35858 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 131 / Monday, July 8, 1996 / Notices

invites written comments from the

public on the matters being investigated.

DATES: This investigation was initiated

on July 2, 1996. Written comments from

the public are due on or before noon on

Monday, August 12, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Office of the United States

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,

N.W., Washington, DC 20508.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Joseph Papovich, Deputy Assistant

USTR for Intellectual Property, (202)

395–6864, or Thomas Robertson,

Assistant General Counsel, (202) 395–

6800.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

302(b)(1) of the Trade Act authorizes the

USTR to initiate an investigation under

chapter 1 of Title III of the Trade Act

(commonly referred to as ‘‘‘section

301’’) with respect to any matter in

order to determine whether the matter is

actionable under section 301. Matters

actionable under section 301 include,

inter alia, the denial of rights of the

United States under a trade agreement,

or acts, policies, and practices of a

foreign country that violate or are

inconsistent with the provisions of, or

otherwise deny benefits to the United

States under, any trade agreement.

On July 2, 1996, having consulted

with the appropriate private sector

advisory committees, the USTR

determined that an investigation should

be initiated to determined whether

certain laws and regulations of India

affecting the grant of patents and

exclusive marketing rights in innovative

pharmaceutical and agricultural

chemical products are actionable under

section 301(a). Article 70 of the TRIPs

Agreement requires all countries that do

not provide product patent protection

for pharmaceuticals and agricultural

chemicals on January 1, 1995, to

establish by that time a means by which

applications for patents for such

inventions can be filed, which is

commonly referred to as a ‘‘mailbox.’’

These applications are to be reviewed

when such protection is ultimately

provided in accordance with the

transitional provisions of the TRIPs

Agreement. This provisions allows

‘‘mailbox’’ applicants to preserve their

original filing date for the purposes of

novelty and nonobviousness

considerations in patentability

determinations. Article 70 of the TRIPs

Agreement also requires those WTO

members delaying the grant of

pharmaceutical and agricultural

chemical product patent protection to

grant ‘‘mailbox’’ applications up to five

years of marketing exclusivity if such

applicants are granted a patent and

marketing approval in another WTO

member and marketing approval in the

member providing marketing

exclusivity. India has not yet

established a permanent formal

‘‘mailbox’’ system for the filing of

pharmaceutical and agricultural

chemical product patent applications,

nor has it established a system for the

grant of exclusive marketing rights. The

Indian Government did attempt to

establish such systems in early 1995

(although the marketing exclusively

system appeared flawed), but the Indian

legislature failed to act in the area and

they expired. United States Government

officials have repeatedly raised this

issue with their Indian counterparts, but

have received no satisfactory response.

Indian’s failure to establish such

systems permanently in a way that gives

legal assurances to the parties that file

‘‘mailbox’’ applications would appear to

be inconsistent with the obligations set

forth in Article 70 of the TRIPs

Agreement.

Investigation and Consultations

As required in section 303(a) of the

Trade Act, the USTR has requested

consultations with the Government of

India regarding the issues under

investigation. The request was made

pursuant to Article 4 of the WTO

Understanding on Rules and Procedures

Governing the Settlement of Disputes

(DSU) and Article 64 of the TRIPs

Agreement (to the extent in incorporates

by reference Article XXII of the General

Agreements on Tariff and Trade 1994).

If the consultations do not result in a

satisfactory resolution of the matter, the

USTR will request the establishment of

a panel pursuant to Article 6 of the

DSU.

Under section 304 of the Trade Act,

the USTR must determine within 18

months after the date on which this

investigation was initiated, or within 30

days after the conclusion of WTO

dispute settlement procedures,

whichever is earlier, whether any act,

policy, or practice or denial of trade

agreement rights described in section

301 of the Trade Act exists and, if that

determination is affirmative, the USTR

must determine what action, if any, to

take under section 301 of the Trade Act.

Public Comment: Requirements for

Submissions

Interested persons are invited to

submit written comments concerning

the acts, policies and practices of India

which are the subject of this

investigation, the amount of burden or

restriction on U.S. commerce cause by

these acts, policies and practices, and

the determinations required under

section 304 of the Trade Act. Comments

must be filed in accordance with the

requirements set forth in 15 CFR

2006.8(b) (55 FR 20593) and must be

filed on or before noon on Monday,

August 12, 1996. Comments must be in

English and provided in twenty copies

to: Sybia Harrison, Staff Assistant to the

Section 301 Committee, Room 223,

Office of the U.S. Trade Representative,

600 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C.

20508.

Comments will be placed in a file

(Docket 301–106) open to public

inspection pursuant to 15 CFR 2006.13,

except confidential business

information exempt from public

inspection in accordance with 15 CFR

2006.15. Confidential business

information submitted in accordance

with 15 CFR 2006.15 must be clearly

marked ‘‘BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL’’

in a contrasting color ink at the top of

each page on each of 20 copies, and

must be accompanied by a

nonconfidential summary of the

confidential information. The

nonconfidential summary shall be

placed in the file that is open to public

inspection. An appointment to review

the docket (Docket No. 301–106) may be

made by calling Brenda Webb (202)

395–6186. The USTR Reading Room is

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

noon and 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, and is located

in Room 101.

Irving A. Williamson,

Chairman, Section 301 Committee.

[FR Doc. 96–17242 Filed 7–5–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3190–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

Petition for Waivers of Compliance

In accordance with 49 CFR §§ 211.9

and 211.41, notice is hereby given that

the Federal Railroad Administration

(FRA) has received from Thrall Car

Manufacturing Company a request for a

waiver of compliance with certain

requirements of Federal regulations. The

petition is described below, including

the regulatory provisions involved, the

nature of the relief being requested and

the petitioner’s arguments in favor of

relief.

Thrall Car Manufacturing Company

[Docket No. SA–96–2]

Thrall Car seeks a waiver of

compliance from certain sections of 49

CFR Part 231, Railroad Safety Appliance

Standards. Thrall Car is requesting a

permanent waiver of the provisions of

49 CFR Part 231 which requires that the
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 131 / Monday, July 8, 1996 / Notices 35859

bottom side handhold be located not

more than (21) inches from top tread of

sill step—.

Thrall Car built 629 covered hopper

cars beginning in 1995 which have the

bottom side handhold located (21–3/8)

inches from the top tread of sill step.

Car series:

CCBX 58595 thru 59000 = 406 cars.

FMLX 62001 ′′ 62040 = 40 cars.

OCPX 70901 ′′ 70944 = 44 cars.

UTCX 49148 ′′ 49287 = 139 cars.

49 CFR 231.27(e)(3) requires in part

that the bottom side handholds be

located not more than (21) inches from

top tread of sill step—.

Thrall Car state that this discrepancy

originated with the introduction of a

new car in June of 1995 and continued

until discovery. Design corrections have

been made with all subsequent covered

hopper cars.

Thrall Car request to continue the use

of these subject cars as they do not

believe this condition presents a safety

concern due to the small variance from

the standard.

Interested parties are invited to

participate in these proceedings by

submitting written views, data, or

comments. FRA does not anticipate

scheduling a public hearing in

connection with these proceedings since

the facts do not appear to warrant a

hearing. If any interested party desires

an opportunity for oral comment, they

should notify FRA, in writing, before

the end of the comment period and

specify the basis for their request.

All communications concerning these

proceedings should identify the

appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver

Petition Docket Number—SA–96–2 and

must be submitted in triplicate to the

Docket Clerk, Chief Counsel, Federal

Railroad Administration, Nassif

Building, 400 Seventh Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20590.

Communications received before August

19, 1996, will be considered by FRA

before final action is taken. Comments

received after that date will be

considered as far as practicable. All

written communications concerning

these proceedings are available for

examination during regular business

hours (9 a.m.–5 p.m.) in Room 8201,

Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street

S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590.

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 1, 1996.

Phil Olekszyk,

Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety

Compliance and Program Implementation.

[FR Doc. 96–17298 Filed 7–5–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P

Notice of Application for Approval of

Discontinuance or Modification of a

Railroad Signal System or Relief From

the Requirements of 49 CFR Part 236

Pursuant to 49 CFR Part 235 and 49

U.S.C. App. 26, the following railroads

have petitioned the Federal Railroad

Administration (FRA) seeking approval

for the discontinuance or modification

of the signal system or relief from the

requirements of 49 CFR Part 236 as

detailed below.

Block Signal Application (BS–AP)–No.

3402

Applicant: Burlington Northern Railroad

Company

Mr. William G. Peterson,

Director Signal Engineering,

1900 Continental Plaza,

777 Main Street,

Fort Worth, Texas 76102–5384.

The Burlington Northern Railroad

Company seeks approval of the

proposed discontinuance and removal

of the traffic control system (TCS),

associated with the installation of an

automatic block signal (ABS) system

with track warrant control, on the single

main track between Appleton,

Minnesota, milepost 578 and Hettinger,

South Dakota, milepost 925.9, on the

Willmar and Yellowstone Divisions,

Appleton, Mobridge, and Hettinger

Subdivision, a distance of

approximately 348 miles. The proposed

changes include: conversion of ‘‘Big

Stone Power Plant’’ and ‘‘West

Aberdeen’’ Control Points to remotecontrolled interlockings, replacement of

all power-operated and spring switches

with circuit controller monitored handoperated switches, removal of all switch

electric locks, and modification of signal

placement and spacing.

The reasons given for the proposed

changes are that reduced traffic patterns

do not justify the high cost to maintain

an aging TCS, and this application will

retain the safety of train operations

provided by an ABS system while

providing economic relief from having

to maintain the additional plant

associated with TCS.

BS–AP–No. 3403

Applicant: Burlington Northern Railroad

Company

Mr. William G. Peterson,

Director Signal Engineering,

1900 Continental Plaza,

777 Main Street,

Fort Worth, Texas 76102–5384.

The Burlington Northern Railroad

Company seeks approval of the

proposed reduction to the limits of the

automatic block signal system, on the

single main track, between ‘‘P.A.

Tower’’, milepost 109.9 and Grand

Forks, milepost 107.6, North Dakota,

Fargo Division, Grand Forks

Subdivision; consisting of the

discontinuance and removal of

automatic block signals 107.9, 107.8,

108.3. 108.4, and 109.2, and conversion

of automatic block signal 109.3 to a

distant approach signal.

The reasons given for the proposed

changes are the reduction in train

movements over the trackage and to

provide a more efficient operation.

Rules Standards & Instructions

Application (RS&I–AP)–No. 1101

Applicant: Florida East Coast Railway

Company

Mr. Charles R. Lynch,

Vice President-Maintenance,

One Malaga Street,

P.O. Box 1048,

St. Augustine, Florida 32085–1048.

The Florida East Coast Railway

Company (FEC) seeks temporary relief

from the requirements of 49 CFR, Part

236, Section 236.566 of the Rules,

Standard and Instructions, for a 30 day

period, to the extent that FEC be

permitted to operate non-operational

automatic train control (ATC) equipped

locomotives, over FEC’s entire ATC

territory by way-side signal indications

of the traffic control system, to

accommodate modifications to both the

onboard and roadway ATC equipment.

Applicant’s justification for relief: To

implement changes to the ATC system

code rates in order to enhance and

improve the reliability of the system,

associated with the designed

elimination of cab signal flips.

Any interested party desiring to

protest the granting of an application

shall set forth specifically the grounds

upon which the protest is made, and

contain a concise statement of the

interest of the protestant in the

proceeding. The original and two copies

of the protest shall be filed with the

Associate Administrator for Safety,

FRA, 400 Seventh Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20590 within 45

calendar days of the date of issuance of

this notice. Additionally, one copy of

the protest shall be furnished to the

applicant at the address listed above.

FRA expects to be able to determine

these matters without oral hearing.

However, if a specific request for an oral

hearing is accompanied by a showing

that the party is unable to adequately

present his or her position by written

statements, an application may be set

for public hearing.