24782 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Notices 

Thursday, June 25th, 2009 in Orofino, 

Idaho for a business meeting. The 

meeting is open to the public. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

business meeting on June 25th will be 

held at the Clearwater National Forest 

Supervisor’s Office in Orofino, Idaho, 

beginning at 10 a.m. (PST). Agenda 

topic will be discussion and approval of 

potential projects. A public forum will 

begin at 3:15 p.m. (PST). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laura A. Smith, Public Affairs Officer 

and Designated Federal Officer, at (208) 

983–5143. 

Dated: May 18, 2008. 

Thomas K. Reilly, 

Forest Supervisor. 

[FR Doc. E9–12038 Filed 5–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–M 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

[Docket No. 090520919–9919–01] 

RIN 0648-XP46 

National Environmental Policy Act— 

Proposed Categorical Exclusions 

AGENCY: U.S. Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice, request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Commerce (DOC) publishes this notice 

to request public comments on 

proposed categorical exclusions of 

actions that the agency has determined 

do not individually or cumulatively 

have a significant effect on the human 

environment and, thus, should be 

categorically excluded from the 

requirement to prepare an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement under 

the National Environmental Policy Act, 

42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. (NEPA). 

DATES: Comments on the proposed list 

of categorical exclusions must be 

received by June 15, 2009 to ensure 

consideration. Late comments will be 

considered to the extent practicable. 

ADDRESSES: The ‘‘Draft Department of 

Commerce Administrative Record’’ for 

the proposed categorical exclusions is 

available at: http://www.nepa.noaa.gov/ 

procedures.html under ‘‘Draft 

Department of Commerce 

Administrative Record for the proposed 

categorical exclusions’’. All comments 

should be addressed to Office of 

Program Planning and Integration, 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, Attn.: Steve 

Kokkinakis, SSMC3—Room 15723, 1315 

East-West Highway, Silver Spring, 

Maryland 20910. Comments may be sent 

by mail or hand-delivered to the abovelisted address Monday—Friday between 

the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. 

Comments may also be sent by 

electronic mail to the following internet 

address: Strategic.planning@noaa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Written requests for a hard copy of the 

‘‘Draft Department of Commerce 

Administrative Record’’ for the 

proposed categorical exclusions should 

be submitted to: Steve Kokkinakis, 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, Office of Program 

Planning & Integration, SSMC3, Room 

15723, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver 

Spring, MD 20910. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. National Environmental Policy Act 

NEPA requires that Federal agencies 

prepare environmental impact 

statements for major Federal actions that 

may ‘‘significantly affect the quality of 

the human environment.’’ NEPA 

requirements apply to any federal 

project, decision, or action, including 

grants that might have a significant 

impact on the quality of the human 

environment. NEPA also established the 

Council on Environmental Quality 

(CEQ), which issued regulations 

implementing the procedural provisions 

of NEPA. Among other considerations, 

the CEQ regulations require Federal 

agencies to adopt their own 

implementing procedures to 

supplement the Council’s regulations, 

and to establish and use ‘‘categorical 

exclusions’’ to define categories of 

actions that do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. These 

particular actions, therefore, do not 

require preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement as required by NEPA. 

DOC consists of thirteen operating 

units with diverse and often highly 

technical portfolios that—together— 

promote job creation and improved 

living standards for all Americans by 

creating an infrastructure that promotes 

economic growth, technological 

competitiveness, and sustainable 

development domestically and abroad 

for all Americans. Among its tasks are: 

1. Provide the information and tools to 

maximize U.S. competitiveness and 

enable economic growth for American 

industries, workers, and consumers; 2 

Foster science and technological 

leadership by protecting intellectual 

property, enhancing technical standards 

and advancing measurement science; 

and 3. Observe, protect and manage the 

Earth’s resources to promote 

environmental stewardship. 

DOC does not currently have any 

Department-wide categorical exclusions 

(CEs). Only two operating units within 

DOC have existing CEs—the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) and the 

Economic Development Administration 

(EDA)—but they are not available for 

use by other DOC operating units. The 

need for Department-wide CEs was 

identified during recent efforts to 

standardize policy and procedures for 

all operating unit grant and cooperative 

agreement programs. This notice targets 

that effort. DOC is requesting public 

comment on the following proposed CEs 

(as well as the administrative record 

supporting each exclusion) before 

making them available for use by all of 

its operating units. 

II. Development Process for 

Establishing Department-wide CEs 

The list of DOC CEs was compiled 

through an inter-departmental effort that 

included participation from the 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST), National 

Telecommunication and Information 

Administration (NTIA), EDA, NOAA, 

the Office of General Counsel and the 

Department’s Energy, Safety and 

Environment Division. Representatives 

from these organizations comprised the 

review panel responsible for 

determining appropriate CEs for the 

DOC. 

The CEs have been approved by the 

DOC Office of General Counsel and the 

designated Senior Agency Official for 

NEPA. 

Each proposed CE was reviewed and 

deliberated in concept, coverage, 

applicability, and wording. The review 

panel carefully examined the portion of 

the administrative record associated 

with each CE to ensure that the 

proposed exclusion fulfilled the goal of 

balancing increased administrative 

efficiency with avoidance of 

misinterpretations and misapplications 

of exclusionary language that could lead 

to non-compliance with NEPA 

requirements. Having determined that 

each proposed CE met these objectives, 

the review panel ultimately concluded 

that the actions contemplated by these 

exclusions encompassed activities that 

have no inherent potential for 

significant environmental impacts. 

The panel’s conclusions were further 

supported by the determinations made 

by other Federal agencies that had 

established CEs for activities similar in 

nature, scope and impact to those 

contemplated by DOC. The review panel 

determined from their experience in or 

on behalf of other Federal agencies that 

the characteristics of the activities in 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Notices 24783 

DOC were no different than those 

performed by other Federal agencies. 

Accordingly, through a deliberative 

process, the review panel determined 

that the proposed categorical exclusions 

encompassed activities that inherently 

did not have individual or cumulative 

significant impact on the human 

environment. 

Notwithstanding these conclusions, 

the review panel noted that all projects 

involving a major federal action will be 

subject to scoring on the ‘‘Departmental 

NEPA Checklist’’. Any project that 

obtains a ‘‘YES’’ answer in any category 

is not permitted to use the CE and will 

be required to prepare an Environmental 

Assessment (EA) or an Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS). Moreover, the 

National Historic Preservation Act 

requirements, if appropriate, still apply 

to all projects. The use of these CEs does 

not constitute a release from Section 106 

consultation requirements. 

III. Proposed Department-wide 

Categorical Exclusions 

A–1 Minor renovations and additions to 

buildings, roads, airfields, grounds, 

equipment, and other facilities that do 

not result in a change in the functional 

use of the real property (e.g. realigning 

interior spaces of an existing building, 

adding a small storage shed to an 

existing building, retrofitting for energy 

conservation, or installing a small 

antenna on an already existing antenna 

tower that does not cause the total 

height to exceed 200 feet and where the 

FCC would not require an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement for the 

installation). 

This categorical exclusion is 

supported by long-standing categorical 

exclusions and administrative records. 

In particular, the review panel 

identified the legacy categorical 

exclusions and Environmental 

Assessments from the U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, Federal Aviation 

Administration, U.S. Coast Guard, the 

U.S. Air Force, Immigration and 

Naturalization Services. Further, the 

review panel found that Environmental 

Assessments of a similar nature, scope, 

and intensity were performed at EDA, 

NOAA, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Federal Law Enforcement Training 

Center and the U.S. Border Patrol 

without significant environmental 

impacts. 

A–2 New construction upon or 

improvement of land where all of the 

following conditions are met: 

(a) The site is in a developed area 

and/or a previously disturbed site, 

(b) The structure and proposed use 

are compatible with applicable Federal, 

tribal, state, and local planning and 

zoning standards and consistent with 

federally approved state coastal 

management programs, 

(c) The proposed use will not 

substantially increase the number of 

motor vehicles at the facility or in the 

area, 

(d) The site and scale of construction 

or improvement are consistent with 

those of existing, adjacent, or nearby 

buildings, and, 

(e) The construction or improvement 

will not result in uses that exceed 

existing support infrastructure 

capacities (roads, sewer, water, parking, 

etc.). 

DOC is not a major land managing 

agency in the Federal government. 

Department activities involving new 

construction or improvements of land 

typically involve single buildings and 

supporting infrastructure in a single 

locality. Any potential for 

environmental impacts would be of a 

small scale and confined to more 

localized impacts. 

The review panel identified an 

internal Departmental EA from EDA that 

resulted in a Finding of No Significant 

Impact and legacy categorical 

exclusions and Findings of No 

Significant Impact from the U.S. Coast 

Guard, Federal Emergency Management 

Agency, U.S. Navy, and the U.S. Border 

Patrol. EDA issues construction grants 

to stimulate economic development. 

Both NOAA and the U.S. Coast Guard 

manage a large number of facilities in 

sensitive aquatic environments along all 

maritime coasts and several rivers. The 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration has a large number of 

specialty buildings used to help develop 

and promote the nation’s space 

program. Legacy categorical exclusions 

from the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency include public 

assistance programs that could be 

implemented in any part of the United 

States to assist in preparing and 

recovering from a disaster. Additionally, 

legacy categorical exclusions from the 

U.S. Navy allow minor construction 

under circumstances identical to those 

proposed under this DOC categorical 

exclusion. The U.S. Border Patrol 

brought a legacy of environmental 

assessments and findings of no 

significant impact for its land based 

activities. Based upon this extensive 

history of environmental analyses and 

the experience of its members, the 

review panel found that actions of a 

similar nature, scope, and intensity 

were performed throughout the Federal 

government without significant 

environmental impacts. 

Since new construction or 

improvements on land could involve 

numerous considerations, the review 

panel took great care to establish 

limiting provisions to avoid the 

potential for significant impacts to the 

human environment. The following 

limiting provisions were established to 

both conform to the evidence presented 

in the administrative record, to clarify 

meaning of those limiting provisions 

found in the administrative record, or to 

add to or modify limitations found in 

the record based on the experience of 

the review panel members to further 

avoid the potential for significant 

impacts to the human environment: 

(a) The site is in a developed area 

and/or a previously disturbed site, 

(b) The structure and proposed use 

are compatible with applicable Federal, 

tribal, state, and local planning and 

zoning standards and consistent with 

federally approved state coastal 

management programs (pursuant to the 

Coastal Zone Management Act); 

(c) The proposed use will not 

substantially increase the number of 

motor vehicles at the facility or in the 

area; 

(d) The site and scale of construction 

or improvement are consistent with 

those of existing, adjacent, or nearby 

buildings; and 

(e) The construction or improvement 

will not result in uses that exceed 

existing support infrastructure 

capacities (roads, sewer, water, parking, 

etc.) 

As a result of all of these limitations, 

the review panel determined that this 

categorical exclusion contemplated 

activities that would inherently have no 

potential for significant impacts to the 

human environment. 

The review panel defined this 

categorical exclusion to be sufficiently 

related to actions that may involve one 

or more extraordinary circumstances. To 

ensure that only those actions having 

negligible impacts on the human 

environment are contemplated by this 

categorical exclusion, the review panel 

proposed that a Record of 

Environmental Consideration be 

prepared to document the determination 

whether the action is either 

appropriately categorically excluded or 

whether it requires further analysis 

through an EA or EIS process. 

A–3 Software development, data 

analysis, or testing, including but not 

limited to computer modeling in 

existing facilities. 

24784 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Notices 

Research, development, testing, and 

evaluation activities or laboratory 

operations contemplated by this 

categorical exclusion are those that 

would be undertaken within facilities 

that are operated under stringent 

requirements designed to protect the 

quality of the human environment. As 

exemplified by documents in the 

administrative record, these 

requirements include strict operating 

procedures governing laboratory 

operations and personnel 

responsibilities. Because of these 

controls, these types of laboratory 

activities have no potential for 

significant environmental impacts. 

Further, the Panel found that actions of 

a similar nature, scope, and intensity 

were performed in laboratories 

throughout the Federal government. 

This CE is supported by long-standing 

categorical exclusions and 

administrative records. In particular, the 

review panel identified legacy 

categorical exclusions from Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, U.S. 

Department of Energy, the U.S. 

Department of Interior, and the U.S. 

Navy. Additionally, the review panel 

identified EAs that resulted in Findings 

of No Significant Impact from NOAA 

and the National Aeronautics and 

Science Administration. 

A–4 Siting/construction/operation of 

microwave/radio communication towers 

less than 200 feet in height without guy 

wires on previously disturbed ground. 

DOC, through NTIA is involved in 

issuing grants for siting, construction, 

operation, and maintenance, 

communications systems and similar 

electronic equipment. These types of 

electronic equipment are essential to 

support the nationwide 

telecommunications network. 

This CE is supported by Findings of 

No Significant Impact on the recently 

completed Programmatic EA for NTIA 

and on EAs from the U.S. Department of 

Energy. Furthermore, this CE is 

supported by long-standing categorical 

exclusions from the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency. 

A–5 Retrofit/upgrade existing 

microwave/radio communication towers 

that do not require ground disturbance. 

This CE is supported by the recently 

completed Programmatic EA for NTIA 

with a Finding of No Significant Impact 

and an EA for the National Aeronautics 

and Space Administration, also with a 

Finding of No Significant Impact. 

A–6 Adding fiber optic cable to 

transmission structures or burying fiber 

optic cable in existing transmission line 

rights-of-way. 

This CE is supported by a longstanding categorical exclusion with the 

Department of Energy and Findings of 

No Significant Impact on Environmental 

Assessments prepared for the Bureau of 

Land Management, Vandenberg Air 

Force Base, the US Park Service, and the 

Tennessee Valley Authority. 

A–7 Acquisition, installation, operation, 

and removal of communications 

systems, data processing equipment, 

and similar electronic equipment. 

This CE is supported by a legacy 

categorical exclusion from the U.S. 

Department of Energy and Findings of 

No Significant Impact on several 

Description Memorandums from the 

U.S. Department of Energy. 

A–8 Planning activities and classroombased training and classroom-based 

exercises using existing conference 

rooms and training facilities. 

This CE is supported by a longstanding categorical exclusion with the 

Department of Energy and a Finding of 

No Significant Impact on an 

Environmental Assessment from the 

recently completed Programmatic EA 

for NTIA. 

A–9 Purchase of mobile and portable 

equipment and infrastructure which is 

stored in previously existing structures 

or facilities. 

This CE is supported by a longstanding categorical exclusion with the 

U.S. Coast Guard and a Finding of No 

Significant Impact on an EA from the 

recently completed Programmatic EA 

for NTIA. 

A–10 Siting, construction (or 

modification), and operation of support 

buildings and support structures 

(including, but not limited to, trailers 

and prefabricated buildings) within or 

contiguous to an already developed area 

(where active utilities and currently 

used roads are readily accessible). 

This CE is supported by a longstanding categorical exclusion with the 

U.S. Department of Energy and two 

Memorandum for File for relevant 

projects and their supporting 

documentation that indicated 

insignificant impacts, also with the U.S. 

Department of Energy. 

A–11 Personnel, fiscal, management, 

and administrative activities, such as 

recruiting, processing, paying, 

recordkeeping, resource management, 

budgeting, personnel actions, and travel. 

The actions contemplated by this CE 

are a variety of administrative activities 

that have no inherent potential for 

significant environmental impacts. This 

CE is supported by long-standing CEs 

from the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Navy, 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army, and 

the U.S. Department of the Interior. 

Further, the Panel found that actions of 

a similar nature, scope, and intensity 

were performed throughout the Federal 

government without significant 

environmental impacts. 

The public is invited to submit 

comments on both the ‘‘Draft 

Department of Commerce 

Administrative Record’’ for the 

proposed CEs, and the CEs listed above. 

See the ADDRESSES for instructions on 

submitting comments. The ‘‘Draft 

Department of Commerce 

Administrative Record’’ for the 

proposed CEs is available at http:// 

www.nepa.noaa.gov/procedures.html 

under ‘‘Draft Department of Commerce 

Administrative Record for the proposed 

categorical exclusions’’. In addition, 

hard copies may be obtained by 

contacting Steve Kokkinakis, as 

provided above. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This notice requests public comments 

on proposed Department-wide CEs and 

does not contain collection-ofinformation requirements subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

Notwithstanding any other provision of 

law, no person is required to, nor shall 

a person be subject to a penalty for 

failure to comply with, a collection of 

information subject to the requirements 

of the PRA unless that collection of 

information displays a currently valid 

OMB control number. 

A Paperwork package for the 

associated ‘‘Departmental NEPA 

Checklist’’ referenced in Section II of 

the Supplementary Information has 

been submitted to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review and approval. A Notice of Action 

in the Federal Register at the conclusion 

of OMB’s review of the information 

collection. 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Notices 24785 

1The Regulations are currently codified in the 

Code of Federal Regulations at 15 CFR Parts 730– 

774 (2009). The violations alleged occurred 2004. 

The Regulations governing the allegation at issue 

are found in the 2004 version of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (15 CFR Parts 730–774 (2004)). The 

2009 Regulations govern the procedural aspects of 

the case. 

2 50 U.S.C. app. §§ 2401–2420 (2000). Since 

August 21, 2001, has been in lapse and the 

President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 

17, 2001 (3 CFR 2001 Comp. p. 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)), continues the 

Regulations in effect under the International 

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

1706 (2000)). 

Dated: May 21, 2009. 

Paul N. Doremus, 

NOAA NEPA Coordinator, Office of Program 

Planning and Integration. 

[FR Doc. E9–12295 Filed 5–21–09; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 3510–12–S 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

Action Affecting Export Privileges; 

Matthew Ayadpoor In the Matter of: 

Matthew Ayadpoor, 9700 Mayview 

Court, Oklahoma City, OK, 73159; 

Respondent; Order Relating To 

Matthew Ayadpoor 

The Bureau of Industry and Security, 

U.S. Department of Commerce (‘‘BIS’’) 

has notified Matthew Ayadpoor 

(‘‘Ayadpoor’’), of its intention to initiate 

an administrative proceeding against 

Ayadpoor pursuant to Section 766.3 of 

the Export Administration Regulations 

(the ‘‘Regulations’’),1 and Section 13(c) 

of the Export Administration Act of 

1979, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’),2 through 

the issuance of a proposed charging 

letter to Ayadpoor that alleged that he 

committed four violations of the 

Regulations. Specifically, these charges 

are: 

Charge 1 15 CFR 764.2(c)— 

Solicitation and Attempt 

On or about June 2, 2004, Ayadpoor 

engaged in conduct prohibited by the 

Regulations by attempting to have 

piston-type differential pressure gauges, 

which is subject to the Regulations and 

classified as EAR99, exported to Iran 

without the required U.S. Government 

authorization. Specifically, Ayadpoor 

ordered a freight forwarding company to 

export the gauges to Iran via the United 

Arab Emirates (‘‘UAE’’). Pursuant to 

Section 560.204 of the Iranian 

Transactions Regulations maintained by 

the Department of the Treasury’s Office 

of Foreign Assets Control (‘‘OFAC’’), an 

export to a third country intended for 

transshipment to Iran is a transaction 

that requires OFAC authorization. 

Pursuant to Section 746.7 of the 

Regulations, no person may engage in 

the exportation of an item subject to 

both the Regulations and the Iranian 

Transactions Regulations without 

authorization from OFAC. No OFAC 

authorization was obtained for the 

export described herein. In engaging in 

the activity described herein, Ayadpoor 

committed one violation of Section 

764.2(c) of the Regulations. 

Charge 2 15 CFR 764.2(e)—Acting 

with Knowledge of a Violation 

In connection with charge one above, 

on or about June 4, 2004, Ayadpoor 

violated the Regulations by ordering the 

export of items subject to the 

Regulations from the United States with 

knowledge that a violation of the 

Regulations would occur in connection 

with the item. Specifically, Ayadpoor 

attempted to export items subject to the 

Regulations and the Iranian 

Transactions Regulations, with 

knowledge or reason to know that the 

items would be exported to Iran via the 

UAE without the required U.S. 

Government authorization. Ayadpoor 

had knowledge that U.S. products could 

not be sold to sanctioned countries, 

including Iran, a fact he acknowledged 

to Office of Export Enforcement (‘‘OEE’’) 

special agents. Additionally, Ayadpoor 

negotiated for the items with persons in 

Iran, knowing that the items would be 

shipped there via the UAE. In so doing, 

Ayadpoor committed one violation of 

Section 764.2(e) of the Regulations. 

Charge 3 15 CFR 764.2(g)— 

Misrepresentation and Concealment of 

Facts 

On or about September 8, 2004, 

Ayadpoor made a false and/or 

misleading statement to OEE special 

agents in the course of an investigation 

subject to the Regulations. Specifically, 

Ayadpoor told the agents that he had 

not participated in any export 

transactions with the UAE company 

associated with the June 2004 

transaction since that transaction. This 

was a false statement in that on or about 

August 31, 2004, Ayadpoor ordered that 

a second shipment of gauges be 

exported to the same UAE company. In 

so doing, Ayadpoor committed one 

violation of Section 764.2(g) of the 

Regulations. 

Charge 4 15 CFR 764.2(i)—Failure To 

Comply With Recordkeeping 

Requirements 

On or about September 8, 2004, 

Ayadpoor failed to comply with the 

recordkeeping requirements set forth in 

Section 762.2 of the Regulations. 

Specifically, Ayadpoor failed to retain 

export control documents, including 

waybills, and/or other pertinent 

documents in connection with its export 

of gauges, described in Charge 3, above. 

In so doing, Ayadpoor committed one 

violation of Section 764.2(i) of the 

Regulations. 

Whereas, BIS and Ayadpoor have 

entered into a Settlement Agreement 

pursuant to Section 766.18(a) of the 

Regulations whereby they agreed to 

settle this matter in accordance with the 

terms and conditions set forth therein, 

and 

Whereas, I have approved of the terms 

of such Settlement Agreement; It is 

therefore ordered: 

First, Ayadpoor shall be assessed a 

civil penalty in the amount of $25,000, 

the payment of which shall be 

suspended for a period of one (1) year 

from the date of entry of the Order, and 

thereafter shall be waived, provided that 

during the period of suspension, 

Ayadpoor has committed no violation of 

the Act, or any regulation, order, or 

license issued thereunder. 

Second, that for a period of one (1) 

year from the date of entry of the Order, 

Ayadpoor, his representatives, assigns 

or agents (‘‘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. 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. 

Third, that 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,