This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains documents other than rules or

proposed rules that are applicable to the

public. Notices of hearings and investigations,

committee meetings, agency decisions and

rulings, delegations of authority, filing of

petitions and applications and agency

statements of organization and functions are

examples of documents appearing in this

section.

Notices Federal Register

22543

Vol. 60, No. 88

Monday, May 8, 1995

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Docket 16–95]

Proposed Foreign-Trade Zone—Lenoir

County, North Carolina (BeaufortMorehead City Customs Port of Entry)

An application has been submitted to

the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the

Board) by the North Carolina Global

TransPark Authority, a North Carolina

public corporation (the TransPark

Authority), to establish a generalpurpose foreign-trade zone in Lenoir

County, North Carolina, adjacent to the

Beaufort-Morehead City Customs port of

entry. The application was submitted

pursuant to the provisions of the

Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended

(19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations

of the Board (15 CFR Part 400). It was

formally filed on April 25, 1995. The

applicant is authorized to make the

proposal under Chapter 55C of the

North Carolina General Statutes.

The proposed zone would be the

second general-purpose zone in the

Beaufort-Morehead City Customs port of

entry area. The existing zone is FTZ 67

in Morehead City, some 60 miles distant

(Grantee: North Carolina Department of

Commerce, Board Order 174, 46 F.R.

22919, April 22, 1981).

The proposed zone site (1,170 acres)

would cover the Kinston Regional

Jetport complex, approximately one

mile northwest of the City of Kinston in

Lenoir County. The Jetport is part of the

North Carolina Global TransPark

(TransPark) project, a new 15,000-acre

manufacturing, distribution,

transportation and logistics facility

currently under development. The

Jetport is owned by the City of Kinston

and Lenoir County, and it is operated by

the County of Lenoir-City of Kinston

Airport Commission. The TransPark

Authority has an option to acquire the

Jetport.

The application contains evidence of

the need for additional zone services in

the Beaufort-Morehead City port of

entry area. Several firms have indicated

an interest in using zone procedures

within the proposed project for

warehousing/distribution of such items

as plastics products, cedar wood

products, electric forklift trucks, fine

china, flashlights and lanterns, and cold

storage products. Specific

manufacturing approvals are not being

sought at this time. Requests would be

made to the Board on a case-by-case

basis.

In accordance with the Board’s

regulations, a member of the FTZ Staff

has been designated examiner to

investigate the application and report to

the Board.

As part of the investigation, the

Commerce examiner will hold a public

hearing on June 8, 1995, 9:00 a.m., in

the Auditorium, Main Building, Lenoir

Community College, Intersection of US

58 South and US 70 East, Kinston,

North Carolina.

Public comment on the application is

invited from interested parties.

Submissions (original and 3 copies)

shall be addressed to the Board’s

Executive Secretary at the address

below. The closing period for their

receipt is July 7, 1995. Rebuttal

comments in response to material

submitted during the foregoing period

may be submitted during the subsequent

15-day period (to July 24, 1995).

A copy of the application and

accompanying exhibits will be available

during this time for public inspection at

the following locations:

Neuse Regional Library, Kinston-Lenoir

County Public Library, 510 N. Queen

Street, Kinston, North Carolina 28501

Office of the Executive Secretary,

Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room

3716, U.S. Department of Commerce,

14th & Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20230.

Dated: April 28, 1995

John J. Da Ponte, Jr.,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–11254 Filed 5–5–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

[Docket A(32b1)–6–95]

Foreign-Trade Zone 122—Corpus

Christi, TX, Subzone 122L, Koch

Refining Company (Crude Oil Refinery

Complex); Request for Modification of

Restriction

A request has been submitted to the

Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board)

by the Port of Corpus Christi Authority,

grantee of FTZ 122, pursuant to

§ 400.32(b)(1) of the Board’s regulations,

for modification of the restrictions in

FTZ Board Order 535 authorizing

Subzone 122L at the crude oil refinery

complex of Koch Refining Company

(Koch) in Corpus Christi, Texas. The

request was formally filed on April 26,

1995.

The FTZ Board approved subzone

status for the Koch refinery in 1991

(Subzone 122L, Board Order 535, 56 FR

43905, 9/5/91). The approval was

subject to certain standard restrictions,

including one that required the election

of privileged foreign status on incoming

foreign merchandise.

The company is now requesting that

this restriction be modified so that it

would have the option available under

the FTZ Act to choose non-privileged

foreign (NPF) status on foreign refinery

inputs used to produce certain

petrochemical feedstocks and byproducts including the following:

Benzene, toluene, xylenes, hydrocarbon

mixtures, distillates/residual fuel oils,

kerosene, naphthas, liquified natural

gas, ethane, propane, butane, ethylene,

propylene, butylene, butadiene,

petroleum coke, asphalt, sulfur, sulfuric

acid, cumene and pseudocumene.

The request cites the FTZ Board’s

recent decision in the Amoco, Texas

City, Texas case (Board Order 731, 60

FR 13118, 3/10/95) which authorized

subzone status with the NPF option

noted above. In the Amoco case, the

Board concluded that the restriction that

precluded this NPF option was not

needed under current oil refinery

industry circumstances.

Public comment on the proposal is

invited from interested parties.

Submissions (original and 3 copies)

shall be addressed to the Board’s

Executive Secretary at the address

below. The closing period for their

receipt is June 7, 1995.

A copy of the application and

accompanying exhibits will be available

for public inspection at the following
22544 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 88 / Monday, May 8, 1995 / Notices

1Evidence supporting, though not requiring, a

finding of de jure absence of central control

includes: (1) An absence of restrictive stipulations

associated with an individual exporter’s business

and export licenses; (2) any legislative enactments

decentralizing control of companies; or (3) any

other formal measure by the government

decentralizing control of companies.

2See ‘‘PRC Government Findings on Enterprise

Autonomy,’’ in Foreign Broadcast Information

Service-China-93–133 (July 14, 1993) and 1992

Central Intelligence Agency Report to the Joint

Economic Committee, Hearings on Global Economic

and Technological Change: Former Soviet Union

and Eastern Europe and China, Pt. 2 (102 Cong., 2d

Sess.).

3The factors considered include: (1) Whether the

export prices are set by or subject to the approval

of a governmental authority; (2) whether the

location: Office of the Executive

Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board,

U.S. Department of Commerce, Room

3716, 14th & Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,

Washington, DC 20230.

Dated: May 1, 1995.

John J. Da Ponte, Jr.,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–11253 Filed 5–5–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P

International Trade Administration

[A–570–835]

Notice of Final Determination of Sales

at Less Than Fair Value: Furfuryl

Alcohol From the People’s Republic of

China

AGENCY: Import Administration,

International Trade Administration,

Department of Commerce.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 8, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Brinkmann or Greg Thompson, Office of

Antidumping Investigations, Import

Administration, International Trade

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution

Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230;

telephone: (202) 482–5288 or (202) 482–

2336, respectively.

Final Determination

We determine that furfuryl alcohol

from the People’s Republic of China

(PRC) is being, or is likely to be, sold in

the United States at less than fair value

(LTFV), as provided in section 735 of

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the

Act). The estimated margins are shown

in the ‘‘Continuation of Suspension of

Liquidation’’ section of this notice.

Case History

Since the preliminary determination

of sales at LTFV on December 9, 1994,

(59 FR 65009, December 16, 1994), the

following events have occurred:

Verification of the questionnaire

responses was conducted in February

1995. Reports concerning these

verifications were issued in March 1995.

QO Chemicals, Inc. (the petitioner) as

well as Qingdao Chemicals & Medicines

& Health Products Import & Export

Company (Qingdao) and Sinochem

Shandong Import & Export Company

(Sinochem Shandong) (together referred

to as respondents) submitted case and

rebuttal briefs on March 27 and 30,

1995, respectively. A public hearing was

held on April 3, 1995. Inasmuch as the

submitted briefs contained certain

untimely, new information, the

Department of Commerce (the

Department) issued letters to the

petitioner and the respondents

concerning the redaction from the

record of this new information on April

10, 1994.

Scope of Investigation

The product covered by this

investigation is furfuryl alcohol

(C4H3OCH2OH). Furfuryl alcohol is a

primary alcohol, and is colorless or pale

yellow in appearance. It is used in the

manufacture of resins and as a wetting

agent and solvent for coating resins,

nitrocellulose, cellulose acetate, and

other soluble dyes.

The product subject to this

investigation is classifiable under

subheading 2932.13.00 of the

Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the

United States (HTSUS). Although the

HTSUS subheading is provided for

convenience and customs purposes, our

written description of the scope of this

proceeding is dispositive.

Period of Investigation

The period of investigation (POI) is

December 1, 1993 through May 31,

1994.

Separate Rates

Both of the participating exporters,

Qingdao and Sinochem Shandong have

requested a separate, company-specific

dumping margin. Their respective

business licenses indicate that they are

owned ‘‘by all the people.’’ In the Final

Determination of Sales at Less Than

Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the

People’s Republic of China, 59 FR

22585, (May 2, 1994) (Silicon Carbide)

and the Final Determination of Sales at

Less Than Fair Value: Coumarin from

the People’s Republic of China, 59 FR

66895 (December 28, 1994) (Coumarin),

we found that the PRC central

government had devolved control of

state-owned enterprises, i.e., enterprises

‘‘owned by all the people.’’ As a result,

we determined that companies owned

‘‘by all the people’’ were eligible for

individual rates, if they met the criteria

developed in the Final Determination of

Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers

from the People’s Republic of China 56

FR 20588 (May 6, 1991) (Sparklers) and

amplified in Silicon Carbide. Under this

analysis, the Department assigns a

separate rate only when an exporter can

demonstrate the absence of both de jure

and de facto governmental control over

export activities.

De Jure Analysis 1

The PRC laws placed on the record of

this investigation establish that the

responsibility for managing companies

owned by ‘‘all the people,’’ including

the respondent companies, has been

transferred from the government to the

enterprises themselves. These laws

include: ‘‘Law of the People’s Republic

of China on Industrial Enterprises

Owned by the Whole People,’’ adopted

on April 13, 1988 (1988 Law);

‘‘Regulations for Transformation of

Operational Mechanism of State-Owned

Industrial Enterprises,’’ approved on

August 23, 1992 (1992 Regulations); and

the ‘‘Temporary Provisions for

Administration of Export

Commodities,’’ approved on December

21, 1992 (1992 Export Provisions). In

particular, the 1988 Law states that

enterprises have the right to set their

own prices (see Article 26). This

principle was restated in the 1992

Regulations (see Article IX).

The 1992 Export Provisions list

includes those products subject to direct

government control. In April 1994, the

‘‘Emergent Notice of Changes in Issuing

Authority for Export Licenses Regarding

Public Quota Bidding for Certain

Commodities’’ (1994 Quota Measure)

entered into force, superseding earlier

laws that had listed the subject

merchandise. Although furfuryl alcohol

was on the 1992 version of the Export

Provisions list, it has since been

removed. (See discussion in Comment

1.)

Consistent with Silicon Carbide, we

determine that the existence of these

laws demonstrates that Qingdao and

Sinochem Shandong, companies owned

by ‘‘all the people,’’ are not subject to

de jure control.

In light of reports 2 indicating that

laws shifting control from the

government to the enterprises

themselves have not been implemented

uniformly, our analysis of de facto

control becomes critical in determining

whether respondents are, in fact, subject

to governmental control.

De Facto Control Analysis 3

In the course of verification, we

confirmed that export prices for both