[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 210 (Wednesday, October 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58136-58137]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23770]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[C-201-846]


Sugar From Mexico: Notice of Court Decision Regarding Amendment 
to the Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty Investigation

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On October 18, 2019, the United States Court of International 
Trade (CIT) issued a final judgment in CSC Sugar LLC v. United States, 
Ct. No. 17-00214, Slip Op. 19-131 (CIT October 18, 2019) (CSC Sugar 
II). Commerce is notifying the public of the CIT's ruling that 
Commerce's 2017 amendment to the Agreement Suspending the 
Countervailing Duty Investigation on Sugar from Mexico (CVD Agreement) 
must be vacated. Commerce intends to take action to implement the CIT 
ruling by November 18, 2019.

DATES: November 29, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sally C. Gannon, Bilateral Agreements 
Unit, Office of Policy and Negotiations, Enforcement and Compliance, 
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-
0162.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On December 19, 2014, Commerce and the Government of Mexico (GOM) 
signed the CVD Agreement.\1\ Between June 2016 and June 2017, Commerce 
and the GOM held consultations to address concerns raised by the 
domestic industry and to ensure that the CVD Agreement met the 
statutory requirements for a suspension agreement, e.g., that 
suspension of the investigation was in the public interest, including 
the availability of supplies of sugar in the U.S. market, and that 
effective monitoring was practicable. The consultations resulted in 
Commerce and the GOM signing an amendment to the CVD Agreement on June 
30, 2017, which was subsequently published in the Federal Register.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Sugar From Mexico: Suspension of Countervailing 
Investigation, 79 FR 78044 (December 29, 2014).
    \2\ See Sugar From Mexico: Amendment to the Agreement Suspending 
the Countervailing Duty Investigation, 82 FR 31942 (July 11, 2017) 
(CVD Amendment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CSC Sugar LLC (CSC Sugar) challenged Commerce's determination to 
amend the CVD Agreement by contending that Commerce did not meet its 
obligation to file a complete administrative record.\3\ Specifically, 
CSC Sugar argued that Commerce failed to memorialize and include in the 
record ex parte communications between Commerce officials and 
interested parties (including the domestic sugar industry and 
representatives of Mexico) as required by section 777(a)(3) of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See CSC Sugar II at 4.
    \4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CIT agreed with CSC Sugar and ordered Commerce to supplement 
the administrative record with any ex parte communications regarding 
the CVD Amendment.\5\ CSC Sugar subsequently filed a motion for 
judgment on the agency record arguing that Commerce's

[[Page 58137]]

failure, during the consultations period, to maintain contemporaneous 
ex parte communication memoranda, in accordance with section 777(a)(3) 
of the Act, could not be adequately remedied by Commerce's delayed and 
incomplete supplementation of the record.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id. (citing CSC Sugar LLC v. United States, 317 F. Supp. 3d 
1322, 1326 (CIT 2018)).
    \6\ See CSC Sugar II at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CIT found that Commerce's failure to follow the recordkeeping 
requirements of Section 777 of the Act cannot be described as 
``harmless.'' \7\ The CIT found that this recordkeeping failure 
substantially prejudiced CSC Sugar.\8\ On that basis, the CIT stated 
that the CVD Amendment must be vacated.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Id. at 11-12.
    \8\ Id. at 12.
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CVD Amendment remains in force until Commerce takes action to 
implement the CIT's ruling. The CIT's rules establish an automatic 30-
day stay of proceedings to enforce a judgment.\10\ Accordingly, 
Commerce intends to implement the CIT's ruling by November 18, 
2019.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See CIT Rule 62(a) (``Except as stated in this rule or as 
otherwise ordered by the court, no execution may issue on a 
judgment, nor may proceedings be taken to enforce it, until 30 days 
have passed after its entry.'').
    \11\ See CIT Rule 6(a)(1). In this case, the 30th day after 
October 18 is Sunday, November 17.

    Dated: October 25, 2019.
Jeffrey I. Kessler,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.
 [FR Doc. 2019-23770 Filed 10-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P