68694 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

15 In particular, the written request for 

confidential treatment that accompanies the 

comment must include the factual and legal basis 

for the request and must identify the specific 

portions of the comment to be withheld from the 

public record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). 

in the United States and, in the case of 

continuing guarantees, signed under the 

penalty of perjury? 

(a) Do retailers who obtain such 

guarantees obtain them for all, most, 

some, or few of the textile products they 

sell? 

(b) Why do retailers decline to obtain 

such guarantees? 

(c) Have changes in technology, such 

as the use of electronic documents, 

affected the ability of retailers to obtain 

valid separate or continuing guarantees? 

If so, why and how? If not, why not? 

(d) Provide any evidence concerning 

the extent to which retailers obtain such 

guarantees and the reasons why retailers 

decline to obtain them. 

(23) What proportion of textile 

products sold in the U.S. are imported? 

What proportion of imported products 

are imported directly by retailers? What 

proportion are imported by businesses 

located in the United States for resale or 

distribution to retailers? How have these 

proportions changed since the Textile 

Act and Rules became effective? 

(a) Have changes in the extent or 

manner in which textile products are 

imported affected the ability of retailers 

to obtain valid separate or continuing 

guarantees? If so, does the ability of 

retailers to obtain such guarantees differ 

depending on whether the textile 

products are imported directly by 

retailers versus imported by businesses 

for resale or distribution to retailers? 

(b) Provide any evidence concerning 

the costs of obtaining valid guarantees 

for imported textile products and the 

impact of such costs on the ability of 

retailers to obtain valid guarantees. 

(c) Do changes in the extent or 

manner in which textile products are 

imported indicate that the Textile Act 

and Rules should be modified? If so, 

why and how? If not, why not? 

You can file a comment online or on 

paper. For the Commission to consider 

your comment, we must receive it on or 

before January 3, 2012. Write ‘‘Textile 

Rules, 16 CFR Part 303, Project No. 

P948404’’ on your comment. Your 

comment—including your name and 

your state—will be placed on the public 

record of this proceeding, including, to 

the extent practicable, on the public 

Commission Web site, at http:// 

www.ftc.gov/os/publiccomments.shtm. 

As a matter of discretion, the 

Commission tries to remove individuals’ 

home contact information from 

comments before placing them on the 

Commission Web site. Because your 

comment will be made public, you are 

solely responsible for making sure that 

your comment doesn’t include any 

sensitive personal information, such as 

anyone’s Social Security number, date 

of birth, driver’s license number or other 

state identification number or foreign 

country equivalent, passport number, 

financial account number, or credit or 

debit card number. You are also solely 

responsible for making sure that your 

comment doesn’t include any sensitive 

health information, like medical records 

or other individually-identifiable health 

information. In addition, don’t include 

any ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or 

financial information which is obtained 

from any person and which is privileged 

or confidential,’’ as provided in Section 

6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and 

FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2). 

In particular, don’t include 

competitively-sensitive information 

such as costs, sales statistics, 

inventories, formulas, patterns, devices, 

manufacturing processes, or customer 

names. 

If you want the Commission to give 

your comment confidential treatment, 

you must file it in paper form, with a 

request for confidential treatment, and 

you must follow the procedure 

explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 

4.9(c).15 Your comment will be kept 

confidential only if the FTC General 

Counsel, in his or her sole discretion, 

grants your request in accordance with 

the law and the public interest. 

Postal mail addressed to the 

Commission is subject to delay due to 

heightened security screening. As a 

result, we encourage you to submit your 

comments online. To make sure that the 

Commission considers your online 

comment, you must file it at https:// 

ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ 

textilerulesanpr by following the 

instructions on the web-based form. If 

this Notice appears at http:// 

www.regulations.gov/#!home, you also 

may file a comment through that Web 

site. 

If you file your comment on paper, 

write ‘‘Textile Rules, 16 CFR Part 303, 

Project No. P948404’’ on your comment 

and on the envelope and mail or deliver 

it to the following address: Federal 

Trade Commission, Office of the 

Secretary, Room H–113 (Annex G), 600 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20580. If possible, submit your 

paper comment to the Commission by 

courier or overnight service. 

Visit the Commission Web site at 

http://www.ftc.gov to read this Notice 

and the news release describing it. The 

FTC Act and other laws that the 

Commission administers permit the 

collection of public comments to 

consider and use in this proceeding as 

appropriate. The Commission will 

consider all timely and responsive 

public comments that it receives on or 

before January 3, 2012. You can find 

more information, including routine 

uses permitted by the Privacy Act, in 

the Commission’s privacy policy, at 

http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm. 

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 303 

Advertising, Labeling, Recordkeeping, 

Textile fiber products. 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 70 et seq. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Donald S. Clark, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–28631 Filed 11–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

22 CFR Part 121 

RIN 1400–AC96 

[Public Notice: [ 7673]] 

Amendment to the International Traffic 

in Arms Regulations: Revision of U.S. 

Munitions List Category VIII 

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 

VIII (aircraft and related articles) of the 

U.S. Munitions List (USML) to describe 

more precisely the military aircraft and 

related defense articles warranting 

control on the USML. 

DATES: The Department of State will 

accept comments on this proposed rule 

until December 22, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may 

submit comments within 45 days of the 

date of publication by one of the 

following methods: 

• E-mail: 

DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov with the 

subject line, ‘‘ITAR Amendments— 

Category VIII. 

• Internet: At http:// 

www.regulations.gov, search for this 

notice by using this rule’s RIN (1400– 

AC96). 

Comments received after that date will 

be considered if feasible, but 

consideration cannot be assured. All 

comments (including any personally 

identifying information or information 

for which a claim of confidentiality is 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 68695 

asserted in those comments or their 

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 http:// 

www.pmddtc.state.gov. Parties who 

wish to comment anonymously may do 

so by submitting their comments via 

http://www.regulations.gov, leaving the 

fields that would identify the 

commenter blank and including no 

identifying information in the comment 

itself. Comments submitted via http:// 

www.regulations.gov are immediately 

available for public inspection. 

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 

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 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. 

Revision of Category VIII 

This proposed rule revises USML 

Category VIII, covering aircraft and 

related articles, to establish a clearer 

line between the USML and the CCL 

regarding controls over military aircraft 

and related articles. The proposed 

revision narrows the types of aircraft 

and related items controlled on the 

USML to only those that warrant control 

under the stringent requirements of the 

Arms Export Control Act. Changes 

include moving similar articles 

currently controlled in multiple 

categories into a single category or 

subcategory (e.g., inertial navigations 

systems for aircraft formerly controlled 

under Category VIII(e) will likely be 

moved to controls either in Category XII 

or the CCL in future proposed rules and, 

as noted in proposed Category VIII(b), 

gas turbine engines for articles 

controlled in this category will likely be 

included in proposed Category XIX, 

which will be the subject of a separate 

notice). Other former Category VIII 

subcategories have been ‘‘reserved’’ 

because the Department is proposing to 

change the jurisdictional status of the 

items covered therein so that they 

would become subject to the EAR, most 

likely under ECCN 9A610 or 9A619. 

This proposed rule also revises 

§ 121.3 to more clearly define ‘‘aircraft’’ 

for purposes of the revised USML 

Category VIII. 

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 specifically 

designed or modified for a defense 

article, regardless of their significance to 

maintaining a military advantage for the 

United States. Rather, it contains, with 

one principal exception, a positive list 

of specific types of parts, components, 

accessories, and attachments that 

continue to warrant control on the 

USML. The exception pertains to parts, 

components, accessories, and 

attachments ‘‘specially designed’’ for 

the following U.S.-origin aircraft that 

have low observable features or 

characteristics: B–1B, B–2, F–15SE, 

F/A18E/F/G, F–22, F–35 (and variants 

thereof), F–117, or United States 

Government technology demonstrators. 

All other parts, components, 

accessories, and attachments ‘‘specially 

designed’’ for a military aircraft and 

other articles now subject to USML 

Category VIII would become subject to 

the new 600 series controls in Category 

9 of 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 

change 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 

definitions have been proposed 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 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68696 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

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. For the purpose of evaluation of 

this proposed rule, reviewers should use 

the definition provided in the December 

2010 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 Munitions 

List Category 10 (ML 10). To that end, 

the public is asked to identify any 

potential lack of coverage brought about 

by the proposed rules for Category VIII 

contained in this FRN and the new 

Category 9 ECCNs published separately 

by the Department of Commerce when 

reviewed together. 

(2) While many of the aircraft 

controlled in paragraph (a) of Category 

VIII are defined based on objective 

parameters, some are not. For example, 

unmanned aerial vehicles controlled 

under (a)(6) are simply described as 

‘‘military.’’ This is to differentiate those 

unmanned aerial vehicles currently 

controlled under Category VIII from 

those currently controlled, and will 

remain so controlled, under ECCN 

9A012. The public is asked to provide 

input on regulatory language that would 

control those with an objective 

description that precludes removal from 

the USML and does not inadvertently 

designate as ‘‘defense articles’’ aircraft 

currently subject to the EAR. 

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. 

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. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 68697 

List of Subjects in Parts 120 and 121 

Arms and munitions, Exports. 

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth 

above, Title 22, Chapter I, Subchapter 

M, parts 120 and 121 are proposed to be 

amended as follows: 

PART 120—PURPOSE AND 

DEFINITIONS 

1. Section Contents is revised to read 

as follows: 

* * * * * 

120.33–120.36 [Reserved] 

120.37 Foreign ownership and foreign 

control. 

120.38 [Reserved] 

120.39 Regular employee. 

120.40 [Reserved] 

PART 121—THE UNITED STATES 

MUNITIONS LIST 

2. 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. 

3. Section 121.1 is amended by 

revising U.S. Munitions List Category 

VIII to read as follows: 

§ 121.1 General. The United States 

Munitions List. 

* * * * * 

VIII—Aircraft and Related Articles 

(a) Aircraft (see § 121.3 of this 

subchapter) as follows: 

*(1) Bombers; 

*(2) Fighters, fighter bombers, and 

fixed-wing attack aircraft; 

*(3) Jet-powered trainers used to train 

pilots for fighter, attack, or bomber 

aircraft; 

*(4) Attack helicopters; 

*(5) Unarmed military unmanned 

aerial vehicles (UAVs); 

*(6) Armed unmanned aerial vehicles; 

*(7) Military intelligence, 

surveillance, and reconnaissance 

aircraft; 

*(8) Electronic warfare, airborne 

warning and control aircraft; 

(9) Air refueling aircraft and Strategic 

airlift aircraft; 

(10) Target drones; 

(11) Aircraft equipped with any 

mission systems controlled under this 

subchapter; or 

(12) Aircraft capable of being refueled 

in flight including hover-in-flight 

refueling (HIFR). 

(b) [Reserved—for items formerly 

controlled under this subcategory see 

Category XIX and an ECCN to be 

determined] 

(c) [Reserved] 

(d) Launching and recovery 

equipment ‘‘specially designed’’ for 

defense articles described in paragraph 

(a) of this category. 

(e) [Reserved] 

(f) Developmental aircraft and 

‘‘specially designed’’ parts, components, 

accessories, and attachments therefor 

developed under a contract with the 

U.S. Department of Defense. 

(g) [Reserved] 

(h) Aircraft components, parts, 

accessories, attachments, and associated 

equipment as follows: 

(1) Components, parts, accessories, 

attachments, and equipment ‘‘specially 

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

aircraft: B–1B, B–2, F–15SE, F/A18E/F/ 

G, F–22, F–35 (and variants thereof), 

F–117, or United States Government 

technology demonstrators. Components, 

parts, accessories, attachments, and 

equipment of the F–15SE, and F/A–18 

E/F/G that are common to earlier 

models of these aircraft, unless listed 

below, are subject to the jurisdiction of 

the Export Administration Regulations; 

(2) Face gear gearboxes, split-torque 

gearboxes, variable speed gearboxes, 

synchronization shafts, interconnecting 

drive shafts, and gearboxes with internal 

pitch line velocities exceeding 15,000 

feet per minute and parts and 

components ‘‘specially designed’’ 

therefor; 

(3) Tail boom, stabilator and 

automatic rotor blade folding systems 

and parts and components ‘‘specially 

designed’’ therefor; 

(4) Aircraft wing folding systems and 

parts and components ‘‘specially 

designed’’ therefor; 

(5) Tail hooks and arresting gear and 

parts and components ‘‘specially 

designed’’ therefor; 

(6) Bomb racks, missile launchers, 

missile rails, weapon pylons, pylon-tolauncher adapters, UAV launching 

systems, and external stores support 

systems and parts and components 

‘‘specially designed’’ therefor; 

(7) Damage/failure-adaptive flight 

control systems; 

(8) Threat-adaptive autonomous flight 

control systems; 

(9) Non-surface-based flight control 

systems and effectors, e.g., thrust 

vectoring from gas ports other than main 

engine thrust vector, ‘‘specially 

designed’’ for aircraft; 

(10) Radar altimeters with output 

power management or signal 

modulation (i.e., frequency hopping, 

chirping, direct sequence-spectrum 

spreading) LPI (low probability of 

intercept) capabilities; 

(11) Air-to-air refueling systems and 

hover-in-flight refueling (HIFR) systems 

and parts and components ‘‘specially 

designed’’ therefor; 

(12) UAV flight control systems and 

vehicle management systems with 

swarming capability, i.e., UAVs interact 

with each other to avoid collisions and 

stay together, or, if weaponized, 

coordinate targeting; 

(13) Aircraft lithium-ion batteries that 

provide 28 VDC or 270 VDC; 

(14) Lift fans, clutches, and roll posts 

for short take-off, vertical landing 

(STOVL) aircraft and parts and 

components ‘‘specially designed’’ for 

such lift fans and roll posts; 

(15) Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems, 

Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems 

(JHMCS), Helmet Mounted Displays, 

Display and Sight Helmets (DASH), and 

variants thereof; 

(16) Fire control computers, mission 

computers, vehicle management 

computers, integrated core processers, 

stores management systems, armaments 

control processors, aircraft-weapon 

interface units and computers (e.g., 

AGM–88 HARM Aircraft Launcher 

Interface Computer (ALIC)) ‘‘specially 

designed’’ for aircraft; 

(17) Radomes ‘‘specially designed’’ for 

operation in multiple or nonadjacent 

radar bands or designed to withstand a 

combined thermal shock greater than 

4.184 x 106 J/m2 accompanied by a peak 

overpressure of greater than 50 kPa; 

(18) Drive systems and flight control 

systems ‘‘specially designed’’ to 

function after impact of a 7.62 mm or 

larger projectile; or 

(19) 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’’ in this subcategory 

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. 

(i) Technical data (as defined in 

§ 120.10 of this subchapter) and defense 

services (as defined in § 120.9 of this 

subchapter) directly related to the 

defense articles enumerated in 

paragraphs (a) through (h) of this 

category. (See § 125.4 of this subchapter 

for exemptions.) 

* * * * * 

4. Section 121.3 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 121.3 Aircraft and related articles. 

(a) In Category VIII, except as 

described in (b) below, ‘‘aircraft’’ means 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68698 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 215 / Monday, November 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

developmental, production, or 

inventory aircraft that: 

(1) Are U.S.-origin aircraft that bear an 

original military designation of A, B, E, 

F, K, M, P, R or S; 

(2) Are foreign-origin aircraft 

‘‘specially designed’’ to provide 

functions equivalent to those of the 

aircraft listed in (a)(1) of this section; 

(3) Are armed or are ‘‘specially 

designed’’ to be used as a platform to 

deliver munitions or otherwise destroy 

targets (e.g., firing lasers, launching 

rockets, firing missiles, dropping bombs, 

or strafing); 

(4) Are strategic airlift aircraft capable 

of airlifting payloads over 35,000 lbs to 

ranges over 2,000 nm without being 

refueled in-flight into short or 

unimproved airfields; 

(5) Are capable of being refueled inflight; or 

(6) Incorporate any ‘‘mission systems’’ 

controlled under this subchapter. 

‘‘Mission systems’’ are defined as 

‘‘systems’’ (see § 121.8(g) of this 

subchapter) that are defense articles that 

perform specific military functions 

beyond airworthiness, such as by 

providing military communication, 

radar, active missile counter measures, 

target designation, surveillance, or 

sensor capabilities. 

(b) Aircraft ‘‘specially designed’’ for 

military applications that are not 

identified in (a) of this section are 

subject to the EAR under an ECCN to be 

determined, including any unarmed 

military aircraft, regardless of origin or 

designation, manufactured prior to 1956 

and unmodified since manufacture. 

Modifications made to incorporate 

safety of flight features or other FAA or 

NTSB modifications such as 

transponders and air data recorders are 

considered ‘‘unmodified’’ for the 

purposes of this subparagraph. 

Dated: October 28, 2011. 

Ellen O. Tauscher, 

Under Secretary, Arms Control and 

International Security, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2011–28502 Filed 11–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–25–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0773; FRL- 9487–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; 

Revision to Nitrogen Oxides Budget 

Trading Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the 

Commonwealth of Virginia that revises 

regulatory language that inadvertently 

ended its nitrogen oxides (NOX) budget 

at the end of the 2008 ozone season. In 

the Final Rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP submittal as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this action, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

DATES: Comments must be received in 

writing by December 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2011–0773 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. E-mail: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0773, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Quality Planning, Mailcode 

3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2011– 

0773. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main 

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marilyn Powers, (215) 814–2308, or by 

email at powers.marilyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

further information, please see the 

information provided in the direct final 

action, with the same title, that is 

located in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ 

section of this Federal Register 

publication. 

Please note that if EPA receives 

adverse comment on an amendment, 

paragraph, or section of this rule 

approving Virginia’s revision to its NOx 

Budget Trading program and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

Dated: October 25, 2011. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2011–28639 Filed 11–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS