Archive for the ‘DDTC’ Category

State/DDTC No Longer Accepts CJ Submission through EFS

Tuesday, November 15th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

(Source: State/DDTC)

Effective Wednesday, November 16th at 5PM EST, The Department of State will no longer use the Electronic Form Submission (EFS) application to accept Commodity Jurisdiction (CJ) (DS-4076) applications. Beginning Monday, November 21st at 8AM EST users will submit CJ applications via the Defense Export Control and Compliance (DECCS) CJ application.

USML Categories VIII, XII, and XV Amended and Some Items Shifting to CCL

Tuesday, November 15th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

The Department of State has published a final rule that will be effective December 31, 2016 that will revise Category XII (fire control, laser, imaging, and guidance equipment) of the U.S. Munitions List (USML) to remove certain items from control on the USML and to describe more precisely the articles continuing to warrant control on the USML. The Department of State also amends USML Categories VIII, XIII, and XV to reflect that items previously described in those Categories are now controlled under the revised Category XII or Commerce Control List. Further, the Department revises USML Category XI to move items to the CCL as a result of changes to related control in USML Category XII. The Export Administration Regulations (EAR) amends Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) 7A611 and creates a new ‘‘600 series’’ ECCNs 7B611, 7D611, and 7E611. In addition, for certain dual-use infrared detection items, this final rule expands controls for certain software and technology, eliminates the use of some license exceptions, revises licensing policy, and expands license requirements for certain transactions involving military end users or foreign military commodities. This final rule also harmonizes provisions within the EAR by revising controls related to certain quartz rate sensors.

ITAR Changes Below:

Section 121.1 is amended by:

  • Removing and reserving paragraph (e) in U.S. Munitions List Category VIII;
  • Revising paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) and (a)(10) of U.S. Munitions List Category XI;
  • Revising U.S. Munitions List Category XII; Removing and reserving paragraph (a) in U.S. Munitions List Category XIII; and
  • Removing and reserving paragraph (c) in U.S. Munitions List Category XV

Federal Register: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-10-12/pdf/2016-24225.pdf

 

EAR Changes Below:

  • Part 734
    • Section 734.4 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (a)(3) and revising paragraph (a)(5).
  • Part 740
    • Section 740.2 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(7) and removing and reserving paragraph (a)(9).
    • Section 740.16 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(1) through (3)
    • Section 740.20 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) and (b)(2)(x)
  • Part 742
    • Section 742.6 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(1)
  • Part 744
    • Section 744.9 is amended by revising the section heading and paragraphs (a) and (b)
  • Part 772
    • Section 772.1 is amended by revising the last sentence in Note 1 to the definition of ‘‘specially designed’’
  • Part 774
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 0, ECCN 0A919 is amended by revising the Items paragraph of the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 0, ECCN 0A987 is amended by:
      • Revising the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section;
      • Revising paragraph f. in the Items paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section; and
      • Adding a note to 0A987.f
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 2, ECCN 2A984 is amended by revising the heading and Note 1 of the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6A002 is amended by:
    • Removing the ‘‘Special Conditions for STA’’ section; and
    • Revising the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section.
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6A003 is amended by:
      • Adding a License Requirement Note in the License Requirements section;
      • Revising notes 3 and 4 in the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section; and
      • Adding note 5 to the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6A004 is amended by revising the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6A005 is amended by revising the last two sentences in the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6A007 is amended by revising the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6A008 is amended by revising the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6A107 is amended by revising the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6A611 is revised
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6A990 is revised
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6A993 is amended by revising the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled sectionn Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6D002 is amended by revising the TSR paragraph in the List Based License Exceptions section and the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6D003 is amended by revising the TSR paragraph in the List Based License Exceptions section and the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6D991 is revised
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6E001 is amended by revising the TSR paragraph in the List Based License Exceptions section and the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, ECCN 6E002 is amended by revising the TSR paragraph in the List Based License Exceptions section and the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 6, The following ECCNs will be amended by revising the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
      • ECCN 6E990
      • ECCN 7A001
      • ECCN 7A002
      • ECCN 7A003
      • ECCN 7A005
      • ECCN 7A101
      • ECCN 7A102
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 7, ECCN 7A611 is revised
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 7, ECCN 7A994 is revised
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 7, add ECCN 7B611 between ECCNs 7B103 and 7B994
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 7, add ECCN 7D611 between ECCNs 7D103 and 7D994
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 7, add ECCN 7E611 between ECCNs 7E104 and 7E994
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 7, ECCN 7E994 is amended by revising the Related Controls paragraphin the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 8, ECCN 8A002 is amended by adding a sentence to the end of the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section
    • In Supplement No. 1 to part 774, Category 9, ECCN 9A991 is amended by:
      • Removing the License Requirement Notes paragraph in the License Requirements section, and
      • Revising the Related Controls paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section.

Federal Register: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-10-12/pdf/2016-24220.pdf

Want a more detailed overview of these regulation changes? Our Export Control Reform for USML Category XII: Fire Control, Laser, Imaging, and Guidance Webinar will cover the following:

  • Significant changes to USML Category XII and corresponding revisions to Categories VIII, XI, XIII, and XV, which will result in some items moving off the USML
  • What the definition of “specially designed” really means for classification purposes, and how Category XII has introduced a new concept of “specially designed for a military end-user”
  • How to classify formerly ITAR-controlled items on the Commerce Control List, especially the new and revised “600 series” Export Control Classification Numbers (ECCNs) (7A611, 7B611, 7D611, and 7E611)
  • Adjustments to several related non-600 series ECCNs is CCL Categories 0, 2, 6, 7, 8, and 9
  • License exception eligibility for these items, including important changes to License Exceptions APR, GOV, and STA
  • Revisions to unique EAR military end use and end user controls
  • The actions exporters should take now to prepare for the rapidly approaching effective date of these changes

Learn More at: http://www.learnexportcompliance.com/Webinars/Export-Control-Reform-for-USML-Category-XII-Fire-C.aspx

DDTC Posts Schedule for Uploading Licensing Submissions and Posting Licenses

Wednesday, October 12th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

(Source: State/DDTC)

Effective September 6, 2016, The Department of State will only be uploading licensing submissions (i.e., DSP -5, -6, -61, -62, -73, -74, and Batch Scheams) and posting licenses (Approved, Approved with Provisos, RWA’ed, and Denied) at 06:30 AM and again at 5:30 PM.

DDTC Posts Revision 4.4a of the Agreement Guidelines

Wednesday, October 12th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

(Source: State/DDTC)

Revision 4.4a of the Agreement Guidelines has been posted and replaces Revision 4.4.

Revision 4.4a corrects an inadvertent omission on page 152. Both Revision 4.4a and a preamble with a summary of changes can be found here. Revision 4.4a is effective September 1, 2016.

Pakistani National Extradited and Sentenced to 33 Months in Prison for Conspiracy to Export Gyroscopes to Pakistan

Wednesday, October 12th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

By: Danielle McClellan

Syed Vaqar Ashraf (71) of Lahore, Pakistan (also known as Vaqar A. Jaffrey) was sentenced to 33 months in prison after being extradited from Belgium on July 31, 2015. According to court documents, in June 2012 Ashraf began asking a Tucson-based company, who shall remain nameless, for price quotes for unmanned aerial vehicles (drones). The company specializes in the design, development, and manufacturing of drones for the US military. The company immediately tipped off Homeland Security Investigations (HIS) agents about Ashraf’s requests.  HSI quickly assigned special agents to work undercover as employees of the Tucson-based company and they began dialoging with Ashraf directly.

From June 2012 to August 2014, Ashraf negotiated with special agents. He represented himself as the head of I&E International, based in Lahore, Pakistan.  Most of the correspondence was done via email where he agreed to purchase 18 gyroscopes that were intended to help medium-sized drones fly longer distances as well as 10 optical receiver modules and laser diodes intended to be installed in the aircraft for approximately $440,000.

In September 2013, HSI agents met with Ashraf in Vienna, Austria to work out details regarding the sale. Ashraf explained during the meeting that Pakistan’s nuclear program had been developed using technology exported from the west without a license. This led the agents to believe that Ashraf was working for Pakistan’s Advanced Engineering Research Organization and the intended use for the electronics was for the Pakistani military UAV program.

From January to March 2014 Ashraf asked agents for suggestions to get around the US export controls after agents requested a license from the Commerce Department and were told that the items would require a special license because the optical receive modules could be used in “activities related to nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons or missile delivery systems.” Ashraf asked if there were any alternative descriptions that would appear to cover the items on documents, but would clear arms control hurdles from State and Commerce departments.  Secret agents offered Ashraf with a few different descriptions and asked him if the customer was aware that transaction was “being done without a license.” Ashraf told the agents that they (customer) were “absolutely aware of everything.” Later in an email, Ashraf wrote, “He (customer) is well aware that he cannot get these gyros in a normal way; he’s well aware of that.” The ultimate plan was to transship all of the items; they would be shipped to Pakistan through Belgium.

HIS agents met with Ashraf three more times in face-to-face meetings, including one in the US where they agreed on a series of wire transfers, including one for $67,000. On August 26, 2014 agents set up a final meeting with Ashraf in Belgium to deliver some of the technology. Before the meeting began Belgian police showed up and arrested Ashraf. A little less than a year later Ashraf was extradited to the US to face trial on charges of conspiracy to export defense controlled items without a license which he later pled guilty to.

Read more: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/pakistani-national-extradited-and-sentenced-attempting-export-sensitive-technology-pakistani

DDTC Agreements Guidelines Updated

Tuesday, September 6th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

On August 11, 2016, the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) announced its newest revision to the Guidelines for Preparing Agreements, which will become effective September 1, 2016. The changes will bring the Agreement Guidelines in line with certain revisions to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) that will also take effect on September 1, 2016.
Highlights of the changes:

  • Various sections of the Agreement Guidelines have been updated to reflect the new definitions for the terms “export,” “reexport” and “retransfer” that will go into effect on September 1.
  • Revision of Section 3.5: Dual/Third Country National (DN/TCN) to remove § 124.16 from Option 2, add references to § 126.18(d) in Option 1, redact the term “retransfer” from the guidance and required statements, remove country of birth as a consideration when vetting DN/TCNs via Option 2, update the required agreement statements for DN/TCN requests pursuant to § 124.8(5), and remove the optional agreement statement for § 126.1 non-(a) TCN requests.
  • The required statements throughout the Agreement Guidelines are updated, including the statement on sublicensing to U.S. Persons, the required statements for DN/TCN requests pursuant to § 124.8(5), and the § 124.8(5) verbatim clause.
  • Templates in Appendix A are updated to remove the § 124.12(a)(10) statement from the transmittal letter, remove the § 124.16 statement from the agreement, and update the required statements mentioned above.

Note:  Applicants are not required to submit an amendment for the sole purpose of updating these statements or removing the § 124.16 statement.  However, the statements must be updated at the next major amendment.  All agreement/amendment applications submitted after September 1, 2016, must include the new required statements, if applicable.  If an old statement is used, a proviso will be added instructing the applicant to change it prior to execution.  Applicants may begin using the new statements prior to September 1.

The templates in Appendix A have been updated to: – Remove the § 124.12(a)(10) statement from the transmittal letter – Remove the § 124.16 statement from the agreement – Update the mandatory statements listed above.

Revised Guidelines: https://www.pmddtc.state.gov/licensing/documents/agreement_guidelinesv4.4.pdf

Summary of Changes: https://www.pmddtc.state.gov/licensing/documents/agreement_guidelines_preamblev4.4.pdf

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

Tuesday, September 6th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

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

State/DDTC Relaunches “Company Visit Program”

Tuesday, August 9th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

(Source: State/DDTC) [Excerpts.]

What is the Company Visit Program?

The Company Visit Program (CVP) entails visits by Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) officials to U.S. entities registered with DDTC as manufacturers, exporters, or brokers of defense articles and defense services, as well as others involved in ITAR-regulated activities, to include foreign companies and foreign governments. The CVP is administered by the Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance (DTCC); however, representatives from DDTC’s Licensing and Policy offices, or other entities in the Department or elsewhere in the U.S. government, may also participate in the visits.

What is the purpose of the Company Visit Program?

The CVP has several purposes. First, the CVP ensures DTCC understands how compliance programs are implemented in accordance with the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). Second, the program enables DDTC to gather information to support the Directorate’s development of regulatory policy and practice. Finally, DTCC uses site visits to glean, assess, and disseminate industry best practices, provide feedback to individual companies on their compliance programs, and share information on compliance programs industry-wide. Note that the CVP includes two (2) types of visits:

  1. CVP-Outreach (“CVP-O”) is an extension of DDTC’s outreach activities, e.g., speaking at conferences. These visits are intended to be a learning exercise for both parties, and provide an opportunity to discuss challenges (such as adapting to changes associated with Export Control Reform) and offer suggestions or best practices. CVP-O site visits are unrelated to specific compliance matters. The purpose of the visit is to understand how companies implement ITAR compliance requirements, not to evaluate compliance failures or violations.
  2. CVP-Compliance (“CVP-C”) visits are designed for DTCC oversight activities, for example as part of consent agreement monitoring. These visits may include a more in-depth look at a company’s compliance program.

Is a CVP visit considered an audit or inspection? What is DDTC looking for during a CVP visit?

Both CVP-O and CVP-C type visits are neither an audit nor an inspection. Visits do not produce a grade or pass/fail assessment for internal or external use, and generally do not include review of transactional records. DDTC will request information from the company to gain a better understanding of their compliance program. CVP-C visits may require a more in-depth look at a company’s compliance program because the visits are focused on overseeing compliance matters already known to DTCC.

How is the visit not an audit if DDTC provides recommendations for improvements to our program?

DDTC may provide recommendations for improvements to a company’s compliance program during both CVP-O and CVP-C type visits. If we make recommendations, it is an effort to offer assistance, help prevent violations and share best practices. The CVP is intended to serve as a learning tool for both parties.

What happens if the DDTC team discovers or learns of a violation during the visit?

DTCC will recommend that the company review the issue and submit a disclosure, if appropriate.

How many companies does DDTC plan to visit each year?

DDTC plans visits for each quarter based on other engagements requiring travel and available resources. Generally, DDTC aims to conduct between two and four CVP visits per quarter. In 2015, DTCC conducted eight company visits under CVP auspices; three of those visits were pursuant to consent agreement monitoring.

How are companies selected for a CVP visit?

DTCC selects companies based on its CVP goals. DTCC considers a variety of factors when selecting companies to visit, including proximity to other activities DDTC is participating in, registration status, volume of licensed activity, experience conducting ITAR activities, nature of business, type and sensitivity of technology, geographic location, monitoring of an existing consent agreement, and value to ongoing work within the Directorate.

How is the DDTC team staffed for each CVP visit?

A CVP team typically consists of two or more staff from DTCC, depending on the size of the individual company/site being visited and number of companies/facilities visited per trip. On some CVP visits, staff members from the Offices of Defense Trade Controls Licensing and Policy, or other relevant agencies, may participate. One DTCC team member serves as team lead and primary point of contact with the company. This primary contact is responsible for coordinating the site visit with the company.

How is a CVP visit conducted and what should a company expect?

  • Once a company is selected for a potential CVP visit, DTCC contacts the company. The company can elect not to participate in the visit. If the company would like to participate, DTCC will propose visit dates and begin planning with the company.
  • Once visit dates are finalized, DTCC sends the company a formal visit notification letter outlining the visit. DTCC may request pre-visit materials from the company for review and preparation purposes. Before the visit, DTCC will work with the company to finalize the agenda.
  • At the visit’s opening, DTCC meets with senior management to explain the visit’s purpose and the agenda. The company should provide an overview of its operations and export activity during opening discussions. Visits generally last one to two days, depending on the purpose, and occur on the company’s premises in offices and conference rooms, and through tours of business operations within the facility (e.g., business development, contracts, procurement, design, manufacture, security, IT, personnel, and shipping).
  • At the visit’s conclusion, the DDTC team briefs company senior management and export control staff to share information the team gathered. DDTC invites the company to provide feedback, ask questions, or raise concerns for follow-up.
  • The DDTC team returns to the Department and generates an internal report. The team also follows up on company feedback. DTCC will send a formal close-out letter to the company. Close-out letters summarize the visit, indicate best practices, recommend areas for improvement or suggest best practices, and address feedback, questions, or concerns raised by the company. DTCC also requests feedback on the visit’s quality and usefulness and suggestions for improving the program.

State also published a slideshow overview of the program, which can be found here.

The Expired DSP-83 is Back

Tuesday, July 12th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

By: Danielle McClellan

Effective immediately an expired DSP-83 forms that the DDTC receives will be processed.

The notice published on the State Department website on May 6, 2016 is rescinded.  If you received a proviso directly an upload of the new DS-83 form in accordance with the rescinded Notice can hereby disregard the proviso by citing this revised notice.

The State Department has updated its policy regarding the DSP-83, although it cannot mandate the use of the expired form, an individual or entity may voluntarily submit the form and it can be processed as long as it contains all of the information and certifications required by the current, unexpired form. At this point, the DSP-83 has not been substantially amended so DDTC will continue to accept the expired form.

DDTC is strongly urging that entities and individuals that do not use the current DSP-83 form provided by the them to implement the new form no later than October 1, 2016 to avoid confusion during the future revisions.

Link to Notice: http://pmddtc.state.gov/documents/DSP83_WebNotice2.pdf

DDTC Company Visit Program Frequently Asked Questions

Tuesday, July 12th, 2016 by Danielle McClellan

(Source: State/DDTC)

Question:  What is the Company Visit Program?

Answer:  The Company Visit Program (CVP) is administered by the Compliance and Registration Division (CRD) Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance. The program involves visits by Department of State officials to U.S. companies that are registered with DDTC as manufacturers, exporters or brokers of defense articles and defense services.
Question:  What is the purpose of the Company Visit Program?

Answer:  The purpose of the program is several-fold. First is to learn how companies establish an overall defense trade control program. Second, is to understand how those programs are implemented and comply with the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). Third, is to gather information for the Department to determine whether we are properly exercising our regulatory responsibility in licensing and compliance. Fourth, is to use the information gathered from visits to adjust or revise our regulations and practices accordingly. Fifth, is to provide direct feedback to companies that we visit, and to learn and disseminate industry best practices.

 

Question:  Is a visit considered an audit or inspection?

Answer:   A visit is neither an audit nor an inspection. DDTC uses the program as a learning tool to provide information on how companies comply with the law and regulations and how DDTC can better do its job as regulator thereof. In visiting companies, DDTC is also exercising its responsibility under recordkeeping requirements detailed in Section 122.5(b) of the ITAR.

 

Question:  How are companies selected for a visit?

Answer:  Companies are selected for a variety of reasons, including: registration status, volume of licensed activity, experience conducting ITAR activities, nature of business, type and sensitivity of technology, geographic location, follow-up to a disclosure of an ITAR violation, or monitoring of a consent agreement.

 

Question:  How is a visit conducted and what should a company expect?

Answer:

  • The company is sent a visit notification letter approximately 6-8 weeks in advance of the visit.
  • The visit letter outlines material that the company is to provide in advance of the team’s visit (e.g., export compliance manual, export compliance policies and procedures, organizational chart, and an overview of ITAR controlled programs at the facility).
  • In consultation with the company, the CVP team establishes an agenda for the one or two day visit.
  • The visit occurs on the company’s premises in offices, conference rooms and tours of business operations within the facility (e.g., business development, contracts, procurement, design, manufacture, security, IT, personnel, shipping, etc.).
  • At the conclusion of the visit, the team conducts a post-visit briefing with senior management and export control staff sharing information the team has gathered.
  • The team returns to the Department and will generate a report for DTCC management. The team will send a formal letter to the company, which records the matters raised in the post-visit briefing.
  • The letter should address any recommendations for improvement and provide feedback on any company best practices.

 

Question:  How is the team staffed?

Answer:  The visit team normally consists of two to four staff from the DTCC, depending upon the size of the company being visited, and number of companies/facilities visited per trip. The team includes civil servants and contract personnel. On some visits, staff members from the Office of Defense Trade Controls Licensing and Policy may participate.

 

Question:  How many companies have been visited?

Answer:  More than 60 companies have been visited since the program’s inception in October 2005. The results overall have been positive for companies and for DDTC. Companies have benefited from meeting DDTC officials, explaining their defense trade control program, discussing best practices and identifying areas for improvement. DDTC has benefited from learning first-hand how companies control and comply and using the results to better inform our regulatory practices.