6714 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 13, 2007 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

Action Affecting Export Privileges; 

Petrom GmbH International Trade and 

Koto Commercio Iberica, S.L.; Order 

Making Order Denying Export 

Privileges of Petrom GmbH 

International Trade Applicable to 

Related Person Koto Commercio 

Iberica, S.L. 

In the Matter of: Petrom GmbH 

International Trade, Maria-Theresia Strasse 

26, Munich 81675, Germany, Respondent, 

and Koto Commercio Iberica, S.L., c/ 

Valderrodrigo no. 55, Madrid, Spain, c/o 

Majid Rahmanifar, Moehlstrasse 31, Munich 

81675, Germany, Related Person. 

Pursuant to section 766.23 of the 

Export Administration Regulations (the 

‘‘Regulations’’), the Bureau of Industry 

and Security (‘‘BIS’’), U.S. Department 

of Commerce, through its Office of 

Export Enforcement (‘‘OEE’’), has 

requested that I make the Denial Order 

that was imposed against Petrom GmbH 

International Trade (‘‘Petrom GmbH’’) 

on June 6, 2005 (70 FR 32743) 

applicable to the following entity 

(hereinafter, the ‘‘Related Person’’), as a 

person related to Petrom GmbH: Koto 

Commercio Iberica, S.L., c/ 

Valderrodrigo no. 55, Madrid, Spain, 

c/o Majid Rahmanifar, Moehlstrasse 31, 

Munich 81675, Germany. 

Section 766.23 of the Regulations 

provides that ‘‘[i]n order to prevent 

evasion, certain types of orders under 

this part may be applicable not only to 

the respondent, but also to other 

persons then or thereafter related to the 

respondent by ownership, control, 

position of responsibility, affiliation, or 

other connection in the conduct of trade 

or business. Orders that may be made 

applicable to related persons include 

those that deny or affect export 

privileges. * * *’’ 15 CFR 766.23(a). 

On June 6, 2005, an Order pursuant to 

Part 766 of the EAR imposing a twentyyear denial of export privileges against 

Petrom GmbH International Trade, 

Maria-Theresia Strasse 26, Munich 

81675, Germany (a.k.a. Petrom GmbH) 

was published in the Federal Register to 

conclude administrative charges 

pending against Petrom GmbH. See 70 

FR 32473 (June 6, 2005). Petrom GmbH 

was found to have conspired and acted 

in concert with others, known and 

unknown, to bring about acts that 

constitute violations of the Regulations 

by arranging the export from the United 

states to Iran via Germany of items 

subject to the Regulations and the 

Iranian Transactions Regulations 

without the required U.S. government 

authorizations and to have solicited on 

six separate occasions violations of the 

Regulations by ordering the shipment of 

the items at issue from the United States 

to Iran via Germany. Furthermore, in 

making each of these six unlawful 

solicitations, Petrom GmbH acted with 

knowledge that a violation of the 

Regulations was intended to occur, as 

Iran was the intended ultimate 

destination of the items. All violations 

occurred from on or about March 1999 

to on or about May 2000. 

This Order is an order that may be 

made applicable to related persons 

pursuant to section 766.23 upon 

evidence that indicates that the Related 

Person is related to Petrom GmbH by 

ownership, control, position of 

responsibility, affiliation, or other 

connection in the conduct of trade or 

business, and that it is necessary to add 

this entity to the Denial Order imposed 

against Petrom GmbH in order to avoid 

evasion of that Order. It is my belief that 

Koto is related to Petrom GmbH ‘‘by 

ownership, control, position of 

responsibility, affiliation, or other 

connection in the conduct of trade or 

business.’’ The determination is based 

on evidence establishing that Majid 

Rahmanifar is the sole owner of Petrom 

GmbH and Koto. As such, he oversees 

all activities of both companies. 

Rahmanifar holds all nominal capital 

related to Petrom GmbH, which was 

formerly located at his home. 

BIS notified the Related Person of its 

plans to take this action on November 

20, 2006 in accordance with sections 

766.5(b) and 766.23 of the Regulations. 

Specifically, BIS provided notice to the 

last known address of the Related Party 

in Spain in January 2006, which was 

returned to BIS unopened. On 

November 20, 2006, BIS then provided 

notice to Majid Rahmanifar, an 

individual in Germany believed to be 

associated with the Related Person. The 

letter requested a response within 30 

days. Rahmanifar signed for the letter, 

thereby indicating that he received it. 

No response, however, was ever 

returned to BIS by the Related Person or 

any individual associated with the 

Related Person. 

It is my belief that Koto is related to 

Petrom GmbH ‘‘by ownership, control, 

position of responsibility, affiliation, or 

other connection in the conduct of trade 

or business’’ and that it is necessary to 

make the Order imposed against Petrom 

GmbH applicable to the Related Person 

to prevent the evasion of that Order. 

It is now Therefore ordered, 

First, that having been provided 

notice and opportunity for comment as 

provided in section 766.23 of the 

Regulations, Koto Commercio Iberica, 

S.L., c/Valderrodrigo no. 55, Madrid, 

Spain and c/o Moehlstrasse 31, Munich 

81675, Germany (‘‘Related Person’’) has 

been determined to be related to Petrom 

GmbH International Trade, MariaTheresia Strasse 26, Munich 81675, 

Germany (a.k.a. Petrom GmbH) by 

affiliation, ownership, control, or 

position of responsibility in the conduct 

of trade or related services, and it has 

been deemed necessary to make the 

Order denying the export privileges of 

Petrom GmbH applicable to this Related 

Person in order to prevent evasion of the 

Order: 

Second, that the denial of export 

privileges described in the Order against 

Petrom GmbH, which was published in 

the Federal Register on June 6, 2005 at 

70 FR 32,743, shall be made applicable 

to the Related Person until its expiration 

on June 6, 2025, as follows: 

I. The Related Person, its successors 

or assigns, and when acting for or on 

behalf of the Related Person, its officers, 

representatives, agents, or employees 

(collectively, ‘‘Denied Person’’) may not 

participate, directly or indirectly, 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, or in any other activity 

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. Benefiting 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. 

II. 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 

271 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 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 29 / Tuesday, February 13, 2007 / Notices 6715 

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, that in accordance with the 

provisions of Section 766.23(c) of the 

Regulations, the Related Person may, at 

any time, make an appeal related to 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. 

Fourth, that this Order does not 

prohibit any export, reexport, or other 

transaction subject to the Regulations 

where the only items involved that are 

subject to the Regulations are the 

foreign-produced direct product of U.S.- 

origin technology. 

Fifth, that this Order shall be 

published in the Federal Register and a 

copy provided to the Related Person. 

This Order is effective upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Entered this 5th day of February, 2007. 

Darryl W. Jackson, 

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export 

Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 07–621 Filed 2–12–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DT–M 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

Action Affecting Export Privileges; 

Petrom GmbH International Trade and 

Petrom Internacional Trade, S.L., Order 

Making Order Denying Export 

Privileges of Petrom GmbH 

International Trade Applicable to 

Related Person Petrom Internacional 

Trade, S.L. 

In the Matter of: Petrom GmbH 

International Trade, Maria-Theresia 

Strasse 26, Munich 81675, Germany, 

Respondent, and Petrom Internacional 

Trade, S.L., PL. De Verin 2, 28029 

Madrid, Spain, c/o Majid Rahmanifar, 

Moehlstrasse 31, Munich 81675, 

Germany, Related Person. 

Pursuant to section 766.23 of the 

Export Administration Regulations 

(‘‘EAR’’), the Bureau of Industry and 

Security (‘‘BIS’’), U.S. Department of 

Commerce, through its Office of Export 

Enforcement (‘‘OEE’’), has requested 

that I make the Denial Order that was 

imposed against Petrom GmbH 

International Trade (‘‘Petrom GmbH’’) 

on June 6, 2005 (70 FR 32743) 

applicable to the following entity 

(hereinafter, the ‘‘Related Person’’), as a 

person related to Petrom GmbH: Petrom 

Internacional Trade, S.L., PL. De Verin 

2, 28029 Madrid, Spain, c/o Majid 

Rahmanifar, Moehlstrasse 31, Munich 

81675, Germany. 

Section 766.23 of the Regulations 

provides that ‘‘[i]n order to prevent 

evasion, certain types of orders under 

this part may be made applicable not 

only to the respondent, but also to other 

persons then or thereafter related to the 

respondent by ownership, control, 

position of responsibility, affiliation, or 

other connection in the conduct of trade 

or business. Orders that may be made 

applicable to related persons include 

those that deny or affect export 

privileges * * *.’’ 15 CFR 766.23(a). 

On June 6, 2005, an Order pursuant to 

Part 766 of the Regulations imposing a 

twenty-year denial of export privileges 

against Petrom GmbH International 

Trade, Maria-Theresia Strasse 26, 

Munich 81675, Germany (a.k.a. Petrom 

GmbH) was published in the Federal 

Register to conclude administrative 

charges pending against Petrom GmbH 

See 70 FR 32473 (June 6, 2005). Petrom 

GmbH was found to have conspired and 

acted in concert with others known and 

unknown, to bring about acts that 

constitute violations of the Regulations 

by arranging export from the United 

States to Iran via Germany of items 

subject to the Regulations and the 

Iranian Transactions Regulations 

without the required U.S. government 

authorizations and to have solicited on 

six separate occasions violations of the 

Regulations by ordering the shipment of 

the items at issue from the United States 

to Iran via Germany. Furthermore, in 

making each of these six unlawful 

solicitations, Petrom GmbH acted with 

knowledge that a violation of the 

Regulations was intended to occur, as 

Iran was the intended ultimate 

destination of the items. All violations 

occurred from on or about March 1999 

and May 2000. 

This Order is an order that may be 

made applicable to related persons 

pursuant to section 766.23 upon 

evidence that indicates that the Related 

Person is related to Petrom GmbH by 

ownership, control, position of 

responsibility, affiliation, or other 

connection in the conduct of trade or 

business, and that it is necessary to add 

this entity to the Denial Order imposed 

against Petrom GmbH in order to avoid 

evasion of that Order. It is my belief that 

Petrom, S.L. is related to Petrom GmbH 

‘‘by ownership, control, position of 

responsibility, affiliation, or other 

connection in the conduct of trade or 

business.’’ The determination is based 

on evidence establishing that Majid 

Rahmanifar is the sole owner of Petrom 

GmbH and Petrom, S.L. As such, he 

oversees all activities of both 

companies. Rahmanifar holds all 

nominal capital related to Petrom 

GmbH, which was formerly located at 

his home. 

BIS notified the Related Person of its 

plans to take this action on November 

20, 2006 in accordance with sections 

766.5(b) and 766.23 of the Regulations. 

Specifically, BIS provided notice to the 

last known address of the Related Party 

in Spain in January 2006, which was 

returned to BIS unopened. On 

November 20, 2006, BIS then provided 

notice to Majid Rahmanifar, an 

individual in Germany believed to be 

associated with the Related Person. The 

letter requested a response within 30 

days. Rahmanifar signed for the letter, 

thereby indicating that he received it. 

No response, however, was ever 

returned to BIS by the Related Person or 

any individual associated with the 

Related Person. 

Based upon the foregoing, it is my 

belief that Petrom, S.L. is related to 

Petrom GmbH ‘‘by ownership, control, 

position of responsibility, affiliation, or 

other connection in the conduct of trade 

or business’’ and that it is necessary to 

make the Order imposed against Petrom 

GmbH applicable to the Related Person 

to prevent the evasion of that Order. 

It is now therefore ordered, 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES