[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 96 (Friday, May 17, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35183-35185]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-12362]


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

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE


WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding the U.S. Department 
of Commerce Final Countervailing Duty Determination Concerning Certain 
Softwood Lumber From Canada

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 May 3, 2002, the United States 
received from Canada a request for consultations under the Marrakesh 
Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (``WTO Agreement'') 
regarding the U.S. Department of Commerce (``DOC'') final 
countervailing duty determination concerning certain softwood lumber 
from Canada. Canada alleges that the initiation and conduct of the 
countervailing duty investigation, the final determination, the 
provision of

[[Page 35184]]

expedited reviews, and related matters are inconsistent with Articles 
1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 19, 22, and 32.1 of the Agreement on 
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (``SCM Agreement'') and Articles 
VI:3 and X:3 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (``GATT 
1994'').
    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 31, 2002 to be assured of timely 
consideration by USTR.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted to Sandy McKinzy, Monitoring 
and Enforcement Unit, Office of the General Counsel, Room 122, Office 
of the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20508, Attn: Softwood Lumber Final CVD Dispute, with a 
confirmation copy sent by fax to (202) 395-3640. Telephone: (202) 395-
3582.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amber L. Cottle, Assistant 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 comment, USTR is providing notice that 
consultations have been requested pursuant to the WTO Dispute 
Settlement Understanding (``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 six to nine months after it is 
established.

Major Issues Raised by Canada

    The notice of the DOC final countervailing duty determination 
concerning certain softwood lumber from Canada was published in the 
Federal Register on April 2, 2002. The notice explains the basis for 
the DOC's final determination that Canada provides countervailable 
subsidies to the Canadian lumber industry.
    In its panel request, Canada describes its claims in the following 
manner:
    The measures at issue include the initiation and conduct of the 
investigation, the final determination, provision of expedited review, 
and other matters related to these measures. These measures are 
inconsistent with, and violate the obligations of the United States 
under Articles 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 19, 22 and 32.1 of the SCM 
Agreement and Articles VI:3 and X:3 of GATT 1994 by:
    1. Initiating the investigation,
    (a) Without sufficient evidence of a subsidy, injury, or a causal 
link between the subsidized imports and the alleged injury, and
    (b) On the basis of an application that failed to identify an 
appropriate applicant or its volume and value of production of the 
domestic like product;
    2. Failing to make an objective assessment of the degree of support 
for the application by the domestic industry;
    3. Imposing countervailing duties against programmes and policies 
that are not subsides within the meaning of Article 1.1 of the SCM 
Agreement and more specifically, by
    (a) Treating stumpage as a ``financial contribution'',
    (b) Determining and measuring benefit through impermissible cross-
border comparisons,
    (c) Failing in its analysis of an alleged benefit to objectively 
assess the facts on the record of the investigation, and
    (d) Presuming that an alleged benefit from stumpage passes through 
arm's-length transactions to downstream recipients;
    4. Countervailing programmes and policies that are not ``specific'' 
within the meaning of Article 2 of the SCM Agreement;
    5. Imposing countervailing duties at a higher rate than the alleged 
subsidy by inflating the subsidy rate by a number of impermissible 
means (including by attributing the entirety of the alleged stumpage 
benefit to only a portion of the products produced from logs, using 
demonstrably inaccurate data, and excluding certain shipments from its 
calculations);
    6. Failing to grant or provide for expedited reviews; and
    7. Failing to conduct its investigation in accordance with 
fundamental substantive and procedural requirements, including by 
failing to address significant evidence and arguments in its 
determination, by gathering and relying upon information not made 
available to the parties, by failing to issue timely decisions and 
provide reasonable schedules for questionnaire responses, briefing, and 
hearings, and by, in effect, improperly applying adverse facts 
available to cooperative parties.

Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions

    Interested persons are invited to submit written comments 
concerning the issues raised in this dispute. Comments must be in 
English and provided in fifteen copies to Sandy McKinzy at the address 
provided above. 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 submitting 
person. 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 submitting person believes that 
information or advice may qualify as such, the submitting person--
    (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, which is located at 1724 F 
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508. 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, 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 may be made by calling the USTR Reading Room at (202) 395-6186. 
The USTR Reading Room is open to the public from 9:30 a.m. to 12

[[Page 35185]]

noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

Bruce Hirsh,
Acting Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and 
Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 02-12362 Filed 5-16-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-01-M