19-0321 Thursday “Daily Bugle”

19-0321 Thursday “Daily Bugle”

Thursday, 21 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 C-TPAT and the Trusted Trader Program 
  1. Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions 
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)
  3. Justice: “Russian National Extradited from Estonia To Face Charges Of Illegal Procurement Of U.S. Electronics”
  4. State/DDTC Announces DECCS Commodity Jurisdiction Testing to Begin Next Week
  5. EU Posts Regulation on Framework for the Screening of Foreign Direct Investment into the EU
  6. Taiwan BOFT Revises Sensitive Commodities List for Iran and North Korea, Dual-Use Goods List, and Common Military List
  1. APP: “Pak-China Bilateral Meeting Held on Strategic Export Controls”
  2. ST&R Trade Report: “Defense Trade Violation Penalties Decline”
  1. A. Federewski: “Reaching the Final Frontier: An Exploration of Space Law”
  2. L. Feldman: “Importer Security Filing: Understanding the Basics”
  3. M. Volkov: “Does Your Board Know How to Conduct Oversight and Monitor Your Compliance Program?”
  4. R. Whitten & F.K. Merchant: “Clear for More Takeoffs: Now is the Time to Have Your Voice Heard on New Satellite and Launch Regulations”
  1. ICPA Presents “2019 EU Conference”, 15-17 May in London

  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Latest Amendments: DHS/Customs (12 Mar 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 (14 Mar 2019), DOS/ITAR (19 Mar 2019), DOT/FACR/OFAC (15 Mar 2019), HTSUS (7 Mar 2019) 
  3. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 



1. DHS/CBP Seeks Comments on C-TPAT and the Trusted Trader Program
(Source: Federal Register, 21 Mar 2019.) [Excerpts.]
84 FR 10520-10521: Agency Information Collection Activities: Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) and the Trusted Trader Program
* 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. …
* 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.
  – Title: Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) and the Trusted Trader Program.
  – OMB Number: 1651-0077.
  – Current Actions: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection with no change to the burden hours or to the information collected. …
  – Abstract: The C-TPAT Program is designed to safeguard the world’s trade industry from terrorists and smugglers by prescreening its participants. The C-TPAT Program applies to United States importers, customs brokers, consolidators, port and terminal operators, carriers, and foreign manufacturers.
  Respondents apply to participate in the Trusted Trader Program and C-TPAT using an on-line application here. The CTPAT Program application requests an applicant’s contact and business information, including the number of company employees, the number of years in business, and a list of company officers. This collection of information is authorized by the SAFE Port Act (Pub. L. 109-347).
  The Trusted Trader Program involves a unification of supply chain security aspects of the C-TPAT Program and the internal controls of the Importer Self-Assessment (ISA) Program to integrate supply chain security and trade compliance. The Trusted Trader Program strengthens security by leveraging the C-TPAT supply chain requirements and validation, identifying low-risk trade entities for supply chain security and trade compliance, and increasing the overall efficiency of trade by segmenting risk and processing by account. The Trusted Trader Program applies to importer participants who have satisfied C-TPAT supply chain security and trade compliance requirements.
  After an importer obtains Trusted Trader Program membership, the importer will be required to submit an Annual Notification Letter to CBP confirming that they are continuing to meet the requirements of the Trusted Trader Program. This letter should include: personnel changes that impact the Trusted Trader Program; organizational and procedural changes; a summary of risk assessment and self-testing results; a summary of post-entry amendments and/or disclosures made to CBP; and any importer activity changes within the last 12-month period. …
  Dated: March 14, 2019.
Seth D. Renkema, Branch Chief, Economic Impact Analysis Branch, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
back to top

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


. Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions

Federal Register)

* State; NOTICES; Designation as a Foreign Terrorist Organization: ISIS (and Other Aliases)  [Pub. Date: 22 Mar 2019.]

* State; NOTICES; Designation as Specially Designated Global Terrorist: ISIS  [Pub. Date: 22 Mar 2019.]

* Treasury; Foreign Assets Control Office; NOTICES; Blocking or Unblocking of Persons and Properties [Pub. Date: 22 Mar 2019.]

* U.S. Trade Representative; NOTICES; Modifications to Rules of Origin of the United States – Morocco Free Trade Agreement [Pub. Date: 22 Mar 2019.]

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

Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)


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

. Justice: “Russian National Extradited from Estonia To Face Charges Of Illegal Procurement Of U.S. Electronics”

Justice, 20 Mar 2019.) [Excerpts.]
Defendant allegedly used laundered funds to smuggle electronic U.S. components into the Russian Federation
A federal grand jury handed down a 52-count indictment charging Valery Kosmachov with engineering a scheme to illegally procure sophisticated electronic components from the United States and to smuggle them into the Russian Federation … Kosmachov was extradited to the United States from Estonia to face the charges.
According to the indictment filed September 21, 2017, and unsealed this morning, Kosmachov, 66, is a Russian national, naturalized citizen of Estonia, and resident of Tallinn, Estonia. He served as owner of Adimir OU and co-owner of Eastline Technology OU, along with co-defendant and Russian national Sergey Vetrov, 66. The indictment describes how Kosmachov and Vetrov used the Estonia-based companies as procurement “fronts” to obtain controlled U.S.-origin microelectronics, in part by misrepresenting that the end-users for the components were located in Estonia. The components included dual-use programmable computer chips capable of operating in austere environments making them useful in both civilian and military applications. Once in possession of the chips in Estonia, the co-defendants allegedly later smuggled them into the Russian Federation, in part by using laundered funds.
In sum, Kosmachov, Vetrov, and their two companies are charged with one count of conspiracy to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and one count of conspiracy to commit international money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956(a)(2)(A) and (h). In addition, Kosmachov and Vetrov are charged with 12 substantive counts of violating the IEEPA, in violation of 50 U.S.C. § 1705, 19 counts of smuggling, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 554 and 2; and 17 counts of international money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § § 1956(a)(2)(A).
Kosmachov was arrested in Tallinn on September 12, 2018, and was extradited to the United States on March 14, 2019, to face prosecution. Vetrov remains at large. Kosmachov appeared this morning before Chief U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero, for a detention hearing. He remains in federal custody pending his next court appearance. Kosmachov is next scheduled to appear on March 28, 2019, before the Honorable William H. Orrick, U.S. District Judge, for further proceedings. …

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

5. State/DDTC Announces DECCS Commodity Jurisdiction Testing to Begin Next Week

(Source: State/DDTC, 20 Mar 2019.)
The industry testing period for the Commodity Jurisdiction (CJ) application will open the week of March 25th. In addition to the new application, the system is being upgraded to provide even more functionality and security. Another announcement will be posted when the system is available for testing.
Please contact the IT Modernization Team at PM_DDTCProjectTeam@state.gov with any questions.
Thank you for your continued support!

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

6. EU Posts Regulation on Framework for the Screening of Foreign Direct Investment into the EU
(Source: Official Journal of the European Union, 21 Mar 2019.)
* Regulation (EU) 2019/452 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2019 establishing a framework for the screening of foreign direct investments into the Union
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

7. Taiwan BOFT Revises Sensitive Commodities List for Iran and North Korea, Dual-Use Goods List, and Common Military List
(Source: Taiwan Bureau of Foreign Trade, 15 Mar 2019.)
The Taiwanese Bureau of Foreign Trade (BOFT) has revised the following lists:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Associated Press Pakistan, 20 Mar 2019.) [Excerpts.]
The Pakistan-China bilateral meeting of Strategic Export Controls experts discussed the latest developments in respective strategic export control system, inter-agency coordination mechanism, licensing processes of dual use items, and capacity building of enforcement agencies. …
The Chinese delegation acknowledged Pakistan’s efforts and appreciated the progress on harmonization of its strategic export control policies and practices with international standards.
Such interactions are part of Pakistan’s consistent effort to engage with the international community to mutually benefit from the best practices.
Pakistan’s non-proliferation measures and the steps taken to further strengthen its export controls are well recognized by the international community. The two sides agreed to continue this process in the future.

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

The Department of State is decreasing the maximum amounts of the civil monetary penalties it assesses for violations of the following provisions of the Arms Export Control Act. These updated amounts will apply to all penalties assessed on or after March 19 regardless of when the actual violation occurred.
  – $1,163,217 (previously $1,134,602) for each violation of 22 USC 2778 (control of exports and imports of defense articles and services)
  – $824,959 (previously $845,764) or five times the amount of the prohibited payment, whichever is greater, for each violation of 22 USC 2779a (prohibition on incentive payments to satisfy an offset agreement for defense articles or services with a foreign country)
  – $981,935 (previously $1,006,699) for each violation of 22 USC 2780 (prohibition on transactions with, including defense exports to, countries supporting acts of international terrorism)

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


Texas Bar Blog, 19 Mar 2019.) [Excerpts.]
* Author: Adam Federewski, Associate Editor, The Texas Bar Journal, (512) 427-1463.
A panel of attorneys discussed the ever-evolving galaxy of space law, including disabusing the notion that space law is “unregulated,” during a panel session at South By Southwest.
Franceska Schroeder, a principal in Fish Richardson, provided an overview of the laws governing space and space exploration including the Commercial Space Launch Act, or CSLA; the National and Commercial Space Programs Act, also known as the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act; the Communications Act; and the U.S. Export Control Laws, including International Traffic in Arms Regulations, and Export Administration Regulations.
These laws apply to all space activities in the territory of the U.S., activities of U.S. national outside of the country if the statute explicitly applies outside of the U.S., and activities outside of the country if there are effects in the U.S. and the statute explicitly applies outside the U.S., Schroeder said.
U.S. Export Controls
Export controls, regulating the use of U.S. technology and munitions, are governed by International Traffic in Arms Regulations, or ITAR, under the administration of the State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, or DDTC, Schroeder said.
  “[DDTC’s] job is control items on the United States Munitions List,” Schroeder said. “It’s more than just things we’d think of as munitions … it’s certain satellites, it’s missile technology, it’s nuclear technology.”
The Export Administration Regulations, or EAR, are administered by the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security, or BIS, and applies to items on the Commerce Control List, or CCL, Schroeder said.
However, the administration of export controls is evolving. About three or four years ago, the Obama administration, under Defense Secretary Robert Gates, launched a robust export reform initiative that resulted in significant changes to the space industry, Schroeder said. …

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

* Author: Lenny Feldman, Esq., Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A., lfeldman@strtrade.com, +1 305-894-1011.
With a recent increase in enforcement of U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s importer security filing rule, it’s a good time for importers to review the basic requirements of this rule and examine their compliance.
Under the ISF rule, importers must transmit an ISF to CBP no later than 24 hours before the cargo is laden aboard a vessel destined to the U.S. (or any time prior to lading for foreign cargo remaining on board). The ISF consists of either ten data elements for shipments of goods intended to be entered into the U.S. or delivered to a foreign-trade zone (ISF-10) or five data elements for shipments entirely of FROB cargo or goods intended to be transported as immediate exportation or transportation and exportation in-bond shipments (ISF-5). CBP uses this information to assess the risk of arriving cargo shipments.
ISF importers are legally responsible for the accuracy and timeliness of their ISF filings, regardless of whether a customs broker or other intermediary does the actual filing. Typically, the ISF importer is the goods’ owner, purchaser, consignee, or agent, such as a broker.
However, in April 2018 CBP amended its regulations to expand the definition of ISF importer and place responsibility for filing the ISF-5 with the party causing the goods to enter the limits of a port in the U.S. and most likely to have access to the required ISF information. Specifically, for FROB shipments the ISF importer could be a non-vessel-operating common carrier as well as a VOCC, and for IE and T&E in-bond shipments and goods to be delivered to an FTZ the ISF importer could be the goods’ owner, purchaser, consignee, or agent (e.g., a licensed customs broker, carrier, or NVOCC).
As of March 15, CBP began issuing liquidated damages claims for violations of this rule, which only applies to ISF-5 shipments. CBP officials recently said ISF-5 compliance overall is currently about 88 percent. Enforcement for ISF-10 shipments has been in place for nearly a decade and compliance is now greater than 95 percent.
CBP has said that while the ISF-5 rule shifted the legal responsibility for such filings it would not change who actually submits the data in the “vast majority of cases.” For example, an NVOCC could use a customs broker or other third-party service provider to submit an ISF filing but, because it bears legal responsibility, would have to provide its own bond to secure the transaction. Since CBP enforcement focuses on liquidated damages rather than penalties, it is thus important for companies to ensure they understand their responsibilities and exposure when putting up their bond to secure ISF transactions.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Volkov Law Group Blog, 21 Mar 2019. Reprinted by permission.)
* Author: Michael Volkov, Esq., Volkov Law Group, mvolkov@volkovlaw.com, 240-505-1992.
There is nothing training cannot do. Nothing is above its reach. It can turn bad morals to good; it can destroy bad principles and recreate good ones; it can lift men to ‘angel ship. – Mark Twain
I am always struck by how much is written about tone-at-the-top, board commitment to compliance and specific benchmarking of chief compliance officer access and reporting to a corporate board and/or audit/compliance committee without asking a fundamental question – does the Board even know how to conduct oversight and monitoring of a company’s ethics and compliance program?  To put it bluntly, most corporate boards do not know specifically how to effectively monitor the company’s compliance program.
The challenge for the chief compliance officer is two-fold – first, to get access to the board for a “training” session; and second, to deliver a message (which is continually reinforced) that the board has to learn how to monitor and assume oversight responsibility for the company compliance program.  A CCO has to use his/her diplomatic and inter-personal skills to communicate to the board this important message.
The CCO has to cover a number of important topics, including:
  – Board responsibility for independent review of a company’s compliance program;
  – What information should the board require and how often should such information be provided to the board?
  – Elements of an effective ethics and compliance program;
  – Requirement that company has “devoted adequate staffing and resources to the compliance program.”  Management, resources and operation of compliance program;
  – Company culture, assessment, trends and measurement;
  – Budget, resources and planning in relation to business, growth, development and planning;
  – Trending issues and priorities for addressing gaps;
  – What are company’s legal and compliance risks, who are the stakeholders, and what is the process for risk evaluation and analysis (as well as continuous monitoring)?
  – Familiarity with Code of Conduct;
  – Compliant, Reporting and Detection of Issues; and
  – Internal investigation program performance: significant investigations, trends and data.
This list is not exhaustive and have many subparts that can be added. But as a starting point, the board should understand each of the above-listed topics and be able to articulate the importance of each topic and how they relate to each other.
Also, a board has to understand how to communicate with the CCO and develop a robust communication framework. In particular, the board has to inquire about the CCOs position and function within the company. These issues include:
  – Is anyone or operational function preventing you/CCO from implementing any of the elements of an effective ethics and compliance program?
  – Does the ethics and compliance function have adequate independence, authority and resources?
  – Are there any issues that have been reported to you/CCO or that you learned of that are not being addressed?
  – Are we aware of and staying current on trends in enforcement and effective compliance program? If there are gaps in our program, how are we addressing these areas?
  – What is current assessment of our culture? What specific metrics is supporting your assessment?
  – What steps can board and/or senior management take to support compliance program?
  – Do you/CCO feel that leadership and employees are comfortable reporting potential issues, and are these issues being appropriately addressed?
  – Have we had any allegations of retaliation? What steps are we taking to identify subtle attempts to retaliate?
  – Are we identifying and prioritizing the company’s ethics and compliance risks? Is our program tailored properly to our current and short-term risk profile?
  – Are we appropriately holding senior management and employees accountable for ethics and compliance responsibilities?
  – What steps and controls have we implemented to monitor and audit our program, potential misconduct, and detect wrongdoing? How is this program working?
These are just a sample of basic questions for discussion between the CCO and the board. There are many other issues that can develop depending on the company’s circumstances.
The board has a fundamental responsibility – to learn about compliance, to require basic information needed to ask the right questions and evaluate the answers, and to ensure a healthy relationship between the board and the CCO.  

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

COM_a413. R. Whitten & F.K. Merchant: “Clear for More Takeoffs: Now is the Time to Have Your Voice Heard on New Satellite and Launch Regulations”
(Source: Sheppard Mullen, 19 Mar 2019.)
* Authors: Reid Whitten, Esq., rwhitten@sheppardmullin.com, and Fatema K. Merchant, Esq., fmerchant@sheppardmullin.com. Both of Sheppard Mullen.
On March 8, the U.S. government signaled regulatory changes that may create new opportunities for international collaboration on satellite development, global sales of satellite and launch equipment, and even sharing launch technology.
. . . and the Government wants you to weigh in.
What was the announcement?
The U.S. Departments of State and Commerce have released an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) that requests comments and opinions from the public on what changes those departments might make to satellite export controls. Specifically, the Departments are focused on Categories IV (Launch Vehicles) and XV (Spacecraft) of the United States Munitions List (USML), which place those items under control of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR).
The stated objectives of reviewing and revising the USML and CCL are: (1) to ensure that USML categories do not inadvertently control items in normal commercial use; (2) account for developments in technology; and (3) to properly implement U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives.
Based on the government’s review of the USML and CCL in light of the comments it receives, the government may remove certain Launch Vehicles, Spacecraft, or related Technical Data from ITAR control and placed under the less restrictive commercial controls of the Export Administration Regulations. In the past few years, the U.S. government has periodically reviewed controls related to satellites, most notably during Export Control Reform in 2014 and 2017, as we discussed here and here. That reform placed many satellites and related technologies under less restrictive controls.
What does it mean?
This means that you have the chance to make your case for reduced controls on items that are critical to your business. If you are in the satellite manufacturing, design, service, sales, or launch industries, you have an opportunity to open up your markets and resources by making a case to the regulators that certain items and technology should be allowed to move more freely around the world.
What we have increasingly seen in the satellite industry, particularly as satellite technologies develop in this new era, is that many technologies that should likely have lesser controls because the technology is commercial in nature are captured under the USML because of current definitions. If you are in the emerging satellite tech industry, this rulemaking should be of high interest. You might be developing technology that will not come to fruition for a few years, but if currently captured under ITAR controls, your ability to develop that technology with non-U.S. persons or in collaboration with smart minds abroad is hindered because of U.S. export controls.
What can I do?
Before April 22, 2019, respond to the request to comment. The window to put in your opinion early and clearly is limited to a few weeks. So check with counsel or advisors on how to submit the most effective comments and get them in to the regulators to engage in this important conversation.
Focus on the Key Questions. The ANPRM asks nine questions, any or all of which may play a part in your response. However, Questions 2, 3 and 9 will be of particular interest to those who would like to reduce the regulatory burden of their work in the satellite industry.
Q2 – Are there specific defense articles described in the referenced categories that have entered into normal commercial use since the most recent revision of that category? If so, please include documentation to support this claim.
Q3 – Are there specific defense articles described in the referenced categories for which commercial use is proposed, intended, or anticipated in the next five years? If so, please provide any documentation.
Q9 – What are the cost savings to private entities from shifting control of a suggested specific item from USML to the CCL?
If these proposed rules may impact your business, consider providing your valuable input to the government and, as appropriate, consult with an advisor on how to draft and position your comment to be most effective.

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


* What: 2019 EU Conference
   – Import and Export Track (click here for the agenda)
Professional Speakers
   – Hot Industry Topics
* When: 15-17 May 2019
* Where: The Tower Hotel, London, United Kingdom.
* Sponsor: International Compliance Professionals Association (ICPA)
* Information & Registration: Click here.

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


. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)


Jean Paul (born Johann Paul Friedrich Richter, 21 Mar 1763 – 14 Nov 1825; was a German Romantic writer, best known for his humorous novels and stories.)
  – “Like a morning dream, life becomes more and more bright the longer we live, and the reason of everything appears more clear. What has puzzled us before seems less mysterious, and the crooked paths look straighter as we approach the end.”
  –  “Every man regards his own life as the New Year’s Eve of time.”

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

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.  The latest amendments to applicable regulations are listed below.

: 19 CFR, Ch. 1, Pts. 0-199.  Implemented by Dep’t of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs & Border Protection.
  – Last Amendment: 12 Mar 2019:
84 FR 8807-8809
: Extension of Import Restrictions Imposed on Archaeological and Ecclesiastical Ethnological Material From Honduras

: 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.]
: 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
  – 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 
.  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 

: 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 

: 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.

; 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: 14 Mar 2019:
84 FR 9239-9240
: Bump-Stock-Type Devices

: 22 C.F.R. Ch. I, Subch. M, Pts. 120-130. Implemented by Dep’t of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls.
  – Last Amendment: 19 Mar 2019: 84 FR 9957-9959: Department of State 2019 Civil Monetary Penalties Inflationary Adjustment
The only available fully updated copy (latest edition: 19 March 2019) of the ITAR with all amendments is contained in 
Bartlett’s Annotated ITAR 
(“BITAR”), by James E. Bartlett III. The BITAR is a 361-page Word document containing 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 download, usually revised within 24 hours after every ITAR amendment. The BITAR is available by annual subscription from the Full Circle Compliance 
. 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 Mar 2019: 
84 FR: 9456-9458
: List of Foreign Financial Institutions Subject to Correspondent Account or Payable-Through Account Sanctions (CAPTA List)
* 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: 
7 Mar 2019: 
Harmonized System Update (HSU) 1903  
[contains 67 ABI records and 13 harmonized tariff records].

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

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

. 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