Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2004 / Notices 78095

1The trackage rights will be granted by the State 

acting by and through the South Dakota State 

Railroad Board and the South Dakota Department 

of Transportation, Office of Railroads.

2The previously abandoned Mitchell-Kadoka 

Line, which is now owned by the State, has been 

leased to MRC. And MRC, in turn, has subleased 

the Mitchell-Kadoka Line to Dakota Southern 

Railway Company (DSRC), which operates over the 

line.

delegated by the President, is 

designating the Greater Cairo zone, 

Alexandria zone, and Suez Canal zone 

as qualifying industrial zones under the 

IFTA Act.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Edmund Saums, Director for Middle 

East Affairs, (202) 395–4987, Office of 

the United States Trade Representative, 

600 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20508.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to authority granted under section 9 of 

the United States-Israel Free Trade Area 

Implementation Act of 1985 (‘‘IFTA 

Act’’), as amended (19 U.S.C. 2112 

note), Presidential Proclamation 6955 of 

November 13, 1996 (61 FR 58761) 

proclaimed certain tariff treatment for 

articles of the West Bank, the Gaza 

Strip, and qualifying industrial zones. In 

particular, the Presidential Proclamation 

modified general notes 3 and 8 of the 

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the 

United States: (a) To provide duty-free 

treatment to qualifying articles that are 

the product of the West Bank, the Gaza 

Strip or a qualifying industrial zone and 

are entered in accordance with the 

provisions of section 9 of the IFTA Act; 

(b) to provide that articles of Israel may 

be treated as though they were articles 

directly shipped from Israel for the 

purposes of the United States-Israel Free 

Trade Area Agreement (‘‘the 

Agreement’’) even if shipped to the 

United States from the West Bank, the 

Gaza Strip, or a qualifying industrial 

zone, if the articles otherwise meet the 

requirements of the Agreement; and (c) 

to provide that the cost or value of 

materials produced in the West Bank, 

the Gaza Strip, or a qualifying industrial 

zone may be included in the cost or 

value of materials produced in Israel 

under section 1(c)(i) of Annex 3 of the 

Agreement and that the direct costs of 

processing operations performed in the 

West Bank, the Gaza Strip, or a 

qualifying industrial zone may be 

included in the direct costs of 

processing operations performed in 

Israel under section 1(c)(ii) of Annex 3 

of the Agreement. 

Section 9(e) of the IFTA Act defines 

a ‘‘qualifying industrial zone’’ as an area 

that ‘‘(1) encompasses portions of the 

territory of Israel and Jordan or Israel 

and Egypt; (2) has been designated by 

local authorities as an enclave where 

merchandise may enter without 

payment of duty or excise taxes; and (3) 

has been specified by the President as 

a qualifying industrial zone.’’

Presidential Proclamation 6955 

delegated to the United States Trade 

Representative the authority to 

designate qualifying industrial zones. 

The United States Trade 

Representative has previously 

designated qualifying industrial zones 

under Section 9 of the IFTA Act on 

March 13, 1998 (63 FR 12572), March 

19, 1999 (64 FR 13623), October 15, 

1999 (64 FR 56015), October 24, 2000 

(65 FR 64472), December 12, 2000 (65 

FR 77688), June 15, 2001 (66 FR 32660), 

and January 28, 2004 (69 FR 4199). 

The governments of Israel and Egypt 

jointly requested in a letter submitted to 

the United States Trade Representative 

on December 7, 2004, the designation as 

qualifying industrial zones of areas 

comprising a Greater Cairo zone, 

Alexandria zone, and Suez Canal zone. 

The names and locations of the factories 

comprising these three zones are 

specified on maps and materials 

submitted by Egypt and Israel and on 

file with the Office of the U.S. Trade 

Representative. Israel and Egypt have 

agreed that merchandise may enter, 

without payment of duty or excise taxes, 

areas under their respective customs 

control that comprise the Greater Cairo 

zone, Alexandria zone, and Suez Canal 

zone. In addition, Israel and Egypt have 

agreed to a ‘‘Protocol Between the 

Government of the State of Israel and 

the Government of the Arab Republic of 

Egypt On Qualifying Industrial Zones’

that provides for the operation and 

administration of these zones. 

Accordingly, the Greater Cairo zone, 

Alexandria zone, and Suez Canal zone 

meet the criteria under sections 9(e)(1) 

and (2) of the IFTA Act. 

Therefore, pursuant to the authority 

delegated to me by Presidential 

Proclamation 6955, I hereby designate 

the areas occupied by the factories that 

comprise the Greater Cairo zone, 

Alexandria zone, and Suez Canal zone, 

as specified on maps and materials 

received from Egypt and Israel, as 

qualifying industrial zones under 

section 9 of the IFTA Act, effective upon 

the date of publication of this notice, 

applicable to articles shipped from these 

qualifying industrial zones after such 

date.

Dated: December 14, 2004. 

Robert B. Zoellick, 

United States Trade Representative.

[FR Doc. 04–28445 Filed 12–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3190–W5–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board 

[STB Finance Docket No. 34630] 

MRC Regional Railroad Authority—

Trackage Rights Exemption—Lines of 

the State of South Dakota 

MRC Regional Railroad Authority 

(MRC), a noncarrier, has filed a verified 

notice of exemption under 49 CFR 

1150.31 to acquire from the State of 

South Dakota (the State) 1 overhead 

trackage rights over a line of railroad 

extending between milepost 654 near 

Mitchell, SD, and milepost 511.90 in 

Sioux City, IA, including such yard 

tracks, sidetracks, and connecting tracks 

(existing or to be constructed) as are 

reasonable: (a) To interchange railcars 

with The Burlington Northern and Santa 

Fe Railway Company (BNSF) and 

Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad 

Corporation at Mitchell; (b) to access the 

State-owned line extending westerly 

from Napa Junction, SD, to Platte, SD; 

and (c) to interchange railcars with 

BNSF, Union Pacific Railroad Company, 

and Canadian National Railway 

Company at Sioux City. MRC will also 

acquire from the State limited local 

trackage rights on the Mitchell-Sioux 

City Line: (i) to move loaded cars of 

corn, soybeans, and wheat originating at 

points on the line between Mitchell and 

Kadoka, SD,2 and terminating at the 

Mitchell Elevator in Mitchell and the 

Beardsley Elevator in Beardsley, SD; 

and (ii) to move empty cars via the 

reverse route. The total distance of the 

trackage rights to be acquired is 

approximately 142.1 miles.

MRC certifies that its projected 

revenues as a result of the MRC-South 

Dakota transaction will not result in 

MRC becoming a Class I or Class II rail 

carrier, and further certifies that its 

projected revenues will not exceed $5 

million. The MRC-South Dakota 

transaction was scheduled to be 

consummated on or after December 17, 

2004. 

If the verified notice contains false or 

misleading information, the exemption 

is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the 

exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d) 

may be filed at any time. The filing of 

a petition to revoke does not 

automatically stay the transaction. 

78096 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 29, 2004 / Notices 

An original and 10 copies of all 

pleadings, referring to STB Finance 

Docket No. 34630, must be filed with 

the Surface Transportation Board, 1925 

K Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20423–

0001. In addition, a copy of each 

pleading must be served on MRC’s 

representative: Kenneth W. Cotton, Wipf 

& Cotton Law Offices, LLC, 107 South 

Main Street, Wagner, SD 57380. 

The notice of exemption filed with 

respect to the MRC-South Dakota 

transaction in this docket is related to a 

notice of exemption concurrently filed 

in a related docket: STB Finance Docket 

No. 34630 (Sub-No. 1), Dakota Southern 

Railway Company—Trackage Rights 

Exemption—State of South Dakota and 

MRC Regional Railroad Authority. The 

notice of exemption filed in the related 

docket contemplates the operation of 

MRC’s Mitchell-Sioux City Line 

trackage rights by DSRC on behalf of 

MRC. 

MRC and DSRC have advised that the 

Mitchell-Sioux City Line, which is 

owned by the State, is now operated on 

behalf of the State by BNSF, pursuant to 

a 1986 Operating Agreement. MRC and 

DSRC have also advised: that, under the 

Operating Agreement, the State has the 

right to grant trackage rights on the 

Mitchell-Sioux City Line subject to 

certain BNSF consent; that, although the 

State has the right to grant trackage 

rights to MRC for operations by MRC’s 

third-party operator (DSRC), BNSF has 

not consented to the grant of those 

rights; and that the failure to provide 

this consent is now the subject of 

litigation between the State and BNSF 

in The Burlington Northern and Santa 

Fe Railway Company v. State of South 

Dakota, Case No. 04–470 (S.D. 6th 

Circuit). MRC and DSRC have further 

advised that they recognize that BNSF 

consent may have to be obtained, either 

voluntarily or through litigation, before 

DSRC can commence trackage rights 

operations on the Mitchell-Sioux City 

Line. MRC and DSRC have suggested, 

however, that, inasmuch as the Board’s 

authority respecting the notices filed in 

this docket and in the related docket is 

‘‘permissive’’ in nature, the filing of the 

notices in the two dockets is appropriate 

as a ‘‘prelude’’ to obtaining any 

necessary consent. 

By letter filed December 17, 2004, 

BNSF has advised that it has not given 

its consent, and does not intend to give 

its consent, to the third-party trackage 

rights operation contemplated by MRC 

and DSRC. BNSF has further advised 

that, in its view, the filings by MRC and 

DSRC in this docket and in the related 

docket are intended to improperly 

influence the pending state court 

litigation. BNSF has asked that the 

Board stress that issuance by the Board 

of the notices filed in this docket and in 

the related docket: does not constitute 

any finding by the Board concerning 

either the Board’s jurisdiction over these 

transactions or DSRC’s right to operate 

over the line without BNSF’s consent; 

and does not provide any basis for MRC 

or DSRC to claim that the Board has 

permitted DSRC to operate over the line 

in the absence of a final decision by the 

courts that DSRC has a legal right to 

conduct such operations. 

In view of the ongoing litigation 

concerning the right of the State to grant 

the trackage rights contemplated in this 

docket and in the related docket, it 

seems best to note that the Board has 

made no determination, one way or the 

other, concerning either the right of the 

State to grant these trackage rights 

without BNSF’s consent or the right of 

DSRC to operate over the line without 

BNSF’s consent. The contractual 

dispute respecting the scope of the 

rights retained by or granted to the State 

and/or BNSF under the 1986 Operating 

Agreement must be resolved in a court 

of competent jurisdiction. 

Board decisions and notices are 

available on its Web site at

‘‘http://www.stb.dot.gov.’’

Decided: December 21, 2004. 

By the Board, David M. Konschnik, 

Director, Office of Proceedings. 

Vernon A. Williams, 

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04–28336 Filed 12–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4915–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board 

[STB Finance Docket No. 34630 (Sub–No. 

1)] 

Dakota Southern Railway Company—

Trackage Rights Exemption—State of 

South Dakota and MRC Regional 

Railroad Authority 

The State of South Dakota (the State) 

and MRC Regional Railroad Authority 

(MRC) have agreed to grant overhead 

trackage rights to Dakota Southern 

Railway Company (DSRC) over a Stateowned line of railroad extending 

between milepost 654 near Mitchell, SD, 

and milepost 511.90 in Sioux City, IA, 

including such yard tracks, sidetracks, 

and connecting tracks (existing or to be 

constructed) as are reasonable: (a) To 

interchange railcars with The 

Burlington Northern and Santa Fe 

Railway Company (BNSF) and Dakota, 

Minnesota & Eastern Railroad 

Corporation at Mitchell; (b) to access the 

State-owned line extending westerly 

from Napa Junction, SD, to Platte, SD; 

and (c) to interchange railcars with 

BNSF, Union Pacific Railroad Company, 

and Canadian National Railway 

Company at Sioux City. The State and 

MRC have also agreed to grant to DSRC 

limited local trackage rights on the 

Mitchell-Sioux City Line: (i) to move 

loaded cars of corn, soybeans, and 

wheat originating at points on the 

DSRC-operated line between Mitchell 

and Kadoka, SD, and terminating at the 

Mitchell Elevator in Mitchell and the 

Beardsley Elevator in Beardsley, SD; 

and (ii) to move empty cars via the 

reverse route. The total distance of the 

trackage rights to be granted to DSRC is 

approximately 142.1 miles. The DSRC–

MRC transaction contemplated by the 

parties was scheduled to be 

consummated on or after December 17, 

2004. 

Under 49 U.S.C. 10502(g), the Board 

may not use its exemption authority to 

relieve a rail carrier of its statutory 

obligation to protect the interests of its 

employees. Section 11326(c), however, 

does not provide for labor protection for 

transactions under sections 11324 and 

11325 that involve only Class III 

carriers. Accordingly, the Board may not 

impose labor protective conditions here, 

because all of the carriers involved are 

Class III carriers. 

The notice of exemption filed in this 

docket was filed under 49 CFR 

1180.2(d)(7). If the notice contains false 

or misleading information, the 

exemption is void ab initio. Petitions to 

revoke the exemption under 49 U.S.C. 

10502(d) may be filed at any time. The 

filing of a petition to revoke does not 

automatically stay the transaction. 

An original and 10 copies of all 

pleadings, referring to STB Finance 

Docket No. 34630 (Sub-No. 1), must be 

filed with the Surface Transportation 

Board, 1925 K Street, NW., Washington, 

DC 20423–0001. In addition, a copy of 

each pleading must be served on DSRC’s 

President: George Alexander Huff, IV, 

Dakota Southern Railway Company, 408 

East Prospect Street, Chamberlain, SD 

57325. 

The notice of exemption filed with 

respect to the DSRC–MRC transaction in 

this docket is related to a notice of 

exemption concurrently filed in a 

related docket: STB Finance Docket No. 

34630, MRC Regional Railroad 

Authority—Trackage Rights 

Exemption—Lines of the State of South 

Dakota. The notice of exemption filed in 

the related docket contemplates MRC’s 

acquisition from the State of the 

trackage rights that MRC intends to 

grant to DSRC. 

MRC and DSRC have advised that the 

Mitchell-Sioux City Line, which is