Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 116 / Thursday, June 15, 2000 / Notices 37595

environmental and labor matters, and

other issues.

Written comments with as much

specificity as possible, including data,

views and arguments, are invited on:

(a) General and commodity-specific

negotiating objectives for the agreement.

(b) Economic costs and benefit to U.S.

producers and consumers of removal of

tariffs and non-tariff barriers to U.S.-

Jordan trade.

(c) Treatment of specific goods

(described by Harmonized System tariff

numbers) under the agreement,

including comments on (1) product

specific import or export interests or

barriers, (2) experience with particular

measures that should be addressed in

the negotiations, and (3) in the case of

articles for which immediate

elimination of tariffs is not appropriate,

recommended staging schedule for such

elimination.

(d) Adequacy of existing customs

measures to ensure Jordanian origin of

imported goods, and appropriate rules

of origin for goods entering the United

States under the agreement.

(e) Proposals for service sectors to be

addressed in the agreement, existing

barriers to trade in those sectors, and

economic costs and benefits of removing

such barriers.

(f) Relevant trade-related intellectual

property rights issues that should be

addressed in the negotiations.

(g) Relevant trade-related

environmental and labor issues that

should be addressed in the negotiations.

(h) Possible environmental effects of

the agreement.

USTR, through the TPSC, will

perform an environmental review of the

proposed agreement pursuant to

Executive order 13141, 64 FR 63169.

Comments identifying as present or

potential trade barriers laws or

regulations that are not primarily traderelated should address the economic,

political and social objectives of such

regulations and the degree to which

they discriminate against producers of

the other country.

Written Comments

Persons submitting written comments

should provide twenty (20) copies no

later than noon, July 17, 2000, to Gloria

Blue at address listed above. Where

possible, please supplement written

comments with a computer disk of the

submission containing as much of the

technical details as possible either in

spreadsheet or word processing table

format, with each tariff line/services

sector in a separate cell. The disk

should have a label identifying the

software used and the submitter.

Written comments submitted in

connection with this request, except for

information granted ‘‘business

confidential’’ status pursuant to 15 CFR

2003.6, will be available for public

inspection in the USTR Reading Room

(Room 101) at the address noted above.

An appointment to review the file may

be made by calling Brenda Webb at

(202) 395–6186. The Reading Room is

open to the public from 10:00 a.m. to 12

noon, and from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. Monday

through Friday.

Business confidential information,

including any information submitted on

disks, will be subject to the

requirements of 15 CFR 2003.6. Any

business confidential material must be

clearly marked as such on the cover

letter or page and each succeeding page,

and must be accompanied by a nonconfidential summary thereof. If the

submission contains business

confidential information, twenty copies

of a public version that does not contain

confidential information, must be

submitted. A justification as to why the

information contained in the

submission should be treated

confidentially must be included in the

submission. In addition, any

submissions containing business

confidential information must be clearly

marked ‘‘Confidential’’ at the top and

bottom of the cover page (or letter) and

each succeeding page of the submission.

The version that does not contain

confidential information should also be

clearly marked, at the top and bottom of

each page, ‘‘public version’’ or ‘‘nonconfidential.’’

Nancy A. LeaMond,

USTR, Chief of Staff.

[FR Doc. 00–15060 Filed 6–14–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3901–01–M

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Docket No. WTO/D–175]

WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding

Regarding Indian Measures Affecting

Trade and Investment in the Motor

Vehicle Sector

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 of the request for the

establishment of a dispute settlement

panel under the Marrakesh Agreement

Establishing the World Trade

Organization (‘‘WTO’’), by the United

States, to examine Public Notice No. 60

((PN)/97–02) of the Indian Ministry of

Commerce, published in the Gazette of

India Extraordinary, effective 12

December 1997 (‘‘Public Notice 60’’);

the Foreign Trade (Development and

Regulation) Act 1992; the Export and

Import Policy, 1997–2002; memoranda

of understanding signed by the

Government of India with

manufacturing firms in the motor

vehicle sector pursuant to Public Notice

No. 60; and certain related Indian

legislative and administrative measures.

In this dispute, the United States alleges

that these measures are inconsistent

with the obligations of India under

Articles III:4 and XI:1 of the General

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994

(GATT 1994) and Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of

the Agreement on Trade-Related

Investment Measures. The 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 by July 28, 2000, to be

assured of timely consideration by the

USTR in preparing its first written

submission to the panel.

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,

NW, Washington, DC, 20508, Attn: India

Motor Vehicle Dispute. Telephone:

(202) 395–3582.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steven F. Fabry, Associate General

Counsel, telephone: (202) 395–3582;

Christopher Rosettie, Director for

Multilateral Services and Investment

Affairs, telephone: (202) 395–7271; or

Joseph Damond, telephone: (202) 395–

6813.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to section 127(b) of the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (URAA) (19 U.S.C.

3537(b)(1)), the USTR is providing

notice that on May 15, 2000, the United

States submitted a request for the

establishment of a WTO dispute

settlement panel to examine the United

States’ claim that certain Indian

measures affecting trade and investment

in the motor vehicle sector are

inconsistent with India’s obligations

under the GATT 1994 and the

Agreement on Trade-Related Investment

Measures. The WTO Dispute Settlement

Body is likely to establish a dispute

settlement panel no later than the end

of July, 2000. Under normal

circumstances, the panel, which will

37596 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 116 / Thursday, June 15, 2000 / Notices

hold its meetings in Geneva,

Switzerland, would be expected to issue

a report detailing its findings and

recommendations within six to nine

months after it is established.

Major Issues Raised and Legal Basis of

the Complaint

The United States claims that Public

Notice 60; the Foreign Trade

(Development and Regulation) Act 1992;

the Export and Import Policy, 1997–

2002; memoranda of understanding

signed by the Government of India with

manufacturing firms in the motor

vehicle sector pursuant to Public Notice

No. 60; and certain related Indian

legislative and administrative measures

are inconsistent with India’s obligations

under the WTO Agreement. The

foregoing measures require

manufacturing firms in the motor

vehicle sector to achieve specified levels

of purchase or use of domestic content;

to achieve a neutralization of foreign

exchange and to balance the value of

certain imports with the value of

exports of cars and components over a

stated period; and to limit imports to a

value based on previous exports. These

requirements are enforceable under

Indian law and rulings, and

manufacturing firms in the motor

vehicle sector must comply with these

requirements in order to obtain certain

Indian import licenses. The United

States claims that the Indian measures

in question are therefore inconsistent

with India’s obligations under Article

III:4 and XI:1 of the GATT 1994 and

Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of the Agreement on

Trade-Related Investment Measures.

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 the 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 nonconfidential summary of the

information or advice.

Pursuant to section 127(e) of the

URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537)e)), the 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 the USTR from

the public with respect to the

proceeding; the U.S. submissions to the

panel in the proceeding, the

submissions, or non-confidential

summaries of submissions, to the panel

received from other parties in the

dispute, as well as the report of the

dispute settlement panel, and, if

applicable, the report of the Appellate

Body. An appointment to review the

public file (Docket WTO/D–175, India

Motor Vehicle 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.

[FR Doc. 00–15138 Filed 6–14–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3190–01–M

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Docket No. WTO/D–195]

WTP Consultations Regarding Certain

Measures in the Philippines’ Motor

Vehicle Development Program

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 23, 2000,

the United States requested

consultations with the Government of

the Philippines under the Marrakesh

Agreement Establishing the World

Trade Organization (WTO), regarding

tariff advantages to motor vehicle

manufacturers located in the

Philippines who meet certain

requirements, including a requirement

to use parts and components produced

in the Philippines and a requirement to

earn a percentage of the foreign

exchange needed to import those parts

and components by exporting finished

vehicles. The US alleges that these

measures are inconsistent with Articles

III:4, III:5 and XI:1 of the General

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994

(‘‘GATT 1994’’), Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of

the Agreement on Trade-Related

Investment Measures, and Article 3.1(b)

of the Agreement on Subsidies and

Countervailing Measures. Pursuant to

Article 4.3 of the WTO Dispute

Settlement Understanding (‘‘DSU’’),

such consultations are to take place

within a period of 30 days from the date

of the request, or within a period

otherwise mutually agreed between the

United States and the Philippines.

USTR invites written comments from

the public concerning the issues raised

in the dispute.

DATES: Although USTR will accept any

comments received during the course of

the dispute settlement proceedings,

comments should be submitted on or

before July 28, 2000, to be assured of

timely consideration by USTR.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to Sandy

McKinzy, Monitoring and Enforcement

Unit, Office of the General Counsel, 122,

Office of the United States Trade

Representative, 600 17th Street, NW,

Washington, DC, 20508, Attn:

Philippines Motor Vehicle Dispute.

Telephone: (202) 395–3582.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steven F. Fabry, Associate General

Counsel, telephone: (202) 395–7271; or

Sean Murphy, Director for ASEAN

Affairs, telephone: (202) 395–6813.

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. 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.