Swimsuit Fabric Short Supply Request Effectively Denied

On November 16, 2015, the Government of the United States received a request from the Swimsuit Commission Corporation ("SCC"), that the United States and Morocco consider revising the rules of origin for certain women’s and girls’ swimwear to address availability of supply of certain printed and piece-dyed warp knit fabrics of polyester or nylon fibers classified under HTSUS subheading 6004.10 containing between 3 percent and 41 percent elastomeric yarns, in which the elastomeric yarns were engineered for chlorine resistance, which the SCC alleged cannot be supplied by the U.S. and Moroccan industries in commercial quantities in a timely manner.

Public comments in opposition were submitted by Agathon Associates, Darlington Fabrics, Elastic Fabrics of America, McMurray Fabrics, and the National Council of Textile Organizations and The American Fiber Manufacturers Association.The Government of Morocco submitted comments in favor of the request.

After approximately 15 months of ongoing engagement between the petitioner and U.S. domestic mills, the government posted this week on the otexa.trade.gov website the finding of "Indications that commercial availability exists." No further action on this request is expected.

DoD Awards to National Industries for the Blind and Goodwill Industries

National Industries for the Blind, Alexandria, Virginia, has been awarded a maximum $17,439,490 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for various uniforms. Other than full and open competition was used in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-5, mandatory source. This is a one-year contract with one one-year option period. Locations of performance are Virginia, Alabama, Maryland, New Jersey, and North Carolina, with an Aug. 31, 2018, estimated performance completion date. Using military service is Air Force. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2017 through 2018 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE1C1-17-D-B012).

Goodwill Industries of South Florida Inc., Miami, Florida, has been awarded a maximum $7,458,318 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for various uniforms. Other than full and open competition was used in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-5, mandatory source. This is a one-year contract with one one-year option term. Location of performance is Florida, with an Aug. 31, 2018, estimated performance completion date. Using military service is Air Force. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2017 through 2018 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE1C1-17-D-N010).

BACKGROUND. Relevant regulation for "other than full and open competition" cited by DoD in making the awards --

6.302-5 Authorized or required by statute.

(a) Authority.

(1) Citations: 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(5) or 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(5).

(2) Full and open competition need not be provided for when—

(i) A statute expressly authorizes or requires that the acquisition be made through another agency or from a specified source; or

(ii) The agency’s need is for a brand name commercial item for authorized resale.

(b) Application. This authority may be used when statutes, such as the following, expressly authorize or require that acquisition be made from a specified source or through another agency:

(1) Federal Prison Industries (UNICOR)—18 U.S.C. 4124 (see subpart 8.6).

(2) Qualified nonprofit agencies for the blind or other severely disabled—41 U.S.C. chapter 85, Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled (see subpart 8.7).

(3) Government Printing and Binding—44 U.S.C. 501-504, 1121 (see subpart 8.8).

(4) Sole source awards under the 8(a) Program (15 U.S.C. 637), but see 6.303 for requirements for justification and approval of sole-source 8(a) awards over $22 million. (See subpart 19.8).

(5) Sole source awards under the HUBZone Act of 1997—15 U.S.C. 657a (see 19.1306).

(6) Sole source awards under the Veterans Benefits Act of 2003 (15 U.S.C. 657f).

(7) Sole source awards under the WOSB Program–15 U.S.C. 637(m) (see 19.1506).

(c) Limitations.

(1) This authority shall not be used when a provision of law requires an agency to award a new contract to a specified non-Federal Government entity unless the provision of law specifically—

(i) Identifies the entity involved;

(ii) Refers to 10 U.S.C. 2304(k) for armed services acquisitions or 41 U.S.C. 3105 for civilian agency acquisitions; and

(iii) States that award to that entity shall be made in contravention of the merit-based selection procedures in 10 U.S.C. 2304(k) or 41 U.S.C. 3105, as appropriate. However, this limitation does not apply—

(A) When the work provided for in the contract is a continuation of the work performed by the specified entity under a preceding contract; or

(B) To any contract requiring the National Academy of Sciences to investigate, examine, or experiment upon any subject of science or art of significance to an executive agency and to report on those matters to the Congress or any agency of the Federal Government.

(2) Contracts awarded using this authority shall be supported by the written justifications and approvals described in 6.303 and 6.304, except for—

(i) Contracts awarded under (a)(2)(ii) or (b)(2) of this subsection;

(ii) Contracts awarded under (a)(2)(i) of this subsection when the statute expressly requires that the procurement be made from a specified source. (Justification and approval requirements apply when the statute authorizes, but does not require, that the procurement be made from a specified source); or

(iii) Contracts less than or equal to $22 million awarded under (b)(4) of this subsection.

(3) The authority in (a)(2)(ii) of this subsection may be used only for purchases of brand-name commercial items for resale through commissaries or other similar facilities. Ordinarily, these purchases will involve articles desired or preferred by customers of the selling activities (but see 6.301(d)).

DoD Textile and Footwear Contracts Awarded

Newpark Mats & Integrated Service LLC, The Woodlands, Texas, has been awarded a maximum $27,793,077 fixed-price with economic-price-adjustment, requirements contract for a heavy-duty composite mat system. This is a two-year base contract with three one-year option periods. Maximum dollar amount is for the life of the contract. This was a sole-source acquisition using justification 10 U.S. Code 2304 (c)(1). Locations of performance are Texas and Louisiana, with a Feb. 23, 2022, performance completion date. Using military services are Army, Air Force, Marine Corps and Navy. Type of appropriation is fiscal 2017 through 2022 defense working capital funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE8E6-17-D-0005).

Wolverine World Wide Inc., Rockford, Michigan, has been awarded a maximum $17,994,690 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for tan temperate weather combat boots. This is a three-year contract with no option periods. This was a competitive acquisition with four offers received. Location of performance is Michigan, with a Feb. 21, 2020, performance completion date. Using customer is Army and Afghanistan Army. Type of appropriation is fiscal year 2017 through 2020 defense working capital; and foreign military sales funds. The contracting activity is the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (SPE1C1-17-D-1028).

WTO Chief Says Border Adjustability Tax May be WTO-Legal

In an interview with CNBC World Trade Organization Director General Roberto Azevêdo leaves open possibility that proposed U.S. border adjustability tax may be WTO-legal. To hear the interview CLICK HERE (BAT discussion starts at about 1:40.)

Wisdom from Washington

Monday, February 20th, is Washington's Birthday, a public holiday in the United States. Federal, state, and local government offices will be closed as will many non-retail business.

Since 1971, Washington's Birthday has been observed, as a public holiday on the third Monday in February. The day is commonly called "Presidents’ Day," but the legal name remains, "Washington's Birthday."

"First in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen, he was second to none in the humble and enduring scenes of private life; pious, just, humane, temperate, and sincere; uniform, dignified, and commanding, his example was as edifying to all around him as were the effects of that example lasting. To his equals he was condescending, to his inferiors kind, and to the dear object of his affections exemplarily tender; correct throughout, vice shuddered in his presence, and virtue always felt his fostering hand; the purity of his private character gave effulgence to his public virtues. His last scene comported with the whole tenor of his life although in extreme pain, not a sigh, not a groan escaped him; and with undisturbed serenity he closed his well-spent life. Such was the man America has lost such was the man for whom our nation mourns."
-- Henry "Light-Horse Harry" Lee

We could do no better, in reflecting on the life and influence of President Washington, than to consult his 1796 Farewell Address to the nation written as he prepared to retire from public life. It was almost immediately reprinted in newspapers across the country and later in pamphlet form.

In the address Washington argues that the Union of the States "ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty," and that "there will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands." He warns against sectionalism: North versus South, or Atlantic versus West. He praises the Constitution, which he declares, "improved upon [the Articles of Confederation]" and "better calculated than [the Articles] for an intimate union." The Constitution, he says, "till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all." As every schoolboy knows, he then goes on to warn against factions and "the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally."

Washington stresses the need for religion and morality if the republic is to be preserved. And he exhorts to maintain good public credit and to be careful with regard to public debt "not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear." Finally Washington warns against foreign alliances.

The full text of the Address is available at libraries and online. The original hand-written address is 32 pages in length, far from a 140 character "tweet."

Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee Meeting March 1st

The Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee (COAC) will meet on Wednesday, March 1, 2017, from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. EST. The meeting will be open to the public.

Agenda

The COAC will hear from the following subcommittees on the topics listed below and then will review, deliberate, provide observations, and formulate recommendations on how to proceed:

1. The Trade Modernization Subcommittee will discuss the progress of the International Engagement and Trade Facilitation Working Group which is identifying examples of best practices in the U.S. and abroad that facilitate trade. The subcommittee will also discuss the progress of the Revenue Modernization Working Group which is generating advice pertaining to the strategic modernization of Customs and Border Protection's revenue collections process and systems. Additionally, the subcommittee will discuss the progress of the Rulings and Decisions Working Group which has been identifying process improvements in the receipt and issuance of Customs and Border Protection Headquarters' rulings and decisions. Finally, the subcommittee will discuss the progress of the newly formed E-Commerce Working Group.

2. The One U.S. Government Subcommittee (1USG) will discuss the progress of the Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) Working Group. The subcommittee will also discuss the progress and completion of the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), core functions, and the Single Window Effort.

3. The Exports Subcommittee will discuss the final work of the Truck Manifest Sub-Working Group, which has been comparing the proposed truck manifest data elements with the Canadian elements. The Post Departure Filing Group will discuss its progress in finalizing the details of its Table Top Exercise.

4. The Trade Enforcement and Revenue Collection (TERC) Subcommittee will discuss the progress made on prior TERC recommendations and updates from the Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty (AD/CVD), Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), and Forced Labor Working Groups.

5. The Global Supply Chain Subcommittee will present their involvement in the review of a draft supply chain security C-TPAT best practice framework, on-going input received regarding the C-TPAT minimum security criteria and the progress of the Pipeline Working Group.

6. The Trusted Trader Subcommittee will continue their discussion on their vision for an enhanced Trusted Trader concept that includes engagement with CBP to include relevant partner government agencies with a potential for international interoperability.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE OFFICE OF TEXTILES AND APPAREL (OTEXA) USA PAVILION At Techtextil 2017 International Trade Show for Technical Textiles and Nonwovens May 9 – 12, 2017

LOCATION: Messe Frankfurt Fairground, Frankfurt, Germany

SHOW DESCRIPTION: Held biennially in Frankfurt, Germany, Techtextil is a leading international trade fair in technical textiles and nonwovens. Now in its 16th edition, Techtextil is the most comprehensive trade show in the European region for technical textiles. Techtextil 2017 will feature 11 distinct product groups of technical textiles (Research and Development, Technologies, Fibers and Yarns, Woven Fabrics, Nonwovens, Coated Textiles, Composites, Bondtec, Functional Apparel Textiles, Associations, and Publishers) that will reflect the full spectrum of technical textiles, non-woven and innovative garment textile supply chain.

VISITORS/EXHIBITORS: In 2015, Techtextil hosted over 34,000 visitors, and 1,393 exhibitors from 52 countries. During the 15th edition of Techtextil 2015, 97 percent of Techtextil visitors rated their time there as having been well or very well spent.

AMENITIES: The Office of Textiles and Apparel (OTEXA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce will feature a catalog/sample booth at Techtextil 2017. Included in the package of services are the collections of leads that will be sent to each company in a spreadsheet after the show, promotion of product samples and the opportunity for pre- concurrent and post-show publicity for your company.

COST: OTEXA Sample Booth participation is $950 for up to 5 exhibitors. This cost will allow each company 4-5 samples not to exceed 10 yards or four book samples, company literature and business cards. Shipment of samples to and from Techtextil 2017 is the responsibility of the participant.

For other companies who may seek to have their own booth in the USA pavilion or independent booth, please contact Carrie Kittrell, Sales Manager by Phone: 678-732-2414 or Email: Carrie.Kittrell@usa.messefrankfurt.com.

WHY SHOULD YOU EXHIBIT? Techtextil is more than the leading international trade fair for technical textiles and nonwovens. Only at Techtextil can you meet the international decision makers, developers and buyers of the entire value-creation chain. This is evidenced by the unerringly high levels of satisfaction among 96 percent of exhibitors.

For additional information or to receive a participation kit, please contact Mary Lynn Landgraf at (202) 482-7909 or Mary-Lynn.Landgraf@trade.gov.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE OFFICE OF TEXTILES AND APPAREL (OTEXA) USA PAVILION At ADRIATIC SEA 2015 DEFENSE & AEROSPACE EXHIBITION & CONFERENCE April 26th-28th 2017

LOCATION: Spaladium Arena, Split, Croatia

SHOW DESCRIPTION: Now in its 4th edition, ASDA 2017 is an international defense exhibition that will showcase and demonstrate cutting edge technologies in the air, sea, and land sectors of defense. This 4th edition of the tri-service Exhibition and Conference is dedicated to Defense, Aerospace, Homeland Security and Safety & Security. ASDA 2017 is fully supported by the Croatian Government through the Croatian Ministry of Defense.

ASDA 2017 offers a unique platform to establish and strengthen relationships with government departments, businesses and armed forces throughout the Adriatic Sea and Southeastern European regions. The event space is held under the patronage of the Ministry of Defense of the government of Croatia which underscores why there is no better place to meet the individuals who are involved in Croatian military acquisition decisions. ASDA 2017 will be the perfect gateway for manufacturers and suppliers to foster new interest in their products within this region. The Croatian Armed Forces Long-Term Development Plan 2015-2024, details the acquisitions required to substantially modernize the Armed Forces at an expected cost of approximately U.S. $ 1 billion. The modernization plans include ongoing and future expected procurements in all three defense sectors: air, land and navy. Textiles are a major component of ASDA 2017, which will showcase everything from clothing to shelters.

VISITORS/EXHIBITORS: In 2015, ASDA hosted 165 exhibitors from 16 countries, over 3,874 attendees from 54 countries and embassy/military attaches from 29 counties. ASDA visitors include high-ranking officials from Defense Ministries and Departments, as well as Armies, Navies, and Air Forces of countries worldwide. Defense industry professionals, Chiefs of Police, Coast Guard branches and private security firms throughout the region are also targeted visitors.

AMENITIES: OTEXA will maintain a sample booth at ASDA 2017 for up to 12 qualified U.S. manufacturers and suppliers of military/defense, industrial, and specialty technical textiles. Participants in this catalog/sample show will receive a package of services, including the collection of leads that will be sent to each company in a spreadsheet after the show, promotion of samples and pre-concurrent and- post show publicity.

COST: $950 for 4-5 samples not to exceed 10 yards or four book samples, company literature and business cards. Shipment of samples to and from ASDA 2017 is the responsibility of the participant.

WHY SHOULD YOU EXHIBIT? OTEXA has not been represented at tradeshows in the Southeastern European region prior to this year’s show. Now, more than ever is the time to respond to the increasing demand in this marketplace. In 2009 Croatia became a full member of NATO. In 2013 Croatia became the European Union’s 28th member.

For additional information or to receive a participation kit, please contact Mary Lynn Landgraf at (202) 482-7909 or

New Endangered/Threatened Species Regs Create Confusion in Wool Trade

On January 2, 2017, certain sheep (Ovis aries) were added to CITES (The Washington Convention) and require additional documentation for international trade. However the domesticated form Ovis aries aries is not subject to the provisions of the Convention. There relevant part of the CITES Appendices reads:

Appendix I	Appendix II
Ovis aries ophion Ovis aries vignei	Ovis aries (Except the subspecies included in Appendix I, the subspecies O. a. isphahanica, O. a. laristanica, O. a. musimon and O. a. orientalis which are not included in the Appendices, and the domesticated form Ovis aries aries which is not subject to the provisions of the Convention)

Shortly after this change Agathon Associates began receiving notes from clients indicating that they have been asked to provide additional information regarding shippments of wool products, in the form of these additional declarations (or words of the same effect) on invoices for wool products:

1. Raw Materials are NOT made of OVIS ARIES OPHION or OVIS ARIES VIGNEI.
2. Raw Materials are made of BRED/DOMESTICATED OVIS ARIES ARIES.

These declarations appear to be in order in light of the January 2nd action relating to certain products of Ovis aries.

Agathon Associates will monitor this new requirement and update as necessary.

BACKGROUND

CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, also known as the Washington Convention) is an international agreement between governments. Its aim is to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival.

CITES works by subjecting international trade in specimens of selected species to certain controls. These require that all import, export, re-export and introduction from the sea of species covered by the Convention has to be authorized through a licensing system. ('Re-export' means export of a specimen that was imported.)

The species covered by CITES are listed in three Appendices, according to the degree of protection they need. (For additional information see CITES Species.)

Appendix I includes species threatened with extinction. Trade in specimens of these species is permitted only in exceptional circumstances.

Appendix II includes species not necessarily threatened with extinction, but in which trade must be controlled in order to avoid utilization incompatible with their survival.

Appendix III contains species that are protected in at least one country, which has asked other CITES Parties for assistance in controlling the trade.

CSPC Staff to Present on Furniture Flammibility at Fiber Materials Conf.

On Monday, February 6 through Wednesday, February 8, 2017, Andrew Lock, Ph.D., Consumer Product Safety Commission Directorate for Laboratory Sciences, and other CPSC staff will be attending the Fire and Materials Conference in San Francisco, CA. Andrew Lock will be making a presentation on furniture flammability. The conference will be held at Hyatt Centric Fisherman's Wharf, 555 North Point Street, San Francisco, CA from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. daily. For additional information, contact Dr. Andrew Lock at 301-987-2099 or alock@cpsc.gov.

U.S. Industry Weighs In Opposed to Rayon Tariff

Agathon Associates, on behalf of ICF Mercantile, and 24 other individuals or entities have filed comments with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative objecting to the proposed inclusion of rayon staple fiber on the list of products from the European Union potentially subject to 100% import duty in retaliation for the EU's unfair treatment of US beef

Here are the comments submitted by Agathon Associates--

1. Viscose rayon staple fiber is not available from domestic U.S. sources.

It is generally known in the textile industry that there is no U.S. production of viscose rayon, a fact that has been acknowledged by the U.S. government. Following the receipt of a request on April 17, 2007, from the United States Trade Representative, the U.S. International Trade Committee instituted investigation No. NAFTA-103-018 Certain Textile Articles: Probable Effect of Modification of NAFTA Rules of Origin for Goods of Canada and Mexico (Sanitary Articles and Nonwoven Wipes). The investigation found "There is no known U.S. production of either viscose rayon staple fibers or acrylic staple fibers" and "In September 2005, Liberty Fibers Corp., Lowland, TN, the sole North American producer of the subject rayon fibers, ceased all manufacturing operations…" Subsequently the U.S. government has determined that the rules of origin and short supply lists under or various free trade agreements should reflect the absence of domestic production of viscose rayon.

2. Other fibers cannot be substituted for viscose rayon.

Other fibers do not have the performance characteristics of rayon, which is why the U.S. Department of Defense requires rayon for certain applications and exempts certain rayon from the "Berry Amendment" domestic sourcing requirement.

3. Additional duties on rayon fiber is contrary to the economic interest of the U.S.

Additional duties on a product that can be sourced only from non-domestic sources is counter to U.S. policy intended to encourage domestic manufacturing. Since 1982, nearly every Congress has passed legislation, the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill, to temporarily suspend tariffs on certain imported products not available from domestic sources. Among the articles historically included in the MTB was rayon fiber. Since the last MTBs expired at the end of 2012, these U.S. manufacturers have been forced to pay duty on fiber that had been duty-free for several years. That 2013 snap-back to the general rate of duty harmed these manufacturers. Further increased duty imposed, due to unrelated trade in an agricultural product, will be a heavy burden on already burdened manufacturers. In 2016 Eleven U.S. manufacturers companies, including ICF Mercantile, filed petitions with the U.S. International Trade Commission for the suspension of the collection of duty on rayon fiber provided for in subheading 5504.10.00 under the new Miscellaneous Tariff Bill procedures of the American Manufacturing Competitiveness Act of 2016. These company are looking forward with sound reason to believe that the general rate of duty will be suspended. It would be highly inconsistent to grant manufacturers relief from a 4.3% import duty, only to impose an even larger duty as retaliation for the EU’s beef regime.

4. Additional duties on rayon fiber is contrary to the national security interests of the U.S.

Sec. 829 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181), enacted on January 28, 2008, provided a waiver for DoD to procure fire resistant rayon fiber for the production of uniforms whereby such fire resistant rayon fiber can be procured from foreign sources. In the case of the fire resistant rayon fiber that ICF Mercantile imports for DoD, the fiber is of European origin. Additional duties would adversely affect our military and tax payers.

Comments were also submitted by:

• Bob Allen (No Company Listed),
• Edwin Betz (No Company Listed),
• Liz Braund, Royal Robbins,
• Frank DeGuire, Meridian Industries, Inc.,
• Katherine Dutilh, Milliken,
• Sean Fahimian (No Company Listed),
• Scott Farmer, Berry Plastics Corporation,
• Darryl Fournier, Mogul South Carolina,
• Jessica Franken, INDA,
• Dmitry Konstantinovsky, Texollini,
• Jason Lough, Sontara Old Hickory Inc.,
• Susan J Mocarski, SJM Merchant Services, LLC,
• Sean Mulvaney, The Procter & Gamble Company (P&G),
• Daniel Nation, Parkdale, Inc.,
• Paul O'Day, AFMA,
• John Patterson, Lenzing Fibers Inc.,
• Richard Reid (No Company Listed),
• Randy Rudolph, Rockline Industries,
• Elizabeth Ruiz , Lenzing,
• Jeff Sellers, Jacob Holm Industries (America),
• Norman Sylvia, Suominen,
• Augustine Tantillo, NCTO,
• Daniel Tuttle (No Company Listed), and
• Amy Wolfteich (No Company Listed).

To read all the comments, go to www.regulations.gov, search for "USTR-2016-0025," then open the docket, view all comments, and search for "rayon."

Renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA): What Actions Do Not Require Congressional Approval?

Congressional Research Service January 26, 2017, Legal Sidebar Renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA): What Actions Do Not Require Congressional Approval?

President Trump has announced his intent to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) among the United States, Canada, and Mexico. NAFTA entered into force on January 1, 1994 and governs the imposition of tariffs on imported products, as well as nontariff trade barriers (e.g., customs procedures or government procurement practices). The President’s announcement raises questions about the extent to which the executive branch may unilaterally renegotiate the agreement—and implement amendments to the agreement in domestic law—without further action from Congress. This Sidebar post briefly addresses these questions. It does not discuss presidential authority to withdraw from NAFTA or policy implications of U.S. renegotiation of NAFTA (e.g., economic or labor consequences that might result from U.S. action).

The nature and scope of modifications to NAFTA by the Trump Administration that are under consideration are currently unclear. Some observers have speculated that a future renegotiation of NAFTA might touch upon a number of issues, such as:

• Tariff rates on merchandise trade among the three NAFTA partners;
• Immigration and border security;
• Cooperation on migration from Central America, drug trafficking, illegal flow of arms and money;
• Elimination of investor-state dispute settlement provisions that allow an injured investor of one NAFTA party to sue another NAFTA party before an international tribunal;
• Rules of origin that set forth the percentage of a product’s content that must originate in the NAFTA region for the product to qualify for preferential tariff treatment; and
• Modifications to NAFTA’s general dispute settlement system.

As discussed in more detail in a CRS study, the negotiation of international agreements is generally considered to be the exclusive prerogative of the Executive. Consequently, the Executive does not appear to need approval from Congress to discuss changes to NAFTA with representatives of Canada and Mexico. Attention will likely focus on whether the agreement resulting from these negotiations must be approved by Congress before it may enter into force and take effect in domestic law.

Federal statutes that provided the foundation for the negotiation, legislative consideration, and implementation of NAFTA do not appear to address Congress’s role in amending the agreement. The applicable statutes include the Trade Act of 1974, which sets up the procedure for Congress’s consideration of implementing legislation; the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, which established the eligibility of NAFTA implementing legislation for expedited legislative consideration; and the NAFTA Implementation Act, which implemented the agreement in domestic law. By contrast to the lack of a clear statutory requirement governing Congress’s role in the amendment of NAFTA, the law implementing the World Trade Organization agreements specifically addresses Congress’s role in amendments to those agreements.

Article 2202 of NAFTA, which Congress approved in the NAFTA Implementation Act, provides that “[t]he Parties may agree on any modification of or addition to this Agreement.” It further provides that “when so agreed, and approved in accordance with the applicable legal procedures of each Party, a modification or addition shall constitute an integral part of this Agreement.” However, NAFTA does not specify whether the “applicable legal procedures” of the United States include approval of amendments by Congress. In addition, neither the text of the agreement, the context in which it appears, nor the subsequent practice of the NAFTA parties sheds light on the meaning of this phrase.

In the past, the executive branch has negotiated limited changes to NAFTA not involving formal amendment and implemented these changes in domestic law without Congress enacting additional legislation. For example, changes to NAFTA’s rules of origin appear to have been implemented by presidential proclamation pursuant to existing statutory authority in the NAFTA-implementing law. This implementation followed congressional consultation but not specific legislative approval. Congress has also delegated authority to the President to adjust tariffs in various provisions of federal law (detailed in this CRS Report), including Section 201(b) of the NAFTA Implementation Act, Section 125(c) of the Trade Act of 1974, and Section 103 of the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015. However, these provisions establish conditions and limitations on the exercise of this delegated tariff authority that may limit their usefulness in the implementation of a renegotiated agreement. It is unclear whether the President could implement a renegotiated agreement on other matters (e.g., border security and dispute settlement provisions) under existing authority without Congress making changes to U.S. statutory law.

While the NAFTA-implementing law and the agreement itself appear to contemplate limited changes to certain aspects of the agreement and their implementation in domestic law (e.g., tariff rates and rules of origin) without further legislative approval, an agreement requiring changes to federal statute, or which otherwise makes major changes to NAFTA, would likely require congressional assent. The Constitution gives Congress specific authority over international trade, including powers to impose and collect tariffs and duties and to regulate international commerce. U.S. free trade agreements , including NAFTA, have historically been approved and implemented as congressionalexecutive agreements by a majority vote of each house of Congress. In the NAFTA-implementing law, Congress approved NAFTA as it existed in 1993. Accordingly, major changes to the agreement would arguably require legislative approval. Furthermore, the President arguably lacks the authority to terminate the domestic effect of federal statutes implementing NAFTA without going through the full legislative process for repeal.

Historical practice supports this view. NAFTA superseded, to a large extent, the prior U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement. When Congress approved NAFTA, it amended the act implementing the prior U.S.-Canada free trade agreement to suspend certain provisions in the act while allowing others to continue to operate. Nevertheless, the President might argue that he could enter into and implement amendments to NAFTA without congressional approval because such amendments did not require changes to U.S. statutory law. In that event, Congress’s enactment of a resolution expressing its opposition to the agreement might make a court more likely to refrain from giving the agreement legal effect.

Milliken Launches First-Ever Fluorine Free Eco-Based Performance Fabric Available in Natural or Recycled Fiber to Address Consumer Demand for More Sustainable Protection

Milliken & Company, a leading global textile technology company, recently launched Breathe by Milliken™, a new and unique collection of eco-elegant performance upholstery fabrics that are durable, repel everyday stains and clean easily without compromising the fabric’s look or soft feel. The industry’s first fluorine-free performance fabrics available in both natural and manmade fibers, Breathe fabrics are a sustainable option, designed and responsibly manufactured using natural or recycled fibers made from plastic bottles and a remarkable plant-based water repellent.

Milliken created Breathe textiles with discerning consumers in mind to address the growing need for more environmentally-friendly, effective and high-quality performance home upholstery fabrics.

Breathe by Milliken fabrics have been extensively tested by certified third parties and meet or exceed industry standards including flammability, water repellency, soil release, spot cleaning, colorfastness, abrasion resistance and pilling. Breathe fabrics meet these standards without adding fluorine, formaldehyde, fire retardants or other chemicals of concern. Unlike common spray-on stain resistance treatments, Breathe fabrics are engineered textiles, providing lasting protection and peace of mind.

All Breathe by Milliken™ fabrics have also achieved GREENGUARD® GOLD certification, which gives assurance that products designed for use in indoor spaces meet strict chemical emissions limits, contributing to the creation of healthier interiors.

“Today’s consumers are better informed and more concerned about product content than ever before – who makes it, what it is made of and how it is made,” said David Smith, vice president, Engineered Performance Products, Milliken & Company. “Every aspect of this product was designed to address this concern. Consumers can breathe easy knowing their beautiful furniture is protected from stains and wear in a much more sustainable way.”

Breathe by Milliken fabrics are sold directly to furniture manufacturers and retailers who specify fabric and will be available at select national retailers beginning in Spring 2017. For more information on Breathe by Milliken, please visit http://www.breathebymilliken.com.

CBP Publishes Drawback Simplification Newsletter

Recently Customs and Border Protection published a Drawback Simplification Newsletter

On February 24, 2016, the President signed the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, strengthening the capabilities of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to enforce U.S. trade laws and regulations, streamline and facilitate the movement of legitimate trade, and interdict non-compliant trade.

The Act of 2015 included a sweeping “game-changer,” for the CBP drawback program, providing numerous, significant enhancements to the drawback laws under 19 U.S.C. § 1313, long-sought over the past decade by both CBP and the trade. Section 906, Drawback and Refunds, of the Act goes far to strengthen the drawback legal framework and CBP’s ability to more accurately and objectively administer drawback.