;

19-0820 Tuesday “Daily Bugle'”

19-0820 Tuesday “Daily Bugle”

Tuesday, 20 August 2019

TOP
The 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. Contact us for advertising 

inquiries and rates
.

  1. State: DTAG to Meet on 26 Sep in Washington, DC 
  2. USTR Announces Additional Tariffs on $300 Billion of Chinese Imports and Excludes Products Subject to Prior Section 301 Tariffs 
  1. Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions 
  2. Commerce/BIS Publishes Advisory Opinion Concerning Prohibited Activities in the Standards Setting or Development Context When a Listed Entity Is Involved
  3. DHS/CBP Announces FDA Downtime From 24 Aug 11 PM EDT Through 25 Aug 1 AM EDT
  4. DoD/DSCA Publishes Policy Memo 9-34: Clarification to LOA Document Assignment to LOA Case Development Groups
  5. State/DDTC: (No new postings.)
  6. EU Amends Sanctions Concerning ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida Organisations
  1. Reuters: “China CNPC Suspends Venezuelan Oil Loading, Worried About U.S. Sanctions”
  2. Time: “The U.S. Extends a Limited Reprieve on Technology Sales to Huawei by 90 Days”
  1. A. Corsoni-Husain: “Named and Shamed: The Implications of Appearing on The EU’s Sanctions List”
  2. D. Hanke: ” CFIUS 2.0: Key CFIUS Leader at Treasury Likely Sworn in by Mid-September, Draft Regulations Still Looming”
  3. P. Goergen: “Space Technologies’ Compliance with Export Control Regimes – New Working Paper”
  1. ECTI Presents U.S. Export Control (ITAR/EAR/OFAC) Seminar Training Focusing on Issues Relevant to Universities, Research Labs & Other Institutions of Higher Learning in Columbus, OH
  2. FCC Presents “Designing an ICP for Export Controls & Sanctions”, 1 Oct in Bruchem, the Netherlands
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Latest Amendments: DHS/Customs (5 Apr 2019), DOC/EAR (14 Aug 2019), DOC/FTR (24 Apr 2018), DOD/NISPOM (18 May 2016), DOE/AFAEC (23 Feb 2015), DOE/EINEM (20 Nov 2018), DOJ/ATF (14 Mar 2018), DOS/ITAR (19 Apr 2019), DOT/FACR/OFAC (6 Aug 2019), HTSUS (22 Jul 2019) 
  3. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 

EXIMITEMS FROM TODAY’S FEDERAL REGISTER

EXIM_a11. State: DTAG to Meet on 26 Sep in Washington, DC

(Source: Federal Register, 20 Aug 2019.)
 
84 FR 43258: Defense Trade Advisory Group; Notice of Open Meeting
 
The Defense Trade Advisory Group (DTAG) will meet in open session from 1:00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, September 26, 2019 at 1777 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20006. Entry and registration will begin at 12:30 p.m. The membership of this advisory committee consists of private sector defense trade representatives, appointed by the Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, who advise the Department on policies, regulations, and technical issues affecting defense trade. The DTAG was established as an advisory committee under the authority of 22 U.S.C. Sections 2651a and 2656 and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss current defense trade issues and topics for further study. The following agenda topics will be discussed and final reports presented:
 
(1) Review Consent Agreements from the past eight years and identify additional compliance remedial measures and/or areas for possible improvement to compliance programs for purposes of enhancing the effectiveness of remedial measures prescribed in future consent agreements.
(2) Evaluate authorizations involving third party technical/proprietary data, provide industry perceptions/problems, and where appropriate make recommendations for improvements; and provide any concerns industry has with other parties exporting or re-exporting their technical data or intellectual property without their knowledge, and provide recommendations.
(3) Identify current challenges with participation in established international cooperative programs and other arrangements; and recommend potential solutions that would reduce licensing challenges and enhance collaboration among the industrial bases of the participating nations, while preserving the critical task of protecting U.S. technology. Members of the public may attend this open session and will be permitted to participate in the question and answer discussion period following the formal DTAG presentation on each agenda topic in accordance with the Chair’s instructions. Members of the public may also submit a brief statement (less than 3 pages) to the committee in writing for inclusion in the public minutes of the meeting. As seating is limited to 125 persons, each member of the public that wishes to attend this session must provide: Name, contact information such as email address and/or phone number and any request for reasonable accommodation to the DTAG Alternate Designated Federal Officer (DFO), Karen Wrege, via email at DTAG@state.gov by COB Monday, September 9, 2018. If notified after this date, the Department might not be able to accommodate requests due to requirements at the meeting location. One of the following forms of valid photo identification will be required for admission to the meeting: U.S. driver’s license, passport, U.S. Government ID or other valid photo ID.
 
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Barbara Eisenbeiss, PM/DDTC, SA-1, 12th Floor, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 20522-0112; telephone (202) 663-2835 or email DTAG@state.gov.
 
  Karen M. Wrege, Alternate Designated Federal Officer, Defense Trade Advisory Group 

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

EXIM_a22. USTR Announces Additional Tariffs on $300 Billion of Chinese Imports and Excludes Products Subject to Prior Section 301 Tariffs

(Source: Federal Register, 20 Aug 2019.) [Excerpts.]
 
84 FR 43304-43471: Notice of Modification of Section 301 Action: China’s Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation; Notice
 
* AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.
* ACTION: Notice of modification of action.
* SUMMARY: In accordance with the specific direction of the President, the U.S. Trade Representative (Trade Representative) has determined to modify the action being taken in this Section 301 investigation by imposing additional duties of 10 percent ad valorem on products of China classified in the tariff subheadings set out in the Annexes to this notice.
* DATES: Additional duties at a rate of 10 percent ad valorem on the tariff subheadings set out in Annex A to this notice are applicable with respect to products that are entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after September 1, 2019. Additional duties at a rate of 10 percent ad valorem on the tariff subheadings set out in Annex C to this notice are applicable with respect to products that are entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after December 15, 2019.
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this action, contact Associate General Counsel Arthur Tsao or Assistant General Counsel Megan Grimball, or Director of Industrial Goods Justin Hoffmann at (202) 395-5725. For questions on customs classification or implementation of additional duties on products identified in the Annexes to this notice, contact traderemedy@cbp.dhs.gov.
* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: …
For these reasons, and in accordance with the specific direction of the President, the Trade Representative has determined to modify the action being taken in the investigation by adopting additional tariffs of 10 percent ad valorem on goods of China with an annual trade value of approximately $300 billion, as set out in the Annexes to this notice. The Trade Representative’s determination takes account of the public comments and the testimony from the seven-day public hearing, as well as the advice of the interagency Section 301 committee and
appropriate advisory committees.
   Certain tariff subheadings proposed in the May 17 notice have been removed from the final list of tariff subheadings subject to additional duties, based on health, safety, national security, and other factors. In addition, the tariff subheadings subject to the 10 percent additional duties are separated into two lists with different effective dates–Annex A contains the formal Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) language for list 1, and Annex B contains an informal description of the products in list 1. Annex C contains the formal HTSUS language for list 2, and Annex D contains an informal description of the products in list 2.
   List 1 includes tariff subheadings where China’s share of U.S. imports from the world is less than 75 percent for each subheading. For list 1, the additional duty of 10 percent ad valorem is effective September 1, 2019.
   List 2 includes products where China’s share of U.S. imports from the world is 75 percent or greater for each subheading. To provide a longer adjustment period for U.S. interested persons, the additional duty of 10 percent ad valorem for list 2 is delayed until December 15,
2019.

 In order to implement this determination, effective September 1, 2019, subchapter III of chapter 99 of the HTSUS is modified by Annexes A and C of this notice. Products of China that are provided for in the HTSUS headings established by Annex A to this notice that are entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 1, 2019, shall be subject to an additional duty of 10 percent ad valorem. Products of China that are provided for in the HTSUS headings established by Annex C to this notice that are entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on December 15, 2019, shall be subject to an additional duty of 10 percent ad valorem. …

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

OGSOTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

OGS_a13. Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions
(Source: Federal Register, 20 August 2019.)

* Commerce/BIS; NOTICES; Meetings: Materials Technical Advisory Committee [Pub. Date: 21 August 2019.]

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

OGS_a24
.
Commerce/BIS Publishes Advisory Opinion Concerning Prohibited Activities in the Standards Setting or Development Context When a Listed Entity Is Involved
(Source: Commerce/BIS, 20 Aug 2019.) [Excerpts.]
 
The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is providing this guidance in response to questions that BIS has received regarding the disclosure of technology or software subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) between and among members of standards setting or development groups or bodies. The questions relate to the addition on May 16, 2019, of Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. (Huawei) and sixty-eight of its non-U.S. affiliates to BIS’s Entity List, found in Supplement No. 4 to Part 744 of the EAR, and BIS’s issuance on May 20, 2019, of a Temporary General License (TGL) relating to these 69 listed Huawei entities. … 

The TGL did not amend the Entity List, but modified the Entity List-based licensing requirements for these 69 entities, including authorizing “subject to other provisions of the EAR, engagement with Huawei and/or the sixty-eight non-U.S. affiliates as necessary for the development of 5G standards by a duly recognized international standards body.” BIS has received a number of questions requesting further clarification concerning the TGL and/or engagement with the 69 listed Huawei entities in connection with other standards setting or development activities, including questions relating to the application of Section 734.7 of the EAR, pursuant to which certain publicly available information, including certain publicly available technology, may not be subject to the EAR. 

These questions tend to have similar themes or overlap with each other at least in part; rather than respond to them individually, BIS has determined that it is more efficient and more informative for the public to issue this general advisory opinion. …

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

OGS_a35
.
DHS/CBP Announces FDA Downtime From 24 Aug 11 PM EDT Through 25 Aug 1 AM EDT
(Source: CSMS #39438717, 20 Aug 2019.)
 
Due to scheduled downstream system maintenance on Saturday August 24th from 11PM EDT to Sunday August 25th at 1 AM EDT, FDA’s Interoperability Web Service (IWS), the interface between CBP and FDA, will be down and FDA will not be processing inbound entries or outbound messages. Normal processing of inbound and outbound traffic will resume at the end of this maintenance period. FDA’s Prior Notice System Interface (PNSI) will be operational, therefore FDA will be operating under Prior Notice contingency scenario 1.
 
Do not resubmit entries during this window as it will add to the backlog to be processed.
 
If Prior Notice has been submitted via ACE and confirmation has been received:
– No further action is required.
If Prior Notice has been submitted via ACE and confirmation has not been received:
– Please do not resubmit entries as this will cause additional delays.
– Filers have the options to:
       – Wait until the issue is resolved, unless this will cause the prior notice submission to be untimely. Filers who choose this option should understand that they remain responsible under section 801(m) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under the prior notice final rule for filing timely prior notice.
       – Provide CBP officers with evidence to show prior notice was submitted via ACE (e.g. signed copy of the ABI/ACE transmission).
If Prior Notice has not been submitted:
– Filers have the options to:
       – Wait until the issue is resolved, unless this will cause the prior notice submission to be untimely. Filers who choose this option should understand that they remain responsible under section 801(m) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under the prior notice final rule for filing timely prior notice.
       – Submit Prior Notice via the Prior Notice System Interface (PNSI) https://www.access.fda.gov/ . The prior notice confirmation number must accompany the article(s). Presenting the PNSI confirmation page(s) to CBP officers is recommended.
Please reference instructions in “CSMS 39392173 – FOR USERS OF THE FDA PRIOR NOTICE SYSTEM INTERFACE (PNSI)” regarding closing PNSI web entries prior to 10:30 PM EDT on August 24th.
 
For additional details, see Prior Notice Contingency Scenario 1.
 
An updated message will be sent once the issue is resolved.

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

OGS_a46.
DoD/DSCA Publishes Policy Memo 9-34: Clarification to LOA Document Assignment to LOA Case Development Groups
(Source: DoD/DSCA, 20 Aug 2019.)
 
 
This memorandum makes administrative changes and provides clarity for use by Implementing Agencies (IAs) in assignment of LOA case development Groups to LOAs, Amendments and Modifications under the specific circumstances.
 
This memo modifies Chapter 5 – FMS Case Development, by revising section C5.4.2. LOA Preparation Timeframe, adding milestone “BPCWAIT” to Table C5.T9. LOA Preparation Milestones, adding section C5.4.2.5. Assignment of an LOA preparation group for BPC cases, and revising Table C5.T6. AOD Group Codes.

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

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

OGS_a68.
EU Amends Sanctions Concerning ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida Organisations
(Source: Official Journal of the European Union, 20 Aug 2019.)
 
Regulations
* Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1353 of 20 August 2019 amending for the 304th time Council Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with the ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida organisations.

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

NWSNEWS

NWS_a19
.
Reuters: “China CNPC Suspends Venezuelan Oil Loading, Worried About U.S. Sanctions”
(Source: Reuters, 20 Aug 2019.) [Excerpts.]
 
China National Petroleum Corp, a leading buyer of Venezuelan oil, has halted August loadings following the latest U.S. sanctions on the South American exporter, three sources with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters on Monday.
 
The Trump administration in early August froze all Venezuelan government assets in the United States and U.S. officials ratcheted up threats against companies that do business with Venezuela’s state-run oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A., or PDVSA.
 
“Trump’s executive order gave a directive for the follow-up sanction measures that shall be announced by the U.S. Treasury… CNPC is worried that the company is likely to be hit by the secondary sanctions,” said one source.
 
A CNPC spokesman declined to comment. PDVSA and Venezuela’s information ministry did not immediately respond to requests for comment. …

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

NWS_a210
.
Time: “The U.S. Extends a Limited Reprieve on Technology Sales to Huawei by 90 Days”

(Source: Time, 20 Aug 2019.) [Excerpts.]
 
The Trump administration has extended a limited reprieve on U.S. technology sales to Huawei, even as questions remain over how much of an effect broader sanctions are having on the Chinese technology giant.
 
Huawei has become enmeshed in the trade war between Washington and Beijing, with President Donald Trump showing a willingness to use the sanctions as a bargaining chip. The U.S. government blacklisted Huawei in May, deeming it a national security risk, meaning U.S. firms aren’t allow to sell the company technology without government approval.
 
At the time, the U.S. exempted a narrow list of products and services. That exemption would have expired Monday, but the Commerce Department extended it for another 90 days, as expected.
 
Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said the main aim of Monday’s announcement is to give smaller U.S. internet and wireless companies that rely on Huawei more time to transition away from reliance on its products. …

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

COMMCOMMENTARY

COM_a111
.
A. Corsoni-Husain: “Named and Shamed: The Implications of Appearing on The EU’s Sanctions List”

(Source: Harneys, 16 Aug 2019.) [Excerpts.]
 
* Author: Aki Corsoni-Husain, Esq., Harney Westwood & Riegels, Cyprus, aki.corsoni-husain@harneys.com, +357-2584-4326.
 
What is the EU’s sanctions list? How is it produced and amended? What are the implications of being listed? Aki Corsoni-Husain answers these questions in this article, originally published by ThomsonReuters©.
 
Of the many client risks faced by financial institutions doing business today, one probably tops the growing list of reasons for Europe-based compliance officers to lose sleep at night: finding out that a client is named on the EU’s consolidated sanctions list of persons, groups and entities subject to EU financial sanctions (sanctions list).
 
It can legitimately take the title of being the primus inter pares of compliance concerns and not just of the private sector but in many cases of regulators and competent authorities alike.
 
These worries have been brought into sharp focus following the steadily increasing use of listings by the world’s two sanctions-designating superpowers: the United States and the European Union. Within the EU two events brought sanctions, or more precisely restrictive measures, into sharp relief: the 2011 Arab spring and Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014.
 
What is the EU’s sanctions list?
 
The sanctions list represents a vital component of the EU’s aim to implement a unified and autonomous foreign policy, ie its common foreign and security policy (CFSP). In practical terms it operates effectively as a blacklist of those individuals, organisations and entities (designated persons) appearing on it.
 
In a rare example of extra-territorial reach, the list must be observed by EU citizens based anywhere in the world. The EU also works actively with third countries, even including the United States at times, to encourage the implementation equivalent and uniform sanctions lists.
 
How is the EU sanctions list produced and amended?
 
The EU is ultimately a rules-based structure, and as such the authority for the imposition of the list is contained in its founding treaties (more precisely, Article 29 of the Treaty on the European Union or TEU). In broad terms, restrictive measures are imposed for political rather than economic reasons, in essence to bring about a change in policy or activity by the target country, government, entities or individuals, in line with the objectives set out in the CFSP implementing legislation. …
  

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

COM_a212. 
D. Hanke: “CFIUS 2.0: Key CFIUS Leader at Treasury Likely Sworn in by Mid-September, Draft Regulations Still Looming”
(Source: 
Arent Fox, 19 Aug 2019.)
 
* Author: David Hanke, Esq., Arent Fox LLP, 1-202-857-6176, david.hanke@arentfox.com.
 
The US Senate is poised to confirm Tom Feddo to run CFIUS as Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Investment Security, increasing the bandwidth of CFIUS at a critical time in its history.
 
Before recessing for the month of August, the US Senate formally began consideration of the nomination of Tom Feddo to be the very first Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Investment Security. Congress formally created this position a year ago, with the goal of increasing the bandwidth of CFIUS, when it enacted the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act (FIRRMA). This reflected a desire by the CFIUS member agencies (the Treasury Department in particular) to expand the pool of senior personnel who carry out and oversee its functions. Feddo’s nomination will become ripe for a procedural vote in the Senate on Monday, September 9, and his subsequent confirmation will likely occur sometime later that week. Feddo is widely seen as a steady hand on the tiller at CFIUS, where he currently serves as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Investment Security.
 
Feddo’s nomination was advanced by the Senate Banking Committee on June 18, 2019, with overwhelming bipartisan support, just two weeks after a very smooth confirmation hearing. Explaining the significance of the new Assistant Secretary position, the Chairman of the Banking Committee called it “an important national security job that protects our most critical technology companies from foreign takeovers and influence.” The Ranking Democrat agreed: “We created this new position because of the critical role CFIUS plays protecting US national security from increasing threats from certain foreign investments. Yesterday we heard about how China has adopted new tactics to acquire American technology in sectors that are vital to our national security. It’s why we passed this bill, and it’s why this job will be so important.” Feddo has been praised by both sides of the aisle for his qualifications, and he is likely to be confirmed with the same level of overwhelming bipartisan support with which FIRRMA was enacted.
 
During the early development of FIRRMA, both its authors in Congress and the CFIUS member agencies had been justifiably concerned about whether CFIUS would have enough staff and other resources to handle a heavier workload. In fact, the Administration has estimated that FIRRMA, once fully implemented, may result in 1,000 total CFIUS cases per year, which would be about a fourfold spike in volume (see p. 29 of this FY20 budget request from the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security). Early on, the Treasury Department had flagged three essential components of any legislative overhaul of CFIUS: adequate resourcing (especially personnel); organizational structure (including what level of official would be required to sign off on CFIUS actions); and flexibility in implementation. Critically, the creation of this new Assistant Secretary position and Feddo’s hiring implicate two out of three of those priorities.
 
FIRRMA
tackled the personnel and resourcing challenges head-on. It authorized an extra $20 million per year in funding for CFIUS agencies, gave CFIUS the authority to charge modest filing fees, and granted the CFIUS member agencies special hiring authority for career positions. And, of course, it created the new position of Assistant Secretary for Investment Security, requiring that its duties “be principally related” to CFIUS. The creation of this CFIUS-dedicated position effectively expands the pool of Treasury officials who are authorized to sign off on CFIUS actions. The Defense Production Act, which provides CFIUS’s statutory authority and guidance, requires Treasury and the co-lead agency of each CFIUS review to send a certification to Congress after the review is completed, stating that there are “no unresolved national security concerns” regarding the transaction. In the past, this signature requirement has sometimes been the cause of bottlenecks in Treasury’s processing of CFIUS cases.
 
The initial inclination by CFIUS and the authors of FIRRMA, as reflected in the originally introduced legislation, was to allow delegation of this signature authority to officials at the Deputy Assistant Secretary level. However, influential private sector stakeholders pushed back, leery of seeing “the pen” transferred to officials below the Presidential Appointment with Senate Confirmation (PAS) level. As the argument went, officials who were never subject to the gauntlet of Senate confirmation are less politically accountable. So, in the final enacted version, FIRRMA both prohibited the delegation of CFIUS signature authority below the Assistant Secretary level and also created a new Assistant Secretary of the Treasury position, dedicated to running CFIUS. Thus, once sworn in, Feddo will be primarily responsible for signing off on CFIUS reviews.
 
Feddo’s move up to the Assistant Secretary role will mark the third concrete step in the implementation of FIRRMA, the first two being CFIUS’s October 2018 launch of the critical technologies pilot program and its simultaneous publication of tweaks to the legacy CFIUS regulations. The promotion of Feddo will also allow Treasury to hire a new Deputy Assistant Secretary for Investment Security, since Feddo will vacate that important role.
 
For investors and companies who are frequent flyers with CFIUS or may need to navigate the process in the near future, Feddo’s move is a positive and timely development. In addition to the increase in workload driven by the pilot program, CFIUS is also in the midst of drafting the implementing regulations for FIRRMA, a substantial undertaking that requires all hands on deck. Drafting the regulations has required CFIUS to wrestle with a slew of difficult issues, including how to define terms such as critical infrastructure and sensitive personal data; whether to redefine terms such as control and foreign person; whether to use “country specification” authority to create a positive list of low-risk investors; and whether and how to impose filing fees. The release of the draft regulations is expected sometime this fall, and Arent Fox will be closely monitoring and analyzing these and any related developments.

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

COM_a313. 
P. Goergen: “Space Technologies’ Compliance with Export Control Regimes – New Working Paper”
(Source: Cross Borders, 19 Aug 2019.) [Excerpts.]
 
* Author: Patrick Goergen, Esq., Cross Borders, Luxembourg, info@crossborders.lu, +352-26-27-25-1.
 
Space has always represented a challenging environment for human exploration. While space is not subject to claims of national sovereignty, States are free to explore that expanse existing beyond the Earth and between celestial bodies, and which, everyone knows, is not completely empty. Luxembourg has recently gone the path and aims to contribute to the peaceful exploration and sustainable utilization of space resources for the benefit of humankind. Its vision is built on support for advanced research activities and technological capabilities, drawing on the country’s existing expertise in the space sector and its ongoing strategy of economic diversification into future oriented high-tech industries.
 
Space technologies have their origin in strategic and military domain. They have now become a key 
in high technology development, both in the military and civilian fields.
 
Technologies related to space launch vehicles may also be deployed in ballistic missiles and thus can have a major impact on the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Satellites play a vital role in the crisis management during natural catastrophes, or allow real time communication
world-wide. At the same time, satellites may provide all kinds of support to military forces, ranging from gathering intelligence information to issuing early warning of hostile missile launches.
 
It is therefore not strange that international organizations are controlling and limiting trade and transfers of space technologies, essentially for national and international security 2 reasons. But how do these controls look like? What do space technology companies have to respect in their strategic and daily business, in order not to contravene international and national rules on export control, and to avoid to run a risk for heavy administrative and criminal sanctions 3?
 
A reply to these questions requires to have a closer look on the technologies themselves (1), on their possible use (2), on their classification with regard to dual-use (4) and military lists (5), as well as on (6) possible sanctions and other restrictive measures dealing with them. An internal compliance program at the level of the company (8) seems to be the best instrument to achieve and demonstrate compliance with all export control related regulations (3) towards licensing authorities competent to issue authorizations (7). …

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


TEEX/IM TRAINING EVENTS & CONFERENCES

TE_a114.
ECTI Presents U.S. Export Control (ITAR/EAR/OFAC) Seminar Training Focusing on Issues Relevant to Universities, Research Labs & Other Institutions of Higher Learning in Columbus, OH
(Source: Jill Kincaid; 
jill@learnexportcompliance.com
)
 
* What: University Export Controls (ITAR/EAR/OFAC) Seminar in Columbus, OH
* When: October 14-17, 2019 
* Where: Columbus, OH: The Blackwell Inn on the campus of The Ohio State University
* Sponsors: Export Compliance Training Institute (ECTI), Descartes Visual Compliance, Amber Road – now part of E2OPEN
* Speaker Panel: Scott Gearity, Marc Binder, with special presentations by Jim Bartlett (Full Circle Trade Law), Felice Laird (Export Strategies), Jessa Albertson, Dorata Grejner-Brzezinska, Stacy Rastauskas Bretherton, Emily Schriver, Elizabeth Wagner & Jennifer Yucel (Ohio State University), Mary Beran (Georgia Tech), Missy Peloso (Univ. of Penn.) and others.
*Register
here
, or 
Jessica Lemon
, 540-433-3977.

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

TE_a215. FCC Presents “Designing an ICP for Export Controls & Sanctions”, 1 Oct in Bruchem, the Netherlands

 
This training course is designed for compliance officers, managers, and other professionals who aim to enhance their organization’s compliance efforts. The course will cover multiple topics and tackle various key questions, including but not limited to:
– Setting the Scene: ensuring compliance in the export control and sanctions arena
– What is expected from your organization? A closer look at the official frameworks and guidelines from U.S. and European government agencies
– Key elements of an ICP
– Best practice tips for enhancing your current compliance efforts  
– Internal controls samples (policies, procedures, instructions)
– Strategic benefits of having an ICP.
* What: Designing an Internal Compliance Program (ICP) for Export Controls & Sanctions
* Date: Tuesday, 1 Oct 2019
* Location: Full Circle Compliance, Landgoed Groenhoven, Dorpsstraat 6, Bruchem, The Netherlands
* Times:
  – Registration and welcome: 9.00 am – 9.30 am
  – Training course hours: 9.30 am – 4.30 pm
* Level: Intermediate
* Target Audience:  the course provides valuable insights for both compliance professionals, employees and (senior / middle) management working in any industry subject to U.S. and/or EU (member state) export control laws and sanctions regulations.
* Instructors: Drs. Ghislaine C.Y. Gillessen RA and Marco M. Crombach MSc.
* Information & Registration: click
here or contact us at 
events@fullcirclecompliance.eu or 31 (0)23 – 844 – 9046.  

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

ENEDITOR’S NOTES

 

* Francis Asbury
(20 Aug 1745 – 31 Mar 1816; was one of the first two bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States. During his 45 years in the colonies and the newly independent United States, he devoted his life to ministry, traveling on horseback and by carriage thousands of miles to those living on the frontier.  He also founded several schools, including Asbury University and Asbury Theological Seminary, of Wilmore, Kentucky.)
 – “My soul is more at rest from the tempter when I am busily employed.”
 
* Benjamin Harrison
(20 Aug 1833 – 13 Mar 1901; was an American politician and lawyer who served as the 23rd president of the United States from 1889 to 1893. He was a grandson of the ninth president, William Henry Harrison, creating the only grandfather-grandson duo to have held the office.
  – “We Americans have no commission from God to police the world.”

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

EN_a317
. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date?
(Source: Editor)

 

*
DHS CUSTOMS REGULATIONS: 19 CFR, Ch. 1, Pts. 0-199.  Implemented by Dep’t of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs & Border Protection.

  – Last Amendment: 5 Apr 2019:
84 FR 13499-13513: Civil Monetary Penalty Adjustments for Inflation
 


DOC EXPORT ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS (EAR)
: 15 CFR Subtit. B, Ch. VII, Pts. 730-774. Implemented by Dep’t of Commerce, Bureau of Industry & Security.


 
* 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 (4 July 2019) of Bartlett’s Annotated FTR (“BAFTR”), by James E. Bartlett III, is available for downloading in Word format. The BAFTR is a 152-page Word document containing 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 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 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 

 

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: 19 Apr 2019: 84 FR 16398-16402: International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Transfers Made by or for a Department or Agency of the U.S. Government   
  – The only available fully updated copy (latest edition: 4 July 2019) of the ITAR with all amendments is contained in Bartlett’s Annotated ITAR (“BITAR”), by James E. Bartlett III. The BITAR is a 371-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 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: 6 August 2019: 84 FR 38545 – August 2019 Amendments to Iranian Financial Sanctions Regulations and Iranian Human Rights Abuses Sanctions Regulations [amendment of 31 CFR Parts 561 and 562.]  

  

* 
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 Amendment: 22 July 2019: Harmonized System Update 1913


  – HTS codes for AES are available here.

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

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

EN_a0318
Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories

(Source: Editor) 

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

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

EPEDITORIAL POLICY

* The Ex/Im Daily Update is a publication of FCC Advisory B.V., compiled by: Editor, James E. Bartlett III; and Assistant Editors, Alexander Witt and Sven Goor. The Ex/Im Daily Update is emailed every business day to approximately 7,000 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 of this newsletter 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