[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 12, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-25222]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: October 12, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
Proposed Changes to Administrative Protective Order Procedures in
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings, APO Application Form
and Standard APO
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice and request for comment on proposed changes to
administrative protective order (APO) procedures in antidumping and
countervailing duty proceedings, APO application form and standard APO.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The International Trade Administration (ITA) of the Department
of Commerce is considering three significant changes in its APO
practice: (1) The adoption of a single revised application for an APO
containing all of the conditions the ITA will require concerning the
use and limited disclosure of hard copy and electronic APO information;
(2) the adoption of a single, standard APO to be placed on the record
of each case by the administering office, and (3) the issuance of an
approved APO list of signatories to the APO. The revised application
and APO respond to the concerns and requests of the Trade Bar that
regularly uses our APO procedures. Copies of the proposed revised
application for APO and the proposed standard APO are printed at the
end of this notice, and are available in the Central Records Unit.
Written comments will be considered before the ITA issues a final
decision regarding this matter, if received not later than 60 days
after publication of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann Sebastian, for Investigations, at
(202) 482-3354, Maureen McPhillips, for Compliance, at (202) 482-3019,
or Andrew Lee Beller, Central Records Unit, Import Administration, at
(202) 482-1248.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
ITA's APO procedures apply to the vast quantity of proprietary
information ITA receives in the course of its administrative
antidumping duty (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) proceedings from
both foreign governments and companies, and the U.S. domestic industry.
The Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. 1905, prevents a federal agency from
disclosing business proprietary information unless a specific exemption
is provided by statute. Section 777 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19
U.S.C. 1677a, however, provides an exemption for the ITA from the Trade
Secrets Act, and permits limited disclosure of business proprietary
information under an APO to representatives of parties to specific
proceedings for which the proprietary information was submitted. The
purpose of limited disclosure is to provide representatives with the
information necessary to fully represent the interests of the parties
in open and fair proceedings.
The ITA last revised its APO application, procedures, and relevant
regulations in 1989 in order to implement the provisions of The Omnibus
Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (the Omnibus Trade Act) affecting
access under APO. The Omnibus Trade Act broadened the scope of
disclosure of business proprietary information under APO, required
direct service of APO information on authorized parties, and
established statutory deadlines for the release of APO information.
Given the dramatic increase in the amount of information submitted in
ITA's proceedings, as well as in the increased desire for access to
electronic media, the 1989 APO application and procedures reflected
ITA's concerns that information in both hard copy and electronic form
be adequately protected.
Under these still current procedures, ITA's APO application and the
APO itself contain detailed restrictions on the use and distribution of
proprietary information. A party's representative submits an APO
application, and the ITA generally issues an APO to that
representative. Except for instances where a party is represented by
co-counsel, a party may have only one representative for each
proceeding. If a party wishes to have an additional representative, it
must operate through the single representative. Any time a party wishes
to add or change a representative, it must file an additional APO
application, and the ITA will issue an amended APO.
After 5 years of experience with the 1989 procedures, and after
consultation with the Bar Committee representing the International Law
Section of the District of Columbia Bar, the Section of International
Law and Practice of the American Bar Association, the International
Trade Commission Trial Lawyers Association, and the Customs and
International Trade Bar Association (the Committee), we believe it is
time to reevaluate and revise our procedures. The Committee polled its
members on various issues. Through this cooperative effort, the ITA is
proposing changes that reduce the micromanagement of a representative's
handling of business proprietary information, allow for two independent
representatives to have APOs in a proceeding, and provide for the
issuance of a single APO on the record in each proceeding, rather than
the issuance of multiple APOs to each representative. We believe that
the proposed changes will provide for effective and practicable
protection of business proprietary information, expedite issuance of
APOs and APO amendments, and reduce the number of APO violations.
Proposed Changes
The proposed changes to the APO application and the procedures are
discussed below.
(1) Revised Application for APO
At the recommendation of the Committee, we propose removing overly
restrictive conditions in the application for APO and the APO itself,
while retaining the critical restrictions necessary to protect the APO
information. The proposed changes will streamline the process for both
the parties and the ITA. Under current procedures, ITA issues one APO
for proprietary information submitted on hard copy, and a different APO
for proprietary information submitted on electronic medium, the so-
called ``computer tape'' APO. The tape APO contains numerous additional
restrictions.
The proposed APO application incorporates three restrictions
concerning electronic data and eliminates additional conditions that
the ITA has traditionally placed in its computer tape APOs. The
significant changes to the APO application are set forth below.
Representation
The proposed APO application (Items 1 and 7) allows a party to the
proceeding to have two independent representatives. Item 7 of the
application defines a ``representative'' as an attorney or non-legal
specialist associated with a single firm, who is acting on behalf of
the party to the proceeding. Separate applications can be filed by
applicants from more than one law firm or non-legal specialist firm
acting on behalf of the party or parties to the proceeding. When an
interested party has representatives from two different firms, the lead
representative that will be the primary contact for the Department must
be identified. A ``lead'' representative must be designated either in
the transmittal letter to the ITA, or in the APO application, if more
than one representative is retained. A non-legal specialist may
function as the ``lead'' representative. The ITA does not wish to
consider authorizing more than two representatives (i.e., firms) on
behalf of a party as it may cause confusion and create difficulties in
administering the proceeding.
The current application for APO requires that an attorney assume
responsibility for a non-legal ``other representative'' if an attorney
has been retained to represent a party to the proceeding. The proposed
modification will allow a party greater flexibility in its choice of
representation and would allow a party to hire a second representative,
an economic consultant or ``other representative,'' separate from a law
firm. In addition, the ITA will only allow a non-legal representative
access to proprietary information if that representative has a
relatively active practice before the ITA, so that barring practice
before the ITA is an effective sanction in the event the representative
abuses the APO system. In this circumstance, the ITA will consider the
non-attorney applicant's established practice before the ITA and proven
reliability before granting the requested APO.
Word Processing Duplication of APO Application
The proposed APO application (Item 2) allows the applicant to
produce page 1, and the names of the representatives and their
affiliations (Items 29 and 30) on a word processing system to
facilitate the application process. To prevent unauthorized alteration
of the content of the substantive requirements contained in the
application, the main body of the application may only be photocopied
by the applicant.
Parties have requested that the ITA consider allowing the entire
application to be reproduced on the applicant's word processing system
to facilitate the application process. Based on prior practice we do
not find this acceptable because of the possibility of an inadvertent
error in the preparation of the application by the applicant, and
because ITA would be required to review every application to ensure it
was consistent with the standard form. In the past the ITA allowed
applicants to submit versions of the ITA's applications that had been
prepared on the applicants' own word processing system, and at times
found that applicants made significant changes. The increased review
time made it difficult for the ITA to issue APOs in a timely fashion.
To address the concerns of the Bar Committee's request, however, we
have revised the format of the application containing the terms and
conditions of disclosure, and are proposing that the sections of the
application that require typing from the representatives be reproduced
on the applicants' word processing system. Page 1 of the application
identifies the case and the segment of the proceeding in which access
to proprietary data is being sought. It also identifies the request as
the original application or an amended request. Items 29 and 30 require
the applicant's name, signature, date of application, firm, and the
identification of admission to a bar or court if an attorney, and any
professional associations for a non-attorney ``other representative''.
The main body of the application, however, may only be photocopied by
the applicant. In continuing to require that the main portion of the
application be photocopied only, and allowing page 1, and Items 29 and
30 to be reproduced on a word processing system, the ITA will limit the
time necessary for administrative review, and also facilitate the
application process for the applicant.
An alternative is to permit a representative to reproduce the
entire form on its word processing equipment, but certify that it is
identical to the ITA standard form, and agree that any if there are any
discrepancies, the parties are bound by the standard form. We invite
comments on these proposals.
Time Limits
The ITA is searching for a practice that will reduce the number of
untimely applications. In accordance with the current regulations, the
present application sets forth strict deadlines. Timeliness in
submitting an application for APO continues to be a major issue of
concern for the ITA and the applicant. The ITA does not wish to impair
a party's ability to fully represent its client. The ITA, however, must
impose an application deadline in order to properly administer the APO
function, and the earlier in the proceeding, the more efficient the
process for the ITA.
The proposed application changes the deadline as set forth in 19
CFR 353.34(b) or 355.34(b) to require that the application be filed
with the first written submission made by a party after it has retained
a representative, but in no event later than the date the case briefs
are due (Item 5). A written submission is any written correspondence by
a representative with the ITA in the course of an AD or CVD proceeding
on behalf of a party to the proceeding. The proposed change in this
area mandates a firm deadline, however it will allow greater
flexibility for a party to retain a representative at a later date in
the proceeding. The representative must apply for an APO with its first
written submission made on behalf of its client. Failure to apply at
that time would result in a subsequently filed application for APO
being denied as untimely. Applications filed after the date the case
briefs are due will not be approved.
Another alternative is to require parties to file a notice of
appearance, and to file the APO application with the notice of
appearance. The ITA also intends to remind parties in its notices of
initiation of a proceeding to file an early APO application. We invite
comment on these two proposals, as well as other suggestions on what
procedures the ITA can implement to obtain timely APO applications
early in proceedings.
Electronic Business Proprietary Information Defined
The proposed application defines the term ``electronic data'' to
include (1) proprietary data submitted by a party, generated by the
ITA, or entered by the recipient on computer tape, disk, diskette, or
any other electronic computer medium, and (2) all electronic work
products resulting from manipulation of this data, as transferred in
any form onto any other electronic computer medium, such as tape, disk,
diskette, Bernoulli cartridge, removable disk pack, etc. (Item 9 of the
proposed APO application).
The term ``electronic data'' has been defined in the ITA's current
``computer tape'' APOs. Because the ITA will no longer issue applicant-
specific ``computer tape'' APOs under the proposed system, the
definition has been moved to the application. The conditions that the
ITA will require for the routine use and protection of ``electronic
data'' will be in the application. The specific ``computer tape''
requirements to ensure protection of electronic information are
discussed below.
Request for Information
The proposed application requires all parties to obtain an APO
covering all business proprietary information submitted in the
proceeding, but allows the applicant the choice of receiving hard copy
information only, or hard copy and electronic information (Item 10 of
the proposed application). Furthermore, parties may waive the right to
be served with the business proprietary information of other parties in
which they have no interest.
The statute and regulations provide for the release of all business
proprietary information in a proceeding (19 U.S.C. 1677f(c)(1)(A) and
19 CFR Sec. 353.34 or 355.34). In practice, however, the ITA has not
always required parties to request all proprietary information, and has
allowed parties to request only the information they wanted to receive.
For administrative convenience, in the 1992 steel investigations the
ITA asked parties to request access to ``all business proprietary
information'' under APO. We have continued this practice in current
proceedings, and most parties are now routinely requesting access to
all proprietary information under APO. Furthermore, as in the steel
investigations, parties may waive the right to be served with the
business proprietary submissions of other respondents in which they
have no interest. Respondents' counsel will, however, be required to
accept submissions by petitioners that may contain business proprietary
information of several parties. The adoption of this practice will
allow parties to prepare only one APO version of business proprietary
documents and will not require the preparation of multiple APO-specific
versions for each party. Additionally, it will reduce the possibility
of APO violations because all parties subject to APO will have access
to all information. In order to ensure that parties are provided with a
means of identification for multiple source data in submissions, the
ITA will amend Secs. 353.32 and 355.32 of the Department of Commerce's
regulations to provide specific instruction concerning the
identification of this information. This will greatly assist all
parties in providing their clients with needed information to present
their case while minimizing the risk of inadvertent disclosure.
The APO application also provides the applicant with the choice of
receiving hard copy information only, or hard copy and electronic
information. Should the applicant choose to receive electronic
information, the applicant does not need to provide any additional
documentation to the ITA concerning this portion of the APO request.
The ITA will no longer require an explanation of the applicant's
computer system or the procedures that will be followed in working with
information in electronic form because the applicant will now be
required to establish its own procedures to ensure the protection of
APO information in electronic and hard copy form. The Bar Committee
emphasized that it was not necessary for the ITA to set forth specific
requirements/restrictions in the application or the APO because they
were unnecessary and overly restrictive, considering the experience
that has been gained by the Trade Bar in working with business
proprietary information subject to APO.
Internal Procedures
A primary area of concern noted by the Bar Committee is the ITA's
perceived micromanagement of the APO area. Under current APO practice,
specific procedures are mandated by the application and APO. In our
discussions, the Bar Committee frequently stressed the experience that
has been gained by the Trade Bar in working with business proprietary
information subject to APO. The Bar Committee emphasized that it was
not necessary for the ITA to set forth detailed requirements or
restrictions in the application or in the APO, such as the requirement
that the use of APO data be restricted to the business office premises,
the prohibition concerning the facsimile transmission of APO data, or
the requirement that an APO Log be maintained. In response to this
concern, we have removed these requirements and restrictions from the
proposed application, and now require the applicant to establish its
own internal procedures to protect the APO information, rather than
have the procedures mandated by ITA (Item 13 of the application). To
assist a party in establishing its own adequate internal procedures,
the ITA will maintain guidelines concerning general procedures for
protecting APO information and more specific suggestions concerning the
establishment of written office procedures. The quality of a party's
internal procedures will be taken into consideration by the ITA in an
APO violation investigation.
The major burden we are placing on parties is that they adopt
procedures to ensure that the applicant does not disclose any of the
APO information to anyone other than the submitter and other persons
authorized to have access to the information in accordance with the
requirements set forth in the DOC's regulations. We are continuing to
require that the applicant use the information solely for the segment
of the ITA proceeding in which it is submitted. Any other use of the
information, including its use before the International Trade
Commission in its proceeding, is a violation of the ITA's APO.
Protection of Electronic Business Proprietary Information
The proposed application prohibits the applicant from seeking
assistance from the ITA in handling or processing electronic data/
medium served on the applicant by a party other than the ITA (Item 14
of the application). In an effort to reduce the complexity of the
proposed standard APO, and to avoid any misconceptions on this matter,
we have included this condition from the ``computer tape'' APOs in the
proposed application.
The ITA is responsible for conducting its proceedings within
statutory deadlines and does not possess the capability of providing
instruction to parties who may be unfamiliar with computer processing.
Should a party experience difficulty in handling or processing
electronic data/media served on them pursuant to an APO, the party
should seek assistance from the provider of the information. The ITA,
of course, will provide appropriate assistance concerning electronic
information prepared and released by the ITA.
The proposed application requires the applicant to ensure that APO
information entered on computers will only be resident in the computer
at times when programs are actually being run, and will not be
accessible via modem or network (Items 15 and 16). These requirements
are also taken from the ``computer tape'' APOs.
The ITA's ``computer tape'' APOs have been a major area of concern
for the Trade Bar. Generally it is felt that the ITA has been overly
restrictive in its requirements concerning electronic data. The
standard ``computer tape'' requirements were developed in response to
the Court of International Trade's directive that the ITA craft an
administrative protective order specifically designed to provide a
heightened degree of protection necessary to protect sensitive
electronic data. In light of the experience we have now gained in
routinely releasing this information under APO, and in view of the
comments we have received from the Trade Bar, we have determined that
two conditions, as set forth in items 15 and 16 of the application, are
critical to the protection of this sensitive data. Electronic
information resident in a computer is most vulnerable. Therefore, we
believe that electronic data released under APO should only be resident
in a computer when it is actually being used (Item 15). At the time it
is resident in the computer and programs are actually being run, access
via modem or network must be rendered impossible (Item 16). Compliance
with these two conditions will prevent unauthorized access via
electronic means.
Certification Requirements
There are two separate certification requirements in the proposed
application. The first concerns the departure of a representative from
a firm, and the second concerns the transition from an ITA APO to a
judicial protective order. The proposed application requires the
applicant to certify to the ITA compliance with the terms of the APO
prior to departure from the applicant's current firm, and to submit a
new application if appropriate (Item 17). This procedure does not
change the established practice.
Although the current application requires an applicant to notify
the ITA if any of the facts in the application change, many parties are
not certain of the procedures that should be followed when an
individual subject to an APO leaves a firm prior to the completion of
the proceeding. Item 17 provides particular guidance to the applicant,
and sets forth within the application specific procedures to be
followed. Additionally, the proposed APO Guidelines outline the
preferred procedure for handling the transfer of APO information should
a change in representation occur during the course of a segment of a
proceeding.
The proposed application requires the applicant to certify to the
return or destruction of the APO information within ten business days
of the expiration of the time for filing for judicial or panel review
at the end of the case (Item 18). Failure to do so is a violation of
the APO. The ITA is making renewed efforts to ensure that this
important provision is strictly adhered to. The ITA is publishing
reminders in its Federal Register notices reminding parties about this
requirement. In the proposed application, we have significantly
increased from the two-day time limit required by the current
application. The current application requires that applicants certify
to the return or destruction of APO information within two business
days of the expiration of the time for filing for, or intervening in, a
judicial or panel review at the end of the case. The increase in time
to ten business days allows the applicant sufficient time to be
notified of a judicial or panel appeal. The ITA has routinely granted
extensions to this deadline when requested, and will adjust this
deadline for the convenience of the parties. The extended deadline is
reasonable, and does not compromise the security of the APO
information.
The proposed application requires the applicant to provide a copy
of the judicial protective order (JPO) to the appropriate ITA official
(Item 19). This will assist the ITA in tracking the certifications
required by Item 18 above. This item provides the ITA with an
additional safeguard to confirm that APO information is properly
protected at the conclusion of a case. The certification required by
Item 18, or a copy of a JPO required by this condition, will assist the
ITA in tracking the final disposition of materials released under APO.
The following items have not changed.
Items 3, 4 and 6 provide basic instructions for the filing and
service of the application, and refer the applicant to the appropriate
sections of the ITA regulations that pertain to the release of
proprietary information under APO. Items 20 through 25 require the
applicant to (1) acknowledge sanctions for the breach of the conditions
of the protective order, (2) inform the ITA if any of the facts in the
application change during the existence of the requested APO, (3)
affirm that all statements in the application are true, accurate, and
complete, (4) agree to be bound by the terms stated in the APO, (5)
assume responsibility for the violation of the APO by any employees of
the firm who are granted access to APO information, and (6) identify
the party represented. Items 26 and 27 require an attorney applicant or
non-attorney applicant to answer particular questions concerning any
other relationship the applicant may have with that party. Item 28
requires the identification and signatures of support staff and
reiterates the assumption of responsibility for any violation of the
protective order by those individuals.
(2) The Proposed Standard APO
We are proposing that a standard APO be placed on the record of
each segment of a proceeding shortly after the initiation notice is
published in the Federal Register. It should be understood that the
``standard APO'' will be specific to each segment of a proceeding,
thereby allowing for modifications, if necessary, to fit the specific
circumstances of different proceedings. Generally, however, the
standard APO is the version on which we are seeking comment. The ITA's
current practice is to issue one standard APO to all of the applicants
from the same firm; ``other representatives'' retained by the attorney
or non-attorney representative are listed on the same APO. The
placement of one APO on the record of each segment of the proceeding
would eliminate specific APOs for the separate parties and streamline
the administrative process.
The proposed APO contains the standard language that is already
used in ITA APOs, and requires the release of all business proprietary
information in a proceeding which the submitting party agrees to
release or the ITA determines to release, except for the information
noted below that is exempt from APO release in accordance with statute
and regulations: customer names in an investigation only (Section
135(b) of the Customs and Trade Act of 1990 specifically amended
Section 777 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677f) to prohibit the
release of customer names by Commerce during any investigation which
requires an injury determination by the International Trade Commission
until either an order is published as a result of the investigation or
the investigation is suspended or terminated.); privileged information;
classified information; and specific information of a type for which
the ITA determines there is a clear and compelling need to withhold
from disclosure.
The proposed APO sets forth three procedures regarding electronic
data. Procedures 1 and 2 are taken from the current ``computer tape''
APO. Procedure 1 requires direct service of electronic data on a party
authorized to receive information in this form and requires that the
electronic information submitted to the ITA be APO releasable in its
entirety. Procedure 2 requires the requesting party to pay the
submitter of the electronic data for copying costs and the medium if
the applicant requests access to information in electronic form.
Procedure 2 does not, however, set a recommended price structure for
the electronic data/medium. Although current ``computer tape'' APOs
suggest a price limit for the reproduction costs of a computer tape or
floppy disk/diskette, we do not believe that the ITA should be involved
in pricing materials over which we have no direct knowledge. The APO
requires the party requesting electronic data to pay all reasonable
costs incurred by the submitter of the data for the copying of its
electronic data released to the applicant. It states that reasonable
costs may include the cost of the electronic medium and the cost of
copying the complete proprietary version of the electronic data/medium
submitted to the ITA in APO releasable form. The APO further states
that the amount charged for copying the electronic data may not include
costs borne by the submitter of the electronic data in the creation of
the electronic data/medium submitted to the ITA for use in presenting
its case. Procedure 3 releases electronic data generated by the ITA
through established procedures. The ITA has not released its own
proceeding-specific computer programs and resulting output in
electronic form under APO on a routine basis. Procedures are now being
developed to provide for the release of this information when it is
requested. We have not required that all parties ask for release of
electronic data in order to limit proliferation of information in this
sensitive form.
(3) The Proposed APO Service List
The final change to ITA procedures implementing a streamlined APO
process is the issuance of an ITA APO Service List that contains the
names of the approved applicants. The ITA's current practice is to (1)
issue a specific standard APO to the representatives of a party from
the same firm or firms, (2) send a letter to parties to the proceeding
who are required to serve proprietary information as a result of the
APO being issued, and (3) amend the APO as requests for amendment are
submitted. The adoption of an APO Service List would provide a single
list designating all parties authorized to receive proprietary
information under the APO. As requests for amendment are received, the
APO Service List would be amended. The proposed APO list would be made
available to parties through the Central Records Unit, in Room B-099 of
the main Commerce building.
The adoption of this procedure would not, however, address the
responsibility of the ITA to provide the APO Service List to counsel
who are not located in the Washington, DC. area and parties who do not
have counsel and are, also, not located in the Washington, DC. area. In
the foreseeable future, the ITA intends to make the service list
available electronically, and parties can easily determine who is on
the service list. In the meantime, we welcome proposals on how out-of-
town parties can most efficiently receive timely notice of the service
list.
Unchanged APO Administrative Procedures
The filing requirements for APO applications will not be changed by
the adoption of the proposed procedures for APO. The ITA will continue
to approve or deny APOs within the established deadlines (19 CFR
353.34(b)(5) or 355.34(b)(5)). Should there be an objection to either
the issuance of an APO to a particular party, or an objection to the
release of particular information, the ITA will continue to address
these issues in a separate decision memorandum in accordance with 19
CFR 353.34(c) or 355.34(c).
Required Regulation Changes
Should the proposed APO Application and Standard APO be adopted, it
will be necessary to amend the following four sections of the ITA
Regulations accordingly:
(1) Sections 353.34(b) and 355.34(b) regarding the application
deadline;
(2) Sections 353.31 and 355.31 regarding the identification of
multiple source data;
(3) Sections 353.34(a) and 355.34(a) regarding customer names in an
investigation only; and
(4) Sections 353.32(a)(2) and 355.32(a)(2) to provide a means of
identification of customer names in an investigation only, such as
double bracketing ([[ ]]).
Additional Considerations
The Bar Committee requested that the ITA consider alternate means
of providing expedited treatment for APO approval. One proposal was to
allow one lead signatory to apply from each law firm or consulting firm
and to give that individual the authority and responsibility for
granting access to other professionals within the firm. We do not
believe that this is a workable procedure because it does not permit
any representative or the ITA to know who has access to APO material at
a given moment. Nor does it permit other parties to the proceeding an
opportunity to comment on the acceptability of the individual seeking
access under APO. While the ITA does not seek approval from parties
prior to the granting of an APO, the ITA does consider objections if
any are made. ITA regulations require that the application for APO be
served on all parties to the proceeding in order to notify all parties
of the APO request and to provide the opportunity for comment. If an
applicant needed expedited approval on a request for an amended APO,
approval could be obtained by the applicant from the parties whose
information would be disclosed under the APO prior to the submission of
the APO application, which would then preclude need for a comment
period.
Another proposal was to have the ITA approve a roster of members of
a representative's firm, and the lead representative could add any
member of the roster to its APO at any time. If a roster is approved by
the ITA, however, it might be just as easy to add all approved members
to the service list when they are approved. The ITA seeks comments on
these approaches and any other suggestions.
It was also suggested that the ITA provide ``APO Guidelines'' to
assist firms in handling business proprietary information released
under APO. The ITA will make ``APO Guidelines'' available, and will
also hold a public training session on implementation of the changes
that are adopted.
Finally, the Committee report addressed the problem of public
summaries at length but did not propose any solutions. The ITA is a
strong advocate of public summaries that a representative can use for a
constructive dialogue with his or her client. We invite proposals to
address the problems parties have in making public summaries of
proprietary information.
Comments
Written comments will be considered before the ITA issues a final
decision regarding this matter, if received not later than sixty
business days after publication of this notice. Address written
comments to Susan G. Esserman, Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration, and file (10) copies with the Central Records Unit,
room B-099, U.S. Department of Commerce, Pennsylvania Avenue and 14th
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20230. Comments should be addressed:
Attention: Notice of Proposed Changes to Administrative Protective
Order Procedures in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings.
Dated: October 4, 1994.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
TN12OC94.027
TN12OC94.028
TN12OC94.029
TN12OC94.030
TN12OC94.031
TN12OC94.032
TN12OC94.033
TN12OC94.034
TN12OC94.035
TN12OC94.036
TN12OC94.037
TN12OC94.038
TN12OC94.039
[FR Doc. 94-25222 Filed 10-11-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-C
