Certain Pasta From Italy: Notice of Partial Rescission of Twelfth (2007) Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 4734-4736 [E9-1718]

Download as PDF 4734 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 27, 2009 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES6 Certain Orange Juice From Brazil, 72 FR 12183 (Mar. 9, 2006). On April 29, 2008, at the request of Tropicana Products, Inc. (Tropicana), a domestic producer of orange juice, the Department initiated a changed circumstances review of the order to consider partially revoking the order with respect to ULPOJ, pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.216(b) and 351.222(g)(1)(i). See Certain Orange Juice From Brazil: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 73 FR 23182 (Apr. 29, 2008). On October 10, 2008, the Department published the preliminary results of this changed circumstances review. See Preliminary Results, 73 FR 60241. In the Preliminary Results, we found that there was sufficient interest on the part of the domestic OJ industry to justify maintaining the order with respect to ULPOJ. We invited parties to comment on our preliminary results of review. In November 2008, we received case and rebuttal briefs from Tropicana and the petitioners in this case (i.e., Florida Citrus Mutual, A. Duda & Sons, Inc. (doing business as Citrus Belle), and Citrus World, Inc.).1 Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have not changed the final results from those presented in the Preliminary Results. Scope of the Order The scope of this order includes certain orange juice for transport and/or further manufacturing, produced in two different forms: (1) Frozen orange juice in a highly concentrated form, sometimes referred to as frozen concentrated orange juice for manufacture (FCOJM); and (2) pasteurized single-strength orange juice which has not been concentrated, referred to as not-from-concentrate (NFC). At the time of the filing of the petition, there was an existing antidumping duty order on frozen concentrated orange juice (FCOJ) from Brazil. See Antidumping Duty Order; Frozen Concentrated Orange Juice from Brazil, 52 FR 16426 (May 5, 1987). Therefore, the scope of this order with regard to FCOJM covers only FCOJM produced and/or exported by those companies which were excluded or revoked from the pre-existing antidumping order on FCOJ from Brazil as of December 27, 2004. Those 1 These entities are opposing revocation of the order in part in this changed circumstances review; however, another petitioner, Southern Gardens Citrus Processing Corporation, has not joined these entities in opposing Tropicana’s request. VerDate Nov<24>2008 18:55 Jan 26, 2009 Jkt 217001 companies are Cargill Citrus Limitada; Coinbra-Frutesp S.A.; Sucocitrico Cutrale, S.A.; Fischer S.A. Comercio, Industria and Agricutura; and Montecitrus Trading S.A. Excluded from the scope of the order are reconstituted orange juice and frozen concentrated orange juice for retail (FCOJR). Reconstituted orange juice is produced through further manufacture of FCOJM, by adding water, oils and essences to the orange juice concentrate. FCOJR is concentrated orange juice, typically at 42 Brix, in a frozen state, packed in retail-sized containers ready for sale to consumers. FCOJR, a finished consumer product, is produced through further manufacture of FCOJM, a bulk manufacturer’s product. The subject merchandise is currently classifiable under subheadings 2009.11.00, 2009.12.25, 2009.12.45, and 2009.19.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). These HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and for customs purposes only and are not dispositive. Rather, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. Scope of Changed Circumstances Review The product subject to this changed circumstances review is ULPOJ, which is concentrated orange juice with a pulp content of two percent or less by weight/volume on an 11.8 degree brix equivalent base. This product is a form of FCOJM and is commonly used in the manufacture of soft drink concentrates. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this changed circumstances review, and to which we have responded, are listed in the Appendix to this notice and addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum (Decision Memo), which is adopted by this notice. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit, room 1117, of the main Department Building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/ frn/. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review More than 15 percent of the domestic industry has expressed opposition to excluding ULPOJ from the antidumping PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 duty order on OJ from Brazil. As a result, we determine that producers accounting for substantially all of the production of the domestic like product have not expressed a lack of interest in maintaining the order with respect to ULPOJ. Thus, we find that changed circumstances sufficient to warrant revocation in part of the antidumping duty order on OJ from Brazil do not exist. The current requirements for the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties on the subject merchandise will remain in effect until further notice. This notice also 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. We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216. Dated: January 16, 2009. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix—Issue in the Decision Memorandum Issue: Whether the Department Should Include Growers in its Industry Support Determination. [FR Doc. E9–1586 Filed 1–26–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–475–819] Certain Pasta From Italy: Notice of Partial Rescission of Twelfth (2007) Countervailing Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective Date: January 27, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew McAllister or Brandon Farlander, AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–1174 and (202) 482–0182, respectively. E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM 27JAN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 27, 2009 / Notices SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES6 Background On July 24, 1996, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) published a countervailing duty order on certain pasta from Italy. See Notice of Countervailing Duty Order and Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain Pasta (‘‘Pasta’’) From Italy, 61 FR 38543 (July 24, 1996). On July 28, 2008, we received a request for review from F.lli De Cecco di Filippo Fara San Martino S.p.A. (‘‘De Cecco’’) of the countervailing duty order on certain pasta from Italy covering the period January 1, 2007, through December 31, 2007. On July 31, 2008, we received a request for review from De Matteis Agroalimentare S.p.A. (‘‘De Matteis’’). On July 31, 2008, we received a request for review from New World Pasta Company, American Italian Pasta Company, and Dakota Growers Pasta Company (‘‘petitioners’’) for De Matteis. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we published a notice of initiation of the review on August 26, 2008. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 73 FR 50308 (August 26, 2008). On December 22, 2008, De Cecco withdrew its request for review. No other party requested a review for De Cecco. 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, based on publicly available information, the Department has determined that, as of August 4, 2004, imports of organic VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:20 Jan 26, 2009 Jkt 217001 4735 pasta from Italy that are accompanied by the appropriate certificate issued by Bioagricert S.r.l. are also excluded from this order. See Memorandum from Eric B. Greynolds to Melissa G. Skinner, dated August 4, 2004, which is on file in the Department’s Central Records Unit (‘‘CRU’’) in Room 1117 of the main Department building. In addition, based on publicly available information, the Department has determined that, as of March 13, 2003, imports of organic pasta from Italy that are accompanied by the appropriate certificate issued by Instituto per la Certificazione Etica e Ambientale (ICEA) are also excluded from this order. See Memorandum from Audrey Twyman to Susan Kuhbach, dated February 28, 2006, entitled ‘‘Recognition of Instituto per la Certificazione Etica e Ambientale (ICEA) as a Public Authority for Certifying Organic Pasta from Italy’’ which is on file in the Department’s CRU. The merchandise subject to review is currently classifiable under items 1901.90.90.95 and 1902.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise subject to the order is dispositive. ounces is within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders. See Memorandum from John Brinkmann to Richard Moreland, dated May 24, 1999, which is on file in the CRU. (4) On April 27, 2000, the Department self-initiated an anti-circumvention inquiry to determine whether Pastificio Fratelli Pagani S.p.A.’s importation of pasta in bulk and subsequent repackaging in the United States into packages of five pounds or less constitutes circumvention with respect to the antidumping and countervailing duty orders on pasta from Italy pursuant to section 781(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), and 19 CFR 351.225(b). See Certain Pasta from Italy: Notice of Initiation of AntiCircumvention Inquiry of the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 65 FR 26179 (May 5, 2000). On September 19, 2003, we published an affirmative finding of the anticircumvention inquiry. See AntiCircumvention Inquiry of the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders on Certain Pasta from Italy: Affirmative Final Determinations of Circumvention of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 68 FR 54888 (September 19, 2003). Scope Rulings The Department has issued the following scope rulings to date: (1) On August 25, 1997, the Department issued a scope ruling that multicolored pasta, imported in kitchen display bottles of decorative glass that are sealed with cork or paraffin and bound with raffia, is excluded from the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders. See Memorandum from Edward Easton to Richard Moreland, dated August 25, 1997, which is on file in the CRU. (2) On July 30, 1998, the Department issued a scope ruling finding that multipacks consisting of six one-pound packages of pasta that are shrinkwrapped into a single package are within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders. See Letter from Susan H. Kuhbach to Barbara P. Sidari, dated July 30, 1998, which is on file in the CRU. (3) 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 is within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders. 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 Rescission of Review Section 351.213(d)(1) of the Department’s regulations provides that the Department will rescind an administrative review, in part, if the party that requested the review withdraws its request for review within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review, or withdraws its request at a later date if the Department determines that it is reasonable to extend the time limit for withdrawing the request. De Cecco withdrew its request for review on December 22, 2008, which is after the 90-day deadline. Nonetheless, the Department accepts the withdrawal request because it has not yet expended significant resources on the review of De Cecco. Therefore, the Department is rescinding this administrative review with respect to De Cecco. We are continuing to conduct an administrative review with respect to De Matteis. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) 15 days after publication of this rescission notice. The Department will instruct CBP to assess countervailing duties on all entries from De Cecco between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2007, at the rates in effect at the time of entry. This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to an administrative PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM 27JAN1 4736 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 16 / Tuesday, January 27, 2009 / Notices protective order (‘‘APO’’) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of 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. This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4). Dated: January 21, 2009. John M. Andersen, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations. [FR Doc. E9–1718 Filed 1–26–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–904] Certain Activated Carbon From the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Initiation and Preliminary Results of Changed Circumstances Review, and Intent To Revoke Order in Part AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES6 DATES: Effective Date: January 27, 2009. SUMMARY: On December 15, 2008, the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) received a request for a changed circumstances review and a request to revoke in part the antidumping duty order on certain activated carbon from the People’s Republic of China with respect to certain parts of fish tank filters which contain no more than 500 grams of activated carbon, or a combination of activated carbon and zeolite, and are fitted to work with specific filters. Petitioners submitted a letter to the Department expressing lack of interest in antidumping duty relief from the imports of certain parts of fish tank filters as described below. Therefore, we are notifying the public of our intent to revoke, in part, the antidumping duty order as it relates to import of certain fish tank filters as described below. The Department invites interested parties to comment on these preliminary results. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine Bertrand, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:20 Jan 26, 2009 Jkt 217001 Avenue, NW., Washington DC. 20230; telephone (202) 482–3207. Background On April 27, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the ‘‘Department’’) published the antidumping duty order on certain activated carbon from the People’s Republic of China. See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Activated Carbon from the People’s Republic of China, 72 FR 20988 (April 27, 2007). On December 15, 2008, the Department received a request on behalf of Rolf C. Hagen (USA), Corp. (‘‘Hagen’’) for a changed circumstances review and a request to revoke in part the antidumping duty order on certain activated carbon from the People’s Republic of China with respect to certain parts of fish tank filters which contain no more than 500 grams of activated carbon, or a combination of activated carbon and zeolite, and fitted to work with specific filters. On December 17, 2008, Petitioners 1, Calgon Carbon Corporation and Norit Americans Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Petitioners’’), submitted a response on the record and stated that they agree with Hagen’s request and agree with the specific proposed exclusion language from Hagen’s December 15, 2008, submission, as described below. Scope of the Order The merchandise subject to this order is certain activated carbon. Certain activated carbon is a powdered, granular, or pelletized carbon product obtained by ‘‘activating’’ with heat and steam various materials containing carbon, including but not limited to coal (including bituminous, lignite, and anthracite), wood, coconut shells, olive stones, and peat. The thermal and steam treatments remove organic materials and create an internal pore structure in the carbon material. The producer can also use carbon dioxide gas (CO2) in place of steam in this process. The vast majority of the internal porosity developed during the high temperature steam (or CO2 gas) activated process is a direct result of oxidation of a portion of the solid carbon atoms in the raw material, converting them into a gaseous form of carbon. The scope of this order covers all forms of activated carbon that are activated by steam or CO2, regardless of the raw material, grade, mixture, additives, further washing or postactivation chemical treatment (chemical or water washing, chemical 1 See Memorandum to the File: Petitioners’ Representation of Domestic Industry (January 6, 2009). PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 impregnation or other treatment), or product form. Unless specifically excluded, the scope of this order covers all physical forms of certain activated carbon, including powdered activated carbon (‘‘PAC’’), granular activated carbon (‘‘GAC’’), and pelletized activated carbon. Excluded from the scope of the order are chemically activated carbons. The carbon-based raw material used in the chemical activation process is treated with a strong chemical agent, including but not limited to phosphoric acid, zinc chloride sulfuric acid or potassium hydroxide, that dehydrates molecules in the raw material, and results in the formation of water that is removed from the raw material by moderate heat treatment. The activated carbon created by chemical activation has internal porosity developed primarily due to the action of the chemical dehydration agent. Chemically activated carbons are typically used to activate raw materials with a lignocellulosic component such as cellulose, including wood, sawdust, paper mill waste and peat. To the extent that an imported activated carbon product is a blend of steam and chemically activated carbons, products containing 50 percent or more steam (or CO2 gas) activated carbons are within this scope, and those containing more than 50 percent chemically activated carbons are outside this scope. This exclusion language regarding blended material applies only to mixtures of steam and chemically activated carbons. Also excluded from the scope are reactivated carbons. Reactivated carbons are previously used activated carbons that have had adsorbed materials removed from their pore structure after use through the application of heat, steam and/or chemicals. Also excluded from the scope is activated carbon cloth. Activated carbon cloth is a woven textile fabric made of or containing activated carbon fibers. It is used in masks and filters and clothing of various types where a woven format is required. Any activated carbon meeting the physical description of subject merchandise provided above that is not expressly excluded from the scope is included within this scope. The products subject to the order are currently classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’) subheading 3802.10.00. Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive. E:\FR\FM\27JAN1.SGM 27JAN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 16 (Tuesday, January 27, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4734-4736]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1718]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-475-819]


Certain Pasta From Italy: Notice of Partial Rescission of Twelfth 
(2007) Countervailing Duty Administrative Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

DATES: Effective Date: January 27, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew McAllister or Brandon 
Farlander, AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, U.S. 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-1174 and (202) 482-0182, 
respectively.

[[Page 4735]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 24, 1996, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') 
published a countervailing duty order on certain pasta from Italy. See 
Notice of Countervailing Duty Order and Amended Final Affirmative 
Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain Pasta (``Pasta'') From 
Italy, 61 FR 38543 (July 24, 1996). On July 28, 2008, we received a 
request for review from F.lli De Cecco di Filippo Fara San Martino 
S.p.A. (``De Cecco'') of the countervailing duty order on certain pasta 
from Italy covering the period January 1, 2007, through December 31, 
2007. On July 31, 2008, we received a request for review from De 
Matteis Agroalimentare S.p.A. (``De Matteis''). On July 31, 2008, we 
received a request for review from New World Pasta Company, American 
Italian Pasta Company, and Dakota Growers Pasta Company 
(``petitioners'') for De Matteis.
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we published a notice 
of initiation of the review on August 26, 2008. See Initiation of 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 73 FR 50308 
(August 26, 2008). On December 22, 2008, De Cecco withdrew its request 
for review. No other party requested a review for De Cecco.

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, based on publicly available information, the Department has 
determined that, as of August 4, 2004, imports of organic pasta from 
Italy that are accompanied by the appropriate certificate issued by 
Bioagricert S.r.l. are also excluded from this order. See Memorandum 
from Eric B. Greynolds to Melissa G. Skinner, dated August 4, 2004, 
which is on file in the Department's Central Records Unit (``CRU'') in 
Room 1117 of the main Department building. In addition, based on 
publicly available information, the Department has determined that, as 
of March 13, 2003, imports of organic pasta from Italy that are 
accompanied by the appropriate certificate issued by Instituto per la 
Certificazione Etica e Ambientale (ICEA) are also excluded from this 
order. See Memorandum from Audrey Twyman to Susan Kuhbach, dated 
February 28, 2006, entitled ``Recognition of Instituto per la 
Certificazione Etica e Ambientale (ICEA) as a Public Authority for 
Certifying Organic Pasta from Italy'' which is on file in the 
Department's CRU. The merchandise subject to review is currently 
classifiable under items 1901.90.90.95 and 1902.19.20 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS 
subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the 
written description of the merchandise subject to the order is 
dispositive.

Scope Rulings

    The Department has issued the following scope rulings to date:
    (1) On August 25, 1997, the Department issued a scope ruling that 
multicolored pasta, imported in kitchen display bottles of decorative 
glass that are sealed with cork or paraffin and bound with raffia, is 
excluded from the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty 
orders. See Memorandum from Edward Easton to Richard Moreland, dated 
August 25, 1997, which is on file in the CRU.
    (2) On July 30, 1998, the Department issued a scope ruling finding 
that multipacks consisting of six one-pound packages of pasta that are 
shrink-wrapped into a single package are within the scope of the 
antidumping and countervailing duty orders. See Letter from Susan H. 
Kuhbach to Barbara P. Sidari, dated July 30, 1998, which is on file in 
the CRU.
    (3) 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 is within the scope of the 
antidumping and countervailing duty orders. On May 24, 1999, we issued 
a final scope ruling finding that, effective October 26, 1998, pasta in 
packages weighing or labeled up to (and including) five pounds four 
ounces is within the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty 
orders. See Memorandum from John Brinkmann to Richard Moreland, dated 
May 24, 1999, which is on file in the CRU.
    (4) On April 27, 2000, the Department self-initiated an anti-
circumvention inquiry to determine whether Pastificio Fratelli Pagani 
S.p.A.'s importation of pasta in bulk and subsequent repackaging in the 
United States into packages of five pounds or less constitutes 
circumvention with respect to the antidumping and countervailing duty 
orders on pasta from Italy pursuant to section 781(a) of the Tariff Act 
of 1930, as amended (``the Act''), and 19 CFR 351.225(b). See Certain 
Pasta from Italy: Notice of Initiation of Anti-Circumvention Inquiry of 
the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 65 FR 26179 (May 5, 
2000). On September 19, 2003, we published an affirmative finding of 
the anti-circumvention inquiry. See Anti-Circumvention Inquiry of the 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders on Certain Pasta from Italy: 
Affirmative Final Determinations of Circumvention of Antidumping and 
Countervailing Duty Orders, 68 FR 54888 (September 19, 2003).

Rescission of Review

    Section 351.213(d)(1) of the Department's regulations provides that 
the Department will rescind an administrative review, in part, if the 
party that requested the review withdraws its request for review within 
90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the 
requested review, or withdraws its request at a later date if the 
Department determines that it is reasonable to extend the time limit 
for withdrawing the request. De Cecco withdrew its request for review 
on December 22, 2008, which is after the 90-day deadline. Nonetheless, 
the Department accepts the withdrawal request because it has not yet 
expended significant resources on the review of De Cecco. Therefore, 
the Department is rescinding this administrative review with respect to 
De Cecco. We are continuing to conduct an administrative review with 
respect to De Matteis.
    The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S. 
Customs and Border Protection (``CBP'') 15 days after publication of 
this rescission notice. The Department will instruct CBP to assess 
countervailing duties on all entries from De Cecco between January 1, 
2007, and December 31, 2007, at the rates in effect at the time of 
entry.
    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to an 
administrative

[[Page 4736]]

protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility concerning the 
disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely notification of 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.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 
777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

    Dated: January 21, 2009.
John M. Andersen,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Operations.
 [FR Doc. E9-1718 Filed 1-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.