Certain Pasta from Turkey: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 33439-33441 [E6-9007]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 111 / Friday, June 9, 2006 / Notices
preliminary results was published in the
Federal Register. However, if the
Department determines that it is not
practicable to complete the review
within this time period, section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and section
351.213(h)(2) of the Department’s
regulations allow the Department to
extend the 245-day period to 365 days
and the 120-day period to 180 days.
The Department determines that the
completion of the final results of this
review within the statutory time period
is not practicable. The Department
requires additional time to analyze
comments regarding the four companies
involved in the instant review, each of
which exported subject merchandise in
at least one of the four classes or kinds
of merchandise covered by this order,
along with complex affiliation and agent
sale issues. Therefore, in accordance
with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the
Department is extending the time period
for issuing the final results of this
review by 25 days until July 31, 2006.
Dated: June 2, 3006.
Stephen J. Claeys,
Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–9006 Filed 6–8–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–489–806]
Certain Pasta from Turkey: Preliminary
Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
is conducting an administrative review
of the countervailing duty order on
certain pasta from Turkey for the period
January 1, 2004, through December 31,
2004. We have preliminarily determined
that Gidasa Sabanci Gida Sanayi ve
Ticaret A.S. did not receive
countervailable subsidies during the
period of review. If the final results
remain the same as these preliminary
results, we will instruct U.S. Customs
and Border Protection to liquidate
without regard to countervailing duties,
as detailed in the ‘‘Preliminary Results
of Review’’ section of this notice.
Interested parties are invited to
comment on these preliminary results
(see the ‘‘Public Comment’’ section of
this notice).
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 9, 2006.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:01 Jun 08, 2006
Jkt 208001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brandon Farlander or Audrey Twyman,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import
Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230;
telephone (202) 482–0182 and (202)
482–3534, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 24, 1996, the Department of
Commerce (‘‘the Department’’)
published in the Federal Register the
countervailing duty order on certain
pasta from Turkey. See Notice of
Countervailing Duty Order: Certain
Pasta from Turkey, 61 FR 38546 (July
24, 1996). On July 1, 2005, the
Department published in the Federal
Register, a notice of ‘‘Opportunity to
Request Administrative Review’’ of this
countervailing duty order. See
Antidumping or Countervailing Duty
Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation; Opportunity to Request
Administrative Review, 70 FR 38099
(July 1, 2005). We received one request
for review on July 29, 2005, and
initiated the review for calendar year
2004, on August 29, 2005. See Initiation
of Antidumping and Countervailing
Duty Administrative Reviews and
Requests for Revocation in Part, 70 FR
51009 (August 29, 2005). In accordance
with 19 CFR 351.213(b), this review of
the order covers Gidasa Sabanci Gida
Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (‘‘Gidasa’’).
On September 8, 2005, we issued
countervailing duty questionnaires to
the Government of Turkey and Gidasa.
We received responses to our
questionnaires on November 14 and 17,
2005, and issued supplemental
questionnaires on January 31, 2006.
Responses to the supplemental
questionnaires were received on
February 23, and March 17, 2006.
On March 14, 2006, the Department
postponed the preliminary results of
review until June 5, 2006. See Certain
Pasta from Turkey: Extension of Time
Limit for Preliminary Results of the
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Review, 71 FR 13966 (March 20, 2006).
On April 5, 2006, we provided Gidasa
an opportunity to place information on
the record concerning the world market
price for durum wheat, and
international freight rates. We received
Gidasa’s submission on April 17, 2006.
Scope of Order
Covered by the 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
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
33439
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 order is typically sold in
the retail market, in fiberboard or
cardboard cartons or polyethylene or
polypropylene bags, of varying
dimensions.
Excluded from the 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.
The merchandise under review is
currently classifiable under subheading
1902.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the HTSUS
subheading is provided for convenience
and customs purposes, our written
description of the scope of the order is
dispositive.
Scope Ruling
To date, the Department has issued
the following scope ruling:
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 Memorandum from John
Brinkman to Richard Moreland, dated
May 24, 1999, which is on file in the
Central Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’) in Room
B–099 of the main Commerce building.
Period of Review
The period of review (‘‘POR’’) for
which we are measuring subsidies is
from January 1, 2004, through December
31, 2004.
Analysis of Programs
I. Programs Preliminarily Determined
To Not Provide a Countervailable
Benefit
1. Purchases of Domestic Wheat from
the Turkish Grain Board (‘‘TMO’’) under
Decree 2003/5468
There are three main ways for Turkish
pasta producers to obtain wheat for
semolina pasta: (1) from the TMO, (2)
from local growers and traders, or (3)
through imports. Prices for wheat in
Turkey are set above world market
prices as part of a price support scheme
benefitting domestic wheat growers.
However, companies holding an Inward
Processing License can obtain lower
E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM
09JNN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
33440
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 111 / Friday, June 9, 2006 / Notices
priced wheat (when compared to the
equivalent domestic–priced wheat) by
purchasing Turkish wheat from the
TMO under Decree 2003/5468, and
using the wheat to produce products for
export. The Government of Turkey and
Gidasa have stated that the price of
wheat purchased under Decree 2003/
5468 is at or above the world market
price, as measured by the price from
international tender auctions held by
the TMO to sell Turkish wheat to
foreign buyers. To purchase wheat,
companies using Inward Processing
Licenses must consume the wheat in the
production of pasta for export only.
Under this program, the Government
of Turkey provides a financial
contribution per section 771(5)(D)(iii) of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the
Act’’), by providing a good (durum
wheat). This program is specific per
section 771(5A)(B) of the Act because it
is contingent upon export performance.
A benefit exists to the extent that the
wheat is being provided on more
favorable terms than the terms
applicable to the provision of like or
directly competitive products for use in
the production of goods for domestic
consumption, unless such terms or
conditions are not more favorable than
those commercially available on world
markets to exporters. The world market
price must be inclusive of delivery
charges. 19 CFR 351.516(a)(1) and (2).
In response to our request for
information, Gidasa provided arguments
concerning world market prices and
delivery charges for purposes of
determining whether a benefit exists
under this program. Concerning
delivery charges, Gidasa argues that the
Department should use a freight rate
that closely resembles the actual freight
paid on imports of durum wheat into
Turkey. In this regard, the Government
of Turkey provided import data showing
that imports of durum wheat into
Turkey during the POR came only from
European Union countries. Therefore,
Gidasa argues, the delivery charge
should reflect freight from countries in
close proximity to Turkey. Gidasa could
not find publicly available freight rates
from countries near Turkey. Instead,
Gidasa provided U.S. import statistics
for durum wheat. These statistics show
international freight for shipments of
durum wheat from Canada to the United
States.
Concerning the world market price of
durum wheat, the Government of
Turkey has reported details on the
single auction sale that it made in 2004
to an international purchaser. This sale
could also be considered to provide a
world market price because we are
satisfied that it was an open and fair
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:01 Jun 08, 2006
Jkt 208001
auction. However, Gidasa has argued
that the wheat sold at this auction was
durum grade 1, whereas the wheat it
purchased under Decree 2003/5468 was
durum grades 2 and 3. The quality
differences between the grade 1 durum
sold internationally and the grades
purchased by Gidasa makes a simple
unadjusted price comparison
inappropriate, according to Gidasa.
Gidasa points instead to U.S. import
statistics as providing the most specific
world market prices of durum wheat. In
particular, only U.S. import statistics
distinguish between grades 1 and 2
durum wheat. Therefore, Gidasa argues
that the Department should compare the
prices Gidasa paid for grades 2 and 3
durum wheat, to the average 2004
import price of durum grade 2 wheat
(HTSUS subheading 1001.10.00.96)
from the U.S. import statistics.
For these preliminary results, we
agree with Gidasa that the delivery
charges should reflect the specific
characteristics of the Turkish trade in
durum wheat. Like Gidasa, we have
been unable to find publicly available
freight rates for durum wheat shipments
to Turkey from nearby countries and,
therefore, we preliminarily used the
delivery charges from Canada to the
United States.
Regarding the selection of a world
market price, the Department finds that
it does not matter whether we use the
U.S. import statistics for durum grade 2
(as suggested by Gidasa), or the
international auction price (as we did in
the preceding review) as the world
market price. (The Department has been
unable to find any additional grade
specific data.) The result is the same in
that the Department finds that the prices
that Gidasa paid for wheat purchased
under Decree 2004/5468 in the POR
were higher than world market prices,
inclusive of delivery charges. Therefore,
we preliminarily find that this program
does not confer a countervailable
benefit. See Memorandum to the File,
‘‘Calculations for the Preliminary
Results for Gidasa Sabanci Gida Sanayi
ve Ticaret A.S.’’ (June 5, 2006).
II. Programs Preliminarily Determined
To Be Not Used
1. VAT Support for Domestic Machinery
and Equipment Purchases
2. Pre–Shipment Export Loans
3. Resource Utilization Support Fund
(‘‘KKDF’’) Tax Exemption on Export–
Related Loans
4. Banking and Insurance (‘‘BIST’’) Tax
Exemption on Export–Related Loans
5. Normal Foreign Currency Export
Loans
6. GIEP
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a. Additional Refunds of VAT
b. Postponement of VAT on Imported
Goods
c. Exemption from Certain Taxes,
Duties, Fees (Other Tax
Exemptions)
d. Exemption from Certain Customs
Duties and Fund Levies
e. Payment of Certain Obligations of
Firms Undertaking Large
Investments
f. Subsidized Turkish Lira Credit
Facilities
g. Land Allocation
h. Interest Spread Return Program
i. Energy Support
7. Exemption from Mass Housing Fund
Levy (Duty Exemptions)
8. Direct Payments to Exporters of
Wheat Products to Compensate for High
Domestic Input prices
9. Export Credit Through Foreign Trade
Corporate Companies Credit Facility
10. Pasta Export Grants
11. Corporate Tax Deferral
12. Subsidized Credit for Proportion of
Fixed Expenditures
13. Subsidized Credit in Foreign
Currencies
14. Subsidized Turkish Lira Credit
Facilities
15. Exemption from Mass Housing Fund
Levy (Duty Exemptions)
16. Performance Foreign Currency
Loans
Preliminary Results of Review
For the period January 1, 2004,
through December 31, 2004, we
preliminarily determine the net subsidy
rate for Gidasa to be that specified in the
chart shown below. If the final results
of this review remain the same as these
preliminary results, the Department will
instruct U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to liquidate all
entries without regard to countervailing
duties.
The Department also intends to
instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of
estimated countervailing duties at the
rate below on the FOB value of all
shipments of the subject merchandise
from Gidasa that are entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption on or after the date of
publication of the final results of this
administrative review.
Company
Gidasa Sabanci Gida Sanayi
ve Ticaret A.S. ..................
E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM
09JNN1
Ad valorem
rate
0.00 percent
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 111 / Friday, June 9, 2006 / Notices
The calculations will be disclosed to
the interested parties in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
For companies that were not named
in our notice initiating this
administrative review, the Department
has directed CBP to assess
countervailing duties on all entries
between January 1, 2004, and December
31, 2004, at the rates in effect at the time
of entry.
For all non–reviewed firms, we will
instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of
estimated countervailing duties at the
most recent company–specific or
country–wide rate applicable to the
company. Accordingly, the cash deposit
rates that will be applied to non–
reviewed companies covered by this
order are those established in the Notice
of Countervailing Duty Order: Certain
Pasta (‘‘Pasta’’) From Turkey, 61 FR
38546 (July 24, 1996), or the company–
specific rate published in the most
recent final results of an administrative
review in which a company
participated. These rates shall apply to
all non–reviewed companies until a
review of a company assigned these
rates is requested.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Public Comment
Interested parties may submit written
arguments in case briefs within 30 days
of the date of publication of this notice.
Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised
in case briefs, may be filed not later than
five days after the date of filing the case
briefs. Parties who submit briefs in this
proceeding should provide a summary
of the arguments not to exceed five
pages and a table of statutes,
regulations, and cases cited. Copies of
case briefs and rebuttal briefs must be
served on interested parties in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f).
Interested parties may request a
hearing within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice. Any hearing,
if requested, will be held two days after
the scheduled date for submission of
rebuttal briefs.
Representatives of parties to the
proceeding may request disclosure of
proprietary information under
administrative protective order no later
than 10 days after the representative’s
client or employer becomes a party to
the proceeding, but in no event later
than the date the case briefs are due. See
19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii).
The Department will publish a notice
of the final results of this administrative
review within 120 days from the
publication of these preliminary results.
This administrative review and notice
are in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:01 Jun 08, 2006
Jkt 208001
Dated: June 5, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–9007 Filed 6–8–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[I.D. 060506B]
New England Fishery Management
Council; Public Meeting
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of a public meeting.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The New England Fishery
Management Council (Council) is
scheduling a public meetings of its
Monkfish Oversight Committee in June,
2006 to consider actions affecting New
England fisheries in the exclusive
economic zone (EEZ).
Recommendations from this group will
be brought to the full Council for formal
consideration and action, if appropriate.
DATES: The meeting will be held on
Thursday, June 29, 2006, at 9 a.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Holiday Inn, 31 Hampshire Street,
Mansfield, MA 02048; telephone: (508)
339–2200.
Council address: New England
Fishery Management Council, 50 Water
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
J. Howard, Executive Director, New
England Fishery Management Council;
telephone: (978) 465–0492.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Monkfish Plan Development Team
(PDT) will present to the committee its
analysis of, and recommendations for,
target total allowable catch (TAC)
alternatives and associated management
measures for Framework 4. In addition,
the PDT will provide comments and
recommendations on other measures
previously identified by the committee
for consideration in Framework 4. The
measures to be discussed include, but
are not limited to, monkfish trip limits
and days-at-sea usage requirements in
the northern management area, days-atsea leasing, industry proposals for a
large-mesh gillnet category and a shift in
the boundary of the monkfish fishery off
the North Carolina/Virginia coast.
Although non-emergency issues not
contained in this agenda may come
before this group for discussion, those
issues may not be the subject of formal
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
33441
action during this meeting. Action will
be restricted to those issues specifically
listed in this notice and any issues
arising after publication of this notice
that require emergency action under
section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act, provided the public has been
notified of the Council’s intent to take
final action to address the emergency.
Special Accommodations
This meeting is physically accessible
to people with disabilities. Requests for
sign language interpretation or other
auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul
J. Howard, Executive Director, at (978)
465–0492, at least 5 days prior to the
meeting date.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: June 6, 2006.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E6–9025 Filed 6–8–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–S
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
[I.D. 060506C]
New England Fishery Management
Council; Public Meeting
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of a public meeting.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The New England Fishery
Management Council (Council) is
scheduling a public meeting of its Sea
Scallop Survey Advisory Panel in June,
2006 to consider actions affecting New
England fisheries in the exclusive
economic zone (EEZ).
Recommendations from this group will
be brought to the full Council for formal
consideration and action, if appropriate.
DATES: This meeting will be held on
Wednesday, June 28, 2006 at 8:30 a.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in
two locations. The meeting will start at
the Dockside Repair, 14 Hervey Tichon
Avenue, New Bedford, MA 02740;
telephone: (508) 993–5300; fax: (508)
991–2226. Later in the day, the meeting
will move to the Harbor Development
Commission, 106 Co-op Wharf, New
Bedford, MA 02740, telephone: (508)
961–3000; fax: (508) 979–1517.
Council address: New England
Fishery Management Council, 50 Water
Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950.
E:\FR\FM\09JNN1.SGM
09JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 111 (Friday, June 9, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33439-33441]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-9007]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-489-806]
Certain Pasta from Turkey: Preliminary Results of Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce is conducting an administrative
review of the countervailing duty order on certain pasta from Turkey
for the period January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2004. We have
preliminarily determined that Gidasa Sabanci Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret
A.S. did not receive countervailable subsidies during the period of
review. If the final results remain the same as these preliminary
results, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to
liquidate without regard to countervailing duties, as detailed in the
``Preliminary Results of Review'' section of this notice. Interested
parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results (see the
``Public Comment'' section of this notice).
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 9, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brandon Farlander or Audrey Twyman,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-
0182 and (202) 482-3534, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 24, 1996, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'')
published in the Federal Register the countervailing duty order on
certain pasta from Turkey. See Notice of Countervailing Duty Order:
Certain Pasta from Turkey, 61 FR 38546 (July 24, 1996). On July 1,
2005, the Department published in the Federal Register, a notice of
``Opportunity to Request Administrative Review'' of this countervailing
duty order. See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or
Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review,
70 FR 38099 (July 1, 2005). We received one request for review on July
29, 2005, and initiated the review for calendar year 2004, on August
29, 2005. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part, 70 FR 51009
(August 29, 2005). In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), this review of
the order covers Gidasa Sabanci Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S.
(``Gidasa'').
On September 8, 2005, we issued countervailing duty questionnaires
to the Government of Turkey and Gidasa. We received responses to our
questionnaires on November 14 and 17, 2005, and issued supplemental
questionnaires on January 31, 2006. Responses to the supplemental
questionnaires were received on February 23, and March 17, 2006.
On March 14, 2006, the Department postponed the preliminary results
of review until June 5, 2006. See Certain Pasta from Turkey: Extension
of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of the Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review, 71 FR 13966 (March 20, 2006).
On April 5, 2006, we provided Gidasa an opportunity to place
information on the record concerning the world market price for durum
wheat, and international freight rates. We received Gidasa's submission
on April 17, 2006.
Scope of Order
Covered by the 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 order is typically sold in the retail market, in
fiberboard or cardboard cartons or polyethylene or polypropylene bags,
of varying dimensions.
Excluded from the 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.
The merchandise under review is currently classifiable under
subheading 1902.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for
convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope
of the order is dispositive.
Scope Ruling
To date, the Department has issued the following scope ruling:
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 Memorandum from
John Brinkman to Richard Moreland, dated May 24, 1999, which is on file
in the Central Records Unit (``CRU'') in Room B-099 of the main
Commerce building.
Period of Review
The period of review (``POR'') for which we are measuring subsidies
is from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2004.
Analysis of Programs
I. Programs Preliminarily Determined To Not Provide a Countervailable
Benefit
1. Purchases of Domestic Wheat from the Turkish Grain Board (``TMO'')
under Decree 2003/5468
There are three main ways for Turkish pasta producers to obtain
wheat for semolina pasta: (1) from the TMO, (2) from local growers and
traders, or (3) through imports. Prices for wheat in Turkey are set
above world market prices as part of a price support scheme benefitting
domestic wheat growers. However, companies holding an Inward Processing
License can obtain lower
[[Page 33440]]
priced wheat (when compared to the equivalent domestic-priced wheat) by
purchasing Turkish wheat from the TMO under Decree 2003/5468, and using
the wheat to produce products for export. The Government of Turkey and
Gidasa have stated that the price of wheat purchased under Decree 2003/
5468 is at or above the world market price, as measured by the price
from international tender auctions held by the TMO to sell Turkish
wheat to foreign buyers. To purchase wheat, companies using Inward
Processing Licenses must consume the wheat in the production of pasta
for export only.
Under this program, the Government of Turkey provides a financial
contribution per section 771(5)(D)(iii) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (``the Act''), by providing a good (durum wheat). This program
is specific per section 771(5A)(B) of the Act because it is contingent
upon export performance. A benefit exists to the extent that the wheat
is being provided on more favorable terms than the terms applicable to
the provision of like or directly competitive products for use in the
production of goods for domestic consumption, unless such terms or
conditions are not more favorable than those commercially available on
world markets to exporters. The world market price must be inclusive of
delivery charges. 19 CFR 351.516(a)(1) and (2).
In response to our request for information, Gidasa provided
arguments concerning world market prices and delivery charges for
purposes of determining whether a benefit exists under this program.
Concerning delivery charges, Gidasa argues that the Department should
use a freight rate that closely resembles the actual freight paid on
imports of durum wheat into Turkey. In this regard, the Government of
Turkey provided import data showing that imports of durum wheat into
Turkey during the POR came only from European Union countries.
Therefore, Gidasa argues, the delivery charge should reflect freight
from countries in close proximity to Turkey. Gidasa could not find
publicly available freight rates from countries near Turkey. Instead,
Gidasa provided U.S. import statistics for durum wheat. These
statistics show international freight for shipments of durum wheat from
Canada to the United States.
Concerning the world market price of durum wheat, the Government of
Turkey has reported details on the single auction sale that it made in
2004 to an international purchaser. This sale could also be considered
to provide a world market price because we are satisfied that it was an
open and fair auction. However, Gidasa has argued that the wheat sold
at this auction was durum grade 1, whereas the wheat it purchased under
Decree 2003/5468 was durum grades 2 and 3. The quality differences
between the grade 1 durum sold internationally and the grades purchased
by Gidasa makes a simple unadjusted price comparison inappropriate,
according to Gidasa.
Gidasa points instead to U.S. import statistics as providing the
most specific world market prices of durum wheat. In particular, only
U.S. import statistics distinguish between grades 1 and 2 durum wheat.
Therefore, Gidasa argues that the Department should compare the prices
Gidasa paid for grades 2 and 3 durum wheat, to the average 2004 import
price of durum grade 2 wheat (HTSUS subheading 1001.10.00.96) from the
U.S. import statistics.
For these preliminary results, we agree with Gidasa that the
delivery charges should reflect the specific characteristics of the
Turkish trade in durum wheat. Like Gidasa, we have been unable to find
publicly available freight rates for durum wheat shipments to Turkey
from nearby countries and, therefore, we preliminarily used the
delivery charges from Canada to the United States.
Regarding the selection of a world market price, the Department
finds that it does not matter whether we use the U.S. import statistics
for durum grade 2 (as suggested by Gidasa), or the international
auction price (as we did in the preceding review) as the world market
price. (The Department has been unable to find any additional grade
specific data.) The result is the same in that the Department finds
that the prices that Gidasa paid for wheat purchased under Decree 2004/
5468 in the POR were higher than world market prices, inclusive of
delivery charges. Therefore, we preliminarily find that this program
does not confer a countervailable benefit. See Memorandum to the File,
``Calculations for the Preliminary Results for Gidasa Sabanci Gida
Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S.'' (June 5, 2006).
II. Programs Preliminarily Determined To Be Not Used
1. VAT Support for Domestic Machinery and Equipment Purchases
2. Pre-Shipment Export Loans
3. Resource Utilization Support Fund (``KKDF'') Tax Exemption on
Export-Related Loans
4. Banking and Insurance (``BIST'') Tax Exemption on Export-Related
Loans
5. Normal Foreign Currency Export Loans
6. GIEP
a. Additional Refunds of VAT
b. Postponement of VAT on Imported Goods
c. Exemption from Certain Taxes, Duties, Fees (Other Tax
Exemptions)
d. Exemption from Certain Customs Duties and Fund Levies
e. Payment of Certain Obligations of Firms Undertaking Large
Investments
f. Subsidized Turkish Lira Credit Facilities
g. Land Allocation
h. Interest Spread Return Program
i. Energy Support
7. Exemption from Mass Housing Fund Levy (Duty Exemptions)
8. Direct Payments to Exporters of Wheat Products to Compensate for
High Domestic Input prices
9. Export Credit Through Foreign Trade Corporate Companies Credit
Facility
10. Pasta Export Grants
11. Corporate Tax Deferral
12. Subsidized Credit for Proportion of Fixed Expenditures
13. Subsidized Credit in Foreign Currencies
14. Subsidized Turkish Lira Credit Facilities
15. Exemption from Mass Housing Fund Levy (Duty Exemptions)
16. Performance Foreign Currency Loans
Preliminary Results of Review
For the period January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2004, we
preliminarily determine the net subsidy rate for Gidasa to be that
specified in the chart shown below. If the final results of this review
remain the same as these preliminary results, the Department will
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') to liquidate all
entries without regard to countervailing duties.
The Department also intends to instruct CBP to collect cash
deposits of estimated countervailing duties at the rate below on the
FOB value of all shipments of the subject merchandise from Gidasa that
are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after
the date of publication of the final results of this administrative
review.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ad valorem
Company rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gidasa Sabanci Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S............... 0.00 percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 33441]]
The calculations will be disclosed to the interested parties in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).
For companies that were not named in our notice initiating this
administrative review, the Department has directed CBP to assess
countervailing duties on all entries between January 1, 2004, and
December 31, 2004, at the rates in effect at the time of entry.
For all non-reviewed firms, we will instruct CBP to collect cash
deposits of estimated countervailing duties at the most recent company-
specific or country-wide rate applicable to the company. Accordingly,
the cash deposit rates that will be applied to non-reviewed companies
covered by this order are those established in the Notice of
Countervailing Duty Order: Certain Pasta (``Pasta'') From Turkey, 61 FR
38546 (July 24, 1996), or the company-specific rate published in the
most recent final results of an administrative review in which a
company participated. These rates shall apply to all non-reviewed
companies until a review of a company assigned these rates is
requested.
Public Comment
Interested parties may submit written arguments in case briefs
within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal
briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be filed not later
than five days after the date of filing the case briefs. Parties who
submit briefs in this proceeding should provide a summary of the
arguments not to exceed five pages and a table of statutes,
regulations, and cases cited. Copies of case briefs and rebuttal briefs
must be served on interested parties in accordance with 19 CFR
351.303(f).
Interested parties may request a hearing within 30 days after the
date of publication of this notice. Any hearing, if requested, will be
held two days after the scheduled date for submission of rebuttal
briefs.
Representatives of parties to the proceeding may request disclosure
of proprietary information under administrative protective order no
later than 10 days after the representative's client or employer
becomes a party to the proceeding, but in no event later than the date
the case briefs are due. See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii).
The Department will publish a notice of the final results of this
administrative review within 120 days from the publication of these
preliminary results.
This administrative review and notice are in accordance with
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 5, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretaryfor Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6-9007 Filed 6-8-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
