64490 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 214 / Friday, November 5, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

computers or electronic assemblies with a 

CTP equal to or less than 33,000 MTOPS. 

CTP: Yes to specific countries (see § 740.7 

of the EAR for eligibility criteria)

* * * * *

Dated: October 28, 2004. 

Peter Lichtenbaum, 

Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration.

[FR Doc. 04–24679 Filed 11–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Parts 740 and 774

Docket No. 041018284–4284–01

RIN 0694–AD04

Microprocessor Technology Eligible 

for Export Under License Exception

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Industry and 

Security (BIS) is expanding the 

availability of License Exception CIV for 

certain deemed exports of 

microprocessor technology on the 

Commerce Control List (CCL) of the 

Export Administration Regulations 

(EAR) under Export Classification 

Control Numbers (ECCN) 3E001 and 

3E002. These ECCNs control technology 

that can be used for the development 

and production of microprocessors. This 

final rule partially implements a 

proposed rule published on October 24, 

2003. The proposed rule included the 

export and reexport of general purpose 

microprocessor technology under 

License Exception CIV, while this final 

rule limits License Exception CIV 

eligibility to deemed exports for certain 

microprocessor technology. BIS has 

determined that further liberalization of 

controls on exports of microprocessor 

technology must await agreement in the 

Wassenaar Arrangement. This rule also 

establishes a ‘‘Foreign National Review 

(FNR)’’ requirement under License 

Exception CIV for deemed exports of 

microprocessor technology to certain 

eligible foreign nationals.

DATES: This rule is effective on 

November 5, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sharron Cook, Senior Export Policy 

Analyst, Office of Exporter Services, 

Regulatory Policy Division, Bureau of 

Industry and Security, Telephone: (202) 

482–2440.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On October 24, 2003, BIS published a 

proposed rule with request for 

comments (68 FR 60891) from industry 

to assist BIS in evaluating 

microprocessor technology controlled 

under ECCN 3E002, as well as computer 

technology and software controls. BIS 

received eleven comments in response 

to this request. While the proposed rule 

covered both microprocessor technology 

and computer technology and software, 

BIS has decided to address computer 

technology and software and 

microprocessor technology in two 

different rules. This final rule 

implements the license exception 

expansion for microprocessor 

technology. The corresponding rule on 

license exception eligibility for 

computer technology is published 

elsewhere in this issue of the Federal 

Register. 

Current Controls on Microprocessor 

Technology 

Technology for the development and 

production of microprocessors that have 

a CTP exceeding 530 MTOPS and an 

arithmetic logic unit with an access 

width of 32 bits or more are controlled 

by ECCN 3E002, pursuant to agreement 

by members of the Wassenaar 

Arrangement (WA). License Exception 

TSR is available for the export and 

reexport of technology for 

microprocessors of unlimited CTP to all 

Country Group B countries (see

Supplement No. 1 to part 740 of the 

EAR), if all the criteria of License 

Exception TSR are met (see section 

740.6 of the EAR for License Exception 

TSR requirements). 

In addition, technology for the 

development or production of 

microprocessors that have more than 

one data or instruction bus or serial 

communication port that provides a 

direct external interconnection between 

parallel ‘‘microprocessor microcircuits’’

with a transfer rate exceeding 150 

Megabytes per second are controlled by 

ECCN 3E001, because ‘‘microprocessor 

microcircuits’’, ‘‘micro-computer 

microcircuits’’ and microcontroller 

microcircuits having this characteristic 

are controlled under ECCN 3A001.a.3.c. 

License Exception TSR is available for 

the export and reexport of technology 

for microprocessors of unlimited 

transfer rate to all Country Group B 

countries (see Supplement No. 1 to part 

740 of the EAR), if all the criteria of 

License Exception TSR are met (see

section 740.6 of the EAR for License 

Exception TSR requirements).

Deemed Export Revisions 

While the original Federal Register

notice proposed expanding License 

Exception availability for actual exports 

and reexports of microprocessor 

technology, this final rule expands 

License Exception CIV availability for 

deemed exports only. Generally, 

Wassenaar countries do not have incountry transfer controls (deemed 

export controls), with the exception of 

classified material. 

Microprocessor technology is listed 

by the Wassenaar Arrangement on the 

Basic List (530 MTOPS). Accordingly 

adjustments in control limits for actual 

exports and reexport of microprocessor 

technology should be implemented 

based on agreement with the United 

States’ Wassenaar partners. Therefore, 

the United States may discuss raising 

the level of controls for actual export 

and reexport of microprocessor 

technology in the Wassenaar 

Arrangement. 

The EAR defines ‘‘export’’ to include, 

among other things, the release of 

technology or source code subject to the 

EAR to a foreign national within the 

United States. Such release is ‘‘deemed’’

to be an export to the home country or 

countries of the foreign national. The 

deemed export rule does not apply to 

persons lawfully admitted for 

permanent residence in the United 

States and does not apply to persons 

who are protected individuals under the 

Immigration and Naturalization Act (8 

U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3)). Deemed export 

license applications for foreign 

nationals with dual citizenship should 

be based on the most recently obtained 

country citizenship. Applications for 

foreign nationals with temporary or 

permanent residence status of a third 

country (i.e., non-U.S. and a temporary 

or permanent residence status other 

than a foreign national’s country of 

origin) should be based on the foreign 

national’s country of citizenship. 

Because the United States is one of 

the only WA country members to 

implement deemed export controls, U.S. 

industry has been required to obtain 

license authorization for these deemed 

exports when other WA member 

countries have not imposed such 

controls on their industries. Expanding 

the availability of a License Exception 

for general purpose microprocessor 

technology provides relief from 

licensing burdens for U.S. industry and 

levels the playing field in global 

competition. BIS has found that the 

expansion of license exception 

availability under the technology 

parameters set forth below will not have 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 214 / Friday, November 5, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 64491

an adverse impact on the U.S. national 

security. 

Expansion of License Exception CIV for 

Certain Deemed Exports of 

Microprocessor Technology Controlled 

Under ECCNs 3E001 and 3E002

This rule authorizes under License 

Exception CIV deemed exports of 

technology controlled under ECCN 

3E001 for the development and 

production of microprocessors 

controlled under ECCN 

3A001.a.3.c.with a CTP less than or 

equal to 40,000 MTOPS (regardless of 

word length or access width) to Country 

Group D:1 nationals. License Exception 

CIV does not apply to ECCN 3E001 

technology for ECCN 3A001.a.3.c 

required for the development or 

production of other items controlled 

under ECCNs beginning with 3A, 3B, or 

3C, or to ECCN 3E001 technology also 

controlled under ECCN 3E003. 

In addition, this rule authorizes under 

License Exception CIV deemed exports 

of technology controlled under ECCN 

3E002 for the development and 

production of microprocessors having a 

CTP less than or equal to 40,000 MTOPS 

(regardless of word length or access 

width) to Country Group D:1 nationals. 

License Exception CIV does not apply to 

ECCN 3E002 technology also required 

for the development or production of 

items controlled under ECCNs 

beginning with 3A, 3B, or 3C, or to 

ECCN 3E002 technology also controlled 

under ECCN 3E003. 

Requirements for Use of License 

Exception CIV for Deemed Exports of 

Eligible Microprocessor Technology 

License Exception CIV may not be 

used for military end-users or to known 

military uses. In addition to 

conventional military activities, military 

uses include any proliferation activities 

described in part 744 of the EAR. 

Deemed exports under License 

Exception CIV are not authorized to 

foreign nationals in an expired visa 

status. It is the responsibility of the 

exporter to ensure that, in the case of 

deemed exports, the foreign national 

maintains a valid U.S. visa, if required 

to hold a visa from the United States. 

This rule makes License Exception 

CIV available for deemed exports of 

eligible microprocessor technology to 

any Country Group D:1 foreign national 

once a Foreign National Review (FNR) 

request has been submitted to BIS and 

confirmation of eligibility has been 

obtained from the System for Tracking 

Export License Applications (STELA) or 

the Simplified Network Application 

Procedure (SNAP). FNR requests must 

be submitted using Form BIS–748P 

(Multipurpose Application), or its 

electronic equivalent, and must include 

information about the foreign national 

who is to receive the microprocessor 

technology. The information required 

for the FNR request is set forth in 

paragraphs (s) and (t) of Supplement No 

2 to part 748 of the EAR. BIS will refer 

the FNR request for interagency review 

within nine business days or, if 

necessary, return the FNR request 

without action to the applicant, e.g., if 

more information is necessary. The 

agencies have 30 days in which to 

return a recommendation to BIS. 

Exporters who have current licenses 

for deemed exports of such technology 

to Country Group D:1 foreign nationals 

that become eligible for License 

Exception CIV are no longer bound by 

conditions on their licenses, as provided 

under section 750.7 of the EAR. 

Termination of license conditions does 

not relieve an exporter of its 

responsibility for violations that 

occurred prior to the availability of the 

License Exception. 

Although most licenses for 

microprocessor technology have been 

issued to companies who employ 

Country Group D:1 foreign nationals in 

their U.S. facilities and who hold work 

visas issued by the U.S. Government, 

the availability of License Exception 

CIV for deemed exports is not confined 

to employer releases of technology to 

employees. It is also available for 

deemed exports of technology to 

Country Group D:1 foreign national 

visitors and customers, provided that 

their backgrounds have been checked 

under the procedures set forth in 

License Exception CIV.

Although the Export Administration 

Act expired on August 20, 2001, 

Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 

2001 (3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783 

(2002)), as extended by the Notice of 

August 6, 2004, 69 FR 48763 (August 

10, 2004) continues the Regulations in 

effect under the International 

Emergency Economic Powers Act. 

Comments 

The comments that were received by 

BIS may be found at http://

efoia.bis.doc.gov/pubcomm/

Computer%20Tech%20

and%20Software/Final.pdf. Set forth 

below are the questions that were posed 

to industry in the proposed rule and a 

summary of the comments BIS received 

and, where applicable, BIS’s response to 

those comments. 

1. What impact would the proposed 

revision of computer technology and 

software controls have on your 

company? 

Comments in response to this 

question are addressed in the final rule 

for computer technology export 

controls. 

2. Is there another proposal regarding 

computer technology and software, and 

microprocessor technology controls that 

you would like Commerce to consider? 

If so, describe your proposal in detail 

and please give technical and other 

justifications for your proposal. 

BIS received many comments from 

industry suggesting that BIS eliminate 

MTOPS controls for microprocessor 

technology and instead use end-user 

and end-use based controls to 

harmonize with the export controls of 

microprocessor chips implemented by 

BIS. 

Technology and software for the 

development and production of 

microprocessor chips is listed on the 

Sensitive List (Annex 1) of the 

Wassenaar Arrangement, i.e., 33 

member countries have agreed that this 

technology must not only be on the List 

of Dual-use Good and Technologies, but 

must be carefully monitored because of 

the usefulness of this technology and 

software in producing and developing 

conventional arms. The controlling 

parameters that have been approved by 

the Wassenaar member countries are 

Composite Theoretical Performance 

(CTP) in Millions of Operations per 

Second (MTOPS), composition material 

(compound semiconductor), clock 

frequency in MHz, and number of data 

or instruction bus or serial 

communication ports and related data 

transfer rate in Mbyte/s. On the other 

hand, the CTP parameter has been 

removed from the Wassenaar List for 

microprocessor chips, which is why BIS 

decided to implement an end-user/use 

control for microprocessor chips, i.e., a 

license is required only when sent to 

military or weapons of mass destruction 

(proliferation) end-uses or end-users. 

Therefore, the microprocessor 

technology and hardware are controlled 

in two different ways, and BIS will not 

change the control parameters for 

microprocessor technology absent a 

change to the Wassenaar List. 

Others suggested that BIS implement 

a license exception for microprocessor 

technology along the same lines as 

License Exception ENC: i.e., to (a) 

permit U.S. information technology (IT) 

companies to transfer controlled 

knowledge to their foreign subsidiaries; 

and (b) permit U.S. IT companies to 

64492 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 214 / Friday, November 5, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

transfer controlled knowledge to their 

lawfully admitted foreign national 

employees working within the United 

States. In return, companies would 

commit to implement fundamental 

safeguards on the internal movement of 

technology. 

This technology is already eligible for 

export or reexport under License 

Exception TSR to countries listed in 

Country Group B. However, because of 

the usefulness of this technology in 

producing and developing conventional 

arms and the sensitivity placed on it by 

the Wassenaar Arrangement, BIS has 

decided that it would not be prudent to 

make such technology eligible for export 

or reexport under a license exception to 

end-users located in countries that the 

United States has determined pose a 

national security concern, i.e., Country 

Group D:1 countries. Nonetheless, 

because other Wassenaar member 

countries do not require licenses for 

deemed exports of this technology, this 

rule will make certain microprocessor 

technology eligible for License 

Exception CIV after the foreign national 

has been approved via a Foreign 

National Review by BIS. 

While BIS has decided to only allow 

deemed exports of this technology 

under license exception at this time, BIS 

recognizes that certain licensing 

requirements for microprocessor 

technology may be limiting. Therefore, 

BIS has discussed with other agencies a 

possibility of allowing the export, 

reexport, or transfer of this technology 

through a ‘‘Special Intra-company 

License (SIL).’’ The goal is to create a 

license that will ease the flow of certain 

authorized technology and source code 

within the global corporate structure, 

based on an approved Technology 

Control Plan, i.e., an internal control 

program.

3. What is the highest CTP level for 

microprocessors currently being 

manufactured by your company? 

Many respondents either said that this 

information was proprietary or that they 

had already submitted this information 

to BIS. Some respondents provided 

CTPs in the range of 2,700–24,170 

MTOPS. 

4. What should be the CTP MTOPS 

limitation for microprocessor 

technology under the proposed License 

Exception CIV? Please provide detailed 

technical and other justification for your 

proposal. 

Most respondents said License 

Exception CIV should have a CTP with 

unlimited MTOPS. This rule makes 

deemed exports of microprocessor 

technology at a certain MTOPs level 

eligible for License Exception CIV. 

While BIS believes that deemed exports 

are more easily enforced, because they 

take place in the United States, BIS is 

not naive about efforts of other countries 

to obtain this integrated circuit 

technology, see 69 F.R. 26360 5/12/04 

regarding Suntek Microwave, Inc. 

Therefore, BIS has set a limit on the 

MTOPS level eligible under License 

Exception CIV. 

In addition, at least two respondents 

requested that if we do not eliminate the 

CTP parameter altogether, then the CTP 

should be set at twice the MTOPS of 

what is in current production. They 

estimated that this would result in a 

CTP threshold of 50,000 MTOPS. This 

final rule adopts the 40,000 MTOPS 

threshold for eligibility of deemed 

exports under License Exception CIV, 

because the projected future trends of 

technology thresholds, which were 

provided by industry, did not justify 

adopting a higher MTOPS level at this 

time. 

Respondents said in support of the 

proposed rule that the export control 

level for microprocessor technology 

should match that of microprocessor 

hardware. One of the controlling 

parameters for microprocessor chips, 

CTP, was removed from the Wassenaar 

List in 2003, which is why BIS decided 

to implement an end-user/use control 

for microprocessor chips, i.e., a license 

is required only when sent to military 

or weapons of mass destruction 

(proliferation) end-uses or end-users. On 

the other hand, technology and software 

for the development and production of 

microprocessor chips is listed on the 

Sensitive List (Annex 1) of the 

Wassenaar Arrangement, i.e., 33 

member countries have agreed that this 

technology must not only be on the List 

of Dual-use Good and Technologies, but 

must be carefully monitored because of 

the usefulness of this technology and 

software in producing and developing 

conventional arms. The controlling 

parameter for microprocessor 

technology that has been approved by 

the Wassenaar member countries under 

ECCN 3E002 is 530 MTOPS. Therefore, 

BIS, in keeping with its agreements to 

the Wassenaar Arrangement, will not be 

eliminating the CTP parameter for 

technology to match the no longer 

existent CTP parameter for 

microprocessor hardware. 

A few respondents claimed that 

microprocessor technology controlled 

under the EAR is already available 

abroad, because microprocessors and 

like commodities (graphics chips, IDE 

controllers, and network routers) 

‘‘require a broad set of design elements’’

(Arithmetic logic unit (ALU), memory, 

clock frequency, and control unit). One 

respondent wrote, ‘‘All of the elements 

are present and required in all of the 

technologies and each requires 

application of knowledge in each or all 

of the elements. For example, a current 

generation graphics processor chip 

contains ALU’s capable of 100 Gf of 32 

Bit FP performance. This level of 

performance would be approximately 

50K CTP if the graphics chip were to be 

subjected to CTP analysis. Export 

controls for all of the example products, 

except for the microprocessor, are 

limited to anti-terrorism (AT) controls. 

There are no multi-national controls on 

those other products. Thus, countries of 

concern in Computer Tier 3 Country 

Group can easily obtain the needed 

component technology and then simply 

re-package it as a microprocessor.’’

If this were feasible and simple to do, 

then countries around the world would 

be producing microprocessor chips and 

not buying U.S. microprocessors. 

However, we have found that this is not 

the case, and countries around the 

world greatly seek not only U.S. 

manufactured microprocessors, but the 

technology to produce and develop 

them. In addition, gathering bits and 

pieces of technology from different 

sources, while not easy in itself, does 

not provide enough comprehensive 

knowledge to produce a high quality 

microprocessor chip. 

5. How do other countries license the 

transfer of computer technology and 

software, and microprocessor 

technology? Have there been instances 

where your company has been placed at 

a competitive disadvantage based on 

current U.S. license requirements?

The majority of respondents stated 

that they did not have access to specific 

procedures or regulations of other 

countries’ export policies with regard to 

computer technology and software, and 

microprocessor technology. Some 

commented that the technology was 

widely available from non-U.S. sources 

and that the majority of other countries 

impose minimal export restrictions on 

this type of technology. 

6. What are your predictions for the CTP 

level of microprocessors that will be in 

production 3 and 5 years from now? On 

what basis did you make your 

predictions? 

Some respondents said they had 

already provided such information to 

BIS. Some respondents provided the 

requested predictions, based on Moore’s 

Law and historic CTP information, as 

follows:

3 year predictions: 160,000 MTOPS, 

250,000 MTOPS, and 400,000 MTOPS 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 214 / Friday, November 5, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 64493

5 year predictions: 600,000 MTOPS and 

640,000 MTOPS 

7 year prediction: 1,000,000 MTOPS

7. What percentage of your research and 

development is accomplished: (1) 

Outside of the United States; and (2) 

with the assistance of foreign nationals 

within the United States? 

Some respondents said they had 

already provided such information to 

BIS. None of the respondents addressed 

this specifically, but one respondent 

noted that in the physical sciences and 

engineering, nearly 50 percent of all 

Masters and PhD degrees awarded by 

U.S. schools are earned by foreign 

nationals. 

8. Is there an alternative method or 

parameter for controlling exports of 

computers and microprocessors and the 

technology and software therefore that 

industry believes would be more in-line 

with the way industry produces, 

develops, or measures these items? 

Many of the respondents pointed out 

that performance-based controls are 

‘‘unsuited’’ for general purpose and 

rapidly-advancing technologies such as 

semiconductors and computers. Many 

respondents would like to see end-use 

and end-user based controls. However, 

it has been determined by Wassenaar 

Arrangement members that technology 

and software for the development and 

production of microprocessors and 

computers warrant extra care and have 

placed such technology and software on 

the Wassenaar Sensitive List (Annex 1). 

These technology and software controls 

are based on their performance 

capabilities, and at this time the only 

metric that the regime members have 

agreed upon is CTP. In keeping with the 

Wassenaar Arrangement agreements, 

BIS will not adopt a unilateral end-use/

user based control for microprocessor 

technology. 

In addition to the above responses to 

the questions that were included in the 

proposed rule, BIS received some 

recommendations about ECCN 

3A001.a.3.c, data transfer rate, another 

parameter that controls 

microprocessors. Some respondents 

recommended that BIS submit a 

proposal to Wassenaar to have this 

parameter removed, because it is 

outdated. BIS has in the past submitted 

proposals to Wassenaar to remove this 

parameter, but has not been successful 

in gaining unanimous agreement. BIS 

also received comments from industry 

explaining that microprocessor 

technology is also controlled under 

ECCN 3E001, because of the ECCN 

3A001.a.3.c controls. Industry advised 

that this effort to expand CIV under 

ECCN 3E002 would be incomplete 

without a similar expansion of CIV 

under ECCN 3E001. BIS agrees with 

industry’s assessment of ECCN 3E001, 

as it controls interconnect technology 

for microprocessors under ECCN 

3A001.a.3.c. Therefore, this final rule 

adopts this recommendation by making 

deemed exports of certain 

microprocessor technology controlled 

under ECCNs 3E001 and 3E002 eligible 

for License Exception CIV. 

Rulemaking Requirements 

1. This final rule has been determined 

to be not significant for purposes of E.O. 

12866. 

2. Notwithstanding any other 

provision of law, no person is required 

to respond to, nor shall any person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with a collection of information, subject 

to the requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

(PRA), unless that collection of 

information displays a currently valid 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) ‘‘Control Number.’’ This rule 

contains a collection of information 

subject to the requirements of the PRA. 

This collection has been approved by 

OMB under Control Number 0694–0088 

(Multi-Purpose Application), which 

carries a burden hour estimate of 58 

minutes to prepare and submit form 

BIS–748. Send comments regarding this 

burden estimate or any other aspect of 

this collection of information, including 

suggestions for reducing the burden, to 

David Rostker, Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB), by e-mail to 

David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov, or by fax 

to (202) 395–7285; and to the Regulatory 

Policy Division, Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Department of Commerce, PO 

Box 273, Washington, DC 20044. 

3. This rule does not contain policies 

with Federalism implications as that 

term is defined under E.O. 13132. 

4. The provisions of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 

553) requiring notice of proposed 

rulemaking, the opportunity for public 

participation, and a delay in effective 

date, are inapplicable because this 

regulation involves a military and 

foreign affairs function of the 

UnitedStates (5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). 

Further, no other law requires that a 

notice of proposed rulemaking and an 

opportunity for public comment be 

given for this final rule. Because a 

notice of proposed rulemaking and an 

opportunity for public comment are not 

required to be given for this rule under 

the Administrative Procedure Act or by 

any other law, the analytical 

requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) are 

not applicable. Therefore, this 

regulation is issued in final form. 

Although there is no formal comment 

period, public comments on this 

regulation are welcome on a continuing 

basis. Comments should be submitted to 

Sharron Cook, Office of Exporter 

Services, Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Department of Commerce, PO 

Box 273, Washington, DC 20044.

List of Subjects 

15 CFR Part 740

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Exports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

15 CFR Part 774

Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements.

■ Accordingly, parts 740 and 774 of the 

Export Administration Regulations (15 

CFR parts 730–799) are amended as 

follows:

PART 740—[AMENDED]

■ 1. The authority citation for part 740 is 

revised to read as follows:

Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 

U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; Sec. 901–911, Pub. L. 

106–387; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 

1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 

3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 

6, 2004, 69 FR 48763 (August 10, 2004).

■ 2. Section 740.5 is revised to read as 

follows:

§ 740.5 Civil End-users (CIV). 

(a) Scope. License Exception CIV 

authorizes exports and reexports of 

items on the Commerce Control List 

(CCL) (Supplement No. 1 to part 774 of 

the EAR) that have a license 

requirement to the ultimate destination 

pursuant to the Commerce Country 

Chart (Supplement No. 1 to part 738 of 

the EAR) for NS reasons only; and 

identified by ‘‘CIV—Yes’’ in the License 

Exception section of the Export Control 

Classification Number (ECCN), provided 

the items are destined to civil end-users 

for civil end-uses in Country Group D:1, 

except North Korea (Supplement No. 1 

to part 740 of this part). 

(b) Restrictions. (1) Restricted endusers and end-uses. You may not use 

CIV if you ‘‘know’’ the item will be or 

is intended to be exported, reexported, 

or transferred within country to military 

uses or military end-users. Such 

exports, reexports, and transfers will 

continue to require a license. In 

addition to conventional military 

activities, military uses include any 

proliferation activities described and 

prohibited by part 744 of the EAR. 

(2) Visa Status. Deemed exports under 

License Exception CIV are not 

64494 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 214 / Friday, November 5, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 

authorized to foreign nationals in an 

expired visa status. It is the 

responsibility of the exporter to ensure 

that, in the case of deemed exports, the 

foreign national maintains a valid U.S. 

visa, if required to hold a visa from the 

United States. 

(c) Reporting Requirement. See 

§ 743.1 of the EAR for reporting 

requirements for exports of certain items 

under this License Exception. 

(d) Foreign National Review (FNR) 

requirement for deemed exports. (1) 

Submission requirement. Prior to 

disclosing eligible technology to a 

foreign national under this License 

Exception, you must submit a Foreign 

National Review (FNR) request to BIS, 

as required under § 748.8(s) of the EAR. 

Your FNR request must include 

information about the foreign national 

required under § 748.8(t) of the EAR and 

set forth in Supplement No. 2 of part 

748 of the EAR. 

(2) Confirmation of eligibility. You 

may not use License Exception CIV 

until you have obtained confirmation of 

eligibility by calling the System for 

Tracking Export License Applications 

(STELA), see § 750.5 for how to use 

STELA, or electronically from the 

Simplified Network Application 

Procedure (SNAP), see http://

www.bis.doc.gov/SNAP/index.htm for 

more information about SNAP. 

(3) Action by BIS. Within nine 

business days of the registration of the 

FNR request, BIS will refer the FNR 

request electronically, along with all 

necessary documentation for 

interagency review, or if necessary 

return the FNR request without action 

(e.g., if the information provided is 

incomplete). Processing time starts at 

the point at which the notification is 

registered into BIS’s electronic system. 

(4) Review by other departments or 

agencies. The Departments of Defense, 

State, Energy, and other agencies, as 

appropriate, may review the FNR 

request. Within 30 calendar days of 

receipt of the BIS referral, the reviewing 

agency will provide BIS with a 

recommendation either to approve or 

deny the FNR request. A reviewing 

agency that fails to provide a 

recommendation within 30 days shall 

be deemed to have no objection to the 

final decision of BIS. 

(5) Action on the FNR Request. After 

the interagency review period, BIS will 

promptly notify the applicant regarding 

the FNR request, i.e., whether the FNR 

request is approved, denied, or more 

time is needed to consider the request.

PART 774—[AMENDED]

■ 3. The authority citation for part 774 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 

U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 10 U.S.C. 7420; 10 U.S.C. 

7430(e); 18 U.S.C. 2510 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 

287c, 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq., 22 U.S.C. 6004; 

30 U.S.C. 185(s), 185(u); 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 42 

U.S.C. 6212; 43 U.S.C. 1354; 46 U.S.C. app. 

466c; 50 U.S.C. app. 5; Sec. 901–911, Pub. L. 

106–387; Sec. 221, Pub. L. 107–56; E.O. 

13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 

228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 

Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 6, 2004, 69 

FR 48763 (August 10, 2004).

■ 4. In Supplement No. 1 to part 774 (the 

Commerce Control List), Category 3—

Electronics, Export Control 

Classification Number (ECCN) 3E001 is 

amended by revising the ‘‘CIV’’

paragraph in the License Exceptions 

section, to read as follows:

3E001 ‘‘Technology’’ according to the 

General Technology Note for the 

‘‘development’’ or ‘‘production’’ of 

equipment or materials controlled by 3A 

(except 3A292, 3A980, 3A981, 3A991 or 

3A992), 3B (except 3B991 or 3B992) or 3C.

* * * * *

License Exceptions 

CIV: Yes for deemed exports, as described 

in § 734.2(b)(2)(ii) of the EAR, of technology 

for the development or production of 

microprocessor microcircuits, microcomputer microcircuits, and microcontroller 

microcircuits having the characteristics 

described in 3A001.a.3.c with a CTP less 

than or equal to 40,000 MTOPS (regardless of 

word length or access width). Deemed 

exports under License Exception CIV are 

subject to a Foreign National Review (FNR) 

requirement, see § 740.5 of the EAR for more 

information about the FNR. License 

Exception CIV does not apply to ECCN 3E001 

technology for 3A001.a.3.c required for the 

development or production of other items 

controlled under ECCNs beginning with 3A, 

3B, or 3C, or to ECCN 3E001 technology also 

controlled under ECCN 3E003. 

TSR: * * *

* * * * *

■ 5. In Supplement No. 1 to part 774 (the 

Commerce Control List), Category 3—

Electronics, Export Control 

Classification Number (ECCN) 3E002 is 

amended by revising the ‘‘CIV’’

paragraph in the License Exceptions 

section, to read as follows:

3E002 ‘‘Technology’’ according to the 

General Technology Note other than that 

controlled in 3E001 for the ‘‘development’’ or 

‘‘production’’ of ‘‘microprocessor 

microcircuits’’, ‘‘micro-computer 

microcircuits’’ and microcontroller 

microcircuits having a ‘‘composite theoretical 

performance’’ (‘‘CTP’’) of 530 million 

theoretical operations per second (MTOPS) 

or more and an arithmetic logic unit with an 

access width of 32 bits or more.

* * * * *

License Exceptions 

CIV: Yes, for deemed exports, as described 

in § 734.2(b)(2)(ii) of the EAR, of 

‘‘technology’’ for the ‘‘development’’ or 

‘‘production’’ of general purpose 

microprocessors with a CTP less than or 

equal to 40,000 MTOPS (regardless of word 

length or access width). Deemed exports 

under License Exception CIV are subject to 

a Foreign National Review (FNR) 

requirement, see § 740.5 of the EAR for more 

information about the FNR. License 

Exception CIV does not apply to ECCN 3E002 

technology also required for the development 

or production of items controlled under 

ECCNs beginning with 3A, 3B, or 3C, or to 

ECCN 3E002 technology also controlled 

under ECCN 3E003. 

TSR: * * *

* * * * *

Dated: October 28, 2004. 

Peter Lichtenbaum, 

Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration.

[FR Doc. 04–24680 Filed 11–4–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD01–04–137] 

Drawbridge Operation Regulations: 

Connecticut River, CT

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation 

from regulations. 

SUMMARY: The Commander, First Coast 

Guard District, has issued a temporary 

deviation from the drawbridge operation 

regulations for the Amtrak Old 

Saybrook-Old Lyme Bridge, mile 3.4, 

across the Connecticut River, 

Connecticut. This deviation from the 

regulations allows the bridge to remain 

closed from 10 p.m. on November 15, 

2004 through 10 a.m. on November 16, 

2004. This deviation is necessary in 

order to facilitate necessary electrical 

repairs at the bridge.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 

November 15, 2004 through November 

16, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy 

Leung-Yee, Project Officer, First Coast 

Guard District, at (212) 668–7195.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Old 

Saybrook-Old Lyme Bridge, at mile 3.4 

across the Connecticut River has a 

vertical clearance in the closed position 

of 19 feet at mean high water and 22 feet 

at mean low water. The existing