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, 24785-24786 [E9-12190]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Notices
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
1 The 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)).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
20:08 May 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24785
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,
E:\FR\FM\26MYN1.SGM
26MYN1
24786
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 99 / Tuesday, May 26, 2009 / Notices
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.
Fourth, that, after notice and
opportunity for comment as provided in
Section 766.23 of the Regulations, any
person, firm, corporation, or business
organization related to Ayadpoor 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.
Fifth, that the proposed charging
letter, the Settlement Agreement, and
this Order shall be made available to the
public.
Sixth, that this Order shall be served
on the Denied Person and on BIS, and
shall be published in the Federal
Register.
This Order, which constitutes the
final agency action in this matter, is
effective immediately.
Entered this 15th day of May, 2009.
Kevin Delli-Colli,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
Export Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E9–12190 Filed 5–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DT–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
20:08 May 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
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. 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 reexported to Syria and is classified as ECCN
9A991.b. No license was obtained from BIS
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’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 reexport 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.
E:\FR\FM\26MYN1.SGM
26MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24785-24786]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-12190]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 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. Sec. Sec. 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)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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,
[[Page 24786]]
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.
Fourth, that, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided
in Section 766.23 of the Regulations, any person, firm, corporation, or
business organization related to Ayadpoor 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.
Fifth, that the proposed charging letter, the Settlement Agreement,
and this Order shall be made available to the public.
Sixth, that this Order shall be served on the Denied Person and on
BIS, and shall be published in the Federal Register.
This Order, which constitutes the final agency action in this
matter, is effective immediately.
Entered this 15th day of May, 2009.
Kevin Delli-Colli,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement.
[FR Doc. E9-12190 Filed 5-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DT-P
