Certain In-shell Roasted Pistachios from the Islamic Republic of Iran: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 38622-38626 [E6-10664]
Download as PDF
38622
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 130 / Friday, July 7, 2006 / Notices
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
box springs), infant cribs, water beds,
and futon frames; (3) office furniture,
such as desks, stand-up desks, computer
cabinets, filing cabinets, credenzas, and
bookcases; (4) dining room or kitchen
furniture such as dining tables, chairs,
servers, sideboards, buffets, corner
cabinets, china cabinets, and china
hutches; (5) other non-bedroom
furniture, such as television cabinets,
cocktail tables, end tables, occasional
tables, wall systems, book cases, and
entertainment systems; (6) bedroom
furniture made primarily of wicker,
cane, osier, bamboo or rattan; (7) side
rails for beds made of metal if sold
separately from the headboard and
footboard; (8) bedroom furniture in
which bentwood parts predominate; 10
(9) jewelry armoires; 11 (10) cheval
mirrors 12 (11) certain metal parts 13 (12)
mirrors that do not attach to,
incorporate in, sit on, or hang over a
dresser if they are not designed and
marketed to be sold in conjunction with
a dresser as part of a dresser-mirror set.
Imports of subject merchandise are
classified under subheading
9403.50.9040 of the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States
(‘‘HTSUS’’) as ‘‘wooden * * * beds’’
and under subheading 9403.50.9080 of
the HTSUS as ‘‘other * * * wooden
furniture of a kind used in the
bedroom.’’ In addition, wooden
headboards for beds, wooden footboards
for beds, wooden side rails for beds, and
wooden canopies for beds may also be
10 As used herein, bentwood means solid wood
made pliable. Bentwood is wood that is brought to
a curved shape by bending it while made pliable
with moist heat or other agency and then set by
cooling or drying. See Customs’ Headquarters’
Ruling Letter 043859, dated May 17, 1976.
11 Any armoire, cabinet or other accent item for
the purpose of storing jewelry, not to exceed 24″ in
width, 18″ in depth, and 49″ in height, including
a minimum of 5 lined drawers lined with felt or
felt-like material, at least one side door (whether or
not the door is lined with felt or felt-like material),
with necklace hangers, and a flip-top lid with inset
mirror. See Memorandum from Laurel LaCivita to
Laurie Parkhill, Office Director, Issues and Decision
Memorandum Concerning Jewelry Armoires and
Cheval Mirrors in the Antidumping Duty
Investigation of Wooden Bedroom Furniture from
the People’s Republic of China dated August 31,
2004. See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the
People’s Republic of China: Notice of Final Results
of Changed Circumstances Review and Revocation
in Part, (FR citation and date to be added).
12 Cheval mirrors, i.e., any framed, tiltable mirror
with a height in excess of 50″ that is mounted on
a floor-standing, hinged base.
13 Metal furniture parts and unfinished furniture
parts made of wood products (as defined above)
that are not otherwise specifically named in this
scope (i.e., wooden headboards for beds, wooden
footboards for beds, wooden side rails for beds, and
wooden canopies for beds) and that do not possess
the essential character of wooden bedroom
furniture in an unassembled, incomplete, or
unfinished form. Such parts are usually classified
under HTSUS subheading 9403.90.7000.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:46 Jul 06, 2006
Jkt 208001
entered under subheading 9403.50.9040
of the HTSUS as ‘‘parts of wood’’ and
framed glass mirrors may also be
entered under subheading 7009.92.5000
of the HTSUS as ‘‘glass mirrors * * *
framed.’’ This order covers all wooden
bedroom furniture meeting the above
description, regardless of tariff
classification. Although the HTSUS
subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, our
written description of the scope of this
proceeding is dispositive.
revocation of the antidumping duty
order and notice are in accordance with
sections 751(b) and (d) and 782(h) of the
Act and 19 CFR 351.216(e) and
351.222(g).
Final Results of Review; Partial
Revocation of Antidumping Duty Order
The affirmative statement of no
interest by petitioners concerning
jewelry armoires, as described herein,
constitutes changed circumstances
sufficient to warrant revocation of this
order in part. One party commented on
the Initiation and Preliminary Results
stating that the Department should
revoke the order for these jewelry
armoires. No party contests that
petitioners’ statement of no interest
represents the views of substantially all
of the domestic industry. Therefore, the
Department is partially revoking the
order with respect to jewelry armoires
that have at least one side door, whether
or not the door is lined with felt or feltlike material from the PRC with regard
to products which meet the
specifications detailed above, in
accordance with sections 751(b) and (d)
and 782(h) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.216(d) and 351.222(g). We will
instruct the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection to liquidate without regard to
antidumping duties, as applicable, and
to refund any estimated antidumping
duties collected for all unliquidated
entries of jewelry armoires that have at
least one side door, whether or not the
door is lined with felt or felt-like
material meeting the specifications
indicated above, and not subject to final
results of an administrative review as of
the date of publication in the Federal
Register of the final results of this
changed circumstances review in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.222.
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 return/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.
This changed circumstances
administrative review, partial
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: June 30, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–10655 Filed 7–6–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
International Trade Administration
[C–507–601]
Certain In–shell Roasted Pistachios
from the Islamic Republic of Iran:
Preliminary Results of Countervailing
Duty Administrative Review
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
(the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the
countervailing duty (CVD) order on
certain in–shell roasted pistachios from
the Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran) for
the period January 1, 2004, through
December 31, 2004. For information on
the net subsidy rate for the reviewed
company, please see 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: July 7, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Darla Brown, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 3, Import Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Room 4014,
14th Street and Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington DC 20230; telephone
(202) 482–2786.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
AGENCY:
Background
On October 7, 1986, the Department
published in the Federal Register the
CVD order on certain in–shell roasted
pistachios from Iran. See Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination and Countervailing Duty
Order: Roasted In–Shell Pistachios from
Iran, 51 FR 35679 (October 7, 1986)
(Roasted Pistachios). On October 3,
2005, the Department published a notice
of opportunity to request an
administrative review of this CVD order.
See Antidumping or Countervailing
Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended
Investigation; Opportunity To Request
Administrative Review, 70 FR 57558
E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM
07JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 130 / Friday, July 7, 2006 / Notices
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
(October 3, 2005). On October 31, 2005,
we received timely requests for
administrative review from the
California Pistachio Commission (CPC)
and Cal Pure Pistachios, Inc. (Cal Pure).
The CPC and Cal Pure requested that the
Department conduct a review with
respect to Tehran Negah Nima Trading
Company, Inc., trading as Nima Trading
Company (Nima), the respondent
company in this proceeding. On
December 1, 2005, we initiated an
administrative review of the CVD order
on in–shell roasted pistachios from Iran
covering the period of review (POR)
January 1, 2004, through December 31,
2004. See Initiation of Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews and Deferral of Administrative
Reviews, 70 FR 72107 (December 1,
2005).
On January 5, 2006, we issued our
initial questionnaire to the Government
of Iran (GOI) and Nima. Neither the GOI
nor Nima submitted questionnaire
responses. On February 13, 2006, Nima
submitted a letter stating that it did not
make any shipments of subject
merchandise to the United States during
the POR. On March 21, 2006, the team
placed on the record the results of a
customs data run, which indicated that
Nima did in fact make shipments of
subject merchandise to the United
States during the POR. See March 21,
2006, memorandum to the file from
Darla Brown, case analyst, re: customs
data. Also on March 21, 2006, we sent
a letter to Nima, asking the company to
explain in writing the apparent
discrepancy between its February 13,
2006, letter and the information
obtained from the U.S. Customs and
Border Protection (CBP). Nima did not
respond to our March 21, 2006, letter.
Therefore, as discussed below in the
‘‘Use of Facts Available’’ section of this
notice, we have resorted to the facts
otherwise available, employing an
adverse inference. See Section 776 of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the
Act).
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.213(b), this administrative review
covers only those producers or exporters
for which a review was specifically
requested. Accordingly, this
administrative review covers Nima and
ten programs used by Nima and/or its
grower(s) and producer(s).
Scope of Order
The product covered by this order is
all roasted in–shell pistachio nuts,
whether roasted in Iran or elsewhere,
from which the hull has been removed,
leaving the inner hard shells and the
edible meat, as currently classifiable in
the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:46 Jul 06, 2006
Jkt 208001
United States (HTSUS) under item
number 0802.50.20.00. The HTSUS
subheading is provided for convenience
and customs purposes. The written
description of the scope of this
proceeding is dispositive.
Use of Facts Available
During the course of this proceeding,
we have sought information from the
company subject to this review, Nima,
and from the GOI pertaining to
countervailable subsidy programs in
Iran and their use by Nima and Nima’s
grower(s) and producer(s). Specifically,
we have asked for information
concerning Nima’s and its growers’
usage of the following programs:
Provision of Credit, Provision of
Fertilizer and Machinery, Tax
Exemptions, Provision of Water and
Irrigation Equipment, Technical
Support, Duty Refunds on Imported
Raw or Intermediate Materials Used in
the Production of Export Goods,
Program to Improve Quality of Exports
of Dried Fruit, Iranian Export Guarantee
Fund, GOI Grants and Loans to
Pistachio Farmers, and Crop Insurance
for Pistachios. In addition, we have
requested information concerning
Nima’s total sales and the sales of
subject merchandise made by Nima
during the POR. See pages II–1–10 and
pages III–3–12 of the Department’s
January 5, 2006, initial questionnaire.
Moreover, the Department has sought
further clarification from Nima
regarding the discrepancy between its
February 13, 2006, statement that Nima
did not make any shipments of the
subject merchandise to the United
States during the POR and proprietary
customs information on the record
contradicting that statement.
Section 776(a) of the Act requires the
use of facts available when an interested
party withholds information that has
been requested by the Department, or
when an interested party fails to provide
the information requested in a timely
manner and in the form required.
Specifically, neither the GOI nor Nima
submitted questionnaire responses to
the Department. By not responding to
our questionnaire, Nima and the GOI
failed to provide information regarding
subsidy programs in Iran, as well as
Nima’s sales, explicitly requested by the
Department. Therefore, we must resort
to the facts otherwise available pursuant
to section 776(a) of the Act.
Furthermore, section 776(b) of the Act
provides that in selecting from among
the facts available, the Department may
use an inference that is adverse to the
interests of a party if it determines that
a party has failed to cooperate to the
best of its ability. The Department finds
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38623
that, by not providing necessary
information specifically requested by
the Department in a timely fashion, the
GOI and Nima have failed to cooperate
to the best of their abilities. Therefore,
in selecting from among the facts
available, the Department determines
that an adverse inference is warranted.
When employing an adverse inference
in an administrative review, the statute
indicates that the Department may rely
upon information derived from (1) the
petition, a final determination in a
countervailing duty or an antidumping
investigation, any previous
administrative review, new shipper
review, expedited antidumping review,
section 753 review, or section 762
review; or (2) any other information
placed on the record. See Section 776(b)
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.308(c). Thus,
in applying adverse facts available, the
Department is relying on information
from Roasted Pistachios; Certain In–
Shell Pistachios and Certain Roasted In–
Shell Pistachios from the Islamic
Republic of Iran: Final Results of New
Shipper Countervailing Duty Reviews,
68 FR 4997 (January 31, 2003)
(Pistachios New Shipper Reviews);
Certain In–shell Pistachios from the
Islamic Republic of Iran: Final Results
of Countervailing Duty Administrative
Review, 70 FR 54027 (September 13,
2005) (2003 In–shell Pistachios); and
Certain In–shell Roasted Pistachios from
the Islamic Republic of Iran: Final
Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Review, 71 FR 27682
(May 12, 2006) (2003 Roasted
Pistachios).
If the Department relies on secondary
information (e.g., data from a petition)
as facts available, section 776(c) of the
Act provides that the Department shall,
‘‘to the extent practicable,’’ corroborate
such information using independent
sources reasonably at its disposal.1 The
SAA further provides that to corroborate
secondary information means that the
Department will satisfy itself that the
secondary information to be used has
probative value. See also 19 CFR
351.308(d) (describing the corroboration
of secondary information).
Thus, in those instances in which it
determines to apply adverse facts
available, the Department, in order to
satisfy itself that such information has
probative value, will examine, to the
extent practicable, the reliability and
relevance of the information used.
However, unlike other types of
information, such as publicly available
1 The Statement of Administrative Action
accompanying the URAA clarifies that information
from the petition is ‘‘secondary information.’’ See
Statement of Administrative Action, URAA, H. Doc.
No. 316, Vol. 1, 103d Cong. (1994) (SAA) at 870.
E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM
07JYN1
38624
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 130 / Friday, July 7, 2006 / Notices
data on the national inflation rate of a
given country or national average
interest rates, there typically are no
independent sources for data on
company–specific benefits resulting
from countervailable subsidy programs.
The only source for such information
normally is administrative
determinations, which are reliable. In
the instant case, no evidence has been
presented or obtained which contradicts
the reliability of the evidence relied
upon in previous segments of this
proceeding.
With respect to the relevance aspect
of corroboration, the Department will
consider information reasonably at its
disposal as to whether there are
circumstances that would render benefit
data not relevant. Where circumstances
indicate that the information is not
appropriate as adverse facts available,
the Department will not use it. See
Fresh Cut Flowers from Mexico; Final
Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 61 FR 6812
(February 22, 1996). In the instant case,
no evidence has been presented or
obtained which contradicts the
relevance of the benefit data relied upon
in previous segments of this proceeding.
Thus, in the instant case, the
Department finds that the information
used has been corroborated to the extent
practicable.
Analysis of Programs
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Programs Preliminarily Determined to
Be Countervailable
Because the GOI and Nima did not
provide the information necessary to
conduct an analysis of these programs,
we are making an adverse inference that
each of these programs continues to
exist, is countervailable, and that a
benefit was conferred upon Nima and/
or its grower(s) and supplier(s) during
the POR.
A. Provision of Fertilizer and
Machinery
In Roasted Pistachios, 51 FR at 35680,
the Department found that growers,
processors or exporters of pistachios in
Iran can obtain fertilizer and machinery
from the GOI at preferential prices.
As further discussed above in the
‘‘Use of Facts Available’’ section of this
notice, we have determined that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted on the grounds that Nima and
the GOI did not respond to our request
for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available
that this program continues to exist and
that Nima received a countervailable
benefit during the POR.
To calculate the net subsidy rate
under this program, we used the highest
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:46 Jul 06, 2006
Jkt 208001
rate listed in Roasted Pistachios for this
program. Accordingly, we preliminarily
determine that the net subsidy rate for
this program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
B. Provision of Credit
In Roasted Pistachios, 51 FR at
35680–81, the Department found that
bounties or grants were provided to
Iranian growers, processors, or exporters
of pistachios under this program.
Specifically, the Department found that
agricultural cooperatives in Iran make
credit available on terms inconsistent
with commercial considerations from
funds provided by the GOI to their
members.
As further discussed above in the
‘‘Use of Facts Available’’ section of this
notice, we have determined that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted on the grounds that Nima and
the GOI did not respond to our request
for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available
that this program continues to exist and
that Nima received a countervailable
benefit during the POR.
To calculate the net subsidy rate
under this program, we used the highest
rate listed in Roasted Pistachios for this
program. Accordingly, we preliminarily
determine that the net subsidy rate for
this program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
C. Tax Exemptions
In Roasted Pistachios, 51 FR at 35681,
the Department found that bounties or
grants were provided to Iranian growers,
processors, or exporters of pistachios
under this program. Specifically, the
Department determined that farmers
benefit from legislation that exempts
farmers and livestock breeders from
paying taxes, provided they follow
government agricultural guidelines.
As further discussed above in the
‘‘Use of Facts Available’’ section of this
notice, we have determined that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted on the grounds that Nima and
the GOI did not respond to our request
for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available
that this program continues to exist and
that Nima received a countervailable
benefit during the POR.
To calculate the net subsidy rate
under this program, we used the highest
rate listed in Roasted Pistachios for this
program. Accordingly, we preliminarily
determine that the net subsidy rate for
this program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
D. Provision of Water and Irrigation
Equipment
In Roasted Pistachios, 51 FR at 35681,
the Department found that bounties or
grants were provided to Iranian growers,
processors, or exporters of pistachios
under this program. Specifically, the
Department determined that pistachio
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
growers in Iran may benefit from the
construction of soil dams, flood barriers,
canals, and other irrigation projects
undertaken by the government to
increase agricultural production.
As further discussed above in the
‘‘Use of Facts Available’’ section of this
notice, we have determined that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted on the grounds that Nima and
the GOI did not respond to our request
for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available
that this program continues to exist and
that Nima received a countervailable
benefit during the POR.
To calculate the net subsidy rate
under this program, we used the highest
rate listed in Roasted Pistachios for this
program. Accordingly, we preliminarily
determine that the net subsidy rate for
this program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
E. Technical Support
In Roasted Pistachios, 51 FR at 35681,
the Department found that bounties or
grants were provided to Iranian growers,
processors, or exporters of pistachios
under this program. Specifically, the
Department determined that pistachio
growers in Iran receive technical
support as part of the GOI’s program to
support agricultural development, and
that this technical support included
research projects to improve cultivation
techniques, as well as assistance in
harvesting, marketing, and the use of
fertilizer.
As further discussed above in the
‘‘Use of Facts Available’’ section of this
notice, we have determined that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted on the grounds that Nima and
the GOI did not respond to our request
for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available
that this program continues to exist and
that Nima received a countervailable
benefit during the POR.
To calculate the net subsidy rate
under this program, we used the highest
rate listed in Roasted Pistachios for this
program. Accordingly, we preliminarily
determine that the net subsidy rate for
this program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
F. Duty Refunds on Imported Raw or
Intermediate Materials Used in the
Production of Export Goods
In the Pistachios New Shipper
Reviews, we found that there was
sufficient information on the record to
suggest that duties and levies paid in
connection with the importation of
intermediate materials used in the
production of the exported commodities
and goods are refunded to exporters,
pursuant to the Third Five Year
Development Plan (TFYDP) enacted by
the GOI. See the May 8, 2002,
Memorandum to Melissa G. Skinner
E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM
07JYN1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 130 / Friday, July 7, 2006 / Notices
from the Team, re: New Subsidy
Allegations, contained in the February
2, 2006, Memorandum to the File from
the Team, re: Placing Memos on the
Record.
As further discussed above in the
‘‘Use of Facts Available’’ section of this
notice, we have determined that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted on the grounds that Nima and
the GOI did not respond to our request
for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available
that this program continues to exist and
that Nima received a countervailable
benefit during the POR.
This program was alleged for the first
time in Pistachios New Shipper
Reviews, and thus was not among the
programs addressed in Roasted
Pistachios. However, lacking any
information from Nima and the GOI on
the record of the instant review, we find
that the net subsidy rate of 6.65 percent,
the highest rate established for an
industry–wide program in Roasted
Pistachios, is the only available
information on the record and is
therefore, as adverse facts available, the
appropriate rate to apply to this program
in these preliminary results.
Accordingly, we preliminarily find that
the net subsidy rate for this program is
6.65 percent ad valorem.
G. Program to Improve Quality of
Exports of Dried Fruit
In the Pistachios New Shipper
Reviews, we found that there was
sufficient information on the record to
suggest that pursuant to the Budget Act
of 2001 – 2002, the GOI provides
financial assistance to exporters of dried
fruit and pistachios to assist them in the
production of export quality goods. See
the May 8, 2002, Memorandum to
Melissa G. Skinner from the Team, re:
New Subsidy Allegations, contained in
the February 2, 2006, Memorandum to
the File from the Team, re: Placing
Memos on the Record.
As further discussed above in the
‘‘Use of Facts Available’’ section of this
notice, we have determined that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted on the grounds that Nima and
the GOI did not respond to our request
for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available
that this program continues to exist and
that Nima received a countervailable
benefit during the POR.
This program was alleged for the first
time in the Pistachios New Shipper
Reviews, and thus was not among the
programs addressed in Roasted
Pistachios. However, lacking any
information from Nima and the GOI on
the record of the instant review, we find
that the net subsidy rate of 6.65 percent,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:46 Jul 06, 2006
Jkt 208001
the highest rate established for an
industry–wide program in Roasted
Pistachios, is the only available
information on the record and is
therefore, as adverse facts available, the
appropriate rate to apply to this program
in these preliminary results.
Accordingly, we preliminarily find that
the net subsidy rate for this program is
6.65 percent ad valorem.
H. Iranian Export Guarantee Fund
In 2003 In–shell Pistachios, we found
that petitioners had provided sufficient
evidence to support their allegation that
the GOI pays a ‘‘prize’’ in the form of
an export subsidy to exporters; these
prizes are payable commensurate with
the added value of export goods and
services. See the October 27, 2004,
Memorandum to Melissa G. Skinner
from the Team, re: New Subsidy
Allegations, contained in the February
2, 2006, Memorandum to the File from
the Team, re: Placing Memos on the
Record. This program was also
examined in the context of 2003
Roasted Pistachios.
As further discussed above in the
‘‘Use of Facts Available’’ section of this
notice, we have determined that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted on the grounds that Nima and
the GOI did not respond to our request
for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available
that this program continues to exist and
that Nima received a countervailable
benefit during the POR.
This program was alleged for the first
time in 2003 In–shell Pistachios, and
thus was not among the programs
addressed in Roasted Pistachios.
However, lacking any information from
Nima and the GOI on the record of the
instant review, we find that the net
subsidy rate of 6.65 percent, the highest
rate established for an industry–wide
program in Roasted Pistachios, is the
only available information on the record
and is therefore, as adverse facts
available, the appropriate rate to apply
to this program in these preliminary
results. Accordingly, we preliminarily
find that the net subsidy rate for this
program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
I. GOI Grants and Loans to Pistachio
Farmers
In 2003 In–shell Pistachios, we found
that petitioners had provided sufficient
evidence to support their allegation that
the GOI’s Foreign Exchange Reserve
Account Board of Trustees agreed to
provide both a grant of $100,000,000
and a $50,000,000 buyer’s credit to
Iranian pistachio cooperatives and
pistachio farmers. See the May 8, 2002,
Memorandum to Melissa G. Skinner
from the Team, re: New Subsidy
Allegations, contained in the February
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38625
2, 2006, Memorandum to the File from
the Team, re: Placing Memos on the
Record. This program was also
examined in the context of 2003
Roasted Pistachios.
As further discussed above in the
‘‘Use of Facts Available’’ section of this
notice, we have determined that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted on the grounds that Nima and
the GOI did not respond to our request
for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available
that this program continues to exist and
that Nima received a countervailable
benefit during the POR.
This program was alleged for the first
time in 2003 In–shell Pistachios, and
thus was not among the programs
addressed in Roasted Pistachios.
However, lacking any information from
Nima and the GOI on the record of the
instant review, we find that the net
subsidy rate of 6.65 percent, the highest
rate established for an industry–wide
program in Roasted Pistachios, is the
only available information on the record
and is therefore, as adverse facts
available, the appropriate rate to apply
to this program in these preliminary
results. Accordingly, we preliminarily
find that the net subsidy rate for this
program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
J. Crop Insurance for Pistachios
In 2003 In–shell Pistachios, we found
that petitioners had provided sufficient
evidence to support their allegation that
the GOI established the Iranian
Agricultural Product Insurance Act
(IAPIA), whereby the Agricultural Bank
will insure agricultural produce as a
means of achieving the goals and
policies of the agricultural sector and
that the GOI aids farmers in securing
insurance premiums at less than market
value. See the May 8, 2002,
Memorandum to Melissa G. Skinner
from the Team, re: New Subsidy
Allegations, contained in the February
2, 2006, Memorandum to the File from
the Team, re: Placing Memos on the
Record. This program was also
examined in the context of 2003
Roasted Pistachios.
As further discussed above in the
‘‘Use of Facts Available’’ section of this
notice, we have determined that the
application of adverse facts available is
warranted on the grounds that Nima and
the GOI did not respond to our request
for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available
that this program continues to exist and
that Nima received a countervailable
benefit during the POR.
This program was alleged for the first
time in 2003 In–shell Pistachios, and
thus was not among the programs
addressed in Roasted Pistachios.
E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM
07JYN1
38626
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 130 / Friday, July 7, 2006 / Notices
However, lacking any information from
Nima and the GOI on the record of the
instant review, we find that the net
subsidy rate of 6.65 percent, the highest
rate established for an industry–wide
program in Roasted Pistachios, is the
only available information on the record
and is therefore, as adverse facts
available, the appropriate rate to apply
to this program in these preliminary
results. Accordingly, we preliminarily
find that the net subsidy rate for this
program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Preliminary Results of Review
In accordance with 19 CFR
351.221(b)(4)(i), we have calculated an
individual subsidy rate for Nima, the
only producer/exporter subject to this
administrative review, for the POR, i.e.,
calendar year 2004. We preliminarily
determine that the total estimated net
countervailable subsidy rate is 66.50
percent ad valorem.
As Nima is the exporter but not the
producer of subject merchandise,
should the final results of this review
remain the same as these preliminary
results, the Department’s final results of
review will apply to all subject
merchandise exported by Nima. See 19
CFR 351.107(b).
The Department intends to instruct
CBP, within 15 days of publication of
the final results of this review, to
liquidate all shipments of subject
merchandise exported by Nima, entered,
or withdrawn from warehouse, for
consumption during the POR at the rate
established in this administrative
review.
We will instruct CBP to continue to
collect cash deposits for non–reviewed
companies 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 will be the rate for that
company established in the most
recently completed administrative
proceeding. See 2003 Roasted
Pistachios. These cash deposit rates
shall apply to all non–reviewed
companies until a review of a company
assigned these rates is requested.
Public Comment
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(b), the
Department will disclose to parties to
the proceeding any calculations
performed in connection with these
preliminary results within five days
after the date of the public
announcement of this notice. Pursuant
to 19 CFR 351.309, interested parties
may submit written comments in
response to these preliminary results.
Unless otherwise indicated by the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:46 Jul 06, 2006
Jkt 208001
Department, case briefs must be
submitted within 30 days after the
publication of these preliminary results.
Rebuttal briefs, which are limited to
arguments raised in case briefs, must be
submitted no later than five days after
the time limit for filing case briefs,
unless otherwise specified by the
Department. Parties who submit
argument in this proceeding are
requested to submit with the argument:
(1) a statement of the issue, and (2) a
brief summary of the argument. Parties
submitting case and/or rebuttal briefs
are requested to provide the Department
copies of the public version on disk.
Case and rebuttal briefs must be served
on interested parties in accordance with
19 CFR 351.303(f). Also, pursuant to 19
CFR 351.310, within 30 days of the date
of publication of this notice, interested
parties may request a public hearing on
arguments to be raised in the case and
rebuttal briefs. Unless the Secretary
specifies otherwise, the hearing, if
requested, will be held two days after
the 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, under 19
CFR 351.309(c)(ii), are due. The
Department will publish the final
results of this administrative review,
including the results of its analysis of
issues raised in any case or rebuttal brief
or at a hearing.
This administrative review and notice
are issued and published in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of
the Act.
Dated: June 30, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–10664 Filed 7–6–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
SUMMARY: On February 28, 2006, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published in the Federal
Register its preliminary results of
administrative reviews of the
countervailing duty (CVD) orders on
low enriched uranium (LEU) from
Germany, the Netherlands, and the
United Kingdom (UK) for the period
January 1, 2004, through December 31,
2004 (see Low Enriched Uranium from
Germany, the Netherlands, and the
United Kingdom: Preliminary Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews and Intent to Revoke the
Countervailing Duty Orders, 71 FR
10062 (February 28, 2006) (Preliminary
Results)). The Department has now
completed these administrative reviews
in accordance with section 751(a) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
Based on information received since
the Preliminary Results and our analysis
of the comments received, the
Department has not revised the net
subsidy rate for Urenco Deutschland
GmbH of Germany (UD), Urenco
Nederland B.V. of the Netherlands
(UNL), Urenco (Capenhurst) Limited
(UCL) of the UK, Urenco Ltd., Urenco
Inc., and Urenco Enrichment Company
Ltd. (UEC) (collectively, the Urenco
Group or respondents), the producers/
exporters of subject merchandise
covered by these reviews. For further
discussion of our positions, see the
‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum’’
from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, to David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, concerning ‘‘Low
Enriched Uranium from Germany, the
Netherlands, and the United Kingdom:
Final Results of Countervailing Duty
Administrative Reviews and Revocation
of Countervailing Duty Orders’’
(Decision Memorandum), dated June 28,
2006. The final net subsidy rate for the
reviewed companies is listed below in
the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of
Reviews.’’
EFFECTIVE DATE:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–428–829; C–421–809; C–412–821]
Low Enriched Uranium from Germany,
the Netherlands, and the United
Kingdom: Final Results of
Countervailing Duty Administrative
Reviews and Revocation of
Countervailing Duty Orders
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
January 1, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Darla Brown, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 3, Import Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Room 4012,
14th Street and Constitution Avenue,
NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202) 482–2849.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On February 28, 2006, the Department
published in the Federal Register its
Preliminary Results. We invited
interested parties to comment on the
E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM
07JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 130 (Friday, July 7, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38622-38626]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-10664]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-507-601]
Certain In-shell Roasted Pistachios from the Islamic Republic of
Iran: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the countervailing duty (CVD) order on certain
in-shell roasted pistachios from the Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran)
for the period January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2004. For
information on the net subsidy rate for the reviewed company, please
see 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: July 7, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Darla Brown, AD/CVD Operations, Office
3, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 4014, 14th
Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington DC 20230; telephone (202)
482-2786.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 7, 1986, the Department published in the Federal
Register the CVD order on certain in-shell roasted pistachios from
Iran. See Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and
Countervailing Duty Order: Roasted In-Shell Pistachios from Iran, 51 FR
35679 (October 7, 1986) (Roasted Pistachios). On October 3, 2005, the
Department published a notice of opportunity to request an
administrative review of this CVD order. See Antidumping or
Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation;
Opportunity To Request Administrative Review, 70 FR 57558
[[Page 38623]]
(October 3, 2005). On October 31, 2005, we received timely requests for
administrative review from the California Pistachio Commission (CPC)
and Cal Pure Pistachios, Inc. (Cal Pure). The CPC and Cal Pure
requested that the Department conduct a review with respect to Tehran
Negah Nima Trading Company, Inc., trading as Nima Trading Company
(Nima), the respondent company in this proceeding. On December 1, 2005,
we initiated an administrative review of the CVD order on in-shell
roasted pistachios from Iran covering the period of review (POR)
January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2004. See Initiation of
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Deferral
of Administrative Reviews, 70 FR 72107 (December 1, 2005).
On January 5, 2006, we issued our initial questionnaire to the
Government of Iran (GOI) and Nima. Neither the GOI nor Nima submitted
questionnaire responses. On February 13, 2006, Nima submitted a letter
stating that it did not make any shipments of subject merchandise to
the United States during the POR. On March 21, 2006, the team placed on
the record the results of a customs data run, which indicated that Nima
did in fact make shipments of subject merchandise to the United States
during the POR. See March 21, 2006, memorandum to the file from Darla
Brown, case analyst, re: customs data. Also on March 21, 2006, we sent
a letter to Nima, asking the company to explain in writing the apparent
discrepancy between its February 13, 2006, letter and the information
obtained from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Nima did
not respond to our March 21, 2006, letter.
Therefore, as discussed below in the ``Use of Facts Available''
section of this notice, we have resorted to the facts otherwise
available, employing an adverse inference. See Section 776 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), this administrative review
covers only those producers or exporters for which a review was
specifically requested. Accordingly, this administrative review covers
Nima and ten programs used by Nima and/or its grower(s) and
producer(s).
Scope of Order
The product covered by this order is all roasted in-shell pistachio
nuts, whether roasted in Iran or elsewhere, from which the hull has
been removed, leaving the inner hard shells and the edible meat, as
currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedules of the United
States (HTSUS) under item number 0802.50.20.00. The HTSUS subheading is
provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description
of the scope of this proceeding is dispositive.
Use of Facts Available
During the course of this proceeding, we have sought information
from the company subject to this review, Nima, and from the GOI
pertaining to countervailable subsidy programs in Iran and their use by
Nima and Nima's grower(s) and producer(s). Specifically, we have asked
for information concerning Nima's and its growers' usage of the
following programs: Provision of Credit, Provision of Fertilizer and
Machinery, Tax Exemptions, Provision of Water and Irrigation Equipment,
Technical Support, Duty Refunds on Imported Raw or Intermediate
Materials Used in the Production of Export Goods, Program to Improve
Quality of Exports of Dried Fruit, Iranian Export Guarantee Fund, GOI
Grants and Loans to Pistachio Farmers, and Crop Insurance for
Pistachios. In addition, we have requested information concerning
Nima's total sales and the sales of subject merchandise made by Nima
during the POR. See pages II-1-10 and pages III-3-12 of the
Department's January 5, 2006, initial questionnaire. Moreover, the
Department has sought further clarification from Nima regarding the
discrepancy between its February 13, 2006, statement that Nima did not
make any shipments of the subject merchandise to the United States
during the POR and proprietary customs information on the record
contradicting that statement.
Section 776(a) of the Act requires the use of facts available when
an interested party withholds information that has been requested by
the Department, or when an interested party fails to provide the
information requested in a timely manner and in the form required.
Specifically, neither the GOI nor Nima submitted questionnaire
responses to the Department. By not responding to our questionnaire,
Nima and the GOI failed to provide information regarding subsidy
programs in Iran, as well as Nima's sales, explicitly requested by the
Department. Therefore, we must resort to the facts otherwise available
pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act.
Furthermore, section 776(b) of the Act provides that in selecting
from among the facts available, the Department may use an inference
that is adverse to the interests of a party if it determines that a
party has failed to cooperate to the best of its ability. The
Department finds that, by not providing necessary information
specifically requested by the Department in a timely fashion, the GOI
and Nima have failed to cooperate to the best of their abilities.
Therefore, in selecting from among the facts available, the Department
determines that an adverse inference is warranted.
When employing an adverse inference in an administrative review,
the statute indicates that the Department may rely upon information
derived from (1) the petition, a final determination in a
countervailing duty or an antidumping investigation, any previous
administrative review, new shipper review, expedited antidumping
review, section 753 review, or section 762 review; or (2) any other
information placed on the record. See Section 776(b) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.308(c). Thus, in applying adverse facts available, the
Department is relying on information from Roasted Pistachios; Certain
In-Shell Pistachios and Certain Roasted In-Shell Pistachios from the
Islamic Republic of Iran: Final Results of New Shipper Countervailing
Duty Reviews, 68 FR 4997 (January 31, 2003) (Pistachios New Shipper
Reviews); Certain In-shell Pistachios from the Islamic Republic of
Iran: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR
54027 (September 13, 2005) (2003 In-shell Pistachios); and Certain In-
shell Roasted Pistachios from the Islamic Republic of Iran: Final
Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR 27682 (May
12, 2006) (2003 Roasted Pistachios).
If the Department relies on secondary information (e.g., data from
a petition) as facts available, section 776(c) of the Act provides that
the Department shall, ``to the extent practicable,'' corroborate such
information using independent sources reasonably at its disposal.\1\
The SAA further provides that to corroborate secondary information
means that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary
information to be used has probative value. See also 19 CFR 351.308(d)
(describing the corroboration of secondary information).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the URAA
clarifies that information from the petition is ``secondary
information.'' See Statement of Administrative Action, URAA, H. Doc.
No. 316, Vol. 1, 103d Cong. (1994) (SAA) at 870.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, in those instances in which it determines to apply adverse
facts available, the Department, in order to satisfy itself that such
information has probative value, will examine, to the extent
practicable, the reliability and relevance of the information used.
However, unlike other types of information, such as publicly available
[[Page 38624]]
data on the national inflation rate of a given country or national
average interest rates, there typically are no independent sources for
data on company-specific benefits resulting from countervailable
subsidy programs. The only source for such information normally is
administrative determinations, which are reliable. In the instant case,
no evidence has been presented or obtained which contradicts the
reliability of the evidence relied upon in previous segments of this
proceeding.
With respect to the relevance aspect of corroboration, the
Department will consider information reasonably at its disposal as to
whether there are circumstances that would render benefit data not
relevant. Where circumstances indicate that the information is not
appropriate as adverse facts available, the Department will not use it.
See Fresh Cut Flowers from Mexico; Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 61 FR 6812 (February 22, 1996). In the instant
case, no evidence has been presented or obtained which contradicts the
relevance of the benefit data relied upon in previous segments of this
proceeding. Thus, in the instant case, the Department finds that the
information used has been corroborated to the extent practicable.
Analysis of Programs
Programs Preliminarily Determined to Be Countervailable
Because the GOI and Nima did not provide the information necessary
to conduct an analysis of these programs, we are making an adverse
inference that each of these programs continues to exist, is
countervailable, and that a benefit was conferred upon Nima and/or its
grower(s) and supplier(s) during the POR.
A. Provision of Fertilizer and Machinery
In Roasted Pistachios, 51 FR at 35680, the Department found that
growers, processors or exporters of pistachios in Iran can obtain
fertilizer and machinery from the GOI at preferential prices.
As further discussed above in the ``Use of Facts Available''
section of this notice, we have determined that the application of
adverse facts available is warranted on the grounds that Nima and the
GOI did not respond to our request for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available that this program continues to
exist and that Nima received a countervailable benefit during the POR.
To calculate the net subsidy rate under this program, we used the
highest rate listed in Roasted Pistachios for this program.
Accordingly, we preliminarily determine that the net subsidy rate for
this program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
B. Provision of Credit
In Roasted Pistachios, 51 FR at 35680-81, the Department found that
bounties or grants were provided to Iranian growers, processors, or
exporters of pistachios under this program. Specifically, the
Department found that agricultural cooperatives in Iran make credit
available on terms inconsistent with commercial considerations from
funds provided by the GOI to their members.
As further discussed above in the ``Use of Facts Available''
section of this notice, we have determined that the application of
adverse facts available is warranted on the grounds that Nima and the
GOI did not respond to our request for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available that this program continues to
exist and that Nima received a countervailable benefit during the POR.
To calculate the net subsidy rate under this program, we used the
highest rate listed in Roasted Pistachios for this program.
Accordingly, we preliminarily determine that the net subsidy rate for
this program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
C. Tax Exemptions
In Roasted Pistachios, 51 FR at 35681, the Department found that
bounties or grants were provided to Iranian growers, processors, or
exporters of pistachios under this program. Specifically, the
Department determined that farmers benefit from legislation that
exempts farmers and livestock breeders from paying taxes, provided they
follow government agricultural guidelines.
As further discussed above in the ``Use of Facts Available''
section of this notice, we have determined that the application of
adverse facts available is warranted on the grounds that Nima and the
GOI did not respond to our request for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available that this program continues to
exist and that Nima received a countervailable benefit during the POR.
To calculate the net subsidy rate under this program, we used the
highest rate listed in Roasted Pistachios for this program.
Accordingly, we preliminarily determine that the net subsidy rate for
this program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
D. Provision of Water and Irrigation Equipment
In Roasted Pistachios, 51 FR at 35681, the Department found that
bounties or grants were provided to Iranian growers, processors, or
exporters of pistachios under this program. Specifically, the
Department determined that pistachio growers in Iran may benefit from
the construction of soil dams, flood barriers, canals, and other
irrigation projects undertaken by the government to increase
agricultural production.
As further discussed above in the ``Use of Facts Available''
section of this notice, we have determined that the application of
adverse facts available is warranted on the grounds that Nima and the
GOI did not respond to our request for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available that this program continues to
exist and that Nima received a countervailable benefit during the POR.
To calculate the net subsidy rate under this program, we used the
highest rate listed in Roasted Pistachios for this program.
Accordingly, we preliminarily determine that the net subsidy rate for
this program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
E. Technical Support
In Roasted Pistachios, 51 FR at 35681, the Department found that
bounties or grants were provided to Iranian growers, processors, or
exporters of pistachios under this program. Specifically, the
Department determined that pistachio growers in Iran receive technical
support as part of the GOI's program to support agricultural
development, and that this technical support included research projects
to improve cultivation techniques, as well as assistance in harvesting,
marketing, and the use of fertilizer.
As further discussed above in the ``Use of Facts Available''
section of this notice, we have determined that the application of
adverse facts available is warranted on the grounds that Nima and the
GOI did not respond to our request for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available that this program continues to
exist and that Nima received a countervailable benefit during the POR.
To calculate the net subsidy rate under this program, we used the
highest rate listed in Roasted Pistachios for this program.
Accordingly, we preliminarily determine that the net subsidy rate for
this program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
F. Duty Refunds on Imported Raw or Intermediate Materials Used in
the Production of Export Goods
In the Pistachios New Shipper Reviews, we found that there was
sufficient information on the record to suggest that duties and levies
paid in connection with the importation of intermediate materials used
in the production of the exported commodities and goods are refunded to
exporters, pursuant to the Third Five Year Development Plan (TFYDP)
enacted by the GOI. See the May 8, 2002, Memorandum to Melissa G.
Skinner
[[Page 38625]]
from the Team, re: New Subsidy Allegations, contained in the February
2, 2006, Memorandum to the File from the Team, re: Placing Memos on the
Record.
As further discussed above in the ``Use of Facts Available''
section of this notice, we have determined that the application of
adverse facts available is warranted on the grounds that Nima and the
GOI did not respond to our request for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available that this program continues to
exist and that Nima received a countervailable benefit during the POR.
This program was alleged for the first time in Pistachios New
Shipper Reviews, and thus was not among the programs addressed in
Roasted Pistachios. However, lacking any information from Nima and the
GOI on the record of the instant review, we find that the net subsidy
rate of 6.65 percent, the highest rate established for an industry-wide
program in Roasted Pistachios, is the only available information on the
record and is therefore, as adverse facts available, the appropriate
rate to apply to this program in these preliminary results.
Accordingly, we preliminarily find that the net subsidy rate for this
program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
G. Program to Improve Quality of Exports of Dried Fruit
In the Pistachios New Shipper Reviews, we found that there was
sufficient information on the record to suggest that pursuant to the
Budget Act of 2001 - 2002, the GOI provides financial assistance to
exporters of dried fruit and pistachios to assist them in the
production of export quality goods. See the May 8, 2002, Memorandum to
Melissa G. Skinner from the Team, re: New Subsidy Allegations,
contained in the February 2, 2006, Memorandum to the File from the
Team, re: Placing Memos on the Record.
As further discussed above in the ``Use of Facts Available''
section of this notice, we have determined that the application of
adverse facts available is warranted on the grounds that Nima and the
GOI did not respond to our request for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available that this program continues to
exist and that Nima received a countervailable benefit during the POR.
This program was alleged for the first time in the Pistachios New
Shipper Reviews, and thus was not among the programs addressed in
Roasted Pistachios. However, lacking any information from Nima and the
GOI on the record of the instant review, we find that the net subsidy
rate of 6.65 percent, the highest rate established for an industry-wide
program in Roasted Pistachios, is the only available information on the
record and is therefore, as adverse facts available, the appropriate
rate to apply to this program in these preliminary results.
Accordingly, we preliminarily find that the net subsidy rate for this
program is 6.65 percent ad valorem.
H. Iranian Export Guarantee Fund
In 2003 In-shell Pistachios, we found that petitioners had provided
sufficient evidence to support their allegation that the GOI pays a
``prize'' in the form of an export subsidy to exporters; these prizes
are payable commensurate with the added value of export goods and
services. See the October 27, 2004, Memorandum to Melissa G. Skinner
from the Team, re: New Subsidy Allegations, contained in the February
2, 2006, Memorandum to the File from the Team, re: Placing Memos on the
Record. This program was also examined in the context of 2003 Roasted
Pistachios.
As further discussed above in the ``Use of Facts Available''
section of this notice, we have determined that the application of
adverse facts available is warranted on the grounds that Nima and the
GOI did not respond to our request for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available that this program continues to
exist and that Nima received a countervailable benefit during the POR.
This program was alleged for the first time in 2003 In-shell
Pistachios, and thus was not among the programs addressed in Roasted
Pistachios. However, lacking any information from Nima and the GOI on
the record of the instant review, we find that the net subsidy rate of
6.65 percent, the highest rate established for an industry-wide program
in Roasted Pistachios, is the only available information on the record
and is therefore, as adverse facts available, the appropriate rate to
apply to this program in these preliminary results. Accordingly, we
preliminarily find that the net subsidy rate for this program is 6.65
percent ad valorem.
I. GOI Grants and Loans to Pistachio Farmers
In 2003 In-shell Pistachios, we found that petitioners had provided
sufficient evidence to support their allegation that the GOI's Foreign
Exchange Reserve Account Board of Trustees agreed to provide both a
grant of $100,000,000 and a $50,000,000 buyer's credit to Iranian
pistachio cooperatives and pistachio farmers. See the May 8, 2002,
Memorandum to Melissa G. Skinner from the Team, re: New Subsidy
Allegations, contained in the February 2, 2006, Memorandum to the File
from the Team, re: Placing Memos on the Record. This program was also
examined in the context of 2003 Roasted Pistachios.
As further discussed above in the ``Use of Facts Available''
section of this notice, we have determined that the application of
adverse facts available is warranted on the grounds that Nima and the
GOI did not respond to our request for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available that this program continues to
exist and that Nima received a countervailable benefit during the POR.
This program was alleged for the first time in 2003 In-shell
Pistachios, and thus was not among the programs addressed in Roasted
Pistachios. However, lacking any information from Nima and the GOI on
the record of the instant review, we find that the net subsidy rate of
6.65 percent, the highest rate established for an industry-wide program
in Roasted Pistachios, is the only available information on the record
and is therefore, as adverse facts available, the appropriate rate to
apply to this program in these preliminary results. Accordingly, we
preliminarily find that the net subsidy rate for this program is 6.65
percent ad valorem.
J. Crop Insurance for Pistachios
In 2003 In-shell Pistachios, we found that petitioners had provided
sufficient evidence to support their allegation that the GOI
established the Iranian Agricultural Product Insurance Act (IAPIA),
whereby the Agricultural Bank will insure agricultural produce as a
means of achieving the goals and policies of the agricultural sector
and that the GOI aids farmers in securing insurance premiums at less
than market value. See the May 8, 2002, Memorandum to Melissa G.
Skinner from the Team, re: New Subsidy Allegations, contained in the
February 2, 2006, Memorandum to the File from the Team, re: Placing
Memos on the Record. This program was also examined in the context of
2003 Roasted Pistachios.
As further discussed above in the ``Use of Facts Available''
section of this notice, we have determined that the application of
adverse facts available is warranted on the grounds that Nima and the
GOI did not respond to our request for information. Therefore, we have
determined as adverse facts available that this program continues to
exist and that Nima received a countervailable benefit during the POR.
This program was alleged for the first time in 2003 In-shell
Pistachios, and thus was not among the programs addressed in Roasted
Pistachios.
[[Page 38626]]
However, lacking any information from Nima and the GOI on the record of
the instant review, we find that the net subsidy rate of 6.65 percent,
the highest rate established for an industry-wide program in Roasted
Pistachios, is the only available information on the record and is
therefore, as adverse facts available, the appropriate rate to apply to
this program in these preliminary results. Accordingly, we
preliminarily find that the net subsidy rate for this program is 6.65
percent ad valorem.
Preliminary Results of Review
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we have calculated an
individual subsidy rate for Nima, the only producer/exporter subject to
this administrative review, for the POR, i.e., calendar year 2004. We
preliminarily determine that the total estimated net countervailable
subsidy rate is 66.50 percent ad valorem.
As Nima is the exporter but not the producer of subject
merchandise, should the final results of this review remain the same as
these preliminary results, the Department's final results of review
will apply to all subject merchandise exported by Nima. See 19 CFR
351.107(b).
The Department intends to instruct CBP, within 15 days of
publication of the final results of this review, to liquidate all
shipments of subject merchandise exported by Nima, entered, or
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the POR at the rate
established in this administrative review.
We will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits for non-
reviewed companies 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
will be the rate for that company established in the most recently
completed administrative proceeding. See 2003 Roasted Pistachios. These
cash deposit rates shall apply to all non-reviewed companies until a
review of a company assigned these rates is requested.
Public Comment
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.224(b), the Department will disclose to
parties to the proceeding any calculations performed in connection with
these preliminary results within five days after the date of the public
announcement of this notice. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309, interested
parties may submit written comments in response to these preliminary
results. Unless otherwise indicated by the Department, case briefs must
be submitted within 30 days after the publication of these preliminary
results. Rebuttal briefs, which are limited to arguments raised in case
briefs, must be submitted no later than five days after the time limit
for filing case briefs, unless otherwise specified by the Department.
Parties who submit argument in this proceeding are requested to submit
with the argument: (1) a statement of the issue, and (2) a brief
summary of the argument. Parties submitting case and/or rebuttal briefs
are requested to provide the Department copies of the public version on
disk. Case and rebuttal briefs must be served on interested parties in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f). Also, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310,
within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice, interested
parties may request a public hearing on arguments to be raised in the
case and rebuttal briefs. Unless the Secretary specifies otherwise, the
hearing, if requested, will be held two days after the 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, under 19 CFR 351.309(c)(ii), are due. The Department
will publish the final results of this administrative review, including
the results of its analysis of issues raised in any case or rebuttal
brief or at a hearing.
This administrative review and notice are issued and published in
accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: June 30, 2006.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E6-10664 Filed 7-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S