[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 6, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 852-853]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-244]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-475-818]
Certain Pasta from Italy: Final Results of New Shipper
Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On October 6, 1998, the Department of Commerce published the
preliminary results of its new shipper review of the antidumping duty
order on certain pasta from Italy. The review covers shipments of this
merchandise to the United States by Corex during the period July 1,
1997, through December 31, 1997. These final results do not differ from
the preliminary results.
We find that Corex did not make sales below normal value during the
period of review. We will instruct the Customs Service not to assess
antidumping duties on certain pasta produced and exported by this
company.
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 6, 1999.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Constance Handley or John Brinkmann,
AD/CVD Enforcement, Office 2, Import Administration, International
Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0631 or (202) 482-5288, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Applicable Statute and Regulations
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are
references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective
date of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise
indicated, all citations to the Department of Commerce's (the
Department's) regulations refer to the regulations codified at 19 CFR
part 351 (1997).
Case History
On March 4, 1998, in response to a request by CO.R.EX. S.r.l,
(Corex), the Department initiated a new shipper review.
On October 6, 1998, the Department published the preliminary
results of this review. See Notice of Preliminary Results of New
Shipper Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 63 FR 53641
(Preliminary Results). From September 28, through October 2, 1998, we
verified the information submitted by Corex. On November 3, 1998, we
received a case brief from Corex. We did not receive comments from any
other interested party.
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 Instituto Mediterraneo Di
Certificazione (IMC), by Bioagricoop Scrl, or by QC&I International
Services.
The merchandise subject to review is currently classifiable under
subheading 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 under order is dispositive.
Scope Rulings
On August 25, 1997, the Department issued a scope ruling that
multicolored pasta, imported in kitchen display bottles of decorative
glass that are sealed with cork or paraffin and bound with raffia, is
excluded from the scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty
orders. See Memorandum from Edward Easton to Richard Moreland, dated
August 25, 1997. In addition, the Department issued a scope ruling on
July 30, 1998, that multipacks consisting of six one-pound packages of
pasta that are shrink wrapped into a single package are within the
scope of the antidumping and countervailing duty orders. (See 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.).
On October 23, 1997, the petitioners 1 filed an
application requesting that the Department initiate an anti-
circumvention investigation against Barilla S.r.L., an Italian producer
and exporter of pasta. On October 5, 1998, the Department issued its
final determination that, pursuant to section 781(a) of the Act,
circumvention of the antidumping duty order is occurring by reason of
exports of bulk pasta from Italy produced by Barilla which subsequently
are repackaged in the United States into packages of five pounds or
less for sale in the United States. (See Anti-circumvention Inquiry of
the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Pasta from Italy: Affirmative
Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order, 63
FR 54672 (October 13, 1998)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Borden Foods Corp., Hershey Pasta and Grocery Group, and
Gooch Foods Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 26, 1998, we 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
[[Page 853]]
antidumping and countervailing duty orders. On November 18, 1998, the
Department received comments regarding this scope inquiry. The
Department received rebuttal comments on November 30, 1998. In
accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(f)(5), the Department will issue a scope
ruling within 120 days of the initiation of the inquiry.
Price Comparisons
We calculated export price (EP) and normal value based on the same
methodology used in the Preliminary Results, with the following
exception:
We used a revised credit rate to calculate an imputed credit
expense for U.S. and Australian sales, both of which were priced in
Italian Lire (see memorandum from Constance Handley to the file,
Analysis Memorandum for CO.R.EX. S.r.l., (December 18,1998)).
Analysis of Comment Received
We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the
preliminary results. As noted above, we received one comment from
Corex.
Comment 1: Commissions
Corex notes that during verification Department officials learned
of commissions on Australian sales which Corex had inadvertently failed
to include in its database. Corex notes further that the Department
officials requested information relating to Corex's indirect selling
expenses. Claiming there is no reason to believe that the information
was ever intentionally withheld, Corex requests that this information
be used in calculating the final margin.
DOC Position:
We are not including the information found at verification because
inclusion of the information would not affect the final margin.
Final Results of Review
As a result of our review, we determine that the following margin
exists for the period July 1, 1997 through December 31, 1997:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Manufacturer/exporter (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corex...................................................... 0.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in the Preliminary Results, because Corex is primarily
a trading company, any entries of merchandise exported by Corex must
identify Corex as the producer in order for the deposit rate
established in this review to apply. If Corex is the exporter but not
the producer, the deposit rate will be the rate for the identified
producer. Otherwise, the ``all others'' rate will apply.
Therefore, the following deposit requirements will be effective for
all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these
final results of new shipper administrative review, as provided by
section 751(a) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for Corex, when
identified as the producer, will be zero; (2) for merchandise exported
by manufacturers or exporters not covered in this review but covered in
a previous segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will
continue to be the company-specific rate published in the most recent
final results in which that manufacturer or exporter participated; (3)
if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or in any previous
segment of this proceeding, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit
rate will be that established for the manufacturer of the merchandise
in these final results of review or in the most recent final results in
which that manufacturer participated; and (4) if neither the exporter
nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this review or in any
previous segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will be
11.26 percent, the ``all others'' rate established in the less-than-
fair-value investigation. These deposit requirements shall remain in
effect until publication of the final results of the next
administrative review.
This notice also serves as final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR part 351 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 in the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
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 353.34(d). Timely written
notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion
to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply is
a violation of the APO.
This determination is issued and published in accordance with
sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Dated: December 29, 1998.
Richard W. Moreland,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 99-244 Filed 1-5-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
