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