66358 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 216 / Friday, November 7, 2014 / Notices 

13 Id. 

1See Deacero’s October 31, 2013, letter to the 

Department. 

2See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, 

Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity 

To Request Administrative Review, 78 FR 60847) 

(October 1, 2013). 

3See Initiation of Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and 

Request for Revocation in Part, 78 FR 72630 

(December 3, 2013). 

instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at 

the PRC-wide rate. In addition, if the 

Department determines that an exporter 

under review had no shipments of the 

subject merchandise, any suspended 

entries that entered under that 

exporter’s case number (i.e., at that 

exporter’s rate) will be liquidated at the 

PRC-wide rate.13

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following cash deposit 

requirements will be effective upon 

publication of the final results of this 

administrative review for shipments of 

the subject merchandise from the PRC 

entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, 

for consumption on or after the 

publication date, as provided by 

sections 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The 

cash deposit rate for Jiangsu RC, which 

has a separate rate, will be that 

established in the final results of this 

review (except, if the rate is zero or de 

minimis, then zero cash deposit will be 

required); (2) for previously investigated 

or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters 

not listed above that received a separate 

rate in a prior segment of this 

proceeding, the cash deposit rate will 

continue to be the existing exporterspecific rate; (3) for all PRC exporters of 

subject merchandise that have not been 

found to be entitled to a separate rate, 

the cash deposit rate will be that for the 

PRC-wide entity (128.63 percent); and 

(4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject 

merchandise which have not received 

their own rate, the cash deposit rate will 

be the rate applicable to the PRC 

exporter that supplied that non-PRC 

exporter. These cash deposit 

requirements, when imposed, shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

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 

Department’s presumption that 

reimbursement of antidumping duties 

occurred and the subsequent assessment 

of double antidumping duties. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.221(b)(4). 

Dated: October 31, 2014. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

Appendix I—List of Topics Discussed in 

the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 

1. Background 

2. Scope of the Order 

3. Intent Not To Rescind Review in Part 

4. Discussion of the Methodology 

a. Non-Market Economy Country 

b. Separate Rates 

c. Surrogate Country 

5. Use of Facts Available 

6. Fair Value Comparisons 

a. Determination of Comparison Method 

b. Results of the Differential Pricing 

Analysis 

c. U.S. Price 

d. Normal Value 

e. Factor Valuations 

7. Currency Conversion 

8. Recommendation 

[FR Doc. 2014–26542 Filed 11–6–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

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; 2012–2013 

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 from Mexico. 

The period of review (POR) is October 

1, 2012 through September 30, 2013. 

The review was initiated at the request 

of Deacero S.A. de C.V. and Deacero 

USA, Inc. (collectively ‘‘Deacero’’).1 We 

preliminarily find that during the POR, 

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. 

If these preliminary results are 

adopted in the final results of this 

administrative review, we will instruct 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP) to assess antidumping duties on 

all appropriate entries of subject 

merchandise during the POR. Interested 

parties are invited to comment on these 

preliminary results. See ‘‘Preliminary 

Results of Review’’ section of this 

notice. 

DATES: Effective Date: November 7, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Conniff, 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– 

482–1009. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On October 2, 2013, the Department 

published in the Federal Register the 

notice of ‘‘Opportunity to Request 

Administrative Review’’ of the 

antidumping duty order on carbon and 

certain alloy steel wire rod from Mexico, 

for the period of October 1, 2012 

through September 30, 2013.2 On 

December 3, 2013, the Department 

published the notice of initiation of this 

antidumping duty administrative review 

with respect to Deacero.3

Scope of the Order 

The merchandise subject to this 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, 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, available in 

Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: 

Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire 

Rod from Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, 

Moldova, Trinidad and Tobago, and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 216 / Friday, November 7, 2014 / Notices 66359 

4See 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). 

5See 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). 

6 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). 

7See 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). 

8See 19 CFR 351.224(b). 

Ukraine, 67 FR 65945 (October 29, 

2002),4 remains dispositive. 

On October 1, 2012, the Department 

published Carbon and Certain Alloy 

Steel Wire Rod From Mexico: 

Affirmative Final Determination of 

Circumvention of the Antidumping Duty 

Order.5 The Department found that 

shipments of wire rod with an actual 

diameter of 4.75 mm to 5.00 mm 

produced in Mexico and exported to the 

United States by Deacero constitute 

merchandise altered in form or 

appearance in such minor respects that 

it should be included within the scope 

of the order on wire rod from Mexico. 

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 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 

memorandum from Christian Marsh, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Operations, to Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance, 

‘‘Decision Memorandum for Preliminary 

Results of 2012/13 Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review: Carbon and 

Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from 

Mexico’’ (Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum), dated concurrently with 

these preliminary results and 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 

(IA ACCESS). IA ACCESS is available to 

registered users at http://

iaaccess.trade.gov, and it is available to 

all parties in the Central Records Unit 

(CRU), Room 7046 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 margin for 

the POR is as follows: 

Producer/Exporter 

Weightedaverage 

dumping 

margin 

(percent) 

Deacero S.A. de C.V ............ 0.59 

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. Deacero reported the name of 

the importer of record and the entered 

value for all of its sales to the United 

Stated during the POR. If Deacero’s 

weighted-average dumping margin is 

not zero or de minimis (i.e., less than 0.5 

percent), we will calculate importerspecific 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).6

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 not zero or de minimis. Where 

either the respondent’s weightedaverage 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. 

The Department clarified its 

‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on 

May 6, 2003. This clarification will 

apply to 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. In such instances, 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 will be equal to 

the weighted-average dumping margin 

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 allothers rate established in the 

investigation.7 These cash deposit 

requirements, when imposed, shall 

remain in effect until further notice. 

Disclosure and Public Comment 

The Department intends to disclose to 

interested parties the calculations 

performed in connection with these 

preliminary results within five days of 

the date of publication of this notice.8

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c), 

interested parties may submit cases 

briefs not later than 30 days after the 

date of publication of this notice. 

Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

66360 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 216 / Friday, November 7, 2014 / Notices 

9See 19 CFR 351.309(d). 

10See 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2). 

11See 19 CFR 351.310(c). 

in the case briefs, may be filed not later 

than five days after the date for filing 

case briefs.9 Parties who submit case 

briefs or rebuttal briefs in this 

proceeding are encouraged to submit 

with each argument: (1) A statement of 

the issue, (2) a brief summary of the 

argument, and (3) a table of 

authorities.10 Case and rebuttal briefs 

must be filed electronically via IA 

ACCESS. An electronically filed 

document must be received successfully 

in its entirety by the Department’s 

electronic records system, IA ACCESS, 

by 5 p.m. Eastern Time in order for it 

to have been submitted timely on that 

day. 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), 

interested parties who wish to request a 

hearing, or to participate if one is 

requested, must submit a written 

request to the Assistant Secretary for 

Enforcement and Compliance, filed 

electronically via IA ACCESS within 30 

days after the date of publication of this 

notice.11 Requests should contain: (1) 

The party’s name, address, and 

telephone number; (2) the number of 

participants; and (3) a list of the issues 

to be discussed. Issues raised in the 

hearing will be limited to those raised 

in the respective case briefs. The 

Department intends to issue the final 

results of this administrative review, 

including the results of its analysis of 

the issues raised by the parties in any 

written briefs, not later 120 days after 

the date of publication of this notice, 

pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the 

Act. 

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. 

Notification to Interested Parties 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results in accordance with sections 

751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.213. 

Dated: October 31, 2014. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement 

and Compliance. 

Appendix—List of Topics Discussed in 

the Preliminary Decision Memorandum 

1. Summary 

2. Background 

3. Scope of the Order 

4. Discussion of Methodology 

a. Universe of Sales 

b. Fair Value Comparisons 

c. Product Comparisons 

d. Date of Sale 

e. U.S. Price 

f. Normal Value 

g. Affiliated Respondents 

h. Cost of Production Analysis 

i. Currency Conversion 

5. Conclusion 

[FR Doc. 2014–26424 Filed 11–6–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XD572 

Availability of Report: California 

Eelgrass Mitigation Policy and 

Implementing Guidelines 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: NMFS is issuing this notice to 

provide the final California Eelgrass 

Mitigation Policy (CEMP) and 

Implementing Guidelines by NMFS 

West Coast Region (WCR) to agencies 

and the public to ensure there is a clear 

and transparent process for developing 

eelgrass mitigation recommendations. 

The intent of the CEMP is to help ensure 

consistent, effective, and appropriate 

mitigation of unavoidable impacts to 

eelgrass habitat throughout California. It 

is anticipated that the adoption and 

implementation of this policy will 

provide for enhanced success of eelgrass 

mitigation in California. The CEMP and 

Implementing Guidelines, responses to 

comments received on the draft CEMP, 

and other supporting documents are 

available at http://wcr.nmfs.noaa.gov/

habitat/ or by calling the contact person 

listed below or by sending a request to 

Korie.Schaeffer@noaa.gov. Please 

include appropriate contact information 

when requesting the documents. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Korie Schaeffer, at 707–575–6087. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Eelgrass 

species are seagrasses that occur in the 

temperate unconsolidated substrate of 

shallow coastal environments, enclosed 

bays, and estuaries. California supports 

dynamic eelgrass habitats that range in 

extent from less than 11,000 acres to 

possibly as much as 15,000 acres 

statewide. While among the most 

productive of habitats, the overall low 

statewide abundance makes eelgrass one 

of the rarest habitats in California. 

Seagrass habitat has been lost from 

temperate estuaries worldwide (Duarte 

2002, Lotze et al. 2006, Orth et al. 2006). 

While both natural and human-induced 

mechanisms have contributed to these 

losses, impacts from human population 

expansion and associated pollution and 

upland development is the primary 

cause (Short and Wyllie-Echeverria 

1996). Human activities that affect 

eelgrass habitat distribution and 

abundance, including, but not limited 

to, urban development, harbor 

development, aquaculture, agricultural 

runoff, effluent discharges, and upland 

land use associated sediment discharge 

(Duarte 2008) occur throughout 

California. The importance of eelgrass 

both ecologically and economically, 

coupled with ongoing human pressure 

and potentially increasing degradation 

and losses associated with climate 

change, highlight the need to protect, 

maintain, and where feasible, enhance 

eelgrass habitat. 

Eelgrass warrants a strong protection 

strategy because of the important 

biological, physical, and economic 

values it provides, as well as its 

importance to managed species under 

the Magnuson Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act. 

NMFS developed the CEMP and 

Implementing Guidelines to establish 

and support a goal of protecting this 

resource and its habitat functions, 

including spatial coverage and density 

of eelgrass habitats. The CEMP includes 

NMFS’ policy to recommend no net loss 

of eelgrass habitat function in 

California. For all of California, 

compensatory mitigation should be 

recommended for the loss of existing 

eelgrass habitat function, but only after 

avoidance and minimization of effects 

to eelgrass have been pursued to the 

maximum extent practicable. Our 

approach is congruous with the 

approach taken in the federal Clean 

Water Act guidelines under section 

404(b)(1) (40 CFR part 230). In absence 

of a complete functional assessment, 

eelgrass distribution and density should 

serve as a proxy for eelgrass habitat 

function. Compensatory mitigation 

options include comprehensive 

management plans, in-kind mitigation, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES