Archive for the ‘Commerce Dept’ Category

BIS Removes Certain Nuclear Nonproliferation Column 2 Controls

Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 by Danielle McClellan

2017/01/31

This rule removes remove nuclear nonproliferation (NP) Column 2 license requirements from certain pressure tubes, pipes, fittings, pipe valves, pumps, numerically controlled machine tools, oscilloscopes, and transient recorders on the Commerce Control List (CCL).

As a result of the changes made by this rule, some of these items are no longer listed under an Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) on the CCL. However, such items remain subject to the EAR under the designation EAR99. This rule also creates four new ECCNs to maintain anti-terrorism (AT) controls on certain affected commodities and related ‘‘software’’ and ‘‘technology.’’ All items subject to the EAR, regardless of whether they are listed on the CCL, may require a license for reasons described elsewhere in the EAR (e.g., license requirements based on end-user/end-use controls, embargoes, or other special controls).

The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) published this final rule on November 25, 2016, however, ‘software’’ ‘‘specially designed’’ for the ‘‘development,’’ ‘‘production,’’ or ‘‘use’’ of items previously controlled under ECCN 3A292 will continue to be classified and licensed by BIS under the designation EAR99 through January 31, 2017. As of February 1, 2017, such ‘‘software’’ will be classified and licensed by BIS under ECCN 3D991.

Federal Register: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-11-25/pdf/2016-28039.pdf

Man Pleads Guilty to Stealing Sensitive Military Documents from United Technologies and Exporting Them to China

Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 by Danielle McClellan

2017/01/31

By: Danielle McClellan

Yu Long, 38, a citizen of China and permanent resident of the US, plead guilty on December 19, 2016 to one count of conspiracy to engage in the theft of trade secrets as well as one count of unlawful export and attempted export of defense articles from the US. Long worked as a Senior Engineer/Scientist at United Technologies Research Center (UTRC) from May 2008 to May 2014 where he worked on F119 and F135 engines. During this time Long always intended to return to China to work on research projects at state-run universities in China using the knowledge and materials he was acquiring at UTRC. During 2013 and 2014, Long was recruited by Shenyang Institute of automation (SIA), of China, where he substantiated claims that he could provide documents from his work at UTRC and examples of projects on which he worked.

On May 30, 2014, Long left URTC and began travelling back and forth between the US and China with a UTRC external hard drive that he unlawfully retained after his employment ended. On November 7, 2014, Long was arrested, two days after he attempted to board a plane to China with sensitive, proprietary and export controlled documents from Rolls Royce, not URTC. His checked baggage was inspected by CBP officer in Newark, NJ, where the hard drive was found with all of the proprietary, export controlled information.

After his digital media was seized it was found that he had voluminous files protected by the ITAR and EAR, as well as files proprietary to UTRC, Pratt, and Rolls Royce. UTRC confirmed that the hard drive that he stole and accessed in China contained not only documents and data from projects long worked on, but also from projects that he did not work on. It was found that he obtained Pratt and Rolls Royce proprietary information from a project that the US Air Force had convened a consortium of major defense contractors to work together to see if they could collectively lower the costs of specific metals used.

A sentencing date has not been set but Long faces a maximum term of imprisonment for 15 years for the theft of trade secrets charge and 20 years of imprisonment for violated the Arms Export Act.

More Information: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/chinese-national-admits-stealing-sensitive-military-program-documents-united-technologies

Final ECR Revisions for Spacecraft Published

Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 by Danielle McClellan

2017/01/31

The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) has published a final rule that will be effective January 15, 2017, and will complete the administration’s goal of moving spacecraft and related items that no longer warrant control under the United states Munitions List (USML) Category XV to the Commerce Control List (CCL). This final rule addresses issues raised in, and public comments, on the interim final rule that was published on May 13, 2014 and groups the changes into four types of changes:

  1. Changes to address the movement of additional spacecraft and related items from the USML to the Commerce Control List (CCL), as a result of changes in aperture size for spacecraft that warrant ITAR control, in response to public comments and further U.S. Government review;
  2. Changes to address the movement of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) from the USML to the CCL;
  3. Other corrections and clarifications to the spacecraft interim final rule; and
  4. Addition of .y items to Export Control Classification Number 9A515

The first type of changes (Changes To Address the Movement of Additional Spacecraft and Related Items From the USML to the CCL) are:

  • In § 740.20, paragraph (g) (License Exception STA eligibility requests for 9×515 and ‘‘600 series’’ end items), this final rule revises paragraph (g)(1) as a conforming change to the changes made to ECCN 9A515.a, described below.
    • To maintain the same scope of paragraph (g)(1), this final rule removes the text that referred to ECCN 9A515.a and adds in its place text referencing ‘‘spacecraft’’ in 9A515.a.1, .a.2, .a.3, or .a.4, or items in 9A515.g.
    • The spacecraft in ECCN 9A515.a.5 are eligible for License Exception STA without a § 740.20(g) request. As a conforming change, this final rule adds ECCN 9E515.b, .d, .e, or .f as eligible for § 740.20(g) License Exception STA eligibility requests.
    • Because the scope of revised paragraph (g) includes items other than end items, this final rule also revises the heading of paragraph (g) to remove the term ‘‘end items’’ and add in its place the term ‘‘items.’’ However, the items eligible to be submitted under the § 740.20(g) process are still limited to those specific ECCNs and ‘‘items’’ paragraphs identified in paragraph (g).
  • The spacecraft transferred to the CCL in this final rule are subject to special regional stability license requirements. Therefore, in § 742.6 (Regional stability), this final rule makes revisions to five paragraphs.
  • The final rule revises paragraph (a)(1), adds a new paragraph (a)(8), revises paragraph (b)(1)(i), and adds paragraphs (b)(5) and (b)(6). These changes are described below.
    • In § 742.6, paragraph (a)(1) (RS Column 1 license requirements in general), this final rule adds a reference to new paragraph (a)(8).
    • New paragraph (a)(8) (Special RS Column 1 license requirement applicable to certain spacecraft and related items) is an RS Column 1 license requirement, which is specific to certain spacecraft and related items. This paragraph specifies that a license is required for all destinations, including Canada, for spacecraft and related items classified under ECCN 9A515.a.1, .a.2., .a.3., .a.4., .g, and ECCN 9E515.f.
    • Although the license requirement for these specified ECCN 9×515 items is more restrictive than for those 9×515 items on the CCL prior to publication of this rule, the license review policy is the same as those for other 9×515 items. As a conforming change, this final rule revises the fourth sentence of paragraph (b)(1)(i) to add a reference to paragraph (a)(8), because that sentence references the ECCN 9×515 license requirements, which now include those special RS license requirements in paragraph (a)(8).
  • This final rule adds two new paragraphs, paragraph (b)(5) (Spacecraft for launch) and paragraph (b)(6) (Remote sensing spacecraft) to specify the requirements that apply for license applications involving spacecraft and remote sensing spacecraft.
    • Consistent with the requirements in paragraph (y) in Supplement No. 2 to part 748 Unique Application and Submission Requirements, this final rule adds paragraphs (b)(5)(i) and (b)(5)(ii) to specify when applications to export or reexport a ‘‘spacecraft’’ controlled under ECCN 9A515.a for launch in or by a country will or may require a technology transfer control plan (DoD), an encryption technology control plan approved by the National Security Agency (NSA), and DoD monitoring of all launch activities. Paragraph (b)(5)(i) specifies that this is a requirement for all such applications for countries that are not a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) or a major non-NATO ally of the United States. This final rule adds a similar requirement under paragraph (b)(5)(ii), but with the key distinction that it may require for countries that are a member of NATO or a major non-NATO ally of the United States.  (TCP) approved by the Department of Defense
  • Also in § 742.6, this final rule adds a new paragraph (b)(6) (Remote sensing spacecraft) to make applicants aware that any application for ‘‘spacecraft’’ described in ECCN 9A515.a.1,.a.2, a.3, or .a.4, for sensitive remote sensing components described in 9A515.g, or for ‘‘technology’’ described in ECCN 9E515.f, may require a government-to- government agreement at the discretion of the U.S. Government. A government- to-government agreement may be required for any destination at the sole discretion of the U.S. Government.
  • In § 750.4 (Procedures for processing license applications), as conforming changes to the changes described above to § 742.6, this final rule makes the following two changes: adds a new paragraph (b)(8), and adds a new paragraph (d)(2)(iv). These changes are described in the next two paragraphs.
  • In § 750.4, consistent with the requirements in paragraph (y) in Supplement No. 2 to part 748 Unique Application and Submission Requirements, this final rule adds a new paragraph (b)(8) (Satellites for launch) to include a requirement for license applications involving a satellite for launch.
    • Applicants must obtain approval by the DoD of a technology transfer control plan and the approval of the NSA of an encryption technology control plan.
    • In addition, the applicant will also be required to make arrangements with the DoD for monitoring of all launch activities.
    • These existing DoD and NSA requirements in regards to satellites for launch are in addition to the EAR licensing requirements, but any license authorized under the EAR for satellites for launch must also be done in accordance with those DoD and NSA requirements to be authorized under an EAR license. Therefore, this final rule adds this requirement to § 750.4(b)(8), which will eliminate the need to add this requirement as a license condition for any license for satellites for launch.
    • These DoD and NSA TCP approval requirements existed under the ITAR and are added to the EAR to preserve the status quo. Therefore, although this paragraph adds three new requirements to the EAR for license applications for spacecraft for launch, the requirements are the same as when these spacecraft were formerly under the ITAR, so there will be no increased burden on exporters, reexporters or transferors.
  • In § 750.4, this final rule adds a new paragraph (d)(2)(iv) (Remote Sensing Interagency Working Group (RSIWG)) to make applicants aware that the RSIWG, chaired by the State Department, will review license applications involving remote sensing spacecraft. These will be any items described in ECCN 9A515.a.1, .a.2, .a.3, or .a.4, sensitive remote sensing components described in 9A515.g, or ‘‘technology’’ described in 9E515.f.
  • ECCN 9A515: This final rule adds a new License Requirement Note, revises the Special Conditions for STA section, revises ‘‘items’’ paragraph (a), and adds paragraph (g) in the List of ‘‘items’’ controlled section of ECCN 9E515. These changes are described in the next five paragraphs.
  • Addition of License Requirement Note to 9A515. As a conforming change to the addition of § 742.6(a)(8), described above, this final rule adds a License Requirement Note to the end of the License Requirements section of ECCN 9A515 to specify that the Commerce Country Chart is not used for determining license requirements for commodities classified as 9A515.a.1, .a.2., .a.3., .a.4, and .g. The new License Requirement also includes a cross reference to § 742.6(a)(8) and alerts exporters and reexporters that these commodities are subject to a worldwide license requirement.
  • In ECCN 9A515, Special Conditions for STA section, this final rule revises paragraph (1). This final rule adds references to the new ‘‘items’’ paragraphs of ECCN 9A515.a (9A515.a.1, .a.2, .a.3 and .a.4) and 9A515.g, which would not be eligible for License Exception STA, unless determined by BIS to be eligible for License Exception STA in accordance with § 740.20(g) (License Exception STA eligibility requests for certain 9×515 and ‘‘600 series’’ end items). Because these items are commodities that are more sensitive, additional U.S. Government review of the specific commodity is warranted prior to allowing exporters, reexporters or transferors to use License Exception STA. The imposition of this requirement is consistent with the use of the paragraph (g) process for other sensitive items in the 9×515 ECCNs and the ‘‘600 series’’ that have been moved to the CCL. Also in the Special Conditions for STA section, this final rule redesignates paragraph (2) as paragraph (3) and adds a new paragraph (2). This final rule adds new paragraph (2) in the Special Conditions for STA section to exclude the use of License Exception if the ‘‘spacecraft’’ controlled in ECCN 9A515.a.1, .a.2, .a.3, or .a.4 contains a separable or removable propulsion system enumerated in USML Category IV(d)(2) or USML Category XV(e)(12) and designated MT. This exclusion is being added because the MTCR Category I components identified in this paragraph are separable or removable and therefore for consistency with the intent to exclude MT items from License Exception STA eligibility, this final rule adds this as an additional restriction on the use of License Exception STA.
  • In ECCN 9A515.a, this final rule revises ‘‘items’’ paragraph (a) to add control parameters for the additional spacecraft being moved from the USML to the CCL. Spacecraft moved from the USML to the CCL and classified under ECCN 9A515.a prior to publication of this rule are being moved to new ‘‘items’’ paragraph (a)(5). This final rule adds ‘‘items’’ paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3) and (a)(4) to ECCN 9A515 to control the additional spacecraft items being moved to the CCL. The identification of these more sensitive spacecraft items in their own ‘‘items’’ level paragraph in ECCN 9A515 (9A515.a.1, .a.2, .a.3., .a.4) will allow for the imposition of more restrictive controls that are needed, while not impacting other spacecraft and related items that do not warrant the more restrictive controls (e.g., 9A515.a.5). These more restrictively controlled items consist of the following: ‘‘spacecraft,’’ including satellites, and space vehicles, whether designated developmental, experimental, research or scientific, not enumerated in USML Category XV or described in ECCN 9A004 that have electro-optical remote sensing capabilities and having a clear aperture greater than 0.35 meters, but less than or equal to 0.50 meters (under ECCN 9A515.a.1). It includes those having remote sensing capabilities beyond NIR (under ECCN 9A515.a.2), those having radar remote sensing capabilities (e.g., AESA, SAR, or ISAR) having a center frequency equal to or greater than 1.0 GHz, but less than 10.0 GHz and having a bandwidth equal to or greater than 100 MHz, but less than 300 MHz (under 9A515.a.3). These more sensitive items being moved from the USML to the CCL also include those providing space-based logistics, assembly, or servicing of another ‘‘spacecraft’’ (under ECCN 9A515.a.4).
  • In ECCN 9A515.g, this final rule also adds ‘‘items’’ paragraph (g) to 9A515, as related to the changes described above to 9A515.a. Paragraph (g) is added to control remote sensing components that are ‘‘specially designed’’ for ‘‘spacecraft’’ described in ECCN 9A515.a.1 though 9A515.a.4, which were described above. Similar to the reason for identifying the items in ECCN 9A515.a.1 through .a.4., specifying that these remote sensing components are the ‘‘items’’ paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) will allow the imposition of more restrictive controls on these components, without needing to impose the same level of restrictions on 9A515.x items, which is the paragraph under which these components would have been controlled if this new 9A515.g paragraph were not being added. Paragraph (g) controls remote sensing components for space-qualified optics with the largest lateral clear aperture dimension equal to or less than 0.35 meters; or with the largest clear aperture dimension greater than 0.35 meters but less than or equal to 0.50 meters (under ECCN 9A515.g.1). In addition, paragraph (g) controls optical bench assemblies ‘‘specially designed’’ for the spacecraft added to ECCN 9A515.a.1 through .a.4 (under ECCN 9A515.g.2), and primary, secondary, or hosted payloads that perform a function of spacecraft added to 9A515.a.1. through .a.4. (under 9A515.g.3).
  • ECCN 9E515: This final rule adds a new License Requirement Note, revises the Special Conditions for STA section and ‘‘items’’ paragraph (a), and adds ‘‘items’’ paragraph (f) in the List of ‘‘items’’ controlled section of ECCN 9E515. These changes are described in the next five paragraphs:
    • Addition of License Requirement Note to 9E515. As a conforming change to the addition of § 742.6(a)(8), described above, this final rule adds a License Requirement Note to the end of the License Requirements section of ECCN 9E515 to specify that the Commerce Country Chart is not used for determining license requirements for ‘‘technology’’ classified 9E515.f. The new License Requirement also includes a cross reference to § 742.6(a)(8) and alerts exporters and reexporters that this ‘‘technology’’ is subject to a worldwide license requirement.
    • In ECCN 9E515, Special Conditions for STA section, this final rule revises paragraph (1) to add a reference to 9E515.f. This final rule specifies that such technology is not eligible for STA, unless the specific technology has been approved under the § 740.20(g) process by the U.S. Government. This change is made to conform to the addition described below of ‘‘technology’’ under ECCN 9E515.f for the additional spacecraft and related components added to 9A515.a and .g described above. In addition, this final rule also specifies that the ‘‘technology’’ controlled under ECCN 9E515.b, .d and .e are not eligible for License Exception STA, unless the specific ‘‘technology’’ has been approved under the § 740.20(g) process by the U.S. Government. Prior to publication of this final rule, ECCN 9E515.b, .d and .e ‘‘technology’’ was excluded from License Exception STA in all cases, which based on public comments and interagency discussions was a more restrictive policy than was needed to protect U.S. national security and foreign policy interests for this ‘‘technology’’ classified under ECCN 9E515. Therefore, this final rule makes the other ‘‘technology’’ (9E515.b, .d and .e) also eligible for the requests under § 740.20(g), as described above in the changes this final rule makes to paragraph (g) of License Exception STA.
    • In ECCN 9E515.a, this final rule revises ‘‘items’’ paragraph (a) to exclude the ‘‘technology’’ for the new commodities added to 9A515.a (.a.1 through .a.4) and .g. ‘‘Required’’ ‘‘technology’’ for these new commodities added to ECCN 9A515.a and .g will be controlled under ECCN 9E515, but in order to impose more restrictive controls on those ‘‘technologies’’ without impacting other 9E515 ‘‘technology,’’ this final rule adds this ‘‘technology’’ being moved to the CCL to a new ‘‘items’’ paragraph (f) to 9E515, as described below.
    • In ECCN 9E515.f, this final rule adds a new ‘‘items’’ paragraph (f) in the List of Items Controlled section to control ‘‘technology’’ ‘‘required’’ for the ‘‘development,’’ ‘‘production,’’ installation, repair, overhaul, or refurbishing of commodities that this final rule adds to ECCN 9A515 under ‘‘items’’ paragraphs .a.1 through .a.4, or .g. As described above, this final rule is identifying these ‘‘technologies’’ in their own ‘‘items’’ paragraph in order to allow more restrictive controls to be placed on these items without impacting other ECCN 9E515 ‘‘technology.’’

 

The second types of changes (Changes To Address the Movement of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) From the USML to the CCL) are:

  • ECCN 9A004: This final rule revises ECCN 9A004 to add a specific telescope, which was ‘‘subject to the ITAR’’ prior to the effective date of this final rule. A determination was made based on the public comments received by the Department of State and the space interagency working group (a group of U.S. Government agencies involved in the export control system and that deal with space related issues) that this specific telescope was within the scope of spacecraft and related items that did not warrant being subject to the ITAR. Therefore, consistent with the stated purpose of the May 13 rule, as well as section 38(f) of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), the Department of State has moved this telescope, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), which is being developed, launched, and operated under the supervision of the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), to the CCL. The ‘‘parts,’’ ‘‘components,’’ ‘‘accessories,’’ and ‘‘attachments’’ that are ‘‘specially designed’’ for use in or with the JWST are also being moved from the ITAR and will be subject to the EAR, as of the effective date of the State and Commerce final rules.
  • To control the JWST and the ‘‘specially designed’’ ‘‘parts,’’ ‘‘components,’’ ‘‘accessories,’’ and ‘‘attachments’’ for the JWST, this final rule adds two new ‘‘items’’ paragraph to ECCN 9A004. First, this final rule adds a new ‘‘items’’ paragraph (u) to 9A004 to control the JWST (the specific telescope) that is being moved to the CCL from the USML. Second, this final rule adds a new ‘‘items’’ paragraph (v) to control the ‘‘specially designed’’ ‘‘parts,’’ ‘‘components,’’ ‘‘accessories,’’ or ‘‘attachments’’ for use in or with the JWST. The commodities this final rule adds to ECCN 9A004.v include the primary and secondary payloads of the JWST.
  • This final rule also specifies in the control parameters in the new paragraph (v)(1) to (v)(4) that the ‘‘parts,’’ ‘‘components,’’ ‘‘accessories,’’ and ‘‘attachments’’ specified in paragraph (v) do not include items that are ‘‘subject to the ITAR,’’ microelectronic circuits, items in ECCNs 7A004 and 7A104, or in any ECCN containing ‘‘space qualified’’ as a control criterion (See ECCN 9A515.x.4). As a conforming change, this final rule revises the phrase ‘‘ECCN 9A004.x’’ in paragraph (y) to add a reference to the ‘‘parts,’’ ‘‘components,’’ ‘‘accessories,’’ and ‘‘attachments’’ in paragraph (v) that this final rule adds. This final rule revises the phrase, so it now specifies ‘‘ECCN 9A004.v or .x,’’ which is being done to account for the fact that paragraphs (v) and (x) will contain certain ‘‘specially designed’’ ‘‘parts,’’ ‘‘components,’’ ‘‘accessories,’’ and ‘‘attachments’’ for items enumerated in ECCN 9A004 and that the new items being added to paragraph (v) and (x) could be reclassified under 9A004.y, if subsequently the specific item is identified in an interagency-cleared commodity classification (CCATS) pursuant to § 748.3(e) as warranting control in 9A004.y. BIS anticipates an increase of approximately 20 license applications per year as a result of these changes to the EAR.
  • In addition to the change to ECCN 9A004, this final rule makes changes to three 9×515 ECCNs to reflect that the JWST and the ‘‘specially designed’’ ‘‘parts,’’ ‘‘components,’’ ‘‘accessories,’’ and ‘‘attachments’’ for the JWST are being added to 9A004. This final rule makes these conforming changes to ECCNs 9A515, 9B515 and 9E515. These are not substantive changes. These changes are described in the next three paragraphs.
  • ECCN 9A515. This final rule revises the third sentence of the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section of ECCN 9A515 to add a reference to the JWST. This final rule also revises the Note to ECCN 9A515.a to specify items in ECCN 9A004 are not within the scope of 9A515.a. A reference to ECCN 9A004 needs to be added because the description of this Note to ECCN 9A515.a would otherwise include the JWST. This final rule revises ‘‘items’’ paragraph (b) in ECCN 9A515, to add a reference to ECCN 9A004.u for the JWST. This conforming change is needed to specify that ground control systems and training simulators ‘‘specially designed’’ for telemetry, tracking and control of the JWST are also within the scope of ECCN 9A515.b. For similar reasons, this final rule revises ‘‘items’’ paragraph (e) to add a reference to ECCN 9A004.u. This conforming change is made to specify that the microelectronic circuits and discrete electronic components described in ECCN 9A515.e include those ‘‘specially designed’’ for the JWST. This final rule also makes some changes to the .y paragraph in ECCN 9A515, which are discussed further below.
  • ECCN 9B515. This final rule revises ‘‘items’’ paragraph (a) in the List of Items Controlled section to add a reference to ECCN 9A004.u. This conforming change is needed to specify that the test, inspection, and production ‘‘equipment’’ ‘‘specially designed’’ for the ‘‘production’’ or ‘‘development’’ of the JWST are also classified under ECCN 9B515.a. For similar reasons, this final rule revises the Note to ECCN 9B515.a to add a reference to ECCN 9A004.u. This conforming change is intended to specify that ECCN 9B515.a includes equipment, cells, and stands ‘‘specially designed’’ for the analysis or isolation of faults in the JWST, in addition to the other commodities enumerated in the Note to ECCN 9A515.a.
  • ECCN 9E515: This final rule also revises the third sentence in the ‘‘Related Controls’’ paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section in ECCN 9E515 to add a reference to the JWST. This sentence will alert persons classifying technology for the JWST to see ECCNs 9E001 and 9E002.

The third types of changes are (Other Corrections and Clarifications to Interim Spacecraft Final Rule):

  • ECCN 9A515: This final rule adds two sentences at the end of the introductory text in the ‘‘items’’ paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section of ECCN 9A515, consistent with the notes to USML Category XV. The introductory paragraph clarifies when ‘‘spacecraft’’ and other items described in ECCN 9A515 remain subject to the EAR even if exported, reexported, or transferred (in-country) with defense articles ‘‘subject to the ITAR’’ integrated into and included therein as integral parts of the item. This introductory paragraph includes some application examples and some qualifiers for when the ITAR jurisdiction would reapply to such defense articles. This final rule adds two new sentences to clarify two additional instances where the jurisdiction of the ITAR would be applicable in such scenarios. The first new sentence is being added to clarify that the removal of a defense article subject to the ITAR from the spacecraft is a retransfer under the ITAR—meaning the removal of a defense article would require an ITAR authorization. The ITAR authorization requirement would apply regardless of which CCL authorization the spacecraft is exported under the EAR. The second sentence clarifies that transfer of technical data regarding the defense article subject to the ITAR integrated into the spacecraft would require an ITAR authorization.
  • ECCN 9B515: This final rule revises the License Requirements section of ECCN 9B515 to add a missile technology (MT) control. The MT control is being added to impose a license requirement on equipment in ECCN 9B515.a that is for the ‘‘development’’ or ‘‘production’’ of commodities in USML Category XV(e)(12) and XV(e)(19) that are MT controlled. This change is made to conform to the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) Annex and the corresponding MT controls in USML Category XV (MTCR Annex, Category I: Item 2.B.2.). BIS anticipates an increase of approximately 10 license applications per year as a result of this change to the EAR, along with the conforming MT change made to ECCN 9E515 described in the next paragraph.
  • ECCN 9E515: This final rule, as a conforming change to the change to ECCN 9B515, revises the MT Control paragraph in the License Requirements section on ECCN 9E515. This final rule revises the MT Control paragraph in ECCN 9E515 to add technology for items in 9B515.a that are controlled for MT reasons. This change is made to conform to the MTCR Annex and the corresponding MT controls in USML Category XV (MTCR Annex, Category I: Item 2.E.1.).

The fourth type (Addition of .y Items to ECCN 9A515) of changes:

  • This final rule adds five .y paragraphs (ECCN 9A515.y.2, .y.3., .y.4, .y.5, and .y.6) as additional commodities specified under paragraph (y) in this ECCN. As noted in the introductory text of paragraph (y), the U.S. Government through the § 748.3(e) process will identify the items that warrant being classified under 9×515.y, such as the commodities being specified under ECCN 9A515.y.2 to .y.6 in this final rule. Specifically, the following space grade or for spacecraft applications commodities: thermistors (ECCN 9A515.y.2); RF microwave bandpass ceramic filters (dielectric resonator bandpass filters) (9A515.y.3); space grade or for spacecraft applications hall effect sensors (9A515.y.4); subminiature (SMA and SMP) plugs and connectors, TNC plugs and cable and connector assemblies with SMA plugs and connectors (9A515.y.5); and flight cable assemblies (9A515.y.6) have been identified in interagency-cleared commodity classifications (CCATS) pursuant to § 748.3(e) as warranting control in 9A515.y.2 to .y.6. The additions described above for ECCN 9A515.y.2 to y.6 are the second set of approved populations of .y controls being added to 9A515. As stated in the May 13 rule, as well as the July 13 rule (which added ECCN 9A515.y.1), BIS (along with State and Defense) will continue to populate the 9A515.y with additional entries as additional classification determinations are made in response to requests from the public under § 748.3(e).

Federal Register: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-01-10/pdf/2016-31755.pdf

Antiboycott Violation Nets $238,000 Fine for Furnishing Prohibited Business Information

Tuesday, November 15th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

2016/11/15

By: Danielle McClellan

Coty Middle East FZCO (UAE) has agreed to pay $238,000 to settle 70 violations of 15 CFR §760.2(d) – Furnishing Information about Business Relationships with Boycotted Countries or Blacklisted Persons.

Coty Middle East FZCO is a foreign affiliate of Coty Inc., a US company located in Delaware thus are they are defined as a US person under 760.1(b) of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). From 2009-2013 Coty Middle East engaged in transactions involving the sale and/or transfer of goods or services from the US to Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, UAE, and Yemen, activities in the interstate or foreign commerce of the United States. In connection with these activities Coty Middle East furnished the following statement 70 times:  “WE HEREBY CERTIFY…. THAT ABOVE MENTIONED GOODS DO NOT CONTAIN ANY MATERIAL OF ISRAEL ORIGIN…”

View Order: https://efoia.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/antiboycott/alleged-antiboycott-violations-2015/1083-a748/file

Middle Man in Illegal Exports Debarred for 8 Years

Tuesday, September 6th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

2016/09/06

By: Danielle McClellan

Walter Anders and his company Terand, Inc. (he was the sole employee) of Huntersville, NC has been debarred for 8 years for his connection in exporting carbon fiber to Singapore. Anders and his company were used as a middle man to send illegal exports from a company in Middlewtown, NY to a company in Singapore in exchange for multiple $1,400 kick backs.

In 2012, Performance Engineered Nonwovens, of Middletown, NY, was contacted by BIS and told that their license to export T300 carbon fiber (ECCN 1C210.a) to Singapore was revoked due to the concerns surrounding the recipient. Performance Engineered Nonwovens then sought out to find a way to conceal the shipments to Singapore, cue Walter Anders and Terand.  Within a few weeks Anders and the president of Performance Engineered Nonwovens, Peter Gromacki, agreed to have Terand falsely act as the US exporter of record for exports of the items to Singapore in return for a $1,400 commission for each successful export.

Terand created and issued commercial invoices on letterhead that falsely named Terand as the exporter and falsely stated that, “This commodity technology exported from the United States is in accordance with the Export administration Regulations.” The company also acted as the intermediary between Performance Engineered Nonwovens and the freight forwarder, providing instructions to the forwarder, signing any and all required shipping documents, and receiving status reports on the progress of exports to Singapore. Terand also appeared as the US Principal Party in Interest (USPPI) on all of the Shipper’s Export Declarations (SED) that were filed.

Over the course of 2012 Terand made 8 exports of T300 carbon fiber to Singapore (approximately 6,557kg). Gromacki (Performance Engineered Nonwovens president) ensured that this process would continue and told Walter Anders that, “You continue to play a crucial role. I cannot export without your help and hence the commission checks will continue to flow in your direction.”

Walter Anders and his company, Terand, have been charged with 8 counts of Causing, Aiding, and/or Abetting Unlicensed Exports. The 8 illegal exports were valued at $288,736, Anders received $11,200 in commissions and 8 years of debarment.

Federal Register: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/08/19/2016-19819/in-the-matter-of-walter-anders-10701-huntersville-commons-drive-suite-c-huntersville-nc-28078-terand

BIS Extends Temporary General License for ZTE Entities

Tuesday, September 6th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

2016/09/06

On March 24, 2016, a final rule was published that created a temporary general license that allowed, for a short time period, two entities (ZTE Corporation and ZTE Kangxun) that had been added to the Entity List on March 8, 2016, to be able to take part in exports, reexports, and transfers (in- country).

BIS has decided to extend the temporary general license until November 28, 2016. Due to this extension, the final rule will remove the date of August 30, 2016 and substitute the newest expiration date of November 28, 2016. No other changes have been made to the license.

Federal Register Notice: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-08-19/pdf/2016-19828.pdf

Screen Your Parties’ Addresses & Screen Before Shipments: Experienced and Sophisticated Company Fined $90,000 for One Export of EAR99 Item

Tuesday, September 6th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

2016/09/06

By: Danielle McClellan

Spectrolab is an experienced and sophisticated exporter, according to BIS’s Order related to the illegal export of a Large Area Pulsed Solar Simulator (EAR99).  You may be thinking, EAR99 items don’t need a license so how is there an illegal export, but as the title states…screening is important and will find violations that otherwise are not obvious to the naked eye.

In this case, Spectrolab sold and transferred a Large Area Pulsed Solar Simulator to a party on the Entity List in Pakistan. SUPARCO (Pakistan’s Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission) was added to the list in 1999 after it was found that they were involved in nuclear or missile activities. SUPARCO used a procurement agent to obtain the simulator from Spectrolab in 2014. Initially the agent said the item was for Pakistan’s Institute of Space Technology (IST) but soon after Spectrolab was made aware that SUPARCO was involved in the transaction. The procurement agent provided Spectrolab with the names and every party involved in the transaction except SUPARCO. Spectrolab screened the names, but not the addresses that they received from the agent which would have alerted them that SUPARCO was on the Entity List as their address was listed as IST.

Spectrolab even hosted an inspection and training session on installation and operation with an engineer from SUPARCO. The engineer even attended the training wearing a SUPARCO badge. As a result, Spectrolab was fully aware that SUPARCO was the end user of the simulator before they ever exported it. Spectrolab failed to run or re-run its screening software to screen either the SUPARCO name or address in connection with the final shipment, a direct contradiction of their own export compliance plan.

There were a few things that went wrong in this case for Spectrolab:

  1. They didn’t screen the companies address; if this was initially done the entire process would have stopped before it even started. BIS noted in the Order that Spectrolab used an export control screening software.
  2. No one raised the question of why the engineer worked for SUPARCO instead of IST or why the end user was SUPARCO instead of IST. This is really where the break down occurred
  3. They didn’t re-run their screening software before shipping the item to Pakistan

The biggest take away from this case is to screen everything about your customers, and that the government expects you to catch on to oddities related to your shipments. In this case, the company name changing, it’s not surprising that no one knew that SUPARCO was on the Entity List, there’s thousands on that list. The issue is that there was a red flag with SUPARCO coming into the transaction but not being listed on the documents. Entities who are on the denial list will be sneaky, and BIS expects you to catch that…that just didn’t happen in this case.

Order:  https://efoia.bis.doc.gov/index.php/electronic-foia/index-of-documents/7-electronic-foia/227-export-violations

EAR and ITAR Will Require the Same New Destination Control Statement on November 15, 2016

Tuesday, September 6th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

2016/09/06

By: John Black

In the August 17, 2016 Federal Register the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) and the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) announced that effective November 1, 2016, the same Destination Control Statements (DCS) will be required for exports under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and exports under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR).  The good news is that exporters no longer will have to use one statement for EAR exports and a different statement for ITAR exports.

The bad news is neither the current EAR DCS nor the current ITAR DCS will be required under the new rules.  When it comes to reprogramming our software that prints documents, it might have been easier if the government had chosen one of the existing statements already in use.  On the other hand, several adjustments to the ITAR and EAR will make life easier for exporters in the long run.

 

Practical Considerations When Implementing the Change

As you prepare to comply with the requirement to comply with the new rules beginning on for the November 15, 2016, here are some important considerations.

 

The New DCS:

‘‘These items are controlled by the U.S. Government and authorized for export only to the country of ultimate destination for use by the ultimate consignee or end-user(s) herein identified. They may not be resold, transferred, or otherwise disposed of, to any other country or to any person other than the authorized ultimate consignee or end-user(s), either in their original form or after being incorporated into other items, without first obtaining approval from the U.S. government or as otherwise authorized by U.S. law and regulations.’’

 

(Interestingly to me, the EAR Federal Register notice does not put a period after the last word “regulations” in the EAR DCS while the ITAR Federal Register notice does place a period after the last word “regulations” in the ITAR DCS.  I doubt anybody else noticed that.  I also doubt this is a deliberate conspiracy by DDTC and BIS to set up exporters who do not properly include or not include the period in their DCS.)

 

When the DCS Is Required:

  • ITAR:  For all defense articles exported in tangible form
  • EAR:  For all items exported in tangible form except a DCS is not required for EAR99 items and items eligible for license exceptions BAG or GFT.

 

ITAR and EAR DCS Required only for Tangible Shipments.  A DCS is not required for items being exported in intangible form such as electronic, oral or visual exports.

 

Where Do You Have to Put the DCS:   The new DCS must be put on the commercial invoice, and not on the airway bill, bill of lading, or other documents.

 

Other Information You Must Put on the Commercial Invoice:  The ITAR and EAR will require the following be put on the commercial invoice, in addition to the DCS:

 

  • ITAR:  1) The country of ultimate destination,

2) The end-user, and

3) The license or other approval number or exemption citation.

  • EAR:    The ECCN for any 9×515 or 600 series items

 

Information Required When Using ITAR Authorizations to Export EAR-Controlled Items:  The new rule clearly requires that when an ITAR license or authorization (exemption) is used to export EAR controlled items, the exporter must give the ECCN or EAR99 classification for each EAR-controlled item to the end-user and consignees.

Removal of Special Requirements for Certain EAR Exports to India:  The new EAR rule will remove the special DCS requirement for exports to India of items controlled for crime control column 1 or 3 reasons or regional stability column 2 reasons.

Other ITAR Changes

Exports of EAR Items under ITAR Exemptions:  The rule clarifies that EAR Items may be exported under ITAR exemptions only if they are being shipped with ITAR items.

Changes to Required Language in ITAR Agreements and Transmittal Letters:  The rule makes several changes to the required language and clauses in ITAR agreements and transmittal letters.

To see the new EAR and ITAR rules, go to http://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/regulations/federal-register-notices#fr54721

BIS EAR Licensing Requirements for EAR-Controlled Items Destined to ISIL-Controlled Facilities or Territory

Wednesday, April 6th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

2016/04/06

(Source: Commerce/BIS)

BIS prohibits the shipment of items subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) absent a license in conjunction with regulations administered by the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). OFAC has designated ISIL as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) and the Department of State has designated ISIL as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).

As part of its efforts against ISIL, the U.S. Government is targeting not only ISIL’s abilities to raise revenue but also its purchase and use of U.S.-origin items.  BIS is committed to preventing ISIL from procuring U.S.-origin items, like oilfield equipment, that generate wealth as well as components useful for improvised explosive devices to support terrorist activities.  Our goal is to provide industry with information on potential diversion risks to safeguard the export, reexport, and transfer (in-country) of U.S.-origin items and protect national security.

ISIL controls facilities located in the areas which it controls and uses the facilities to generate revenue; some of these facilities require U.S.-origin parts and accessories to operate.  A list of ISIL-controlled facilities in Iraq and the addresses thereof is incorporated into Attachment A of this notice (see below).  BIS advises persons exporting or reexporting U.S.-origin items to Iraq to review Attachment A on a regular basis; it will be updated as necessary.  BIS also reminds persons exporting or reexporting U.S.-origin items to Syria of the existing license requirements for all items subject to the EAR, other than food or medicine classified as EAR99.  The full text of BIS’s licensing requirements and policy specific to Syria is found here.

Exporters/reexporters are advised that sanctions administered by other agencies, including those administered by OFAC, may also impact transactions in the region.  Exporters/reexporters should note that U.S. entities/persons are generally prohibited from engaging in activities with any entities/persons who are on the OFAC administered Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List.

Pursuant to Section 744.12  of the EAR, BIS requires a license for the export or reexport to an SDGT of any item subject to the EAR.  However, to avoid duplication, U.S. persons are not required to seek authorization for an export or reexport to an SDGT of an item that is subject to both the EAR and OFAC’s regulatory authority from both OFAC and BIS.  Rather, if OFAC authorizes an export from the United States or an export or reexport by a U.S. person to an SDGT, no separate authorization from BIS is necessary.  However, U.S. persons must seek authorization from BIS for the export or reexport to an SDGT of any item subject to the EAR that is not subject to OFAC’s jurisdiction and non-U.S. persons must seek authorization from BIS for any export from abroad or reexport of any item subject to the EAR to an SDGT.  BIS will generally review license applications for exports or reexports to SDGTs under a policy of denial.  No license exceptions or other BIS authorizations are available for the export or reexport to an SDGT of an item subject to the EAR.   Additionally, the EAR does not make contract sanctity available for export or reexport license applications to SDGTs.

BIS’s license requirements for shipments of items subject to the EAR to FTOs are found in Section 744.14 of the EAR.  Note especially the guidance in Section 744.14(e), which is specific to FTOs that are also designated as Specially Designated Terrorists (SDTs) or SDGTs, and directs that the guidance specific to SDTs or SDGTs, as applicable, will apply instead.

BIS also notes that an export, reexport, or transfer (in-country) to geographic areas controlled by ISIL carries a “red flag” and suggests that you exercise caution and strong oversight if you opt to engage in an EAR transaction within these areas. A list of geographic areas known to be under ISIL control is contained in Attachment B (see below).

For additional information on this FAQ or attachments, please contact the Office of Enforcement Analysis at the following: EEinquiry@BIS.DOC.GOV or 202-482-1881.

BIS & DDTC Release Another Set of Proposed Rules on Military Aircraft

Tuesday, March 29th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

2016/03/29

By: Danielle McClellan

BIS and Department of State simultaneously released proposed rules based on a review of Categories VII and XIX as well as ECCNs 9A610, 9A619, 9C610, 9C619, and 9E619.

BIS Revisions would be as follows:

Changes to ECCN 9A610

  • This proposed rule would remove text currently in the “Control(s)” table that excludes paragraphs .t, .u, .v and .w from national security controls. Although the text of those paragraphs is taken from the Missile Technology Control Regime Annex, the commodities that they control are unmanned aerial vehicle parts, components or associated equipment that also are subject to category ML10 on the Munitions List of the Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies. The addition of the national security controls would not increase the number of destinations to which a license is required for the commodities controlled by these paragraphs as those paragraphs already have missile technology and regional stability controls. …

Changes to ECCN 9A619

  • This rule would make three additions to the “Related Controls” paragraph. The first would state explicitly the historical practice of controlling 501-D22 gas turbine engines in ECCN 9A991.d, which is the classification that has been used for many years. The second would add a reference to USML Category XIX(f) to alert readers that some aircraft parts and components are enumerated in that paragraph. Finally, a note would be added reminding readers that the commodities enumerated in paragraph .y are subject to the controls in that paragraph rather than the broader controls elsewhere in this ECCN. …

Changes to ECCN 9C610

  • ECCN 9C610 would be revised by adding references to USML Category VIII in both the heading and in paragraph .a, to make clear that materials specially designed for commodities enumerated or otherwise described in that category are controlled in ECCN 9C610.

Changes to ECCN 9C619

  • ECCN 9C619 would be revised by adding references to USML Category XIX in both the heading and in paragraph .a, to make clear that materials specially designed for commodities enumerated or otherwise described in that category are controlled in ECCN 9C619.

Change to ECCN 9E619

  • The related controls paragraph in ECCN 9E619 would be amended by removing the sentence that reads “Technology described in ECCN 9E003 is controlled by that ECCN.” Although true, the placement of the sentence in a 600 series ECCN could mislead readers into thinking that the order of review does not apply in this instance.

Comments must be received by BIS by March 25, 2016. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

  • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Search for this rule using its regulations.gov docket number: BIS-2016-0009.
  • By email directly to publiccomments@bis.doc.gov. Include RIN 0694-AG76 in the subject line.
  • By mail or delivery to Regulatory Policy Division, Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 2099B, 14th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. Refer to RIN 0694-AG76.
  • FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas DeFee or Jeffrey Leitz in the Office of Strategic Industries and Economic Security, Munitions Control Division by telephone at (202) 482-4506 or by email at Thomas.DeFee@bis.doc.gov or Jeffrey.Leitz@bis.doc.gov.

Department of State Revisions would be as follows:

Revision of Category VIII

This proposed rule revises USML Category VIII, covering aircraft and related articles, to describe more precisely the articles warranting control on the USML.

  • Paragraph (a) is revised to clarify that the controls for all paragraphs are applicable “whether manned, unmanned, remotely piloted, or optionally piloted,” by modifying paragraph (a)(5) to clarify the features meriting USML control, and by deleting paragraph (a)(6) and placing it into reserve, because the relevant control would be subsumed by paragraph (a)(5).
  • Paragraphs (a)(7) and (a)(8) are modified to clarify the features meriting USML control.
  • Paragraphs (a)(11) and (a)(13) are deleted and placed into reserve.
  • Paragraph (a)(14) is modified to exclude L-100 aircraft manufactured prior to 2013 from the scope of control.
  • The Note to paragraph (a) is revised to incorporate technical corrections.
  • Paragraph (d) is modified to delete the “ship-based” control parameter and to clarify the intent and scope of the control.
  • Notes 1 and 3 to paragraph (f) are modified to incorporate clarifying language. …

Revision of Category XIX

This proposed rule revises USML Category XIX, covering gas turbine engines and associated equipment, to describe more precisely the articles warranting control on the USML.

  • Paragraph (a) is modified to clarify the scope of controlled engines and to incorporate technical corrections.
  • Paragraph (b) is revised to provide additional technical parameters to clarify the scope of controlled engines. With respect to paragraph (b)(1), public comment is requested on whether any commercial models exceed the capability described in this paragraph. In any public comment submitted in reply to this request, please provide specific examples of the commercial models at issue.
  • Paragraph (c) is modified to incorporate conforming changes and to make clear that the paragraph applies only to gas turbine engines, while paragraph (d) is modified to update the list of subject engines.
  • The Note to paragraph (e) is modified to incorporate a conforming change.

The Department of State will accept comments on this proposed rule until March 25, 2016. Interested parties may submit comments within 45 days of the date of publication by one of the following methods:

  • Email: DDTCPublicComments@state.gov with the subject line, “ITAR Amendment–Categories VIII and XIX.”
  • Internet: At www.regulations.gov, search for this notice by using this rule’s RIN (1400-AD89).
  • Comments received after that date will be considered if feasible, but consideration cannot be assured. Those submitting comments should not include any personally identifying information they do not wish to be made public or information for which a claim of confidentiality is asserted, because those comments and/or transmittal emails will be made available for public inspection and copying after the close of the comment period via the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls Web site at www.pmddtc.state.gov. Parties who wish to comment anonymously may do so by submitting their comments via www.regulations.gov, leaving the fields that would identify the commenter blank and including no identifying information in the comment itself. Comments submitted via www.regulations.gov are immediately available for public inspection.
  • FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. C. Edward Peartree, Director, Office of Defense Trade Controls Policy, Department of State, telephone (202) 663-2792; email DDTCPublicComments@state.gov. ATTN: ITAR Amendment–USML Categories VIII and XIX.