80 FR 69641 - Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 217 (November 10, 2015)
International Trade Administration
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 217 (November 10, 2015)
| Page Range | 69641-69643 | |
| FR Document | 2015-28623 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 217 (Tuesday, November 10, 2015)] [Notices] [Pages 69641-69643] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-28623] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-201-830] Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; 2013-2014 AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod (wire rod) from Mexico. The period of review (POR) is October 1, 2013 through September 30, 2014.\1\ This review covers two producers/exporters of subject merchandise: ArcelorMittal Las Truchas, S.A. de C.V. (AMLT) and Deacero S.A. de C.V. We preliminarily determine that AMLT and Deacero made sales of subject merchandise at less than normal value (NV) during the POR. Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary results. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago, and Ukraine 67 FR 65945 (October 29, 2002) (Wire Rod Order). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATES: Effective date: November 10, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Terpstra (for Deacero) or Jolanta Lawska (for AMLT), 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: 202-482-3965 and 202-482-8362, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Scope of the Order The merchandise covered by the Wire Rod Order is carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod. The product is currently classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) item numbers 7213.91.3000, 7213.91.3010, 7213.91.3011, [[Page 69642]] 7213.91.3015, 7213.91.3020, 7213.91.3090, 7213.91.3091, 7213.91.3092, 7213.91.3093, 7213.91.4500, 7213.91.4510, 7213.91.4590, 7213.91.6000, 7213.91.6010, 7213.91.6090, 7213.99.0030, 7213.99.0031, 7213.99.0038, 7213.99.0090, 7227.20.0000, 7227.20.0010, 7227.20.0020, 7227.20.0030, 7227.20.0080, 7227.20.0090, 7227.20.0095, 7227.90.6010, 7227.90.6020, 7227.90.6030, 7227.90.6035, 7227.90.6050, 7227.90.6051, 7227.90.6053, 7227.90.6058, 7227.90.6059, 7227.90.6080, and 7227.90.6085 of the HTSUS. Although the HTS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive.\2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ For a complete description of the scope of the order, see Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ``Decision Memorandum for Preliminary Results of 2013/14 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Mexico'' (Preliminary Decision Memorandum), dated concurrently with these preliminary results. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Methodology The Department is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Constructed export prices or export price are calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, please see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an appendix to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and 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 http://access.trade.gov, and it is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit (CRU), Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. The signed Preliminary Decision Memorandum and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Preliminary Results of the Review As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine that the weighted-average dumping margins for the POR are as follows: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Weighted- average Producer/exporter dumping margin (percent) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Deacero S.A. de C.V..................................... 72.95 ArcelorMittal Las Truchas, S.A. de C.V.................. 12.38 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Assessment Rate Upon issuance of the final results, the Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. For any individually examined respondents whose weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis, we will calculate 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).\3\ We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above de minimis (i.e., 0.50 percent). Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review where applicable. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ In these preliminary 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). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In accordance with the Department's ``automatic assessment'' practice, for entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by each respondent for which they did not know that their merchandise was destined for the United States, 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 Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). We intend to issue instructions 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 Deacero and AMLT will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margins 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 completed segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published in the completed segment for the most recent period; (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 in the completed segment for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 20.11 percent, the all-others rate established in the investigation.\4\ These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico, 67 FR 55800 (August 30, 2002). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Concerning Deacero, on October 1, 2012, the Department found that wire rod with an actual diameter of 4.75 mm to 5.00 mm produced (hereinafter referred to as narrow gauge wire rod) in Mexico and exported to the United States by Deacero was circumventing the Wire Rod Order.\5\ Specifically, the Department found that it is appropriate to consider that Deacero's shipments to the United States of narrow gauge wire rod constitute merchandise altered in form or appearance in such minor respects that it should be included within the scope of Wire Rod Order.\6\ [[Page 69643]] The Department's affirmative finding in the Final Circumvention Determination applied solely to Deacero. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico: Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Order, 77 FR 59892 (October 1, 2012) (Final Circumvention Determination) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. \6\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Deacero challenged the Department's ruling in the Final Circumvention Determination and on December 22, 2014, the Court of International Trade (CIT) entered its final judgement in Deacero III,\7\ sustaining the Department's negative circumvention determination from the First Remand Redetermination in which the Department, under protest, found that Deacero's shipments of narrow gauge wire rod to the United States were not subject antidumping duties.\8\ The Department is appealing the CIT's decision at the Federal Circuit. Consistent with the CIT's holding and Wire Rod Timken Notice,\9\ the Department instructed CBP to set the cash deposit rate for narrow gauge wire rod shipped to the United States by Deacero to zero, pending a final and conclusive court decision. Additionally, we instructed CBP to refund any antidumping duties deposited for narrow gauge wire rod shipped to the United States by Deacero that entered from January 1, 2015, through the publication date of the Wire Rod Timken Notice (July 27, 2015) and, for such entries, to continue to suspend Deacero's narrow gauge wire rod at a zero cash deposit rate.\10\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ See Deacero S.A.P.I. de C.V. and Deacero Usa, Inc. v. United States and Arcelormittal USA LLC, Gerdau Ameristeel U.S. Inc., Evraz Rocky Mountain Steel, and Nucor Corporation, Court No. 12-00345, Slip Op. 14-151 (Deacero III). \8\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Deacero S.A. de C.V. and Deacero USA Inc. v. United States and Arcelormittal USA LLC, Gerdau Ameristeel U.S. Inc., Evraz Rocky Mountain Steel, and Nucor Corporation, Court No. 12-00345; Slip Op. 13-126 (CIT 2013) (January 29, 2014) (First Remand Redetermination). \9\ See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico: Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results and Notice of Amended Final Determination, 80 FR 44326, 44327 (July 27, 2015) (Wire Rod Timken Notice). \10\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- During the POR of the instant review, Deacero shipped narrow gauge wire rod as well as wire rod with actual diameters greater than 5.00 mm. In light of the CIT's holding in Deacero III and our statement in Wire Rod Timken Notice that Deacero's narrow gauge wire rod is excluded from antidumping duties,\11\ we have, for purposes of these preliminary results, removed narrow gauge wire rod from Deacero's dumping calculations. Per the Court's holding in Deacero III, the preliminary cash deposit rate for Deacero, as listed above, only applies with regard its entries of wire with an actual diameter that is greater than 5.00 and less than or equal to 19.00 mm. The cash deposit rate listed above for Deacero does not apply to its entries of narrow gauge wire rod. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclosure and Public Comment The Department intends to disclose to interested parties to this proceeding the calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results within five days after the date of publication of this notice.\12\ Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii), interested parties may submit case briefs not later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than five days after the date for filing case briefs.\13\ Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding 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.\14\ All case and rebuttal briefs must be filed electronically using ACCESS, and must also be served on interested parties.\15\ An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the Department's electronic records system, ACCESS, by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Executive summaries should be limited to five pages total, including footnotes. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ See 19 CFR 351.224(b). \13\ See 19 CFR 351.309(d). \14\ See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2). \15\ See 19 CFR 351.303(f). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce. All documents must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically-filed request must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.\16\ Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, the Department intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \16\ See 19 CFR 351.310(c). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unless the deadline is extended, the Department intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of our analysis of the issues raised by the parties in their case and rebuttal briefs, within 120 days after the publication of these preliminary results, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h). 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. These preliminary results of review are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: October 30, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. Appendix--List of Topics Discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum I. Summary II. Background III. Scope of the Order IV. Discussion of Methodology A. Universe of Sales B. Date of Sale C. Comparisons to Normal Value D. Product Comparisons E. Determination of Comparison Method F. Results of DP Analysis G. U.S. Price H. Normal Value I. Cost of Production Analysis J. Affiliated Respondents K. Currency Conversion V. Recommendation [FR Doc. 2015-28623 Filed 11-9-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 217 / Tuesday, November 10, 2015 / Notices 69641
with the statute.17 Accordingly, the understanding of the substance of the Act and consistent with the clarification
CAFC held that the Department must information.’ ’’ 25 The CIT thus directed in Diamond Sawblades.
include rates calculated for voluntary the Department on remand to either Dated: November 4, 2015.
respondents in determining an all- request the publicly ranged data from Paul Piquado,
others rate.18 As the Department had not the voluntary respondents, or publicly
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
used the rates calculated for the range the companies’ information itself, Compliance.
voluntary respondents in the underlying and reconsider its determination to use
[FR Doc. 2015–28668 Filed 11–9–15; 8:45 am]
investigation to determine the all-others a simple average of their subsidy rates.26
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
rate, the CAFC therefore held that the The Department requested and
Department was required to recalculate received from the voluntary respondents
the all-others rate using the voluntary (i.e., Guang Ya Companies and Zhongya DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
respondents’ rates. The CIT Companies) their publicly ranged sales
subsequently remanded the issue to the value and volume data for exports of International Trade Administration
Department for reconsideration in light subject merchandise to the United
of the CAFC’s holding.19 States during the 2009 investigation [A–201–830]
On remand, the Department period. Using that data, the Department
recalculated the all-others rate using a Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire
calculated a weighted-average all-others
simple average of the voluntary Rod From Mexico: Preliminary Results
subsidy rate of 7.37 percent.27 In
respondents’ rates.20 Section of Antidumping Duty Administrative
accordance with the MacLean-Fogg
705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act provides that, Review; 2013–2014
Remand Order, the Department
in general, the all-others rate ‘‘shall be reconsidered its decision to rely on the AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance,
an amount equal to the weighted simple average of the voluntary International Trade Administration,
average countervailable subsidy rates respondents’ rates in determining the U.S. Department of Commerce.
established for exporters and producers all-others rate.28 Specifically, because
individually investigated . . . .’’ SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
the subsidy rate determined based on (the Department) is conducting an
However, the Department explained in the publicly ranged data, rather than the
the Third Remand Results that the use administrative review of the
subsidy rate determined based on a antidumping duty order on carbon and
of a weighted average would have simple average, is closer to the subsidy
revealed the proprietary information of certain alloy steel wire rod (wire rod)
rate that would have resulted from from Mexico. The period of review
the voluntary respondents to each weighting the voluntary respondents’
other.21 (POR) is October 1, 2013 through
rates based on proprietary sales values, September 30, 2014.1 This review
Petitioners 22 argued that the
the Department revised the all-others covers two producers/exporters of
Department should have requested
rate to 7.37 percent in its Final Remand subject merchandise: ArcelorMittal Las
publicly ranged versions of proprietary
Results.29 Truchas, S.A. de C.V. (AMLT) and
data on the record from the voluntary
On October 23, 2015, in MacLean Deacero S.A. de C.V. We preliminarily
respondents to use in its calculation of
Fogg Remand Order, the CIT affirmed determine that AMLT and Deacero
the all-others rate, but in the Third
the Department’s Final Remand Results, made sales of subject merchandise at
Remand Results, the Department
instead calculated the all-others rate upholding that the Department’s all- less than normal value (NV) during the
using a simple average of the rates of the others rate of 7.37 percent.30 POR. Interested parties are invited to
two voluntary respondents, which Amended Final Determination comment on these preliminary results.
resulted in a rate of 7.42 percent.23 DATES: Effective date: November 10,
After considering the Third Remand Because there is now a final court
decision with respect to the Final 2015.
Results, the CIT remanded to the
Department the all-others rate Determination, the Department amends FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
calculation, explaining that the ‘‘statute its Final Determination. The following James Terpstra (for Deacero) or Jolanta
unequivocally and without exception revised net subsidy rate exists: Lawska (for AMLT), AD/CVD
requires that the Department base the Operations, Office III, Enforcement and
Company Subsidy rate Compliance, International Trade
all-others rate on the weighted average
of individually-investigated non-zero, Administration, U.S. Department of
All-Others ............. 7.37 percent ad valorem. Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution
non-de minimis, non-AFA rates.’’ 24
Furthermore, the CIT emphasized that Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230;
For companies subject to the all- telephone: 202–482–3965 and 202–482–
19 CFR 351.304(c)(1) requires all others rate, the cash deposit rate will be
proprietary information ‘‘to be 8362, respectively.
the rate listed above and the Department
accompanied by public versions ‘in will instruct U.S. Customs and Border SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
sufficient detail to permit a reasonable Protection accordingly. This notice is Scope of the Order
issued and published in accordance
17 See MacLean-Fogg Co. v. United States (CAFC), The merchandise covered by the Wire
with sections 705(d) and 777(i)(1) of the
753 F.3d 1237 (Fed. Cir. 2014). Rod Order is carbon and certain alloy
18 Id., at 1245.
steel wire rod. The product is currently
19 See MacLean-Fogg Co. v. United States, 32 F. 25 Id.,at 30.
classified under the Harmonized Tariff
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Supp. 3d 1358 (CIT 2014) (MacLean-Fogg V). 26 Id.,at 31.
20 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant 27 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant
Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)
to Court Remand, dated March 17, 2015 (Third to Court Remand, dated October 15, 2015 (Final item numbers 7213.91.3000,
Remand Results) at 6, available at http:// Remand Results), available at http:// 7213.91.3010, 7213.91.3011,
enforcement.trade.gov/remands. enforcement.trade.gov/remands.
21 Id. 28 Id. 1 See Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Carbon
22 Petitioners are the Aluminum Extrusions Fair 29 Id.
and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Brazil,
Trade Committee. 30 See MacLean Fogg Co., et al. v. United States, Indonesia, Mexico, Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago,
23 See Third Remand Result.
Slip Op. 15–119, Court No. 11–00209 (October 23, and Ukraine 67 FR 65945 (October 29, 2002) (Wire
24 See MacLean-Fogg Remand Order, at 21. 2015). Rod Order).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:41 Nov 09, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\10NON1.SGM 10NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_69858/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 217 / Tuesday, November 10, 2015 / Notices 69643
The Department’s affirmative finding in greater than 5.00 and less than or equal results of this administrative review,
the Final Circumvention Determination to 19.00 mm. The cash deposit rate including the results of our analysis of
applied solely to Deacero. listed above for Deacero does not apply the issues raised by the parties in their
Deacero challenged the Department’s to its entries of narrow gauge wire rod. case and rebuttal briefs, within 120 days
ruling in the Final Circumvention after the publication of these
Determination and on December 22, Disclosure and Public Comment
preliminary results, pursuant to section
2014, the Court of International Trade The Department intends to disclose to 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
(CIT) entered its final judgement in interested parties to this proceeding the 351.213(h).
Deacero III,7 sustaining the calculations performed in connection
Department’s negative circumvention with these preliminary results within Notification to Importers
determination from the First Remand five days after the date of publication of This notice also serves as a
Redetermination in which the this notice.12 Pursuant to 19 CFR preliminary reminder to importers of
Department, under protest, found that 351.309(c)(1)(ii), interested parties may their responsibility under 19 CFR
Deacero’s shipments of narrow gauge submit case briefs not later than 30 days 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
wire rod to the United States were not after the date of publication of this regarding the reimbursement of
subject antidumping duties.8 The notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues antidumping duties prior to liquidation
Department is appealing the CIT’s raised in the case briefs, may be filed of the relevant entries during this
decision at the Federal Circuit. not later than five days after the date for review period. Failure to comply with
Consistent with the CIT’s holding and filing case briefs.13 Parties who submit this requirement could result in the
Wire Rod Timken Notice,9 the case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this Secretary’s presumption that
Department instructed CBP to set the proceeding are requested to submit with reimbursement of antidumping duties
cash deposit rate for narrow gauge wire the argument: (1) A statement of the occurred and the subsequent assessment
rod shipped to the United States by issue, (2) a brief summary of the of double antidumping duties.
Deacero to zero, pending a final and argument, and (3) a table of These preliminary results of review
conclusive court decision. Additionally, authorities.14 All case and rebuttal briefs are issued and published in accordance
we instructed CBP to refund any must be filed electronically using with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of
antidumping duties deposited for ACCESS, and must also be served on the Act.
narrow gauge wire rod shipped to the interested parties.15 An electronically Dated: October 30, 2015.
United States by Deacero that entered filed document must be received Paul Piquado,
from January 1, 2015, through the successfully in its entirety by the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
publication date of the Wire Rod Department’s electronic records system, Compliance.
Timken Notice (July 27, 2015) and, for ACCESS, by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time
such entries, to continue to suspend within 30 days after the date of Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in
Deacero’s narrow gauge wire rod at a publication of this notice. Executive the Preliminary Decision Memorandum
zero cash deposit rate.10 summaries should be limited to five I. Summary
During the POR of the instant review, pages total, including footnotes. II. Background
Deacero shipped narrow gauge wire rod Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), III. Scope of the Order
as well as wire rod with actual interested parties who wish to request a IV. Discussion of Methodology
diameters greater than 5.00 mm. In light hearing must submit a written request to A. Universe of Sales
of the CIT’s holding in Deacero III and the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement B. Date of Sale
our statement in Wire Rod Timken C. Comparisons to Normal Value
and Compliance, U.S. Department of
D. Product Comparisons
Notice that Deacero’s narrow gauge wire Commerce. All documents must be filed E. Determination of Comparison Method
rod is excluded from antidumping electronically using ACCESS. An F. Results of DP Analysis
duties,11 we have, for purposes of these electronically-filed request must be G. U.S. Price
preliminary results, removed narrow received successfully in its entirety by H. Normal Value
gauge wire rod from Deacero’s dumping ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, I. Cost of Production Analysis
calculations. Per the Court’s holding in within 30 days after the date of J. Affiliated Respondents
Deacero III, the preliminary cash publication of this notice.16 Requests K. Currency Conversion
deposit rate for Deacero, as listed above, should contain the party’s name, V. Recommendation
only applies with regard its entries of address, and telephone number, the [FR Doc. 2015–28623 Filed 11–9–15; 8:45 am]
wire with an actual diameter that is number of participants, and a list of the BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
issues to be discussed. If a request for
7 See Deacero S.A.P.I. de C.V. and Deacero Usa,
a hearing is made, the Department
Inc. v. United States and Arcelormittal USA LLC, intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Gerdau Ameristeel U.S. Inc., Evraz Rocky Mountain
Steel, and Nucor Corporation, Court No. 12–00345, Department of Commerce, 14th Street
and Constitution Avenue NW., International Trade Administration
Slip Op. 14–151 (Deacero III).
8 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant Washington, DC 20230, at a time and [A–570–024]
to Deacero S.A. de C.V. and Deacero USA Inc. v. date to be determined. Parties should
United States and Arcelormittal USA LLC, Gerdau Certain Polyethylene Terephthalate
Ameristeel U.S. Inc., Evraz Rocky Mountain Steel,
confirm by telephone the date, time, and
and Nucor Corporation, Court No. 12–00345; Slip location of the hearing two days before Resin From the People’s Republic of
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Op. 13–126 (CIT 2013) (January 29, 2014) (First the scheduled date. China: Notice of Correction to
Remand Redetermination). Unless the deadline is extended, the Preliminary Affirmative Less Than Fair
9 See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod
Department intends to issue the final Value Determination
From Mexico: Notice of Court Decision Not in
Harmony With Final Results and Notice of
12 See
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance,
Amended Final Determination, 80 FR 44326, 44327 19 CFR 351.224(b).
13 See 19 CFR 351.309(d).
International Trade Administration,
(July 27, 2015) (Wire Rod Timken Notice).
10 Id. 14 See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2). Department of Commerce.
11 See Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. 15 See 19 CFR 351.303(f). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010). 16 See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Steve Bezirganian, Office VI, AD/CVD
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:41 Nov 09, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\10NON1.SGM 10NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_69858/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-03-01 11:26:13
Document Modified: 2018-03-01 11:26:13
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Dates | Effective date: November 10, 2015. | |
| Contact | James Terpstra (for Deacero) or Jolanta Lawska (for AMLT), 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: 202-482-3965 and 202-482-8362, respectively. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 69641 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR