Source: https://www.regulations.gov/?_escaped_fragment_=documentDetail;D=DOS_FRDOC_0001-2421
Timestamp: 2016-09-28 10:21:46
Document Index: 158439516

Matched Legal Cases: ['arts 120', 'arts 730', 'art 774', 'art 447', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009124', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009124', '§\u2009124', '§\u2009124', '§\u2009124', 'arts 120', 'arts 120', 'art 120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009120', '§\u2009126', '§\u2009126', 'art 121', '§\u2009772', '§\u2009123', 'art 124', '§\u2009124', '§\u2009124', 'arts 120']

Skip Navigation HomeHelpResourcesContact Us Advanced Search Start of Main Content International Traffic in Arms: Revision of U.S. Munitions List Category XV and Definition of Defense Service This Proposed Rule document was issued by the U.S. Department of State (DOS) For related information, Open Docket Folder Show agency attachment(s) DEPARTMENT OF STATE
AgencyDepartment of State.
SummaryAs 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.
DatesThe Department of State will accept comments on this proposed rule until July 8, 2013.
AddressesInterested parties may submit comments within 45 days of the date of publication by one of the following methods: Email: with the subject line, “ITAR Amendment—USML Category XV and Defense Services.”
Internet: At , 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 . Parties who wish to comment anonymously may do so by submitting their comments via , leaving the fields that would identify the commenter blank and including no identifying information in the comment itself. Comments submitted via are immediately available for public inspection.
For Further Information ContactMs. Candace M.J. Goforth, Director, Office of Defense Trade Controls Policy, U.S. Department of State, telephone (202) 663-2792, or email . ATTN: Regulatory Change, USML Category XV and Defense Services. The Department of State's full retrospective plan can be accessed at .
Supplementary InformationThe 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 XVPublic 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.
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 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 ServicesA 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.
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 ServicesTwo 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.”
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 ServiceFive 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.
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 “fundamental research,” as it is defined in ITAR § 120.11, is not controlled by the ITAR.
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 ParagraphTwo 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.
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 organizational- level maintenance is specifically 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 CommentsTwo 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 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 ChangesThe 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 NoticesAdministrative Procedure ActThe 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 ActSince 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 1995This 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 1996This 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 13132This 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 activities do not apply to this proposed rulemaking.Executive Orders 12866 and 13563Executive 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).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.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 ActFollowing 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:
List of Subjects22 CFR Parts 120 and 121
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
AuthoritySections 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.
§ 120.9 Defense service.
(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, demilitarization, destruction, or processing of defense articles (see § 120.6 of this subchapter);
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).
(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);
(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
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.
* * * * *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:
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., Δλ) that can be distinguished at full width at half maximum (FWHM) of wavelength λ.
Note 3 to Paragraph a 7 An optical satellite or spacecraft is not SME if non-earth pointing.
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.
Note to Paragraph A Spacecraft that are not identified in this paragraph are subject to the EAR.
Note to Paragraph B Parts, components, accessories, attachments, equipment, or systems that are common to satellite ground systems or simulators used to control non-USML satellites are subject to the EAR.
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.”
(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/sec 2 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;
(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*GHz 2/fGHz 2]; or
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.
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 “space-qualified” 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 “space-qualified” 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.
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 Off Shore Procurement and Other Defense Services
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.
§ 124.1 Manufacturing license agreements and technical assistance agreements.
§ 124.2 Exemptions for training and related technical data.
[FR Doc. 2013-11985 Filed 5-23-13; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4710-25-P
Attachments View All (0) View document: No documents available. Attachments View All (0) Comment Now! Comment Period Closed Jul 8 2013, at 11:59 PM ET ID: DOS-2013-0015-0001 Tracking Number: View original printed format: Document Information Date Posted: May 24, 2013RIN: 1400-AD33CFR: 22 CFR Parts 120, 121, and 124Federal Register Number: 2013-11985 Show More Details Submitter Information Comments27 Comments Received* Please find the attached comments from the University of Oklahoma. View Comment This rulemaking might inappropriately place commercial human spaceflight vehicles into the Department of Defense Munitions List. We ask that the Department of... View Comment Putting suborbital and orbital people carrying craft on the munitions list will have the same affect that putting communications satellites on the list did... View Comment Docket Information This document is contained in DOS-2013-0015 Related Dockets: NoneRelated RINs: NoneRelated Documents: None Related Comments: View all * This count refers to the total comment/submissions received on this document, as of 11:59 PM yesterday. Note: Agencies review all submissions, however some agencies may choose to redact, or withhold, certain submissions (or portions thereof) such as those containing private or proprietary information, inappropriate language, or duplicate/near duplicate examples of a mass-mail campaign. This can result in discrepancies between this count and those displayed when conducting searches on the Public Submission document type. For specific information about an agency’s public submission policy, refer to its website or the Federal Register document. Document text and images courtesy of the Federal Register Home Search Advanced Search Browse By Category Learn About Us eRulemaking Program Media Toolkit Agencies Awards & Recognition Enhancements & Fixes Resources Site Data Regulatory Agenda Agency Reports Required by Statute API Overview Developers Help How to use Regulations.gov FAQs Glossary Connect With Contact Us Privacy and Security Notice User Notice Accessibility Statement Partner Sites We the People Federal Register Reginfo Congress.gov USA.gov E-Gov Opengov Participate Today!