Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Notices 15291 

1As noted in the Preliminary Results, the 

Department selected HYSCO, POSCO, Dongbu and 

Union as mandatory respondents in this review. See 

Memorandum from Dennis McClure, International 

Trade Compliance Analyst, through James Terpstra, 

Program Manager, to Melissa Skinner, Director, 

Office 3, entitled ‘‘2008–2009 Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review of Corrosion-Resistant 

Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of 

Korea: Selection of Respondents for Individual 

Review,’’ dated December 7, 2009. 

adopted by the Board (74 FR 1170, 1/12/ 

09 (correction 74 FR 3987, 1/22/09); 75 

FR 71069–71070, 11/22/10). The ASF is 

an option for grantees for the 

establishment or reorganization of 

general-purpose zones and can permit 

significantly greater flexibility in the 

designation of new ‘‘usage-driven’’ FTZ 

sites for operators/users located within 

a grantee’s ‘‘service area’’ in the context 

of the Board’s standard 2,000-acre 

activation limit for a general-purpose 

zone project. The application was 

submitted pursuant to the Foreign-Trade 

Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a– 

81u), and the regulations of the Board 

(15 CFR part 400). It was formally filed 

on March 15, 2011. 

FTZ 106 was established by the Board 

on September 13, 1984 (Board Order 

271, 49 FR 36133, 9/21/84), and 

expanded on December 7, 1989 (Board 

Order 455, 54 FR 51441, 12/15/89), on 

February 10, 2000 (Board Order 1078, 

65 FR 8337–8338, 2/18/00), on 

September 28, 2007 (Board Order 1529, 

72 FR 56722–56723, 10/4/07), and on 

June 26, 2009 (Board Order 1628, 74 FR 

32892, 7/9/09). 

The current zone project consists of 

six sites (totaling 1,450 acres) in the 

Oklahoma City area: Site 1 (1,061 

acres)—within the 6,700-acre Will 

Rogers World Airport complex; Site 2 (6 

acres)—Biagi Bros. Warehouse, 5002 SW 

36th, Oklahoma City; Site 8 (30 acres)— 

Will Rogers World Airport NE, 

immediately northeast of Will Rogers 

World Airport, Oklahoma City; Site 12 

(26 acres, sunset 10/31/2012)—ICON 

Center Industrial Park, 300 Arlington, 

Ada; Site 13 (308 acres)—within the 

401-acre Guthrie/Edmond Regional 

Airport, 520 Airport Road, Guthrie; and, 

Site 14 (19 acres, expires 6/30/2014)— 

Industrial Gasket, Inc. dba International 

Group, facility, 720 South Sara Road, 

Mustang. (Note: Sites 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 

and 11 have expired or were deleted 

through a previous Board action.) 

The grantee’s proposed service area 

under the ASF would be Blaine, Caddo, 

Canadian, Cleveland, Comanche, Custer, 

Garfield, Garvin, Grady, Kay, Kingfisher, 

Lincoln, Logan, McClain, Noble, 

Oklahoma, Payne, Pontotoc, 

Pottawatomie, Seminole and Stephens 

Counties, Oklahoma. If approved, the 

grantee would be able to serve sites 

throughout the service area based on 

companies’ needs for FTZ designation. 

The proposed service area is within and 

adjacent to the Oklahoma City Customs 

and Border Protection port of entry. 

The applicant is requesting authority 

to reorganize its existing zone project to 

include existing Sites 12, 13 and 14 as 

‘‘magnet sites’’, existing Site 2 as a 

‘‘usage-driven’’ site, and combine 

existing Site 1 and Site 8 to become Site 

1 (new site total—1,091 acres) as a 

magnet site. The ASF allows for the 

possible exemption of one magnet site 

from the sunset time limits that 

generally apply to sites under the ASF, 

and the applicant proposes that Site 1 

be so exempted. The applicant is also 

requesting approval of two additional 

‘‘magnet’’ sites: Proposed Site 15 (67.688 

acres)—Enid Woodring Regional 

Airport/Cimarron Industrial Park, 1026 

S. 66th, Enid (Garfield County); and, 

Proposed Site 16 (63.434 acres)— 

Shawnee Regional Airport, 2202 Airport 

Road, Shawnee (Pottawatomie County). 

Because the ASF only pertains to 

establishing or reorganizing a generalpurpose zone, the application would 

have no impact on FTZ 106’s authorized 

subzones. 

In accordance with the Board’s 

regulations, Camille Evans of the FTZ 

Staff is designated examiner to evaluate 

and analyze the facts and information 

presented in the application and case 

record and to report findings and 

recommendations to the Board. 

Public comment is invited from 

interested parties. Submissions (original 

and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the 

Board’s Executive Secretary at the 

address below. The closing period for 

their receipt is May 20, 2011. Rebuttal 

comments in response to material 

submitted during the foregoing period 

may be submitted during the subsequent 

15-day period to June 6, 2011. 

A copy of the application will be 

available for public inspection at the 

Office of the Executive Secretary, 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 2111, 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20230–0002, and in the ‘‘Reading 

Room’’ section of the Board’s Web site, 

which is accessible via http:// 

www.trade.gov/ftz. For further 

information, contact Camille Evans at 

Camille.Evans@trade.gov or (202) 482– 

2350. 

Dated: March 15, 2011. 

Andrew McGilvray, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6562 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[A–580–816] 

Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon 

Steel Flat Products From the Republic 

of Korea: Notice of Final Results of the 

Sixteenth Administrative Review 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: On September 14, 2010, the 

Department of Commerce (the 

Department) published the preliminary 

results of the antidumping duty 

administrative review for certain 

corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat 

products (CORE) from the Republic of 

Korea (Korea). See Certain CorrosionResistant Carbon Steel Flat Products 

From the Republic of Korea: Notice of 

Preliminary Results of the Sixteenth 

Antidumping Duty Administrative 

Review, 75 FR 55769 (September 14, 

2010) (Preliminary Results). This review 

covers eight manufacturers and/or 

exporters (collectively, the respondents) 

of the subject merchandise: LG Chem., 

Ltd. (LG Chem); Haewon MSC Co. Ltd. 

(Haewon); Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd. 

(Dongbu); Hyundai HYSCO (HYSCO); 

Pohang Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. (POSCO) 

and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd. 

(POCOS) (collectively, POSCO); 

Dongkuk Industries Co., Ltd. (Dongkuk); 

LG Hausys, Ltd. (Hausys); and Union 

Steel Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Union).1

The period of review (POR) is August 1, 

2008, through July 31, 2009. 

As a result of our analysis of the 

comments received, these final results 

differ from the Preliminary Results. For 

our final results, we find that Union and 

Dongbu made sales of subject 

merchandise at less than normal value 

(NV), and that POSCO and HYSCO have 

not. In addition, based on the final 

results for the respondents selected for 

individual review, we have determined 

a weighted-average margin for those 

companies that were not selected for 

individual review. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 21, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dennis McClure (Union), Jolanta 

Lawska (HYSCO), Christopher Hargett 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

15292 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Notices 

(Dongbu) and Victoria Cho (the POSCO 

Group, and non-selected companies), 

Office 3, AD/CVD Operations, Import 

Administration, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–5973, (202) 482– 

8362, (202) 482–4161, and (202) 482– 

5075, respectively. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On September 14, 2010, the 

Department published the Preliminary 

Results. In the Preliminary Results, the 

Department determined that Union and 

Dongbu made sales of subject 

merchandise at less than NV during the 

POR, and that HYSCO and POSCO did 

not. In addition, based on the 

preliminary results for the respondents 

selected for individual review, the 

Department calculated a weightedaverage margin for those companies that 

were not selected for individual review. 

We conducted sales verifications at 

the POSCO Group from October 18 

through 22, 2010, at HYSCO from 

October 25 through 29, 2010, and at 

Union from November 1 through 5, 

2010. We conducted cost verifications at 

HYSCO from October 4 through 8, 2010, 

at the POSCO Group from October 11 

through 15, 2010, and at Union from 

November 8 through 12, 2010. On 

December 7, 15, and 21, 2010, 

respectively, the Department released 

sales verification reports for Union, 

HYSCO, and the POSCO Group. On 

November 29, December 6, and 

December 17, 2010, respectively, the 

Department released cost verification 

reports for the POSCO Group, HYSCO, 

and Union. 

On December 13, 2010, the 

Department extended the time limits for 

the final results of this review until no 

later than March 14, 2011. See 

Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat 

Products From the Republic of Korea: 

Notice of Extension of Time Limit for 

the Final Results of Antidumping Duty 

Administrative Review, 75 FR 77615 

(December 13, 2010). 

Comments From Interested Parties 

We invited parties to comment on our 

Preliminary Results. On January 14, 

2011, United States Steel Corporation 

(U.S. Steel) filed case briefs concerning 

all four mandatory respondents. On 

January 14, 2011, HYSCO, POSCO, 

Union, and Dongbu each filed case 

briefs. On January 14, 2011, Hausys 

submitted its case brief, stating that it 

supports the arguments submitted by 

Union and Dongbu in their case briefs 

because Hausys’s dumping margin 

would be based on the respondents 

subject to individual examination. On 

January 21, 2011, U.S. Steel and Nucor 

Corporation (Nucor) (collectively, 

petitioners) each filed rebuttal briefs. On 

January 21, 2011, HYSCO, POSCO, 

Union, and Dongbu each filed rebuttal 

briefs. 

Scope of the Order 

This order covers cold-rolled (coldreduced) carbon steel flat-rolled carbon 

steel products, of rectangular shape, 

either clad, plated, or coated with 

corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, 

aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickelor iron-based alloys, whether or not 

corrugated or painted, varnished or 

coated with plastics or other 

nonmetallic substances in addition to 

the metallic coating, in coils (whether or 

not in successively superimposed 

layers) and of a width of 0.5 inch or 

greater, or in straight lengths which, if 

of a thickness less than 4.75 millimeters, 

are of a width of 0.5 inch or greater and 

which measures at least 10 times the 

thickness or if of a thickness of 4.75 

millimeters or more are of a width 

which exceeds 150 millimeters and 

measures at least twice the thickness, as 

currently classifiable in the Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States 

(HTSUS) under item numbers 

7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 

7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 

7210.49.0090, 7210.61.0000, 

7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 

7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 

7210.90.1000, 7210.90.6000, 

7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 

7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 

7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 

7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 

7212.50.0000, 7212.60.0000, 

7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 

7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500, 

7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 

7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 

7217.90.5060, 7217.90.5090. Included in 

this order are corrosion-resistant flatrolled products of non-rectangular 

cross-section where such cross-section 

is achieved subsequent to the rolling 

process (i.e., products which have been 

‘‘worked after rolling’’)—for example, 

products which have been beveled or 

rounded at the edges. Excluded from 

this order are flat-rolled steel products 

either plated or coated with tin, lead, 

chromium, chromium oxides, both tin 

and lead (terne plate), or both chromium 

and chromium oxides (tin-free steel), 

whether or not painted, varnished or 

coated with plastics or other 

nonmetallic substances in addition to 

the metallic coating. Also excluded from 

this order are clad products in straight 

lengths of 0.1875 inch or more in 

composite thickness and of a width 

which exceeds 150 millimeters and 

measures at least twice the thickness. 

Also excluded from this order are 

certain clad stainless flat-rolled 

products, which are three-layered 

corrosion-resistant carbon steel flatrolled products less than 4.75 

millimeters in composite thickness that 

consist of a carbon steel flat-rolled 

product clad on both sides with 

stainless steel in a 20%–60%–20% 

ratio. 

These HTSUS item numbers are 

provided for convenience and customs 

purposes. The written descriptions 

remain dispositive. 

Analysis of Comments Received 

All issues raised in the case and 

rebuttal briefs by parties to this 

administrative review are addressed in 

the accompanying Issues and Decision 

Memorandum, which is hereby adopted 

by this notice. A list of the issues which 

parties have raised, and to which we 

have responded in the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum, is attached to 

this notice as an Appendix. In addition, 

a complete version of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum can be accessed 

directly on the Internet at http:// 

ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and 

electronic version of the Issues and 

Decision Memorandum are identical in 

content. 

Changes From the Preliminary Results 

As a result of the Department’s 

analysis of comments received, we have 

made certain changes to the calculations 

of company-specific weight-average 

margins. 

For Union, we revised our treatment 

of laminated CORE products as noted at 

Comment 2 of our Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. See also ‘‘Calculation 

Memorandum for Union Steel,’’ from 

Dennis McClure to the File, dated 

March 14, 2011. We have also revised 

Union’s reported cost of manufacturing 

figures to reflect a recalculation of 

Union’s scrap offset, GNA-expense rate 

calculation, cost of goods sold 

denominator to reflect the FY scrap 

revenue, and financial expense ratio as 

noted at Comments 16, 17, 18, and 19. 

See also ‘‘Cost of Production and 

Constructed Value Calculation 

Adjustments for the Final Results— 

Union Steel Co. Ltd.,’’ from Kristin Case 

to Neal Halper, dated March 14, 2010. 

For the POSCO Group, we revised our 

treatment of laminated CORE products, 

U.S. warranty expenses, home market 

indirect selling expenses, and U.S. 

indirect selling expenses incurred in the 

country of manufacture, as noted at 

Comments 2, 6, and 9 of our Issues and 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Notices 15293 

2This rate is a weight-average percentage margin 

(based on the two reviewed companies with an 

affirmative dumping margin) for the period August 

1, 2008, through July 31, 2009, and does not include 

zero and de minimis rates or any rates based solely 

upon facts available. 

Decision Memorandum. See also 

‘‘Calculation Memorandum for Pohang 

Iron & Steel Company, Ltd. (POSCO), 

and Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd. 

(POCOS) (collectively, the POSCO 

Group),’’ from Victoria Cho to the File, 

dated March 14, 2011. We have also 

revised the POSCO Group’s reported 

cost of manufacturing figures to reflect 

a recalculation of POSCO’s total cost of 

manufacturing, as noted at Comment 12. 

See also ‘‘Cost of Production and 

Constructed Value Calculation 

Adjustments for the Final Results— 

Pohang Iron & Steel Company, Ltd., and 

Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd.,’’ from 

Sheikh M. Hannan to Neal M. Halper, 

dated March 14, 2011. 

For HYSCO, we calculated the temper 

rolling cost adjustment factors for both 

temper rolled and non-temper rolled 

products and applied them to HYSCO’s 

reported cost file as noted at Comment 

5 of our Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. See also ‘‘Cost of 

Production and Constructed Value 

Calculation Adjustments for the Final 

Results—Hyundai HYSCO,’’ from Ji 

Young Oh to Neal M. Halper, dated 

March 14, 2011 (HYSCO’s Final Cost 

Calculation Memorandum). Moreover, 

we reversed our adjustment made in the 

Preliminary Results as facts available, 

regarding the use of weighted-average 

value of SOTHMAT, DIRLAB, and FOH 

from the cost file for CONNUMS with 

negative values and disregarded the cost 

file field COMADJ3 as noted at 

Comment 4 of our Issues and Decision 

Memorandum. See Preliminary Results, 

75 FR at 55774; see also HYSCO’s Final 

Cost Calculation Memorandum. 

We have made no changes to 

Dongbu’s margin calculations since the 

Preliminary Results. See ‘‘Final Results 

in the 16th Administrative Review on 

Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat 

Products from Korea: Calculation 

Memorandum for Dongbu Steel,’’ from 

Christopher Hargett to the File, dated 

March 14, 2011. 

Final Results of Review 

We determine that the following 

weighted-average margins exist: 

Manufacturer/exporter Percent 

margin 

HYSCO ........................................... a 0.20 

The POSCO Group ........................ a 9.05 

Union .............................................. 2.27 

Dongbu ........................................... 3.89 

Review-Specific Average Rate .......

Applicable to the Following Companies2: LG Chem, Haewon, 

Hausys and Dongkuk .................. 3.0% 

a (de minimis). 

Assessment 

The Department will determine, and 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties 

on all appropriate entries, pursuant to 

19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department 

calculated importer-specific duty 

assessment rates on the basis of the ratio 

of the total antidumping duties 

calculated for the examined sales to the 

total entered value of the examined 

sales for that importer. Where the 

assessment rate is above de minimis, we 

will instruct CBP to assess duties on all 

entries of subject merchandise by that 

importer. The Department intends to 

issue appropriate assessment 

instructions directly to CBP 15 days 

after publication of these final results of 

review. 

The Department clarified its 

‘‘automatic assessment’’ regulation on 

May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23954). This 

clarification applies to POR entries of 

subject merchandise produced by 

companies examined in this review (i.e., 

companies for which a dumping margin 

was calculated) where the companies 

did not know that their merchandise 

was destined for the United States. In 

such instances, we will instruct CBP to 

liquidate unreviewed entries at the allothers rate if there is no rate for the 

intermediate company(ies) involved in 

the transaction. For a full discussion of 

this clarification, see Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Proceedings: 

Assessment of Antidumping Duties, 68 

FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). 

Cash Deposit Requirements 

The following deposit requirements 

will be effective upon publication of the 

final results of this administrative 

review for all shipments of CORE from 

Korea entered, or withdrawn from 

warehouse, for consumption on or after 

the publication date of these final 

results, as provided by section 751(a) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act): (1) For companies covered by this 

review, the cash deposit rate will be the 

rate listed above; (2) for previously 

reviewed or investigated companies 

other than those covered by this review, 

the cash deposit rate will be the 

company-specific rate established for 

the most recent period; (3) if the 

exporter is not a firm covered in this 

review, a prior review, or the less-thanfair-value investigation, but the 

producer is, the cash deposit rate will be 

the rate established for the most recent 

period for the manufacturer of the 

subject merchandise; and (4) if neither 

the exporter nor the producer is a firm 

covered in this review, a prior review, 

or the investigation, the cash deposit 

rate will be 17.70 percent, the all-others 

rate established in the less-than-fairvalue investigation. These deposit 

requirements shall remain in effect until 

further notice. 

Reimbursement of Duties 

This notice also serves as a final 

reminder to importers of their 

responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) 

to file a certificate regarding the 

reimbursement of antidumping and/or 

countervailing duties prior to 

liquidation of the relevant entries 

during this review period. Failure to 

comply with this requirement could 

result in the presumption that 

reimbursement of antidumping and/or 

countervailing duties occurred and the 

subsequent increase in antidumping 

duties by the amount of antidumping 

and/or countervailing duties 

reimbursed. 

Administrative Protective Order 

This notice also is the only reminder 

to parties subject to administrative 

protective order (APO) of their 

responsibility concerning the return or 

destruction of proprietary information 

disclosed under APO in accordance 

with 19 CFR 351.305. Timely written 

notification of the return/destruction of 

APO materials or conversion to judicial 

protective order is hereby requested. 

Failure to comply with the regulations 

and the terms of an APO is a 

sanctionable violation. 

We are issuing and publishing these 

results and notice in accordance with 

sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the 

Act. 

Dated: March 14, 2011. 

Kim Glas, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

APPENDIX I 

List of Comments in the Accompanying 

Issues and Decision Memorandum: 

A. General Issues 

Comment 1: Treatment of ‘‘Negative Dumping 

Margins’’ (Zeroing) 

Comment 2: Treatment of Laminated 

Products in Model Match 

B. Company-Specific Issues 

Hyundai HYSCO 

Comment 3: Liquidation Instructions 

Comment 4: Cost Adjustments Made by 

HYSCO 

Comment 5: Whether the Department Should 

Treat All Products that Passed Through the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

15294 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Notices 

Continuous Galvanizing Line as TemperRolled 

The POSCO Group 

Comment 6: POSCO’s Average Warranty 

Expense for U.S. Price 

Comment 7: The Department’s Treatment of 

Service Fees in its Home Market Indirect 

Selling Expenses 

Comment 8: The POSCO Group’s Home 

Market Warranty Expenses for Non-Prime 

Merchandise with Certain Gross Unit 

Prices 

Comment 9: The Allocation of POSCO’s 

Home Market Warranty Expense Over All 

Home Market Sales 

Comment 10: The Treatment of POSAM’s 

Other Expenses in its U.S. Indirect Selling 

Expenses 

Comment 11: The Treatment of the POSCO 

Group’s Actual Interest Expense in 

INDIRSU 

Comment 12: Beginning Inventory Variances 

for Semi-finished Goods 

Comment 13: Reported Costs 

Comment 14: General and Administrative 

Expense Ratio Calculation 

Union 

Comment 15: Cost-Recovery Test when Using 

a Quarterly-Cost Methodology 

Comment 16: Scrap Offset 

Comment 17: General and Administrative 

Expenses 

Comment 18: Cost of Goods Sold (COGS) 

Denominator 

Comment 19: Financial Expenses 

Dongbu 

Comment 20: Calculation of Home MarketShort Term Interest Rate 

Comment 21: Reported U.S. Customs Duty 

[FR Doc. 2011–6566 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[Application No. 10–00005] 

Export Trade Certificate of Review 

ACTION: Notice of issuance of an Export 

Trade Certificate of Review to ARC 

Industries Ltd. (‘‘ARC’’) (Application 

#10–00005). 

SUMMARY: On March 7, 2011, the U.S. 

Department of Commerce issued an 

Export Trade Certificate of Review to 

ARC Industries Ltd. (‘‘ARC’’). This 

notice summarizes the conduct for 

which certification has been granted. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph E. Flynn, Director, Office of 

Competition and Economic Analysis, 

International Trade Administration, by 

telephone at (202) 482–5131 (this is not 

a toll-free number) or e-mail at 

etca@trade.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title III of 

the Export Trading Company Act of 

1982 (15 U.S.C. 4001–21) authorizes the 

Secretary of Commerce to issue Export 

Trade Certificates of Review. The 

regulations implementing Title III are 

found at 15 CFR part 325 (2010). The 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 

International Trade Administration, 

Office of Competition and Economic 

Analysis (‘‘OCEA’’) is issuing this notice 

pursuant to 15 CFR 325.6(b), which 

requires the Secretary of Commerce to 

publish a summary of the issuance in 

the Federal Register. Under Section 

305(a) of the Export Trading Company 

Act (15 U.S.C. 4012(b)(1)) and 15 CFR 

325.11(a), any person aggrieved by the 

Secretary’s determination may, within 

30 days of the date of this notice, bring 

an action in any appropriate district 

court of the United States to set aside 

the determination on the ground that 

the determination is erroneous. 

Description of Certified Conduct 

ARC is certified to engage in the 

Export Trade Activities and Methods of 

Operation described below in the 

following Export Trade and Export 

Markets. 

I. Export Trade 

1. Products: All products. 

2. Services: All services. 

3. Technology Rights: Technology 

rights that relate to Products and 

Services including, but not limited to, 

patents, trademarks, copyrights, and 

trade secrets. 

4. Export Trade Facilitation Services 

(as They Relate to the Export of 

Products, Services, and Technology 

Rights): Export Trade Facilitation 

Services include professional services in 

the areas of government relations and 

assistance with State and Federal 

programs; foreign trade and business 

protocol; consulting; market research 

and analysis; collection of information 

on trade opportunities; marketing; 

negotiations; joint ventures; shipping; 

export management; export licensing; 

advertising; documentation and services 

related to compliance with customs 

requirements; insurance and financing; 

trade show exhibitions; organizational 

development; management and labor 

strategies; licensing of technology; 

transportation; and facilitating the 

formation of products and services 

associations. 

II. Export Markets 

The Export markets include all parts 

of the world except the United States: 

(the fifty States of the United States, the 

District of Columbia, the 

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the 

Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, 

the Commonwealth of the Northern 

Mariana Islands, and the Trust Territory 

of the Pacific Islands). 

III. Export Trade Activities and 

Methods of Operation 

1. With respect to the export of 

Products and Services, licensing of 

Technology Rights and provision of 

Export Trade Facilitation Services, ARC 

may, subject to the terms and conditions 

listed below: 

a. Provide and/or arrange for the 

provision of Export Trade Facilitation 

Services; 

b. Engage in promotional and 

marketing activities and collect 

information on trade opportunities in 

the Export Markets and distribute such 

information to clients; 

c. Enter into exclusive and/or nonexclusive licensing and/or sales 

agreements with Suppliers for the 

export of products and services, and/or 

technology rights to Export Markets; 

d. Enter into exclusive and/or nonexclusive agreements with distributors 

and/or sales representatives in Export 

Markets; 

e. Allocate export sales or divide 

Export Markets among Suppliers for the 

sale and/or licensing of products and 

services and/or technology rights; 

f. Allocate export orders among 

Suppliers; 

g. Establish the price of products and 

services and/or technology rights for 

sales and/or licensing in Export 

Markets; and 

h. Negotiate, enter into, and/or 

manage licensing agreements for the 

export of technology rights. 

2. ARC may exchange information 

with individual Suppliers on a one-toone basis regarding that Supplier’s 

inventories and near-term production 

schedules in order that the availability 

of Products for export can be 

determined and effectively coordinated 

by ARC with its distributors in Export 

Markets. 

IV. Terms and Conditions 

1. In engaging in Export Trade 

Activities and Methods of Operation, 

ARC will not intentionally disclose, 

directly or indirectly, to any Supplier 

any information about any other 

Supplier’s costs, production, capacity, 

inventories, domestic prices, domestic 

sales, or U.S. business plans, strategies, 

or methods that is not already generally 

available to the trade or public. 

2. ARC will comply with requests 

made by the Secretary of Commerce on 

behalf of the Secretary or the Attorney 

General for information or documents 

relevant to conduct under the 

Certificate. The Secretary of Commerce 

will request such information or 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES