); 81 FR 11187, (March
3, 2016) (collectively, the Orders).
E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM
09JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 110 (Friday, June 9, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26777-26778]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11995]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-475-818]
Certain Pasta From Italy: Notice of Final Results of Antidumping
Duty Changed Circumstances Review
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On March 17, 2017, the Department of Commerce (Department)
published the preliminary results of the changed circumstances review
(CCR) of the antidumping duty order on certain pasta from Italy and
preliminarily determined that Francesco Tamma S.p.A. (Tamma) is not the
successor-in-interest to Tamma Industrie Alimentary Capitanata S.r.l.
(TIAC), the company affiliated with Delverde, S.r.l. (Delverde), which
was excluded from the order on pasta from Italy. We received comments
from interested parties. Based on our analysis, for the final results,
the Department continues to find that Tamma is not the successor-in-
interest to TIAC.
DATES: Effective June 9, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joy Zhang, Office III, AD/CVD
Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-1168.
Background
On July 24, 1996, the Department published in the Federal Register
the antidumping duty order on pasta from Italy, which included Delverde
and its affiliate TIAC (collectively, Delverde/TIAC).\1\ Pursuant to a
decision by the Court of International Trade, on remand, the Department
determined that Delverde/TIAC had a de minimis dumping margin and
should be excluded from the order on pasta from Italy.\2\ In accordance
with a decision from the World Trade Organization (WTO), the United
States Trade Representative subsequently directed the Department to
revise the all-others rate for the Pasta Order to 15.45 percent ad
valorem.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order and Amended Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Pasta from
Italy, 61 FR 38547 (July 24, 1996) (Pasta Order).
\2\ See Notice of Amendment of Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value Pursuant to Court Decision and Revocation in
Part: Certain Pasta from Italy, 66 FR 65889 (December 21, 2001).
\3\ See Implementation of the Findings of the WTO Panel in US--
Zeroing (EC): Notice of Determinations Under Section 129 of the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act and Revocations and Partial Revocations
of Certain Antidumping Duty Orders, 72 FR 25261, 25263 (May 4, 2007)
(Pasta Section 129 Implementation Determination).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2014, the Department conducted a CCR of Delverde Industrie
Alimentari S.p.A. (Delverde S.p.A.) and found that Delverde S.p.A. was
not the successor-in-interest to Delverde based on aspects of the
bankruptcy of Delverde, changes in management, changes in supplier
relationships, and changes in production facilities.\4\ Thus, the
Department found that Delverde S.p.A. was not entitled to the exclusion
from the Pasta Order that was originally granted to Delverde, a defunct
entity.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Certain Pasta from Italy: Notice of Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 79 FR 28481 (May
16, 2014); unchanged in Certain Pasta from Italy: Notice of Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 79 FR
76339 (September 19, 2014) and accompanying Issues and Decision
Memorandum (Delverde CCR).
\5\ See Delverde CCR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 29, 2016, American Italian Pasta Company, Dakota Growers
Pasta Company, and New World Pasta Company (the petitioners) filed a
request for the Department to initiate a CCR of Tamma to determine
whether Tamma is the successor-in-interest to TIAC, the company
excluded from the Pasta Order that was previously affiliated with the
now defunct Delverde.\6\ On September 13, 2016, we initiated a CCR with
respect to Tamma.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Petitioners' letter titled, ``Request for 2015-2016
Administrative Reviews of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain
Pasta from Italy,'' dated July 29, 2016. This letter requests an
administrative review and changed circumstances review of Tamma. On
August 11, 2016, the petitioners refiled this review request to
clarify the specific company names requested for review.
\7\ See Certain Pasta from Italy: Initiation of Changed
Circumstances Review, 81 FR 62864 (September 13, 2016) (Initiation
Notice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 21, 2017, the Department issued the Preliminary Results of
this CCR, in which it determined that Tamma is not the successor-in-
interest to TIAC, the company in the Delverde/TIAC entity, which was
excluded from the Pasta Order.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Certain Pasta from Italy: Notice of Preliminary Results
of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 82 FR 14501 (March
21, 2017) (Preliminary Results) and the accompanying Preliminary
Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 26778]]
On March 31, 2017, Tamma submitted comments regarding the
Preliminary Results.\9\ On April 17, 2017, the petitioners submitted
their rebuttal brief.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Tamma's Case Brief, entitled ``Certain Pasta from Italy:
Changed Circumstances Review Case Brief of Francesco Tamma S.p.A.,''
dated March 31, 2017.
\10\ See Petitioners' Rebuttal Brief, entitled ``Certain Pasta
from Italy: Petitioners' Rebuttal Brief for Francesco Tamma
S.p.A.'', dated April 17, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scope of the Order
Imports covered by the order are shipments of certain non-egg dry
pasta. The merchandise subject to review is currently classifiable
under items 1901.90.90.95 and 1902.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings
are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written
description of the merchandise subject to the order is dispositive.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ For a full description of the scope of the order, see
Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to
this changed circumstances review are addressed in the Issues and
Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of
the issues which parties have raised, and to which we have responded in
the Issues and Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an
Appendix. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and
is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping
and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS).
ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov,
and it is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room
B8024, of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a
complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed
directly on the internet at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The
signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic version of the
Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review
Based on the record evidence and our analysis of the comments
received, the Department continues to find that Tamma is not the
successor-in-interest to TIAC pursuant to section 751(b) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.216.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection
As a result of this determination, the Department will instruct
U.S. Customs and Border Protection to collect estimated antidumping
duties for all shipments of subject merchandise produced and/or
exported by Tamma and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the publication date of this notice in the
Federal Register at the 15.45 percent all-others rate established in
the antidumping duty investigation, as modified by the section 129
determination.\13\ This cash deposit requirement shall remain in effect
until further notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Pasta Section 129 Implementation Determination, 72 FR
at 25263.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification to Interested Parties
This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.306. Timely written notification of
the destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective
order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and
terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing this final results notice in
accordance with sections 751(b) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR
351.216 and 351.221(c)(3).
Dated: June 1, 2017.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
Appendix
I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope of the Order
IV. Discussion of Interested Party Comments
Comment: Whether a Successor-in-Interest CCR Analysis Should Be
Based on an Event/Events or on the Totality of the Circumstances on
the Record
V. Recommendation
[FR Doc. 2017-11995 Filed 6-8-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P