LCA Portal supporting statement rev 6-20

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
WASHINGTON DC 20508

Supporting Statement for Emergency Clearance of Information Collection Request:
Large Civil Aircraft Dispute Portal
OMB Control Number [TBD]
A.

JUSTIFICATION

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary.
Following an investigation, and nearly 15 years of litigation, the U.S. Trade Representative
determined that the European Union (EU) and certain member States or former member States
denied U.S. rights under the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement and failed to
implement WTO Dispute Settlement Body recommendations concerning certain subsidies to the
EU large civil aircraft industry. Pursuant to sections 301(a), 301(c), 304(a)(1)(B), and 306(b) of
the Trade Act of 1974 (Trade Act) (19 U.S.C. 2411(a), 2411(c), 2414(a)(1)(B), and 2416(b)), the
U.S. Trade Representative determined to take action in the form of additional duties on products
of certain EU member States, at levels of 10 or 25 percent ad valorem, as specified in the list of
products included in Annex A of the October 9 notice, effective October 18, 2019 (retaliation
list). See 84 FR 54245 (October 9, 2019).
You can find background on the proceedings in this investigation in prior notices including 84
FR 15028 (April 12, 2019), 84 FR 32248 (July 5, 2019), 84 FR 54245 (October 9, 2019), 84 FR
55998 (October 18, 2019), 84 FR 67992 (December 12, 2019), 85 FR 10204 (February 21,
2020), and 85 FR 14517 (March 12, 2020).
Section 306(b)(2)(B) of the Trade Act requires the U.S. Trade Representative to revise the
retaliation list unless certain conditions are met. Under section 306(c), the U.S. Trade
Representative must make revisions 120 days after he took action, and every 180 days thereafter
unless certain conditions are met. Before making revisions, section 306(d) requires the U.S Trade
Representative to seek public comments.
The U.S. Trade Representative announced the beginning of the 120-day review of the action on
December 12, 2019. See 84 FR 67992 (December 12 notice). The December 12 notice
specifically requested public comments on:
•
•
•

whether the U.S. Trade Representative should remove products of specific EU member
States from the list of products subject to additional duties or should remain on the list.
if a product remains on the list, whether the U.S. Trade Representative increase the
current rate of additional duty to as high as 100 percent.
whether the U.S. Trade Representative should add additional EU products to the list.

1

USTR received nearly 26,000 comments in response to the December 12 notice. The U.S. Trade
Representative announced certain revisions to the action being taken in the investigation on
February 14, 2020. See 85 FR 10204 (February 21, 2020), and 85 FR 14517 (March 12, 2020).
Unless certain statutory conditions are met, the next 180-day revision is required on or about
August 12, 2020. USTR anticipates receiving at least as many public comments as it received in
response to the 120-day review.
2. Explain how, by whom, how frequently, and for what purpose the information will be
used. If the information collected will be disseminated to the public or used to support
information that will be disseminated to the public, then explain how the collection
complies with all applicable Information Quality Guidelines.
USTR intends to collect the same type of information it requested in the December 12 notice (see
response to Question 1) for each periodic revision. To assist in timely and comprehensive review
and public availability of comments in response to notices of periodic revisions, USTR is
establishing the Large Civil Aircraft Dispute Portal and requiring use of the attached LCA Form.
USTR uses the information it collects to inform the U.S. Trade Representative’s determination
whether or not to make any revisions. USTR will make the comments, except for Business
Confidential Information (BCI), available to the public through the Portal.
3. Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological techniques or other forms of
information technology.
Commenters will make all submissions via an electronic portal - the Large Civil Aircraft Dispute
Portal. USTR will make the information, except for BCI, available to the public through the
Portal.
4. Describe efforts to identify duplication.
Commenters will be able to submit their views regarding multiple products at once. This will
mitigate the need for commenters to make more than one submission if they want to comment on
more than one product.
5. If the collection of information involves small businesses or other small entities, describe
the methods used to minimize burden.
The submission requirements for all commenters to submit views on whether to change the
treatment accorded to a particular product are the same. The ability to submit a single comment
on multiple products will minimize the burden on all commenters, including small businesses.
6. Describe the consequences to the Federal program or policy activities if the collection is
not conducted or is conducted less frequently.
Without the information collection, USTR will be unable to comply with the provisions of the

2

Trade Act that require the U.S. Trade Representative to revise the action being taken in the large
civil aircraft dispute, unless certain conditions are met, in accordance with a specified schedule.
7. Explain any special circumstances that require the collection to be conducted in a
manner inconsistent with OMB guidelines.
The collection of information is consistent with OMB guidelines.
8. Provide information on the PRA Federal Register Notice that solicited public comments
on the information collection prior to this submission. Summarize the public comments
received in response to that notice and describe the actions taken by the agency in response
to those comments. Describe the efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain
their views on the availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions
and recordkeeping, disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data elements to be
recorded, disclosed, or reported.
On May 27, 2020 (85 FR 31845), USTR published an emergency clearance request notice in the
Federal Register. It asked interested persons to submit comments to OMB no later than June 9,
2020. Most comments addressed whether the U.S. Trade Representative should make changes to
the duties on products of certain EU member States. In response to the comments concerning the
LCA Form, USTR will label each question/field, other than the information identifying a
commenter in Question 1, as an ‘optional field.’ USTR also will add introductory language to
each section/screen on the portal to indicate that a commenter may proceed to the next
screen/section, and a note at the bottom of each screen/section indicating that commenters will
have an opportunity to “submit additional information, general comments, and attachments at
Step 4.” A mock-up of an example portal page is attached.
9. Explain any decisions to provide payments or gifts to respondents, other than
remuneration of contractors or grantees. N/A.
10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for
assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.
USTR will post all submissions for public inspection through the Portal other than information
the submitter certifies is business confidential.
11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual
behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered
private. N/A.
12. Provide an estimate in hours of the burden of the collection of information.
Based on the first periodic review, USTR anticipates receiving approximately 25,000 comments
in response to each biannual notice of periodic revision. Because a commenter can submit a
single comment on multiple products, we do not anticipate more than one comment from the
same submitter. Commenters likely will include importers and end-users of a product. For

3

example, in the first review, USTR received comments from importers and distributors of wine,
as well as individual wine consumers.
USTR expects that the length of submissions and burden on commenters will vary widely.
Comments expressing general support or opposition to the tariff action, which are not specific to
a particular product, comprised 80% of the first review submissions, and generally are less than
10 sentences. Preparation and submission of these comments likely takes 15 minutes or less.
Comments that are product specific, or submitted on behalf of industries, tended to be more
complex and lengthy, spanning three to ten or more pages, and including additional attachments.
These more detailed submissions could take up to two hours to prepare.
Comment

prepare and submit
comment

Submission
Time
2 hours

Number of
Comments

Total
Total Annual Cost
Annual
Hours
25,000 per notice 50,000 x
$200 per request x
2=100,000 50,000 = $10M

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to the respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection (excluding the value of the burden hours in Question
12 above).
The estimated annual cost burden to respondents excluding the value of the burden hours in
Question 12 is $0.
14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government.
Comment
evaluate each
comment

Processing
Time
15 minutes

Number of
Requests
25,000 per notice

Total Annual
Hours
6,250 x 2 =
12,500

Total Annual
Cost
$1.25M x 2 =
$2.5M

The $1.25 million biannual cost estimate includes the average annual salary plus benefits, for the
federal employees and contractors expected to work on the periodic review process. Until certain
statutory requirements are met, USTR will initiate a periodic review every 180 days, or twice a
year. If necessary, the estimated annual cost of the information collection would be $2.5 million.
15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments.
USTR has transitioned its collection of public comments from the public docket on
Regulations.gov to a purpose built electronic portal available through USTR’s website. Among
other improvements to the public comment process, the electronic portal facilitates the collection
of comments, enhances USTR’s ability to view/organize data, and allows the public to more
easily search/view public submissions.

4

16. For collections whose results will be published, outline the plans for tabulation and
publication.
USTR will announce the Large Civil Aircraft Dispute Portal in the Federal Register notices
soliciting comments on revisions and provide a link to the Portal on the USTR website. The
submissions, except for BCI, will be publicly available and searchable through the Portal. Based
on a review of public comments, and other considerations, USTR will publish the results of its
periodic review in the Federal Register.
17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the
information collection, explain the reasons why display would be inappropriate. N/A.
18. Explain each exception to the certification statement. N/A.
B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS
This collection does not employ statistical methods.

5

Review of Action: Large Civil Aircraft Dispute Form
1.

Submitter Information
Full Organization Legal Name (Public)
Commenter First Name (Public)
Commenter Last Name (Public)
Commenter Email Address (BCI)
Are you a third party, such as a law firm, trade association, or customs broker,
submitting on behalf of an organization or industry? (Public)
Note: If you are submitting on behalf of an organization or industry, provide the
information below.
Third Party Organization Type (Public)
Third Party Firm; Association Name (Public)
Third Party Representative (BCI)
Third Party Email Address (BCI)

2.

Product Details
a) Select one or more product categories applicable to or covered by your
comment. (Public)
Submitter will have the option to select one or more general product categories from
a pre-filled list.
b) What specific product(s) are applicable to or covered by your comment?
(Public)

Submitter may enter their own product names.
c) Provide the HTSUS subheading or the statistical reporting number
applicable to the specific product(s). (Public)

Submitter will have the option to select one or more HTSUS codes from a pre-filled
list and/or enter their own.
d) What is the current or former EU member State(s) applicable to or covered
by your comment? (i.e., the origin of product.) (Public)
Submitter may select one or more applicable current or former EU member State(s)
from a drop down menu.
3.

Respond to the questions below if the product(s) you identified in Question 2 is
currently subject to additional duties. (Annex I to the Federal Register notice

6

lists products currently subject to additional duties.) If the product(s) you
identified in Question 2 is not currently subject to additional duties, move to
Question 4.
a) With respect to product(s) identified in your response to Question 2, what is
your recommendation as to whether additional duties should be maintained?
(Public)
Submitter may select the applicable recommendation (*dropdown):
Maintain current level of additional duties on product(s); Remove additional duties
from product(s); Maintain additional duties on product, but modify current rate of
additional duties; N/A
b) If you recommend the rate of additional duty be modified, you may provide
a recommendation as to the revised rate of additional duty (as high as 100
percent).

4.

Respond to the questions below if the product(s) you identified in Question 2 is
not currently subject to additional duties. (Annex II to the Federal Register
notice lists products for which additional duties of up to 100 percent previously
had been proposed, but for which no additional duties are currently imposed.)
a) With respect to products listed in Annex II, what is your recommendation as
it relates to the inclusion of the specific product(s) on a revised list of products
subject to additional duties? (Public)
Submitter may select the applicable recommendation (*dropdown):
Support Imposition of Additional Duties; Oppose Imposition of Additional Duties;
N/A
b) You may provide a recommendation as to the rate of additional duty to be
imposed (as high as 100 percent). (Public)

5.

Please comment on whether maintaining or imposing additional duties on a
specific product of one or more specific EU member State (or former member
State) would be appropriate to enforce U.S. WTO rights or to obtain the
elimination of the WTO-inconsistent measures, and/or would be likely to result
in the implementation the DSB recommendations in the Large Civil Aircraft
dispute or in achieving a mutually satisfactory solution. (Public)

6.

Please comment on whether maintaining or imposing additional duties on
specific products of one or more specific EU member States (or former member
States) would cause disproportionate economic harm to U.S. interests,
including small or medium size businesses and consumers. (Public)

7

7.

Use the field below to provide any additional information in support of your
comment, taking account of the instructions provided in Section B of the
Federal Register notice. (Public)

8.

You may upload additional attachments in support of your comment. Please
specify whether the attachment is Public or contains Business Confidential
Information. (Submitter Determines Public or BCI)

*Fields designated as BCI will not be visible to the public.

8