Michael Moratz What specific legal action and against who, has the U.S. government undertaken resulting from, or linked to, this EO?             There are multiple regulations imposed under Executive Order (EO) 13382 that also link to Executive 12938 and 31 C.F.R Section 539.  If we break EO 13382 down, the specific legal action imposed include three separate sanctions programs.  First, EO 13382, “blocks the property of persons engaged in proliferation activities and their support networks (OFAC, 2012).”  Second, EO 13382, implements “a ban on imports into the United States, pursuant to Executive Order 12938 (OFAC, 2012).”  EO 12938 empowers the Secretary of the Treasury to prohibit the importation of goods, technology, or services by a foreign person who participates in WMD proliferation activities.  Third, EO 13382 blocks the Russian Federation from doing anything with their highly enriched uranium stockpiles other than what has already been agreed upon with the U.S. (OFAC, 2012).  In summary, executive order 13382, “denies those parties access to the U.S. financial and commercial systems (OFAC, 2012).”  Which means entities and their supporters that deal in WMD proliferation are subject to denial to the US financial systems and having their assets frozen.              Executive Order 13382 affects many different international entities from multiple countries.  EO 13382 initially applied to eight organizations within the countries of North Korea, Iran, and Syria.  However, the EO allows the Secretary of the Treasury in conjunction with the Secretary of State to impose sanctions on additional entities and their supporters who conduct WMD proliferation activities.  The current list of “foreign persons” under “active” import bans pursuant to EO 12938 includes about 205 entities or their supporters (DOS, 2016).  EO 13382 also affects the Russian Federation, who has further restrictions emplaced, in regards to their blend down of highly enriched uranium to low enriched uranium.  Specifically, over a twenty-year period the Russian Federation will reduce 500 metric tons to low enriched uranium for use in commercial reactors (OFAC, 2012).  Furthermore, EO 13382 blocks U.S. persons or companies and their foreign branches from engaging in any transaction with any party designed by the order.               Executive Order 13382 basically creates an easier way for the executive branch of the United States Government to impose sanctions.  The language in the order is broad and places the burden of sanctions on the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of State.  Meaning, Congress does not get a vote and the process of placing international sanctions on foreign entities or property in the possession of U.S. citizens is streamlined (Crail, 2008).  Which allows for the question of, without legislation authorizing sanctions have all legal standards set by Congress been met?  An Executive Order that is upheld by the judicial branch can clear up the mud ...

1. Michael Moratz
What specific legal action and against who, has the U.S.
government undertaken resulting from, or linked to, this EO?
There are multiple regulations imposed under Executive
Order (EO) 13382 that also link to Executive 12938 and 31
C.F.R Section 539. If we break EO 13382 down, the specific
legal action imposed include three separate sanctions programs.
First, EO 13382, “blocks the property of persons engaged in
proliferation activities and their support networks (OFAC,
2012).” Second, EO 13382, implements “a ban on imports into
the United States, pursuant to Executive Order 12938 (OFAC,
2012).” EO 12938 empowers the Secretary of the Treasury to
prohibit the importation of goods, technology, or services by a
foreign person who participates in WMD proliferation
activities. Third, EO 13382 blocks the Russian Federation from
doing anything with their highly enriched uranium stockpiles
other than what has already been agreed upon with the U.S.
(OFAC, 2012). In summary, executive order 13382, “denies
those parties access to the U.S. financial and commercial
systems (OFAC, 2012).” Which means entities and their
supporters that deal in WMD proliferation are subject to denial
to the US financial systems and having their assets frozen.
Executive Order 13382 affects many different
international entities from multiple countries. EO 13382
initially applied to eight organizations within the countries of
North Korea, Iran, and Syria. However, the EO allows the
Secretary of the Treasury in conjunction with the Secretary of
State to impose sanctions on additional entities and their
supporters who conduct WMD proliferation activities. The
current list of “foreign persons” under “active” import bans
pursuant to EO 12938 includes about 205 entities or their
supporters (DOS, 2016). EO 13382 also affects the Russian

2. Federation, who has further restrictions emplaced, in regards to
their blend down of highly enriched uranium to low enriched
uranium. Specifically, over a twenty-year period the Russian
Federation will reduce 500 metric tons to low enriched uranium
for use in commercial reactors (OFAC, 2012). Furthermore, EO
13382 blocks U.S. persons or companies and their foreign
branches from engaging in any transaction with any party
designed by the order.
Executive Order 13382 basically creates an easier way
for the executive branch of the United States Government to
impose sanctions. The language in the order is broad and places
the burden of sanctions on the Secretary of the Treasury and the
Secretary of State. Meaning, Congress does not get a vote and
the process of placing international sanctions on foreign entities
or property in the possession of U.S. citizens is streamlined
(Crail, 2008). Which allows for the question of, without
legislation authorizing sanctions have all legal standards set by
Congress been met? An Executive Order that is upheld by the
judicial branch can clear up the muddy waters of executive
action versus legislative action. However, even without a court
ruling, a streamlined approach to sanctions against proliferators
of WMDs is ideal for obvious reasons.
References
Crail, P. (2008). U.S. Wields Financial Sanctions Against
Iran. Arms Control Association. Retrieved from
https://www.armscontrol.org/print/3422
DOS. (2016). Department of State Sanctioned Entities. U.S.
Department Of State Federal Register. Retrieved from
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/261144.pdf
OFAC. (2012). Executive Order 13382,Blocking Weapons of
Mass Destruction Proliferators and Their Supports. U.S.
Department of the Treasury. Retrieved
from https://edge.apus.edu/access/content/attachment/333872/F
orums/65a2f7cb-704f-4170-964f-
ff3aafafe2fa/ExecutiveOrder13382.pdf

3. 1" 2"
3:"side"view"
3:"top"view"
5"
4"
6:"top"view" 6:"side"view"
7:"two"varia5ons"
8"
9"
10"
11"

4. 12"
14:top"view"
13"
14:side"view"
15"
16"
17"
18"
18"
19"
20" 21"
21"
Identify the following rocks using the Key provided. Place the
names with the appropriate number.

5. Basalt, Breccia, Chert, Conglomerate, Coquina, Diorite,
Fossiliferous Limestone, Garnet schist, Gneiss, Granite, Marble,
Obsidian, Oolitic Limestone, Petrified Wood, Phyllite, Pumice,
Rhyolite, Sandstone, Scoria, Shale, Slate
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
1.
Igneous Grain
visibility Texture/composition Name Properties

6. Grains
are
Obvious
Quartz
Present Granite
Large
grained;
peachy-­‐pink
grains
of
orthoclase
and
the
transparent
grains
of
quartz
Quartz
Absent Diorite Similar
to
granite,
but
not
orthoclase
or
quartz
Glassy Obsidian Black;
glassy
texture
Vesicular
(porous) Scoria Dark
in

7. color;
porous
Grains
aren't
Obvious Pumice Light
in
color;
porous
Fine
grains Basalt Dark
gray-­‐black;
only
very
small
crystals
visible
Rhyolite Peachy-­‐pink;
only
very
small
crystals
visible
2.
Sedimentary
Grain
visibility Grain
size Grain
type Name Properties
Grains
are
not
Shells Breccia Large

8. angular
grains
Grains
are
Large Conglomerate Large
rounded
grains
Grains
are
Shells Fossiliferous
Limestone
Fossils
imbedded
in
considerable
matrix
Grains
are
Visible Coquina Fossils
imbedded
in
very
little
matrix
Grains
are
Not
Large Sandstone Does
not
react
to
acid

9. Oolitic
Limestone Reacts
to
acid
Shale Thinly
bedded
Grains
are
not
Visible Chert Very
smooth
and
angular
Petrified
Wood Characteristics
of
wood
preserved
3.
Metamorphic
Grain
visibility Banding Name Properties
Banding
Present Gneiss Grains
align
in
bands
Grains
are
Visible Marble Granular;
will

10. effervesce
in
acid
Banding
Absent Phyllite Fine,
but
visible
grains
Garnet
schist Large,
12-­‐sided
garnets
imbedded
in
matrix
Grains
are
not
Visible Slate Dark
colored;
flat
on
top
and
bottom
Michael Messina
What specific legal action and against who, has the U.S.
government undertaken resulting from, or linked to, this EO?
President George W Bush signed the Executive Order 13382 on
June 25, 2005 and its purpose was to add to the already previous

11. Executive Orders signed in the 1990’s by then President
Clinton. President Bush like President Clinton recognized the
threat of proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction posed to
the United States and the international world. The EO 13382
allowed the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets
Control (OFAC) to implement three distinct sanctions programs
designed to combat the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction (WMD). (OFAC, 2012) The main priority of EO
13382 is for OFAC to block the property of persons engaged in
proliferation activities and their support networks. This
wasoriginally put into effect and applied against eight
organizations in North Korea, Iran, and Syria. (OFAC, 2012)
This Executive order was created to block or freeze the assets of
persons or corporations that are actively involved in the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. For instance
countries like North Korea, Iran and Syria were seen as
countries trying to gain some sort of an active WMD program.
Iran and North Korea longed stated they wished to have an
active nuclear program. Under this EO OFAC designated
certain people or companies that were actively involved in
gaining WMDs. The thought process used is by freezing or
blocking the assets of these people it would aid in the counter
proliferation of the materials that can create WMDs. On top of
the financial sanctions the EO presents it also stops US entities
from carrying out transactions with anyone or any institution
that is being blocked. At the time the order was issued in 2005,
the Treasury Department immediately placed financial
restrictions against eight organizations in Iran, North Korea,
and Syria. Washington currently maintains sanctions under
Executive Order 13382 against 114 individuals and
organizations, including engineering firms, defense industries,
banks, and trading companies. Nearly all of these entities are
located in or controlled by firms based in China, Iran, North
Korea, and Syria or are nationals of those countries. (Crail,
2008)

12. Executive Order 13382, (2012), Blocking Property of Weapons
of Mass Destruction Proliferators and Their Supporters; the
Weapons of Mass Destruction Trade Control Regulations and
the Highly Enriched Uranium Agreement Assets Control
Regulations.
Crail, P. (2008), U.S. Wields Financial Sanctions Against Iran.
Arms Control today. Retrieved from
https://www.armscontrol.org/print/3422