[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