[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 240 (Wednesday, December 13, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77855-77857]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-31753]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-489-805]


Certain Pasta From Turkey: Preliminary Results of New Shipper 
Antidumping Duty Review

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

ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of new shipper antidumping duty 
review: Certain pasta from Turkey.

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

SUMMARY: In response to a request by a pasta producer and its 
affiliated exporter in Turkey, Beslen Makarna Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret 
A.S., and Beslen Pazarlarma Gida Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S., respectively 
(collectively ``Beslen''), the Department of Commerce (``the 
Department'') is conducting a new shipper review of the antidumping 
duty order on certain pasta from Turkey. The review covers sales during 
the period July 1, 1999 through December 31, 1999. We preliminarily 
determine that Beslen did not sell subject merchandise at less than 
normal value during the period of review.
    Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary 
results.

EFFECTIVE DATE: December 13, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Lai Robinson or James Terpstra, 
AD/CVD Enforcement, Office 6, Group II, Import Administration, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th 
Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 
(202) 482-3797, or 482-3965, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute and Regulations

    Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (``the Act'') are references to the provisions 
effective January 1, 1995, the effective date of the amendments made to 
the Act by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (``URAA''). In addition, 
unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the Department's 
regulations refer to the regulations codified at 19 CFR part 351 
(1999).

Case History

    The Department published the antidumping duty order on certain 
pasta from Turkey on July 24, 1996 (61 FR 38545). On January 27, 2000, 
Beslen requested a new shipper review pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B) 
of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214.
    On February 17, 2000, the Department initiated the new shipper 
review of Beslen, and the notice of initiation was published on 
February 23, 2000 (65 FR 8949).
    On February 17, 2000, we issued an antidumping questionnaire \1\ to 
Beslen. Beslen submitted its sections A, B and C questionnaire response 
on March 27, 2000. The Department issued two supplemental section A 
through C questionnaires to Beslen on August 25 and September 22, 2000. 
Beslen submitted its responses to our supplemental questionnaires on 
September 18 and October 10, 2000, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section A of the questionnaire requests general information 
concerning a company's corporate structure and business practices, 
the merchandise under review that it sells, and the sales of the 
merchandise in all of its markets. Sections B and C of the 
questionnaire request comparison market sales listings and U.S. 
sales listings, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 8, 2000, the Department published a notice postponing the 
preliminary results of this review until December 7, 2000 (65 FR 
48477).
    We verified the sales information submitted by Beslen from November 
13 to 17, 2000.

Scope of the Review

    Imports covered by this review are shipments of certain non-egg dry 
pasta in packages of five pounds (or 2.27 kilograms) or less, whether 
or not enriched or fortified or containing milk or other optional 
ingredients such as chopped vegetables, vegetable purees, milk, gluten, 
diastases, vitamins, coloring and flavorings, and up to two percent egg 
white. The pasta covered by this 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. Also excluded 
are imports of organic pasta from Turkey that are accompanied by the 
appropriate certificate issued by the Instituto Mediterraneo Di 
Certificazione, by Bioagricoop Scrl, or by QC&I International Services.
    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, our written description of the scope is 
dispositive.

[[Page 77856]]

Scope Rulings

    The Department has issued the following scope ruling to date:
    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, in the case file in the Central Records Unit (``the 
CRU''), main Commerce building, room B-099.

Verification

    As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, we verified sales 
information provided by Beslen. We used standard verification 
procedures, including on-site inspection of the manufacturer's 
facilities and examination of relevant sales and financial records. Our 
verification results are outlined in the verification report placed in 
the case file in the CRU.

Product Comparisons

    In accordance with section 771(16) of the Act, the Department first 
attempted to match contemporaneous sales of products sold in the U.S. 
and comparison markets that were identical with respect to the 
following characteristics: (1) Pasta shape; (2) type of wheat; (3) 
additives; and (4) enrichment. Because Beslen sold identical 
merchandise in the U.S. and comparison markets, when comparing U.S. 
sales with comparison market sales, it was not necessary to make any 
adjustments for physical differences in the merchandise as permitted 
under section 773(a)(6)(C)(ii) of the Act.

Comparisons to Normal Value

    To determine whether sales of certain pasta from Turkey were made 
in the United States at less than normal value (``NV''), we compared 
the export price (``EP'') to the NV, as described in the ``Export 
Price'' and ``Normal Value'' sections of this notice. Because Turkey's 
economy experienced high inflation during the POR (over 60 percent), as 
is Department practice, we limited our comparisons to home market sales 
made during the same month in which the U.S. sale occurred and did not 
apply our ``90/60 contemporaneity rule'' (see, e.g., Notice of Final 
Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative 
Review: Certain Pasta From Turkey, 64 FR 69493 (December 13, 1999) and 
Certain Porcelain on Steel Cookware from Mexico: Final Results of 
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 62 FR 42496, 42503 (August 7, 
1997)). This methodology minimizes the extent to which calculated 
dumping margins are overstated or understated due solely to price 
inflation that occurred in the intervening time period between the U.S. 
and home market sales.

Export Price

    For the price to the United States, we used EP in accordance with 
section 772(a) of the Act because the merchandise was sold by the 
producer or exporter outside the United States to the first 
unaffiliated purchaser in the United States prior to importation and 
constructed export price was not otherwise warranted based on the facts 
on the record. We based EP on the packed delivered prices to the first 
unaffiliated customer in the United States.
    In accordance with section 772(c)(2) of the Act, we made 
deductions, where appropriate, for movement expenses including inland 
freight from plant to port of exportation, foreign handling fees, 
international freight, U.S. brokerage, U.S. duty, and U.S. inland 
freight. In addition, we increased the EP by the amount of the 
countervailing duties imposed that were attributable to an export 
subsidy, in accordance with section 772(c)(1)(C) of the Act.

Selection of Comparison Markets

    In order to determine whether there was a sufficient volume of 
sales in the home market to serve as a viable basis for calculating NV, 
we compared Beslen's volume of home market sales of the foreign like 
product to the volume of its U.S. sales of the subject merchandise. 
Pursuant to section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, because Beslen's aggregate 
volume of home market sales of the foreign like product was greater 
than five percent of its aggregate volume of U.S. sales of the subject 
merchandise, we determined that the home market was viable for Beslen.

Normal Value

    We calculated NV based on ex-works or delivered prices to 
comparison market customers. We made deductions from the starting price 
for inland freight, discounts, and rebates according to 
773(a)(6)(B)(ii) of the Act. We added U.S. packing costs and deducted 
comparison market packing costs in accordance with sections 
773(a)(6)(A) and (B) of the Act. In addition, we made circumstance of 
sale adjustments for direct expenses, including imputed credit and 
advertising, in accordance with section 773(a)(6)(C)(iii) of the Act.

Level of Trade

    In accordance with section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act, we determined 
NV based on sales in the comparison market at the same level of trade 
(``LOT'') as the U.S. EP sales, to the extent practicable. When there 
were no sales at the same LOT, we compared U.S. sales to comparison 
market sales at a different LOT.
    Pursuant to section 351.412 of the Department's regulations, to 
determine whether comparison market sales were at a different LOT, we 
examined stages in the marketing process and selling functions along 
the chain of distribution between the producer and the unaffiliated 
customers. If the comparison market sales were at a different LOT and 
the differences affected price comparability, as manifested in a 
pattern of consistent price differences between the sales on which NV 
is based and comparison market sales at the LOT of the export 
transaction, we made a LOT adjustment under section 773(a)(7)(A) of the 
Act.
    Beslen reported 95 percent of comparison market sales to an 
unaffiliated distributor (``group 1''). The remaining 5 percent of 
comparison market sales were made to distributors, end-users, or 
affiliated customers (collectively, ``group 2''). We found that the two 
home market groups differed significantly with respect to selling 
activities for sales process and marketing support. Based on our 
overall analysis, we found that the two home market groups constituted 
two different LOTs.
    Beslen reported one EP sale to an unaffiliated retailer and, 
therefore, only had one level of trade for U.S. sales. This EP LOT 
differed considerably from the home market group 1 with respect to 
selling activities associated with sales process and marketing support, 
advertising, and freight and delivery, and from group 2 with respect to 
freight and delivery, and advertising. Consequently, we could not match 
EP sales to sales at the same LOT in the home market. In addition, we 
could not make a LOT adjustment because there was no way to measure 
whether the differences in the LOTs between the comparison market sales 
and the U.S. sale affected price comparability since there were no home 
market sales at the LOT of the export transaction. Therefore, we have 
matched EP sales to all sales in the home market and made no level of 
trade adjustment.

[[Page 77857]]

Currency Conversion

    Because this proceeding involves a high-inflation economy, we 
limited our comparison of U.S. and home market sales to those occurring 
in the same month (as described above) and used daily exchange rates. 
See Notice of Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty 
Administrative Review: Certain Pasta From Turkey, 63 FR 68429 (December 
11, 1998).
    The Department's preferred source for daily exchange rates is the 
Federal Reserve Bank. However, the Federal Reserve Bank does not track 
or publish exchange rates for the Turkish Lira. Therefore, we made 
currency conversions based on the daily exchange rates from the Dow 
Jones Service, as published in the Wall Street Journal.

Preliminary Results of the Review

    As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine that the 
weighted-average dumping margin for Beslen is 0.00 percent.
    The Department will disclose calculations performed within five 
days of the date of publication of this notice to the parties of this 
proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). An interested party 
may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of these 
preliminary results. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Any hearing, if requested, 
will be held 44 days after the date of publication, or the first 
working day thereafter. Interested parties may submit case briefs and/
or written comments no later than 30 days after the date of publication 
of these preliminary results of review. Rebuttal briefs and rebuttals 
to written comments, limited to issues raised in such briefs or 
comments, may be filed no later than 37 days after the date of 
publication. Parties who submit arguments are requested to submit with 
the argument (1) a statement of the issue, (2) a brief summary of the 
argument and (3) a table of authorities. Further, we would appreciate 
it if parties submitting written comments would provide the Department 
with an additional copy of the public version of any such comments on 
diskette. The Department will issue the final results of this 
administrative review, which will include the results of its analysis 
of issues raised in any such comments, or at a hearing, if requested, 
within 120 days of publication of these preliminary results.

Assessment Rate

    Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department calculated an 
assessment rate for each importer of the subject merchandise. Upon 
issuance of the final results of this new shipper 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 the U.S. Customs Service to 
assess antidumping duties on appropriate entries by applying the 
assessment rate to the entered value of the merchandise. For assessment 
purposes, we calculated importer-specific assessment rates for the 
subject merchandise by aggregating the dumping margins for all U.S. 
sales to each importer and dividing the amount by the total entered 
value of the sales to that importer. Where appropriate, in order to 
calculate the entered value, we subtracted international movement 
expenses (e.g., international freight) from the gross sales value.

Cash Deposit Requirements

    To calculate the cash-deposit rate for each producer and/or 
exporter included in this new shipper review, we divided the total 
dumping margins for each company by the total net value for that 
company's sales during the review period.
    Furthermore, the following deposit rates will be effective upon 
publication of the final results of this new shipper review for all 
shipments of certain pasta from Turkey entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as 
provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate 
for Beslen will be zero; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated 
companies, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-
specific rate published for the most recent final results in which that 
manufacturer or exporter participated; (3) if the exporter is not a 
firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original less-than-
fair-value (``LTFV'') investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash 
deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent final 
results for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) if neither the 
exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previous 
review conducted by the Department, the cash deposit rate will be 51.49 
percent, the ``All Others'' rate established in the LTFV investigation. 
See Notice of Antidumping Duty Order and Amended Final Determination of 
Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Pasta from Turkey, 61 FR 38546 
(July 24, 1996).
    These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in 
effect until publication of the final results of the next 
administrative review.

Notification to Importers

    This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of 
their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate 
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation 
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply 
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that 
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent 
assessment of double antidumping duties.
    This determination is issued and published in accordance with 
sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: December 1, 2000.
Troy H. Cribb,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 00-31753 Filed 12-12-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P