Port of Export Code Updated in the Automated Export System

May 27th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

(Source: census@subscriptions.census.gov, 12 May 2016)

Port of Export Code Updated in the Automated Export System (AES)

Please note the following Port of Export code has been UPDATED in the AES effective immediately.

   Port Code Description   Allowed MOTs

3901         Chicago, IL   Vessel, Air

Rail is no longer an Allowed MOT for Port of Export 3901.

Successful Violations for Dummies: Don’t Fly to the US when Attempting to Arrange Illegal Exports

May 27th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

New Zealand Man Arrested in Seattle After Contacting Undercover Agent

By: Danielle McClellan

William Ali, a New Zealand man has been indicted in Seattle on federal charges that he attempted to purchase aircraft parts in the US that he planned to sell to a client in China. Last year Ali contacted a US company looking for “aircraft parts called accelerometers.” These parts are developed for low or zero gravity navigation systems used in spacecraft and aircraft and any one selling the items must have an export license (Ali did not).

A Homeland Security agent began to investigate Ali shortly after he contacted the company looking to purchase the accelerometers. The agent and Ali exchanged emails and Ali admitted that he knew there were controls on the sale of the items that he was looking to buy and that trying to buy them was turning out to be difficult. He also explained that he didn’t think he could get an export license for the parts so he was trying to purchase them through different sources. His client was looking for a “huge quantity” of the product because they were “manufacturing a variant of the MA60 aircraft and needed high-quality US parts” according to the criminal complaint.

After considering all of his options, Ali flew to Seattle to pick up the pars where he was arrested when he arrived on April 11, 2016.

More Details: http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/new-zealand-man-faces-illegal-export-charges-in-seattle/

Export Business Manager Pleads Guilty to Attempted Illegal Exports to Iran

May 27th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

By: Danielle McClellan

Asim Fareed (age 51) of North Brunswick, NJ operated an export business in Somerset, NJ that agreed to ship items purchased by customers in Iran. Fareed provided false documentation to the US Department of Commerce for export purposes between 2013 and 2015. He created invoices that contained false information related to the identity and geographic location of the purchasers of the goods. The items were supposed to be shipped from the US to the UAE and then onto Iran. The items never were actually shipped.

Asim Fareed agreed to enter a plea to conspiracy to provide false statements in connection to the illegal export of goods to Iran. “The Office of Export Enforcement vigorously pursues violators of our nation’s export control laws, which are in place to further and protect our national security and foreign policy.  As in this instance, we work closely with our colleagues at HSI and other law enforcement agencies in prosecuting this case,” said Jonathan Carson, Special Agent in Charge, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, Office of Export Enforcement, New York Field Office.
“This case demonstrates how far individuals will go to circumvent U.S. export laws to export goods to countries like the Islamic Republic of Iran,” said Angel M. Melendez, special agent in charge of HSI in New York. “The Iran Trade Embargo prohibits Americans from supplying goods, technology and services to Iran directly or indirectly. HSI is committed to aggressively pursuing those who conduct illegal business with Iran.”
The case was investigated by the Department of Commerce, Office of Export Enforcement and U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement’s (ICE), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).  Assistant U.S. Attorney Todd K. Hinkley is prosecuting the case.
More information: https://www.justice.gov/usao-mdpa/pr/new-jersey-man-charged-conspiracy-provide-false-statements-related-export-prohibited

Commerce/BIS: “Cuba: Exports and Reexports of Foreign-Made Items”

May 27th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

(Source: Commerce/BIS)

Both the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) and the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) administer Cuba sanctions pursuant to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) (15 C.F.R. Parts 730-774) and the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (CACR) (31 C.F.R. Part 515), respectively.  Most export or reexport transactions require general or specific authorizations from both BIS and OFAC.  OFAC has issued a general license authorizing all transactions ordinarily incident to the exportation of items from the United States, or the reexportation of 100 percent U.S.-origin items from a third country, to any person in Cuba, provided that the exportation is licensed or otherwise authorized by BIS.  See 31 C.F.R. § 515.533.
Accordingly, for those BIS-licensed exports or reexports, further OFAC authorization generally is not needed.  However, in some cases, a specific license from OFAC may be required in connection with BIS-authorized exports or reexports.  For example, although BIS may authorize the export to Cuba of foreign-made items from the United States, persons may require a specific license from OFAC for the initial importation into the United States of items specifically intended for export to Cuba.
Additionally, even if BIS has authorized the reexport of items that are not 100 percent U.S.-origin to Cuba, persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction would also require a specific license from OFAC to reexport the items, and OFAC’s consideration of applications for such licenses may be subject to statutory restrictions.  See 31 C.F.R. § 515.559.

For additional information regarding BIS’s Cuba sanctions, please visit http://www.bis.doc.gov/cuba. You may also call BIS’s Foreign Policy Division (202-482-4252).

For additional information regarding OFAC’s Cuba sanctions, please visit http://www.treasury.gov/cuba.

You may also call OFAC’s toll free hotline (800-540-6322 FREE), its local hotline (202-622-2490), or the Licensing Division (202-622-2480), or send a message to OFAC’s email hotline account (ofac_feedback@treasury.gov).

Export Control Reform Is Not Dead

May 27th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

By: John Black

Maybe you were beginning to feel comfortable with the sweeping changes to US export controls resulting from the Obama Administration’s Export Control Reform Initiative.   Well, the regulatory change party isn’t over.  Get out your reading glasses and free up some time in your calendar because it won’t be long before the EAR-ITAR definitions clean-up regulations hit the street.  In 2015, DDTC and BIS published proposed, so-called harmonization rules to harmonize EAR and ITAR definitions of terms such as export, publicly available/public domain and others.  At first glance I thought the proposed EAR and ITAR rules were not harmonization because they proposed to have different definitions of many key terms.  Then the musicians in my family reminded me that when two people sing harmony they do not sing the same note at the same time but they sing different notes at the same time.  So I guess the proposal to have definitions in harmony was musically correct because the definitions were not the same.

It’s easier for me to talk about the rules as definitions clean up, updates or clarifications, or perhaps just changes.  In any event, putting aside the name I prefer to use, this is a high level overview of what I/we should expect:

  • Clarifications of the EAR definitions of export (something leaves the US), reexport (something goes from one foreign country to another) and retransfer (change in end-use or end-user).
  • Stating in the EAR that a person’s country status under the EAR deemed export rule is the most recent country of citizenship or permanent resident status.
  • If technical data, technology or software is electronically transmitted or moved using end-to-end encryption, and is not intended for storage in the most sensitive export control countries such as China, Russia, and arms-embargoed countries, it is not an unauthorized export if electronic transmissions transit countries for which the a license would be required for the content of the transmission.
  • The EAR will include provisions to apply the ITAR 126.18 and 124.16 concepts to EAR deemed reexports of technology or source code.  Deemed reexports from Country Group A:5 STA eligible countries to nationals of any of those A:5 countries will be authorized.  Deemed EAR reexports involving other countries and nationals will be authorized along the lines of ITAR 126.18 which means the deemed reexporter has an NDA from the recipient, a compliance procedure to vet/control the deemed reexport and there is no substantive contact with problem countries.
  • The EAR will include provisions to apply ITAR special arrangements involving countries such as Canada, the UK and Australia to EAR issues.
  • The EAR will require that the license applicant inform all other parties in the license of the license scope and conditions.
  • The EAR will clarify that technology that is an input into a fundamental research is not fundamental research.

To a large extent, the definition changes will merely clarify that the definitions mean what you thought they meant, which will increase your confidence in your understanding of the regulations and, hopefully, make it easier for you to explain and apply the rules in your organization, and perhaps help you to sleep better at night.  Clarification, even without hope for changes to the restrictions and requirements, is something I always appreciate because for me it is always better to understand the rules than to agree with them.

In any event, once the new changes are out, it will be time to join me as I print out the Federal Register notices, get some small sticky notes and a couple highlighter pens, pour yourself a big cup of coffee, and start to read the notices, including the preamble text, and study the new rules.  I am looking forward to it, and I hope you are too.

It’s Pho Real! Obama Lifts US Arms Embargo on Vietnam

May 27th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

By: John Black

During his visit to Vietnam, President Obama announced that the US was lifting its long standing arms embargo on Vietnam.   While this may not result in an immediate flood of US weapons to Vietnam, it paves the way for US exporters and foreign companies who sell US military items to seek new, yet perhaps relatively modest, business opportunities in Vietnam.

On May 23, 2016, the Department of State’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls announced is it ending its policy prohibiting the sale or transfer of lethal weapons to Vietnam.   DDTC said it will review on case-by-case basis applications for licenses to export or temporarily import defense articles and defense services to or from Vietnam under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). DDTC will soon publish a rule in the Federal Register to implement a conforming change to ITAR §126.1.

While the US Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) has not yet officially announced it will make corresponding changes to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to remove the EAR/ ITAR-lite arms embargo on Vietnam, it is reasonable to assume that BIS will do so in approximately the same “soon” timeframe as DDTC’s ITAR change.

“The decision to lift the ban was not based on China… but on our desire to complete what has been a lengthy process moving towards normalization with Vietnam,” Obama said at a joint press conference alongside his Vietnamese counterpart President Tran Dai Quang.   A casual observer like me, however, cannot help but think that to a certain extent this US action is intended to send a clear symbolic, and perhaps tangible, signal to China in response to China’s recent empire expanding actions in the South China Sea including, for example, building a military air base on the Spratly Islands, which most of the world do not recognize to be Chinese territory.

Vietnam’s economy has been growing at an impressive rate compared to other countries in the region in recent years as it has begun to be a low cost manufacturing source that is taking some manufacturing opportunities away from China as Chinese manufacturing costs increase.  According to the latest CIA statistics, Vietnam has the 36th highest GDP in the world and its industrial production growth rate of 7.5% is the 15th highest in the world.  This is not to say that Vietnam soon will be cranking out  a high volume of low cost ITAR and EAR controlled military parts as it becomes a regional military manufacturing powerhouse.  It is unlikely that the US Government is prepared to approve the transfer of technology for the production of sophisticated military items to Vietnam anytime soon and equally unlikely that Vietnam has the capability to do so.  Nonetheless, this shift in US-Vietnam economic relations removes the US arms embargo as a cloud hanging over trade between the two countries and is another step in improving US-Vietnam relations.  Certainly too, some extent this enhances Vietnams status in the region.

North Korean Ruler Kim Jong-un was unavailable for comment.

AESDirect Accounts with Prefixes “60-79 and “80-99” Are Now Deactivated

May 5th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

(Source: census@subscriptions.census.gov, 21 Apr 2016)

This message is not intended for filers using AESWebLink and AESDirect EDI Upload. It is strictly for the attention of filers using the legacy AESDirect portal at aesdirect.census.gov and the AESPcLink application.

On Monday April 11th at 12:01 AM ET Legacy AESDirect Accounts with prefixes “60-79” were deactivated.

On Monday April 25th at 12:01 AM ET Legacy AESDirect Accounts with prefixes “80-99” were deactivated.

The Refactored AESDirect system in the Automated Commercial Environment was launched on November 30, 2015. Since that time, filers have submitted over 950,000 accepted shipments using the new system.

As part of the transition of AESDirect to the ACE Portal, the ability to file Electronic Export Information via legacy AESDirect at aesdirect.census.gov and the AESPcLink application will be terminated in stages over the next month. All legacy AESDirect filers have been notified of their mandatory transition date to the Refactored AESDirect system upon login and have been provided a specific date their account will be closed off based upon their Filer ID.

As a reminder, your filing in the Refactored AESDirect system does not require vetting or Reports Authorization. Vetting is only required for those companies looking to obtain export reports access outside of the AESDirect Shipment Manager. For more information regarding the transition, please see our AESDirect Transition to ACE – Refactored AESDirect page.

Please make sure you have secured ACE Exporter access and have taken the necessary steps to begin filing in the Refactored AESDirect system in ACE prior to your mandatory transition date. For questions regarding your ACE Account access, please contact the CBP Accounts Service Desk at 1-866-530-4172 option 1, then option 2 or ACE.Support@cbp.dhs.gov.
Please expect 15 to 30 minute waiting times during this transition period.
Complete Transition Schedule:

  • Prefixes 00-19 on 02/29/2016
  • Prefixes 20-39 on 03/14/2016
  • Prefixes 40-59 on 03/28/2016
  • Prefixes 60-79 on 04/11/2016
  • Prefixes 80-99 on 04/25/2016

Once your account is deactivated, there will be no further access to legacy AESDirect to file or amend Electronic Export Information. You will only have access to the Shipment Manager application to view previously submitted shipments. The access to the Shipment Manager Application (for viewing submitted shipments) will be available for all users until May 20, 2016.

For further information or questions, contact the U.S. Census Bureau’s Data Collection Branch.

DDTC Agreements Guidelines Updates

May 5th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

Revision 4.3 of the Guidelines for Preparing Agreements has been posted on the DDTC website. Download the document at http://pmddtc.state.gov/licensing/documents/AG_Rev%204.3.pdf.

Singaporean Extradited for Illegal Exports Later Found in IEDs

May 5th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

By: Danielle McClellan

Lim Yong Nam (known as Steven Lim), a citizen of Singapore, has been extradited from Indonesia to stand trial in Washington, DC on charges of conspiracy.  He allegedly caused 6,000 radio frequency modules to be illegally exported from the US to Iran. Over the course of May 2008 and July 2010, sixteen of the modules were found in unexploded IEDs recovered in Iraq by coalition forces.

Between 2007 and February 2008 Lim and others in Singapore purchased 5 shipments of radio frequency modules from a Minnesota-based company by falsifying documents that stated the modules would stay in Singapore. When the modules were purchased they were always destined for Iran, however, Lim and his Singapore counterparts knew this would not be approved by the US government so they concealed the ultimate origin from the US manufacturer.

In 2009, when Lim was questioned by US authorities he was adamant that he never participated in any illicit exports to Iran. Communications were later found between Lim and several others regarding the US export rules and the issues with sending the modules to Iran.

Lim is currently facing the following charges:

  • One count of conspiracy to defraud the US
  • One count of smuggling
  • One count of Illegal export of goods from the US to Iran
  • One count of making false statements to the US Government
  • One count of making false statements to law enforcement

More details: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/singapore-man-extradited-united-states-connection-plot-involving-exports-iran-us-components

BIS Amends EAR and Updates Six ECCNs for MTCR Annex

May 5th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

By: Danielle McClellan

On April 4, 2016 The Bureau of Industry and Security published a final rule to reflect changes to the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) Annex that were agreed on by MTCR member countries in October 2015. The following changes have been published:

  • In § 742.5 (Missile technology), this final rule adds a new paragraph (b)(3), and redesignates paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4), as paragraphs (b)(4) and (b)(5). This paragraph specifies that BIS licenses for MT controlled items also authorize the minimum ‘‘software’’ and ‘‘technology’’ for MT controlled items authorized under the same license, unless such minimum ‘‘software’’ and ‘‘technology’’ are specifically excluded by BIS on the license.
  • This final rule also amends § 750.7(c)(1), which identifies ‘‘non-material changes [to a license that] do not require submission of a ‘Replacement’ license or any other notification to BIS.’’ BIS has determined that a license applicant who does not seek a license for minimum ‘‘software’’ or ‘‘technology’’ for an MT controlled item need not seek a ‘‘Replacement’’ license if the applicant subsequently wishes to export such software or technology under the authority of the previously issued license.
  • Accordingly, in this rule BIS establishes a new paragraph (c)(1)(x) to § 750.7 that applies to all MT licenses, except when a condition is placed on the license that excludes such minimum ‘‘software’’ and ‘‘technology.’’ These changes are also consistent with the boilerplate text on BIS licenses, because the § 750.7(c)(1)(x) revision identifies the export, reexport or transfer (in-country) of minimum necessary MT controlled software and technology as a non-material change to a license.
  • BIS makes this change to MT licensing policy to be consistent with the MTCR Annex General Minimum Software Note and the MTCR Annex General Technology Note that specify that a license for MT controlled items should also authorize certain minimum ‘‘software’’ and ‘‘technology,’’ which is being implemented by adding paragraph (c)(1)(x) to § 750.7 (which allows licensees to make such exports, reexports and transfers (in-country) pursuant to licenses for MT items) and paragraph (b)(3) to § 742.5 (which specifies this MT licensing policy) of the EAR.
  • The MTCR General Minimum Software Note, MTCR Annex General Technology Note, and the provisions this final rule adds to § 742.5 are consistent with the General Software Note and General Technology Note in Supplement No. 2 to part 774 and License Exception TSU under § 740.13, paragraphs (a) and (c). Note, however, that the implementation of these provisions is being done through the MT licensing policy, and the addition of paragraph (c)(1)(x) to § 750.7 described below, instead of through the use of a license exception.
  • This final rule also specifies in § 742.5, paragraph (b)(3) that a license for MT controlled items authorizes pursuant to § 750.7(c)(1)(x) the later export (or reexport, or transfer (in- country) as applicable) of ‘‘software’’ controlled for MT reasons intended to correct defects (bug fixes) in a previously legally exported item under a BIS license to the same ultimate consignee(s) and end user(s) specified on the license, provided that the capability and/or performance of the item are not otherwise enhanced and such ‘‘software’’ is not excluded from the license by a BIS condition on the license.
  • Lastly, for the changes to § 742.5, this final rule adds a Note to paragraph (b)(3) to clarify that for the limited number of ECCNs that are identified in § 740.2, paragraph (a)(5), License Exception TSU is available, and therefore exporters do not need to apply for a license from BIS for such minimum ‘‘software’’ or ‘‘technology.’’
  • In § 750.7(c) (Changes to the license), this rule adds a new paragraph (c)(1)(x), as referenced above in the description of the changes this final rule makes to § 742.5. This paragraph (c)(1)(x) specifies that the export, reexport or transfer (in-country) of missile technology (MT) controlled minimum ‘‘software’’ and/or ‘‘technology’’ permitted pursuant to the missile technology licensing policy in § 742.5(b)(3) does not require a new license.
  • This final rule also includes a parenthetical phrase in § 750.7(c)(1)(x) to cross reference § 742.5(b)(3)(i) to define the scope of eligible minimum ‘‘software’’ and ‘‘technology’’ and other limitations for licenses for MT controlled items.
  • Also in § 750.7, this final rule adds two notes to paragraph (c)(1)(x). The new Note 1 provides context for why BIS is implementing the MT licensing policy pursuant to § 750.7(c)(1)(x). Note 1 explains that the MT licensing policy is being implemented pursuant to paragraph (c)(1)(x) because it applies to all MT licenses. This new Note 1 also explains that this MT licensing policy does not apply when BIS places a condition on the specific license(s) which excludes the use of paragraph (c)(1)(x).
  • This final rule also adds a Note 2 to paragraph (c)(1)(x) to provide guidance on the relationship between License Exception TSU and § 750.7(c)(1)(x), as well as § 742.5(b)(3). Note 2 is the same as the Note to paragraph (b)(3) to § 742.5, described above in this final rule, except for minor changes to reflect that the note is in § 750.7.
  • This final rule amends ECCN 1B101 by revising paragraph a and the introductory text of paragraph b in the List of Items Controlled section. (MTCR Annex Change, Category II: Item 6.B.1.a. and b., Bern 2015 TEM). Specifically, this final rule amends paragraph a to revise the term ‘fiber- placement machines’ to add the term ‘‘/tow’’ after the term ‘‘fiber’’ to clarify that the scope of the control parameter extends to placement machines regardless of whether they are named fiber-placement machines or tow- placement machines.
    • This final rule revises the term ‘‘fiber-placement machines’’ to ‘‘fiber/tow-placement machines’’ in order to clarify that both these similar machines (two types of placement machines) are classified under this control parameter, regardless of the naming convention.
    • This final rule revises paragraph b to add single quotation marks around the term ‘tape- laying machines’ to indicate that this term is defined for purposes of ECCN 1B101.
    • This final rule also revises paragraph b to remove the phrase ‘‘and sheets,’’ because it is no longer needed as part of the control parameter because the definition of tape now encompasses sheets. Lastly, this final rule adds four new Technical Notes to paragraphs a and b. The addition of these four Technical Notes provides a cleartechnical definition for ‘fiber/tow- placement machines’ and ‘tape-laying machines’ under new Technical Note 1, which is based on the minimum width of material that these machines are capable of laying (as specified further in the new Technical Notes 3 and 4 this final rule adds to ECCN 1B101).
    • This final rule also adds a Technical Note 2 to provide an ECCN-specific definition of ‘filament band,’ which is also used as part of the definition of ‘fiber/tow- placement machines’ and ‘tape-laying machines.’ The purpose of this change to ECCN 1B101 is to more clearly define and differentiate between fiber/tow- placement machines and tape-laying machines.
  • This final rule amends ECCN 1C111 by revising paragraphs b.4, b.9, d.9, and d.12 in the List of Items Controlled section to add CAS (Chemical Abstract Service) Numbers. CAS Numbers are numerical identifiers assigned by the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) to every chemical substance described in open scientific literature, including organic and inorganic compounds, minerals, isotopes and alloys. The inclusion of CAS Numbers will make it easier to identify the materials controlled under these ‘‘items’’ paragraphs of 1C111.
    • This final rule revises paragraph b.4 to add the CAS Number (CAS 25265– 19–4/CAS 68891–50–9) after the material ‘‘polybutadiene acrylic acid acrylonitrile (PBAN).’’ (MTCR Annex Change, Category II: Item 4.C.5.e., otterdam 2015 Plenary).
    • This final rule revises paragraph d.9 to add the CAS Number (CAS 6068– 98–0) after the material ‘‘ethylene dihydrazine.’’ (MTCR Annex Change, Category II: Item 4.C.2.b.8., Rotterdam 2015 Plenary).
    • This final rule revises paragraph d.12 to add the material ‘‘1,1- Dimethylhydrazinium azide (CAS 227955–52–4),’’ which is an alternative structure of the same chemical (Dimethylhydrazinium azide) classified under d.12. This final rule also revises paragraph d.12 to add ‘‘1,2-’’ before the material ‘‘Dimethylhydrazinium azide’’ and adds the CAS Number (CAS 299177–50–7) after the material ‘‘1,2- Dimethylhydrazinium azide.’
    • Lastly, for the changes to ECCN 1C111, this final rule revises paragraph d.19, to add the material ‘‘1,1- Diethylhydrazine nitrate (DEHN),’’ which is an alternative structure of the same chemical (Diethylhydrazine nitrate (DEHN)) classified under d.19.
    • This final rule also revises paragraph d.19 to add ‘‘1,2-’’ before the material ‘‘Diethylhydrazine nitrate (DEHN)’’ and adds the CAS Number (CAS 363453– 17–2) after the material ‘‘1,2- Dimethylhydrazinium nitrate.’’
  • This final rule amends ECCN 7A116 to revise the heading to add the term ‘‘pneumatic’’ to the beginning of the control parameter to specify that pneumatic flight control systems are also controlled under ECCN 7A116. In addition, this final rule adds the phrase ‘‘and fly-by-light’’ to the parenthetical phrase ‘‘(including fly-by- wire systems)’’ to specify that the flight control systems classified under this ECCN include fly-by-wire and fly-by- light systems. (MTCR Annex Change, Category II: Item 10.A.1., Rotterdam 2015 Plenary).
  • This final rule amends ECCN 9A012 by adding paragraph b.5 in the List of Items Controlled section to control pneumatic, hydraulic, mechanical, electro-optical, or electromechanical flight control systems (including fly-by-wire and fly-by-light systems) and attitude control equipment designed or modified for UAVs or drones controlled by ECCN 9A012, and capable of delivering at least 500 kilograms payload to a range of at least 300 km. (MTCR Annex Change, Category II: Item 10.A.1., Rotterdam 2015 Plenary). New paragraph b.5 is not intended to control UAVs or drones controlled by either USML paragraph VIII(a) or ECCN 9A610.a.
  • This final rule also makes two conforming changes to ECCN 9A012 for the addition of paragraph 9A012.b.5. Specifically, this final rule is revising the ‘‘MT’’ paragraph in the License Requirements section to add an MT control for the new paragraph 9A012.b.5.
  • This final rule is revising the Related Control Paragraph to include a reference to also see ECCN 9A610, because as noted above, similar types of systems and equipment are controlled under ECCN 9A610.w
  • This final rule amends ECCN 9A610 by revising paragraph w in the List of Items Controlled section to add the term ‘‘pneumatic’’ to the beginning of the control parameter to specify that pneumatic flight control systems are also classified under this paragraph w.
    • In addition, this final rule adds the phrase ‘‘and fly-by-light’’ to the parenthetical phrase ‘‘(including fly-by- wire systems)’’ to specify that the flight control systems classified under this paragraph w include fly-by-wire and fly- by-light systems. (MTCR Annex Change, Category II: Item 10.A.1., Rotterdam 2015 Plenary).
  • This final rule amends ECCN 9B106 by revising paragraphs a.1 and the introductory text of paragraph a.2 in the List of Items Controlled section. The introductory text of paragraph previously referred to both paragraphs a.1 and a.2 as flight conditions, which was not entirely accurate.
    • Therefore, this final rule revises the introductory text of paragraph a by removing the phrase ‘‘simulating all of the following flight conditions’’ and adding in its place the phrase ‘‘having all of the following characteristics.’’ (MTCR Annex Change, Category II: Item 15.B.4.a., Bern 2015 TEM). The altitude and temperature requirements specified in paragraphs a.1.a and a.2.a are flight conditions, but the incorporation or ability to incorporate a shaker unit or other vibration test equipment specified in paragraph a.2 is not strictly a flight condition, but a means of simulating a flight condition, so the introductory text of paragraph a needed to be updated for clarity. This clarification to the introductory text of paragraph a reflects the way this control has previously been interpreted by BIS.
    • This final rule revises the control parameter in paragraph a.1.b to clarify the temperature range goes from below ¥50° C to above 125° C.
    • The revision to paragraph a.1.b does not change the scope of control of 9B610 and this revision will better reflect the control text of the MTCR Annex. (MTCR Annex Change, Category II: Item 15.B.4.a.1.b., Conforming Change to MTCR Annex).

 

Shipments of items removed from eligibility for a License Exception or export or reexport without a license (NLR) as a result of this regulatory action that were on dock for loading, on lighter, laden aboard an exporting or reexporting carrier, or enroute aboard a carrier to a port of export or reexport, on April 4, 2016, pursuant to actual orders for export or reexport to a foreign destination, may proceed to that destination under the previous eligibility for a License Exception or export or reexport without a license (NLR) so long as they are exported or reexported before May 4, 2016. Any such items not actually exported or reexported before midnight, on May 4, 2016, require a license in accordance with this rule.

Federal Register Notice: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-04-04/pdf/2016-07601.pdf