400.31—Manufacturing and processing activity; criteria.
(a) In general.
Pursuant to section 15(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 81o(c) ), the Board has authority to restrict or prohibit zone activity “that in its judgment is detrimental to the public interest.” When evaluating zone and subzone manufacturing and processing activity, either as proposed in an application, in a request for manufacturing/ processing approval, or as part of a review of an ongoing operation, the Board shall determine whether the activity is in the public interest by reviewing it in relation to the evaluation criteria contained in paragraph (b) of this section. With regard to processing activity, this section shall apply only when the activity involves foreign articles subject to quantitative import controls (quotas) or results in articles subject to a lower duty rate (inverted tariff) than any of their foreign components. Such a review involves consideration of whether the activity is consistent with trade policy and programs, and whether its net economic effect is positive.
(b) Evaluation criteria—
(1) Threshold factors.
It is the policy of the Board to authorize zone activity only when it is consistent with public policy and, in regard to activity involving foreign merchandise subject to quotas or inverted tariffs, when zone procedures are not the sole determining cause of imports. Thus, without undertaking a review of the economic factors enumerated in § 400.31(b)(2), the Board shall deny or restrict authority for proposed or ongoing activity if it determines that:
(i)
The activity is inconsistent with U.S. trade and tariff law, or policy which has been formally adopted by the Executive branch;
(ii)
Board approval of the activity under review would seriously prejudice U.S. tariff and trade negotiations or other initiatives; or
(iii)
The activity involves items subject to quantitative import controls or inverted tariffs, and the use of zone procedures would be the direct and sole cause of imports that, but for such procedures, would not likely otherwise have occurred, taking into account imports both as individual items and as components of imported products.
(2) Economic factors.
After its review of threshold factors, if there is a basis for further consideration, the Board shall consider the following factors in determiing the net economic effect of the activity or proposed activity:
(viii)
Other relevant information relating to public interest and net economic impact considerations, including technology transfers and investment effects.
(c) Methodology and evidence—
(1)
The first phase ( § 400.31(b)) involves consideration of threshold factors. If an examiner or reviewer makes a negative finding on any of the factors in paragraph (b)(1) of this section in the course of a review, the applicant shall be informed pursuant to § 400.27(d)(3)(vii)(A). When threshold factors are the basis for a negative recommendation in a review of ongoing activity, the zone grantee and directly affected party shall be notified and given an opportunity to submit evidence pursuant to § 400.27(d)(3)(vii)(A). If the Board determines in the negative any of the factors in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, it shall deny or restrict authority for the proposed or ongoing activity.
(ii)
The process for paragraph (b)(2) of this section involves consideration of the enumerated economic factors, taking into account their relative weight and significance under the circumstances. Previous evaluations in similar cases are considered. The net effect is arrived at by balancing the positive and negative factors and arriving at a net economic effect.
(2) Contributory effect.
In assessing the significance of the economic effect of the zone activity as part of the consideration of economic factors, and in consideration of whether there is a significant public benefit, the Board may consider the contributory effect zone savings have as an incremental part of cost effectiveness programs adopted by companies to improve their international competitiveness.
(3) Burden of proof.
Applicants for subzones shall have the burden of submitting evidence establishing that the activity does or would result in a significant public benefit, taking into account the factors in paragraph (b) of this section. Applicants for approval of manufacturing or processing in general-purpose zones shall submit evidence regarding the positive economic effects that would result from activity within the zone and may submit evidence and comments as to policy considerations. Both types of applicants are expected to submit information in response to evidence of adverse economic effects during the public comment period. Parties should submit evidence that is probative and substantial in addressing the matter in issue.
(d) Monitoring and post-approval reviews—
(1)
Ongoing zone activity may be reviewed at anytime to determine whether it is in compliance with the Act and regulations, as well as the authority granted by the Board. Reviews may also be conducted to determine whether there are changed circumstances that raise questions as to whether the activity is detrimental to the public interest, taking into account the factors enumerated in § 400.31. The Board may prescribe special monitoring requirements in its decisions when appropriate.
(2)
Reviews may be initiated by the Board, the Commerce Department's Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, or the Executive Secretary; or, they may be undertaken in response to requests from parties directly affected by the activity in question and showing good cause.
(3)
Upon review, if the Board finds that zone activity is no longer in the public interest, taking into account the provisions of § 400.31, it may restrict the activity in question. The appropriateness of a delayed effective date will be considered in such cases.