WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding European Communities and Certain Member States-Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft-Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU, 23539-23540 [2012-9426]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 76 / Thursday, April 19, 2012 / Notices DATES: This notice is effective April 19, 2012. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah J. Heidema, Office of Defense Trade Controls Policy, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 20522–0112, telephone (202) 663–2809, email at heidemasj@state.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 21, 2012, the Department of State published a rule (77 FR 16592) amending the ITAR to implement the Treaty, and identify via a supplement the defense articles and defense services that may not be exported pursuant to the Treaty. The rule also amended the ITAR section pertaining to the Canadian exemption and added Israel to the list of countries and entities that have a shorter Congressional notification certification time period and a higher dollar value reporting threshold. This rule indicated it would become effective upon the entry into force of the Treaty and that the Department of State would publish a rule document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date of this rule. This notice is being published to make such announcement. Dated: April 13, 2012. Beth M. McCormick, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Defense Trade and Regional Security, Bureau of PoliticalMilitary Affairs, U.S. Department of State. [FR Doc. 2012–9451 Filed 4–18–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710–25–P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE [Dispute No. WTO/DS316] WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding European Communities and Certain Member States—Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft—Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Notice; request for comments. AGENCY: The Office of the United States Trade Representative (‘‘USTR’’) is providing notice that on March 30, 2012, the United States requested establishment of a dispute settlement panel under the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (‘‘WTO Agreement’’). That request may be found at www.wto.org contained in a document designated as WT/DS316/23. USTR invites written comments from the public concerning the issues raised in this dispute. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:10 Apr 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 Although USTR will accept any comments received during the course of the dispute settlement proceedings, comments should be submitted on or before May 21, 2012 to be assured of timely consideration by USTR. ADDRESSES: Public comments should be submitted electronically to www.regulations.gov, docket number USTR–2012–007. If you are unable to provide submissions to www.regulations.gov, please contact Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395–9483 to arrange for an alternative method of transmission. If (as explained below) the comment contains confidential information, then the comment should be submitted by fax only to Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395–3640. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Willis S. Martyn, Associate General Counsel, or Frank J. Schweitzer, Associate General Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20508, (202) 395–3150. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 127(b)(1) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) (19 U.S.C. 3537(b)(1)) requires that notice and opportunity for comment be provided after the United States submits or receives a request for establishment of a WTO dispute settlement panel. Consistent with this obligation, USTR is providing notice that it has requested a panel pursuant to the WTO Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (‘‘DSU’). Once it is established, the panel will hold its meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, and could issue a report on its findings and recommendations as soon as three months after its establishment. DATES: Major Issues Raised by the United States On June 1, 2011, the Dispute Settlement Body (‘‘DSB’’) adopted its recommendations and rulings in the dispute European Communities and Certain Member States—Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft (DS316) (‘‘EC—Large Civil Aircraft’’). The DSB ruled that the following are specific subsidies within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (‘‘SCM Agreement’’) that caused adverse effects to U.S. interests within the meaning of Articles 5(c) and 6.3(a), (b), and (c) of that Agreement: • Grants of launch aid/member State financing (‘‘LA/MSF’’) by the European Union (‘‘EU’’) member state governments of France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom to Airbus for PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 23539 the A300, A310, A320, A330, A340, A330–200, A340–500/600, and A380; ¨ • The provision of the Muhlenberger Loch site and the lengthened Bremen Airport Runway; • Grants by authorities in Germany and Spain for the construction of manufacturing and assembly facilities in Nordenham, Germany, and Sevilla, La Rinconada, Toledo, Puerto de Santa Maria, and Puerto Real, Spain, and by the government of Andalusia and Castilla-La Mancha to Airbus in Puerto Real, Sevilla, and Illescas (Toledo); • The 1989 acquisition by ¨ Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau (‘‘KfW’’) of a 20 percent equity interest in Deutsche Airbus and the 1992 transfer by KfW of its 100 percent equity interest in Deutsche Airbus to Messerschmitt¨ Bolkow-Blohm GmbH (‘‘MBB’’); and • The 1987, 1988, 1992, and 1994 ´ equity infusions to Aerospatiale. The DSB recommended that the EU and certain member States bring their WTO-inconsistent measures into compliance with their obligations under the SCM Agreement. On December 1, 2011, the EU transmitted a document (‘‘EU Notification’’) to the United States and the DSB claiming that the EU had brought its measures fully into conformity with the DSB recommendations and rulings. The EU notification included a list of 36 ‘‘appropriate steps’’ taken by the EU to bring its measures into conformity with the EU’s WTO obligations. Upon review of the notification, the United States did not agree with the EU’s position that the EU had fully complied with the DSB recommendations and rulings. Accordingly, the United States requested consultations on December 9, 2011. The United States and the EU held consultations on January 13, 2012. The consultations failed to resolve the dispute. Article 7.8 of the SCM Agreement provides that a Member found to maintain measures inconsistent with Article 5(c) and 6.3 of the SCM Agreement ‘‘shall take appropriate steps to remove the adverse effects or shall withdraw the subsidy.’’ The United States considers that the EU has done neither of these with regard to the measures identified above. As there is ‘‘disagreement as to the existence or consistency with a covered agreement of measures taken to comply with the recommendations and rulings’’ of the DSB, the United States is seeking recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU. The United States has requested that the Article 21.5 panel consider the following matters. With respect to the measures the EU has identified in the E:\FR\FM\19APN1.SGM 19APN1 23540 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 76 / Thursday, April 19, 2012 / Notices EU Notification as the measures taken to comply with the recommendations and rulings of the DSB for purposes of Article 21.5 of the DSU, the United States considers that (i) these measures are insufficient to remove the adverse effects or withdraw the subsidies, and (ii) certain of these measures taken to comply introduce new inconsistencies with the SCM Agreement. In addition, French, German, Spanish, and UK LA/ MSF for the A350XWB (i) are measures closely related to the measures the EU has identified as taken to comply and to the EU measures the DSB found to be inconsistent with the SCM Agreement and (ii) replace or continue the LA/MSF for twin-aisle aircraft covered by the recommendations and rulings of the DSB. The United States considers these LA/MSF measures for the A350XWB to be inconsistent with the SCM Agreement. Additional details are provided in the panel request, which may be found at www.wto.org contained in a document designated as WT/DS316/23. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning the issues raised in this dispute. Persons may submit public comments electronically to www.regulations.gov docket number USTR–2012–0007. If you are unable to provide submissions by www.regulations.gov, please contact Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395–9483 to arrange for an alternative method of transmission. To submit comments via www.regulations.gov, enter docket number USTR–2012–0007 on the home page and click ‘‘search’’. The site will provide a search-results page listing all documents associated with this docket. Find a reference to this notice by selecting ‘‘Notice’’ under ‘‘Document Type’’ on the left side of the searchresults page, and click on the link entitled ‘‘Submit a Comment.’’ (For further information on using the www.regulations.gov Web site, please consult the resources provided on the Web site by clicking on ‘‘How to Use This Site’’ on the left side of the home page.) The www.regulations.gov site provides the option of providing comments by filling in a ‘‘Type Comments’’ field, or by attaching a document using an ‘‘upload file’’ field. It is expected that most comments will be provided in an attached document. If a document is attached, it is sufficient VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:10 Apr 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 to type ‘‘See attached’’ in the ‘‘Type Comments’’ field. 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. Any comment containing business confidential information must be submitted by fax to Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395–3640. A non-confidential summary of the confidential information must be submitted to www.regulations.gov. The nonconfidential summary will be placed in the docket and open to public inspection. 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) Must provide a non-confidential summary of the information or advice. Any comment containing confidential information must be submitted by fax. A non-confidential summary of the confidential information must be submitted to www.regulations.gov. The non-confidential summary will be placed in the docket and open to public inspection. Pursuant to section 127(e) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR will maintain a docket on this dispute settlement proceeding accessible to the public at www.regulations.gov, docket number USTR 2012–0007. 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 or in the event of an appeal from such a panel, the U.S. submissions, any nonconfidential submissions, or nonconfidential summaries of submissions, received from other participants in the dispute, will be made available to the PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 public on USTR’s Web site at www.ustr.gov, and the report of the panel, and, if applicable, the report of the Appellate Body, will be available on the Web site of the World Trade Organization, www.wto.org. Comments open to public inspection may be viewed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Bradford Ward, Acting Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement. [FR Doc. 2012–9426 Filed 4–18–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190–W2–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Notice of Delays in Processing of Special Permits Applications Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT. ACTION: List of applications delayed more than 180 days. AGENCY: In accordance with the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 51I7(c), PHMSA is publishing the following list of special permit applications that have been in process for 180 days or more. The reason(s) for delay and the expected completion date for action on each application is provided in association with each identified application. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan Paquet, Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Special Permits and Approvals, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, East Building, PHH–30, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590– 0001, (202) 366–4535. SUMMARY: Key to ‘‘Reason for Delay’’ 1. Awaiting additional information from applicant. 2. Extensive public comment under review. 3. Application is technically complex and is of significant impact or precedent-setting and requires extensive analysis. 4. Staff review delayed by other priority issues or volume of special permit applications. Meaning of Application Number Suffixes N—New application M—Modification request E:\FR\FM\19APN1.SGM 19APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 76 (Thursday, April 19, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23539-23540]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-9426]


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

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Dispute No. WTO/DS316]


WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding European Communities 
and Certain Member States--Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil 
Aircraft--Recourse by the United States to Article 21.5 of the DSU

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 March 30, 2012, the United 
States requested establishment of a dispute settlement panel under the 
Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (``WTO 
Agreement''). That request may be found at www.wto.org contained in a 
document designated as WT/DS316/23. 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 May 21, 2012 to be assured of timely 
consideration by USTR.

ADDRESSES: Public comments should be submitted electronically to 
www.regulations.gov, docket number USTR-2012-007. If you are unable to 
provide submissions to www.regulations.gov, please contact Sandy 
McKinzy at (202) 395-9483 to arrange for an alternative method of 
transmission. If (as explained below) the comment contains confidential 
information, then the comment should be submitted by fax only to Sandy 
McKinzy at (202) 395-3640.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Willis S. Martyn, Associate General 
Counsel, or Frank J. Schweitzer, Associate General Counsel, Office of 
the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street NW., 
Washington, DC 20508, (202) 395-3150.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 127(b)(1) of the Uruguay Round 
Agreements Act (URAA) (19 U.S.C. 3537(b)(1)) requires that notice and 
opportunity for comment be provided after the United States submits or 
receives a request for establishment of a WTO dispute settlement panel. 
Consistent with this obligation, USTR is providing notice that it has 
requested a panel pursuant to the WTO Understanding on Rules and 
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (``DSU'). Once it is 
established, the panel will hold its meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, 
and could issue a report on its findings and recommendations as soon as 
three months after its establishment.

Major Issues Raised by the United States

    On June 1, 2011, the Dispute Settlement Body (``DSB'') adopted its 
recommendations and rulings in the dispute European Communities and 
Certain Member States--Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft 
(DS316) (``EC--Large Civil Aircraft''). The DSB ruled that the 
following are specific subsidies within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 
of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (``SCM 
Agreement'') that caused adverse effects to U.S. interests within the 
meaning of Articles 5(c) and 6.3(a), (b), and (c) of that Agreement:
     Grants of launch aid/member State financing (``LA/MSF'') 
by the European Union (``EU'') member state governments of France, 
Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom to Airbus for the A300, A310, 
A320, A330, A340, A330-200, A340-500/600, and A380;
     The provision of the M[uuml]hlenberger Loch site and the 
lengthened Bremen Airport Runway;
     Grants by authorities in Germany and Spain for the 
construction of manufacturing and assembly facilities in Nordenham, 
Germany, and Sevilla, La Rinconada, Toledo, Puerto de Santa Maria, and 
Puerto Real, Spain, and by the government of Andalusia and Castilla-La 
Mancha to Airbus in Puerto Real, Sevilla, and Illescas (Toledo);
     The 1989 acquisition by Kreditanstalt f[uuml]r 
Wiederaufbau (``KfW'') of a 20 percent equity interest in Deutsche 
Airbus and the 1992 transfer by KfW of its 100 percent equity interest 
in Deutsche Airbus to Messerschmitt-B[ouml]lkow-Blohm GmbH (``MBB''); 
and
     The 1987, 1988, 1992, and 1994 equity infusions to 
A[eacute]rospatiale.
    The DSB recommended that the EU and certain member States bring 
their WTO-inconsistent measures into compliance with their obligations 
under the SCM Agreement.
    On December 1, 2011, the EU transmitted a document (``EU 
Notification'') to the United States and the DSB claiming that the EU 
had brought its measures fully into conformity with the DSB 
recommendations and rulings. The EU notification included a list of 36 
``appropriate steps'' taken by the EU to bring its measures into 
conformity with the EU's WTO obligations. Upon review of the 
notification, the United States did not agree with the EU's position 
that the EU had fully complied with the DSB recommendations and 
rulings. Accordingly, the United States requested consultations on 
December 9, 2011. The United States and the EU held consultations on 
January 13, 2012. The consultations failed to resolve the dispute.
    Article 7.8 of the SCM Agreement provides that a Member found to 
maintain measures inconsistent with Article 5(c) and 6.3 of the SCM 
Agreement ``shall take appropriate steps to remove the adverse effects 
or shall withdraw the subsidy.'' The United States considers that the 
EU has done neither of these with regard to the measures identified 
above. As there is ``disagreement as to the existence or consistency 
with a covered agreement of measures taken to comply with the 
recommendations and rulings'' of the DSB, the United States is seeking 
recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU.
    The United States has requested that the Article 21.5 panel 
consider the following matters. With respect to the measures the EU has 
identified in the

[[Page 23540]]

EU Notification as the measures taken to comply with the 
recommendations and rulings of the DSB for purposes of Article 21.5 of 
the DSU, the United States considers that (i) these measures are 
insufficient to remove the adverse effects or withdraw the subsidies, 
and (ii) certain of these measures taken to comply introduce new 
inconsistencies with the SCM Agreement. In addition, French, German, 
Spanish, and UK LA/MSF for the A350XWB (i) are measures closely related 
to the measures the EU has identified as taken to comply and to the EU 
measures the DSB found to be inconsistent with the SCM Agreement and 
(ii) replace or continue the LA/MSF for twin-aisle aircraft covered by 
the recommendations and rulings of the DSB. The United States considers 
these LA/MSF measures for the A350XWB to be inconsistent with the SCM 
Agreement.
    Additional details are provided in the panel request, which may be 
found at www.wto.org contained in a document designated as WT/DS316/23.

Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments 
concerning the issues raised in this dispute. Persons may submit public 
comments electronically to www.regulations.gov docket number USTR-2012-
0007. If you are unable to provide submissions by www.regulations.gov, 
please contact Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395-9483 to arrange for an 
alternative method of transmission.
    To submit comments via www.regulations.gov, enter docket number 
USTR-2012-0007 on the home page and click ``search''. The site will 
provide a search-results page listing all documents associated with 
this docket. Find a reference to this notice by selecting ``Notice'' 
under ``Document Type'' on the left side of the search-results page, 
and click on the link entitled ``Submit a Comment.'' (For further 
information on using the www.regulations.gov Web site, please consult 
the resources provided on the Web site by clicking on ``How to Use This 
Site'' on the left side of the home page.)
    The www.regulations.gov site provides the option of providing 
comments by filling in a ``Type Comments'' field, or by attaching a 
document using an ``upload file'' field. It is expected that most 
comments will be provided in an attached document. If a document is 
attached, it is sufficient to type ``See attached'' in the ``Type 
Comments'' field.
    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. Any comment 
containing business confidential information must be submitted by fax 
to Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395-3640. A non-confidential summary of the 
confidential information must be submitted to www.regulations.gov. The 
non-confidential summary will be placed in the docket and open to 
public inspection.
    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) Must provide a non-confidential summary of the information or 
advice.
    Any comment containing confidential information must be submitted 
by fax. A non-confidential summary of the confidential information must 
be submitted to www.regulations.gov. The non-confidential summary will 
be placed in the docket and open to public inspection.
    Pursuant to section 127(e) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 
U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR will maintain a docket on this dispute settlement 
proceeding accessible to the public at www.regulations.gov, docket 
number USTR 2012-0007. 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 or in the event of an appeal 
from such a panel, the U.S. submissions, any non-confidential 
submissions, or non-confidential summaries of submissions, received 
from other participants in the dispute, will be made available to the 
public on USTR's Web site at www.ustr.gov, and the report of the panel, 
and, if applicable, the report of the Appellate Body, will be available 
on the Web site of the World Trade Organization, www.wto.org. Comments 
open to public inspection may be viewed on the www.regulations.gov Web 
site.

Bradford Ward,
Acting Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and 
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2012-9426 Filed 4-18-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-W2-P