[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 123 (Wednesday, June 30, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34736-34737]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13944]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-ORD-2005-0530; FRL-10025-75-OMS]

Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and
Approval; Comment Request; Application for Reference and Equivalent
Method Determination (Renewal)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has submitted an
information collection request (ICR), Application for Reference and
Equivalent Method Determination (EPA ICR Number 0559.14, OMB Control
Number 2080-0005) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act.
This is a proposed extension of the ICR, which is currently approved
through June 20, 2021. Public comments were previously requested via
the Federal Register on February 12, 2021 during a 60-day comment
period. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public
comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its
estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before July 30, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
ORD-2005-0530 online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method)
or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460. EPA's
policy is that all comments received will be included in the public
docket without change including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to
be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
    Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed
information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information
collection by selecting ``Currently under 30-day Review--Open for
Public Comments'' or by using the search function.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert W. Vanderpool, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Methods and Characterization Division, Air
Quality Branch, Mail Drop D205-03, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711;
telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents, which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available
in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at
www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West,
Room

3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number
for the Docket Center is<PHONE_NUMBER>. For additional information about
EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Abstract: To determine compliance with the NAAQS, State air
monitoring agencies are required to use, in their air quality
monitoring networks, air monitoring methods that have been formally
designated by the EPA as either reference or equivalent methods under
EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 53. A manufacturer or seller of an air
monitoring method (e.g., an air monitoring sampler or analyzer) that
seeks to obtain such EPA designation of one of its products must carry
out prescribed tests of the method. The test results and other
information must then be submitted to the EPA in the form of an
application for a reference or equivalent method determination in
accordance with 40 CFR part 53. The EPA uses this information, under
the provisions of part 53, to determine whether the particular method
should be designated as either a reference or equivalent method. After
a method is designated, the applicant must also maintain records of the
names and mailing addresses of all ultimate purchasers of all analyzers
or samplers sold as designated methods under the method designation. If
the method designated is a method for fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) and coarse particulate matter (PM10-2.5),
the applicant must also submit a checklist signed by an ISO-certified
auditor to indicate that the samplers or analyzers sold as part of the
designated method are manufactured in an ISO 9001-registered facility.
Also, an applicant must submit a minor application to seek approval for
any proposed modifications to previously designated methods
    Form Numbers: None.
    Respondents/affected entities: Private manufacturers, states.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Required to obtain the benefit
of EPA designation under 40 CFR part 53.
    Estimated number of respondents; 22.
    Frequency of response: Annual.
    Total estimated burden: 7492 (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR
1320.03(b).
    Total estimated cost: $746,029 (per year), includes $152,152
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
    Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the hours in the
total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently
approved by OMB.

Courtney Kerwin,
Director, Regulatory Support Division.
[FR Doc. 2021-13944 Filed 6-29-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 55 (Thursday, March 23, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14848-14850]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05777]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 350, 365, 385, 386, 387, and 395

[Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0001]
RIN 2126-AB11

Carrier Safety Fitness Determination

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of withdrawal.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: FMCSA withdraws its January 21, 2016, notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM), which proposed a revised methodology for issuance of
a safety fitness determination (SFD) for motor carriers. The new
methodology would have determined when a motor carrier is not fit to
operate commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) in or affecting interstate
commerce based on the carrier's on-road safety data; an investigation;
or a combination of on-road safety data and investigation information.
FMCSA had recently announced that, rather than move to a final rule, a
Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) would be the next
step in the rulemaking process. However, after reviewing the record in
this matter, FMCSA withdraws the NPRM and cancels the plans to develop
a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The Agency must receive
the Correlation Study from the National Academies of Science, as
required by the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act,
assess whether and, if so, what corrective actions are advisable, and
complete additional analysis before determining whether further
rulemaking action is necessary to revise the safety fitness
determination process.

DATES: The NPRM ``Carrier Safety Fitness Determination,'' RIN 2126-
AB11, published on January 21, 2016 (81 FR 3562), is withdrawn as of
March 23, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Barbara Baker,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA office hours are from 7:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 21, 2016, FMCSA published an NPRM
proposing revisions to the current methodology for issuance of a SFD
for motor carriers as required by 49 U.S.C. 31144 (81 FR 3562).
    The essential elements of the proposed rule included determining
safety fitness from not only a comprehensive compliance investigation,
but also considering roadside inspections data. Adding roadside
inspections to the proposal included a minimum number of inspections
and violations to be used for the SFD, as well as providing failure
standards, and elimination of the current three-tier rating system
(i.e., satisfactory--conditional--unsatisfactory). Also, the NPRM
proposed revising the SFD appeals process and establishing
implementation and transition provisions for a final rule.
    The Agency received 153 initial comment period submissions and 17
reply comment period submissions in response to the NPRM. After
considering the comments, FMCSA announced that, rather than move to a
final rule, a SNPRM would be the next step in the rulemaking
process.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``FMCSA Sets Schedule for Safety Fitness Determination--
Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,'' January 12, 2017, at
https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/newsroom/fmcsa-sets-schedule-safety-fitness-determination-supplemental-notice-proposed-rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

NPRM Comments Generally

Elimination of Three Tier Rating System and Scope of FMCSA Rating
Obligation

    In the NPRM, FMCSA proposed to eliminate the current three ratings
of satisfactory, conditional and unsatisfactory. Instead, the Agency
proposed only one rating of ``unfit.'' Commenters including John
Brannum, C.H. Robinson, Greyhound Lines, Advocates for Highway and Auto
Safety (Advocates), Road Safe America, Truck Safety Coalition and the
American Association for Justice supported the termination of the
three-tier rating system. These commenters supported the fact that this
change would not allow conditional carriers to operate without
improving their operations and would make it much clearer for the
shipping community to determine which carriers may or may not operate.
Specifically, C. H. Robinson noted it has long recommended a two-tiered
structure that more clearly signals to shippers, and other industry
stakeholders, which carriers should not be hired due to safety
concerns. It said all stakeholders seek clear direction from FMCSA, and
FMCSA desires stakeholders to properly use data collected by FMCSA.
David Gee, an owner of a motor carrier and a broker, commented that the
Agency should use the rulemaking to affirm that the shipper and broker
community can rely upon the agency's ultimate safety fitness
determination in making carrier selections free from state law
negligence suits. Greyhound stated it agrees that the change will do
away with the misperception that a ``satisfactory'' rating is a sign of
operational approval.
    However, commenters including the National Motor Freight Traffic
Association (NMFTA), Minnesota Trucking Association, School Bus, Inc.,
National School Transportation Association, and the American Trucking
Associations, Inc. (ATA), opposed the proposed change. ATA wrote that
the proposal to remove the term ``safety rating'' may have negative,
perhaps unanticipated, consequences. Specifically, ATA explained that
there will be no means to distinguish fleets whose safety management
controls have been verified during compliance reviews (i.e. those
labeled

``Satisfactory'') from fleets that have not been reviewed. Second,
there will be no means to separate fleets with documented deficiencies
(i.e. those labeled ``Conditional'') from all other fleets not labeled
``Unfit.'' In addition to the inequity this creates for fleets that
have earned a ``Satisfactory'' rating, ATA believes it does a
disservice to third parties and the general public who should be
alerted to the fleets with documented problems. ATA also proposed that
FMCSA should allow fleets that have been investigated to maintain their
satisfactory ratings; this idea was echoed by NMFTA and the Intermodal
Association of North America.
    Further, ATA suggested that FMCSA consider three labels: Assessed--
Unfit, Assessed--Not Unfit, and Not Assessed. ATA noted that a tiered
naming convention such as this could help eliminate confusion and leave
third parties better informed.
    Some commenters also asserted that FMCSA, contrary to the position
expressed in the NPRM, had a statutory duty to determine the fitness of
all motor carriers, not just those that are unfit. These commenters
claimed that the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 31144 require such actions.

Failure Standards

    Advocates expressed concern that, as proposed, one of the
assessment methods would only reach the worst 1 percent or 4 percent of
carriers, depending on the various categories. Advocates believe that
the failure standards were ``artificially selected'' based on the
Agency's resources ``instead of making safety the highest priority.''
Advocates recommended that the SFD process should identify each and
every motor carrier that is unsafe and needs to be determined
``Unfit.'' Contrarily, to support the Agency's proposal, the
International Brotherhood of Teamsters offered that the Agency should
only be expected to determine the safety fitness of as many carriers as
possible, given existing resources.
    Advocates further commented that if the agency plans to use the
absolute performance measure based on a snapshot of data to establish
the thresholds, there must be a plan to continually update this data to
encourage improvements in safety on par with increases in on-road
safety, both within the industry and on-road in general.
    Knight Transportation agreed with the Agency's proposal that
carrier fitness should not be based on relative peer performance. NMFTA
added that the assignment of absolute failure standards for the
individual categories would provide a carrier with a better method to
track and assess its safety compliance based on the roadside
inspections, and sooner identify an area which might require additional
attention. The International Brotherhood of Teamsters noted that, under
the proposed methodology, carriers will benefit from being judged
solely on their own performance rather than other companies' safety
performance. Intermodal Association of North America also believes that
moving to an absolute measurement approach is an improved method over
the existing, relative measurements of the Compliance, Safety, and
Accountability program.
    The American Bus Association questioned how FMCSA can issue a
regulatory proposal to change the long standing safety fitness
determination process for motor carriers, without providing the failure
standards in the NPRM.
    C.H. Robinson commended the decision to move away from a percentile
ranking and establish firm, fixed safety data targets as represented by
the ``absolute measure'' thresholds that began to be published in
August 2014. C.H. Robinson found, however, that FMCSA has not educated
stakeholders well about how absolute measures are formulated and
specifically why absolute measures vary greatly across peer groups.
C.H. Robinson suggests FMCSA fully explain absolute measures to
shippers, brokers and other stakeholders, to reduce the risk that small
business carriers will be adversely impacted. C.H. Robinson believes
the potential adverse impact to small carriers regarding this confusion
is significant.
    In addition, the Alliance for Safe, Efficient and Competitive Truck
Transportation (ASCETT) noted that, with declining inspection rates,
continued evidence of enforcement anomalies, electronic logging devices
(ELDs) and speed limiters, a new NPRM and opportunity for notice and
comment is needed. ASCETT further commented that the Agency will have
to recalibrate the failure measures through rulemaking to justify new
enforcement thresholds. However, ASCETT questioned if the
recalibrations would be worth the expense.

Criticism of Data Analysis Period (2011)

    Some commenters noted that applying the methodologies to more
current data would change the population of carriers that would be
identified as proposed unfit. Commenters noted that the number of
inspections has decreased since 2011. Additionally, some commenters
pointed out that by the end of 2017, ELDs will be mandatory. This
change will alter the violations in the Hours of Service category.
Also, these commenters stated that if speed limiters become mandated
for heavy vehicles this would result in changes to violations.

Comments on Costs

    Some commenters alleged that some costs associated with declaring
additional carriers ``unfit'' were not considered in the economic
analysis. According to these commenters, other costs to consider in
addition to those currently in the economic analysis include: Impacts
to non-driver staff; costs for improving performance to come into
compliance (e.g., attorney, consultant, and employee training costs);
costs for administrative appeals; damage to business reputation and
creditworthiness; lost sales; opportunity costs of time away from the
business; lost revenue to suppliers (such as fuel suppliers); lost
capital utilization if vehicles are taken off the market unnecessarily;
defaults on loans; repossession of equipment; and personal bankruptcy
of owners.

Impacts on Small Businesses

    Three commenters suggested that FMCSA should consider changes to
the proposed rule for small entities, including retaining the
``corrective action plan'' provision in the current regulation. In
addition, some commenters recommended that FMCSA allow for reduced
reporting requirements and timetables for small carriers.

Letter to the Secretary of Transportation Urging Withdrawal

    On February 15, 2017, a letter from 62 national and regional
organizations of motor carriers urged Secretary of Transportation
Elaine L. Chao to withdraw the NPRM; a copy of the letter has been
added to the docket.
    The organizations argued that the proposed rule utilizes SMS data
and methodologies, which Congress directed the National Academies of
Science to review in the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act,
Public Law 114-94 (FAST Act) (Dec. 4, 2015). The National Academies of
Science final report is expected in June 2017. The organizations
representing motor property and passenger carriers believe it is ill-
advised to develop a new SFD system until the report is received and
any necessary reforms are made through corrective actions to the
foundational data and methodologies that support

safety fitness determinations. While the petitioners support the goal
of an easily understandable, rational SFD system, they believe the NPRM
should be withdrawn at this time.

FMCSA Decision To Withdraw the NPRM

    Based on the current record, including comments received in
response to the NPRM and the February 2017 correspondence to Secretary
Chao, FMCSA has decided to withdraw the January 2016 NPRM and,
accordingly, cancels the plans to develop a SNPRM as announced by the
Agency on January 12, 2017. If FMCSA determines changes to the safety
fitness determination process are still necessary and advisable in the
future, a new rulemaking would be initiated that will incorporate any
appropriate recommendations from the National Academies of Science and
the comments received through this rulemaking. The NPRM concerning
motor carrier safety fitness determinations is withdrawn.

    Issued under the authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.87 on: March
17, 2017.
Daphne Y. Jefferson,
Deputy Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2017-05777 Filed 3-22-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 20, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43090-43093]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17875]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[Docket Number USCG-2019-0231]
RIN 1625-AA08

Special Local Regulation; Kaskaskia River MM 10-11, Evansville,
IL

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing to establish temporary special
local regulations for certain waters of the Kaskaskia River. This
action is necessary to provide for the safety of life near Evansville,
IL on the Kaskaskia River from mile marker 10 to mile marker 11 during
drag boat races on September 14 and 15, 2019. This proposed rulemaking
would prohibit persons and vessels from being in the regulated area
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi
River or a designated representative. We invite your comments on this
proposed rulemaking.

DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast
Guard on or before September 4, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG-
2019-0231 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for
Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further
instructions on submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this
proposed rulemaking, call or email Lieutenant Commander Christian
Barger, Waterways Management Division, Sector Upper Mississippi River,
U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COTP Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi River
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background, Purpose, and Legal Basis

    The Kentucky Drag Boat Association notified the Coast Guard that it
would be conducting drag boat races from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on September
14 and 15, 2019. The drag boat races will take place between Mile
Marker (MM) 10 and MM 11 on the Kaskaskia River in Evansville, IL. The
Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi River (COTP) has
determined that potential hazards associated with the drag boat races
would be a safety concern for anyone within a one-mile range of the
race course area.
    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of vessels
and the navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled event.
The Coast Guard is proposing this rulemaking under authority in 46
U.S.C. 70041 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1233).
    The Coast Guard is issuing this notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) with a 15-day prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant
to section (b)(3) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C.
553). This provision authorizes an agency to publish a rule in less
than 30 days before its effective date for ``good cause found and
published with the rule.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), the Coast Guard
finds that good cause exists for publishing this NPRM with a 15-day
comment period because it is impractical to provide a 30-day comment
period. This proposed special local regulation is necessary to ensure
the safety of vessels and persons during the marine events. It is
impracticable to publish an NPRM with a 30-day comment period because
we must establish this regulated area by September 14, 2019. A 15-day
comment period would allow the Coast Guard to provide for public notice
and comment, but also update the proposed regulation soon enough that
the length of the notice and comment period does not compromise public
safety.

III. Discussion of Proposed Rule

    The COTP is proposing to establish a Special Local Regulation on
the Kaskaskia River located near Evansville, IL from Mile Marker (MM)
10 to MM 11 to all vessel traffic, except for these vessels involved in
the marine event, from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on September 14 and 15, 2019.
The duration of the closure is intended to ensure the safety of vessels
and these navigable waters before, during, and after the scheduled
event. No vessel or person would be permitted to enter the regulated
area without obtaining permission from the COTP or a designated
representative. A designated representative may be a Patrol Commander
(PATCOM). The PATCOM may be aboard either a Coast Guard or Coast Guard
Auxiliary vessel. The PATCOM may be contacted on Channel 16 VHF-FM
(156.8 MHz) by the call sign ``PATCOM'' or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    All persons and vessels not registered with the sponsor as
participants or official patrol vessels are considered spectators. The
``official patrol vessels'' consist of any Coast Guard, state, or local
law enforcement and sponsor provided vessels assigned or approved by
the COTP or a designated representative to patrol the regulated area.
    Spectator vessels desiring to transit the regulated area may do so
only with prior approval of the COTP or a designated representative and
when so directed by that officer will be operated at a minimum safe
navigation speed in a manner which will not endanger participants in
the regulated area or any other vessels.
    No spectator vessel shall anchor, block, loiter, or impede the
through transit of participants or official patrol vessels in the
regulated area during the effective dates and times, unless cleared for
entry by or through an official patrol vessel.
    Spectator vessels may anchor outside the regulated area, but may
not anchor in, block, or loiter in a navigable channel. Spectator
vessels may be moored to a waterfront facility within the regulated
area in such a way that they shall not interfere with the progress of
the event. Such mooring must be complete at least 30 minutes prior to
the establishment of the regulated area and remain moored through the
duration of the event.
    The COTP or a designated representative may forbid and control the
movement of all vessels in the regulated area. When hailed or signaled
by an official patrol vessel, a vessel shall come to an immediate stop
and comply with the directions given. Failure to do so may result in
expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply, or both.
    The COTP or a designated representative may terminate the event or
the operation of any vessel at any time it is deemed necessary for the
protection of life or property.
    The COTP or a designated representative will terminate enforcement
of the special local regulations at the conclusion of the event.
    The regulatory text we are proposing appears at the end of this
document.

IV. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes
and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our
analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and
we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This NPRM has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location
and duration for the special local regulation. This special local
regulation covers only the one-mile stretch of the Kaskaskia River near
Evansville, IL on which the drag boat race will take place. The
duration of this event is only two days, encompassing 10 hours each
day. Moreover, the Coast Guard will publish details of this event via
the Local Notice to Mariners (LNMs), Broadcast Notice to Mariners
(BNM), and/or Marine Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs) as
appropriate.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
temporary regulated area may be small entities, for the reasons stated
in section IV.A above, this proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on any vessel owner or operator.
    If you think that your business, organization, or governmental
jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have
a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see
ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what
degree this rule would economically affect it.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this proposed rule. If the rule would affect
your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you
have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that
question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action
of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This proposed rule would not call for a new collection of
information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132
(Federalism), if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and
have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under
Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments) because it would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or
Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule would not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland
Security Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1
(series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have made
a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of
actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves the
establishment of special local regulation for a 10-hour period that
would prohibit entry into the regulated area for two days. Normally
such actions are categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L 60(a) in Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental
Planning Implementing Procedures 5090.1. A preliminary Record of
Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available
in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the discovery of a significant
environmental impact from this proposed rule.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places, or vessels.

V. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking,
and will consider all comments and material received during the comment
period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If
you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this
rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which
each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation.
    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, visit https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice.
    Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket,
and all public comments, will be in our online docket at https://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that website's
instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up
for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a
final rule is published.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

    Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, and Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is
proposing to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  46 U.S.C. 70041; 33 CFR 1.05-1.

0
2. Add Sec.  100.T08-0231 to read as follows:

Sec.  100.T08-0231   Special Local Regulation; Kaskaskia River MM 10-
11, Evansville, IL.

    (a) Location. The following area is a special local regulation: All
navigable waters of the Kaskaskia River between mile markers (MM) 10
and MM 11 in Evansville, IL.
    (b) Effective period. This section is effective each day from 8
a.m. through 6 p.m. on September 14 and 15, 2019.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  100.35, entry into this regulated area is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi River

(COTP) or a designated representative. A designated representative may
be a Patrol Commander (PATCOM). The PATCOM may be aboard either a Coast
Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel. The PATCOM may be contacted on
Channel 16 VHF-FM (156.8 MHz) by the call sign ``PATCOM'' or by calling
(314) 269-2332.
    (2) All persons and vessels not registered with the sponsor as
participants or official patrol vessels are considered spectators. The
``official patrol vessels'' consist of any Coast Guard, state, or local
law enforcement and sponsor provided vessels assigned or approved by
the COTP or a designated representative to patrol the regulated area.
    (3) Spectator vessels desiring to transit the regulated area may do
so only with prior approval of the COTP or a designated representative
and when so directed by that officer will be operated at a minimum safe
navigation speed in a manner which will not endanger participants in
the regulated area or any other vessels.
    (4) No spectator vessel shall anchor, block, loiter, or impede the
through transit of participants or official patrol vessels in the
regulated area during the effective dates and times, unless cleared for
entry by or through an official patrol vessel.
    (5) Spectator vessels may anchor outside the regulated area, but
may not anchor in, block, or loiter in a navigable channel. Spectator
vessels may be moored to a waterfront facility within the regulated
area in such a way that they shall not interfere with the progress of
the event. Such mooring must be complete at least 30 minutes prior to
the establishment of the regulated area and remain moored through the
duration of the event.
    (6) The COTP or a designated representative may forbid and control
the movement of all vessels in the regulated area. When hailed or
signaled by an official patrol vessel, a vessel shall come to an
immediate stop and comply with the directions given. Failure to do so
may result in expulsion from the area, citation for failure to comply,
or both.
    (7) The COTP or a designated representative may terminate the event
or the operation of any vessel at any time it is deemed necessary for
the protection of life or property.
    (8) The COTP or a designated representative will terminate
enforcement of the special local regulations at the conclusion of the
event.
    (d) Information broadcasts. The COTP or a designated representative
will inform the public of the enforcement times and date for this
regulated area through Local Notice to Mariners (LNMs), Broadcast
Notice to Mariners (BNM), and/or Marine Safety Information Bulletins
(MSIBs) as appropriate.

    Dated: August 14, 2019.
S.A. Stoermer,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sector Upper Mississippi
River.
[FR Doc. 2019-17875 Filed 8-19-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: June 28, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 123)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 36516-36522]
[DOCID:fr28jn10-4]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Part 744

[Docket No. 100429205-0248-01]
RIN 0694-AE92

Addition and Removal of Certain Persons on the Entity List:
Addition of Persons Acting Contrary to the National Security or Foreign
Policy Interests of the United States; Removal of Person Based on
Removal Request

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This rule amends the Export Administration Regulations (EAR)
by adding twenty-four persons to the Entity List (Supplement No. 4 to
Part 744) on the basis of Section 744.11 of the EAR. The persons who
are added to the Entity List have been determined by the U.S.
Government to be acting contrary to the national security or foreign
policy interests of the United States. These persons will be listed
under the following nine destinations on the Entity List: Belarus,
China, Hong Kong, Iran, Malaysia, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa and
United Kingdom.
    This rule also removes one person located in Hong Kong from the
Entity List. This person is being removed from the Entity List as a
result of a request for removal submitted by that person, a review of
information provided in the removal request in accordance with Section
744.16 (Procedure for requesting removal or modification of an Entity
List entity), and further review conducted by the End-User Review
Committee's (ERC) member agencies.
    The Entity List provides notice to the public that certain exports,
reexports, and transfers (in-country) to parties identified on the
Entity List require a license from the Bureau of Industry and Security
(BIS) and that availability of license exceptions in such transactions
is limited.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective June 28, 2010. Although
there is no formal comment period, public comments on this regulation
are welcome on a continuing basis.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 0694-AE92, by any
of the following methods:
    E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Include ``RIN 0694-AE92'' in
the subject line of the message.
    Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Please alert the Regulatory Policy Division,
by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>, if you are faxing comments.
    Mail or Hand Delivery/Courier: Timothy Mooney, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, Regulatory Policy Division,
14th St. & Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 2705, Washington, DC 20230,
Attn: RIN 0694-AE92.
    Send comments regarding the collection of information associated
with this rule, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to
Jasmeet K. Seehra, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), by e-mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by fax to<PHONE_NUMBER>; and to
the Regulatory Policy Division, Bureau of Industry and Security,
Department of Commerce, 14th St. & Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 2705,
Washington, DC 20230. Comments on this collection of information should
be submitted separately from comments on the final rule (i.e. RIN 0694-
AE92)--all comments on the latter should be submitted by one of the
three methods outlined above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Nies-Vogel, Chairman, End-User
Review Committee, Office of the Assistant Secretary, Export
Administration, Bureau of Industry and Security, Department of
Commerce, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, E-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Entity List provides notice to the public that certain exports,
reexports, and transfers (in-country) to parties identified on the
Entity List require a license from the Bureau of Industry and Security
(BIS) and that availability of license exceptions in such transactions
is limited. Persons are placed on the Entity List on the basis of
criteria set forth in certain sections of part 744 (Control Policy:
End-User and End-Use Based) of the EAR.
    The End-User Review Committee (ERC), composed of representatives of
the Departments of Commerce (Chair), State, Defense, Energy and, where
appropriate, the Treasury, makes all decisions regarding additions to,
removals from or changes to the Entity List. The ERC makes all
decisions to add an entry to the Entity List by majority vote and all
decisions to remove or modify an entry by unanimous vote.

ERC Entity List Decisions

Additions to the Entity List

    The ERC made a determination to add twenty-four persons under
twenty-five entries to the Entity List on the basis of Section 744.11
(License Requirements that Apply to Entities Acting Contrary to the
National Security or Foreign Policy Interests of the United States) of
the EAR. The twenty-five entries added to the Entity List consist of
three persons in Belarus, three persons in China, two persons in Hong
Kong, three persons in Iran, four persons in Malaysia, two persons in
New Zealand, two persons in Norway, five persons in South Africa, and
one person in the United Kingdom. The twenty-fifth entry is to account
for one person who has addresses in both Norway and South Africa.
    The ERC reviewed Section 744.11(b) (Criteria for revising the
Entity List) in making the determination to add these persons to the
Entity List. Under that paragraph, entities for which there is
reasonable cause to believe, based on specific and articulable facts,
that have been involved, are involved, or pose a significant risk of
being or becoming involved in activities that are contrary to the
national security or foreign policy interests of the United States and
those acting on behalf of such entities may be added to the Entity List
pursuant to Section 744.11. Paragraphs (b)(1)-(b)(5) include an
illustrative list of activities that could be contrary to the national
security or foreign policy interests of the United States. The persons
being added to the Entity List under this rule have been determined by
the ERC to be involved in activities that could be contrary to the
national security or foreign policy interests of the United States.
Examples of the specific activities these persons were involved with
that are contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests
of the United States pursuant to Section 744.11 are, as follows:
    Belmicrosystems Research and Design Center, SOE Semiconductor
Devices Factory, Vasili Kuntsevich and Hamid Reza Simchi are being
added based on evidence that they reexported U.S.-origin read-out
integrated circuit (ROIC) wafers to Electronic Components Industries
(ECI) of Iran.
    Fang Yu and Xi'an Xiangyu Aviation Technology Group are being added
due to their role in the illegal export to China of Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle (UAV) autopilots controlled for national security reasons.
    OnTime Electronics Technology Company and Tam Wai Tak, a.k.a.,
Thomsom Tam, are being added due to their involvement in the diversion
of controlled U.S.-origin items through Hong Kong to China. On June 5,
2008, OnTime Electronics Technology Company and Tam Wai Tak were
indicted in the Southern District of Florida for conspiracy and
violations of the Arms Export Control Act and the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act.
    Fadjr Marine Industries, a.k.a., SADAF; Tadbir Sanaat Sharif
Technology Development Center (TSS); Austral Aero-Marine Corp. Sdn Bhd;
Austral Aviation Corp.; Jimmy Tok; Mok Chin Fan, a.k.a., Chong Chen
Fah; Leigh Michau; Q-SPD (Q-Marine International Ltd.); Gunther
Migeotte; Icarus Design AS; Icarus Marine (Pty) Ltd.; Ralph Brucher;
Scavenger Manufacturing (Pty) Ltd.; Shawn Hugo De Villiers; and Ad Hoc
Marine Designs Ltd., are being added for illegally reexporting the
Bradstone Challenger, a vessel that was subject to the EAR, to Iran for
intended use by the Iranian

Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy and for providing technical
assistance on Iranian naval projects.
    In addition, the Department of Commerce has reason to believe that
Chinese electro-optics procurement firm Toptics, Inc. has procured U.S.
origin uncooled thermal imaging cameras and may have reexported these
items to Iran.
    This rule implements the decision of the ERC to add twenty-four
persons under twenty-five entries to the Entity List on the basis of
Section 744.11 of the EAR. For all of the twenty-four persons under
twenty-five entries added to the Entity List, the ERC specifies a
license requirement for all items subject to the EAR and establishes a
license application review policy of a presumption of denial. A BIS
license is required for the export, reexport or transfer (in-country)
of any item subject to the EAR to any of the persons listed above and
described below in further detail, including any transaction in which
any of the listed persons will act as purchaser, intermediate
consignee, ultimate consignee, or end-user of the items. This listing
of these persons also prohibits the use of license exceptions (see part
740 of the EAR) for exports, reexports and transfers (in-country) of
items subject to the EAR involving such persons.
    Specifically, this rule adds the following twenty-four persons
under twenty-five entries to the Entity List:
BELARUS
(1) Belmicrosystems Research and Design Center, Office 313, 12
Korzhenevsky Street, 20108 Minsk, Republic of Belarus;
(2) SOE Semiconductor Devices Factory, Office 313, 12 Korzhenevsky
Street, 20108 Minsk, Republic of Belarus; and
(3) Vasili Kuntsevich, Office 313, 12 Korzhenevsky Street, 20108 Minsk,
Republic of Belarus.
CHINA
(1) Fang Yu, 16 Gaoxin 4th Road, Xian High Tech Industrial Development
Zone, Xian, China;
(2) Toptics, Inc., Chuangye Building 7/1F, 1197 Bin'An Road, Binjiang,
Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310052, China; and
(3) Xi'an Xiangyu Aviation Technology Group, a.k.a., Xi'an Xiangyu
Aviation Technology Company, 16 Gaoxin 4th Road, Xian High Tech
Industrial Development Zone, Xian, China.
HONG KONG
(1) OnTime Electronics Technology Company, Room 609-610 6/F Boss
Commercial Center, 28 Ferry Street, Jordon, Kowloon, Hong Kong; and
(2) Tam Wai Tak, a.k.a., Thomsom Tam, Room 609-610 6/F, Boss Commercial
Center, 28 Ferry Street, Jordon, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
IRAN
(1) Fadjr Marine Industries, a.k.a., SADAF, 169 Malekloo Ave, Farjam
Ave, Tehran Pars, Tehran, Iran;
(2) Hamid Reza Simchi, P.O. Box 19575-354, Tehran, Iran; and
(3) Tadbir Sanaat Sharif Technology Development Center (TSS), First
Floor, No. 25 Shahid Siadat Boulevard, North Zanjan Street,Yadegar Emam
Highway, Tehran, Iran.
MALAYSIA
(1) Austral Aero-Marine Corp. Sdn Bhd, 10A Jalan 2/137B, Resource
Industrial Centre Off Jalan Kelang Lama 58000, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia;
(2) Austral Aviation Corp., 10A Jalan 2/137B, Resource Industrial
Centre Off Jalan Kelang Lama 58000, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia;
(3) Jimmy Tok, 10A Jalan 2/137B, Resource Industrial Centre Off Jalan
Kelang Lama 58000, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; and
(4) Mok Chin Fan, a.k.a., Chong Chen Fah, 10A Jalan 2/137B, Resource
Industrial Centre Off Jalan Kelang Lama 58000, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
NEW ZEALAND
(1) Leigh Michau, P.O. Box 34-881, Birkenhead, Auckland, New Zealand;
and
(2) Q-SPD (Q-Marine International Ltd.), P.O. Box 34-881, Birkenhead,
Auckland, New Zealand.
NORWAY
(1) Gunther Migeotte, Titangata 1, N-1630 Gamle, Fredrikstad, Norway;
and H. Evjes vei 8A, Gressvik, Norway; and Holsneset 19, 6030 Langevag,
Norway; and Titangata 1, 1630 Fredrikstad, Norway (See alternate
address under South Africa); and
(2) Icarus Design AS, Titangata 1 N-1630 Gamle, Fredrikstad, Norway.
SOUTH AFRICA
(1) Gunther Migeotte, 1 River Street, Rosebank, Cape Town, 7700, South
Africa; and P.O. Box 36623, Menlo Park, 0102, South Africa; and 16 Manu
Rua, 262 Sprite Avenue, Faerie Glen, 0081, South Africa (See alternate
address under Norway);
(2) Icarus Marine (Pty) Ltd., 1 River Street, Rosebank, Cape Town,
South Africa;
(3) Ralph Brucher, P.O. Box 9523, Centurion 0046, South Africa;
(4) Scavenger Manufacturing (Pty) Ltd., P.O. Box 288, Silverton,
Pretoria 0127, South Africa; and
(5) Shawn Hugo De Villiers, 1 River Street, Rosebank, Cape Town 7700,
South Africa; and 39 Myburgii Street, Somerset West, Cape Town, South
Africa.
UNITED KINGDOM
(1) Ad Hoc Marine Designs Ltd., 38 Buckland Gardens, Ryde Isle of Wight
PO 33 3AG United Kingdom.

Removal From the Entity List

    The ERC also made a determination to remove one person, Asia Link,
located in Hong Kong, as a result of Asia Link's request for removal
from the Entity List. Based upon the review of the information provided
in the removal request in accordance with Section 744.16 (Procedure for
requesting removal or modification of an Entity List entity), and
further review that was conducted by the ERC's member agencies, the ERC
determined that Asia Link should be removed from the Entity List.
    The ERC decision to remove Asia Link took into account Asia Link's
cooperation with the U.S. Government, as well as Asia Link's assurances
of future compliance with the EAR. In accordance with Section
744.16(c), the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export Administration has
sent written notification to Asia Link informing this entity of the
ERC's decision to remove it from the Entity List. This final rule
implements the decision to remove this one Hong Kong person from the
Entity List.
    Specifically, this rule removes the following person from the
Entity List:
HONG KONG
(1) Asia Link, Flat 1022, 10/F, No. 1 Hung To Rd., Kwun Tong, Kowloon,
Hong Kong.

    The removal of Asia Link from the Entity List (from Hong Kong, as
described above) eliminates the existing license requirement in
Supplement No. 4 to part 744 for exports, reexports and transfers (in-
country) to this person. However, the removal of Asia Link from the
Entity List does not relieve persons of other obligations under part
744 of the EAR or under other parts of the EAR. Neither the removal of
a person from the Entity List nor the removal of Entity List-based
license requirements relieves persons of their obligations

under General Prohibition 5 in Section 736.2(b)(5) of the EAR, which
provides that, ``you may not, without a license, knowingly export or
reexport any item subject to the EAR to an end-user or end-use that is
prohibited by part 744 of the EAR.'' Nor do such removals relieve
persons of their obligation to apply for export, reexport or in-country
transfer licenses required by other provisions of the EAR. BIS strongly
urges the use of Supplement No. 3 to part 732 of the EAR, ``BIS's `Know
Your Customer' Guidance and Red Flags,'' when persons are involved in
transactions that are subject to the EAR.

Savings Clause

    Shipments of items removed from eligibility for a License Exception
or export or reexport without a license (NLR) as a result of this
regulatory action that were on dock for loading, on lighter, laden
aboard an exporting or reexporting carrier, or en route aboard a
carrier to a port of export or reexport, on June 28, 2010, pursuant to
actual orders for export or reexport to a foreign destination, may
proceed to that destination under the previous eligibility for a
License Exception or export or reexport without a license (NLR) so long
as they are exported or reexported before July 13, 2010. Any such items
not actually exported or reexported before midnight, on July 13, 2010,
require a license in accordance with this rule.
    Although the Export Administration Act expired on August 20, 2001,
the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, 3 CFR,
2001 Comp., p. 783 (2002), as extended by the Notice of August 13,
2009, 74 FR 41325 (August 14, 2009), has continued the Export
Administration Regulations in effect under the International Emergency
Economic Powers Act.

Rulemaking Requirements

    1. This rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes
of Executive Order 12866.
    2. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is
required to respond to nor be subject to a penalty for failure to
comply with a collection of information, subject to the requirements of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA),
unless that collection of information displays a currently valid Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number. This regulation involves
collections previously approved by the OMB under control numbers 0694-
0088, ``Multi-Purpose Application,'' which carries a burden hour
estimate of 58 minutes to prepare and submit form BIS-748.
Miscellaneous and recordkeeping activities account for 12 minutes per
submission. Total burden hours associated with the Paperwork Reduction
Act and Office and Management and Budget control number 0694-0088 are
expected to increase slightly as a result of this rule.
    3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined in Executive Order 13132.
    4. The provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, the opportunity for
public participation, and a delay in effective date, are inapplicable
because this regulation involves a military or foreign affairs function
of the United States. (See 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). BIS implements this
rule to prevent items from being exported, reexported or transferred
(in country) to the persons being added to the Entity List. If this
rule were delayed to allow for notice and comment and a delay in
effective date, then entities being added to the Entity List by this
action would continue to be able to receive items without a license and
to conduct activities contrary to the national security or foreign
policy interests of the United States. Further, no other law requires
that a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public
comment be given for this rule. Because a notice of proposed rulemaking
and an opportunity for public comment are not required to be given for
this rule by 5 U.S.C. 553, or by any other law, the analytical
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,
are not applicable.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 744

    Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Terrorism.

0
Accordingly, part 744 of the Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR
parts 730-774) is amended as follows:

PART 744--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 744 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22
U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 179;
E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12938, 59
FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 950; E.O. 12947, 60 FR 5079, 3 CFR,
1995 Comp., p. 356; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p.
228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 208; E.O. 13222,
66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 13224, 66 FR 49079, 3
CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 786; Notice of August 13, 2009, 74 FR 41325
(August 14, 2009); Notice of November 6, 2009, 74 FR 58187 (November
10, 2009).

0
2. Supplement No. 4 to part 744 is amended:
0
(a) By adding, in alphabetical order, the destination of Belarus under
the Country column and three Belarusian entities;
0
(b) By adding under China, People's Republic of, in alphabetical order,
three Chinese entities;
0
(c) By removing under Hong Kong, this one Hong Kong entity ``Asia Link,
Flat 1022, 10/F, No. 1 Hung To Rd., Kwun Tong, Kowloon, Hong Kong'';
0
(d) By adding under Hong Kong, in alphabetical order, two Hong Kong
entities;
0
(e) By adding under Iran, in alphabetical order, three Iranian
entities;
0
(f) By adding under Malaysia, in alphabetical order, four Malaysian
entities;
0
(g) By adding, in alphabetical order, the destination of New Zealand
under the Country column and two New Zealanders entities;
0
(h) By adding, in alphabetical order, the destination of Norway under
the Country column and two Norwegian entities;
0
(i) By adding, in alphabetical order, the destination of South Africa
under the Country column and five South African entities; and
0
(j) By adding under United Kingdom, in alphabetical order, one British
entity.
    The additions read as follows:

                                    Supplement No. 4 to Part 744--Entity List
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              License         License review    Federal Register
            Country                      Entity             requirement           policy            citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
BELARUS........................  Belmicrosystems         For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Research and Design     subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Center, Office 313,     EAR. (See 744.11                      28/10.
                                  12 Korzhenevsky         of the EAR).
                                  Street, 20108 Minsk,
                                  Republic of Belarus.
                                 SOE Semiconductor       For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Devices Factory,        subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER ] 6/
                                  Office 313, 12          EAR. (See 744.11                      28/10.
                                  Korzhenevsky Street,    of the EAR).
                                  20108 Minsk, Republic
                                  of Belarus.
                                 Vasili Kuntsevich,      For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Office 313, 12          subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Korzhenevsky Street,    EAR. (See 744.11                      28/10.
                                  20108 Minsk, Republic   of the EAR).
                                  of Belarus.

                                                  * * * * * * *
CHINA, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 Fang Yu, 16 Gaoxin 4th  For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Road, Xian High Tech    subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER]. 6/
                                  Industrial              EAR. (See 744.11                      28/10.
                                  Development Zone,       of the EAR).
                                  Xian, China.

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 Toptics, Inc.,          For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Chuangye Building 7/    subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  1F, 1197 Bin'An Road,   EAR. (See 744.11                      28/10.
                                  Binjiang, Hangzhou,     of the EAR).
                                  Zhejiang 310052,
                                  China.

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 Xi'an Xiangyu Aviation  For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Technology Group,       subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  a.k.a., Xi'an Xiangyu   EAR. (See 744.11                      28/10.
                                  Aviation Technology     of the EAR).
                                  Company, 16 Gaoxin
                                  4th Road, Xian High
                                  Tech Industrial
                                  Development Zone,
                                  Xian, China.

                                                  * * * * * * *
HONG KONG

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 OnTime Electronics      For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Technology Company,     subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Room 609-610 6/F Boss   EAR. (See 744.11                      28/10.
                                  Commercial Center, 28   of the EAR).
                                  Ferry Street, Jordon,
                                  Kowloon, Hong Kong.

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 Tam Wai Tak, a.k.a.,    For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Thomsom Tam, Room 609-  subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  610 6/F, Boss           EAR. (See 744.11                      28/10.
                                  Commercial Center, 28   of the EAR).
                                  Ferry Street, Jordon,
                                  Kowloon, Hong Kong.

                                                  * * * * * * *
IRAN

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 Fadjr Marine            For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Industries, a.k.a.,     subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  SADAF, 169 Malekloo     EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  Ave., Farjam Ave.,      744.11 of the
                                  Tehran Pars, Tehran,    EAR).
                                  Iran.

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 Hamid Reza Simchi,      For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  P.O. Box 19575-354,     subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Tehran, Iran.           EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                                          744.11 of the
                                                          EAR).

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 Tadbir Sanaat Sharif    For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Technology              subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Development Center      EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  (TSS), First Floor,     744.11 of the
                                  No. 25 Shahid Siadat    EAR).
                                  Boulevard, North
                                  Zanjan Street,
                                  Yadegar Emam Highway,
                                  Tehran, Iran.

                                                  * * * * * * *
MALAYSIA

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 Austral Aero-Marine     For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Corp. Sdn Bhd, 10A      subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Jalan 2/137B,           EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  Resource Industrial     744.11 of the
                                  Centre Off Jalan        EAR).
                                  Kelang Lama 58000,
                                  Kuala Lumpur,
                                  Malaysia.
                                 Austral Aviation        For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Corp., 10A Jalan 2/     subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  137B, Resource          EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  Industrial Centre Off   744.11 of the
                                  Jalan Kelang Lama       EAR).
                                  58000, Kuala Lumpur,
                                  Malaysia.

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 Jimmy Tok, 10A Jalan 2/ For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  137B, Resource          subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Industrial Centre Off   EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  Jalan Kelang Lama       744.11 of the
                                  58000, Kuala Lumpur,    EAR).
                                  Malaysia.

                                                  * * * * * * *
                                 Mok Chin Fan, a.k.a.,   For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Chong Chen Fah, 10A     subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Jalan 2/137B,           EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  Resource Industrial     744.11 of the
                                  Centre Off Jalan        EAR).
                                  Kelang Lama 58000,
                                  Kuala Lumpur,
                                  Malaysia.

                                                  * * * * * * *
NEW ZEALAND....................  Leigh Michau, P.O. Box  For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  34-881, Birkenhead,     subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Auckland, New Zealand.  EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                                          744.11 of the
                                                          EAR).
                                 Q-SPD (Q-Marine         For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  International Ltd.),    subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  P.O. Box 34-881,        EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  Birkenhead, Auckland,   744.11 of the
                                  New Zealand.            EAR).
NORWAY.........................  Gunther Migeotte,       For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Titangata 1, N-1630     subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Gamle, Fredrikstad,     EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  Norway; and H. Evjes    744.11 of the
                                  vei 8A, Gressvik,       EAR).
                                  Norway; and Holsneset
                                  19, 6030 Langevag,
                                  Norway; and Titangata
                                  1, 1630 Fredrikstad,
                                  Norway. (See
                                  alternate address
                                  under South Africa).
                                 Icarus Design AS,       For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Titangata 1 N-1630      subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Gamle, Fredrikstad,     EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  Norway.                 744.11 of the
                                                          EAR).

                                                  * * * * * * *
SOUTH AFRICA...................  Gunther Migeotte, 1     For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  River Street,           subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Rosebank, Cape Town,    EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  7700, South Africa;     744.11 of the
                                  and P.O. Box 36623,     EAR).
                                  Menlo Park, 0102,
                                  South Africa; and 16
                                  Manu Rua, 262 Sprite
                                  Avenue, Faerie Glen,
                                  0081, South Africa
                                  (See alternate
                                  address under Norway).
                                 Icarus Marine (Pty)     For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Ltd., 1 River Street,   subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Rosebank, Cape Town,    EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  South Africa.           744.11 of the
                                                          EAR).
                                 Ralph Brucher, P.O.     For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Box 9523, Centurion     subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  0046, South Africa.     EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                                          744.11 of the
                                                          EAR).
                                 Scavenger               For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Manufacturing (Pty)     subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Ltd., P.O. Box 288,     EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  Silverton, Pretoria     744.11 of the
                                  0127, South Africa.     EAR).
                                 Shawn Hugo De           For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Villiers, 1 River       subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Street, Rosebank,       EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  Cape Town 7700, South   744.11 of the
                                  Africa; and 39          EAR).
                                  Myburgii Street,
                                  Somerset West, Cape
                                  Town, South Africa.

                                                  * * * * * * *
UNITED KINGDOM.................  Ad Hoc Marine Designs   For all items      Presumption of     75 FR [INSERT FR
                                  Ltd., 38 Buckland       subject to the     denial.            PAGE NUMBER] 6/
                                  Gardens, Ryde, Isle     EAR. (See Sec.                        28/10.
                                  of Wight PO 33 3AG,     744.11 of the
                                  United Kingdom.         EAR).

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Dated: June 21, 2010.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010-15447 Filed 6-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P