[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 98 (Monday, May 20, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 25207]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12518]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[C-351-818; C-201-810; C-412-815]
Notice of Court Decision: Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel
Plate From Brazil, Mexico, and the United Kingdom
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of Court Decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 2, 1996, the United States Court of International
Trade (CIT) affirmed the remand determinations made by the Department
of Commerce (the Department) that the privatizations of Usinas
Siderurgicas de Minas Gerais (USIMINAS), Altos Hornos de Mexico
(AHMSA), and British Steel plc (BS plc), respectively, were sales of
shares, and that the privatized entities continued to be, for all
intents and purposes, the same entities that had received the subsidies
prior to privatization. British Steel Plc. et al. v. United States,
Slip Op. 96-6011 (British Steel II). In so doing, the Court implicitly
rejected the Department's ``repayment'' methodology set forth in the
privatization portion of its General Issues Appendix, which is appended
to the Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain
Steel Products from Austria, 58 FR 37217, 37259 (July 9, 1993).
EFFECTIVE DATE:May 20, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roy A. Malmrose, Office of
Countervailing Investigations, or Brian Albright, Office of
Countervailing Compliance, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
5414 and (202) 482-2786 respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In its Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determinations: Certain Steel Products from Brazil, 58 FR 37295 (July
9, 1993), Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determinations: Certain
Steel Products From Mexico 58 FR 37352 (July 9, 1993), and Final
Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination; Certain Steel Products
From the United Kingdom, 58 FR 37393 (July 9, 1993), the Department
determined that subsidies provided to certain steel producers remained
countervailable after those firms were privatized. The rationale for
the Department's determinations was that the countervailing duty law
does not require, as a prerequisite for countervailability, that a
subsidy bestowed on a producer confer a demonstrable ``competitive
benefit'' on that producer. However, the Department also determined
that a portion of the sales prices for USIMINAS, AHMSA, and BS plc,
respectively, represented partial repayment of prior subsidies. The
Department's privatization methodology was fully set forth in the
General Issues Appendix.
On February 9, 1995, the CIT held that the Department's
privatization methodology was unlawful, and remanded the determinations
in question. British Steel plc et al. v. United States, 879 F. Supp.
1254. In accordance with the CIT's instructions, the Department
reexamined the privatization transactions in question. The Department
found that USIMINAS, AHMSA, and BS plc were privatized through sales of
shares, and that the privatized entities continued to be, for all
intents and purposes, the same entities that had received the subsidies
prior to privatization. On this basis, and in accordance with the CIT's
instructions, the Department determined that the pre-privatization
subsidies remained countervailable in full. The Department did not
attribute any portion of the sales price for any of the producers to a
partial repayment of prior subsidies.
On April 2, 1996, the CIT affirmed the Department's remand
determination. British Steel II. In so doing, the Court implicitly
rejected the ``repayment'' aspect of the Department's privatization
methodology, as set forth in the General Issues Appendix.
In its decision in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed.
Cir. 1990), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
held that, pursuant to 19 U.S.C. section 1516a(e), the Department must
publish a notice of a court decision which is not ``in harmony'' with a
Department determination, and must suspend liquidation of entries
pending a ``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's decision in British
Steel II on April 2, 1996, constitutes a decision not in harmony with
the Departments final affirmative determinations. Publication of this
notice fulfills the Timken requirement.
Accordingly, the Department will continue to suspend liquidation
pending the expiration of the period of appeal, or, if appealed, until
a ``conclusive'' court decision.
Dated: May 9, 1996.
Paul L. Joffe,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-12518 Filed 5-17-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
