WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding: Countervailing Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from India
This Notice document was issued by the Office of United States Trade Representative (USTR)
For related information, Open Docket Folder
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
[Dispute No. WTO/DS436]
WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding United States—Countervailing Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From India
Office of the United States Trade Representative.
Notice; request for comments.
The Office of the United States Trade Representative (“USTR”) is providing notice that on April 24, 2012, India requested consultations with the United States under the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (“WTO Agreement”) concerning countervailing measures regarding certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India. That request may be found at contained in a document designated as WT/DS436/1/Rev.1. USTR invites written comments from the public concerning the issues raised in this dispute.
Although USTR will accept any comments received during the course of the dispute settlement proceedings, comments should be submitted on or before May 22, 2012, to be assured of timely consideration by USTR.
Public comments should be submitted electronically to , docket number USTR-2012-0008. If you are unable to provide submissions by , 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
Greta Milligan, Assistant General Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20508, (202) 395-3150.
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 nine months after it is established.
Major Issues Raised by India
On April 24, 2012, India requested consultations concerning countervailing measures regarding certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India (Investigation C-533-821). (This request supersedes a prior request for consultations received from India on April 12, 2012.) India's challenge addresses the Tariff Act of 1930, in particular sections 771(7)(G) and 776(b), as well as Title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations, sections 351.308 and 351.511(a)(2)(i)-(iv). In addition, India challenges certain actions of the United States with respect to U.S. Department of Commerce countervailing duty determinations and the countervailing duty order related to certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India. The consultation “request covers the countervailing duties and other measures, if any, applied on the subject goods from India through any notice, determination, decision memorandum, order, or any other instrument issued by the United States from time to time in connection with case no. C-533-821.” A list of proceedings and actions subject to the consultation request is provided at Annex 1 to the request and includes determinations related to the original investigation, certain administrative reviews of the countervailing duty order, and a five-year “sunset” review of that order. Finally, the “request also covers all the amendments, replacements, implementing acts or any other related measure in connection with the measures” described above.
India alleges inconsistencies with Articles I and IV of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and Articles 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, 21, 22 and 32 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.
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 docket number USTR-2012-0008. If you are unable to provide submissions via , please contact Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395-9483 to arrange for an alternative method of transmission.
To submit comments via , enter docket number USTR-2012-0008 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 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 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 . 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 . 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 , docket number USTR-2012-0008.
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 , 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, . Comments open to public inspection may be viewed on the Web site.
Bradford L. Ward,
Acting Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2012-10818 Filed 5-3-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-W2-P
No documents available.
| || |
Comment Period Closed
May 22 2012, at 11:59 PM ET
Show More Details
Date Posted: May 4, 2012
Federal Register Number: 2012-10818
This document is contained in
Related RINs: None
* This count refers to the total comment/submissions received on this document, as of 11:59 PM yesterday. Note: Agencies review all submissions, however some agencies may choose to redact, or withhold, certain submissions (or portions thereof) such as those containing private or proprietary information, inappropriate language, or duplicate/near duplicate examples of a mass-mail campaign. This can result in discrepancies between this count and those displayed when conducting searches on the Public Submission document type. For specific information about an agency’s public submission policy, refer to its website or the Federal Register document.
Document text and images courtesy of the