8524 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 18, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

9A990.a and .b, and 9A991.d and .e. 

* * * 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of 

paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this 

section, applications for Sudan will be 

considered on a case-by-case basis in 

the following four situations. 

(i) The transaction involves the 

reexport to Sudan of items where Sudan 

was not the intended ultimate 

destination at the time of original export 

from the United States, provided that 

the exports from the U.S. occurred prior 

to the applicable contract sanctity date. 

(ii) The U.S. content of foreignproduced commodities is 20% or less by 

value. 

(iii) The commodities are medical 

items. 

(iv) The items are telecommunications 

equipment and associated computers, 

software and technology for civil end 

use, including items useful for the 

development of civil 

telecommunications network 

infrastructure. 

Note to paragraph (b)(3) of this section: 

Applicants who wish any of the factors 

described in paragraph (b)(3) of this section 

to be considered in reviewing their license 

applications must submit adequate 

documentation demonstrating the 

appropriateness of the factor: i.e., the date of 

export from the United States, the value of 

the U.S. content, the specifications and 

medical use of the equipment, or the specific 

civil end use of the item and any function the 

item will have in the development of civil 

telecommunications network infrastructure, 

as relevant to the factor for which 

consideration is sought. 

* * * * * 

Dated: February 12, 2015. 

Kevin J. Wolf, 

Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03329 Filed 2–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Part 744 

[Docket No. 141230999–4999–01] 

RIN 0694–AG46 

Addition of Certain Persons to the 

Entity List; and Removal of Person 

From the Entity List Based on a 

Removal Request 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Commerce. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule amends the Export 

Administration Regulations (EAR) by 

adding eleven persons to the Entity List. 

The eleven 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 eleven persons will be 

listed on the Entity List under the 

destinations of People’s Republic of 

China (China), Pakistan, and United 

Arab Emirates (U.A.E.). 

This final rule also removes one 

person from the Entity List, as the result 

of a request for removal submitted by 

the person, a review of information 

provided in the removal request 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 February 

18, 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: (202) 482–5991, Fax: (202) 482– 

3911, Email: ERC@bis.doc.gov. 

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 eleven persons under 

eleven entries to the Entity List. These 

eleven persons are being added on the 

basis of § 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 eleven entries added to the 

Entity List consist of four entries in 

China, four in Pakistan, and three in the 

U.A.E. 

The ERC reviewed § 744.11(b) 

(Criteria for revising the Entity List) in 

making the determination to add these 

eleven 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 § 744.11 include 

an illustrative list of activities that could 

be contrary to the national security or 

foreign policy interests of the United 

States. 

The ERC determined the following 

four persons being added to the Entity 

List under the destination of China have 

been involved in activities contrary to 

the national security and foreign policy 

interests of the United States. The ERC 

determined that the National University 

of Defense Technology (NUDT), the 

National Supercomputing Center in 

Changsha (NSCC–CS), National 

Supercomputing Center in Guangzhou 

(NSCC–GZ), and the National 

Supercomputing Center in Tianjin 

(NSCC–TJ), all located in the People’s 

Republic of China, meet the guidelines 

listed under § 744.11(b): Entities for 

which there is reasonable cause to 

believe, based on specific and 

articulated facts, that an entity has been 

involved, is involved, or poses 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 entities may be 

added to the Entity List pursuant to this 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 18, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 8525 

section. Specifically, NUDT has used 

U.S.-origin multicores, boards, and 

(co)processors to produce the TianHe– 

1A and TianHe–2 supercomputers 

located at the National Supercomputing 

Centers in Changsha, Guangzhou, and 

Tianjin. The TianHe–1A and TianHe–2 

supercomputers are believed to be used 

in nuclear explosive activities as 

described in § 744.2(a) of the EAR. 

The ERC also determined the seven 

persons being added to the Entity List 

under the destinations of Pakistan (four 

additions) and the U.A.E. (three 

additions) have been involved in 

activities contrary to the national 

security and foreign policy interests of 

the United States. The ERC determined 

that Pakistan’s Hakim Noor (a.k.a., 

Hakim Nur) and the United Arab 

Emirates’ Ajab Noor (a.k.a., Ajab Nur) 

and entities working with Hakim and 

Ajab meet the guidelines listed under 

§ 744.11(b). Specifically, Hakim Noor, 

Ajab Noor, Sher Qadir, Azad Motors 

Property Choice, Hakim Nur Sarafa, 

Ajab Trading Co. LLC, and Perfect Tyre 

Trading Co. LLC, have engaged in 

activities in support of the Haqqani 

Network, a person designated by the 

Secretary of State as a Foreign Terrorist 

Organization, and a number of 

transnational extremist organizations. 

Pursuant to § 744.11(b)(1) and (b)(5) of 

the EAR, the ERC determined that the 

conduct of these eleven persons raises 

sufficient concern that prior review of 

exports, reexports, or transfers (incountry) 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 National University of Defense 

Technology (NUDT), National 

Supercomputing Center in Changsha 

(NSCC–CS), National Supercomputing 

Center in Guangzhou (NSCC–GZ), and 

the National Supercomputing Center in 

Tianjin (NSCC–TJ), the ERC specified a 

license requirement for all items subject 

to the EAR, and established a license 

application review policy of case-bycase review for all items subject to the 

EAR. For the other seven persons 

recommended for addition on the basis 

of § 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 (incountry) 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 (incountry) to the persons being added to 

the Entity List in this rule. 

This final rule adds the following 

eleven persons under eleven entries to 

the Entity List: 

China 

(1) National Supercomputing Center 

Changsha (NSCC–CS), Changsha City, 

Hunan Province, China; 

(2) National Supercomputing Center 

Guangzhou (NSCC–GZ), Sun Yat-Sen 

University, University City, Guangzhou, 

China; 

(3) National Supercomputing Center 

Tianjin (NSCC–TJ), 7th Street, Binhai 

New Area, Tianjin, China; and 

(4) National University of Defense 

Technology (NUDT), Garden Road 

(Metro West), Changsha City, Kaifu 

District, Hunan Province, China. 

Pakistan 

(1) Azad Motors Property Choice, 

a.k.a., the following four aliases: 

—Peshawar Master Azad Motors; 

—Peshawar Motors Complex; 

—Karakoram Azad Motors; and 

—Azad Cars. Main GT Road, Hajji 

Camp, Peshawar, Pakistan; 

(2) Hakim Noor, a.k.a., the following 

one alias: 

—Hakim Nur. Sarafa Shop #10, Noor 

Muhammad Market, Miram Shaw, 

Pakistan; and Mir Nasir Plaza, 

Sikandar Pura, Pakistan; 

(3) Hakim Nur Sarafa, a.k.a., the 

following two aliases: 

—Noor Muhammad Market; and 

—Haji Hakim Noor Saraf. Sarafa Shop 

#10, Noor Muhammad Market, Miram 

Shaw, Pakistan; and Market Shop 

Number 10, Sarafa Bazar Miram 

Shaw, Pakistan; and 

(4) Sher Qadir, Darpa Khel Village, 

Mirim Shaw, Pakistan. 

United Arab Emirates 

(1) Ajab Noor, a.k.a., the following 

one alias: 

—Ajab Nur. Box No. 28715, Dubai, 

U.A.E.; and Dubai Tower, Al 

Maktoum Rd, Al Rigga, Dubai, Near 

Baniyas Square Metro Station, U.A.E.; 

(2) Ajab Trading Co. LLC, Box No. 

28715, Dubai, U.A.E.; and Dubai Tower, 

Al Maktoum Rd, Al Rigga, Dubai, Near 

Baniyas Square Metro Station, U.A.E.; 

and 

(3) Perfect Tyre Trading Co LLC, Al 

Ain—Al Sanaiya—Inh. Mohammed 

Sultan Aldarmaki–Bld, Dubai, U.A.E.; 

and Post Box No. 67221, Abu Dhabi, 

U.A.E. 

Removal From the Entity List 

This rule implements a decision of 

the ERC to remove one person, SATCO 

GmbH, located in Germany, from the 

Entity List on the basis of a removal 

request by a company of the same name 

as the listed person. Based upon a 

review of the information provided in 

the removal request in accordance with 

§ 744.16 (Procedure for requesting 

removal or modification of an Entity 

List entity), the ERC determined that 

this person should be removed from the 

Entity List. 

SATCO GmbH was originally added 

to the Entity List on December 12, 2013 

(78 FR 75458) for participating in a 

procurement ring headed by Saeed 

Talebi (Talebi) that coordinated the 

supply and sale of U.S.-origin items in 

violation of Department of Treasury, 

Office of Foreign Assets Control 

regulations and the EAR. Based on a 

request from an unrelated company of 

the same name being adversely 

impacted, and the fact that SATCO 

GmbH is not a legally established 

corporate entity in Bremen, Germany, 

and that BIS has no evidence of the use 

of this name by Talebi network since 

their addition to the Entity List, the ERC 

determined to remove SATCO GmbH 

from the Entity List. 

In accordance with § 744.16(c), the 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration has sent written 

notification to this person, informing 

the person of the ERC’s decision to 

remove the person from the Entity List. 

This final rule implements the 

decision to remove the following one 

person located in Germany from the 

Entity List: 

Germany 

(1) SATCO GmbH, a.k.a., the 

following one alias: 

—Satco Inc., Park Street 4, Bremen, 

Germany 28209. 

The removal of the one entity 

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 this entity. 

However, the removal of this entity 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 

§ 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

8526 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 18, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

end-use that is prohibited by part 744 of 

the EAR.’’ Additionally this removal 

does 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 

February 18, 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 Jasmeet_K._

Seehra@omb.eop.gov, or by fax to (202) 

395–7285. 

3. This rule does not contain policies 

with Federalism implications as that 

term is defined in Executive Order 

13132. 

4. For the eleven persons added under 

eleven entries 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 or the entries 

being modified on 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 these 

entities 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 one removal 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)). This one 

removal has 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 applicant to 

receive U.S. exports immediately since 

this one applicant already has 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 18, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 8527 

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 

decision to remove this entity. 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 one 

person from the Entity List removes a 

requirement (the Entity-List-based 

license requirement and limitation on 

use of license exceptions) on this one 

person being removed from the Entity 

List. The rule does not impose a 

requirement on any other person for this 

one removal 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] 

■ 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 January 21, 2014, 79 FR 3721 

(January 22, 2014); Notice of August 7, 2014, 

79 FR 46959 (August 11, 2014); Notice of 

September 17, 2014, 79 FR 56475 (September 

19, 2014); Notice of January 21, 2015, 80 FR 

3461 (January 22, 2015). 

■ 2. Supplement No. 4 to part 744 is 

amended: 

■ a. By adding under China, in 

alphabetical order, four Chinese entities; 

■ b. By removing under Germany, one 

German entity, ‘‘Satco GmbH, a.k.a., the 

following one alias: -Satco Inc. Park 

Street 4, Bremen, Germany 28209.’’; 

■ c. By adding under Pakistan, in 

alphabetical order, four Pakistani 

entities; and 

■ d. By adding under United Arab 

Emirates, in alphabetical order, three 

Emirati entities. 

The additions read as follows: 

Supplement No. 4 to Part 744—Entity 

List 

Country Entity License requirement License 

review policy 

Federal Register 

citation 

*******

CHINA, PEO- * * * * * * 

PLE’S REPUBLIC OF 

National Supercomputing Center 

Changsha (NSCC–CS), Changsha 

City, Hunan Province, China 

For all items subject to 

the EAR. (See § 744.11 

of the EAR) 

Case-by-case basis ......... 80 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER 2/18/15]. 

National Supercomputing Center 

Guangzhou (NSCC–GZ), Sun YatSen University, University City, 

Guangzhou, China 

For all items subject to 

the EAR. (See § 744.11 

of the EAR) 

Case-by-case basis ......... 80 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER 2/18/15]. 

National Supercomputing Center 

Tianjin (NSCC–TJ), 7th Street, Binhai 

New Area, Tianjin, China 

For all items subject to 

the EAR. (See § 744.11 

of the EAR) 

Case-by-case basis ......... 80 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER 2/18/15]. 

National University of Defense Technology (NUDT), Garden Road (Metro 

West), Changsha City, Kaifu District, 

Hunan Province, China 

For all items subject to 

the EAR. (See § 744.11 

of the EAR) 

Case-by-case basis ......... 80 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER 2/18/15]. 

******

*******

PAKISTAN * * * * * * 

Azad Motors Property Choice, a.k.a., 

the following four aliases: 

—Peshawar Master Azad Motors; 

For all items subject to 

the EAR. (See § 744.11 

of the EAR) 

Presumption of denial ...... 80 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER 2/18/15]. 

—Peshawar Motors Complex; 

—Karakoram Azad Motors; and 

—Azad Cars 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

8528 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 18, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

Country Entity License requirement License 

review policy 

Federal Register 

citation 

Main GT Road, Hajji Camp, Peshawar, 

Pakistan 

******

Hakim Noor, a.k.a., the following one 

alias: 

—Hakim Nur. 

For all items subject to 

the EAR. (See § 744.11 

of the EAR) 

Presumption of denial ...... 80 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER 2/18/15]. 

Sarafa Shop #10, Noor Muhammad 

Market, Miram Shaw, Pakistan; and 

Mir Nasir Plaza, Sikandar Pura, Pakistan. 

Hakim Nur Sarafa, a.k.a., the following 

two aliases: 

—Noor Muhammad Market; and 

For all items subject to 

the EAR. (See § 744.11 

of the EAR) 

Presumption of denial ...... 80 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER 2/18/15]. 

—Haji Hakim Noor Saraf. 

Sarafa Shop #10, Noor Muhammad 

Market, Miram Shaw, Pakistan; and 

Market Shop Number 10, Sarafa Bazar 

Miram Shaw, Pakistan. 

******

Sher Qadir, Darpa Khel Village, Mirim 

Shaw, Pakistan 

For all items subject to 

the EAR 

Presumption of denial ...... 80 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER 2/18/15]. 

******

*******

UNITED ARAB 

EMIRATES 

* * * * * * 

Ajab Noor, a.k.a., the following one 

alias: 

—Ajab Nur. 

For all items subject to 

the EAR. (See § 744.11 

of the EAR) 

Presumption of denial ...... 80 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER 2/18/15]. 

Box No. 28715, Dubai, U.A.E.; and 

Dubai Tower, Al Maktoum Rd, Al 

Rigga, Dubai, Near Baniyas Square 

Metro Station, U.A.E. 

Ajab Trading Co. LLC, Box No. 28715, 

Dubai, U.A.E.; and 

For all items subject to 

the EAR. (See § 744.11 

of the EAR) 

Presumption of denial ...... 80 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER 2/18/15]. 

Dubai Tower, Al Maktoum Rd, Al 

Rigga, Dubai, Near Baniyas Square 

Metro Station, U.A.E. 

******

Perfect Tyre Trading Co LLC, Al Ain— 

Al Sanaiya—Inh. Mohammed Sultan 

Aldarmaki—Bld, Dubai, U.A.E.; and 

Post Box No. 67221, Abu Dhabi, 

U.A.E. 

For all items subject to 

the EAR. (See § 744.11 

of the EAR) 

Presumption of denial ...... 80 FR [INSERT FR PAGE 

NUMBER 2/18/15]. 

******

*******

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 32 / Wednesday, February 18, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 8529 

Dated: February 12, 2015. 

Kevin J. Wolf, 

Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03321 Filed 2–17–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

27 CFR Part 9 

[Docket No. TTB–2014–0006; T.D. TTB–128; 

Ref: Notice No. 144] 

RIN 1513–AC09 

Establishment of the Fountaingrove 

District Viticultural Area 

AGENCY: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau, Treasury. 

ACTION: Final rule; Treasury decision. 

SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax 

and Trade Bureau (TTB) establishes the 

approximately 38,000-acre 

‘‘Fountaingrove District’’ viticultural 

area in Sonoma County, California. The 

viticultural area lies entirely within the 

larger, multicounty North Coast 

viticultural area. TTB designates 

viticultural areas to allow vintners to 

better describe the origin of their wines 

and to allow consumers to better 

identify wines they may purchase. 

DATES: This final rule is effective March 

20, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and 

Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco 

Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street 

NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; 

phone 202–453–1039, ext. 175. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background on Viticultural Areas 

TTB Authority 

Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol 

Administration Act (FAA Act), 27 

U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary 

of the Treasury to prescribe regulations 

for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits, 

and malt beverages. The FAA Act 

provides that these regulations should, 

among other things, prohibit consumer 

deception and the use of misleading 

statements on labels and ensure that 

labels provide the consumer with 

adequate information as to the identity 

and quality of the product. The Alcohol 

and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 

(TTB) administers the FAA Act 

pursuant to section 1111(d) of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002, 

codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The 

Secretary has delegated various 

authorities through Treasury 

Department Order 120–01 (Revised), 

dated December 10, 2013, to the TTB 

Administrator to perform the functions 

and duties in the administration and 

enforcement of this law. 

Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 

part 4) authorizes TTB to establish 

definitive viticultural areas and regulate 

the use of their names as appellations of 

origin on wine labels and in wine 

advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB 

regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets forth 

standards for the preparation and 

submission of petitions for the 

establishment or modification of 

American viticultural areas (AVAs) and 

lists the approved AVAs. 

Definition 

Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB 

regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) defines 

a viticultural area for American wine as 

a delimited grape-growing region having 

distinguishing features, as described in 

part 9 of the regulations, and a name 

and a delineated boundary, as 

established in part 9 of the regulations. 

These designations allow vintners and 

consumers to attribute a given quality, 

reputation, or other characteristic of a 

wine made from grapes grown in an area 

to the wine’s geographic origin. The 

establishment of AVAs allows vintners 

to describe more accurately the origin of 

their wines to consumers and helps 

consumers to identify wines they may 

purchase. Establishment of an AVA is 

neither an approval nor an endorsement 

by TTB of the wine produced in that 

area. 

Requirements 

Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB 

regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(2)) outlines 

the procedure for proposing an AVA 

and provides that any interested party 

may petition TTB to establish a grapegrowing region as an AVA. Section 9.12 

of the TTB regulations (27 CFR 9.12) 

prescribes standards for petitions for the 

establishment or modification of AVAs. 

Petitions to establish an AVA must 

include the following: 

• Evidence that the area within the 

proposed AVA boundary is nationally 

or locally known by the AVA name 

specified in the petition; 

• An explanation of the basis for 

defining the boundary of the proposed 

AVA; 

• A narrative description of the 

features of the proposed AVA affecting 

viticulture, such as climate, geology, 

soils, physical features, and elevation, 

that make the proposed AVA distinctive 

and distinguish it from adjacent areas 

outside the proposed AVA boundary; 

• The appropriate United States 

Geological Survey (USGS) map(s) 

showing the location of the proposed 

AVA, with the boundary of the 

proposed AVA clearly drawn thereon; 

and 

• A detailed narrative description of 

the proposed AVA boundary based on 

USGS map markings. 

Fountaingrove District Petition 

TTB received a petition from Douglas 

Grigg of Walnut Hill Vineyards, LLC, on 

behalf of the Fountaingrove Appellation 

Committee, proposing the establishment 

of the ‘‘Fountaingrove District’’ AVA in 

Sonoma County, California, northeast of 

the city of Santa Rosa. The committee 

originally proposed the name 

‘‘Fountaingrove,’’ after the 19th Century 

utopian community of Fountaingrove 

that once existed within the region of 

the proposed AVA. Before the 

publication of the proposed rule, the 

committee submitted to TTB a request 

to change the name to ‘‘Fountaingrove 

District’’ in order to avoid affecting 

current use of the word 

‘‘Fountaingrove,’’ standing alone, in 

brand names on wine labels. The 

proposed AVA covers approximately 

38,000 acres and has approximately 35 

commercially-producing vineyards 

covering a total of 500 acres. 

The proposed Fountaingrove District 

AVA is located entirely within the 

larger, multicounty North Coast AVA 

(27 CFR 9.30). The proposed AVA 

shares its boundaries with the 

established Russian River Valley (27 

CFR 9.66), Chalk Hill (27 CFR 9.52), 

Knights Valley (27 CFR 9.76), Calistoga 

(27 CFR 9.209), Diamond Mountain 

District (27 CFR 9.166), Spring 

Mountain District (27 CFR 9.143), and 

Sonoma Valley (27 CFR 9.29) AVAs but 

does not overlap any of these AVAs. 

According to the petition, the 

distinguishing features of the proposed 

Fountaingrove District AVA are its 

topography, climate, and soils. The 

proposed AVA is located on the western 

slopes of the Mayacmas Mountains and 

features low, rolling hills as well as 

higher, steeper mountains with 

southwest-facing slopes. The Sonoma 

Mountains, along the southwestern 

boundary of the proposed AVA, shelter 

the proposed AVA from the strongest 

marine breezes and heaviest fog, but an 

air gap in the mountains does allow 

some cooling air and fog into the 

proposed AVA. The moderate 

temperatures within the proposed 

Fountaingrove District AVA are suitable 

for growing cabernet sauvignon, 

chardonnay, sauvignon blanc, merlot, 

cabernet franc, zinfandel, syrah, and 

voignier grape varieties. The proposed 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES