17726 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 63 / Thursday, April 2, 2015 / Notices 

1The EAR are currently codified at 15 CFR parts 

730–774 (2014). The EAR issued under the Export 

Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. 

app. §§ 2401–2420 (2000)) (‘‘EAA’’). 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, 

2014 (79 FR 46959 (Aug. 11, 2014)), has continued 

the Regulations in effect under the International 

Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, 

et seq.) (2006 & Supp. IV 2010). 

or any order, license or authorization 

issued thereunder; any regulation, 

license, or order issued under the 

International Emergency Economic 

Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–1706); 18 

U.S.C. 793, 794 or 798; section 4(b) of 

the Internal Security Act of 1950 (50 

U.S.C. 783(b)), or section 38 of the Arms 

Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778).’’ 15 

CFR 766.25(a); see also Section 11(h) of 

the EAA, 50 U.S.C. app. § 2410(h). The 

denial of export privileges under this 

provision may be for a period of up to 

10 years from the date of the conviction. 

15 CFR 766.25(d); see also 50 U.S.C. 

app. § 2410(h). In addition, Section 

750.8 of the Regulations states that the 

Bureau of Industry and Security’s Office 

of Exporter Services may revoke any 

Bureau of Industry and Security (‘‘BIS’’) 

licenses previously issued in which the 

person had an interest in at the time of 

his conviction. 

BIS has received notice of Bishop’s 

conviction for violating the AECA, and 

has provided notice and an opportunity 

for Bishop to make a written submission 

to BIS, as provided in Section 766.25 of 

the Regulations. BIS has not received a 

submission from Bishop. 

Based upon my review and 

consultations with BIS’s Office of 

Export Enforcement, including its 

Director, and the facts available to BIS, 

I have decided to deny Bishop’s export 

privileges under the Regulations for a 

period of five years from the date of 

Bishop’s conviction. I have also decided 

to revoke all licenses issued pursuant to 

the Act or Regulations in which Bishop 

had an interest at the time of his 

conviction. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ordered: 

First, from the date of this Order until 

May 7, 2018, Brian Keith Bishop, with 

a last known address of 93000 Pretoria 

Place, Dulles, VA 20189–9300, and 

when acting for or on his behalf, his 

successors, assigns, employees, agents 

or representatives (the ‘‘Denied 

Person’’), 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 

Regulations, 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 Regulations, or in any 

other activity subject to the Regulations; 

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 Regulations, or in 

any other activity subject to the 

Regulations. 

Second, no person may, directly or 

indirectly, do any of the following: 

A. Export or reexport to or on behalf 

of the Denied Person any item subject to 

the Regulations; 

B. Take any action that facilitates the 

acquisition or attempted acquisition by 

the Denied Person of the ownership, 

possession, or control of any item 

subject to the Regulations that has been 

or will be exported from the United 

States, including financing or other 

support activities related to a 

transaction whereby the 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 the Denied Person of 

any item subject to the Regulations that 

has been exported from the United 

States; 

D. Obtain from the Denied Person in 

the United States any item subject to the 

Regulations 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 Regulations that 

has been or will be exported from the 

United States and which is owned, 

possessed or controlled by the Denied 

Person, or service any item, of whatever 

origin, that is owned, possessed or 

controlled by the Denied Person if such 

service involves the use of any item 

subject to the Regulations 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, after notice and opportunity for 

comment as provided in Section 766.23 

of the Regulations, any other person, 

firm, corporation, or business 

organization related to Bishop by 

ownership, control, position of 

responsibility, affiliation, or other 

connection in the conduct of trade or 

business may also be made subject to 

the provisions of this Order in order to 

prevent evasion of this Order. 

Fourth, in accordance with Part 756 of 

the Regulations, Bishop may file an 

appeal of this Order with the Under 

Secretary of Commerce for Industry and 

Security. The appeal must be filed 

within 45 days from the date of this 

Order and must comply with the 

provisions of Part 756 of the 

Regulations. 

Fifth, a copy of this Order shall be 

delivered to the Bishop. This Order 

shall be published in the Federal 

Register. 

Sixth, this Order is effective 

immediately and shall remain in effect 

until May 7, 2018. 

Issued this 26th day of March, 2015. 

Thomas Andrukonis, 

Acting Director, Office of Exporter Services. 

[FR Doc. 2015–07638 Filed 4–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

Order Renewing Order Temporarily 

Denying Export Privileges; X–TREME 

Motors LLC, et al. 

In the Matter of: X–TREME Motors LLC, a/ 

k/a XTREME Motors, 2496 South 1900 West, 

West Haven, Utah 84401; and XTREME 

Outdoor Store, a/k/a XTREME Outdoors, 

2496 South 1900 West, West Haven, Utah 

84401; and Tyson Preece, 3930 West Old 

Highway Road, Morgan, Utah 84050; and 

Corey Justin Preece, a/k/a Corey Preece, a/k/ 

a Justin Preece, 1245 South Morgan Valley 

Drive, Morgan, Utah 84050; and Toby Green, 

480 West 175 North, Morgan, Utah 84050. 

Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the 

Export Administration Regulations, 15 

CFR parts 730–774 (2014) (‘‘EAR’’ or the 

‘‘Regulations’’),1 I hereby grant the 

request of the Office of Export 

Enforcement (‘‘OEE’’) to renew the 

September 30, 2014 Order Temporarily 

Denying the Export Privileges of X– 

TREME Motors LLC, also known as 

XTREME Motors; XTREME Outdoor 

Store, also known as XTREME 

Outdoors; Tyson Preece; Corey Justin 

Preece, also known as Corey Preece or 

Justin Preece; and Toby Green I find that 

renewal of the Temporary Denial Order 

(‘‘TDO’’) is necessary in the public 

interest to prevent an imminent 

violation of the EAR. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 63 / Thursday, April 2, 2015 / Notices 17727 

2Neither Tyson Preece, Corey Justin Preece, nor 

Toby Green has at any time challenged his 

respective inclusion as a related person to 

X–TREME. 

I. Procedural History and Background 

On September 30, 2014, I signed a 

TDO denying for 180 days the export 

privileges of X–TREME Motors LLC and 

XTREME Outdoor Store (collectively, 

‘‘X–TREME’’). Tyson Preece, Corey 

Justin Preece, and Toby Green were 

added to the TDO as related persons in 

accordance with Section 766.23 of the 

Regulations. The TDO was issued ex 

parte pursuant to Section 766.24(a), and 

went into effect upon issuance on 

September 30, 2014. Copies of the TDO 

were sent to each party named in the 

September 30, 2014 order in accordance 

with Sections 766.5 and 766.24(d) of the 

Regulations, and on October 7, 2014, the 

TDO was published in the Federal 

Register. 79 FR 60,445 (Oct. 7, 2014). 

In support of the original TDO, OEE 

presented evidence that X–TREME 

repeatedly exported items controlled for 

Crime Control reasons without the 

required licenses to various 

destinations, including Russia and 

China. In order to conceal the actual 

contents of the shipments the 

Respondents intentionally mislabeled 

the contents on U.S. Customs 

Declarations. Between September 1, 

2014, and the issuance of the TDO on 

September 30, 2014, the United States 

Government detained approximately 20 

shipments containing rifle scopes to 

destinations that required an export 

license. 

The current TDO dated September 30, 

2014, will expire on March 28, 2015, 

unless renewed on or before that date. 

On March 5, 2015, OEE submitted a 

written request for renewal of the TDO 

as to each named party. Notice of the 

renewal request was provided in 

accordance with Sections 766.5 and 

766.24(d) of the Regulations. No 

opposition to any aspect of the 

requested renewal has been received.2

II. TDO Renewal 

A. Legal Standard 

Pursuant to Section 766.24(b) of the 

Regulations, 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). ‘‘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 

charges 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 there is sufficient 

reason to believe the likelihood of a 

violation.’’ Id. 

B. Request for Renewal 

OEE’s request for renewal is based 

upon the facts underlying the issuance 

of the TDO and the evidence developed 

over the course of this investigation, 

including the evidence summarized in 

Section I., supra. OEE’s on-going 

investigation of X–TREME, in 

conjunction with the United States 

Attorney’s Office for the District of 

Utah, included the execution of a search 

warrant at X–TREME’s place of business 

on September 29, 2014. Based on 

evidence obtained via the search 

warrant and since reviewed, OEE has 

determined that X–TREME’s unlawful 

export activities were more extensive 

than known at the time the TDO issued, 

including that X–TREME engaged in at 

least 44 unlicensed exports over a 30- 

day period prior to the issuance of the 

TDO. In addition to the unlicensed 

export of rifle scopes discussed above, 

OEE also identified unlicensed exports 

of stun guns and Oleoresin Capsicum 

spray, items also controlled for Crime 

Control reasons. 

Moreover, despite the execution of the 

search warrant and the issuance of the 

TDO the following day, X–TREME 

continued to engage in unlawful export 

activities. On October 21, 2014 and 

October 28, 2014, respectively, X– 

TREME exported or attempted to export 

items subject to the Regulations to 

Canada. While the October 28, 2014 

shipment was stopped by the United 

States Postal Service, X–TREME was 

successful in exporting the October 21, 

2014 shipment. Both of these 

transactions plainly violated the TDO, 

which prohibits X–TREME from 

engaging in any export-related activities 

involving items subject to the EAR. 

C. Findings 

I find that the evidence presented by 

OEE demonstrates that renewal of the 

TDO is necessary to avoid an imminent 

violation of the Regulations based upon 

X–TREME’s deliberate and covert 

violations both pre- and post-issuance of 

the TDO. Accordingly, renewal of the 

TDO is needed to give notice to persons 

and companies in the United States and 

abroad that they should cease dealing 

with the Respondents in export and reexport transactions involving items 

subject to the EAR or other activities 

prohibited by the TDO. Doing so is 

consistent with the public interest to 

preclude future violations of the EAR. 

It is therefore ordered: 

First, that X–TREME MOTORS LLC, 

a/k/a XTREME MOTORS, 2496 South 

1900 West, West Haven, Utah 84401; 

XTREME OUTDOOR STORE, a/k/a 

XTREME OUTDOORS, 2496 South 1900 

West, West Haven, Utah 84401; TYSON 

PREECE, 3930 West Old Highway Road, 

Morgan, Utah 84050; COREY JUSTIN 

PREECE, a/k/a COREY PREECE, a/k/a 

JUSTIN PREECE, 1245 South Morgan 

Valley Drive, Morgan, Utah 84050; and 

TOBY GREEN, 480 West 175 North, 

Morgan, Utah 84050; 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; 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
17728 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 63 / Thursday, April 2, 2015 / Notices 

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. 

In accordance with the provisions of 

Section 766.24(e) of the EAR, X–TREME 

Motors LLC and/or XTREME Outdoor 

Store 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, Tyson Preece, 

Corey Justin Preece and/or Toby Green 

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. The 

Respondents may oppose such a request 

to renew this Order by filing a written 

submission with the Assistant Secretary 

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 served 

on the Respondents and shall be 

published in the Federal Register. 

This Order is effective immediately 

and shall remain in effect for 180 days. 

Dated: March 27, 2015. 

David W. Mills, 

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export 

Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2015–07569 Filed 4–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

Proposed Information Collection; 

Comment Request; NOAA Marine 

Debris Program Performance Progress 

Report 

AGENCY: National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Commerce, as part of its continuing 

effort to reduce paperwork and 

respondent burden, invites the general 

public and other Federal agencies to 

take this opportunity to comment on 

proposed and/or continuing information 

collections, as required by the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before June 1, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments 

to Jennifer Jessup, Departmental 

Paperwork Clearance Officer, 

Department of Commerce, Room 6616, 

14th and Constitution Avenue NW., 

Washington, DC 20230 (or via the 

Internet at JJessup@doc.gov). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

copies of the information collection 

instrument and instructions should be 

directed to Tom Barry at (301) 713–4248 

x161 or tom.barry@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

This request is for a new information 

collection. 

The NOAA Marine Debris Program 

(MDP) supports national and 

international efforts to research, 

prevent, and reduce the impacts of 

marine debris. The MDP is a centralized 

office within NOAA that coordinates 

and supports activities, both within the 

bureau and with other federal agencies, 

that address marine debris and its 

impacts. In addition to inter-agency 

coordination, the MDP uses 

partnerships with state and local 

agencies, tribes, non-governmental 

organizations, academia, and industry to 

investigate and solve the problems that 

stem from marine debris through 

research, prevention, and reduction 

activities, in order to protect and 

conserve our nation’s marine 

environment and ensure navigation 

safety. 

The Marine Debris Research, 

Prevention, and Reduction Act (33 

U.S.C. 1951 et seq.) as amended by the 

Marine Debris Act Amendments of 2012 

(Pub. L. 112–213, Title VI, Sec. 603, 126 

Stat. 1576, December 20, 2012) outlines 

three central program components for 

the MDP to undertake: (1) Mapping, 

identification, impact assessment, 

removal, and prevention; (2) reducing 

and preventing fishing gear loss; and (3) 

outreach to stakeholders and the general 

public. To address these components, 

the Marine Debris Act authorized the 

MDP to establish several competitive 

grant programs on marine debris 

research, prevention and removal that 

provide federal funding to non-federal 

applicants throughout the coastal 

United States and territories. 

The terms and conditions of the 

financial assistance awarded through 

these grant programs require regular 

progress reporting and communication 

of project accomplishments to MDP. 

Progress reports contain information 

related to, among other things, the 

overall short and long-term goals of the 

project, project methods and monitoring 

techniques, actual accomplishments 

(such as tons of debris removed from an 

ecosystem, numbers of volunteers 

participating in a cleanup project, etc.), 

status of approved activities, challenges 

or potential roadblocks to future 

progress, and lessons learned. This 

information collection enables MDP to 

monitor and evaluate the activities 

supported by federal funds to ensure 

accountability to the public and to 

ensure that funds are used consistent 

with the purpose for which they were 

appropriated. It also ensures that 

reported information is standardized in 

such a way that allows for it to be 

meaningfully synthesized across a 

diverse set of projects and project types. 

MDP uses the information collected in 

a variety of ways to communicate with 

federal and non-federal partners and 

stakeholders on individual project and 

general program accomplishments. 

The MDP operates within the Office 

of Response and Restoration as part of 

NOAA’s National Ocean Service. 

II. Method of Collection 

Respondents to this collection may 

choose to submit electronically or in 

paper format. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES