;

20-0814 Friday ” Daily Bugle”

20-0814 Friday “Daily Bugle”

 this copy of the Daily Bugle to others or share this subscription link
Friday, 14 August 2020

  1. Presidential Documents: “Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Export Control Regulations (IEEPA)”
  1. Items Scheduled for Future Federal Register Edition
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings)
  3. State/DDTC: (No new postings)
  4. USTR Modifies $7.5 Billion WTO Award Implementation Relating to Illegal Airbus Subsidies
  1. EU Sanctions: “Third Countries Align with EU Venezuela Sanctions”
  2. WORLDecr: “Gulf Arms Sales Probe Says Pompeo Acted Lawfully but Failed to Assess Yemen Deaths”
  1. Akin Gump: “FEMA Extends Temporary Final Rule Restricting Certain Exports of PPE”
  2. Baker McKenzie: “US – Trump Administration Approves Updated Unmanned Aerial System Export Policy”
  3. Thompson Coburn: “Commerce Department Formally Suspends Most Export License Exceptions for Hong Kong”
  4. Torres: “Guide To Complying With U.S. Export Control And Immigration And Anti-Discrimination Laws”
  1. Congratulations to Jim Bartlett on his Reappointment to DTAG and RPTAC
  1. FCC Academy Presents 4 Webinars: U.S. Export Controls: ITAR & EAR | FMS | Designing and Implementing an ICP
  2. Friday List of Approaching Events: 211 Events Posted This Week, Including 9 New Events
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. How to Publish Your Article in the Daily Bugle 
  3. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Find the Latest Amendments Here. 
  4. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 
  5. Submit Your Job Opening and View All Job Openings 
  6. Submit Your Event and View All Approaching Events 

Are You Keeping Up to Date with the Latest Regulations?
 

Bartlett’s Annotated ITAR and Bartlett’s Annotated FTR are Word documents to down-

load to your laptop to keep you updated on the latest amendments, and contain over 800 footnotes of section history, key cases, practice tips & tricks, and extensive Tables of Contents. The ITAR amendments to the ITAR that took effect on 9 March and 25 March are included in the current edition of the BITAR.  Subscribers receive updated editions every time the regulations are amended (usually within 24 hours) so you will always have the current versions of the regulations. Subscribe to the BITAR now to guarantee you have an up-to-date ITAR!    
 

Combo
BITAR + BAFTR
Price: $300
Offer: $275

  Buy Here

BITAR

Price: $200
BAFTR

  Price: $100

EXIM ITEMS FROM TODAY’S FEDERAL REGISTER

 
85 FR 49939: Notice
  On August 17, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13222 pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act [IEEPA](50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.). In that order, the President declared a national emergency with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States related to the expiration of the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.). Because the implementation of certain sanctions authorities, including sections 11A, 11B, and 11C of such Export Administration Act of 1979, consistent with section 1766(b) of Public Law 115-232 (50 U.S.C. 4601 note), is to be carried out under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the national emergency declared on August 17, 2001, must continue in effect beyond August 17, 2020. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13222, as amended by Executive Order 13637 of March 8, 2013.

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

OGS OTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

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

OGS_a23. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings)

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

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

(Source: USTR, 12 Aug 2020)
 
  As required by U.S. law, the United States Trade Representative is issuing a modification to the list of products subject to WTO-authorized additional duties in the United States’ successful WTO challenge to subsidies for large civil aircraft provided by the European Union, France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom.   USTR is removing from the tariff list certain products from Greece and the United Kingdom and adding an equivalent amount of trade from France and Germany.  The changes are modest; the amount of products subject to countermeasures will remain unchanged at $7.5 billion and the tariff rates will remain unchanged at 15% for aircraft and 25% for all other products.
  “The EU and member states have not taken the actions necessary to come into compliance with WTO decisions,” Ambassador Robert Lighthizer stated.  “The United States, however, is committed to obtaining a long-term resolution to this dispute.  Accordingly, the United States will begin a new process with the EU in an effort to reach an agreement that will remedy the conduct that harmed the U.S. aviation industry and workers and will ensure a level playing field for U.S. companies. ”  
  The modifications announced will take effect on Sept. 1, 2020.
 
BACKGROUND
  In October 2019, the WTO authorized the United States to take $7.5 billion in countermeasures following the largest victory in WTO history in the long-running dispute against the EU, France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom regarding their illegal subsidies for the Airbus consortium.  Following a notice and comment process, on October 9, 2019, the United States imposed additional tariffs of up to 25 percent on products of current and former EU member states with a trade value of approximately $7.5 billion.  The section 301 statute provides for periodic review and modification of the tariff action.  A prior revision was made in February 2020.  
  The details of the modification are set out in a Notice that will be published in the Federal Register.   

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

COM NEWS

(Source: EU Sanctions, 13 Aug 2020) [Excerpts]
 
  On 29 June 2020, the EU Council adopted Decision (CFSP) 2020/898, which added 11 Venezuelan officials to its sanctions list for their alleged actions against the democratic functions of the National Assembly.
  North Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia have aligned themselves with this decision. See Declaration.

(Source: WORLDecr, 13 Aug 2020) [Excerpts]
 
  The US State Department said on 10 August that a government investigation into an ’emergency’ arms sale worth more than $8 billion to Saudi Arabia and other Middle East allies had found that Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had acted within the law by authorising the deal. 
  But the report also added that he had failed to ‘fully assess’ the risk of civilian casualties in Yemen, where Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are in a devastating proxy war with Iran.
  ‘The State Department Office of Inspector General (OIG) has confirmed in a final report that the Department acted in complete accordance with the law and found no wrongdoing in the Administration’s exercise of emergency authorities available under the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) to expedite $8 billion in critical defense systems to key Middle East partners,’ the report said. ‘The transfers were essential to bolster the security of the Gulf region and our ally Israel against the sharp increase in Iranian aggression in 2019,’ it added. …
  The OIG report also found that the State Department had been selling precision guided munitions (‘PGMs’) in component parts, so that each individual transfer fell below the threshold requiring congressional approval. There were ‘4,221 below-threshold arms transfers involving Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, with an estimated total value of $11.2bn since January 2017,’ the OIG reported. …

COM COMMENTARY

(Source: Akin Gump, 12 Aug 2020)
 
* Principal Author: Kevin J. Wolf, Esq., 1-202-887-4051, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
 
Key Points
  • On August 10, 2020, FEMA extended the duration of its restrictions on the export of certain shipments of PPE through December 31, 2020.
  • The August 10 notice narrowed the types of PPE covered by the restrictions to certain defined types of surgical (as opposed to industrial) respirators, surgical masks, nitrile gloves, and surgical gowns.
  • The August 10 notice also extends 11 exemptions allowing exports of shipments meeting certain criteria that FEMA has established since the export restrictions became effective in April 2020. 
Background
  On August 10, 2020, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) issued a notice modifying restrictions to reflect current needs and extending the duration of its restrictions on the export of certain shipments of personal protective equipment (PPE) through December 31, 2020 (the “August 10 notice”). The notice also extends 11 exemptions allowing exports of certain covered PPE shipments meeting identified criteria. The notice went into effect immediately.
  As detailed in a previous Akin Gump client alert, FEMA established export restrictions on certain covered PPE products in a temporary final rule (the “Temporary Final Rule”) issued on April 7, 2020. The Temporary Final Rule authorized U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to temporarily detain exports of certain covered PPE products. While in CBP custody or constructive custody, the Temporary Final Rule allowed FEMA to review the shipments and determine whether to return the shipment for domestic use, issue a Defense Product Act (DPA) rated order for the shipment, or allow part or all of the shipment to be exported. FEMA has stated that it is undertaking best efforts to provide a determination on each covered export shipment within three business days. Absent the August 10 notice, the Temporary Final Rule would have expired on August 10.
  Another previous Akin Gump client alert detailed 11 exemptions to the export restrictions that FEMA established via guidance issued on April 17, 2020 (the “Guidance”). Covered PPE shipments that qualify for the exemptions, including documentation requirements as applicable, are permitted to leave the United States without FEMA’s explicit approval.
 
Modifications to Covered PPE
  The August 10 notice modifies the Temporary Final Rule by reducing the list of covered materials to four types of PPE in order to reflect current domestic demand. FEMA identified domestic demand using the number of open requests for such materials from state, local, Tribal, and territorial jurisdictions. Accordingly, covered PPE is now limited to the following items:
  • Surgical N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators, including devices that are disposable half-face-piece non-powered air-purifying particulate respirators intended for use to cover the nose and mouth of the wearer to help reduce wearer exposure to pathogenic biological airborne particulates.
  • PPE surgical masks, including masks that cover the user’s nose and mouth and provide a physical barrier to fluids and particulate materials.
  • PPE nitrile gloves, including those defined at 21 CFR 880.6250 (exam gloves) and 878.4460 (surgical gloves) and such nitrile gloves intended for the same purposes.
  • Level 3 and 4 Surgical Gowns and Surgical Isolation Gowns that meet all of the requirements in ANSI/AAMI PB70 and ASTM F2407-06 and are classified by Surgical Gown Barrier Performance based on AAMI PB70.
  The August 10 notice thereby reduces the list of materials covered by FEMA’s export restrictions from five to four types of PPE. The notice modifies the former description of covered N95 Filtering Facepiece Respirators by adding the word “surgical” to the description “[b]ecause [high] demand is specific to surgical N95 respirators and does not include industrial respirators.” Industrial respirators are therefore no longer subject to export restrictions. Similarly, the August 10 notice narrows the scope of covered gloves to solely the nitrile types specified above because “[d]omestic supply for latex and vinyl examination and surgical gloves has largely caught up with demand,” justifying their removal from the scope of covered gloves. The August 10 notice also removes two items from the list of covered PPE: (1) “other filtering facepiece respirators”; and (2) “elastomeric, air-purifying respirators and appropriate particulate filters/cartridges.” By contrast, the August 10 notice adds restrictions for the specified types of surgical gowns, which were not previously subject to export restrictions.
 
Eleven Exemptions Remain in Place
  The August 10 notice expressly extends the exemption established by the Temporary Final Rule for “shipments made by or on behalf of U.S. manufacturers with continuous export agreements with customers in other countries since at least January 1, 2020, so long as at least 80 percent of such manufacturer’s domestic production of covered materials, on a per item basis, was distributed in the United States in the preceding 12 months.”
  The August 10 notice also extends the exemptions and applicable documentation requirements for ten additional categories of shipments established in its April 17 Guidance as follows:

i. Shipments to U.S. Commonwealths and Territories, Including Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (Including Minor Outlying Islands).

ii. Exports of Covered Materials by Non-profit or Non-governmental Organizations that are Solely for Donation to Foreign Charities or Governments for Free Distribution (Not Sale) at their Destination(s).

iii. Intracompany Transfers of Covered Materials by U.S. Companies from Domestic Facilities to Company-owned or Affiliated Foreign Facilities.

iv. Shipments of Covered Materials that are Exported Solely for Assembly in Medical Kits and Diagnostic Testing Kits Destined for U.S. Sale and Delivery.

v. Sealed, Sterile Medical Kits and Diagnostic Testing Kits Where Only a Portion of the Kit is Made Up of One or More Covered Materials That Cannot be Easily Removed Without Damaging the Kits.

vi. Declared Diplomatic Shipments from Foreign Embassies and Consulates to their Home Countries. These May be Shipped via Intermediaries (Logistics Providers) but are Shipped from and Consigned to Foreign Governments.

vii. Shipments to Overseas U.S. Military Addresses, Foreign Service Posts (e.g. Diplomatic Post Offices), and Embassies.

viii. In-Transit Merchandise: Shipments in Transit through the United States with a Foreign Shipper and Consignee, Including Shipments Temporarily Entered into a Warehouse or Temporarily Admitted to a Foreign Trade Zone.

ix. Shipments for Which the Final Destination is Canada or Mexico.

x. Shipments by or on behalf of the U.S. Federal Government, including its Military.

  FEMA established an additional exemption for certain surplus covered PPE materials via guidance issued on its website on July 6, 2020. That exemption allowed exporters with “a surplus of a covered material [who] can demonstrate a good-faith and unsuccessful attempt to sell the material domestically, . . . [to] submit a request to FEMA to allow the material to be exported.” However, that exemption is not expressly addressed in the August 10 notice, and it is therefore unclear whether it has been extended.
 
Guidance for the Customs and Export Communities

  Aside from the changes to covered PPE highlighted above, FEMA’s export restrictions on those products remain largely the same as originally established under the Temporary Final Rule. FEMA will accordingly continue to implement the Temporary Final Rule in conjunction with CBP and other applicable agencies. FEMA may also continue to provide additional guidance regarding the application of any exemptions to the restrictions and may establish additional exemptions, as appropriate.

(Source: Sanctions & Export Controls Update, 12 Aug 2020)

* Principal Author: Sylwia Lis, Esq., 1-202-835-6147, Backer McKenzie

 
  On July 24, 2020, the Trump Administration announced a new policy (the “Updated UAS Policy”) on exports of US-origin unmanned aerial systems (UAS), also known as “drones.”  The Updated UAS Policy follows the Trump Administration’s UAS policy reforms announced in April 2018 (“April 2018 UAS Export Policy”), which allowed exports of certain US-origin armed and unarmed UAS to occur via direct sales between US companies and foreign end users. Our previous blog post on the April 2018 UAS Export Policy is available here. The Updated UAS Policy does not change UAS export licensing requirements under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations or the Export Administration Regulations, but does remove a major restriction on exports of US-origin UAS. 
  The Trump Administration’s new policy comes at a time when the UAS regulatory climate is undergoing rapid transformation. As previously discussed on Baker McKenzie’s UAS Insights blog, the Federal Aviation Administration is in the process of promulgating regulations that would require UAS to have remote identification and would authorize UAS operations at night and over people, and is overseeing a pilot program to promote innovative UAS uses such as supply deliveries.
 
US Reinterpretation of the MTCR Guidelines
  The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) is an informal, voluntary arrangement among partner countries to limit the proliferation of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapon delivery systems and related technology through common export policy guidelines. Historically, military UAS and related sub-systems, software, and technology were listed in MTCR Category I. Export license applications for MTCR Category I items are subject to an unconditional strong presumption of denial. As part of the Updated UAS Policy, the Trump Administration will reinterpret the MTCR Guidelines so that a subset of MTCR Category I UAS with a maximum airspeed of less than 800 kilometers per hour will be listed under MTCR Category II. MTCR Category II items are generally considered less-sensitive and are subject to case-by-case review in terms of export licensing. The White House noted in a press statement released with the Updated UAS Policy that efforts begun in April 2018 to modify the MTCR’s guidelines had failed and thus the Trump Administration is now implementing this policy unilaterally.
 
Focus on Increasing UAS Exports

  The Updated UAS Policy appears to be partially motivated by an effort to increase US manufacturers’ share of the UAS export market. In the White House statement, the Trump Administration asserted that the policy change “will increase our national security by improving the capabilities of our partners and increase our economic security by opening the UAS market to United States industry.” As such, the Updated UAS Policy reflects the broader effort to increase consideration of economic interests in arms transfer decisions under the Trump Administration and promote exports of UAS to US allies and partners.

 
 
  On June 30, 2020 the Chinese government passed a national security law for Hong Kong in response to anti-government protests on the previously autonomous island. In the wake of renewed tensions between China and the United States, the passage of the new law raised concerns in the U.S. and elsewhere about the viability of Hong Kong’s autonomous status, prompting the U.S. government to revise its policy towards Hong Kong and China. This included revisions to export control policy and legislation threatening sanctions against the People’s Republic of China (PRC) individuals and entities.
  On the same day the Hong Kong security law was passed in China, and in furtherance of comments made by the Secretary of Commerce the previous day, the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) announced it would cease granting differential treatment to goods originating on the island. According to a notice published on June 30, 2020, BIS was suspending license exceptions for exports to Hong Kong, re-exports to Hong Kong, and transfers (in-country) within Hong Kong of items subject to the Export Administration Regulation (EAR) to the extent they provided differential treatment as compared to those available for the PRC. Accordingly, if a license exception was not available for China, it can no longer be used for Hong Kong. BIS cited concerns that China’s new security law would create the risk that U.S. technologies and controlled items exported to Hong Kong would be diverted to unauthorized end uses and end users in China, Iran or North Korea. Controlled items that were on dock for loading, on lighter, laden aboard an exporting or transferring carrier or en route aboard a carrier to a port of export or re-export on June 30, 2020 were excepted from this change.
  BIS excepted deemed exports/re-exports involving Hong Kong persons until August 28, 2020, but noted “exporters, re-exporters or transferors (in-country) availing themselves of this 60 day savings clause must maintain documentation demonstrating that the Hong Kong recipient was hired and provided access to eligible technology… prior to June 30, 2020.”
  On July 31, 2020 BIS published a notice in the Federal Register formally implementing these changes and identifying the affected license exceptions. The amended rule includes the saving clauses for items in transit on June 30, 2020 and for continuation of deemed exports until August 28, 2020 (subject to the conditions set out in the original notice.)

  While not cited in the Federal Register Notice, this rule appears to fulfill the BIS obligation under Executive Order 13936 (July 14, 2020), in which the President directed BIS, as well as other Federal agencies, to commence appropriate actions to “suspend or eliminate different and preferential treatment for Hong Kong to the extent permitted by law and in the national security, foreign policy, and economic interest of the United States.” We caution exporters to continue to monitor postings by the Department of State and BIS with respect to additional changes to U.S. export control laws and regulations with respect to Hong Kong.

(Source: Torres Law) [Excerpts] 

  To comply with the various U.S. laws and regulations governing immigration, anti-discrimination, and export controls, companies must navigate the confusing legal landscape connecting these areas. The below guide should help companies understand the intersection of these laws and regulations and provides best practices for compliance.

Export Control Laws

  The International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (administered by the U.S. Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC)) and the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) (administered by the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS)) are the primary export control regimes in the United States.
  Both the ITAR and EAR may require that an export license be obtained from DDTC or BIS, respectively, before the release of export-controlled technical data or technology to a “foreign person” (22 C.F.R. § 120.17(2); 15 C.F.R. § 734.13). A release of technical data or technology (whether oral/visual disclosure or provision of physical document or materials) may include virtually any exchange of information – including in-person discussions, telephone conversations, technical proposals, fax communications, e-mails and other electronic communications, the sharing of computer databases, briefings, or training sessions.
  The release of technical data or technology to a foreign person that occurs within the United States is “deemed” to be an export to the foreign person’s “home country,” and whether an export license is required for a particular release may depend on both the nature of export controls applicable to the technology or technical data (including whether it is subject to the ITAR or EAR) as well as the citizenship of the foreign person.
  When a foreign person is a national of more than one country, BIS will only consider the last country of citizenship or permanent residence in determining nationality under the EAR. However, for ITAR compliance purposes, DDTC will consider all countries of citizenship and permanent residence.
  Under the export control regulations, a “U.S. person” (22 C.F.R. § 120.15; 15 C.F.R. § 772.1) is someone who is:
  1. a U.S. citizen (whether born or naturalized);
  2. a lawful permanent resident of the United States (e.g., “green card” holders); or
  3. a protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. § 1324b(a)(3) (e.g., foreign persons such as refugees and asylees who are protected persons and considered U.S. persons for export control purposes).
  Corporations incorporated in the United States are U.S. persons for purposes of the ITAR and EAR. Moreover, the export control regulations define “foreign person” to mean any person who is not a “U.S. person” as defined above. Generally, this means any foreign person in a foreign country, or any foreign person in the United States on a temporary work visa (e.g., H-1B, L-1, TN, etc.) who does not have lawful permanent resident status (e.g., a green card) or who has not been admitted to the United States as a refugee or asylee. “Foreign person” also includes foreign corporations (including foreign corporations not incorporated or organized to do business in the United States), international organizations, and foreign governments.

U.S. Immigration and Anti-Discrimination Laws  

  The U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 1964 (Title VII) prohibit discrimination based on protected characteristics. The INA prohibits discrimination based on, among other characteristics, national origin or citizenship. Additionally, Title VII prohibits discrimination based on race and national origin, which typically includes discrimination based on citizenship or immigration status. Notably, the definition of “U.S. person” under the ITAR and EAR, includes the definition of “protected individuals” under the INA. Therefore, these protected individuals are not subject to the licensing requirements under the ITAR and EAR.

  Furthermore, the INA prohibits “unfair documentary practices,” which are identified as instances where employers request more or different documents than those necessary to verify employment eligibility or request such documents with the intent to discriminate based on national origin or citizenship.


The Intersection of Export Control Laws and U.S. Immigration and Anti-Discrimination Laws

  The U.S. government has implemented immigration processes that recognize that export control laws and immigration laws and policy may impact one another. For instance, U.S. employers seeking to hire a non-U.S. citizen under certain work authorization (visa) programs must complete an “I-129 – Petition for a Non-Immigrant Worker Form.” For certain types of visas (e.g., H-1B), such form requires a certification by the U.S. employer as to whether an export license is required to release any technical data or technology to the foreign person. But aside from the certification, most companies may not be aware that U.S. export control laws apply to them or their employment of non-U.S. persons.
  Using the work authorization example above, assume a company is fully compliant with U.S. immigration laws and has obtained a work visa for a foreign person employee; however, this company is also a manufacturer/exporter of export-controlled items and did not verify or put in place compliance controls to ensure this individual does not have access to controlled information without the required licenses. If the foreign person employee’s co-workers discuss with the foreign person employee work-related matters regarding export-controlled technical data/technology, then the corporation will be in violation of the export control laws.
  Given such a scenario, companies may initially believe that a simple solution is to have a U.S. person-only hiring policy. However, as described above, such a policy would likely constitute discrimination against individuals based on their national origin or citizenship status in violation of Title VII, the INA, and other federal, state, and local anti-discrimination laws.


DOJ Cases

  As recent cases indicate, the DOJ is concerned about companies applying simple, overly broad solutions such as a U.S. person-only hiring policy, and instead expects companies to develop and implement hiring policies and processes that are non-discriminatory while also containing appropriate controls for compliance with the U.S. export control laws. Failure to adhere to these standards can lead to penalties and government monitoring of the violating companies. The below selection of DOJ settlements provides evidence of the DOJ’s stance with regards to the issue:
  Collectively, these recent DOJ cases demonstrate that employers cannot seek to comply with U.S. export control laws by instituting a U.S. person- or U.S. citizen-only hiring policy when a position involves working with export-controlled items/information and, more generally, may not discriminate in their application of citizenship verification processes. Companies are expected to implement policies and procedures reasonably tailored to address export control compliance requirements while not engaging in unnecessary discrimination on the basis of citizenship or national origin.

Best Practices

  Considering the DOJ’s trend of investigating unlawful employment practices involving the misunderstanding of the export control laws, companies would be well advised to invest resources to review their compliance practices regarding U.S. export control, immigration, and anti-discrimination laws. Best practices in this area include:
  • Adopt policies ensuring that both qualified U.S. persons and non-U.S. persons may be considered for all positions;
  • Avoid using language such as “U.S. citizens only,” in hiring notices; instead use “U.S. work authorized applicants only”;
  • Use questions during the hiring process consistent with advice from the DOJ Immigration and Employee Rights Section (IER), providing questions related to work authorization that employers can ask applicants during the hiring process without fear of violating Title VIII or the INA, including:
    •  Are you legally authorized to work in the United States?
    • Will you now or in the future require employment visa sponsorship?
  • Avoid including verification of “U.S. person” status when determining employment eligibility; and
  • Avoid applying export control screening procedures to positions which are not reasonably likely to be affected by export control laws.

TE EX/IM MOVERS & SHAKERS

(Source: Daily Bugle Staff)

  As a recognized leader in trade and national security law, James E. Bartlett III, principal of Full Circle Law, PLLC, partner of Full Circle Compliance, BV, and Editor of the Daily Bugle, was reappointed by the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State to the Defense Trade Advisory Group (DTAG) for the term 2020-2022. In this capacity, he advises the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), which is the U.S. Department of State’s principal regulator of defense trade under the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and its implementing regulations, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR).  Mr. Bartlett is author of the book, Bartlett’s Annotated ITAR (the “BITAR”).
  Mr. Bartlett has also been reappointed by the Assistant Secretary of Commerce to the Regulations and Procedures Technical Advisory Group (RPTAC) for the term 2020-2022. In this capacity, he advises the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), which is the U.S. Department of Commerce’s principal regulator of dual-use trade in accordance with the Export Control Act (ECA) and its implementing regulations under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and the Foreign Trade Regulations (FTR).  Mr. Bartlett is author of the book, Bartlett’s Annotated FTR (the “BAFTR”).
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

TE EX/IM TRAINING EVENTS & CONFERENCES

ITAR & EAR from a non-US perspective
Tuesday, 8 September 2020
More Info
The ABC of Foreign Military Sales (FMS)
Tuesday, 29 September 2020
Designing and Implementing an ICP
Tuesday, 6 October 2020 More Info
Wednesday, 7 October
More Info
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

(Sources: Event sponsors)  
 

Submit your event in the Submission section at the end of this newsletter.  
 
[Editor’s note:  This Daily Bugle Event List has grown so large that we have run out of space to display it, so we are displaying here only the new events in the Daily Bugle, while maintaining a LINK HERE to the full list.]
 

On-Line:

Published every Friday or last publication day of the week. Send events to events@fullcirclecompliance.eu, composed in the below format:
 
# * Date: (Location;) “Event Title”; <Weblink>” Event Sponsor;
 
On-Line:
 

* 27 – 28 Aug: “2 Half-Day Virtual Export Training“; Masters Method
1 Sep: “Export Pro Series: Market Identification, Prioritization and Research Programs & RAISE“; WI SBDC/USCommercial Service Fargo & Milwaukee/Global Bus Network North/West WI
* 9 – 10 Sep: “Customs Valuation 101“; Masters Method
* 24 Sep: “Brexit webinar: where do we stand now?“; Travers Smith
* 24 – 25 Sep: “2 Half-Day Virtual Export Training“; Masters Method
* 29 – 30 Sep: “Free Trade Agreements 101“; Masters Method
* 6 – 7 Oct: “Origin, Marking and Labeling“; Masters Method

* 3 – 4 Dec: “2 Half-Day Virtual Export Training“; Masters Method

Back to top

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

EN EDITOR’S NOTES

EN_a115. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)
 

Letitia Elizabeth Landon (14 Aug 1802 – 15 Oct 1838; was an English poet and novelist, better known by her initials L.E.L.) 
  – “Enthusiasm is the divine particle in our composition: with it we are great, generous, and true; without it, we are little, false, and mean.” 
  – “No thoroughly occupied man was ever very miserable.”

Friday funnies:
* It’s been a blessing being home with the wife for three months.  We’ve caught up on everything I’ve done wrong for the past 15 years.
* How many times can you subtract 10 from 100? Once. The next time you would be subtracting 10 from 90.
* What did the shark say when he ate the clownfish? “This tastes funny!”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

(Source: Jim Bartlett, Daily Bugle Editor)
 
  Your analysis and commentary on a current trade issue can generate new clients from among the Daily Bugle’s subscribers (nearly 10,000 world-wide). We receive far more articles every day from law firms and consultants than we can publish, but if you would like have your article published, please contact Jim Bartlett at 1-202-802-0646 or JEBartlett@JEBartlett.com.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

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 are listed below.
 
Agency 
Regulations 
Latest Update 
DHS CUSTOMS REGULATIONS: 19 CFR, Ch. 1, Pts. 0-199.

 

5 Apr 2019: 84 FR 13499:

Civil Monetary Penalty Adjustments for Inflation. 
DOC EXPORT ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS (EAR): 15 CFR Subtit. B, Ch. VII, Pts. 730-774. 
31 Jul 2020: 85 FR 45998: Revision of the Export Administration Regulations and Suspension of License Exceptions for Hong Kong. 
DOC FOREIGN TRADE REGULATIONS (FTR): 15 CFR Part 30.   24 Apr 2018: 83 FR 17749: Foreign Trade Regulations (FTR): Clarification on the Collection and Confidentiality of Kimberley Process Certificates.  
DOD NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY PROGRAM OPERATING MANUAL (NISPOM)

: DoD 5220.22-M. Implemented by Dep’t of Defense. 

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.    23 Feb 2015: 80 FR 9359: comprehensive updating of regulations, updates the activities and technologies subject to specific authorization and DOE reporting requirements. 
DOE EXPORT AND IMPORT OF NUCLEAR EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL; 10 CFR Part 110.  

15 Nov 2017, 82 FR 52823: miscellaneous corrections include correcting references, an address and a misspelling.

 
DOJ ATF ARMS IMPORT REGULATIONS: 27 CFR Part 447-Importation of Arms, Ammunition, and Implements of War. 
14 Mar 2019: 84 FR 9239: Bump-Stock-Type Devices.

DOS INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN ARMS REGULATIONS (ITAR): 22 C.F.R. Ch. I, Subch. M, Pts. 120-130. 

29 Jul 2020: 85 FR 45513 Extension to Certain Temporary Suspensions, Modifications, and Exceptions due to Corona Virus.  The latest edition of the BITAR is 29 July 2020.  

 
DOT FOREIGN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS (OFAC FACR): 31 CFR, Parts 500-599, Embargoes, Sanctions, Executive Orders

17 Jul 2020: 85 FR 43436: Nicaragua Sanctions Regulations. 

 
 
 
USITC HARMONIZED TARIFF SCHEDULE OF THE UNITED STATES (HTS, HTSA or HTSUSA), Revision 8.

1 Jan 2019: 19 USC 1202 Annex.
  – HTS codes for AES are available here.
  – HTS codes that are not valid for AES are available here.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Daily Bugle Archive

Are you searching for updates from the past editions of the Daily Bugle? 

We publish a list of over 100 trade compliance job openings every day.

Submit your job for free.
PermanentJobListView All Job Openings

Are you looking for a new job in trade compliance? Click here to see the current job openings.

We publish a list of over 100 trade compliance events every day. Submit your event for free.

PermanentJobListView All Events

Are you looking for an upcoming event?   Click here to see upcoming events.

Scroll to Top