[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 79 (Monday, April 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21658-21659]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-9538]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 731-TA-961 (Final) (Second Remand)]
Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod From Trinidad and Tobago
AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice of remand proceedings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. International Trade Commission (``Commission'')
hereby gives notice of the court-ordered second remand of its final
determination in the antidumping duty Investigation No. 731-TA-961
concerning carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod (``wire rod'') from
Trinidad and Tobago. For further information concerning the conduct of
this proceeding and rules of general application, consult the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A
through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subpart A (19 CFR part 207).
DATES: Effective Date: April 20, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Messer, Office of Investigations,
telephone 202-205-3193, or Marc A. Bernstein, Office of General
Counsel, telephone 202-205-3087, U.S. International Trade Commission,
500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can
obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD
terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will
need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should
contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General
information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing
its internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). The public record of
Investigation No. 731-TA-961 may be viewed on the Commission's
electronic docket (``EDIS'') at http://edis.usitc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background.--In October 2002, the Commission determined that a
domestic industry was materially injured by reason of imports of wire
rod from Trinidad and Tobago that were sold in the United States at
less than fair value. Caribbean Ispat Ltd., a Trinidadian producer and
exporter of wire rod now known as Mittal Steel Point Lisas, Ltd.,
initiated a judicial action to review the Commission's determination.
The Court of International Trade affirmed the Commission's
determination. Caribbean Ispat Ltd. v. United States, 366 F. Supp. 1300
(Ct. Int'l Trade 2005). The United States Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit vacated and remanded. Caribbean Ispat Ltd. v. United
States, 450 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006). It ruled: (1) That the
Commission acted contrary to law by failing to consider in its
causation analysis concerning subject imports from Trinidad and Tobago
the impact of imports from other subject countries which the Commission
was statutorily precluded from cumulating with the Trinidadian imports;
and (2) that the Commission's causation analysis did not satisfy the
requirements the Federal Circuit previously articulated in Bratsk
Aluminum Smelter v. United States, 444 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2006). The
Federal Circuit remanded the matter for further consideration in light
of its opinion. Accordingly, the Court of International Trade remanded
the matter to the Commission.
In January 2007, the Commission reached a negative determination on
remand. The Court of International Trade affirmed the remand
determination. Mittal Steel Point Lisas, Ltd. v. United States, 495 F.
Supp.2d 1374 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2007). The Federal Circuit vacated and
remanded in a decision issued in September 2008. Mittal Steel Point
Lisas, Ltd. v. United States, 542 F.3d 867 (Fed. Cir. 2008). It found
three deficiencies in the Commission opinion on remand. These
[[Page 21659]]
concerned: (1) The Commission's construction and application of the
causation standard articulated in Bratsk and Caribbean Ispat with
respect to its analysis of material injury by reason of subject
imports; (2) the Commission's analysis of whether wire rod was a
``commodity product'' for purposes of performing the type of
``replacement/benefit'' analysis that the Federal Circuit endorsed in
Bratsk; and (3) the Commission's construction and application of the
causation standard with respect to its analysis of threat of material
injury by reason of subject imports. The matter was consequently
remanded to the Court of International Trade. On March 29, 2010, the
Court of International Trade remanded the matter to the Commission,
directing the Commission ``to attempt to comply with the [Federal
Circuit's] reasoning, as set forth in its foregoing, more recent
opinion, and to report to this court any results of this mandated
remand.''
Participation in the proceeding.--Only those persons who were
interested parties to the original investigation (i.e., persons listed
on the Commission Secretary's service list) and were parties to the
underlying Mittal litigation may participate in the remand proceeding.
Such persons need not re-file their appearance notices or protective
order applications to participate in the remand proceeding. Business
proprietary information (``BPI'') referred to during the remand
proceeding will be governed, as appropriate, by the administrative
protective order issued in the original investigation.
Written submissions.--The Commission is not reopening the record in
this remand proceeding. The Commission will permit the parties to file
written comments. Comments should be limited to no more than twenty-
five (25) double-spaced and single-sided pages of textual material, may
not contain new factual information, and may address only the following
issues within the scope of the remand: (1) whether the information in
the record would support a determination of material injury or threat
of material injury by reason of subject imports under the causation
standard the Federal Circuit articulated in sections II.B. and C. of
the Mittal opinion; and (2) whether wire rod is a ``commodity product''
pursuant to the standards the Federal Circuit has authorized the
Commission to apply pursuant to section II.A. of the Mittal opinion.
Any such comments must be filed with the Commission no later than May
7, 2010.
All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section
201.8 of the Commission's rules; any submissions that contain BPI must
also conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7
of the Commission's rules. The Commission's rules do not authorize
filing of submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic
means, except to the extent permitted by section 201.8 of the
Commission's rules, as amended, 67 FR 68036 (Nov. 8, 2002).
In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission's
rules, each document filed by a party to the investigation must be
served on all other parties to the investigation (as identified by
either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service
must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for
filing without a certificate of service.
Parties are also advised to consult with the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part
201), and part 207, subpart A (19 CFR part 207) for provisions of
general applicability concerning written submissions to the Commission.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: April 20, 2010.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-9538 Filed 4-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P