[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 22, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-15179]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: June 22, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[C-412-811]
Notice of Court Decision: Certain Hot Rolled Lead and Bismuth
Carbon Steel Products From the United Kingdom
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 22, 1994.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Annika L. O'Hara or Julie Anne Osgood,
Office of Countervailing Investigations, Import Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-4198 and (202) 482-0167,
respectively.
SUMMARY: On June 7, 1994, the United States Court of International
Trade (``CIT'') overturned the determination by the Department of
Commerce (``the Department'') that United Engineering Steels, Ltd.
(``UES'') was being subsidized by reason of subsidies previously
bestowed on a government-owned company which sold one of its productive
units to UES in an arm's-length transaction.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In its Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty
Determination: Certain Hot Rolled Lead and Bismuth Carbon Steel
Products From the United Kingdom, 58 FR 6237 (January 27, 1993), the
Department determined that subsidies previously bestowed on the British
Steel Corporation (``BSC'') passed through, in part, to UES, a joint-
venture company, when UES purchased one of BSC's productive units in an
arm's-length transaction. The Department's determination was
challenged. The Department subsequently requested, and was granted, a
remand in order to reconsider its final determination. On remand, the
Department adopted its reasoning in Final Affirmative Countervailing
Duty Determination: Certain Steel Products From the United Kingdom, 58
FR 37393 (July 9, 1993), in which it determined that part of the price
UES paid for the productive unit purchased from BSC constituted payment
for prior subsidies. On June 7, 1994, in Inland Steel Bar Co. v. United
States, (``Inland Steel''), Slip Op. 94-93, the CIT overturned the
Department's determination that previously bestowed subsidies are
passed through to a successor company sold in an arm's-length
transaction.
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 Inland
Steel on June 7, 1994, constitutes a decision not in harmony with the
Department's final affirmative determination. 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, upon a
``conclusive'' court decision. Absent an appeal, or, if appealed, upon
a ``conclusive'' court decision affirming the CIT's opinion, the
countervailing duty order will be revoked effective June 17, 1994.
Dated: June 16, 1994.
Paul L. Joffe,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 94-15179 Filed 6-21-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P