On Sanction Law we are hosting a new series, “Getting to Know OFAC”, in which we engage in a question and answer session with former OFAC officials, government policy makers, and OFAC practitioners. For our inaugural posting we had the pleasure of interview Mr. Michael Romero a former OFAC sanctions investigator in the Office of Global Targeting.

Mr. Romero was a Sanctions Investigator with OFAC for three and a half (3 1/2) years and is currently working in the private sector for a U.S. financial institution.

Q: How long did you work at OFAC and in what division did you work?

A: I worked for 3.5 years in the Office of Global Targeting, Global Counter Narcotics Division (fka Designation Investigations Division)

Q: As an official in the designation investigations division were there any particular sanctions program that you worked on?

A: I primarily worked on sanctions pursuant to the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act (“Kingpin Act”).

Q: What were some of your duties during your time in the designation investigations division?

A: Primarily, I was a Sanctions Investigator responsible for conducting investigations and implementing sanctions pursuant to the Kingpin Act.

Q: OFAC is a relatively small agency. How many people worked in the designation investigations division?

A: Approximately 25 investigators.

Q: There has been some talk that OFAC has been outsourcing some of its tasks and duties to government contracts. Was this occurring in the designation investigations division while you were there?

A: No, I am not aware of an outsourcing of tasks.

Q: Was there a separate office within the designation investigations division that handled removal of SDN Designations?

A: No, removals were not handled by a separate office.

Q: The SDN reconsideration process is often considered to be shrouded in mystery. Can you give us some insight on what processes go on internally within the government when reviewing a request to reconsider an SDN Designation?

A: All requests for delisting are subject to a rigorous process of investigation, analysis and review. Once a recommendation for delisting or re-designation is made by an investigator, the entire case is subject of extensive legal review before being submitted to senior OFAC management for final approval. In short, the delisting request is a case in and of itself requiring the same amount of investigation and careful review as a normal designation investigation.

Q: Aside from not getting on the SDN List in the first place, is there any insight you could give blocked parties on how to most efficiently go about seeking their removal from the list?

A: There is no formula for being removed from the SDN List. However, parties seeking removal should be prepared to provide fulsome responses to OFAC’s questions. Additionally, the individual should provide supporting documentation to corroborate their claims.

Q: OFAC obviously has a very big job to do and has limited resources. What do you think needs to happen both from a public sector viewpoint, as well as a private sector viewpoint, for OFAC to become more efficient at protecting the U.S. financial system?

A: I think on the public side that OFAC should continue its efforts to reach out to the private sector so as to most effectively explain and communicate new regulations and policies related to U.S. sanctions. In the same vein, I think the private sector should see OFAC as a resource, not just a law enforcement agency, and should take advantage of the option to proactively request information or guidance from OFAC through the hotline or via formal written correspondence.

The author of this blog is Erich Ferrari, an attorney specializing in OFAC matters. If you have any questions please contact him at 202-280-6370 or ferrari@ferrari-legal.com.