### 46789 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 151 / Monday, August 6, 2012 / Notices

reasons which have led to the imposition of the final measures.

7. Articles 3.1 and 4.1 of the AD Agreement and Articles 15.1 and 16.1 of the SCM Agreement because China made a determination of injury using an improper definition of the domestic industry and as a result failed to base its determination on positive evidence and conduct an objective examination of the facts with respect to the domestic industry producing the subject imports.

8. Articles 3.1 and 3.2 of the AD Agreement and Articles 15.1 and 15.2 of the SCM Agreement because China’s analysis of the effects of imports under investigation on the price of the like product was not based upon an objective examination of the record and positive evidence.

9. Articles 3.1, 3.4, and 3.5 of the AD Agreement and Articles 15.1, 15.4, and 15.5 of the SCM Agreement because: (a) China’s analysis of the alleged causal link was not based upon an objective examination of the record and positive evidence, including an examination of
all relevant economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the industry, an examination of all relevant evidence before the authorities, or an examination of any known factors other than allegedly dumped and subsidized imports which at the same time were injuring the domestic industry, and (b) China failed to meet the requirement that injuries caused by
other factors must not be attributed to the allegedly dumped and subsidized imports.

10. Article 6.2 of the AD Agreement because China failed to grant interested parties a full opportunity for the defense
of their interests.

11. Article 1 of the AD Agreement as a consequence of the breaches of the AD Agreement described above.

12. Article 10 of the SCM Agreement as a consequence of the breaches of the SCM Agreement described above.

13. Article VI of the GATT 1994 as a consequence of the breaches of the AD and SCM Agreements described above.

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 www.regulations.gov, docket number USTR–2012–0016. If you are unable to provide submissions by www.regulations.gov, please contact Sandy McKinzy at (202) 395–9483 to arrange for an alternative method of

transmission.

To submit comments via www.regulations.gov, enter docket number USTR–2012–0016 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 ‘‘DocumentType’’ on the left side of the searchresults page, and click on the link entitled ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ (For further information on using the www.regulations.gov Web site, please consult the resources provided on the Web site by clicking on ‘‘How to Use
This Site’’ on the left side of the home page).

The www.regulations.gov Web site allows users to provide comments by filling in a ‘‘Type Comments’’ field, or by attaching a document using an ‘‘Upload File’’ field. It is expected that most comments will be provided in an
attached document. If a document is attached, it is sufficient to type ‘‘See attached’’ in the ‘‘Type Comments’’
field.

A person requesting that information,
contained in a comment that he submitted, 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. 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 at www.regulations.gov. The non-confidential summary will be placed in the docket and will be open to public inspection.

USTR may determine that information
or advice contained in a comment submitted, other than business confidential information, is 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. A non-confidential summary of the
confidential information must be
submitted at www.regulations.gov. The non-confidential summary will be placed in the docket and will be open to public inspection.

Pursuant to section 127(e) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR will maintain a docket on this dispute settlement proceeding, docket number USTR– 2012–0016, accessible to the public at www.regulations.gov.

The public file will include nonconfidential comments received by USTR from the public regarding the dispute. If a dispute settlement panel is convened, or in the event of an appeal from such a panel, the following
documents will be made available to the public at www.ustr.gov: the UnitedStates’ submissions, any nonconfidential submissions received from other participants in the dispute, and any non-confidential summaries of
submissions received from other participants in the dispute. In the event that a dispute settlement panel is convened, or in the event of an appeal from such a panel, the report of the panel, and, if applicable, the report of the Appellate Body, will also be
available on the Web site of the World Trade Organization at www.wto.org. Comments open to public inspection may be viewed at www.regulations.gov.

Bradford L. Ward, Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 2012–19154 Filed 8–3–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3290–F2–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Office of the Secretary**

**[Docket Number: OST–1995–177]**

**Agency Request for Renewal of a Previously Approved Collection:**  **Disclosure of Change-of-Gauge**
**Services**

**AGENCY :**  Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation.

**ACTION :**  Notice and request for

comments.

**SUMMARY :**  The Department of Transportation (DOT) invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew an information collection. We are required to publish this notice in the Federal Register by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13.

**DATES :**  Written comments should be submitted by October 5, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  You may submit comments (identified by DOT Docket Number


### 46790 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 151 / Monday, August 6, 2012 / Notices

OST–1995–177) through one of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251.

• Mail or Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building, Room W12– 140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal Holidays.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Barbara Snoden, (202) 366–4834, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs, Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

OMB Control Number: 2105–0538. Title: Disclosure of Code Sharing Arrangements and Long-Term Wet

Leases.

Type of Review: Renewal of an
information collection.

Abstract: Change-of-gauge service is scheduled passenger air transportation for which the operating carrier uses one single flight number even though passengers do not travel in the same aircraft from origin to destination but must change planes at an intermediatestop. In addition to one-flight-to-oneflight change-of-gauge services, changeof-gauge services can also involve aircraft changes between multiple flights on one side of the change point and one single flight on the other side. As with one-for-one change-of-gauge services, the carrier assigns a single flight number for the passenger’s entire itinerary even though the passenger changes planes, but in addition, the single flight to or from the exchange point itself has multiple numbers, one for each segment with which it connects
and one for the local market in which it operates.

The Department recognizes various public benefits that can flow from change-of-gauge services, such as a
lowered likelihood of missedconnections. However, although changeof-gauge flights can offer valuable consumer benefits, they can be confusing and misleading unless consumers are given reasonable and timely notice that they will be required to change planes during their journey.

Section 41712 of Title 49 of the U.S. code authorizes the Department to decide if a U.S. air carrier or foreign air carrier or ticket agent (including travel agents) has engaged in unfair or deceptive practices. Under this authority, the Department has adopted various regulations and policies to prevent unfair or deceptive practices or unfair methods of competition. The Department requires as a matter of policy that customers be given notice of aircraft changes for change-of-gauge flights. (See Department Order 89–1–31, page 5.) The Department proposed to adopt the extant regulations, however,

because it was not convinced that these rules and policies resulted in effective

disclosure all of the time.

Respondents: All U.S. air carriers, foreign air carriers, computer reservations systems (CRSs), and travel agents doing business in the United States, and the traveling public.

Number of Respondents: 16,000, excluding travelers.

Frequency: At 15 seconds per call and an average of 1.5 calls per trip, a total of 22.5 seconds per respondent or traveler, for the approximately 33% of estimated change-of-gauge itineraries that involve personal contact.

Total Annual Burden: Annual reporting burden for this data collection is estimated at 76,313 hours for all travel agents and airline ticket agents, based on 15 seconds per phone call and an average of 1.5 phone calls per trip, for the approximately 33% of estimated change-of-gauge itineraries that involve personal contact. Most of this data collection (third party notification) is accomplished through highly automated computerized systems.

Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of this information collection, including (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the Department’s performance; (b) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for the Department to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collection; and (d) ways

that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of the

collected information.

Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended;

and 49 CFR 1:48.

Issued in Washington, DC, on July 31,

2012.
Todd M. Homan,
Director, Office of Aviation Analysis.

[FR Doc. 2012–19111 Filed 8–3–12; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION** 

**Federal Highway Administration**

**Environmental Impact Statement: Dane County, WI** 

**AGENCY :**  Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

**SUMMARY :**  The purpose of this NOI is to update the notice issued in the Federal Register, Vol. 71, No. 112, Monday, June 12, 2006, Notices. The FHWA and WisDOT are updating this notice to advise the public that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is continuing to be prepared for proposed transportation improvements on the United States Highway (US) 51 corridor in the Madison Urban Area, Dane County, Wisconsin. The general location is between U.S. 12/18 (Madison South Beltline Highway) and Wisconsin State Highway (WIS) 19. The EIS is being prepared in conformance with 40 CFR 1500 and FHWA regulations. The NOI is being updated to reflect the current status of the environmental study, changes in contact information, and significant coordination efforts etc that have been completed since the revised NOI was issued in June 2006.

The project was placed on ‘‘Hold’’ by
the WisDOT in the Summer of 2010 because it was determined the type and cost of the improvements being
considered met the revised definition of a WisDOT ‘‘Major Project’’ requiring approval by the Wisconsin Legislature’s Transportation Projects Commission (TPC). In November 2011, the TPC approved the EIS study for the project as part of WisDOT’s Majors Program,
and efforts to continue with the EIS study were initiated in April 2012. The Project limits, Purpose & Need, and Range of Alternatives being evaluated have not changed

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Johnny Gerbitz, Field Operations Engineer, Federal Highway Administration, 525 Junction Rd, Suite 8000, Madison, Wisconsin, 53717–2157, Telephone: (608) 829–7500. You may also contact Rebecca Burkel, Director, Bureau of Technical Services, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, P.O. Box 7965, Madison, Wisconsin, 53707–7965: Telephone: (608) 516–6336.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 

Electronic Access

An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded by using a computer, modem and suitable