Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 9, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 69609 

listed in this document will be 

published subsequently in that Order. 

The Rule 

This action amends Title 14 Code of 

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by 

modifying Class E airspace extending 

upward from 700 feet above the surface 

to accommodate IFR aircraft executing 

RNAV (GPS) standard instrument 

approach procedures at Blythe Airport. 

Also, the boundary coordinates in the 

regulatory text for the Class E 1,200-foot 

airspace area is adjusted to be in concert 

with the FAA’s aeronautical database. 

This action is necessary for the safety 

and management of IFR operations. 

With the exception of editorial changes 

and the changes noted above, this rule 

is the same as that proposed in the 

NPRM. 

The FAA has determined this 

regulation only involves an established 

body of technical regulations for which 

frequent and routine amendments are 

necessary to keep them operationally 

current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not 

a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT 

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 

FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) 

does not warrant preparation of a 

regulatory evaluation as the anticipated 

impact is so minimal. Since this is a 

routine matter that will only affect air 

traffic procedures and air navigation, it 

is certified this rule, when promulgated, 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the criteria of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA’s 

authority to issue rules regarding 

aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the 

U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, section 106 

discusses the authority of the FAA 

Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation 

Programs, describes in more detail the 

scope of the agency’s authority. This 

rulemaking is promulgated under the 

authority described in subtitle VII, part 

A, subpart I, section 40103. Under that 

section, the FAA is charged with 

prescribing regulations to assign the use 

of airspace necessary to ensure the 

safety of aircraft and the efficient use of 

airspace. This regulation is within the 

scope of that authority as it creates 

additional controlled airspace at Blythe 

Airport, Blythe, CA. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

Adoption of the Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 71 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 

40120; E. O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– 

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, 

dated August 9, 2011, and effective 

September 15, 2011 is amended as 

follows: 

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas 

extending upward from 700 feet or more 

above the surface of the earth. 

* * * * * 

AWP CA E5 Blythe, CA [Modified] 

Blythe Airport, CA 

(Lat. 33°37′09′′ N., long. 114°43′01′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 6.7-mile 

radius of the Blythe Airport, and within 4 

miles south and 1.2 miles north of the 264° 

bearing from the airport extending from the 

6.7-mile radius to 10 miles west of the 

airport. That airspace extending upward from 

1,200 feet above the surface within an area 

bounded by lat. 33°50′00′′ N., long. 

114°21′00′′ W.; to lat. 33°42′00′′ N., long. 

114°17′00′′ W.; to lat. 33°41′30′′ N., long. 

114°07′30′′ W.; to lat. 33°27′00′′ N., long. 

114°09′00′′ W.; to lat. 33°28′00′′ N., long. 

114°13′00′′ W.; to lat. 33°28′28′′ N., long. 

114°27′12′′ W., thence clockwise along the 

15.8-mile radius of Blythe Airport to lat. 

33°26′30′′ N., long. 114°57′00′′ W., to lat. 

33°26′00′′ N., long. 115°04′00′′ W.; to lat. 

33°53′00′′ N., long. 115°07′00′′ W.; to lat. 

34°15′00′′ N., long. 114°50′00′′ W.; to lat. 

34°15′00′′ N., long. 114°28′00′′ W.; to lat. 

33°52′00′′ N., long. 114°29′00′′ W., thence to 

the point of beginning. 

Issued in Seattle, Washington, on October 

3, 2011. 

John Warner, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, Western 

Service Center. 

[FR Doc. 2011–28931 Filed 11–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Part 748 

[Docket No. 110804481–1527–01] 

RIN 0694–AF32 

Amendment to Existing Validated EndUser Authorizations in the People’s 

Republic of China: National 

Semiconductor Corporation and 

Semiconductor Manufacturing 

International Corporation 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this rule, the Bureau of 

Industry and Security (BIS) amends the 

Export Administration Regulations 

(EAR) to remove National 

Semiconductor Corporation (National 

Semiconductor) from the list of 

‘‘Validated End-Users’’ and ‘‘Eligible 

Destinations’’ in the People’s Republic 

of China (PRC). BIS also removes one 

facility from the list of ‘‘Eligible 

Destinations’’ for Semiconductor 

Manufacturing International 

Corporation (SMIC) in the PRC, the 

Semiconductor Manufacturing 

International (Chengdu) Corporation, 

Assembly and Testing (AT2) Facility 

(SMIC AT2 facility). These amendments 

are due to material changes in the 

ownership and control of National 

Semiconductor and the SMIC AT2 

facility. These amendments are not the 

result of activities of concern by 

National Semiconductor or SMIC and 

do not establish any new license 

requirements or licensing policies for 

exports, reexports, or transfers (incountry) of items to National 

Semiconductor, SMIC, or their facilities. 

DATES: This rule is effective November 

9, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karen Nies-Vogel, Chair, End-User 

Review Committee, Bureau of Industry 

and Security, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street & Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; by 

telephone: (202) 482–5991, by fax: (202) 

482–3991, or email: ERC@bis.doc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Authorization Validated End-User 

(VEU) 

BIS amended the EAR in a final rule 

on June 19, 2007 (72 FR 33646), creating 

a new authorization for ‘‘validated endusers’’ (VEUs) located in eligible 

destinations to which eligible items may 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
69610 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 9, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

be exported, reexported, or transferred 

(in-country) under a general 

authorization instead of a license, in 

conformance with section 748.15 of the 

EAR. VEUs may obtain eligible items 

that are on the Commerce Control List, 

set forth in Supplement No. 1 to Part 

774 of the EAR, without having to wait 

for their suppliers to obtain export 

licenses from BIS. Eligible items may 

include commodities, software, and 

technology, except those controlled for 

missile technology or crime control 

reasons. 

The VEUs listed in Supplement No. 7 

to Part 748 of the EAR were reviewed 

and approved by the U.S. Government 

in accordance with the provisions of 

section 748.15 and Supplement Nos. 8 

and 9 to Part 748 of the EAR. 

Amendment to Existing Validated EndUser Authorizations for the PRC 

Removal of VEU Authorization for 

National Semiconductor Corporation 

(National Semiconductor) 

In a rule published in the Federal 

Register on October 19, 2007 (72 FR 

59164), BIS designated National 

Semiconductor as a VEU and identified 

three of its facilities (NSC VEU 

facilities) as ‘‘Eligible Destinations,’’ 

thus authorizing exports, reexports, and 

transfers (in-country) of certain eligible 

items to the three eligible facilities 

under Authorization VEU. Due to a 

material change in the ownership and 

control of National Semiconductor, 

National Semiconductor asked that its 

VEU authorization be ended. 

Accordingly, consistent with section 

748.15 of the EAR, BIS now amends 

Supplement No. 7 to Part 748 of the 

EAR to remove National Semiconductor 

from the list of approved VEUs and 

eligible destinations. As a result of this 

rule, National Semiconductor 

Corporation and the NSC VEU facilities 

at the following addresses are no longer 

authorized to receive items under 

Authorization VEU: 

National Semiconductor Hong Kong 

Limited, Beijing Representative 

Office, Room 604, CN Resources 

Building, No. 8 Jianggumenbei A, 

Beijing, China, 100005. 

National Semiconductor Hong Kong 

Limited, Shanghai Representative 

Office, Room 903–905 Central Plaza, 

No. 227 Huangpi Road North, 

Shanghai, China, 200003. 

National Semiconductor Hong Kong 

Limited, Shenzhen Representative 

Office, Room 1709 Di Wang 

Commercial Centre, Shung Hing 

Square, 5002 Shenna Road East, 

Shenzhen, China, 518008. 

This amendment is made due to a 

material change in the ownership and 

control of National Semiconductor and 

is not the result of activities of concern 

by National Semiconductor or the NSC 

VEU facilities. This action does not 

establish any new license requirements 

or licensing policies for exports, 

reexports or transfers (in-country) of 

items to National Semiconductor. 

Rather, the license requirements set 

forth in the EAR continue to apply to 

this entity and its facilities. Parties 

seeking to export, reexport or transfer 

(in-country) items under the EAR to 

National Semiconductor or these 

facilities may now have to obtain a 

license to do so, depending on the item 

at issue. 

All conditions and restrictions that 

applied to transactions that were 

undertaken pursuant to Authorization 

VEU prior to the effective date of this 

amendment that involved National 

Semiconductor or the NSC VEU 

facilities continue to apply to those 

transactions. These restrictions and 

conditions include any that were 

imposed on National Semiconductor or 

the NSC VEU facilities in connection 

with its eligibility for Authorization 

VEU, as established by BIS in its 

communications authorizing National 

Semiconductor’s participation in the 

VEU program. 

Removal of Semiconductor 

Manufacturing International (Chengdu) 

Corporation, Assembly and Testing 

(AT2) Facility (SMIC AT2 Facility) From 

the List of VEU Semiconductor 

Manufacturing International 

Corporation’s (SMIC’s) Approved 

Facilities in the PRC 

In a rule published in the Federal 

Register on October 19, 2007 (72 FR 

59164), BIS designated SMIC as a VEU, 

thus authorizing certain specific 

exports, reexports and transfers (incountry) to five listed facilities of the 

company, including the SMIC AT2 

facility. Due to a material change in the 

ownership and control of the SMIC AT2 

facility, SMIC has requested that BIS 

remove that facility’s VEU 

authorization. Accordingly, in this rule, 

BIS further amends Supplement No. 7 to 

Part 748 of the EAR to remove the SMIC 

AT2 facility and its address (8–8 Kexin 

Road, Export Processing Zone (West 

Area), Chengdu, China 611731) from the 

list of SMIC’s authorized VEU facilities. 

This change leaves three SMIC facilities 

that are approved to receive eligible 

items under SMIC’s VEU authorization. 

As a result of this rule, the SMIC AT2 

facility is no longer authorized to 

receive items under Authorization VEU. 

Thus, parties seeking to export, 

reexport, or transfer (in-country) items 

under the EAR to the SMIC AT2 facility 

may now need to obtain a license to do 

so, depending on the item at issue. 

This amendment is made due to a 

material change in the ownership and 

control at the SMIC AT2 facility and is 

not the result of activities of concern by 

the SMIC AT2 facility or SMIC. SMIC 

remains a qualified participant in the 

VEU program, and thus exports, 

reexports and transfers (in-country) of 

the items controlled under the ECCNs 

listed in SMIC’s entry in Supplement 

No. 7 to Part 748 of the EAR to the SMIC 

facilities listed in the same part may 

continue to be made under 

Authorization VEU. This action does 

not establish any new license 

requirements or licensing policies for 

exports, reexports or transfers (incountry) of items to the SMIC AT2 

facility. Rather, the license requirements 

set forth in the EAR continue to apply 

to this entity and its facilities. 

This amendment applies only to 

transactions under Authorization VEU 

involving the SMIC AT2 facility. All 

conditions and restrictions that applied 

to transactions that were undertaken 

pursuant to Authorization VEU prior to 

the effective date of this amendment, 

and that involved the SMIC AT2 

facility, continue to apply to those 

transactions. These restrictions and 

conditions include any that were 

imposed on the SMIC AT2 facility in 

connection with its eligibility for 

Authorization VEU, as established by 

BIS in its communications authorizing 

the SMIC AT2 facility’s participation in 

the VEU program. 

Saving Clause 

Shipments of items removed from 

eligibility for export, reexport or transfer 

(in-country) under Authorization VEU 

(i.e., under the designator VEU) as a 

result of this regulatory action that were 

on dock for loading, on lighter, laden 

aboard an exporting carrier, or en route 

aboard a carrier to a port of export, on 

November 9, 2011, pursuant to actual 

orders for export, reexport or transfer 

(in-country) to an eligible destination, 

may proceed to that destination under 

the previously applicable Authorization 

so long as they are exported, reexported 

or transferred (in-country) before 

November 25, 2011. Any such items not 

actually exported, reexported or 

transferred (in-country) before midnight, 

on November 25, 2011, require an 

individual license or other applicable 

authorization under the EAR. 

Since August 21, 2001, the Export 

Administration Act (the Act) has been 

in lapse and the President, through 

Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 9, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 69611 

2001 (3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783 

(2002)), as extended most recently by 

the Notice of August 12, 2011, 76 FR 

50661 (August 16, 2011), has continued 

the EAR in effect under the 

International Emergency Economic 

Powers Act. BIS continues to carry out 

the provisions of the Act, as appropriate 

and to the extent permitted by law, 

pursuant to Executive Order 13222. 

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. This rule involves collections 

previously approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

Control Number 0694–0088, ‘‘MultiPurpose Application,’’ which carries a 

burden hour estimate of 43.8 minutes to 

prepare and submit form BIS–748; and 

for recordkeeping, reporting and review 

requirements in connection with 

Authorization VEU, which carries an 

estimated burden of 30 minutes per 

submission. This rule is expected to 

result in a decrease in license 

applications submitted to BIS. Total 

burden hours associated with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA) and OMB 

Control Number 0694–0088 are not 

expected to increase significantly as a 

result of this rule. 

Notwithstanding any other provisions 

of law, no person is required to respond 

or to be subject to a penalty for failure 

to comply with a collection of 

information, subject to the requirements 

of the PRA, unless that collection of 

information displays a currently valid 

OMB Control Number. 

3. This rule does not contain policies 

with Federalism implications as that 

term is defined under Executive Order 

13132. 

4. There is good cause under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B) to waive the provisions of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) 

requiring prior notice and the 

opportunity for public comment 

because, specific to this rule, they are 

unnecessary, impracticable, and 

contrary to the public interest. 

In determining whether to grant or 

revoke VEU designations, a committee 

of U.S. Government agencies evaluates a 

variety of information, the nature and 

terms of which are set forth in 15 CFR 

part 748, supplement No. 8. The criteria 

for evaluation by the committee are set 

forth in 15 CFR 748.15(a)(2). The 

information, commitments, and criteria 

for this extensive review were all 

established through the notice of 

proposed rulemaking and public 

comment process (71 FR 38313, July 2, 

2006, and 72 FR 33646, June 19, 2007). 

Thus, authorization of a VEU is similar 

to granting a license: To receive 

authorization VEU, an application must 

be submitted on behalf of an entity; the 

entity must be found to meet certain 

previously identified criteria; and the 

application must be approved. Because 

the authorization granted by BIS 

pursuant to 15 CFR 748.15 is similar to 

that granted to exporters for individual 

licenses, which do not undergo public 

review when they are approved, denied, 

revoked, or amended, allowing public 

review and comments to this rule is 

unnecessary. 

Publication of this rule in other than 

final form is unnecessary because the 

procedure for revocation of a VEU or 

facility from the Authorized VEU list is 

similar to the license revocation 

procedure, which does not undergo 

public review. During the revocation 

procedure, the U.S. Government 

analyzes confidential business 

information according to set criteria to 

determine whether a given authorized 

VEU entity remains eligible for VEU 

status. Revocation may, as in this case, 

be the result of a material change in 

circumstance at the VEU or the VEU’s 

authorized facility. Examples of such a 

material change include changes in the 

operational status of a VEU facility or 

changes in the end-use of the products 

produced at the facility. Such changes 

may result in a VEU or VEU facility no 

longer meeting the eligibility criteria for 

Authorization VEU, and may thus lead 

the U.S. Government to modify or 

revoke VEU authorization. VEUs or VEU 

facilities that undergo material changes 

that result in their no longer meeting the 

criteria to be eligible VEUs must, 

according to the VEU program, have 

their VEU status revoked. Here, National 

Semiconductor requested removal from 

the VEU program and SMIC requested 

that BIS remove the SMIC AT2 facility 

from the VEU program due to material 

changes in ownership and control. 

Consequently, BIS is removing National 

Semiconductor from the list of 

‘‘Validated End-Users’’ and ‘‘Eligible 

Destinations’’ and removing the SMIC 

AT2 facility from ‘‘Eligible 

Destinations’’ in the EAR. Public 

comments on whether to make these 

removals are unnecessary. 

Additionally, allowing for prior 

public notice and comment on this rule 

may be impracticable and contrary to 

the public interest. The EAR advance 

U.S. national security, foreign policy, 

and economic objectives by ensuring an 

effective export control system. In 

accordance with the pre-set criteria, the 

U.S. Government reviews each VEU and 

its facilities to ensure that exports, 

reexports and transfers (in-country) of 

specified items to these entities are 

consistent with such objectives. 

Accordingly, VEUs and their facilities 

may receive through export, reexport or 

transfer (in-country) items that would 

otherwise require a license and 

transaction-specific review, in part due 

to national security concerns. However, 

the VEU and listed facility here are no 

longer eligible to receive items under 

Authorized VEU, and in order to protect 

national security, the restrictions of the 

EAR must be in place as soon as 

possible. Allowing public comments on 

this rule would hinder the ability of BIS 

to enforce the EAR’s restrictions on 

exports without a license to the listed 

facilities. Thus public comment on this 

rule is both impracticable, because 

allowing such comment would prevent 

BIS from undertaking its statutory 

duties, and contrary to the public’s 

national security interests. 

In addition, BIS finds good cause to 

waive the requirement of 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3) to delay the effectiveness of 

this regulation, because such a delay is 

contrary to the public’s interest. When 

the U.S. Government has been notified 

of or has identified a material change in 

circumstances that warrants revocation 

or modification of VEU status for an 

end-user or a facility of an end-user, 

there is a need to quickly alert the 

public that the facility is no longer 

authorized as a recipient of items under 

Authorization VEU. Delaying this 

action’s effectiveness could result in 

items that otherwise require licenses 

being exported, reexported, or 

transferred (in-country), license-free, to 

an ineligible facility, at risk to national 

security. Accordingly, it would be 

contrary to the public interest to delay 

this rule’s effectiveness. 

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 to be given for this rule under 

the APA or by any other law, the 

analytical requirements of the 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES
69612 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 9, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.) are not applicable and no 

regulatory flexibility analysis has been 

prepared. 

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 748 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Exports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Accordingly, part 748 of the EAR (15 

CFR parts 730–774) is amended as 

follows: 

PART 748—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for 15 CFR 

part 748 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 

U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 

3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 

FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice 

of August 12, 2011, 76 FR 50661 (August 16, 

2011). 

■ 2. Supplement No. 7 to Part 748 is 

amended by: 

■ a. Removing the entire entry for 

National Semiconductor Corporation; 

and 

■ b. Removing ‘‘Semiconductor 

Manufacturing International (Chengdu) 

Corporation, Assembly and Testing 

(AT2) Facility, 8–8 Kexin Road, Export 

Processing Zone (West Area), Chengdu, 

China 611731’’ from the ‘‘Eligible 

Destinations’’ column in ‘‘China 

(People’s Republic of)’’. 

Dated: November 1, 2011. 

Kevin J. Wolf, 

Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2011–28916 Filed 11–8–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

22 CFR Part 126 

[Public Notice: 7682] 

RIN 1400–AC93 

Amendment to the International Traffic 

in Arms Regulations: Sudan 

AGENCY: Department of State. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of State is 

amending the International Traffic in 

Arms Regulations to include the 

Republic of the Sudan as a proscribed 

destination, pursuant to a United 

Nations Security Council arms embargo, 

and to clarify that this policy does not 

apply to the Republic of South Sudan. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective November 9, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Charles B. Shotwell, Director, Office of 

Defense Trade Controls Policy, U.S. 

Department of State, telephone (202) 

663–2792, or email 

DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov. ATTN: 

Regulatory Change, Sudan. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

126.1(v) is added to set out U.S. policy 

on arms exports to the Republic of the 

Sudan, in accordance with UN Security 

Council resolutions imposing an arms 

embargo and recent political 

developments in Sudan. UNSC 

resolution 1556, adopted July 30, 2004, 

imposes an arms embargo on nongovernmental entities and individuals 

operating in Darfur, with certain 

exceptions. Subsequently, UNSC 

resolution 1591, adopted on March 29, 

2005, expanded the arms embargo to all 

parties to the N’djamena Ceasefire 

Agreement, including the Government 

of the Republic of Sudan. UNSC 

resolution 1945, adopted on October 14, 

2010, reaffirmed and strengthened the 

arms embargo. Accordingly, it is the 

policy of the United States to deny 

licenses or other approvals for exports 

or imports of defense articles and 

defense services destined for or 

originating in the Republic of the 

Sudan. The exceptions, as provided in 

the referenced resolutions, are for (1) 

Supplies and related technical training 

and assistance to monitoring, 

verification, or peace support 

operations, including those authorized 

by the UN or operating with the consent 

of the relevant parties; (2) supplies of 

non-lethal military equipment intended 

solely for humanitarian, human rights 

monitoring, or protective uses, and 

related technical training and 

assistance; (3) personal protective gear 

for the personal use of United Nations 

personnel, human rights monitors, 

representatives of the media, and 

humanitarian and development workers 

and associated personnel; and (4) 

assistance and supplies provided in 

support of implementation of the 

Comprehensive Peace Agreement. 

Licenses submitted pursuant to these 

exceptions will be considered on a caseby-case basis. 

Sections 126.1(c) and (d) are revised 

to change ‘‘Sudan’’ to ‘‘The Republic of 

the Sudan.’’ 

On July 9, 2011, the Republic of South 

Sudan declared independence from 

Sudan and was recognized as a 

sovereign state by the United States. The 

policy of denial as it applies to the 

Republic of the Sudan does not apply to 

the Republic of South Sudan. Licenses 

or other approvals for exports or imports 

of defense articles and defense services 

destined for or originating in the 

Republic of the South Sudan will be 

considered on a case-by-case basis. 

Regulatory Analysis and Notices 

Administrative Procedure Act 

The Department of State is of the 

opinion that controlling the import and 

export of defense articles and services is 

a foreign affairs function of the United 

States Government and that rules 

implementing this function are exempt 

from § 553 (Rulemaking) and § 554 

(Adjudications) of the Administrative 

Procedure Act. Since the Department is 

of the opinion that this rule is exempt 

from 5 U.S.C. 553, it is the view of the 

Department of State that the provisions 

of § 553(d) do not apply to this 

rulemaking. Therefore, this rule is 

effective upon publication. The 

Department also finds that, given the 

national security issues surrounding 

U.S. policy towards the Republic of the 

Sudan, notice and public procedure on 

this rule would be impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest; for the same reason, the rule 

will be effective immediately. See 5 

U.S.C. 808(2). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Since this amendment is not subject 

to 5 U.S.C. 553, it does not require 

analysis under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

Unfunded Mandates Act of 1995 

This amendment does not involve a 

mandate that will result in the 

expenditure by state, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any year and it will not significantly 

or uniquely affect small governments. 

Therefore, no actions were deemed 

necessary under the provisions of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 

This amendment has been found not 

to be a major rule within the meaning 

of the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. 

Executive Orders 12372 and 13132 

This amendment will not have 

substantial direct effects 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. Therefore, in 

accordance with Executive Order 13132, 

it is determined that this amendment 

does not have sufficient federalism 

implications to require consultations or 

warrant the preparation of a federalism 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES