8178 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2010 / Notices 

Administrative Action accompanying 

the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, 

H.R. Doc. No. 103–316 (1994), reprinted 

in 1994 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4040; (3) 

Department of Commerce regulations set 

forth in part 351 of Title 19 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations, in particular 

sections 351.212(b) and 351.414(c) and 

(e); (4) the Import Administration 

Antidumping Manual (1997 ed.), 

including the computer programs 

referenced therein; and (5) the general 

procedures and methodology employed 

by the United States to determine 

dumping margins in administrative 

reviews, whereby the Department of 

Commerce, in comparing weighted 

average normal value with the 

transaction price of individual export 

transactions, treats as zero negative 

intermediate comparison results (i.e., 

situations in which the individual 

export price is greater than the weighted 

average normal value), which 

methodology Vietnam asserts is 

commonly referred to as ‘‘simple 

zeroing’’ and/or the U.S. ‘‘zeroing 

procedures.’’ 

Vietnam alleges that these laws, 

regulations, administrative procedures, 

practices, and methodologies are, as 

such and as applied in the 

determinations by the Department of 

Commerce and actions by U.S. Customs 

and Border Protection in the shrimp 

administrative reviews and new shipper 

reviews, inconsistent with Articles I, II, 

VI:1, and VI:2 of the General Agreement 

on Tariffs and Trade 1994; Articles 1, 

2.1, 2.4, 2.4.2, 6.8, 6.10, 9.1, 9.3, 9.4, 

11.2, 11.3, 18.1, and 18.4, and Annex II 

of the Agreement on Implementation of 

Article VI of the General Agreement on 

Tariffs and Trade 1994 (the AntiDumping Agreement); Article XVI:4 of 

the WTO Agreement; and Vietnam’s 

Protocol of Accession to the WTO. 

Vietnam alleges that the United States 

acted inconsistently with the WTO 

Agreement obligations identified above 

by applying so-called ‘‘zeroing’’ in the 

determination of the margins of 

dumping in the reviews identified 

above, by repeatedly and consistently 

failing to provide most Vietnamese 

respondents seeking a review an 

opportunity to demonstrate the absence 

of dumping by being permitted to 

participate in a review, and by requiring 

companies to demonstrate their 

independence from government control 

and applying an adverse facts available 

rate to companies failing to do so in all 

reviews. 

Public Comment: Requirements for 

Submissions 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit written comments concerning 

the issues raised in this dispute. Persons 

may submit public comments 

electronically to http:// 

www.regulations.gov docket number 

USTR–2010–0008. If you are unable to 

submit comments using http:// 

www.regulations.gov, please contact 

Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395–9483 to 

arrange for an alternative method of 

transmission. 

To submit comments via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, enter docket 

number USTR–2010–0008 on the home 

page and click ‘‘search.’’ The site will 

provide a search-results page listing all 

documents associated with this docket. 

Find a reference to this notice by 

selecting ‘‘Notice’’ under ‘‘Document 

Type’’ on the left side of the search 

results page, and click on the link 

entitled ‘‘Submit a Comment.’’ (For 

further information on using the http: 

//www.regulations.gov Web site, please 

consult the resources provided on the 

Web site by clicking on the ‘‘Help’’ link 

at the top of the home page.) 

The http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site provides the option of providing 

comments by filling in a ‘‘Type 

Comment and Upload File’’ field, or by 

attaching a document. It is expected that 

most comments will be provided in an 

attached document. If a document is 

attached, it is necessary and sufficient to 

type ‘‘See attached’’ in the ‘‘Type 

Comment and Upload File’’ field. 

A person requesting that information 

contained in a comment submitted by 

that person be treated as business 

confidential information must certify 

that such information is business 

confidential and would not customarily 

be released to the public by the 

submitter. Business confidential 

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. Any 

comment containing business 

confidential information must be 

submitted by fax to Sandy McKinzy at 

(202) 395–3640. A non-confidential 

summary of the confidential 

information must be submitted to http: 

//www.regulations.gov. The nonconfidential summary will be placed in 

the docket and open to public 

inspection. 

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) Must provide a non-confidential 

summary of the information or advice. 

Any comment containing confidential 

information must be submitted by fax to 

Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395–3640. A 

non-confidential summary of the 

confidential information must be 

submitted to http:// 

www.regulations.gov. The nonconfidential summary will be placed in 

the docket and open to public 

inspection. 

USTR will maintain a docket on this 

dispute settlement proceeding 

accessible to the public. 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, any nonconfidential submissions, or nonconfidential summaries of submissions, 

received from other participants in the 

dispute; the report of the panel; and, if 

applicable, the report of the Appellate 

Body. 

Comments will be placed in the 

docket and 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 or 

information determined by USTR to be 

confidential in accordance with 19 

U.S.C. 2155(g)(2). Comments open to 

public inspection may be viewed on the 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Steven F. Fabry, 

Acting Assistant United States Trade 

Representative for Monitoring and 

Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2010–3551 Filed 2–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3190–W0–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary 

Application of Rugby Aviation LLC D/ 

B/A Northwest Sky Ferry for Commuter 

Air Carrier Authority 

AGENCY: Department of Transportation. 

ACTION: Notice of Order to Show Cause 

(Order 2010–2–7) Docket OST–2009– 

0188. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Transportation is directing all interested 

persons to show cause why it should 

not issue an order finding Rugby 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2010 / Notices 8179 

1This application is subject to a motion to strike 

and request for a cease and desist order filed by 

CTR on January 14, 2010, which allege that the City 

has unlawfully removed part of the track. The 

issues raised by this filing will be resolved in a 

subsequent decision. 

Aviation, LLC d/b/a Northwest Sky 

Ferry fit, willing, and able, and 

awarding it commuter air carrier 

authority to conduct scheduled 

commuter service. 

DATES: Persons wishing to file 

objections should do so no later than 

February 26, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Objections and answers to 

objections should be filed in Docket 

DOT–OST–2009–0188 and addressed to 

Docket Operations, (M–30, Room W12– 

140), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

and should be served upon the parties 

listed in Attachment A to the order. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Catherine O’Toole, Air Carrier Fitness 

Division (X–56, Room W86–489), U.S. 

Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, (202) 366–9721. 

Dated: February 16, 2010. 

Susan L. Kurland, 

Assistant Secretary For Aviation and 

International Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2010–3452 Filed 2–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Surface Transportation Board 

[STB Docket No. AB–1036] 

The City of Chicago, Illinois—Adverse 

Abandonment—Chicago Terminal 

Railroad in Chicago, IL 

On February 1, 2010, the City of 

Chicago, IL (the City), filed an 

application under 49 U.S.C. 10903, 

requesting that the Surface 

Transportation Board (Board) authorize 

the third-party or adverse abandonment 

of two railroad lines in the City owned 

by the Chicago Terminal Railroad (CTR), 

totaling 1.625 miles: (1) a portion of the 

Kingsbury Branch from its southern 

terminus at the intersection of 

Kingsbury, Division, and Halstead 

Streets, to, but not including, the point 

at which the Goose Island Branch 

diverges from the Kingsbury Branch at 

or near Willow Street, a distance of 

approximately 6 city blocks (.75 mile) 

(the Kingsbury Segment); and (2) a 

portion of the Lakewood Avenue Line 

between the southwest right-of-way line 

of Clybourn Avenue and the Line’s 

northern terminus at Diversey Parkway, 

a distance of approximately 7 city 

blocks (.875 mile) (the Lakewood 

Segment).1 The lines traverse United 

States Postal Service Zip Codes 60614 

and 60622 and include no stations. The 

application is available on the Board’s 

Web site at http://www.stb.dot.gov, or a 

copy can be secured from applicant’s 

counsel, whose name and address 

appear below. 

According to the City, these segments 

are not required for rail service, and 

their abandonment would benefit the 

City by improving safety and facilitating 

the reconstruction of the streets where 

the track is located. 

In a decision served in this 

proceeding on July 10, 2009, the City 

was granted exemptions from several 

statutory provisions as well as waivers 

of certain Board regulations at 49 CFR 

1152 that were not relevant to its 

adverse abandonment application or 

that sought information not available to 

it. Specifically, the City was granted 

waiver of certain requirements 

pertaining to the notice of intent 

prescribed at 49 CFR 1152.21; waivers 

of and exemptions from requirements in 

49 CFR 1152.20(a)(2)(i) and (a)(3), and 

49 U.S.C. 10903(a)(3)(D) and (B) that the 

notice be served on significant users and 

posted, except to the extent necessary to 

require the City to mail a copy of its 

notice to four shippers located on 

contiguous lines; waiver of the 

requirement in 49 CFR 1152.20(a)(2)(xii) 

that the notice be served on certain 

labor organizations; waiver of and 

exemption from the requirements 

pertaining to the System Diagram Map 

in 49 CFR 1152.10 to 1152.14, 

1152.24(e)(1), 1152.22(a)(5), and 49 

U.S.C. 10903(c)(2); waiver of the 

requirements of 49 CFR 1152.22(b)–(d), 

which require a description of the 

physical condition of the line, estimated 

deferred maintenance and rehabilitation 

costs, a description of service performed 

on the line during the prior year, and 

computation of the revenues and 

avoidable costs attributable to the line; 

certain requirements in 49 CFR 

1152.22(i) pertaining to the draft 

Federal Register notice; waiver of the 1- 

year time limit on abandonment 

authority specified at 49 CFR 

1152.29(e)(2); exemption from 49 U.S.C. 

10904, which governs offers of financial 

assistance (OFAs), and waiver of the 

implementing regulations at 49 CFR 

1152.27; and exemption from the 

provisions of 49 U.S.C. 10905, which 

provide for the offering of rail properties 

approved for abandonment for sale for 

public purposes, and waiver of the 

implementing regulations at 49 CFR 

1152.28. 

The City states that there is no 

documentation in its possession 

indicating that the lines contain 

Federally granted rights-of-way and that 

it will make any such documentation 

relating to this abandonment available 

promptly to those requesting it. The 

City’s entire case for adverse 

abandonment was filed with the 

application. 

The interests of railroad employees, if 

there are any employees on the lines, 

will be protected by the conditions set 

forth in Oregon Short Line R. Co.— 

Abandonment—Goshen, 360 I.C.C. 91 

(1979). 

Any interested person may file 

written comments concerning the 

proposed abandonment or protests 

(including the protestant’s entire 

opposition case), by March 18, 2010. 

Persons who may oppose the proposed 

adverse abandonment but who do not 

wish to participate fully in the process 

by submitting verified statements of 

witnesses containing detailed evidence 

should file comments. Persons opposing 

the proposed adverse abandonment who 

wish to participate actively and fully in 

the process should file a protest, 

observing the filing, service, and content 

requirements in 49 CFR 1152.25. 

Because this is an adverse abandonment 

proceeding, OFAs and public use 

requests are not appropriate and will 

not be entertained. The City’s reply is 

due by April 2, 2010. 

The Board has not yet had occasion to 

decide whether the issuance of a 

certificate of interim trail use in an 

adverse abandonment would be 

consistent with the grant of such an 

application. Accordingly, any request 

for a trail use condition under 16 U.S.C. 

1247(d) (49 CFR 1152.29) must be filed 

by March 18, 2010, and should address 

that issue. Each trail use request must be 

accompanied by a $250 filing fee. See 49 

CFR 1002.2(f)(27). 

All filings in response to this notice 

must refer to STB Docket No. AB–1036 

and must be sent to: (1) Surface 

Transportation Board, 395 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20423–0001; (2) 

counsel for applicant—Thomas F. 

McFarland, 208 South LaSalle Street, 

Suite 1890, Chicago, IL 60604–1112; 

and (3) counsel for CTR—John D. 

Heffner, 1750 K Street, NW., Suite 200, 

Washington, DC 20006. 

Filings may be submitted either via 

the Board’s e-filing format or in the 

traditional paper format. Any person 

using e-filing should comply with the 

instructions found on the Board’s http:// 

www.stb.dot.gov Web site, at the ‘‘EFILING’’ link. Any person submitting a 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES