[Federal Register: September 16, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 179)]
[Notices]
[Page 54710-54711]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16se05-44]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
Action Affecting Export Privileges; Gold Technology Ltd., Hero
Peak Ltd., Joanna Liu. Oriental Trading Corp., Portson Trading Ltd.,
Zhenke International Trading
In the Matters of: Gold Technology Limited, Flat 23C, 97 High
Street, Hong Kong; Hero Peak Limited, Flat C, Block 4, 11/F Golden
Bldg, 145 Fuk Wa Street, Sham Shui, Po, Kowloon, Hong Kong, and, Room
D, 11/F, Fui Nam Building, 48-51 Connaught Road West, Hong Kong; Joanna
Liu, Flat 23C, 97 High Street, Hong Kong; Oriental Trading Corporation,
1st Floor, Masco Plaza, Blue Area, P.O. Box 2879, Islamabad, Pakistan;
Portson Trading Limited, Room D, 8/F, 217-223 Tung Choi Street,
Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong Kong, and, Room 709 Wing Shan Tower, 173 Des
Voeux Road Central, Hong Kong, and, Room 2208, 22/F, 118 Connaught Road
West, Hong Kong, and, Zhenke International Trading Co. Ltd., Tianjin
Port Free Trade Zone, Room 801, Gold Beauty Building No. 99, Haibain 9
Road, TPFTZ, Tianjin, Peoples Republic of China, Respondents; Order
Renewing Temporary Denial Order As To Goldtechnology Limited, Hero Peak
Limited, Joanna Liu, Oriental Trading Corporation, Portson Trading
Limited, and Zhenke International Trading Co. Ltd.
Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the Export Administration Regulations
(``EAR''), the Bureau of Industry and Security (``BIS''), U.S.
Department of Commerce, through its Office of Export Enforcement
(``OEE''), has requested that I renew for 180 days an Order temporarily
denying export privileges of the following:
(1) GOLD TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, Flat 23C, 97 High Street, Hong Kong;
(2) HERO PEAK LIMITED, Flat C, Block 4, 11/F Golden Bldg, 145 Fuk
Wa Street, Sham Shui, Po, Kowloon, Hong Kong and Room D, 11/F, Fui Nam
Building, 48-51 Connaught Road West, Hong Kong;
(3) JOANNA LIU, Flat 23C, 97 High Street, Hong Kong;
(4) ORIENTAL TRADING CORPORATION, 1st Floor, Masco Plaza, Blue
Area, P.O. Box 2879, Islamabad, Pakistan;
(5) PORTSON TRADING LIMITED, Room D, 8/F, 217-223 Tung Choi Street,
Mongkok, Kowloon, Hong Kong and Room 709 Wing Shan Tower, 173 Des Voeux
Road Central, Hong Kong, and Room 2208, 22/F, 118 Connaught Road West,
Hong Kong; and
(6) ZHENKE INTERNATIONAL TRADING CO. LTD. Tianjin Port Free Trade
Zone, Room 801, Gold Beauty Building No. 99, Haibain 9 Road, TPFTZ,
Tianjin, Peoples Republic of China (hereinafter collectively referred
to as the ``Respondents'').
On March 8, 2005, I found that the Respondents \1\ had conspired to
undertake acts that violated the EAR, that such violations had been
deliberate and covert, and that there was a strong likelihood of future
violations, particularly given the nature of the transactions and the
elaborate steps that had been taken by the Respondents to avoid
detection by the U.S. Government while knowing that their actions were
in violation of the EAR. 70 FR 12442 (Mar. 14, 2005). This finding was
based on evidence presented by BIS that indicated that Respondents had
conspired with others, known and unknown, to cause items subject to the
EAR to be illegally exported to Pakistan, that they caused exports of
items controlled for nuclear non-proliferation reasons to Pakistan with
knowledge that violations of the EAR would occur, and they took actions
intending to violate the EAR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sunford Trading Limited, Room 2208, 22/F, 118 Connaught Road
West, Hong Kong, was included as a Respondent in the initial Order,
but was not included in the request for renewal of the Order because
of an unrelated three year denial order on the company that became
effective on August 25, 2005 (70 FR 49910 Aug. 25, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BIS continues to investigate this matter and believes that all of
the facts found in the original Order continue to justify the renewal
of the Order, especially given the nature of the transactions and the
steps that have been taken by Respondents to avoid detection by the
U.S. Government while knowing their actions were in violation of the
EAR. BIS believes evidence described in the initial request for the
Order, including evidence that indicates the Respondents intend to
continue acquiring or purchasing significant amounts of U.S. origin
items, supports this Order.
Based on the evidence submitted by BIS, I find that renewal of the
Order naming Respondents is necessary, in the public interest, to
prevent an imminent violation of the EAR. A copy of the request for
renewal of this Order was served upon Respondents in accordance with
the requirements of 15 CFR Sec. 766.24 of the EAR, and no responses
were received in opposition to this request within the applicable time
period described in that section.
It Is Therefore Ordered:
First, that the Respondents, at the address listed above, and their
successors and assigns and when acting on behalf of any of the
Respondents, their officers, employees, agents or representatives,
(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 limited to:
A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, License
Exception, or export control document;
B. Carrying on negotiations concerning, or order, 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:
A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of the Denied Persons any
item subject to the EAR;
B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted
acquisition by the Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or
control of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be
exported from the United States, including financing or other support
activities related to a transaction whereby the Denied Persons acquires
or attempts to acquire such ownership, possession or control;
C. Take any action to acquire from or to facilitate the acquisition
or attempted acquisition from the Denied Persons of any item subject to
the EAR that has been exported from the United States;
D. Obtain from the Denied Persons 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
[[Page 54711]]
been or will be exported from the United States and which is owned,
possessed or controlled by the Denied Persons, or service any item, of
whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied
Persons 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 any of the Respondents 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 Section 766.24(e) of the EAR,
the Respondents 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 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. The Respondents may
oppose a request to renew this Order by filing a written submission
with the Assistant Secretary 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 served on the Respondents, and shall
be published in the Federal Register.
This Order is effective on September 11, 2005 and shall remain in
effect for 180 days.
Entered this 9th day of September, 2005.
Wendy Wysong,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 05-18375 Filed 9-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DT-M