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, 44326-44327 [2015-18335]

Download as PDF 44326 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 2015 / Notices Affected Public: Individuals or households. Frequency: Annually. Respondent’s Obligation: Required to obtain benefits. This information collection request may be viewed at reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to view Department of Commerce collections currently under review by OMB. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to OIRA_Submission@ omb.eop.gov or fax to (202) 395–5806. Sheleen Dumas, Departmental PRA Lead, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. 2015–18296 Filed 7–24–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–13–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [B–46–2015] tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Foreign-Trade Zone 147—Berks County, Pennsylvania; Application for Reorganization (Expansion of Service Area); Under Alternative Site Framework An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board by the FTZ Corporation of Southern Pennsylvania, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 147, requesting authority to reorganize the zone to expand its service area under the alternative site framework (ASF) adopted by the FTZ Board (15 CFR 400.2(c)). The ASF is an option for grantees for the establishment or reorganization of zones and can permit significantly greater flexibility in the designation of new subzones or ‘‘usage-driven’’ FTZ sites for operators/ users located within a grantee’s ‘‘service area’’ in the context of the FTZ Board’s standard 2,000-acre activation limit for a zone. The application was submitted pursuant to the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), and the regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally docketed on July 20, 2015. FTZ 147 was approved by the FTZ Board on June 28, 1988 (Board Order 378, 53 FR 26094, July 11, 1988) and reorganized under the ASF on April 30, 2013 (Board Order 1897, 78 FR 27953– 27954, May 13, 2013). The zone currently has a service area that includes Berks, Cumberland, Dauphin, Franklin, Lancaster and York Counties, Pennsylvania. The applicant is now requesting authority to expand the service area of VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:58 Jul 24, 2015 Jkt 235001 the zone to include Adams, Fulton, Juniata, Lebanon and Perry Counties, Pennsylvania, as described in the application. If approved, the grantee would be able to serve sites throughout the expanded service area based on companies’ needs for FTZ designation. The proposed expanded service area is adjacent to the Harrisburg Customs and Border Protection Port of Entry. In accordance with the FTZ Board’s regulations, Elizabeth Whiteman of the FTZ Staff is designated examiner to evaluate and analyze the facts and information presented in the application and case record and to report findings and recommendations to the FTZ Board. Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the FTZ Board’s Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is September 25, 2015. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period to October 13, 2015. A copy of the application will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 21013, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230–0002, and in the ‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the FTZ Board’s Web site, which is accessible via www.trade.gov/ftz. For further information, contact Elizabeth Whiteman at Elizabeth.Whiteman@trade.gov or (202) 482–0473. Dated: July 20, 2015. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. 2015–18334 Filed 7–24–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Ameristeel U.S. Inc., Evraz Rocky Mountain Steel, and Nucor Corporation, Court No. 12–00345, Slip Op. 14–151 (Deacero III), sustaining the Department of Commerce’s (the Department) negative circumvention determination from the First Remand Results.1 Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken), as clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond Sawblades), the Department is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department’s Final Determination 2 that, pursuant to section 781(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.225, Deacero’s entries of wire rod with an actual diameter of 4.75 millimeters (mm) to 5.00 mm constitute circumvention of the Order.3 DATES: Effective Date: January 1, 2015. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Greynolds, 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) 482–6071. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On October 1, 2012, the Department issued its Final Determination in which it determined that Deacero’s shipments of wire rod with an actual diameter of 4.75 mm to 5.00 mm constitute a circumventing minor alteration of the Order.4 Deacero challenged the Department’s determination. Upon review, the CIT remanded the Final Determination, holding that the Department improperly determined that wire rod with a thickness between 4.75 mm and 5.00 mm was inside the scope despite the fact that it was commercially available before the investigation and [A–201–830] 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 Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On December 22, 2014, the United States Court of International Trade (CIT) entered its final judgment in Deacero S.A.P.I. de C.V. and Deacero Usa, Inc. v. United States and Arcelormittal USA LLC, Gerdau AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 1 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 Results). 2 See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico: Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty Order, 77 FR 59892 (October 1, 2012) (Final Determination) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (Final Decision Memorandum). 3 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) (Order). 4 See Final Determination. E:\FR\FM\27JYN1.SGM 27JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 143 / Monday, July 27, 2015 / Notices petitioners ‘‘consciously chose to limit the Order’s reach to certain steel products 5.00 mm or more, but less than 19.00 mm in solid cross-sectional diameter.’’ 5 On remand, based on the Court’s reasoning, the Department found that there is no alternative but to change the results of the anti-circumvention determination and find on remand that 4.75 mm wire rod is not within the scope of the Order.6 In Deacero II, the Court held that although the Department ultimately reached a supportable result in the First Remand Results, remand was nonetheless necessary because the Department arrived at the result by misinterpreting Deacero I.7 Therefore, in Deacero II, the Court instructed the Department to explain whether it seeks the Court’s leave to revisit the issue of commercial availability.8 In the Second Remand Results, the Department continued to respectfully disagree with the Court that the ‘‘commercial availability’’ of a product in the country in question, in a third country or in the United States bars the Department from reaching an affirmative anticircumvention determination under the minor alteration provision of the statute.9 For these same reasons, the Department did not request a remand to further consider ‘‘commercial availability’’ in the context of this minor alteration proceeding. On December 22, 2014, the CIT entered final judgment sustaining the First Remand Results.10 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Timken Notice In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with a Department determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s December 22, 2014 judgment sustaining the Department’s First Remand Results with respect to Deacero’s shipments of wire rod with an actual diameter of 4.75 mm to 5.00 mm not constituting a circumventing minor alteration of the Order constitutes a final decision of the 5 See Deacero S.A. de C.V. v. United States, 37 CIT, 942 F. Supp. 2d 1321, 1324–25 (2013). (Deacero I);Deacero Remand, Slip Op. 13–126 at 15. 6 See First Remand Results at 6. 7 See Deacero S.A.P.I. de C.V. v. United States, Slip Op. 14–99, 2014 WL 4244349, *1–3 (CIT Aug. 28, 2014) (Deacero II) at 11–12. 8 Id. at 12. 9 See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Deacero S.A. de C.V. et al v. United States, Court No. 12–00345; Slip Op. 14–99 (CIT August 28, 2014) (Second Remand Results). 10 See Deacero III. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:58 Jul 24, 2015 Jkt 235001 Court that is not in harmony with the Department’s Final Determination. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. Amended Final Determination Because there is now a final court decision, we are amending the Final Determination with respect to Deacero’s shipments of wire rod with an actual diameter of 4.75 mm to 5.00 mm. Based on the negative circumvention determination, Deacero’s 4.75 mm wire rod is not subject to antidumping duties. Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of liquidation of the subject merchandise, but set the cash deposit rate for the 4.75 mm up to 5 mm diameter wire rod to zero pending a final and conclusive court decision. For any antidumping duties which have been deposited for 4.75 up to 5mm diameter wire rod entered from January 1, 2015 to the date of this notice, we will instruct Customs and Border Protection to refund the cash deposit upon request but continue to suspend the entries at a zero cash deposit rate. Notification to Interested Parties This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: July 20, 2015. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2015–18335 Filed 7–24–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology Advisory Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction Meeting National Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. AGENCY: The Advisory Committee on Earthquake Hazards Reduction (ACEHR or Committee), will hold an open meeting via WEBEX on Friday, August 21, 2015, from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The primary purpose of this meeting is to finalize the Committee’s 2015 Report on the Effectiveness of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP). The agenda may change to accommodate Committee business. The final agenda and any draft meeting materials will be posted prior to the meeting on the NEHRP Web site at SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44327 https://nehrp.gov/. Interested members of the public will be able to participate in the meeting from remote locations by calling into a central phone number. DATES: The ACEHR will hold a meeting via WEBEX on Friday, August 21, 2015, from 1:00 p.m. until 3:00 p.m. Eastern Time. The meeting will be open to the public. ADDRESSES: Questions regarding the meeting should be sent to National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 804, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899–8604. For instructions on how to participate in the meeting via WEBEX, please see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tina Faecke, Management and Program Analyst, National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, Engineering Laboratory, NIST, 100 Bureau Drive, Mail Stop 8604, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899–8604. Ms. Faecke’s email address is tina.faecke@nist.gov and her phone number is (301) 975–5911. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee was established in accordance with the requirements of Section 103 of the NEHRP Reauthorization Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108–360). The Committee is composed of 15 members appointed by the Director of NIST, who were selected for their established records of distinguished service in their professional community, their knowledge of issues affecting NEHRP, and to reflect the wide diversity of technical disciplines, competencies, and communities involved in earthquake hazards reduction. In addition, the Chairperson of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee (SESAC) serves as an ex-officio member of the Committee. The Committee assesses: • Trends and developments in the science and engineering of earthquake hazards reduction; • the effectiveness of NEHRP in performing its statutory activities; • any need to revise NEHRP; and • the management, coordination, implementation, and activities of NEHRP. Background information on NEHRP and the Advisory Committee is available at https://nehrp.gov/. Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App., notice is hereby given that the ACEHR will hold an open meeting via WEBEX on Friday, August 21, 2015, from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Eastern E:\FR\FM\27JYN1.SGM 27JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 143 (Monday, July 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44326-44327]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18335]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-201-830]


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

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On December 22, 2014, the United States Court of International 
Trade (CIT) entered its final judgment in 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), 
sustaining the Department of Commerce's (the Department) negative 
circumvention determination from the First Remand Results.\1\ 
Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for 
the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (Timken), as clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. 
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (Diamond 
Sawblades), the Department is notifying the public that the final 
judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department's Final 
Determination \2\ that, pursuant to section 781(c) of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.225, Deacero's entries of 
wire rod with an actual diameter of 4.75 millimeters (mm) to 5.00 mm 
constitute circumvention of the Order.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 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 Results).
    \2\ See Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Mexico: 
Affirmative Final Determination of Circumvention of the Antidumping 
Duty Order, 77 FR 59892 (October 1, 2012) (Final Determination) and 
accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (Final Decision 
Memorandum).
    \3\ 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) 
(Order).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: January 1, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Greynolds, 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-
6071.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On October 1, 2012, the Department issued its Final Determination 
in which it determined that Deacero's shipments of wire rod with an 
actual diameter of 4.75 mm to 5.00 mm constitute a circumventing minor 
alteration of the Order.\4\ Deacero challenged the Department's 
determination. Upon review, the CIT remanded the Final Determination, 
holding that the Department improperly determined that wire rod with a 
thickness between 4.75 mm and 5.00 mm was inside the scope despite the 
fact that it was commercially available before the investigation and

[[Page 44327]]

petitioners ``consciously chose to limit the Order's reach to certain 
steel products 5.00 mm or more, but less than 19.00 mm in solid cross-
sectional diameter.'' \5\ On remand, based on the Court's reasoning, 
the Department found that there is no alternative but to change the 
results of the anti-circumvention determination and find on remand that 
4.75 mm wire rod is not within the scope of the Order.\6\ In Deacero 
II, the Court held that although the Department ultimately reached a 
supportable result in the First Remand Results, remand was nonetheless 
necessary because the Department arrived at the result by 
misinterpreting Deacero I.\7\ Therefore, in Deacero II, the Court 
instructed the Department to explain whether it seeks the Court's leave 
to revisit the issue of commercial availability.\8\ In the Second 
Remand Results, the Department continued to respectfully disagree with 
the Court that the ``commercial availability'' of a product in the 
country in question, in a third country or in the United States bars 
the Department from reaching an affirmative anti-circumvention 
determination under the minor alteration provision of the statute.\9\ 
For these same reasons, the Department did not request a remand to 
further consider ``commercial availability'' in the context of this 
minor alteration proceeding. On December 22, 2014, the CIT entered 
final judgment sustaining the First Remand Results.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Final Determination.
    \5\ See Deacero S.A. de C.V. v. United States, 37 CIT, 942 F. 
Supp. 2d 1321, 1324-25 (2013).
    (Deacero I);Deacero Remand, Slip Op. 13-126 at 15.
    \6\ See First Remand Results at 6.
    \7\ See Deacero S.A.P.I. de C.V. v. United States, Slip Op. 14-
99, 2014 WL 4244349, *1-3 (CIT Aug. 28, 2014) (Deacero II) at 11-12.
    \8\ Id. at 12.
    \9\ See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Deacero 
S.A. de C.V. et al v. United States, Court No. 12-00345; Slip Op. 
14-99 (CIT August 28, 2014) (Second Remand Results).
    \10\ See Deacero III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades, the CAFC held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department must publish a 
notice of a court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Department 
determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a 
``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's December 22, 2014 judgment 
sustaining the Department's First Remand Results with respect to 
Deacero's shipments of wire rod with an actual diameter of 4.75 mm to 
5.00 mm not constituting a circumventing minor alteration of the Order 
constitutes a final decision of the Court that is not in harmony with 
the Department's Final Determination. This notice is published in 
fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken.

Amended Final Determination

    Because there is now a final court decision, we are amending the 
Final Determination with respect to Deacero's shipments of wire rod 
with an actual diameter of 4.75 mm to 5.00 mm. Based on the negative 
circumvention determination, Deacero's 4.75 mm wire rod is not subject 
to antidumping duties.
    Accordingly, the Department will continue the suspension of 
liquidation of the subject merchandise, but set the cash deposit rate 
for the 4.75 mm up to 5 mm diameter wire rod to zero pending a final 
and conclusive court decision. For any antidumping duties which have 
been deposited for 4.75 up to 5mm diameter wire rod entered from 
January 1, 2015 to the date of this notice, we will instruct Customs 
and Border Protection to refund the cash deposit upon request but 
continue to suspend the entries at a zero cash deposit rate.

Notification to Interested Parties

    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: July 20, 2015.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2015-18335 Filed 7-24-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.