Source: https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/2012-03-30-17-54-11/ecr-faqs
Timestamp: 2017-04-30 14:52:20
Document Index: 589565046

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 740', 'art 774', '§ 748', '§\u3000748', '§120', '§748']

ECR FAQs Transition Issues Q.1: I exported an item under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), but it transitioned to the “600 series” while located overseas after I exported it. What do I need to do to bring it back to the U.S. for servicing under the.....
Q.1: I exported an item under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), but it transitioned to the “600 series” while located overseas after I exported it. What do I need to do to bring it back to the U.S. for servicing under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR)? A.1: Unlike under the ITAR, there are no temporary import licensing requirements under the EAR. No license is required for the item to come back to the United States. To return the serviced item to your customer overseas, consult License Exceptions under part 740 of the EAR to see if any are available for your transaction. Section 740.2 sets forth restrictions on license exceptions in general, with section 740.2 (a)(13) providing a list of license exceptions available for "600 series" items. You may, for example, meet the terms and conditions of License Exception Servicing and Replacement of Parts and Equipment (RPL) in section 740.10 and be able to use that authorization to return the serviced item. If no license exceptions are available, apply to BIS for a license.
600 Series Items Q.1: What is the “600 series”?
A.2: Yes, twenty-nine "600 series" ECCNs have been added to the EAR. The first ten "600 series" ECCNs were added to the EAR in the April 16, 2013 Initial Implementation of Export Control Reform (ECR) final rule that became effective October 15, 2013. The second set of "600 series" ECCNs (nineteen additional "600 series" ECCNs) were added to the EAR in the July 8, 2013 ECR implementation rule that became effective January 6, 2014.
9A610, 9B610, 9C610, 9D610, and 9E610
9A619, 9B619, 9C619, 9D619, and 9E619
8A609, 8B609, 8C609, 8D609, and 8E609
Tanks/Military Vehicles
0A606, 0B606, 0C606, 0D606, and 0E606
0A617, 0B617, 0C617, 0D617, and 0E617
8A620, 8B620, 8D620, and 8E620
A.3: Yes, additional ECCNs will be added. For example, additional "600 series" ECCNs were included in the January 2, 2014 final rule. However, these ECCNs will not become effective until July 1, 2014. Specifically, items from USML categories IV, V, IX, and X: military training equipment, energetic materials, personal protective equipment, shelters, articles related to launch vehicles, missiles, rockets, military explosives, and related items the President has determined no longer warrant control on the United States Munitions List will be added to the "600 series" of the CCL. To follow transfers from the ITAR USML to the EAR CCL, see the ECR dashboard at
http://export.gov/static/RedGreenYellow%20ECR%20Dashbaord%20Editor%20081313_Latest_eg_main_044971.pdf Subsequent final rules will be published creating additional "600 series" entries that correspond with revised USML Categories. After the publication date and prior to the effective date of each final rule, you may pre-position applications for Commerce licenses for items that will transition, as well as submit classification requests to BIS for items that you believe will move to the "600 series." However, until the effective date, you must follow the existing ITAR and EAR.
License Exception Strategic Trade Authorization (STA) Q.1: What happens if my customer reexports or transfers a License Exception STA-eligible item without first obtaining a prior consignee statement?
CLICK HERE for the template for other items Q.4. I exported under License Exception STA a “600 series” item to a defense contractor in a Country Group A:5 country for the ultimate end use by the military of that Country Group A:5 country. I have already obtained a prior consignee statement from....
A.4. You (including the defense contractor in the Country Group A:5 country) do not need to obtain a prior consignee statement from the Country Group A:5 government. While License Exception STA requires a prior consignee statement from the defense contractor for export to the Country Group A:5 country, the subsequent transfer (in-country) from the defense contractor to the Country Group A:5 military does not require an additional authorization under the EAR. A transfer (in-country) for which no license is required does not require an EAR authorization. Therefore, since a prior consignee statement was provided by the defense contractor and the subsequent transfers (in-country) does not require an additional authorization, a separate prior consignee statement is not needed from the Country Group A:5 military or from any other party receiving the "600 series" item in-country prior to the Country Group A:5 military receiving the "600 series" item for its ultimate end use.
License Exception GOV Q.1: How long does “temporary” mean for purposes of paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(C) of License Exception GOV?
CCL Order of Review Q.1: What is the Commerce Control List Order of Review?
A:8: You may contact Timothy Mooney by email: timothy.mooney@bis.doc.gov or by telephone at (202) 482-2440 for questions specific to the CCL Order of Review Decision Tool. The Office of Exporter Services at (202) 482-4811 or ECDOEXS@bis.doc.gov is also available to answer questions about the EAR, including those related to the CCL Order of Review Decision Tool. Specially Designed Q.1: Where can I find the definition of “specially designed” in the EAR?
A.3: You only need to review the definition of "specially designed" when the paragraph you are reviewing uses the term "specially designed." See Specially Designed Q.4. below in regards to the CCL Order of Review. There is a decision tree tool for "specially designed" at http://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/specially-designed-tool. To access the webinar on the "Export Control Reform Initiative- Implementation and Specially Designed" that was broadcast on April 17 by Assistant Secretary Wolf you can either:
2. Download it by using the following information: Visit mymeetings.com User Name: PW9710678 Password: LEADER
A.4: The Commerce Control List Order of Review in Supplement No. 4 to Part 774 was added to the EAR through the April 16, 2013 Initial Implementation of ECR final rule. The CCL Order of Review consists of six steps that guide you through how to analyzes the CCL, starting with the "600 series" and then the other ECCNs on the CCL. The CCL Order of Review specifies when you need to analyze "specially designed" as part of the larger review of the CCL, both when reviewing the "600 series" and then, if needed, when reviewing other ECCNs on the CCL.
A.5: The same definition of "specially designed" applies to all ECCN provisions that use the term "specially designed" as a control parameter
A.7: The Departments of State and Commerce have adopted essentially the same definition of "specially designed." There are slight differences in the definitions to make them EAR specific and ITAR specific, but both definitions are based on the catch-and-release construct. In addition, once you become familiar with one definition (either the EAR definition or ITAR definition), it will be easier for you to understand the other definition because they are constructed in the same way. However, it is important to understand that you only use the ITAR "specially designed" definition when reviewing the ITAR and the EAR "specially designed" definition when reviewing the EAR
A.17: Yes, see paragraph (b)(1) of "specially designed" and § 748.3(e) (Classification requests to confirm that a "part," "component," "accessory" "attachment" or "software" is not "specially designed"). Under the §　748.3(e) process, if the Departments of Commerce, Defense and State all concur that a "part," "component," "accessory," "attachment," or "software" does not warrant being "specially designed," BIS can issue a classification specifying that the "part," "component," "accessory," "attachment," or "software" is not "specially designed" and provide a classification in an ECCN paragraph that does not use "specially designed" or an EAR99 designation. However, before submitting such a classification request, you should review the entire "specially designed" definition. Your submission should include information on why the item does not meet any of the paragraph (b) tests.
(does NOT meet the ‘equivalent’ standard): A fuel pump used in AT-only aircraft in "production" is modified for use in a military aircraft. However, in addition to modifying the fuel pump solely for fit purposes (to fit in an area of a military aircraft), the fuel pump has been made of higher strength materials to allow it to pump at a higher pressure.
A.26: Paragraph (b)(6) is similar to paragraph (b)(4), but the paragraph (b)(6) ‘release’ is specific to AT-only ECCNs that use "specially designed." Under the paragraph (b)(6) ‘release,’ if the "part," "component," "accessory," "attachment," or "software" was "developed" for use in or with AT-only ECCNs and also EAR99 commodities or software, it would not be "specially designed." Or if the "part," "component," "accessory" was "developed" exclusively for EAR99 commodities or software, it would not be "specially designed." Under both of these scenarios to be ‘released’ from "specially designed" you must have documentation from the "development" phase meeting the paragraph (b)(6) criteria"
Q.27: Under paragraph (b)(4), (b)(5) and (b)(6), does it matter what the first use of the “part,” “component,” “accessory,” “attachment,” or “software” is, or what the predominant market share is for the “part,” “component,” “accessory,” “attachment,”....
Self-determination of an item's jurisdictional and classification status by a foreign person Q.1: May a foreign person, such as an intermediate consignee or end user, “self-determine” (i.e., assess for itself) the jurisdictional and classification status of a commodity, item of software, or unit of technology under the International Traffic in...
A.1: Yes. Absent such a determination, a foreign person may make a self-determination of an item’s jurisdictional and classification status. Indeed, a foreign person is obligated to know whether an item is subject to the ITAR or, if subject to the EAR, how it is classified before reexporting or transferring the item in order to ensure compliance with the ITAR’s and the EAR’s licensing and other obligations. The U.S. exporter is responsible for determining the jurisdictional and classification status of the items it is exporting. However, if reliable jurisdictional and classification information has not already been provided by another party, such as the original equipment manufacturer, then the foreign person may and, indeed, must make these determinations itself in order to avoid violating the ITAR or the EAR if it later reexports or retransfers the article or item. As a matter of due diligence, however, the foreign person should seek jurisdictional and classification information from the manufacturer of the items or the owner of the technology in question and resolve any potential differences in interpretation. If after reviewing the ITAR’s U.S. Munitions List (USML) and all relevant facts, doubt exists regarding whether the item is enumerated or otherwise described on the USML, the foreign person should request from DDTC a commodity jurisdiction determination pursuant to 22 C.F.R. §120.4. If the item is clearly not enumerated or otherwise described on the USML and, after reviewing the EAR and all relevant facts, there is doubt regarding whether or where the item is enumerated or otherwise described on the EAR’s Commerce Control List, then the foreign person should request from the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security a commodity classification determination pursuant to 15 C.F.R. §748.3.
A.3: If the term "parts" is not used as part of the control parameters of a particular ECCN that means that "parts" generically are not controlled under that ECCN. However, be advised that certain ECCNs may enumerate or otherwise describe a commodity that would also meet the "parts" definition, such as ECCN 1A005. ECCN 1A005 does not include a generic control on "parts," but 1A005.b does control hard body armor plates that provide ballistic protection less than NIJ level III (NIJ 0101.06, July 2008) or national equivalents. A plate would in most cases also meet the EAR definition of "part." In this case the parts are controlled under that ECCN.
Must be a single element
. For example, any commodity that includes assembly instructions or blue prints for connecting more than one single element, would take the commodity in question outside the scope of the definition of "part." In this example, the commodity would be considered an assembly, a term which under the EAR, is also referred to as a "component."