Certain Pasta from Turkey: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 6834-6836 [E5-538]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
• International Trade Administration

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 26 (Wednesday, February 9, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6834-6836]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-538]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

(A-489-805)


Certain Pasta from Turkey: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 6, 2004, the Department of Commerce (the Department) 
published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the 
antidumping duty order on certain pasta from Turkey. This review covers 
two exporters/producers of subject merchandise, Filiz Gida Sanayi ve 
Ticaret A.S. (Filiz) and Tat Konserve A.S. (Tat), succesor-in-interest 
to Pastavilla Makarnacilik San. V. Tic. A.S., (Pastavilla). The period 
of review (POR) is July 1, 2002, through June 30, 2003.
    As a result of our analysis of the comments received, these final 
results differ from the preliminary results. For our final results, we 
have found that during the POR, Tat and Filiz sold subject merchandise 
at less than normal value (NV). The final results are listed in the 
``Final Results of Review'' section below.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 9, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lyman Armstrong or Eric Greynolds, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 
482-3601 or (202) 482-6071, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On August 6, 2004, the Department published the preliminary results 
of its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on pasta 
from Turkey. See Certain Pasta from Turkey: Notice of Preliminary 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 69 FR 47876 (August 
6, 2004)

[[Page 6835]]

(Preliminary Results). The review covers two manufacturers/exporters. 
The POR is July 1, 2002, through June 30, 2003. We invited parties to 
comment on our preliminary results of review. We only received timely 
case briefs from Tat and petitioners\1\ on September 7, 2004. We 
received rebuttal briefs from Tat, Filiz, and petitioners on September 
13, 2004.\2\ On September 17, 2004, Filiz submitted an untimely case 
brief, and requested that the Department consider it for these final 
results. On September 22, 2004, the Department returned Filiz's case 
brief as untimely filed new factual information pursuant to 19 CFR 
351.301 (b)(2). See Letter to the File Re: Removal of Filiz Case Brief, 
dated September 22, 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Petitioners are New World Pasta Company, Dakota Growers 
Pasta Company, Borden Foods Corporation and American Italian Pasta 
Company.
    \2\ On September 13, 2004, Filiz filed a rebuttal brief stating 
that it would not address the issues raised by petitioners in their 
September 7, 2004 filing because Filiz had already addressed the 
issues in its case brief. However, Filiz had failed to file the 
referenced case brief with the Department.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 4, 2004, the Department published the notice of 
extension of final results of the antidumping duty administrative 
review of pasta from Turkey, extending the date for these final results 
to February 2, 2005. See Certain Pasta From Turkey: Extension of Final 
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 69 FR 64275 
(November 4, 2005).

Scope of Review

    Imports covered by this order 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 order 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.
    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 
antidumping and countervailing duty orders. See Memorandum from John 
Brinkmann, Program Manager, to Richard Moreland, Deputy Assistant 
Secretary, Concerning Final Scope Ruling, dated May 24, 1999, in the 
case file in the Central Records Unit, main Commerce building, room B-
099 (the CRU).
    The merchandise subject to this order 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.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal brief by parties to this 
administrative 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. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at https://
ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the 
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on our analysis of comments received, we have made certain 
changes in the margin calculations. We calculated the export price and 
NV using the same methodology described in the Preliminary Results, 
except as follows:
 The Department has corrected a clerical error in order to 
collapse wheat codes 1 and 2 consistently throughout the program for 
Filiz and Tat.
 The countervailing duty expense (CVDU) reported by Tat was 
deleted from the margin calculation program in order to avoid double-
counting of this expense.
 The Department has corrected an error in applying the 
affiliated party test for Tat.
    These changes are discussed in the relevant sections of the 
Decision Memorandum.

Final Results of Review

    We determine that the following weighted-average margins exist for 
the period July 1, 2002, through June 30, 2003:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Manufacturer/exporter                  Margin (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tat.................................................               36.65
Filiz...............................................               17.73
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment

    The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate 
entries. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b), we have calculated 
exporter/importer-specific duty assessment rates by aggregating the 
dumping margins for the examined U.S. sales for each importer and 
dividing the amount by the total entered value of the sales for that 
importer. In situations in which the importer-specific assessment rate 
is above de miminis, we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties 
on that importer's entries of subject merchandise. The Department will 
issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP within 15 
days of publication of these final results of review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of this notice of final results of the administrative 
review for all shipments of certain pasta from Turkey entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of 
publication of these final results, as provided by section 751(a)(1) of 
the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for the reviewed companies will be 
the rates shown above, except where the margin is de minimis or zero we 
will instruct CBP not to collect cash deposits; (2) for previously 
reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit 
rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the 
most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this 
review, a prior review, or the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) 
investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be 
the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of 
the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other 
manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 51.49 percent, the ``All 
Others'' rate established in the LTFV investigation. See Notice of 
Antidumping Duty Order and Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less 
Than Fair Value: Certain Pasta from Turkey, 61 FR 38545 (July 24, 
1996). These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until 
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.

Notification

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding 
the reimbursement of antidumping duties

[[Page 6836]]

and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant 
entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this 
requirement may result in the Secretary's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred and 
the subsequent increase in antidumping duties by the amount of 
antidumping and/or countervailing duties reimbursed.
    This notice also 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 351.305. Timely notification of the 
return/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 are sanctionable violations.
    We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: February 2, 2005.
Barbara E. Tillman,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

APPENDIX I

List of Comments and Issues in the Decision Memorandum

I. List of Comments:

Tat Konserve A.S. (Tat)

Comment 1: Whether the Department Should Reject Tat's February 24, 
2004, Submission
Comment 2: Calculation Error in Affiliated Party Arm's-Length Test
Comment 3: Whether the Department Should Continue to Collapse Tat's 
Wheat Codes
Comment 4: Whether the Department Should Correct Tat's Cost Test to 
Account for Different Levels of Trade
Comment 5: Whether the Department Double-Counted Tat's Countervailing 
Duties
Comment 6: Modification of Imputed Credit Calculations

Filiz Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (Filiz)

Comment 7: The Department Should Continue to Collapse Wheat Codes 1 and 
2 But Correct for a Clerical Error

II. Background

III. Wheat Codes

IV. Discussion of Interested Party Comments

[FR Doc. E5-538 Filed 2-8-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S