Order Renewing Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges, 61745-61751 [2017-28113]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 249 / Friday, December 29, 2017 / Notices ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES objection, the Forest Service will attempt to verify the identity of the objector to confirm objection eligibility; (2) Signature or other verification of authorship upon request (a scanned signature for electronic mail may be filed with the objection); (3) Identification of the lead objector, when multiple names are listed on an objection. The Forest Service will communicate to all parties to an objection through the lead objector. Verification of the identity of the lead objector must also be provided if requested; (4) The name of the forest plan amendment being objected to, and the name and title of the Responsible Official; (5) A statement of the issues and/or parts of the forest plan amendment to which the objection applies; (6) A concise statement explaining the objection and suggesting how the proposed plan decision may be improved. If the objector believes that the forest plan amendment is inconsistent with law, regulation, or policy, an explanation should be included; (7) A statement that demonstrates the link between the objector’s prior substantive formal comments and the content of the objection, unless the objection concerns an issue that arose after the opportunities for formal comment; and (8) All documents referenced in the objection (a bibliography is not sufficient), except that the following need not be provided: a. All or any part of a Federal law or regulation, b. Forest Service Directive System documents and land management plans or other published Forest Service documents, c. Documents referenced by the Forest Service in the planning documentation related to the proposal subject to objection, and d. Formal comments previously provided to the Forest Service by the objector during the plan amendment comment period. Responsible Official The responsible official for the Santa Fe’s Forest Plan Amendment for Geothermal Leasing on the Santa Fe National Forest is James Melonas, Forest Supervisor, Santa Fe National Forest, 11 Forest Lane, Santa Fe, NM, 87508. Dated: December 15, 2017. Glenn P. Casamassa, Associate Deputy Chief, National Forest System. [FR Doc. 2017–28134 Filed 12–28–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3411–15–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:09 Dec 28, 2017 Jkt 244001 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Order Renewing Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges Mahan Airways, Mahan Tower, No. 21, Azadegan St., M.A. Jenah Exp. Way, Tehran, Iran; Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard, a/k/a Kosarian Fard, P.O. Box 52404, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; Mahmoud Amini, G#22 Dubai Airport Free Zone, P.O. Box 393754, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; and P.O. Box 52404, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; and Mohamed Abdulla Alqaz Building, Al Maktoum Street, Al Rigga, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; Kerman Aviation, a/k/a GIE Kerman Aviation, 42 Avenue Montaigne 75008, Paris, France; Sirjanco Trading LLC, P.O. Box 8709, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; Mahan Air General Trading LLC, 19th Floor Al Moosa Tower One, Sheik Zayed Road, Dubai 40594, United Arab Emirates; Mehdi Bahrami, Mahan Airways—Istanbul Office, Cumhuriye Cad. Sibil Apt No: 101 D:6, 34374 Emadad, Sisli Istanbul, Turkey; Al Naser Airlines, a/k/a al-Naser Airlines, a/ k/a Al Naser Wings Airline, a/k/a Alnaser Airlines and Air Freight Ltd., Home 46, AlKarrada, Babil Region, District 929, St 21 Beside Al Jadirya Private Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq; and Al Amirat Street, Section 309, St. 3/H.20 Al Mansour, Baghdad, Iraq; and P.O. Box 28360, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; and P.O. Box 911399, Amman 11191, Jordan; Ali Abdullah Alhay, a/k/a Ali Alhay, a/k/a Ali Abdullah Ahmed Alhay, Home 46, AlKarrada, Babil Region, District 929, St 21, Beside Al Jadirya Private Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq; and Anak Street, Qatif, Saudi Arabia 61177; Bahar Safwa General Trading, PO Box 113212 Citadel Tower, Floor-5, Office #504, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; and PO Box 8709, Citadel Tower, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; Sky Blue Bird Group, a/k/a Sky Blue Bird Aviation, a/k/a Sky Blue Bird Ltd, a/k/a Sky Blue Bird FZC, P.O. Box 16111, Ras Al Khaimah Trade Zone, United Arab Emirates; Issam Shammout, a/k/a Muhammad Isam Muhammad Anwar Nur Shammout, a/k/a Issam Anwar, Philips Building, 4th Floor, Al Fardous Street, Damascus, Syria; and Al Kolaa, Beirut, Lebanon 151515; and 17–18 Margaret Street, 4th Floor, London, W1W 8RP, United Kingdom; and Cumhuriyet Mah. Kavakli San St. Fulya, Cad. Hazar Sok. No.14/A Silivri, Istanbul, Turkey PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 61745 Order Renewing Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the Export Administration Regulations, 15 CFR parts 730–774 (2016) (‘‘EAR’’ or ‘‘the Regulations’’),1 I hereby grant the request of the Office of Export Enforcement (‘‘OEE’’) to renew the temporary denial order issued in this matter on June 27, 2017, as recently modified on November 16, 2017. I find that renewal of this order, as recently modified, is necessary in the public interest to prevent an imminent violation of the EAR. I also find it necessary in connection with this renewal to add ‘‘Al Naser Wings Airline’’ as an alias being used by respondent Al Naser Airlines. I. Procedural History On March 17, 2008, Darryl W. Jackson, the then-Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement (‘‘Assistant Secretary’’), signed an order denying Mahan Airways’ export privileges for a period of 180 days on the ground that issuance of the order was necessary in the public interest to prevent an imminent violation of the Regulations. The order also named as denied persons Blue Airways, of Yerevan, Armenia (‘‘Blue Airways of Armenia’’), as well as the ‘‘Balli Group Respondents,’’ namely, Balli Group PLC, Balli Aviation, Balli Holdings, Vahid Alaghband, Hassan Alaghband, Blue Sky One Ltd., Blue Sky Two Ltd., Blue Sky Three Ltd., Blue Sky Four Ltd., Blue Sky Five Ltd., and Blue Sky Six Ltd., all of the United Kingdom. The order was issued ex parte pursuant to Section 766.24(a) of the Regulations, and went into effect on March 21, 2008, the date it was published in the Federal Register. This temporary denial order (‘‘TDO’’) was renewed in accordance with Section 766.24(d) of the Regulations.2 1 The Regulations, currently codified at 15 CFR parts 730–774 (2017), originally issued pursuant to the Export Administration Act of 1979 (‘‘EAA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’). 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 15, 2017 (82 FR 39,005 (Aug. 16, 2017)) has continued the Regulations in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq. (2012)). 2 Section 766.24(d) provides that BIS may seek renewal of a temporary denial order for additional 180-day renewal periods, if it believes that renewal is necessary in the public interest to prevent an imminent violation. Renewal requests are to be made in writing no later than 20 days before the scheduled expiration date of a temporary denial order. Renewal requests may include discussion of any additional or changed circumstances, and may seek appropriate modifications to the order, E:\FR\FM\29DEN1.SGM Continued 29DEN1 61746 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 249 / Friday, December 29, 2017 / Notices ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Subsequent renewals also have issued pursuant to Section 766.24(d), including most recently on June 27, 2017.3 Some of the renewal orders and the modification orders that have issued between renewals have added certain parties as respondents or as related persons, or effected the removal of certain parties.4 The September 11, 2009 renewal order continued the denial order as to Mahan Airways, but not as to the Balli Group Respondents or Blue Airways of Armenia.5 As part of the February 25, 2011 renewal order, Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard (a/k/a Kosarian Fard), Mahmoud Amini, and Gatewick LLC (a/ k/a Gatewick Freight and Cargo Services, a/k/a Gatewick Aviation Services) were added as related persons to prevent evasion of the TDO.6 A including the addition of parties as respondents or related persons, or the removal of parties previously added as respondents or related persons. BIS is not required to seek renewal as to all parties, and a removal of a party can be effected if, without more, BIS does not seek renewal as to that party. Any party included or added to a temporary denial order as a respondent may oppose a renewal request as set forth in Section 766.24(d). Parties included or added as related persons can at any time appeal their inclusion as a related person, but cannot challenge the underlying temporary denial order, either as initially issued or subsequently renewed, and cannot oppose a renewal request. See also note 4, infra. 3 The June 27, 2017 renewal order was effective upon issuance and published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2017 (82 FR 30,823). Prior renewal orders issued on September 17, 2008, March 16, 2009, September 11, 2009, March 9, 2010, September 3, 2010, February 25, 2011, August 24, 2011, February 15, 2012, August 9, 2012, February 4, 2013, July 31, 2013, January 24, 2014, July 22, 2014, January 16, 2015, July 13, 2015, January 7, 2016, July 7, 2016, and December 30, 2016, respectively. The August 24, 2011 renewal followed the issuance of a modification order that issued on July 1, 2011, to add Zarand Aviation as a respondent. The July 13, 2015 renewal followed a modification order that issued May 21, 2015, and added Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa General Trading as respondents. Each of the renewal orders and each of the modification orders referenced in this footnote or elsewhere in this order has been published in the Federal Register. 4 Pursuant to Sections 766.23 and 766.24(c) of the Regulations, any person, firm, corporation, or business organization related to a denied person by affiliation, ownership, control, or position of responsibility in the conduct of trade or related services may be added as a ‘‘related person’’ to a temporary denial order to prevent evasion of the order. 5 Balli Group PLC and Balli Aviation settled proposed BIS administrative charges as part of a settlement agreement that was approved by a settlement order issued on February 5, 2010. The sanctions imposed pursuant to that settlement and order included, inter alia, a $15 million civil penalty and a requirement to conduct five external audits and submit related audit reports. The Balli Group Respondents also settled related charges with the Department of Justice and the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control. 6 See note 4, supra, concerning the addition of related persons to a temporary denial order. Kosarian Fard and Mahmoud Amini remain parties VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:09 Dec 28, 2017 Jkt 244001 modification order issued on July 1, 2011, adding Zarand Aviation as a respondent in order to prevent an imminent violation.7 As part of the August 24, 2011 renewal, Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco Trading LLC, and Ali Eslamian were added as related persons. Mahan Air General Trading LLC, Equipco (UK) Ltd., and Skyco (UK) Ltd. were added as related persons by a modification order issued on April 9, 2012. Mehdi Bahrami was added as a related person as part of the February 4, 2013 renewal order. On May 21, 2015, a modification order issued adding Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa General Trading as respondents. As detailed in that order and discussed further infra, these respondents were added to the TDO based upon evidence that they were acting together to, inter alia, obtain aircraft subject to the Regulations for export or reexport to Mahan in violation of the Regulations and the TDO. Sky Blue Bird Group and its chief executive officer, Issam Shammout, were added as related persons as part of the July 13, 2015 renewal order.8 The June 27, 2017 renewal order continued the denial of the export privileges of Mahan Airways, Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard, Mahmoud Amini, Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco Trading LLC, Mahan Air General Trading LLC, Mehdi Bahrami, Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, Bahar Safwa General Trading, Sky Blue Bird Group, and Issam Shammout, as well as Ali Eslamian, Equipco (UK) Ltd., and Skyco (UK) Ltd. On November 16, 2017, a modification order issued to remove to the TDO. On August 13, 2014, BIS and Gatewick resolved administrative charges against Gatewick, including a charge for acting contrary to the terms of a BIS denial order (15 CFR 764.2(k)). In addition to the payment of a civil penalty, the settlement includes a seven-year denial order. The first two years of the denial period were active, with the remaining five years suspended conditioned upon Gatewick’s full and timely payment of the civil penalty and its compliance with the Regulations during the seven-year denial order period. This denial order, in effect, superseded the TDO as to Gatewick, which was not included as part of the January 16, 2015 renewal order. The Gatewick LLC Final Order was published in the Federal Register on August 20, 2014. See 79 FR 49283 (Aug. 20, 2014). 7 Zarand Aviation’s export privileges remained denied until July 22, 2014, when it was not included as part of the renewal order issued on that date. 8 The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (‘‘OFAC’’) designated Sky Blue Bird and Issam Shammout as Specially Designated Global Terrorists (‘‘SDGTs’’) on May 21, 2015, pursuant to Executive Order 13324, for ‘‘providing support to Iran’s Mahan Air.’’ See 80 FR 30762 (May 29, 2015). PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Eslamian, Equipco, and Skyco following a request by OEE for their removal.9 On November 28, 2017, BIS, through OEE, submitted a written request for renewal of the TDO that issued on June 27, 2017, as modified on November 16, 2017. The written request was made more than 20 days before the TDO’s scheduled expiration. Notice of the renewal request was provided to Mahan Airways, Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa General Trading in accordance with Sections 766.5 and 766.24(d) of the Regulations. No opposition to the renewal of the TDO has been received. Furthermore, no appeal of the related person determinations made as part of the September 3, 2010, February 25, 2011, August 24, 2011, April 9, 2012, February 4, 2013, and July 13, 2015 renewal or modification orders has been made by Kosarian Fard, Mahmoud Amini, Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco Trading LLC, Mahan Air General Trading LLC, Mehdi Bahrami, Sky Blue Bird Group, or Issam Shammout.10 II. Renewal of the TDO A. Legal Standard Pursuant to Section 766.24, BIS may issue or renew an order temporarily denying a respondent’s export privileges upon a showing that the order is necessary in the public interest to prevent an ‘‘imminent violation’’ of the Regulations. 15 CFR 766.24(b)(1) and 766.24(d). ‘‘A violation may be ‘imminent’ either in time or degree of likelihood.’’ 15 CFR 766.24(b)(3). BIS may show ‘‘either that a violation is about to occur, or that the general circumstances of the matter under investigation or case under criminal or administrative charges demonstrate a likelihood of future violations.’’ Id. As to the likelihood of future violations, BIS may show that the violation under investigation or charge ‘‘is significant, 9 The November 16, 2017 modification was published in the Federal Register on December 4, 2017. See 82 FR 57,203 (Dec. 4, 2017). On September 28, 2017, BIS and Ali Eslamian resolved an administrative charge for acting contrary to the terms of the denial order (15 CFR 764.2(k)) that was based upon Eslamian’s violation of the TDO after his addition to the TDO on August 24, 2011. Equipco (UK) Ltd. and Skyco (UK) Ltd., two companies owned and operated by Eslamian, also were parties to settlement agreement and were added to the settlement order as related persons. In addition to other sanctions, the settlement provides that Eslamian, Equipco, and Skyco shall be subject to a conditionally-suspended denial order for a period of four years from the date of the settlement order. 10 A party named or added as a related person may not oppose the issuance or renewal of the underlying temporary denial order, but may file an appeal of the related person determination in accordance with Section 766.23(c). See also note 2, supra. E:\FR\FM\29DEN1.SGM 29DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 249 / Friday, December 29, 2017 / Notices ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES deliberate, covert and/or likely to occur again, rather than technical or negligent [.]’’ Id. A ‘‘lack of information establishing the precise time a violation may occur does not preclude a finding that a violation is imminent, so long as there is sufficient reason to believe the likelihood of a violation.’’ Id. B. The TDO and BIS’s Request for Renewal OEE’s request for renewal is based upon the facts underlying the issuance of the initial TDO, and the renewal and modification orders subsequently issued in this matter, including the May 21, 2015 modification order and the renewal order issued on June 27, 2017, and the evidence developed over the course of this investigation, which indicate a blatant disregard of U.S. export controls and the TDO. The initial TDO was issued as a result of evidence that showed that Mahan Airways and other parties engaged in conduct prohibited by the EAR by knowingly reexporting to Iran three U.S.-origin aircraft, specifically Boeing 747s (‘‘Aircraft 1–3’’), items subject to the EAR and classified under Export Control Classification Number (‘‘ECCN’’) 9A991.b, without the required U.S. Government authorization. Further evidence submitted by BIS indicated that Mahan Airways was involved in the attempted re-export of three additional U.S.-origin Boeing 747s (‘‘Aircraft 4–6’’) to Iran. As discussed in the September 17, 2008 renewal order, evidence presented by BIS indicated that Aircraft 1–3 continued to be flown on Mahan Airways’ routes after issuance of the TDO, in violation of the Regulations and the TDO itself.11 It also showed that Aircraft 1–3 had been flown in further violation of the Regulations and the TDO on the routes of Iran Air, an Iranian Government airline. Moreover, as discussed in the March 16, 2009, September 11, 2009 and March 9, 2010 renewal orders, Mahan Airways registered Aircraft 1–3 in Iran, obtained Iranian tail numbers for them (EP–MNA, EP–MNB, and EP–MNE, respectively), and continued to operate at least two of them in violation of the Regulations and the TDO,12 while also committing an additional knowing and willful violation when it negotiated for and acquired an additional U.S.-origin aircraft. The additional acquired aircraft 11 Engaging in conduct prohibited by a denial order violates the Regulations. 15 CFR 764.2(a) and (k). 12 The third Boeing 747 appeared to have undergone significant service maintenance and may not have been operational at the time of the March 9, 2010 renewal order. VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:09 Dec 28, 2017 Jkt 244001 was an MD–82 aircraft, which subsequently was painted in Mahan Airways’ livery and flown on multiple Mahan Airways’ routes under tail number TC–TUA. The March 9, 2010 renewal order also noted that a court in the United Kingdom (‘‘U.K.’’) had found Mahan Airways in contempt of court on February 1, 2010, for failing to comply with that court’s December 21, 2009 and January 12, 2010 orders compelling Mahan Airways to remove the Boeing 747s from Iran and ground them in the Netherlands. Mahan Airways and the Balli Group Respondents had been litigating before the U.K. court concerning ownership and control of Aircraft 1–3. In a letter to the U.K. court dated January 12, 2010, Mahan Airways’ Chairman indicated, inter alia, that Mahan Airways opposes U.S. Government actions against Iran, that it continued to operate the aircraft on its routes in and out of Tehran (and had 158,000 ‘‘forward bookings’’ for these aircraft), and that it wished to continue to do so and would pay damages if required by that court, rather than ground the aircraft. The September 3, 2010 renewal order discussed the fact that Mahan Airways’ violations of the TDO extended beyond operating U.S.-origin aircraft and attempting to acquire additional U.S.origin aircraft. In February 2009, while subject to the TDO, Mahan Airways participated in the export of computer motherboards, items subject to the Regulations and designated as EAR99, from the United States to Iran, via the United Arab Emirates (‘‘UAE’’), in violation of both the TDO and the Regulations, by transporting and/or forwarding the computer motherboards from the UAE to Iran. Mahan Airways’ violations were facilitated by Gatewick LLC, which not only participated in the transaction, but also has stated to BIS that it acted as Mahan Airways’ sole booking agent for cargo and freight forwarding services in the UAE. Moreover, in a January 24, 2011 filing in the U.K. court, Mahan Airways asserted that Aircraft 1–3 were not being used, but stated in pertinent part that the aircraft were being maintained in Iran especially ‘‘in an airworthy condition’’ and that, depending on the outcome of its U.K. court appeal, the aircraft ‘‘could immediately go back into service . . . on international routes into and out of Iran.’’ Mahan Airways’ January 24, 2011 submission to U.K. Court of Appeal, at p. 25, ¶¶ 108, 110. This clearly stated intent, both on its own and in conjunction with Mahan Airways’ prior misconduct and statements, demonstrated the need to PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 61747 renew the TDO in order to prevent imminent future violations. Two of these three 747s subsequently were removed from Iran and are no longer in Mahan Airways’ possession. The third of these 747s, with Manufacturer’s Serial Number (‘‘MSN’’) 23480 and Iranian tail number EP–MNE, remained in Iran under Mahan’s control. Pursuant to Executive Order 13324, it was designated a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (‘‘SDGT’’) by the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (‘‘OFAC’’) on September 19, 2012.13 Furthermore, as discussed in the February 4, 2013 Order, open source information indicated that this 747, painted in the livery and logo of Mahan Airways, had been flown between Iran and Syria, and was suspected of ferrying weapons and/or other equipment to the Syrian Government from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Open source information showed that this aircraft had flown from Iran to Syria as recently as June 30, 2013, and continues to show that it remains in active operation in Mahan Airways’ fleet. In addition, as first detailed in the July 1, 2011 and August 24, 2011 orders, and discussed in subsequent renewal orders in this matter, Mahan Airways also continued to evade U.S. export control laws by operating two Airbus A310 aircraft, bearing Mahan Airways’ livery and logo, on flights into and out of Iran.14 At the time of the July 1, 2011 and August 24, 2011 orders, these Airbus A310s were registered in France, with tail numbers F–OJHH and F–OJHI, respectively.15 The August 2012 renewal order also found that Mahan Airways had acquired another Airbus A310 aircraft subject to the Regulations, with MSN 499 and 13 See http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/ sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/pages/ 20120919.aspx. 14 The Airbus A310s are powered with U.S.-origin engines. The engines are subject to the EAR and classified under Export Control Classification (‘‘ECCN’’) 9A991.d. The Airbus A310s contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a result are subject to the EAR. They are classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or reexport of these aircraft to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations. 15 OEE subsequently presented evidence that after the August 24, 2011 renewal, Mahan Airways worked along with Kerman Aviation and others to de-register the two Airbus A310 aircraft in France and to register both aircraft in Iran (with, respectively, Iranian tail numbers EP–MHH and EP–MHI). It was determined subsequent to the February 15, 2012 renewal order that the registration switch for these A310s was cancelled and that Mahan Airways then continued to fly the aircraft under the original French tail numbers (F– OJHH and F–OJHI, respectively). Both aircraft apparently remain in Mahan Airways’ possession. E:\FR\FM\29DEN1.SGM 29DEN1 61748 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 249 / Friday, December 29, 2017 / Notices Iranian tail number EP–VIP, in violation of the TDO and the Regulations.16 On September 19, 2012, all three Airbus A310 aircraft (tail numbers F–OJHH, F– OJHI, and EP–VIP) were designated as SDGTs.17 The February 4, 2013 renewal order laid out further evidence of continued and additional efforts by Mahan Airways and other persons acting in concert with Mahan, including Kral Aviation and another Turkish company, to procure U.S.-origin engines—two GE CF6–50C2 engines, with MSNs 517621 and 517738, respectively—and other aircraft parts in violation of the TDO and the Regulations.18 The February 4, 2013 order also added Mehdi Bahrami as a related person in accordance with Section 766.23 of the Regulations. Bahrami, a Mahan Vice-President and the head of Mahan’s Istanbul Office, also was involved in Mahan’s acquisition of the original three Boeing 747s (Aircraft 1–3) that resulted in the original TDO, and has had a business relationship with Mahan dating back to 1997. The July 31, 2013 renewal order detailed additional evidence obtained by OEE showing efforts by Mahan Airways to obtain another GE CF6–50C2 aircraft engine (MSN 528350) from the United States via Turkey. Multiple Mahan employees, including Mehdi Bahrami, were involved in or aware of matters related to the engine’s arrival in Turkey from the United States, plans to visually inspect the engine, and prepare it for shipment from Turkey. Mahan Airways sought to obtain this U.S.-origin engine through Pioneer 16 See note 14, supra. http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/ sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/pages/ 20120919.aspx. Mahan Airways was previously designated by OFAC as a SDGT on October 18, 2011. 77 FR 64,427 (October 18, 2011). 18 Kral Aviation was referenced in the February 4, 2013 renewal order as ‘‘Turkish Company No. 1.’’ Kral Aviation purchased a GE CF6–50C2 aircraft engine (MSN 517621) from the United States in July 2012, on behalf of Mahan Airways. OEE was able to prevent this engine from reaching Mahan by issuing a redelivery order to the freight forwarder in accordance with Section 758.8 of the Regulations. OEE also issued Kral Aviation a redelivery order for the second CF6–50C2 engine (MSN 517738) on July 30, 2012. The owner of the second engine subsequently cancelled the item’s sale to Kral Aviation. In September 2012, OEE was alerted by a U.S. exporter that another Turkish company (‘‘Turkish Company No. 2’’) was attempting to purchase aircraft spare parts intended for re-export by Turkish Company No. 2 to Mahan Airways. See February 4, 2013 renewal order. On December 31, 2013, Kral Aviation was added to BIS’s Entity List, Supplement No. 4 to Part 744 of the Regulations. See 78 FR75458 (Dec. 12, 2013). Companies and individuals are added to the Entity List for engaging in activities contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States. See 15 CFR 744.11. ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES 17 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:09 Dec 28, 2017 Jkt 244001 Logistics Havacilik Turizm Yonetim Danismanlik (‘‘Pioneer Logistics’’), an aircraft parts supplier located in Turkey, and its director/operator, Gulnihal Yegane, a Turkish national who previously had conducted Mahan related business with Mehdi Bahrami and Ali Eslamian. Moreover, as referenced in the July 31, 2013 renewal order, a sworn affidavit by Kosol Surinanda, also known as Kosol Surinandha, Managing Director of Mahan’s General Sales Agent in Thailand, stated that the shares of Pioneer Logistics for which he was the listed owner were ‘‘actually the property of and owned by Mahan.’’ He further stated that he held ‘‘legal title to the shares until otherwise required by Mahan’’ but would ‘‘exercise the rights granted to [him] exactly and only as instructed by Mahan and [his] vote and/ or decisions [would] only and exclusively reflect the wills and demands of Mahan[.]’’ 19 The January 24, 2014 renewal order outlined OEE’s continued investigation of Mahan Airways’ activities and detailed an attempt by Mahan, which OEE thwarted, to obtain, via an Indonesian aircraft parts supplier, two U.S.-origin Honeywell ALF–502R–5 aircraft engines (MSNs LF5660 and LF5325), items subject to the Regulations, from a U.S. company located in Texas. An invoice of the Indonesian aircraft parts supplier dated March 27, 2013, listed Mahan Airways as the purchaser of the engines and included a Mahan ship-to address. OEE also obtained a Mahan air waybill dated March 12, 2013, listing numerous U.S.origin aircraft parts subject to the Regulations—including, among other items, a vertical navigation gyroscope, a transmitter, and a power control unit— being transported by Mahan from Turkey to Iran in violation of the TDO. The July 22, 2014 renewal order discussed open source evidence from the March-June 2014 time period regarding two BAE regional jets, items subject to the Regulations, that were painted in the livery and logo of Mahan Airways and operating under Iranian tail numbers EP–MOK and EP–MOI, respectively.20 In addition, aviation 19 Pioneer Logistics, Gulnihal Yegane, and Kosol Surinanda also were added to the Entity List on December 12, 2013. See 78 FR 75458 (Dec. 12, 2013). 20 The BAE regional jets are powered with U.S.origin engines. The engines are subject to the EAR and classified under ECCN 9A991.d. These aircraft contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a result are subject to the EAR. They are classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or reexport of these aircraft to Iran requires U.S. PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 industry resources indicated that these aircraft were obtained by Mahan Airways in late November 2013 and June 2014, from Ukrainian Mediterranean Airline, a Ukrainian airline that was added to BIS’s Entity List (Supplement No. 4 to Part 744 of the Regulations) on August 15, 2011, for acting contrary to the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.21 Open source information indicates that at least EP– MOI remains active in Mahan’s fleet, and that the aircraft was being operated on multiple flights within the last week. The January 16, 2015 renewal order detailed evidence of additional attempts by Mahan Airways to acquire items subject the Regulations in further violation of the TDO. Specifically, in March 2014, OEE became aware of an inertial reference unit bearing serial number 1231 (‘‘the IRU’’) that had been sent to the United States for repair. The IRU is subject to the Regulations, classified under ECCN 7A103, and controlled for missile technology reasons. Upon closer inspection, it was determined that IRU came from or had been installed on an Airbus A340 aircraft bearing MSN 056. Further investigation revealed that as of approximately February 2014, this aircraft was registered under Iranian tail number EP–MMB and had been painted in the livery and logo of Mahan Airways. The January 16, 2015 renewal order also described related efforts by the Departments of Justice and Treasury to further thwart Mahan’s illicit procurement efforts. Specifically, on August 14, 2014, the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland filed a civil forfeiture complaint for the IRU pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 401(b) that resulted in the court issuing an Order of Forfeiture on December 2, 2014. EP–MMB remains listed as active in Mahan Airways’ fleet and has been used on flights into and out of Iran as recently as December 19, 2017. Government authorization pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations. 21 See 76 FR 50407 (Aug. 15, 2011). The July 22, 2014 renewal order also referenced two Airbus A320 aircraft painted in the livery and logo of Mahan Airways and operating under Iranian tail numbers EP–MMK and EP–MML, respectively. OEE’s investigation also showed that Mahan obtained these aircraft in November 2013, from Khors Air Company, another Ukrainian airline that, like Ukrainian Mediterranean Airlines, was added to BIS’s Entity List on August 15, 2011. Open source evidence indicates the two Airbus A320 aircraft may be been transferred by Mahan Airways to another Iranian airline in October 2014, and issued Iranian tail numbers EP–APE and EP–APF, respectively. E:\FR\FM\29DEN1.SGM 29DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 249 / Friday, December 29, 2017 / Notices ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Additionally, on August 29, 2014, OFAC blocked the property and interests in property of Asian Aviation Logistics of Thailand, a Mahan Airways affiliate or front company, pursuant to Executive Order 13224. In doing so, OFAC described Mahan Airways’ use of Asian Aviation Logistics to evade sanctions by making payments on behalf of Mahan for the purchase of engines and other equipment.22 The May 21, 2015 modification order detailed the acquisition of two aircraft, specifically an Airbus A340 bearing MSN 164 and an Airbus A321 bearing MSN 550, that were purchased by Al Naser Airlines in late 2014/early 2015 and are currently located in Iran under the possession, control, and/or ownership of Mahan Airways.23 The sales agreements for these two aircraft were signed by Ali Abdullah Alhay for Al Naser Airlines.24 Payment information reveals that multiple electronic funds transfers (‘‘EFT’’) were made by Ali Abdullah Alhay and Bahar Safwa General Trading in order to acquire MSNs 164 and 550. The May 21, 2015 modification order also laid out evidence showing the respondents’ attempts to obtain other controlled aircraft, including aircraft physically located in the United States in similarlypatterned transactions during the same recent time period. Transactional documents involving two Airbus A320s bearing MSNs 82 and 99, respectively, again showed Ali Abdullah Alhay signing sales agreements for Al Naser Airlines.25 A review of the payment 22 See http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/ sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/Pages/ 20140829.aspx. See 79 FR 55073 (Sep. 15, 2014). OFAC also blocked the property and property interests of Pioneer Logistics of Turkey on August 29, 2014. Id. Mahan Airways’ use of Pioneer Logistics in an effort to evade the TDO and the Regulations was discussed in a prior renewal order, as summarized, supra, at 13–14. BIS added both Asian Aviation Logistics and Pioneer Logistics to the Entity List on December 12, 2013. See 78 FR 75458 (Dec. 12, 2013). 23 Both of these aircraft are powered by U.S.origin engines that are subject to the Regulations and classified under ECCN 9A991.d. Both aircraft contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a result are subject to the EAR regardless of their location. The aircraft are classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or re-export of these aircraft to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations. 24 The evidence obtained by OEE showed Ali Abdullah Alhay as a 25% owner of Al Naser Airlines. 25 Both aircraft were physically located in the United States and therefore are subject to the Regulations pursuant to Section 734.3(a)(1). Moreover, these Airbus A320s are powered by U.S.origin engines that are subject to the Regulations and classified under Export Control Classification Number ECCN 9A991.d. The Airbus A320s contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more than 10 VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:09 Dec 28, 2017 Jkt 244001 information for these aircraft similarly revealed EFTs from Ali Abdullah Alhay and Bahar Safwa General Trading that follow the pattern described for MSNs 164 and 550, supra. MSNs 82 and 99 were detained by OEE Special Agents prior to their planned export from the United States. The July 13, 2015 renewal order outlined evidence showing that Al Naser Airlines’ attempts to acquire aircraft on behalf of Mahan Airways extended beyond MSNs 164 and 550 to include a total of nine aircraft.26 Four of the aircraft, all of which are subject to the Regulations and were obtained by Mahan from Al Naser Airlines, had been issued the following Iranian tail numbers: EP–MMD (MSN 164), EP– MMG (MSN 383), EP–MMH (MSN 391) and EP–MMR (MSN 416), respectively.27 Publicly available flight tracking information provided evidence that at the time of the July 13, 2015 renewal, both EP–MMH and EP–MMR were being actively flown on routes into and out of Iran in violation of the TDO and Regulations.28 The January 7, 2016 renewal order discussed evidence that Mahan Airways had begun actively flying EP–MMD on international routes percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a result are subject to the EAR regardless of their location. The aircraft are classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or re-export of these aircraft to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations. 26 This evidence included a press release dated May 9, 2015, that appeared on Mahan Airways’ website and stated that Mahan ‘‘added 9 modern aircraft to its air fleet [,]’’ and that the newly acquired aircraft included eight Airbus A340s and one Airbus A321. See http://www.mahan.aero/en/ mahan-air/press-room/44. The press release was subsequently removed from Mahan Airways’ website. Publicly available aviation databases similarly showed that Mahan had obtained nine additional aircraft from Al Naser Airlines in May 2015, including MSNs 164 and 550. As also discussed in the July 13, 2015 renewal order, Sky Blue Bird Group, via Issam Shammout, was actively involved in Al Naser Airlines’ acquisition of MSNs 164 and 550, and the attempted acquisition of MSNs 82 and 99 (which were detained by OEE). 27 The Airbus A340s are powered by U.S.-origin engines that are subject to the Regulations and classified under ECCN 9A991.d. The Airbus A340s contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a result are subject to the EAR regardless of their location. The aircraft are classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or re-export of these aircraft to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations. 28 There is some publicly available information indicating that the aircraft Mahan Airways is flying under Iranian tail number EP–MMR is now MSN 615, rather than MSN 416. Both aircraft are Airbus A340 aircraft that Mahan acquired from Al Naser Airlines in violation of the TDO and the Regulations. Moreover, both aircraft were designated as SDGTs by OFAC on May 21, 2015, pursuant to Executive Order 13324. See 80 FR 30762 (May 29, 2015). PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 61749 into and out of Iran, including from/to Bangkok, Thailand. Additionally, the January 7, 2016 order described publicly available aviation database and flight tracking information indicating that Mahan Airways continued efforts to acquire Iranian tail numbers and press into active service under Mahan’s livery and logo at least two more of the Airbus A340 aircraft it had obtained from or through Al Naser Airlines: EP–MME (MSN 371) and EP–MMF (MSN 376), respectively. Since January 2016, EP– MME has logged flights to and from Tehran, Iran involving various destinations, including Guangzhou, China and Dubai, United Arab Emirates, in further violation of the TDO and the Regulations. The July 7, 2016 renewal order described Mahan Airways’ acquisition of a BAE Avro RJ–85 aircraft (MSN E2392) in violation of the TDO and its subsequent registration under Iranian tail number EP–MOR.29 This information was corroborated by publicly available information on the website of Iran’s civil aviation authority. The July 7, 2016 order also outlined Mahan’s continued operation of EP– MMF in violation of the TDO on routes from Tehran, Iran to Beijing, China and Shanghai, China, respectively. The December 30, 2016 renewal order outlined Mahan’s continued operation of multiple Airbus aircraft, including EP–MMD (MSN 164), EP–MMF (MSN 376), and EP–MMH (MSN 391), which were acquired from or through Al Naser Airlines in violation of the TDO, as previously detailed in pertinent part in the July 13, 2015 and January 7, 2016 renewal orders. Publicly available flight tracking information showed that the aircraft were operated on flights into and out of Iran, including from/to Beijing, China, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and Istanbul, Turkey.30 The June 27, 2017 renewal order included similar evidence regarding Mahan Airways’ violation of the TDO by operating multiple Airbus aircraft 29 The BAE Avro RJ–85 is powered by U.S.-origin engines that are subject to the Regulations and classified under ECCN 9A991.d. The BAE Avro RJ– 85 contains controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a result is subject to the EAR regardless of its location. The aircraft is classified under ECCN 9A991.b, and its export or re-export to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations. 30 Specifically, on December 22, 2016, EP–MMD (MSN 164) flew from Dubai, UAE to Tehran, Iran. Between December 20 and December 22, 2016, EP– MMF (MSN 376) flew on routes from Tehran, Iran to Beijing, China and Istanbul, Turkey, respectively. Between December 26 and December 28, 2016, EP– MMH (MSN 391) flew on routes from Tehran, Iran to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. E:\FR\FM\29DEN1.SGM 29DEN1 61750 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 249 / Friday, December 29, 2017 / Notices ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES subject to the Regulations, including, but not limited to, aircraft procured from or through Al Naser Airlines, on flights into and out of Iran, including from/to Moscow, Russia, Shanghai, China and Kabul, Afghanistan.31 The June 27, 2017 order also detailed evidence concerning a suspected planned or attempted diversion to Mahan of an Airbus A340 subject to the Regulations that had first been mentioned in OEE’s December 13, 2016 renewal request. OEE’s November 28, 2017 renewal request presented evidence that a Mahan employee attempted to initiate negotiations with a U.S. company for the purchase of an aircraft subject to the Regulations and classified under ECCN 9A610. The request also includes evidence indicating that Mahan Airways continues to operate a number of aircraft subject to the Regulations, including aircraft originally procured from or through Al Naser Airlines, on flights into and out of Iran from/to Lahore, Pakistan, Shanghai, China, Ankara, Turkey, Kabul, Afghanistan, and Baghdad, Iraq, in violation of the TDO.32 Additionally, multiple open sources indicate that Al Naser Airlines recently acquired, via lease, at least possession and/or control of a Boeing 737 (MSN 25361), bearing tail number YR–SEB, and an Airbus A320 (MSN 357), bearing tail number YR–SEA, from a Romanian company.33 Publicly available flight tracking data shows, furthermore, that in November 2017, YR–SEA was operated on international flights between Baghdad and destinations including Beirut, Lebanon and Istanbul, 31 Publicly available flight tracking information shows that on June 22, 2017, EP–MME (MSN 371) flew from Moscow, Russia to Tehran, Iran. Additionally, between June 19, 2017, and June 20, 2017, EP–MMQ (MSN 449), an Airbus A430 also obtained from or through Al Naser Airlines, flew on routes between Shanghai, China and Tehran, Iran. Similar flight tracking information shows that on June 20, 2017, EP–MNK (MSN 618), an Airbus A300 originally acquired by Mahan via a Ukrainian company, flew between Kabul, Afghanistan and Mashhad, Iran. 32 For example, publicly available flight tracking information shows that on December 17, 2017, EP– MNV (MSN 567) flew from Lahore, Pakistan to Tehran, Iran. On December 18–19, 2017, EP–MMQ (MSN 449) flew on routes between Istanbul, Turkey and Tehran, Iran. Additionally, on December 17, 2017, EP–MNK (MSN 618), an Airbus A300 originally acquired by Mahan via a Ukrainian company, flew on routes between Baghdad, Iraq and Mashhad, Iran. 33 The Airbus A320 is powered with U.S.-origin engines, which are subject to the EAR and classified under Export Control Classification (‘‘ECCN’’) 9A991.d. The engines are valued at more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft, which consequently is subject to the EAR. The aircraft is classified under ECCN 9A991.b., and its export or reexport to Iran would require U.S. Government authorization pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations. VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:09 Dec 28, 2017 Jkt 244001 Turkey under the International Air Transport Association (‘‘IATA’’) designator for Al Naser Airlines. These transactions thus violate the TDO. OEE’s investigation also shows that Al Naser Airlines is using the additional alias ‘‘Al Naser Wings Airline.’’ C. Findings Under the applicable standard set forth in Section 766.24 of the Regulations and my review of the entire record, I find that the evidence presented by BIS convincingly demonstrates that the denied persons have acted in violation of the Regulations and the TDO; that such violations have been significant, deliberate and covert; and that given the foregoing and the nature of the matters under investigation, there is a likelihood of future violations. Therefore, renewal of the TDO is necessary in the public interest to prevent imminent violation of the Regulations and to give notice to companies and individuals in the United States and abroad that they should continue to cease dealing with Mahan Airways and Al Naser Airlines and the other denied persons in connection with export and reexport transactions involving items subject to the Regulations and in connection with any other activity subject to the Regulations. I also find it necessary to add ‘‘Al Naser Wings Airline’’ as an alias for Al Naser Airlines. IV. Order It is therefore ordered: First, that MAHAN AIRWAYS, Mahan Tower, No. 21, Azadegan St., M.A. Jenah Exp. Way, Tehran, Iran; PEJMAN MAHMOOD KOSARAYANIFARD A/K/ A KOSARIAN FARD, P.O. Box 52404, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; MAHMOUD AMINI, G#22 Dubai Airport Free Zone, P.O. Box 393754, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and P.O. Box 52404, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and Mohamed Abdulla Alqaz Building, Al Maktoum Street, Al Rigga, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; KERMAN AVIATION A/K/A GIE KERMAN AVIATION, 42 Avenue Montaigne 75008, Paris, France; SIRJANCO TRADING LLC, P.O. Box 8709, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; MAHAN AIR GENERAL TRADING LLC, 19th Floor Al Moosa Tower One, Sheik Zayed Road, Dubai 40594, United Arab Emirates; MEHDI BAHRAMI, Mahan AirwaysIstanbul Office, Cumhuriye Cad. Sibil Apt No: 101 D:6, 34374 Emadad, Sisli Istanbul, Turkey; AL NASER AIRLINES A/K/A AL–NASER AIRLINES A/K/A AL NASER WINGS AIRLINE A/K/A ALNASER AIRLINES AND AIR FREIGHT LTD., Home 46, Al-Karrada, PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Babil Region, District 929, St 21, Beside Al Jadirya Private Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq, and Al Amirat Street, Section 309, St. 3/H.20, Al Mansour, Baghdad, Iraq, and P.O. Box 28360, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and P.O. Box 911399, Amman 11191, Jordan; ALI ABDULLAH ALHAY A/K/A ALI ALHAY A/K/A ALI ABDULLAH AHMED ALHAY, Home 46, Al-Karrada, Babil Region, District 929, St 21, Beside Al Jadirya Private Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq, and Anak Street, Qatif, Saudi Arabia 61177; BAHAR SAFWA GENERAL TRADING, P.O. Box 113212, Citadel Tower, Floor5, Office #504, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and P.O. Box 8709, Citadel Tower, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; SKY BLUE BIRD GROUP A/K/A SKY BLUE BIRD AVIATION A/K/A SKY BLUE BIRD LTD A/K/A SKY BLUE BIRD FZC, P.O. Box 16111, Ras Al Khaimah Trade Zone, United Arab Emirates; and ISSAM SHAMMOUT A/K/A MUHAMMAD ISAM MUHAMMAD ANWAR NUR SHAMMOUT A/K/A ISSAM ANWAR, Philips Building, 4th Floor, Al Fardous Street, Damascus, Syria, and Al Kolaa, Beirut, Lebanon 151515, and 17–18 Margaret Street, 4th Floor, London, W1W 8RP, United Kingdom, and Cumhuriyet Mah. Kavakli San St. Fulya, Cad. Hazar Sok. No.14/A Silivri, Istanbul, Turkey, and when acting for or on their behalf, any successors or assigns, agents, or employees (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. Benefitting 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. Second, that no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the following: E:\FR\FM\29DEN1.SGM 29DEN1 ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 249 / Friday, December 29, 2017 / Notices A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of a Denied Person any item subject to the EAR; B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted acquisition by a Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or control of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States, including financing or other support activities related to a transaction whereby a 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 a Denied Person of any item subject to the EAR that has been exported from the United States; D. Obtain from a Denied Person in the United States any item subject to the EAR 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 EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is owned, possessed or controlled by a Denied Person, or service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by a Denied Person if such service involves the use of any item subject to the EAR 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, that, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided in section 766.23 of the EAR, any other person, firm, corporation, or business organization related to a Denied Person 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. Fourth, that this Order does not prohibit any export, reexport, or other transaction subject to the EAR where the only items involved that are subject to the EAR are the foreign-produced direct product of U.S.-origin technology. In accordance with the provisions of Sections 766.24(e) of the EAR, Mahan Airways, Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and/or Bahar Safwa General Trading may, at any time, appeal this Order by filing a full written statement in support of the appeal with the Office of the Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202–4022. In accordance with the provisions of Sections 766.23(c)(2) and 766.24(e)(3) of the EAR, Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard, Mahmoud Amini, Kerman Aviation, VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:09 Dec 28, 2017 Jkt 244001 Sirjanco Trading LLC, Mahan Air General Trading LLC, Mehdi Bahrami, Sky Blue Bird Group, and/or Issam Shammout may, at any time, appeal their inclusion as a related person by filing a full written statement in support of the appeal with the Office of the Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202– 4022. In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(d) of the EAR, BIS may seek renewal of this Order by filing a written request not later than 20 days before the expiration date. A renewal request may be opposed by Mahan Airways, Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and/or Bahar Safwa General Trading as provided in Section 766.24(d), by filing a written submission with the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement, which must be received not later than seven days before the expiration date of the Order. A copy of this Order shall be provided to Mahan Airways, Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa General Trading and each related person, and shall be published in the Federal Register. This Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect for 180 days. Dated: December 20, 2017. Richard R. Majauskas, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement performing the nonexclusive duties and functions of the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement. [FR Doc. 2017–28113 Filed 12–28–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–475–828, A–557–809, A–565–801] Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings From Italy, Malaysia, and the Philippines: Continuation of Antidumping Duty Orders Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission (the ITC) have determined that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings (butt-weld fittings) from Italy, Malaysia, and the Philippines would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States. Therefore, Commerce is AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 61751 publishing a notice of continuation of these orders. DATES: Effective December 29, 2017. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madeline Heeren, AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482–9179. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On June 2, 2017, the Department initiated five-year (sunset) reviews of the Orders 1 on butt-weld fittings pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).2 On June 1, 2017, the ITC instituted its review of the Orders.3 Commerce conducted an expedited sunset review of the Orders. As a result of these sunset reviews, Commerce determined that revocation of the Orders would likely lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and, therefore, notified the ITC of the magnitude of the dumping margins likely to prevail should the orders be revoked, pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and 752(c)(3) of the Act.4 On December 20, 2017, the ITC published its determination, pursuant to section 751(c) and 752(a) of the Act, that revocation of the Orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United Sates within a reasonably foreseeable time.5 Scope of the Orders For purposes of these Orders, the product covered is certain stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings (butt-weld fittings). Butt-weld fittings are under 14 inches in outside diameter (based on nominal pipe size), whether finished or unfinished. The product encompasses all grades of stainless steel and ‘‘commodity’’ and ‘‘specialty’’ fittings. Specifically excluded from the 1 See Antidumping Duty Orders: Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Italy, Malaysia, and the Philippines, 66 FR 11257 (February 23, 2001) (Orders). 2 See Initiation of Five-Year (‘‘Sunset’’) Review, 82 FR 25599 (June 2, 2017) (Sunset Initiation). 3 See Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Italy, Malaysia, and the Philippines; Institution of Five-Year Reviews, 82 FR 25324 (June 1, 2017). 4 Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Italy, Malaysia, and the Philippines: Final Results of the Expedited Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Orders, 82 FR 46763 (October 6, 2017), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. 5 See Investigation No. 731–TA–865–867 (Third Review), 82 FR 60419 (December 20, 2017), and USITC Publication 4751 (January 2018), entitled Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings from Italy, Malaysia, and the Philippines: Investigation Nos. 731–TA–865–867 (Third Review). E:\FR\FM\29DEN1.SGM 29DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 249 (Friday, December 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61745-61751]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-28113]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security


Order Renewing Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges

Mahan Airways, Mahan Tower, No. 21, Azadegan St., M.A. Jenah Exp. 
Way, Tehran, Iran;

Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard, a/k/a Kosarian Fard, P.O. Box 52404, 
Dubai, United Arab Emirates;

Mahmoud Amini, G#22 Dubai Airport Free Zone, P.O. Box 393754, Dubai, 
United Arab Emirates;

and
P.O. Box 52404, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; and
Mohamed Abdulla Alqaz Building, Al Maktoum Street, Al Rigga, Dubai, 
United Arab Emirates;

Kerman Aviation, a/k/a GIE Kerman Aviation, 42 Avenue Montaigne 
75008, Paris, France;

Sirjanco Trading LLC, P.O. Box 8709, Dubai, United Arab Emirates;

Mahan Air General Trading LLC, 19th Floor Al Moosa Tower One, Sheik 
Zayed Road, Dubai 40594, United Arab Emirates;

Mehdi Bahrami, Mahan Airways--Istanbul Office, Cumhuriye Cad. Sibil 
Apt No: 101 D:6, 34374 Emadad, Sisli Istanbul, Turkey;

Al Naser Airlines, a/k/a al-Naser Airlines, a/k/a Al Naser Wings 
Airline, a/k/a Alnaser Airlines and Air Freight Ltd., Home 46, Al-
Karrada, Babil Region, District 929, St 21 Beside Al Jadirya Private 
Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq; and
Al Amirat Street, Section 309, St. 3/H.20 Al Mansour, Baghdad, Iraq; 
and
P.O. Box 28360, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; and
P.O. Box 911399, Amman 11191, Jordan;

Ali Abdullah Alhay, a/k/a Ali Alhay, a/k/a Ali Abdullah Ahmed Alhay, 
Home 46, Al-Karrada, Babil Region, District 929, St 21, Beside Al 
Jadirya Private Hospital, Baghdad, Iraq; and
Anak Street, Qatif, Saudi Arabia 61177;
Bahar Safwa General Trading, PO Box 113212 Citadel Tower, Floor-5, 
Office #504, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; and
PO Box 8709, Citadel Tower, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab 
Emirates;

Sky Blue Bird Group, a/k/a Sky Blue Bird Aviation, a/k/a Sky Blue 
Bird Ltd, a/k/a Sky Blue Bird FZC, P.O. Box 16111, Ras Al Khaimah 
Trade Zone, United Arab Emirates;

Issam Shammout, a/k/a Muhammad Isam Muhammad Anwar Nur Shammout, a/
k/a Issam Anwar, Philips Building, 4th Floor, Al Fardous Street, 
Damascus, Syria; and
Al Kolaa, Beirut, Lebanon 151515; and
17-18 Margaret Street, 4th Floor, London, W1W 8RP, United Kingdom; 
and
Cumhuriyet Mah. Kavakli San St. Fulya, Cad. Hazar Sok. No.14/A 
Silivri, Istanbul, Turkey

Order Renewing Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges

    Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the Export Administration 
Regulations, 15 CFR parts 730-774 (2016) (``EAR'' or ``the 
Regulations''),\1\ I hereby grant the request of the Office of Export 
Enforcement (``OEE'') to renew the temporary denial order issued in 
this matter on June 27, 2017, as recently modified on November 16, 
2017. I find that renewal of this order, as recently modified, is 
necessary in the public interest to prevent an imminent violation of 
the EAR. I also find it necessary in connection with this renewal to 
add ``Al Naser Wings Airline'' as an alias being used by respondent Al 
Naser Airlines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Regulations, currently codified at 15 CFR parts 730-774 
(2017), originally issued pursuant to the Export Administration Act 
of 1979 (``EAA'' or ``the Act''). 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 15, 2017 (82 FR 39,005 (Aug. 16, 2017)) has continued 
the Regulations in effect under the International Emergency Economic 
Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq. (2012)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Procedural History

    On March 17, 2008, Darryl W. Jackson, the then-Assistant Secretary 
of Commerce for Export Enforcement (``Assistant Secretary''), signed an 
order denying Mahan Airways' export privileges for a period of 180 days 
on the ground that issuance of the order was necessary in the public 
interest to prevent an imminent violation of the Regulations. The order 
also named as denied persons Blue Airways, of Yerevan, Armenia (``Blue 
Airways of Armenia''), as well as the ``Balli Group Respondents,'' 
namely, Balli Group PLC, Balli Aviation, Balli Holdings, Vahid 
Alaghband, Hassan Alaghband, Blue Sky One Ltd., Blue Sky Two Ltd., Blue 
Sky Three Ltd., Blue Sky Four Ltd., Blue Sky Five Ltd., and Blue Sky 
Six Ltd., all of the United Kingdom. The order was issued ex parte 
pursuant to Section 766.24(a) of the Regulations, and went into effect 
on March 21, 2008, the date it was published in the Federal Register.
    This temporary denial order (``TDO'') was renewed in accordance 
with Section 766.24(d) of the Regulations.\2\

[[Page 61746]]

Subsequent renewals also have issued pursuant to Section 766.24(d), 
including most recently on June 27, 2017.\3\ Some of the renewal orders 
and the modification orders that have issued between renewals have 
added certain parties as respondents or as related persons, or effected 
the removal of certain parties.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Section 766.24(d) provides that BIS may seek renewal of a 
temporary denial order for additional 180-day renewal periods, if it 
believes that renewal is necessary in the public interest to prevent 
an imminent violation. Renewal requests are to be made in writing no 
later than 20 days before the scheduled expiration date of a 
temporary denial order. Renewal requests may include discussion of 
any additional or changed circumstances, and may seek appropriate 
modifications to the order, including the addition of parties as 
respondents or related persons, or the removal of parties previously 
added as respondents or related persons. BIS is not required to seek 
renewal as to all parties, and a removal of a party can be effected 
if, without more, BIS does not seek renewal as to that party. Any 
party included or added to a temporary denial order as a respondent 
may oppose a renewal request as set forth in Section 766.24(d). 
Parties included or added as related persons can at any time appeal 
their inclusion as a related person, but cannot challenge the 
underlying temporary denial order, either as initially issued or 
subsequently renewed, and cannot oppose a renewal request. See also 
note 4, infra.
    \3\ The June 27, 2017 renewal order was effective upon issuance 
and published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2017 (82 FR 
30,823). Prior renewal orders issued on September 17, 2008, March 
16, 2009, September 11, 2009, March 9, 2010, September 3, 2010, 
February 25, 2011, August 24, 2011, February 15, 2012, August 9, 
2012, February 4, 2013, July 31, 2013, January 24, 2014, July 22, 
2014, January 16, 2015, July 13, 2015, January 7, 2016, July 7, 
2016, and December 30, 2016, respectively. The August 24, 2011 
renewal followed the issuance of a modification order that issued on 
July 1, 2011, to add Zarand Aviation as a respondent. The July 13, 
2015 renewal followed a modification order that issued May 21, 2015, 
and added Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa 
General Trading as respondents. Each of the renewal orders and each 
of the modification orders referenced in this footnote or elsewhere 
in this order has been published in the Federal Register.
    \4\ Pursuant to Sections 766.23 and 766.24(c) of the 
Regulations, any person, firm, corporation, or business organization 
related to a denied person by affiliation, ownership, control, or 
position of responsibility in the conduct of trade or related 
services may be added as a ``related person'' to a temporary denial 
order to prevent evasion of the order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The September 11, 2009 renewal order continued the denial order as 
to Mahan Airways, but not as to the Balli Group Respondents or Blue 
Airways of Armenia.\5\ As part of the February 25, 2011 renewal order, 
Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard (a/k/a Kosarian Fard), Mahmoud Amini, and 
Gatewick LLC (a/k/a Gatewick Freight and Cargo Services, a/k/a Gatewick 
Aviation Services) were added as related persons to prevent evasion of 
the TDO.\6\ A modification order issued on July 1, 2011, adding Zarand 
Aviation as a respondent in order to prevent an imminent violation.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Balli Group PLC and Balli Aviation settled proposed BIS 
administrative charges as part of a settlement agreement that was 
approved by a settlement order issued on February 5, 2010. The 
sanctions imposed pursuant to that settlement and order included, 
inter alia, a $15 million civil penalty and a requirement to conduct 
five external audits and submit related audit reports. The Balli 
Group Respondents also settled related charges with the Department 
of Justice and the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets 
Control.
    \6\ See note 4, supra, concerning the addition of related 
persons to a temporary denial order. Kosarian Fard and Mahmoud Amini 
remain parties to the TDO. On August 13, 2014, BIS and Gatewick 
resolved administrative charges against Gatewick, including a charge 
for acting contrary to the terms of a BIS denial order (15 CFR 
764.2(k)). In addition to the payment of a civil penalty, the 
settlement includes a seven-year denial order. The first two years 
of the denial period were active, with the remaining five years 
suspended conditioned upon Gatewick's full and timely payment of the 
civil penalty and its compliance with the Regulations during the 
seven-year denial order period. This denial order, in effect, 
superseded the TDO as to Gatewick, which was not included as part of 
the January 16, 2015 renewal order. The Gatewick LLC Final Order was 
published in the Federal Register on August 20, 2014. See 79 FR 
49283 (Aug. 20, 2014).
    \7\ Zarand Aviation's export privileges remained denied until 
July 22, 2014, when it was not included as part of the renewal order 
issued on that date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the August 24, 2011 renewal, Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco 
Trading LLC, and Ali Eslamian were added as related persons. Mahan Air 
General Trading LLC, Equipco (UK) Ltd., and Skyco (UK) Ltd. were added 
as related persons by a modification order issued on April 9, 2012. 
Mehdi Bahrami was added as a related person as part of the February 4, 
2013 renewal order.
    On May 21, 2015, a modification order issued adding Al Naser 
Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa General Trading as 
respondents. As detailed in that order and discussed further infra, 
these respondents were added to the TDO based upon evidence that they 
were acting together to, inter alia, obtain aircraft subject to the 
Regulations for export or reexport to Mahan in violation of the 
Regulations and the TDO. Sky Blue Bird Group and its chief executive 
officer, Issam Shammout, were added as related persons as part of the 
July 13, 2015 renewal order.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign 
Assets Control (``OFAC'') designated Sky Blue Bird and Issam 
Shammout as Specially Designated Global Terrorists (``SDGTs'') on 
May 21, 2015, pursuant to Executive Order 13324, for ``providing 
support to Iran's Mahan Air.'' See 80 FR 30762 (May 29, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The June 27, 2017 renewal order continued the denial of the export 
privileges of Mahan Airways, Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard, Mahmoud 
Amini, Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco Trading LLC, Mahan Air General Trading 
LLC, Mehdi Bahrami, Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, Bahar Safwa 
General Trading, Sky Blue Bird Group, and Issam Shammout, as well as 
Ali Eslamian, Equipco (UK) Ltd., and Skyco (UK) Ltd. On November 16, 
2017, a modification order issued to remove Eslamian, Equipco, and 
Skyco following a request by OEE for their removal.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The November 16, 2017 modification was published in the 
Federal Register on December 4, 2017. See 82 FR 57,203 (Dec. 4, 
2017). On September 28, 2017, BIS and Ali Eslamian resolved an 
administrative charge for acting contrary to the terms of the denial 
order (15 CFR 764.2(k)) that was based upon Eslamian's violation of 
the TDO after his addition to the TDO on August 24, 2011. Equipco 
(UK) Ltd. and Skyco (UK) Ltd., two companies owned and operated by 
Eslamian, also were parties to settlement agreement and were added 
to the settlement order as related persons. In addition to other 
sanctions, the settlement provides that Eslamian, Equipco, and Skyco 
shall be subject to a conditionally-suspended denial order for a 
period of four years from the date of the settlement order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On November 28, 2017, BIS, through OEE, submitted a written request 
for renewal of the TDO that issued on June 27, 2017, as modified on 
November 16, 2017. The written request was made more than 20 days 
before the TDO's scheduled expiration. Notice of the renewal request 
was provided to Mahan Airways, Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, 
and Bahar Safwa General Trading in accordance with Sections 766.5 and 
766.24(d) of the Regulations. No opposition to the renewal of the TDO 
has been received. Furthermore, no appeal of the related person 
determinations made as part of the September 3, 2010, February 25, 
2011, August 24, 2011, April 9, 2012, February 4, 2013, and July 13, 
2015 renewal or modification orders has been made by Kosarian Fard, 
Mahmoud Amini, Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco Trading LLC, Mahan Air General 
Trading LLC, Mehdi Bahrami, Sky Blue Bird Group, or Issam Shammout.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ A party named or added as a related person may not oppose 
the issuance or renewal of the underlying temporary denial order, 
but may file an appeal of the related person determination in 
accordance with Section 766.23(c). See also note 2, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Renewal of the TDO

A. Legal Standard

    Pursuant to Section 766.24, BIS may issue or renew an order 
temporarily denying a respondent's export privileges upon a showing 
that the order is necessary in the public interest to prevent an 
``imminent violation'' of the Regulations. 15 CFR 766.24(b)(1) and 
766.24(d). ``A violation may be `imminent' either in time or degree of 
likelihood.'' 15 CFR 766.24(b)(3). BIS may show ``either that a 
violation is about to occur, or that the general circumstances of the 
matter under investigation or case under criminal or administrative 
charges demonstrate a likelihood of future violations.'' Id. As to the 
likelihood of future violations, BIS may show that the violation under 
investigation or charge ``is significant,

[[Page 61747]]

deliberate, covert and/or likely to occur again, rather than technical 
or negligent [.]'' Id. A ``lack of information establishing the precise 
time a violation may occur does not preclude a finding that a violation 
is imminent, so long as there is sufficient reason to believe the 
likelihood of a violation.'' Id.

B. The TDO and BIS's Request for Renewal

    OEE's request for renewal is based upon the facts underlying the 
issuance of the initial TDO, and the renewal and modification orders 
subsequently issued in this matter, including the May 21, 2015 
modification order and the renewal order issued on June 27, 2017, and 
the evidence developed over the course of this investigation, which 
indicate a blatant disregard of U.S. export controls and the TDO. The 
initial TDO was issued as a result of evidence that showed that Mahan 
Airways and other parties engaged in conduct prohibited by the EAR by 
knowingly re-exporting to Iran three U.S.-origin aircraft, specifically 
Boeing 747s (``Aircraft 1-3''), items subject to the EAR and classified 
under Export Control Classification Number (``ECCN'') 9A991.b, without 
the required U.S. Government authorization. Further evidence submitted 
by BIS indicated that Mahan Airways was involved in the attempted re-
export of three additional U.S.-origin Boeing 747s (``Aircraft 4-6'') 
to Iran.
    As discussed in the September 17, 2008 renewal order, evidence 
presented by BIS indicated that Aircraft 1-3 continued to be flown on 
Mahan Airways' routes after issuance of the TDO, in violation of the 
Regulations and the TDO itself.\11\ It also showed that Aircraft 1-3 
had been flown in further violation of the Regulations and the TDO on 
the routes of Iran Air, an Iranian Government airline. Moreover, as 
discussed in the March 16, 2009, September 11, 2009 and March 9, 2010 
renewal orders, Mahan Airways registered Aircraft 1-3 in Iran, obtained 
Iranian tail numbers for them (EP-MNA, EP-MNB, and EP-MNE, 
respectively), and continued to operate at least two of them in 
violation of the Regulations and the TDO,\12\ while also committing an 
additional knowing and willful violation when it negotiated for and 
acquired an additional U.S.-origin aircraft. The additional acquired 
aircraft was an MD-82 aircraft, which subsequently was painted in Mahan 
Airways' livery and flown on multiple Mahan Airways' routes under tail 
number TC-TUA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Engaging in conduct prohibited by a denial order violates 
the Regulations. 15 CFR 764.2(a) and (k).
    \12\ The third Boeing 747 appeared to have undergone significant 
service maintenance and may not have been operational at the time of 
the March 9, 2010 renewal order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The March 9, 2010 renewal order also noted that a court in the 
United Kingdom (``U.K.'') had found Mahan Airways in contempt of court 
on February 1, 2010, for failing to comply with that court's December 
21, 2009 and January 12, 2010 orders compelling Mahan Airways to remove 
the Boeing 747s from Iran and ground them in the Netherlands. Mahan 
Airways and the Balli Group Respondents had been litigating before the 
U.K. court concerning ownership and control of Aircraft 1-3. In a 
letter to the U.K. court dated January 12, 2010, Mahan Airways' 
Chairman indicated, inter alia, that Mahan Airways opposes U.S. 
Government actions against Iran, that it continued to operate the 
aircraft on its routes in and out of Tehran (and had 158,000 ``forward 
bookings'' for these aircraft), and that it wished to continue to do so 
and would pay damages if required by that court, rather than ground the 
aircraft.
    The September 3, 2010 renewal order discussed the fact that Mahan 
Airways' violations of the TDO extended beyond operating U.S.-origin 
aircraft and attempting to acquire additional U.S.-origin aircraft. In 
February 2009, while subject to the TDO, Mahan Airways participated in 
the export of computer motherboards, items subject to the Regulations 
and designated as EAR99, from the United States to Iran, via the United 
Arab Emirates (``UAE''), in violation of both the TDO and the 
Regulations, by transporting and/or forwarding the computer 
motherboards from the UAE to Iran. Mahan Airways' violations were 
facilitated by Gatewick LLC, which not only participated in the 
transaction, but also has stated to BIS that it acted as Mahan Airways' 
sole booking agent for cargo and freight forwarding services in the 
UAE.
    Moreover, in a January 24, 2011 filing in the U.K. court, Mahan 
Airways asserted that Aircraft 1-3 were not being used, but stated in 
pertinent part that the aircraft were being maintained in Iran 
especially ``in an airworthy condition'' and that, depending on the 
outcome of its U.K. court appeal, the aircraft ``could immediately go 
back into service . . . on international routes into and out of Iran.'' 
Mahan Airways' January 24, 2011 submission to U.K. Court of Appeal, at 
p. 25, ]] 108, 110. This clearly stated intent, both on its own and in 
conjunction with Mahan Airways' prior misconduct and statements, 
demonstrated the need to renew the TDO in order to prevent imminent 
future violations. Two of these three 747s subsequently were removed 
from Iran and are no longer in Mahan Airways' possession. The third of 
these 747s, with Manufacturer's Serial Number (``MSN'') 23480 and 
Iranian tail number EP-MNE, remained in Iran under Mahan's control. 
Pursuant to Executive Order 13324, it was designated a Specially 
Designated Global Terrorist (``SDGT'') by the U.S. Department of the 
Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (``OFAC'') on September 19, 
2012.\13\ Furthermore, as discussed in the February 4, 2013 Order, open 
source information indicated that this 747, painted in the livery and 
logo of Mahan Airways, had been flown between Iran and Syria, and was 
suspected of ferrying weapons and/or other equipment to the Syrian 
Government from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Open source 
information showed that this aircraft had flown from Iran to Syria as 
recently as June 30, 2013, and continues to show that it remains in 
active operation in Mahan Airways' fleet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/pages/20120919.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, as first detailed in the July 1, 2011 and August 24, 
2011 orders, and discussed in subsequent renewal orders in this matter, 
Mahan Airways also continued to evade U.S. export control laws by 
operating two Airbus A310 aircraft, bearing Mahan Airways' livery and 
logo, on flights into and out of Iran.\14\ At the time of the July 1, 
2011 and August 24, 2011 orders, these Airbus A310s were registered in 
France, with tail numbers F-OJHH and F-OJHI, respectively.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The Airbus A310s are powered with U.S.-origin engines. The 
engines are subject to the EAR and classified under Export Control 
Classification (``ECCN'') 9A991.d. The Airbus A310s contain 
controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more than 10 percent of the 
total value of the aircraft and as a result are subject to the EAR. 
They are classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or reexport of 
these aircraft to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization 
pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations.
    \15\ OEE subsequently presented evidence that after the August 
24, 2011 renewal, Mahan Airways worked along with Kerman Aviation 
and others to de-register the two Airbus A310 aircraft in France and 
to register both aircraft in Iran (with, respectively, Iranian tail 
numbers EP-MHH and EP-MHI). It was determined subsequent to the 
February 15, 2012 renewal order that the registration switch for 
these A310s was cancelled and that Mahan Airways then continued to 
fly the aircraft under the original French tail numbers (F-OJHH and 
F-OJHI, respectively). Both aircraft apparently remain in Mahan 
Airways' possession.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The August 2012 renewal order also found that Mahan Airways had 
acquired another Airbus A310 aircraft subject to the Regulations, with 
MSN 499 and

[[Page 61748]]

Iranian tail number EP-VIP, in violation of the TDO and the 
Regulations.\16\ On September 19, 2012, all three Airbus A310 aircraft 
(tail numbers F-OJHH, F-OJHI, and EP-VIP) were designated as SDGTs.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See note 14, supra.
    \17\ See http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/pages/20120919.aspx. Mahan Airways was previously 
designated by OFAC as a SDGT on October 18, 2011. 77 FR 64,427 
(October 18, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The February 4, 2013 renewal order laid out further evidence of 
continued and additional efforts by Mahan Airways and other persons 
acting in concert with Mahan, including Kral Aviation and another 
Turkish company, to procure U.S.-origin engines--two GE CF6-50C2 
engines, with MSNs 517621 and 517738, respectively--and other aircraft 
parts in violation of the TDO and the Regulations.\18\ The February 4, 
2013 order also added Mehdi Bahrami as a related person in accordance 
with Section 766.23 of the Regulations. Bahrami, a Mahan Vice-President 
and the head of Mahan's Istanbul Office, also was involved in Mahan's 
acquisition of the original three Boeing 747s (Aircraft 1-3) that 
resulted in the original TDO, and has had a business relationship with 
Mahan dating back to 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Kral Aviation was referenced in the February 4, 2013 
renewal order as ``Turkish Company No. 1.'' Kral Aviation purchased 
a GE CF6-50C2 aircraft engine (MSN 517621) from the United States in 
July 2012, on behalf of Mahan Airways. OEE was able to prevent this 
engine from reaching Mahan by issuing a redelivery order to the 
freight forwarder in accordance with Section 758.8 of the 
Regulations. OEE also issued Kral Aviation a redelivery order for 
the second CF6-50C2 engine (MSN 517738) on July 30, 2012. The owner 
of the second engine subsequently cancelled the item's sale to Kral 
Aviation. In September 2012, OEE was alerted by a U.S. exporter that 
another Turkish company (``Turkish Company No. 2'') was attempting 
to purchase aircraft spare parts intended for re-export by Turkish 
Company No. 2 to Mahan Airways. See February 4, 2013 renewal order.
    On December 31, 2013, Kral Aviation was added to BIS's Entity 
List, Supplement No. 4 to Part 744 of the Regulations. See 78 
FR75458 (Dec. 12, 2013). Companies and individuals are added to the 
Entity List for engaging in activities contrary to the national 
security or foreign policy interests of the United States. See 15 
CFR 744.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The July 31, 2013 renewal order detailed additional evidence 
obtained by OEE showing efforts by Mahan Airways to obtain another GE 
CF6-50C2 aircraft engine (MSN 528350) from the United States via 
Turkey. Multiple Mahan employees, including Mehdi Bahrami, were 
involved in or aware of matters related to the engine's arrival in 
Turkey from the United States, plans to visually inspect the engine, 
and prepare it for shipment from Turkey.
    Mahan Airways sought to obtain this U.S.-origin engine through 
Pioneer Logistics Havacilik Turizm Yonetim Danismanlik (``Pioneer 
Logistics''), an aircraft parts supplier located in Turkey, and its 
director/operator, Gulnihal Yegane, a Turkish national who previously 
had conducted Mahan related business with Mehdi Bahrami and Ali 
Eslamian. Moreover, as referenced in the July 31, 2013 renewal order, a 
sworn affidavit by Kosol Surinanda, also known as Kosol Surinandha, 
Managing Director of Mahan's General Sales Agent in Thailand, stated 
that the shares of Pioneer Logistics for which he was the listed owner 
were ``actually the property of and owned by Mahan.'' He further stated 
that he held ``legal title to the shares until otherwise required by 
Mahan'' but would ``exercise the rights granted to [him] exactly and 
only as instructed by Mahan and [his] vote and/or decisions [would] 
only and exclusively reflect the wills and demands of Mahan[.]'' \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Pioneer Logistics, Gulnihal Yegane, and Kosol Surinanda 
also were added to the Entity List on December 12, 2013. See 78 FR 
75458 (Dec. 12, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The January 24, 2014 renewal order outlined OEE's continued 
investigation of Mahan Airways' activities and detailed an attempt by 
Mahan, which OEE thwarted, to obtain, via an Indonesian aircraft parts 
supplier, two U.S.-origin Honeywell ALF-502R-5 aircraft engines (MSNs 
LF5660 and LF5325), items subject to the Regulations, from a U.S. 
company located in Texas. An invoice of the Indonesian aircraft parts 
supplier dated March 27, 2013, listed Mahan Airways as the purchaser of 
the engines and included a Mahan ship-to address. OEE also obtained a 
Mahan air waybill dated March 12, 2013, listing numerous U.S.-origin 
aircraft parts subject to the Regulations--including, among other 
items, a vertical navigation gyroscope, a transmitter, and a power 
control unit--being transported by Mahan from Turkey to Iran in 
violation of the TDO.
    The July 22, 2014 renewal order discussed open source evidence from 
the March-June 2014 time period regarding two BAE regional jets, items 
subject to the Regulations, that were painted in the livery and logo of 
Mahan Airways and operating under Iranian tail numbers EP-MOK and EP-
MOI, respectively.\20\ In addition, aviation industry resources 
indicated that these aircraft were obtained by Mahan Airways in late 
November 2013 and June 2014, from Ukrainian Mediterranean Airline, a 
Ukrainian airline that was added to BIS's Entity List (Supplement No. 4 
to Part 744 of the Regulations) on August 15, 2011, for acting contrary 
to the national security and foreign policy interests of the United 
States.\21\ Open source information indicates that at least EP-MOI 
remains active in Mahan's fleet, and that the aircraft was being 
operated on multiple flights within the last week.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The BAE regional jets are powered with U.S.-origin engines. 
The engines are subject to the EAR and classified under ECCN 
9A991.d. These aircraft contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued 
at more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a 
result are subject to the EAR. They are classified under ECCN 
9A991.b. The export or reexport of these aircraft to Iran requires 
U.S. Government authorization pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 
of the Regulations.
    \21\ See 76 FR 50407 (Aug. 15, 2011). The July 22, 2014 renewal 
order also referenced two Airbus A320 aircraft painted in the livery 
and logo of Mahan Airways and operating under Iranian tail numbers 
EP-MMK and EP-MML, respectively. OEE's investigation also showed 
that Mahan obtained these aircraft in November 2013, from Khors Air 
Company, another Ukrainian airline that, like Ukrainian 
Mediterranean Airlines, was added to BIS's Entity List on August 15, 
2011. Open source evidence indicates the two Airbus A320 aircraft 
may be been transferred by Mahan Airways to another Iranian airline 
in October 2014, and issued Iranian tail numbers EP-APE and EP-APF, 
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The January 16, 2015 renewal order detailed evidence of additional 
attempts by Mahan Airways to acquire items subject the Regulations in 
further violation of the TDO. Specifically, in March 2014, OEE became 
aware of an inertial reference unit bearing serial number 1231 (``the 
IRU'') that had been sent to the United States for repair. The IRU is 
subject to the Regulations, classified under ECCN 7A103, and controlled 
for missile technology reasons. Upon closer inspection, it was 
determined that IRU came from or had been installed on an Airbus A340 
aircraft bearing MSN 056. Further investigation revealed that as of 
approximately February 2014, this aircraft was registered under Iranian 
tail number EP-MMB and had been painted in the livery and logo of Mahan 
Airways.
    The January 16, 2015 renewal order also described related efforts 
by the Departments of Justice and Treasury to further thwart Mahan's 
illicit procurement efforts. Specifically, on August 14, 2014, the 
United States Attorney's Office for the District of Maryland filed a 
civil forfeiture complaint for the IRU pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 401(b) 
that resulted in the court issuing an Order of Forfeiture on December 
2, 2014. EP-MMB remains listed as active in Mahan Airways' fleet and 
has been used on flights into and out of Iran as recently as December 
19, 2017.

[[Page 61749]]

    Additionally, on August 29, 2014, OFAC blocked the property and 
interests in property of Asian Aviation Logistics of Thailand, a Mahan 
Airways affiliate or front company, pursuant to Executive Order 13224. 
In doing so, OFAC described Mahan Airways' use of Asian Aviation 
Logistics to evade sanctions by making payments on behalf of Mahan for 
the purchase of engines and other equipment.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/Pages/20140829.aspx. See 79 FR 55073 (Sep. 15, 2014). 
OFAC also blocked the property and property interests of Pioneer 
Logistics of Turkey on August 29, 2014. Id. Mahan Airways' use of 
Pioneer Logistics in an effort to evade the TDO and the Regulations 
was discussed in a prior renewal order, as summarized, supra, at 13-
14. BIS added both Asian Aviation Logistics and Pioneer Logistics to 
the Entity List on December 12, 2013. See 78 FR 75458 (Dec. 12, 
2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The May 21, 2015 modification order detailed the acquisition of two 
aircraft, specifically an Airbus A340 bearing MSN 164 and an Airbus 
A321 bearing MSN 550, that were purchased by Al Naser Airlines in late 
2014/early 2015 and are currently located in Iran under the possession, 
control, and/or ownership of Mahan Airways.\23\ The sales agreements 
for these two aircraft were signed by Ali Abdullah Alhay for Al Naser 
Airlines.\24\ Payment information reveals that multiple electronic 
funds transfers (``EFT'') were made by Ali Abdullah Alhay and Bahar 
Safwa General Trading in order to acquire MSNs 164 and 550. The May 21, 
2015 modification order also laid out evidence showing the respondents' 
attempts to obtain other controlled aircraft, including aircraft 
physically located in the United States in similarly-patterned 
transactions during the same recent time period. Transactional 
documents involving two Airbus A320s bearing MSNs 82 and 99, 
respectively, again showed Ali Abdullah Alhay signing sales agreements 
for Al Naser Airlines.\25\ A review of the payment information for 
these aircraft similarly revealed EFTs from Ali Abdullah Alhay and 
Bahar Safwa General Trading that follow the pattern described for MSNs 
164 and 550, supra. MSNs 82 and 99 were detained by OEE Special Agents 
prior to their planned export from the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Both of these aircraft are powered by U.S.-origin engines 
that are subject to the Regulations and classified under ECCN 
9A991.d. Both aircraft contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued 
at more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a 
result are subject to the EAR regardless of their location. The 
aircraft are classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or re-export 
of these aircraft to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization 
pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations.
    \24\ The evidence obtained by OEE showed Ali Abdullah Alhay as a 
25% owner of Al Naser Airlines.
    \25\ Both aircraft were physically located in the United States 
and therefore are subject to the Regulations pursuant to Section 
734.3(a)(1). Moreover, these Airbus A320s are powered by U.S.-origin 
engines that are subject to the Regulations and classified under 
Export Control Classification Number ECCN 9A991.d. The Airbus A320s 
contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more than 10 percent 
of the total value of the aircraft and as a result are subject to 
the EAR regardless of their location. The aircraft are classified 
under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or re-export of these aircraft to 
Iran requires U.S. Government authorization pursuant to Sections 
742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The July 13, 2015 renewal order outlined evidence showing that Al 
Naser Airlines' attempts to acquire aircraft on behalf of Mahan Airways 
extended beyond MSNs 164 and 550 to include a total of nine 
aircraft.\26\ Four of the aircraft, all of which are subject to the 
Regulations and were obtained by Mahan from Al Naser Airlines, had been 
issued the following Iranian tail numbers: EP-MMD (MSN 164), EP-MMG 
(MSN 383), EP-MMH (MSN 391) and EP-MMR (MSN 416), respectively.\27\ 
Publicly available flight tracking information provided evidence that 
at the time of the July 13, 2015 renewal, both EP-MMH and EP-MMR were 
being actively flown on routes into and out of Iran in violation of the 
TDO and Regulations.\28\ The January 7, 2016 renewal order discussed 
evidence that Mahan Airways had begun actively flying EP-MMD on 
international routes into and out of Iran, including from/to Bangkok, 
Thailand. Additionally, the January 7, 2016 order described publicly 
available aviation database and flight tracking information indicating 
that Mahan Airways continued efforts to acquire Iranian tail numbers 
and press into active service under Mahan's livery and logo at least 
two more of the Airbus A340 aircraft it had obtained from or through Al 
Naser Airlines: EP-MME (MSN 371) and EP-MMF (MSN 376), respectively. 
Since January 2016, EP-MME has logged flights to and from Tehran, Iran 
involving various destinations, including Guangzhou, China and Dubai, 
United Arab Emirates, in further violation of the TDO and the 
Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ This evidence included a press release dated May 9, 2015, 
that appeared on Mahan Airways' website and stated that Mahan 
``added 9 modern aircraft to its air fleet [,]'' and that the newly 
acquired aircraft included eight Airbus A340s and one Airbus A321. 
See http://www.mahan.aero/en/mahan-air/press-room/44. The press 
release was subsequently removed from Mahan Airways' website. 
Publicly available aviation databases similarly showed that Mahan 
had obtained nine additional aircraft from Al Naser Airlines in May 
2015, including MSNs 164 and 550. As also discussed in the July 13, 
2015 renewal order, Sky Blue Bird Group, via Issam Shammout, was 
actively involved in Al Naser Airlines' acquisition of MSNs 164 and 
550, and the attempted acquisition of MSNs 82 and 99 (which were 
detained by OEE).
    \27\ The Airbus A340s are powered by U.S.-origin engines that 
are subject to the Regulations and classified under ECCN 9A991.d. 
The Airbus A340s contain controlled U.S.-origin items valued at more 
than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a result 
are subject to the EAR regardless of their location. The aircraft 
are classified under ECCN 9A991.b. The export or re-export of these 
aircraft to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization pursuant to 
Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations.
    \28\ There is some publicly available information indicating 
that the aircraft Mahan Airways is flying under Iranian tail number 
EP-MMR is now MSN 615, rather than MSN 416. Both aircraft are Airbus 
A340 aircraft that Mahan acquired from Al Naser Airlines in 
violation of the TDO and the Regulations. Moreover, both aircraft 
were designated as SDGTs by OFAC on May 21, 2015, pursuant to 
Executive Order 13324. See 80 FR 30762 (May 29, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The July 7, 2016 renewal order described Mahan Airways' acquisition 
of a BAE Avro RJ-85 aircraft (MSN E2392) in violation of the TDO and 
its subsequent registration under Iranian tail number EP-MOR.\29\ This 
information was corroborated by publicly available information on the 
website of Iran's civil aviation authority. The July 7, 2016 order also 
outlined Mahan's continued operation of EP-MMF in violation of the TDO 
on routes from Tehran, Iran to Beijing, China and Shanghai, China, 
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ The BAE Avro RJ-85 is powered by U.S.-origin engines that 
are subject to the Regulations and classified under ECCN 9A991.d. 
The BAE Avro RJ-85 contains controlled U.S.-origin items valued at 
more than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft and as a 
result is subject to the EAR regardless of its location. The 
aircraft is classified under ECCN 9A991.b, and its export or re-
export to Iran requires U.S. Government authorization pursuant to 
Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The December 30, 2016 renewal order outlined Mahan's continued 
operation of multiple Airbus aircraft, including EP-MMD (MSN 164), EP-
MMF (MSN 376), and EP-MMH (MSN 391), which were acquired from or 
through Al Naser Airlines in violation of the TDO, as previously 
detailed in pertinent part in the July 13, 2015 and January 7, 2016 
renewal orders. Publicly available flight tracking information showed 
that the aircraft were operated on flights into and out of Iran, 
including from/to Beijing, China, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and Istanbul, 
Turkey.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Specifically, on December 22, 2016, EP-MMD (MSN 164) flew 
from Dubai, UAE to Tehran, Iran. Between December 20 and December 
22, 2016, EP-MMF (MSN 376) flew on routes from Tehran, Iran to 
Beijing, China and Istanbul, Turkey, respectively. Between December 
26 and December 28, 2016, EP-MMH (MSN 391) flew on routes from 
Tehran, Iran to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The June 27, 2017 renewal order included similar evidence regarding 
Mahan Airways' violation of the TDO by operating multiple Airbus 
aircraft

[[Page 61750]]

subject to the Regulations, including, but not limited to, aircraft 
procured from or through Al Naser Airlines, on flights into and out of 
Iran, including from/to Moscow, Russia, Shanghai, China and Kabul, 
Afghanistan.\31\ The June 27, 2017 order also detailed evidence 
concerning a suspected planned or attempted diversion to Mahan of an 
Airbus A340 subject to the Regulations that had first been mentioned in 
OEE's December 13, 2016 renewal request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Publicly available flight tracking information shows that 
on June 22, 2017, EP-MME (MSN 371) flew from Moscow, Russia to 
Tehran, Iran. Additionally, between June 19, 2017, and June 20, 
2017, EP-MMQ (MSN 449), an Airbus A430 also obtained from or through 
Al Naser Airlines, flew on routes between Shanghai, China and 
Tehran, Iran. Similar flight tracking information shows that on June 
20, 2017, EP-MNK (MSN 618), an Airbus A300 originally acquired by 
Mahan via a Ukrainian company, flew between Kabul, Afghanistan and 
Mashhad, Iran.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OEE's November 28, 2017 renewal request presented evidence that a 
Mahan employee attempted to initiate negotiations with a U.S. company 
for the purchase of an aircraft subject to the Regulations and 
classified under ECCN 9A610. The request also includes evidence 
indicating that Mahan Airways continues to operate a number of aircraft 
subject to the Regulations, including aircraft originally procured from 
or through Al Naser Airlines, on flights into and out of Iran from/to 
Lahore, Pakistan, Shanghai, China, Ankara, Turkey, Kabul, Afghanistan, 
and Baghdad, Iraq, in violation of the TDO.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ For example, publicly available flight tracking information 
shows that on December 17, 2017, EP-MNV (MSN 567) flew from Lahore, 
Pakistan to Tehran, Iran. On December 18-19, 2017, EP-MMQ (MSN 449) 
flew on routes between Istanbul, Turkey and Tehran, Iran. 
Additionally, on December 17, 2017, EP-MNK (MSN 618), an Airbus A300 
originally acquired by Mahan via a Ukrainian company, flew on routes 
between Baghdad, Iraq and Mashhad, Iran.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, multiple open sources indicate that Al Naser Airlines 
recently acquired, via lease, at least possession and/or control of a 
Boeing 737 (MSN 25361), bearing tail number YR-SEB, and an Airbus A320 
(MSN 357), bearing tail number YR-SEA, from a Romanian company.\33\ 
Publicly available flight tracking data shows, furthermore, that in 
November 2017, YR-SEA was operated on international flights between 
Baghdad and destinations including Beirut, Lebanon and Istanbul, Turkey 
under the International Air Transport Association (``IATA'') designator 
for Al Naser Airlines. These transactions thus violate the TDO.
    OEE's investigation also shows that Al Naser Airlines is using the 
additional alias ``Al Naser Wings Airline.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ The Airbus A320 is powered with U.S.-origin engines, which 
are subject to the EAR and classified under Export Control 
Classification (``ECCN'') 9A991.d. The engines are valued at more 
than 10 percent of the total value of the aircraft, which 
consequently is subject to the EAR. The aircraft is classified under 
ECCN 9A991.b., and its export or reexport to Iran would require U.S. 
Government authorization pursuant to Sections 742.8 and 746.7 of the 
Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Findings

    Under the applicable standard set forth in Section 766.24 of the 
Regulations and my review of the entire record, I find that the 
evidence presented by BIS convincingly demonstrates that the denied 
persons have acted in violation of the Regulations and the TDO; that 
such violations have been significant, deliberate and covert; and that 
given the foregoing and the nature of the matters under investigation, 
there is a likelihood of future violations. Therefore, renewal of the 
TDO is necessary in the public interest to prevent imminent violation 
of the Regulations and to give notice to companies and individuals in 
the United States and abroad that they should continue to cease dealing 
with Mahan Airways and Al Naser Airlines and the other denied persons 
in connection with export and reexport transactions involving items 
subject to the Regulations and in connection with any other activity 
subject to the Regulations. I also find it necessary to add ``Al Naser 
Wings Airline'' as an alias for Al Naser Airlines.

IV. Order

    It is therefore ordered:
    First, that MAHAN AIRWAYS, Mahan Tower, No. 21, Azadegan St., M.A. 
Jenah Exp. Way, Tehran, Iran; PEJMAN MAHMOOD KOSARAYANIFARD A/K/A 
KOSARIAN FARD, P.O. Box 52404, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; MAHMOUD 
AMINI, G#22 Dubai Airport Free Zone, P.O. Box 393754, Dubai, United 
Arab Emirates, and P.O. Box 52404, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and 
Mohamed Abdulla Alqaz Building, Al Maktoum Street, Al Rigga, Dubai, 
United Arab Emirates; KERMAN AVIATION A/K/A GIE KERMAN AVIATION, 42 
Avenue Montaigne 75008, Paris, France; SIRJANCO TRADING LLC, P.O. Box 
8709, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; MAHAN AIR GENERAL TRADING LLC, 19th 
Floor Al Moosa Tower One, Sheik Zayed Road, Dubai 40594, United Arab 
Emirates; MEHDI BAHRAMI, Mahan Airways- Istanbul Office, Cumhuriye Cad. 
Sibil Apt No: 101 D:6, 34374 Emadad, Sisli Istanbul, Turkey; AL NASER 
AIRLINES A/K/A AL-NASER AIRLINES A/K/A AL NASER WINGS AIRLINE A/K/A 
ALNASER AIRLINES AND AIR FREIGHT LTD., Home 46, Al-Karrada, Babil 
Region, District 929, St 21, Beside Al Jadirya Private Hospital, 
Baghdad, Iraq, and Al Amirat Street, Section 309, St. 3/H.20, Al 
Mansour, Baghdad, Iraq, and P.O. Box 28360, Dubai, United Arab 
Emirates, and P.O. Box 911399, Amman 11191, Jordan; ALI ABDULLAH ALHAY 
A/K/A ALI ALHAY A/K/A ALI ABDULLAH AHMED ALHAY, Home 46, Al-Karrada, 
Babil Region, District 929, St 21, Beside Al Jadirya Private Hospital, 
Baghdad, Iraq, and Anak Street, Qatif, Saudi Arabia 61177; BAHAR SAFWA 
GENERAL TRADING, P.O. Box 113212, Citadel Tower, Floor-5, Office #504, 
Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, and P.O. Box 8709, Citadel 
Tower, Business Bay, Dubai, United Arab Emirates; SKY BLUE BIRD GROUP 
A/K/A SKY BLUE BIRD AVIATION A/K/A SKY BLUE BIRD LTD A/K/A SKY BLUE 
BIRD FZC, P.O. Box 16111, Ras Al Khaimah Trade Zone, United Arab 
Emirates; and ISSAM SHAMMOUT A/K/A MUHAMMAD ISAM MUHAMMAD ANWAR NUR 
SHAMMOUT A/K/A ISSAM ANWAR, Philips Building, 4th Floor, Al Fardous 
Street, Damascus, Syria, and Al Kolaa, Beirut, Lebanon 151515, and 17-
18 Margaret Street, 4th Floor, London, W1W 8RP, United Kingdom, and 
Cumhuriyet Mah. Kavakli San St. Fulya, Cad. Hazar Sok. No.14/A Silivri, 
Istanbul, Turkey, and when acting for or on their behalf, any 
successors or assigns, agents, or employees (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. Benefitting 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.
    Second, that no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the 
following:

[[Page 61751]]

    A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of a Denied Person any item 
subject to the EAR;
    B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted 
acquisition by a Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or control 
of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from 
the United States, including financing or other support activities 
related to a transaction whereby a 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 a Denied Person of any item subject to 
the EAR that has been exported from the United States;
    D. Obtain from a Denied Person in the United States any item 
subject to the EAR 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 EAR 
that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is 
owned, possessed or controlled by a Denied Person, or service any item, 
of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by a Denied 
Person if such service involves the use of any item subject to the EAR 
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, that, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided 
in section 766.23 of the EAR, any other person, firm, corporation, or 
business organization related to a Denied Person 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.
    Fourth, that this Order does not prohibit any export, reexport, or 
other transaction subject to the EAR where the only items involved that 
are subject to the EAR are the foreign-produced direct product of U.S.-
origin technology.
    In accordance with the provisions of Sections 766.24(e) of the EAR, 
Mahan Airways, Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and/or Bahar 
Safwa General Trading may, at any time, appeal this Order by filing a 
full written statement in support of the appeal with the Office of the 
Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40 
South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202-4022. In accordance with 
the provisions of Sections 766.23(c)(2) and 766.24(e)(3) of the EAR, 
Pejman Mahmood Kosarayanifard, Mahmoud Amini, Kerman Aviation, Sirjanco 
Trading LLC, Mahan Air General Trading LLC, Mehdi Bahrami, Sky Blue 
Bird Group, and/or Issam Shammout may, at any time, appeal their 
inclusion as a related person by filing a full written statement in 
support of the appeal with the Office of the Administrative Law Judge, 
U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore, 
Maryland 21202-4022.
    In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(d) of the EAR, 
BIS may seek renewal of this Order by filing a written request not 
later than 20 days before the expiration date. A renewal request may be 
opposed by Mahan Airways, Al Naser Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and/or 
Bahar Safwa General Trading as provided in Section 766.24(d), by filing 
a written submission with the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 
Export Enforcement, which must be received not later than seven days 
before the expiration date of the Order.
    A copy of this Order shall be provided to Mahan Airways, Al Naser 
Airlines, Ali Abdullah Alhay, and Bahar Safwa General Trading and each 
related person, and shall be published in the Federal Register. This 
Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect for 180 days.

    Dated: December 20, 2017.
Richard R. Majauskas,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement 
performing the non-exclusive duties and functions of the Assistant 
Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2017-28113 Filed 12-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE P