Notices. Notice; request for comments
3,077 words·~14 min read·
/register/2006/03/16/06-2489A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Delegation of Authority 290] Delegation by the Secretary of State to Carol Rodley of Authorities Normally Vested in the Assistant Secretary for Intelligence and Research By virtue of the authority vested in me as Secretary of State by the laws of the United States, including section 1 of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2651a) and Executive Order 12333 of December 4, 1981, I hereby delegate to Carol Rodley, to the extent authorized by law, all authorities vested in the Assistant Secretary for Intelligence and Research, including all authorities that have been or may be delegated or re-delegated to the Assistant Secretary for Intelligence and Research.
Any act, executive order, regulation, or procedure subject to, or affected by, this delegation shall be deemed to be such act, executive order, regulation, or procedure as amended from time to time. Notwithstanding this delegation of authority, the Secretary of State or Deputy Secretary of State may exercise any function delegated hereby. This delegation shall expire upon the appointment and entry upon duty of a new Assistant Secretary for Intelligence and Research. This delegation of authority shall be published in the **Federal Register** .
Dated: March 9, 2006. Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State, Department of State. [FR Doc. E6-3834 Filed 3-15-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-10-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE [Docket No. WTO/DS-334] WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding Turkey—Measures Affecting the Importation of Rice 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, in accordance with the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (“WTO Agreement”), the United States has requested the establishment of a panel regarding Turkey's import restrictions on rice from the United States. That request may be found at *http://www.wto.org* contained in a document designated as WT/DS334/4. 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, comments should be submitted on or before May 17, 2006 to be assured of timely consideration by USTR. ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted
(i)electronically, to *FR0604@ustr.gov,* with “Turkey Rice (DS334)” in the subject line, or
(ii)by fax, to Sandy McKinzy at
(202)395-3640, with a confirmation copy sent electronically to the electronic mail address above, in accordance with the requirements for submission set out below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Weiss, Assistant General Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC,
(202)395-4498. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 127(b) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act
(URAA)(19 U.S.C. 3537(b)(1)), USTR is providing notice that the United States has requested the establishment of a WTO dispute settlement panel pursuant to the WTO Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (“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 United States Under its import regime for rice, Turkey requires an import license to import rice. Turkey operates tariff-rate quotas for rice imports requiring that, in order to import specified quantities of rice at reduced tariff levels, importers must purchase specified quantities of domestic rice, including from the Turkish Grain Board, Turkish producers, or producer associations. In addition, Turkey denies or fails to grant licenses to import rice at or below the bound rate of duty without domestic purchase, including at the over-quota rate of duty. USTR believes these measures are inconsistent with Turkey's obligations under: 1. Article 2.1 and paragraph 1(a) of Annex 1 of the TRIMs Agreement because Turkey imposes domestic purchase requirements; 2. Article III:4 of the GATT 1994 because Turkey accords imported rice less favorable treatment than domestic rice through the imposition of domestic purchase requirements “affecting [its] internal sale, offering for sale, purchase, transportation, distribution, or use”; 3. Article XI:1 of the GATT 1994 because Turkey's
(1)denial of, or failure to grant, import licenses for rice at or below the bound rate of duty, and
(2)the domestic purchase requirements, both on their own and in conjunction, constitute a prohibition or restriction on imports other than in the form of duties, taxes, or other charges; and 4. Article 4.2 of the Agriculture Agreement because Turkey's
(1)denial of, or failure to grant, import licenses for rice at or below the bound rate of duty, and
(2)the domestic purchase requirements, both on their own and in conjunction, are “measures of the kind which have been required to be converted into ordinary customs duties,” such as quantitative import restrictions, discretionary import licensing, and non-tariff measures maintained through a state-trading enterprise, which Members may not resort to or maintain under that Agreement. USTR also considers that these measures are inconsistent with Turkey's obligations under: Articles X:1, X:2, and X:3 of the GATT 1994 and Articles 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 3.2, 3.3, 3.5(a), 3.5(b), 3.5(d), 3.5(e), 3.5(f), 3.5(g), 3.5(h), 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, and 5.4 of the Import Licensing Agreement. Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning the issues raised in the dispute. Comments should be submitted
(i)electronically, to *FR0604@ustr.gov,* with “Turkey Rice (DS334)” in the subject line, or
(ii)by fax, to Sandy McKinzy at
(202)395-3640, with a confirmation copy sent electronically to the electronic mail address above. USTR encourages the submission of documents in Adobe PDF format as attachments to an electronic mail. Interested persons who make submissions by electronic mail should not provide separate cover letters; information that might appear in a cover letter should be included in the submission itself. Similarly, to the extent possible, any attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. Comments must be in English. 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 designated as such and “BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL” must be marked at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page. 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 clearly so designate the information or advice;
(2)Must clearly mark the material as “SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE” at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page; 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 or in the event of an appeal from such a panel, the U.S. submissions, the submissions, or non-confidential summaries of submissions, received from other participants in the dispute; the report of the panel and; if applicable, the report of the Appellate Body. An appointment to review the public file (Docket WTO/DS-334, Turkey Rice Dispute) 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 noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Daniel Brinza, Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement. [FR Doc. E6-3783 Filed 3-15-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190-W6-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding Sunset Reviews of Anti-Dumping Measures on Oil Country Tubular Goods From Argentina 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 Argentina has requested the establishment of a dispute settlement panel under the *Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization* (“WTO Agreement”). That request may be found at *http://www.wto.org* contained in a document designated as WT/DS268/16. 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, comments should be submitted on or before May 19, 2006, to be assured of timely consideration by USTR. ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted
(i)electronically, to *FR0609@ustr.gov.eop,* Attn: “Argentina OCTG” in the subject line, or
(ii)by fax, to Sandy McKinzy at 202-395-3640, with a confirmation copy sent electronically to the e-mail address above. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth V. Baltzan, Associate General Counsel, Office of the United States Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20508,
(202)395-3582. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If a dispute settlement panel is established, such panel, which would hold its meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, would be expected to issue a report on its findings and recommendations within 90 days after referral of the matter to it. Major Issues Raised by Argentina In its panel request, Argentina alleges that the United States had not fully complied with the recommendations and rulings of the Dispute Settlement Body from the original dispute. Those recommendations and rulings stem from the panel and Appellate Body reports which may be found at *http://www.wto.org* designated as WT/DS268/R and WT/DS268/AB/R, respectively. In particular, Argentina contends that the U.S. Department of Commerce erred by developing new factual information and that the reasoning in the redetermination made pursuant to section 129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act is not consistent with Articles 11.1, 11.3, and 11.4 of the Antidumping Agreement. Argentina also considers that the redetermination was inconsistent with a number of procedural obligations in the Antidumping Agreement, including Articles 6.1, 6.2, 6.4, 6.5.1, 6.6, 6.8, 6.9, 12.2, and Annex II. Argentina also alleges that USTR was required to direct Commerce to implement the redetermination in order to avoid a breach of Article 13 of the Antidumping Agreement. Argentina further contends that Commerce was required to amend or repeal the statute and that the amended regulation is inconsistent with the obligation to arrive at a reasoned conclusion on the basis of positive evidence, as well as Articles 6.1, 6.2, 6.6, 11.1, and 11.3 of the Antidumping Agreement. Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning the issues raised in this dispute. Persons submitting comments may either send one copy by fax to Sandy McKinzy at
(202)395-3640, or transmit a copy electronically to *FR0609@ustr.gov.eop,* with “Argentina OCTG” in the subject line. For documents sent by fax, USTR requests that the submitter provide a confirmation copy to the electronic mail address listed above. USTR encourages the submission of documents in Adobe PDF format, as attachments to an electronic mail. Interested persons who make submissions by electronic mail should not provide separate cover letters; information that might appear in a cover letter should be included in the submission itself. Similarly, to the extent possible, any attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. 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 submitter. Confidential business information must be clearly designated as such and the submission must be marked “BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL” at the top and bottom of the cover page and each succeeding page of the submission. 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 clearly so designate the information or advice;
(2)Must clearly mark the material as “SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE” at the top and bottom of each page of the cover page and each succeeding page; 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 or in the event of an appeal from such a panel, the U.S. submissions, the submissions, or non-confidential summaries of submissions, received from other participants in the dispute; the report of the panel and; if applicable, the report of the Appellate Body. An appointment to review the public file (Docket No. WT/DS-268, Sunset Reviews of Anti-dumping Measures on Oil Country Tubular Goods from Argentina) 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 noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Daniel E. Brinza, Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement. [FR Doc. E6-3784 Filed 3-15-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190-W6-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Public Notice for Waiver of Aeronautical Land-Use Assurance; Gary/Chicago International Airport; Gary, IN AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice of intent of waiver with respect to land. SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA)is considering a proposal to change a portion of the airport from civilian aeronautical use to military aeronautical use and to authorize the lease of the airport property. The area is a twenty-five acre parcel located in the southwest quadrant of the airport south of Runway 12/30 and west of Runway 2/20. The land is vacant and is used as a stockpile area for various construction materials and was the former site of a Nike missile silo battery. The land had been transferred to the City of Gary in 1947 by Quitclaim Deed from the Reconstruction Finance Corporation as non-surplus property as defined by section 16 of the Federal Airport Act of 1946. Public Law 102-148, dated October 10, 1991 released the land from the section 16 restriction requiring Congressional action for land releases and authorized the FAA to administer land releases. There are no adverse impacts to the airport by allowing the airport to lease the property. The land is not needed for civilian aeronautical use and a Limited Army Aviation Support Facility helicopter base, which will be operated by the Indiana National Guard, will be constructed on the property. A Joint-Use Agreement will be negotiated between the Indiana National Guard and the airport that will address all fees, charges, and assessments for services such as snow removal, fire fighting and fueling. Approval does not constitute a commitment by the FAA to financially assist in the disposal of the subject airport property nor a determination of eligibility for grant-in-aid funding from the FAA. The disposition of proceeds from the lease of the airport property will be in accordance with FAA's Policy and Procedures Concerning the Use of Airport Revenue, published in the **Federal Register** on February 16, 1999. In accordance with section 47107(h) of title 49, United States Code, this notice is required to be published in the **Federal Register** 30 days before modifying the land-use assurance that requires the property to be used for an aeronautical purpose. DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 17, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory N. Sweeny, Airports Engineer, Chicago Airports District Office, 2300 East Devon Avenue, Des Plaines, Illinois 60018. Telephone Number
(847)294-7526/Fax Number
(847)294-7046. Documents reflecting this FAA action may be reviewed at this same location or at Gary/Chicago International Airport, Gary, Indiana. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Following is a legal description of the property located in Gary, Lake County, Indiana, and described as follows: A parcel of land in the east half of section 35, Township 37 North, Range 9 West of the second principal meridian, in the City of Gary, Lake County, Indiana, being a part of those premises now commonly known as the Gary/Chicago International Airport, said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a concrete monument at the center of said Section 35, thence South 89°49′11″ East (all bearings in this description are based on the true bearing of North 55°49′59″ West for the center line of Runway 12/30) along the east and west center line of said Section 35 a distance of 71.64 feet to a point; thence North 00°56′07″ East a distance of 42.41 feet to the true point of beginning of the tract herein described; thence continuing North 00°56′07″ East a distance of 545.92 feet to a point; thence North 44°07′06″ East a distance of 375.73 feet to a point in a line which is 600.00 feet distant and parallel with the center line of Runway 12/30 aforesaid; thence South 55°49′59″ East along said parallel line a distance of 860.84 feet to a point; thence South 29°28′52″ East a distance of 349.36 feet to a point which is 625.00 feet distant and parallel with the center of Runway 2/20; thence South 21°11′05″ West along said parallel line a distance of 754.45 feet to a point; thence North 68°45′22″ West a distance of 419.05 feet to a point; thence South 77°38′14″ West a distance of 134.67 feet to a point in a non-tangent circular curve concave to the west and having a radius of 1,061.90 feet and a chord bearing of North 33°05′02″ West for a distance of 659.34 feet; thence northerly and northwesterly along said curve an arc distance of 670.41 feet to the true point of beginning, and containing 25.01 acres, more or less, and subject to all easements and restrictions of record. Issued in Des Plaines, Illinois on February 27, 2006. Larry H. Ladenforf, Acting Manager, Chicago Airports District Office, FAA, Great Lakes Region. [FR Doc. 06-2489 Filed 3-15-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 4
1 reference not yet in our index
- Pub. L. 102-148
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice; request for comments
Pub. L.Pub. L. 102-148
Cites 5Cited by 0 across 0 sources