;

20-1015 Thursday “Daily Bugle”

20-1015 Thursday “Daily Bugle”

 this copy of the Daily Bugle to others or share this subscription link
Thursday, 15 October 2020

  1. DoD: “Federal Acquisition Regulation: Revision of Definition of “Commercial Item”
  1. Items Scheduled for Future Federal Register Edition
  2. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings)
  3. DHS/CBP: “Correction – 8 Oct Customs Broker License Exam”
  4. State/DDTC: (No new postings)
  5. EU Council: “Libya – Further Sanctions Over Violations of the UN Arms Embargo”
  6. EU External Action: “EU and Cuba hold Dialogues on Illicit Arms Trade and Non-proliferation”
  7. EU Designates Yevgeniy Prigozhin for Violating Libya Arms Embargo
  1. EU Sanctions: “EU Approves Project to Promote Arms Export Controls in Third Countries”
  2. WSWS: “Britain – The World’s Second Largest Arms Exporter and Friend to Warmongers and Despots”
  1. Arent Fox: “Human Rights Now Part of US Export Licensing Review for Nearly All Export Licenses”
  2. GT: “Importers Could Still Be Eligible to File Section 301 Refund Actions”
  3. Herdem: “Turkey Sets New Rules for Import and End-Use Certificates in Dual-Use Materials and Technologies”
  4. University of Maryland: “Emerging Technologies and Trade Controls: A Sectoral Composition Approach”
  1. FD Associates Presents: 10 – 12 Nov; “ITAR for the Empowered Official & Compliance Personnel”
  1. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations 
  2. Are Your Copies of Regulations Up to Date? Find the Latest Amendments Here. 
  3. Weekly Highlights of the Daily Bugle Top Stories 
  4. Submit Your Job Opening and View All Job Openings 
  5. 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 amendment of the ITAR that took effect on 28 September is 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 here to guarantee you have an up-to-date ITAR!

EXIM ITEMS FROM TODAY’S FEDERAL REGISTER

(Source: Federal Register, 15 Oct 2020) [Excerpts]
 
85 FR 65610: Proposed Rule
* AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
* ACTION: Proposed rule.
* SUMMARY: DoD, GSA and NASA are proposing to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation to implement a section of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 to change the definition of “commercial item.”
* DATES: Interested parties should submit comments to the Regulatory Secretariat Division at one of the addresses shown below on or before December 14, 2020 to be considered in the formulation of a final rule. …
* Discussion and Analysis
 As required by section 836 of the NDAA for FY 2019, DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to replace instances of commercial item(s) with commercial product(s), commercial service(s), or both commercial product(s) and commercial service(s). The following summarizes the proposed changes to the FAR: 
1. Removed from FAR part 2 the definition of ”commercial item” and replaced it with the definitions of ”commercial product,” and ”commercial service” from the NDAA with only the minor revisions for clarification currently in the FAR definition of ”commercial item.” The clarification in paragraph 3(ii) of the proposed definition of ”commercial product” has been in FAR part 2 since the definition of ”commercial item” was incorporated by FAR case 94-790, Acquisition of Commercial Items, in 1995. Paragraphs 2(i) and 2(ii) of the proposed definition of ”commercial service” are also long standing; they stem from a FAR change published October 22, 2001, which was revised slightly in a FAR change published June 18, 2004. 
2. Replaced all instances of ”noncommercial” and ”noncommercial” with ”other than commercial” as it relates to this rule. This is an editorial change and will provide consistent language throughout the FAR. 
3. Removed FAR 12.102(g), and a corresponding reference at FAR 37.601(c), as obsolete. FAR 12.102(g) only applies to contracts or orders entered into before November 23, 2013. 
4. Added the definition of ”established price” at FAR 16.001 to be consistent with the term as defined at the FAR clauses at FAR 52.216-2, Economic Price Adjustment-Standard Supplies, and 52.216-3, Economic Price Adjustment-Semistandard Supplies. This is an editorial change for consistency to have the definition in both the clause and the corresponding FAR part.
5. Made conforming changes to cross references, and the following Standard Forms (SF): SF 294, Subcontracting Report for Individual Contracts; SF 1443, Contractor’s Request for Progress Payment; and SF 1449, Solicitation/ Contract/Order for Commercial Items. These forms are managed by the FAR Council and were identified as containing the term ”commercial item.” This rule proposes to replace each instance of the term with ”commercial product” or ”commercial service” as appropriate. Also minor editorial changes were made as needed throughout the FAR. These revisions do not impact terms and conditions of commercial contracts or how the Government procures commercial products or commercial services.
* ADDRESSES: Submit comments in response to FAR Case 2018-018 to https://www.regulations.gov.  … 
* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Zenaida Delgado, Procurement Analyst, at 202-969-7207 or zenaida.delgado@gsa.gov for clarification of content. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat Division at 202-501-4755. Please cite “FAR Case 2018-018”.

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

OGS OTHER GOVERNMENT SOURCES

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

OGS_a23. Commerce/BIS: (No new postings)

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

(Source: DHS/CBP), 15 Oct 2020)
 
  The bi-annual Customs Broker License Exam (CBLE) was administered on October 8, 2020. The electronic exam was held nationwide at over 120 testing locations. At some testing locations, applicants encountered system issues, while other applicants tested but did not experience problems and loss of the exam time. In response to these issues Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is withholding release of the exam content until further notice in an effort to address the concerns.
  If you have questions regarding the 2020 broker exam, contact Headquarters Broker Management Branch (BMB) via email at brokermanagement@cbp.dhs.gov.

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

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

 
  The Council today imposed targeted restrictive measures on one person engaged in and providing support for acts that threaten the peace, security or stability of Libya, including through violations of the UN arms embargo. The sanctions imposed against this person comprise a travel ban and an asset freeze. In addition, EU persons and entities are forbidden from making funds available to those listed.
  With this new designation, the EU now has imposed a travel ban on 16 listed individuals and an asset freeze on 20 persons and 19 entities.
  The Council remains gravely concerned about the situation in Libya and in particular about the acts that threaten the peace, security or stability of Libya, including through violations of the UN arms embargo, human rights abuses and violations as well as the attempted illicit export of petroleum from Libya.
The EU’s sanctions complement and reinforce the sanctions adopted by the UN, which include the UN arms embargo and individual measures, including for human rights abuses.
  The relevant legal acts, including the names of the persons and entities concerned, have been published in the Official Journal.

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

 
  On 14 October 2020, the European Union and Cuba held the second sessions of their political dialogues on illicit trade in small arms and light weapons and other conventional weapons, as well as on disarmament and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.
  Discussions included exchanges of views on recent developments in the area of arms control, illicit trafficking of small arms and light weapons, and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The parties also discussed lethal autonomous weapons systems. They agreed on the importance of stepping up international cooperation in these areas, and exchanged views on the assistance provided to third countries for the purpose of arms export control and non-proliferation. The EU briefed on the support it is providing, including in Latin America and the Caribbean. The parties agreed to continue exchange of information and to consider further cooperation in these areas.
  The Dialogues were preceded by a civil society seminar on 13 October, where representatives of Cuban and European civil society exchanged experience on the ways in which civil society can promote peace and disarmament.
  The EU delegation was headed by the Special Envoy for Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, Marjolijn van Deelen and included the Head of Division for Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean, Katja Afheldt, the EU Ambassador to Cuba Alberto Navarro  and other representatives of the European External Action Service. Rodolfo Reyes Rodríguez, Director General for Multilateral Issues and International Law of the Cuban Ministry for Foreign Affairs led the Cuban delegation, which included the Cuban Ambassador to the EU H.E. Norma Goicochea Estenoz, as well as other officials of the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Representatives of EU Member States also participated in the Dialogue as observers.
Background
  The Dialogues on illicit trade in small arms and light weapons and other conventional weapons, and on disarmament and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction were held under the EU-Cuba Political Dialogue and Cooperation Agreement (PDCA), which was signed in December 2016 and entered into provisional application on 1 November 2017. The Dialogues are two of five political Dialogues that then HRVP Mogherini and Cuban Foreign Minister Rodriguez decided to launch during the first EU-Cuba Ministerial Joint Council under the PDCA in May 2018. The other political dialogues cover the topics of human rights (first held on 9 October 2018 in Havana), of unilateral coercive measures (first held on 19 November 2018 in Brussels) and of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (first held in Havana on 16 April 2019).

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

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2016/44 of 18 January 2016 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya and repealing Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 (1), and in particular Article 21(2) &
Having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 of 31 July 2015 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya, and repealing Decision 2011/137/CFSP (1), and in particular Article 12(2) thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,
Whereas:
  (1) On 18 January 2016, the Council adopted Regulation (EU) 2016/44.
  (2) On 12 May 2020, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy issued a declaration, on behalf of the Union, which stated that the Union remains determined to see the UN arms embargo in Libya fully respected. It was also underlined that all efforts must be made to ensure the full and effective implementation of the relevant UN Security Council resolutions, also through the land and air borders with Libya.
  (3) On 21 September 2020, the Council adopted Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1309 (2), which designated three entities involved in violating the UN arms embargo.
  (4) The Council remains gravely concerned about the situation in Libya and in particular about acts that threaten the peace, security or stability of Libya, including violations of the UN arms embargo.
  (5) In that context, one person involved in such acts should be added to the list of natural and legal persons, entities or bodies subject to restrictive measures as set out in Annex III to Regulation (EU) 2016/44.
  (6) Annex III to Regulation (EU) 2016/44 should therefore be amended accordingly,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Article 1
  • Annex III to Regulation (EU) 2016/44 is amended in accordance with the Annex to this Regulation and under the heading ‘A. Persons’, the following entry is added:
  • Annexes II and IV to Decision (CFSP) 2015/1333 are amended in accordance with the Annex to this Decision and under the heading ‘A. Persons’, the following entry is added:
Yevgeniy Viktorovich PRIGOZHIN (Евгений Викторович Пригожин),

Date of birth: 1 June 1961
Place of birth: Leningrad (St. Petersburg)
Nationality: Russian

Gender: male

Article 2
This Regulation shall enter into force on the date of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

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

COM NEWS

(Source: EU Sanctions, 14 Oct 2020) [Excerpts]
 
  In line with objectives set out in Common Position 2008/944/CFSP, the EU has adopted Council Decision (CFSP) 2020/1464. It provides that the German Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control (BAFA) will implement a 2-year project to promote effective arms controls in 23 third countries across Eastern and South Eastern Europe, North Africa and Central Asia.
  The project will focus on (inter alia) drafting/updating/implementing relevant legislation, training in licensing and enforcement, outreach to domestic arms industries, and accession to/ratification of the Arms Trade Treaty through regional workshops, study visits, awareness raising events, and remote assistance.

(Source: World Socialist Web Site, 13 Oct 2020) [Excerpts]

 
  According to data released by the Department for International Trade (DIT), the UK government was the world’s second biggest arms exporter behind the US between 2010-2019. Britain signed £86 billion worth of contracts for military equipment and services.
  Last year, Britain exported £11 billion worth of fighter jets, radar, missiles, arms, and materiel, the second highest year for UK arms sales since 1983.
While the US was by far the largest arms exporter, accounting for 47 percent of the global arms trade, the UK accounted for 16 percent, while Russia and France had 11 percent and 10 percent respectively.
  Sales were down from 2018’s £14 billion due to what DIT said was “the volatile nature of the global export market for defence.” The UK won “no major platform orders in 2019” and arms exports to Saudi Arabia were halted in June last year, following the Court of Appeal’s ruling that the UK government had failed to take into account whether Saudi airstrikes in Yemen that targeted civilians broke humanitarian law.
  While the US is Britain’s largest single arms customer, most of Britain’s arms exports (60 percent) go to the Middle East, with Saudi Arabia by far the largest buyer along with Oman, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, Israel, Bahrain, and Egypt.
  The UK government had no hesitation in greenlighting the sale of arms to countries waging war at home or abroad, including to Saudi Arabia, the Philippines, Afghanistan, UAE, Nigeria, Mexico, Iraq, Ukraine, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, and South Sudan. The list of Britain’s customers reads like a roll call of the most corrupt and blood-soaked regimes on the planet.
  The UK has licensed more than £6.5 billion worth of arms to the Saudi-led coalition in the five years since March 26, 2015, when the bombing began. This is likely an underestimate as many of the bombs, missiles, and aircraft components are licensed via the opaque and secretive Open Licence system that is “more flexible” than a standard licence and “avoids the need to apply for a new licence for every export.”

COM COMMENTARY

(Source: Arent Fox, 9 Oct 2020)

 
* Principal Author: Kay C. Georgi, Esq., 1-202-857-6293, Arent Fox LLP
 
  Target areas are telecom, information security, and sensor items that can be used for censorship, surveillance, detention, and use of force.
On October 6, 2020, the US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) released a final rule (Final Rule), taking effect the same day, revising its licensing policy for crime control and detection (CC) items, “which is designed to promote respect for human rights throughout the world.”
  But if you read it quickly and thought it only dealt with crime control items, look again! BIS also revised the Export Administration Regulations EAR so that a review of human rights is part of every license application review, with the sole exception of short supply (SS) items.
  If you think this might have something to do with the Administration’s disagreements China, you may be right. The preamble indicates abuse of human rights could involve censorship, surveillance, detention, or the excessive use of force, and BIS also states that “the revision is necessary to prevent items currently controlled for reasons other than CC, including reasons related to certain telecommunications and information security and sensors, from being used to engage in or enable the violation or abuse of human rights.”
Also on October 6, 2020, BIS made another CC-related move, issuing a final rule regarding new controls on water cannon systems and related parts and components, with the preamble specifically describing riot and crowd control in Hong Kong. (Export Control Classification Numbers (ECCNs) 0A977, 0D977 and 0E977.)

Revised Licensing Policy

A) BIS’s Changes in a Nutshell
The licensing policy amends 15 CFR § 742.7 to address two issues:
  1. License applications for items controlled for CC revisions will be considered favorably on a case-by-case basis unless there is civil disorder in the country or region of destination or if BIS assesses there is a risk that the items will be used in a violation or abuse of human rights;
  2. Other than items controlled for SS applications for all export-controlled items on the Commerce Control List (CCL) will be considered under this human rights framework.
B) BIS’s Change To the CC Licensing Policy

As side-by-side comparison shows how the licensing policy has been broadened under the Final Rule:
 

LICENSING POLICY IN EFFECT AS OF OCTOBER 6, 2020  LICENSING POLICY IN EFFECT BEFORE OCTOBER 6, 2020 
Applications for items controlled under this section will generally be considered favorably on a case-by-case basis, unless there is civil disorder in the country or region or unless there is a risk that the items will be used to violate or abuse human rights. The judicious use of export controls is intended to deter human rights violations and abuses, distance the United States from such violations and abuses, and avoid contributing to civil disorder in a country or region.  Applications for items controlled under this section will generally be considered favorably on a case-by-case basis unless there is civil disorder in the country or region or unless there is evidence that the government of the importing country may have violated internationally recognized human rights. The judicious use of export controls is intended to deter the development of a consistent pattern of human rights abuses, distance the United States from such abuses and avoid contributing to civil disorder in a country or region. 

 
  BIS notes that the “revision is necessary to clarify to the exporting community that licensing decisions are based in part upon US Government assessments about whether CC-controlled items may be used to engage in or enable violations or abuses of human rights including through violations and abuses involving censorship, surveillance, detention, or excessive use of force.”
  Notably, the change also removes the requirement that there be actual evidence of past human rights violations, leaving BIS in charge of assessing whether there is merely a risk that the items will be used to violate or abuse human rights.
 
C) Addition of a New Licensing Policy
  Far more significant from the perspective of most exporters, however, is the addition of “a new subparagraph (b)(2) to make clear that BIS will consider the [human rights] licensing policy set forth in new subparagraph (b)(1) when reviewing items controlled for reasons other than CC with the exception of items controlled for short supply.” 15 CFR §742.7. The new licensing policy is in the EAR provision dealing with CC controls. We note there have been no changes in any other reason-based controls, such as the national security (NS) licensing policy, to indicate license application reviews will consider human rights concerns, and as such, we wonder if exporters of non-CC items will completely miss this new license review policy.
  According to BIS, the new licensing policy will now allow BIS and other reviewing agencies to consider two factors:
  1. violations or abuses of human rights by individuals or entities other than the government of the importing country, and
  2. abuses of human rights by the government in addition to violations of internationally recognized human rights.

What Does This Mean for Exporters?

  This Final Rule is in line with the current Administration’s efforts to combat human rights violations, particularly in China, which has been off limits for CC items since the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests.
  If you do export CC-controlled items, this Final Rule makes it easier for BIS to deny your license applications. That said, it was not particularly hard for BIS to do this in the past, so it is unclear whether this will have much of an impact on the number of licenses denied.
  For the rest of the items on the CCL (except SS-controlled items) the change is more significant and far-reaching. BIS can now deny license applications for non-CC items based on human rights concerns, including those involving censorship, surveillance, detention, or excessive use of force. If you export items – particularly telecommunications and information security and sensors – that require a license and could be used for censorship, surveillance, detention, or use of force (such as arrest), you should anticipate licensing denials for certain countries and regions of the world.
  As a practical matter, exporters who export to such countries or regions would be well-advised to conduct additional due diligence on end users and end uses prior to filing an export license application, and should address any potential human rights risks in their license applications.

 
* Principal Author: Laura Siegel Rabinowitz, Esq., 1-212-801-9201, Greenberg Traurig, LLP
 
  U.S. importers of products manufactured in China and subject to Section 301 Lists 3 and 4A may still file actions in the Court of International Trade (CIT) requesting tariff refunds. The numerous lawsuits already filed allege that the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) overstepped its authority in promulgating Lists 3 and 4A.
  USTR’s Section 301 investigation found that U.S. exports were unfairly burdened by Chinese intellectual property policies and therefore recommended $50 billion in retaliatory tariffs. Those tariffs were issued pursuant to List 1 ($34 billion) and List 2 ($16 billion). The lawsuits filed allege that the imposition of Section 301 duties on List 3 ($200 billion) and 4A ($116 billion) goods was outside USTR’s original authority, as they were promulgated in response to other issues including currency manipulation and cyber theft.
  In addition, Section 304 of the Trade Act of 1974 requires USTR to determine what action to take, if any, within 12 months after initiation of that investigation. USTR issued List 3 and List 4A beyond the 12-month period. If successful, the actions could result in refunds to plaintiffs for all duties paid under Lists 3 and 4A up until the case is resolved.
  There is a two-year statute of limitations to file for refund cases under 28 USC §1581(i). USTR’s List 3 was published in the Federal Register on Sept. 21, 2018. Therefore, many companies filed for refunds by Sept. 21, 2020. List 4A was not published until August 2019, so the deadline will be August 2021.
  The cases filed after Sept. 21, 2020, allege that under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) a plaintiff has standing once it suffers an “injury in fact.” Each entry and duty payment can be considered an injury in fact; therefore, importers may well have standing under the APA to sue beyond Sept. 21, 2020. Based on prior CIT actions, it is unclear whether the court will consider the date of publication of the Federal Register Notice or the date of payment of duties as the start of the two-year statute of limitations period.
  Even though it is uncertain whether the CIT will approve of using the APA to establish standing, importers of merchandise on List 3, who have not yet filed, may want to consider submitting a complaint requesting Section 301 tariff refunds using the APA to establish standing.

 
* Principal Author: Şafak Herdem, 90-212-2884959, Herdem
 
  On October 13, 2020 Turkey set the news procedures and principles regarding the approval of the Certificate of Import and End Use requested from the importer by the exporting country / exporter to import dual-use materials and technologies that can be used in the manufacture, development, processing, storage, transportation and distribution of weapons of mass destruction into Turkey on basis of export control regime. The new rules are also applicable to imports to Turkey from free zones.
  Accordingly, it is regulated that the Certificate of Import and End-Use requested from the importer by the exporting country or exporter is subject to the approval of the Ministry of Trade General Directorate of Import. The validity period of both certificates is six (6) months and not subject to extension. Moreover, the validity period of the certificates processed by the authorities of the exporting country is not considered in import transactions. For Certificate of End-Use, if the end user is different from the importer, the information of both importer and end-user shall be stated in the certificate as they are hold jointly responsible.   Applications shall be electronically through E-Government platform or website of Ministry of Trade (www.ticaret.gov.tr)
  In case the goods subject to Import and End Use Certificates are to be transferred to a third country, a Permit Letter / Permit from the exporting country / exporter shall be obtained and sent to the General Directorate of Import of the Ministry of Trade by the importer and this Letter / Document must be sent to the General Directorate of Import of the Ministry of Trade.

TE EX/IM TRAINING EVENTS & CONFERENCES

 
* What:  Live Stream Webinar “ITAR for the Empowered Official & Compliance Personnel” — Agenda
* When:  Tue-Thu 10-12 November 2020
* Where:  Your computer 
* Sponsor:  FD Associates
* Presenters: Jenny Hahn, President, FD Associates. 

 

* Register HERE, call 1-703-847-5801, or email info@fdassociates.net.

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

EN EDITOR’S NOTES

EN_a116. Bartlett’s Unfamiliar Quotations

(Source: Editor)

 
* Mikhail Lermontov (Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov; 15 Oct 1814 – 27 Jul 1841; was a Russian Romantic writer, poet and painter, sometimes called “the poet of the Caucasus”, the most important Russian poet after Alexander Pushkin’s death in 1837 and the greatest figure in Russian Romanticism.)
  – “Many a calm river begins as a turbulent waterfall, yet none hurtles and foams all the way to the sea.”
 
* Friedrich Nietzsche (Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (15 Oct 1844 – 25 Aug 1900; was a German philosopher, cultural critic, composer, poet, and philologist whose work has exerted a profound influence on modern intellectual history.  He became the youngest person ever to hold the Chair of Classical Philology at the University of Basel in 1869 at the age of 24. At age 44, he suffered a collapse and afterward a complete loss of his mental faculties. He lived his remaining years in the care of his mother.)
  – “There are no facts, only interpretations.
  – “It is not a lack of love, but a lack of friendship that makes unhappy marriages.”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 

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. 

9 Oct 2020: 
85 FR 64014:  Revisions to the Unverified List (UVL)

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. 

28 Sep 2020: 85 FR 60874: Temporary Amendment for Republic of Cyprus. The latest edition of the BITAR is 28 Sep 2020. 

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