53378 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 198 / Tuesday, October 14, 1997 / Notices

affecting 1.09 acres of land on

Chickamauga Lake in Meigs County,

Tennessee (Tract No. XTCR–192H).

E3. Sale of noncommercial,

nonexclusive permanent easements to

Robert K. Tallent (Tract No. XTELR–

197RE) and John T. Smolik (Tract No.

XTELR–198RE) for construction and

maintenance of recreational water-use

facilities affecting 0.42 acre of land on

Tellico Lake in Loudon County,

Tennessee.

E4. Grant of permanent easement to

LaFollette Utilities for a powerline

affecting approximately 5.02 acres of

TVA land and former TVA land on

Norris Lake in Campbell County,

Tennessee (Tract No. XTNR–110PR).

E5. Sale of 40-year easement to

Lighthouse Fuels, Inc., for industrial

development, affecting approximately

37.5 acres of land on Pickwick Lake in

Tishomingo County, Mississippi (Track

No. XYECR–111E).

Unclassified

F1. Approval to file condemnation

cases in connection with the following

power transmission lines: AlphaLoughridge, Murray County, Georgia;

Batesville-West Batesville, Panola

County, Mississippi; Savannah-North

Adamsville, Hardin County, Tennessee;

and Widows Creek-Fort Payne, Jackson

County, Alabama.

Information Items

1. Approval for calculation

adjustments to distributor retail rate

schedules related to the price increase

which became effective October 1, 1997.

2. Approval of completion of final

contract negotiations with Southern

Company Services, Inc., and execution

of reciprocal network transmission

service agreements to serve each

company’s isolated native loads located

within the other company’s control area.

3. Approval to abandon a portion of

TVA’s Chickamauga-Friendship

transmission line right-of-way easement

affecting 0.1 acre in Hamilton County,

Tennessee (Tract No. 2CF–10).

4. Amended and restated agreement

among TVA, Southeastern Power

Administration, and Tennessee Valley

Public Power Association regarding

power supply from the Corps of

Engineers’ Cumberland River projects.

5. Approval to submit two proposals

to the Department of Energy under

which TVA would offer to provide DOE

with irradiation services for the

production of tritium.

6. Reformation of a contract between

TVA and the TVA Retirement System.

7. Approval to amend the program for

TVA contributions to the cost of

medical coverage in TVA-sponsored

medical plans for current and future

retirees and to count all Federal civilian

service prior to coming to TVA as

creditable service for persons who retire

from TVA after January 1, 1997.

For more information: Please call TVA

Public Relations at (423) 632–6000,

Knoxville, Tennessee. Information is also

available at TVA’s Washington Office (202)

898–2999.

Dated: October 8, 1997.

Edward S. Christenbury,

General Counsel and Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–27217 Filed 10–9–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8120–08–M

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Docket No. WTO/D–20]

WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding

Regarding Japanese Varietal Testing

and Quarantine Requirements

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 the United States

has requested establishment of a dispute

settlement panel under the Marrakesh

Agreement Establishing the World

Trade Organization (WTO), to examine

Japan’s prohibition on imports of certain

agricultural products. Specifically, for

each agricultural product for which

Japan requires quarantine treatment,

Japan prohibits the importation of each

variety of that product until the

quarantine treatment has been tested for

that variety even though the treatment

has proven effective with respect to

other varieties of the same product. This

redundant testing requirement has no

apparent scientific basis but serves as a

significant barrier to market access. In

this dispute the United States alleges

that these Japanese measures are

inconsistent with the obligations of

Japan under the Agreement on the

Application of Sanitary and

Phytosanitary Measures, the General

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994

(‘‘GATT 1994’’), and the Agreement on

Agriculture. USTR also 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 November 10, 1997 to be assured

of timely consideration by USTR in

preparing its first written submission to

the panel.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be

submitted by Ileana Falticeni, Litigation

Assistant, Office of Monitoring and

Enforcement, Room 501, Attn: Japan

Fruit Quarantine Dispute, Office of the

U.S. Trade Representative, 600 17th

Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20508.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Daniel Brinza, Senior Advisor and

Special Counsel for Natural Resources,

(202) 395–7305, Audrae Erickson, Office

of Agricultural Affairs, (202) 395–6127,

or Elizabeth Hyman, Office of the

General Counsel, (202) 395–3150.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to section 127(b)(1) of the Uruguay

Round Agreements Act (URAA) (19

U.S.C. 3537(b)(1)), the USTR is

providing notice that on October 3,

1997, the United States requested the

establishment of a WTO dispute

settlement panel to examine whether

the import prohibition on agricultural

products, in particular the varietal

testing requirements, maintained by

Japan are inconsistent with Japan’s

obligations under the Agreement on the

Application of Sanitary and

Phytosanitary Measures, the GATT

1994, and the Agreement on

Agriculture. The WTO Dispute

Settlement Body is likely to establish

the panel no later than mid-November,

1997. Under normal circumstances, the

panel, which will hold its meetings in

Geneva, Switzerland, would be

expected to issue a report detailing its

findings and recommendations within

nine months after it is established.

Major Issues Raised by the United

States and Legal Basis of Complaint

For each agricultural product for

which Japan requires quarantine

treatment, Japan prohibits the

importation of each variety of that

product until the quarantine treatment

has been tested for that variety, even

though the treatment has proven

effective with respect to other varieties

of the same product. The relevant

provisions of Japanese laws include the

Plant Protection Law (Law No. 151)

enacted May 4, 1950, as amended, and

the Plant Protection Law Enforcement

Regulation (Ministry of Agriculture,

Forestry and Fisheries Ordinance No.

73) of June 30, 1950, as amended.

For example, after years of effort by

the United States, in January 1995 Japan

agreed to permit imports of U.S. Red

Delicious and Golden Delicious apples

based on Japan’s determination that

treatment of fruit from inspected

orchards both with methyl bromide

fumigation and a cold storage treatment

would be effective against codling moth,

a plant pest. However, Japan has refused
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 198 / Tuesday, October 14, 1997 / Notices 53379

to allow other varieties of apples, such

as Gala, Fuji, Braeburn, Jonagold and

Granny Smith, to be imported into Japan

unless lengthy and expensive tests are

performed on each variety to prove the

efficacy of the same methyl bromide/

cold storage treatment at killing codling

moths. There is no scientific basis for

distinguishing between different

varieties of fruit in this respect.

The USTR believes that these

measures are inconsistent with the

obligations of Japan under several

provisions of the WTO Agreements,

including Articles 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8 of

the Agreement on the Application of

Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures;

Article XI of the General Agreement on

Tariffs and Trade 1994; and Article 4 of

the Agreement on Agriculture.

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 that 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)), 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,

N.W., Washington, DC 20508. The

public file will include a listing of any

comments received by USTR from the

public with respect to the proceeding;

the U.S. submissions to the panel in the

proceeding; the submissions, or nonconfidential summaries of submissions,

to the panel received from other

participants 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–

20, ‘‘U.S.-Japan Fruit Quarantine

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 U.S. Trade Representative for

Monitoring and Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 97–27067 Filed 10–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3190–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

[Summary Notice No. PE–97–52]

Petitions for Exemption; Summary of

Petitions Received; Dispositions of

Petitions Issued

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of petitions for

exemption received and of dispositions

of prior petitions.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking

provisions governing the application,

processing, and disposition of petitions

for exemption (14 CFR part 11), this

notice contains a summary of certain

petitions seeking relief from specified

requirements of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR Chapter I),

dispositions of certain petitions

previously received, and corrections.

The purpose of this notice is to improve

the public’s awareness of, and

participation in, this aspect of FAA’s

regulatory activities. Neither publication

of this notice nor the inclusion of

omission of information in the summary

is intended to affect the legal status of

any petition or its final disposition.

DATES: Comments on petitions received

must identify the petition docket

number involved and must be received

on or before November 3, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on any

petition in triplicate to: Federal

Aviation Administration, Office of the

Chief Counsel, Attn: Rule Docket (AGC–

200), Petition Docket No. 29009, 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20591.

Comments may also be sent

electronically to the following internet

address: 9–NPRM–CMNTS@faa.dot.gov.

The petition, any comments received,

and a copy of any final disposition are

filed in the assigned regulatory docket

and are available for examination in the

Rules Docket (AGC–200), Room 915G,

FAA Headquarters Building (FOB 10A),

800 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20591; telephone

(202) 267–3132.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Heather Thorson (202) 267–7470 or

Angela Anderson (202) 267–9681, Office

of Rulemaking (ARM–1), Federal

Aviation Administration, 800

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20591.

This notice is published pursuant to

paragraphs (c), (e), and (g) of § 11.27 of

part 11 of the Federal Aviation

Regulations (14 CFR part 11).

Issued in Washington, D.C., on October 8,

1997.

Donald P. Byrne,

Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.

Petitions for Exemption

Docket No.: 29009.

Petitioner: United Airlines, Inc.

Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR

part 93, subparts K and S.

Description of Relief Sought: To

prevent the withdrawal of domestic

slots from UAL at O’Hare International

Airport for reallocation to foreign

carriers.

[FR Doc. 97–27147 Filed 10–10–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Submission to OMB for Review;

Comment Request

October 7, 1997.

The Department of Treasury has

submitted the following public

information collection requirement(s) to

OMB for review and clearance under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Public Law 104–13. Copies of the

submission(s) may be obtained by

calling the Treasury Bureau Clearance

Officer listed. Comments regarding this

information collection should be

addressed to the OMB reviewer listed

and to the Treasury Department

Clearance Officer, Department of the

Treasury, Room 2110, 1425 New York

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

OMB Number: 1545–1549.

Form Number: None.

Type of Review: Extension.

Title: Tip Reporting Alternative

Commitment for the food and beverage

industry.