[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 157 (Thursday, August 14, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48599-48601]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-20782]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-475-819]


Certain Pasta from Italy: Final Results of the Sixth 
Countervailing Duty Administrative Review

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

ACTION: Notice of Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative 
Review.

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

SUMMARY: On April 9, 2003, the Department of Commerce published in the 
Federal Register its preliminary results of the sixth administrative 
review of the countervailing duty order on certain pasta from Italy for 
the period January 1 through December 31, 2001.
    Based on information received since the preliminary results and our 
analysis of the comments received, the Department has revised the net 
subsidy rate for F.lli De Cecco di Fillipo Fara S. Martino S.p.A. 
Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results. The 
final net subsidy rates for the reviewed companies are listed below in 
the section entitled ``Final Results of Review.''

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 14, 2003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Cho or John Brinkmann, AD/CVD 
Enforcement, Group I, Office 1, Import Administration, U.S. Department 
of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 
20230; telephone (202) 482-3798 or 482-4126, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 24, 1996, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') 
published in the Federal Register (61 FR 38544) the countervailing duty 
order on certain pasta from Italy.
    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), this review of the order 
covers the following producers or exporters of the subject merchandise 
for which a review was specifically requested: F.lli De Cecco di 
Fillipo Fara S. Martino S.p.A. (``De Cecco'') and Italian American 
Pasta Company, S.r.L. (``IAPC'').
    Based on withdrawal of the request for review, we rescinded this 
administrative review for Labor S.r.L., F. Divella, S.p.A., and 
Delverde, S.p.A. (See Certain Pasta from Italy: Preliminary Results and 
Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 68 FR 
17346 (April 9, 2003) (``Preliminary Results'').
    Since the publication of the Preliminary Results, a case brief was 
submitted on May 8, 2003, by De Cecco. The Department did not conduct a 
hearing in this review because none was requested.

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 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 Italy that are accompanied by the 
appropriate certificate issued by the Istituto Mediterraneo Di 
Certificazione, Bioagricoop Scrl, QC&I International Services, Ecocert 
Italia, Consorzio per il Controllo dei Prodotti Biologici, Associazione 
Italiana per l'Agricoltura Biologica, or Codex S.r.L.
    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.

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 countervailing duty order. (See August 
25, 1997, memorandum from Edward Easton to Richard Moreland, which is 
on file in the

[[Page 48600]]

Central Records Unit (``CRU'') in Room B-099 of the main Commerce 
building.)
    (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 
countervailing duty order. (See July 30, 1998, letter from Susan H. 
Kuhbach, Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, 
to Barbara P. Sidari, Vice President, Joseph A. Sidari Company, Inc., 
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 may be within the scope of the 
countervailing duty order. On May 24, 1999, we issued a final scope 
ruling finding that, effective October 26, 1998, pasta in packages 
weighing or labeled up to (and including) five pounds four ounces is 
within the scope of the countervailing duty order. (See May 24, 1999, 
memorandum from John Brinkmann to Richard Moreland, which is on file in 
the CRU.)

Period of Review

    The period of review (``POR'') for which we are measuring subsidies 
is from January 1 through December 31, 2001.

Analysis of Comments Received

    All issues raised in the case brief by the interested party to this 
administrative review are addressed in the August 7, 2003, Issues and 
Decision Memorandum (``Decision Memorandum'') from Jeffrey May, Deputy 
Assistant Secretary, Import Administration, to James J. Jochum, 
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, which is hereby adopted 
by this notice. Attached to this notice as Appendix I is a list of the 
issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded in the 
Decision Memorandum. 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 CRU, Room B-099 of the 
Department. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum 
can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn/ 
under the heading ``Italy.'' The paper copy and electronic version of 
the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

    Based on information received subsequent to the Preliminary Results 
and our analysis of the comment submitted in the case brief, we have 
made changes in our calculation of the net subsidies for De Cecco. 
These changes are discussed in the relevant section of the Decision 
Memorandum.

Final Results of Review

    In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated an 
individual subsidy rate for each producer/exporter subject to this 
administrative review. For the period January 1 through December 31, 
2001, we determine the net subsidy rates for producers/exporters under 
review to be those specified in the chart shown below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Ad valorem
                          Company                                rate
                                                              (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
F.lli De Cecco di Filippo Fara San Martino, S.p.A..........         2.01
Italian American Pasta Company, S.r.L......................         0.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We will instruct the U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border Protection 
(``BCBP'') to assess countervailing duties as indicated above. The 
Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to 
the BCBP within 15 days of publication of these final results of 
review. The Department will also instruct the BCBP to collect cash 
deposits of estimated countervailing duties in the percentage detailed 
above of the f.o.b. invoice prices on all shipments of the subject 
merchandise from the producers/exporters under review, entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of 
publication of the final results of this administrative review.
    The cash deposit rates for all companies not covered by this review 
are not changed by the results of this review. Thus, we will instruct 
BCBP to continue to collect cash deposits for non-reviewed companies, 
except Barilla G. e R. F.lli S.p.A. and Gruppo Agricoltura Sana S.r.L. 
(which were excluded from the order during the investigation), at the 
most recent rate applicable to the company. These rates shall apply to 
all non-reviewed companies until a review of the companies assigned 
these rates is completed. In addition, for the period January 1 through 
December 31, 2001, the assessment rates applicable to all non-reviewed 
companies covered by these orders are the cash deposit rates in effect 
at the time of entry.
    This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to 
administrative protective order (``APO'') of their responsibility 
concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under 
APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.301. Timely written notification of 
return or 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 administrative review and notice are in accordance with 
section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 
1675(a)(1)).

    Dated: August 7, 2003.
James J. Jochum,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

Appendix I--Issues Discussed in the Decision Memorandum

I. Subsidies Valuation Methodology
    1. Benchmarks for Long-term Loans and Discount Rates
    2. Allocation Period
    3. Attribution
II. Analysis of Programs
    A. Programs Previously Determined to Confer Subsidies
    1. Law 64/86 Industrial Development Grants
    2. Law 488/92 Industrial Development Grants
    3. Industrial Development Loans Under Law 64/86
    4. Law 341/95 Interest Contributions on Debt Consolidation Loans
    5. Social Security Reductions and Exemptions--Sgravi
    6. IRAP Exemptions
    7. Export Restitution Payments
    B. Programs Determined to Be Not Used
    1. Law 64/86 VAT Reductions
    2. Export Credits under Law 227/77
    3. Capital Grants under Law 675/77
    4. Retraining Grants under Law 675/77
    5. Interest Contributions on Bank Loans under Law 675/77
    6. Interest Grants Financed by IRI Bonds
    7. Preferential Financing for Export Promotion under Law 394/81
    8. Urban Redevelopment under Law 181
    9. Grant Received Pursuant to the Community Initiative 
Concerning the Preparation of Enterprises for the Single Market 
(``PRISMA'')
    10. Law 183/76 Industrial Development Grants
    11. Law 598/94 Interest Subsidies
    12. Law 236/93 Training Grants
    13. European Regional Development Fund (``ERDF'')
    14. Duty-Free Import Rights
    15. Remission of Taxes on Export Credit Insurance Under Article 
33 of Law 227/77
    16. Law 1329/65 Interest Contributions (``Sabatini Law'')
    17. European Social Fund (``ESF'')
    18. Corporate Income Tax (IRPEG) Exemptions

[[Page 48601]]

    19. Export Marketing Grants under Law 304/90
III. Analysis of Comments
    Comment: Clerical Error (De Cecco)

[FR Doc. 03-20782 Filed 8-13-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P