In the Matter of: Lev Steinberg, 119 Mackenzie Street, Brooklyn, New York 11235; Order Denying Export Privileges, 70849-70850 [2014-28068]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 229 / Friday, November 28, 2014 / Notices be evaluated during the consideration of a request to use Federal land, how is guidance provided to the applicant by your agency prior to completion of the SF–299? What role should the Telecommunications Program play in providing guidance to such applicants? 4. The Programmatic Environmental Assessment of the Telecommunications Program will outline the Federal land management agencies’ categorical exclusions and procedures for identifying extraordinary circumstances. The RUS environmental document will also acknowledge that the use and occupancy of Federal land by some Telecommunications Program projects is necessary and, in particular circumstances with necessary authorizations, appropriate. What barriers do you envision in adopting a RUS environmental document in the consideration of your agency’s decisions to authorize a special use permit by a Telecommunications Program participant? 5. How can RUS and other Federal agencies work together to share information as well as train managers and staff at the field levels regarding broadband issues and necessary environmental reviews and Federal decisionmaking, including land use authorizations? Dated: November 4, 2014. Jasper Schneider, Acting Administrator, Rural Utilities Service. [FR Doc. 2014–28100 Filed 11–26–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES In the Matter of: Lev Steinberg, 119 Mackenzie Street, Brooklyn, New York 11235; Order Denying Export Privileges On February 25, 2014, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Lev Steinberg (‘‘Steinberg’’) was convicted of violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq. (2006 & Supp. IV 2010)) (‘‘IEEPA’’). Specifically, Steinberg unlawfully, willfully and knowingly exported and attempted to export from the United States to Russia, items on the Commerce Control List, namely, an Eo-Tech 552 holographic weapons scope and other items, without first having obtained a license to do so from the United States Department of Commerce. Steinberg was sentenced to probation for a term of 12 months, criminal fine of $4000 and a $200 assessment. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Nov 26, 2014 Jkt 235001 Section 766.25 of the Export Administration Regulations (‘‘EAR’’ or ‘‘Regulations’’) 1 provides, in pertinent part, that ‘‘[t]he Director of the Office of Exporter Services, in consultation with the Director of the Office of Export Enforcement, may deny the export privileges of any person who has been convicted of a violation of the Export Administration Act (‘‘EAA’’), the EAR, or any order, license or authorization issued thereunder; any regulation, license, or order issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–1706); 18 U.S.C. 793, 794 or 798; section 4(b) of the Internal Security Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 783(b)), or section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778).’’ 15 CFR 766.25(a); see also Section 11(h) of the EAA, 50 U.S.C. app. § 2410(h). The denial of export privileges under this provision may be for a period of up to 10 years from the date of the conviction. 15 CFR 766.25(d); see also 50 U.S.C. app. § 2410(h). In addition, Section 750.8 of the Regulations states that the Bureau of Industry and Security’s Office of Exporter Services may revoke any Bureau of Industry and Security (‘‘BIS’’) licenses previously issued in which the person had an interest in at the time of his conviction. BIS has received notice of Steinberg’s conviction for violating the IEEPA, and in accordance with Section 766.25 of the Regulations, BIS has provided notice and an opportunity for Steinberg to make a written submission to BIS. BIS has not received a submission from Steinberg. Based upon my review and consultations with BIS’s Office of Export Enforcement, including its Director, and the facts available to BIS, I have decided to deny Steinberg’s export privileges under the Regulations for a period of two (2) years from the date of Steinberg’s conviction. I have also decided to revoke all licenses issued pursuant to the Act or Regulations in which Steinberg had an interest at the time of his conviction. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered: First, from the date of this Order until February 25, 2016, Lev Steinberg, with 1 The Regulations are currently codified in the Code of Federal Regulations at 15 CFR parts 730– 774 (2014). The Regulations issued pursuant to the Export Administration Act (50 U.S.C. app. §§ 2401– 2420 (2000)) (‘‘EAA’’). Since August 21, 2001, the EAA 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 7, 2014 (79 FR 46959 (August 11, 2014)), has continued the Regulations in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq. (2006 & Supp. IV 2010)). PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 70849 a last known address of 119 Mackenzie Street, Brooklyn, New York 11235, and when acting for or on his behalf, his successors, assigns, employees, agents or representatives (the ‘‘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, 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. Second, 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, 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 E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM 28NON1 70850 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 229 / Friday, November 28, 2014 / Notices 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. Third, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided in Section 766.23 of the Regulations, any other person, firm, corporation, or business organization related to Steinberg by ownership, control, position of responsibility, affiliation, or other connection in the conduct of trade or business may also be made subject to the provisions of this Order in order to prevent evasion of this Order. Fourth, in accordance with Part 756 of the Regulations, Steinberg may file an appeal of this Order with the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security. The appeal must be filed within 45 days from the date of this Order and must comply with the provisions of Part 756 of the Regulations. Fifth, a copy of this Order shall be delivered to the Steinberg. This Order shall be published in the Federal Register. Sixth, this Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect until February 25, 2016. Issued this 20th day of November, 2014. Karen H. Nies-Vogel, Director, Office of Exporter Services. [FR Doc. 2014–28068 Filed 11–26–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) has received requests to conduct administrative reviews of various antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings with October anniversary dates. In accordance with the Department’s regulations, we are initiating those administrative reviews. DATES: Effective November 28, 2014. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda E. Waters, Office of AD/CVD Operations, Customs Liaison Unit, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Nov 26, 2014 Jkt 235001 Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482–4735. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department has received timely requests, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), for administrative reviews of various antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings with October anniversary dates. All deadlines for the submission of various types of information, certifications, or comments or actions by the Department discussed below refer to the number of calendar days from the applicable starting time. Notice of No Sales If a producer or exporter named in this notice of initiation had no exports, sales, or entries during the period of review (‘‘POR’’), it must notify the Department within 60 days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. All submissions must be filed electronically at http:// iaaccess.trade.gov in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303.1 Such submissions are subject to verification in accordance with section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘Act’’). Further, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(1)(i), a copy must be served on every party on the Department’s service list. Respondent Selection In the event the Department limits the number of respondents for individual examination for administrative reviews, the Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) data for U.S. imports during the POR. We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (‘‘APO’’) to all parties having an APO within seven days of publication of this initiation notice and to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 21 days of publication of this Federal Register notice. The Department invites comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within five days of placement of the CBP data on the record of the applicable review. Rebuttal comments will be due five days after submission of initial comments. In the event the Department decides it is necessary to limit individual examination of respondents and conduct respondent selection under section 777A(c)(2) of the Act: 1 See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Electronic Filing Procedures; Administrative Protective Order Procedures, 76 FR 39263 (July 6, 2011). PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 In general, the Department has found that determinations concerning whether particular companies should be ‘‘collapsed’’ (i.e., treated as a single entity for purposes of calculating antidumping duty rates) require a substantial amount of detailed information and analysis, which often require follow-up questions and analysis. Accordingly, the Department will not conduct collapsing analyses at the respondent selection phase of this review and will not collapse companies at the respondent selection phase unless there has been a determination to collapse certain companies in a previous segment of this antidumping proceeding (i.e., investigation, administrative review, new shipper review or changed circumstances review). For any company subject to this review, if the Department determined, or continued to treat, that company as collapsed with others, the Department will assume that such companies continue to operate in the same manner and will collapse them for respondent selection purposes. Otherwise, the Department will not collapse companies for purposes of respondent selection. Parties are requested to (a) identify which companies subject to review previously were collapsed, and (b) provide a citation to the proceeding in which they were collapsed. Further, if companies are requested to complete the Quantity and Value (‘‘Q&V’’) Questionnaire for purposes of respondent selection, in general each company must report volume and value data separately for itself. Parties should not include data for any other party, even if they believe they should be treated as a single entity with that other party. If a company was collapsed with another company or companies in the most recently completed segment of this proceeding where the Department considered collapsing that entity, complete Q&V data for that collapsed entity must be submitted. Deadline for Withdrawal of Request for Administrative Review Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), a party that has requested a review may withdraw that request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The regulation provides that the Department may extend this time if it is reasonable to do so. In order to provide parties additional certainty with respect to when the Department will exercise its discretion to extend this 90-day deadline, interested parties are advised that the Department does not intend to extend the 90-day deadline unless the requestor demonstrates that an E:\FR\FM\28NON1.SGM 28NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 229 (Friday, November 28, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70849-70850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28068]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security


In the Matter of: Lev Steinberg, 119 Mackenzie Street, Brooklyn, 
New York 11235; Order Denying Export Privileges

    On February 25, 2014, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern 
District of New York, Lev Steinberg (``Steinberg'') was convicted of 
violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 
1701, et seq. (2006 & Supp. IV 2010)) (``IEEPA''). Specifically, 
Steinberg unlawfully, willfully and knowingly exported and attempted to 
export from the United States to Russia, items on the Commerce Control 
List, namely, an Eo-Tech 552 holographic weapons scope and other items, 
without first having obtained a license to do so from the United States 
Department of Commerce. Steinberg was sentenced to probation for a term 
of 12 months, criminal fine of $4000 and a $200 assessment.
    Section 766.25 of the Export Administration Regulations (``EAR'' or 
``Regulations'') \1\ provides, in pertinent part, that ``[t]he Director 
of the Office of Exporter Services, in consultation with the Director 
of the Office of Export Enforcement, may deny the export privileges of 
any person who has been convicted of a violation of the Export 
Administration Act (``EAA''), the EAR, or any order, license or 
authorization issued thereunder; any regulation, license, or order 
issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 
1701-1706); 18 U.S.C. 793, 794 or 798; section 4(b) of the Internal 
Security Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 783(b)), or section 38 of the Arms 
Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778).'' 15 CFR 766.25(a); see also 
Section 11(h) of the EAA, 50 U.S.C. app. Sec.  2410(h). The denial of 
export privileges under this provision may be for a period of up to 10 
years from the date of the conviction. 15 CFR 766.25(d); see also 50 
U.S.C. app. Sec.  2410(h). In addition, Section 750.8 of the 
Regulations states that the Bureau of Industry and Security's Office of 
Exporter Services may revoke any Bureau of Industry and Security 
(``BIS'') licenses previously issued in which the person had an 
interest in at the time of his conviction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Regulations are currently codified in the Code of 
Federal Regulations at 15 CFR parts 730-774 (2014). The Regulations 
issued pursuant to the Export Administration Act (50 U.S.C. app. 
Sec. Sec.  2401-2420 (2000)) (``EAA''). Since August 21, 2001, the 
EAA 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 7, 2014 (79 FR 46959 (August 11, 2014)), has 
continued the Regulations in effect under the International 
Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq. (2006 & Supp. 
IV 2010)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BIS has received notice of Steinberg's conviction for violating the 
IEEPA, and in accordance with Section 766.25 of the Regulations, BIS 
has provided notice and an opportunity for Steinberg to make a written 
submission to BIS. BIS has not received a submission from Steinberg.
    Based upon my review and consultations with BIS's Office of Export 
Enforcement, including its Director, and the facts available to BIS, I 
have decided to deny Steinberg's export privileges under the 
Regulations for a period of two (2) years from the date of Steinberg's 
conviction. I have also decided to revoke all licenses issued pursuant 
to the Act or Regulations in which Steinberg had an interest at the 
time of his conviction.
    Accordingly, it is hereby ordered:
    First, from the date of this Order until February 25, 2016, Lev 
Steinberg, with a last known address of 119 Mackenzie Street, Brooklyn, 
New York 11235, and when acting for or on his behalf, his successors, 
assigns, employees, agents or representatives (the ``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, 
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.
    Second, 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, 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

[[Page 70850]]

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.
    Third, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided in 
Section 766.23 of the Regulations, any other person, firm, corporation, 
or business organization related to Steinberg by ownership, control, 
position of responsibility, affiliation, or other connection in the 
conduct of trade or business may also be made subject to the provisions 
of this Order in order to prevent evasion of this Order.
    Fourth, in accordance with Part 756 of the Regulations, Steinberg 
may file an appeal of this Order with the Under Secretary of Commerce 
for Industry and Security. The appeal must be filed within 45 days from 
the date of this Order and must comply with the provisions of Part 756 
of the Regulations.
    Fifth, a copy of this Order shall be delivered to the Steinberg. 
This Order shall be published in the Federal Register.
    Sixth, this Order is effective immediately and shall remain in 
effect until February 25, 2016.

    Issued this 20th day of November, 2014.
Karen H. Nies-Vogel,
Director, Office of Exporter Services.
[FR Doc. 2014-28068 Filed 11-26-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P