Bureau of Political-Military Affairs; Statutory Debarment Under the Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, 42949-42951 [E9-20443]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 25, 2009 / Notices
should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly.
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission
• Written comments may be mailed to
the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, Three Lafayette Center,
1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC
20581, attention Office of the
Secretariat; transmitted by facsimile to
the CFTC at (202) 418–5521; or
transmitted electronically to
secretary@cftc.gov. Reference should be
made to ‘‘Harmonization of Regulation.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara
Gillis Hawkins, Special Counsel, at
(202) 551–5523, or Leigh W. Duffy,
Attorney-Adviser, at (202) 551–5928,
Division of Trading and Markets,
Securities and Exchange Commission,
100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549; or Sauntia Warfield, (202) 418–
5084, at the CFTC.
By the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
Dated: August 19, 2009.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
By the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
Dated: August 19, 2009.
David A. Stawick,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–20356 Filed 8–24–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P, 6351–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES
Sunshine Act Meeting.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to
the provisions of the Government in the
Sunshine Act, Public Law 94–409, that
the Securities and Exchange
Commission will hold a Closed Meeting
on Thursday, August 27, 2009 at 2 p.m.
Commissioners, Counsel to the
Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries
will attend the Closed Meeting. Certain
staff members who have an interest in
the matters also may be present.
The General Counsel of the
Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or
more of the exemptions set forth in 5
U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), 9(B) and (10)
and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii)
and (10), permit consideration of the
scheduled matters at the Closed
Meeting.
Commissioner Casey, as duty officer,
voted to consider the items listed for the
Closed Meeting in a closed session.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:52 Aug 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
The subject matter of the Closed
Meeting scheduled for Thursday,
August 27, 2009 will be:
Institution and settlement of
injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of
administrative proceedings; and
Other matters relating to enforcement
proceedings.
At times, changes in Commission
priorities require alterations in the
scheduling of meeting items.
For further information and to
ascertain what, if any, matters have been
added, deleted or postponed, please
contact: The Office of the Secretary at
(202) 551–5400.
Dated: August 20, 2009.
Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–20506 Filed 8–21–09; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 6737]
Bureau of Political-Military Affairs;
Statutory Debarment Under the Arms
Export Control Act and the
International Traffic in Arms
Regulations
ACTION:
Notice.
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
the Department of State has imposed
statutory debarment pursuant to
§ 127.7(c) of the International Traffic in
Arms Regulations (‘‘ITAR’’) (22 CFR
Parts 120 to 130) on persons convicted
of violating, attempting to violate or
conspiring to violate Section 38 of the
Arms Export Control Act, as amended,
(‘‘AECA’’) (22 U.S.C. 2778).
DATES: Effective Date: Date of conviction
as specified for each person.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Daniel Buzby, Acting Director, Office of
Defense Trade Controls Compliance,
Bureau of Political-Military Affairs,
Department of State (202) 663–2980.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
38(g)(4) of the AECA, 22 U.S.C.
2778(g)(4), prohibits the Department of
State from issuing licenses or other
approvals for the export of defense
articles or defense services where the
applicant, or any party to the export, has
been convicted of violating certain
statutes, including the AECA. In
implementing this provision, Section
127.7 of the ITAR provides for
‘‘statutory debarment’’ of any person
who has been convicted of violating or
conspiring to violate the AECA. Persons
subject to statutory debarment are
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42949
prohibited from participating directly or
indirectly in the export of defense
articles, including technical data, or in
the furnishing of defense services for
which a license or other approval is
required.
Statutory debarment is based solely
upon conviction in a criminal
proceeding, conducted by a United
States Court, and as such the
administrative debarment procedures
outlined in Part 128 of the ITAR are not
applicable.
The period for debarment will be
determined by the Assistant Secretary
for Political-Military Affairs based on
the underlying nature of the violations,
but will generally be for three years
from the date of conviction. At the end
of the debarment period, export
privileges may be reinstated only at the
request of the debarred person followed
by the necessary interagency
consultations, after a thorough review of
the circumstances surrounding the
conviction, and a finding that
appropriate steps have been taken to
mitigate any law enforcement concerns,
as required by Section 38(g)(4) of the
AECA. Unless export privileges are
reinstated, however, the person remains
debarred.
Department of State policy permits
debarred persons to apply to the
Director, Office of Defense Trade
Controls Compliance, for reinstatement
beginning one year after the date of the
debarment. Any decision to grant
reinstatement can be made only after the
statutory requirements under Section
38(g) (4) of the AECA have been
satisfied.
Exceptions, also known as transaction
exceptions, may be made to this
debarment determination on a case-bycase basis at the discretion of the
Assistant Secretary of State for PoliticalMilitary Affairs, after consulting with
the appropriate U.S. agencies. However,
such an exception would be granted
only after a full review of all
circumstances, paying particular
attention to the following factors:
whether an exception is warranted by
overriding U.S. foreign policy or
national security interests; whether an
exception would further law
enforcement concerns that are
consistent with the foreign policy or
national security interests of the United
States; or whether other compelling
circumstances exist that are consistent
with the foreign policy or national
security interests of the United States,
and that do not conflict with law
enforcement concerns. Even if
exceptions are granted, the debarment
continues until subsequent
reinstatement.
E:\FR\FM\25AUN1.SGM
25AUN1
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES
42950
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 25, 2009 / Notices
Pursuant to Section 38(g)(4) of the
AECA and Section 127.7(c) of the ITAR,
the following persons are statutorily
debarred as of the date of their AECA
conviction:
(1) Miguel Alonso Apodaca, November
6, 2007, U.S. District Court, District
of Arizona, Case # CR 07–00296–
002–TUC–DCB (JCG).
(2) Cedric Lloyd Manuel, November 6,
2007, U.S. District Court, District of
Arizona, Case # CR 07–00296–001–
TUC–DCB (JCG).
(3) Joaquin Rodriguez-Diaz, February 6,
2006, U.S. District Court, District of
Arizona, Case # 2:05–cr–00965–
ROS–1.
(4) Chi Mak, March 26, 2008, U.S.
District Court, Central District of
California, Case # 8:05–cr–00293–
CJC.
(5) Tai Wang Mak, April 21, 2008, U.S.
District Court, Central District of
California, Case # 8:05–cr–00293–
CJC.
(6) David Mehrdad Talebi, November
26, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of California, Case
# 05CR2213–LAB.
(7) Ali Danny Talebi, July 7, 2008, U.S.
District Court, Southern District of
California, Case # 05CR2213–LAB.
(8) Murray Rinzler, November 30, 2007,
U.S. District Court, District of
Connecticut, Case # 3:07cr61
(AHN).
(9) World Electronics, Inc., November
30, 2007, U.S. District Court,
District of Connecticut, Case #
3:07cr61 (AHN).
(10) Leonard Allen Schenk, December
11, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Northern District of Florida, Case #
3:07cr90–001LAC.
(11) Jerri C. Stringer, December 13,
2007, U.S. District Court, Northern
District of Florida, Case # 3:07cr90–
002LAC.
(12) Lance Michael Brooks, May 27,
2009, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Florida, Case # 0:07–
60265–CR–1 and 0:08–60154–CR–1.
(13) Shahrazad Mir Gholikhan, March 6,
2009, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Florida, Case # 0:05–
60238–CR–COHN (S) (S) (S).
(14) Hassan Saied Keshari, May 13,
2009, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Florida, Case # 1:08–
20612–CR–SEITZ–01.
(15) Bertrand Lalsingh, February 11,
2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Florida, Case # 07–
60273–CR–MARRA.
(16) Osmar D. Mejia, August 2, 2008,
U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Florida, Case #
0:08CR60028–001.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:52 Aug 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
(17) Joseph Piquet, May 18, 2009, U.S.
District Court, Southern District of
Florida, Case # 2:08–14031–CR–
MARTINEZ–1.
(18) Rigel Optics, Inc., May 12, 2009,
U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Iowa, Case # 4:08–cr–
00086–001.
(19) Riad Skaff, July 14, 2008, U.S.
District Court, Northern District of
Illinois, Case # 07–CR–41–1.
(20) Haji Subandi, December 19, 2007,
U.S. District Court, District of
Maryland, Case # CCB–06–0439.
(21) Green Supply, Inc., January 22,
2008, U.S. District Court, Eastern
District of Missouri, Case #
4:07CR659 CEJ.
(22) Jyimin Horng, January 17, 2008,
U.S. District Court, District of New
Jersey, Case # 1:05–CR–00612–02.
(23) Octavio Rodriguez-Gutierrez,
October 29, 2008, U.S. District
Court, District of New Mexico, Case
# 2:08CR01600–001JEC.
(24) Raul Rodriguez-Gutierrez, October
27, 2008, U.S. District Court,
District of New Mexico, Case #
2:08CR01746–001JEC.
(25) David M. Janowski, January 26,
2009, U.S. District Court, Northern
District of Ohio, Case # 1:08CR389–
01.
(26) Master A. Ohene Kwesi Yeboah,
April 20, 2009, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Ohio, Case #
2:08–CR–138.
(27) Ken Miller, August 14, 2008, U.S.
District Court, Eastern District of
Pennsylvania, Case # 07–452.
(28) Euro Optics, Ltd., July 31, 2008,
U.S. District Court, Middle District
of Pennsylvania, Case # 4:07–CR–
0407.
(29) Akanonu Fabian Mgbobila, October
4, 2007, U.S. District Court, Middle
District of Tennessee, Case # 3:06–
00126.
(30) Guillermo Aguilar-Medina, October
23, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case #
1:07CR00279–002.
(31) Luis Miguel Rodriguez-Vazques,
October 23, 2007, U.S. District
Court, Southern District of Texas,
Case # 1:07CR00279–001.
(32) Erik Arguelles, March 18, 2008,
U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case #
1:07CR00797–001.
(33) Jose Cipriano-Sanchez, April 13,
2009, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case #
7:07CR01274–001.
(34) Jorge Alberto Cervantes-Garcia,
March 27, 2008, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case #
1:07CR00857–001.
(35) Rogelio Esparza-Juarez, December
31, 2008, U.S. District Court,
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Southern District of Texas, Case #
7:08CR01042–001.
(36) Francisco Gaona-Doval, October 27,
2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case #
7:07CR00906–001.
(37) Roberto Garza-Lopez, March 14,
2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case #
7:07CR00671–001.
(38) Juan Lopez-Martinez, March 14,
2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case #
7:07CR00671–002.
(39) Luis Martin Velasquez-Ibarra,
March 14, 2008, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case #
7:07CR00671–003.
(40) Reneberto Velasquez-Velez, March
14, 2008, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case #
7:07CR00671–004.
(41) Jose Fernando Licona-Cruz, April 4,
2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case #
7:07CR01128–001.
(42) Gregorio Magallan, Jr., February 2,
2009, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case #
7:08CR00892–002.
(43) Rogelio Ramos-Reyes, January 21,
2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case #
7:07CR00916–001.
(44) Lorena Beatriz Salas, February 4,
2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case #
1:07CR00753–001.
(45) Victor Hugo Salazar-Mata, February
10, 2009, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case #
7:07CR00986–001.
(46) Greg Anthony Belcik, December 10,
2007, U.S. District Court, Western
District of Texas, Case # DR–07–
CR–007(1)–AML.
(47) Robert Frederick Gibson, August
24, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Western District of Texas, Case #
EP–07–CR–249–DB(2).
(48) Robert Thomas Caldwell, November
9, 2007, U.S. District Court, Western
District of Texas, Case # EP–07–CR–
249–DB(3).
(49) Abraham Trujillo, November 12,
2008, U.S. District Court, District of
Utah, Case # DUTX 2:07–cr–00714–
001.
(50) David John Waye, November 12,
2008, U.S. District Court, District of
Utah, Case # DUTX 2:07–cr–00714–
002.
(51) Shu Quan-Sheng, April 10, 2009,
U.S. District Court, Eastern District
of Virginia, Case # 2:08cr194.
(52) Jason Dean Smith, June 8, 2007,
U.S. District Court, Western District
of Washington, Case # CR05–
00390RSM–001.
E:\FR\FM\25AUN1.SGM
25AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 163 / Tuesday, August 25, 2009 / Notices
(53) Kendall S. George, July 13, 2007,
U.S. District Court, Western District
of Washington, Case # CR06–
0205RSM.
As noted above, at the end of the threeyear period following the date of
conviction, the above named persons/
entities remain debarred unless export
privileges are reinstated.
Debarred persons are generally
ineligible to participate in activity
regulated under the ITAR (see, e.g.,
sections 120.1(c) and (d), and 127.11(a)).
Also, under Section 127.1(c) of the
ITAR, any person who has knowledge
that another person is subject to
debarment or is otherwise ineligible
may not, without disclosure to and
written approval from the Directorate of
Defense Trade Controls, participate,
directly or indirectly, in any export in
which such ineligible person may
benefit therefrom or have a direct or
indirect interest therein.
This notice is provided for purposes
of making the public aware that the
persons listed above are prohibited from
participating directly or indirectly in
activities regulated by the ITAR,
including any brokering activities and
in any export from or temporary import
into the United States of defense
articles, related technical data, or
defense services in all situations
covered by the ITAR. Specific case
information may be obtained from the
Office of the Clerk for the U.S. District
Courts mentioned above and by citing
the court case number where provided.
Dated: August 17, 2009.
Andrew J. Shapiro,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of PoliticalMilitary Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9–20443 Filed 8–24–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–25–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration
[Docket No. FMCSA–2009–0183]
pwalker on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Extension of a CurrentlyApproved Information Collection
Request: Training Certification for
Entry-Level Commercial Motor Vehicle
(CMV) Operators
AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
FMCSA announces its plan to submit to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
22:52 Aug 24, 2009
Jkt 217001
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for approval its request to extend
a currently-approved information
collection request (ICR) entitled,
‘‘Training Certification for Entry-level
CMV Operators,’’ that relates to the
training requirements for drivers
applying for a commercial driver’s
license (CDL). There is no change from
the burden estimate approved by OMB
for this ICR on March 11, 2008. On May
28, 2009, FMCSA published a Federal
Register notice (74 FR 25607) allowing
for a 60-day comment period on the
extension of this ICR. The Agency did
not receive any comments in response
to this notice.
DATES: Please send your comments by
September 24, 2009. OMB must receive
your comments by this date in order to
act quickly on the ICR.
ADDRESSES: All comments should
reference Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) Docket Number
FMCSA–2009–0183. Interested persons
are invited to submit written comments
on the proposed information collection
to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget. Comments
should be addressed to the attention of
the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/Office of the Secretary,
and sent via electronic mail to
oira_submission@omb.eop.gov, faxed to
(202) 395–6974, or mailed to the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget,
Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Thomas Yager, Chief, Driver and Carrier
Operations Division, FMCSA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC
20590. Telephone: (202) 366–4325. Email: MCPSD@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Training Certification for EntryLevel Commercial Motor Vehicle
Operators.
OMB Control Number: 2126–0028.
Type of Request: Extension of a
currently-approved information
collection request.
Respondents: Entry-level CMV
drivers.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
45,611.
Estimated Time per Response: 10
minutes.
Expiration Date: September 30, 2009.
Frequency of Response: On occasion.
Estimated Total Annual Burden:
7,602 hours. FMCSA estimates that an
entry-level driver requires
approximately 10 minutes to complete
the tasks necessary to comply with the
regulation. Those tasks are:
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42951
photocopying the training certificate,
giving the photocopy to the motor
carrier employer, and placing the
original of the certificate in a personal
file. Therefore, the annual burden for all
entry-level drivers of CMVs is 7,602
hours [45,611 respondents × 10
minutes/60 minutes to complete a
response = 7,601.8 hours (rounded to
7,602 hours)].
Definitions: ‘‘Commercial Motor
Vehicle (CMV)’’: A motor vehicle
operated in commerce and having a
gross vehicle weight rating of 26,001
pounds or more, regardless of actual
weight, or designed to transport 16 or
more passengers, or used to transport
placardable and dangerous hazardous
materials (49 CFR 383.5). The term
‘‘CMV’’ is limited to this definition in
this document; the term ‘‘CDL driver’’ is
used because the operators of these
CMVs are required to have a valid
commercial driver’s license (CDL). This
rule currently applies solely to ‘‘entrylevel’’ CDL drivers, i.e. those who have
less than 1 year of experience operating
a CMV in interstate commerce (49 CFR
380.502(b)).
Background:
The Motor Carrier Act of 1935
provides that ‘‘The Secretary of
Transportation may prescribe
requirements for (1) qualifications and
maximum hours of service of employees
of, and safety of operation and
equipment of, a motor carrier; and (2)
qualification and maximum hours of
service of employees of, and standards
of equipment of, a motor private carrier,
when needed to promote safety of
operation’’ [49 U.S.C. 3502(b)]. This Act
is applicable to interstate commerce and
not intrastate commerce. The
Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of
1986 (CMVSA) created the CDL program
and defined ‘‘commerce’’ in such as way
as to include interstate and intrastate
operations (49 U.S.C. 31302(2),(4)].
Section 4007(a)(2) of the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of
1991 (ISTEA) (Pub. L. 102–240,
December 18, 1991) directed the FHWA
to ‘‘commence a rulemaking proceeding
on the need to require training of all
entry-level drivers of CMVs.’’ The
Congress did not explicitly provide that
ISTEA extended to operations in
intrastate commerce. In view of the
nature of the concurrent authority
created by the CMVSA and the Motor
Carrier Act of 1935, and the absence of
direction from the Congress in ISTEA,
FMCSA has decided that entry-level
training requirements should be
confined to those drivers applying for a
CDL who intend to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.
E:\FR\FM\25AUN1.SGM
25AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 25, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42949-42951]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20443]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 6737]
Bureau of Political-Military Affairs; Statutory Debarment Under
the Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms
Regulations
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Department of State has
imposed statutory debarment pursuant to Sec. 127.7(c) of the
International Traffic in Arms Regulations (``ITAR'') (22 CFR Parts 120
to 130) on persons convicted of violating, attempting to violate or
conspiring to violate Section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act, as
amended, (``AECA'') (22 U.S.C. 2778).
DATES: Effective Date: Date of conviction as specified for each person.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Buzby, Acting Director, Office
of Defense Trade Controls Compliance, Bureau of Political-Military
Affairs, Department of State (202) 663-2980.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 38(g)(4) of the AECA, 22 U.S.C.
2778(g)(4), prohibits the Department of State from issuing licenses or
other approvals for the export of defense articles or defense services
where the applicant, or any party to the export, has been convicted of
violating certain statutes, including the AECA. In implementing this
provision, Section 127.7 of the ITAR provides for ``statutory
debarment'' of any person who has been convicted of violating or
conspiring to violate the AECA. Persons subject to statutory debarment
are prohibited from participating directly or indirectly in the export
of defense articles, including technical data, or in the furnishing of
defense services for which a license or other approval is required.
Statutory debarment is based solely upon conviction in a criminal
proceeding, conducted by a United States Court, and as such the
administrative debarment procedures outlined in Part 128 of the ITAR
are not applicable.
The period for debarment will be determined by the Assistant
Secretary for Political-Military Affairs based on the underlying nature
of the violations, but will generally be for three years from the date
of conviction. At the end of the debarment period, export privileges
may be reinstated only at the request of the debarred person followed
by the necessary interagency consultations, after a thorough review of
the circumstances surrounding the conviction, and a finding that
appropriate steps have been taken to mitigate any law enforcement
concerns, as required by Section 38(g)(4) of the AECA. Unless export
privileges are reinstated, however, the person remains debarred.
Department of State policy permits debarred persons to apply to the
Director, Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance, for
reinstatement beginning one year after the date of the debarment. Any
decision to grant reinstatement can be made only after the statutory
requirements under Section 38(g) (4) of the AECA have been satisfied.
Exceptions, also known as transaction exceptions, may be made to
this debarment determination on a case-by-case basis at the discretion
of the Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs,
after consulting with the appropriate U.S. agencies. However, such an
exception would be granted only after a full review of all
circumstances, paying particular attention to the following factors:
whether an exception is warranted by overriding U.S. foreign policy or
national security interests; whether an exception would further law
enforcement concerns that are consistent with the foreign policy or
national security interests of the United States; or whether other
compelling circumstances exist that are consistent with the foreign
policy or national security interests of the United States, and that do
not conflict with law enforcement concerns. Even if exceptions are
granted, the debarment continues until subsequent reinstatement.
[[Page 42950]]
Pursuant to Section 38(g)(4) of the AECA and Section 127.7(c) of
the ITAR, the following persons are statutorily debarred as of the date
of their AECA conviction:
(1) Miguel Alonso Apodaca, November 6, 2007, U.S. District Court,
District of Arizona, Case CR 07-00296-002-TUC-DCB (JCG).
(2) Cedric Lloyd Manuel, November 6, 2007, U.S. District Court,
District of Arizona, Case CR 07-00296-001-TUC-DCB (JCG).
(3) Joaquin Rodriguez-Diaz, February 6, 2006, U.S. District Court,
District of Arizona, Case 2:05-cr-00965-ROS-1.
(4) Chi Mak, March 26, 2008, U.S. District Court, Central District of
California, Case 8:05-cr-00293-CJC.
(5) Tai Wang Mak, April 21, 2008, U.S. District Court, Central District
of California, Case 8:05-cr-00293-CJC.
(6) David Mehrdad Talebi, November 26, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of California, Case 05CR2213-LAB.
(7) Ali Danny Talebi, July 7, 2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of California, Case 05CR2213-LAB.
(8) Murray Rinzler, November 30, 2007, U.S. District Court, District of
Connecticut, Case 3:07cr61 (AHN).
(9) World Electronics, Inc., November 30, 2007, U.S. District Court,
District of Connecticut, Case 3:07cr61 (AHN).
(10) Leonard Allen Schenk, December 11, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Northern District of Florida, Case 3:07cr90-001LAC.
(11) Jerri C. Stringer, December 13, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Northern District of Florida, Case 3:07cr90-002LAC.
(12) Lance Michael Brooks, May 27, 2009, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Florida, Case 0:07-60265-CR-1 and 0:08-60154-CR-
1.
(13) Shahrazad Mir Gholikhan, March 6, 2009, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Florida, Case 0:05-60238-CR-COHN (S) (S)
(S).
(14) Hassan Saied Keshari, May 13, 2009, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Florida, Case 1:08-20612-CR-SEITZ-01.
(15) Bertrand Lalsingh, February 11, 2008, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Florida, Case 07-60273-CR-MARRA.
(16) Osmar D. Mejia, August 2, 2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Florida, Case 0:08CR60028-001.
(17) Joseph Piquet, May 18, 2009, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Florida, Case 2:08-14031-CR-MARTINEZ-1.
(18) Rigel Optics, Inc., May 12, 2009, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Iowa, Case 4:08-cr-00086-001.
(19) Riad Skaff, July 14, 2008, U.S. District Court, Northern District
of Illinois, Case 07-CR-41-1.
(20) Haji Subandi, December 19, 2007, U.S. District Court, District of
Maryland, Case CCB-06-0439.
(21) Green Supply, Inc., January 22, 2008, U.S. District Court, Eastern
District of Missouri, Case 4:07CR659 CEJ.
(22) Jyimin Horng, January 17, 2008, U.S. District Court, District of
New Jersey, Case 1:05-CR-00612-02.
(23) Octavio Rodriguez-Gutierrez, October 29, 2008, U.S. District
Court, District of New Mexico, Case 2:08CR01600-001JEC.
(24) Raul Rodriguez-Gutierrez, October 27, 2008, U.S. District Court,
District of New Mexico, Case 2:08CR01746-001JEC.
(25) David M. Janowski, January 26, 2009, U.S. District Court, Northern
District of Ohio, Case 1:08CR389-01.
(26) Master A. Ohene Kwesi Yeboah, April 20, 2009, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Ohio, Case 2:08-CR-138.
(27) Ken Miller, August 14, 2008, U.S. District Court, Eastern District
of Pennsylvania, Case 07-452.
(28) Euro Optics, Ltd., July 31, 2008, U.S. District Court, Middle
District of Pennsylvania, Case 4:07-CR-0407.
(29) Akanonu Fabian Mgbobila, October 4, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Middle District of Tennessee, Case 3:06-00126.
(30) Guillermo Aguilar-Medina, October 23, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case 1:07CR00279-002.
(31) Luis Miguel Rodriguez-Vazques, October 23, 2007, U.S. District
Court, Southern District of Texas, Case 1:07CR00279-001.
(32) Erik Arguelles, March 18, 2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case 1:07CR00797-001.
(33) Jose Cipriano-Sanchez, April 13, 2009, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case 7:07CR01274-001.
(34) Jorge Alberto Cervantes-Garcia, March 27, 2008, U.S. District
Court, Southern District of Texas, Case 1:07CR00857-001.
(35) Rogelio Esparza-Juarez, December 31, 2008, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case 7:08CR01042-001.
(36) Francisco Gaona-Doval, October 27, 2008, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case 7:07CR00906-001.
(37) Roberto Garza-Lopez, March 14, 2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case 7:07CR00671-001.
(38) Juan Lopez-Martinez, March 14, 2008, U.S. District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Case 7:07CR00671-002.
(39) Luis Martin Velasquez-Ibarra, March 14, 2008, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case 7:07CR00671-003.
(40) Reneberto Velasquez-Velez, March 14, 2008, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case 7:07CR00671-004.
(41) Jose Fernando Licona-Cruz, April 4, 2008, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case 7:07CR01128-001.
(42) Gregorio Magallan, Jr., February 2, 2009, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case 7:08CR00892-002.
(43) Rogelio Ramos-Reyes, January 21, 2008, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case 7:07CR00916-001.
(44) Lorena Beatriz Salas, February 4, 2008, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case 1:07CR00753-001.
(45) Victor Hugo Salazar-Mata, February 10, 2009, U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Texas, Case 7:07CR00986-001.
(46) Greg Anthony Belcik, December 10, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Western District of Texas, Case DR-07-CR-007(1)-AML.
(47) Robert Frederick Gibson, August 24, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Western District of Texas, Case EP-07-CR-249-DB(2).
(48) Robert Thomas Caldwell, November 9, 2007, U.S. District Court,
Western District of Texas, Case EP-07-CR-249-DB(3).
(49) Abraham Trujillo, November 12, 2008, U.S. District Court, District
of Utah, Case DUTX 2:07-cr-00714-001.
(50) David John Waye, November 12, 2008, U.S. District Court, District
of Utah, Case DUTX 2:07-cr-00714-002.
(51) Shu Quan-Sheng, April 10, 2009, U.S. District Court, Eastern
District of Virginia, Case 2:08cr194.
(52) Jason Dean Smith, June 8, 2007, U.S. District Court, Western
District of Washington, Case CR05-00390RSM-001.
[[Page 42951]]
(53) Kendall S. George, July 13, 2007, U.S. District Court, Western
District of Washington, Case CR06-0205RSM.
As noted above, at the end of the three-year period following the date
of conviction, the above named persons/entities remain debarred unless
export privileges are reinstated.
Debarred persons are generally ineligible to participate in
activity regulated under the ITAR (see, e.g., sections 120.1(c) and
(d), and 127.11(a)). Also, under Section 127.1(c) of the ITAR, any
person who has knowledge that another person is subject to debarment or
is otherwise ineligible may not, without disclosure to and written
approval from the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, participate,
directly or indirectly, in any export in which such ineligible person
may benefit therefrom or have a direct or indirect interest therein.
This notice is provided for purposes of making the public aware
that the persons listed above are prohibited from participating
directly or indirectly in activities regulated by the ITAR, including
any brokering activities and in any export from or temporary import
into the United States of defense articles, related technical data, or
defense services in all situations covered by the ITAR. Specific case
information may be obtained from the Office of the Clerk for the U.S.
District Courts mentioned above and by citing the court case number
where provided.
Dated: August 17, 2009.
Andrew J. Shapiro,
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Department
of State.
[FR Doc. E9-20443 Filed 8-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-25-P
