June 23, 2009
Partner David Hartquist was quoted in an American Metal Market article titled, “US Said Diluting Specialty Metals Rules.” The article discusses his testimony given to the Congressional Steel Caucus, speaking as counsel to the Specialty Steel Industry of North America (SSINA).
Domestic specialty steel industry sources charge that the U.S. Defense Department is undermining the Specialty Metals Amendment by changing the definition of U.S. production. Mr. Hartquist’s testimony questioned the Defense Department decision and also charged that the Treasury's Office of Foreign Asset Control might not be doing enough to enforce the sanctions on material from Cuba--especially on imports of Chinese stainless steel that contain Cuban nickel into the U.S. market. Mr. Hartquist noted that the Berry amendment enacted in 1973 has been a major factor in maintaining the overwhelming U.S. technological lead in the production of specialty metals by guaranteeing that U.S. weapons systems will be built with domestically melted material. It has "provided the incentive that our companies need to make the substantial investments necessary or preserve that technological lead," he told the caucus." At the same time, the Berry amendment has been modified over the years to address concerns of defense contractors who have had difficulty complying--"or simply refused to comply" with the law, Hartquist said.