EXPORT CONTROL REFORM RESHAPING THE CONTROL LISTS IMPLICATIONS FOR UNIVERSITIES Bernard Kritzer Director, Office of Exporter Services ------------------------ Bureau of Industry and Security --------------------------- U.S. Department of Commerce ---------------------------- March 26,2013
REVISE THE U.S. MUNITIONS LIST USML was broadly written and it: - Caught many items in non-specific catch-all controls, and - Resulted each year in high license volumes, lengthy jurisdictional determinations and many compliance determinations Affected billions of dollars of export trade Develop positive list to control items based on objective technical parameters
REGULATORY IMPACTS: USML POSITIVE LIST Identify what items require USML control -Inherent military function; critical military and intelligence advantage Turn USML into a positive list -Establish objective technical parameters rather than design intent to control items
REVISE U.S. MUNITIONS LIST - CONTINUED Items not meeting positive USM criteria would be transferred to new 600 series on CCL* and include: -end-items, parts, components, accessories, and attachments, parts, components, etc. Review has involved hundreds of interagency engineers, regulatory specialist and licensing officers over the past 30 months. * Requires Congressional notification
BENEFITS OF 600 SERIES Focus controls and compliance (incl. resources) Security of supply with allies and partners Avoid design-out USML defense articles End-items Worldwide license - Canada Identified P+C Worldwide license - Canada Specifically/specially designed P+C Worldwide license - Canada Insignificant P+C Worldwide license - Canada CCL 600 series items Worldwide license - Canada License Exception STA (.x ) License Exception STA (.y ) NLR except T-5 + China Eliminate Manufacturing License Agreements (MLAs) and Technical Assistance Agreements (TAAs) Eliminate registration requirements De minimis None 25% (except ITAR 126.1 countries Registration Yes No Prohibitions ITAR 126.1 ITAR 126.1/EAR D5; enduse/user controls Exemptions/ exceptions Temporary Import Controls Exemptions: LIMITED All USML items Exceptions: GOV, STA (ultimate government end-use), TSU, TMP, RPL None
MAKING THE CCL CLEARER 11/29/12, BIS published proposed rule, Revisions to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) To Make the Commerce Control List (CCL) Clearer. This proposed rule, often referred to as the CCL Clean-up rule, included a large number of changes to make the CCL clearer: Clarifications to existing CCL controls, including use of parts and components on the CCL; Changes to conform CCL to the multilateral export control regime control lists and previous EAR amendments; Structural changes to improve clarity of CCL; and Removal of fourteen ECCNs subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
CCL CLEAN-UP RULE Comment period closed 1/28/13. BIS received 10 comments. These comments are available on the BIS website and regulations.gov. Generally most commenters thought the cumulative impact of the CCL Clean-up rule would be beneficial for exporters, improve the clarity of the CCL, and make the CCL easier to use. BIS is drafting the Clean-up final rule that will implement these changes to the EAR, including some additional changes that were identified in the public comments submitted in response to the proposed rule that would make the CCL clearer. BIS anticipates publication of the CCL Clean-up final rule in 2013. Although this rule originated with the ECR initiative, the CCL Clean-up rule is entirely consistent in spirit and substance with Executive Order 13563, under which agencies are to conduct retrospective analyses of their regulations to identify and remedy any unnecessary compliance burden caused by rules that are unduly complex, outmoded, inconsistent, or overlapping.
Export Control Reform: Control Lists Tracker U.S. Munitions List (USML) Category and Rule (End of Comment Period) Commerce Control List (CCL) CCL 600 Series Entries and Rule I-Firearms -Firearms II-Guns III-Ammunition IV-Missiles Proposed Rule (1/31/2013. Public Comments 604. Proposed Rule (1/31/2013). Public Comments. V-Explosives Proposed Rule (6/18/2012). Public Comments 608: Proposed Rule (6/18/2012). Public Comments. VI-Vessels Proposed Rule (2/6/2012). Public Comments. 609: Proposed Rule (2/6/2012). Public Comments VII-Vehicles \ 606: Proposed Rule (1/20/2012). Public Comments. Proposed Rule (1/20/2012). Public Comments VIII-Aircraft Proposed Rule (12/22/2011). Proposed Rule (2/6/2012). Public Comments. Public 610: Proposed Rule (12/22/2011). Public Comments. Comments. 614: Proposed Rule (7/30/2012). Public Comments. IX-Training Equipment Proposed Rule (7/30/2012). Public Comments. X-Protective Equipment Proposed Rule (7/23/2012). Public Comments. 613: Proposed Rule (7/23/2012). Public Comments XI-Electronics Proposed Rule (11/28/12). Public Comments 611: Proposed Rule (11/28/12). Public Comments. XII-Sensors XIII-Aux. Military Equip. Proposed Rule (7/2/2012). Public Comments. 617: Proposed Rule (7/2/2012). Public Comments XIV-Chem/Bio XV-Satellites XVI-Nuclear Proposed Rule (3/18/13). No Corresponding Rule XVIII-Directed Energy XIX-Gas Turbine Engines Proposed Rule (1/20/2012). Public Comments 619: Proposed Rule (1/20/2012). Public Comments. XX-Submersibles Proposed Rule (2/6/2012). Public Comments 620: Proposed Rule (2/6/2012). Public Comments Specially Designed Rules Proposed Rule (8/3/2012). Public Comments. Proposed Rule (8/3/2012) Public Comments. Transition Rules Proposed Rule (8/6/2012). Public Comments Proposed Rule (8/6/2012). Public Comments. March 2013
ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Emerging technologies -universities and research institutes -industry Compliance burdens and strategies Harmonized definitions Specially designed definition Importance of university comments in the ECR regulatory review process