Action Affecting Export Privileges; Gold Technology Limited; Hero Peak Limited; Joanna Liu; Oriental Trading Corporation; Portson Trading Limited; Sunford Trading Limited and Zhenke International Trading Co. Ltd., 12442-12443 [05-4877]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
12442
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 48 / Monday, March 14, 2005 / Notices
Forest Service
Eastern Washington Cascades
Provincial Advisory Committee and the
Yakima Provincial Advisory Committee
Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Eastern Washington
Cascades Provincial Advisory
Committee and the Yakima Provincial
Advisory Committee will meet on
Thursday, March 24, 2005, at the Red
Lion Hotel, 1225 North Wenatchee Ave.,
Wenatchee, Washington. The meeting
will begin at 9 a.m. and continue until
3 p.m. During this meeting we will
share information on the Interstate
Highway 90 expansion project, Forest
Plan monitoring, Recreation Fee
legislation, and new developments
relating to the Northwest Forest Plan.
All Eastern Washington Cascades and
Yakima Province Advisory Committee
meetings are open to the public.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Direct questions regarding this meeting
to Paul Hart, Designated Federal
Official, USDA, Wenatchee National
Forest, 215 Melody Lane, Wenatchee,
Washington 98801, 509–664–9200.
Dated: March 8, 2005.
Paul Hart,
Designated Federal Official, Okanogan and
Wenatchee National Forests.
[FR Doc. 05–4927 Filed 3–11–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service
Siskiyou County Resource Advisory
Committee
Forest Service, USDA.
Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Siskiyou County
Resource Advisory Committee will meet
in Yreka, California, March 21, 2005.
The meeting will include routine
business, a discussion of larger scale
projects, and the review and
recommendation for implementation of
submitted project proposals.
DATES: The meeting will be held March
21, 2005, from 4 p.m. until 7 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Yreka High School Library, Preece
Way, Yreka, California.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob
Talley, RAC Coordinator, Klamath
National Forest, (530) 841–4423 or
electronically at rtalley@fs.fed.us.
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:31 Mar 11, 2005
Jkt 205001
The
meeting is open to the public. Public
comment opportunity will be provided
and individuals will have the
opportunity to address the Committee at
that time.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Dated: March 8, 2005.
Margaret J. Boland,
Designated Federal Official.
[FR Doc. 05–4928 Filed 3–11–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
Action Affecting Export Privileges;
Gold Technology Limited; Hero Peak
Limited; Joanna Liu; Oriental Trading
Corporation; Portson Trading Limited;
Sunford Trading Limited and Zhenke
International Trading Co. Ltd.
Order Temporarily Denying Export
Privileges
Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the
Export Administration Regulations
(‘‘EAR’’), the Bureau of Industry and
Security (‘‘BIS’’), U.S. Department of
Commerce, through its Office of Export
Enforcement (‘‘OEE’’), has requested
that I issue an Order temporarily
denying the export privileges under the
EAR of the following:
(1) Gold Technology Limited, Flat 23C, 97
High Street, Hong Kong;
(2) Hero Peak Limited, Flat C, Block 4, 11/
F Golden Bldg., 145 Fuk Wa Street, Sham
Shui, Po, Kowloon, Hong Kong; and, Room
D, 11/F, Fui Nam Building, 48–51 Connaught
Road West, Hong Kong;
(3) Joanna Liu, Flat 23C, 97 High Street,
Hong Kong;
(4) Oriental Trading Corporation, 1st Floor,
Masco Plaza, Blue Area, P.O. Box 2879,
Islamabad, Pakistan;
(5) Portson Trading Limited, Room D, 8/F,
217–223 Tung Choi Street, Mongkok,
Kowloon, Hong Kong; and, Room 709 Wing
Shan Tower, 173 Des Voeux Road Central,
Hong Kong; and, Room 2208, 22/F, 118
Connaught Road West, Hong Kong;
(6) Sunford Trading Limited, Room 2208,
22/F, 118 Connaught Road West, Hong Kong;
(7) Zhenke International Trading Co. Ltd.,
Tianjin Port Free Trade Zone, Room 801,
Gold Beauty Building, No. 88, Haibain 8
Road, TPFTZ, Tianjin, People’s Republic of
China;
(hereinafter collectively referred to as the
‘‘Respondents’’).
In its request, BIS has presented
evidence that indicates that the
Respondents have conspired with
others, known and unknown, to cause
items subject to the EAR to be illegally
exported to Pakistan, that they caused
exports of items controlled for nuclear
non-proliferation reasons to Pakistan
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
with knowledge that violations of the
EAR would occur, and that they took
actions intended to evade the EAR.
I find the evidence presented by BIS
demonstrates that the Respondents have
in the past conspired to undertake acts
that violate the EAR, that such
violations have been deliberate and
covert, and that there is a strong
likelihood of future violations,
particularly given the nature of the
transactions and the elaborate steps that
have been taken by Respondents to
avoid detection by the U.S. government
while knowing that their actions were in
violation of the EAR. As such, a
Temporary Denial Order (‘‘TDO’’) is
needed to give notice to persons and
companies in the United States and
abroad that they should cease dealing
with the Respondents in export
transactions involving items subject to
the EAR. Such a TDO is consistent with
the public interest to preclude future
violations of the EAR.
Accordingly, I find that a TDO
naming the Respondents is necessary, in
the public interest, to prevent an
imminent violation of the EAR. This
Order is issued on an ex parte basis
without a hearing based upon BIS’s
showing of an imminent violation.
It is therefore ordered:
First, that the Respondents, at the
addresses listed above (collectively 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’’)
exported or to be exported from the
United States that is subject to the
Export Administration Regulations
(‘‘EAR’’), or in any other activity subject
to the EAR, 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 exported or to be
exported from the United States that is
subject to the EAR, or in any other
activity subject to the EAR; or
C. Benefitting in any way from any
transaction involving any item exported
or to be exported from the United States
that is subject to the EAR, or in any
other activity subject to the EAR.
Second, that no person may, directly
or indirectly, do any of the following:
A. Export or reexport to or on behalf
of the Denied Persons any item subject
to the EAR;
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 48 / Monday, March 14, 2005 / Notices
B. Take any action that facilitates the
acquisition or attempted acquisition by
the Denied Persons of the ownership,
possession, or control of any item
subject to the EAR that has been or will
be exported from the United States,
including financing or other support
activities related to a transaction
whereby 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 the Denied Persons of
any item subject to the EAR that has
been exported from the United States;
D. Obtain from the Denied Persons
order in the United States any item
subject to the EAR with knowledge or
reason to know that the item will be, or
is intended to be, exported from the
United States; or
E. Engage in any transaction to service
any item subject to the EAR that has
been or will be exported from the
United States and which is owned,
possessed or controlled by the Denied
Persons, or service any item, of
whatever origin, that is owned,
possessed or controlled by the Denied
Persons if such service involves the use
of any item subject to the EAR that has
been or will be exported from the
United States. For purposes of this
paragraph, servicing means installation,
maintenance, repair, modification or
testing.
Third, that, after notice and
opportunity for comment as provided in
section 766.23 of the EAR, any other
person, firm, corporation, or business
organization related to any of the
Respondents 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.
Fourth, that this Order does not
prohibit any export, reexport, or other
transaction subject to the EAR where the
only items involved that are subject to
the EAR are the foreign-produced direct
product of U.S.-origin technology.
Fifth, that in accordance with the
provisions of Section 766.24(e) of the
EAR, the Respondents 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.
Sixth, that in accordance with the
provisions of Section 766.24(d) of the
EAR, BIS may seek renewal of this
Order by filing a written request not
later than 20 days before the expiration
date. The Respondents may oppose a
request to renew this Order by filing a
VerDate jul<14>2003
15:31 Mar 11, 2005
Jkt 205001
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.
Seventh, that a copy of this Order
shall be served on the Respondents and
shall be published in the Federal
Register.
Eighth, that this Order is effective
upon publication in the Federal
Register and shall remain in effect for
180 days.
Entered this 8th day of March, 2005.
Wendy L. Wysong,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
Export Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 05–4877 Filed 3–11–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DT–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A–351–832]
Notice of Extension of Final Results of
Antidumping Duty Administrative
Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy
Steel Wire Rod From Brazil
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 14, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Constance Handley or David Neubacher,
at (202) 482–0631 or (202) 482–5823,
respectively; AD/CVD Operations,
Office 1, Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th
Street & Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
AGENCY:
Statutory Time Limits
Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires
the Department to issue (1) the
preliminary results of a review within
245 days after the last day of the month
in which occurs the anniversary of the
date of publication of an order or
finding for which a review is requested,
and (2) the final results within 120 days
after the date on which the preliminary
results are published. However, if it is
not practicable to complete the review
within that time period, section
751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the
Department to extend the time limit for
the preliminary results to a maximum of
365 days and the final results to a
maximum of 180 days (or 300 days if
the Department does not extend the
time limit for the preliminary results)
from the date of the publication of the
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
12443
preliminary results. See also 19 CFR
351.213(h)(2).
Extension of Final Results of Reviews
We determine that it is not practicable
to complete the final results of this
review within the original time limits.
Due to the complexity of issues present
in this administrative review, such as
the issues of affiliation and adverse facts
available, the Department needs more
time to address these items and evaluate
the issues more thoroughly. The
Department also needs more time to
address issues raised in the formal
scope inquiry that was initiated in
conjunction with the administrative
review on the exclusion of Grade 1080
Tire Cord Quality Wire Rod and Tire
Bead Quality Wire Rod. Therefore, we
are extending the deadline for the final
results of the above-referenced review
by 60 days. This 60-day extension of the
final results falls on Saturday, May 7,
2005; therefore, the final results will be
issued no later than the first business
day thereafter, Monday, May 9, 2005.
This extension is in accordance with
section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19
CFR 351.213(h)(2).
Dated: March 8, 2005.
Barbara E. Tillman,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import
Administration.
[FR Doc. E5–1066 Filed 3–11–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
(A–580–816)
Notice of Final Results of the Tenth
Administrative Review and New
Shipper Review of the Antidumping
Duty Order on Certain Corrosion–
Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products
from the Republic of Korea
Import Administration,
International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On September 7, 2004, the
Department of Commerce (the
Department) published the preliminary
results of the antidumping duty
administrative review and antidumping
duty new shipper review for certain
corrosion–resistant carbon steel flat
products (CORE) from the Republic of
Korea (Preliminary Results). This review
covers four manufacturers and exporters
of the subject merchandise: Union Steel
Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Union);
Pohang Iron & Steel Company, Ltd.
(POSCO), Pohang Coated Steel Co., Ltd.
(POCOS), and Pohang Steel Industries
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\14MRN1.SGM
14MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 48 (Monday, March 14, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12442-12443]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-4877]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
Action Affecting Export Privileges; Gold Technology Limited; Hero
Peak Limited; Joanna Liu; Oriental Trading Corporation; Portson Trading
Limited; Sunford Trading Limited and Zhenke International Trading Co.
Ltd.
Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges
Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the Export Administration Regulations
(``EAR''), the Bureau of Industry and Security (``BIS''), U.S.
Department of Commerce, through its Office of Export Enforcement
(``OEE''), has requested that I issue an Order temporarily denying the
export privileges under the EAR of the following:
(1) Gold Technology Limited, Flat 23C, 97 High Street, Hong
Kong;
(2) Hero Peak Limited, Flat C, Block 4, 11/F Golden Bldg., 145
Fuk Wa Street, Sham Shui, Po, Kowloon, Hong Kong; and, Room D, 11/F,
Fui Nam Building, 48-51 Connaught Road West, Hong Kong;
(3) Joanna Liu, Flat 23C, 97 High Street, Hong Kong;
(4) Oriental Trading Corporation, 1st Floor, Masco Plaza, Blue
Area, P.O. Box 2879, Islamabad, Pakistan;
(5) Portson Trading Limited, Room D, 8/F, 217-223 Tung Choi
Street, Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong Kong; and, Room 709 Wing Shan Tower,
173 Des Voeux Road Central, Hong Kong; and, Room 2208, 22/F, 118
Connaught Road West, Hong Kong;
(6) Sunford Trading Limited, Room 2208, 22/F, 118 Connaught Road
West, Hong Kong;
(7) Zhenke International Trading Co. Ltd., Tianjin Port Free
Trade Zone, Room 801, Gold Beauty Building, No. 88, Haibain 8 Road,
TPFTZ, Tianjin, People's Republic of China;
(hereinafter collectively referred to as the ``Respondents'').
In its request, BIS has presented evidence that indicates that the
Respondents have conspired with others, known and unknown, to cause
items subject to the EAR to be illegally exported to Pakistan, that
they caused exports of items controlled for nuclear non-proliferation
reasons to Pakistan with knowledge that violations of the EAR would
occur, and that they took actions intended to evade the EAR.
I find the evidence presented by BIS demonstrates that the
Respondents have in the past conspired to undertake acts that violate
the EAR, that such violations have been deliberate and covert, and that
there is a strong likelihood of future violations, particularly given
the nature of the transactions and the elaborate steps that have been
taken by Respondents to avoid detection by the U.S. government while
knowing that their actions were in violation of the EAR. As such, a
Temporary Denial Order (``TDO'') is needed to give notice to persons
and companies in the United States and abroad that they should cease
dealing with the Respondents in export transactions involving items
subject to the EAR. Such a TDO is consistent with the public interest
to preclude future violations of the EAR.
Accordingly, I find that a TDO naming the Respondents is necessary,
in the public interest, to prevent an imminent violation of the EAR.
This Order is issued on an ex parte basis without a hearing based upon
BIS's showing of an imminent violation.
It is therefore ordered:
First, that the Respondents, at the addresses listed above
(collectively 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'') exported or to be exported from the United States that is
subject to the Export Administration Regulations (``EAR''), or in any
other activity subject to the EAR, 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 exported or to be exported from the
United States that is subject to the EAR, or in any other activity
subject to the EAR; or
C. Benefitting in any way from any transaction involving any item
exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to
the EAR, or in any other activity subject to the EAR.
Second, that no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the
following:
A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of the Denied Persons any
item subject to the EAR;
[[Page 12443]]
B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted
acquisition by the Denied Persons of the ownership, possession, or
control of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be
exported from the United States, including financing or other support
activities related to a transaction whereby 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 the Denied Persons of any item subject to
the EAR that has been exported from the United States;
D. Obtain from the Denied Persons order in the United States any
item subject to the EAR with knowledge or reason to know that the item
will be, or is intended to be, exported from the United States; or
E. Engage in any transaction to service any item subject to the EAR
that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is
owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Persons, or service any
item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by the
Denied Persons if such service involves the use of any item subject to
the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States. For
purposes of this paragraph, servicing means installation, maintenance,
repair, modification or testing.
Third, that, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided
in section 766.23 of the EAR, any other person, firm, corporation, or
business organization related to any of the Respondents 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.
Fourth, that this Order does not prohibit any export, reexport, or
other transaction subject to the EAR where the only items involved that
are subject to the EAR are the foreign-produced direct product of U.S.-
origin technology.
Fifth, that in accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(e)
of the EAR, the Respondents 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.
Sixth, that in accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(d)
of the EAR, BIS may seek renewal of this Order by filing a written
request not later than 20 days before the expiration date. The
Respondents 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.
Seventh, that a copy of this Order shall be served on the
Respondents and shall be published in the Federal Register.
Eighth, that this Order is effective upon publication in the
Federal Register and shall remain in effect for 180 days.
Entered this 8th day of March, 2005.
Wendy L. Wysong,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 05-4877 Filed 3-11-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DT-P
