;

19-0301 Friday “Daily Bugle”

19-0301 Friday “Daily Bugle”

Friday, 1 March 2019

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

Contact us 
for advertising inquiries and rates
.

  1. DHS/CBP Seeks Comments on Form 3171, Application-Permit-Special License Unlading-Lading-Overtime Services
  2. DHS/CBP Seeks Comments on Form 1300, Vessel Entrance or Clearance Statement
  1. Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions 
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)
  3. DHS/CBP Announces Delay in Determination on Enforcement Dates for In-Bond
  4. DHS/CBP Posts Updated ACE Development and Deployment Schedule
  5. GAO: “Export Controls: State and Commerce Should Share Watch List Information If Proposed Rules to Transfer Firearms Are Finalized”
  6. Justice: “Snohomish County Resident Convicted of Violating the Arms Export Control Act and Three Federal Firearms Laws”
  7. State/DDTC: (No new postings.)
  1. Expeditors News: “CBP Updates HTS to Extend 10% Duty Rate for Third Round of Section 301 Tariffs”
  2. Financial Times: “U.S. Pledges to Limit Export Controls on Advanced Tech”
  3. Roll Call: “Menendez Blocks Firearm Export Rule, Citing Oversight Concerns”
  4. ST&R Trade Report: “Export Control Changes for Firearms, Ammunition on Hold”
  1. J.W. Bennett: “Are Cleared Defense Contractors Becoming Unwitting Export Violators?”
  2. M. Volkov: “AppliChem Pays OFAC $5.5 Million for Cuba Sanctions Violations”
  3. S. Capruzzi: “Dual-Use Goods. The European Union and The United Kingdom Are Preparing for A No Deal Scenario”
  1. FCC Presents U.S. Export Controls Awareness Course: “ITAR & EAR from a non-U.S. Perspective”, 9 April in Bruchem, the Netherlands
  2. List of Approaching Events: 142 Events Posted This Week, Including 34 New Events
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Latest Amendments: DHS/Customs (14 Jan 2019), DOC/EAR (20 Dec 2018), DOC/FTR (24 Apr 2018), DOD/NISPOM (18 May 2016), DOE/AFAEC (23 Feb 2015), DOE/EINEM (20 Nov 2018), DOJ/ATF (26 Dec 2018), DOS/ITAR (4 Oct 2018), DOT/FACR/OFAC (15 Nov 2018), HTSUS (27 Feb 2019)
  3. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 

EXIMITEMS FROM TODAY’S FEDERAL REGISTER

EXIM_a1

1. 
DHS/CBP Seeks Comments on Form 3171, Application-Permit-Special License Unlading-Lading-Overtime Services

(Source: 
Federal Register, 1 Mar 2019.) [Excerpts.]
 
84 FR 7098-7099: Agency Information Collection Activities:
* AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Department of Homeland Security.
* ACTION: 60-Day notice and request for comments; extension of an existing collection of information. … 
* ADDRESSES: Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) 
contained in this notice must include the OMB Control Number 1651-0005 
in the subject line and the agency name. To avoid duplicate
submissions, please use only one of the following methods to submit 
comments:
  (1) Email. Submit comments to: 
CBP_PRA@cbp.dhs.gov.
  (2) Mail. Submit written comments to: CBP Paperwork Reduction Act Officer, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade, Regulations and Rulings, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, 90 K Street NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177.
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional PRA information should be directed to Seth Renkema, Chief, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade, Regulations and Rulings, 90 K Street NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, Telephone number (202) 325-0056 or via email 
CBP_PRA@cbp.dhs.gov. Please note that the contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. Individuals seeking information about other CBP programs should contact the CBP National Customer Service Center at 877-227-5511, (TTY) 1-800-877-8339, or CBP website at 
https://www.cbp.gov.
* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: … 
  – Title: Application-Permit-Special License Unlading-Lading-Overtime Services.
  – OMB Number: 1651-0005.
  – Form Number: CBP Form 3171.
  – Action: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection with no change to the estimated burden hours or to CBP Form 3171.
  – Abstract: The Application-Permit-Special License Unlading-Lading-Overtime Services (CBP Form 3171) is used by commercial carriers and importers as a request for permission to unlade imported merchandise, baggage, or passengers. It is also used to request overtime services from CBP officers in connection with lading or unlading of merchandise, or the entry or clearance of a vessel, including the boarding of a vessel for preliminary supplies, ship’s stores, sea stores, or equipment not to be reladen. CBP Form 3171 is provided for 19 CFR 4.10, 4.30, 4.39, 4.91, 10.60, 24.16, 122.38, 123.8, 146.32 and 146.34. This form is accessible 
here. … 
 
  Dated: February 26, 2019.
Seth D Renkema, Branch Chief, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

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

EXIM_a2

2. 
DHS/CBP Seeks Comments on Form 1300, Vessel Entrance or Clearance Statement

(Source: 
Federal Register, 1 Mar 2019.) [Excerpts.] 
 
84 FR 7099-7100: Agency Information Collection Activities: Vessel Entrance or Clearance Statement
* AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Department of Homeland Security.
* ACTION: 30-Day notice and request for comments; extension of an existing collection of information. … 
* ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on this proposed information collection to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be addressed to the OMB Desk Officer for Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and sent via electronic mail to 
dhsdeskofficer@omb.eop.gov.
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional PRA information should be directed to Seth Renkema, Chief, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Office of Trade, Regulations and Rulings, 90 K Street NE, 10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229-1177, Telephone number (202) 325-0056 or via email 
CBP_PRA@cbp.dhs.gov. Please note that the contact information provided here is solely for questions regarding this notice. Individuals seeking information about other CBP programs should contact the CBP National Customer Service Center at 877-227-5511, (TTY) 1-800-877-8339, or CBP website at 
https://www.cbp.gov/.
* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: … 
  – Title: Vessel Entrance or Clearance Statement.
  – OMB Number: 1651-0019.
  – Form Number: CBP Form 1300.
  – Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection with no change to the burden hours or to the information being collected.
  – Abstract: CBP Form 1300, Vessel Entrance or Clearance Statement, is used to collect essential commercial vessel data at time of formal entrance and clearance in U.S. ports. The form allows the master to attest to the truthfulness of all CBP forms associated with the manifest package, and collects information about the vessel, cargo, purpose of entrance, certificate numbers, and expiration for various certificates. It also serves as a record of fees and tonnage tax payments in order to prevent overpayments. CBP Form 1300 was developed through agreement by the United Nations Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO) in conjunction with the United States and various other countries. This form is authorized by 19 U.S.C. 1431, 1433, and 1434, and provided for by 19 CFR part 4, and accessible 
here. … 
 
  Dated: February 26, 2019.
Seth D. Renkema, Branch Chief, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

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

OGSOTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

OGS_a13
. Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions
 

(Source:
Federal Register)
 

* State; NOTICES; Bureau of Political-Military Affairs; Rescission of Statutory Debarment of Rocky Mountain Instrument Company under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations [Pub. Date: 4 Mar 2019.]  

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

OGS_a24
Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)

(Source: 
Commerce/BIS)

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

OGS_a03
5. DHS/CBP Announces Delay in Determination on Enforcement Dates for In-Bond 
(Source: CSMS #19-000100, 1 Mar 2019.)
 
This message is to provide notification that an enforcement date for updated in-bond regulations has not been determined at this time.
 
On January 18, 2019, the Office of Field Operations announced via CSMS 19-000011 that enforcement of the changes to the in-bond regulations that was scheduled to begin on February 6, 2019 was postponed and a new enforcement date would be established. In this announcement, CBP stated that enforcement is not expected prior to March 1, 2019. This was to allow CBP to reschedule the planned consultation and collaboration with the trade through the Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee (COAC) In-bond Working Group. This collaboration is currently scheduled to take place in early April. The new enforcement date will be determined and announced at the completion of the review.
 
  – Related CSMS No. 19-000011
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OGS_a4
6. DHS/CBP Posts Updated ACE Development and Deployment Schedule

(Source: CSMS #19-000102, 1 Mar 2019.)
 
An updated ACE Development and Deployment Schedule has been posted to CBP.gov/ACE. The schedule includes updates as of February 2019.
 
Please note that this is a notional schedule and subject to change.
 
Visit CBP.gov/ACE for the most up to date information on ACE Deployments.

 

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

OGS_a5
7. GAO: “Export Controls: State and Commerce Should Share Watch List Information If Proposed Rules to Transfer Firearms Are Finalized”
(Source:
GAO Reports and Testimonies
, 1 Mar 2019.)
 
What GAO Found
 
The Department of State (State) reviewed approximately 69,000 commercial export license applications for firearms, artillery, and ammunition valued at up to $45.4 billion during fiscal years 2013 to 2017. About two-thirds of these applications were for firearms, and the majority involved the export of non-automatic and semi-automatic firearms, which are among the items proposed for transfer from State to Department of Commerce (Commerce) control.
 
GAO identified several differences in Commerce’s and State’s export controls including those related to registration, licensing, end-use monitoring, and congressional notification that, according to the agencies, would apply to firearms, artillery, and ammunition proposed for transfer. Some of these differences are due to varying requirements in applicable laws and regulations. For example, the law requires manufacturers, exporters, and brokers to register with State for items controlled by State but not for items controlled by Commerce. Additionally, while Commerce and State both screen parties to licenses against relevant watch lists, Commerce officials said they do not have direct access to State’s internal watch list, which contains derogatory information from past screening of licenses for firearms, artillery, and ammunition exports. State and Commerce officials stated that, while they have held some discussions, they have not established a process for sharing watch list information. Without access to State’s watch list, Commerce may lack critical information to effectively screen parties to exports of firearms and related items. State and Commerce also both have end-use monitoring programs to confirm the legitimacy of end-users but some differences exist. For example, State relies on embassy staff to conduct end-use monitoring whereas Commerce relies primarily on several officers positioned overseas specifically for this purpose. In addition, a statutory requirement to notify Congress of proposed firearms exports over $1 million would no longer apply to firearms that transfer from State to Commerce, according to Commerce officials.
 
According to the proposed rules and agency officials, the proposed transfer, if finalized, would result in a decline in licenses and revenues for State and an increase in licenses for Commerce, but the precise extent of these changes is unknown. State estimates that the transfer would result in a decline in revenue from registration fees but officials stated it is difficult to predict the extent of this decline. Commerce officials stated that they expected their licensing and enforcement workload to increase as a result of the transfer, if finalized, but they believe they have sufficient staff resources available to absorb the increase.
 
Why GAO Did This Study
 
The U.S. government implements an export control system to manage risks associated with exporting sensitive items while facilitating legitimate trade. State currently controls the export of most firearms, artillery, and ammunition. Regulatory changes proposed by State and Commerce would transfer this responsibility for many of these items to Commerce, which implements export controls under different legal and regulatory authorities. The proposed changes are part of a larger export control reform effort since 2010 to transfer control of less sensitive items from State to Commerce.
 
GAO was asked to review the proposed changes to export controls of firearms, artillery, and ammunition. This report assesses (1) the volume and value of commercial export license applications State reviewed for these items in fiscal years 2013-2017, (2) how certain export controls differ between State and Commerce, and (3) what is known about the resource implications for State and Commerce due to the proposed transfer. GAO reviewed the proposed rules and related laws and regulations; analyzed data and documents related to licensing, end-use monitoring, and staff resources; and interviewed agency officials.
 
What GAO Recommends
 
GAO recommends that if the proposed regulatory changes become final, State and Commerce develop a process for sharing State’s internal watch list with Commerce to enhance oversight of firearms, artillery, and ammunition exports. State and Commerce agreed with GAO’s recommendations.
 
For more information, contact Kimberly Gianopoulos at (202) 512-8612 or GianopoulosK@gao.gov.
 

[Editor’s Note: The entire report can be found
here.]

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

OGS_a6
8. Justice: “Snohomish County Resident Convicted of Violating the Arms Export Control Act and Three Federal Firearms Laws”
(Source: Justice, 28 Feb 2019.) [Excerpts.]
 
A 35-year-old resident of Tulalip, Washington, was convicted late yesterday in U.S. District Court in Seattle on four federal felonies related to illegal gun possession and trafficking, announced U.S. Attorney Brian T. Moran. Hany Veletanlic, a citizen of Bosnia legally residing in the United States, was found guilty of violating the Arms Export Control Act, illegally possessing two unregistered silencers, and possessing a firearm with an obliterated serial number. The jury deliberated nearly three hours following two days of testimony. U.S. District Judge James L. Robart scheduled sentencing for May 20, 2019.
 
According to records filed in the case and testimony at trial, in February 2017, Swedish law enforcement seized a part of a Glock firearm from a residence in Fagersta, Sweden. The serial number on the Glock firearm had been filed off, but Glock Inc. was able to trace the sale of the firearm using a specialized company code imprinted on the part. The gun had been purchased by a resident of the Seattle area. When contacted by law enforcement, the resident said he had privately sold the gun to VELETANLIC. In May 2017, VELETANLIC contacted Homeland Security agents when he learned they had been asking about the firearm. VELETANLIC told agents about his activity selling firearms on eBay and in direct sales. After being advised of his Miranda rights, VELETANLIC ultimately admitted shipping packages of firearms overseas – as many as 20 different shipments to two different customer groups in Sweden. He also shipped gun parts to a person in France.
 
In the course of a July 2017 interview with law enforcement, VELETANLIC admitted that the customer in France had shipped him two silencers in exchange for the firearms parts. VELETANLIC claimed the silencers had been destroyed. However, when agents received permission to look in VELETANLIC’s gun safe, they found one of the silencers. The second silencer was turned over by VELETANLIC to agents in August 2017.
 
In May 2018, VELETANLIC was arrested on federal charges. At the time of his arrest he was carrying a Ruger pistol with an obliterated serial number. VELETANLIC admitted the weapon had an obliterated serial number because it had been stolen.
 
Violating the Arms Export Control Act is punishable by up to 20 years in prison. Possession of as unregistered firearm is punishable by up to ten years in prison. Possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number is punishable by up to five years in prison. The maximum statutory sentence is prescribed by Congress and is provided here for informational purposes. The sentencing of the defendant will be determined by the court based on the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors. …
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

OGS_a7
9. State/DDTC: (No new postings.)
(Source: State/DDTC)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NWSNEWS

(Source:
Expeditors News, 27 Feb 2019.)
 
On February 27, 2019, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) made changes to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) to extend the 10% duty rate on HTS 9903.88.03, as announced in Cargo System Messaging Service (CSMS) #19-000088. The duty rate was set to increase on March 2, 2019 to 25% for goods that were subject to the third round of Section 301 tariffs.
 
CBP states that additional updates are possible once a forthcoming Federal Register notice is published.
 
The CSMS may be found here.

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

(Source:
Financial Times, 28 Feb 2019.) [Excerpts.]
 
Silicon Valley had feared fallout from broad ban sweeping up AI and other products
 
Donald Trump’s plans to slap controls on US exports of artificial intelligence and other advanced technologies will be far narrower than initially feared by Silicon Valley when the move was unveiled last year, according to a senior White House official.

Lynne Parker, the assistant director of artificial intelligence at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, said on Thursday that the list of technologies that will eventually be targeted by the Trump administration will be much shorter than an initial list published last November would suggest.

 
Speaking at the Center for a New American Security, Ms Parker said: “Don’t take from that notice of proposed rulemaking – the very broad nature of that list – don’t take it to mean what’s going to be export-controlled. …
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

(Source:
Roll Call, 28 Feb 2019.)
 
A senior Democratic senator has blocked a Trump administration proposed rule to switch oversight authority of firearm sales abroad from the State Department to the Commerce Department, arguing the move would significantly weaken congressional oversight and increase the risk of terrorists and criminals getting their hands-on powerful military-grade weapons.
 
Sen. Robert Menendez, ranking member on the Foreign Relations Committee, placed the hold last week after he was notified earlier this month about the proposed change by the State Department. Menendez is objecting to the final language of the rule.
 
“Firearms and ammunition – especially those derived from military models … are uniquely dangerous,” the New Jersey Democrat wrote in a Feb. 22 letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announcing his hold. “They should be subject to more, not less, rigorous export controls and oversight.”
 
Hill staffers and outside experts are concerned President Donald Trump will disregard Menendez’s hold, which is not legally binding but is based on decades of bipartisan tradition. The development of the rule change started under the Obama administration, and the Trump administration is now proposing it.
 
The proposed rule change would switch oversight responsibility on exports of firearms, including semi-automatic pistols, sniper rifles and AK-47-type assault weapons from Foggy Bottom to the Commerce Department. Critics of the move say that human rights, terrorism and rule of law concerns would take a back seat when considering an export request. It would also, they say, make it more difficult for lawmakers to learn about and stop firearm sales they disagree with.
 
Menendez has halted – for now – the regulatory change process, which would otherwise next move to a formal congressional notification period before the rule change would go into effect. The final rule has not been shared but an earlier version was published in May 2018 in the Federal Register.
Supporters of the rule argue it will bring more efficiency to the firearm export control process and make it easier to investigate potential export violations as Commerce has more resources to commit to the matter than the State Department.
 
  “At the time, I liked the fact that Commerce has 105 special agents whose sole purpose is to investigate and enforce export control violations,” Kevin Wolf, a former assistant secretary of Commerce for export administration in the Obama administration, said in an interview. “That was actually part of my motive for supporting this, because of the added enforcement resources that would be provided to this. Commerce is better able to deal with non-military customers.”
 
Wolf, now a partner with the law firm Akin Gump, said the Obama administration developed but never put forth the rule change because it occurred so close to the 2012 gun massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, and the political climate for it never improved. But the core motive of the rule change, which was part of a broader regulatory overhaul of defense industry exports, “was for State to do what it did best and for Commerce to do what it did best,” he said.
 
Also at issue is whether the State Department and other government agencies like the Pentagon will be able to block Commerce from approving an export request if the other agencies determine it is not in U.S. foreign policy or national security interests.
 
  “They will send possible license exports over to State for comment but they will be the ones making the final decision,” said a congressional aide, referring to the Commerce Department. “One of the reasons for doing this is fundamentally for export promotion, to make it easier to traffic in these arms abroad.” The staffer opposes the rule change and is not authorized to be quoted.
 
But Wolf insisted that under the proposed rule, “Commerce must get consensus from the other agencies and any one agency can object.”
 
If there is interagency disagreement about a proposed gun sale, the matter would be brought up the chain to higher agency officials, but how disputes ultimately would be settled is still unclear.
 
  “I’m an Obama appointee and I’m a gun-control Democrat,” Wolf said. “I am also just an export control person, who wanted a more efficient regulatory system to more properly [monitor] these dangerous items.”
 
Congress in the Dark
 
But rule opponents and supporters agree that Congress would be left in the dark on the majority of firearm exports.
 
Under the Arms Export Control Act, the State Department is required to notify Congress about any proposed exports of lethal weapons worth $1 million or more that fall under the United States Munitions List.
 
But the rule change would take firearms off the Munitions List and place them on the Commerce Control List, where they would be subject to much less congressional oversight including the pre-sale notification requirements contained in the export control law.
 
Furthermore, the Commerce Department is not required to notify Congress, as the State Department is, when there is evidence that U.S. defense exports have been misused, according to a July 2018 report by the liberal Center for International Policy. The Center objects to the proposed rule change.
 
In the past, lawmakers have used the notification period provided by the export control law to stop the proposed sale of guns to a number of problematic foreign governments that the State Department would otherwise have approved. In 2016 and 2017, lawmakers blocked separate Foggy Bottom proposals to export assault rifles and semi-automatic handguns to security services in the Philippines and Turkey due to human rights and rule of law concerns.
 
Without that final backstop of congressional notification, human rights advocates argue that even the State Department will be more likely to give the go-ahead to exporting military-grade weapons to buyers who could use them against civilians.
 
  “It’s definitely the most dramatic reduction in export control since the creation of the Arms Export Control Act,” said Colby Goodman, an independent arms control analyst, who co-authored the Center for International Policy report. In the past few years, he said, “we know that Congress has played a pretty important role in reviewing arms control and human rights cases.”
 
Among other things, Goodman’s report recommends the rule change not go forward until Congress’ internal watchdog, the Government Accountability Office, has completed an analysis on the risks of moving firearms from State’s Munitions List to the Commerce Control List.
 
For his part, Menendez has said he will not lift his hold until his concerns are addressed about how congressional oversight over foreign firearms sales will be maintained.
 
Menendez is also demanding Commerce make a final legal determination on whether 3D-printed firearms, which are difficult for metal detectors to uncover, constitute an “emerging” technology. Such a determination would make it illegal for someone in America to upload to the Internet the blueprints for a 3D-printable firearm. The State Department until recently barred the posting online of 3D-printed gun designs, though a lawsuit has thrown the matter to the courts.

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

 
Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., notified the State Department recently that he is putting a hold on a congressional notification of a department proposal to transfer responsibility for export controls on firearms and ammunition from the U.S. Munitions List to the Commerce Control List. This proposal, along with a related proposal from the Bureau of Industry and Security, would move articles that the president determines no longer warrant control under categories I (firearms, close assault weapons, and combat shotguns), II (guns and armament), and III (ammunition/ordnance) of the USML to the CCL.
 
BIS has said these changes would not deregulate the transferred items and that licenses would be required to export or reexport to any country a firearm or other weapon currently on the USML that would be added to the CCL. BIS would also require licenses for the export or reexport of guns and armament that would be controlled under new ECCN 0A602. BIS said it is trying to reduce the procedural burdens and costs of export compliance on the U.S. firearms industry while allowing the U.S. government to enforce export controls for firearms appropriately and make better use of its export control resources.
 
However, Menendez said firearms and ammunition are “uniquely dangerous” and are easily modified, diverted, and proliferated, meaning “they should be subject to more, not less, rigorous export controls and oversight.” In particular, he said, combat rifles and rifles of any type that are U.S. military standard, along with semi-automatic firearms and any related equipment, ammunition, or associated manufacturing equipment, technology, or technical data, should not be removed from the USML.
 
Menendez expressed concern that the proposed rules would effectively eliminate congressional oversight and potential disapproval of exports of lethal weapons. In addition, he said, they present a risk of “open[ing] the floodgates of information for the 3D printing of nearly-undetectable firearms and components by foreign persons and terrorists that intend to harm U.S. citizens and interests.” In so doing, he added, the proposals may be at odds with the Export Control Reform Act of 2018, which authorizes the Department of Commerce (which oversees the CCL) to control emerging and foundational technologies (such as 3D printing). Menendez said his hold will remain in place until these issues are sufficiently addressed.
 
Blocking this and other transfers from the USML would also be the result of the Prevent Crime and Terrorism Act (H.R. 1134) introduced recently in the House.
 

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

COMCOMMENTARY

COM_a114. 
J.W. Bennett: “Are Cleared Defense Contractors Becoming Unwitting Export Violators?”

(Source: 
Clearance Jobs, 28 Feb 2019.) 
 
* Author: Jeffrey W. Bennett, security consultant with SFPC, SAPPC, ISOC, ISP certifications. Visit his website 
www.redbikepublishing.com for more information.
 
With technology improvements, time, and the shrinking of borders in this well-connected global economy, we should consider the question: “what would an adversary with limited resources be able to exploit in our computers?”
 
This is an important question to ask as cyber-attacks increase in frequency and severity. Now an adversary on foreign lands can easily gather military or dual use technical information governed by the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR) and commercial information covered in the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) without ever meeting a U.S. citizen.
 
Export Training May be Lacking
 
This cyber-attack activity should not be surprising to the well-educated security cleared employee. What may be surprising is the protected sensitive information’s vulnerability on well-connected information systems. For example, Facility Security Officers, (FSOs), those working in corporate law, and export compliance officers provide regular reminders and 
conduct training on requirements to protect sensitive information. However, there may be a disconnect between training and application. The immediate “go to” measure is to protect the organization’s enterprise network of computers from cyber threats and to remind employees that exports are not authorized without a license or exemption.
 
The U.S. Government encourages companies to pursue business with foreign enterprises and these opportunities are provide through requested licenses. However, exports are occurring where licenses may not exist. According to ITAR, an export is defined as:
  1. Sending or taking hardware out of the U.S. or transferring to a foreign person in the U.S.
  2. Disclosing (oral, email, written, video, or other visual disclosure) or transferring technical data to a foreign person whether in the U.S. or abroad.
  3. Providing a service to, or for the benefit of a foreign person, whether in the U.S. or abroad. 
Definition two provides the most risk to our technical information if we consider that disclosure can be voluntary or unwitting. For example, if the movement of non-U.S. persons visiting a facility is not controlled, 
they may be able to exploit export controlled information appearing on a computer screen, overhead projection, left on a printer, and etc. Additionally, cyber-threat examples abound, such as hacking into enterprise networks and exfiltrating sensitive information.
 
Re-thinking an Export: the Evolution
 
In 2012, John Reece Roth, a plasma physicist, was sentenced to prison for export violations. The charges included taking a laptop containing sensitive plans with him on a lecture tour in China. Despite warning not to do so, he brought his computer and sensitive information to China where that information was vulnerable to exploitation.
 
The above story provides good reference points for security safeguards while travelling abroad. Recommended practices include getting approval for all presentations to non U.S. persons, getting licenses for technical data expected to be released during the presentation, and bringing a “clean” computer that only stores information permitted for presentation.
 
Changing the Export Paradigm
 
Whether or not we are in the U.S. or visiting 
overseas, we should be concerned with an adversary’s ability to conduct cyber-attacks anywhere and at any time. Whenever an employee travels abroad, they may find themselves liberated from their computer at the host country’s customs. They should also expect to have the hard drive duplicated, files read, etc. These are the contingencies for which astute security specialists plan.
 
While an information system is employed at a defense contractor facility, sensitive information should be protected by firewalls, software, network defense, and other countermeasures to prevent cyber-intrusion. However, once the information system is removed, so is the cyber-security protection afforded by the facility.
 
A common practice is for employees to bring their laptops on business trips, vacation, to night school, and other locations. Our sense of security of being within the U.S. borders provides an added vulnerability to that sensitive information.
 
What could go wrong? 
 
Consider that an employee may be providing a presentation in another country. The contractor facility may provide the employee with a computer storing only the authorized material. Everything is done properly to ensure the employee and information are protected from unauthorized information disclosure.
 
In our example the laptop is removed from the facility for authorized work. However, since the laptop will be used within United States borders, the employee is permitted to take his working laptop, with all the unclassified technical information he has been working on for the past few years. Since the employees business is within the U.S., and will not be “releasing” the information to non-U.S. persons, there is no problem; or is there?
 
The employee will connect to the internet at the airport, university, or other public wi-fi or other provider of the needed internet connection. Without the proper protections (which usually don’t travel with the employee) the information is almost as vulnerable as if the laptop were provided for international travel.
 
What can be done to protect U.S. secrets?
 
The best place to begin change is by facing the facts; global connectivity makes our sensitive information vulnerable to exploitation. Even more eye opening is that an adversary with limited resources is better equipped through this connectivity to target and acquire information they seek. Defense contractors should assume the task of making targeted information very difficult to get.
 
Policies that allow for the removal of information systems should consider how sensitive information is vulnerable both within and outside of the facility. Construct the behavior that recognizes and prevents unauthorized disclosure of economic, classified or sensitive information. Policies should consider any removal of information from the security of the enterprise network as vulnerable to export violation through cyber attacks.
 
Our well-connected global economy should remind us that our information is vulnerable to “export violations” even while resting in information systems physically residing at home. Defense contractors should rethink the definition of export to include weak 
cybersecurity practices of information removed from the protected facility networks.

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

COM_a215. 
M. Volkov: “AppliChem Pays OFAC $5.5 Million for Cuba Sanctions Violations”

(Source: 
Volkov Law Group Blog, 27 Feb 2019. Reprinted by permission.) 
 
* Author: Michael Volkov, Esq., Volkov Law Group, 
mvolkov@volkovlaw.com, 240-505-1992. 
 
OFAC continues to pile up enforcement actions for sanctions violations.  In yet another example of a failure of companies to address compliance, to follow up on compliance and to ensure ultimate compliance, AppliChem, a German company agreed to pay $5.5 million for 304 violations of the Cuban Assets Control Regulations during the time period between May 2012 and February 2016. Specifically, AppliChem engaged in 304 prohibited transactions for sale of chemical reagents to customers in Cuba.
 
On January 1, 2012, Illinois Tool Works, Inc. (ITW), in Glenview, Illinois, acquired AppliChem, a German manufacturer of chemicals and reagents for the pharmaceutical and chemical industries.  During the acquisition negotiations, ITW noticed that AppliChem’s website listed certain countries subject to U.S. economic and trade sanctions. 
 
On December 19, 2011, ITW warned AppliChem that it would be required to cease all Cuban business after ITW’s acquisition.  After the acquisition closed, an ITW official sent AppliChem’s former owners (who were still working at the merged company) a memo explaining ITW’s guidelines for complying with U.S. sanctions, including the Cuban sanctions. 
 
AppliChem ignored the two separate warnings from ITW and continued to complete and collect on existing orders with Cuban nationals under pre-acquisition contracts.
 
ITW discovered this continuing sales activity and warned AppliChem’s former owners, yet again, to cease all sales to Cuba.  ITW then submitted a voluntary disclosure on January 23, 2013.  ITW represented to OFAC that all Cuba transactions were cancelled.
 
On May 29, 2015, OFAC issued a warning letter to ITW concerning the post-acquisition Cuba transactions.
 
On January 27, 2016, ITW’s ethics helpline received an anonymous report that AppliChem continued to conduct sales to Cuba through a third-party in Berlin, Germany.  ITW launched an internal investigation which confirmed that AppliChem’s former owners continued its Cuba business. Specifically, ITW learned that AppliChem implemented what it called “Caribbean Procedures” (a code referring to Cuba) to ensure that no documents were prepared or retained relating to its continuing Cuba business. 
 
AppliChem engaged an external logistics company and independent consultant to prepare shipping documents and declarations.  In fact, AppliChem conducted training sessions for AppliChem staff to further the illegal scheme and ensure that it was hidden from ITW.  At AppliChem, the illegal procedures were known and an “open secret” at AppliChem.
 
Prior to the helpline report, AppliChem employees reported the continuing misconduct to the General Manager of ITW’s relevant division.  The General Manager sought assurances from the intermediary company that a pending shipment would not be diverted to Cuba, but did not initiate a fuller internal investigation at that time.
 
ITW earned over 2.8 million euros (approximately $3.4 million) through these illegal transactions. 
 
According to OFAC, the enforcement action underscores the importance of: (i) implementing risk-based controls, such as regular audits to ensure subsidiaries are complying with their obligations under OFAC’s sanctions regulations; (ii) performing follow-up due diligence on acquisitions of foreign persons known to engage in historical transactions with sanctioned persons and jurisdictions; and (iii) appropriately responding to derogatory information regarding the sanctions compliance efforts of foreign persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

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

COM_a316. S. Capruzzi: “Dual-Use Goods. The European Union and The United Kingdom Are Preparing for A No Deal Scenario”
(Source:
Dejalex, 27 Feb 2019.)
 
* Authors: Sara Capruzzi, Associate,
s.capruzzi@dejalex.com.
 
On 19 December 2018, the European Commission presented a proposal for a Regulation to add the United Kingdom to the list of countries for which a general authorisation to export dual-use items is valid throughout the EU. [FN/1]
 
At the European level, the export control regime of dual-use items is governed by Regulation (EC) No. 428/2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items (Dual-Use Regulation). [FN/2] The Dual-Use Regulation is binding and directly applicable in all Member States, including the United Kingdom.
 
According to the Regulation, dual-use goods are “… items, including software and technology, which can be used for both civil and military purposes. They consist of all goods, including intermediate ones, which may be used for non-explosive purposes, as well as for the manufacture of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices…“. [FN/3]
 
The Regulation establishes a common EU control list as well as rules for its implementation. Under the Regulation, an authorisation is required for the export of dual-use items to third countries. This authorisation may be individual, global or general. The Regulation provides for “Union General export authorisations” for the export of certain dual-use items to certain third countries under certain conditions. In particular, Annex IIa to the Regulation provides for a Union General Export Authorisation (“EU001”) for certain low-risk transactions, e.g. exports to Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland (including Liechtenstein), and the United States of America.
 
According to the Commission, the United Kingdom should be added to the list of EU001 countries since: (i) it is a party to relevant international treaties and a member of international non-proliferation regimes and maintains full compliance with related obligations and commitments; (ii) it maintains full compliance with obligations under sanctions imposed by a decision or a common position adopted by the Council or by a decision of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) or by a resolution of the Security Council of the United Nations; and (iii) it applies proportionate and adequate controls effectively addressing considerations about intended end use and the risk of diversion consistent with the provisions and objectives of the Regulation. [FN/4]
 
On the same date, the Export Control Joint Unit (ECJU) of the Department for International Trade of the UK Government [FN/5] updated its guidelines on export of controlled goods in case of a no deal Brexit, explaining that, despite the overall system continuing to be the same, changes would occur to some licensing requirements. In particular: (i) the movement of dual-use items from the UK to the EU would require an export licence; (ii) since extant export licences issued in the UK would no longer be valid for exporting dual-use items from EU Member States, a new licence, issued by an EU Member State, will be required; (iii) extant export licences issued by the remaining Member States would no longer be valid for exporting dual-use items from the UK and a new licence, issued by the UK, will be required. [FN/6]
 
As a result, on 1 February 2019 the ECJU published a new open general export licence (OGEL) [FN/7], coming into force on 29 March 2019 should the UK leave the EU without a deal. The OGEL will allow the export of dual-use items from the UK to EU Member States and the Channel Islands.
 
————-
  [FN/1] Commission proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 by granting a Union General Export Authorisation for the export of certain dual-use items from the Union to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. COM(2018) 891 final.
  [FN/2] Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 of 5 May 2009 setting up a Community regime for the control of exports, transfer, brokering and transit of dual-use items, OJ L 134, 29.5.2009.
  [FN/3] Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 428/2009.
  [FN/4] See the Commission proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 428/2009 by granting a Union General Export Authorisation for the export of certain dual-use items from the Union to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. COM(2018) 891 final.
  [FN/5] The Export Control Joint Unit (ECJU) is responsible for the UK system of export controls on military items, dual-use items (items with both civil and military uses), civilian firearms, and items usable for torture. These items are regulated through a system of export licensing.
  [FN/6] Joint Export Control Unit, 19 December 2018, Exporting controlled goods if there’s no Brexit deal. Available at the following LINK.
  [FN/7] Joint Export Control Unit, 1 February 2019, Open General Export Licence. Export of Dual-Use items to EU Member States. Available at the following LINK.
 

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

TEEX/IM TRAINING EVENTS & CONFERENCES

TEC_a1
17. 
FCC Presents U.S. Export Controls Awareness Course: “ITAR & EAR from a non-U.S. Perspective”, 9 April in Bruchem, the Netherlands
(Source: Full Circle Compliance, 
events@fullcirclecompliance.eu.)
Our next academy course is specifically designed for beginning compliance professionals and those in a similar role who aim to stay up-to-date with the latest U.S. export control requirements that apply to non-U.S. transactions, and industry’s best practices.
 
The course will cover multiple topics relevant for organizations outside the U.S. that are subject to U.S. export controls, including: the U.S. regulatory framework, key concepts and definitions, tips regarding classification and licensing, essential steps to ensure a U.S. export control compliant shipment, how to handle a (potential) non-compliance issue, recent enforcement trends, and the latest and anticipated regulatory amendments.  Participants will receive a certification upon completion of the training.
 
* What: Awareness Course U.S. Export Controls: ITAR & EAR from a Non-U.S. Perspective 
* When: Tuesday, 9 Apr 2010, 9.30 am – 4.30 pm (CET)
* Where: Landgoed Groenhoven, Bruchem, the Netherlands
* Sponsor: 
Full Circle Compliance (FCC)
* Instructors: Drs. Ghislaine C.Y. Gillessen RA, Michael E. Farrell, and Drs. Alexander P. Bosch
* Information & Registration: 
HERE, or email 
events@fullcirclecompliance.eu.

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

TE_a318. 
List of Approaching Events: 142 Events Posted This Week, Including 34 New Events
(Sources: Editor and Event Sponsors)

Published every Friday or last publication day of the week, o
ur overview of Approaching Events is organized to list c
ontinuously available training, training events, s
eminars & conferences, and 
webinars. 
 
Please, submit your event announcement to Alexander Witt, Events & Jobs Editor (email: 
awitt@fullcirclecompliance.eu
), composed in the below format:
 
# DATE: LOCATION; “EVENT TITLE”; EVENT SPONSOR; WEBLINK; CONTACT DETAILS (email and/or phone number)
 

#” = New or updated listing  

 
Continuously Available Training
 
* E-Seminars:US Export Controls” / “Defense Trade Controls“; Export Compliance Training Institute; danielle@learnexportcompliance.com 

* Webinar: ”
Company-Wide US Export Controls Awareness Program“; Export Compliance Training Institute;
danielle@learnexportcompliance.com 

* E-Seminars: “ITAR/EAR Awareness“; Export Compliance Solutions;
spalmer@exportcompliancesolutions.com
* Online: “Simplified Network Application Process Redesign (SNAP-R)“; Commerce/BIS; 202-482-2227
* E-Seminars: “Webinars On-Demand Library“; Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A.
* Online: “International Trade Webinars“; Global Training Center
*
 
Online: “On-Demand Webinars“; “General Training“; Center for Development of Security Excellence; Defense Security Service (DSS)
* Online: “ACE Reports Training and User Guide“; DHS/CBP

* Online: ”
Increase Your International Sales – Webinar Archive“; U.S. Commercial Service

* Web Form: “Compliance Snapshot Assessment“; Commonwealth Trading Partners (CTP)
* Online: “
Customs Broker Exam Prep Course
“; The Exam Center
 
 
Seminars and Conferences

 


Mar 4-6: Savannah, GA; “
2019 Winter Back to Basics Conference
“; SIA
* 
Mar 5: Leeds, UK; “
Understanding Incoterms
“; Chamber International

* Mar 5-6: San Diego, CA; “
Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS

*
Mar 5-7:  Orlando, FL; “
Partnering for Compliance’ Export/Import Control Training and Education Program
“; Partnering for Compliance
* 
Mar 6: McLean, VA; “
International Trade, Export Compliance & Customs Update
“; KPMG LLP; cdonahue@kpmg.com; +1 703-286-8131;

* Mar 6-7: San Diego, CA;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS


Mar 7: Washington, DC; “
2019 International Trade Update
“; Georgetown Law

* Mar 7-8: Dallas, TX; “
CTPAT Training
“; SCS America

*
 Mar 9: Orlando, FL; “
Customs/Import Boot Camp
;” Partnering for Compliance

* Mar 11: Hoofddorp, NL; “
Export Control, Dual-use en Sancties
“; Fenex

* Mar 12-14: Dallas, TX;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS
* Mar 12-14: Dallas, TX;

How to Build an Export Compliance Program
“; Commerce/BIS
*
 Mar 12: Hasselt, Belgium; “
Wegwijs in exportcontrole, dual-use goederen & embargo
“; Vlaams Netwerk van Ondernemingen


Mar 12: Sheffield, UK; “
Customs Procedures and Compliance in International Trade
“; Sheffield Chamber of Commerce


Mar 12-13: Plano, TX; “
Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS 

* Mar 13: Birmingham, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Intermediate Practitioners course
“; UK/DIT
* Mar 14: Birmingham, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Foundation Workshop
“; UK/DIT
* Mar 14: Birmingham, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Licenses Workshop
“; UK/DIT


Mar 14: Charlotte, NC; “
Importing Procedures
“; Global Training Center

Mar 14: Plano, TX; “
How to Build an Export Compliance Program
“; Commerce/BIS

Mar 15: Charlotte, NC; “
Importing 201
“; Global Training Center

*
 
May 15-17; London, UK; “ICPA European Conference“; ICPA

* Mar 18-21: Las Vegas, NV; “
ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar
“; ECTI

Mar 19: Charlotte, NC; “
Tariff Classification“; 
Global Training Center


Mar 20: Charlotte, NC; “
NAFTA Rules of Origin
“; Global Training Center

*
 Mar 20: Miami, FL; “
CHINA TARIFFS/AD/CVD 101
“; Diaz Trade Consulting


Mar 20: St. Johns, Canada: “
Export Controls Seminar
“; Atlantic Canada

Mar 21: Charlotte, NC; “
Exporting Procedures
; Global Training Center

*
 
Mar 24-27: Orlando, FL; “
2019 ICPA Annual Conference

; ICPA
* Mar 25-27: San Francisco; “
Global Encryption, Cloud and Cyber Trade Controls Conference
“; Thomsen & Burke LLP;
* 
Mar 26: Leeds, UK; “
Understanding Exporting
“; Chamber International

*
 Mar 26-27: Pittsburgh, PA; “
Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS
*
 
Mar 26-27: Scottsdale, AZ; “
Managing ITAR/EAR Complexities
“; 
Export Compliance Solutions (ECS)

spalmer@exportcompliancesolutions.com
 or 
866-238-4018
* 
Mar 27: Bristol, UK; “
Classification of Goods – Using Commodity and Tariff Codes
“; BusinessWest
* 
Mar 27: Bristol, UK; “
Incoterms® Rules 2010
“; BusinessWest

* Mar 27-28: San Francisco, CA; “Global Encryption, Cloud & Cyber Trade Controls;” American Conference Institute
*
 
Mar 28: Bristol, UK; “
Introduction to Export Procedures
“; BusinessWest

* Apr 1: Eindhoven, NL; “
Export Control, Dual-use en Sancties
“; Fenex
*
 
Apr 2: Brussels, Belgium; “
Dual-Use, Military Research & Misuse
“; Vrije Universiteit Brussel


Apr 2: Delft, The Netherlands; “
Export Compliance Training“; 
Netherlands Aerospace Group and Full Circle Compliance

* Apr 1-4: Washington, DC;ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls Seminar“; ECTI

* Apr 3-4: Denver, CO;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS

* Apr 4-5; Miami, FL; “
CTPAT Training
“; SCS America
* 
Apr 9: Bruchem, The Netherlands; “
Awareness Course U.S. Export Controls: ITAR & EAR from a Non-U.S. Perspective
“; Full Circle Compliance


Apr 9: Sheffield, UK; “
An Introduction to Export
“; Sheffield Chamber of Commerce

Apr 9: London, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Intermediate Practitioners Course
“; UK/DIT

Apr 10: London, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Foundation Workshop
“; UK/DIT

#
Apr 10: London, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Licenses Workshop
“; UK/DIT


April 10: Sheffield, UK; “
Export Documentation – How and Why?” 
; Sheffield Chamber of Commerce

* 
Apr 16: Leeds, UK; “
Export Documentation
“; Chamber International

Apr 17: Miami, FL; “
CBP COMPLIANCE & ENFORCEMENT
“; Diaz Trade Consulting
*
 Apr 17-18; Miramar, FL; “
11th Maritime Forwarding, Freight Logistics & Global Chain Supply Workshop
“; ABS Consulting;
April 18: Sheffield, UK; “International Trade Operations and Procedures (ITOPS); Sheffield Chamber of Commerce
* Apr 23-24: Portsmouth, NH;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS
Apr 25: Portsmouth, NH;

Technology Controls
“; Commerce/BIS


Apr 25: London, UK; “
Making better License Applications
“; 
UK/DIT

*
 
Apr 30-May 1: Irvine, CA: “
Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce /BIS

*
 Apr 30-May 1: Nashville, TN: “Mastering ITAR/EAR Challenges“; Export Compliance Solutions (ECS);
*
 
May 1: Leeds, UK; “
Understanding Exporting & Incoterms
“; Chamber International

* May 2-3: Washington DC; “Economic Sanctions Enforcement and Compliance;” American Conference Institute
*
 
May 5: Munich, Germany; “
European and German Export Controls
“; AWA;

* May 5-7: Savannah, GA;2019 Spring Seminar“; National Association of Foreign Trade Zones (NAFTZ)

May 6-7: Atlanta, GA; “
2019 Spring Conference
“; SIA
* 
May 7: Bruchem, The Netherlands; “
An Introduction to EU / Dutch Dual-Use and Military Export Controls
“; Full Circle Compliance


May 8: Southampton, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Intermediate Practitioners course
“; UK/DIT

May 9: Southampton, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Foundation Workshop
“; UK/DIT

May 9: Southampton, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Licenses Workshop
“; UK/DIT

May 9: Sheffield, UK; “
Essential Incoterms – Getting it Rights
“; Sheffield Chamber of Commerce

*
 
May 15: Bristol, UK; “
A Foundation Course in Importing
“; BusinessWest
*
 
May 15-17; London, UK; “ICPA European Conference“; ICPA
* 
May 16: Bristol, UK; “
Export Controls and Licensing
; BusinessWest
*
 
May 16: Bristol, UK; “
Inward Processing Relief
“; BusinessWest
*
 May 16: Hamburg, Germany; “
U.S. Export Controls and Embargoes & Sanctions for European Companies
“; Hamburger Zollakademie
*
 
May 16-17; Toronto, Canada; “ICPA Canada Conference“; ICPA
*
 
May 21: London, UK; “
US & UK Export Controls: A Basic Understanding
“; The Institute of Export and International Trade

* Jun 5-6: Seattle, WA; “
Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS
*
 
Jun 7: Upper Marlboro, MD; “
2019 Spring Golf Outing
“; SIA

*
 
Jun 10: Cleveland, OH; “
Letters of Credit
“; Global Training Center
*
 
Jun 11: Cleveland, OH; “
Export Doc & Proc
“; Global Training Center


Jun 11: Sheffield, UK; “
Customs Procedures and Compliance in International Trade
“; Sheffield Chamber of Commerce

*
 
Jun 12: Cleveland, OH; “
Tariff Classificatio
n“; Global Training Center


Jun 12: Derby, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Intermediate Practitioners course
“; UK/DIT

*
 
Jun 13: Cleveland, OH; “
NAFTA Rules of Origin
“; Global Training Center


Jun 13: Derby, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Foundation Workshop
“; UK/DIT

Jun 13: Derby, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Licenses Workshop
“; UK/DIT

*
 
Jun 13: Detroit, MI; “
How to Build an Export Compliance Program
“; Commerce/BIS
*
 
Jun 14: Cleveland, OH; “
Incoterms® 2010 Rules
“; Global Training 
* Jun 17-20: San Diego, CA; “ITAR Defense Trade Controls / EAR Export Controls“; ECTI
*
 
Jul 3: Bristol, UK; “
Introduction to Export Procedures – Export Training
“; BusinessWest


Jul 3: Cambridge, UK;
Strategic Export Control: Intermediate Practitioners Course
“; UK/DIT

Jul 4: Cambridge, UK;
Strategic Export Control: Foundation Workshop
“; UK/DIT

Jul 4: Cambridge, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Licenses Workshop
“; UK/DIT

*
 
Jul 4: Bristol, UK;
Using Documentary Letters of Credit, Drafts and Bills”; 
BusinessWest


Jul 4: Sheffield, UK; “
An Introduction to Export
“; Sheffield Chamber of Commerce

*
 
Jul 8-9: Seattle, WA: “
Boot Camp: Achieving ITAR/EAR Compliance
“; Export Compliance Solutions (ECS);

Jul 8 – 10: National Harbour, MD; “
2019 Summer Back to Basics Conference
“; SIA


July 10: Sheffield, UK; “
Export Documentation – How and Why?” 
; Sheffield Chamber of Commerce

*
 
Jul 11: Birmingham, UK; “
US & UK Export Controls: A Basic Understanding
“; The Institute of Export and International Trade

* Aug 20-21: Cincinnati, OH;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“; Commerce/BIS

* Aug 20-21: Milpitas, CA;

Complying with U.S. Export Controls
“;
Commerce/BIS
* Aug 22: Milpitas, CA:

Encryption Controls
“;
Commerce/BIS

* Sep 8-11: Chicago, IL; “2019 Annual Conference and Exposition“; National Association of Foreign Trade Zones (NAFTZ)

* Sep 16-19: Austin, TX; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls (Sep 18-19) Seminar Series
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977


Sep 17: Sheffield, UK; “
Customs Procedures and Compliance in International Trade
“; Sheffield Chamber of Commerce


Sep 17-19: Annapolis, MD; “
The ECS 2nd Annual ITAR/EAR Symposium
“; ECS
*
 Sep 20: Las Vegas; “
EAR and OFAC Fundamentals: Export Control Of Dual-Use Equipment
“; Barnes & Thornburg LLP
*
 
Sep 25: Bristol, UK; “
Classification of Goods – Using Commodity and Tariff Codes”; 
BusinessWest
* 
Sep 25: Bristol, UK; “
Incoterms® Rules 2010
“; BusinessWest
*
 
Sep 25: London, UK; “
US & UK Export Controls: A Basic Understanding
; The Institute of Export and International Trade


Sep 25: Sheffield, UK; “
Essential Incoterms – Getting it Rights
“; Sheffield Chamber of Commerce

*
 
Sep 26: Bristol, UK; “
Understanding The Paperwork
“; BusinessWest

* Sep 30 – Oct 3; Amsterdam, NL; “
ITAR Controls / EAR/OFAC Commercial and Military Controls
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977
*
 
Oct 7: Munich, Germany; “
European and German Export Controls
“; AWA

* Oct 14-17; Columbus, OH; “
University Export Controls Seminar
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977


Oct 17: Sheffield, UK; “
Export Documentation – How and Why?” 
; Sheffield Chamber of Commerce

*
 
Oct 27: Singapore; “
5th Asia Pacific Summit on Economic Sanctions Compliance and Enforcement
“; 
American Conference Institute


Oct 28-29: Washington D.C.; “
2019 Fall Advanced Conference
“; SIA

* Oct 28-31; Phoenix, AZ; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls Seminar Series
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977
* Nov 11-14; Washington, DC; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls Seminar Series
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977
*
 
Nov 20: Bristol, UK; “
Introduction to Export Procedures – Export Training
“; BusinessWest
*
 
Nov 21: Bristol, UK; “
A Foundation Course in Importing
“; BusinessWest

*
 
Nov 26: Bruchem, The Netherlands; “The International Traffic in Arms Regulations (EAR) from a non-U.S. Perspective“; Full Circle Compliance
* 
Nov 27: Bruchem, The Netherlands; ” The Export Administration Regulations (EAR) from a non-U.S. Perspective“; Full Circle Compliance
 
*
 
Nov 27: Manchester, UK; “
US & UK Export Controls: A Basic Understanding
“; The Institute of Export and International Trade
* Dec 4-5: New York, NY; “10th Annual New York Forum on Economic Sanctions;” American Conference Institute
*
 
Dec 4-5: Washington, DC; “
36th International Conference on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
“; American Conference Institute

* Dec 9-12; Miami, FL; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls Seminar Series
“; ECTI
; 540-433-3977
*
 Dec 12-13; Washington D.C.; “
Coping with U.S. Export Controls and Sanctions 2019
“; Practicing Law Institute
 
2020

 
*
 
Jan 30-31: Houston, TX; “
14th Forum on the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
“; 
American Conference Institute
 

 
Webinars 


 

*
 
Mar 8: Webinar: “
Managing Export Compliance and Export Controls Risk”; 
Online Compliance Panel
*
 Mar 12: Webinar;
 
DIY Encryption Classification 2019 Edition“;
 ECTI; 540-433-3977;
danielle@learnexportcompliance.com 
*
 Mar 13: Webinar: “
Cornerstones of ITAR Compliance: Licenses and Agreements
“; ECTI; 540-433-3977

* Mar 14: Webinar: “ITAR Training Basics – For Compliance Executives March“; CVG Strategy

*
 Mar 20: Webinar: “
Cornerstones of ITAR Compliance: Administration, Documentation and Shipping
“; ECTI; 540-433-3977

* Apr 23: Webinar: “ITAR Training Basics – For Compliance Executives April“; CVG Strategy

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

ENEDITOR’S NOTES

EN_a119
. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)


Frederic Chopin (Frédéric François Chopin; 1 Mar 1810 – 17 Oct 1849; was a Polish composer and virtuoso pianist of the Romantic era who wrote primarily for solo piano. He has maintained worldwide renown as a leading musician of his era, one whose “poetic genius was based on a professional technique that was without equal in his generation.”)
  – “As long as I have health and strength, I will gladly work all my days.”
 

Dr. Seuss (Theodor Seuss Geisel; 2 Mar 1904 – 24 Sep 1991; was an American children’s author, political cartoonist, and animator. He is known for his work writing and illustrating more than 60 books under the pen name Dr. Seuss. His work includes many of the most popular children’s books of all time, selling over 600 million copies and being translated into more than 20 languages by the time of his death.)
  – “You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself in any direction you choose. You’re on your own, and you know what you know. And you are the guy who’ll decide where to go.”
  – “You’re never too old, too wacky, too wild, to pick up a book and read to a child.”
 
Friday funnies:
“I’m proud of myself.  I finished a jigsaw puzzle in only 6 months, and the box said 2-4 years.”
* “Sometimes I tuck my knees into my chest and lean forward.  That’s just how I roll.”
* Sign outside a church: “Adultery is a sin.  You can’t have your Kate and Edith too.”

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

EN_a220. 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.  The latest amendments to applicable regulations are listed below.
 

*
DHS CUSTOMS REGULATIONS
: 19 CFR, Ch. 1, Pts. 0-199.  Implemented by Dep’t of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs & Border Protection.
  – Last Amendment:
14 Jan 2019: 84 FR 112-116: Extension of Import Restrictions Imposed on Certain Archaeological and Ecclesiastical Ethnological Material from Bulgaria; and 84 FR 107-112: Extension of Import Restrictions Imposed on Certain Archaeological Material From China.
 

DOC EXPORT ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS (EAR)
: 15 CFR Subtit. B, Ch. VII, Pts. 730-774. Implemented by Dep’t of Commerce, Bureau of Industry & Security.
  – Last Amendment: 20 Dec 2018: 
83 FR 65292-65294
: Control of Military Electronic Equipment and Other Items the President Determines No Longer Warrant Control Under the United States Munitions List (USML); Correction [Concerning ECCN 7A005 and ECCN 7A105.]
 
*
DOC FOREIGN TRADE REGULATIONS (FTR)
: 15 CFR Part 30.  Implemented by Dep’t of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau.
  – Last Amendment: 24 Apr 2018: 
83 FR 17749-17751
: Foreign Trade Regulations (FTR): Clarification on the Collection and Confidentiality of Kimberley Process Certificates
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available
here
.
  – The latest edition (1 Jan 2019) 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 approximately 250 footnotes containing case annotations, practice tips, Census/AES guidance, and explanations of the numerous errors contained in the official text. Subscribers receive revised copies in Microsoft Word 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. Government employees (including military) and employees of universities are eligible for a 50% discount on both publications at 
www.FullCircleCompiance.eu
.  
 

DOD NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY PROGRAM OPERATING MANUAL (NISPOM)
: DoD 5220.22-M. Implemented by Dep’t of Defense.
  – 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 cancelled Supp. 1 to the NISPOM (Summary 
here
.) 
 

DOE ASSISTANCE TO FOREIGN ATOMIC ENERGY ACTIVITIES
: 10 CFR Part 810; Implemented by Dep’t of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
  – Last Amendment: 23 Feb 2015:

80 FR 9359
, comprehensive updating of regulations, updates the activities and technologies subject to specific authorization and DOE reporting requirements. This rule also identifies destinations with respect to which most assistance would be generally authorized and destinations that would require a specific authorization by the Secretary of Energy.
 

DOE EXPORT AND IMPORT OF NUCLEAR EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL
; 10 CFR Part 110; Implemented by Dep’t of Energy, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
  – Last Amendment: 20 Nov 2018, 10 CFR 110.6, Re-transfers.
 

DOJ ATF ARMS IMPORT REGULATIONS
: 27 CFR Part 447-Importation of Arms, Ammunition, and Implements of War.  Implemented by Dep’t of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives.
  – Last Amendment: 26 Dec 2018: 
83 FR 66514-66554
: Bump-Stock-Type Devices
 

DOS INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN ARMS REGULATIONS (ITAR)
: 22 C.F.R. Ch. I, Subch. M, Pts. 120-130. Implemented by Dep’t of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls.
  – Last Amendment: 4 Oct 2018:
83 FR 50003-50007
: Regulatory Reform Revisions to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations.
  – The only available fully updated copy (latest edition: 1 Jan 2019) of the ITAR with all amendments 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, over 800 footnotes containing amendment histories, 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 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.
 
*
DOT FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS (OFAC FACR)
: 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders. 
Implemented by Dep’t of Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control.
  – Last Amendment: 15 Nov 2018: 
83 FR 57308-57318
: Democratic Republic of the Congo Sanctions Regulations
  
* USITC HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE OF THE UNITED STATES (HTS, HTSA or HTSUSA), 1 Jan 2019: 19 USC 1202 Annex. Implemented by U.S. International Trade Commission. (“HTS” and “HTSA” are often seen as abbreviations for the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated, shortened versions of “HTSUSA”.)

  – Last Update: 27 Feb 2019: Harmonized System Update 1902  [contains 40 ABI records and 11 harmonized tariff records.]

  – HTS codes for AES are available here.
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available here.

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

EN_a321
. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories
(Source: Editor)
 

Review last week’s top Ex/Im stories in “Weekly Highlights of Daily Bugle Top Stories” posted here.

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

* The Ex/Im Daily Update is a publication of FCC Advisory B.V., compiled by: Editor, James E. Bartlett III; Assistant Editors, Alexander P. Bosch and Vincent J.A. Goossen; and Events & Jobs Editor, Alex Witt. The Ex/Im Daily Update is emailed every business day to approximately 6,500 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, DOE/NRC, DOJ/ATF, DoD/DSS, DoD/DTSA, FAR/DFARS, 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.

* 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, provided attribution is given to “The Export/Import Daily Bugle of (date)”. Any further use of contributors’ material, however, must comply with applicable copyright laws.  If you would to submit material for inclusion in the The Export/Import Daily Update (“Daily Bugle”), please find instructions here.

* 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.

* BACK ISSUES: An archive of Daily Bugle publications from 2005 to present is available HERE.

* TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Use the Safe Unsubscribe link below.

Scroll to Top