Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 76097 

FDA has received a request to extend 

the comment period. The request stated 

that additional time is needed to 

coordinate factual information and 

policy positions with a large number of 

States on several of the questions in the 

ANPRM. The request noted that their 

comments will be more thorough and of 

more assistance to FDA if more time is 

available to develop them. 

FDA has considered the request and 

is extending the comment period an 

additional 6 weeks, until January 19, 

2012. We believe that the additional 

time will provide interested parties 

sufficient time to submit comments on 

the ANPRM. 

II. Comments 

Interested persons may submit to the 

Division of Dockets Management (see 

ADDRESSES) either electronic or written 

comments regarding this ANPRM. It is 

only necessary to send one set of 

comments. It is no longer necessary to 

send two copies of mailed comments. 

Identify comments with the docket 

number found in brackets in the 

heading of this document. Received 

comments may be seen in the Division 

of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. 

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. 

Dated: December 1, 2011. 

Leslie Kux, 

Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2011–31225 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

22 CFR Part 121 

RIN 1400–AC98 

[Public Notice 7703] 

Amendment to the International Traffic 

in Arms Regulations: Establishment of 

U.S. Munitions List Category XIX for 

Gas Turbine Engines 

AGENCY: Department of State. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: As part of the President’s 

Export Control Reform effort, the 

Department of State proposes to amend 

the International Traffic in Arms 

Regulations (ITAR) to establish Category 

XIX of the U.S. Munitions List (USML) 

to describe gas turbine engines and 

associated equipment warranting 

control on the USML. 

DATES: The Department of State will 

accept comments on this proposed rule 

until January 20, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may 

submit comments within 45 days of the 

date of publication by one of the 

following methods: 

• Email: 

DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov with the 

subject line, ‘‘ITAR Amendments— 

Category XIX, Gas Turbine Engines.’’ 

• Internet: At www.regulations.gov, 

search for this notice by using this rule’s 

RIN (1400–AC98). 

Comments received after that date will 

be considered if feasible, but 

consideration cannot be assured. We 

will make all comments (including any 

personally identifying information or 

information for which a claim of 

confidentiality is asserted in those 

comments or their transmittal emails) 

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: 

Director Charles B. Shotwell, Office of 

Defense Trade Controls Policy, 

Department of State, Telephone (202) 

663–2792 or Fax (202) 261–8199; Email 

DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov. Attn: 

Regulatory Change, USML Category 

XIX. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Directorate of Defense Trade Controls 

(DDTC), U.S. Department of State, 

administers the International Traffic in 

Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR parts 

120–130). The items subject to the 

jurisdiction of the ITAR, i.e., ‘‘defense 

articles,’’ are identified on the ITAR’s 

U.S. Munitions List (USML) (22 CFR 

121.1). With few exceptions, items not 

subject to the export control jurisdiction 

of the ITAR are subject to the 

jurisdiction of the Export 

Administration Regulations (‘‘EAR,’’ 15 

CFR parts 730–774, which includes the 

Commerce Control List in part 774), 

administered by the Bureau of Industry 

and Security (BIS), U.S. Department of 

Commerce. Both the ITAR and the EAR 

impose license requirements on exports 

and reexports. Items not subject to the 

ITAR or to the exclusive licensing 

jurisdiction of any other set of 

regulations are subject to the EAR. 

Export Control Reform Update 

The Departments of State and 

Commerce described in their respective 

Advance Notices of Proposed 

Rulemaking (ANPRM) in December 

2010 the Administration’s plan to make 

the USML and the CCL positive, tiered, 

and aligned so that eventually they can 

be combined into a single control list 

(see ‘‘Commerce Control List: Revising 

Descriptions of Items and Foreign 

Availability,’’ 75 FR 76664 (December 9, 

2010) and ‘‘Revision to the United 

States Munitions List,’’ 75 FR 76935 

(December 10, 2010)). The notices also 

called for the establishment of a ‘‘bright 

line’’ between the USML and the CCL to 

reduce government and industry 

uncertainty regarding export 

jurisdiction by clarifying whether 

particular items are subject to the 

jurisdiction of the ITAR or the EAR. 

While these remain the 

Administration’s ultimate Export 

Control Reform objectives, their 

concurrent implementation would be 

problematic in the near term. In order to 

more quickly reach the national security 

objectives of greater interoperability 

with our allies, enhancing our defense 

industrial base, and permitting the U.S. 

Government to focus its resources on 

controlling and monitoring the export 

and reexport of more significant items to 

destinations, end uses, and end users of 

greater concern than our NATO and 

other multi-regime partners, the 

Administration has decided, as an 

interim step, to propose and implement 

revisions to both the USML and the CCL 

that are more positive, but not yet 

tiered. 

Specifically, based in part on a review 

of the comments received in response to 

the December 2010 notices, the 

Administration has determined that 

fundamentally altering the structure of 

the USML by tiering and aligning them 

on a category-by-category basis would 

significantly disrupt the export control 

compliance systems and procedures of 

exporters and reexporters. For example, 

until the entire USML was revised and 

became final, some USML categories 

would follow the legacy numbering and 

control structures while the newly 

revised categories would follow a 

completely different numbering 

structure. In order to allow for the 

national security benefits to flow from 

re-aligning the jurisdictional status of 

defense articles that no longer warrant 

control on the USML on a category-bycategory basis while minimizing the 

impact on exporters’ internal control 

and jurisdictional and classification 

marking systems, the Administration 

plans to proceed with building positive 

lists now and afterward return to 

structural changes. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
76098 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Establishment of Category XIX for Gas 

Turbine Engines and Associated 

Equipment 

This proposed rule establishes USML 

Category XIX to cover gas turbine 

engines and associated equipment 

currently covered in Categories VI, VII, 

and VIII. The USML identifies engine 

subcategories in all three of these 

categories, but there has been confusion 

concerning the controls in Category VI 

(which currently lists only ‘‘naval 

nuclear propulsion plants,’’ leading 

exporters to question whether other 

types of propulsion systems are 

controlled as ‘‘components’’ in Category 

VI(f)), Category VII (which controls both 

diesel and gas turbine engines under the 

same general term ‘‘engines’’ in 

Category VII(f)), and Category VIII 

(which controls ‘‘military aircraft 

engines’’ but not reciprocating engines). 

The intent of this change is to make 

clear that gas turbine engines for surface 

vessels, vehicles, and aircraft that meet 

certain objective parameters are 

controlled on the USML. 

The most significant aspect of this 

more positive, but not yet tiered, 

proposed USML category is that it does 

not contain controls on all generic parts, 

components, accessories, and 

attachments that are in any way 

specifically designed or modified for a 

defense article, regardless of their 

significance to maintaining a military 

advantage for the United States. Rather, 

it contains a list of specific types of 

parts, components, accessories, and 

attachments that continue to warrant 

control on the USML. All other parts, 

components, accessories, and 

attachments will become subject to the 

new 600 series controls in the CCL to be 

published separately by the Department 

of Commerce. The Administration has 

also proposed revisions to the 

jurisdictional status of certain militarily 

less significant end items that do not 

warrant USML control, but the primary 

impact of this proposed rule will be 

with respect to current USML controls 

on parts, components, accessories, and 

attachments that no longer warrant 

USML control. 

Definition for Specially Designed 

Although one of the goals of the 

export control reform initiative is to 

describe USML controls without using 

design intent criteria, a few of the 

controls in the proposed revision 

nonetheless use the term ‘‘specially 

designed.’’ It is, therefore, necessary for 

the Department to define the term. Two 

proposed definitions have been 

published to date. 

The Department first provided a draft 

definition for ‘‘specially designed’’ in 

the December 2010 ANPRM (75 FR 

76935) and noted the term would be 

used minimally in the USML, and then 

only to remain consistent with the 

Wassenaar Arrangement or other 

multilateral regime obligation or when 

no other reasonable option exists to 

describe the control without using the 

term. The draft definition provided at 

that time is as follows: ‘‘For the 

purposes of this Subchapter, the term 

‘‘specially designed’’ means that the 

end-item, equipment, accessory, 

attachment, system, component, or part 

(see ITAR § 121.8) has properties that (i) 

Distinguish it for certain predetermined 

purposes, (ii) are directly related to the 

functioning of a defense article, and (iii) 

are used exclusively or predominantly 

in or with a defense article identified on 

the USML.’’ 

The Department of Commerce 

subsequently published on July 15, 

2011, for public comment the 

Administration’s proposed definition of 

‘‘specially designed’’ that would be 

common to the CCL and the USML. The 

public provided more than 40 

comments on that proposed definition 

on or before the September 13 deadline 

for comments. The Departments of 

State, Commerce, and Defense are now 

reviewing those comments and related 

issues, and the Departments of State and 

Commerce plan to publish for public 

comment another proposed rule on a 

definition of ‘‘specially designed’’ that 

would be common to the USML and the 

CCL. In the interim, and for the purpose 

of evaluation of this proposed rule, 

reviewers should use the definition 

provided in the December ANPRM. 

Request for Comments 

As the U.S. Government works 

through the proposed revisions to the 

USML, some solutions have been 

adopted that were determined to be the 

best of available options. With the 

thought that multiple perspectives 

would be beneficial to the USML 

revision process, the Department 

welcomes the assistance of users of the 

lists and requests input on the 

following: 

(1) A key goal of this rulemaking is to 

ensure the USML and the CCL together 

control all the items that meet 

Wassenaar Arrangement commitments 

embodied in the Munitions List. To that 

end, the public is asked to identify any 

potential lack of coverage brought about 

by the proposed rules for engines for 

vessels of war, military vehicles, and 

military aircraft contained in this notice 

and the new ECCNs published 

separately by the Department of 

Commerce when reviewed together. 

(2) The assumption behind the 

creation of a single category for items 

that are part of systems controlled in 

several categories is that the 

consolidation of these items sharing 

essentially the same technology will 

clarify which engines and related items 

are controlled, will simplify the 

regulations as a whole, and will lead to 

more effective controls over engines 

with national security concerns. We ask 

the public to specifically address this 

assumption, and to provide its opinion 

on whether the creation of a new 

category, as opposed to retaining 

controls in various categories, would be 

easier for users of the list. 

Regulatory Analysis and Notices 

Administrative Procedure Act 

The Department of State is of the 

opinion that controlling the import and 

export of defense articles and services is 

a foreign affairs function of the United 

States Government and that rules 

implementing this function are exempt 

from § 553 (Rulemaking) and § 554 

(Adjudications) of the Administrative 

Procedure Act. Although the 

Department is of the opinion that this 

rule is exempt from the rulemaking 

provisions of the APA, the Department 

is publishing this rule with a 45-day 

provision for public comment and 

without prejudice to its determination 

that controlling the import and export of 

defense services is a foreign affairs 

function. As noted above, and also 

without prejudice to the Department 

position that this rulemaking is not 

subject to the APA, the Department 

previously published a related Advance 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (RIN 

1400–AC78), and accepted comments 

for 60 days. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Since this proposed amendment is not 

subject to 5 U.S.C. 553, it does not 

require analysis under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

This proposed amendment does not 

involve a mandate that will result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any year and it will not significantly 

or uniquely affect small governments. 

Therefore, no actions were deemed 

necessary under the provisions of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 76099 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 

This proposed amendment has been 

found not to be a major rule within the 

meaning of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996. 

Executive Orders 12372 and 13132 

This proposed amendment will not 

have substantial direct effects on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, in 

accordance with Executive Order 13132, 

it is determined that this proposed 

amendment does not have sufficient 

federalism implications to require 

consultations or warrant the preparation 

of a federalism summary impact 

statement. The regulations 

implementing Executive Order 12372 

regarding intergovernmental 

consultation on Federal programs and 

activities do not apply to this proposed 

amendment. 

Executive Order 12866 

The Department is of the opinion that 

controlling the import and export of 

defense articles and services is a foreign 

affairs function of the United States 

Government and that rules governing 

the conduct of this function are exempt 

from the requirements of Executive 

Order 12866. However, the Department 

has reviewed the proposed rule to 

ensure its consistency with the 

regulatory philosophy and principles set 

forth in the Executive Order. 

Executive Order 12988 

The Department of State has reviewed 

the proposed amendment in light of 

sections 3(a) and 3(b) (2) of Executive 

Order 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, 

minimize litigation, establish clear legal 

standards, and reduce burden. 

Executive Order 13175 

The Department of State has 

determined that this rulemaking will 

not have tribal implications, will not 

impose substantial direct compliance 

costs on Indian tribal governments, and 

will not pre-empt tribal law. 

Accordingly, the requirement of 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply 

to this rulemaking. 

Executive Order 13563 

The Department of State has 

considered this rule in light of 

Executive Order 13563, dated January 

18, 2011, and affirms that this regulation 

is consistent with the guidance therein. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed amendment does not 

impose any new reporting or 

recordkeeping requirements subject to 

the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 

chapter 35. 

List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 121 

Arms and munitions, Exports. 

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth 

above, Title 22, Chapter I, Subchapter 

M, part 121 is proposed to be amended 

as follows: 

PART 121—THE UNITED STATES 

MUNITIONS LIST 

1. The authority citation for part 121 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 2, 38, and 71, Pub. L. 90– 

629, 90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778, 

2797); E.O. 11958, 42 FR 4311; 3 CFR, 1977 

Comp. p. 79; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; Pub. L. 105– 

261, 112 Stat. 1920. 

2. Section 121.1 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 121.1 General. The United States 

Munitions List. 

* * * * * 

Category XIX—Gas Turbine Engines 

and Associated Equipment 

*(a) Turbofan and Turbojet engines, 

whether in development, production, or 

inventory (including technology 

demonstrators), capable of 15,000 lbf 

(66.7 kN) of thrust or greater that have 

any of the following: 

(1) with or capable of thrust 

augmentation (afterburner); 

(2) thrust or exhaust nozzle vectoring; 

(3) contains parts or components 

controlled in paragraph (f)(4) of this 

category; 

(4) capable of inverted flight; 

(5) capable of high power extraction 

(greater than 50 percent of engine 

thrust) at altitudes greater than 40,000 

feet; or 

(6) capable of directed flow thrust 

reversing using bypass/fan and core 

flow air and also capable for being 

deployed in flight. 

*(b) Turboshaft and Turboprop 

engines, whether in development, 

production, or inventory (including 

technology demonstrators), capable of 

1500 shp (1119 kW) or greater that have 

any of the following: 

(1) Cooled low pressure turbine, 

cooled intermediate pressure turbine, or 

cooled power turbine; 

(2) contains parts or components 

controlled in paragraph (f)(4)(i) or 

(f)(4)(ii) of this category; or 

(3) capable of oil sump sealing when 

the engine is in the vertical position. 

(c) Engines, whether in development, 

production, or inventory (including 

technology demonstrators), ‘‘specially 

designed’’ for armed or military 

unmanned aerial vehicle systems, cruise 

missiles, or target drones. 

*(d) AGT1500, CTS800, TF40B, T55, 

TF60, T700, and TF50 engines. 

*(e) Digital engine controls (e.g., Full 

Authority Digital Engine Controls 

(FADEC) and Digital Electronic Engine 

Controls (DEEC)) ‘‘specially designed’’ 

for gas turbine engines controlled in this 

category. 

(f) Components, parts, accessories, 

attachments, or associated equipment as 

follows: 

(1) components, parts, accessories, 

attachments, and equipment ‘‘specially 

designed’’ for the following U.S.-origin 

engines (and military variants thereof): 

AE1107C, F101, F107, F112, F118, 

F119, F120, F124, F125, F135, F136, 

F414, F415, J402, GE38, TF40B, and 

TF60; 

Note: Digital engine controls (e.g., Full 

Authority Digital Engine Controls (FADEC) 

and Digital Electronic Engine Controls 

(DEEC)) ‘‘specially designed’’ for the engines 

identified in (f)(1) of this category are 

controlled by (e) of this category. 

*(2) hot section components (i.e., 

combustors, turbine blades, vanes, 

nozzles, disks and shrouds) ‘‘specially 

designed’’ for gas turbine engines 

controlled this category and related 

cooled components (i.e., cooled low 

pressure turbine blades, vanes, disks; 

cooled augmenters; and cooled nozzles) 

‘‘specially designed’’ for gas turbine 

engines controlled in this category. The 

cowl, diffuser, dome, chamber, shells, 

and liners for the combustors are also 

controlled by this paragraph; 

(3) engine monitoring systems (i.e., 

prognostics, diagnostics, and health) 

‘‘specially designed’’ for gas turbine 

engines and components controlled in 

this category; or 

(4) any component, part, accessory, 

attachment, equipment, or system that: 

(i) is classified; 

(ii) contains classified software; 

(iii) is manufactured using classified 

production data; or 

(iv) is being developed using 

classified information. 

‘‘Classified’’ means classified 

pursuant to Executive Order 13526, or 

predecessor order, and a security 

classification guide developed pursuant 

thereto or equivalent, or to the 

corresponding classification rules of 

another government. 

(g) Technical data and defense 

services directly related to the defense 

articles enumerated in paragraphs (a) 

through (f) of this category. 

* * * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
76100 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: November 28, 2011. 

Ellen O. Tauscher, 

Under Secretary, Arms Control and 

International Security, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2011–30977 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–25–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

22 CFR Part 121 

[Public Notice 7702] 

RIN 1400–AC77 

Amendment to the International Traffic 

in Arms Regulations: Revision of U.S. 

Munitions List Category VII 

AGENCY: Department of State. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: As part of the President’s 

Export Control Reform effort, the 

Department of State proposes to amend 

the International Traffic in Arms 

Regulations (ITAR) to revise Category 

VII (ground vehicles) of the U.S. 

Munitions List (USML) to describe more 

precisely the military ground vehicles 

warranting control on the USML. 

DATES: The Department of State will 

accept comments on this proposed rule 

until January 20, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may 

submit comments within 45 days of the 

date of publication by one of the 

following methods: 

• Email: 

DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov with the 

subject line, ‘‘ITAR Amendments— 

Category VII.’’ 

• Internet: At www.regulations.gov, 

search for this notice by using this rule’s 

RIN (1400–AC77). 

Comments received after that date 

will be considered if feasible, but 

consideration cannot be assured. We 

will make all comments (including any 

personally identifying information or 

information for which a claim of 

confidentiality is asserted in those 

comments or their transmittal emails) 

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 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Director Charles B. Shotwell, Office of 

Defense Trade Controls Policy, 

Department of State, telephone (202) 

663–2792, or email 

DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov. ATTN: 

Regulatory Change, USML Category VII. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

December 10, 2010, the Department 

published as a proposed rule a revised 

Category VII that included tiering (75 FR 

76930). As discussed below, the tiering 

of the categories has been postponed. In 

this regard, this revision differs from the 

earlier one. Because the differences 

between the two proposed versions of 

Category VII are considerable, the 

Department will not provide an 

assessment of public comments received 

from the first proposed rule, but 

welcomes comments on this proposed 

rule from all parties. If you submitted 

comments in response to the December 

2010 rulemaking, please re-submit your 

comments, if they are still appropriate. 

Background 

The Directorate of Defense Trade 

Controls (DDTC), U.S. Department of 

State, administers the International 

Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 

CFR parts 120–130). The items subject 

to the jurisdiction of the ITAR, i.e., 

‘‘defense articles,’’ are identified on the 

ITAR’s U.S. Munitions List (USML) (22 

CFR 121.1). With few exceptions, items 

not subject to the export control 

jurisdiction of the ITAR are subject to 

the jurisdiction of the Export 

Administration Regulations (‘‘EAR,’’ 15 

CFR parts 730–774, which includes the 

Commerce Control List in part 774), 

administered by the Bureau of Industry 

and Security (BIS), U.S. Department of 

Commerce. Both the ITAR and the EAR 

impose license requirements on exports 

and reexports. Items not subject to the 

ITAR or to the exclusive licensing 

jurisdiction of any other set of 

regulations are subject to the EAR. 

Export Control Reform Update 

The Departments of State and 

Commerce described in their respective 

Advanced Notices of Proposed 

Rulemaking (ANPRM) in December 

2010 the Administration’s plan to make 

the USML and the CCL positive, tiered, 

and aligned so that eventually they can 

be combined into a single control list 

(see ‘‘Commerce Control List: Revising 

Descriptions of Items and Foreign 

Availability,’’ 75 FR 76664 (Dec. 9, 

2010) and ‘‘Revision to the United 

States Munitions List,’’ 75 FR 76935 

(Dec. 10, 2010)). The notices also called 

for the establishment of a ‘‘bright line’’ 

between the USML and the CCL to 

reduce government and industry 

uncertainty regarding export 

jurisdiction by clarifying whether 

particular items are subject to the 

jurisdiction of the ITAR or the EAR. 

While these remain the 

Administration’s ultimate Export 

Control Reform objectives, their 

concurrent implementation would be 

problematic in the near term. In order to 

more quickly reach the national security 

objectives of greater interoperability 

with our allies, enhancing our defense 

industrial base, and permitting the U.S. 

Government to focus its resources on 

controlling and monitoring the export 

and re-export of more significant items 

to destinations, end uses, and end users 

of greater concern than our NATO and 

other multi-regime partners, the 

Administration has decided, as an 

interim step, to propose and implement 

revisions to both the USML and the CCL 

that are more positive, but not yet 

tiered. 

Specifically, based in part on a review 

of the comments received in response to 

the December 2010 notices, the 

Administration has determined that 

fundamentally altering the structure of 

the USML by tiering and aligning them 

on a category-by-category basis would 

significantly disrupt the export control 

compliance systems and procedures of 

exporters and reexporters. For example, 

until the entire USML was revised and 

became final, some USML categories 

would follow the legacy numbering and 

control structures while the newly 

revised categories would follow a 

completely different numbering 

structure. In order to allow for the 

national security benefits to flow from 

re-aligning the jurisdictional status of 

defense articles that no longer warrant 

control on the USML on a category-bycategory basis while minimizing the 

impact on exporters’ internal control 

and jurisdictional and classification 

marking systems, the Administration 

plans to proceed with building positive 

lists now and afterward return to 

structural changes. 

Revision of Category VII 

This proposed rule revises USML 

Category VII, Ground Vehicles, to 

establish a clear ‘‘bright line’’ between 

the USML and the CCL for the control 

of military ground vehicles. The 

proposed revision narrows the types of 

ground vehicle controlled on the USML 

to only those that warrant control under 

the stringent requirements of the Arms 

Export Control Act. Changes include the 

removal of most unarmored and 

unarmed military vehicles, trucks, 

trailers, and trains (unless ‘‘specially 

designed’’ as firing platforms for 

weapons above .50 caliber), and 

armored vehicles (either unarmed or 

with inoperable weapons) manufactured 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1