Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 8, 2009 / Notices 46089 

13222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR, 2001 

Comp., p. 783 (2002)), which has been 

extended by successive Presidential 

Notices, the most recent being that of 

August 13, 2009 (74 FR 41,325 (August 

14, 2009)), continues the EAR and, to 

the extent permitted by law, the 

provisions of the EAA, in effect under 

the International Emergency Economic 

Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–1706 

(2000)). The Department of Commerce, 

insofar as appropriate, is following the 

provisions of Section 6 by reviewing its 

foreign policy-based export controls, 

requesting public comments on such 

controls, and preparing a report to be 

submitted to Congress. In January 2009, 

the Secretary of Commerce, on the 

recommendation of the Secretary of 

State, extended for one year all foreign 

policy-based export controls then in 

effect. BIS is now soliciting public 

comment on the effects of extending or 

modifying the existing foreign policybased export controls for another year. 

Among the criteria considered in 

determining whether to continue or 

revise U.S. foreign policy-based export 

controls are the following: 

1. The likelihood that such controls 

will achieve the intended foreign policy 

purpose, in light of other factors, 

including the availability from other 

countries of the goods, software or 

technology proposed for such controls; 

2. Whether the foreign policy 

objective of such controls can be 

achieved through negotiations or other 

alternative means; 

3. The compatibility of the controls 

with the foreign policy objectives of the 

United States and with overall United 

States policy toward the country subject 

to the controls; 

4. Whether the reaction of other 

countries to the extension of such 

controls is not likely to render the 

controls ineffective in achieving the 

intended foreign policy objective or be 

counterproductive to United States 

foreign policy interests; 

5. The comparative benefits to U.S. 

foreign policy objectives versus the 

effect of the controls on the export 

performance of the United States, the 

competitive position of the United 

States in the international economy, the 

international reputation of the United 

States as a supplier of goods and 

technology; and 

6. The ability of the United States to 

enforce the controls effectively. 

BIS is particularly interested in 

receiving comments on the economic 

impact of proliferation controls. BIS is 

also interested in industry information 

relating to the following: 

1. Information on the effect of foreign 

policy-based export controls on sales of 

U.S. products to third countries (i.e., 

those countries not targeted by 

sanctions), including the views of 

foreign purchasers or prospective 

customers regarding U.S. foreign policybased export controls. 

2. Information on controls maintained 

by U.S. trade partners. For example, to 

what extent do U.S. trade partners have 

similar controls on goods and 

technology on a worldwide basis or to 

specific destinations? 

3. Information on licensing policies or 

practices by our foreign trade partners 

that are similar to U.S. foreign policybased export controls, including license 

review criteria, use of conditions, 

requirements for pre- and post-shipment 

verifications (preferably supported by 

examples of approvals, denials and 

foreign regulations). 

4. Suggestions for revisions to foreign 

policy-based export controls that would 

bring them more into line with 

multilateral practice. 

5. Comments or suggestions as to 

actions that would make multilateral 

controls more effective. 

6. Information that illustrates the 

effect of foreign policy-based export 

controls on trade or acquisitions by 

intended targets of the controls. 

7. Data or other information on the 

effect of foreign policy-based export 

controls on overall trade at the level of 

individual industrial sectors. 

8. Suggestions as to how to measure 

the effect of foreign policy-based export 

controls on trade. 

9. Information on the use of foreign 

policy-based export controls on targeted 

countries, entities, or individuals. 

BIS is also interested in comments 

relating generally to the extension or 

revision of existing foreign policy-based 

export controls. 

Parties submitting comments are 

asked to be as specific as possible. All 

comments received before the close of 

the comment period will be considered 

by BIS in reviewing the controls and 

developing the report to Congress. 

All comments must be in writing 

(either e-mail or on paper). All 

comments will be a matter of public 

record and will be available for public 

inspection and copying. 

These comments will be displayed on 

BIS’s Freedom of Information Act 

(FOIA) Web site at www.bis.doc.gov/ 

foia. 

Dated: September 2, 2009. 

Matthew S. Borman, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E9–21591 Filed 9–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board 

[Order No. 1644] 

Grant of Authority for Subzone Status; 

Cellusuede Products, Inc. (Flock 

Fiber), Rockford, IL 

Pursuant to its authority under the 

Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 

1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), 

the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the 

Board) adopts the following Order: 

Whereas, the Foreign-Trade Zones Act 

provides for ‘‘* * * the establishment 

* * * of foreign-trade zones in ports of 

entry of the United States, to expedite 

and encourage foreign commerce, and 

for other purposes,’’ and authorizes the 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board to grant to 

qualified corporations the privilege of 

establishing foreign-trade zones in or 

adjacent to U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection ports of entry; 

Whereas, the Board’s regulations (15 

CFR Part 400) provide for the 

establishment of special-purpose 

subzones when existing zone facilities 

cannot serve the specific use involved, 

and when the activity results in a 

significant public benefit and is in the 

public interest; 

Whereas, the Greater Rockford Airport 

Authority, grantee of Foreign-Trade 

Zone 176, has made application to the 

Board for authority to establish a 

special-purpose subzone at the flock 

fiber manufacturing and distribution 

facility of Cellusuede Products, Inc., 

located in Rockford, Illinois, (FTZ 

Docket 48–2008, filed 9–3–2008); 

Whereas, notice inviting public 

comment has been given in the Federal 

Register (73 FR 52816–52817, 9–11–08) 

and the application has been processed 

pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board’s 

regulations; and, 

Whereas, the Board adopts the 

findings and recommendations of the 

examiner’s report, and finds that the 

requirements of the FTZ Act and 

Board’s regulations would be satisfied, 

and that the proposal would be in the 

public interest if subject to the 

restriction listed below; 

Now, therefore, the Board hereby 

grants authority for subzone status for 

activity related to the manufacturing 

and distribution of flock fiber at the 

facility of Cellusuede Products, Inc., 

located in Rockford, Illinois (Subzone 

1‘76F), as described in the application 

and Federal Register notice, subject to 

the FTZ Act and the Board’s regulations, 

including Section 400.28, and further 

subject to the following restriction: 

Privileged foreign status (19 CFR 146.41) 

shall be elected on foreign status nylon, 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
46090 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 8, 2009 / Notices 

polyester and polypropylene fibers and tow 

(HTSUS 5501.10, 5501.20, 5501.40, 5503.20, 

5503.40). 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 27th day of 

August 2009. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 

Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, 

Foreign-Trade Zones Board. 

Attest: lllllllllllllll

Andrew McGilvray, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–21616 Filed 9–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XQ10 

Incidental Takes of Marine Mammals 

During Specified Activities; Blasting 

and Dredging Operations by the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. 

Marine Corps in the U.S. Marine Corps 

Slipway at the Blount Island Facility, 

Duval County, FL 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice; proposed incidental 

harassment authorization; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS has received an 

application from the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (ACOE) and U.S. Marine 

Corps (USMC) for an Incidental 

Harassment Authorization (IHA) to take 

small numbers of marine mammals, by 

harassment, incidental to blasting and 

dredging operations in the USMC 

slipway at the Blount Island facility 

(MCSF-BI Slipway) in Duval County, 

FL. NMFS has reviewed the application, 

including all supporting documents, 

and determined that it is adequate and 

complete. Pursuant to the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS 

is requesting comments on its proposal 

to issue an IHA to ACOE and USMC to 

incidentally harass, by Level B 

harassment only, marine mammals 

during the specified activities within 

the specified geographic region. 

DATES: Comments and information must 

be received no later than October 8, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the 

application should be addressed to 

Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, 

Conservation and Education Division, 

Office of Protected Resources, National 

Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD 

20910–3225. The mailbox address for 

providing email comments is PR1.0648– 

XQ10 @noaa.gov. NMFS is not 

responsible for e-mail comments sent to 

addresses other than the one provided 

here. Comments sent via e-mail, 

including all attachments, must not 

exceed a 10–megabyte file size. 

Instructions: All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ 

incidental.htm without change. All 

Personal Identifying Information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

A copy of the application containing 

a list of the references used in this 

document may be obtained by writing to 

the address specified above, telephoning 

the contact listed below (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT), or 

visiting the internet at: http:// 

www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/ 

incidental.htm. Documents cited in this 

notice may be viewed, by appointment, 

during regular business hours, at the 

aforementioned address. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Howard Goldstein or Jolie Harrison, 

Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 

301–713–2289, ext. 172. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Sections 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 

(16 U.S.C. 1361 (a)(5)(D)) directs the 

Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon 

request, the incidental, but not 

intentional, taking of marine mammals 

for periods not more than one year by 

U.S. citizens who engage in a specified 

activity (other than commercial fishing) 

within a specified geographical region if 

certain findings are made and if the 

taking is limited to harassment, a notice 

of a proposed authorization is provided 

to the public for review. 

An authorization to take small 

numbers of marine mammals by 

harassment shall be granted if NMFS 

finds that the taking will have a 

negligible impact on the species or 

stock(s), will not have an unmitigable 

adverse impact on the availability of the 

species or stock(s) for subsistence uses 

(where relevant), and if the permissible 

methods of taking and requirements 

pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring 

and reporting of such takings are set 

forth to achieve the least practicable 

adverse impact. NMFS has defined 

‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 

as ’’ * * * an impact resulting from the 

specified activity that cannot be 

reasonably expected to, and is not 

reasonably likely to, adversely affect the 

species or stock through effects on 

annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’ 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA 

established an expedited process by 

which citizens of the United States can 

apply for an authorization to 

incidentally take small numbers of 

marine mammals by harassment. Except 

with respect to certain activities not 

pertinent here, the MMPA defines 

‘‘harassment’’ as: 

any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance 

which (I) has the potential to injure a marine 

mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild 

[Level A harassment]; or (ii) has the potential 

to disturb a marine mammal or marine 

mammal stock in the wild by causing 

disruption of behavioral patterns, including, 

but not limited to, migration, breathing, 

nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering 

[Level B harassment]. 

Section 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a 45– 

day time limit for NMFS review of an 

application followed by a publication in 

the Federal Register and other relevant 

media proposed authorizations for the 

incidental harassment of marine 

mammals. The publication of the 

proposed authorization initiates a 30– 

day public comment period. Within 45 

days of the close of the comment period, 

NMFS must either issue or deny 

issuance of the authorization. 

Summary of Request 

On January 16, 2009, NMFS received 

a letter from the ACOE and USMC, 

requesting an IHA. The requested IHA 

would authorize the take, by Level B 

(behavioral) harassment, of small 

numbers of Atlantic bottlenose dolphins 

(Tursiops truncatus) incidental to 

blasting and dredging operations in the 

MCSF-BI Slipway. Proposed activities 

will include the removal of concrete 

sill/cemented rock by blasting and 

advanced maintenance dredging. The 

ACOE proposed to use blasting to 

fracture (‘‘pre-treat’’) an existing 

concrete sill and cemented rock in the 

slipway, then completely remove the 

pre-treated sill and cemented rock by 

dredging, and dredge the entire slipway 

from its current depth of -37 ft mean 

low low water (MLLW) to -47 ft MLLW. 

The dredging will likely be completed 

using a mechanical dredge (i.e., 

clamshell or backhoe), cutterhead 

dredge, and blasting. The dredging will 

remove approximately 750,000 cubic 

yards of material from the slipway. 

Material removed from the dredging 

will be placed in Dayson Island Dredge 

Material Management Area located at 

Little Marsh Island. Concrete from the 

sill will be removed to an offsite 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES