Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 190 / Friday, September 29, 2000 / Notices 58507

1The Act expired on August 20, 1994. Executive

Order 12924 (3 CFR, 1994 Comp. 917 (1995)),

which has been extended by successive Presidential

Notices, the most recent being that of August 3,

2000 (65 FR 48347, August 8, 2000), continued the

Regulations in effect under the International

Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C.A.

1701–1706 (1991 & Supp. 2000)).

2BXA understands that the ultimate goal of this

project is to bring fresh water from wells drilled in

southeast and southwest Libya through prestressed

concrete cylinder pipe to the coastal cities of Libya.

This multibillion dollar, multiphase engineering

endeavor is being performed by the Dong Ah

Construction Company of Seoul, South Korea.

people with disabilities. Requests for

sign language interpretation or other

auxiliary aids should be directed to

Colleen Ryan at 202–606–9603.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Committee was established on

September 2, 1999, to advise the Bureau

of Economic Analysis (BEA) on matters

related to the development and

improvement of BEA’s national,

regional, and international economic

accounts. This will be the Committee’s

second meeting.

Dated: September 19, 2000.

J. Steven Landefeld,

Director, Bureau of Economic Analysis.

[FR Doc. 00–25002 Filed 9–28–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–06–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Export Administration

Action Affecting Export Privileges:

Thane-Coat, Inc., Jerry Vernon Ford

and Preston John Engebretson

In the Matters of: Thane-Coat, Inc., 12725

Royal Drive, Stafford, Texas 77477, Jerry

Vernon Ford, President, Thane-Coat, Inc.,

12725 Royal Drive, Stafford, Texas 77477,

and with an address at 7707 Augustine Drive,

Houston, Texas 77036, and Preston John

Engebretson, Vice-President, Thane-Coat,

Inc., 12725 Royal Drive, Stafford, Texas

77477, and with an address at 8903

Bonhomme Road, Houston, Texas 77074,

Respondents.

Decision and Order on Renewal of

Temporary Denial Order

On April 10, 2000, I issued a Decision

and Order on Renewal of Temporary

Denial Order (hereinafter ‘‘Order’’ or

‘‘TDO’’), renewing for 180 days, in a

‘‘non-standard’’ format, a May 5, 1997

Order naming, inter alia, Thane-Coat,

Inc.; Jerry Vernon Ford, president,

Thane-Coat, Inc.; and Preston John

Engebretson, vice-president, ThaneCoat, Inc. (hereinafter referred to

collectively as the ‘‘Respondents’’), as

persons temporarily denied all U.S.

export privileges. 65 FR 21169–21170

(April 20, 2000). Unless renewed, the

Order will expire on October 8, 2000.

On September 18, 2000, pursuant to

Section 766.24 of the Export

Administration Regulations (currently

codified at 15 CFR Parts 730–774

(2000)) (hereinafter the ‘‘Regulations’’),

issued pursuant to the Export

Administration Act of 1979, as amended

(50 U.S.C.A. app. 2401–2420 (1991 &

Supp. 2000)) (hereinafter the ‘‘Act’’),1

the Office of Export Enforcement,

Bureau of Export Administration,

United States Department of Commerce

(hereinafter ‘‘BXA’’), requested that I

renew the Order against Thane-Coat,

Inc., Jerry Vernon Ford, and Preston

John Engebretson for 180 days in a nonstandard format, consistent with the

terms agreed to by and between the

parties in April 1998.

In its request, BXA stated that, as a

result of an ongoing investigation, it had

reason to believe that, during the period

from approximately June 1994 through

approximately July 1996, Thane-Coat,

Inc., through Ford and Engebretson, and

using its affiliated companies, TIC Ltd.

and Export Materials, Inc., made

approximately 100 shipments of U.S.-

origin pipe coating materials, machines,

and parts to the Dong Ah Consortium in

Benghazi, Libya. These items were for

use in coating the internal surface of

prestressed concrete cylinder pipe for

the Government of Libya’s Great ManMade River Project.2 Moreover, BXA’s

investigation gave it reason to believe

that the Respondents and the affiliated

companies employed a scheme to export

U.S.-origin products from the United

States, through the United Kingdom, to

Libya, a country subject to a

comprehensive economic sanctions

program, without the authorizations

required under U.S. law, including the

Regulations. The approximate value of

the 100 shipments at issue was $35

million. In addition, the Respondents

and the affiliated companies undertook

several significant and affirmative

actions in connection with the

solicitation of business on another

phase of the Great Man-Made River

Project.

BXA has stated that it believes that

the matters under investigation and the

information obtained to date in that

investigation support renewal of the

TDO issued against the Respondents. In

that regard, in April 1998, BXA and the

Respondents reached an agreement,

whereby BXA sought a renewal of the

TDO in a ‘‘non-standard’’ format,

denying all of the Respondents’ U.S.

export privileges to the United

Kingdom, the Bahamas, Libya, Cuba,

Iraq, North Korea, Iran, and any other

country or countries that may be made

subject in the future to a general trade

embargo by proper legal authority. In

return, the Respondents agreed that,

among other conditions, at least 14 days

in advance of any export that any of the

Respondents intends to make of any

item from the United States to any

destination world-wide, the

Respondents will provide to BXA’s

Dallas Field Office (i) notice of the

intended export, (ii) copies of all

documents reasonably related to the

subject transaction, including, but not

limited to, the commercial invoice and

bill of lading, and (iii) the opportunity,

during the 14-day notice period, to

inspect physically the item at issue to

ensure that the intended shipment is in

compliance with the Export

Administration Act, the Export

Administration Regulations, or any

order issued thereunder. BXA has

sought renewal of the TDO in a ‘‘nonstandard’’ format; respondents have not

opposed renewal of the TDO in the

‘‘non-standard’’ format.

Based on BXA’s showing, I find that

it is appropriate to renew the order

temporarily denying the export

privileges of Thane-Coat, Inc., Jerry

Vernon Ford, and Preston John

Engebretson in a ‘‘non-standard’’ format,

incorporating the terms agreed to by and

between the parties in April 1998. I find

that such renewal is necessary in the

public interest to prevent an imminent

violation of the Regulations and to give

notice to companies in the United States

and abroad to cease dealing with these

persons in any commodity, software, or

technology subject to the Regulations

and exported or to be exported to the

United Kingdom, the Bahamas, Libya,

Cuba, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, and any

other country or countries that may be

made subject in the future to a general

trade embargo by proper legal authority,

or in any other activity subject to the

Regulations with respect to these

specific countries. Moreover, I find such

renewal is in the public interest in order

to reduce the substantial likelihood that

Thane-Coat, Inc., Ford and Engebretson

will engage in activities which are in

violation of the Regulations.

Accordingly, It Is Therefore Ordered:

First, that Thane-Coat, Inc., 12725

Royal Drive, Stafford, Texas 77477, and

all of its successors or assigns, officers,

representatives, agents, and employees

when acting on its behalf; Jerry Vernon

Ford, President, Thane-Coat, Inc., 12725

Royal Drive, Stafford, Texas 77477, and

7707 Augustine Drive, Houston, Texas

77036, and all of his successors, or

assigns, representatives, agents and

employees when acting on his behalf;

and Preston John Engebretson, VicePresident, Thane-Coat, Inc., 12725 Royal

58508 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 190 / Friday, September 29, 2000 / Notices

Drive, Stafford, Texas 77477 and 8903

Bonhomme Road, Houston, Texas

77074, and all of his successors, or

assigns, representatives, agents, and

employees when acting on his behalf

(all of the foregoing parties hereinafter

collectively referred to as the ‘‘denied

persons’’), may not, directly or

indirectly, participate in any way in any

transaction involving any commodity,

software or technology (hereinafter

collectively referred to as ‘‘item’’)

subject to the Export Administration

Regulations (hereinafter the

‘‘Regulations’’) and exported or to be

exported from the United States to the

United Kingdom, the Bahamas, Libya,

Cuba, Iraq, North Korea, or Iran, or to

any other country or countries that may

be made subject in the future to a

general trade embargo pursuant to

proper legal authority (hereinafter the

‘‘Covered Countries’’), or in any other

activity subject to the Regulations with

respect to the Covered Countries,

including, but not limited to:

A. Applying for, obtaining, or using

any license, License Exception, or

export control document;

B. Carrying on negotiations

concerning, or ordering, buying,

receiving, using, selling, delivering,

storing, disposing of, forwarding,

transporting, financing, or otherwise

servicing in any way, any transaction

involving any item that is subject to the

Regulations and that is exported or to be

exported from the United States to any

of the Covered Countries, or in any

other activity subject to the Regulations;

or

C. Benefitting in any way from any

transaction involving any item exported

or to be exported from the United States

to any of the Covered Countries that is

subject to the Regulations, or in any

other activity subject to the Regulations.

Second, that no person may, directly

or indirectly, do any of the following:

A. Export or reexport to or on behalf

of any of the denied persons any item

subject to the Regulations to any of the

Covered Countries;

B. Take any action that facilitates the

acquisition, or attempted acquisition by

any of the denied persons of the

ownership, possession, or control of any

item subject to the Regulations that has

been or will be exported from the

United States to any of the Covered

Countries, including financing or other

support activities related to a

transaction whereby any of the denied

persons acquires or attempts to acquire

such ownership, possession or control;

C. Take any action to acquire from or

to facilitate the acquisition or attempted

acquisition from any of the denied

persons of any item subject to the

Regulations that has been exported from

the United States to any of the Covered

Countries;

D. Obtain from any of the denied

persons in the United States any item

subject to the Regulations with

knowledge or reason to know that the

item will be, or is intended to be,

exported from the United States to any

of the Covered Countries; or

E. Engage in any transaction to service

any item subject to the Regulations that

has been or will be exported from the

United States to any of the Covered

Countries, and which is owned,

possessed or controlled by any of the

denied persons, or service any item, of

whatever origin, that is owned,

possessed or controlled by any of the

denied persons if such service involves

the use of any item subject to the

Regulations that has been or will be

exported from the United States to any

of the Covered Countries. For purposes

of this paragraph, servicing means

installation, maintenance, repair,

modification or testing.

Third, that, at least 14 days in

advance of any export that any of the

denied persons intends to make of any

item from the United States to any

destination world-wide, the denied

person will provide to BXA’s Dallas

Field Office (i) notice of the intended

export, (ii) copies of all documents

reasonably related to the subject

transaction, including, but not limited

to, the commercial invoice and bill of

lading, and (iii) the opportunity, during

the 14-day notice period, to inspect

physically the item at issue to ensure

that the intended shipment is in

compliance with the Export

Administration Act, the Export

Administration Regulations, or any

order issued thereunder.

Fourth, that, after notice and

opportunity for comment, as provided

in Section 766.23 of the Regulations,

any person, firm, corporation, or

business organization related to any of

the denied persons by affiliation,

ownership, control, or position of

responsibility in the conduct of trade or

related services, may also be made

subject to the provisions of this Order.

Fifth, that this Order does not prohibit

any export, reexport, or other

transaction subject to the Regulations

where the only items involved that are

subject to the Regulations are the

foreign-produced direct product of U.S.-

origin technology.

Sixth, that, in accordance with the

provisions of section 766.24(e) of the

Regulations, Thane-Coat, Ford, or

Engebretson may, at any time, appeal

this Order by filing a full written

statement in support of the appeal with

the Office of the Administrative Law

Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing

Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore,

Maryland 21202–4022.

Seventh, that this Order is effective

immediately and shall remain in effect

for 180 days.

Eighth, that, in accordance with the

provisions of section 766.24(d) of the

Regulations, BXA may seek renewal of

this Order by filing a written request not

later than 20 days before the expiration

date. Any respondent may oppose a

request to renew this Order by filing a

written submission with the Assistant

Secretary for Export Enforcement,

which must be received not later than

seven days before the expiration date of

the Order.

A copy of this Order shall be served

on each Respondent and shall be

published in the Federal Register.

Entered this 21st day of September, 2000.

F. Amanda DeBusk,

Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 00–25027 Filed 9–28–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DT–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Order No. 1120]

GRANT OF AUTHORITY FOR

SUBZONE STATUS; ASO Corporation

(Adhesive Bandages); Sarasota

County, Florida

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 (the Board)

to grant to qualified corporations the

privilege of establishing foreign-trade

zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs

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 Manatee County Port

Authority, grantee of Foreign-Trade

Zone 169, has made application to the

Board for authority to establish specialpurpose subzone status at the adhesive