31444 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

22 CFR Parts 120, 121, and 124 

[Public Notice: 8329] 

RINs 1400–AC80 and 1400–AD33 

Amendment to the International Traffic 

in Arms Regulations: Revision of U.S. 

Munitions List Category XV and 

Definition of ‘‘Defense Service’’ 

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 

XV (Spacecraft Systems and Related 

Articles) of the U.S. Munitions List 

(USML) to describe more precisely the 

articles warranting control on the 

USML. The definition of ‘‘defense 

service’’ is to be revised to, among other 

changes, specifically include the 

furnishing of assistance for certain 

spacecraft related activities. The 

revisions contained in this rule are part 

of the Department of State’s 

retrospective plan under E.O. 13563 

completed on August 17, 2011. 

DATES: The Department of State will 

accept comments on this proposed rule 

until July 8, 2013. 

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 

Amendment—USML Category XV and 

Defense Services.’’ 

• Internet: At www.regulations.gov, 

search for this notice by using this rule’s 

RIN (1400–AD33). 

Comments received after that date 

will be considered if feasible, but 

consideration cannot be assured. Those 

submitting comments should not 

include any personally identifying 

information they do not desire to be 

made public or information for which a 

claim of confidentiality is asserted 

because those comments and/or 

transmittal emails will be made 

available for public inspection and 

copying after the close of the comment 

period via the Directorate of Defense 

Trade Controls Web site at www.

pmddtc.state.gov. Parties who wish to 

comment anonymously may do so by 

submitting their comments via 

www.regulations.gov, leaving the fields 

that would identify the commenter 

blank and including no identifying 

information in the comment itself. 

Comments submitted via 

www.regulations.gov are immediately 

available for public inspection. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Candace M.J. Goforth, Director, Office of 

Defense Trade Controls Policy, U.S. 

Department of State, telephone (202) 

663–2792, or email DDTCResponse

Team@state.gov. ATTN: Regulatory 

Change, USML Category XV and 

Defense Services. The Department of 

State’s full retrospective plan can be 

accessed at http://www.state.gov/

documents/organization/181028.pdf. 

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’’ and ‘‘defense services,’’ 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 

(CCL) in Supplement No. 1 to 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. 

All references to the USML in this 

rule are to the list of defense articles 

controlled for the purpose of export or 

temporary import pursuant to the ITAR, 

and not to the defense articles on the 

USML that are controlled by the Bureau 

of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and 

Explosives (ATF) for the purpose of 

permanent import under its regulations. 

See 27 CFR part 447. Pursuant to section 

38(a)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act 

(AECA), all defense articles controlled 

for export or import are part of the 

USML under the AECA. For the sake of 

clarity, the list of defense articles 

controlled by ATF for the purpose of 

permanent import is the U.S. Munitions 

Import List (USMIL). The transfer of 

defense articles from the ITAR’s USML 

to the EAR’s CCL for the purpose of 

export control does not affect the list of 

defense articles controlled on the 

USMIL under the AECA for the purpose 

of permanent import. 

Revision of Category XV 

Public Law 105–261, the Strom 

Thurmond National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999, 

required that space-related items, 

including all satellites, were to be 

controlled as defense articles and 

removed the President’s authority to 

change their jurisdictional status. 

Section 1248 of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 

(Pub. L. 111–84) provided that the 

Secretaries of Defense and State carry 

out an assessment of the risks associated 

with removing satellites and related 

components from the USML. The 

Departments of Defense and State 

conducted this review and identified 

certain satellites and related items that 

do not contain technologies unique to 

the United States, are not critical to 

national security, and are more 

appropriately controlled by the EAR, 

which allows for the creation of license 

exceptions for exports to certain 

destinations and complete controls for 

exports to others. This report was 

provided to the Congress in April 2012. 

The National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Pub. L. 112– 

239), in section 1261, effectively 

returned to the President the authority 

to determine which regulations govern 

the export of satellites and related 

articles. With this authority, and 

pursuant to the President’s Export 

Control Reform effort, the Department 

proposes the following revisions to 

USML Category XV. 

Paragraphs (a) and (e) are to be 

revised to more specifically describe the 

articles controlled therein. 

Paragraph (b) is to be revised to limit 

its scope to ground control systems and 

training simulators specially designed 

for telemetry, tracking, and control of 

spacecraft in paragraph (a). 

The articles currently covered in 

paragraph (c), certain Global Positioning 

System receiving equipment, are 

proposed to be controlled on the USML 

under Category XII. Until a revised 

USML Category XII is implemented, 

these articles will continue to be 

covered in USML Category XV(c). 

The articles currently covered in 

paragraph (d), certain radiationhardened microelectronic circuits, are to 

be controlled on the CCL in new ECCN 

9A515.d. 

Additionally, articles common to the 

Missile Technology Control Regime 

Annex and the USML are to be 

identified on the USML, including in 

USML Category XV, with the 

parenthetical ‘‘(MT)’’ at the end of each 

section containing such articles. 

A new ‘‘(x) paragraph’’ has been 

added to USML Category XV, allowing 

ITAR licensing for commodities, 

software, and technical data subject to 

the EAR provided those commodities, 

software, and technical data are to be 

used in or with defense articles 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules 31445 

controlled in USML Category XV and 

are described in the purchase 

documentation submitted with the 

application. 

Although the proposed revisions to 

the USML do not preclude the 

possibility that satellites and related 

items in normal commercial use would 

or should be ITAR-controlled because, 

e.g., they provide the United States with 

a critical military or intelligence 

advantage, the U.S. Government does 

not want to inadvertently control items 

on the ITAR that are in normal 

commercial use. The public is thus 

asked to provide specific examples of 

satellites and related items, if any, that 

would be controlled by the revised 

USML Category XV that are now in 

normal commercial use. 

Definition for Defense Services 

A proposed revision of the definition 

of defense service, pursuant to ECR, was 

first published on April 13, 2011, as RIN 

1400–AC80 (see ‘‘International Traffic 

in Arms Regulations: Defense Services,’’ 

76 FR 20590). In that rule, the 

Department explained it was 

determined that the definition is overly 

broad, capturing certain forms of 

assistance or services that do not 

warrant ITAR control. 

Rather than proceed to a final rule on 

the definition, the Department is 

republishing the definition as a 

proposed rule, incorporating certain 

changes stemming from the public 

comment review, but also including in 

the definition the provision of certain 

assistance with regard to spacecraft. 

For the first revision, thirty-nine 

parties submitted comments within the 

established comment period 

recommending changes to the revised 

definition. The Department reviewed 

and considered these comments and, 

when the recommended changes added 

to the clarity of the regulation and were 

congruent with ECR objectives, the 

Department accepted them. The 

Department’s evaluation of certain of 

the written comments and 

recommendations follows, grouped by 

general subject matter. 

Comments on Terms and Definitions in 

Defense Services 

Two commenting parties 

recommended clarification that 

‘‘integration’’ as used in ITAR 

§ 120.9(a)(2) does not mean activities to 

ensure compatibility, secure, load, or 

install cargo that is subject to the EAR 

for stowage in spacecraft or other 

aircraft, vessels, or vehicles which are 

themselves subject to the ITAR. The 

Department confirms that the meaning 

of ‘‘integration’’ does not encompass the 

meaning of ‘‘stowage.’’ 

Three commenting parties 

recommended replacing the term 

‘‘incorporation’’ in ITAR § 120.9(b)(3) 

with either ‘‘installation’’ or 

‘‘integration,’’ to avoid confusion. The 

Department accepted this 

recommendation and has replaced 

‘‘incorporated’’ with ‘‘integrated.’’ 

Two commenting parties 

recommended ‘‘mere plug-and-play 

installation activities’’ should not be 

considered a defense service and thus 

described in ITAR § 120.9(b). The 

Department agrees that such services are 

not within the definition of a defense 

service. However, given that ITAR 

§ 120.9(a)(2) is limited to integration 

services a separate exclusion paragraph 

is unnecessary. To clarify the 

distinction between services comprised 

of ‘‘installation’’ and those of 

‘‘integration,’’ the Department is 

providing within the regulation the 

definitions of those terms that were 

provided in the first proposed rule’s 

supplementary information section. 

Three commenting parties 

recommended replacing the phrase 

‘‘employment of defense articles’’ with 

‘‘use of defense articles’’ in ITAR 

§ 120.9(a)(3) and ITAR § 124.1(a) for 

clarity. Similarly, another commenting 

party recommended replacing the word 

‘‘employment’’ with the word ‘‘use,’’ as 

the term is defined in the EAR. And, 

another commenting party 

recommended modifying the term 

‘‘employment’’ with the terms ‘‘tactical 

or combat.’’ The Department has revised 

this section adding the term ‘‘tactical,’’ 

to differentiate training in such 

employment from the type that is not to 

be within the definition of a defense 

service (training in basic operation). 

One commenting party recommended 

that reference to ‘‘foreign units and 

forces’’ in ITAR § 120.9(a)(3) be revised 

to ‘‘foreign military units and forces’’ for 

consistency with ITAR § 124.1(a). The 

Department has reviewed the 

terminology in this section, but rather 

than accept the recommendation, 

‘‘foreign person’’ will replace ‘‘foreign 

units and forces’’ in ITAR § 120.9(a)(3), 

and is removed from ITAR § 124.1(a) 

entirely. 

One commenting party requested 

clarification of whether companies not 

involved in the manufacture of defense 

articles would nonetheless be required 

to register with DDTC if their items are 

integrated into USML controlled items 

pursuant to ITAR § 120.9(a)(2). Mere 

integration of an item into a defense 

article does not render it a defense 

article, and thereby necessitating 

registration of the manufacturer of the 

item. The manufacturer may determine 

its classification by consulting the 

USML for its enumeration, applying the 

specially designed definition, or by 

submitting a commodity jurisdiction 

request to the Department for its official 

determination. 

One commenting party requested 

clarification of whether companies will 

be required to amend approved 

agreements for activities that may no 

longer be considered defense services. 

While companies will not be required to 

submit amendment requests in these 

instances, the Department recommends 

these companies contact the Department 

of State or Commerce for any necessary 

clarification of their circumstances and 

which authorizations are required. 

Comments on the Use of Public Domain 

Information in a Defense Service 

Five commenting parties 

recommended ITAR § 120.9(a)(4) be 

revised to clarify that an aggregation of 

public domain data is still public 

domain data, and two commenting 

parties requested clarification that the 

aggregation of public domain data 

cannot be considered a defense service 

or render the data ‘‘other than public 

domain.’’ The Department confirms that 

a defense service involves technical data 

and therefore the use of publicly 

available information would not 

constitute a defense service according to 

the new ITAR § 120.9(b)(2). The 

Department notes, however, that it is 

seldom the case that a party can 

aggregate public domain data for 

purposes of application to a defense 

article without using proprietary 

information or creating a data set that 

itself is not in the public domain. 

Ten commenting parties 

recommended replacing the phrase 

‘‘other than public domain’’ in ITAR 

§ 120.9(a)(1) with ‘‘using technical data 

(see § 120.10),’’ as the former phrase 

would extend the definition of ‘‘defense 

service’’ to include services the 

Department did not intend to capture, 

including assistance provided using 

proprietary data not controlled by the 

ITAR. The Department did not accept 

this comment because it intends to 

control as a defense service certain 

services that use other than technical 

data. An example would be the services 

covered under ITAR § 120.9(a)(3). 

Two commenting parties 

recommended exclusion of 

‘‘fundamental research’’ from ITAR 

controls, similar to the EAR treatment of 

this term found in 15 CFR 734.8. These 

parties suggested that this measure 

would ensure science and academic 

research are not unnecessarily 

hampered. The Department notes that 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31446 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

‘‘fundamental research,’’ as it is defined 

in ITAR § 120.11, is not controlled by 

the ITAR. 

One commenting party noted that the 

supplementary information section of 

the proposed rule indicated that using 

data that is ‘‘other than public domain 

data’’ (including proprietary data or 

‘‘technology’’ ‘‘subject to the Export 

Administration Regulations’’) to provide 

assistance would constitute a defense 

service, but this is not reflected in the 

actual regulation. This matter will be 

addressed more fully in the forthcoming 

rules regarding the revision of the 

definitions for technical data and public 

domain information. 

One commenting party stated that the 

Department’s intention of narrowing the 

focus of defense services to the 

furnishing of assistance using ‘‘other 

than public domain data’’ is frustrated 

by the exclusion of the phrase ‘‘other 

than public domain data’’ from 

paragraphs (a)(2)–(a)(4) of the definition. 

Similarly, another commenting party 

requested clarification from the 

Department on whether the exclusion 

was an oversight. The Department 

confirms excluding the phrase from 

those paragraphs was intentional, and 

disagrees with the first commenting 

party for the following reasons. In 

paragraph (a)(2), the service of 

integrating an item into a defense article 

is covered, which necessarily involves 

the use of technical data (meaning, the 

Department believes that the service of 

‘‘integration’’ cannot be effected only 

with public domain information). 

Paragraph (a)(3) may control services 

that use other than technical data. And 

the phrase ‘‘other than public domain 

data’’ is not relevant to the service 

described and controlled in paragraph 

(a)(4). 

One commenting party recommended 

that proprietary data furnished by a 

foreign person not be covered by the 

phrase ‘‘other than public domain data.’’ 

And two commenting parties 

recommended the controls in ITAR 

§ 120.9 be based on the use of ‘‘U.S. 

origin’’ technical data. The Department 

intends to regulate the identified 

services regardless of the origin of the 

data used in the provision of the service. 

Comments on Proposed Exclusions 

Paragraph 

Two commenting parties 

recommended that the exclusion in 

ITAR § 120.9(b)(1) be extended to 

include intermediate-level maintenance 

for greater interoperability. The 

Department did not accept this 

recommendation. The Department 

wants to continue controlling this level 

of maintenance. 

Twelve commenting parties suggested 

that use of the phrase ‘‘U.S. citizen’’ in 

ITAR § 120.9(b)(2) raises questions 

regarding the employment of lawful 

permanent residents, or unnecessarily 

rules out other categories of U.S. person 

employees (e.g., lawful permanent 

residents as defined by 8 U.S.C. 

1101(a)(20) and protected individuals 

defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3)) from 

the exclusion, and that this phrase 

should be replaced with ‘‘U.S. person’’ 

as defined by ITAR § 120.15, ‘‘an 

individual who is a U.S. person,’’ or 

‘‘U.S. person (natural person).’’ The 

Department accepted this comment in 

part by revising the phrase to read 

‘‘natural U.S. person.’’ 

One commenting party stated that use 

of the phrase ‘‘mere employment’’ in 

ITAR § 120.9(b)(2) is too narrow and 

would not exclude U.S. persons from 

performing the duties of their 

employment, and recommended that 

this part be revised to explicitly exclude 

these activities as well. Stating that this 

section is ambiguous, two commenting 

parties recommended it be revised to 

more explicitly state which employment 

activities are excluded by this section. 

This part of the regulation is meant to 

provide that the act of employing a 

natural U.S. person does not 

automatically mean that a foreign 

person will be receiving a defense 

service. The Department believes the 

phrasing conveys this meaning. 

One commenting party requested that, 

because ITAR § 120.9(b)(2) covers cases 

where a foreign person employing a U.S. 

person may constitute the provision of 

a defense service, the Department clarify 

whether an individual may register as a 

manufacturer or exporter of defense 

articles and defense services, since that 

individual would first have to be 

registered with the Department before 

he can seek a license. Another 

commenting party recommended that 

individual U.S. employees working 

abroad should be permitted to use U.S. 

origin technical data exported to their 

parent foreign company without a 

license. A third commenting party 

recommended that ITAR § 120.9(b)(2) be 

revised to stipulate that the definition of 

a defense service not include the 

instance where a U.S. person uses 

foreign-source technical data that would 

be ITAR-controlled had it been acquired 

by the U.S. person in the United States. 

The issue of whether an individual U.S. 

person may be required to register with 

the Department will be addressed in 

future guidance. 

Two commenting parties 

recommended stipulating that all law 

enforcement, physical security, or 

personal protective services not be 

included within the definition of a 

defense service, and not only that which 

uses public domain data. The use of 

technical data is a controlled activity, 

regardless of the type of service 

provided. Therefore, the Department did 

not accept this recommendation. 

One commenting party recommended 

exclusion from the definition of defense 

service the integration of items 

controlled on the CCL into items on the 

USML using solely public domain data. 

Given the nature of the integration 

process, the Department does not agree 

that this type of service should be 

excluded. 

One commenting party recommended 

clarification that the provision of 

defense services exclusively to the U.S. 

Government outside the United States is 

not a defense service. The Department 

agrees activities between two U.S. 

persons do not constitute a defense 

service. 

One commenting party recommended 

that ITAR § 120.9(b)(3), which excludes 

from the definition of a defense service 

the servicing of an item subject to the 

EAR that has been integrated or 

installed into a defense article, be 

clarified to include ‘‘installation’’ and 

‘‘removal’’ of CCL items during those 

activities. Similarly, one commenting 

party recommended adding 

‘‘troubleshooting,’’ ‘‘inspection,’’ and 

‘‘other routine services for’’ to that 

paragraph, as examples of services not 

considered defense services. The 

Department has rephrased the paragraph 

to cover the ‘‘servicing of an item 

subject to the EAR,’’ which includes the 

activities described by these 

commenting parties. 

One commenting party recommended 

the example of what is not a defense 

service identified in § 120.9(b)(1) be 

expanded to include actual performance 

of basic maintenance on a defense 

article on behalf of a foreign person. 

Similarly, another commenting party 

requested clarification on whether 

actual performance is included. The 

Department notes that for certain 

countries, there are licensing 

exemptions for the performance of basic 

maintenance (see ITAR § 124.2). This is 

the extent to which the Department 

wants to exempt from the licensing 

requirement actual performance of basic 

maintenance on a defense article on 

behalf of a foreign person. 

One commenting party recommended 

that because ‘‘organizational-level 

maintenance’’ is not cited in ITAR 

§ 120.9(a)(1), it should be explicitly 

included as an exclusion in ITAR 

§ 120.9(b). Training in organizationallevel maintenance is specifically 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules 31447 

excluded as a defense service in 

paragraph (b)(1). 

Five commenting parties 

recommended clarification of whether 

ITAR § 120.9(b) provides an exhaustive 

list of what does not constitute a 

defense service, and if not, that the 

regulatory text specify that the examples 

provided in paragraph (b) are not 

exhaustive. The examples in ITAR 

§ 120.9(b) are not an exhaustive listing 

of services that are not within the 

definition of a defense service. Rather, 

the paragraph is meant to highlight 

those services about which the 

Department has received, or anticipates 

receiving, inquiries regarding their 

classification. 

Paragraph (a)(2) and Miscellaneous 

Comments 

Two commenting parties noted that 

ITAR § 120.9(a)(2) includes within the 

definition of a defense service the 

integration into a defense article of 

items controlled on the USML or on the 

CCL, but not items that are subject to the 

EAR but classified as EAR99. The 

commenting party recommended this 

exclusion be specifically stated to avoid 

confusion. Similarly, two commenting 

parties recommended clarification to 

explicitly exclude integration of items 

designated as EAR99. The Department 

has replaced reference to items 

controlled on the CCL with items 

subject to the EAR. The focus of this 

paragraph is on the service of 

‘‘integration’’ into a USML article, 

which of necessity requires use of 

technical data. 

One commenting party requested 

clarification of whether integration of a 

foreign item into a defense article would 

constitute a defense service. The 

Department confirms that the origin of 

an item is not relevant in determining 

whether a defense service is being 

provided. 

One commenting party recommended 

that the definition of defense service 

address instances where USML articles 

are incorporated or installed into a CCL 

item, similar to how ITAR § 120.9(b)(3) 

addresses CCL items integrated or 

installed into USML items. This 

circumstance will be addressed in a 

separate rule. 

One commenting party stated that 

activities beyond the jurisdiction of U.S. 

law are captured by the new defense 

services definition. The commenting 

party provides as an example of such 

activity the case where a foreign person 

located outside the United States 

furnishes assistance to another foreign 

person for the integration of a foreign 

item into another foreign item. By 

definition, defense services are only 

provided by U.S. person to a foreign 

person. ITAR § 120.9 does not capture 

the circumstance described by the 

commenting party. 

One commenting party recommended 

ITAR § 120.9(a)(2) should focus on the 

nature of the integration activity and not 

on the part being integrated and 

suggested the proposed phrasing would 

allow a U.S. person to integrate a foreign 

origin article without providing a 

‘‘defense service,’’ because these parts 

are not under U.S. jurisdiction. For the 

purposes of clarity, ITAR § 120.9(a)(2) 

does identify the classification of 

articles (USML and CCL) that are 

included for the purposes of control in 

this defense service. Nevertheless, the 

focus of this provision is the service of 

‘‘integration’’ into a defense article. And 

as noted in the paragraph, the service of 

integration into an ITAR controlled 

defense article is a defense service 

regardless of the origin of the articles. 

Additional Changes 

The Department proposes that ITAR 

§ 124.1(a), which describes the approval 

requirements of manufacturing license 

agreements and technical assistance 

agreements, be revised to remove the 

requirement of Department approval for 

the provision of a defense service using 

public domain data or data otherwise 

exempt from ITAR licensing 

requirements. The Department also 

proposes that it be revised to remove a 

redundant provision regarding the 

necessity to obtain approval for the 

training of foreign military forces, an 

activity covered in ITAR § 120.9(a)(3). 

The Department proposes to remove 

ITAR § 124.2(a). The activity described 

therein—the provision of training in the 

basic operation of a defense article— 

will not be controlled as a defense 

service, therefore obviating the need for 

this exemption. ITAR § 124.2(b) will be 

removed for similar reasons: The 

activity described therein is not 

controlled as a defense service, 

nullifying the reason for this exemption. 

ITAR § 124.2(c) will be revised to reflect 

the proposed deletion of § 124.2(a). 

These changes conform to the proposed 

revision of the defense service 

definition. 

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 sections 553 (rulemaking) and 554 

(adjudications) of the Administrative 

Procedure Act (APA). 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, and also published a proposed 

definition of ‘‘defense service’’ on April 

13, 2011 (RIN 1400–AC80), and 

accepted comments for 60 days. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Since the Department is of the 

opinion that this proposed rule is 

exempt from the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 

553, there is no requirement for an 

analysis under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

This proposed rulemaking 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. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 

This proposed rulemaking 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 rulemaking 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 

rulemaking 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 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31448 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

activities do not apply to this proposed 

rulemaking. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct agencies to assess costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributed impacts, and equity). 

These executive orders stress the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, of reducing costs, of 

harmonizing rules, and of promoting 

flexibility. These rules have been 

designated ‘‘significant regulatory 

actions,’’ although not economically 

significant, under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, 

this proposed rule has been reviewed by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). 

Executive Order 12988 

The Department of State has reviewed 

this proposed rulemaking 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 proposed 

rulemaking will not have tribal 

implications, will not impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

Indian tribal governments, and will not 

preempt tribal law. Accordingly, the 

provisions of Executive Order 13175 do 

not apply to this proposed rulemaking. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

Following is a listing of approved 

collections that will be affected by 

revision, pursuant to the President’s 

Export Control Reform (ECR) initiative, 

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

the Commerce Control List. The list of 

collections and the description of the 

manner in which they will be affected 

pertains to revision of the USML in its 

entirety, not only to the category 

published in this rule: 

(1) Statement of Registration, DS– 

2032, OMB No. 1405–0002. The 

Department estimates that 1,000 of the 

currently-registered persons will not 

need to maintain registration following 

full revision of the USML. This would 

result in a burden reduction of 1,000 

hours annually. 

(2) Application/License for Permanent 

Export of Unclassified Defense Articles 

and Related Unclassified Technical 

Data, DSP–5, OMB No. 1405–0003. The 

Department estimates that there will be 

35,000 fewer DSP–5 submissions 

annually following full revision of the 

USML. This would result in a burden 

reduction of 35,000 hours annually. In 

addition, the DSP–5 will allow 

respondents to select USML Category 

XIX, a newly-established category, as a 

description of articles to be exported. 

(3) Application/License for 

Temporary Import of Unclassified 

Defense Articles, DSP–61, OMB No. 

1405–0013. The Department estimates 

that there will be 200 fewer DSP–61 

submissions annually following full 

revision of the USML. This would result 

in a burden reduction of 100 hours 

annually. In addition, the DSP–61 will 

allow respondents to select USML 

Category XIX, a newly-established 

category, as a description of articles to 

be temporarily imported. 

(4) Application/License for 

Temporary Export of Unclassified 

Defense Articles, DSP–73, OMB No. 

1405–0023. The Department estimates 

that there will be 800 fewer DSP–73 

submissions annually following full 

revision of the USML. This would result 

in a burden reduction of 800 hours 

annually. In addition, the DSP–73 will 

allow respondents to select USML 

Category XIX, a newly-established 

category, as a description of articles to 

be temporarily exported. 

(5) Application for Amendment to 

License for Export or Import of 

Classified or Unclassified Defense 

Articles and Related Technical Data, 

DSP–6, –62, –74, –119, OMB No. 1405– 

0092. The Department estimates that 

there will be 2,000 fewer amendment 

submissions annually following full 

revision of the USML. This would result 

in a burden reduction of 1,000 hours 

annually. In addition, the amendment 

forms will allow respondents to select 

USML Category XIX, a newlyestablished category, as a description of 

articles the subject of the amendment 

request. 

(6) Request for Approval of 

Manufacturing License Agreements, 

Technical Assistance Agreements, and 

Other Agreements, DSP–5, OMB No. 

1405–0093. The Department estimates 

that there will be 1,000 fewer agreement 

submissions annually following full 

revision of the USML. This would result 

in a burden reduction of 2,000 hours 

annually. In addition, the DSP–5, the 

form used for the purposes of 

electronically submitting agreements, 

will allow respondents to select USML 

Category XIX, a newly-established 

category, as a description of articles to 

be exported. 

(7) Maintenance of Records by 

Registrants, OMB No. 1405–0111. The 

requirement to actively maintain 

records pursuant to provisions of the 

International Traffic in Arms 

Regulations (ITAR) will decline 

commensurate to the drop in the 

number of persons who will be required 

to register with the Department 

pursuant to the ITAR. As stated above, 

the Department estimates that 1,000 of 

the currently-registered persons will not 

need to maintain registration following 

full revision of the USML. This would 

result in a burden reduction of 20,000 

hours annually. The ITAR does provide, 

though, for the maintenance of records 

for a period of five years. Therefore, 

persons newly relieved of the 

requirement to register with the 

Department may still be required to 

maintain records. 

(8) Export Declaration of Defense 

Technical Data or Services, DS–4071, 

OMB No. 1405–0157. The Department 

estimates that there will be 2,000 fewer 

declaration submissions annually 

following full revision of the USML. 

This would result in a burden reduction 

of 1,000 hours annually. 

List of Subjects 

22 CFR Parts 120 and 121 

Arms and munitions, Classified 

information, Exports. 

22 CFR Part 124 

Arms and munitions, Exports, 

Technical assistance. 

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth 

above, Title 22, Chapter I, Subchapter 

M, parts 120, 121, and 124, are proposed 

to be amended as follows: 

PART 120—PURPOSE AND 

DEFINITIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 120 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Sections 2, 38, and 71, Pub. L. 

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

2797); 22 U.S.C. 2794; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; Pub. 

L. 105–261, 112 Stat. 1920; Pub. L. 111–266; 

Section 1261, Pub. L. 112–239; E.O. 13637, 

78 FR 16129. 

■ 2. Section 120.9 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 120.9 Defense service. 

(a) A defense service means: 

(1) The furnishing of assistance 

(including training) using other than 

public domain information (see § 120.11 

of this subchapter) to a foreign person 

(see § 120.16 of this subchapter), 

whether in the United States or abroad, 

in the design, development, 

engineering, manufacture, production, 

assembly, testing, intermediate- or 

depot-level maintenance (see § 120.38 of 

this subchapter), modification, 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules 31449 

demilitarization, destruction, or 

processing of defense articles (see 

§ 120.6 of this subchapter); 

(2) The furnishing of assistance to a 

foreign person, whether in the United 

States or abroad, for the integration of 

any item controlled on the U.S. 

Munitions List (USML) (see § 121.1 of 

this subchapter) or items subject to the 

EAR (see § 120.42 of this subchapter) 

into an end item (see § 121.8(a) of this 

subchapter) or component (see 

§ 121.8(b) of this subchapter) that is 

controlled as a defense article on the 

USML, regardless of the origin; 

Note to paragraph (a)(2): ‘‘Integration’’ 

means the systems engineering design 

process of uniting two or more items in order 

to form, coordinate, or blend into a 

functioning or unified whole, including 

introduction of software to enable proper 

operation of the article. This includes 

determining where to integrate an item (e.g., 

integration of a civil engine into a destroyer 

which requires changes or modifications to 

the destroyer in order for the civil engine to 

operate properly; not plug and play). 

‘‘Integration’’ is distinct from ‘‘installation,’’ 

which means the act of putting something in 

its place and does not require changes or 

modifications to the item in which it is being 

installed (e.g., installing a dashboard radio 

into a military vehicle where no changes or 

modifications to the vehicle are required). 

(3) The furnishing of assistance 

(including training), to a foreign person 

regardless of whether technical data (see 

§ 120.10 of this subchapter) is 

transferred, including formal or 

informal instruction in the United States 

or abroad by any means, in the tactical 

employment (not basic operation) of a 

defense article; 

(4) Conducting direct combat 

operations for a foreign person (see 

paragraph (b)(5) of this section); 

(5) The furnishing of assistance 

(including training) in the integration of 

a satellite or spacecraft to a launch 

vehicle, including both planning and 

onsite support, regardless of the 

jurisdiction of, the ownership of, or the 

origin of the satellite or spacecraft, or 

whether technical data is used; or 

(6) The furnishing of assistance 

(including training) in the launch failure 

analysis of a satellite, spacecraft, or 

launch vehicle, regardless of the 

jurisdiction of, the ownership of, or the 

origin of the satellite, spacecraft, or 

launch vehicle, or whether technical 

data is used. 

(b) The following is not a defense 

service: 

(1) Training in organizational-level 

(basic-level) maintenance (see § 120.38 

of this subchapter) of a defense article 

lawfully approved for export from the 

United States or subsequently approved 

for reexport or retransfer to an end-user, 

unless otherwise proscribed in § 126.1 

of this subchapter or otherwise 

ineligible (see § 126.7(a)(4) and (6) of 

this subchapter); 

(2) Mere employment of a natural U.S. 

person by a foreign person; 

(3) Servicing of an item subject to the 

EAR (see § 120.42 of this subchapter) 

that has been integrated or installed into 

a defense article; 

(4) Providing law enforcement, 

physical security, or personal protective 

services (including training and advice) 

to or for a foreign person (see § 120.16 

of this subchapter) using only public 

domain information; or 

(5) Services performed, to include 

direct combat operations, as a member 

of the regular military forces of a foreign 

nation by a U.S. person who has been 

drafted into such forces. 

PART 121—THE UNITED STATES 

MUNITIONS LIST 

■ 3. 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); 22 U.S.C. 2651a; Pub. L. 105–261, 112 

Stat. 1920; Section 1261, Pub. L. 112–239; 

E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129. 

■ 4. Section 121.1 is amended by 

revising U.S. Munitions List Category 

XV to read as follows: 

§ 121.1 General. The United States 

Munitions List. 

* * * * * 

Category XV—Spacecraft Systems and 

Related Articles 

(a) Spacecraft, including satellites, 

manned or unmanned space vehicles, 

whether designated developmental, 

experimental, research or scientific, or 

having a commercial, civil, or military 

end-use, that: 

*(1) Are specially designed to mitigate 

effects (e.g., scintillation) of or for 

detection of a nuclear detonation; 

*(2) Track ground, airborne, missile, 

or space objects using imaging, infrared, 

radar, or laser systems; 

*(3) Conduct signals or measurement 

and signatures intelligence; 

(4) Provide space-based logistics, 

assembly or servicing of any spacecraft 

(e.g., refueling); 

*(5) Are anti-satellite or antispacecraft (e.g., kinetic, RF, laser, 

charged particle); 

*(6) Have space-to-ground weapons 

systems (e.g., kinetic or directed 

energy); 

*(7) Have any of the following electrooptical remote sensing capabilities or 

characteristics: 

(i) Electro-optical visible and near 

infrared (VNIR) (i.e., 400nm to 1,000nm) 

or infrared (i.e., greater than 1,000nm to 

30,000nm) with less than 40 spectral 

bands having an aperture greater than 

0.35 meters; 

(ii) Electro-optical hyperspectral with 

40 spectral bands or more in the VNIR, 

short-wavelength infrared (SWIR) (i.e., 

greater than 1,000nm to 2,500nm) or any 

combination of the aforementioned and 

having a Ground Sample Distance (GSD) 

less than 30 meters; 

(iii) Electro-optical hyperspectral with 

40 spectral bands or more in the midwavelength infrared (MWIR) (i.e., 

greater than 2,500nm to 5,500nm) 

having a narrow spectral bandwidth of 

Dl less than or equal to 20nm full width 

at half maximum (FWHM) or having a 

wide spectral bandwidth with Dl greater 

than 20nm FWHM and a GSD less than 

200 meters; or 

(iv) Electro-optical hyperspectral with 

40 spectral bands or more in the longwavelength infrared (LWIR) (i.e., greater 

than 5,500nm to 30,000nm) having a 

narrow spectral bandwidth of Dl less 

than or equal to 50nm FWHM or having 

a wide spectral bandwidth with Dl 

greater than 50nm FWHM and a GSD 

less than 500 meters; 

Note 1 to paragraph (a)(7): Ground Sample 

Distance (GSD) is measured from a 

spacecraft’s nadir (i.e., local vertical) 

position. 

Note 2 to paragraph (a)(7): Optical remote 

sensing spacecraft or satellite spectral 

bandwidth is the smallest difference in 

wavelength (i.e., Dl) that can be 

distinguished at full width at half maximum 

(FWHM) of wavelength l. 

Note 3 to paragraph (a)(7): An optical 

satellite or spacecraft is not SME if non-earth 

pointing. 

*(8) Have radar remote sensing 

capabilities or characteristics (e.g., 

active electronically scanned array 

(AESA), synthetic aperture radar (SAR), 

inverse synthetic aperture radar (ISAR), 

ultra-wideband SAR) except those 

having a center frequency equal to or 

greater than 1 GHz but less than or equal 

to 10 GHz AND having a bandwidth less 

than 300 MHz; 

(9) Provide Positioning, Navigation, 

and Timing (PNT); 

Note to paragraph (a)(9): This paragraph 

does not control a satellite or spacecraft that 

provides only a differential correction 

broadcast for the purposes of positioning, 

navigation, or timing. 

*(10) Are specially designed to be 

used in a constellation or formation that 

when operated together, in essence or 

effect, form a virtual satellite (e.g., 

functioning as if one satellite) with the 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31450 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

characteristics of other items in 

paragraph (a); 

(11) Are man-rated sub-orbital, 

orbital, lunar, interplanetary or habitat; 

or 

*(12) Are classified, contain classified 

software or hardware, are manufactured 

using classified production data, or are 

being developed using classified 

information (e.g., having classified 

requirements, specifications, functions, 

or operational characteristics or include 

classified cryptographic items 

controlled under USML Category XIII of 

this subchapter). ‘‘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 or international 

organization. 

Note to paragraph (a): Spacecraft that are 

not identified in this paragraph are subject to 

the EAR. 

(b) Ground control systems and 

training simulators specially designed 

for telemetry, tracking, and control of 

spacecraft in paragraph (a) of this 

category. 

Note to paragraph (b): Parts, components, 

accessories, attachments, equipment, or 

systems that are common to satellite ground 

systems or simulators used to control nonUSML satellites are subject to the EAR. 

(c) Global Positioning System (GPS) 

receiving equipment specifically 

designed, modified, or configured for 

military use; or GPS receiving 

equipment with any of the following 

characteristics: 

(1) Designed for encryption or 

decryption (e.g., Y-Code) of GPS precise 

positioning service (PPS) signals; 

(2) Designed for producing navigation 

results above 60,000 feet altitude and at 

1,000 knots velocity or greater; 

(3) Specifically designed or modified 

for use with a null steering antenna or 

including a null steering antenna 

designed to reduce or avoid jamming 

signals; 

(4) Designed or modified for use with 

unmanned air vehicle systems capable 

of delivering at least a 500 kg ‘‘payload’’ 

to a ‘‘range’’ of at least 300 km. 

Note 1 to paragraph (c)(4): ‘‘Payload’’ is 

the total mass that can be carried or delivered 

by the specified rocket, space launch vehicle, 

missile, drone, or unmanned aerial vehicle 

that is not used to maintain flight. ‘‘Range’’ 

is the maximum distance that the specified 

aircraft system is capable of traveling in the 

mode of stable flight as measured by the 

projection of its trajectory over the surface of 

the Earth. The maximum capability based on 

the design characteristics of the system, 

when fully loaded with fuel or propellant, 

will be taken into consideration in 

determining ‘‘range.’’ The ‘‘range’’ for aircraft 

systems will be determined independently of 

any external factors such as operational 

restrictions, limitations imposed by 

telemetry, data links, or other external 

constraints. For aircraft systems, the ‘‘range’’ 

will be determined for a one-way distance 

using the most fuel-efficient flight profile 

(e.g., cruise speed and altitude), assuming 

International Civil Aviation Organization 

(ICAO) standard atmosphere with zero wind. 

Note 2 to paragraph (c)(4): GPS receivers 

designed or modified for use with military 

unmanned air vehicle systems with less 

capability are considered to be specifically 

designed, modified, or configured for 

military use and therefore covered under this 

paragraph (c)(4). Any GPS equipment not 

meeting this definition is subject to the 

jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce 

(DOC). Manufacturers or exporters of 

equipment under DOC jurisdiction are 

advised that the U.S. Government does not 

assure the availability of the GPS P-Code for 

civil navigation. It is the policy of the 

Department of Defense (DOD) that GPS 

receivers using P-Code without clarification 

as to whether or not those receivers were 

designed or modified to use Y-Code will be 

presumed to be Y-Code capable and covered 

under this paragraph. The DOD policy 

further requires that a notice be attached to 

all P-Code receivers presented for export. The 

notice must state the following: ‘‘ADVISORY 

NOTICE: This receiver uses the GPS P-Code 

signal, which, by U.S. policy, may be 

switched off without notice.’’ 

(d) [Reserved] 

(e) Spacecraft parts, components, 

accessories, attachments, equipment, or 

systems, as follows: 

(1) Antennas as follows: 

(i) Having a diameter greater than 25 

meters; 

(ii) Are actively scanned; 

(iii) Are adaptive beam forming; or 

(iv) Are for interferometric radar; 

(2) Space-qualified optics (i.e., lens or 

mirror), including optical coating, 

having active properties (e.g., adaptive 

or deformable), or having a largest 

lateral dimension greater than 0.35 

meters; 

(3) ‘‘Space-qualified’’ focal plane 

arrays (FPA) having a peak response in 

the wavelength range exceeding 900nm 

and readout integrated circuit (ROIC) 

specially designed therefor; 

(4) ‘‘Space-qualified’’ mechanical 

cryocooler, active cold finger, and 

associated control electronics specially 

designed therefor; 

(5) ‘‘Space-qualified’’ active vibration 

suppression, including isolation and 

dampening, and associated control 

electronics therefor; 

(6) Optical bench assemblies for items 

in paragraph (a) of this category and the 

multi-aperture assemblies; fast steering 

mirrors (i.e., greater than 300 rad/sec2

acceleration), pushbroom assemblies, 

flexure mounts, beam splitters, mirror 

folds, focus or channeling mechanisms, 

alignment mechanisms, inertial 

reference unit (IRU), black body 

cavities, baffles and covers, and control 

electronics specially designed therefor; 

(7) Non-communications spacequalified directed energy (e.g., lasers or 

RF) systems and specially designed for 

a spacecraft in paragraph (a) of this 

category; 

(8) Space-based kinetic systems or 

charged particle energy systems, 

including power conditioning and 

beam-handling/switching, propagation, 

tracking, or pointing equipment, and 

specially designed parts and 

components therefor; 

(9) ‘‘Space-qualified’’ cesium, 

rubidium, hydrogen maser, or quantum 

(e.g., based upon Al, Hg, Yb, Sr, Be Ions) 

atomic clocks, and specially designed 

parts and components therefor; 

(10) Attitude determination and 

control systems, and specially designed 

parts and components therefor, that 

provide earth location accuracy without 

using Ground Location Points better 

than or equal to: 

(i) 5 meters from low earth orbit 

(LEO); 

(ii) 30 meters from medium earth orbit 

(MEO); 

(iii) 150 meters from geosynchronous 

orbit (GEO); or 

(iv) 225 meters from high earth orbit 

(HEO); 

(11) Space-based nuclear thermionic 

or non-nuclear thermionic converters or 

generators, and specially designed parts 

and components therefor; 

(12) Thrusters (e.g., rocket engines) 

that provide for orbit adjustment greater 

than 150 lbf (i.e., 667.23 N) vacuum 

thrust; 

(13) Control moment gyroscope; 

(14) ‘‘Space-qualified’’ monolithic 

microwave integrated circuits (MMIC) 

that combine transmit and receive (T/R) 

functions on a single die as follows: 

(i) Having a power amplifier with 

maximum saturated peak output power 

(in watts), Psat, greater than 200 divided 

by the maximum operating frequency 

(in GHz) squared [Psat >200 W*GHz2/ 

fGHz2]; or 

(ii) Having a common path (e.g., phase 

shifter-digital attenuator) circuit with 

greater than 3 bits phase shifting at 

operating frequencies 10 GHz or below, 

or greater than 4 bits phase shifting at 

operating frequencies above 10 GHz; 

(15) ‘‘Space-qualified’’ oscillator for 

radar in paragraph (a) of this category 

with phase noise less than -120 dBc/Hz 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2013 / Proposed Rules 31451 

+ (20 log10(RF) (in GHz)) measured at 2 

KHz*RF (in GHz) from carrier; 

(16) ‘‘Space-qualified’’ star tracker or 

star sensor with angular accuracy less 

than or equal to 1 arcsec in all three 

axes and a tracking rate equal to or 

greater than 3.0 deg/sec, and specially 

designed parts and components therefor 

(MT); 

*(17) Secondary or hosted payload, 

and specially designed parts and 

components therefor, that perform any 

of the functions described in paragraph 

(a) of this category; 

*(18) Department of Defense-funded 

secondary or hosted payload, and 

specially designed parts and 

components therefor; or 

(19) Spacecraft re-entry vehicles, and 

specially designed parts and 

components therefor, as follows (MT if 

usable in rockets, SLVs, missiles, 

drones, or UAVs capable of delivering a 

‘‘payload’’ of at least 500 kg to a ‘‘range’’ 

of at least 300 km): 

(i) Heat shields, and components 

therefore, fabricated of ceramic or 

ablative materials; 

(ii) Heat sinks and components 

therefore, fabricated of light-weight, 

high heat capacity materials; or 

(iii) Electronic equipment specially 

designed for spacecraft re-entry 

vehicles; 

Note to paragraph (e)(19): For definition of 

‘‘range’’ as it pertains to aircraft systems, see 

note to paragraph (c)(4) of this category. For 

definition of ‘‘range’’ as it pertains to rocket 

systems, see note to paragraph (f)(6) of USML 

Category VI. 

*(20) Any part, component, accessory, 

attachment, equipment, or system that 

(i) is classified; 

(ii) Contains classified software; or 

(iii) 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 or international 

organization. 

Note 1 to paragraph (e): Parts, 

components, accessories, and attachments 

specially designed for spacecraft enumerated 

in this category but not listed in paragraph 

(e) are subject to the EAR. 

Note 2 to paragraph (e): For the purposes 

of this paragraph, an article is ‘‘spacequalified’’ if it is designed, manufactured, or 

qualified through successful testing, for 

operation at altitudes greater than 100 km 

above the surface of the Earth. Notes: (1) A 

determination that a specific article (or 

commodity) (e.g., by product serial number) 

is ‘‘space-qualified’’ by virtue of testing does 

not mean that other articles in the same 

production run or model series are ‘‘spacequalified’’ if not individually tested. (2) 

‘‘Article’’ is synonymous with ‘‘commodity,’’ 

as defined in EAR § 772.1. (3) A specific 

article not designed or manufactured for use 

at altitudes greater than 100 km above the 

surface of the Earth is not ‘‘space-qualified’’ 

before it is successfully tested. 

(f) Technical data (see § 120.10 of this 

subchapter) and defense services (see 

§ 120.9 of this subchapter) directly 

related to the defense articles 

enumerated in paragraphs (a) through 

(e) of this category and classified 

technical data directly related to items 

controlled in ECCNs 9A515, 9B515, 

9C515, and 9D515 and defense services 

using the classified technical data. (See 

§ 125.4 of this subchapter for 

exemptions.) (MT for technical data and 

defense services related to articles 

designated as such.) 

(g)–(w) [Reserved] 

(x) Commodities, software, and 

technical data subject to the EAR (see 

§ 120.42 of this subchapter) used in or 

with defense articles controlled in this 

category. 

Note to paragraph (x): Use of this 

paragraph is limited to license applications 

for defense articles controlled in this category 

where the purchase documentation includes 

commodities, software, or technical data 

subject to the EAR (see § 123.1(b) of this 

subchapter). 

* * * * * 

PART 124—AGREEMENTS, OFFSHORE PROCUREMENT, AND OTHER 

DEFENSE SERVICES 

■ 5. The authority citation for part 124 

is revised it to read as follows: 

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

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

2797); 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 2776; Pub. 

L. 105–261; Pub. L. 111–266; Section 1261, 

Pub. L. 112–239; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129. 

■ 6. In § 124.1, paragraph (a) is revised 

to read as follows: 

§ 124.1 Manufacturing license agreements 

and technical assistance agreements. 

(a) Approval. The approval of the 

Directorate of Defense Trade Controls 

must be obtained before the defense 

services described in § 120.9(a) of this 

subchapter may be furnished. In order 

to obtain such approval, the U.S. person 

must submit a proposed agreement to 

the Directorate of Defense Trade 

Controls. Such agreements are generally 

characterized as manufacturing license 

agreements, technical assistance 

agreements, distribution agreements, or 

off-shore procurement agreements, and 

may not enter into force without the 

prior written approval of the Directorate 

of Defense Trade Controls. Once 

approved, the defense services 

described in the agreements may 

generally be provided without further 

licensing in accordance with §§ 124.3 

and 125.4(b)(2) of this subchapter. In 

exceptional cases, the Directorate of 

Defense Trade Controls, upon written 

request, will consider approving the 

provision of defense services described 

in § 120.9(a) of this subchapter by 

granting a license under part 125 of this 

subchapter. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Section 124.2 is amended by 

revising the section header, removing 

and reserving paragraphs (a) and (b), 

and revising paragraph (c) introductory 

text to read as follows: 

§ 124.2 Exemptions for training and 

related technical data. 

* * * * * 

(c) For NATO countries, Australia, 

Japan, and Sweden, in addition to the 

basic maintenance information 

exemption in § 125.4(b)(5) of this 

subchapter, no technical assistance 

agreement is required for maintenance 

training or the performance of 

maintenance, including the export of 

supporting technical data, when the 

following criteria can be met: 

* * * * * 

Dated: May 14, 2013. 

Rose E. Gottemoeller, 

Acting Under Secretary, Arms Control and 

International Security, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2013–11985 Filed 5–23–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–25–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

24 CFR Part 5 

[Docket No. FR–5586–P–01] 

RIN 2501–AD60 

Pet Ownership for the Elderly or 

Persons With Disabilities in Multifamily 

Rental Housing; Accumulation of 

Deposits for Costs Attributable to Pets 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HUD. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: HUD regulations governing 

multifamily rental housing for the 

elderly or persons with disabilities 

allow for the residents of such housing 

to own common household pets, subject 

to the residents’ paying a refundable pet 

deposit. Currently, the regulations 

require that owners of HUD-assisted 

multifamily rental housing for the 

elderly or persons with disabilities 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS