16-0825 Thursday “The Daily Bugle”

16-0825 Thursday “Daily Bugle”

Thursday, 25 August 2016

TOPThe Daily Bugle is a free daily newsletter from Full Circle Compliance, containing changes to export/import regulations (ATF, Customs, NISPOM, EAR, FACR/OFAC, FTR/AES, HTSUS, and ITAR), plus news and events. Subscribe 
for free subscription.
Contact us
 for advertising inquiries and rates.

  1. Commerce/BIS: President’s Export Council Subcommittee on Export Administration to Meet on 15 Sep in Wash DC 
  2. Commerce/ITA: President’s Export Council to Meet on 14 Sep – Accessible Via Webcast 
  1. Ex/Im Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions
  2. Commerce/Census: “ACE Export Reports: Revised Certification of Authority” 
  3. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.) 
  4. DoD/DSCA Posts SAMM and Policy Memoranda, Week 21-27 Aug 
  5. DoD/DSS Releases DSS Authorization and Assessment Process Manual 
  6. State/DDTC: (No new postings.) 
  1. ST&R Trade Report: “Opportunity to Add or Remove Goods and Countries to/from GSP Duty-Free Treatment”  
  1. CTP: “Harmonizing the Destination Control Statement: What You Need to Know” 
  2. S.H. Mintzer, M.J. McConkey & J. Zhang: “US Customs Issues New Regulations Allowing US Interested Parties to Initiate Investigations into Importers Allegedly Evading Antidumping and Countervailing Duties” 
  3. T. McCarthy & H. Shapiro: “Would the International Emergency Economic Powers Act Help Trump?” 
  4. Gary Stanley’s ECR Tip of the Day 
  1. “7th Annual ‘Partnering for Compliance™’ West ECR/Export/Import Control Program” – Dallas, TX, 13-16 Sep 
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Latest Changes: ATF (15 Jan 2016), Customs (22 Mar 2016), DOD/NISPOM (18 May 2016), EAR (23 Aug 2016), FACR/OFAC (18 May 2016), FTR (15 May 2015), HTSUS (1 Jul 2016), ITAR (17 Aug 2016) 



1. Commerce/BIS: President’s Export Council Subcommittee on Export Administration to Meet on 15 Sep in Wash DC

(Source: Federal Register) [Excerpts.]
81 FR 58472: President’s Export Council Subcommittee on Export Administration; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting
   The President’s Export Council Subcommittee on Export Administration (PECSEA) will meet on September 15, 2016, 10:00 a.m., at the U.S. Department of Commerce, Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues NW., Washington, DC The PECSEA provides advice on matters pertinent to those portions of the Export Administration Act, as amended, that deal with United States policies of encouraging trade with all countries with which the United States has diplomatic or trading relations and of controlling trade for national security and foreign policy reasons. …
   The open session will be accessible via teleconference to 25 participants on a first come, first served basis. To join the conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Yvette Springer at Yvette.Springer@bis.doc.gov no later than September 8, 2016.
   A limited number of seats will be available for the public session. Reservations are not accepted. To the extent that time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. The public may submit written statements at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate the distribution of public presentation materials to the Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward the public presentation materials prior to the meeting to Ms. Springer via email. …
   For more information, call Yvette Springer at (202) 482-2813.
   Dated: August 18, 2016.
Kevin J. Wolf, Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

81 FR 58472-58743: President’s Export Council: Meeting of the President’s Export Council
* AGENCY: International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
* ACTION: Notice of an open meeting.
* SUMMARY: The President’s Export Council (Council) will hold a meeting to deliberate on recommendations related to promoting the expansion of U.S. exports. Priority topics will include: the Trans-Pacific Partnership and Board appointments for the Export-Import Bank of the United States. Additional topics may include: the Administration’s trade agenda, infrastructure investment, workforce readiness, access to capital for microbusinesses and SMEs, and export control reform. The final agenda will be posted at least one week in advance of the meeting on the President’s Export Council Web site at http://trade.gov/pec.
* DATES: September 14, 2016 at 9:30 a.m. (ET)
* ADDRESSES: The President’s Export Council meeting will be broadcast via live webcast on the Internet at http://whitehouse.gov/live.
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tricia Van Orden, Designated Federal Officer, President’s Export Council, Room 4043, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: 202-482-5876, email: tricia.vanorden@trade.gov.
   Press inquiries should be directed to the International Trade Administration’s Office of Public Affairs, telephone: 202-482-3809.
   Public Submissions: The public is invited to submit written statements to the President’s Export Council. Statements must be received by 5:00PM ET on September 12, 2016 by either of the following methods: …
   Dated: August 18, 2016.
Tricia Van Orden, Designated Federal Officer, President’s Export Council.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 


OGS_a13. Ex/Im Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions
(Source: Federal Register)

* State; NOTICES; Foreign Terrorist Organization Designations: Jemaah Islamiya and Other Aliases  [Publication Date: 26 August 2016.]

* U.S. Customs and Border Protection; RULES; Administrative Exemption on Value Increased for Certain Articles [Publication Date: 26 August 2016.]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OGS_a64. Commerce/Census: “ACE Export Reports: Revised Certification of Authority”

(Source: census@subscriptions.census.gov, 25 Aug 2016)
There is a revised COA for Export Reports authorization in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE). The goal of this new form is to expedite the vetting process and continue to ensure privacy and data confidentiality per the Foreign Trade Regulations, Section 30.60.
How does this change affect you? It depends on where you are in the process.
Users that have already submitted their request in ACE and provided COA:
NO immediate action is required. Your request is being vetted in the order it was received. An analyst will contact you if further information is needed.
New Users
If you have not submitted a request and would like access to ACE Export Reports:
  (1) Log into your ACE Exporter Account at: CBP.gov/ACE
  (2) Select the accounts tab.
  (3) Then select Exporter from the pull down menu on the left hand side. Select GO.
  (4) Select your account located on the bottom left, by clicking the expand button (‘+’ sign) then selecting EIN or Account Name.
  (5) On the top right hand side of the page, click on the “Request EIN Reports Authorization” button. Once you submit your request, you are prompted to the REVISED COA. Complete the form as instructed.
Benefits of the ACE Export Reports
The ACE Export Reports feature provides users in the trade community the ability to access their official export records free of charge. Users have access to 5 year’s worth of data in addition to the current year and can create customizable reports (dynamic or scheduled). This is a great auditing and compliance tool because users now have access to data they file directly and data filed on their behalf.
Additional information on ACE Export Reports can be found here.
Contact Information
For question on the vetting process or completing the COA:
Trade Outreach Branch
  – Phone: 1-800-549-0595 option 5
  – Email: exportreports@census.gov
For questions on ACE Export Accounts and/or Export Reports:                            
CBP ACE Account Service Desk
  – Phone:1-866-530-4172 option1, followed by option 2
  – Email: ace.support@cbp.dhs.gov
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OGS_a55. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)

(Source: Commerce/BIS)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OGS_a26. DoD/DSCA Posts SAMM and Policy Memoranda, Week 21-27 Aug

(Source: DoD/DSCA)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OGS_a37. DoD/DSS Releases DSS Authorization and Assessment Process Manual

(Source: DoD/DSS)
The release of the DAAPM begins our transition of the National Industrial Security Program (NISP) Certification and Accreditation (C&A) process to Risk Management Framework (RMF). This transition will align our authorization process for cleared Industry’s classified systems with other Federal Agencies, the Intelligence Community and the Department of Defense. The intent of RMF is to improve information security, improve our risk management processes and to promote reciprocity.
Risk Management Framework (RMF) Transition Plan

Current authorizations are grandfathered and systems can continue to process under existing authorizations until expiration. See transition timeline below:
System Accreditation Status
Transition Timeline / Instructions
System Security Plan (SSP) /Master System Security Plan (MSSP) submitted prior to October 3, 2016.
Continue using current C&A process with the latest version of the ODAA Process Manual. The ATO will last no greater than 18 months starting October 3, 2016. Within six months of authorization, develop a Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M) for transition to RMF.
SSPs/MSSPs after October 3, 2016.
Execute RMF Assessment and Authorization through the DAAPM.

Standalones are no longer allowed to be self-certified under the C&A process.

Local Area Network (LAN), Wide Area Network (WAN) or Interconnected System after October 3, 2016.
Phase 1:
Cleared contractors continue using the current C&A process with the latest version of the ODAA Process Manual. ATO will last no greater than 18 months starting October 1, 2016. Within six months of authorization, develop a POA&M for transition to RMF.

Phase 2: Execute RMF Assessment and Authorization process through the DAAPM. (Timeline TBD.)

Everyone is encouraged to review DAAPM, templates and job aids below in preparation for the transitioning of Single User and Multi-User Standalones to RMF effective October 3, 2016.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OGS_a48. State/DDTC: (No new postings.)

(Source: State/DDTC)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Importers, foreign governments and others again have an opportunity to petition the U.S. government for changes in the coverage of the Generalized System of Preferences. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has initiated its annual review of the products and countries eligible for duty-free treatment under GSP and is accepting petitions seeking to add, preserve or remove GSP benefits. …
Product Review
. Interested parties, including foreign governments, may submit petitions to:
  – designate additional articles as eligible for GSP benefits, including when imported only from (a) least-developed beneficiary developing countries or (b) beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries under the African Growth and Opportunity Act;
  – withdraw, suspend or limit the application of GSP duty-free treatment with respect to any article; and
  – otherwise modify GSP coverage.
Such petitions are due by Oct. 4 and must include a detailed description of the product and the eight-digit HTSUS subheading under which it is classified.
Country Practices Review
. Any interested party may submit a petition to:
  – review the GSP eligibility of any BDC with respect to any of the GSP designation criteria (petitions due by Oct. 4); or
  – waive the 2016 competitive need limitation for individual BDCs with respect to specific articles that would otherwise be removed from GSP eligibility (petitions due by Dec. 2).
USTR states that before submitting CNL waiver petitions prospective petitioners may wish to review the 2016 year-to-date import trade data for products of interest that is available here.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


COMM_a110. CTP: “Harmonizing the Destination Control Statement: What You Need to Know”

(Source: CTP)
On August 17, 2016, the Bureau of Industry and Security and the Department of State published final rules (here and here) to harmonize the Destination Control Statement (DCS) required under §758.6 of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and §123.9 under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) respectively. As part of Export Control Reform (ECR) efforts, the agencies have sought to harmonize regulatory provisions that are intended to achieve the same purpose. The DCS is one example of an area where interagency coordination should reduce the burden on exporters.
The purpose of the DCS is to notify consignees and end users that the shipment is subject to U.S. export controls and that diversion contrary to U.S. law is prohibited. Prior to the final rule, the EAR required exporters to include a DCS on certain export control documents while the ITAR had a similar requirement but utilized slightly different verbiage. The ECR initiative has led to an increased number of shipments featuring both ITAR- and EAR-controlled items. The harmonized DCS aims to simplify export clearance requirements and address this issue so exporters don’t have to determine which DCS to use.
Since the proposed rule was posted on May 22, 2015, additional changes have been made to further harmonize the two statements and provide greater clarity based on public comments received. Here’s what you need to know:
  – The DCS requirement is limited to the commercial invoice. Once the final rule enters into effect, exporters will no longer need to include the DCS on the air waybill, the bill of lading, or other export control documents.
  – Under the EAR, a DCS is required for any shipment of tangible items from the U.S. of any item subject to the EAR, including exports authorized under No License Required (NLR).
  – A DCS is not required for shipments of only EAR99 tangible items or items exported under License Exceptions BAG or GFT.
  – For shipments of 9×515 or “600 series” items exported in tangible form, the Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) of each item must be included on the commercial invoice. Although not required, BIS considers it a best practice to list all ECCNs on the commercial invoice.
  – For shipments under the ITAR, you must also specify the country of ultimate destination, the end-user, and the license or other approval or license exemption citation on the commercial invoice.
  – In situations where shipments of USML items and items subject to the EAR are shipped pursuant to a Department of State license or approval, the U.S. exporter must provide the end-user and consignees with the appropriate ECCN or EAR99 designation of the items included in the shipment. However, this need not be included in the commercial invoice. An exporter is not required to provide the specific USML category for the items included in the shipment.
The final DCS language applicable under the ITAR and the EAR is as follows:
These items are controlled by the U.S. Government and authorized for export only to the country of ultimate destination for use by the ultimate consignee or end-user(s) herein identified. They may not be resold, transferred, or otherwise disposed of, to any other country or to any person other than the authorized ultimate consignee or end-user(s), either in their original form or after being incorporated into other items, without first obtaining approval from the U.S. Government or as otherwise authorized by U.S. law and regulations.
As you can see, the revised DCS does not include EAR-specific language, but rather adopts text that is equally applicable under the ITAR. For additional clarity, the term “authorized” includes exports, reexports, and transfers (in-country) designated under a NLR authorization, and “country of ultimate destination” means the country specified on the commercial invoice where the ultimate consignee or end user will receive the items as an “export.” For example, if the ultimate consignee is a distributor, the country of ultimate destination is the country in which the distributor is located. 
BIS expects to publish FAQs on the new requirements in the coming weeks. The final rules become effective on November 15, 2016. Exporters should use this three month implementation period to take any necessary actions needed to modify their export compliance procedures and train the proper personnel.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

COMM_a211. S.H. Mintzer, M.J. McConkey & J. Zhang: “US Customs Issues New Regulations Allowing US Interested Parties to Initiate Investigations into Importers Allegedly Evading Antidumping and Countervailing Duties”
(Source: Mayer Brown)
* Authors: Sydney H. Mintzer, Esq., smintzer@mayerbrown.com, 202-263-3866; Matthew J. McConkey, Esq., mmcconkey@mayerbrown.com,
+86 135-1103-0873; and Jing Zhang, Esq., jzhang@mayerbrown.com, 202-263-3385. All of Mayer Brown
On August 22, 2016, US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Department of the Treasury published a set of interim regulations setting forth new procedures for CBP to investigate claims of evasion of antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) orders (the “duty evasion investigations.”). [FN/1] The interim regulations seek to address a closely watched issue regarding US AD and CVD proceedings: Private parties that may benefit from the collection of AD or CV duties, including relevant US producers and competing importers, are now accorded their day in court, although the process starts with CBP.
On February 24, 2016, President Obama signed into law a new trade act that contains Title IV-Prevention of Evasion of AD and CVD Orders (EAPA). [FN/2] The interim regulations were required by section 421 of the EAPA. By way of background, lack of enforcement of AD and CVD orders is widely considered in the United States to be a serious endemic. In May 2012, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report titled “Management Enhancements Needed to Improve Efforts to Detect and Deter Duty Evasion.” This report called for more robust CBP efforts to address AD and CVD order evasion and facilitate oversight of these efforts. [FN/3] Recently, in August 2016, another GAO report examined a related issue of non-payment risks associated with CBP’s efforts to collect AD and CV duties, [FN/4] which quickly gathered the support of a critical federal lawmaker. [FN/5] It was against this backdrop that the new interim regulations targeting evasion of AD and CVD orders were issued.
The interim regulations now obligate CBP to investigate private duty evasion allegations that have reasonable factual support. This new mandate to act on private allegations does not take away the agency’s traditional enforcement authority. Under pre-existing customs laws, CBP can take enforcement actions against an evasion of AD and CVD orders, which include the assessment of civil penalties against offending importers. In addition, a fraudulent scheme to evade AD duties has led to a criminal prosecution of the offending importer. [FN/6] However, AD and CV duty evasion allegations submitted by private parties prior to the implementation of the EAPA did not afford the complaining parties an opportunity to participate in a resultant investigation. Also, CBP used to have no obligation to notify the complaining parties of the outcome of the agency’s investigation. Both above-mentioned problems have been addressed in the August 22 interim regulations. Meanwhile, the interim regulations made clear that CBP retains the authority to use information obtained during an EAPA investigation to impose penalties under its traditional civil enforcement tool (19 U.S.C. § 1592).
The August 22 interim regulations provide for the definition of ”evade” and ”evasion.” In the current context, these terms refer to entering merchandise subject to a US AD or CVD order (the “covered merchandise”) for consumption by means of any document or electronically transmitted data or information, written or oral statement or act that is material and false or to any omission that is material and that results in any cash deposit or other security or any amount of applicable AD or CV duties being reduced or not being applied. Hence, falsely reporting the country of origin or physical nature of the goods falls squarely within the ambit of the interim regulations. As to who may make a duty evasion complaint, US producers of a domestic like product are typically who allege wrongful importer actions to evade AD and CVD orders. The new interim regulations also give standing to importers of the covered merchandise who wish to bring evasion allegations against competing importers. These competing importers are included in the definition of “interested parties.” A duty evasion investigation may also be requested by a federal agency, including the Department of Commerce or the United States International Trade Commission.
Regarding the new investigation procedures, generally CBP will decide whether a duty evasion investigation is warranted within 15 business days after the receipt of a properly filed allegation. If CBP decides to not initiate an investigation, the complainant will be informed within five business days of that determination. Conversely, CBP will notify all known parties to a duty evasion investigation no later than 95 calendar days after the initiation of the investigation. A CBP determination as to whether duty evasion occurred will be made within 300 calendar days from the date of initiation of the investigation, with a 60-day extension reserved for “extraordinarily complicated” investigations. The parties to the investigation will be notified within five business days of the initial determination by CBP. They also have up to 30 business days after the date of the initial determination to request an administrative review by Regulations and Rulings, Office of Trade, which is a branch of CBP. The final administrative determination issued thereby is subject to judicial review in accordance with section 421 of the EAPA.
In publishing the interim regulations, effective August 22, 2016, CBP also seeks public comments on their contents and requires that all comments be received by October 21, 2016. All parties concerned with a covered merchandise should take notice of the interim regulations bringing private AD and CV duty evasion allegations into the process. Opportunities and risks coexist as CBP tees up its efforts to strengthen the enforcement of AD and CVD orders. The clock is already ticking on taking advantage of the public comment period.
  [FN/1] Investigation of Claims of Evasion of Antidumping and Countervailing Duties, 81 Fed. Reg. 56477 (Aug. 22, 2016).
  [FN/2] Pub. L. 114- 125, 130 Stat. 122, 155 (Feb. 24, 2016); 19 U.S.C. 4301 note.
  [FN/3] GAO, Management Enhancements Needed to Improve Efforts to Detect and Deter Duty Evasion (May 2012, available here.
  [FN/4] GAO, CBP Action Needed to Reduce Duty Processing Errors and Mitigate Nonpayment Risk (Jul. 2016), available here.
  [FN/5] House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady (R-TX), Brady Statement on GAO Report on Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Collections (Aug. 15, 2016) (press release), available here.
  [FN/6] Mayer Brown Legal Update, The Continuing US Trend to Criminalize Customs Violations (Oct. 30, 2012), available here.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

COMM_a312. T. McCarthy & H. Shapiro: “Would the International Emergency Economic Powers Act Help Trump?”

(Source: Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP,
reprinted with permission from the August 22, 2016 edition of THE NATIONAL LAW JOURNAL
) [This article does not advocate for election of a specific candidate.]
* Authors: Thomas McCarthy, Esq., tmccarthy@akingump.com, 202-887-4047; and Hal Shapiro, Esq., hshapiro@akingump.com, 202-887-4053. Both of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP.
Over the past two weeks, Donald Trump has outlined his economic plan and his national security plan, reiterating some of the primary tenets of his campaign: The United States is threatened by a host of actors outside of our country, including China, South Korea, Mexico and the Islamic State group.
In his descriptions, the threats are manifest in various ways – immigration, unfavorable trade agreements, offshoring and outsourcing, and currency manipulation, to name a few. Trump’s positions on trade and national security articulate a muscular U.S. response to these threats, but provide very little detail on the statutory authority to advance his agenda other than a reference to the Patriot Act as a basis for compelling Mexico to construct a border wall. This raises the question: How would he implement his international economic and national security vision under U.S. law?
The expansion of the presidential use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. 1701-1707, offers one possible answer, which if applied in a novel and unprecedented manner could have significant consequences its authors did not foresee.
Enacted in 1977, the IEEPA provides the president with authority to undertake a wide range of actions in response to “any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.” For example, the president may investigate, regulate, void, prevent or prohibit any acquisition, importation, exportation or dealing in transactions involving property in which any foreign country or a national thereof has an interest, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
Used for Sanctions
The IEEPA has historically been used by presidents to implement U.S. sanctions on foreign parties and persons. For example, in 1979, President Jimmy Carter issued Executive Order 12170, by which the United States imposed sanctions on Iran. Every president since Carter has used the act for similar purposes – most recently in March 2016, President Barack Obama used it enact measures against North Korea.
Despite the act’s broad authority, federal courts – comforted by the fact that Congress can terminate a declaration of national emergency by joint resolution – have held the IEEPA does not represent an unconstitutional delegation of authority to the president. In fact, the act was passed in an effort to limit the president’s authority to declare an indefinite state of national emergency during peacetime.
As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit wrote in its May 2011 ruling in United States v. Ali Amirnazmi, “IEEPA removed certain tools from the President’s peacetime kit. … IEEPA subjected the President’s authority to a host of procedural limitations designed to ensure Congress would retain its essential legislative superiority in the formulation of sanctions regimes erected under the Act’s delegation of emergency power.”
Trump does not have a record of public service that can be examined to determine whether he will break with presidential tradition and expand the use of IEEPA to accomplish his goals. However, the use of the act to single out foreign actors correlates closely with his transactional and litigious approach to issue resolution. The act is ideally suited to the task of extracting concessions and punishing recalcitrant partners – providing the ability to act quickly and unilaterally to respond to a wide range of perceived crises involving vexing third parties.
Examples of IEEPA’s potential use by Trump abound: a Trump administration could attempt to wield IEEPA to restrict imports from Mexico, China, South Korea or other countries during North American Free Trade Agreement, World Trade Organization or other free trade agreement renegotiations or disputes. To the extent that immigration laws fall short in furthering Trump’s plans for “extreme vetting” or other similar measures, IEEPA could provide additional authority to take action, such as seizing the assets of persons deemed a threat by a Trump administration. Emerging issues during his presidency could be afforded similar treatment.
Such actions would be subject to review by Congress, constitutional and statutory claims in U.S. federal courts, and challenges from U.S. trading partners under international dispute-resolution mechanisms. To the extent they conflict with the will of Congress or are deemed by federal courts to violate the IEEPA or Constitution, they could be challenged and possibly overturned, but not before the actions are executed and their effects are felt.
Although directed at foreign actors, the consequences would have repercussions, unintentionally or otherwise, for companies, consumers and workers within the United States and could be used indirectly to target uncooperative or U.S. companies or those otherwise critical of Trump.
The lifting of the era of restraint in the use of IEEPA should not be viewed as unthinkable or far-fetched. Indeed, Con­gress should examine this issue now and make clear whether it would view such uses of IEEPA as proper. As Americans go to the polls, they deserve a clear statement of where the candidates and their representatives stand on a question affecting U.S. trade relations and national security, and the separation of powers between the political branches of government.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

COMM_a413. Gary Stanley’s ECR Tip of the Day

(Source: Defense and Export-Import Update; available by subscription from
* Author: Gary Stanley, Esq., Global Legal Services, PC, (202) 352-3059,
If you are certain that your product is subject to the ITAR, but you are uncertain about which specific USML category paragraph applies to it, you should submit a commodity jurisdiction request rather than a general correspondence to get an official determination.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


TE_a114. “7th Annual ‘Partnering for Compliance™’ West ECR/Export/Import Control Program” – Dallas, TX, 13-16 Sep

(Source: Ailish NicPhaidin, Ailish@PartneringForCompliance.org)

* What: The 7th Annual “Partnering for Compliance™” West. Two additional DoS/DDTC speakers-see below. Program will focus intensely on a broad spectrum of export/import regulatory and compliance matters with an array of senior-level government and industry speakers. Our objective is to greatly expand your knowledge and awareness of the requirements needed to adhere to US export/import control regulations, thus helping to ensure your success as a global trader.
* Where: Dallas/Ft. Worth Marriott South Hotel, Dallas, TX
* When:
  – Tue, 13 Sep: 1-Day Program “Customs/Import Boot Camp”
  – Wed-Fri, 14-16 Sep: “7th Annual ‘Partnering for Compliance™’ West ECR/Export Control Program
* Speakers: Opening Keynote: DoC Assistant Secretary David Mills; DoS/DDTL: Terry Davis, Angela Countee Brown & Michael Reed; DoS/DDTC: Daniel Buzby; DoC/BIS: Adam Krepp & OEE James Fuller; DoD/DTSA: Ken Oukrop; Census Bureau: Dale Kelly; DHS/CBP: O’Ruill McCanlas; ICE: Dean Fittz; AND, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Field, LLP: Jonathan Poling; Braumiller Law Group PLLC: Adrienne Braumiller & Bruce Leeds (Imports); David Hayes: UK/EU Export Controls and U.S. Trade. NOTE: Adam Krepp will also focus on ECR updates.
* Cost: Customs/Import 1-day program: $200. Export 3-day program: $600. Both programs: $800.
* Remarks: As time permits, all Government and trade speakers will informally hold short “one-to-one” meetings with participants on a “first-come, first-served” basis.
*Certificates of Completion granting: 4.5 IIEI CEUs and 20 CES NCBFAA Credits for 3-day Exports program, and 6.5 CCS NCBFAA Credits for 1-day Customs/Import Boot Camp will be awarded for each program.
* More information: Here.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


(Source: Editor)

“Nothing except the mint can make money without advertising.”

  – Thomas Babington Macaulay (1st Baron Macaulay, PC, 1800-1859, was a British historian and Whig politician. He wrote extensively as an essayist and reviewer; his books on British history have been hailed as literary masterpieces.)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

EN_a216. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date?
(Source: Editor)

The official versions of the following regulations are published annually in the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), but are updated as amended in the Federal Register.  Changes to applicable regulations are listed below.
: 27 CFR Part 447-Importation of Arms, Ammunition, and Implements of War
  – Last Amendment: 15 Jan 2016: 81 FR 2657-2723: Machineguns, Destructive Devices and Certain Other Firearms; Background Checks for Responsible Persons of a Trust or Legal Entity With Respect To Making or Transferring a Firearm  
: 19 CFR, Ch. 1, Pts. 0-199
  – Last Amendment: 22 Mar 2015: 81 FR 15159: Customs and Border Protection’s Bond Program; Correction 

  – Last Amendment: 18 May 2016: Change 2: Implement an insider threat program; reporting requirements for Cleared Defense Contractors; alignment with Federal standards for classified information systems; incorporated and canceled Supp. 1 to the NISPOM  (Summary here.)

  – Last Amendment: 23 Aug 2016: 81 FR 57451-57456: Addition of Certain Persons to the Entity List 

: 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders
  – Last Amendment: 18 May 2016: 81 FR 31169-31171: Burmese Sanctions Regulations 
: 15 CFR Part 30
  – Last Amendment: 15 May 2015; 80 FR 27853-27854: Foreign Trade Regulations (FTR): Reinstatement of Exemptions Related to Temporary Exports, Carnets, and Shipments Under a Temporary Import Bond 
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available
  – The latest edition (9 May 2016) of Bartlett’s Annotated FTR (“BAFTR”), by James E. Bartlett III, is available for downloading in Word format. The BAFTR contains all FTR amendments, FTR Letters and Notices, a large Index, and footnotes containing case annotations, practice tips, and Census/AES guidance.  Subscribers receive revised copies every time the FTR is amended.  The BAFTR is available by annual subscription from the Full Circle Compliance website.  BITAR subscribers are entitled to a 25% discount on subscriptions to the BAFTR, please contact us to receive your discount code. 
, 1 Jul 2016: 19 USC 1202 Annex.  (“HTS” and “HTSA” are often seen as abbreviations for the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated, shortened versions of “HTSUSA”.)
  – Last Amendment: 12 Aug 2016; Harmonized System Update 1611, containing 2,707 ABI records and 743 harmonized tariff records.
  – HTS codes for AES are available
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available

22 C.F.R. Ch. I, Subch. M, Pts. 120-130 (Caution — The ITAR as posted on GPO’s eCFR website and linked on the DDTC often takes several weeks to update the latest amendments.)

  – Latest Amendment: 17 Aug 2016:
81 FR 54732-54737: Amendment to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Procedures for Obtaining State Department Authorization To Export Items Subject to the Export Administration Regulations; Revision to the Destination Control Statement; and Other Changes 
  – The only available fully updated copy (latest edition 17 Aug 2016) of the ITAR is contained in Bartlett’s Annotated ITAR (“BITAR”), by James E. Bartlett III.  The BITAR contains all ITAR amendments to date, plus a large Index, and over 700 footnotes containing case annotations, practice tips, DDTC guidance, and explanations of errors in the official ITAR text.  Subscribers receive updated copies of the BITAR in Word by email, usually revised within 24 hours after every ITAR amendment.  The BITAR is THE essential tool of the ITAR professional.  The BITAR is available by annual subscription from the Full Circle Compliance website.  BAFTR subscribers receive a 25% discount on subscriptions to the BITAR, please contact us to receive your discount code.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


* The Ex/Im Daily Update is a publication of FCC Advisory B.V., edited by James E. Bartlett III and Alexander Bosch, and emailed every business day to approximately 7,500 subscribers to inform readers of changes to defense and high-tech trade laws and regulations. We check the following sources daily: Federal Register, Congressional Record, Commerce/AES, Commerce/BIS, DHS/CBP, DOJ/ATF, DoD/DSS, DoD/DTSA, State/DDTC, Treasury/OFAC, White House, and similar websites of Australia, Canada, U.K., and other countries and international organizations.  Due to space limitations, we do not post Arms Sales notifications, Denied Party listings, or Customs AD/CVD items.

* INTERNET ACCESS AND BACK ISSUES: The National Defense Industrial Association (“NDIA”) posts the Daily Update on line, and maintains back issues since August, 2009 here.

* RIGHTS & RESTRICTIONS: This email contains no proprietary, classified, or export-controlled information. All items are obtained from public sources or are published with permission of private contributors, and may be freely circulated without further permission. Any further use of contributors’ material, however, must comply with applicable copyright laws.

* CAVEAT: The contents cannot be relied upon as legal or expert advice.  Consult your own legal counsel or compliance specialists before taking actions based upon news items or opinions from this or other unofficial sources.  If any U.S. federal tax issue is discussed in this communication, it was not intended or written by the author or sender for tax or legal advice, and cannot be used for the purpose of avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter.

* SUBSCRIPTIONS: Subscriptions are free.  Subscribe by completing the request form on the Full Circle Compliance website.

* TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Use the Safe Unsubscribe link below.

Scroll to Top