Certain Pasta From Italy: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012-2013, 8604-8606 [2015-03334]

Download as PDF 8604 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 18, 2015 / Notices 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Feirongda Weaving Material Co. Ltd. Hangzhou Qingqing Mechanical Co. Ltd. Hangzhou Yingqing Material Co. Ltd Hongye (HK) Group Development Co. Ltd. Liaoning Metals & Mineral Imp/Exp Corp. Nanton Eason Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. Ningbo Bingcheng Import & Export Co., Ltd. 9 Ningbo Peacebird Import & Export Co., Ltd. 10 Shang Zhou Leather Shoes Plant 11 Shanghai Bao Heng Relay Making Co., Ltd. 12 Shanghai Ding Ying Printing & Dyeing Co. Ltd. 13 Shanghai Ganghun Beddiry Clothing Factory 14 Shanghai Guoxing Metal Products Co. Ltd. 15 Shanghai Jianhai International Trade Co., Ltd. 16 Shanghai Lian Development Co. Ltd. 17 Shanghai Shuang Qiang Embroidery Factory 18 Shanghai Tonghui 19 Shangyu Baoli Electro Chemical Aluminum Products Co., Ltd. 20 Shangyu Baoxiang Metal Manufactured Co. Ltd. 21 Shangyu Tongfang Labour Protective Articles Co., Ltd. 22 Shaoxing Guochao Metallic Products Co., Ltd. 23 Shaoxing Liangbao Metal Manufactured Co. Ltd. 24 Shaoxing Meideli Hanger Co. Ltd. 25 Shaoxing Shunji Metal Clotheshorse Co., Ltd. 26 Shaoxing Shuren Tie Co., Ltd. 27 Shaoxing Zhongbao Metal Manufactured Co., Ltd. 28 Shaoxing Zhongdi Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. 29 Tianjin Innovation International 30 Tianjin Tailai Import and Export Co. Ltd. 31 Wesken International (Kunshan) Co. Ltd. 32 Xia Fang Hanger (Cambodia) Co., Ltd. 33 Zhejiang Hongfei Plastic Industry Co. Ltd. 34 Zhejiang Jaguar Import and Export Co. Ltd. 35 Zhejiang Lucky Cloud Hanger Co., Ltd. parties an opportunity to comment.1 The review initially covered two mandatory respondents, Molino e Pastificio Tomasello S.p.A. (Tomasello), and Rummo,2 and eight non-selected companies.3 We rescinded the review with respect to Alica and Lensi in the Preliminary Results.4 The period of review (POR) is July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2013. As a result of our analysis of the comments and information received, these final results differ from the Preliminary Results. For the final weighted-average dumping margin, see the ‘‘Final Results of Review’’ section below. DATES: Effective Date: February 18, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Moore (Tomasello) or Cindy Robinson (Rummo), AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3692 or (202) 482– 3797, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On August 25, 2014, the Department published the Preliminary Results. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii), we invited parties to comment on our Preliminary Results.5 On September 24, 2014, Rummo and Tomasello submitted case briefs. On September 24, 2014, Rummo also requested a hearing. On October 3, 2014, Petitioners 6 filed a rebuttal brief with respect to Rummo. On November 13, 2014, the Department held a public [FR Doc. 2015–03193 Filed 2–17–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–475–818] Certain Pasta From Italy: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2012–2013 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On August 25, 2014, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the Preliminary Results of the antidumping duty administrative review of certain pasta from Italy and provided interested emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:32 Feb 17, 2015 Jkt 235001 1 See Certain Pasta From Italy: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Partial Rescission; 2012–2013, 79 FR 50614 (August 25, 2014) (Preliminary Results). 2 The ‘‘Rummo Group’’ consists of Rummo S.p.A., a producer and seller of subject merchandise, Lenta Lavorazione, a seller of subject merchandise, Pasta Castiglioni, a producer and seller of subject merchandise, and the ultimate holding company (with no operations), Rummo S.p.A. Molino e Pastificio (collectively, ‘‘Rummo’’). 3 The non-selected companies are: Alica srl (Alica); Dalla Costa Alimentare srl; Delverde Industrie Alimentari S.p.A.; Ghigi Industria Agroalimentare in San Clemente srl; Pasta Lensi S.r.l (Lensi); Pasta Zara S.p.A.; Pastificio Toscano srl; Valdigrano di Flavio Pagani S.r.L. We rescinded, in part, this administrative review with respect to Alica and Lensi. 4 See Preliminary Results. 5 The Department issued the briefing schedule in a Memorandum to the File, dated January 7, 2014. This briefing schedule indicated that the case and rebuttal briefs were due by close of business January 15, 2014 and January 22, 2014, respectively. 6 The Petitioners are New World Pasta Company and Dakota Growers Pasta Company. PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 hearing.7 On December 19, 2014, the Department issued a memorandum extending the time period for issuing the final results of this administrative review from December 23, 2013 to February 21, 2014.8 Scope of the Order Imports covered by the order are shipments of certain non-egg dry pasta. 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.9 Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this administrative review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.10 A list of the issues that parties raised and to which we responded is attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on-file electronically via ACCESS. ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and in the CRU. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at https://enforcement.ita.doc.gov/frn/ index.html. The signed Issues and Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on a review of the record and comments received from interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we recalculated Rummo’s and Tomasello’s weighted-average dumping margins for these final results. 7 See the hearing transcript dated November 13, 2014, which is on-file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. 8 Because February 21, 2015, is a Saturday, the deadline for the final results will be Monday, February 23, 2015. 9 For a full description of the scope of the order, see the ‘‘Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 17th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Pasta from Italy; 2012–2013’’ from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, dated concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum). 10 Id. E:\FR\FM\18FEN1.SGM 18FEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 18, 2015 / Notices emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES For Rummo, we revised our margin program by utilizing the nonconsolidated customer code for one of Rummo’s consolidated customers.11 As a result of this change, we applied the average-to-average (A-to-A) comparison to calculate Rummo’s weighted-average dumping margin. In addition, we made a correction to our margin program for Rummo’s U.S. direct selling expenses which were inadvertently double counted in the Preliminary Results.12 We made a change to our margin program for Tomasello with respect to certain billing adjustments. As a result of this revision, we applied the averageto-transaction (A-to-T) method for the U.S. sales passing the Cohen’s d test and the A-to-A method for the U.S. sales not passing the Cohen’s d test to calculate the weighted-average dumping margin for Tomasello.13 As a result of the aforementioned recalculations of Tomasello’s and Rummo’s rates, the weighted-average dumping margin for the six non-selected companies changed. Producer and/or Exporter Delverde Industrie Alimentari S.p.A ..................................... Ghigi Industria Agroalimentare in San Clemente srl .............. Valdigrano di Flavio Pagani S.r.L ....................................... Pasta Zara S.p.A ...................... Pastificio Toscano srl; .............. Weightedaverage dumping margin (percent) 2.36 2.36 2.36 2.36 2.36 Duty Assessment The Department shall determine and the CBP shall assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.15 For any individually examined respondents whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis, we calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer’s examined sales to the total entered value of those same sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Upon issuance of the final results of this administrative review, if Final Results of the Review any importer-specific assessment rates As a result of this review, the calculated in the final results are above Department determines the following de minimis (i.e., at or above 0.5 percent), weighted-average dumping margins 14 the Department will issue appraisement for the period July 1, 2012, through June instructions directly to CBP to assess 30, 2013, are as follows: antidumping duties on appropriate entries. WeightedTo determine whether the duty average assessment rates covering the period Producer and/or Exporter dumping were de minimis, in accordance with margin (percent) the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), for each respondent we Rummo S.p.A. Molino e calculated importer (or customer)Pastificio, Rummo S.p.A., specific ad valorem rates by aggregating Lenta Lavorazione, and the amount of dumping calculated for Pasta Castiglioni (collectively the Rummo Group) ............... 4.26 all U.S. sales to that importer or customer and dividing this amount by Molino e Pastificio Tomasello S.p.A. .................................... 1.71 the total entered value of the sales to Dalla Costa Alimentare srl ........ 2.36 that importer (or customer). Where an importer (or customer)-specific ad 11 See Issues and Decision Memorandum at valorem rate is greater than de minimis, comment 4; see also Memorandum to the File, and the respondent has reported reliable Through Eric B. Greynolds, Program Manager, entered values, we apply the assessment Office III, from Cindy Robinson, Case Analyst, rate to the entered value of the Office III, titled ‘‘Certain Pasta from Italy: importer’s/customer’s entries during the Calculation Memorandum—the Rummo Group,’’ dated December 23, 2014 (Rummo Calc. Memo), for review period. Where an importer (or details. customer)-specific ad valorem rate is 12 See Issues and Decision Memorandum at greater than de minimis and we do not comment 5 and Rummo Calc. Memo for details. have reliable entered values, we 13 See Sales Analysis Memorandum for the Final calculate a per-unit assessment rate by Results for Molino e Pastificio Tomasello S.p.A. (Tomasello). aggregating the amount of dumping for 14 The rate applied to the non-selected companies all U.S. sales to each importer (or is a weighted-average percentage margin calculated customer) and dividing this amount by based on the publicly-ranged U.S. volumes of the two reviewed companies with an affirmative dumping margin, for the period July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2013. See Memorandum to the File, titled, ‘‘Certain Pasta from Italy: Margin for Respondents Not Selected for Individual Examination,’’ from Stephanie Moore, Case Analyst, through Eric B. Greynolds, Program Manager, dated concurrently with this notice. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:32 Feb 17, 2015 Jkt 235001 15 In these final results, the Department applied the assessment rate calculation method adopted in Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Proceedings: Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012). PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 8605 the total quantity sold to that importer (or customer). The Department clarified its ‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on May 6, 2003.16 This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by the respondent for which it 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. For a full discussion of this clarification, see the Automatic Assessment Clarification. We intend to issue assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review. Cash Deposit Requirements The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for respondents noted above will be the rate established in the final results of this administrative review; (2) for merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not covered in this administrative review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the manufacturer of the subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 15.45 percent, the all-others rate established in the antidumping investigation as modified by the section 129 determination. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. Notification to Importers Regarding the Reimbursement of Duties This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 16 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) (Automatic Assessment Clarification). E:\FR\FM\18FEN1.SGM 18FEN1 8606 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 18, 2015 / Notices to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during the POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department’s presumption that reimbursement of antidumping and/or countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Administrative Protective Order AGENCY: This notice also serves as a 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), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. 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 this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h). Dated: February 10, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES List of Topics Discussed in the Final Issues and Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope IV. List of Comments Comment 1: Consideration of an Alternative Comparison Method in Administrative Reviews Comment 2: The Utilization of the Cohen’s d Test in Differential Pricing Analysis Comment 3: Application of the Average-toTransaction Method to Non-dumped U.S. Sales Comment 4: Definition of ‘‘Purchaser’’ in the Differential Pricing Analysis Comment 5: Correction for Rummo’s U.S. Direct Selling Expenses Comment 6: The Commission Offset for Rummo’s Constructed Export Price (CEP) Sales Comment 7: Treatment of Tomasello’s Billing Adjustments V. Analysis VI. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2015–03334 Filed 2–17–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:32 Feb 17, 2015 Jkt 235001 International Trade Administration [A–201–805] Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe from Mexico: Notice of Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review Pursuant to Settlement Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: Effective: February 18, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Flessner or Robert James, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–6312 and (202) 482–0649, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On April 9, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the final results of its administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain circular welded non-alloy steel pipe from Mexico. The period of review (POR) is November 1, 2008, through October 31, 2009.1 In the Final Results, the Department assigned to Mueller Comercial de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. (Mueller), an exporter of certain circular welded nonalloy steel pipe from Mexico to the United States, a rate of 19.81 percent for the 2008–09 period of review. The Department had conducted administrative reviews of Mueller, Tuberia Nacional, S.A. de C.V. (TUNA), and Ternium, S.A.de C.V. (Ternium). The Department based Mueller’s margin, in part, on facts available because an unaffiliated supplier refused to supply the Department with its costs of production, necessary to conduct the sales-below-cost test on Mueller’s home market sales. Following the publication of the Final Results, Mueller filed a lawsuit with the United States Court of International Trade (CIT) challenging the Department’s final results of administrative review.2 The CIT upheld 1 See Certain Circular Welded Non-Alloy Steel Pipe From Mexico: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 76 FR 36086 (June 21, 2011) (Final Results). 2 See Mueller Comercial de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. United States, Court No. 11–00319, Slip Op. 12–156 (December 21, 2012). PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 the Department’s final results.3 Mueller timely appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC or Court).4 The CAFC remanded for the Department to reconsider the margin calculated for Mueller.5 The United States and Mueller have now entered into an agreement to settle this dispute. The Court issued its amended Order of Judgment by Stipulation on February 6, 2015.6 Pursuant to the Court’s amended Order of Judgment by Stipulation, the amended final weighted-average dumping margin for Mueller Comercial de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. is 13.70 percent, as agreed to by the parties. Assessment Rates The Department shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP within 15 days after the date of publication of these amended final results of review in the Federal Register. Because Mueller’s weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 percent), the Department has calculated importerspecific antidumping duty assessment rates. We calculated importer-specific ad valorem antidumping duty assessment rates by aggregating the total amount of dumping calculated for the examined sales of each importer and dividing each of these amounts by the total entered value associated with those sales. We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review where an importer-specific assessment rate is not zero or de minimis. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we will instruct CBP to liquidate without regard to antidumping duties any entries for which the importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis. Cash Deposit Requirements The cash deposit rate for Mueller will be that stipulated in the settlement agreement, 13.70 percent. Notification to Importers This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 3 See Mueller Comercial de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. United States, Court No. 11–00319, Slip Op. 13–57 (May 2, 2013). 4 See Mueller Comercial de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. United States, 753 F.3rd 1227 (Fed. Circ., 2014). 5 Id., at 1235–36. 6 See Mueller Comercial de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. United States, Court No. 11–00319, Slip Op. 15–9 (February 6, 2015). E:\FR\FM\18FEN1.SGM 18FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 32 (Wednesday, February 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8604-8606]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03334]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-475-818]


Certain Pasta From Italy: Final Results of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review; 2012-2013

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On August 25, 2014, the Department of Commerce (the 
Department) published the Preliminary Results of the antidumping duty 
administrative review of certain pasta from Italy and provided 
interested parties an opportunity to comment.\1\ The review initially 
covered two mandatory respondents, Molino e Pastificio Tomasello S.p.A. 
(Tomasello), and Rummo,\2\ and eight non-selected companies.\3\ We 
rescinded the review with respect to Alica and Lensi in the Preliminary 
Results.\4\ The period of review (POR) is July 1, 2012, through June 
30, 2013. As a result of our analysis of the comments and information 
received, these final results differ from the Preliminary Results. For 
the final weighted-average dumping margin, see the ``Final Results of 
Review'' section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Certain Pasta From Italy: Preliminary Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Partial Rescission; 2012-
2013, 79 FR 50614 (August 25, 2014) (Preliminary Results).
    \2\ The ``Rummo Group'' consists of Rummo S.p.A., a producer and 
seller of subject merchandise, Lenta Lavorazione, a seller of 
subject merchandise, Pasta Castiglioni, a producer and seller of 
subject merchandise, and the ultimate holding company (with no 
operations), Rummo S.p.A. Molino e Pastificio (collectively, 
``Rummo'').
    \3\ The non-selected companies are: Alica srl (Alica); Dalla 
Costa Alimentare srl; Delverde Industrie Alimentari S.p.A.; Ghigi 
Industria Agroalimentare in San Clemente srl; Pasta Lensi S.r.l 
(Lensi); Pasta Zara S.p.A.; Pastificio Toscano srl; Valdigrano di 
Flavio Pagani S.r.L. We rescinded, in part, this administrative 
review with respect to Alica and Lensi.
    \4\ See Preliminary Results.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: February 18, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Moore (Tomasello) or Cindy 
Robinson (Rummo), AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and 
Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 
20230; telephone: (202) 482-3692 or (202) 482-3797, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    On August 25, 2014, the Department published the Preliminary 
Results. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii), we invited 
parties to comment on our Preliminary Results.\5\ On September 24, 
2014, Rummo and Tomasello submitted case briefs. On September 24, 2014, 
Rummo also requested a hearing. On October 3, 2014, Petitioners \6\ 
filed a rebuttal brief with respect to Rummo. On November 13, 2014, the 
Department held a public hearing.\7\ On December 19, 2014, the 
Department issued a memorandum extending the time period for issuing 
the final results of this administrative review from December 23, 2013 
to February 21, 2014.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Department issued the briefing schedule in a Memorandum 
to the File, dated January 7, 2014. This briefing schedule indicated 
that the case and rebuttal briefs were due by close of business 
January 15, 2014 and January 22, 2014, respectively.
    \6\ The Petitioners are New World Pasta Company and Dakota 
Growers Pasta Company.
    \7\ See the hearing transcript dated November 13, 2014, which is 
on-file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System 
(ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 7046 of 
the main Department of Commerce building.
    \8\ Because February 21, 2015, is a Saturday, the deadline for 
the final results will be Monday, February 23, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scope of the Order

    Imports covered by the order are shipments of certain non-egg dry 
pasta. 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.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ For a full description of the scope of the order, see the 
``Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Final Results of the 17th 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Pasta from Italy; 
2012-2013'' from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for 
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, 
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, dated 
concurrently with this notice (Issues and Decision Memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to 
this administrative review are addressed in the Issues and Decision 
Memorandum.\10\ A list of the issues that parties raised and to which 
we responded is attached to this notice as an Appendix. The Issues and 
Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on-file electronically 
via ACCESS. ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov and in the CRU. In addition, a complete version of the 
Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet 
at https://enforcement.ita.doc.gov/frn/. The signed Issues and 
Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Issues and 
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on a review of the record and comments received from 
interested parties regarding our Preliminary Results, we recalculated 
Rummo's and Tomasello's weighted-average dumping margins for these 
final results.

[[Page 8605]]

    For Rummo, we revised our margin program by utilizing the non-
consolidated customer code for one of Rummo's consolidated 
customers.\11\ As a result of this change, we applied the average-to-
average (A-to-A) comparison to calculate Rummo's weighted-average 
dumping margin. In addition, we made a correction to our margin program 
for Rummo's U.S. direct selling expenses which were inadvertently 
double counted in the Preliminary Results.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum at comment 4; see also 
Memorandum to the File, Through Eric B. Greynolds, Program Manager, 
Office III, from Cindy Robinson, Case Analyst, Office III, titled 
``Certain Pasta from Italy: Calculation Memorandum--the Rummo 
Group,'' dated December 23, 2014 (Rummo Calc. Memo), for details.
    \12\ See Issues and Decision Memorandum at comment 5 and Rummo 
Calc. Memo for details.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We made a change to our margin program for Tomasello with respect 
to certain billing adjustments. As a result of this revision, we 
applied the average-to-transaction (A-to-T) method for the U.S. sales 
passing the Cohen's d test and the A-to-A method for the U.S. sales not 
passing the Cohen's d test to calculate the weighted-average dumping 
margin for Tomasello.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Sales Analysis Memorandum for the Final Results for 
Molino e Pastificio Tomasello S.p.A. (Tomasello).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of the aforementioned recalculations of Tomasello's and 
Rummo's rates, the weighted-average dumping margin for the six non-
selected companies changed.

Final Results of the Review

    As a result of this review, the Department determines the following 
weighted-average dumping margins \14\ for the period July 1, 2012, 
through June 30, 2013, are as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The rate applied to the non-selected companies is a 
weighted-average percentage margin calculated based on the publicly-
ranged U.S. volumes of the two reviewed companies with an 
affirmative dumping margin, for the period July 1, 2012, through 
June 30, 2013. See Memorandum to the File, titled, ``Certain Pasta 
from Italy: Margin for Respondents Not Selected for Individual 
Examination,'' from Stephanie Moore, Case Analyst, through Eric B. 
Greynolds, Program Manager, dated concurrently with this notice.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Weighted-
                                                               average
                  Producer and/or Exporter                     dumping
                                                                margin
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rummo S.p.A. Molino e Pastificio, Rummo S.p.A., Lenta               4.26
 Lavorazione, and Pasta Castiglioni (collectively the Rummo
 Group)....................................................
Molino e Pastificio Tomasello S.p.A........................         1.71
Dalla Costa Alimentare srl.................................         2.36
Delverde Industrie Alimentari S.p.A........................         2.36
Ghigi Industria Agroalimentare in San Clemente srl.........         2.36
Valdigrano di Flavio Pagani S.r.L..........................         2.36
Pasta Zara S.p.A...........................................         2.36
Pastificio Toscano srl;....................................         2.36
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Duty Assessment

    The Department shall determine and the CBP shall assess antidumping 
duties on all appropriate entries.\15\ For any individually examined 
respondents whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis, 
we calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based 
on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the 
importer's examined sales to the total entered value of those same 
sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Upon issuance of the 
final results of this administrative review, if any importer-specific 
assessment rates calculated in the final results are above de minimis 
(i.e., at or above 0.5 percent), the Department will issue appraisement 
instructions directly to CBP to assess antidumping duties on 
appropriate entries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ In these final results, the Department applied the 
assessment rate calculation method adopted in Antidumping 
Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and 
Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Proceedings: Final 
Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To determine whether the duty assessment rates covering the period 
were de minimis, in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 
351.106(c)(2), for each respondent we calculated importer (or 
customer)-specific ad valorem rates by aggregating the amount of 
dumping calculated for all U.S. sales to that importer or customer and 
dividing this amount by the total entered value of the sales to that 
importer (or customer). Where an importer (or customer)-specific ad 
valorem rate is greater than de minimis, and the respondent has 
reported reliable entered values, we apply the assessment rate to the 
entered value of the importer's/customer's entries during the review 
period. Where an importer (or customer)-specific ad valorem rate is 
greater than de minimis and we do not have reliable entered values, we 
calculate a per-unit assessment rate by aggregating the amount of 
dumping for all U.S. sales to each importer (or customer) and dividing 
this amount by the total quantity sold to that importer (or customer).
    The Department clarified its ``automatic assessment'' regulation on 
May 6, 2003.\16\ This clarification will apply to entries of subject 
merchandise during the POR produced by the respondent for which it 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. For a full discussion of this 
clarification, see the Automatic Assessment Clarification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 
Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68FR 23954 (May 6, 2003) 
(Automatic Assessment Clarification).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We intend to issue assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days 
after publication of the final results of this review.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon 
publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for 
all shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication of the final 
results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2) 
of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for respondents noted above will 
be the rate established in the final results of this administrative 
review; (2) for merchandise exported by manufacturers or exporters not 
covered in this administrative review but covered in a prior segment of 
the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company 
specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this 
proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a 
prior review, or the original investigation, but the manufacturer is, 
the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most 
recently completed segment of this proceeding for the manufacturer of 
the subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other 
manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 15.45 percent, the all-
others rate established in the antidumping investigation as modified by 
the section 129 determination. These cash deposit requirements, when 
imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

Notification to Importers Regarding the Reimbursement of Duties

    This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their 
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)

[[Page 8606]]

to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping and/or 
countervailing duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries 
during the POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in 
the Department's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping and/or 
countervailing duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled 
antidumping duties.

Administrative Protective Order

    This notice also serves as a 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), which 
continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of 
the proceeding. 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 this notice in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).

    Dated: February 10, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

Appendix

List of Topics Discussed in the Final Issues and Decision Memorandum

I. Summary
II. Background
III. Scope
IV. List of Comments
    Comment 1: Consideration of an Alternative Comparison Method in 
Administrative Reviews
    Comment 2: The Utilization of the Cohen's d Test in Differential 
Pricing Analysis
    Comment 3: Application of the Average-to-Transaction Method to 
Non-dumped U.S. Sales
    Comment 4: Definition of ``Purchaser'' in the Differential 
Pricing Analysis
    Comment 5: Correction for Rummo's U.S. Direct Selling Expenses
    Comment 6: The Commission Offset for Rummo's Constructed Export 
Price (CEP) Sales
    Comment 7: Treatment of Tomasello's Billing Adjustments
V. Analysis
VI. Recommendation

[FR Doc. 2015-03334 Filed 2-17-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.