81 FR 31875 - Modification of Regulation Regarding Written Argument: Establishing Word Limits for Case and Rebuttal Briefs in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 98 (May 20, 2016)

Page Range		31875-31877
FR Document		2016-11864
The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') proposes to modify the regulation pertaining to written argument in antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings and is seeking comments from parties. This modification, if adopted, is intended to establish word limits for submission of case and rebuttal briefs. This action is necessary to streamline the process contained in the current regulation, to better align with current Department practices and to reduce the strain on resources.
Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 98 (Friday, May 20, 2016)
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 98 (Friday, May 20, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31875-31877]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11864]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

19 CFR Part 351

[Docket No. 160506400-6400-01]
RIN 0625-AB05


Modification of Regulation Regarding Written Argument: 
Establishing Word Limits for Case and Rebuttal Briefs in Antidumping 
and Countervailing Duty Proceedings

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

ACTION: Proposed rule and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') proposes to 
modify the regulation pertaining to written argument in antidumping and 
countervailing duty proceedings and is seeking comments from parties. 
This modification, if adopted, is intended to establish word limits for 
submission of case and rebuttal briefs. This action is necessary to 
streamline the process contained in the current regulation, to better 
align with current Department practices and to reduce the strain on 
resources.

DATES: To be assured of consideration, written comments must be 
received no later than June 20, 2016.

ADDRESSES:  All comments must be submitted through the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket No. ITA-2016-
0001, unless the commenter does not have access to the Internet. 
Commenters that do not have access to the internet may submit the 
original and one electronic copy of each set of comments by mail or 
hand delivery/courier. All comments should be addressed to Paul 
Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement & Compliance, Room 1870, 
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Ave. NW., 
Washington, DC 20230. Comments submitted to the Department will be 
uploaded to the eRulemaking Portal at www.Regulations.gov.
    The Department will consider all comments received before the close 
of the comment period. All comments responding to this notice will be a 
matter of public record and will be available on the Federal 
eRulemaking Portal at www.Regulations.gov. The Department will not 
accept comments accompanied by a request that part or all of the 
material be treated confidentially because of its business proprietary 
nature or for any other reason.
    Any questions concerning file formatting, document conversion, 
access on the Internet, or other electronic filing issues should be 
addressed to Moustapha Sylla, Enforcement and Compliance Webmaster, at 
(202) 482-4685, email address: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Myrna Lobo at (202) 482-2371 or 
Michele Lynch at (202) 482-2879.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Section 351.309 of the Department's regulations sets forth limits 
for the submission of case and rebuttal briefs and provides guidance on 
what should be contained in these documents. However, unlike other 
Federal Agencies (e.g., the International Trade Commission, Department 
of Labor, or the Internal Revenue Service Tax Court),\1\ the Department 
does not currently limit the length of such briefs. As a result, 
submissions may contain lengthy or duplicative arguments in antidumping 
and countervailing duty proceedings. The review and summarization of 
these lengthy submissions consumes considerable resources. To reduce 
the strain on limited resources and streamline the process, the 
Department proposes amending 19 CFR 351.309 to impose word limits on 
case and rebuttal briefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The United States Court of International Trade and the 
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit also impose 
word limits on briefs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed revision would set forth a limit of 25,000 words in 
total for each party's case and rebuttal briefs. A party may decide on 
the number of words it chooses to allocate among its case brief and 
rebuttal brief, but the combined total between the two shall not exceed 
25,000 words. Each case brief must contain a certification by the 
filing party or its representative, indicating the number of words used 
in the brief, and the number of unused words remaining for the rebuttal 
brief. Each rebuttal brief must contain a certification by the filing 
party or its representative indicating the number of words used and 
that the total combined word limit of 25,000 words has not been 
exceeded. The word limit will include all attachments, headings, 
footnotes, endnotes, and quotations used in the document; it will not 
include the table of contents, table of statutes, regulations and cases 
cited, and summary of arguments that preface the arguments in the 
brief, referenced in paragraphs (c)(2) and (d)(2) of the revised 
regulation below. In determining the word count, a party may rely on 
the software program used to prepare the brief. Briefs in excess of the 
word count shall be rejected and shall be considered untimely.
    If an interested party challenges a party's word count, such a 
filing must be made within 48 hours of the filing of the final version 
of the case or reply brief in ACCESS.\2\ While parties may not be able 
to view another party's business proprietary case brief in ACCESS and 
may have to rely on being served the brief by the filing party, we note 
that 19 CFR 351.303(f)(3)(i) contains specific rules for service of 
briefs. Case briefs must be served on persons on the service list \3\ 
the same day that they are filed with the Department by personal 
service or by overnight mail or courier the next day

[[Page 31876]]

which we find provides adequate time for a party's challenge to be 
filed within the 48-hour window. \4\ The Department will evaluate 
challenges received and determine the proper course of action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing 
Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (``ACCESS''). ACCESS is 
available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov.
    \3\ 19 CFR 103(d)(2).
    \4\ For parties that have designated an agent to receive service 
that is located outside the United States, and served case briefs by 
first class airmail in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(3)(i), the 
Department will consider on a case-by-case basis the time allowed to 
that party to challenge another party's word count.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Where the Department finds that good cause exists, the word limit 
may be revised by the Department if a party makes such a request. Such 
requests must be received sufficiently in advance of the briefing 
deadlines to be considered.
    The Department is issuing this proposed rule to modify the 
regulation at issue pursuant to Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 
553) notice and comment procedures; we invite comments from all 
interested parties.

Proposed Modification

    The Department proposes to modify 19 CFR 351.309, to include new 
paragraph (e) on word limits, as indicated below and to make conforming 
amendments to 19 CFR 351.309(a), (b), and (c). These modifications, if 
adopted, are intended to establish word limits for case and rebuttal 
briefs, as well as the accompanying requirements for imposing word 
limits. This rulemaking would be effective for proceedings initiated on 
or after 30 days following the date of publication of the final rule. 
This proposed rule makes additional minor edits to Sec.  351.309: (1) 
The words ``or countervailing duty'' are being added to Sec.  
351.309(b)(1) and (c)(1)(iii) to be consistent with Sec.  351.214(k), 
and (2) the Roman numerals (i) and (ii) in current Sec.  351.309(e), 
which is proposed Sec.  351.309(f), have been amended to be Arabic 
numbers (1) and (2) to be consistent with the other paragraphs of the 
regulation.
    The Department invites parties to comment on this proposed rule and 
the proposed effective date. Further, any party may submit comments 
expressing its disagreement with the Department's proposal and may 
propose an alternative approach.

Classifications

Executive Order 12866

    It has been determined that this proposed rule is not significant 
for purposes of Executive Order 12866.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule contains no new collection of information 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

Executive Order 13132

    This proposed rule does not contain policies with federalism 
implications as that term is defined in section 1(a) of Executive Order 
13132, dated August 4, 1999 (64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999)).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Chief Counsel for Regulation has certified to the Chief Counsel 
for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration under the provisions 
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that the proposed 
rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small business entities. A summary of the need for, 
objectives of and legal basis for this rule is provided in the 
preamble, and is not repeated here.
    The entities upon which this rulemaking could have an impact 
include foreign exporters and producers, some of whom are affiliated 
with U.S. companies, and U.S. importers. Enforcement & Compliance 
currently does not have information on the number of entities that 
would be considered small under the Small Business Administration's 
size standards for small businesses in the relevant industries. 
However, some of these entities may be considered small entities under 
the appropriate industry size standards. Although this proposed rule 
may indirectly impact small entities that are parties to individual 
antidumping or countervailing duty proceedings, it will not have a 
significant economic impact on any entities.
    The proposed action is merely to streamline the process contained 
in the current Department regulations. If the proposed rule is 
implemented, no entities would be required to undertake additional 
compliance measures or expenditures. Rather, the regulation, in this 
proposed rulemaking, is to reduce the burden placed on the Department 
and interested parties when lengthy or duplicative arguments are made 
in case briefs and then must be addressed. Because the proposed rule 
imposes limits on the submissions of case and rebuttal briefs in an 
antidumping or countervailing duty proceeding, it does not place a 
burden on or directly impact any business entities. The proposed rule 
merely strengthens the current regulations to better align with current 
Departmental practices. Therefore, the proposed rule would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small business 
entities. For this reason, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
is not required and one has not been prepared.

List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 351

    Administrative practice and procedure, Antidumping, Business and 
industry, Cheese, Confidential business information, Countervailing 
duties, Freedom of information, Investigations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: May 12, 2016.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

    For the reasons stated, 19 CFR part 351 is proposed to be amended 
as follows:

PART 351--ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTIES

0
1. The authority citation for 19 CFR part 351 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority:  5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 1202 note; 19 U.S.C. 1303 
note; 19 U.S.C. 1671 et seq.; and 19 U.S.C. 3538.

0
2. Section 351.309 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  351.309  Written argument.

    (a) Introduction. Written argument may be submitted during the 
course of an antidumping or countervailing duty proceeding. This 
section sets forth the time and word limits for submission of case and 
rebuttal briefs and provides guidance on what should be contained in 
these documents.
    (b) Written argument--(1) In general. In making the final 
determination in a countervailing duty investigation or antidumping 
investigation, or the final results of an administrative review, new 
shipper review, expedited antidumping or countervailing duty review, 
section 753 review, or section 762 review, the Secretary will consider 
written arguments in case or rebuttal briefs filed within the time and 
word limits in this section.
    (2) Written argument on request. Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(1) 
of this section, the Secretary may request written argument on any 
issue from any person or U.S. Government agency at any time during a 
proceeding.
    (c) Case brief. (1) Any interested party or U.S. Government agency 
may submit a ``case brief'' within:
    (i) For a final determination in a countervailing duty 
investigation or antidumping investigation, or for the final results of 
a full sunset review, 50 days after the date of publication of the 
preliminary determination or results of review, as applicable, unless 
the Secretary alters the time limit;

[[Page 31877]]

    (ii) For the final results of an administrative review, new shipper 
review, changed circumstances review, or section 762 review, 30 days 
after the date of publication of the preliminary results of review, 
unless the Secretary alters the time limit; or
    (iii) For the final results of an expedited sunset review, 
expedited antidumping or countervailing duty review, Article 8 
violation review, Article 4/Article 7 review, or section 753 review, a 
date specified by the Secretary.
    (2) The case brief must present all arguments that continue in the 
submitter's view to be relevant to the Secretary's final determination 
or final results, including any arguments presented before the date of 
publication of the preliminary determination or preliminary results. As 
part of the case brief, parties are encouraged to provide a summary of 
the arguments not to exceed five pages and a table of statutes, 
regulations, and cases cited.
    (d) Rebuttal brief. (1) Any interested party or U.S. Government 
agency may submit a ``rebuttal brief'' within five days after the time 
limit for filing the case brief, unless the Secretary alters this time 
limit.
    (2) The rebuttal brief may respond only to arguments raised in case 
briefs and should identify the arguments to which it is responding. As 
part of the rebuttal brief, parties are encouraged to provide a summary 
of the arguments not to exceed five pages and a table of statutes, 
regulations, and cases cited.
    (e) Word limits. (1) Except with the consent of Enforcement & 
Compliance for good cause, each party shall use no more than 25,000 
words total between its case and rebuttal briefs. The allocation of the 
25,000 words between case and rebuttal briefs is left to each party. 
All attachments to such briefs, headings, footnotes, endnotes, and 
quotations shall be included in the word limitation. The summary of 
arguments and the table of statutes, regulations and cases cited 
referenced in paragraphs (c)(2) and (d)(2) of this section shall not be 
included in the word limitation.
    (2) The case brief, if any, shall contain a certification by the 
party or its representative indicating the number of words in the brief 
and the number of words available for the rebuttal brief. The rebuttal 
brief, if any, shall contain a certification by the party or its 
representative indicating the number of words in the brief and 
certifying that the total word limit of 25,000 has not been exceeded in 
the party's combined case and rebuttal brief word limit. The party 
filing the certification may rely on the word count of the software 
program used to prepare the brief. Briefs in excess of the word 
limitation shall be rejected and shall be considered untimely. 
Challenges to opposing party's word count must be filed with the agency 
within 48 hours of the filing of the case or reply brief and 
accompanying certifications or the challenge will not be considered. If 
a person has designated an agent to receive service that is located 
outside the United States, and served briefs by first class airmail in 
accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(3)(i), the agency will consider on a 
case-by-case basis the time allowed to that person to challenge a 
party's word count.
    (f) Comments on adequacy of response and appropriateness of 
expedited sunset review--(1) In general. Where the Secretary determines 
that respondent interested parties provided inadequate response to a 
notice of initiation (see Sec.  351.218(e)(1)(ii)) and has notified the 
International Trade Commission as such under Sec.  
351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C), interested parties (and industrial users and 
consumer organizations) that submitted a complete substantive response 
to the notice of initiation under Sec.  351.218(d)(3) may file comments 
on whether an expedited sunset review under section 751(c)(3)(B) of the 
Act and Sec.  351.218(e)(1)(ii)(B) or (C) is appropriate based on the 
adequacy of responses to the notice of initiation. These comments may 
not include any new factual information or evidence (such as 
supplementation of a substantive response to the notice of initiation) 
and are limited to five pages.
    (2) Time limit for filing comments. Comments on adequacy of 
response and appropriateness of expedited sunset review must be filed 
not later than 70 days after the date publication in the Federal 
Register of the notice of initiation.

[FR Doc. 2016-11864 Filed 5-19-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
31876 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 98 / Friday, May 20, 2016 / Proposed Rules

which we find provides adequate time Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not
for a party’s challenge to be filed within Chapter 35. required and one has not been prepared.
the 48-hour window. 4 The Department
Executive Order 13132 List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 351
will evaluate challenges received and
determine the proper course of action. This proposed rule does not contain Administrative practice and
Where the Department finds that good policies with federalism implications as procedure, Antidumping, Business and
cause exists, the word limit may be that term is defined in section 1(a) of industry, Cheese, Confidential business
revised by the Department if a party Executive Order 13132, dated August 4, information, Countervailing duties,
makes such a request. Such requests 1999 (64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999)). Freedom of information, Investigations,
must be received sufficiently in advance Regulatory Flexibility Act Reporting and recordkeeping
of the briefing deadlines to be requirements.
considered. The Chief Counsel for Regulation has
certified to the Chief Counsel for Dated: May 12, 2016.
The Department is issuing this
Advocacy of the Small Business Paul Piquado,
proposed rule to modify the regulation
at issue pursuant to Administrative Administration under the provisions of Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. Compliance.
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) notice and
comment procedures; we invite 605(b), that the proposed rule would not For the reasons stated, 19 CFR part
comments from all interested parties. have a significant economic impact on 351 is proposed to be amended as
a substantial number of small business follows:
Proposed Modification entities. A summary of the need for,
The Department proposes to modify objectives of and legal basis for this rule PART 351—ANTIDUMPING AND
19 CFR 351.309, to include new is provided in the preamble, and is not COUNTERVAILING DUTIES
paragraph (e) on word limits, as repeated here.
indicated below and to make The entities upon which this ■ 1. The authority citation for 19 CFR
conforming amendments to 19 CFR rulemaking could have an impact part 351 continues to read as follows:
351.309(a), (b), and (c). These include foreign exporters and Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 1202
modifications, if adopted, are intended producers, some of whom are affiliated note; 19 U.S.C. 1303 note; 19 U.S.C. 1671 et
to establish word limits for case and with U.S. companies, and U.S. seq.; and 19 U.S.C. 3538.
rebuttal briefs, as well as the importers. Enforcement & Compliance ■ 2. Section 351.309 is revised to read
accompanying requirements for currently does not have information on as follows:
imposing word limits. This rulemaking the number of entities that would be
would be effective for proceedings considered small under the Small § 351.309 Written argument.
initiated on or after 30 days following Business Administration’s size (a) Introduction. Written argument
the date of publication of the final rule. standards for small businesses in the may be submitted during the course of
This proposed rule makes additional relevant industries. However, some of an antidumping or countervailing duty
minor edits to § 351.309: (1) The words these entities may be considered small proceeding. This section sets forth the
‘‘or countervailing duty’’ are being entities under the appropriate industry time and word limits for submission of
added to § 351.309(b)(1) and (c)(1)(iii) to size standards. Although this proposed case and rebuttal briefs and provides
be consistent with § 351.214(k), and (2) rule may indirectly impact small guidance on what should be contained
the Roman numerals (i) and (ii) in entities that are parties to individual in these documents.
current § 351.309(e), which is proposed antidumping or countervailing duty (b) Written argument—(1) In general.
§ 351.309(f), have been amended to be proceedings, it will not have a In making the final determination in a
Arabic numbers (1) and (2) to be significant economic impact on any countervailing duty investigation or
consistent with the other paragraphs of entities. antidumping investigation, or the final
the regulation. The proposed action is merely to results of an administrative review, new
The Department invites parties to streamline the process contained in the shipper review, expedited antidumping
comment on this proposed rule and the current Department regulations. If the or countervailing duty review, section
proposed effective date. Further, any proposed rule is implemented, no 753 review, or section 762 review, the
party may submit comments expressing entities would be required to undertake Secretary will consider written
its disagreement with the Department’s additional compliance measures or arguments in case or rebuttal briefs filed
proposal and may propose an expenditures. Rather, the regulation, in within the time and word limits in this
alternative approach. this proposed rulemaking, is to reduce section.
the burden placed on the Department (2) Written argument on request.
Classifications and interested parties when lengthy or Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(1) of this
Executive Order 12866 duplicative arguments are made in case section, the Secretary may request
briefs and then must be addressed. written argument on any issue from any
It has been determined that this
Because the proposed rule imposes person or U.S. Government agency at
proposed rule is not significant for
limits on the submissions of case and any time during a proceeding.
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
rebuttal briefs in an antidumping or (c) Case brief. (1) Any interested party
Paperwork Reduction Act countervailing duty proceeding, it does or U.S. Government agency may submit
not place a burden on or directly impact a ‘‘case brief’’ within:
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS

This proposed rule contains no new
collection of information subject to the any business entities. The proposed rule (i) For a final determination in a
merely strengthens the current countervailing duty investigation or
4 For parties that have designated an agent to regulations to better align with current antidumping investigation, or for the
receive service that is located outside the United Departmental practices. Therefore, the final results of a full sunset review, 50
States, and served case briefs by first class airmail proposed rule would not have a days after the date of publication of the
in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(3)(i), the
Department will consider on a case-by-case basis
significant economic impact on a preliminary determination or results of
the time allowed to that party to challenge another substantial number of small business review, as applicable, unless the
party’s word count. entities. For this reason, an Initial Secretary alters the time limit;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:17 May 19, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1
Document Created: 2016-05-20 01:59:26
Document Modified: 2016-05-20 01:59:26
Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Proposed Rules
Action		Proposed rule and request for comments.
Dates		To be assured of consideration, written comments must be received no later than June 20, 2016.
Contact		Myrna Lobo at (202) 482-2371 or Michele Lynch at (202) 482-2879.
FR Citation		81 FR 31875
RIN Number		0625-AB05
CFR Associated		Administrative Practice and Procedure; Antidumping; Business and Industry; Cheese; Confidential Business Information; Countervailing Duties; Freedom of Information; Investigations and Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements