19-0927 Friday “Daily Bugle”

19-0927 Friday “Daily Bugle”

Friday, 27 September 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. Contact us for advertising  

inquiries and rates. 

[No items of interest noted today.]
  1. Items Scheduled for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions 
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)
  3. DHS/CBP Publishes Guidance on Eleventh Round of Products Excluded from Section 301 Duties
  4. State/DDTC: (No new postings.)
  5. OMB/OIRA Reviews of Proposed Ex/Im Regulations: “Restricting Additional Exports and Reexports to Cuba”
  6. EU Imposes New Sanctions on Venezuela
  7. EU Trade Commission to Host ‘Trade for Her: Empowering Women through International Trade’ Live Stream Conference”
  1. FT: “Truss Admits to More Breaches of Saudi Arms Exports Ban”
  2. Expeditors News: “UK Publishes Guidance on Paying Reduced Rates of Customs Duty”
  1. C.B. Monahan and A.O. Johnson: “Whether to Voluntarily Disclose Potential ITAR Violations and the Lesson from L3Harris”
  2. S.L. Clark and D.O. Hindin: “Viewpoint: Security Assistance Programs – A Guide for the Perplexed”
  1. ECTI Presents U.S. Export Control (ITAR/EAR/OFAC) Seminar Series in Washington, DC: November 11-14, 2019
  2. FCC Presents “The ABC of FMS”, 28 Nov in Bruchem, the Netherlands
  3. List of Approaching Events: 110 Events Posted This Week, Including 14 New Events 
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Latest Amendments: DHS/Customs (5 Apr 2019), DOC/EAR (21 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 2019), DOS/ITAR (30 Aug 2019), DOT/FACR/OFAC (9 Sep 2019), HTSUS (3 Sep 2019) 
  3. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 


[No items of interest today.]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


. Items Scheduled
for Publication in Future Federal Register Editions

(Source: Federal Register, 27 September 2019.)
[No items noted today.] 

back to top

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

. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings.)


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

DHS/CBP Publishes Guidance on Eleventh Round of Products Excluded from Section 301 Duties
(Source: DHS/CBP, 27 Sep 2019.) [Excerpts.]
On September 20, 2019, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) published Federal Register (FR) Notice 84 FR 49600 announcing the decision to grant the eleventh round of certain exclusion requests from the 25 percent duty assessed under the Section 301 investigation related to goods from China ($16B Action – Tranche 2).
These product exclusions relate to the imposed additional duties announced in 83 FR 40823 on Chinese goods with an annual trade value of approximately $16 billion as part of the action in the Section 301 investigation of China’s acts, policies, and practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property, and innovation. The product exclusions announced in this notice will retroactively apply as of the August 23, 2018 effective date of the $16 billion action (Tranche 2), and will extend for one year after the publication of 84 FR 49600.
The exclusions are available for any product that meets the description as set out in the Annex to Federal Register Notice 84 FR 49600, regardless of whether the importer filed an exclusion request. Further, the scope of each exclusion is governed by the scope of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) 10-digit headings and product descriptions in the Annex; not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request for exclusion. The Annex to 84 FR 49600 link is embedded in this document for ease of reference.
The functionality for the acceptance of the eleventh round of products of China excluded from Section 301 duties will be available in the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) as of September 29, 2019.
Instructions for importers, brokers, and filers on submitting entries to CBP containing products granted exclusions by the USTR from the Section 301 measures as set out in 84 FR 49600 are as follow:
   – In addition to reporting the regular Chapters 39, 73, 76, 84, 85, 86, 87 and 90 classifications of the HTSUS for the imported merchandise, importers shall report the HTSUS classification 9903.88.17 (Articles the product of China, as provided for in U.S. note 20(v) to this subchapter, each covered by an exclusion granted by the U.S. Trade Representative) for imported merchandise subject to the exclusion.
   – Importers shall not submit the corresponding Chapter 99 HTS number for the Section 301 duties when HTS 9903.88.17 is submitted. …

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

State/DDTC: (No new postings.)

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

OMB/OIRA Reviews of Proposed Ex/Im Regulations: “Restricting Additional Exports and Reexports to Cuba”
, 26 Sep 2019.)    
Office of Management & Budget; Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) Report of Executive Order Submissions Under Review:
* TITLE: Restricting Additional Exports and Reexports to Cuba
– AGENCY: Commerce/BIS
– STAGE: Final Rule
– RECEIVED DATE: 26 September 2019
– RIN: 0694-AH90
– STATUS: Pending Review

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

EU Imposes New Sanctions on Venezuela
(Source: Official Journal of the European Union, 27 Sep 2019.)
* Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/1586 of 26 September 2019 implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2063 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Venezuela

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

EU Trade Commission to Host ‘Trade for Her: Empowering Women through International Trade’ Live Stream Conference

On 30 September 2019, EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström will host the ‘Trade for Her’ conference to find out how to achieve greater involvement of women in international trade, in the EU and beyond. The conference will look into the results of the first ever study on barriers faced by women in the European Union who are engaged in international trade. High-level representatives from international organisations, governments, businesses and civil society, will share their experiences, views and ideas on women in trade. Kindly note that registration is now closed, however the event will be web-streamed.
Join Commissioner @MalmstromEU at the #TradeForHer conference on 30 September at http://bit.ly/tradeforher.


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


FT: “Truss Admits to More Breaches of Saudi Arms Exports Ban”

(Source: Financial Times, 26 Sep 2019.) [Excerpts.]
Liz Truss admitted the UK government had again broken a court ruling that bans arms export licences to Saudi Arabia, sparking fresh criticism from campaigners who say British weapons are being used in the conflict in Yemen.
Last week Ms Truss, the international trade secretary, said there had been two “inadvertent” breaches of the court ruling, prompting an urgent investigation to establish whether there had been further infringements, and to enhance blocking procedures.
On Thursday, she told MPs there had been yet another breach and warned it was “possible that more cases will come to light”.
“As a result of the internal review so far, we have identified one further licence that has been granted in breach of the undertaking given to the Court of Appeal,” Ms Truss said. “This licence has not been used and has now been revoked.” …

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

Expeditors News: “UK Publishes Guidance on Paying Reduced Rates of Customs Duty”

(Source: Expeditors News, 26 Sep 2019.)
On September 16, 2019, the government of the United Kingdom (UK) published duty and tax reduction guidance.
The duty reduction programs include articles falling under the following categories:
– Re-importing goods that were previously exported;
– Importing goods to process or repair them;
– Educational and cultural goods;
– Medical or scientific goods;
– Printed and promotional goods;
– Goods for research;
– Helicopters and airplanes;
– Sea produce;
– Moving your business to the UK;
– Receiving goods by post;
– Goods for charity or supporting people with disabilities;
– Goods for personal use;
– Delaying Customs Duty and import VAT.
The guidance may be found here.

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


C.B. Monahan and A.O. Johnson: “Whether to Voluntarily Disclose Potential ITAR Violations and the Lesson from L3Harris”
(Source: Winston & Strawn LLP, 25 Sep 2019.) [Excerpts.]
* Authors: Christopher B. Monahan, Esq., cmonahan@winston.com, 1-202-282-5778; and Adeoye O. Johnson, aojohnson@winston.com, 1-202-282-5293; both of Winston & Strawn LLP.
On September 23, 2019, L3Harris Technologies, Inc. (L3Harris) agreed to settle charges of alleged unauthorized exports of defense articles, providing false statements, violating licensing provisos, terms, and conditions, and failing to properly manage temporary export licenses. Under the three-year Consent Agreement, L3Harris will pay a $13,000,000 fine (partially suspended on condition that the funds be used to remediate), subject itself to an external Special Compliance Officer, and undergo two external audits of its compliance program.
This is the second Consent Agreement made public by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) this year.
The Charging Letter details 131 alleged violations. The violations are primarily related to L3Harris’s failure to maintain a sufficiently capable compliance program to manage the concerns the U.S. Government previously expressed about the increased capabilities of L3Harris’s third-generation Adaptive Networking Wideband Waveform (ANW2C). Although not necessarily specific to the ANW2C, many public Consent Agreements tell similar stories about companies that are unable to manage the use of temporary export licenses, agreements, and/or license exemptions.
This Consent Agreement is interesting because of how DDTC accounted for L3Harris’s cooperation as a mitigating factor in the final penalty. In this case, it appears that DDTC learned of certain alleged violations by L3Harris from a referral from the Defense Technology Security Administration (DTSA). DDTC directed a disclosure that led to L3Harris then supplementing that disclosure with several voluntary disclosures to DDTC that were all considered in arriving at the Charging Letter.
A directed disclosure, subsequent voluntary disclosures, and what seems to be an overwhelmed compliance program are also not especially interesting characteristics in the context of DDTC Consent Agreements. The interesting characteristic, in this case, is how DDTC addressed three of those subsequent voluntary disclosures.
DDTC stated in its Proposed Charging Letter that, although “the Department considers these disclosures voluntary, the violations in these disclosures are directly related to the directed disclosure matter.” Consequently, although the Department of State explicitly considered three of the disclosures voluntary, in the next sentence it stated, “the voluntary nature of these three disclosures will not be considered a mitigating factor.”
One is forced to ask, what does the Department of State gain by not considering the disclosures mitigating if it considered them to have been made voluntarily? How related were the three subsequent disclosures to the directed disclosure to completely eliminate any potential mitigation credit? If the Department of State had simply determined that the three disclosures were not actually voluntary because they arose from the directed disclosure, then this would likely go unnoticed. However, by explicitly finding them to have been voluntary and then denying any mitigation credit, the Department of State is effectively removing the incentive to make voluntary disclosures.
Every company has to undergo a calculus when evaluating whether to make a voluntary disclosure to the government. This Charging Letter further complicates this calculus in that it suggests a voluntary disclosure may be insufficient alone to receive mitigation credit. If the Department of State begins a practice of not providing credit for voluntary disclosure, then such a practice will likely have a chilling effect on companies the next time they must make a decision of whether to disclose.

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

S.L. Clark and D.O. Hindin: “Viewpoint: Security Assistance Programs – A Guide for the Perplexed”

National Defense Magazine, 27 Sep 2019.) [Excerpts.]
* Authors: Samantha L. Clark, Esq., sclark@cov.com; and Doron O. Hindin, Esq., dhindin@cov.com; both at Covington & Burling, LLP
Each year, the U.S. government authorizes billions of dollars’ worth of security assistance to friendly foreign countries to support ongoing defense cooperation and in pursuit of security and diplomacy goals. In fiscal year 2018 alone, it authorized defense exports totaling $192.3 billion, an increase of 6 percent from the preceding fiscal year. …
The Defense Department’s inspector general March 19 announced that an audit was about to commence on the FMS agreement development process. The audit will assess how the DSCA, military departments and other stakeholders coordinate foreign government requirements for defense articles and services and whether the Defense Department makes appropriate use of the results of the FMS agreement development process. The House Armed Services Committee mandated the audit in response to congressional concern over the “slow, cumbersome and complicated” FMS program, with its uncoordinated acquisition processes that do not necessarily support U.S. national security objectives or the U.S. defense industrial base. Recommendations from audits often become legislative initiatives in the following year’s annual defense policy bill.
The Arms Export Control Act of 1976 authorizes the president, with approval from the secretary of state, to sell, lease and grant defense articles and services to friendly foreign governments and to international organizations. This presidential authority has been delegated to the State Department and to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency.
Under the program, foreign government purchasers acquire defense articles or services directly from the U.S. government, which in turn fulfills the foreign government requirements either from military stocks or through private sector procurement. By contrast, a direct commercial sale exists when, pursuant to Defense and State Department approval, a foreign government makes a purchase directly from a private contractor, oftentimes after internal negotiations over the country-specific requirements that need to be integrated into the items being acquired.
Typically, these two transactions must be financed completely by the foreign government purchaser. However, in the pursuit of U.S. national interests and to support allied forces, Congress routinely appropriates funds in order to finance select critical transactions.
Parties to an FMS transaction consist of the U.S. Defense Department and the foreign government purchaser. The terms of the transaction negotiated by the parties are memorialized in a “letter of offer and acceptance,” the government-to-government contract for the acquisition. With a letter in hand, the U.S. government then fulfills the requirements, either by turning to its stock or to private contractors.
When administering an FMS case, the U.S. government is bound by the thousands of rules codified in the security assistance management manual. The services follow the manual, but generally also follow their own internal security assistance manuals, which provide their interpretations and offer additional directives relevant to the particular service or department.
Although the letters are tailored to the particular transaction and the foreign government requirements, many key provisions are predetermined by the rules. For example, each letter must include the Defense Security Cooperation Agency’s most current “LOA standard terms and conditions,” which, among other things, commits the U.S. government to “in general, employ the same contract clauses, the same contract administration, and the same quality and audit inspection procedures as would be used in procuring for itself.” . . .
The rules in the manual and in other government-issued security assistance guidelines apply directly only to U.S. agencies, and not to private contractors. Instead, private contractors bidding on and fulfilling FMS requirements are bound by the general legal apparatus of U.S. procurement law as governed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation and Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement. Accordingly, from the perspective of private contractors, it is generally immaterial whether defense articles or services are being provided for use by the U.S. government or for resale to an FMS purchaser. In both scenarios, U.S. government contracting law applies. As a result, it is not uncommon for U.S. contractors to perform on FMS cases without ever knowing that the items they are supplying are intended for foreign government end-users.
That said, exceptions do exist in which U.S. contractors develop direct relationships with the FMS purchasers.  For example, the regulations exempt the U.S. government from holding a competitive bidding process in response to a sole-source FMS request.  In addition, it is not uncommon in this context for a contractor to interact directly with the foreign government purchaser in order to negotiate offsets and countertrade agreements or to assist in negotiating the letter of offer and acceptance with the U.S. government.
In a direct commercial sales transaction, foreign governments engage directly with private contractors to purchase defense equipment or services. The U.S. government is not a party to the transaction and instead operates in an oversight and regulatory capacity, ensuring that export control laws are observed and that national interests are safeguarded.
The primary regulator in these transactions is State’s directorate of defense trade controls, which takes guidance from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, the Defense Technology Security Administration, and from various military departments. Compliance with the International Traffic In Arms Regulations (ITAR), which implements the Arms Export Control Act and is overseen by State, is required for the export of defense articles, which includes any hardware and technical data related to items with military application. For less sensitive defense and dual-use items, the Department of Commerce’s bureau of industry and security is the relevant export control licensing authority.
Because contractors in these transactions sell directly to the foreign purchasers and not to the U.S. government, the burden of U.S. procurement law is avoided. Moreover, because the strictures of the security assistance management manual and of other U.S. agency rules do not apply, parties can negotiate the terms of sale with greater freedom and flexibility. However, the manual also maintains an “FMS-only list” that enumerates categories of items that are ineligible for direct transactions, such as fighter aircraft, missiles, sonar and unmanned systems.
But even when permitted, there are drawbacks to direct transactions, as contractors are exposed to an array of risks and imbalances associated with negotiating with and selling directly to foreign governments. Such risks include, among others, exposure to allegations of foreign corruption, sovereign immunity defenses that could be raised by the buyer in the event a dispute emerges, or the imposition by the foreign government of expensive or unreasonable offset or countertrade requirements. Moreover, it is not uncommon for contractors to find it difficult to negotiate favorable terms with foreign governments, which, for example, routinely insist on subjecting the contract to their domestic choice of law and to resolving disputes before their local courts.
Meanwhile, Congress routinely appropriates funds to finance purchases by friendly foreign governments. Each year, the president submits a foreign military financing budget request for consideration by the Senate and House committees on appropriations. The foreign operations and related programs appropriations subcommittees review the request and determine the level of funding to set in that year’s appropriations bill.
When utilizing the financing, most countries are required to fulfill their procurement through the foreign military sales route, utilizing their allotted funds as “FMS credit” to finance approved purchases. However, ten designated countries, when in good standing with the United States and authorized to receive security assistance, are permitted to utilize the financing also through direct sales purchases, through a transaction framework known as direction commercial contracting. The countries are: Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, Portugal, Pakistan, Yemen and Greece.
Generally, the financing is earmarked for advanced weapons systems aimed at preserving a foreign ally’s qualitative military edge, while supporting interoperability between U.S. and foreign military forces. As a result, the policy is to deny requests for low technology items or commodities, such as fuel, food, small caliber weapons and munitions or office equipment.
In FMS credit transactions, the financing allocated for a particular country is deposited into a trust account established and administered by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency on behalf of that country. The money in that account is used to pay the U.S. government, if the FMS is fulfilled through Defense Department stock, or private contractors fulfilling requirements. From the perspective of private contractors, there are no operative differences between bidding and performing on a U.S. government contract funded by FMS credit or, for regular cases, by national funds of the foreign government. In both scenarios, the payor is the U.S. government.
Several statutory restrictions limit use of FMS credit. Thus, absent an offshore procurement waiver, credit is generally not available to non-U.S. vendors or for any end-items whose value is composed of 50 percent or more non-U.S. content. Waivers may only be issued if, with concurrence from the Departments of Commerce and State, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency determines that the allocation of U.S. funds will not adversely impact the U.S. economy or defense industrial mobilization base. In addition, credit is not available for co-production abroad of U.S.-origin items and may only cover transportation costs incurred from U.S. flag ships or aircraft.
An additional bedrock rule in the guidelines is that for items with mixed U.S. and non-U.S. content, absent an exception, the financing may be used only to cover the cost of the U.S. content. As a result, contractors performing on a direct commercial contract must maintain strict “cost accounting” records that distinguish between U.S. and non-U.S. content. Those records must be reported to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency as a prerequisite for payment.
The guidelines do not clarify when an item is deemed to have been “manufactured and assembled” in the United States, and guidance rooted in the Buy American Act or the Trade Agreements Act is inapposite given that those U.S. procurement laws do not apply to direct contracts. Instead, prior to allocating financing in such contracts, the agency generally expects to see that an item underwent a process in the United States that resulted in substantial added value and significant U.S. employment.
The guidelines make clear that any unwillingness or inability by a contractor to comply with them can lead to debarment from future direct contracts, unless it actively demonstrates that past non-compliance has been remediated and provides reasonable assurances of future adherence to regulations.
The security assistance programs discussed above present distinct risks and opportunities. Their applicable regulatory frameworks are complicated and continually evolve, and they will likely undergo yet further reform as they incorporate the results of the inspector general’s latest audit. Nonetheless, when navigated with the proper care, these programs offer vast contracting opportunities for U.S. and foreign companies, provide strategic support to foreign allies, and play a key role in U.S. defense and foreign policy.

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



ECTI Presents U.S. Export Control (ITAR/EAR/OFAC
Seminar Series in Washington, DC: November 11-14, 2019
Jill Kincaid)
* What: United States Export Control (ITAR/EAR/OFAC) Seminar Series in Washington, DC
* When: ITAR Seminar: November 11-12, 2019; EAR/OFAC Seminar: November 13-14, 2019
* Where: Embassy Suites Alexandria Old Town
* Sponsor: Export Compliance Training Institute (ECTI)
* ECTI Speaker Panel: Scott Gearity, Greg Creeser, Melissa Proctor, Marc Binder and Timothy O’Toole
* Register
here, or Jessica Lemon, 540-433-3977.

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

FCC Presents “The ABC of FMS”, 28 Nov in Bruchem, the Netherlands
This training course is specifically designed for compliance professionals and those in a similar role working for government agencies or companies (temporarily) obtaining U.S. export-controlled articles and technology procured through government-to-government Foreign Military Sales (FMS), and authorized by the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) (22 U.S.C. 2751, et. seq.).
The course will cover multiple topics relevant for organizations outside the U.S. working with U.S. export-controlled articles and technology procured through FMS, including: the U.S. regulatory framework, with a special focus on the AECA, key concepts and definitions, and practical compliance tips to ensure the proper handling of FMS-acquired articles and technology. Participants will receive a certification upon completion of the training.
* What: The ABC of Foreign Military Sales (FMS)
* When: Thursday, 28 Nov 2019
– Welcome and Registration: 9.00 am – 9.30 am
– Training hours: 9.30 am – 4.00 pm
* Where: Full Circle Compliance, Landgoed Groenhoven, Dorpsstraat 6, Bruchem, the Netherlands
* Information & Registration: here or contact FCC at events@fullcirclecompliance.eu or + 31 (0)23 – 844 – 9046
* This course can be followed in combination with “U.S. Export Controls: The International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) from a non-U.S. Perspective” (26 Nov 2019), and/or “U.S. Export Controls: The Export Administration Regulations (EAR) from a non-U.S. Perspective” (27 Nov 2019). Please, see the event page for our combo deals

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

List of Approaching Events: 110 Events Posted This Week, Including 14 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 
If you wish to submit an event listing, please send it to
, composed in the below format:
* Date: Location; “Event Title”; <Weblink>”; EVENT SPONSOR
# = 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;

* E-Seminars: “ITAR/EAR Awareness“; Export Compliance Solutions;

* Webinar Series: “Complying with US Export Controls“; Commerce/BIS

* E-Seminars: “Webinars On-Demand Library“; Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A.
* Online: “International Trade Webinars“; Global Training Center

* Online: “ITAR – Requirements for Government Contractors“; Williams Mullins, LLP

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



* Sep 30 – Oct 3; Amsterdam, NL; “
ITAR Controls / EAR/OFAC Commercial and Military Controls
; 540-433-3977

* Oct 1: Boston; “Incoterms® 2020 Rules“; Massachusetts Export Center

* Oct 2: New York, NY; “Sanctions Compliance Think Tank“; American Conference Institute

* Oct 2-3: Toronto, Canada; “Canadian Forum on Global Economic Sanctions Compliance & Enforcement“; The Canadian Institute

* Oct 3: Chicago, IL; “
Trade Compliance & Policy” C.H. Robinson

* Oct 3: Perth, Australia; “Defence Export Controls Outreach“; Australian DoD

* Oct 3: Rotterdam, the Netherlands; “Trade Compliance Congres 2019“; Sdu

Oct 7: Munich, Germany; “
European and German Export Controls
“; AWA

* Oct 8: New York, NY; “Trade Compliance & Policy” C.H. Robinson* Oct 14-17; Columbus, OH; “
University Export Controls Seminar

* Oct 10: Rancho Mirage, CA; “WESCCON 2019 Conference“; Pacific Coast Council

Oct 15: Singapore; “
5th Asia Pacific Summit on Economic Sanctions Compliance and Enforcement
American Conference Institute

* Oct 15; Strongsville, OH; “Trade Compliance & Policy Seminar 2019“; C.H. Robinson

* Oct 15-16: Washington DC; “The WorldECR Export Controls & Sanctions Forum 2019“; WorldECR

* Oct 16-17; Miramar, FL; “12th Maritime Logistics Training Course“; albert@abs-consulting.net or 954-218-5285; ABS Consulting & Florida Shipowners Group

* Oct 17: Grayslake, IL: “How to Write an Export Management Compliance Program (EMCP)“; Lake County Chamber of Commerce

* Oct 17: Leeds, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Foundation Workshop“; UK/DIT
* Oct 17: Leeds, UK; “
Strategic Export Control: Licenses Workshop“; UK/DIT

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

* Oct 20-22: Grapevine, TX; “ICPA Fall Conference 2019“; ICPA

* Oct 21-25: Chicago, IL; “Certified Classification Specialist (CCLS)“; Amber Road

* Oct 22: Indianapolis, IN; “
Trade Compliance & Policy” C.H. Robinson

* Oct 22: Kansas City; “FTZ 101“; Miller & Company P.C.
* Oct 23: Kansas City; “FTZ 201“; Miller & Company P.C.

* Oct 24: New York, NY; “The Fundamentals of Export Regulatory Compliance“; NEXCO  

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

* Oct 28-31; Phoenix, AZ; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls Seminar Series

* Oct 29: Montreal, Canada; “
Trade Compliance & Policy” C.H. Robinson

* Oct 29: San Francisco, CA; “San Francisco Economic Sanctions Boot Camp“; American Conference Institute

* Oct 29-30; Tysons Corner, VA; “Conducting an internal Import/Export Audit“; Amber Road

* Oct 31: San Francisco, CA; “Incoterms 2020 Rules Seminar“; International Chamber of Commerce

* Oct 31: Toronto, Canada; “Trade Compliance & Policy” C.H. Robinson  
# * Nov 1:  Plainville, MA; “Essentials of Harmonized Tariff Classification and Free Trade Agreement Compliance“; Massachusetts Export Cente   

Nov 5; Baltimore, MD; “
Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) Export Compliance Seminar
“; U.S. Census Bureau

* Nov 7; Amsterdam, the Netherlands; “Annual International Trade & Compliance Conference“; Baker McKenzie

* Nov 8:  North Reading, MA; “Best Practices for EAR99 Exporters“; Massachusetts Export Center

* Nov 12; Washington, DC; “2019 OFAC Fall Symposium“, Treasury/OFAC

* Nov 11-13; London, United Kingdom; “International Trade Finance Training Course“; IFF

* Nov 11-14; Washington, DC; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls Seminar Series

* Nov 13: Manchester, UK; “Intermediate Seminar: Strategic Export Controls“; UK DIT

* Nov 13-14; Santa Clara, CA; “2019 Year-End Review of Import/Export Developments“; Baker McKenzie  

* Nov 14: Manchester, UK; “Foundation Workshop: Strategic Export Controls“; UK DIT
* Nov 14: Manchester, UK; “Licenses Workshop: Strategic Export Controls“; UK DIT

* Nov 15:  Westborough, MA; “Deemed Export Compliance & Technology Control Plan Development“; Massachusetts Export Center

* Nov 18: London, UK; “2nd Annual Navigating Russia Sanctions Complexities“; C5

* Nov 19:  Webinar; “Using ACE Reports to Manage and Audit AES Filings“; Massachusetts Export Center

* Nov 19-20: London, UK; “London Forum on Economic Sanctions“; C5

* Nov 19-21: Tysons Corner, VA; “Export Controls Specialist – Certification“; Amber Road

Nov 20: Bristol, UK; “
Introduction to Export Procedures – Export Training
“; BusinessWest
Nov 21: Bristol, UK; “
A Foundation Course in Importing
“; BusinessWest

* Nov 26: Birmingham, UK; “
Export Control Symposium


Nov 26: Bruchem, The Netherlands; “The International Traffic in Arms  

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

* Nov 27: Rotterdam, the Netherlands; “Incoterms 2020“; Fenex

* Dec 2-6: Tysons Corner, VA; “Certified Classification Specialist (CCLS)“; Amber Road

* Dec 3: London, UK; “Intermediate Seminar: Strategic Export Controls“; UK DIT

* Dec 4: London, UK; “Foundation Workshop: Strategic Export Controls“; UK DIT
* Dec 4: London, UK; “Licenses Workshop: Strategic Export Controls“; UK DIT

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

* Dec 10-11: New York, NY; ” 
10th Annual New York Forum on Economic Sanctions“; American Conference Institute

 Dec 12-13; Washington D.C.; “
Coping with U.S. Export Controls and Sanctions 2019
“; Practicing Law Institute

* Dec 13:  Boston, MA; “Export Expo“; Massachusetts Export Center


* Jan 20-23; San Diego, CA; “ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls Seminar Series“, ECTI; 540-433-3977  

* Jan 22-23: New York, NY; “AML & OFAC for the Insurance Industry“; American Conference Institute  

* Jan 23: Orlando, FL; “Customs/Import Boot Camp“; Partnering for Compliance

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

* Feb 5-6; Munich, Germany; “Export Compliance in Europe Conference“; NielsonSmith

* Feb 17-20; Huntsville, AL; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls Seminar Series
“, ECTI; 540-433-3977

* Feb 20-21; Berlin, Germany; “
14. Exportkontrolltag
“; ZAR

* Feb 24-26; Las Vegas, NV; “Winter Back to Basics Conference“; Society for International Affairs

* Mar 2-5; Washington D.C.; “
ITAR Controls / EAR & OFAC Export Controls Seminar Series
“, ECTI; 540-433-3977

* Mar 3-5; Vienna, Austria; “Lehrgang Exportkontrolle & Export Compliance“; OPWZ

* Mar 10-12:  Orlando, FL; “‘Partnering for Compliance’ Export/Import Control Training and Education Program“; Partnering for Compliance

* Apr 22-23: Washington D.C.; “Economic Sanctions Enforcement and Compliance“;
American Conference Institute

* Apr 29-30: Washington DC; “
Economic Sanctions Enforcement and Compliance
“; American Conference Institute
* Mar 2-5: Washington; “ITAR Controls (Mar 2-3) / EAR & OFAC Export Controls (Mar 4-5)“; ECTI; 540-433-3977
* Mar 30-Apr 2: Orlando, FL; “ITAR Controls (Mar 30-31) / EAR & OFAC Export Controls (Apr 1-2)“; ECTI; 540-433-3977

* May 20-21: Berlin, Germany; “Berlin Forum on Global Economic Sanctions“; C5

* May 27-28: Hong Kong, China; “Hong Kong Summit on Economic Sanctions Enforcement and Compliance“;
American Conference Institute

* Jun 9-10: Shanghai, China; “China Forum for Legal and Compliance Officers“; American Conference Institute

* Jun 17: London, UK; “Trade & Customs Compliance Group“; TechUK

* Jul 21-22: Washington DC; “FCPA High Risks Markets“; American Conference Institute



* Oct 1: Webinar: “Export Control and IT Modernization – Issues and Considerations“; ECTI; 540-433-3977

* Oct 3:  Webinar; “Country of Origin Management & Determination“; Massachusetts Export Center

* Oct 3: Webinar: “Resolving Disputes with Customs and Border Protection“; ECTI; 540-433-3977

* Oct 8: Webinar: “Advanced Letters of Credit“; NCBFAA  

* Oct 8:  Webinar; “KYC For Today’s Global Business Environment“; Massachusetts Export Center

* Oct 23: Webinar: “Understanding the ITAR and EAR Order of Review“; ECTI; 540-433-3977

* Oct 24:  Webinar; “Am I Really Subject to the EAR?; Massachusetts Export Center

* Oct 29: Webinar: “Key updates on export controls and sanctions“; Baker McKenzie

* Oct 31: “Conflicts Between EU and US Export Rules Webinar“; ECTI; 540-433-3977

* Nov 12: Webinar: “Duty Drawback and Refunds“; NCBFAA

* Dec 10: Webinar: “ECCN Classification Numbers“; NCBFAA

* Dec 17: Webinar: “Managing Emerging Compliance Risks“; Baker McKenzie


* Jan 14: Webinar: “Commodity Jurisdiction“; NCBFAA

Feb 18: Webinar: “Drop Shipments & Routed Transactions“; NCBFAA

* Apr 14: Webinar: “ACE Export Reports for Compliance“; NCBFAA

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


. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)

* Samuel Adams (27 Sep 1722 – 2 Oct 1803) was an American statesman, political philosopher, and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States. He was a politician in colonial Massachusetts, a leader of the movement that became the American Revolution, and one of the architects of the principles of American republicanism that shaped the political culture of the United States. He was a second cousin to his fellow Founding Father, President John Adams.)
  – “Among the natural rights of the colonists are these: First a right to life, secondly to liberty, and thirdly to property; together with the right to defend them in the best manner they can.”
  – “While I am in this world, I am resolved that no vexation shall put me out of temper if I can possibly command myself. Even old age, which is making strides towards me, shall not prevail to make me peevish.”
Friday funnies:
Why did the chicken cross the road?  Because she heard that on the construction site across the road there was a guy laying bricks and she thought to herself, “This I’ve got to see!”

back to top

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

EN_a316. 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: 5 Apr 2019:
5 Apr 2019: 84 FR 13499-13513: Civil Monetary Penalty Adjustments for Inflation

: 15 CFR Subtit. B, Ch. VII, Pts. 730-774. Implemented by Dep’t of Commerce, Bureau of Industry & Security.

Last Amendment: 21 August 2019: 84 FR 43493-43501: Addition of Certain Entities to the Entity List and Revision of Entries on the Entity List and 84 FR 43487-43493: Temporary General License: Extension of Validity, Clarifications to Authorized Transactions, and Changes to Certification Statement Requirements


: 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 (4 Jul 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 
.  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: 30 Aug 2019: 84 FR 45652-45654, Adjustment of Controls for Lower Performing Radar and Continued Temporary Modification of Category XI of the United States Munitions List.  

  – The only available fully updated copy (latest edition: 30 August 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: 9 Sep 2019: 84 FR 47121-47123: Cuban Assets Control Regulations


, 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: 4 Sep 2019: Harmonized System Update (HSU) 1915   
  – 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; and Assistant Editor, Alexander Witt. The Ex/Im Daily Update is emailed every business day to approximately 7,500 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