29784 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 12, 1996 / Notices

Interest rates are:

Percent

For Physical Damage:

Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere ........................ 7.625

Homeowners Without Credit

Available Elsewhere ................ 3.875

Businesses With Credit Available

Elsewhere ................................ 8.000

Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere ........................ 4.000

Others (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere ........................ 7.125

For Economic Injury: Businesses

and Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available

Elsewhere .................................... 4.000

The number assigned to this disaster

for physical damage is 285906. For

economic injury the numbers are

890900 for West Virginia; 891000 for

Kentucky; 891100 for Maryland; 891200

for Ohio; 891300 for Pennsylvania; and

891400 for Virginia.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

Program Nos. 59002 and 59008)

Date: June 4, 1996.

Bernard Kulik,

Associate Administrator for Disaster

Assistance.

[FR Doc. 96–14904 Filed 6–11–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8025–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Office of Defense Trade Controls

[Public Notice 2395]

Statutory Debarment Under the

International Traffic in Arms

Regulations

AGENCY: Office of Defense Trade

Controls, Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of

which persons have been statutorily

debarred pursuant to § 127.7(c) of the

International Traffic in Arms

Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR Parts 120–

130).

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 12, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Philip S. Rhoads, Chief, Compliance

Enforcement Branch, Office of Defense

Trade Controls, Department of State

(703–875–6650).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

38(g)(4)(A) of the Arms Export Control

Act (AECA), 22 U.S.C. § 2778, prohibits

licenses or other approvals for the

export of defense articles and defense

services to be issued to a person, or any

party to the export, who has been

convicted of violating certain U.S.

criminal statutes, including the AECA.

The term ‘‘person’’, as defined in 22

C.F.R. § 120.14 of the International

Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR),

means a natural person as well as a

corporation, business association,

partnership, society, trust, or any other

entity, organization or group, including

governmental entities. The ITAR,

specifically § 126.7(e), defines the term

‘‘party to the export’’ to include the

president, the chief executive officer,

and other senior officers and officials of

the license applicant; the freight

forwarders or designated exporting

agent of the license applicant; and any

consignee or end-user of any item to be

exported. The statue permits certain

limited exceptions to this prohibition to

be made on a case-by-case basis. 22

U.S.C. § 2778(g)(4).

The ITAR, Section 127.7, authorizes

the Assistant Secretary of State for

Political-Military Affairs to prohibit

certain persons convicted of violating,

or conspiring to violate, the AECA, from

participating directly or indirectly in the

export of defense articles or in the

furnishing of defense services for which

a license or approval is required. Such

a prohibition is referred to as a

‘‘statutory debarment,’’ which may be

imposed on the basis of judicial

proceedings that resulted in a

conviction for violating, or of conspiring

to violate, the AECA. See 22 C.F.R.

§ 127.7(c). The period for debarment

will normally be three years from the

date of conviction. At the end of the

debarment period, licensing privileges

may be reinstated at the request of the

debarred person following the necessary

interagency consultations, after a

thorough review of the circumstances

surrounding the conviction, and a

finding that appropriate steps have been

taken to mitigate any law enforcement

concerns, as required by the AECA, 22

U.S.C. § 2778(g)(4).

Statutory debarment is based solely

upon a conviction in a criminal

proceeding, conducted by a United

States court. Thus, the administrative

debarment procedures, as outlined in

the ITAR, 22 CFR Part 128, are not

applicable in such cases.

The Department of State will not

consider applications for licenses or

requests for approvals that involve any

person or any party to the export who

has been convicted of violating, or of

conspiring to violate, the AECA during

the period of statutory debarment.

Persons who have been statutorily

debarred may appeal to the Under

Secretary for International Security

Affairs for reconsideration of the

ineligibility determination. A request for

reconsideration must be submitted in

writing within 30 days after a person

has been informed of the adverse

decision. 22 CFR § 127.7(d).

The Department of State policy

permits debarred persons to apply for

reinstatement of export privileges one

year after the date of the debarment, in

accordance with the AECA, 22 U.S.C.

§ 2778(g)(4)(A), and the ITAR, Section

127.7. A reinstatement request is made

to the Director of the Office of Defense

Trade Controls. Any decision to

reinstate export privileges can be made

only after the statutory requirements

under Section 38(g)(4) of the AECA have

been satisfied through a process

administered by the Office of Defense

Trade Controls. If reinstatement is

granted, the debarment will be

suspended.

Pursuant to the AECA, 22 U.S.C.

§ 2778(g)(4)(A), and the ITAR, 22 CFR

§ 127.7, the Assistant Secretary for

Political-Military Affairs has statutorily

debarred three persons who have been

convicted of conspiring to violate or

violating the AECA.

Teledyne Industries, Inc. d/b/a

Teledyne Wah Chang Albany has been

debarred for a one-year period from the

date of its most recent conviction

pursuant to a Consent Agreement

between the Department of State and

Teledyne Industries, Inc. d/b/a

Teledyne Wah Chang Albany. All other

persons listed below have been debarred

for a three-year period following the

date of their conviction, and have been

so notified by a letter from the Office of

Defense Trade Controls. Pursuant to

ITAR, Section 127.7(c), the names of

these persons, their offense, date(s) of

conviction and court(s) of conviction are

hereby being published in the Federal

Register. Anyone who requires

additional information to determine

whether a person has been debarred

should contact the Office of Defense

Trade Controls.

This notice involves a foreign affairs

function of the United States

encompassed within the meaning of the

military and foreign affairs exclusion of

the Administrative Procedure Act.

Because the exercise of this foreign

affairs function is discretionary, it is

excluded from review under the

Administrative Procedure Act.

In accordance with these authorities

the following persons are debarred for a

period of three years following their

conviction for conspiring to violate or

violating the AECA (name/address/

offense/conviction date/court citation):

1. Teledyne Industries, Inc., d/b/a Teledyne

Wah Chang Albany, P.O. Box 460, 1600
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 12, 1996 / Notices 29785

N.E. Old Salem Road, Albany, OR 97231–

0460, 18 U.S.C. § 371 (conspiracy to violate

22 U.S.C. § 2778) January 30, 1995, United

States v. Teledyne Industries, et al., U.S.

District Court, District of Columbia,

Criminal Docket No. CR–94–0286

2. Teledyne Industries, Inc., d/b/a Teledyne

Wah Chang Albany, P.O. Box 460, 1600

N.E. Old Salem Road, Albany, OR 97231–

0460, 18 U.S.C. § 371 (conspiracy to violate

22 U.S.C. § 2778) January 26, 1995, United

States v. Teledyne Industries, et al., U.S.

District Court, Southern District of Florida,

Criminal Docket No. 93–241–CR–

Highsmith

3. Swissco Management Group. Inc., 15485

Eagle Nest Lane, #210, Miami Lakes, FL

33014, 18 U.S.C. § 371 (conspiracy to

violate 22 U.S.C. § 2778), August 7, 1995,

United States v. Teledyne Industries, et al.,

U.S. District Court, Southern District of

Florida, Criminal Docket No. 93–241–CR–

Highsmith

4. Edward A. Johnson, 1655 Ferguson Drive,

N.W., Albany, OR 18 U.S.C. § 371

(conspiracy to violate 22 U.S.C. § 2778),

and 22 U.S.C. § 2778 (violating the AECA),

August 7, 1995, United States v. Teledyne

Industries, et al., U.S. District Court,

Southern District of Florida, Criminal

Docket No. 93–241–CR–Highsmith

Dated: May 6, 1996.

Michael T. Dixon,

Acting Director, Office of Defense Trade

Controls, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs,

Department of State.

[FR Doc. 96–14826 Filed 6–11–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–25–M

BUREAU OF POLITICAL-MILITARY

AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Bureau of Political-Military Affairs

[Public Notice 2404]

Imposition of Missile Proliferation

Sanctions Against Entities in Iran and

North Korea

AGENCY: Bureau of Political-Military

Affairs Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The United States

Government has determined that

entities in North Korea and Iran have

engaged in missile technology

proliferation activities that require

imposition of sanctions pursuant to the

Arms Export Control Act and the Export

Administration Act of 1979 (as carried

out under Executive Order 12424 of

August 19, 1994), as amended by the

National Defense Authorization Act for

Fiscal Year 1991, and the National

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal

Years 1992 and 1993.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 24, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vann H. Van Diepen, Office of

Chemical, Biological & Missile

Nonproliferation, Bureau of PoliticalMilitary Affairs, Department of State,

(202–647–1142).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to Section 73(a)(1) of the Arms Export

Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2797b(a)(1)),

Section 11B(b)(1) of the Export

Administration Act of 1979, as amended

(50 U.S.C. app. 2410b(b)(1)), as carried

out under Executive Order 12924 of

August 19, 1994 (hereinafter cited as the

‘‘Export Administration Act of 1979’’),

and Executive Order 12851 of June 11,

1993, the United States Government

determined on May 24, 1996, that the

following foreign persons have engaged

in missile technology proliferation

activities that require the imposition of

the sanctions described in Section

73(a)(2)(A) of the Arms Export Control

Act (22 U.S.C. 2797b(a)(2)(A)) and

Section 11B(b)(1)(B)(i) of the Export

Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C.

app. 2410b(b)(1)(B)(i) on these entities

and their sub-units and successors:

1. Changgwang Sinyong Corporation

(aka the Korea Mining Development

Trading Bureau) (North Korea)

2. Ministry of Defense Armed Forces

Logistics (Iran)

3. State Purchasing Office (Iran)

Accordingly, the following sanctions

are being imposed on these entities and

their sub-units and successors:

(A) Licenses for export to the entities

described above of Missile Technology

Control Regime (MTCR) equipment or

technology controlled pursuant to the

Export Administration Act of 1979 will

be denied for two years; and

(B) Licenses for export to the entities

described above of MTCR equipment or

technology controlled pursuant to the

Arms Export Control Act will be denied

for two years; and

(C) No United States Government

contracts relating to MTCR equipment

or technology and involving the entities

described above will be entered into for

two years.

Additionally, because of North

Korea’s status as a country with a nonmarket economy that was not a member

of the Warsaw Pact, the following

sanctions must be applied pursuant to

section 74(8)(B) of the Arms Export

Control Act to all activities of the North

Korean government relating to the

development or production of missile

equipment or technology, as well as all

activities of the North Korean

government affecting the development

or production of electronics, space

systems or equipment, and military

aircraft:

(A) Licenses for export to the

government activities described above

of MTCR equipment or technology

controlled pursuant to the Arms Export

Control Act will be denied for two

years; and

(B) No U.S. government contracts

relating to MTCR equipment or

technology and involving the

government activities described above

will be entered into for two years.

With respect to items controlled

pursuant to the Export Administration

Act of 1979, the export sanction does

not apply to exports made pursuant to

certain General licenses.

These measures shall be implemented

by the responsible agencies as provided

in Executive Order 12851 of June 11,

1993.

Dated: May 29, 1996.

Eric D. Newsom,

Acting Assistant Secretary of State for

Political-Military Affairs.

[FR Doc. 96–14823 Filed 6–11–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–25–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

Reports, Forms and Recordkeeping

Requirements Agency Information

Collection Activity Under OMB Review

AGENCY: Department of Transportation

(DOT), Office of the Secretary (OST).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that

the Information Collection Request (ICR)

abstracted below has been forwarded to

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and comment. The

ICR describes the nature of the

information collection and its expected

cost and burden. The Federal Register

Notice with a 60-day comment period

soliciting comments on the following

collection of information was published

on February 15, 1996 [61 FR 6056].

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before July 8, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles McGuire, (202) 366–1037, and

refer to the OMB Control Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Tariffs.

OMB Control Number: 2106–0009.

Abstract: Chapter 415 of Title 49 of

the United States Code requires that

every air carrier and foreign air carrier

file with the Department of

Transportation (DOT), publish and keep

open (i.e. post) for public inspection,

tariffs showing all ‘‘foreign’’ or

international fares, rates, and related

charges for air transportation between