Certain Pasta From Turkey: Final Results of Expedited Five-Year (“Sunset”) Review of the Countervailing Duty Order, 5269-5271 [E7-1813]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 23 / Monday, February 5, 2007 / Notices
Preliminary Results of Antidumping
Duty Administrative Review, 71 FR
64938 (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). We
invited interested parties to comment on
the preliminary results of review. No
interested party submitted comments.
We have conducted this administrative
review in accordance with section
751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (‘‘the Act’’).
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Scope of the Order
The products covered by this order
are certain preserved mushrooms,
whether imported whole, sliced, diced,
or as stems and pieces. The preserved
mushrooms covered under this order are
the species Agaricus bisporus and
Agaricus bitorquis. ‘‘Preserved
mushrooms’’ refer to mushrooms that
have been prepared or preserved by
cleaning, blanching, and sometimes
slicing or cutting. These mushrooms are
then packed and heated in containers
including but not limited to cans or
glass jars in a suitable liquid medium,
including but not limited to water,
brine, butter or butter sauce. Preserved
mushrooms may be imported whole,
sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces.
Included within the scope of this order
are ‘‘brined’’ mushrooms, which are
presalted and packed in a heavy salt
solution to provisionally preserve them
for further processing.
Excluded from the scope of this order
are the following: (1) All other species
of mushroom, including straw
mushrooms; (2) all fresh and chilled
mushrooms, including ‘‘refrigerated’’ or
‘‘quick blanched mushrooms’’; (3) dried
mushrooms; (4) frozen mushrooms; and
(5) ‘‘marinated,’’ ‘‘acidified’’ or
‘‘pickled’’ mushrooms, which are
prepared or preserved by means of
vinegar or acetic acid, but may contain
oil or other additives.
The merchandise subject to this order
is currently classifiable under
subheadings 2003.10.0127,
2003.10.0131, 2003.10.0137,
2003.10.0143, 2003.10.0147,
2003.10.0153 and 0711.51.0000 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS). Although the
HTSUS subheadings are provided for
convenience and customs purposes, our
written description of the scope of this
order dispositive.
Final Results of Review
We determine that the following
weighted–average margin percentage
exists:
Margin
(percent)
Manufacturer/exporter
Agro Dutch Industries, Ltd. .........
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:07 Feb 02, 2007
Jkt 211001
0.61
Assessment
The Department shall determine, and
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(‘‘CBP’’) shall assess, antidumping
duties on all appropriate entries, in
accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b).
With respect to Agro Dutch, we
calculated importer–specific assessment
rates for the subject merchandise by
aggregating the dumping margins
calculated for all the U.S. sales
examined and dividing this amount by
the total entered value of the sales
examined. Pursuant to 19 CFR
351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to
assess antidumping duties on all
appropriate entries covered by this
review if any importer–specific
assessment rate calculated in the final
results of this review is above de
minimis (i.e., is not less than 0.50
percent). The Department intends to
issue assessment instructions to CBP 15
days after the date of publication of
these final results of review.
The Department clarified its
‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on
May 6, 2003. See Antidumping and
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68
FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This
clarification will apply to entries of
subject merchandise during the POR
produced by the company included in
these final results of review for which
the reviewed company did not know its
merchandise was destined for the
United States. In such instances, we will
instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed
entries at the ‘‘All Others’’ rate if there
is no rate for the intermediate
company(ies) involved in the
transaction.
5269
or exporters will continue to be 11.30
percent. This rate is the ‘‘All Others’’
rate from the LTFV investigation. These
deposit requirements shall remain in
effect until publication of the final
results of the next administrative
review.
This notice also serves as a final
reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR
351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of
antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this
review period. Failure to comply with
this requirement could result in the
Secretary’s presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties
occurred and the subsequent assessment
of doubled antidumping duties.
This notice serves as the only
reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective order (APO) of
their responsibility concerning the
disposition of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance
with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
written notification of return/
destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is
hereby requested. Failure to comply
with the regulations and the terms of an
APO is a sanctionable violation.
We are issuing and publishing this
determination and notice in accordance
with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the
Act.
Dated: January 30, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E7–1810 Filed 2–2–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit
requirements will be effective for all
shipments of the subject merchandise
entered, or withdrawn from warehouse,
for consumption on or after the
publication date of the final results of
this administrative review, as provided
by section 751(a)(1) of the Act: (1) the
cash deposit rate for Agro Dutch will be
0.61 percent; (2) for previously reviewed
or investigated companies not listed
above, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the company–specific
rate published for the most recent
period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm
covered in this review, a prior review,
or the original less–than-fair–value
(‘‘LTFV’’) investigation, but the
manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate
will be the rate established for the most
recent period for the manufacturer of
the merchandise; and (4) the cash
deposit rate for all other manufacturers
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C–489–806]
Certain Pasta From Turkey: Final
Results of Expedited Five-Year
(‘‘Sunset’’) Review of the
Countervailing Duty Order
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 2, 2006, the
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
Department’’) published in the Federal
Register the notice of initiation of the
second five-year sunset review of the
countervailing duty order on certain
pasta (‘‘pasta’’) from Turkey, pursuant to
section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (‘‘the Act’’). See Initiation
of Five-year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews, 71 FR
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
5270
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 23 / Monday, February 5, 2007 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
57921 (October 2, 2006) (‘‘Second
Sunset Review’’). The Department has
conducted an expedited sunset review
of this order pursuant to section
751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). As a result of this
sunset review, the Department finds that
revocation of the countervailing duty
order is likely to lead to continuation or
recurrence of a countervailable subsidy
at the levels indicated in the ‘‘Final
Results of Review’’ section of this
notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Audrey R. Twyman or Brandon
Farlander, AD/CVD Operations, Office
1, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3534 or
(202) 482–0182, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The countervailing duty order which
covers pasta from Turkey was published
in the Federal Register on July 24, 1996.
See Notice of Countervailing Duty
Order: Certain Pasta (‘‘Pasta’’) From
Turkey, 61 FR 38546 (July 24, 1996). On
October 2, 2006, the Department
initiated the second sunset review of
this order, pursuant to section 751(c) of
the Act. See Second Sunset Review. The
Department received a notice of intent
to participate from the following
domestic parties: A. Zerega’s Sons, Inc.;
American Italian Pasta Company;
Dakota Growers Pasta Company, Inc.;
New World Pasta Company; and
Philadelphia Macaroni Company
(collectively, ‘‘domestic interested
parties’’), within the deadline specified
in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). The
companies claimed interested party
status under section 771(9)(C) of the
Act, as manufacturers of a domestic-like
product in the United States.
The Department received a request for
a 12-day extension of time from the
Government of the Republic of Turkey
(‘‘GRT’’) to submit its substantive
response. The Department partially
granted the GRT’s request and extended
the deadline for filing a substantive
response to November 8, 2006. The
same extension was also granted to the
domestic interested parties, per their
request. On November 8, 2006, the
Department received complete
substantive responses to the notice of
initiation from the domestic interested
parties and from the GRT.
The Department did not receive any
substantive responses from Turkish
producers or exporters of the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:07 Feb 02, 2007
Jkt 211001
merchandise covered by this order.
Based on the fact that a government’s
response alone, normally, is not
sufficient for full sunset reviews in
which the orders are not done on an
aggregate basis, we determined to
conduct an expedited (120 day) sunset
review of this order. See section
751(c)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). See, e.g., Final
Results of Expedited Sunset Reviews of
Countervailing Duty Orders: Pure
Magnesium and Alloy Magnesium from
Canada, 70 FR 67140 (November 4,
2005). See also Letter to Robert
Carpenter, Director, Office of
Investigations, International Trade
Commission, from Wendy Frankel,
Director, Import Administration,
Department of Commerce, regarding
inadequate response to the notice of
initiation from respondent interested
parties (November 21, 2006); and
Memorandum from Saliha Loucif,
International Trade Compliance
Analyst, to Susan Kuhbach, Office
Director, Import Administration,
Department of Commerce, regarding
‘‘Adequacy Determination of the Second
Sunset Review of the Countervailing
Duty Order on Certain Pasta from
Turkey’’ (November 21, 2006).
On January 19, 2007, the Department
placed the calculation of the all-others
rate from the investigation onto the
record of this sunset review and allowed
parties to comment. We received
comment from domestic interested
parties and the GRT on January 24,
2007. No hearing was held because none
was requested.
Scope of the 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
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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
Brinkmann to Richard Moreland, dated
May 24, 1999, which is on file in the
Central Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’) in room
B–099 of the main Department building.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in substantive
responses by parties in this sunset
review are addressed in the ‘‘Issues and
Decision Memo for the Expedited
Sunset Review of the Countervailing
Duty Order on Certain Pasta from
Turkey; Final Results,’’ (‘‘Decision
Memo’’), from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, to David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, dated January 30, 2007,
which is hereby adopted by this notice.
The issues discussed in the Decision
Memo include the likelihood of
continuation or recurrence of a
countervailable subsidy, the net
countervailable subsidy rate likely to
prevail if the order were revoked, and
the nature of the subsidies.
Parties can find a complete discussion
of all issues raised in this sunset review
and the corresponding recommendation
in this public memorandum which is on
file in the CRU. In addition, a complete
version of the Decision Memo can be
accessed directly on the Department’s
Web page at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/
index.html. The paper copy and
electronic version of the Decision Memo
are identical in content.
Final Results of Review
The Department determines that
revocation of the countervailing duty
order on pasta from Turkey is likely to
lead to continuation or recurrence of
countervailable subsidies at the
following countervailing duty rates:
Manufacturer/Exporter
Filiz Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
Net Subsidy
Rate
(percent)
3.03
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 23 / Monday, February 5, 2007 / Notices
revocation of the countervailing duty
order is likely to lead to continuation or
recurrence of a countervailable subsidy
at the levels indicated in the ‘‘Final
Maktas Makarnacilik ve
Results of Review’’ section of this
Ticaret/ Gidasa Gida
San.Tic.A.S. 1 ...................
4.49 notice.
Oba Makarnacilik Sanayi ve
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 2007.
Ticaret ...............................
14.48 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
‘‘All Others’’ ...........................
10.25
Audrey R. Twyman or Brandon
Farlander, AD/CVD Operations, Office
Notification Regarding Administrative
1, Import Administration, International
Orders
Trade Administration, U.S. Department
This notice also serves as the only
of Commerce, 14th Street and
reminder to parties subject to
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
administrative protective orders
DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3534 or
(‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility
(202) 482–0182, respectively.
concerning the return or destruction of
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
proprietary information disclosed under
Background
APO in accordance with 19 CFR
351.305(a)(3). Timely notification of the
The countervailing duty order which
return or destruction of APO materials
covers pasta from Italy was published in
or conversion to judicial protective
the Federal Register on July 24, 1996.
order is hereby requested. Failure to
See Notice of Countervailing Duty Order
comply with the regulations and terms
and Amended Final Affirmative
of an APO is a violation which is subject Countervailing Duty Determination:
to sanction.
Certain Pasta (‘‘Pasta’’) From Italy, 61
We are issuing and publishing this
FR 38544 (July 24, 1996). On October 2,
determination and notice in accordance 2006, the Department initiated the
with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i) of
second sunset review of this order,
the Act.
pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act.
See Second Sunset Review. The
Dated: January 30, 2007.
Department received a notice of intent
David M. Spooner,
to participate from the following
Assistant Secretary for Import
domestic parties: A. Zerega’s Sons, Inc.;
Administration.
American Italian Pasta Company;
[FR Doc. E7–1813 Filed 2–2–07; 8:45 am]
Dakota Growers Pasta Company, Inc.;
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
New World Pasta Company; and
Philadelphia Macaroni Company
(collectively, ‘‘domestic interested
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
parties’’), within the deadline specified
International Trade Administration
in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). The
companies claimed interested party
[C–475–819]
status under section 771(9)(C) of the
Certain Pasta From Italy: Final Results Act, as manufacturers of a domestic-like
product in the United States.
of Expedited Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’)
On October 12, 2006, the Department
Review of the Countervailing Duty
received a request for a 12-day
Order
extension of time from the Government
AGENCY: Import Administration,
of Italy (‘‘GOI’’) to submit its substantive
International Trade Administration,
response. The Department partially
Department of Commerce
granted the GOI’s request and extended
SUMMARY: On October 2, 2006, the
the deadline for filing a substantive
Department of Commerce (‘‘the
response to November 8, 2006. The
Department’’) published in the Federal
same extension was also granted to the
Register the notice of initiation of the
domestic interested parties, per their
second five-year sunset review of the
request. On November 8, 2006, the
countervailing duty order on certain
Department received complete
pasta (‘‘pasta’’) from Italy, pursuant to
substantive responses to the notice of
section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930,
initiation from the domestic interested
as amended (‘‘the Act’’). See Initiation
parties and from the GOI. On November
of Five-year (‘‘Sunset’’) Reviews, 71 FR
2, 2006, we received a complete
57921 (October 2, 2006) (‘‘Second
substantive response to the notice of
Sunset Review’’). The Department has
initiation from the Delegation of the
conducted an expedited sunset review
European Commission (‘‘EC’’).
of this order pursuant to section
The Department did not receive any
751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR
substantive responses from any Italian
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). As a result of this producers or exporters of the
sunset review, the Department finds that merchandise covered by this order.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Manufacturer/Exporter
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:07 Feb 02, 2007
Net Subsidy
Rate
(percent)
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5271
Based on the fact that a government’s
response alone, normally, is not
sufficient for full sunset reviews in
which the orders are not done on an
aggregate basis, we determined to
conduct an expedited (120 day) sunset
review of this order. See section
751(c)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). See, e.g., Final
Results of Expedited Sunset Reviews of
Countervailing Duty Orders: Pure
Magnesium and Alloy Magnesium from
Canada, 70 FR 67140 (November 4,
2005). See also Letter to Robert
Carpenter, Director, Office of
Investigations, International Trade
Commission, from Wendy Frankel,
Director, Import Administration,
Department of Commerce, regarding
inadequate response to the notice of
initiation from respondent interested
parties (November 21, 2006); and
Memorandum from Saliha Loucif,
International Trade Compliance
Analyst, to Susan Kuhbach, Office
Director, Import Administration,
Department of Commerce, regarding
‘‘Adequacy Determination of the
Second Sunset Review of the
Countervailing Duty Order on Certain
Pasta from Italy,’’ (November 21, 2006).
On January 19, 2007, the Department
placed the calculation of the all others
rate from the investigation onto the
record of this sunset review and allowed
parties to comment. We received
comment from domestic interested
parties on January 24, 2007. No hearing
was held because none was requested.
Scope of the Order
Imports covered by the order are
shipments of certain non-egg dry pasta
in packages of five pounds four ounces
or less, whether or not enriched or
fortified or containing milk or other
optional ingredients such as chopped
vegetables, vegetable purees, milk,
gluten, diastasis, vitamins, coloring and
flavorings, and up to two percent egg
white. The pasta covered by this scope
is typically sold in the retail market, in
fiberboard or cardboard cartons, or
polyethylene or polypropylene bags of
varying dimensions.
Excluded from the scope of 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.
Also excluded are imports of organic
pasta from Italy that are accompanied by
the appropriate certificate issued by the
Instituto Mediterraneo Di Certificazione,
Bioagricoop S.r.l., QC&I International
Services, Ecocert Italia, Consorzio per il
Controllo dei Prodotti Biologici,
Associazione Italiana per l’Agricoltura
Biologica, or Codex S.r.l. In addition,
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 23 (Monday, February 5, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5269-5271]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-1813]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-489-806]
Certain Pasta From Turkey: Final Results of Expedited Five-Year
(``Sunset'') Review of the Countervailing Duty Order
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 2, 2006, the Department of Commerce (``the
Department'') published in the Federal Register the notice of
initiation of the second five-year sunset review of the countervailing
duty order on certain pasta (``pasta'') from Turkey, pursuant to
section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act''). See
Initiation of Five-year (``Sunset'') Reviews, 71 FR
[[Page 5270]]
57921 (October 2, 2006) (``Second Sunset Review''). The Department has
conducted an expedited sunset review of this order pursuant to section
751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). As a result
of this sunset review, the Department finds that revocation of the
countervailing duty order is likely to lead to continuation or
recurrence of a countervailable subsidy at the levels indicated in the
``Final Results of Review'' section of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Audrey R. Twyman or Brandon Farlander,
AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3534
or (202) 482-0182, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The countervailing duty order which covers pasta from Turkey was
published in the Federal Register on July 24, 1996. See Notice of
Countervailing Duty Order: Certain Pasta (``Pasta'') From Turkey, 61 FR
38546 (July 24, 1996). On October 2, 2006, the Department initiated the
second sunset review of this order, pursuant to section 751(c) of the
Act. See Second Sunset Review. The Department received a notice of
intent to participate from the following domestic parties: A. Zerega's
Sons, Inc.; American Italian Pasta Company; Dakota Growers Pasta
Company, Inc.; New World Pasta Company; and Philadelphia Macaroni
Company (collectively, ``domestic interested parties''), within the
deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). The companies claimed
interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as
manufacturers of a domestic-like product in the United States.
The Department received a request for a 12-day extension of time
from the Government of the Republic of Turkey (``GRT'') to submit its
substantive response. The Department partially granted the GRT's
request and extended the deadline for filing a substantive response to
November 8, 2006. The same extension was also granted to the domestic
interested parties, per their request. On November 8, 2006, the
Department received complete substantive responses to the notice of
initiation from the domestic interested parties and from the GRT.
The Department did not receive any substantive responses from
Turkish producers or exporters of the merchandise covered by this
order. Based on the fact that a government's response alone, normally,
is not sufficient for full sunset reviews in which the orders are not
done on an aggregate basis, we determined to conduct an expedited (120
day) sunset review of this order. See section 751(c)(3)(A) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2). See, e.g., Final Results of
Expedited Sunset Reviews of Countervailing Duty Orders: Pure Magnesium
and Alloy Magnesium from Canada, 70 FR 67140 (November 4, 2005). See
also Letter to Robert Carpenter, Director, Office of Investigations,
International Trade Commission, from Wendy Frankel, Director, Import
Administration, Department of Commerce, regarding inadequate response
to the notice of initiation from respondent interested parties
(November 21, 2006); and Memorandum from Saliha Loucif, International
Trade Compliance Analyst, to Susan Kuhbach, Office Director, Import
Administration, Department of Commerce, regarding ``Adequacy
Determination of the Second Sunset Review of the Countervailing Duty
Order on Certain Pasta from Turkey'' (November 21, 2006).
On January 19, 2007, the Department placed the calculation of the
all-others rate from the investigation onto the record of this sunset
review and allowed parties to comment. We received comment from
domestic interested parties and the GRT on January 24, 2007. No hearing
was held because none was requested.
Scope of the 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 Brinkmann to Richard Moreland, dated May 24, 1999, which is on
file in the Central Records Unit (``CRU'') in room B-099 of the main
Department building.
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised in substantive responses by parties in this
sunset review are addressed in the ``Issues and Decision Memo for the
Expedited Sunset Review of the Countervailing Duty Order on Certain
Pasta from Turkey; Final Results,'' (``Decision Memo''), from Stephen
J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to
David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated
January 30, 2007, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The issues
discussed in the Decision Memo include the likelihood of continuation
or recurrence of a countervailable subsidy, the net countervailable
subsidy rate likely to prevail if the order were revoked, and the
nature of the subsidies.
Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this
sunset review and the corresponding recommendation in this public
memorandum which is on file in the CRU. In addition, a complete version
of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Department's Web
page at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The paper copy and
electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content.
Final Results of Review
The Department determines that revocation of the countervailing
duty order on pasta from Turkey is likely to lead to continuation or
recurrence of countervailable subsidies at the following countervailing
duty rates:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net Subsidy
Manufacturer/Exporter Rate (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Filiz Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret............................ 3.03
[[Page 5271]]
Maktas Makarnacilik ve Ticaret/ Gidasa Gida San.Tic.A.S. 4.49
1......................................................
Oba Makarnacilik Sanayi ve Ticaret...................... 14.48
``All Others''.......................................... 10.25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notification Regarding Administrative Orders
This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely
notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or
conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to
comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is
subject to sanction.
We are issuing and publishing this determination and notice in
accordance with sections 751(c), 752, and 777(i) of the Act.
Dated: January 30, 2007.
David M. Spooner,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E7-1813 Filed 2-2-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
