[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24786-24787]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12046]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security


Action Affection Export Privileges: Orion Air S.L.; Syrian Pearl 
Airlines

    In the Matter of:

Orion Air, S.L., Canada Real de Merinas, 7 Edificio 5, 3'A, 
Eissenhower Business Center, 28042 Madrid, Spain.
Ad. de las Cortes Valencianas no 37, Esc.A Puerta 45 46015 Valencia, 
Spain.
Syrian Pearl Airlines, Damascus International Airport, Damascus, 
Syria. Respondents.

Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges

    Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the Export Administration 
Regulations (``EAR''),\1\ the Bureau of Industry and Security 
(``BIS''), U.S. Department of Commerce, through its Office of Export 
Enforcement (``OEE''), has requested that I issue an Order 
temporarily denying, for a period of 180 days, the export privileges 
under the EAR of:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The EAR is currently codified at 15 CFR Parts 730-774 
(2009). The EAR are 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 July 23, 2008 (73 FR 43603 
(July 25, 2008)), has continued the Regulations in effect under the 
International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706 
(2000)) (``IEEPA'').

1. Orion Air, S.L., Canada Real de Merinas, 7 Edificio 5, 3'A, 
Eissenhower Business Center, 28042 Madrid, Spain and Ad. de las 
Cortes Valencianas no 37, Esc.A Puerta 45 46015 Valencia, Spain.
2. Syrian Pearl Airlines, Damascus International Airport, Damascus, 
Syria.

    BIS has presented evidence that on or about May 1, 2009, Orion 
Air re-exported a BAE 146-300 aircraft (tail number EC-JVO) to Syria 
and specifically to Syrian Pearl Airways without the U.S. Government 
authorization required by General Order No. 2 of Supplement 1 to 
Part 736 of the EAR. This re-export took place after Orion Air had 
been directly informed of the export licensing requirements by the 
U.S. Government, and thus had actual as well as constructive notice 
of those licensing requirements, and occurred despite assurances 
made by Orion Air that it would put the transaction on hold based on 
the U.S. Government's concerns.
    The aircraft is powered with four U.S.-origin engines and also 
contains a U.S.-origin auxiliary power unit (``APU'') and electronic 
flight instrumentation system (``EFIS''), all of which are items 
subject to the EAR. The engines and APU are classified as Export 
Control Classification Number (``ECCN'') 9A991.d and the EFIS is 
classified as ECCN 7A994. Because the aircraft contains greater than 
a 10 percent de minimis of U.S.-origin items, a fact Orion Air 
acknowledged, the aircraft is also subject to the EAR if re-exported 
to Syria and is classified as ECCN 9A991.b. No license was obtained 
from BIS for export or re-export of the U.S.-origin parts contained 
in the aircraft, nor the aircraft itself. BIS has also produced 
evidence that the re-exported aircraft bears the livery, colors and 
logos of Syrian Pearl Airlines, a national of Syria, a country group 
E:1 destination.
    Moreover, BIS argues that future violations of the EAR are 
imminent based on statements by Orion Air to the U.S. Government 
that Orion Air plans to re-export an additional BAE 146-300 
aircraft, currently located in Spain, to Syria and specifically to 
Syrian Pearl Airlines. This information is corroborated by 
publically available information in the Syrian press and contained 
in industry data bases. Based on this evidence, including Orion's 
recent re-export to Syria in violation of the EAR, it is highly 
likely that this additional aircraft will be re-exported to Syria 
contrary to U.S. export control laws.
    I find that the evidence presented by BIS demonstrates that a 
violation of the Regulations is imminent in both time and degree of 
likelihood. The conduct in this case is deliberate, significant and 
likely to occur again absent the issuance of a TDO. As such, a 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 transactions involving items subject to the 
EAR. Such a TDO is consistent with the public interest to preclude 
future violations of the EAR.
    Accordingly, I find that a TDO naming Orion Air and Syrian Pearl 
Airlines is necessary, in the public interest, to prevent an 
imminent violation of the EAR.
    This Order is being issued on an ex parte basis without a 
hearing based upon BIS's showing of an imminent violation.
    It Is Therefore Ordered:
    First, that, Orion Air, S.L., Canada Real de Merinas, 7 Edificio 
5, 3'A, Eissenhower Business Center, 28042 Madrid, Spain, and Ad. de 
las Cortes Valencianas no 37, Esc.A Puerta 4546015 Valencia, Spain; 
and Syrian Pearl Airlines, Damascus International Airport, Damascus, 
Syria. (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. Benefiting 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.

[[Page 24787]]

    Second, that no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of 
the following:
    A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of any Denied Person any 
item subject to the EAR;
    B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted 
acquisition by any 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 any 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 any Denied Person of any 
item subject to the EAR that has been exported from the United 
States;
    D. Obtain from any 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 any Denied Person, or 
service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or 
controlled by any 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 any of the Respondents 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 Section 766.24(e) of the 
EAR, the Respondents 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 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 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 upon issuance and shall remain in effect 
for 180 days.

    Entered this 7th day of May 2009.
Kevin Delli-Colli,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement.

[FR Doc. E9-12046 Filed 5-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DT-P