Defense Trade News, v.6 n.01  Return to: Index of Defense Trade News Archives || Electronic Research Collections Index || ERC Homepage


U.S. Department of State
1995 OCTOBER: Defense Trade News and Export Policy Bulletin, Vol.6, No.1
Bureau of Political-Military Affairs

Special Section
Leadership Changes in Defense Trade
Bureau of Political-Military Affairs Gets New Leadership 

Thomas  E. McNamara
Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs, A Message 
to Industry

Operations

Federal Register Online
	Same Day Updates Online.....4

Agreement Notes, Part II:  Estimating Values.....5

No More "Worthless" Agreements, Please 
	Zeroing in on Munitions List Categories      6

Accurate Applications Speed Processing
	DSP-119, Application for Amendment     6

What It Is and How to Use It
	Arms Transfer Reorganization .....7

Political-Military Review More Efficient
Foreign Export Control Cooperation and Assistance......11
The State Department's Role 

Departments
Defense Trade Advisory Group Developments  12

Reinstatements & Debarment           15

Commodity Jurisdiction Determinations           17

Personnel Updates           19

Feedback, ELLIE & Training Forms           21

Editor's Note
1995 has brought substantial changes to the Political-Military bureau 
and to DTC.  This first issue of the year introduces our readership to 
Thomas E. McNamara,  Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs, 
Mr. Hugh ("Gerry") Hamilton, Director of the Office of Arms Transfer and 
Export Control Policy, and Mr. William J. Lowell, the new Director of 
the Office of Defense Trade Controls.  Mr. William B. Robinson, the 
former director, now serves as the Special Advisor to DTC.  It also 
addresses the recent consolidation/reorganization of Arms Transfer 
policy in the Bureau. As we continue to expand our customers service, 
let us know what we are doing well or not so well. 
 
DTC Seminars  Not Just for Industry
Keep in mind that DTC's in-house seminars are not exclusively for 
industry.  Defense attaches,  commercial officers, or other interested 
employees of a foreign embassy, consulate, or other government entity 
who are engaged in defense issues, import/export issues, etc., are 
welcome.

To register your interest and to be placed on the mailing list for the 
next seminar, mail or fax the application form at the back of the 
Defense Trade News and Export Policy Bulletin.

OPERATIONS

Federal Register Online
Same Day Updates Online

What is it?
The Government Printing Office, through its GPO Access online service, 
now provides an online database for the Federal Register.  The database 
is updated by 6 a.m. each day the Federal Register is published.  It 
includes both text and graphics beginning with [Volume 59, Number 1 
(January 2, 1994)].

How Do I Gain Access?
The database is available on a Wide Area Information Server (WAIS) 
through the Internet and via asynchronous dial-in.  To subscribe, follow 
the procedure below:
	Internet users:
	1.  telnet to wais.access.gpo.gov;
	2.  log in as newuser (all lowercase).  No         password is 
required.
	Dial-in users:
	1.  call (202) 512-1661 and log in as wais          (all 
lowercase).  No password is required.
	2.  at the second log in prompt, log in as         newuser 
(again, all lowercase).
	3.  follow the instructions on the screen.

What Is it Going to Cost?
The annual subscription fee for a single workstation is $375 per year 
($200 for a six-month subscription and $35 for one month).  Discounts 
are available for multiple-workstation subscriptions.

If You Need More Information...
Contact the GPO Access User Support Team by sending an Internet E-mail 
to help@eids05.eids.gpo.gov, a fax to (202) 512-1262, or calling (202) 
512-1530 between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday.  (###)


Agreement Notes, Part II: Estimating Values
No More "Worthless" Agreements, Please
Proposed Manufacturing License Agreements and Technical Assistance 
Agreements submitted to the Office of Defense Trade Controls (DTC) for 
approval must contain a "statement of the actual or estimated value of 
the agreement," derived from "the estimated value of all defense 
articles to be exported in furtherance of the agreements or amendments 
thereto [22 CFR $ 124.12(a)(6)]."

Nonetheless, many applications are received which list the value as 
"none." Applicants justify this omission by citing such factors as a 
lack of immediate remuneration (as on joint development or teaming 
agreements) or offsets.  Yet proposed Agreements received without an 
estimated value are often delayed in processing until DTC can obtain 
this information from the applicant.

Multiple Measures
The value of an Agreement can be estimated by answering one of the 
following questions:

-- Actual contract cost. How much will the applicant actually receive 
for the service provided?

-- Objective contract value. How much would the applicant charge for the 
service if it were being offered independent of offset or teaming 
arrangements?

-- Estimated sales of the article. What is the value of sales of the 
article over the Agreement period?

-- Impact of disapproval. How much will it cost the applicant  if the 
Agreement is not approved?
If an applicant firm is able to calculate an answer to more than one of 
these questions,		it should include all the answers in its letter 
of transmittal for action. 

In for the Duration
The information to be provided is the estimated value over the duration 
of the Agreement. Estimates which account for only the sale of the 
license, but not the value of the articles produced  under the license, 
do not accurately depict the value of the Agreement as defined in the 
International Traffic in Arms Regulations. 

Ditto for Amendments
This process is also applicable to estimating the value of amendments. 
There is more flexibility here, however, as some amendments are 
administrative in nature and have, by definition, no value (e.g. 
novations). 

However, amendments which add items, expand the scope, expand the sales 
territory or extend the duration of an Agreement almost certainly will 
change the value of the basic Agreement, and thus an estimated value of 
the amendment must be submitted.  Note, however, that the value to be 
provided with the application for amendment is the value attributable to 
the amendment itself, not a cumulative amount attributable to the 
Agreement since its inception.  

Questions on this process should be addressed to the Licensing Division 
of the Office of Defense Trade Controls.  (###)


Zeroing in on Munitions List Categories 
Accurate Applications Speed Processing
When completing license applications, applicants must list the specific 
U.S. Munitions List category and sub-category of the equipment or 
technical data being exported -- e.g., category VIII(e) or 
XI(a)(4)(iii), rather than the general category VIII or XI.  This will 
expedite processing by ensuring the application is forwarded to the 
appropriate licensing officer for evaluation. 

Moreover, the Munitions List category must reflect the primary end-item 
equipment. The key is to indicate the "lowest-level" whole end-item to 
which the individual part relates.  This whole end-item should be 
referred to in the Specific Purpose block of the application. 

For example, an application listing parts for a heads-up display should 
read Category XI(d) [electronic system parts and components], not 
Category VIII(j) [aircraft parts and components], even though the 
display will be installed on an aircraft.  Similarly, an application 
listing parts for a shipborne chaff system should read Category 
XI(a)(4)(i) [electronic combat equipment, including countermeasures] 
rather than Category VI(f) [parts and components of ships], even though 
the equipment will be installed on a ship. 

If in doubt, applicants should contact the Arms Licensing Division of 
the Office of Defense Trade Controls for guidance before submitting 
applications.  (###)


DSP-119, Application for Amendment
What It Is and How to Use It

There is nothing so constant as change.  Therefore, if you find that you 
need to change information on an existing license such as the freight 
forwarder, an additional consignor, etc., use the DSP-119, Application 
for Amendment, to amend certain information on that license.

Certain Restrictions Apply.  You can only amend one existing license per 
eachApplication for Amendment.  Furthermore, the Application for 
Amendment does not allow you to make wholesale changes to the license; 
but it does allow you to amend the following:

1.  The addition of a U.S. freight             forwarder or consignor, 

2.  A correction of a typographical error         on a previous 
license, or	3.  A change in a commodity source.
You cannot use the DSP-119 to make substantial changes to the license 
such as additional quantities, commodities, countries of ultimate 
destination, foreign consignees, end-users, or end-uses.
You may make more than one amendment to a license using the DSP-119 as 
long as the amendments are to only one license and are of the type 
required by the DSP-119 (i.e. typographic corrections, commodity 
source changes, or additions of freight forwarders or consignors).  The 
form itself will accommodate up to four amendments.  If you are making 
more than four, you may use a continuation sheet as described in the 
instructions to the form.  (###)

Arms Transfer Reorganization
Political-Military Review More Efficient
Assistant Secretary McNamara has approved a reorganization plan that 
complies with recommendations from the Vice President's National 
Performance Review, the Secretary's Strategic Management Initiatives and 
the PM Bureau Program Plan.  All of these management endeavors 
specifically direct bureaus to streamline operations, consolidate like 
functions and to eliminate unnecessary layering.  As approved, the plan 
among other things: 

- -  Retitles the Office of Export Control Policy (EXP) as the Office of 
Arms Transfer and Export Control Policy (ATEC).  This new office will 
absorb arms transfer functionsfrom the Office of Defense Relations and 
Security Assistance (DRSA).  The office will be headed by Mr. Gerry 
Hamilton.

- -  Retitles the Office of Regional Security Policy (RSP) as the Office 
of Security Relations, Policy and Resources (SRP).  This office will 
inherit DRSA functions supporting defense relations and security 
assistance.  Mr. John Finney will serve as Director of the new PM/SRP.

- - Abolishes the Office of Defense Relations and Security Assistance 
and transfers its functions and personnel to the Office of Arms Transfer 
and Export Control Policy or the Office of Security Relations, Policy 
and Resources.
The arms transfer policy consolidation/reorganization became effective 
on August 1,1995.  (###)


Leadership in Defense Trade
McNamara, Lowell, Hamilton
Thomas E. McNamara was confirmed as the Assistant Secretary of State for 
Political-Military Affairs on October 13, 1994, succeeding Robert L. 
Gallucci.  William J. Lowell, replaces William B. Robinson as the 
Director of the Office of Defense Trade Controls.  Mr. William B. 
Robinson serves the Bureau as a Special Adviser to DTC.
Thomas E. McNamara.  Previously the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary 
of State for Political-Military Affairs since July, 1993.  Prior to 
this, Ambassador McNamara headed the State Department Office of the 
Ambassador-at-Large for Counterterrorism.

From 1988 to 1991, he was the U.S. Ambassador to Colombia.  Following 
that assignment, Mr. McNamara returned to Washington to work at the 
National Security Council as Special Assistant to the President for 
National Security Affairs and Senior Director for International Programs 
and African Affairs.  A career diplomat, his overseas experience 
included tours in Paris, Lubumbashi, Bukavu, Moscow, and as Deputy Chief 
of Mission in Kinshasa, Zaire.

Assistant Secretary McNamara has extensive experience in political-
military affairs, focusing on arms control and regional security.  In 
the 1970s he was involved in most major arms control issues, serving in 
embassies, on negotiating delegations, and in the Department of State 
and the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.  His background in regional 
security affairs includes every major area of the globe -- Europe, Mid-
East, Africa, Asia, and Latin America.  He was responsible for regional 
security affairs as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Politico-
Military Affairs, 1983-86, before his first tour on the National 
Security Council as Director for Counterterrorism and Counternarcotics.
Ambassador McNamara was born in New Haven, Connecticut and received a 
B.A. and an LLD (hon.) from Manhattan College, and an M.A. from the 
University of Notre Dame.

William J. Lowell.  Appointed Director to the Office of Defense Trade 
Controls on November, 27, 1994.  Mr. Lowell joined the Department in 
1972, serving first with the Bureau of Consular Affairs in a number of 
positions until 1976. In 1976, he was reassigned to the Bureau of Public 
Affairs, where he served until 1978.

In 1978, Mr. Lowell joined the Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs, 
with responsibilities for international telecommunications negotiations.  
In 1983, he transferred to the Office of Advanced Technology with the 
Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, 
with responsibilities for international space and high technology 
negotiations.  He was appointed Deputy Director of that office in 1984.
In 1991 he was appointed special assistant to the Under Secretary for 
International Security Affairs, and served in that capacity until the 
end of January 1993.  In January 1993 Mr. Lowell was detailed to the 
personal staff of the U.S. Special Envoy for the Former Yugoslavia.  In 
mid 1993 he rejoined the office of the Under Secretary for International 
Security Affairs, and remained in the position until his recent 
appointment to the Office of Defense Trade Controls.
Mr. Lowell has wide experience in conventional arms issues and export 
control policy.A native of Massachusetts, he earned a B.A. from the 
University of Massachusetts and an M.A. from Georgetown University.  

Hugh G. Hamilton, Jr.  became Director, Office of Arms Transfer and 
Export ControlPolicy in May 1995.  Previous State Department positions 
he has held include Head of Mission, CSCE Long-term Mission to Latvia; 
Deputy Coordinator for East European Assistance; Deputy Chief of 
Mission, Cote d'Ivoire; and Deputy Chief of Mission, Luxembourg.  He 
also served in Poland, the former USSR, and a number of African posts. 
A native of Kansas City, Missouri, "Gerry" is a graduate of Washington & 
Lee University, and has engaged in non-degree graduate studies at 
Georgetown and American Universities.  (###)

Foreign Export Control Cooperation and Assistance 
The State Department's Role
________________________________________

The Department of State is responsible for developing and implementing, 
on an interagency basis, policy for export control cooperation with 
countries whose control ofgoods, technology and services is deemed 
essential for stemming the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, 
their means of delivery, and for avoiding build-ups of destabilizing 
conventional military arms.  This cooperation and assistance contribute 
to important US national security objectives.

Within that context, the State Department's Office of Arms Traffic 
andExport Control Policy (ATEC) coordinates bilateral consultations on 
export controls with many countries around the world.  These talks are 
designed to encourage countries to commit to responsible arms and dual-
use technology transfer policies and to develop or strengthen export 
control systems to implement and enforce those policies.  In addition, 
ATEC leads interagency efforts to develop assistance programs.
In that regard, ATEC heads an interagency working group on export 
control assistance comprised of experts from U.S. Government departments 
responsible for U.S. export licensing and enforcement.  These experts 
and others from their departments interact with their foreign 
counterparts to provide advice, training and technical assistance.  This 
effort is geared toward strengthening and developing comprehensive and 
effective export control systems of countries whose cooperation is 
essential to combat proliferation.

Export control cooperation efforts are focused on the four nuclear 
states of the former Soviet Union, but also include Central Europe, East 
Asia, Latin America and Africa.  For example, ATEC  coordinated a 
training seminar for Central European countries  held in Budapest.  ATEC 
also developed plans for installation in Poland and other Central 
European states of a communication and information network for export 
licensing and enforcement which, when operational, will enable rapid 
interagency communication within the host governments and will 
facilitate coordination with U.S. and other Western officials. (###)

Change in Express Mail/Courier Delivery to the Office of Defense Trade 
Controls
In consideration of physical security requirements, the Office of 
Defense Trade Controls (PM/DTC) will no longer accept courier-delivered 
materials, effective August 31, 1995.  Such materials (e.g., license 
applications and other written requests for approval), when sent outside 
the U.S. postal system or not personally presented by U.S. industry 
representatives with appropriate security clearances, must be directed 
to the main Department of State building, which is located at 2201 C 
Street, NW, Washington, D.C.  Deliveries should be made at 21st Street 
("Joggers' Entrance").  Materials for PM/DTC should be addressed to:  
U.S. Department of StatePM/DTC, SA-6, Room 200Washington, DC 20522-
0602

DTAG Developments 
On March 13, 1995, the Defense Trade Advisory Group held its seventh 
plenary meeting.  The morning presentations, which consisted of a 
keynote address by Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export Controls Dr. 
Martha Harris and reports from the DTAG Working Groups, were open to all 
attendees.  Two informal working sessions on regional issues, briefings 
on issues of concern, and concluding remarks from Assistant Secretary 
for Political-Military Affairs Thomas E. McNamara made up the afternoon 
program.  The afternoon sessions were restricted to DTAG members and USG 
officials to allow  for classified discussion.

Dr. Harris summarized major Administration achievements in 
nonproliferation in the last two years.  First, Ukraine, Belarus, and 
Kazakhstan have signed onto the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT).  
START I has entered into force, and the United States and Russia are 
committed to ratifying the START II Treaty this year.  Second, Russia 
has pledged adherence to the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) 
and will stop nuclear exports to India.  Third, in September 1994 
President Yeltsin made a public commitment to end future arms sales to 
Iran and fulfill only existing contracts.  Fourth, China has agreed to 
halt exports of ground-to-ground missiles targeted by the MTCR.  This 
allowed the United States to waive sanctions for previous Chinese 
missile exports to Pakistan.  Last, the U.S. / DPRK security agreement 
establishes broad principles for North Korea to dismantle its nuclear 
program.  North Korea has accepted full-scope IAEA safeguards, and will 
work with South Korea to implement an accord to denuclearize the Korean 
peninsula.

Dr. Harris explained that the Conventional Arms Transfer (CAT) policy, 
announced on February 17, 1995, reaffirms that the United States will 
support legitimate transfers, but will prohibit those inconsistent with 
our national security and foreign policy interests.  In terms of dollar 
values, FY94 exports declined 11% from those of the previous year.  
Moreover, about 80% of FY94 licenses involve, but are not limited to, 
NATO countries and traditional allies such as Japan and Israel.  These 
figures disprove the contention that the United States is fueling an 
arms race in the Third World:  arms transfers to Latin America, South 
Asia, and Africa made up less that 4% of 1994, commercial sales.
In other CAT policy developments, Dr. Harris outlined the U.S. position 
on arms transfers to Central Europe.  Previously the United States 
prohibited lethal transfers to the Central European states and reviewed 
proposed lethal transfers to the Central European states and reviewed 
proposed defensive exports on a case-by-case basis.  Because the CE 
countries have participated in the Partnership for Peace (PFP), 
expressed interest in joining European security organizations, and 
advanced democratic and market reforms, the United States now considers 
proposed exports of lethal weaponry to certain countries on a case-by-
case basis.

Turning to multilateral export control issues,  Dr. Harris noted that 
Russia, as a major supplier, must be factored into the COCOM successor 
regime and any credible arms restraint arrangement.  The Administration 
is working with the Russians to follow up on President Yeltsin's pledge 
to end arms sales to Iran.  Resolving this issue will pave the way for 
Russia's participation in the new regime.  According to mutual 
agreement, new members must adhere to international nonproliferation 
norms, be committed to responsible arms and sensitive dual-use transfer 
policies, and have effective export controls.  By these standards, China 
is not yet eligible to join the successor regime.

Dr. Harris also affirmed that export control assistance is essential to 
making multilateral control regimes effective, and she noted that 
similar national technology control regimes help level the playing field 
for U.S. exporters.  By strengthening economic ties between the United 
States and participating nations, export control assistance may lead to 
increased defense trade between the United States and certain CE states.
Under the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, we have advised Belarus, 
Kazakhstan, and Ukraine, and the United States hopes to offer export 
control assistance to Russia in the near future.

Dr. Harris cited PM/DTC teaming arrangements, the electronic licensing 
system ELLIE, the Remote Online Bulletin Board (ROBB), and the State 
Appeals Review Process (SARP) as examples of how the Department 
continues to improve its export licensing process and procedures.  The 
existing commodity jurisdiction (CJ) process is effective; more than 400 
CJ decisions were made last year, and 62% of these resulted in movement 
of an item to the CCL.

Following Dr. Harris' presentation, the three DTAG Working Groups 
reported on their activities.  The Policy Working Group (PWG) is 
preparing studies on U.S. arms transfer policy towards Latin America and 
policy changes required to incorporate non-standard subsystems into non-
standard platforms.  The PWG will be considering defense export 
financing, U.S. defense industrial cooperation with our allies, and 
developing a foreign availability database, all in connection with the 
CAT policy.

The DTAG Vise-Chair and others have worked on revising the BATF import 
regulations.  They are examining whether mergers and acquisitions among 
defense companies necessitate changes in the ITAR or methods of 
licensing, and are following the regulatory changes connected with 
Sections 36 and 39 of the Arms Export Controls Act (AECA) involving 
offsets.

The Regulatory Working Group (RWG) recommended that because the number 
of Commerce license applications has drastically declined while 
munitions applications have increased, Commerce should transfer some of 
its full-time equivalency slots to State for licensing purposes.  
Second, the Department should summarize PM/DTC's electronic licensing 
advances in Defense Trade News.  Third, the Department should publish an 
ITAR incorporating all amendments since the July 1993 revision, and 
maintain a current version available through subscription or sale.
The Technical Working Group continues to examine jet engine hot 
sections, space-related components, and encryption technologies to 
determine if they should be moved under Commodity Control List (CCL) 
control.

After the open sessions in the morning, there were regional briefings on 
Latin America and Central Europe.  Although the Latin America region 
overall is making economic progress, Department briefers cautioned that 
Latin American countries will probably not be making substantial arms 
purchases in the near-term.  Many of the region's economies are weak, 
and although the region is generally at peace, contentious border 
disputes such as the Peru-Ecuador conflict and simmering guerrilla 
movements exist.  Other policy considerations include human rights 
concerns and civil-military relations.  The United States will continue 
efforts to coordinate multilateral restrictions on sales of potentially 
destabilizing advanced equipment.

Regarding Central Europe, State participants explained that there was 
previously a presumption of denial for transferring sophisticated, 
lethal military equipment to the CE states.  After a policy review, it 
was decided that all proposed USML exports would be reviewed on a case-
by-case basis.  Only the former Yugoslav Republics cannot receive 
military equipment:  a UN arms embargo prohibits them from receiving 
weapons and other military equipment which would exacerbate the military 
conflict.  Export controls towards specific CE nations have liberalized 
as they have instituted political and economic reforms.

The first afternoon briefing involved regulatory changes connected with 
acquisitions and mergers, audits, and compliance requirements.  In the 
next briefing, DTAG members expressed interest in the Department's 
tanker policy in general and Singapore's desire for tankers in 
particular.  Department speakers advised that the United States would be 
cautious about introducing advanced and possibly destabilizing 
technologies into the East Asia/Southeast Asia region.  The final 
briefing dealt with encryption articles and technologies and 
supercomputers.  Although national security concerns dictate that 
encryption controls would stand, representatives of the Department noted 
that efforts are being made to reform the export requirements and reduce 
the burden to industry.  Specifics on the U.S. / Japanese supercomputer 
negotiations were discussed, including countries to which case-by-case 
review of proposed exports applied and the terms of notification.
Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs Thomas 
McNamara gave concluding remarks on the financial hardships imposed by a 
shrinking global defense market, the criteria for U.S. arms transfers, 
and USG support for responsible transfers. 

DTAG-related questions can be directed to Linda Lum of the DTAG 
Secretariat at (202) 647-4231.

Reinstatements &Debarments
Reinstatement of Export/Retransfer PrivilegesThe following persons 
have had export/retransfer privileges reinstated pursuant to section 38 
(g) (4) of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) (22 U.S.C. $ 2778 (g) (4)) 
and section 127.11 (b) of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations 
(ITAR) (22 C.F.R. $ 127.11 (b))  (Key -- Name; City and State; Effective 
Date of Reinstatement):

American Aviation Parts and Service Corp. Arlington, Virginia September 
26, 1988

Napco, Inc. (a subsidiary of Thermo Electron Corp.) Terryville, 
Connecticut October 11, 1988

Environmental Tectonics Corp.Southhampton, Pennsylvania April 21, 1989

Napco International, Inc. (Ventruian Corp. parent company) Hopkins, 
Minnesota August 1, 1989

Olin Corp. East Alton, Illiniois January 4, 1990

Elder Industries, Inc. Newport Beach, California October 1, 1990

Charlotte Aircraft Corp. Charlotte, North Carolina January 4, 1992

Technical Service International Miami, Florida January 9, 1992

Mr. Clifford Kapel Technical Service International Miami, 
Florida January 9, 1992

Mr. George McArthur Posey Newport Aeronautical Sales Costa Mesa, 
California April 3, 1992

Forway Industries Woodbury, New York June 15, 1993

These persons may once again participate in the export or retransfer of 
defense articles, defense services, or related technical data pursuant 
to section 38 of the AECA and the ITAR.

Notice of these reinstatements was published in the Federal Register 
(Vol. 59, No. 90, May 11, 1994, p. 24501-2). 

Public Notice of Debarred Persons
The following persons have been debarred for a period of three years 
following their convictions for violating or conspiring to violate the 
AECA (Key -- Name; Offense(s);  Date of Conviction; U.S. District Court):

Zeljko Vusir 22 U.S.C. $ 2778 (violating the AECA) May 6, 1992 District 
of Arizona

Mark Belinic 22 U.S.C. $ 2778 (violating the AECA) July 29, 
1992 District of Arizona

Bet-Air, Inc. 18 U.S.C. $ 371 (conspiracy to violate 22 U.S.C. $ 2778) 
and 22 U.S.C. $ 2778 (violating the AECA)April 23, 1993 Central 
District of California

J. Randall Shute 18 U.S.C. $ 371 (conspiracy to violate 22 U.S.C. $ 
2778)April 28, 1993Northern District of Georgia

Louis J. Kocurek III 18 U.S.C. $ 371 (conspiracy to violate 22 U.S.C. $ 
2778) April 28, 1993 Northern District of Georgia

Lance B. Ordway 18 U.S.C. $ 371 (conspiracy to violate 22 U.S.C. $ 
2778) May 11, 1993 Northern District of Georgia

Bin Wu 18 U.S.C. $ 371 (conspiracy to violate 22 U.S.C. $ 2778) and 22 
U.S.C. $ 2778 (violating the AECA) September 17, 1993 Eastern District 
of Virginia

Jin Ping Li 18 U.S.C. $ 371 (conspiracy to violate 22 U.S.C. $ 2778) and 
22 U.S.C. $ 2778 (violating the AECA) September 17, 1993 Eastern 
District of Virginia

Pinzhe Zhang (aka "Peter Zhang") 18 U.S.C. $ 371 (conspiracy to violate 
22U.S.C. $ 2778) and 22 U.S.C. $ 2778 (violating the AECA) September 
17, 1993 Eastern District of Virginia

Alexander Nikolic 18 U.S.C. $ 371 (conspiracy to violate 22 U.S.C. $ 
2778) and 22 U.S.C. $ 2778 (violating the AECA) November 22, 
1993 Northern District of Illinois

Kem and Associates, Inc. 22 U.S.C. $ 2778 (violating the AECA)December 
14, 1993 Western District of Texas

Bajro Hukic (aka "Bob Hukic" and "Bab Hucici") 18 U.S.C. $ 371 
(conspiracy to violate 22 U.S.C. $ 2778) January 19, 1994Northern 
District of Illinois

Notice of these statutory debarments was published in the Federal 
Register  (Vol. 59, No. 166, August 29, 1994, p.  44451-2

Anyone needing additional information to determine whether a person has 
been debarred or reinstated should contact the Compliance Division of 
the Office of Defense Trade Controls.  (##)



Personnel Updates

Out...
Carolyn Love, Licensing Officer, retired from the Office of Defense 
Trade Controls in November  after completing 25 years of service with 
the Department of State.

DTC Licensing Officer Suzanne Palmer departed in November to assume new 
duties with the  Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA).

Tom Denner, former  DTC Commodity Jurisdiction officer, resigned from 
the Department of State in October 1994 to join the Prince William, Va. 
Fire Department.

Ann Diemer, DTC staff aide, retired in December 1994, after many years 
of service.

In...
Sharone Barnes came to DTC in November to fill the position of 
secretary.  She transferred from the Office of Export Control Policy.

John C. Pisa-Relli is an attorney in DTC's Compliance and Enforcement 
Branch.  Before coming to State, he worked with the Office of 
Antiboycott Compliance, Department of Commerce.

Jim Sturdevant serves in DTC as a Research Compliance Specialist in the 
Research and Analysis Branch.  Mr. Sturdevant recently served as a 
Senior Analyst with the Air Force Intelligence in the Pentagon 
specializing in the Mideast/Africa/Asia/Pacific regions.

Jefferey Cellars joined DTC as the Special Assistant to the Director in 
August 1994.  A career Foreign Service Officer since 1989, Mr. Cellars 
has served in Budapest, Hungary and prior to DTC, in Manama, Bahrain.

Stephen M. Geis  joined EXP in August 1994 as Director of the Technology 
Transfer Division.  A career Foreign Service Officer since 1973, Mr. 
Geis has served in Europe, Latin America, and the Department.  His most 
recent posting prior to joining EXP was as Political Counselor at the 
U.S. Embassy in Asuncion, Paraguay.

Richard Morey Sherman chairs the Technology Transfer Working Group.  In 
the Department he had an assignment in the office of Ocean Law and 
Policy, OES bureau.  He joined PM/EXP in October.

Joseph L. Novak is the action officer responsible for Nunn-Lugar program 
assistance to the nuclear successor states of the former Soviet Union -- 
Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus.  Before joining EXP, Mr. Novak 
was a Political/Consular officer at the U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, 
Bangladesh.

Gilbert J. Sperling spent 15 of his 20 year career in the Foreign 
Service doing consular work.  His last foreign posting was as chief of 
the Consular Section in Madras.  Most recently he worked in the 
Department's Bureau of Consular Affairs.  Mr. Sperling joined EXP in 
September and is responsible for issues and cases involving lasers, 
sensors, materials, and machine tools.

Philip S. Rhoads had been Chief, Compliance and Enforcement Branch, 
Office of Defense Trade Controls, since April 1995. His previous U.S. 
Government service was as Supervisory Compliance Specialist, Office of 
Antiboycott Compliance, Bureau of Export Administration, U.S. Department 
of Commerce. He has a B.A. (international affairs), theGeorge 
Washington University; an M.I.A. (international affairs), Columbia 
University; and a J.D., University of Kentucky School of Law.
Mr. Rhoads is a member of the District of Columbia, Kentucky and 
Louisiana Bar Associations. In addition to private practice attorney 
inNew Orleans, Louisiana, specializing in export contracting, and 
financing.  Also criminal and civil practice, he worked with the agency 
for International Development, (law clerkship), and served as an 
International Trade Specialist, Kentucky Department of Commerce.


 (###)

To the top of this page