[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