Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2001 / Notices 11269

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C–475–819]

Certain Pasta From Italy: Final Results

of the Third 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 August 8, 2000, the

Department of Commerce published in

the Federal Register its preliminary

results of the third administrative

review of the countervailing duty order

on certain pasta from Italy for the period

January 1 through December 31, 1998.

Based on our analysis of the

comments received, and the decision of

the Court of Appeals for the Federal

Circuit in Delverde S.r.L. v. United

States, 202 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2000)

(‘‘Delverde III’’), the Department has

reexamined its change in ownership

analysis and methodology. As a result,

we have made changes to Delverde’s net

subsidy rate. We have also revised

Rummo’s and Riscossa’s net subsidy

rate. Therefore, the final results differ

from the preliminary results. The final

net subsidy rates for each reviewed

company are listed below in the section

entitled ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 23, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Craig Matney, Annika O’Hara, Sally

Hastings or Andrew Covington, AD/

CVD Enforcement, Group I, Office 1,

Import Administration, U.S. Department

of Commerce, Room 1780, 14th Street

and Constitution Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone

(202) 482–1778, 482–3798, 482–3464 or

482–3534, respectively.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicable Statute and Regulations

Unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the statute are references to

the provisions of the Tariff Act of 1930,

as amended by the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (‘‘URAA’’), effective

January 1, 1995 (‘‘the Act’’). The

Department is conducting this

administrative review in accordance

with section 751(a) of the Act. In

addition, unless otherwise indicated, all

citations to the Department’s regulations

are to the regulations codified at 19 CFR

351 (1998).

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: Delverde S.p.A. (‘‘Delverde’’);

Tamma Industrie Alimentari S.r.L.

(‘‘Tamma’’); Rummo S.p.A. Molino e

Pastaficio (‘‘Rummo’’); and Pastificio

Riscossa F.lli Mastromauro S.r.L.

(‘‘Riscossa’’). La Molisana, which had

requested to be included in this review,

withdrew its request on October 14,

1999. Consequently, the Department

rescinded this review with respect to La

Molisana. (See Certain Pasta from Italy:

Preliminary Results and Partial

Rescission of Countervailing Duty

Administrative Review, 65 FR 48479

(August 8, 2000) (‘‘Preliminary

Results’’)). This review covers 29

programs.

Since the publication of the

Preliminary Results the following events

have occurred. On August 14, 2000, the

European Union (‘‘EU’’) submitted its

case brief. On September 7, 2000, the

Government of Italy (‘‘GOI’’), the

petitioners, and respondents Delverde

and Tamma submitted case briefs.

Petitioners and respondents Delverde

and Tamma filed rebuttal briefs on

September 18, 2000. Respondents

Rummo and Riscossa did not file case

or rebuttal briefs.

On October 5, 2000, we issued a

questionnaire to Delverde regarding its

change in ownership; we received

Delverde’s response to this

questionnaire on October 23, 2000. On

October 13, 2000, we published in the

Federal Register a notice extending the

due date for issuing these final results

to February 5, 2001 (see Certain Pasta

from Italy: Notice of Extension of Time

Limit for the 1998 Countervailing Duty

Administrative Review, 65 FR 60911).

On December 27, 2000, the

Department placed on the record of the

instant case a copy of Delverde’s

response to a supplemental

questionnaire regarding its change of

ownership that it had submitted in the

remand proceeding pursuant to the

September 27, 2000 order from the U.S.

Court of International Trade (‘‘CIT’’) in

Delverde III. 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 Instituto

Mediterraneo Di Certificazione (‘‘IMC’’),

by Bioagricoop Scrl, by QC&I

International Services, by Ecocert Italia,

or by the Conzorzio per il Controllo dei

Prodotti Biologici.

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

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 shrinkwrapped 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

11270 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2001 / Notices

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, 1998.

Analysis of Comments Received

All issues raised in the case and

rebuttal briefs by parties to this

administrative review are addressed in

the February 5, 2001 Issues and

Decision Memorandum (‘‘Decision

Memorandum’’) from Susan H.

Kuhbach, Acting Deputy Assistant

Secretary, Import Administration, to

Bernard T. Carreau, fulfilling the duties

of 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 Central Records Unit, 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 our analysis of comments

received, and the Department’s revised

change-in-ownership approach based on

the Court’s ruling in Delverde III, we

have made certain changes to Delverde’s

net subsidy rate. Also, based on our

analysis of the GOI’s questionnaire

responses, one of which was received

after the Preliminary Results, we have

revised our findings and calculation

methodology for interest subsidies

received by Rummo under Law 598/94.

These changes are discussed in the

relevant sections of the Decision

Memorandum. Lastly, we revised

Riscossa’s overall net subsidy rate due

to a clerical error discovered by the

Department since the Preliminary

Results. See February 5, 2001

Calculation Memorandum for Riscossa,

a public version of which is on file in

room B–099 of the Department’s main

building.

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, 1998,

we determine the net subsidy rates for

producers/exporters under review to be

those specified in the chart shown

below.

Company Ad valorem rate

percent

Delverde S.p.A./Delverde S.r.L. .................................................................................................................................................... 4.04

Tamma Industrie Alimentari S.r.L .................................................................................................................................................. 3.63

Pastificio Riscossa F.lli Mastromauro S.r.L ................................................................................................................................... 1.13

Rummo S.p.A. Molino e Pastificio ................................................................................................................................................. 0.71

We will instruct the U.S. Customs

Service (‘‘Customs’’) to assess

countervailing duties as indicated

above. The Department will also

instruct Customs 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 Customs

to continue to collect cash deposits for

non-reviewed companies, except Barilla

G. e R. F.lli S.p.A. (‘‘Barilla’’) and

Gruppo Agricoltura Sana S.r.L.

(‘‘Gruppo’’) (which were excluded from

the order during the investigation), at

the most recent rate applicable to the

company. Accordingly, the cash deposit

rates that will be applied to nonreviewed companies covered by this

order are those established in the Notice

of Countervailing Duty Order and

Amended Final Affirmative

Countervailing Duty Determination:

Certain Pasta from Italy, 61 FR 38544

(July 24, 1996), Certain Pasta from Italy:

Final Results of Countervailing Duty

Administrative Review, 63 FR 43905

(August 17, 1998), or Amendment of

Final Results of Countervailing Duty

Administrative Review, 64 FR 51293

(September 22, 1999), whichever notice

provides the most recently published

countervailing duty rates for companies

not reviewed in this administrative

review. These rates shall apply to all

non-reviewed companies until a review

of a company assigned these rates is

completed. In addition, for the period

January 1 through December 31, 1998,

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, except for

Barilla and Gruppo (which were

excluded from the order during the

original investigation).

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 Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)).

Dated: February 5, 2001.

Timothy J. Hauser,

Acting Under Secretary for International

Trade.

Appendix I—Issues discussed in the

Decision Memorandum

I. Methodology and Background Information

1. Change in Ownership

2. Subsidies Valuation Information

A. Benchmarks for Long-term Loans and

Discount Rates

B. Allocation Period

C. Benefits to Mills

3. Affiliated Parties

II. Analysis of Program

1. Programs Previously Determined to Confer

Subsidies

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 37 / Friday, February 23, 2001 / Notices 11271

A. Law 64/86 Industrial Development

Grants

B. Law 488/92 Industrial Development

Grants

C. Law 183/76 Industrial Development

Grants

D. Industrial Development Loans Under

Law 64/86

E. Law 304/90 Export Marketing Grants

F. Social Security Reductions and

Exemptions-Sgravi

G. Law 598/94 Interest Subsidies

H. Law 236/93 Training Grants

I. European Social Fund

J. Export Restitution Payments

2. Programs Determined Not To Confer

Countervailable Subsidies in the POR

A. Social Security Reductions and

Exemptions-Fiscalizzazione

3. Programs Determined to Be Not Used

During the POR

A. Law 113/86 Training Grants

B. Law 64/86 VAT Reductions

C. Law 357/94 Tax Benefits

D. Local Income Tax (‘‘ILOR’’) Exemptions

E. Remission of Taxes on Export Credit

Insurance under Article 33 of Law 227/

77

F. Export Credits under Law 227/77

G. Capital Grants under Law 675/77

H. Retraining Grants under Law 675/77

I. Interest Contributions on Bank Loans

under Law 675/77

J. Interest Grants Financed by IRI Bonds

K. Preferential Financing for Export

Promotion under Law 394/81

L. Corporate Income Tax (‘‘IRPEG’’)

Exemptions

M. Urban Redevelopment under Law 181

N. Debt Consolidation Law 341/95

O. Interest Contributions under Law 1329/

65

P. Grant Received Pursuant to the

Community Initiative Concerning the

Preparation of Enterprises for the Single

Market (‘‘PRISMA’’)

Q. European Agricultural Guidance and

Guarantee Fund (‘‘EAGGF’’)

R. European Regional Development Fund

(‘‘ERDF’’)

III. Analysis of Comment

Comment 1: European Social Fund

Comment 2: Change of Ownership

Methodology in Preliminary

Determination

Comment 3: Interpretation of Delverde III

Comment 4: Use of the Successor-inInterest Test

Comment 5: Shares v. Assets

Comment 6: Subsidies to Delverde/

Analysis of Facts on the Record

[FR Doc. 01–4535 Filed 2–22–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

Export Trade Certificate of Review

AGENCY: International Trade

Administration, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of initiation of process to

revoke export trade certificate of review

No. 97–00001.

SUMMARY: The Secretary of Commerce

issued an export trade certificate of

review to Dairy Marketing Information

Association. Because this certificate

holder has failed to file an annual report

as required by law, the Department is

initiating proceedings to revoke the

certificate. This notice summarizes the

notification letter sent to Dairy

Marketing Information Association.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vanessa Bachman, Acting Director,

Office of Export Trading Company

Affairs, International Trade

Administration, (202) 482–5131. This is

not a toll-free number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title III of

the Export Trading Company Act of

1982 (‘‘the Act’’) [15 U.S.C. 4011–21]

authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to

issue Export Trade Certificates of

Review. The regulations implementing

Title III (‘‘the Regulations’’) are found at

15 CFR part 325. Pursuant to this

authority, a certificate of review was

issued on April 17, 1997 to Dairy

Marketing Information Association.

A certificate holder is required by law

(section 308 of the Act, 15 U.S.C. 4018)

to submit to the Department of

Commerce annual reports that update

financial and other information relating

to business activities covered by its

certificate. The annual report is due

within 45 days after the anniversary

date of the issuance of the certificate of

review (sections 325.14(a) and (b) of the

Regulations). Failure to submit a

complete annual report may be the basis

for revocation. (Sections 325.10(a) and

325.14(c) of the Regulations.)

The Department of Commerce sent to

Dairy Marketing Information

Association, on April 7, 2000, a letter

containing annual report questions with

a reminder that its annual report was

due on June 1, 2000. Additional

reminders were sent on December 1,

2000 and on December 12, 2000. The

Department has received no written

response to any of these letters.

On February 16, 2001, and in

accordance with section 325.10(c)(1) of

the Regulations, a letter was sent by

certified mail to notify Dairy Marketing

Information Association that the

Department was formally initiating the

process to revoke its certificate. The

letter stated that this action is being

taken because of the certificate holder’s

failure to file an annual report.

In accordance with section

325.10(c)(2) of the Regulations, each

certificate holder has thirty days from

the day after its receipt of the

notification letter in which to respond.

The certificate holder is deemed to have

received this letter as of the date on

which this notice is published in the

Federal Register. For good cause shown,

the Department of Commerce can, at its

discretion, grant a thirty-day extension

for a response.

If the certificate holder decides to

respond, it must specifically address the

Department’s statement in the

notification letter that it has failed to file

an annual report. It should state in

detail why the facts, conduct, or

circumstances described in the

notification letter are not true, or if they

are, why they do not warrant revoking

the certificate. If the certificate holder

does not respond within the specified

period, it will be considered an

admission of the statements contained

in the notification letter (section

325.10(c)(2) of the Regulations).

If the answer demonstrates that the

material facts are in dispute, the

Department of Commerce and the

Department of Justice shall, upon

request, meet informally with the

certificate holder. Either Department

may require the certificate holder to

provide the documents or information

that are necessary to support its

contentions (section 325.10(c)(3) of the

Regulations).

The Department shall publish a notice

in the Federal Register of the revocation

or modification or a decision not to

revoke or modify (section 325.10(c)(4) of

the Regulations). If there is a

determination to revoke a certificate,

any person aggrieved by such final

decision may appeal to an appropriate

U.S. district court within 30 days from

the date on which the Department’s

final determination is published in the

Federal Register (sections 325.10(c)(4)

and 325.11 of the Regulations).

Dated: February 16, 2001.

Vanessa Bachman,

Acting Director, Office of Export Trading

Company Affairs.

[FR Doc. 01–4464 Filed 2–22–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

[I.D. 021301E]

South Atlantic Fishery Management

Council; Public Meetings

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.