Federal Register: December 2, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 231)NoticesPage 67561-67562From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
C-427-810Certain Steel Products from France; Notice of Final Court Decision and Amended Final Determination of Countervailing Duty Investigation
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of final court decision and amended final determination of countervailing duty investigation.
SUMMARY: On August 24, 1999, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the U.S. Court of International Trade's decisions sustaining the Department of Commerce's final determination in the countervailing duty investigation of certain steel products from France, as modified by two remand determinations. As there is now a final and conclusive court decision in this action, we are amending our final determination.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rosa Jeong or Blanche Ziv, Office of Antidumping/Countervailing Duty Enforcement, Group I, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 3099, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-3853 and 482-4207, respectively.
On July 9, 1993, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published notice of its final affirmative countervailing duty determination of certain steel products from France. The Department's final determination is set forth in Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determinations; Certain Steel Products from France, 58 FR 37304 (July 9, 1993), and in relevant parts of the General Issues Appendix to Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination; Certain Steel Products from Austria, 58 FR 37217, 37231-36 (July 9, 1993). Subsequent to the publication of the Department's countervailing duty order, the petitioners and the respondents challenged the Department's final determination before the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT).
Thereafter, the CIT issued its decision in British Steel plc v. United States, 879 F. Supp. 1254 (CIT 1995), which addressed general issues common to various countervailing duty investigations of certain steel products which, including the French investigation, had been before the Department concurrently. While affirming the Department's final determination on other general issues, the CIT rejected the Department's reliance on IRS tables showing industry-specific average useful life of assets in determining an allocation period of 15 years. In a subsequent remand determination dated June 30, 1995, the Department calculated a company-specific allocation period for Usinor Sacilor based on the average useful life of non-renewable physical assets, and the CIT affirmed it. British Steel plc v. United States, 929 F. Supp. 426 (CIT 1996).
Meanwhile, the CIT addressed issues specific to the French investigation in three decisions, which affirmed the Department's final determination on all but one issue. With regard to that issue, in Inland Steel Industries, Inc. v. United States, 967 F. Supp. 1338 (1997), the CIT accepted the Department's request for a voluntary remand. Specifically, during the verification of Usinor Sacilor's questionnaire responses, the Department had discovered that six Credit National loans included in the 1991 consolidation of outstanding Credit National loans were export promotion loans. Although in its final concurrence memorandum the Department stated that it would determine these loans to be specific, it inadvertently overlooked these loans in its final determination and calculations. On July 7, 1997, the Department filedits required remand results with the CIT, which were affirmed on December 5, 1997. Inland Steel Industries, Inc. v. United States, 985 F. Supp. 132 (CIT 1997).
Consistent with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's (CAFC) decision in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990), once the CIT litigation was concluded, the Department published a ``Notice of Court Decision'' in the Federal Register on January 12, 1998 (63 FR 1827). In that notice, we stated that we would continue to suspend liquidation of any subject merchandise entered, or
[Page 67562]withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption until a final and conclusive decision in the case was reached. We also announced that we would instruct the Customs Service to change the relevant cash deposit rates in the event that the CIT's ruling is not appealed or the CAFC issues a final decision affirming the CIT's ruling.
On August 24, 1999, in Inland Steel Industries, Inc. v. United States,
Therefore, as there is now a final and conclusive court decision in this case, we are amending our final determination.
Amendment to Final Determination
Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1516a(e), we are now amending our final determination in certain steel products from France. The recalculated net subsidy rate for all programs for Usinor Sacilor and the country- wide rate is 15.13% ad valorem. We will instruct the Customs Service to change the cash deposit requirements accordingly. In addition, because there have been no requests for administrative reviews of the countervailing duty order, the Department will instruct the Customs Service to proceed with liquidation of subject merchandise entered on or after December 7, 1992, the date of the Department's preliminary determination, and before April 6, 1993, the date on which the Department's authority to impose provisional measures lapsed as explained in the final determination, 58 FR at 37314, as well as subject merchandise entered on or after August 17, 1993, the date on which the countervailing duty order was published, and before December 31, 1998, which is the last day of the most recent period for which no administrative review was requested.
Dated: November 19, 1999. Joseph A. Spetrini, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
FR Doc. 99-31300Filed12-1-99; 8:45 amBILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
This document cites
- U.S. Code - Title 19: Customs Duties - 19 USC 1516 - Sec. 1516. Petitions by domestic interested parties
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - the Timken Company, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. the United States, Defendant-Appellant, and China National Machinery and Equipment Import and Export Corporation, Defendant-Appellee., 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990)
See other documents that cite the same legislation