Certain Pasta from Turkey: Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review, 17153-17154 [E9-8498]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 14, 2009 / Notices companies5 subject to this review which were not selected for individual examination, we calculated an assessment rate based on the cash deposit rate calculated for Kejriwal in this review. The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of these final results of review. The Department clarified its ‘‘automatic assessment’’’ regulation on May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This clarification applies to POR entries of subject merchandise produced by companies examined in this review (i.e., companies for which a dumping margin was calculated) where the companies did not know that their 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. For a full discussion of this clarification, see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). Cash Deposit Requirements The following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of certain lined paper products from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these final results, as provided by section 751(a) of the Act: (1) for companies covered by this review, the cash deposit rate will be the rate listed above; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies other than those covered by this review, the cash deposit rate will be the company–specific rate established for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the less–than-fair–value investigation, but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the subject merchandise; and (4) if neither the exporter nor the producer is a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the investigation, the cash deposit rate will be 3.91 percent, the all–others rate established in the less– than-fair–value investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further notice. Reimbursement of Duties This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 5 As stated above, Ria will receive an AFA rate of 23.17 percent. VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:39 Apr 13, 2009 Jkt 217001 responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the presumption that reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent increase in antidumping duties by the amount of antidumping and/or countervailing duties reimbursed. Administrative Protective Order This notice also is the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. 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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. 17153 Department’’) published a notice of initiation of a changed circumstances review of the antidumping duty order of certain pasta from Turkey as requested by Marsan Gida Sanayi ve Ticret A.S. (‘‘Marsan’’). After receiving additional information on the operations of Marsan, we preliminarily determine that Marsan is the successor–in-interest to Gidasa Sabanci Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (‘‘Gidasa’’), and should be accorded the same antidumping duty treatment accorded Gidasa with respect to the antidumping duty order on certain pasta from Turkey. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results. EFFECTIVE DATE: April 14, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Hargett, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–4161. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE On July 24, 1996, the Department published in the Federal Register an antidumping duty order on certain pasta from Turkey.1 On December 3, 2008, Marsan requested that the Department initiate and conduct an expedited changed circumstances review to determine that, for purposes of the antidumping law, Marsan is the successor–in-interest to Gidasa. See December 3, 2008, letter from Marsan to the Secretary of Commerce. On January 7, 2009, the Department published a notice of initiation of a changed circumstances review of the antidumping order.2 On February 23, 2009, the Department requested additional information from Marsan regarding its operations in Turkey. See February 23, 2009, changed circumstances review questionnaire from the Department to Marsan. On March 16, 2009, Marsan replied to the Department’s questionnaire. See March 16, 2009, letter from Marsan to the Secretary of Commerce. International Trade Administration Scope of Review [A–489–805] Imports covered by this review are shipments of certain non–egg dry pasta in packages of five pounds (2.27 kilograms) or less, whether or not Dated: April 6, 2009. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. APPENDIX I List of Comments in the Accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum Comment 1: Appropriate Rate for Non– Selected Respondents Comment 2: Whether to Assign a Higher Adverse Facts Available (AFA) Rate to Ria Comment 3: General and Administrative Expense Ratio Comment 4: Financial Expense Ratio Comment 5: Capitalized Expenses [FR Doc. E9–8495 Filed 4–13–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S Certain Pasta from Turkey: Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On January 7, 2009, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 1 See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order and Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Pasta from Turkey, 61 FR 68545 (July 24, 1996). 2 See Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review: Certain Pasta from Turkey, 74 FR 681 (January 7, 2009). E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM 14APN1 17154 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 70 / Tuesday, April 14, 2009 / Notices enriched or fortified or containing milk or other optional ingredients such as chopped vegetables, vegetable purees, milk, gluten, diastases, vitamins, coloring and flavorings, and up to two percent egg white. The pasta covered by this scope is typically sold in the retail market, in fiberboard or cardboard cartons, or polyethylene or polypropylene bags of varying dimensions. Excluded from the scope of this review 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 subject to review is currently classifiable under item 1902.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTSUS’’). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise subject to the order is dispositive. Preliminary Results of Changed Circumstances Review Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), and 19 CFR 351.216, the Department will conduct a changed circumstances review upon receipt of information concerning, or a request from an interested party for review of, an antidumping duty order which shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review of the order. In this case, the Department finds that the information submitted by the respondent provided sufficient evidence of changed circumstances to warrant a review to determine whether Marsan is the successor–in-interest to Gidasa. Thus, in accordance with section 751(b) of the Act, the Department initiated a changed circumstances review to determine whether Marsan is the successor–in-interest to Gidasa for purposes of determining antidumping duty liability with respect to imports of certain pasta from Turkey. In making a successor–in-interest determination, the Department examines several factors including, but not limited to, changes in: (1) management; (2) production facilities; (3) supplier relationships; and (4) customer base. See, e.g., Notice of Final Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Polychloroprene Rubber From Japan, 67 FR 58 (January 2, 2002); Brass Sheet and Strip from Canada: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 57 FR 20460 (May 13, 1992). While no single factor or combination of factors will VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:39 Apr 13, 2009 Jkt 217001 necessarily provide a dispositive indication of a successor–in-interest relationship, the Department will generally consider the new company to be the successor to the previous company if the new company’s resulting operation is not materially dissimilar to that of its predecessor. See, e.g., Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon from Norway; Final Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 64 FR 9979 (March 1, 1999); Industrial Phosphoric Acid from Israel; Final Results of Changed Circumstances Review, 59 FR 6944 (February 14, 1994). Thus, if the evidence demonstrates that, with respect to the production and sale of the subject merchandise, the new company operates as the same business entity as the former company, the Department will accord the new company the same antidumping treatment as its predecessor. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(i), we preliminarily determine that Marsan is the successor– in-interest to Gidasa. In its December 3, 2008, and March 16, 2009, submissions Marsan provided evidence supporting its claim to be the successor–in-interest to Gidasa. Documentation attached to Marsan’s December 3, 2008, submission shows that the acquisition of Gidasa by MGS Marmara Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (‘‘MGS’’) and the following name change to Marsan resulted in little or no change in management, production facilities, supplier relationships, or customer base. This documentation consists of: (1) organizational charts of both Marsan and Gidasa; (2) the documentation of the name change from Gidasa to Marsan; (3) a list of products before and after the acquisition of Gidasa by MGS; (4) a list of suppliers before and after the name change from Gidasa to Marsan; (5) a list of home market and U.S. customers before and after the name change from Gidasa to Marsan; (6) MGS’s articles and notice of incorporation; (7) MGS’s 2007 management report to shareholders; and (8) MGS’s 2008 draft income statement and balance sheet. The documentation described above demonstrates that there was little to no change in management structure, supplier relationships, production facilities, or customer base and, thus, the operations of Marsan are essentially the same as the operations of Gidasa. Therefore, we preliminarily find that Marsan is the successor–in-interest to Gidasa and, thus, should receive the same antidumping duty treatment with respect certain pasta from Turkey as the former Gidasa. PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Public Comment Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of this notice. Any hearing, if requested, will be held no later than 44 days after the date of publication of this notice, or the first workday thereafter.3 Case briefs from interested parties may be submitted not later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to the issues raised in those comments, may be filed not later than 37 days after the date of publication of this notice.4 All written comments shall be submitted in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303. Persons interested in attending the hearing, if one is requested, should contact the Department for the date and time of the hearing. The Department will publish the final results of this changed circumstances review in accordance with 19 CFR 351.216(e), including the results of its analysis of issues raised in any written comments. The current requirement for a cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties on all subject merchandise will continue unless and until it is modified pursuant to the final results of this changed circumstances review. We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) and (2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216. Dated: April 8, 2009. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E9–8498 Filed 4–13–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–932] Certain Steel Threaded Rod from the People’s Republic of China: Notice of Antidumping Duty Order AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: Based on affirmative final determinations by the Department of Commerce (‘‘Department’’) and the International Trade Commission (‘‘ITC’’), the Department is issuing an antidumping duty order on certain steel threaded rod (‘‘STR’’) from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). On April 6, 2009, the ITC notified the Department of its affirmative determination of material 3 See 4 See E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM 19 CFR 351.310. 19 CFR 351.309. 14APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 70 (Tuesday, April 14, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17153-17154]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8498]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-489-805]


Certain Pasta from Turkey: Notice of Preliminary Results of 
Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On January 7, 2009, the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') published a notice of initiation of a changed 
circumstances review of the antidumping duty order of certain pasta 
from Turkey as requested by Marsan Gida Sanayi ve Ticret A.S. 
(``Marsan''). After receiving additional information on the operations 
of Marsan, we preliminarily determine that Marsan is the successor-in-
interest to Gidasa Sabanci Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. (``Gidasa''), 
and should be accorded the same antidumping duty treatment accorded 
Gidasa with respect to the antidumping duty order on certain pasta from 
Turkey. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary 
results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 14, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Hargett, AD/CVD 
Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution 
Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-4161.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 24, 1996, the Department published in the Federal Register 
an antidumping duty order on certain pasta from Turkey.\1\ On December 
3, 2008, Marsan requested that the Department initiate and conduct an 
expedited changed circumstances review to determine that, for purposes 
of the antidumping law, Marsan is the successor-in-interest to Gidasa. 
See December 3, 2008, letter from Marsan to the Secretary of Commerce. 
On January 7, 2009, the Department published a notice of initiation of 
a changed circumstances review of the antidumping order.\2\ On February 
23, 2009, the Department requested additional information from Marsan 
regarding its operations in Turkey. See February 23, 2009, changed 
circumstances review questionnaire from the Department to Marsan. On 
March 16, 2009, Marsan replied to the Department's questionnaire. See 
March 16, 2009, letter from Marsan to the Secretary of Commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order and Amended Final 
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Pasta from 
Turkey, 61 FR 68545 (July 24, 1996).
    \2\ See Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Duty Changed 
Circumstances Review: Certain Pasta from Turkey, 74 FR 681 (January 
7, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of Review

    Imports covered by this review are shipments of certain non-egg dry 
pasta in packages of five pounds (2.27 kilograms) or less, whether or 
not

[[Page 17154]]

enriched or fortified or containing milk or other optional ingredients 
such as chopped vegetables, vegetable purees, milk, gluten, diastases, 
vitamins, coloring and flavorings, and up to two percent egg white. The 
pasta covered by this scope is typically sold in the retail market, in 
fiberboard or cardboard cartons, or polyethylene or polypropylene bags 
of varying dimensions.
    Excluded from the scope of this review 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 subject to review is currently classifiable under 
item 1902.19.20 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 
(``HTSUS''). Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience 
and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise 
subject to the order is dispositive.

Preliminary Results of Changed Circumstances Review

    Pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 
(``the Act''), and 19 CFR 351.216, the Department will conduct a 
changed circumstances review upon receipt of information concerning, or 
a request from an interested party for review of, an antidumping duty 
order which shows changed circumstances sufficient to warrant a review 
of the order. In this case, the Department finds that the information 
submitted by the respondent provided sufficient evidence of changed 
circumstances to warrant a review to determine whether Marsan is the 
successor-in-interest to Gidasa. Thus, in accordance with section 
751(b) of the Act, the Department initiated a changed circumstances 
review to determine whether Marsan is the successor-in-interest to 
Gidasa for purposes of determining antidumping duty liability with 
respect to imports of certain pasta from Turkey.
    In making a successor-in-interest determination, the Department 
examines several factors including, but not limited to, changes in: (1) 
management; (2) production facilities; (3) supplier relationships; and 
(4) customer base. See, e.g., Notice of Final Results of Changed 
Circumstances Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Polychloroprene 
Rubber From Japan, 67 FR 58 (January 2, 2002); Brass Sheet and Strip 
from Canada: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 
57 FR 20460 (May 13, 1992). While no single factor or combination of 
factors will necessarily provide a dispositive indication of a 
successor-in-interest relationship, the Department will generally 
consider the new company to be the successor to the previous company if 
the new company's resulting operation is not materially dissimilar to 
that of its predecessor. See, e.g., Fresh and Chilled Atlantic Salmon 
from Norway; Final Results of Changed Circumstances Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review, 64 FR 9979 (March 1, 1999); Industrial 
Phosphoric Acid from Israel; Final Results of Changed Circumstances 
Review, 59 FR 6944 (February 14, 1994). Thus, if the evidence 
demonstrates that, with respect to the production and sale of the 
subject merchandise, the new company operates as the same business 
entity as the former company, the Department will accord the new 
company the same antidumping treatment as its predecessor.
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3)(i), we preliminarily 
determine that Marsan is the successor-in-interest to Gidasa. In its 
December 3, 2008, and March 16, 2009, submissions Marsan provided 
evidence supporting its claim to be the successor-in-interest to 
Gidasa. Documentation attached to Marsan's December 3, 2008, submission 
shows that the acquisition of Gidasa by MGS Marmara Gida Sanayi ve 
Ticaret A.S. (``MGS'') and the following name change to Marsan resulted 
in little or no change in management, production facilities, supplier 
relationships, or customer base. This documentation consists of: (1) 
organizational charts of both Marsan and Gidasa; (2) the documentation 
of the name change from Gidasa to Marsan; (3) a list of products before 
and after the acquisition of Gidasa by MGS; (4) a list of suppliers 
before and after the name change from Gidasa to Marsan; (5) a list of 
home market and U.S. customers before and after the name change from 
Gidasa to Marsan; (6) MGS's articles and notice of incorporation; (7) 
MGS's 2007 management report to shareholders; and (8) MGS's 2008 draft 
income statement and balance sheet. The documentation described above 
demonstrates that there was little to no change in management 
structure, supplier relationships, production facilities, or customer 
base and, thus, the operations of Marsan are essentially the same as 
the operations of Gidasa.
    Therefore, we preliminarily find that Marsan is the successor-in-
interest to Gidasa and, thus, should receive the same antidumping duty 
treatment with respect certain pasta from Turkey as the former Gidasa.

Public Comment

    Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of 
publication of this notice. Any hearing, if requested, will be held no 
later than 44 days after the date of publication of this notice, or the 
first workday thereafter.\3\ Case briefs from interested parties may be 
submitted not later than 30 days after the date of publication of this 
notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to the issues raised in those 
comments, may be filed not later than 37 days after the date of 
publication of this notice.\4\ All written comments shall be submitted 
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303. Persons interested in attending the 
hearing, if one is requested, should contact the Department for the 
date and time of the hearing. The Department will publish the final 
results of this changed circumstances review in accordance with 19 CFR 
351.216(e), including the results of its analysis of issues raised in 
any written comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 19 CFR 351.310.
    \4\ See 19 CFR 351.309.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current requirement for a cash deposit of estimated antidumping 
duties on all subject merchandise will continue unless and until it is 
modified pursuant to the final results of this changed circumstances 
review.
    We are issuing and publishing these results and notice in 
accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i)(1) and (2) of the Act and 
19 CFR 351.216.

    Dated: April 8, 2009.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-8498 Filed 4-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S