81 FR 45276 - Order Renewing Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 134 (July 13, 2016)

Page Range		45276-45282
FR Document		2016-16567

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 134 (Wednesday, July 13, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 13, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45276-45282]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16567]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

Order Renewing Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges

Mahan Airways, Mahan Tower, No. 21, Azadegan St., M.A. Jenah Exp.
Way, Tehran, Iran;
Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard, a/k/a Kosarian Fard, P.O. Box
52404,Dubai, United Arab Emirates;
Mahmoud Amini, G#22 Dubai Airport Free Zone, P.O. Box 393754,Dubai,
United Arab Emirates and P.O. Box 52404, Dubai, United Arab
Emirates,and Mohamed Abdulla Alqaz Building, Al Maktoum Street, Al
Rigga, Dubai, United Arab Emirates;
Kerman Aviation, a/k/a GIE Kerman Aviation, 42 Avenue Montaigne
75008, Paris, France;
Sirjanco Trading LLC, P.O. Box 8709, Dubai, United Arab Emirates;
Ali Eslamian, 33 Cavendish Square, 4th Floor, London, W1G0PW, United
Kingdom and 2 Bentinck Close, Prince Albert Road St. Johns Wood,
London NW87RY, United Kingdom;
Mahan Air General Trading LLC, 19th Floor Al Moosa Tower One, Sheik
Zayed Road, Dubai 40594, United Arab Emirates;
Skyco (UK) Ltd., 33 Cavendish Square, 4th Floor, London, W1G 0PV,
United Kingdom;
Equipco (UK) Ltd., 2 Bentinck Close, Prince Albert Road, London, NW8
7RY, United Kingdom;
Mehdi Bahrami, Mahan Airways-Istanbul Office, Cumhuriye Cad. Sibil
Apt No: 101 D:6, 34374 Emadad, Sisli Istanbul, Turkey;
Al Naser Airlines, a/k/a al-Naser Airlines, a/k/a Alnaser Airlines
and, Air Freight Ltd. Home 46, Al-Karrada, Babil Region, District
929, St 21 Beside Al Jadirya Private Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq and Al
Amirat Street, Section 309, St. 3/H.20 Al Mansour Baghdad, Iraq, and
P.O. Box 28360, Dubai, United Arab Emiratesand P.O. Box 911399,
Amman 11191, Jordan;
Ali Abdullah Alhay, a/k/a Ali Alhay, a/k/a Ali Abdullah Ahmed Alhay,
Home 46, Al-Karrada, Babil Region, District 929, St 21, Beside Al
Jadirya Private Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq and Anak Street, Qatif,
Saudi Arabia 61177;

[[Page 45277]]

Bahar Safwa General Trading, P.O. Box 113212 Citadel Tower, Floor-5,
Office #504, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab Emirates and P.O. Box
8709, Citadel Tower, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab Emirates;
Sky Blue Bird Group, a/k/a Sky Blue Bird Aviation, a/k/a Sky Blue
Bird Ltd, a/k/a Sky Blue Bird FZC, P.O. Box 16111, Ras Al Khaimah
Trade Zone, United Arab Emirates;
Issam Shammout, a/k/a Muhammad Isam Muhammad Anwar Nur Shammout, a/
k/a Issam Anwar, Philips Building, 4th Floor, Al Fardous Street,
Damascus, Syria and Al Kolaa, Beirut, Lebanon 151515 and17-18
Margaret Street, 4th Floor, London, W1W 8RP, United Kingdomand
Cumhuriyet Mah. Kavakli San St. Fulya, Cad. Hazar Sok. No.14/A
Silivri, Istanbul, Turkey

Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the Export Administration
Regulations, 15 CFR parts 730-774 (2016) (``EAR'' or the
``Regulations''),\1\ I hereby grant the request of the Office of Export
Enforcement (``OEE'') to renew the January 7, 2016 Temporary Denial
Order (the ``TDO''). The January 7, 2016 Order denied the export
privileges of Mahan Airways, Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard, Mahmoud
Amini, Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco Trading LLC, Ali Eslamian, Mahan Air
General Trading LLC, Skyco (UK) Ltd., Equipco (UK) Ltd., Mehdi Bahrami,
Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, Bahar Safwa General Trading, Sky
Blue Bird Group, and Issam Shammout.\2\ I find that renewal of the TDO
is necessary in the public interest to prevent an imminent violation of
the EAR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ The Regulations, currently codified at 15 CFR parts 730-774
(2016), originally issued pursuant to the Export Administration Act
of 1979. Since August 21, 2001, the Act has been in lapse and the
President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR,
2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), which has been extended by successive
Presidential Notices, the most recent being that of August 7, 2015
(80 FR 48,223 (Aug. 11, 2015)), has continued the Regulations in
effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50
U.S.C. 1701, et seq. (2006 & Supp. IV 2010)).
\2\ See note 3, infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Procedural History

On March 17, 2008, Darryl W. Jackson, the then-Assistant Secretary
of Commerce for Export Enforcement (``Assistant Secretary''), signed a
TDO denying Mahan Airways' export privileges for a period of 180 days
on the grounds that its issuance was necessary in the public interest
to prevent an imminent violation of the Regulations. The TDO also named
as denied persons Blue Airways, of Yerevan, Armenia (``Blue Airways of
Armenia''), as well as the ``Balli Group Respondents,'' namely, Balli
Group PLC, Balli Aviation, Balli Holdings, Vahid Alaghband, Hassan
Alaghband, Blue Sky One Ltd., Blue Sky Two Ltd., Blue Sky Three Ltd.,
Blue Sky Four Ltd., Blue Sky Five Ltd., and Blue Sky Six Ltd., all of
the United Kingdom. The TDO was issued ex parte pursuant to Section
766.24(a), and went into effect on March 21, 2008, the date it was
published in the Federal Register.
The TDO subsequently has been renewed in accordance with Section
766.24(d), including most recently on January 7, 2016.\3\ As of March
9, 2010, the Balli Group Respondents and Blue Airways were no longer
subject to the TDO. As part of the February 25, 2011 TDO renewal,
Gatewick LLC (a/k/a Gatewick Freight and Cargo Services, a/k/a Gatewick
Aviation Services), Mahmoud Amini, and Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard
(``Kosarian Fard'') were added as related persons in accordance with
Section 766.23 of the Regulations.\4\ On July 1, 2011, the TDO was
modified by adding Zarand Aviation as a respondent in order to prevent
an imminent violation.\5\ As part of the August 24, 2011 renewal,
Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco Trading LLC, and Ali Eslamian were added to
the TDO as related persons. Mahan Air General Trading LLC, Skyco (UK)
Ltd., and Equipco (UK) Ltd. were added as related persons on April 9,
2012. Mehdi Bahrami was added to the TDO as a related person as part of
the February 4, 2013 renewal order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ The January 7, 2016 Order was published in the Federal
Register on January 15, 2016 (81 F.R. 2161, Jan. 15, 2016). The TDO
previously had been renewed on September 17, 2008, March 16, 2009,
September 11, 2009, March 9, 2010, September 3, 2010, February 25,
2011, August 24, 2011, February 15, 2012, August 9, 2012, February
4, 2013, July 31, 2013, January 24, 2014, July 22, 2014, January 16,
2015, and July 13, 2015. The August 24, 2011 renewal followed the
modification of the TDO on July 1, 2011, which added Zarand Aviation
as a respondent. The July 13, 2015 renewal followed the modification
of the TDO on May 21, 2015, which added Al Naser Airlines, Ali
Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa General Trading as respondents. Each
renewal or modification order was published in the Federal Register.
\4\ On August 13, 2014, BIS and Gatewick LLC resolved
administrative charges against Gatewick, including a charge for
acting contrary to the terms of a BIS denial order (15 CFR
764.2(k)). In addition to the payment of a civil penalty, the
settlement includes a seven-year denial order. The first two years
of the denial period are active, with the remaining five years
suspended on condition that Gatewick LLC pays the civil penalty in
full and timely fashion and commits no further violation of the
Regulations during the seven-year denial period. The Gatewick LLC
Final Order was published in the Federal Register on August 20,
2014. See 79 FR 49283 (Aug. 20, 2014).
\5\ As of July 22, 2014, Zarand Aviation was no longer subject
to the TDO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On May 21, 2015, the TDO was modified to add Al Naser Airlines, Ali
Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa General Trading as respondents. Sky
Blue Bird Group and its chief executive officer Issam Shammout were
added to the TDO as related persons as part of the July 13, 2015
renewal order.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign
Assets Control (``OFAC'') designated Sky Blue Bird and Issam
Shammout as Specially Designated Global Terrorists (``SDGTs'') on
May 21, 2015, pursuant to Executive Order 13324, for ``providing
support to Iran's Mahan Air.'' See 80 FR 30762 (May 29, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On June 15, 2016, BIS, through its Office of Export Enforcement
(``OEE''), submitted a written request for renewal of the TDO. The
written request was made more than 20 days before the scheduled
expiration of the current TDO, which issued on January 7, 2016. Notice
of the renewal request also was provided to Mahan Airways, Al Naser
Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa General Trading in
accordance with Sections 766.5 and 766.24(d) of the Regulations. No
opposition to the renewal of the TDO has been received. Furthermore, no
appeal of the related person determinations I made as part of the
September 3, 2010, February 25, 2011, August 24, 2011, April 9, 2012,
February 4, 2013, and July 13, 2015 renewal or modification orders has
been made by Kosarian Fard, Mahmoud Amini, Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco
Trading LLC, Ali Eslamian, Mahan Air General Trading LLC, Skyco (UK)
Ltd., Equipco (UK) Ltd., Mehdi Bahrami, Sky Blue Bird Group, or Issam
Shammout.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\7\ A party named or added as a related person may not oppose
the issuance or renewal of the underlying temporary denial order,
but may file an appeal of the related person determination in
accordance with Section 766.23(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Renewal of the TDO

A. Legal Standard

Pursuant to Section 766.24, BIS may issue or renew an order
temporarily denying a respondent's export privileges upon a showing
that the order is necessary in the public interest to prevent an
``imminent violation'' of the Regulations. 15 CFR 766.24(b)(1) and
776.24(d). ``A violation may be `imminent' either in time or degree of
likelihood.'' 15 CFR 766.24(b)(3). BIS may show ``either that a
violation is about to occur, or that the general circumstances of the
matter under investigation or case under criminal or administrative
charges demonstrate a likelihood of future violations.'' Id. As to the
likelihood of future violations, BIS may show that the violation under
investigation or charge ``is significant, deliberate, covert and/or
likely to occur again, rather than technical or negligent [.]'' Id. A
``lack of information establishing the precise time a violation may
occur does not preclude a finding that a violation is imminent, so long
as

[[Page 45278]]

there is sufficient reason to believe the likelihood of a violation.''
Id.

B. The TDO and BIS's Request for Renewal

OEE's request for renewal is based upon the facts underlying the
issuance of the initial TDO and the TDO renewals in this matter and the
evidence developed over the course of this investigation indicating a
blatant disregard of U.S. export controls and the TDO. The initial TDO
was issued as a result of evidence that showed that Mahan Airways and
other parties engaged in conduct prohibited by the EAR by knowingly re-
exporting to Iran three U.S.-origin aircraft, specifically Boeing 747s
(``Aircraft 1-3''), items subject to the EAR and classified under
Export Control Classification Number (``ECCN'') 9A991.b, without the
required U.S. Government authorization. Further evidence submitted by
BIS indicated that Mahan Airways was involved in the attempted re-
export of three additional U.S.-origin Boeing 747s (``Aircraft 4-6'')
to Iran.
As discussed in the September 17, 2008 renewal order, evidence
presented by BIS indicated that Aircraft 1-3 continued to be flown on
Mahan Airways' routes after issuance of the TDO, in violation of the
Regulations and the TDO itself.\8\ It also showed that Aircraft 1-3 had
been flown in further violation of the Regulations and the TDO on the
routes of Iran Air, an Iranian Government airline. Moreover, as
discussed in the March 16, 2009, September 11, 2009 and March 9, 2010
Renewal Orders, Mahan Airways registered Aircraft 1-3 in Iran, obtained
Iranian tail numbers for them (EP-MNA, EP-MNB, and EP-MNE,
respectively), and continued to operate at least two of them in
violation of the Regulations and the TDO,\9\ while also committing an
additional knowing and willful violation when it negotiated for and
acquired an additional U.S.-origin aircraft. The additional acquired
aircraft was an MD-82 aircraft, which subsequently was painted in Mahan
Airways' livery and flown on multiple Mahan Airways' routes under tail
number TC-TUA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\8\ Engaging in conduct prohibited by a denial order violates
the Regulations. 15 CFR 764.2(a) and (k).
\9\ The third Boeing 747 appeared to have undergone significant
service maintenance and may not have been operational at the time of
the March 9, 2010 renewal order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The March 9, 2010 Renewal Order also noted that a court in the
United Kingdom (``U.K.'') had found Mahan Airways in contempt of court
on February 1, 2010, for failing to comply with that court's December
21, 2009 and January 12, 2010 orders compelling Mahan Airways to remove
the Boeing 747s from Iran and ground them in the Netherlands. Mahan
Airways and the Balli Group Respondents had been litigating before the
U.K. court concerning ownership and control of Aircraft 1-3. In a
letter to the U.K. court dated January 12, 2010, Mahan Airways'
Chairman indicated, inter alia, that Mahan Airways opposes U.S.
Government actions against Iran, that it continued to operate the
aircraft on its routes in and out of Tehran (and had 158,000 ``forward
bookings'' for these aircraft), and that it wished to continue to do so
and would pay damages if required by that court, rather than ground the
aircraft.
The September 3, 2010 renewal order discussed the fact that Mahan
Airways' violations of the TDO extended beyond operating U.S.-origin
aircraft and attempting to acquire additional U.S.-origin aircraft. In
February 2009, while subject to the TDO, Mahan Airways participated in
the export of computer motherboards, items subject to the Regulations
and designated as EAR99, from the United States to Iran, via the United
Arab Emirates (``UAE''), in violation of both the TDO and the
Regulations, by transporting and/or forwarding the computer
motherboards from the UAE to Iran. Mahan Airways' violations were
facilitated by Gatewick LLC, which not only participated in the
transaction, but also has stated to BIS that it acted as Mahan Airways'
sole booking agent for cargo and freight forwarding services in the
UAE.
Moreover, in a January 24, 2011 filing in the U.K. court, Mahan
Airways asserted that Aircraft 1-3 were not being used, but stated in
pertinent part that the aircraft were being maintained in Iran
especially ``in an airworthy condition'' and that, depending on the
outcome of its U.K. court appeal, the aircraft ``could immediately go
back into service . . . on international routes into and out of Iran.''
Mahan Airways' January 24, 2011 submission to U.K. Court of Appeal, at
p. 25, ]] 108, 110. This clearly stated intent, both on its own and in
conjunction with Mahan Airways' prior misconduct and statements,
demonstrated the need to renew the TDO in order to prevent imminent
future violations. Two of these three 747s subsequently were removed
from Iran and are no longer in Mahan Airway's possession. The third of
these 747s, with Manufacturer's Serial Number (``MSN'') 23480 and
Iranian tail number EP-MNE, remained in Iran under Mahan's control.
Pursuant to Executive Order 13324, it was designated a Specially
Designated Global Terrorist (``SDGT'') by the U.S. Department of the
Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (``OFAC'') on September 19,
2012.\10\ Furthermore, as discussed in the February 4, 2013 Order, open
source information indicated that this 747, painted in the livery and
logo of Mahan Airways, had been flown between Iran and Syria, and was
suspected of ferrying weapons and/or other equipment to the Syrian
Government from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Open source
information showed that this aircraft had flown from Iran to Syria as
recently as June 30, 2013, and continues to show that it remains in
active operation in Mahan Airways' fleet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\10\ See http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/pages/20120919.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In addition, as first detailed in the July 1, 2011 and August 24,
2011 orders, and discussed in subsequent renewal orders in this matter,
Mahan Airways also continued to evade U.S. export control laws by
operating two Airbus A310 aircraft, bearing Mahan Airways' livery and
logo, on flights into and out of Iran.\11\ At the time of the July 1,
2011 and August 24, 2011 Orders, these Airbus A310s were registered in
France, with tail numbers F-OJHH and F-OJHI, respectively.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\11\ The Airbus A310s are powered with U.S.-origin engines. The
engines are subject to the EAR and classified under Export Control
Classification (``ECCN'') 9A991.d. The Airbus A310s contain
controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more than 10 percent of the
total value of the aircraft and as a result are subject to the EAR.
They are classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or reexport of
these aircraft to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization
pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations.
\12\ OEE subsequently presented evidence that after the August
24, 2011 renewal, Mahan Airways worked along with Kerman Aviation
and others to de-register the two Airbus A310 aircraft in France and
to register both aircraft in Iran (with, respectively, Iranian tail
numbers EP-MHH and EP-MHI). It was determined subsequent to the
February 15, 2012 renewal order that the registration switch for
these A310s was cancelled and that Mahan Airways then continued to
fly the aircraft under the original French tail numbers (F-OJHH and
F-OJHI, respectively). Both aircraft apparently remain in Mahan
Airways' possession.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The August 2012 renewal order also found that Mahan Airways had
acquired another Airbus A310 aircraft subject to the Regulations, with
MSN 499 and Iranian tail number EP-VIP, in violation of the TDO and the
Regulations.\13\ On September 19, 2012, all three Airbus A310 aircraft
(tail numbers F-OJHH, F-OJHI, and EP-VIP) were designated as SDGTs.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\13\ See note 12, supra.
\14\ See http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/pages/20120919.aspx. Mahan Airways was previously
designated by OFAC as a SDGT on October 18, 2011. 77 FR 64,427
(October 18, 2011).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 45279]]

The February 4, 2013 Order laid out further evidence of continued
and additional efforts by Mahan Airways and other persons acting in
concert with Mahan, including Kral Aviation and another Turkish
company, to procure U.S.-origin engines--two GE CF6-50C2 engines, with
MSNs 517621 and 517738, respectively--and other aircraft parts in
violation of the TDO and the Regulations.\15\ The February 4, 2013
renewal order also added Mehdi Bahrami as a related person in
accordance with Section 766.23 of the Regulations. Bahrami, a Mahan
Vice-President and the head of Mahan's Istanbul Office, also was
involved in Mahan's acquisition of the original three Boeing 747s
(Aircraft 1-3) that resulted in the original TDO, and has had a
business relationship with Mahan dating back to 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\15\ Kral Aviation was referenced in the February 4, 2013 Order
as ``Turkish Company No. 1.'' Kral Aviation purchased a GE CF6-50C2
aircraft engine (MSN 517621) from the United States in July 2012, on
behalf of Mahan Airways. OEE was able to prevent this engine from
reaching Mahan by issuing a redelivery order to the freight
forwarder in accordance with Section 758.8 of the Regulations. OEE
also issued Kral Aviation a redelivery order for the second CF6-50C2
engine (MSN 517738) on July 30, 2012. The owner of the second engine
subsequently cancelled the item's sale to Kral Aviation. In
September 2012, OEE was alerted by a U.S. exporter that another
Turkish company (``Turkish Company No. 2'') was attempting to
purchase aircraft spare parts intended for re-export by Turkish
Company No. 2 to Mahan Airways. See February 4, 2013 Order.
On December 31, 2013, Kral Aviation was added to BIS's Entity
List, Supplement No. 4 to Part 744 of the Regulations. See 78 FR
75458 (Dec. 12, 2013). Companies and individuals are added to the
Entity List for engaging in activities contrary to the national
security or foreign policy interests of the United States. See 15
CFR 744.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The July 31, 2013 Order detailed additional evidence obtained by
OEE showing efforts by Mahan Airways to obtain another GE CF6-50C2
aircraft engine (MSN 528350) from the United States via Turkey.
Multiple Mahan employees, including Mehdi Bahrami, were involved in or
aware of matters related to the engine's arrival in Turkey from the
United States, plans to visually inspect the engine, and prepare it for
shipment from Turkey.
Mahan sought to obtain this U.S.-origin engine through Pioneer
Logistics Havacilik Turizm Yonetim Danismanlik (``Pioneer Logistics''),
an aircraft parts supplier located in Turkey, and its director/
operator, Gulnihal Yegane, a Turkish national who previously had
conducted Mahan related business with Mehdi Bahrami and Ali Eslamian.
Moreover, as referenced in the July 31, 2013 Order, a sworn affidavit
by Kosol Surinanda, also known as Kosol Surinandha, Managing Director
of Mahan's General Sales Agent in Thailand, stated that the shares of
Pioneer Logistics for which he was the listed owner were ``actually the
property of and owned by Mahan.'' He further stated that he held
``legal title to the shares until otherwise required by Mahan'' but
would ``exercise the rights granted to [him] exactly and only as
instructed by Mahan and [his] vote and/or decisions [would] only and
exclusively reflect the wills and demands of Mahan[.]'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\16\ Pioneer Logistics, Gulnihal Yegane, and Kosol Surinanda
also were added to the Entity List on December 12, 2013. See 78 FR
75458 (Dec. 12, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The January 24, 2014 Order outlined OEE's continued investigation
of Mahan Airways' activities and detailed an attempt by Mahan, which
OEE thwarted, to obtain, via an Indonesian aircraft parts supplier, two
U.S.-origin Honeywell ALF-502R-5 aircraft engines (MSNs LF5660 and
LF5325), items subject to the Regulations, from a U.S. company located
in Texas. An invoice of the Indonesian aircraft parts supplier dated
March 27, 2013, listed Mahan Airways as the purchaser of the engines
and included a Mahan ship-to address. OEE also obtained a Mahan air
waybill dated March 12, 2013, listing numerous U.S.-origin aircraft
parts subject to the Regulations--including, among other items, a
vertical navigation gyroscope, a transmitter, and a power control
unit--being transported by Mahan from Turkey to Iran in violation of
the TDO.
The July 22, 2014 Order discussed open source evidence from the
March-June 2014 time period regarding two BAE regional jets, items
subject to the Regulations, that were painted in the livery and logo of
Mahan Airways and operating under Iranian tail numbers EP-MOK and EP-
MOI, respectively.\17\ In addition, aviation industry resources
indicated that these aircraft were obtained by Mahan Airways in late
November 2013 and June 2014, from Ukrainian Mediterranean Airline, a
Ukrainian airline that was added to BIS's Entity List (Supplement No. 4
to Part 744 of the Regulations) on August 15, 2011, for acting contrary
to the national security and foreign policy interests of the United
States.\18\ OEE's on-going investigation indicates that both BAE
regional jets remain active in Mahan's fleet, with open source
information showing EP-MOI being used on flights into and out of Iran
as recently as January 12, 2015. The continued operation of these
aircraft by Mahan Airways violates the TDO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\17\ The BAE regional jets are powered with U.S.-origin engines.
The engines are subject to the EAR and classified under ECCN
9A991.d. These aircraft contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued
at more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a
result are subject to the EAR. They are classified under ECCN
9A991.b. The export or reexport of these aircraft to Iran requires
U.S. Government authorization pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7
of the Regulations.
\18\ See 76 FR 50407 (Aug. 15, 2011). The July 22, 2014 TDO
renewal order also referenced two Airbus A320 aircraft painted in
the livery and logo of Mahan Airways and operating under Iranian
tail numbers EP-MMK and EP-MML, respectively. OEE's investigation
also showed that Mahan obtained these aircraft in November 2013,
from Khors Air Company, another Ukrainian airline that, like
Ukrainian Mediterranean Airlines, was added to BIS's Entity List on
August 15, 2011. Open source evidence indicates the two Airbus A320
aircraft may be been transferred by Mahan Airways to another Iranian
airline in October 2014, and issued Iranian tail numbers EP-APE and
EP-APF, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The January 16, 2015 Order detailed evidence of additional attempts
by Mahan Airways to acquire items subject the Regulations in further
violation of the TDO. Specifically, in March 2014, OEE became aware of
an inertial reference unit bearing serial number 1231 (``the IRU'')
that had been sent to the United States for repair. The IRU is subject
to the Regulations, classified under ECCN 7A103, and controlled for
missile technology reasons. Upon closer inspection, it was determined
that IRU came from or had been installed on an Airbus A340 aircraft
bearing MSN 056. Further investigation revealed that as of
approximately February 2014, this aircraft was registered under Iranian
tail number EP-MMB and had been painted in the livery and logo of Mahan
Airways.
The January 16, 2015 Order also described related efforts by the
Departments of Justice and Treasury to further thwart Mahan's illicit
procurement efforts. Specifically, on August 14, 2014, the United
States Attorney's Office for the District of Maryland filed a civil
forfeiture complaint for the IRU pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 401(b) that
resulted in the court issuing an Order of Forfeiture on December 2,
2014. EP-MMB remains listed as active in Mahan Airways' fleet.
Additionally, on August 29, 2014, OFAC blocked the property and
interests in property of Asian Aviation Logistics of Thailand, a Mahan
Airways affiliate or front company, pursuant to Executive Order 13224.
In doing so, OFAC described Mahan Airway's use of Asian Aviation
Logistics to evade sanctions by making payments on behalf of Mahan for
the purchase of engines and other equipment.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\19\ See http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/Pages/20140829.aspx. See 79 FR 55073 (Sep. 15, 2014).
OFAC also blocked the property and property interests of Pioneer
Logistics of Turkey on August 29, 2014. Id. Mahan Airways' use of
Pioneer Logistics in an effort to evade the TDO and the Regulations
was discussed in a prior renewal order, as summarized, supra, at 13-
14. BIS added both Asian Aviation Logistics and Pioneer Logistics to
the Entity List on December 12, 2013. See 78 FR 75458 (Dec. 12,
2013).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 45280]]

The May 21, 2015 modification order detailed the acquisition of two
aircraft, specifically an Airbus A340 bearing MSN 164 and an Airbus
A321 bearing MSN 550, that were purchased by Al Naser Airlines in late
2014/early 2015 and are currently located in Iran under the possession,
control, and/or ownership of Mahan Airways.\20\ The sales agreements
for these two aircraft were signed by Ali Abdullah Alhay for Al Naser
Airlines.\21\ Payment information reveals that multiple electronic
funds transfers (``EFT'') were made by Ali Abdullah Alhay and Bahar
Safwa General Trading in order to acquire MSNs 164 and 550.
The May 21, 2015 modification order also laid out evidence showing
the respondents' attempts to obtain other controlled aircraft,
including aircraft physically located in the United States in
similarly-patterned transactions during the same recent time period.
Transactional documents involving two Airbus A320s bearing MSNs 82 and
99, respectively, again showed Ali Abdullah Alhay signing sales
agreements for Al Naser Airlines.\22\ A review of the payment
information for these aircraft similarly revealed EFTs from Ali
Abdullah Alhay and Bahar Safwa General Trading that follow the pattern
described for MSNs 164 and 550, supra. MSNs 82 and 99 were detained by
OEE Special Agents prior to their planned export from the United
States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\20\ Both of these aircraft are powered by U.S.-origin engines
that are subject to the Regulations and classified under ECCN
9A991.d. Both aircraft contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued
at more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a
result are subject to the EAR regardless of their location. The
aircraft are classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or re-export
of these aircraft to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization
pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations.
\21\ Ali Abdullah Alhay is a 25% owner of Al Naser Airlines.
\22\ Both aircraft were physically located in the United States
and therefore are subject to the Regulations pursuant to Section
734.3(a)(1). Moreover, these Airbus A320s are powered by U.S.-origin
engines that are subject to the Regulations and classified under
Export Control Classification Number ECCN 9A991.d. The Airbus A320s
contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more than 10 percent
of the total value of the aircraft and as a result are subject to
the EAR regardless of the their location. The aircraft are
classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or re-export of these
aircraft to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization pursuant to
Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The July 13, 2015 Order outlined evidence showing that Al Naser
Airlines' attempts to acquire aircraft on behalf of Mahan Airways
extended beyond MSNs 164 and 550 to include a total of nine
aircraft.\23\ Four of the aircraft, all of which are subject to the
Regulations and were obtained by Mahan from Al Naser Airlines, had been
issued the following Iranian tail numbers: EP-MMD (MSN 164), EP-MMG
(MSN 383), EP-MMH (MSN 391) and EP-MMR (MSN 416), respectively.\24\
Publicly available flight tracking information provided evidence that
at the time of the July 13, 2015 renewal, both EP-MMH and EP-MMR were
being actively flown on routes into and out of Iran in violation of the
TDO and Regulations.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\23\ This evidence included a press release dated May 9, 2015,
that appeared on Mahan Airways' Web site and stated that Mahan
``added 9 modern aircraft to its air fleet[,]'' and that the newly
acquired aircraft included eight Airbus A340s and one Airbus A321.
See http://www.mahan.aero/en/mahan-air/press-room/44. The press
release was subsequently removed from Mahan Airways' Web site.
Publicly available aviation databases similarly showed that Mahan
had obtained nine additional aircraft from Al Naser Airlines in May
2015, including MSNs 164 and 550. As also discussed in the July 13,
2015 renewal order, Sky Blue Bird Group, via Issam Shammout, was
actively involved in Al Naser Airlines' acquisition of MSNs 164 and
550, and the attempted acquisition of MSNs 82 and 99 (which were
detained by OEE).
\24\ The Airbus A340s are powered by U.S.-origin engines that
are subject to the Regulations and classified under ECCN 9A991.d.
The Airbus A340s contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more
than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a result
are subject to the EAR regardless of the their location. The
aircraft are classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or re-export
of these aircraft to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization
pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations.
\25\ There is some publically available information indicating
that the aircraft Mahan Airways is flying under Iranian tail number
EP-MMR is now MSN 615, rather than MSN 416. Both aircraft are Airbus
A340 aircraft that Mahan acquired from Al Naser Airlines in
violation of the TDO and the Regulations. Moreover, both aircraft
were designated as SDGTs by OFAC on May 21, 2015, pursuant to
Executive Order 13324. See 80 FR 30762 (May 29, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The January 7, 2016 Order discussed evidence that Mahan Airways had
begun actively flying EP-MMD, another of the aircraft Mahan obtained
from Al Naser Airlines as discussed in the July 13, 2015 renewal order,
on international routes into and out of Iran, including from/to
Bangkok, Thailand. Additionally, the January 7, 2016 Order described
publically available aviation database and flight tracking information
indicating that Mahan was continuing its efforts to acquire Iranian
tail numbers and press into active service under Mahan's livery and
logo at least two more of the Airbus A340 aircraft it obtained from Al
Naser Airlines: EP-MME (MSN 371) and EP-MMF (MSN 376), respectively.
Since January 2016, EP-MME has logged flights to and from Tehran, Iran
involving various destinations, including Guangzhou, China and Dubai,
United Arab Emirates in further violation of the TDO and the
Regulations.
The June 15, 2016 renewal request presents similar publically
available information indicating that Mahan has operated EP-MMF on
routes into and out of Iran. Publically available flight tracking
information shows that between June 7, 2016, and June 14, 2016, EP-MMF
flew on routes from Tehran, Iran to Beijing, China and Shanghai, China,
respectively. Additional evidence obtained by OEE since the January 7,
2016 renewal shows that in or about November 2015, Mahan Airways
acquired a BAE Avro RJ-85 aircraft (MSN E2392) in violation of the TDO
and that the aircraft now bears Iranian tail number EP-MOR.\26\ This
evidence includes information available on the Web site of Iran's civil
aviation authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\26\ The BAE Avro RJ-85 is powered by U.S.-origin engines that
are subject to the Regulations and classified under ECCN 9A991.d.
The BAE Avro RJ-85 contains controlled U.S.-origin items valued at
more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a
result is subject to the EAR regardless of the its location. The
aircraft is classified under ECCN 9A991.b, and its export or re-
export to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization pursuant to
Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Findings

Under the applicable standard set forth in Section 766.24 of the
Regulations and my review of the entire record, I find that the
evidence presented by BIS convincingly demonstrates that the denied
persons have acted in violation of the EAR and the TDO, that such
violations have been significant, deliberate and covert, and that there
is a likelihood of future violations. Therefore, renewal of the TDO is
necessary to prevent imminent violation of the EAR and to give notice
to companies and individuals in the United States and abroad that they
should continue to cease dealing with Mahan Airways and the other
denied persons under the TDO in connection with export and reexport
transactions involving items subject to the EAR.

IV. Order

It is therefore ordered:
First, that MAHAN AIRWAYS, Mahan Tower, No. 21, Azadegan St., M.A.
Jenah Exp. Way, Tehran, Iran; PEJMAN MAHMOOD KOSARAYANIFARD A/K/A
KOSARIAN FARD, P.O. Box 52404, Dubai, United Arab Emirates;

[[Page 45281]]

MAHMOUD AMINI, G#22 Dubai Airport Free Zone, P.O. Box 393754, Dubai,
United Arab Emirates, and P.O. Box 52404, Dubai, United Arab Emirates,
and Mohamed Abdulla Alqaz Building, Al Maktoum Street, Al Rigga, Dubai,
United Arab Emirates; KERMAN AVIATION A/K/A GIE KERMAN AVIATION, 42
Avenue Montaigne 75008, Paris, France; SIRJANCO TRADING LLC, P.O. Box
8709, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; ALI ESLAMIAN, 33 Cavendish Square,
4th Floor, London W1G0PW, United Kingdom, and 2 Bentinck Close, Prince
Albert Road St. Johns Wood, London NW87RY, United Kingdom; MAHAN AIR
GENERAL TRADING LLC, 19th Floor Al Moosa Tower One, Sheik Zayed Road,
Dubai 40594, United Arab Emirates; SKYCO (UK) LTD., 33 Cavendish
Square, 4th Floor, London, W1G 0PV, United Kingdom; EQUIPCO (UK) LTD.,
2 Bentinck Close, Prince Albert Road, London, NW8 7RY, United Kingdom;
and MEHDI BAHRAMI, Mahan Airways--Istanbul Office, Cumhuriye Cad. Sibil
Apt No: 101 D:6, 34374 Emadad, Sisli Istanbul, Turkey; AL NASER
AIRLINES A/K/A AL-NASER AIRLINES A/K/A ALNASER AIRLINES AND AIR FREIGHT
LTD., Home 46, Al-Karrada, Babil Region, District 929, St 21, Beside Al
Jadirya Private Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq, and Al Amirat Street, Section
309, St. 3/H.20, Al Mansour, Baghdad, Iraq, and P.O. Box 28360, Dubai,
United Arab Emirates, and P.O. Box 911399, Amman 11191, Jordan; ALI
ABDULLAH ALHAY A/K/A ALI ALHAY A/K/A ALI ABDULLAH AHMED ALHAY, Home 46,
Al-Karrada, Babil Region, District 929, St 21, Beside Al Jadirya
Private Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq, and Anak Street, Qatif, Saudi Arabia
61177; BAHAR SAFWA GENERAL TRADING, P.O. Box 113212, Citadel Tower,
Floor-5, Office #504, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and
P.O. Box 8709, Citadel Tower, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab
Emirates; SKY BLUE BIRD GROUP A/K/A SKY BLUE BIRD AVIATION A/K/A SKY
BLUE BIRD LTD A/K/A SKY BLUE BIRD FZC, P.O. Box 16111, Ras Al Khaimah
Trade Zone, United Arab Emirates; and ISSAM SHAMMOUT A/K/A MUHAMMAD
ISAM MUHAMMAD ANWAR NUR SHAMMOUT A/K/A ISSAM ANWAR, Philips Building,
4th Floor, Al Fardous Street, Damascus, Syria, and Al Kolaa, Beirut,
Lebanon 151515, and 17-18 Margaret Street, 4th Floor, London, W1W 8RP,
United Kingdom, and Cumhuriyet Mah. Kavakli San St. Fulya, Cad. Hazar
Sok. No.14/A Silivri, Istanbul, Turkey, and when acting for or on their
behalf, any successors or assigns, agents, or employees (each a
``Denied Person'' and collectively the ``Denied Persons'') may not,
directly or indirectly, participate in any way in any transaction
involving any commodity, software or technology (hereinafter
collectively referred to as ``item'') exported or to be exported from
the United States that is subject to the Export Administration
Regulations (``EAR''), or in any other activity subject to the EAR
including, but not limited to:
A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, License
Exception, or export control document;
B. Carrying on negotiations concerning, or ordering, buying,
receiving, using, selling, delivering, storing, disposing of,
forwarding, transporting, financing, or otherwise servicing in any way,
any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the
United States that is subject to the EAR, or in any other activity
subject to the EAR; or
C. Benefitting in any way from any transaction involving any item
exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to
the EAR, or in any other activity subject to the EAR.
Second, that no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the
following:
A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of a Denied Person any item
subject to the EAR;
B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted
acquisition by a Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or control
of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from
the United States, including financing or other support activities
related to a transaction whereby a Denied Person acquires or attempts
to acquire such ownership, possession or control;
C. Take any action to acquire from or to facilitate the acquisition
or attempted acquisition from a Denied Person of any item subject to
the EAR that has been exported from the United States;
D. Obtain from a Denied Person in the United States any item
subject to the EAR with knowledge or reason to know that the item will
be, or is intended to be, exported from the United States; or
E. Engage in any transaction to service any item subject to the EAR
that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is
owned, possessed or controlled by a Denied Person, or service any item,
of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by a Denied
Person if such service involves the use of any item subject to the EAR
that has been or will be exported from the United States. For purposes
of this paragraph, servicing means installation, maintenance, repair,
modification or testing.
Third, that, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided
in section 766.23 of the EAR, any other person, firm, corporation, or
business organization related to a Denied Person by affiliation,
ownership, control, or position of responsibility in the conduct of
trade or related services may also be made subject to the provisions of
this Order.
Fourth, that this Order does not prohibit any export, reexport, or
other transaction subject to the EAR where the only items involved that
are subject to the EAR are the foreign-produced direct product of U.S.-
origin technology.
In accordance with the provisions of Sections 766.24(e) of the EAR,
Mahan Airways, Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and/or Bahar
Safwa General Trading may, at any time, appeal this Order by filing a
full written statement in support of the appeal with the Office of the
Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40
South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202-4022. In accordance with
the provisions of Sections 766.23(c)(2) and 766.24(e)(3) of the EAR,
Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard, Mahmoud Amini, Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco
Trading LLC, Ali Eslamian, Mahan Air General Trading LLC, Skyco (UK)
Ltd., Equipco (UK) Ltd., Mehdi Bahrami, Sky Blue Bird Group, and/or
Issam Shammout may, at any time, appeal their inclusion as a related
person by filing a full written statement in support of the appeal with
the Office of the Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ
Docketing Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202-4022.
In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(d) of the EAR,
BIS may seek renewal of this Order by filing a written request not
later than 20 days before the expiration date. A renewal request may be
opposed by Mahan Airways, Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and/or
Bahar Safwa General Trading as provided in Section 766.24(d), by filing
a written submission with the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
Export Enforcement, which must be received not later than seven days
before the expiration date of the Order.
A copy of this Order shall be provided to Mahan Airways, Al Naser
Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa General Trading and each
related person, and shall be published in the Federal Register. This
Order is effective

[[Page 45282]]

immediately and shall remain in effect for 180 days.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\27\ Review and consideration of this matter have been delegated
to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export
Enforcement.

Dated: July 7, 2016.
Richard R. Majauskas,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2016-16567 Filed 7-12-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices 45277

Bahar Safwa General Trading, P.O. Box Blue Sky One Ltd., Blue Sky Two Ltd., officer Issam Shammout were added to
113212 Citadel Tower, Floor-5, Office Blue Sky Three Ltd., Blue Sky Four Ltd., the TDO as related persons as part of the
#504, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab Blue Sky Five Ltd., and Blue Sky Six July 13, 2015 renewal order.6
Emirates and P.O. Box 8709, Citadel
Ltd., all of the United Kingdom. The On June 15, 2016, BIS, through its
Tower, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab
Emirates; TDO was issued ex parte pursuant to Office of Export Enforcement (‘‘OEE’’),
Sky Blue Bird Group, a/k/a Sky Blue Bird Section 766.24(a), and went into effect submitted a written request for renewal
Aviation, a/k/a Sky Blue Bird Ltd, a/k/a on March 21, 2008, the date it was of the TDO. The written request was
Sky Blue Bird FZC, P.O. Box 16111, Ras Al published in the Federal Register. made more than 20 days before the
Khaimah Trade Zone, United Arab The TDO subsequently has been scheduled expiration of the current
Emirates; renewed in accordance with Section TDO, which issued on January 7, 2016.
Issam Shammout, a/k/a Muhammad Isam 766.24(d), including most recently on Notice of the renewal request also was
Muhammad Anwar Nur Shammout, a/k/a January 7, 2016.3 As of March 9, 2010,
Issam Anwar, Philips Building, 4th Floor, provided to Mahan Airways, Al Naser
Al Fardous Street, Damascus, Syria and Al
the Balli Group Respondents and Blue Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar
Kolaa, Beirut, Lebanon 151515 and17–18 Airways were no longer subject to the Safwa General Trading in accordance
Margaret Street, 4th Floor, London, W1W TDO. As part of the February 25, 2011 with Sections 766.5 and 766.24(d) of the
8RP, United Kingdomand Cumhuriyet TDO renewal, Gatewick LLC (a/k/a Regulations. No opposition to the
Mah. Kavakli San St. Fulya, Cad. Hazar Gatewick Freight and Cargo Services, a/ renewal of the TDO has been received.
Sok. No.14/A Silivri, Istanbul, Turkey k/a Gatewick Aviation Services), Furthermore, no appeal of the related
Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the Mahmoud Amini, and Pejman person determinations I made as part of
Export Administration Regulations, 15 Mahmood Kosarayanifard (‘‘Kosarian the September 3, 2010, February 25,
CFR parts 730–774 (2016) (‘‘EAR’’ or the Fard’’) were added as related persons in 2011, August 24, 2011, April 9, 2012,
‘‘Regulations’’),1 I hereby grant the accordance with Section 766.23 of the February 4, 2013, and July 13, 2015
request of the Office of Export Regulations.4 On July 1, 2011, the TDO renewal or modification orders has been
Enforcement (‘‘OEE’’) to renew the was modified by adding Zarand made by Kosarian Fard, Mahmoud
January 7, 2016 Temporary Denial Order Aviation as a respondent in order to Amini, Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco
(the ‘‘TDO’’). The January 7, 2016 Order prevent an imminent violation.5 As part Trading LLC, Ali Eslamian, Mahan Air
denied the export privileges of Mahan of the August 24, 2011 renewal, Kerman General Trading LLC, Skyco (UK) Ltd.,
Airways, Pejman Mahmood Aviation, Sirjanco Trading LLC, and Ali Equipco (UK) Ltd., Mehdi Bahrami, Sky
Kosarayanifard, Mahmoud Amini, Eslamian were added to the TDO as Blue Bird Group, or Issam Shammout.7
Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco Trading LLC, related persons. Mahan Air General
Ali Eslamian, Mahan Air General Trading LLC, Skyco (UK) Ltd., and II. Renewal of the TDO
Trading LLC, Skyco (UK) Ltd., Equipco Equipco (UK) Ltd. were added as related A. Legal Standard
(UK) Ltd., Mehdi Bahrami, Al Naser persons on April 9, 2012. Mehdi
Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, Bahar Bahrami was added to the TDO as a Pursuant to Section 766.24, BIS may
Safwa General Trading, Sky Blue Bird related person as part of the February 4, issue or renew an order temporarily
Group, and Issam Shammout.2 I find 2013 renewal order. denying a respondent’s export privileges
that renewal of the TDO is necessary in On May 21, 2015, the TDO was upon a showing that the order is
the public interest to prevent an modified to add Al Naser Airlines, Ali necessary in the public interest to
imminent violation of the EAR. Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa prevent an ‘‘imminent violation’’ of the
General Trading as respondents. Sky Regulations. 15 CFR 766.24(b)(1) and
I. Procedural History Blue Bird Group and its chief executive 776.24(d). ‘‘A violation may be
On March 17, 2008, Darryl W. ‘imminent’ either in time or degree of
Jackson, the then-Assistant Secretary of 3 The January 7, 2016 Order was published in the likelihood.’’ 15 CFR 766.24(b)(3). BIS
Federal Register on January 15, 2016 (81 F.R. 2161, may show ‘‘either that a violation is
Commerce for Export Enforcement Jan. 15, 2016). The TDO previously had been
(‘‘Assistant Secretary’’), signed a TDO renewed on September 17, 2008, March 16, 2009,
about to occur, or that the general
denying Mahan Airways’ export September 11, 2009, March 9, 2010, September 3, circumstances of the matter under
privileges for a period of 180 days on 2010, February 25, 2011, August 24, 2011, February investigation or case under criminal or
15, 2012, August 9, 2012, February 4, 2013, July 31, administrative charges demonstrate a
the grounds that its issuance was 2013, January 24, 2014, July 22, 2014, January 16,
necessary in the public interest to 2015, and July 13, 2015. The August 24, 2011
likelihood of future violations.’’ Id. As
prevent an imminent violation of the renewal followed the modification of the TDO on to the likelihood of future violations,
Regulations. The TDO also named as July 1, 2011, which added Zarand Aviation as a BIS may show that the violation under
respondent. The July 13, 2015 renewal followed the investigation or charge ‘‘is significant,
denied persons Blue Airways, of modification of the TDO on May 21, 2015, which
Yerevan, Armenia (‘‘Blue Airways of added Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and
deliberate, covert and/or likely to occur
Armenia’’), as well as the ‘‘Balli Group Bahar Safwa General Trading as respondents. Each again, rather than technical or negligent
Respondents,’’ namely, Balli Group renewal or modification order was published in the [.]’’ Id. A ‘‘lack of information
Federal Register. establishing the precise time a violation
PLC, Balli Aviation, Balli Holdings, 4 On August 13, 2014, BIS and Gatewick LLC
Vahid Alaghband, Hassan Alaghband, may occur does not preclude a finding
resolved administrative charges against Gatewick,
including a charge for acting contrary to the terms that a violation is imminent, so long as
1 The Regulations, currently codified at 15 CFR of a BIS denial order (15 CFR 764.2(k)). In addition
parts 730–774 (2016), originally issued pursuant to to the payment of a civil penalty, the settlement 6 The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of

the Export Administration Act of 1979. Since includes a seven-year denial order. The first two Foreign Assets Control (‘‘OFAC’’) designated Sky
August 21, 2001, the Act has been in lapse and the years of the denial period are active, with the Blue Bird and Issam Shammout as Specially
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

President, through Executive Order 13222 of August remaining five years suspended on condition that Designated Global Terrorists (‘‘SDGTs’’) on May 21,
17, 2001 (3 CFR, 2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), which Gatewick LLC pays the civil penalty in full and 2015, pursuant to Executive Order 13324, for
has been extended by successive Presidential timely fashion and commits no further violation of ‘‘providing support to Iran’s Mahan Air.’’ See 80 FR
Notices, the most recent being that of August 7, the Regulations during the seven-year denial 30762 (May 29, 2015).
2015 (80 FR 48,223 (Aug. 11, 2015)), has continued period. The Gatewick LLC Final Order was 7 A party named or added as a related person may
the Regulations in effect under the International published in the Federal Register on August 20, not oppose the issuance or renewal of the
Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, 2014. See 79 FR 49283 (Aug. 20, 2014). underlying temporary denial order, but may file an
et seq. (2006 & Supp. IV 2010)). 5 As of July 22, 2014, Zarand Aviation was no appeal of the related person determination in
2 See note 3, infra. longer subject to the TDO. accordance with Section 766.23(c).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:08 Jul 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM 13JYN1

45282 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Notices

immediately and shall remain in effect SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: producer is subject to the order, if the
for 180 days.27 Secretary concludes that subsequent to
Scope of the Order
Dated: July 7, 2016. the revocation, SGBC/SKF sold TRBs at
The merchandise covered by the order less than NV.4 Under 19 CFR
Richard R. Majauskas,
includes tapered roller bearings and 351.222(b)(2)(i)(B) as long as any
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for parts thereof. The subject merchandise
Export Enforcement. exporter or producer is subject to an
is currently classifiable under antidumping duty order which remains
[FR Doc. 2016–16567 Filed 7–12–16; 8:45 am] Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the in force, an entity previously granted a
BILLING CODE P United States (HTSUS) subheadings: revocation may be reinstated under that
8482.20.00, 8482.91.00.50, 8482.99.15, order if it is established that the entity
8482.99.45, 8483.20.40, 8483.20.80, has resumed the dumping of subject
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 8483.30.80, 8483.90.20, 8483.90.30, merchandise.
International Trade Administration 8483.90.80, 8708.70.6060, 8708.99.2300, In this case, because other exporters
8708.99.4850, 8708.99.6890, in the PRC remain subject to the TRBs
[A–570–601] 8708.99.8115, and 8708.99.8180. The order, the order remains in effect, and
HTSUS subheadings are provided for SGBC/SKF may be reinstated in the
Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts convenience and customs purposes
Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, order. The Department granted SGBC/
only; the written description of the SKF revocation based in part upon its
From the People’s Republic of China: scope of the order is dispositive.1
Preliminary Results of Changed agreement to immediate reinstatement
Circumstances Review and Intent To Tolling of Deadlines for Preliminary in the antidumping duty order if the
Reinstate Shanghai General Bearing Results Department were to find that the
Co., Ltd. in the Antidumping Duty company resumed dumping of TRBs
As explained in the memorandum
Order from the PRC.5
from the Acting Assistant Secretary for As discussed in the Preliminary
AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, Enforcement and Compliance, the Decision Memorandum, we have
International Trade Administration, Department exercised its discretion to examined SGBC/SKF’s response and
Department of Commerce. toll all administrative deadlines for the have preliminarily found that SGBC/
duration of the closure of the Federal SKF’s dumping margin for the review
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce
Government during Snowstorm period is greater than de minimis.
(the Department) is conducting a
‘‘Jonas.’’ 2 Therefore, all deadlines in
changed circumstances review of the Accordingly, we preliminarily intend to
this segment of the proceeding have
antidumping duty order on tapered reinstate SGBC/SKF in the antidumping
been extended by four days. The revised
roller bearings and parts thereof, duty order on TRBs from the PRC.
deadline for the preliminary results of
finished and unfinished (TRBs), from
this review is now July 5, 2016.3 Methodology
the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to
determine whether Shanghai General Basis for Reinstatement The Department is conducting this
Bearing Co., Ltd. (SGBC/SKF) has changed circumstances review in
In requesting revocation, pursuant to
resumed dumping TRBs and whether accordance with section 751(b)(1) of the
19 CFR 351.222(b)(2)(i)(B), SGBC/SKF
the antidumping order should be Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act),
agreed to immediate reinstatement of
reinstated for TRBs from the PRC and 19 CFR 351.216(d). As noted above,
the order, so long as any exporter or
manufactured and exported by SGBC/ this changed circumstances review is
SKF. The period of review is June 1, 1 For a complete description of the scope of the
being conducted with respect to TRBs
2014, through May 31, 2015. order, see memorandum from Gary Taverman, from the PRC manufactured and
We preliminarily determine that Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for exported by SGBC/SKF. For SGBC/SKF,
SGBC/SKF has sold TRBs at less than Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, we calculated constructed export prices
to Ronald K. Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary
normal value (NV) and that TRBs for Enforcement and Compliance, dated July 5, 2016
in accordance with section 772 of the
produced and exported by SGBC/SKF entitled ‘‘Decision Memorandum for the Act. Because the PRC is a non-market
should be reinstated in the antidumping Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty economy (NME) within the meaning of
order on TRBs from the PRC. We will Changed Circumstances Review of Tapered Roller section 771(18) of the Act, NV has been
Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and
instruct U.S. Customs and Border Unfinished, from the People’s Republic of China’’ calculated in accordance with section
Protection (CBP) to suspend liquidation (Preliminary Decision Memorandum), issued 773(c) of the Act.
of all entries of TRBs manufactured and concurrently with and hereby adopted by this For a full description of the
exported by SGBC/SKF and entered, or notice. methodology underlying our
2 See Memorandum to the Record from Ron
withdrawn from warehouse, for conclusions, see the Preliminary
Lorentzen, Acting Assistant Secretary for
consumption on or after the date of Enforcement and Compliance, regarding ‘‘Tolling of Decision Memorandum. The
publication of this notice in the Federal Administrative Deadlines As a Result of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a
Register. Interested parties are invited to Government Closure During Snowstorm Jonas,’’ public document and is on file
comment on these preliminary results. dated January 27, 2016.
3 We aligned the deadlines of this processing with
electronically via Enforcement and
DATES: Effective Date: July 13, 2016. those in the concurrent 2014–2015 administrative Compliance’s Antidumping and
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: review of TRBs from the PRC. See memorandum Countervailing Duty Centralized
Alice Maldonado, Enforcement and from Alice Maldonado, International Trade Electronic Service System (ACCESS).
Compliance Analyst, Office II, to Christian Marsh, ACCESS is available to registered users
Compliance, International Trade Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Administration, U.S. Department of Countervailing Duty Operations, entitled ‘‘Tapered
4 See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof,
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and
Unfinished, from the People’s Republic of China: Finished and Unfinished, From the People’s
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; Republic of China; Final Results of Antidumping
Changed Circumstances Review of Shanghai
telephone (202) 482–4682. General Bearing Company, Ltd., entitled, Alignment Duty Administrative Review and Revocation in Part
with the 2014–2015 Antidumping Duty of Antidumping Duty Order, 62 FR 6189 (February
27 Review and consideration of this matter have Administrative Review of Tapered Roller Bearings 11, 1997) (for the 1993–1994 review) (SGBC/SKF
been delegated to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of from the People’s Republic of China,’’ dated Revocation).
Commerce for Export Enforcement. October 27, 2015. 5 See SGBC/SKF Revocation, 62 FR at 6214.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:08 Jul 12, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM 13JYN1

Document Created: 2016-07-13 01:44:12
Document Modified: 2016-07-13 01:44:12

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
FR Citation		81 FR 45276

81 FR 45276 - Order Renewing Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEBureau of Industry and Security

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 134 (July 13, 2016)

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security