Revision and Clarification of Deemed Export Related Regulatory Requirements, 15607-15609 [05-6057]
Download as PDF
15607
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 58 / Monday, March 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules
environmental, and energy-related
aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both
docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA–
2005–20616 and Airspace Docket No.
05–ANM–04) and be submitted in
triplicate to the Docket Management
System (see ADDRESSES section for
address and phone number). You may
also submit comments through the
Internet at https://dms.dot.gov.
Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments
on this action must submit with those
comments a self-addressed, stamped
postcard on which the following
statement is made: ‘‘Comments to FAA
Docket No. FAA–2005–20616 and
Airspace Docket No. 05–ANM–04.’’ The
postcard will be date/time stamped and
returned to the commenter.
All communications received on or
before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before
taking action on the proposed rule. The
proposal contained in this action may
be changed in light of comments
received. All comments submitted will
be available for examination in the
public docket both before and after the
closing date for comments. A report
summarizing each substantive public
contact with FAA personnel concerned
with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.
Availability of NPRM’s
An electronic copy of this document
may be downloaded through the
Internet at https://dms.dot.gov. Recently
published rulemaking documents can
also be accessed through the FAA’s Web
page at https://www.faa.gov or the
Federal Register’s Web page at https://
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/.
You may review the public docket
containing the proposal, any comments
received, and any final disposition in
person in the Dockets Office (see
ADDRESSES section for address and
phone number) between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. An informal docket
may also be examined during normal
business hours at the office of the
Regional Air Traffic Division, Federal
Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind
Avenue, #14, SW., Renton, WA 98055.
Persons interested in being placed on
a mailing list for future NPRM’s should
contact the FAA’s Office of Rulemaking,
(202) 267–9677, for a copy of Advisory
Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking Distribution System, which
describes the application procedure.
Background
The existing R–2211, at Blair Lakes,
AK, extends from the surface up to
VerDate jul<14>2003
12:47 Mar 25, 2005
Jkt 205001
18,000 feet MSL. The USAF has
proposed raising the ceiling of the area
because the existing restricted airspace
is too small to permit essential aircrew
training in the tactics used in recent
real-world engagements. The current
18,000-foot MSL upper limit of the area
is not sufficient to satisfy high altitude
weapons release training requirements.
The Proposal
The FAA is proposing to amend Title
14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 73 (part 73) to modify R–2211 by
raising the ceiling from 18,000 feet MSL
to FL 310. The current restricted
airspace at Blair Lakes is too small to
allow aircrew training in high altitude
weapons delivery tactics. The purpose
of the proposed expansion of R–2211 is
to accommodate high altitude, high
angle weapons delivery training to
fulfill USAF training requirements.
The FAA has determined that this
proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical
regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to
keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this proposed regulation: (1)
Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not
a ‘‘significant rule’’ under Department of
Transportation (DOT) Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034;
February 26, 1979); and (3) does not
warrant preparation of a regulatory
evaluation as the anticipated impact is
so minimal. Since this is a routine
matter that will only affect air traffic
procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this proposed rule, when
promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Environmental Review
This proposal will be subject to the
appropriate environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1D,
Policies and Procedures for Considering
Environmental Impacts, prior to any
FAA final regulatory action.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73
Airspace, Navigation (air).
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend 14 CFR part 73 as
follows:
PART 73—SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE
1. The authority citation for part 73
continues to read as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 73.22
[Amended]
2. Section 73.22 is amended as
follows:
*
*
*
*
*
R–2211 Blair Lakes, AK [Amended]
Boundaries. Beginning at lat. 64°29′58″ N.,
long. 147°44′09″ W.; to lat. 64°19′58″ N.,
long. 147°19′09″ W.; to lat. 64°13′28″ N.,
long. 147°32′08″ W.; to lat. 64°22′28″ N.,
long. 147°58′09″ W.; to the point of
beginning.
Time of designation. 0800 to 1800, local
Monday through Friday, other times by
NOTAM.
Designated altitude. Surface to FL310.
Controlling agency. FAA, Fairbanks
Approach Control.
Using agency. U.S. Air Force, 354th Fighter
Wing, Eielson AFB, AK.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, March 22, 2005.
Edith V. Parish,
Acting Manager, Airspace and Rules.
[FR Doc. 05–5965 Filed 3–25–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
15 CFR Parts 734 and 772
[Docket No. 050316075–5075–01]
RIN 0694–AD29
Revision and Clarification of Deemed
Export Related Regulatory
Requirements
Bureau of Industry and
Security, Commerce.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Industry and
Security (BIS) is reviewing the
recommendations contained in the U.S.
Department of Commerce Office of
Inspector General Report entitled
‘‘Deemed Export Controls May Not Stop
the Transfer of Sensitive Technology to
Foreign Nationals in the U.S.’’ (Final
Inspection Report No. IPE–16176–
March 2004). Certain of these
recommendations would require
regulatory changes that would affect
existing requirements and policies for
deemed export licenses. BIS is seeking
comments on how these revisions
would affect industry, the academic
community, and U.S. government
agencies involved in research.
DATES: Comments must be received by
May 27, 2005.
E:\FR\FM\28MRP1.SGM
28MRP1
15608
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 58 / Monday, March 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules
You may submit comments,
identified by RIN 0694–AD29, by any of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail: scook@bis.doc.gov. Include
‘‘RIN 0694–AD29’’ in the subject line of
the message.
• Fax: (202) 482–3355.
• Mail or Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of
Industry and Security, Regulatory Policy
Division, 14th & Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW., Room 2705, Washington, DC
20230, ATTN: RIN 0694–AD29.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex
Lopes, Director, Deemed Exports and
Electronics Division, Bureau of Industry
and Security, telephone: (202) 482–
4875, or e-mail: alopes@bis.doc.gov.
Copies of the referenced OIG Report are
available at https://www.oig.doc.gov/oig/
reports/2004/BIS-IPE–16176–03–
2004.pdf.
ADDRESSES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In its report, the Office of Inspector
General (OIG) concluded that existing
BIS policies under the Export
Administration Regulations (EAR) could
enable foreign nationals from countries
and entities of concern to access
otherwise controlled technology.
Adopting the OIG’s recommendations to
address these concerns would entail
regulatory or other administrative action
that would clarify the definition of
‘‘use’’ technology subject to the EAR,
base the requirement for a deemed
export license on a foreign national’s
country of birth, and modify regulatory
guidance on licensing of technology to
foreign nationals working with
government-sponsored research and
research conducted in universities.
Definition of ‘‘Use’’ Technology
The OIG stated that confusion existed
over the definition and implementation
of controls associated with the ‘‘use’’ of
equipment by foreign nationals in the
United States. In § 772.1 of the EAR, the
term ‘‘use’’ is defined as: ‘‘Operation,
installation (including on-site
installation), maintenance (checking),
repair, overhaul, and refurbishing.’’ The
OIG expressed concern about the
presence of the word ‘‘and’’ in the
definition being interpreted to mean
that all of the activities enumerated in
the definition must be present in order
to constitute ‘‘use.’’
The OIG concluded that whereas,
under the ‘‘use’’ definition, BIS grants
approval for foreign entities to operate,
install, maintain, repair, overhaul, and
VerDate jul<14>2003
12:47 Mar 25, 2005
Jkt 205001
refurbish equipment exported from the
United States in order to permit the enduser the full range of uses for an
exported item, the same ‘‘use’’
definition did not seem to apply to
deemed exports (i.e., to foreign
nationals ‘‘using’’ the equipment in the
United States). The OIG concluded that
it would be unlikely that one individual
would have the responsibility or
capability of accomplishing all of the
enumerated tasks that together
constitute ‘‘use’’ in most situations. In
addition, the OIG also noted that two of
the four multilateral control regimes
defined the term ‘‘use’’ either with an
‘‘or,’’ or without any conjunction (i.e., a
bullet point list of the activities).
The OIG further concluded that this
difference in interpretation is critical in
determining how to implement and
enforce the deemed export provisions in
the EAR. The OIG reported that U.S.
academic and federal research
institutions generally use the
fundamental research exemption under
the EAR for most of the research they
conduct. However, when equipment is
used by foreign nationals at a U.S.
university or federal research facility,
the OIG concluded that it is most likely
accompanied by some transmittal of use
or other information or instruction
constituting ‘‘technology.’’ According to
the OIG, many of the academic and
federal officials the OIG met with had
not contemplated the transfer of
technology associated with the ‘‘use’’ of
equipment as a deemed export; others
contended that the transfer of ‘‘use’’
technology related to equipment in
furtherance of fundamental research is
exempt under the regulations. The OIG
suggested that BIS revise the definition
of ‘‘use’’ in § 772.1 of the EAR to replace
the word ‘‘and’’ with the word ‘‘or,’’ as
follows:
‘‘Use’’. (All categories and General
Technology Note)—Means all aspects of
‘‘use,’’ such as: operation, installation
(including on-site installation)
maintenance (checking), repair,
overhaul, or refurbishing.
Use of Foreign National’s Country of
Birth as Criterion for Deemed Export
License Requirement
Current BIS deemed export license
requirements are based on a foreign
national’s most recent citizenship or
permanent residency. The OIG
expressed concern that this policy
allows foreign nationals originally from
countries of concern to obtain access to
controlled dual-use technology without
scrutiny if they maintain current
citizenship or permanent resident status
in a country to which the export of the
technology would not require a license.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
For example, transfer of technology to
an Iranian who has established
permanent residency or citizenship in
Canada would be treated, for export
licensing purposes under the existing
guidelines, as a deemed export to a
Canadian foreign national. This policy
is described in the deemed export
guidance provided on the BIS Web site
at: https://www.bis.doc.gov/
DeemedExports/
DeemedExportsFAQs.html.
The OIG recommended that BIS
amend its policy to require U.S.
organizations to apply for a deemed
export license for employees or visitors
who are foreign nationals and have
access to dual-use controlled technology
if they were born in a country where the
technology transfer in question would
require an export license, regardless of
their most recent citizenship or
permanent residency.
Clarification of Supplemental
Questions and Answers on Government
Sponsored Research and Fundamental
Research
The OIG reviewed the questions and
answers in Supplement No. 1 to part
734 of the EAR. OIG noted that whereas
the questions and answers did not cover
all scenarios, the intent was to help
potential license applicants understand
how BIS applies the EAR to specific
facts. The OIG reported that it
considered two of the answers provided
may be inaccurate or unclear.
Answer to Question A(4)
Question A(4) from Supplement No. 1
to part 734, which falls under the
‘‘publication of technology’’ category,
discusses whether ‘‘prepublication
clearance’’ by a government sponsor (in
this case the Department of Energy)
would void the exemption in the EAR
for material to be published and trigger
the deemed export rule. See § 734.7.
(Published Information and Software).
The answer states, ‘‘no * * * the
transaction is not subject to the EAR.’’
The OIG stated that, according to
§ 734.11 of the EAR, if research is
funded by the U.S. government and
national security controls are in place to
protect any resulting information, the
research is subject to the EAR.
In its comments on the OIG report,
BIS concurred with the OIG that the
answer to Question A(4) requires
clarification. BIS stated that it proposed
to modify in the answer to Question
A(4) to state, by reference to Question
A(2) in this Supplement, that, if the
government sponsor reviewer imposed
restrictions on publication of the
research, then the technology would
continue to be subject to the EAR.
E:\FR\FM\28MRP1.SGM
28MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 58 / Monday, March 28, 2005 / Proposed Rules
Answer to Question D(1)
Question D(1), which falls under the
‘‘research, correspondence, and
informal scientific exchanges’’ category,
discusses whether a license would be
required for a foreign graduate student
to ‘‘work’’ in a laboratory. The answer
provided in the supplement states, ‘‘not
if the research on which the foreign
student is working qualifies as
‘fundamental research’ * * *’’
However, because allowing scientists,
engineers, or students to work in a
laboratory may necessitate their ‘‘use’’
of equipment, the OIG stated that this
answer may lead a potential license
applicant to assume that ‘‘use’’ of
equipment is covered under the
fundamental research exemption.
In its comments on the OIG report,
BIS agreed that the answer to question
D(1) requires clarification. BIS proposes
to revise the answer for D(1) to qualify
the statement that no license is required,
by stating that, whereas no license is
required for the transfer of technology to
conduct ‘‘fundamental research,’’ a
license may be required if, in
conducting fundamental research, the
foreign graduate student needs access to
technology to ‘‘use’’ equipment if the
export of the equipment to the student
would require a license under the EAR.
Request for Comments
The Department of Commerce is
interested in evaluating the impact that
the changes recommended by the OIG
would have on U.S. industry, academic
institutions, U.S. government agencies,
and holders of export controlled
technology.
To ensure public participation in the
review process, BIS is soliciting
comments for 60 days on this proposal.
BIS is particularly interested in views
on the impact the proposal will have on
technology developers and
manufacturers, academic institutions,
and U.S. government research facilities.
BIS is interested in receiving specific
information regarding the impact of the
regulations, e.g., data on the number of
foreign nationals in the United States
who will face licensing requirements if
the OIG’s recommendations were
adopted, and impact of compliance with
the new licensing requirements—cost,
resources, procedures. BIS is also
interested in receiving any alternative
suggestions regarding the concerns
raised by the OIG.
Parties submitting comments are
asked to be as specific as possible. BIS
encourages interested persons who wish
to comment to do so at the earliest
possible date.
The period for submission of
comments will close May 27, 2005, BIS
VerDate jul<14>2003
12:47 Mar 25, 2005
Jkt 205001
will consider all comments received
before the close of the comment period
in developing a final rule. Comments
received after the end of the comment
period will be considered if possible,
but their consideration cannot be
assured. BIS will not accept public
comments accompanied by a request
that a part or all of the material be
treated confidentially because of its
business proprietary nature or for any
other reason. BIS will return such
comments and materials to the persons
submitting the comments and will not
consider them in the development of the
final rule. All public comments on this
proposed rule must be in writing
(including fax or e-mail) and will be a
matter of public record, available for
public inspection and copying. The
Office of Administration, Bureau of
Industry and Security, U.S. Department
of Commerce, displays these public
comments on BIS’s Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) Web site at
https://www.bis.doc.gov/foia. This office
does not maintain a separate public
inspection facility. If you have technical
difficulties accessing this Web site,
please call BIS’s Office of
Administration at (202) 482–0637 for
assistance.
List of Subjects
15 CFR Part 734
Administrative practice and
procedure, Exports, Inventions and
patents, Research, Science and
technology.
15 CFR Part 772
Exports.
Dated: March 23, 2005.
Matthew S. Borman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export
Administration.
[FR Doc. 05–6057 Filed 3–25–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–33–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 168
[USCG–2003–14734]
RIN 1625–AA65 (Formerly RIN 2115–AE10)
Escort Vessels for Certain Tankers—
Crash Stop Criteria
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to
make permanent the 1994 suspension of
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
15609
the crash stop requirements in our
tanker escort rules.
DATES: Comments and related material
must reach the Docket Management
Facility on or before June 27, 2005.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by Coast Guard docket
number USCG–2003–14734 to the
Docket Management Facility at the U.S.
Department of Transportation. To avoid
duplication, please use only one of the
following methods:
(1) Web Site: https://dms.dot.gov.
(2) Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC
20590–0001.
(3) Fax: (202) 493–2251.
(4) Delivery: Room PL–401 on the
Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The telephone number is (202) 366–
9329.
(5) Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this proposed
rule, call Lieutenant Sam Stevens, G–
MSE–1, telephone (202) 267–0173, email: SStevens@comdt.uscg.mil. If you
have questions on viewing or submitting
material to the docket, call Ms. Andrea
M. Jenkins, Program Manager, Docket
Operations, telephone (202) 366–0271.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation and Request for
Comments
We encourage you to participate in
this rulemaking by submitting
comments and related materials. All
comments received will be posted,
without change, to https://dms.dot.gov
and will include any personal
information you have provided. We
have an agreement with the Department
of Transportation (DOT) to use the
Docket Management Facility. Please see
DOT’s ‘‘Privacy Act’’ paragraph below.
Submitting comments: If you submit a
comment, please include your name and
address, identify the docket number for
this rulemaking (USCG–2003–14734),
indicate the specific section of this
document to which each comment
applies, and give the reason for each
comment. You may submit your
comments and material by electronic
means, mail, fax, or delivery to the
Docket Management Facility at the
address under ADDRESSES; but please
submit your comments and material by
only one means. If you submit them by
mail or delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 81⁄2 by
11 inches, suitable for copying and
E:\FR\FM\28MRP1.SGM
28MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 58 (Monday, March 28, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15607-15609]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-6057]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
15 CFR Parts 734 and 772
[Docket No. 050316075-5075-01]
RIN 0694-AD29
Revision and Clarification of Deemed Export Related Regulatory
Requirements
AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is reviewing the
recommendations contained in the U.S. Department of Commerce Office of
Inspector General Report entitled ``Deemed Export Controls May Not Stop
the Transfer of Sensitive Technology to Foreign Nationals in the U.S.''
(Final Inspection Report No. IPE-16176-March 2004). Certain of these
recommendations would require regulatory changes that would affect
existing requirements and policies for deemed export licenses. BIS is
seeking comments on how these revisions would affect industry, the
academic community, and U.S. government agencies involved in research.
DATES: Comments must be received by May 27, 2005.
[[Page 15608]]
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 0694-AD29, by any
of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: scook@bis.doc.gov. Include ``RIN 0694-AD29'' in
the subject line of the message.
Fax: (202) 482-3355.
Mail or Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S. Department of
Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, Regulatory Policy Division,
14th & Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 2705, Washington, DC 20230, ATTN:
RIN 0694-AD29.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alex Lopes, Director, Deemed Exports
and Electronics Division, Bureau of Industry and Security, telephone:
(202) 482-4875, or e-mail: alopes@bis.doc.gov. Copies of the referenced
OIG Report are available at https://www.oig.doc.gov/oig/reports/2004/
BIS-IPE-16176-03-2004.pdf.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In its report, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) concluded that
existing BIS policies under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR)
could enable foreign nationals from countries and entities of concern
to access otherwise controlled technology. Adopting the OIG's
recommendations to address these concerns would entail regulatory or
other administrative action that would clarify the definition of
``use'' technology subject to the EAR, base the requirement for a
deemed export license on a foreign national's country of birth, and
modify regulatory guidance on licensing of technology to foreign
nationals working with government-sponsored research and research
conducted in universities.
Definition of ``Use'' Technology
The OIG stated that confusion existed over the definition and
implementation of controls associated with the ``use'' of equipment by
foreign nationals in the United States. In Sec. 772.1 of the EAR, the
term ``use'' is defined as: ``Operation, installation (including on-
site installation), maintenance (checking), repair, overhaul, and
refurbishing.'' The OIG expressed concern about the presence of the
word ``and'' in the definition being interpreted to mean that all of
the activities enumerated in the definition must be present in order to
constitute ``use.''
The OIG concluded that whereas, under the ``use'' definition, BIS
grants approval for foreign entities to operate, install, maintain,
repair, overhaul, and refurbish equipment exported from the United
States in order to permit the end-user the full range of uses for an
exported item, the same ``use'' definition did not seem to apply to
deemed exports (i.e., to foreign nationals ``using'' the equipment in
the United States). The OIG concluded that it would be unlikely that
one individual would have the responsibility or capability of
accomplishing all of the enumerated tasks that together constitute
``use'' in most situations. In addition, the OIG also noted that two of
the four multilateral control regimes defined the term ``use'' either
with an ``or,'' or without any conjunction (i.e., a bullet point list
of the activities).
The OIG further concluded that this difference in interpretation is
critical in determining how to implement and enforce the deemed export
provisions in the EAR. The OIG reported that U.S. academic and federal
research institutions generally use the fundamental research exemption
under the EAR for most of the research they conduct. However, when
equipment is used by foreign nationals at a U.S. university or federal
research facility, the OIG concluded that it is most likely accompanied
by some transmittal of use or other information or instruction
constituting ``technology.'' According to the OIG, many of the academic
and federal officials the OIG met with had not contemplated the
transfer of technology associated with the ``use'' of equipment as a
deemed export; others contended that the transfer of ``use'' technology
related to equipment in furtherance of fundamental research is exempt
under the regulations. The OIG suggested that BIS revise the definition
of ``use'' in Sec. 772.1 of the EAR to replace the word ``and'' with
the word ``or,'' as follows:
``Use''. (All categories and General Technology Note)--Means all
aspects of ``use,'' such as: operation, installation (including on-site
installation) maintenance (checking), repair, overhaul, or
refurbishing.
Use of Foreign National's Country of Birth as Criterion for Deemed
Export License Requirement
Current BIS deemed export license requirements are based on a
foreign national's most recent citizenship or permanent residency. The
OIG expressed concern that this policy allows foreign nationals
originally from countries of concern to obtain access to controlled
dual-use technology without scrutiny if they maintain current
citizenship or permanent resident status in a country to which the
export of the technology would not require a license. For example,
transfer of technology to an Iranian who has established permanent
residency or citizenship in Canada would be treated, for export
licensing purposes under the existing guidelines, as a deemed export to
a Canadian foreign national. This policy is described in the deemed
export guidance provided on the BIS Web site at: https://
www.bis.doc.gov/DeemedExports/DeemedExportsFAQs.html.
The OIG recommended that BIS amend its policy to require U.S.
organizations to apply for a deemed export license for employees or
visitors who are foreign nationals and have access to dual-use
controlled technology if they were born in a country where the
technology transfer in question would require an export license,
regardless of their most recent citizenship or permanent residency.
Clarification of Supplemental Questions and Answers on Government
Sponsored Research and Fundamental Research
The OIG reviewed the questions and answers in Supplement No. 1 to
part 734 of the EAR. OIG noted that whereas the questions and answers
did not cover all scenarios, the intent was to help potential license
applicants understand how BIS applies the EAR to specific facts. The
OIG reported that it considered two of the answers provided may be
inaccurate or unclear.
Answer to Question A(4)
Question A(4) from Supplement No. 1 to part 734, which falls under
the ``publication of technology'' category, discusses whether
``prepublication clearance'' by a government sponsor (in this case the
Department of Energy) would void the exemption in the EAR for material
to be published and trigger the deemed export rule. See Sec. 734.7.
(Published Information and Software). The answer states, ``no * * * the
transaction is not subject to the EAR.'' The OIG stated that, according
to Sec. 734.11 of the EAR, if research is funded by the U.S.
government and national security controls are in place to protect any
resulting information, the research is subject to the EAR.
In its comments on the OIG report, BIS concurred with the OIG that
the answer to Question A(4) requires clarification. BIS stated that it
proposed to modify in the answer to Question A(4) to state, by
reference to Question A(2) in this Supplement, that, if the government
sponsor reviewer imposed restrictions on publication of the research,
then the technology would continue to be subject to the EAR.
[[Page 15609]]
Answer to Question D(1)
Question D(1), which falls under the ``research, correspondence,
and informal scientific exchanges'' category, discusses whether a
license would be required for a foreign graduate student to ``work'' in
a laboratory. The answer provided in the supplement states, ``not if
the research on which the foreign student is working qualifies as
`fundamental research' * * *'' However, because allowing scientists,
engineers, or students to work in a laboratory may necessitate their
``use'' of equipment, the OIG stated that this answer may lead a
potential license applicant to assume that ``use'' of equipment is
covered under the fundamental research exemption.
In its comments on the OIG report, BIS agreed that the answer to
question D(1) requires clarification. BIS proposes to revise the answer
for D(1) to qualify the statement that no license is required, by
stating that, whereas no license is required for the transfer of
technology to conduct ``fundamental research,'' a license may be
required if, in conducting fundamental research, the foreign graduate
student needs access to technology to ``use'' equipment if the export
of the equipment to the student would require a license under the EAR.
Request for Comments
The Department of Commerce is interested in evaluating the impact
that the changes recommended by the OIG would have on U.S. industry,
academic institutions, U.S. government agencies, and holders of export
controlled technology.
To ensure public participation in the review process, BIS is
soliciting comments for 60 days on this proposal. BIS is particularly
interested in views on the impact the proposal will have on technology
developers and manufacturers, academic institutions, and U.S.
government research facilities. BIS is interested in receiving specific
information regarding the impact of the regulations, e.g., data on the
number of foreign nationals in the United States who will face
licensing requirements if the OIG's recommendations were adopted, and
impact of compliance with the new licensing requirements--cost,
resources, procedures. BIS is also interested in receiving any
alternative suggestions regarding the concerns raised by the OIG.
Parties submitting comments are asked to be as specific as
possible. BIS encourages interested persons who wish to comment to do
so at the earliest possible date.
The period for submission of comments will close May 27, 2005, BIS
will consider all comments received before the close of the comment
period in developing a final rule. Comments received after the end of
the comment period will be considered if possible, but their
consideration cannot be assured. BIS will not accept public comments
accompanied by a request that a part or all of the material be treated
confidentially because of its business proprietary nature or for any
other reason. BIS will return such comments and materials to the
persons submitting the comments and will not consider them in the
development of the final rule. All public comments on this proposed
rule must be in writing (including fax or e-mail) and will be a matter
of public record, available for public inspection and copying. The
Office of Administration, Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S.
Department of Commerce, displays these public comments on BIS's Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA) Web site at https://www.bis.doc.gov/foia. This
office does not maintain a separate public inspection facility. If you
have technical difficulties accessing this Web site, please call BIS's
Office of Administration at (202) 482-0637 for assistance.
List of Subjects
15 CFR Part 734
Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Inventions and
patents, Research, Science and technology.
15 CFR Part 772
Exports.
Dated: March 23, 2005.
Matthew S. Borman,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 05-6057 Filed 3-25-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P