In an earlier post, we took the Bureau of Industry and Security (“BIS”) to task for filing a default motion against William Kovacs to deny his export privileges even though he was in jail for his export violation and his ability to respond to BIS’s default motion would be, well, limited. We also felt pretty sure that BIS knew where he was, because BIS’s own reports on the case indicated that Kovacs had been incarcerated.

Well, maybe BIS doesn’t really know where Kovacs is. Today BIS updated the Denied Party List (the “DPL”) and here is the entry for Kovacs:

That’s his old home address.

We might give BIS for some slack over its confusion about the real location of William Kovacs were it not for the Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locator which you can find here. Enter Mr. Kovacs’s name and the Inmate Locator will serve up a result page showing that he is currently inmate 24999-038 at the Fort Dix Federal Correctional Institute in New Jersey.

So, here’s my question. William Kovacs is a fairly common name. Suppose that an international courier service got a package from Mr. Kovacs with a gift for his favorite aunt in London. The courier checks the DPL and finds only a William Kovacs at a street address in Boxford, Massachusetts, so the courier goes ahead and ships the package. Has the courier violated BIS rules?

Now, I have suggested before that a prison address might be a red flag. But in other instances, BIS has gone out of its way to list, even to correct, prison addresses and inmate numbers on the DPL. There certainly seems no reason that they haven’t done that here.

Permalink


Copyright © 2007 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)