Rules for Investigations Relating to Global and Bilateral Safeguard Actions, Market Disruption, Trade Diversion, and Review of Relief Actions, 37804-37806 [2012-15346]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
37804
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
information and a regulatory analysis of
the amendments.
These amendments are being
promulgated in accordance with the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553) (APA), and will be codified in 19
CFR part 206.
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
19 CFR Part 206
Rules for Investigations Relating to
Global and Bilateral Safeguard
Actions, Market Disruption, Trade
Diversion, and Review of Relief
Actions
United States International
Trade Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The United States
International Trade Commission
(Commission) is adopting as a final rule,
with changes to correct three
typographical errors, the interim rule
amending its Rules of Practice and
Procedure (Rules) that was published on
January 26, 2012. The rule concerns the
conduct of safeguard investigations
under statutory provisions that
implement bilateral safeguard
provisions in free trade agreements that
the United States has negotiated with
Australia, Bahrain, Chile, Colombia, the
Dominican Republic and five Central
American countries (Costa Rica, El
Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and
Nicaragua), Jordan, Korea, Morocco,
Oman, Panama, Peru, and Singapore.
With the exception of the free trade
agreement with Panama, all of the
aforementioned free trade agreements
have entered into force. The free trade
agreement with Panama is expected to
enter into force imminently. The interim
rule amended and expanded upon rules
previously in effect that pertained to the
conduct of bilateral safeguard
investigations under the North
American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA) Implementation Act with
respect to imports from Canada and
Mexico.
SUMMARY:
Effective date: June 25, 2012.
Lisa
R. Barton, Acting Secretary, telephone
(202) 205–2000, or William Gearhart,
Esquire, Office of the General Counsel,
United States International Trade
Commission, telephone (202) 205–3091.
Hearing-impaired individuals are
advised that information on this matter
can be obtained by contacting the
Commission’s TDD terminal at 202–
205–1810. General information
concerning the Commission may also be
obtained by accessing its Web site at
https://www.usitc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
preamble below is designed to assist
readers in understanding these
amendments to the Commission’s Rules.
This preamble provides background
DATES:
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:43 Jun 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
Background
Section 335 of the Tariff Act of 1930
(19 U.S.C. 1335) authorizes the
Commission to adopt such reasonable
procedures, rules and regulations as it
deems necessary to carry out its
functions and duties. The Commission
is adopting as a final rule, with three
changes to correct typographical errors,
the interim rule published in the
Federal Register on January 26, 2012
(77 FR 3922) governing investigations
relating to global and bilateral safeguard
actions, market disruption, trade
diversion, and review of relief actions
(part 206 of its Rules). The final rule
principally concerns subpart D of part
206, Investigations Relating to Bilateral
Safeguard Actions, but also includes
several technical and conforming
changes to the general rules in subpart
A of part 206. Prior to publication of the
interim rule, the rules in subpart D
applied only to Commission
investigations under the bilateral
safeguard provision in the NAFTA
Implementation Act with respect to
imports from Canada and Mexico. The
Commission adopted the interim rule in
response to legislation enacted by
Congress in recent years that
implements bilateral safeguard
provisions in several additional free
trade agreements (FTAs), including
legislation approved on October 21,
2011, that implements FTAs with
Colombia, Korea, and Panama. The
implementing legislation for each of
those FTAs directs the Commission,
upon receipt of a petition, to conduct an
investigation and determine whether, as
a result of the reduction or elimination
of a duty under the agreement, an article
is being imported into the United States
in such increased quantities, in absolute
terms or relative to domestic
production, and under such conditions
that imports of such article constitute a
substantial cause of serious injury or the
threat thereof to the domestic industry
producing an article that is like or
directly competitive with the imported
article. If the Commission makes an
affirmative determination, it must
recommend a remedy to the President;
the President makes the final decision
on remedy.
More specifically, in addition to the
NAFTA Implementation Act, the
Commission is required to conduct
bilateral safeguard investigations and
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
make determinations under section
311(b) of the United States-Australia
Free Trade Agreement Implementation
Act, section 311(b) of the United StatesBahrain Free Trade Agreement
Implementation Act, section 311(b) of
the United States-Chile Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act, section
311(b) of the United States-Colombia
Trade Promotion Agreement
Implementation Act, section 311(b) of
the Dominican Republic-Central
America-United States Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act, section
211(b) of the United States-Jordan Free
Trade Area Implementation Act, section
311(b) of the United States-Korea Free
Trade Agreement Implementation Act,
section 311(b) of the United StatesMorocco Free Trade Agreement
Implementation Act, section 311(b) of
the United States-Oman Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act, section
311(b) of the United States-Panama
Trade Promotion Agreement
Implementation Act, section 311(b) of
the United States-Peru Trade Promotion
Agreement Implementation Act, and
section 311(b) of the United StatesSingapore Free Trade Agreement
Implementation Act. For U.S. Code
citations to the respective
implementation acts, see the text of
interim rule section 206.31 published in
the Federal Register on January 26,
2012 (77 FR 3922).
These amendments expand upon
previous rules in Subpart D of Part 206
that provide for investigations and
determinations under the NAFTA
Implementation Act. Each of the
statutory provisions listed above
contains requirements that are similar
both substantively and procedurally to
the provision in the NAFTA
Implementation Act. These amended
rules identify the types of entities that
may file a petition, describe the
information that must be included in a
petition, indicate the time for
Commission determinations and
reporting, and establish procedures for
the limited disclosure of confidential
business information under
administrative protective order in those
instances in which the Commission is
authorized to make such disclosure.
In its notice of the interim rule
published in the Federal Register on
January 26, 2012, the Commission
invited interested parties to submit
written comments and asked that they
be received within 60 days of
publication in the notice in the Federal
Register. The Commission received one
written comment from the Embassy of
the Republic of Korea (Korea),
Washington, DC, on February 13, 2012.
In its written comment, Korea stated
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
that, in the case of the bilateral
safeguard provision in the FTA with
Korea, the interim rule either did not
properly incorporate or did not fully
elaborate on (1) The obligation to notify
the other Party in writing and consult
on the initiation of an investigation
within 30 days after it applies a
safeguard measure; (2) the obligation to
give interested parties a period of at
least 20 days to submit comments after
the publication of the notice; and (3) the
obligation not to apply a provisional
measure until at least 45 days after the
initiation of investigation. In a footnote,
Korea stated that the obligation to notify
in writing and consult on the initiation
of an investigation is usually fulfilled by
the Executive Branch of the U.S.
Government.
The Commission carefully reviewed
the written comment of Korea and in so
doing considered whether it should
make any changes to the rule to address
the concerns raised by Korea. Based on
that review, the Commission concluded
that no change is necessary and that the
interim rule should be adopted as a final
rule without change (other than to
correct typographical errors). The
Commission considered each of the
concerns raised by Korea. With respect
to the obligation to notify and consult,
the Commission notes, and Korea
appears to agree, that obligations to
notify and consult under the FTAs are
generally fulfilled by executive branch
agencies other than the Commission,
which is an independent agency. In the
Commission’s view it would be
inappropriate for the Commission to
issue a rule that states how or when
another executive branch agency should
notify and/or consult with Korea in a
bilateral safeguard matter.
With respect to the obligation to
provide interested parties with a period
of at least 20 days to submit comments
after publication of the notice, the
Commission is of the view that this
obligation can be readily satisfied
within the statutory time period for
making an injury determination and is
more properly addressed in the notice
announcing institution of the
investigation. The U.S. implementing
statute provides that the Commission
must make its injury determination
within 120 days (180 days if critical
circumstances are alleged) after the date
on which the investigation is initiated.
With respect to the obligation not to
apply a provisional measure until at
least 45 days after initiation of an
investigation, the Commission notes
that decisions regarding whether and
when to apply a provisional measure are
made by the President, not the
Commission. Accordingly, in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:43 Jun 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
37805
Commission’s view it would be
inappropriate for the Commission to
promulgate a rule that addresses the
period in time at which the President
might apply a measure. Moreover, the
Commission notes that when critical
circumstances are alleged in a petition,
U.S. legislation gives the Commission
more than 45 days (up to 60 days from
the day on which a request for
provisional relief is filed) to make and
transmit a determination and
provisional relief recommendation to
the President. When the request
involves a perishable agricultural
product, U.S. legislation allows the
Commission to conduct an expedited
investigation and recommend
provisional relief with respect to a
perishable agricultural product only if
the Commission has, for at least 90 days
prior to receipt of the petition
containing the request, monitored and
investigated imports of the product
concerned under section 332(g) of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1332(g)).
The Commission conducts such
monitoring investigations at the request
of the U.S. Trade Representative.
The three typographical errors are in
sections 206.1 and 206.32 of the rule.
The first two errors are in section 206.1,
which is amended to add the word
‘‘sections’’ before the list of statutory
sections cited, and to substitute the
symbol ‘‘§ ’’ for the word ‘‘section’’ so as
to refer to ‘‘§ 206.31’’ of the rule to
conform with standard rule writing
format. The third error corrected is in
section 206.32(a), which concerns the
definition of ‘‘substantial cause,’’ to add
the word ‘‘in’’ before the word
‘‘section.’’
by state, local, and tribal governments,
in the aggregate, or by the private sector,
of $100,000,000 or more in any one
year, and will not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.
The final rule is not a major rule as
defined by section 804 of the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801
et seq.). Moreover, it is exempt from the
reporting requirements of that Act
because it contains rules of agency
organization, procedure, or practice that
do not substantially affect the rights or
obligations of non-agency parties.
The amendments are not subject to
section 3504(h) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.),
since they do not contain any new
information collection requirements.
Regulatory Analysis
The Commission has determined that
this action adopting a final rule does not
meet the criteria described in section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) and thus does
not constitute a significant regulatory
action for purposes of the Executive
Order.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is inapplicable to this
rulemaking because it is not one for
which a notice of final rulemaking is
required under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) or any
other statute.
This final rule does not contain
federalism implications warranting the
preparation of a federalism summary
impact statement pursuant to Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 4,
1999).
No actions are necessary under the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) because this final
rule will not result in the expenditure
■
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 206
Administrative practice and
procedure, Australia, Bahrain, Business
and industry, Canada, Chile, Colombia,
Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El
Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras,
Imports, Investigations, Jordan, Korea,
Mexico, Morocco, Nicaragua, Oman,
Panama, Peru, Singapore, Trade
agreements.
Accordingly, the interim rule
amending 19 CFR part 206 which was
published at 77 FR 3922 on January 26,
2012, is adopted as a final rule with the
following changes:
PART 206—INVESTIGATIONS
RELATING TO GLOBAL AND
BILATERAL SAFEGUARG ACTIONS,
MARKET DISRUPTION, TRADE
DIVERSION, AND REVIEW OF RELIEF
ACTIONS
1. The authority citation for part 206
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 1335, 2112 note,
2251–2254, 2436, 2451–2451a, 3351–3382,
3805 note, 4051–4065, and 4101.
■
2. Revise § 206.1 to read as follows:
§ 206.1
Applicability of part.
Part 206 applies to proceedings of the
Commission under sections 201–202,
204, 406, and 421–422 of the Trade Act
of 1974, as amended (2251–2252, 2254,
2436, 2451–2451a), sections 301–317 of
the North American Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19
U.S.C. 3351–3382) (hereinafter NAFTA
Implementation Act), and the statutory
provisions listed in § 206.31 of this part
206 that implement bilateral safeguard
provisions in other free trade
agreements into which the United States
has entered.
■ 3. Amend § 206.32 by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
37806
§ 206.32
D.
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Definitions applicable to subpart
*
*
*
*
*
(a) The term substantial cause has the
same meaning as in section 202(b)(1)(B)
of the Trade Act.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued: June 18, 2012.
By order of the Commission.
William R. Bishop,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012–15346 Filed 6–22–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Parts 1 and 301
[TD 9596]
RIN 1545–BK39
Disregarded Entities and the Indoor
Tanning Services Excise Tax
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Final and temporary
regulations.
AGENCY:
This document contains final
and temporary regulations relating to
disregarded entities (including qualified
subchapter S subsidiaries) and the
indoor tanning services excise tax.
These regulations affect disregarded
entities responsible for collecting the
indoor tanning services excise tax and
owners of those disregarded entities.
The text of these temporary regulations
serves as the text of proposed
regulations (REG–125570–11) published
in the Proposed Rules section in this
issue of the Federal Register.
DATES: Effective Date: These regulations
are effective on June 25, 2012.
Applicability Date: For dates of
applicability, see §§ 1.1361–
4T(a)(8)(iii)(B) and 301.7701–2T(e)(9)(i).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael H. Beker, (202) 622–3130 (not
a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Background and Explanation of
Provisions
This document contains amendments
to the Income Tax Regulations (26 CFR
part 1) under section 1361 of the
Internal Revenue Code (Code) and the
Procedure and Administration
Regulations (26 CFR part 301) under
section 7701 of the Code.
Since January 1, 2008, §§ 1.1361–
4(a)(8) and 301.7701–2(c)(2)(v) have
treated a qualified subchapter S
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:43 Jun 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
subsidiary (QSub) and a single-owner
eligible entity that is disregarded as an
entity separate from its owner for any
purpose under § 301.7701–2
(collectively, a disregarded entity) as a
separate entity for purposes of excise
taxes imposed by Chapters 31, 32 (other
than section 4181), 33, 34, 35, 36 (other
than section 4461), and 38 of the Code,
and any floor stocks tax imposed on
articles subject to any of these taxes.
Effective July 1, 2010, section 10907
of the Patient Protection and Affordable
Care Act, Public Law 111–148 (124 Stat.
119 (2010)), added new Chapter 49 to
the Code, which imposes an excise tax
on amounts paid for indoor tanning
services under section 5000B.
Consistent with existing §§ 1.1361–
4(a)(8) and 301.7701–2(c)(2)(v), these
temporary regulations add Chapter 49 to
the list of excise taxes for which
disregarded entities are treated as
separate entities. Accordingly, effective
for taxes imposed on amounts paid on
or after July 1, 2012, these temporary
regulations treat a disregarded entity as
a separate entity for purposes of the
indoor tanning services excise tax under
section 5000B. These temporary
regulations also treat a single-owner
eligible entity that is disregarded as an
entity separate from its owner for any
purpose under § 301.7701–2 as a
corporation with respect to the indoor
tanning services excise tax.
The indoor tanning services excise tax
is reported on Form 720 ‘‘Quarterly
Federal Excise Tax Return’’. As a result
of these temporary regulations, a Form
720 reporting indoor tanning services
excise taxes imposed on amounts paid
on or after July 1, 2012, must be filed
under the name and employer
identification number (EIN) of the entity
rather than under the name and EIN of
the disregarded entity’s owner. Thus,
this rule affects returns of this tax that
are due on or after October 31, 2012.
For taxes imposed under section
5000B on amounts paid before July 1,
2012, the IRS will treat payments made
by a disregarded entity, or other actions
taken by a disregarded entity, with
respect to the indoor tanning services
excise tax as having been made or taken
by the owner of that entity. Thus, for
such periods, the owner of a disregarded
entity will be treated as satisfying its
obligations with respect to the indoor
tanning services excise tax if those
obligations are satisfied either: (i) By the
owner itself or (ii) by the disregarded
entity on behalf of the owner.
Special Analyses
It has been determined that this
Treasury decision is not a significant
regulatory action as defined in
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Executive Order 12866, as
supplemented by Executive Order
13563. Therefore, a regulatory
assessment is not required. It has also
been determined that section 553(b) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (5
U.S.C. chapter 5) does not apply to these
regulations. For applicability of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
chapter 6), please refer to the Special
Analyses section of the preamble to the
cross-reference notice of proposed
rulemaking published elsewhere in this
issue of the Federal Register. Pursuant
to section 7805(f) of the Code, this
regulation has been submitted to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration for comment
on its impact on small business.
Drafting Information
The principal author of these
regulations is Michael H. Beker, Office
of the Associate Chief Counsel
(Passthroughs and Special Industries).
However, other personnel from the IRS
and the Treasury Department
participated in their development.
List of Subjects
26 CFR Part 1
Income taxes, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
26 CFR Part 301
Employment taxes, Estate taxes,
Excise taxes, Gift taxes, Income taxes,
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Amendments to the Regulations
Accordingly, 26 CFR parts 1 and 301
are amended as follows:
PART 1—INCOME TAX
Paragraph 1. The authority citation
for part 1 continues to read in part as
follows:
■
Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *
Par. 2. Section 1.1361–4 is amended
by adding paragraph (a)(8)(iii) to read as
follows:
■
§ 1.1361–4
Effect of QSub election.
(a) * * *
(8) * * *
(iii) [Reserved]. For further guidance,
see § 1.1361–4T(a)(8)(iii).
*
*
*
*
*
■ Par. 3. Section 1.1361–4T is added to
read as follows:
§ 1.1361–4T Effect of QSub election
(temporary).
(a)(1) through (a)(8)(ii) [Reserved]. For
further guidance, see § 1.1361–4(a)(1)
through (a)(8)(ii).
E:\FR\FM\25JNR1.SGM
25JNR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37804-37806]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15346]
[[Page 37804]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
19 CFR Part 206
Rules for Investigations Relating to Global and Bilateral
Safeguard Actions, Market Disruption, Trade Diversion, and Review of
Relief Actions
AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States International Trade Commission (Commission)
is adopting as a final rule, with changes to correct three
typographical errors, the interim rule amending its Rules of Practice
and Procedure (Rules) that was published on January 26, 2012. The rule
concerns the conduct of safeguard investigations under statutory
provisions that implement bilateral safeguard provisions in free trade
agreements that the United States has negotiated with Australia,
Bahrain, Chile, Colombia, the Dominican Republic and five Central
American countries (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and
Nicaragua), Jordan, Korea, Morocco, Oman, Panama, Peru, and Singapore.
With the exception of the free trade agreement with Panama, all of the
aforementioned free trade agreements have entered into force. The free
trade agreement with Panama is expected to enter into force imminently.
The interim rule amended and expanded upon rules previously in effect
that pertained to the conduct of bilateral safeguard investigations
under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Implementation
Act with respect to imports from Canada and Mexico.
DATES: Effective date: June 25, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa R. Barton, Acting Secretary,
telephone (202) 205-2000, or William Gearhart, Esquire, Office of the
General Counsel, United States International Trade Commission,
telephone (202) 205-3091. Hearing-impaired individuals are advised that
information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the
Commission's TDD terminal at 202-205-1810. General information
concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Web
site at https://www.usitc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The preamble below is designed to assist
readers in understanding these amendments to the Commission's Rules.
This preamble provides background information and a regulatory analysis
of the amendments.
These amendments are being promulgated in accordance with the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) (APA), and will be codified
in 19 CFR part 206.
Background
Section 335 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1335) authorizes
the Commission to adopt such reasonable procedures, rules and
regulations as it deems necessary to carry out its functions and
duties. The Commission is adopting as a final rule, with three changes
to correct typographical errors, the interim rule published in the
Federal Register on January 26, 2012 (77 FR 3922) governing
investigations relating to global and bilateral safeguard actions,
market disruption, trade diversion, and review of relief actions (part
206 of its Rules). The final rule principally concerns subpart D of
part 206, Investigations Relating to Bilateral Safeguard Actions, but
also includes several technical and conforming changes to the general
rules in subpart A of part 206. Prior to publication of the interim
rule, the rules in subpart D applied only to Commission investigations
under the bilateral safeguard provision in the NAFTA Implementation Act
with respect to imports from Canada and Mexico. The Commission adopted
the interim rule in response to legislation enacted by Congress in
recent years that implements bilateral safeguard provisions in several
additional free trade agreements (FTAs), including legislation approved
on October 21, 2011, that implements FTAs with Colombia, Korea, and
Panama. The implementing legislation for each of those FTAs directs the
Commission, upon receipt of a petition, to conduct an investigation and
determine whether, as a result of the reduction or elimination of a
duty under the agreement, an article is being imported into the United
States in such increased quantities, in absolute terms or relative to
domestic production, and under such conditions that imports of such
article constitute a substantial cause of serious injury or the threat
thereof to the domestic industry producing an article that is like or
directly competitive with the imported article. If the Commission makes
an affirmative determination, it must recommend a remedy to the
President; the President makes the final decision on remedy.
More specifically, in addition to the NAFTA Implementation Act, the
Commission is required to conduct bilateral safeguard investigations
and make determinations under section 311(b) of the United States-
Australia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, section 311(b) of
the United States-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act,
section 311(b) of the United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement
Implementation Act, section 311(b) of the United States-Colombia Trade
Promotion Agreement Implementation Act, section 311(b) of the Dominican
Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement
Implementation Act, section 211(b) of the United States-Jordan Free
Trade Area Implementation Act, section 311(b) of the United States-
Korea Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, section 311(b) of the
United States-Morocco Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, section
311(b) of the United States-Oman Free Trade Agreement Implementation
Act, section 311(b) of the United States-Panama Trade Promotion
Agreement Implementation Act, section 311(b) of the United States-Peru
Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act, and section 311(b) of the
United States-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act. For
U.S. Code citations to the respective implementation acts, see the text
of interim rule section 206.31 published in the Federal Register on
January 26, 2012 (77 FR 3922).
These amendments expand upon previous rules in Subpart D of Part
206 that provide for investigations and determinations under the NAFTA
Implementation Act. Each of the statutory provisions listed above
contains requirements that are similar both substantively and
procedurally to the provision in the NAFTA Implementation Act. These
amended rules identify the types of entities that may file a petition,
describe the information that must be included in a petition, indicate
the time for Commission determinations and reporting, and establish
procedures for the limited disclosure of confidential business
information under administrative protective order in those instances in
which the Commission is authorized to make such disclosure.
In its notice of the interim rule published in the Federal Register
on January 26, 2012, the Commission invited interested parties to
submit written comments and asked that they be received within 60 days
of publication in the notice in the Federal Register. The Commission
received one written comment from the Embassy of the Republic of Korea
(Korea), Washington, DC, on February 13, 2012. In its written comment,
Korea stated
[[Page 37805]]
that, in the case of the bilateral safeguard provision in the FTA with
Korea, the interim rule either did not properly incorporate or did not
fully elaborate on (1) The obligation to notify the other Party in
writing and consult on the initiation of an investigation within 30
days after it applies a safeguard measure; (2) the obligation to give
interested parties a period of at least 20 days to submit comments
after the publication of the notice; and (3) the obligation not to
apply a provisional measure until at least 45 days after the initiation
of investigation. In a footnote, Korea stated that the obligation to
notify in writing and consult on the initiation of an investigation is
usually fulfilled by the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government.
The Commission carefully reviewed the written comment of Korea and
in so doing considered whether it should make any changes to the rule
to address the concerns raised by Korea. Based on that review, the
Commission concluded that no change is necessary and that the interim
rule should be adopted as a final rule without change (other than to
correct typographical errors). The Commission considered each of the
concerns raised by Korea. With respect to the obligation to notify and
consult, the Commission notes, and Korea appears to agree, that
obligations to notify and consult under the FTAs are generally
fulfilled by executive branch agencies other than the Commission, which
is an independent agency. In the Commission's view it would be
inappropriate for the Commission to issue a rule that states how or
when another executive branch agency should notify and/or consult with
Korea in a bilateral safeguard matter.
With respect to the obligation to provide interested parties with a
period of at least 20 days to submit comments after publication of the
notice, the Commission is of the view that this obligation can be
readily satisfied within the statutory time period for making an injury
determination and is more properly addressed in the notice announcing
institution of the investigation. The U.S. implementing statute
provides that the Commission must make its injury determination within
120 days (180 days if critical circumstances are alleged) after the
date on which the investigation is initiated.
With respect to the obligation not to apply a provisional measure
until at least 45 days after initiation of an investigation, the
Commission notes that decisions regarding whether and when to apply a
provisional measure are made by the President, not the Commission.
Accordingly, in the Commission's view it would be inappropriate for the
Commission to promulgate a rule that addresses the period in time at
which the President might apply a measure. Moreover, the Commission
notes that when critical circumstances are alleged in a petition, U.S.
legislation gives the Commission more than 45 days (up to 60 days from
the day on which a request for provisional relief is filed) to make and
transmit a determination and provisional relief recommendation to the
President. When the request involves a perishable agricultural product,
U.S. legislation allows the Commission to conduct an expedited
investigation and recommend provisional relief with respect to a
perishable agricultural product only if the Commission has, for at
least 90 days prior to receipt of the petition containing the request,
monitored and investigated imports of the product concerned under
section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1332(g)). The
Commission conducts such monitoring investigations at the request of
the U.S. Trade Representative.
The three typographical errors are in sections 206.1 and 206.32 of
the rule. The first two errors are in section 206.1, which is amended
to add the word ``sections'' before the list of statutory sections
cited, and to substitute the symbol ``Sec. '' for the word ``section''
so as to refer to ``Sec. 206.31'' of the rule to conform with standard
rule writing format. The third error corrected is in section 206.32(a),
which concerns the definition of ``substantial cause,'' to add the word
``in'' before the word ``section.''
Regulatory Analysis
The Commission has determined that this action adopting a final
rule does not meet the criteria described in section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and thus does not constitute
a significant regulatory action for purposes of the Executive Order.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is
inapplicable to this rulemaking because it is not one for which a
notice of final rulemaking is required under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) or any
other statute.
This final rule does not contain federalism implications warranting
the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement pursuant to
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 4, 1999).
No actions are necessary under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) because this final rule will not result in
the expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more in any one
year, and will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The final rule is not a major rule as defined by section 804 of the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.). Moreover, it is exempt
from the reporting requirements of that Act because it contains rules
of agency organization, procedure, or practice that do not
substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency parties.
The amendments are not subject to section 3504(h) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), since they do not contain any
new information collection requirements.
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 206
Administrative practice and procedure, Australia, Bahrain, Business
and industry, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic,
El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Imports, Investigations, Jordan,
Korea, Mexico, Morocco, Nicaragua, Oman, Panama, Peru, Singapore, Trade
agreements.
Accordingly, the interim rule amending 19 CFR part 206 which was
published at 77 FR 3922 on January 26, 2012, is adopted as a final rule
with the following changes:
PART 206--INVESTIGATIONS RELATING TO GLOBAL AND BILATERAL SAFEGUARG
ACTIONS, MARKET DISRUPTION, TRADE DIVERSION, AND REVIEW OF RELIEF
ACTIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 206 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 1335, 2112 note, 2251-2254, 2436, 2451-
2451a, 3351-3382, 3805 note, 4051-4065, and 4101.
0
2. Revise Sec. 206.1 to read as follows:
Sec. 206.1 Applicability of part.
Part 206 applies to proceedings of the Commission under sections
201-202, 204, 406, and 421-422 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended
(2251-2252, 2254, 2436, 2451-2451a), sections 301-317 of the North
American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3351-3382)
(hereinafter NAFTA Implementation Act), and the statutory provisions
listed in Sec. 206.31 of this part 206 that implement bilateral
safeguard provisions in other free trade agreements into which the
United States has entered.
0
3. Amend Sec. 206.32 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
[[Page 37806]]
Sec. 206.32 Definitions applicable to subpart D.
* * * * *
(a) The term substantial cause has the same meaning as in section
202(b)(1)(B) of the Trade Act.
* * * * *
Issued: June 18, 2012.
By order of the Commission.
William R. Bishop,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012-15346 Filed 6-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
