Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2006/09/22/06-8066/in-the-matter-of-mr-mohammad-al-mashan-jleeb-asoukh-commercial-area-alwaha-complex-first-floor-1
Timestamp: 2017-10-22 03:35:25
Document Index: 441793878

Matched Legal Cases: ['§\u2009764', '§\u2009764', 'arts 730', '§\u2009766', '§\u2009766', '§\u2009766', '§\u2009764', '§\u2009764', 'art 730']

Federal Register :: In the Matter of: Mr. Mohammad Al-Mashan, Jleeb Asoukh Commercial Area, Alwaha Complex, First Floor #1, Safat, Kuwait, and P.O. Box 5909, Safat 13060 Kuwait, Respondent; Decision and Order
55424-55427 (4 pages)
Docket No. 04-BIS-20
06-8066
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/06-8066 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/06-8066
In a charging letter filed on October 25, 2004, the Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) alleged that Respondent, Mr. Mohammad Al-Mashan (“Al-Mashan”), committed two violations of the Export Administration Regulations (“Regulations”),[1] issued under the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. app. 2401-2420 (2000)) (the “Act”).[2] Specifically, the charging letter alleged that during the period between on or about October 27, 1999 and on or about February 23, 2000, Al-Mashan engaged in conduct prohibited by the Regulations when he transferred an uncooled infrared camera, an item subject to the Regulations and controlled on the Commerce Control List for national security reasons, to an individual from the United Arab Emirates in violation of a BIS license condition. The BIS license Start Printed Page 55425that authorized the export of the camera from the United States to Al-Mashan prohibited the resale, transfer, or reexport of the camera to anyone other than the approved end-users on the license without prior authorization by the U.S. Government. In transferring the camera to a non-approved end-user without prior U.S. Government authorization, Al-Mashan committed one violation of Section 764.2(a) of the Regulations.
The charging letter further alleged that during the period on or about October 27, 1999 and on or about February 23, 2000, Al-Mashan transferred an uncooled infrared camera, an item subject to the Regulations and controlled on the Commerce Control List for national security reasons, to an individual from the United Arab Emirates with knowledge, or reasons to know, that a violation would subsequently occur in connection with the item. Specifically, at the time Al-Mashan transferred the camera, he knew, or had reasons to know that the BIS license authorizing the export of the camera from the United States to Al-Mashan prohibited the resale, transfer, or reexport of the camera by Al-Mashan to any entity other than those listed on the license as approved end-users without prior U.S. Government authorization. In transferring the camera with such knowledge, Al-Mashan committed one violation of Section 764.2(e) of the Regulations.
In accordance with Section 766.3 of the Regulations, on October 25, 2004, BIS mailed the notice of issuance of the charging letter by registered mail to Al-Mashan at his last known address. The charging letter was returned to BIS unopened. As stated in the ALJ's Recommended Decision and Order, although service of the notice of issuance of the charging letter by registered mail did not result in actual delivery of the charging letter, MAMG constructively refused delivery of the charging letter when it was served in accordance with Section 766.3 of the Regulations but returned to BIS as undeliverable. To date, Al-Mashan has not filed an answer to the charging letter with the ALJ, as required by the Regulations.
In accordance with Section 766.7 of the Regulations, and because more than thirty days had passed since delivery of the charging letter was constructively refused, BIS filed a Motion for Default Order on July 19, 2006. This Motion for Default Order recommended that Al-Mashan be denied export privileges for a period of ten years. Pursuant to Section 766.7(a) of the Regulations, “[f]ailure of the respondent to file an answer within the time provided constitutes a waiver of the respondent's right to appear,” and “on BIS's motion and without further notice to the respondent, [the ALJ] shall find the facts to be as alleged in the charging letter.”
On August 30, 2006, based on the record before him, the ALJ found Al-Mashan to be in default, and he issued a Recommended Decision and Order in which he found that Al-Mashan committed one violation of Section 764.2(a) and one violation of Section 764.2(e) of the Regulations. The ALJ recommended the penalty of denial of Al-Mashan's export privileges for a period of ten years.
First, that, for a period of ten (10) years from the date this Order is published in the Federal Register, Mohammad Al-Mashan, Jleeb Asoukh Commercial Area, Alwaha Complex, first Floor #1, Safat, Kuwait and with an address at P.O. Box 5909, Safat 13060 Kuwait (“Al-Mashan”), its successors and assigns, and when acting for or on behalf of Al-Mashan, his representatives, agents, assigns and employees (“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, or in any other activity subject to the Regulations, including, but not limited to:
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.Start Printed Page 55426
On October 24, 2004, the Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce (“BIS”), issued a changing letter initiating this administrative enforcement proceeding against Mohammad Al-Mashan (“Al-Mashan”). The charging letter alleged that Al-Mashan committed one violation of § 764.2(a) and one violation of § 764.2(e) of the Export Administration Regulations (currently codified at 15 CFR parts 730-774 (2006)) (the “Regulations”).[1] The Regulations are issued under the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. app. 2401-2420 (2000))(the “Act”).2 In accordance with § 766.7 of the Regulations, BIS has moved for the issuance of an Order of Default against Al-Mashan as Al-Mashan has failed to file an answer to the allegations in the charging letter issued by BIS within the time period required by law.
In this case, BIS served notice of issuance of the charging letter in accordance with § 766.3(b)(1) of the Regulations when it sent a copy of the charging letter by registered mail to Al-Mashan at his last known address on October 25, 2004. After the letter was returned unopened, BIS then sent a copy of the charging letter by registered mail to Al-Mashan at the only other known address for him. That letter was also returned to BIS, but postage marks indicated that the letter had remained in Kuwait for approximately one month. Finally, in one last attempt to provide actual notice to Al-Mashan, BIS mailed a copy of the charging letter to his last known address via Federal Express. The final letter was delivered.
Although there is no evidence that the letters were actually refused by Al-Mashan himself, Al-Mashan is determined to have constructively refused delivery as of the date upon which the notice that was sent out on October 25, 2004 was returned to BIS. I find that the delivery of a charging letter is deemed constructively refused when the letter has been properly served at the respondent's last known address in accordance with § 766.3 of the Regulations but has been returned to BIS as undeliverable. See In re Export Materials, Inc. (Docket No. 98-BXA-09), 64 FR 40820, (July 28, 1999) (Decision and Order); see also In re Modern Engineering Services, Ltd. (Docket No. 97-BXA-01), 65 FR 81822 (Dec. 27, 2000) (Decision and Order). BIS may legally pursue a default judgment against him because more than thirty (30) days have passed without response from Al-Mashan.
The charging letter issued by BIS included a total of two charges. Specifically, the charging letter alleged that during the period between on or about October 27, 1999 and on or about February 23, 2000, Al-Mashan engaged in conduct prohibited by the Regulations when he transferred an uncooled infrared camera, an item subject to the Regulations, to an individual from the United Arab Emirates in violation of a BIS license condition. The BIS license that authorized the export of the camera from the United States to Al-Mashan prohibited the resale, transfer, or reexport of the camera to anyone other than the approved end-users on the license without prior authorization by the U.S. Government. In transferring the camera to a non-approved end-user without prior U.S. Government authorization Al-Mashan committed one violation of § 764.2(e) of the Regulations.
The charging letter further alleged that during the period on or about October 27, 1999 and on or about February 23, 2000, Al-Mashan transferred an uncooled infrared camera, an item subject to the Regulations, to an individual transferred from the United Arab Emirates with knowledge or reason to know that a violation would subsequently occur in connection with the item. Specifically, at the time Al-Mashan transferred the camera, he knew or had reason to know that the BIS license authorizing the export of the camera from the United States to Al-Mashan prohibited the resale, transfer, or reexport of the camera by Al-Mashan to any entity other than those listed on the license as approved end-users without prior U.S. Government authorization. In transferring the camera with such knowledge, Al-Mashan committed one violation of § 764.2(e) of the Regulations.
Within thirty (30) days after receipt of this Recommended Decision and Order, the Under Secretary shall issue a written order affirming, modifying, or vacating Start Printed Page 55427the Recommended Decision and Order. See 15 CFR 766.22(c).
Done and Dated August 30, 2006.
1. The charged violations occurred from 1999 through 2000. The Regulations governing the violations at issue are found in the 1999 through 2000 versions of the Code of Federal Regulations (15 CFR part 730-774 (1999-2000)). Actions taken during this administrative enforcement proceeding are governed by the Regulations in effect at the time such actions take place.
2. From August 21, 1994 through November 12, 2000, the Act was in lapse. During that period, the President, through Executive Order 12924, which had been extended by successive Presidential Notices, the last of which was August 3, 2000 (3 CFR, 2000 Comp. 397 (2001)), continued the Regulations in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706 (2000)) (“IEEPA”). On November 13, 2000, the Act was reauthorized and it remained in effect through August 20, 20001. 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 3, 2006 (71 FR 44,551 (August 7, 2006)), has continued the Regulations in effect under IEEPA.
2. From August 21, 1994 through November 12, 2000, the Act was in lapse. During that period, the President, through Executive Order 12924, which had been extended by successive Presidential Notices, the last of which was August 3, 2000, 3 CFR, 2000 Comp. 397 (2001), continued the Regulations in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. 1701-1706 (2000) (“IEEPA”). On November 13, 2000, the Act was reauthorized and it remained in effect through August 20, 2001. 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), as extended by the Notice of August 2, 2005, 70 FR 45273 (Aug. 5, 2005), has continued the Regulations in effect under the IEEPA.
[FR Doc. 06-8066 Filed 9-21-06; 8:45 am]