[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 26, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 81556-81557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-32822]


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

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Docket No. WTO/DS-214]


WTO Consultations Regarding U.S. Safeguard Measures on Line Pipe 
and Wire Rod

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 December 1, 2000, the European Communities 
(EC) requested WTO consultations with the United States regarding 
Sections 201 and 202 of the Trade Act of 1974, section 311 of the NAFTA 
Implementation Act, and the U.S. safeguard measures on imports of line 
pipe and wire rod. USTR invites written comments from the public 
concerning the issues raised in this dispute.

DATES: Although the USTR will accept any comments received during the 
course of the dispute settlement proceedings, comments should be 
submitted on or before January 15, 2001 to be assured of timely 
consideration by USTR.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to Sandy McKinzy, Monitoring and Enforcement 
Unit, Office of the General Counsel, Room 122 Office of the United 
States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., 
20508, Attn: EC Line Pipe and Wire Rod Dispute. Telephone: (202) 395-
3582.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David J. Ross, Associate General 
Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th 
Street, NW., Washington, DC, (202) 395-3581.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 127(b) 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 the establishment of a WTO dispute settlement 
panel. Consistent with this obligation, but in an effort to provide 
additional opportunity for comments, USTR is providing notice that 
consultations have been requested pursuant to the WTO Dispute 
Settlement Understanding. If such consultations should fail to resolve 
the matter and a dispute settlement panel is established pursuant to 
the DSU, such panel, which would hold its meetings in Geneva, 
Switzerland, would be expected to issue a report on its findings and 
recommendations within six to nine months after it is established.

Major Issues Raised by the European Commission

    The EC claims that sections 201 and 202 of the Trade Act of 1974 
(19 U.S.C. 2251 and 2252) contain provisions relating to the 
determination of a causal link between increased imports and injury or 
threat thereof which prevent the United States from respecting Articles 
4 and 5 of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards (Safeguards Agreement). It 
also claims that section 311 of the NAFTA Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 
3371) contains provisions concerning imports from Canada an Mexico 
which do not respect what it characterizes as

[[Page 81557]]

the ``requirement of parallelism'' between the imported products 
subject to a safeguard investigation and the imported products subject 
to a safeguard measure, contrary to Articles 2, 4 and 5 of the 
Safeguards Agreement. The EC claims that these provisions are also 
inconsistent with the Most-Favoured-Nation principle of Article I of 
the GATT 1994.
    In addition, the EC challenges certain aspects of the U.S. 
safeguard investigations and imposition of measures on imports of line 
pipe and wire rod. The EC claims that the U.S. measures are 
inconsistent with the following provisions of the Safeguards Agreement 
and the GATT 1994:
     ``Article 2 SA, because, inter alia, they are based on 
deficient determination on the like or directly competitive products, 
absence of `imports in such increased quantities' and/or `under such 
conditions', lack of serious injury or threat thereof, lack of 
causality and non-respect of the requirement of parallelism between the 
scope of the imported products subject to the investigation and the 
scope of the imported products subject to the application of the 
measures;
     Article 3(1) and 3(2) SA, because, inter alia, they do not 
adequately set forth the findings and reasoned conclusions on all 
pertinent issues of fact and law, including the justification for the 
actual measure imposed, as well as abusive recourse to confidentiality 
in relation to disclosure of information;
     Articles 4(1) and 4(2) SA, because, inter alia, they are 
not justified by `imports in such increased quantities' and/or `under 
such conditions', lack of serious injury or threat thereof, lack of 
causality and non-respect of the requirement of parallelism between the 
scope of the imported products subject to the investigation and the 
scope of the imported products subject to the application of the 
measures;
     Article 5(1) SA, since, inter alia, they grant relief 
beyond `the extent necessary to prevent or remedy serious injury and to 
facilitate adjustment';
     Article 8(1) SA, because of, inter alia, non-respect of 
the requirements regarding the level of concessions and other 
obligations and the trade compensation;
     Articles 12(2), 12(3) and 12(11) SA, because of, inter 
alia, non-respect of the obligation to provide the Committee on 
Safeguards with all pertinent information, non-respect of the 
obligation to provide adequate opportunity for prior consultations with 
a view to reaching an understanding on ways to achieve the objective 
set out in Article 8(1) SA, and abusive recourse to confidentiality in 
relation to disclosure of information;
     Article I:1 of GATT 1994 since, inter alia, the safeguard 
measure discriminates between products originating in the EC and 
products originating in other WTO countries; and
     Article XIX:1 of GATT 1994, because, inter alia, they fail 
to show, prior to the application of the measures, that the increases 
in imports and the conditions of importation of the products covered by 
each of the two above-mentioned measures were the result of `unforeseen 
developments' and of the effect of the USA obligations under GATT 
1994.''

Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments 
concerning the issues raised in the dispute. Comments must be in 
English and provided in fifteen copies. 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 commenter. Confidential business information must be 
clearly marked ``BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL'' in a contrasting color ink at 
the top of each page of each copy.
    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 so designate the information or advice;
    (2) Must clearly mark the material as ``SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE'' 
in a contrasting color ink at the top of each page of each copy, and
    (3) Is encouraged to provide a non-confidential summary of the 
information or advice.
    Pursuant to section 127(e) of the URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR 
will maintain a file on this dispute settlement proceeding, accessible 
to the public, in the USTR Reading Room: Room 101, Office of the United 
States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 
20508. The public file will include a listing of any comments received 
by USTR from the public with respect to the dispute; if a dispute 
settlement panel is convened, the U.S. submissions to that panel, the 
submissions, or non-confidential summaries of submissions, to the panel 
received from other participants in the dispute, as well as the report 
of the panel; and, if applicable, the report of the Appellate Body. An 
appointment to review the public file (Docket WTO/DS-214, EC Line Pipe 
and Wire Rod Dispute) may be made by calling Brenda Webb, (202) 395-
6186. The USTR Reading Room is open to the public from 9:30 a.m. to 12 
noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

A. Jane Bradley,
Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and 
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 00-32822 Filed 12-22-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-01-U