WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding United States-Customs Bond Directive for Merchandise Subject to Anti-Dumping/Countervailing Duties, 44723-44724 [E6-12788]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 151 / Monday, August 7, 2006 / Notices 2. With respect to eligible products of Bahrain (i.e., goods and services covered by the Schedules of the United States in Annexes 9–A–1 and 9–A–2 of the Bahrain FTA) and suppliers of such products, the application of any law, regulation, procedure, or practice regarding government procurement that would, if applied to such products and suppliers, result in treatment less favorable than accorded— (A) To United States products and suppliers of such products; or (B) To eligible products of another foreign country or instrumentality which is a party to the Agreement on Government Procurement referred to in section 101(d)(17) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3511(d)(17)) and suppliers of such products, shall be waived. With respect to Bahrain, this waiver shall be applied by all entities listed in the Schedules of the United States in Annex 9–A–1 and in List A of Annex 9– A–2 of the Bahrain FTA. 3. The designation in paragraph 1 and the waiver in paragraph 2 are subject to modification or withdrawal by the United States Trade Representative. Susan C. Schwab, United States Trade Representative. [FR Doc. E6–12792 Filed 8–4–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190–W6–P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE [Docket No. WTO/DS345] WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding United States—Customs Bond Directive for Merchandise Subject to Anti-Dumping/ Countervailing Duties Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Notice; request for comments. sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Office of the United States Trade Representative (‘‘USTR’’) is providing notice that on June 6, 2006, India requested consultations with the United States under the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (‘‘WTO Agreement’’) concerning certain issues relating to Customs Bond Directive 99–3510–004, as amended by the Amendment to Bond Directive 99–3510–004 (July 9, 2004), and clarifications and amendments thereof. That request may be found at http://www.wto.org contained in a document designated as WT/DS345/1. USTR invites written comments from the public concerning the issues raised in this dispute. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:19 Aug 04, 2006 Jkt 208001 Although USTR will accept any comments received during the course of the dispute settlement proceedings, comments should be submitted on or before August 18, 2006 to be assured of timely consideration by USTR. ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted (i) electronically, to FR0624@ustr.eop.gov, Attn: ‘‘India Bond Dispute (DS345)’’ in the subject line, or (ii) by fax, to Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395–3640. For documents sent by fax, USTR requests that the submitter provide a confirmation copy to the electronic mail address listed above. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elissa Alben, Assistant General Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508, (202) 395–9622. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: USTR is providing notice that consultations have been requested pursuant to the WTO Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (‘‘DSU’’). If such consultations should fail to resolve the matter and a dispute settlement panel is established pursuant to the DSU, such panel, which would hold its meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, would be expected to issue a report on its findings and recommendations within six to nine months after it is established. DATES: Major Issues Raised by India On August 4, 2004, the Department of Commerce published in the Federal Register notice of its affirmative preliminary less-than-fair-value (‘‘LTFV’’) determination in an investigation concerning certain frozen and canned warm water shrimp from India (69 FR 47,111). On December 23, 2004, the Department of Commerce published notice of its affirmative final LTFV determination (69 FR 76,916), and on February 1, 2005, the Department of Commerce published an amended final LTFV determination, along with an antidumping duty order, covering only certain frozen warm water shrimp from India (70 FR 5147). The latter notice contains the final margins of LTFV sales, as provided in section 733 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. In its request for consultations, India alleges that the United States has imposed on importers a requirement to maintain a continuous entry bond in the amount of the anti-dumping duty margin multiplied by the value of imports of frozen warmwater shrimp imported by the importer in the preceding year, and that Customs Bond Directive 99–3510–004, as amended on July 9, 2004 (and any clarifications and amendments thereof) as such constitutes PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 44723 specific action against dumping and subsidization not in accordance with GATT 1994 Article VI:2 and 3, as well as Articles 1, and 18.1 of the AD Agreement and Articles 10 and 32.1 of the Subsidies Agreement, that it results in charges in excess of the margin of dumping or amount of subsidy that are not in accordance with GATT 1994 Articles VI:2 and VI:3, and that it is unreasonable as security for payment of antidumping and countervailing duties and therefore inconsistent with Note Ad paragraphs 2 and 3 of GATT 1994 Article VI. India further alleges that the continuous bond requirement as such is inconsistent with Articles 7.1, 7.2, 7.4, and 7.5 of the AD Agreement and Articles 17.1, 17.2, 17.4, and 17.5 of the Subsidies Agreement to the extent that it may be characterized as a provisional measure or is applied prior to the imposition of definitive antidumping duties, and that it is inconsistent with Articles 9.2 and 9.3 of the AD Agreement and Articles 19.3 and 19.4 of the Subsidies Agreement. India further states that because the amended directive was not published in the Federal Register or the Customs Bulletin of the United States, it is inconsistent with GATT 1994 Article X, AD Agreement Article 18.5, and Subsidies Agreement Article 32.5. India alleges that the measure as such is inconsistent with GATT 1994 Article I and II as a charge in excess of that imposed or mandatorily required by legislation on the date of entry into force of the GATT, and that it is inconsistent with GATT 1994 Article XI as a restriction other than a duty, tax or other charge and GATT 1994 Article XIII to the extent it is applied in a discriminatory manner. India also states that the application of the continuous bond requirement to imports of frozen warmwater shrimp from India is inconsistent with Articles I, II, VI:2 (including Note 1 Ad Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article VI) XI, and XIII of the GATT, and Articles 1, 7.1, 7.2, 7.4, 7.5, 9.2, 9.3, 9.3.1 and 18.1 of the AD Agreement. Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning the issues raised in this dispute. Persons may submit their comments either (i) electronically, to FR0624@ustr.eop.gov, Attn: ‘‘India Bond Dispute (DS345)’’ in the subject line, or (ii) by fax to Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395–3640. For documents sent by fax, USTR requests that the submitter provide a confirmation copy to the electronic mail address listed above. E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM 07AUN1 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES 44724 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 151 / Monday, August 7, 2006 / Notices USTR encourages the submission of documents in Adobe PDF format, as attachments to an electronic mail. Interested persons who make submissions by electronic mail should not provide separate cover letters; information that might appear in a cover letter should be included in the submission itself. Similarly, to the extent possible, any attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. A person requesting that information contained in a comment submitted by that person be treated as confidential business information must certify that such information is business confidential and would not customarily be released to the public by the submitter. Confidential business information must be clearly designated as such and the submission must be marked ‘‘BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL’’ at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page. Information or advice contained in a comment submitted, other than business confidential information, may be determined by USTR to be confidential in accordance with section 135(g)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155(g)(2)). If the submitter believes that information or advice may qualify as such, the submitter— (1) Must clearly so designate the information or advice; (2) Must clearly mark the material as ‘‘SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE’’ at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page; and (3) Is encouraged to provide a nonconfidential summary of the information or advice. Pursuant to section 127(e) of the URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR will maintain a file on this dispute settlement proceeding, accessible to the public, in the USTR Reading Room, which is located at 1724 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508. The public file will include non-confidential comments received by USTR from the public with respect to the dispute; if a dispute settlement panel is convened, the U.S. submissions to that panel, the submissions, or non-confidential summaries of submissions, to the panel received from other participants in the dispute, as well as the report of the panel; and, if applicable, the report of the Appellate Body. An appointment to review the public file (Docket No. WT/ DS–345, India Bond Dispute) may be made by calling the USTR Reading Room at (202) 395–6186. The USTR Reading Room is open to the public VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:19 Aug 04, 2006 Jkt 208001 from 9:30 a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. include a mailing address with your request. Daniel Brinza, Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement. [FR Doc. E6–12788 Filed 8–4–06; 8:45 am] DATES: BILLING CODE 3190–W6–P OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Proposed Collection; Comment Request for Review of a New Information Collection; OPM Form 1655 and OPM Form 1655–A Office of Personnel Management. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–13, May 22, 1995), this notice announces that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) intends to submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for review of a new information collection. OPM 1655, Application for Senior Administrative Law Judge, and OPM 1655–A, Geographic Preference Statement for Senior Administrative Law Judge Applicant, are used by retired Administrative Law Judges seeking reemployment on a temporary and intermittent basis to complete hearings of one or more specified case(s) in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946. Approximately 150 OPM 1655 are completed annually. Each form takes approximately 30–45 minutes to complete. The annual estimated burden is 94 hours. Approximately 200 OPM 1655–A are completed annually. Each form takes approximately 15–25 minutes to complete. The annual estimated burden is 67 hours. Comments are particularly invited on: • Whether this information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of OPM, and whether it will have practical utility; • Whether our estimates of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; • And ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. For copies of this proposal, contact Mary Beth Smith-Toomey on (202) 606– 8358, Fax (202) 418–3251 or e-mail to mbtoomey@opm.gov. Please be sure to PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Comments on this proposal should be received within 60 calendar days from the date of this publication. ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments to—Juanita H. Love, Program Manager, Administrative Law Judge Program Office, Human Capital Leadership & Merit System, Accountability Division, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, NW., Room 7425, Washington, DC 20415. FOR INFORMATION REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATION CONTACT: Karyn D. Lusby, Program Analyst, Administrative Law Judge Program Office, Human Capital Leadership & Merit System, Accountability Division, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, NW., Room 7425, Washington, DC 20415, karyn.lusby@opm.gov. Office of Personnel Management. Dan G. Blair, Deputy Director. [FR Doc. E6–12784 Filed 8–4–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325–43–P OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Excepted Service Office of Personnel Management (OPM). ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This gives notice of OPM decisions granting authority to make appointments under Schedules A, B, and C in the excepted service as required by 5 CFR 6.6 and 213.103. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Guilford, Center for Leadership and Executive Resources Policy, Division for Strategic Human Resources Policy, 202–606–1391. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Appearing in the listing below are the individual authorities established under Schedules A, B, and C between June 1, 2006, and June 30, 2006. Future notices will be published on the fourth Tuesday of each month, or as soon as possible thereafter. A consolidated listing of all authorities as of June 30 is published each year. Schedule A No Schedule A appointments were approved for June 2006. Schedule B No Schedule B appointments were approved for June 2006. E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM 07AUN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 151 (Monday, August 7, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44723-44724]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-12788]


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

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Docket No. WTO/DS345]


WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding United States--
Customs Bond Directive for Merchandise Subject to Anti-Dumping/
Countervailing Duties

AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The Office of the United States Trade Representative 
(``USTR'') is providing notice that on June 6, 2006, India requested 
consultations with the United States under the Marrakesh Agreement 
Establishing the World Trade Organization (``WTO Agreement'') 
concerning certain issues relating to Customs Bond Directive 99-3510-
004, as amended by the Amendment to Bond Directive 99-3510-004 (July 9, 
2004), and clarifications and amendments thereof. That request may be 
found at http://www.wto.org contained in a document designated as WT/
DS345/1. USTR invites written comments from the public concerning the 
issues raised in this dispute.

DATES: Although USTR will accept any comments received during the 
course of the dispute settlement proceedings, comments should be 
submitted on or before August 18, 2006 to be assured of timely 
consideration by USTR.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted (i) electronically, to 
FR0624@ustr.eop.gov, Attn: ``India Bond Dispute (DS345)'' in the 
subject line, or (ii) by fax, to Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395-3640. For 
documents sent by fax, USTR requests that the submitter provide a 
confirmation copy to the electronic mail address listed above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elissa Alben, Assistant General 
Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508, (202) 395-9622.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: USTR is providing notice that consultations 
have been requested pursuant to the WTO Understanding on Rules and 
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (``DSU''). If such 
consultations should fail to resolve the matter and a dispute 
settlement panel is established pursuant to the DSU, such panel, which 
would hold its meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, would be expected to 
issue a report on its findings and recommendations within six to nine 
months after it is established.

Major Issues Raised by India

    On August 4, 2004, the Department of Commerce published in the 
Federal Register notice of its affirmative preliminary less-than-fair-
value (``LTFV'') determination in an investigation concerning certain 
frozen and canned warm water shrimp from India (69 FR 47,111). On 
December 23, 2004, the Department of Commerce published notice of its 
affirmative final LTFV determination (69 FR 76,916), and on February 1, 
2005, the Department of Commerce published an amended final LTFV 
determination, along with an antidumping duty order, covering only 
certain frozen warm water shrimp from India (70 FR 5147). The latter 
notice contains the final margins of LTFV sales, as provided in section 
733 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.
    In its request for consultations, India alleges that the United 
States has imposed on importers a requirement to maintain a continuous 
entry bond in the amount of the anti-dumping duty margin multiplied by 
the value of imports of frozen warmwater shrimp imported by the 
importer in the preceding year, and that Customs Bond Directive 99-
3510-004, as amended on July 9, 2004 (and any clarifications and 
amendments thereof) as such constitutes specific action against dumping 
and subsidization not in accordance with GATT 1994 Article VI:2 and 3, 
as well as Articles 1, and 18.1 of the AD Agreement and Articles 10 and 
32.1 of the Subsidies Agreement, that it results in charges in excess 
of the margin of dumping or amount of subsidy that are not in 
accordance with GATT 1994 Articles VI:2 and VI:3, and that it is 
unreasonable as security for payment of antidumping and countervailing 
duties and therefore inconsistent with Note Ad paragraphs 2 and 3 of 
GATT 1994 Article VI. India further alleges that the continuous bond 
requirement as such is inconsistent with Articles 7.1, 7.2, 7.4, and 
7.5 of the AD Agreement and Articles 17.1, 17.2, 17.4, and 17.5 of the 
Subsidies Agreement to the extent that it may be characterized as a 
provisional measure or is applied prior to the imposition of definitive 
antidumping duties, and that it is inconsistent with Articles 9.2 and 
9.3 of the AD Agreement and Articles 19.3 and 19.4 of the Subsidies 
Agreement. India further states that because the amended directive was 
not published in the Federal Register or the Customs Bulletin of the 
United States, it is inconsistent with GATT 1994 Article X, AD 
Agreement Article 18.5, and Subsidies Agreement Article 32.5. India 
alleges that the measure as such is inconsistent with GATT 1994 Article 
I and II as a charge in excess of that imposed or mandatorily required 
by legislation on the date of entry into force of the GATT, and that it 
is inconsistent with GATT 1994 Article XI as a restriction other than a 
duty, tax or other charge and GATT 1994 Article XIII to the extent it 
is applied in a discriminatory manner. India also states that the 
application of the continuous bond requirement to imports of frozen 
warmwater shrimp from India is inconsistent with Articles I, II, VI:2 
(including Note 1 Ad Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article VI) XI, and XIII of 
the GATT, and Articles 1, 7.1, 7.2, 7.4, 7.5, 9.2, 9.3, 9.3.1 and 18.1 
of the AD Agreement.

Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments 
concerning the issues raised in this dispute. Persons may submit their 
comments either (i) electronically, to FR0624@ustr.eop.gov, Attn: 
``India Bond Dispute (DS345)'' in the subject line, or (ii) by fax to 
Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395-3640. For documents sent by fax, USTR 
requests that the submitter provide a confirmation copy to the 
electronic mail address listed above.

[[Page 44724]]

    USTR encourages the submission of documents in Adobe PDF format, as 
attachments to an electronic mail. Interested persons who make 
submissions by electronic mail should not provide separate cover 
letters; information that might appear in a cover letter should be 
included in the submission itself. Similarly, to the extent possible, 
any attachments to the submission should be included in the same file 
as the submission itself, and not as separate files.
    A person requesting that information contained in a comment 
submitted by that person be treated as confidential business 
information must certify that such information is business confidential 
and would not customarily be released to the public by the submitter. 
Confidential business information must be clearly designated as such 
and the submission must be marked ``BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL'' at the top 
and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page.
    Information or advice contained in a comment submitted, other than 
business confidential information, may be determined by USTR to be 
confidential in accordance with section 135(g)(2) of the Trade Act of 
1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155(g)(2)). If the submitter believes that information 
or advice may qualify as such, the submitter--
    (1) Must clearly so designate the information or advice;
    (2) Must clearly mark the material as ``SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE'' 
at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page; and
    (3) Is encouraged to provide a non-confidential summary of the 
information or advice.
    Pursuant to section 127(e) of the URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR 
will maintain a file on this dispute settlement proceeding, accessible 
to the public, in the USTR Reading Room, which is located at 1724 F 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508. The public file will include non-
confidential comments received by USTR from the public with respect to 
the dispute; if a dispute settlement panel is convened, the U.S. 
submissions to that panel, the submissions, or non-confidential 
summaries of submissions, to the panel received from other participants 
in the dispute, as well as the report of the panel; and, if applicable, 
the report of the Appellate Body. An appointment to review the public 
file (Docket No. WT/DS-345, India Bond Dispute) may be made by calling 
the USTR Reading Room at (202) 395-6186. The USTR Reading Room is open 
to the public from 9:30 a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday.

Daniel Brinza,
Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and 
Enforcement.
 [FR Doc. E6-12788 Filed 8-4-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-W6-P