[Federal Register: July 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 140)]
[Notices]
[Page 36545-36547]
[DOCID:fr23jy09-96]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Petition for Exemption from the Vehicle Theft Prevention
Standard; Mercedes-Benz

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Grant of petition for exemption.

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

SUMMARY: This document grants in full the Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC.'s
(MBUSA) petition for exemption of the SLK Class Line Chassis (SLK-
Class) vehicle line in accordance with 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from
the Theft Prevention Standard. This petition is granted because the
agency has determined that the antitheft device to be placed on the
line as standard equipment is likely to be as effective in reducing and
deterring motor vehicle theft as compliance with the parts-marking
requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard (49 CFR part 541).

DATES: The exemption granted by this notice is effective beginning with
the 2010 model year.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rosalind Proctor, Office of
International Policy, Fuel Economy and Consumer Programs, NHTSA, West
Building, W43-302, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
Ms. Proctor's phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Her fax number is (202)
493-0073.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a petition dated June 19, 2009, MBUSA
requested exemption from the parts-marking requirements of the theft
prevention standard (49 CFR part 541) for the SLK-Class Line Chassis
vehicle line, beginning with the 2010 model year. The petition has been
filed pursuant to 49 CFR part 543, Exemption from Vehicle Theft
Prevention Standard, based on the installation of an antitheft device
as standard equipment for an entire vehicle line.
    Under Sec.  543.5(a), a manufacturer may petition NHTSA to grant an
exemption for one vehicle line per model year. In its petition, MBUSA
provided a detailed description and diagram of the identity, design,
and location of the components of the antitheft device for the SLK-
Class Chassis vehicle line. MBUSA stated that

all SLK-Class Chassis vehicles will be equipped with a passive,
transponder-based electronic immobilizer device and a locking system as
standard equipment beginning with MY 2010. Features of the antitheft
device will include an electronic transmitter key, a passive
immobilizer system (FBS III) which includes an electronic ignition
starter switch control unit (EIS) and an engine control unit (ECU).
MBUSA stated that the transmitter key, the electronic ignition starter
switch control unit and the engine control unit will work collectively
to perform the immobilizer function. The immobilizer will prevent the
engine from running unless a valid key is used in the ignition switch.
Immobilization is activated when the key is removed from the ignition
switch, whether the doors are open or closed. Once activated, a valid,
coded-key must be inserted into the ignition switch to disable
immobilization and permit the vehicle to start.
    The device also incorporates an access code-protected locking
system. MBUSA stated that there is an encoded data exchange that occurs
between the transmitter key and the central controller for the lock/
unlock function of the locking system to be carried out. The unlocking
signal from the remote key triggers a message to the vehicle's central
electronic control unit using a permanent and rolling code. Once the
codes are verified and matched, the locking system unlocks the doors,
tailgate and fuel filler cover. MBUSA stated that the device will not
incorporate a visible and audible alarm. MBUSA's submission is
considered a complete petition as required by 49 CFR 543.7, in that it
meets the general requirements contained in 543.5 and the specific
content requirements of 543.6.
    In addressing the specific content requirements of 543.6, MBUSA
provided information on the reliability and durability of its proposed
device. To ensure reliability and durability of the device and to
verify its ability to satisfactorily perform under extreme conditions,
MBUSA conducted various tests based on its own specified standards.
MBUSA provided a detailed list of the various tests conducted and
believes that the device is reliable and durable since the device
complied with its own specific test conditions.
    MBUSA also compared the device proposed for its vehicle line with
other devices which NHTSA has determined to be as effective in reducing
and deterring motor vehicle theft as would compliance with the parts-
marking requirements. MBUSA stated that its proposed device is
functionally equivalent to the systems used in the C-Line Chassis, E-
Line Chassis and S-Line Chassis vehicles which the agency has granted
exemptions from the parts-marking requirements of the theft prevention
standard. The theft rates using an average of three model years' data
(2005-2007) are 1.4366, 0.7416 and 1.5975 respectively. MBUSA concluded
that the antitheft device for its SLK-Class Chassis vehicle line is no
less effective than those devices in lines for which NHTSA has already
granted full exemption. The agency agrees that the device is
substantially similar to devices in other vehicle lines for which the
agency has already granted exemptions.
    MBUSA informed the agency that the theft rate for the SLK-Class
Chassis vehicle line decreased following installation of an immobilizer
device in MY 2006. MBUSA stated that based on NHTSA's theft rates from
2005 to 2006, the average theft rate of the SLK-Class Chassis vehicles
without the immobilizer was 1.6489 (CY 2005) and 0.1484 after
installation of the immobilizer device (CY 2006). MBUSA concluded that
the data indicates that the immobilizer was effective in contributing
to the theft rate reduction for its SLK-Class Chassis vehicles. MBUSA
also stated that its overall experience with other vehicles indicates
that low theft rates can also be expected from other vehicles equipped
with immobilizer devices as standard equipment. In its petition, MBUSA
compared the theft rates of the SLK-Class Chassis to its competitive
lines before and after installation of a standard equipment immobilizer
device. The data showed that theft rates for the Honda S2000, BMW Z4,
Audi TT and the Porsche Boxster vehicle lines also decreased following
installation of a standard equipment immobilizer device.
    Based on the evidence submitted by MBUSA, the agency believes that
the antitheft device for the SLK-Class Chassis vehicle line is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention
Standard (49 CFR part 541).
    Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 33106 and 49 CFR 543.7(b), the agency grants
a petition for an exemption from the parts-marking requirements of part
541 either in whole or in part, if it determines that, based upon
substantial evidence, the standard equipment antitheft device is likely
to be as effective in reducing and deterring motor vehicle theft as
compliance with the parts-marking requirements of part 541. The agency
finds that MBUSA has provided adequate reasons for its belief that the
antitheft device will reduce and deter theft. This conclusion is based
on the information MBUSA provided about its device.
    The agency concludes that the device will provide the four types of
performance listed in Sec.  543.6(a)(3): promoting activation;
preventing defeat or circumvention of the device by unauthorized
persons; preventing operation of the vehicle by unauthorized entrants;
and ensuring the reliability and durability of the device. The agency
agrees that the device is substantially similar to devices in other
vehicle lines for which the agency has already granted exemptions. In
addition, the theft rate has reduced since the installation of this
device on the line.
    For the foregoing reasons, the agency hereby grants in full MBUSA's
petition for exemption for the vehicle line from the parts-marking
requirements of 49 CFR part 541. The agency notes that 49 CFR part 541,
Appendix A-1, identifies those lines that are exempted from the Theft
Prevention Standard for a given model year. 49 CFR 543.7(f) contains
publication requirements incident to the disposition of all Part 543
petitions. Advanced listing, including the release of future product
nameplates, the beginning model year for which the petition is granted
and a general description of the antitheft device is necessary in order
to notify law enforcement agencies of new vehicle lines exempted from
the parts-marking requirements of the Theft Prevention Standard.
    If MBUSA decides not to use the exemption for this line, it must
formally notify the agency, and, thereafter, the line must be fully
marked as required by 49 CFR parts 541.5 and 541.6 (marking of major
component parts and replacement parts).
    NHTSA notes that if MBUSA wishes in the future to modify the device
on which this exemption is based, the company may have to submit a
petition to modify the exemption. Section 543.7(d) states that a Part
543 exemption applies only to vehicles that belong to a line exempted
under this part and equipped with the anti-theft device on which the
line's exemption is based. Further, Sec.  543.9(c)(2) provides for the
submission of petitions ``to modify an exemption to permit the use of
an antitheft device similar to but differing from the one specified in
that exemption.''
    The agency wishes to minimize the administrative burden that Part
543.9(c)(2) could place on exempted vehicle manufacturers and itself.
The agency did not intend Part 543 to require the submission of a
modification petition for every change to the

components or design of an antitheft device. The significance of many
such changes could be de minimis. Therefore, NHTSA suggests that if the
manufacturer contemplates making any changes the effects of which might
be characterized as de minimis, it should consult the agency before
preparing and submitting a petition to modify.

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR
1.50.

Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. E9-17557 Filed 7-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 204 (Wednesday, October 22, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63127-63128]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25105]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1027]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office
of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Infant Formula Recall
Regulations

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by
November 21, 2014.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer,
FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or emailed to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>All
comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0188.
Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FDA PRA Staff, Office of Operations,
Food and Drug Administration, 8455 Colesville Rd., COLE-14526, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has
submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for
review and clearance.

Infant Formula Recall Regulations--21 CFR 107.230, 107.240, 107.250,
107.260, and 107.280 (OMB Control Number 0910-0188)--(Extension)

    Section 412(e) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the
FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 350a(e)) provides that if the manufacturer of an
infant formula has knowledge that reasonably supports the conclusion
that an infant formula processed by that manufacturer has left its
control and may not provide the nutrients required in section 412(i) of
the FD&C Act or is otherwise adulterated or misbranded, the
manufacturer must promptly notify the Secretary of Health and Human
Services (the Secretary). If the Secretary determines that the infant
formula presents a risk to human health, the manufacturer must
immediately take all actions necessary to recall shipments of such
infant formula from all wholesale and retail establishments, consistent
with recall regulations and guidelines issued by the Secretary. Section
412(f)(2) of the FD&C Act states that ``the Secretary shall by
regulation prescribe the scope and extent of recalls of infant formula
necessary and appropriate for the degree of risk to human health
presented by the formula subject to recall.'' Our infant formula recall
regulations in part 107 (21 CFR part 107) implement these statutory
provisions.
    Section 107.230 requires each recalling firm to conduct an infant
formula recall with the following elements: (1) Evaluate the hazard to
human health, (2) devise a written recall strategy, (3) promptly notify
each affected direct account (customer) about the recall, and (4)
furnish the appropriate FDA district office with copies of these
documents. If the recalled formula presents a risk to human health, the
recalling firm must also request that each establishment that sells the
recalled formula post (at point of purchase) a notice of the recall and
provide us with a copy of the notice. Section 107.240 requires the
recalling firm to conduct an infant formula recall with the following
elements: (1) Notify the appropriate FDA district office of the recall
by telephone within 24 hours, (2) submit a written report to that
office within 14 days, and (3) submit a written status report at least
every 14 days until the recall is terminated. Before terminating a
recall, the recalling firm is required to submit a recommendation for
termination of the recall to the appropriate FDA district office and
wait for our written concurrence (Sec.  107.250). Where the recall
strategy or implementation is determined to be deficient, we may
require the firm to change the extent of the recall, carry out
additional effectiveness checks, and issue additional notifications
(Sec.  107.260). In addition, to facilitate location of the product
being recalled, the recalling firm is required to maintain distribution
records for at least 1 year after the expiration of the shelf life of
the infant formula (Sec.  107.280).
    The reporting and recordkeeping requirements described previously
are designed to enable us to monitor the effectiveness of infant
formula recalls in order to protect babies from infant formula that may
be unsafe because of contamination or nutritional inadequacy or
otherwise adulterated or misbranded. We use the information collected
under these regulations to help ensure that such products are quickly
and efficiently removed from the market.
    In the Federal Register of August 7, 2014 (79 FR 46270), FDA
published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed
collection of information. No comments were received.
    We estimate the annual burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                   21 CFR section; activity                         Number of       responses per     Total annual     Average burden      Total hours
                                                                   respondents       respondent         responses       per response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
107.230; elements of infant formula recall....................                 2                 1                 2             4,450             8,900
107.240; notification requirements............................                 2                 1                 2             1,482             2,964
107.250; termination of infant formula recall.................                 2                 1                 2               120               240
107.260; revision of an infant formula recall \2\.............                 1                 1                 1               625               625
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................................................  ................  ................  ................  ................            12,729
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
\2\ No burden has been estimated for the recordkeeping requirement in Sec.   107.280 because these records are maintained as a usual and customary part
  of normal business activities. Manufacturers keep infant formula distribution records for the prescribed period as a matter of routine business
  practice.

    The reporting and third-party disclosure burden estimates are based
on our records, which show that there are 5 manufacturers of infant
formula and that there have been, on average, 2 infant formula recalls
per year for the past 3 years. Based on this information, we estimate
that there will be, on average, approximately 2 infant formula recalls
per year over the next 3 years.
    Thus, we estimate that 2 respondents will conduct recalls annually
pursuant to Sec. Sec.  107.230, 107.240, and 107.250. The estimated
number of respondents for Sec.  107.260 is minimal because we seldom
use this section; therefore, we estimate that there will be 1 or fewer
respondents annually for Sec.  107.260. The estimated number of hours
per response is an average based on our experience and information from
firms that have conducted recalls. We estimate that 2 respondents will
conduct infant formula recalls under Sec.  107.230 and that it will
take a respondent 4,450 hours to comply with the requirements of that
section, for a total of 8,900 hours. We estimate that 2 respondents
will conduct infant formula recalls under Sec.  107.240 and that it
will take a respondent 1,482 hours to comply with the requirements of
that section, for a total of 2,964 hours. We estimate that 2
respondents will submit recommendations for termination of infant
formula recalls under Sec.  107.250 and that it will take a respondent
120 hours to comply with the requirements of that section, for a total
of 240 hours. Finally, we estimate that 1 respondent will need to carry
out additional effectiveness checks and issue additional notifications,
for a total of 625 hours.
    Under 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(2), the time, effort, and financial resources
necessary to comply with a collection of information are excluded from
the burden estimate if the reporting, recordkeeping, or disclosure
activities needed to comply are usual and customary because they would
occur in the normal course of activities. No burden has been estimated
for the recordkeeping requirement in Sec.  107.280 because these
records are maintained as a usual and customary part of normal business
activities. Manufacturers keep infant formula distribution records for
the prescribed period as a matter of routine business practice.

                                               Table 2--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                   21 CFR section; activity                         Number of      disclosures per    Total annual     Average burden      Total hours
                                                                   respondents       respondent        disclosures     per disclosure
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
107.230; elements of infant formula recall....................                 2                 1                 2                50               100
107.260; revision of an infant formula recall.................                 1                 1                 1                25                25
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................................................  ................  ................  ................  ................               125
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    Table 2 reports our third-party disclosure burden estimates for
Sec. Sec.  107.230 and 107.260. The estimated burden hours per
disclosure is an average based on our experience. The third-party
disclosure burden in Sec.  107.230 is the requirement to promptly
notify each affected direct-account (customer) about the recall, and if
the recalled formula presents a risk to human health, the requirement
that the recalling firm must also request that each establishment that
sells the recalled formula post a notice of the recall at the point of
purchase. We estimate that 2 respondents will conduct infant formula
recalls under Sec.  107.230 and that it will take a respondent 50 hours
to comply with the third-party disclosure requirements of that section,
for a total of 100 hours. The third-party disclosure burden in Sec.
107.260 is the requirement to issue additional notifications where the
recall strategy or implementation is determined to be deficient. We
estimate that 1 respondent will issue additional notifications under
Sec.  107.260 and that it will take a respondent 25 hours to comply
with the third-party disclosure requirements of that section, for a
total of 25 hours.

    Dated: October 16, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-25105 Filed 10-21-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 218 (Friday, November 9, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56137-56138]
[FR Doc No: 2018-24553]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0017]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

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

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to exempt 12 individuals from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate
commerce. They are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for
various reasons. The exemptions enable these individuals to operate
CMVs in interstate commerce without meeting the vision requirement in
one eye.

DATES: The exemptions were applicable on October 11, 2018. The
exemptions expire on October 11, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected], FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have
questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Insert the docket number, FMCSA-2018-0017, in the keyword box, and
click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket Folder'' button and
choose the document to review. If you do not have access to the
internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the Ground Floor of the DOT West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On September 10, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing receipt
of applications from 12 individuals requesting an exemption from vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and requested comments from the
public (83 FR 45750). The public comment period ended on October 10,
2018, and two comments were received.
    FMCSA has evaluated the eligibility of these applicants and
determined that granting the exemptions to these individuals would
achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level that
would be achieved by complying with the current regulation 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding vision
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has distant visual acuity of at
least 20/40 (Snellen) in each eye without corrective lenses or visual
acuity separately corrected to 20/40 (Snellen) or better with
corrective lenses, distant binocular acuity of a least 20/40 (Snellen)
in both eyes with or without corrective lenses, field of vision of at
least 70[deg] in the horizontal meridian in each eye, and the ability
to recognize the colors of traffic signals and devices showing red,
green, and amber.

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received two comments in this proceeding. Vicky Johnson of
the Minnesota Department of Public Safety has no objections to
Nathanael Lee or James Wright being granted an exemption. Valerie Chung
agrees with FMCSA's decision to grant exemptions to the drivers listed
in this notice, and supports the determination that doing so is likely
to achieve an equivalent or greater level of safety than would be
achieved without the exemption.

IV. Basis for Exemption Determination

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for up to five years from the vision standard in

49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) if the exemption is likely to achieve an
equivalent or greater level of safety than would be achieved without
the exemption. The exemption allows applicants to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-
year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical
certification.
    The Agency's decision regarding these exemption applications is
based on medical reports about the applicants' vision as well as their
driving records and experience driving with the vision deficiency. The
qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each applicant
were stated and discussed in detail in the September 10, 2018, Federal
Register notice (83 FR 45750) and will not be repeated in this notice.
    FMCSA recognizes that some drivers do not meet the vision
requirement but have adapted their driving to accommodate their
limitation and demonstrated their ability to drive safely. The 12
exemption applicants listed in this notice are in this category. They
are unable to meet the vision requirement in one eye for various
reasons, including amblyopia, enucleation, macular hole, macular scar,
prosthesis, retinal detachment, and retinal scar. In most cases, their
eye conditions were not recently developed. Six of the applicants were
either born with their vision impairments or have had them since
childhood. The six individuals that sustained their vision conditions
as adults have had it for a range of 3 to 20 years. Although each
applicant has one eye which does not meet the vision requirement in 49
CFR 391.41(b)(10), each has at least 20/40 corrected vision in the
other eye, and in a doctor's opinion, has sufficient vision to perform
all the tasks necessary to operate a CMV.
    Doctors' opinions are supported by the applicants' possession of a
valid license to operate a CMV. By meeting State licensing
requirements, the applicants demonstrated their ability to operate a
CMV, with their limited vision in intrastate commerce, even though
their vision disqualified them from driving in interstate commerce. We
believe that the applicants' intrastate driving experience and history
provide an adequate basis for predicting their ability to drive safely
in interstate commerce. Intrastate driving, like interstate operations,
involves substantial driving on highways on the interstate system and
on other roads built to interstate standards. Moreover, driving in
congested urban areas exposes the driver to more pedestrian and
vehicular traffic than exists on interstate highways. Faster reaction
to traffic and traffic signals is generally required because distances
between them are more compact. These conditions tax visual capacity and
driver response just as intensely as interstate driving conditions.
    The applicants in this notice have driven CMVs with their limited
vision in careers ranging for 3 to 80 years. In the past three years,
no drivers were involved in crashes, and no drivers were convicted of
moving violations in CMVs. All the applicants achieved a record of
safety while driving with their vision impairment, demonstrating the
likelihood that they have adapted their driving skills to accommodate
their condition. As the applicants' ample driving histories with their
vision deficiencies are good predictors of future performance, FMCSA
concludes their ability to drive safely can be projected into the
future.
    Consequently, FMCSA finds that in each case exempting these
applicants from the vision requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) is
likely to achieve a level of safety equal to that existing without the
exemption.

V. Conditions and Requirements

    The terms and conditions of the exemption are provided to the
applicants in the exemption document and includes the following: (1)
Each driver must be physically examined every year (a) by an
ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the standard in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and
(b) by a certified Medical Examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) each driver
must provide a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's report to
the Medical Examiner at the time of the annual medical examination; and
(3) each driver must provide a copy of the annual medical certification
to the employer for retention in the driver's qualification file, or
keep a copy in his/her driver's qualification file if he/she is self-
employed. The driver must also have a copy of the exemption when
driving, for presentation to a duly authorized Federal, State, or local
enforcement official.

VI. Preemption

    During the period the exemption is in effect, no State shall
enforce any law or regulation that conflicts with this exemption with
respect to a person operating under the exemption.

VII. Conclusion

    Based upon its evaluation of the 12 exemption applications, FMCSA
exempts the following drivers from the vision requirement, 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10), subject to the requirements cited above:

John A. Edison (GA)
Rodney P. Hains (ND)
Darryl D. Kelley (TX)
Thomas J. Knapp (WA)
Darrell D. Kropf (CA)
Nathanael Lee (MN)
John G. Mudd (KY)
Jeffrey Ridenhour (AR)
John R. Russ II (NC)
Gary A. Ulitsch (CT)
Casey O. Wootan (MT)
James C. Wright (MN)

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each exemption
will be valid for two years from the effective date unless revoked
earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be revoked if the following
occurs: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and conditions of
the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower level of
safety than was maintained prior to being granted; or (3) continuation
of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals and objectives
of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and 31315.

    Issued on: November 1, 2018.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-24553 Filed 11-8-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register: December 17, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 241)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 71281-71284]
[DOCID:fr17de07-21]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2007-0338; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-139-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A.
(EMBRAER) Model EMB-135BJ, -135ER, -135KE, -135KL, -135LR, -145, -
145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to supersede an existing airworthiness
directive (AD) that applies to all EMBRAER Model EMB-135BJ, -135ER, -
135KE, -135KL, -135LR, -145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP,
and -145EP airplanes. The existing AD currently requires reviewing the
airplane maintenance records for recent reports of vibration from the
tail section or rudder pedals. The existing AD also currently requires
repetitively inspecting the skin, attachment fittings, and control rods
of rudder II to detect cracking, loose parts, wear, or damage; and
related investigative/corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD
would require the existing repetitive inspection to be done with new
service information. This proposed AD also would require replacing the
locking tab washers on the control rods of the rudder II and installing
springs on the hinge assemblies of the rudder II, which would terminate
the repetitive inspection requirements. This proposed AD results from
reports of rudder vibration due to wear. We are proposing this AD to
prevent failure of the rudder control rods, which could result in
jamming of the rudder II, and possible structural failure and reduced
controllability of the airplane.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by January 16,
2008.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov.
 Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this AD, contact Empresa
Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER), P.O. Box 343--CEP 12.225, Sao
Jose dos Campos--SP, Brazil.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
; or in person at the Docket Management Facility

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed
AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other
information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone 800-
647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in
the AD docket shortly after receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan Rodina, Aerospace Engineer,
International Branch, ANM-116, Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2125; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address
listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2007-0338;
Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-139-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov
, including any personal information you provide. We

will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    On November 2, 2005, we issued AD 2005-25-04, amendment 39-14397
(70 FR 72902, December 8, 2005), for all EMBRAER Model EMB-135BJ, -
135ER, -135KE, -135KL, -135LR, -145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -
145MP, and -145EP airplanes. That AD requires reviewing the airplane
maintenance records for recent reports of vibration from the tail
section or rudder pedals. That AD also requires repetitively inspecting
the skin, attachment fittings, and control rods of rudder II to detect
cracking, loose parts, wear, or damage; and related investigative/
corrective actions if necessary. That AD resulted from reports of
rudder vibration due to wear. We issued that AD to prevent failure of
multiple hinge fittings, which could result in severe vibration, and to
prevent failure of the rudder control rods, which could result in
jamming of the rudder II; and possible structural failure and reduced
controllability of the airplane.

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued

    Since we issued AD 2005-25-04, the Ag[ebreve]ncia Nacional de
Avia[ccedil][atilde]o Civil (ANAC), which is the airworthiness
authority for Brazil, issued Brazilian airworthiness directive 2005-09-
02R2, effective May 10, 2007, to include updated procedures for the
existing repetitive inspections and a terminating action for the
repetitive inspections.

Relevant Service Information

    EMBRAER has issued Alert Service Bulletin 145LEG-55-A010, Revision
02, dated May 16, 2006 (for Model EMB-135BJ airplanes); and 145-55-
A036, Revision 03, dated May 16, 2006 (for Model EMB-135ER, -135KE, -
135KL, -135LR, -145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP
airplanes). (AD 2005-25-04 refers to EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin
145LEG-55-A010, dated August 26, 2005; and 145-55-A036, Revision 01,
dated September 5, 2005; as the appropriate sources of service
information for accomplishing the required repetitive inspections).
Revision 02 of EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin 145LEG-55-A010 and
Revision 03 of EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin 145-55-A036 were issued
to include more details for accomplishing the repetitive inspections.
    EMBRAER also has issued Alert Service Bulletin 145LEG-55-0011,
Revision 01, dated January 23, 2007 (for Model EMB-135BJ airplanes);
and 145-55-0038, Revision 01, dated January 23, 2007 (for Model EMB-
135ER, -135KE, -135KL, -135LR, -145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -
145MP, and -145EP airplanes). The service bulletins describe procedures
for replacing the locking tab washers on the control rods of the rudder
II with new improved ones, and installing springs on the hinge
assemblies of the rudder II. Accomplishment of these actions eliminates
the need for the repetitive inspections specified in the service
bulletins described previously.
    Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is
intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. The ANAC mandated
the service information and issued Brazilian airworthiness directive
2005-09-02R2, effective May 10, 2007, to ensure the continued
airworthiness of these airplanes in Brazil.
    EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin 145LEG-55-A010, Revision 02, dated
May 16, 2006, refers to EMBRAER Service Bulletins 145LEG-55-0008,
Revision 02, dated May 26, 2006; and 145LEG-55-0009, Revision 01, dated
November 23, 2005; as additional sources of service information for
installing washers in the rudder II hinge fittings and control rod
assembly.
    EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin 145-55-A036, Revision 03, dated May
16, 2006, refers to EMBRAER Service Bulletins 145-55-0034, Revision 02,
dated May 25, 2006; and 145-55-0035, Revision 02, dated March 28, 2006;
as additional sources of service information for installing washers in
the rudder II hinge fittings and control rod assembly.

FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD

    These airplanes are manufactured in Brazil and are type
certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions of
section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and
the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to this
bilateral airworthiness agreement, the ANAC has kept the FAA informed
of the situation described above. We have examined the ANAC's findings,
evaluated all pertinent information, and determined that AD action is
necessary for airplanes of this type design that are certificated for
operation in the United States. This proposed AD would supersede AD
2005-25-04 and would retain the requirements of the existing AD. This
proposed AD would also require accomplishing the actions specified in
the service bulletins described previously.

Costs of Compliance

    The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators
to comply with this proposed AD.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                                                                Average labor                                        Cost per      U.S.-
                     Action                        Work hours   rate per hour                 Parts                  airplane    registered   Fleet cost
                                                                                airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Records review (required by AD 2005-25-04)......            1             $80  None..............................          $80          463      $37,040

Terminating action (new proposed action)........            5              80  644...............................        1,044          463      483,372
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed
regulation:
    1. Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order
12866;
    2. Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and
    3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to
comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the
ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) amends Sec.  39.13 by
removing amendment 39-14397 (70 FR 72902, December 8, 2005) and adding
the following new airworthiness directive (AD):

Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. (EMBRAER): Docket No. FAA-
2007-0338; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-139-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by January
16, 2008.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2005-25-04.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to all EMBRAER Model EMB-135BJ, -135ER, -
135KE, -135KL, -135LR, -145, -145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP,
and -145EP airplanes; certificated in any category.

Unsafe Condition

    (d) This AD results from reports of rudder vibration due to
wear. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of multiple hinge
fittings, which could result in severe vibration, and to prevent
failure of the rudder control rods, which could result in jamming of
the rudder II; and possible structural failure and reduced
controllability of the airplane.

Compliance

    (e) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Requirements of AD 2005-25-04

Records Review

    (f) Within 5 days after December 23, 2005 (the effective date of
AD 2005-25-04): Review the airplane maintenance records to determine
whether any vibration from the tail section or rudder pedals was
reported within 120 flight hours or 100 flight cycles before
December 23, 2005.

Inspection

    (g) At the applicable time specified in paragraph (g)(1) or
(g)(2) of this AD: Do a detailed inspection of the skin, attachment
fittings, and control rods of rudder II to detect cracks, loose
parts, wear, or damage. Inspect in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin
145LEG-55-A010, dated August 26, 2005 (for Model EMB-135BJ
airplanes); or 145-55-A036, Revision 01, dated September 5, 2005
(for all other airplanes); except as provided by paragraph (l) of
this AD. Do all related investigative/corrective actions before
further flight by doing all applicable actions specified in the
service bulletin; except as required by paragraphs (i) and (l) of
this AD. Repeat the inspection at intervals not to exceed 2,500
flight hours, except as required by paragraph (h) of this AD.
    (1) If any vibration was reported during the time period
specified in paragraph (f) of this AD, inspect within 2 days after
the records review.
    (2) If no vibration was reported during the time period
specified in paragraph (f) of this AD, except as required by
paragraph (h) of this AD, inspect before the later of:
    (i) 2,500 total accumulated flight hours.
    (ii) 600 flight hours or 500 flight cycles, whichever occurs
first, after December 23, 2005.

    Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a detailed inspection is:
``An intensive examination of a specific item, installation, or
assembly to detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available
lighting is normally supplemented with a direct source of good
lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. Inspection aids such as
a mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface
cleaning and elaborate procedures may be required.''

    (h) If any vibration from the tail section or rudder pedals is
reported after December 23, 2005, do the inspection specified in
paragraph (g) of this AD before the next flight. Repeat the
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 2,500 flight hours.

    Note 2: EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin 145LEG-55-A010, dated
August 26, 2005, and 145-55-A036, Revision 01, dated September 5,
2005; refer to EMBRAER Service Bulletins 145LEG-55-0008, Revision
01, dated January 14, 2005, 145LEG-55-0009, dated June 21, 2004, and
145-55-0034, Revision 01, dated January 14, 2005, as additional
sources of service information for installing washers in the rudder
II hinge fittings and control rod assembly.

Exceptions to Service Bulletin Specifications

    (i) Where EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletins 145LEG-55-A010 and
145-55-

A036 specify to contact EMBRAER for repair instructions, operators
must perform the repair before further flight using a method
approved by either the Manager, International Branch, ANM-116,
Transport Airplane Directorate, FAA; or the Departmento de Aviacao
Civil (or its delegated agent).
    (j) Although EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletins 145LEG-55-A010 and
145-55-A036 recommend sending a report of the inspection results to
the manufacturer, this AD does not require a report.

Credit for Prior Accomplishment of Earlier Service Bulletin

    (k) For Model -135ER, -135KE, -135KL, -135LR, -145, -145ER, -
145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP airplanes: Accomplishment
of the inspection and applicable related investigative/corrective
actions before December 23, 2005, in accordance with EMBRAER Alert
Service Bulletin 145-55-A036, dated August 20, 2005, is acceptable
for compliance with the corresponding requirements of this AD.

New Requirements of This AD

New Revision to Service Bulletins

    (l) As of the effective date of this AD, use only the
Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin
145LEG-55-A010, Revision 02, dated May 16, 2006 (for Model EMB-135BJ
airplanes); or 145-55-A036, Revision 03, dated May 16, 2006 (for all
other airplanes); as applicable; to do the actions required by
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this AD, until the actions required by
paragraph (m) of this AD are done.

    Note 3: EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin 145LEG-55-A010, Revision
02, dated May 16, 2006 (for Model EMB-135BJ airplanes) refers to
EMBRAER Service Bulletins 145LEG-55-0008, Revision 02, dated May 26,
2006; and 145LEG-55-0009, Revision 01, dated November 23, 2005; as
additional sources of service information for installing washers in
the rudder II hinge fittings and control rod assembly.

    Note 4: EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin 145-55-A036, Revision 03,
dated May 16, 2006 (for EMB-135ER, -135KE, -135KL, -135LR, -145, -
145ER, -145MR, -145LR, -145XR, -145MP, and -145EP airplanes), refers
to EMBRAER Service Bulletins 145-55-0034, Revision 02, dated May 25,
2006; and 145-55-0035, Revision 02, dated March 28, 2006; as
additional sources of service information for installing washers in
the rudder II hinge fittings and control rod assembly.

Terminating Action

    (m) Within 5,500 flight hours or 36 months after the effective
date of this AD, whichever occurs first, replace the locking tab
washers on the control rods of the rudder II and install springs on
the hinge assemblies of the rudder II, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER Alert Service Bulletin
145LEG-55-0011, Revision 01, dated January 23, 2007 (for Model EMB-
135BJ airplanes); or 145-55-0038, Revision 01, dated January 23,
2007 (for all other airplanes); as applicable. Accomplishment of the
replacement and installation constitutes terminating action for the
requirements of this AD.

Credit for Prior Accomplishment of Earlier Service Bulletins

    (n) Actions done before the effective date of this AD in
accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of EMBRAER Alert
Service Bulletin 145LEG-55-0011, dated May 12, 2006 (for Model EMB-
135BJ airplanes); or 145-55-0038, dated May 12, 2006 (for all other
airplanes); as applicable; are acceptable for compliance with the
requirements of paragraph (m) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (o)(1) The Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, Transport
Airplane Directorate, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for
this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the FAA
Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local
FSDO.
    (3) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2005-25-04
are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding provisions of this AD.

Related Information

    (p) Brazilian airworthiness directive 2005-09-02R2, effective
May 10, 2007, also addresses the subject of this AD.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 10, 2007.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. E7-24330 Filed 12-14-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 144 (Tuesday, July 28, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44846-44852]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18511]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Part 744

[Docket No. 150427401-5401-01]
RIN 0694-AG61

Addition of Certain Persons to the Entity List; and Removal of
Certain Persons From the Entity List Based on Removal Requests

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends the Export Administration Regulations (EAR)
by adding ten persons to the Entity List. The ten 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 ten persons will be listed on the Entity List
under the destinations of China and South Korea.
    This final rule also removes four persons from the Entity List, as
the result of requests for removal submitted by these persons, a review
of information provided in the removal requests in accordance with the
procedure for requesting removal or modification of an Entity List
entity, and further review conducted by the End-User Review Committee
(ERC).

DATES: This rule is effective July 28, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chair, 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>, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Entity List (Supplement No. 4 to Part 744) notifies the public
about entities that have engaged in activities that could result in an
increased risk of the diversion of exported, reexported or transferred
(in-country) items to weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs. Since
its initial publication, grounds for inclusion on the Entity List have
expanded to include activities sanctioned by the State Department and
activities contrary to U.S. national security or foreign policy
interests. Certain exports, reexports, and transfers (in-country) to
entities identified on the Entity List require licenses from BIS and
are usually subject to a policy of denial. The availability of license
exceptions in such transactions is very limited. The license review
policy for each entity is identified in the license review policy
column on the Entity List and the availability of license exceptions is
noted in the Federal Register notices adding persons to the Entity
List. BIS places entities on the Entity List based on certain sections
of part 744 (Control Policy: End-User and End-Use Based) and part 746
(Embargoes and Other Special Controls) of the EAR.
    The 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 other
modifications 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

    This rule implements the decision of the ERC to add ten persons to
the Entity List. These ten persons are being added on the basis of
Sec.  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 ten entries added to the Entity List
consist of eight entries in China and two entries in South Korea.
    The ERC reviewed Sec.  744.11(b) (Criteria for revising the Entity
List) in making the determination to add these ten persons to the
Entity List. Under that paragraph, persons for whom there is reasonable
cause to believe, based on specific and articulable facts, 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 persons may be added to the Entity List. Paragraphs
(b)(1) through (b)(5) of Sec.  744.11 include an illustrative list of
activities that could be contrary to the national security or foreign
policy interests of the United States.
    Pursuant to Sec.  744.11 of the EAR, the ERC determined that the
following eight persons under the destination of China and two persons
under the destination of South Korea be added to the Entity List for
actions contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests
of the United States.
    Specifically, for the eight additions under the destination of
China, there is reasonable cause to believe, based on specific and
articulable facts, that these eight persons have violated U.S. export
laws by illicitly procuring sensitive U.S. items for unauthorized end
use in China and Iran. For the two additions under the destination of
South Korea, there is reasonable cause to believe, based on specific
and articulable facts that these two persons have violated U.S. export
laws by supporting the illicit procurement efforts of ballistic-missile
related parties in Iran since at least 2011.
    Pursuant to Sec.  744.11(b)(5) of the EAR, the ERC determined that
the conduct of these ten persons raises sufficient concern that prior
review of exports, reexports, or transfers (in-country) of items
subject to the EAR involving these persons, and the possible imposition
of license conditions or license denials on shipments to the persons,
will enhance BIS's ability to prevent violations of the EAR.
    For the ten persons recommended for addition on the basis of Sec.
744.11, the ERC specified a license requirement for all items subject
to the EAR and a license review policy of presumption of denial. The
license requirements apply to any transaction in which items are to be
exported, reexported, or transferred (in-country) to any of the persons
or in which such persons act as purchaser, intermediate consignee,
ultimate consignee, or end-user. In addition, no license exceptions are
available for exports, reexports, or transfers (in-country) to the
persons being added to the Entity List in this rule.
    This final rule adds the following ten persons to the Entity List:

China

    (1) Beijing FJR Optoelectronic Technology Company Ltd, a.k.a, the
following three aliases:

--FJIR Optoelectronic Technology Company Ltd.;
--Beijing Fu Jerry; and
--Fu Jirui.
    No. 2A Zhonghuan South Road, Wangjing, Chaoyang District, Beijing,
China, 100102; and Room 302 Office, Bldg. 11, No. 4, Anningzhuang Rd,
Beijing, China, 100085; and Beijing Shunyi district airport into 25-4,
Huiyuan, 25th floor, 100028, Beijing; and 25-4 Yuhua Rd, 25th Floor,
Shunyi District, Beijing, China 101318;

    (2) Beijing Opto-Electronics Technology Company, a.k.a., the
following one alias:

--BOET.
    No. 4, Jiuxianqiao Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, China, 100015;

    (3) BOP Opto-Electronics Technology Company, a.k.a., the following
one alias

:

--Beijing BOP Electro-Optics.
    No. 10, Jiuxianqiao North Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, China,
100016; and
    No. 4 Jiuxianqiao Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, China, 100015;

    (4) China Electronic Technology Group Corporation No. 11 Research
Institute, a.k.a, the following three aliases, and including the named
subordinate institutions:

--North China Research Institute of Electro-Optics (NCRIEO);
--China North Research Institute of Electro-Optics; and
--CETC 11th Research Institute (CETC 11th RI).

    Subordinate institution Beijing Laiyin Company Ltd, a.k.a., the
following one alias,

--Beijing North China Lai Yin Opto-Electronics Technology Company;

    Subordinate institution China Electronics Technology Corporation
(CETC) Infrared Engineering and Technology Company, a.k.a., the
following one alias:

--CETC Infrared or CETC IR.
    No. 10, Jiuxianqiao North Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, China,
100016; and
    No. 4 Jiuxianqiao Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, China, 100015;
and Electronic City of Zhong Guan Cun Technical Zone, Beijing, China,
100015.

    (5) China National Commercial New Tone Trading Company Ltd, Room
616, 2nd Building, No. 45 Fuxingmennei St, Beijing, China, 100801; and
No. 45 Fuxing Mennei Avenue, Xicheng District, Beijing, China, 100801;
    (6) Fuyuan Huang, No. 2A Zhonghuan South Road, Wangjing, Chaoyang
District, Beijing, China, 100102; and Room 302 Office, Bldg 11, No. 4,
Anningzhuang Rd, Beijing, China, 100085;
    (7) Yin Zhao, No. 2A Zhonghuan South Road, Wangjing, Chaoyang
District, Beijing, China, 100102; and Room 302 Office, Bldg 11, No. 4,
Anningzhuang Rd, Beijing, China, 100085; and
    (8) Yiwu Tianying Optical Instrument Company, Room 301, 1 Unit, 18
Building, Houcheng Yi Qu, Jiangdong Street, Yiwu City, Zhejiang, China,
322000.

South Korea

    (1) Korea Automation Industry (KAI),
    D-304, Songdo BRC Smart Valley 30 Songdomirae-ro Yeonsu-gu,
Incheon, South Korea 406-840; and 4F Miejeong B/D, 405-216, MOK 1-Dong,
Yangcheon-Ku, Seoul, South Korea; and Number 102-704, Daewoo 2nd, 925-7
Dongchundong, Yeonsu-Ku, Incheon, South Korea; and
    (2) Joseph Choi, aka Yo-so'p Ch'oe,
    D-304, Songdo BRC Smart Valley 30 Songdomirae-ro Yeonsu-gu,
Incheon, South Korea 406-840; and 4F Miejeong B/D, 405-216, MOK 1-Dong,
Yangcheon-Ku, Seoul, South Korea.

Removals From the Entity List

    This rule implements a decision of the ERC to remove four persons,
Shanghai Hengtong Optics Technology Limited, located in China; and
Zener Electrical & Electronics, Zener Electronics Services, and Zener
Navcom, located in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), from the Entity List
on the basis of removal requests submitted by these listed persons.
Based upon a review of the information provided in the removal requests
in accordance with Sec.  744.16 (Procedure for requesting removal or
modification of an Entity List entity) and further review conducted by
the ERC, the ERC determined that these four persons should be removed
from the Entity List.
    For the first ERC approved removal, Shanghai Hengtong Optics
Technology Limited was added to the Entity List on May 1, 2014 (79 FR
24563) pursuant to Sec.  744.11(b)(2) and (b)(5) of the EAR. The ERC's
decision to remove Shanghai Hengtong from the Entity List was based on
information provided by the company in its appeal request pursuant to
Sec.  744.16, forthcoming information provided by Shanghai Hengtong in
subsequent cooperative exchanges, and further reviews conducted by the
ERC.
    For the three ERC approved removals for Zener Electronics Services,
Zener Electrical & Electronics, and Zener Navcom, these persons were
added to the Entity List on June 5, 2014 (79 FR 32441), pursuant to
Sec.  744.11(b)(1), (b)(2) and (b)(4) of the EAR. The ERC's decision to
remove Zener Electronics Services, Zener Electrical & Electronics, and
Zener Navcom from the Entity List was based on the information provided
by the companies in their appeal request, forthcoming information by
the companies in subsequent cooperative exchanges, and further reviews
conducted by the ERC.
    The Zeneer related entity removals in this rule are limited to the
three entities specified in this rule. This rule does not remove any of
the other Zener related entities currently on the Entity List (Zener
Marine, Zener One Net located in the UAE, and Zener Lebanon located in
Lebanon), which were also added to the Entity List on June 5, 2014 (79
FR 32441) and are still subject to the Entity List-based license
requirements.
    In accordance with Sec.  744.16(c), the Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Export Administration has sent written notification to these four
persons, informing these persons of the ERC's decision to remove these
persons from the Entity List.
    This final rule implements the decision to remove the following
four persons located in China and the UAE from the Entity List:

China

    (1) Shanghai Hengtong Optics Technology Limited, a.k.a., the
following two aliases:
--Shanghai Hengtong Group; and
--Shanghai Hengtong Optic-Electric Co., Ltd.
    12F Tower A, Fareast International Plaza, 319 Xianxia Road,
Shanghai, China.

United Arab Emirates

    (1) Zener Electrical & Electronics,
    P.O. Box 389, Dubai, U.A.E.; and P.O. Box 3905, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.;
and Zener Electrical & Electronics Service Building, Liwa Street, Umm
al Nar area, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.;
    (2) Zener Electronics Services,
    Al Sharafi Building, Khalid bin Walid Rd, Dubai, U.A.E.; and P.O.
Box 389, Dubai, U.A.E.; and P.O. Box 3905, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.; and Plot
S20206, Dubai, U.A.E.; and
    (3) Zener Navcom,
    P.O. Box 389, Dubai, U.A.E.; and P.O. Box 3905, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.;
and Plot S20206, Dubai, U.A.E.
    The removal of the four entities referenced above, which was
approved by the ERC, eliminates the existing license requirements in
Supplement No. 4 to part 744 for exports, reexports and transfers (in-
country) to these entities. However, the removal of these four entities
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 an entity from the Entity List nor the removal of Entity
List-based license requirements relieves persons of their obligations
under General Prohibition 5 in Sec.  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.'' Additionally these removals do not
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 en route aboard a carrier to a port of
export or reexport, on July 28, 2015, 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).

Export Administration Act

    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 amended by Executive Order 13637 of March
8, 2013, 78 FR 16129 (March 13, 2013) and as extended by the Notice of
August 7, 2014, 79 FR 46959 (August 11, 2014), has continued the Export
Administration Regulations in effect under the International Emergency
Economic Powers Act. BIS continues to carry out the provisions of the
Export Administration Act, as appropriate and to the extent permitted
by law, pursuant to Executive Order 13222 as amended by Executive Order
13637.

Rulemaking Requirements

    1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. 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 OMB under control number 0694-0088,
Simplified Network Application Processing System, which includes, among
other things, license applications and carries a burden estimate of
43.8 minutes for a manual or electronic submission. Total burden hours
associated with the PRA and OMB control number 0694-0088 are not
expected to increase as a result of this rule. You may 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 email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by fax to<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined in Executive Order 13132.
    4. For the ten persons added to the Entity List in this final rule,
the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553)
requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, the opportunity for public
comment 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
protect U.S. national security or foreign policy interests by
preventing 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. In addition, because these parties may
receive notice of the U.S. Government's intention to place this entity
on the Entity List if a proposed rule is published, doing so would
create an incentive for these persons to either accelerate receiving
items subject to the EAR to conduct activities that are contrary to the
national security or foreign policy interests of the United States, or
to take steps to set up additional aliases, change addresses, and other
measures to try to limit the impact of the listing on the Entity List
once a final rule was published. 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. Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required
and none has been prepared.
    5. For the four removals from the Entity List in this final rule,
pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B), BIS finds good cause to waive requirements that this rule
be subject to notice and the opportunity for public comment because it
would be contrary to the public interest.
    In determining whether to grant removal requests from the Entity
List, a committee of U.S. Government agencies (the End-User Review
Committee (ERC)) evaluates information about and commitments made by
listed persons requesting removal from the Entity List, the nature and
terms of which are set forth in 15 CFR part 744, Supplement No. 5, as
noted in 15 CFR 744.16(b). The information, commitments, and criteria
for this extensive review were all established through the notice of
proposed rulemaking and public comment process (72 FR 31005 (June 5,
2007) (proposed rule), and 73 FR 49311 (August 21, 2008) (final rule)).
These four removals have been made within the established regulatory
framework of the Entity List. If the rule were to be delayed to allow
for public comment, U.S. exporters may face unnecessary economic losses
as they turn away potential sales because the customer remained a
listed person on the Entity List even after the ERC approved the
removal pursuant to the rule published at 73 FR 49311 on August 21,
2008. By publishing without prior notice and comment, BIS allows the
applicants to receive U.S. exports immediately since these four
applicants already have received approval by the ERC pursuant to 15 CFR
part 744, Supplement No. 5, as noted in 15 CFR 744.16(b).
    The removals from the Entity List granted by the ERC involve
interagency deliberation and result from review of public and non-
public sources, including sensitive law enforcement information and
classified information, and the measurement of such information against
the Entity List removal criteria. This information is extensively
reviewed according to the criteria for evaluating removal requests from
the Entity List, as set out in 15 CFR part 744, Supplement No. 5 and 15
CFR 744.16(b). For reasons of national security, BIS is not at liberty
to provide to the public detailed information on which the ERC relied
to make the decisions to remove these four entities. In addition, the
information included in

the removal request is information exchanged between the applicant and
the ERC, which by law (section 12(c) of the Export Administration Act),
BIS is restricted from sharing with the public. Moreover, removal
requests from the Entity List contain confidential business
information, which is necessary for the extensive review conducted by
the U.S. Government in assessing such removal requests.
    Section 553(d) of the APA generally provides that rules may not
take effect earlier than thirty (30) days after they are published in
the Federal Register. BIS finds good cause to waive the 30-day delay in
effectiveness under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) because this rule is a
substantive rule which relieves a restriction. This rule's removal of
four persons from the Entity List removes a requirement (the Entity-
List-based license requirement and limitation on use of license
exceptions) on these four persons being removed from the Entity List.
The rule does not impose a requirement on any other person for these
four removals from the Entity List.
    No other law requires that a notice of proposed rulemaking and an
opportunity for public comment be given for this final rule. Because a
notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public comment are
not required under the APA or by any other law, the analytical
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
are not applicable. As a result, no final regulatory flexibility
analysis is required and none has been prepared.

List of Subject in 15 CFR Part 744

    Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Terrorism.

    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 7, 2014, 79 FR 46959
(August 11, 2014); Notice of September 17, 2014, 79 FR 56475
(September 19, 2014); Notice of November 7, 2014, 79 FR 67035
(November 12, 2014); Notice of January 21, 2015, 80 FR 3461 (January
22, 2015).

0
2. Supplement No. 4 to part 744 is amended:
0
a. By adding under China, in alphabetical order, eight Chinese
entities;
0
b. By removing under China, one Chinese entity, ``Shanghai Hengtong
Optics Technology Limited, a.k.a., the following two aliases:
--Shanghai Hengtong Group; and
--Shanghai Hengtong Optic-Electric Co., Ltd., 12F Tower A, Fareast
International Plaza, 319 Xianxia Road, Shanghai, China.'';
0
c. By adding in alphabetical order the destination of South Korea under
the Country Column, and two South Korean entities; and
0
d. By removing under United Arab Emirates, three Emerati entities,
``Zener Electrical & Electronics, P.O. Box 389, Dubai, U.A.E.; and P.O.
Box 3905, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.; and Zener Electrical & Electronics Service
Building, Liwa Street, Umm al Nar area, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.''; ``Zener
Electronics Services, Al Sharafi Building, Khalid bin Walid Rd, Dubai,
U.A.E.; and P.O. Box 389, Dubai, U.A.E.; and P.O. Box 3905, Abu Dhabi,
U.A.E.; and Plot S20206, Dubai, U.A.E.''; and ``Zener Navcom, P.O. Box
389, Dubai, U.A.E.; and P.O. Box 3905, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.; and Plot
S20206, Dubai, U.A.E.''.
    The additions read as follows:

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

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

                                                   * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHINA, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC   Beijing FJR            For all items         Presumption of       80 FR [INSERT FR
 OF.                        Optoelectronic         subject to the EAR.   denial.              PAGE NUMBER]; 7/28/
                            Technology Company     (See Sec.   744.11                         2015.
                            Ltd, a.k.a, the        of the EAR).
                            following three
                            aliases:
                           --FJIR Optoelectronic
                            Technology Company
                            Ltd.;
                           --Beijing Fu Jerry;
                            and
                           --Fu Jirui. No. 2A
                            Zhonghuan South
                            Road, Wangjing,
                            Chaoyang District,
                            Beijing, China,
                            100102; and Room 302
                            Office, Bldg. 11,
                            No. 4, Anningzhuang
                            Rd, Beijing, China,
                            100085; and Beijing
                            Shunyi district
                            airport into 25-4,
                            Huiyuan, 25th floor,
                            100028, Beijing; and
                            25-4 Yuhua Rd, 25th
                            Floor, Shunyi
                            District, Beijing,
                            China 101318.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                   * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Beijing Opto-          For all items         Presumption of       80 FR [INSERT FR
                            Electronics            subject to the EAR.   denial.              PAGE NUMBER AND
                            Technology Company,    (See Sec.   744.11                         DATE]; 7/28/2015.
                            a.k.a., the            of the EAR).
                            following one alias:
                           --BOET
                           No. 4, Jiuxianqiao
                            Road, Chaoyang
                            District, Beijing,
                            China, 100015.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                   * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           BOP Opto-Electronics   For all items         Presumption of       80 FR [INSERT FR
                            Technology Company,    subject to the EAR.   denial.              PAGE NUMBER]; 7/28/
                            a.k.a., the            (See Sec.   744.11                         2015.
                            following one alias:   of the EAR).
                           --Beijing BOP Electro-
                            Optics.
                           No. 10, Jiuxianqiao
                            North Road, Chaoyang
                            District, Beijing,
                            China, 100016; and
                           No. 4 Jiuxianqiao
                            Road, Chaoyang
                            District, Beijing,
                            China, 100015.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                   * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           China Electronic       For all items         Presumption of       80 FR [INSERT FR
                            Technology Group       subject to the EAR.   denial.              PAGE NUMBER]; 7/28/
                            Corporation No. 11     (See Sec.   744.11                         2015.
                            Research Institute,    of the EAR).
                            a.k.a, the following
                            three aliases,
                            including the named
                            subordinate
                            institutions:
                           --North China
                            Research Institute
                            of Electro-Optics
                            (NCRIEO);
                           --China North
                            Research Institute
                            of Electro-Optics;
                            and
                           --CETC 11th Research
                            Institute (CETC 11th
                            RI).
                           Subordinate
                            institution Beijing
                            Laiyin Company Ltd,
                            a.k.a., the
                            following one alias,
                           --Beijing North China
                            Lai Yin Opto-
                            Electronics
                            Technology Company.
                           Subordinate
                            Institution: China
                            Electronics
                            Technology
                            Corporation (CETC)
                            Infrared Engineering
                            and Technology
                            Company, a.k.a., the
                            following one alias:
                           --CETC Infrared or
                            CETC IR.
                           No. 10, Jiuxianqiao
                            North Road, Chaoyang
                            District, Beijing,
                            China, 100016; and
                           No. 4 Jiuxianqiao
                            Road, Chaoyang
                            District, Beijing,
                            China, 100015; and
                           Electronic City of
                            Zhong Guan Cun
                            Technical Zone,
                            Beijing, China,
                            100015.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                   * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           China National         For all items         Presumption of       80 FR [INSERT FR
                            Commercial New Tone    subject to the EAR.   denial.              PAGE NUMBER]; 7/28/
                            Trading Company Ltd,   (See Sec.   744.11                         2015.
                            Room 616, 2nd          of the EAR).
                            Building, No. 45
                            Fuxingmennei St,
                            Beijing, China,
                            100801; and No. 45
                            Fuxing Mennei
                            Avenue, Xicheng
                            District, Beijing,
                            China, 100801.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                   * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Fuyuan Huang, No. 2A   For all items         Presumption of       80 FR [INSERT FR
                            Zhonghuan South        subject to the EAR.   denial.              PAGE NUMBER]; 7/28/
                            Road, Wangjing,        (See Sec.   744.11                         2015.
                            Chaoyang District,     of the EAR).
                            Beijing, China,
                            100102; and Room 302
                            Office, Bldg 11, No.
                            4, Anningzhuang Rd,
                            Beijing, China,
                            100085.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                   * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Yin Zhao, No. 2A       For all items         Presumption of       80 FR [INSERT FR
                            Zhonghuan South        subject to the EAR.   denial.              PAGE NUMBER]; 7/28/
                            Road, Wangjing,        (See Sec.   744.11                         2015.
                            Chaoyang District,     of the EAR).
                            Beijing, China,
                            100102; and Room 302
                            Office, Bldg 11, No.
                            4, Anningzhuang Rd,
                            Beijing, China,
                            100085.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           Yiwu Tianying Optical  For all items         Presumption of       80 FR [INSERT FR
                            Instrument Company,    subject to the EAR.   denial.              PAGE NUMBER]; 7/28/
                            Room 301, 1 Unit, 18   (See Sec.   744.11                         2015.
                            Building, Houcheng     of the EAR).
                            Yi Qu, Jiangdong
                            Street, Yiwu City,
                            Zhejiang, China,
                            322000.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOUTH KOREA..............  Korea Automation       For all items         Presumption of       80 FR [INSERT FR
                            Industry (KAI), D-     subject to the EAR.   denial.              PAGE NUMBER]; 7/28/
                            304, Songdo BRC        (See Sec.   744.11                         2015.
                            Smart Valley 30        of the EAR).
                            Songdomirae-ro
                            Yeonsu-gu, Incheon,
                            South Korea 406-840;
                            and 4F Miejeong B/D,
                            405-216, MOK 1-Dong,
                            Yangcheon-Ku, Seoul,
                            South Korea; and
                            Number 102-704,
                            Daewoo 2nd, 925-7
                            Dongchundong, Yeonsu-
                            Ku, Incheon, South
                            Korea.
                           Joseph Choi, aka Yo-   For all items         Presumption of       80 FR [INSERT FR
                            so'p Ch'oe, D-304,     subject to the EAR.   denial.              PAGE NUMBER]; 7/28/
                            Songdo BRC Smart       (See Sec.   744.11                         2015.
                            Valley 30              of the EAR).
                            Songdomirae-ro
                            Yeonsu-gu, Incheon,
                            South Korea 406-840;
                            and 4F Miejeong B/D,
                            405-216, MOK 1-Dong,
                            Yangcheon-Ku, Seoul,
                            South Korea.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Dated: July 22, 2015.
Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-18511 Filed 7-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P