Mandatory Electronic Filing of Export and Reexport License Applications, Classification Requests, Encryption Review Requests, and License Exception AGR Notifications, 49323-49331 [E8-18852]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 163 / Thursday, August 21, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
and vote on all such requests. The time
frames, procedures and right of escalation by
a member agency that is dissatisfied with the
results that apply to proposals made by a
member agency shall apply to these requests.
The decision of the ERC (or the ACEP or
EARB or the President, as may be applicable
in a particular case) shall be the final agency
decision on the request and shall not be
appealable under part 756 of the EAR. The
chairman will prepare the response to the
party who made the request. The response
will state the decision on the request and the
fact that the response is the final agency
decision on the request. The response will be
signed by the Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Export Administration.
The End-User Review Committee will
conduct a review of the entire Entity List at
least once per year for the purpose of
determining whether any listed entities
should be removed or modified. The review
will include analysis of whether the criteria
for listing the entity are still applicable and
research to determine whether the name(s)
and address(es) of each entity are accurate
and complete and whether any affiliates of
each listed entity should be added or
removed.
PART 756—[AMENDED]
8. The authority citation for part 756
is revised to read as follows:
I
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025,
3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of July 23,
2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008).
9. In § 756.1, add a new paragraph
(a)(3) to read as follows:
I
§ 756.1
Introduction.
(a) * * *
(3) A decision on a request to remove
or modify an Entity List entry made
pursuant to § 744.16 of the EAR.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 7, 2008.
Christopher R. Wall,
Assistant Secretary for Export
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–19102 Filed 8–20–08; 8:45 am]
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
BILLING CODE 3510–33–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:30 Aug 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
15 CFR Parts 740, 742, 744, 748, 750,
754, 764 and 772
[Docket No. 0612242559–8545–02]
RIN 0694–AD94
Mandatory Electronic Filing of Export
and Reexport License Applications,
Classification Requests, Encryption
Review Requests, and License
Exception AGR Notifications
Bureau of Industry and
Security, Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This rule requires that export
and reexport license applications,
classification requests, encryption
review requests, License Exception AGR
notifications and related documents be
submitted to the Bureau of Industry and
Security (BIS) via its Simplified
Network Application Process (SNAP–R)
system. This requirement does not
apply to applications for Special
Comprehensive Licenses or in certain
situations in which BIS authorizes
paper submissions.
DATES: Effective date October 20, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information about this rule contact
William Arvin, e-mail
warvin@bis.doc.gov or tel. 202–482–
2440. For information about registering
for or using the SNAP–R system contact
Lisa Williams at 202–482–2148.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
BIS administers a system of export
and reexport controls in accordance
with the Export Administration
Regulations (EAR). In doing so, BIS
requires that parties wishing to engage
in certain transactions apply for
licenses, submit encryption review
requests, or submit certain notifications
to BIS. BIS also reviews, upon request,
specifications of various items and
determines their proper classification
under the EAR. Currently, members of
the public submit these applications,
requests and notifications to BIS in one
of three ways: via SNAP–R, via BIS’s
Electronic License Application
Information Network (ELAIN), or via the
paper BIS Multipurpose Application
Form BIS 748–P and its two appendices,
the BIS 748–P A (item appendix) and
the BIS 748–P B (end user appendix). In
many instances, BIS needs additional
documents to act on the submission. For
documents that relate to paper
submissions, the documents can be
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
49323
mailed or delivered to BIS with the BIS
748–P form. For submissions made
electronically via ELAIN, the documents
must be sent to BIS separately and
matched up with the applications when
they arrive.
In 2006, BIS replaced its then existing
Simplified Network Application
Processing system (SNAP) with an
improved system referred to as ‘‘SNAP
Redesign (SNAP–R)’’. The
improvements include the ability to
include documents related to a
submission in the form of PDF (portable
document format) files as ‘‘attachments’’
to the submission. Other improvements
include a feature that allows BIS
personnel to securely request additional
information from the submitting party
and for the party to submit that
information in a manner that ties the
chain of communication to the
submission.
BIS believes that use of SNAP–R will
reduce processing times and simplify
compliance with and administration of
export controls. SNAP–R provides not
only improved efficiency in submission
and processing, but improved end-user
security through rights management and
an updated application and security
infrastructure.
Therefore, beginning October 20, 2008
all export and reexport license
applications (other than Special
Comprehensive License and Special Iraq
Reconstruction License applications),
classification requests, encryption
review requests, License Exception AGR
notifications, and ‘‘attached’’ related
documents must be submitted to BIS via
its Simplified Network Application
Process Redesign (SNAP–R) system
unless BIS authorizes paper
submissions. This rule also sets forth
the criteria under which BIS authorizes
paper submissions.
Changes Made by This Rule
The changes that this rule makes
center on part 748 of the EAR, which
sets forth the principal procedures
governing the submission of the
applications, review requests and
notifications affected by this rule. The
changes are in § 748.1 ‘‘General
provisions,’’ § 748.3 ‘‘Classification
requests, advisory opinions, and
encryption review requests,’’ and in
§ 748.6 ‘‘General instructions for license
applications.’’ The rule also makes
conforming changes to a number of EAR
provisions that currently employ
language related to the paper forms.
Substantive Changes
Section 748.1 is revised to emphasize
electronic filing over paper and to set
forth the basic requirement that license
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
49324
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 163 / Thursday, August 21, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
applications (other than Special
Comprehensive License or Special Iraq
Reconstruction License applications),
encryption review requests, License
Exception AGR notifications, and
classification requests and any
accompanying documents must be
submitted via SNAP–R unless BIS
authorizes submission via paper.
Revised section 748.1 continues to
specify that for paper submissions, only
original BIS paper forms may be used
and that reproductions or facsimiles are
not acceptable.
Section 748.1 also sets forth the
criteria under which BIS will authorize
paper submissions. Those criteria are:
(1) BIS has received no more than one
submission from the party in the twelve
months immediately preceding the
current submission, i.e., the combined
total of the party’s license applications
(other than Special Comprehensive
Licenses), encryption review requests,
License Exception AGR notifications,
and classification requests could not
exceed one; (2) the party does not have
access to the Internet; (3) BIS has
rejected the party’s electronic filing
registration or revoked its eligibility to
file electronically; (4) BIS has requested
that the party submit on paper for a
particular transaction; or (5) BIS has
determined that urgency, a need to
implement government policy or a
circumstance outside the submitting
party’s control justifies allowing paper
submissions on a particular instance.
Parties who wish to submit on paper
must submit the BIS Form 748–P. In
addition to the information relevant to
the substance of the submission itself,
the submitter must include, either on
the form or as an attachment, a
statement explaining which of the five
foregoing criteria justifies a paper
submission and provide supporting
information. If BIS agrees that at least
one of the criteria is met, it will process
the submission in accordance with its
regular procedures. If BIS finds that
none of the criteria asserted by the
submitter are met, it will return the form
without action and inform the submitter
of the reason for rejecting the request to
file on paper. A decision by BIS to reject
the request to file on paper is subject to
appeal under part 756 of the EAR. This
rule also moves the address for paper
submissions from § 748.2 to § 748.1.
Section 748.3 is revised to replace
instructions about where and how to
submit classification requests, with a
reference to the procedures in § 748.1
and to require that documents
submitted with the classification request
be submitted in PDF format as
attachments to the SNAP–R submission
unless BIS had authorized a paper
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:30 Aug 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
submission pursuant to § 748.1 of the
EAR. Section 748.3 continues to state
requirements about the kinds of
information that must be included in
classification requests.
Section 748.6 is revised to require that
any documents submitted in support of
any license application submitted via
SNAP–R be submitted via the SNAP–R
system as PDF (portable document
format) files. Section 748.6 also is
revised to remove the statement that
application control numbers are
preprinted on the paper forms. The
paper forms will continue to bear a
preprinted application control number,
but for electronic submissions,
application control numbers are
communicated to the submitter
electronically once BIS accepts the
submission.
Conforming Changes
Prior to publication of this rule, a
number of EAR provisions stated that a
particular submission must be made on
the BIS 748–P paper form or its
electronic equivalent. If such a
provision referred to a classification
request or encryption review request,
this rule revises that provision to state
that the submission must be made in
accordance with §§ 748.1 and 748.3. If
such a provision referred to a license
application (other than a Special
Comprehensive License application or
Special Iraq Reconstruction License),
this rule also would revise that
provision to state that the submission
must be in accordance with §§ 748.1,
748.4 and 748.6. The changes described
in this paragraph are to be made in:
• § 740.8(b)(2), relating to
classification requests pursuant to
License Exception ‘‘Key Management
Infrastructure (KMI)’’;
• § 740.9(a)(4)(i) and (iii), relating to
authorizations to sell or dispose of or to
retain abroad more than one year items
exported under License Exception
‘‘Temporary imports, exports and
reexports (TMP)’’;
• § 740.12(a)(2)(iii)(C), relating to
applications to exceed the frequency
limits for individual gift parcels under
License Exception ‘‘Gift parcels and
humanitarian donations (GFT)’’;
• § 740.15, footnote number 4,
relating to certain exports to U.S. or
Canadian vessels;
• § 740.17(d)(1), relating to the
submission of encryption review
requests under License Exception
‘‘Encryption commodities and software
(ENC)’’;
• § 742.15(b)(2)(i), relating to
submission of review requests for
certain encryption items;
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• Supplement No. 6 to part 742,
relating to submission of review
requests for certain ‘‘mass market’’
encryption commodities and software;
• § 754.2(g)(1), relating to
applications for export of certain
California crude oil;
• § 754.4(d)(1), relating to
applications to export unprocessed
Western Red Cedar; and
• § 764.7(b)(2)(i), relating to
applications to take certain actions with
respect to certain items in Libya.
This rule replaces the requirement to
use the form BIS 748–P in § 740.18(c)(2)
when submitting notice to the
government in advance of shipments
under License Exception ‘‘Agricultural
Commodities (AGR)’’ with a
requirement to submit such notices in
accordance with § 748.1 of the EAR.
This rule also replaces references to
the BIS 748-P Multipurpose Application
Form with the word ‘‘application’’ in
provisions that describe certain
information that must be submitted with
particular types of license applications.
This change emphasizes that the same
information is required regardless of
whether an application is submitted on
paper or electronically. The change
described in this paragraph is made in:
• § 742.2(e)(1), relating to certain
license requirements imposed for
chemical and biological weapons
proliferation concerns;
• § 744.21(d), relating to applications
to export or reexport certain items to
known military end-uses in the People’s
Republic of China;
• § 748.4(b)(1), relating to disclosure
of parties on a license application;
• § 748.4(b)(2)(ii), relating to written
authority of certain agents to submit on
a principal’s behalf;
• § 748.5 introductory paragraph and
paragraph (b), relating to parties on the
application;
• § 754.4(d)(2) and (d)(3), relating to
applications for export of unprocessed
western red cedar;
• § 754.5(b)(2), relating to
applications to export horses by sea;
• Supplement No. 2 to Part 754,
relating to applications for export of
western red cedar: and
• § 772.1, definition of ‘‘Other party
authorized to receive license.’’
This rule removes the reference to
date time stamping in § 754.2(g)(5)(i) by
BIS of applications to export crude oil
because that process occurs only with
paper applications. However, the rule
retains the policy in § 754.2(g)(5)(i) of
issuing licenses for approved
applications in the order in which the
applications are received.
This rule also changes the references
to § 748.2(c) as a source of BIS’s address
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 163 / Thursday, August 21, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
in §§ 748.3, 750.7(h)(3), 750.8(b) and
750.9(a) to a reference to § 748.1(h)(3)
because the rule removes § 748.2(c) and
includes the address in § 748.1(h)(3).
Public Comments
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Comments Related to Lack of Direct
Data Interface Between SNAP–R and
Corporate Databases
BIS received comments on the
proposed rule from eleven commenters.
Eight commenters stated that SNAP–R
should be modified to include
capability for direct data transfer from
corporate databases. Five of these eight
stated that SNAP–R should not be made
mandatory until it includes such a
function. Two of the eight stated that a
direct data interface was needed but did
not state that they were opposed to
making use of SNAP–R mandatory
without such an interface. One of the
eight supported making use of SNAP–R
mandatory, but noted the need for a
direct data interface. Four of the eight
commenters stated that ‘‘rather than
terminate ELAIN replace it with a
program interface that incorporates
SNAP–R data formats and document
attachment capabilities.’’
The eight commenters who addressed
direct data transfer offered the following
points in support of the need for a direct
data interface. Not all of the eight
commenters offered all of these points
and some of these points were offered
by more than one commenter.
• Lack of a direct interface forces
users to go outside corporate computer
systems that provide internal
compliance checks, a practice that
creates a compliance risk because it
reduces management’s ability to see the
information and removes a basis for
analysis and audits of best practices
throughout the corporation.
• Manual data entry is a potential
source of errors and is inefficient and
costly. One commenter estimated that it
will have to spend $50,000 in additional
labor costs to do data entry in SNAP–
R.
• Other government programs that
require submission of export related
information to the government have
direct data interfaces. Commenters
specifically mentioned the D–TRADE
(used for State Department export
license applications) and the Automated
Export System (used to collect shippers’
export data).
• The application of current Internet
technologies (including file transfer and
XML data formats) to parallel the
SNAP–R Web site make the
development of a SNAP–R automated
interface a very modest information
systems project.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:30 Aug 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
• Allowing direct data interface
would allow large users to employ their
own business compliance rules in the
application submission process. In some
cases, these internal rules might be
stricter than the minimum EAR
requirements.
• Allowing direct data interface
would allow large users to incorporate
automated denied persons list
screening, automated status checking,
message handling and notifications into
the industry side of the system.
• Although BIS addressed the impact
of the rule on small entities, it did not
address the fact that a large percentage
of submissions come from a small
number of submitters and the burden
that manual data entry would impose on
them.
BIS acknowledges the convenience
and potential cost savings that can be
provided to the public by a direct data
transmission from the applicants’
computer systems to BIS. However, BIS
must also consider the security
requirements of its computer systems.
These security needs are based on both
Federal information system security
requirements and a statutory provision
that precludes BIS from disclosing
certain information in those systems,
except as provided by law. As a
government agency, BIS must comply
with these requirements in a manner
that treats similarly situated parties in a
similar manner.
The data provided to BIS through the
submissions affected by this rule can
include sensitive international trade
information about pricing, technical
design or the identity of potential
customers. The systems that contain the
data are high security impact systems in
accordance with Federal Information
Processing Standards Publication 199,
Standards for Security Categorization of
Federal Information Systems and the
National Institute of Standards and
Technology Special Publication (SP)
800–60, Guide for Mapping Types of
Information and Information Systems to
Security Categories. These standards did
not exist when ELAIN was created in
the 1980s.
In addition to the need to comply
with government standards for high
security impact systems, BIS is
obligated to implement the provisions of
Section 12(c) of the Export
Administration Act of 1979, as amended
(EAA). Section 12(c) of the EAA
prohibits the release of information that
was obtained for the purpose of
consideration of or that concerns license
applications without a determination
that the release of such information is in
the national interest. To meet this
obligation, BIS, among other things,
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
49325
makes efforts to guard against
unauthorized access to its computer
systems that contain information that is
protected by Section 12(c) of the EAA.1
Meeting these obligations poses ever
increasing challenges for BIS. Over the
last decade, the number and
sophistication of cyber attacks on
government systems has increased. BIS
is a confirmed target of these attacks and
in order to prevent the loss or
compromise of the data that it is
obligated to protect, BIS has adopted
stringent measures.
BIS requires extraordinary IT Security
measures due to its: (1) International
trade data which per FIPS–199
referenced above, carries a ‘‘high’’
security impact level, and (2)
confirmation by the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) U.S.
Computer Emergency Response Team
(USCERT) that BIS is a target of
international actors engaging in broad
federal level cyber espionage. The
former requires data security exceeding
even the requirements of personal
privacy information; the latter requires
security infrastructure over and above
that provided by commercially available
products.
The general nature of the cyberespionage threat is that BIS has been
and continues to be the target of
attempts by external actors to exfiltrate
data. The history and pattern of these
attacks support the premise that their
frequency and sophistication are likely
to increase. BIS bases its information
technology security planning upon that
premise.
The most effective BIS response to the
cyber-espionage threat is to implement
a compartmentalized network and
security infrastructure to secure mission
critical export control system
applications and data from foreign
intrusions. Physical and logical
segregation is the same concept applied
to classified systems and data
protection. BIS has implemented this
approach for the same reasons that it is
applied in classified environments—the
cyber espionage vulnerabilities exceed
the protections provided by commercial
products in a non-compartmentalized
environment. As confirmed with DHS
and other independent federal and
1 Although the EAA expired in August 2001, the
President has ordered that ‘‘the provisions of the
[EAA] and the provisions for administration of the
[EAA] shall be carried out * * * so as to continue
in full force and effect * * * the export control
system.’’ Executive Order 13222 (Aug. 17, 2001).
The Department has determined, and federal courts
have agreed, that this order has the effect of
preserving the confidentiality requirements of
Section 12(c). See e.g. Wisconsin Project on Nuclear
Arms Control v. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, 317 F.3d
275 (DC Cir. 2003).
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
49326
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 163 / Thursday, August 21, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
private security experts, a
compartmentalized system is the only
approach which will, with a high degree
of certainty, yield results. Selective
targeted IT security measures have not
been and are not effective because of the
breadth, resources, sophistication and
nature of the attack methods. For
example, the BIS compartmentalization
includes, but is not limited to, export
control system segregation from general
internet access, and particular e-mail
message formats and attachments. This
not only allows BIS to continue to
mitigate, with 100% effectiveness, the
risk of BIS systems losing sensitive data,
but to ensure its systems are not used
to launch an attack against the exporter
community or other agencies.
Finally, this security posture must be
implemented with the principle that
any direct computer interface standard
to be implemented for the purpose of
submitting data to BIS should not
arbitrarily exclude any party.
With these considerations in mind,
BIS has assessed options for
accomplishing the goals of the
commenters without breaching its
security and fairness obligations. This
examination included, but was not
limited to, review of procedures used by
the other agencies referenced by the
commenters.
For example, one method to achieve
the commenters’ objectives would be to
allow direct data interface between
private sector computer systems and the
BIS licensing systems. BIS rejected this
alternative. Allowing a system of
unknown security standards to interface
directly with a high impact security
system is, in BIS’s view, inconsistent
with the security controls specified in
National Institute of Standards and
Technology publication 800–53A, Guide
for Assessing the Security Controls in
Federal Information Systems. This
position is reinforced by the information
provided by Federal and private
security sources, and the knowledge BIS
has acquired in responding to previous
attempts by outside parties to gain
access to data in its information
systems. BIS has determined that this
method would pose an unacceptable
risk of compromise and unauthorized
system and data access.
BIS also considered the option of
allowing data transmission from private
sector computers to a logically and
physically segregated BIS computer that
would be isolated from BIS systems that
would store sensitive data. There are
options to mitigate but not to eliminate
the risk posed by malicious code which
may be embedded in transmissions and
data content. Given sufficient time and
resources, BIS could implement an
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:30 Aug 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
isolation and containment solution that
would provide an acceptable level of
risk mitigation. However, the cost of the
solution would increase as the number
of unique user systems authorized to
interface directly with BIS computer
systems increased. The possibility of
concealing harmful code in a data
transmission and the corresponding
costs and technical challenges of
detecting and removing that code exist
regardless of the data interface method
or format; they will simply differ in
nature if BIS applies an XML schema as
suggested by one commenter.
Because costs and complexity would
increase as the number of unique user
systems increased, providing
opportunity for direct data transmission
to all parties who submitted comments
requesting direct data transmission to
BIS would not be cost effective given
current information technology security
requirements and capabilities.
Moreover, BIS could not in fairness
limit such costs and complexity by
restricting direct data transmission to a
few parties or to a limited number of
service providers. Doing so would favor
some private sector parties over others
and could be viewed as fostering a
government protected oligopoly.
After considering the foregoing
factors, BIS concludes that eliminating
the ELAIN system and requiring use of
the SNAP–R Web based data entry
system is the best available alternative
given current information technology
capabilities and fiscal constraints.
Accordingly, BIS intends to discontinue
use of ELAIN and require the use of the
SNAP–R system unless one of the
reasons for authorizing paper
submissions set forth in this rule applies
in particular case.
Comment Related to Cost Reduction
Afforded by SNAP–R
One commenter noted that use of
SNAP–R would likely reduce costs and
processing time compared to paper
forms.
BIS agrees. One of the main
advantages of an electronic system such
as SNAP–R is reduced costs and
processing time.
Comments Proposing Changes to SNAP–
R That Are Not Related to the Proposed
Rule
BIS received several comments
proposing changes to SNAP–R that do
not address the issues in the proposed
rule. BIS will consider these comments
as it further develops the SNAP–R
system and may implement them as
resources become available. These
comments are:
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• SNAP–R should provide status
checking ability similar to STELA,
either in addition to STELA or instead
of STELA;
• Licensing officers should be able to
enter remarks about the status of a
submission that would be readable by
the applicant;
• SNAP–R should list the licensing
officer assigned to the application;
• SNAP–R should allow edits to the
commodity field after the field is saved
by the user;
• Improve SNAP–R rights
management to allow better
management oversight via access to all
of the company’s submissions,
employee reassignments, assignment of
access rights, systematic peer review
and coordination of export control
compliance policies, and practices
among affiliated companies (Consider
the United Kingdom’s SPIRE system as
an example);
• Allow exporters to designate third
parties to submit on their behalf and to
monitor the activities of those third
parties;
• Include application control
numbers or reference numbers in the
drop down menu;
• Interact with the National Security
Agency (NSA) so that encryption
requests submitted via SNAP–R are
automatically routed to NSA instead of
requiring applicant to submit a copy of
its SNAP–R submission to NSA; and
• Revise the ‘‘View Messages’’ screen
in SNAP–R to add columns that show
the (submitter’s) reference number and
the application control number and
allow the submitter to sort the display
on these columns.
These comments embody proposals to
make SNAP–R more useful or effective.
BIS believes that they need not be
addressed in connection with this rule.
BIS will consider these comments in
connection with its future efforts to
improve SNAP–R.
Comments Proposing Changes That
Cannot Be Implemented at This Time
Because of Legacy System Limitations
Two comments proposed changes to
SNAP–R that cannot be implemented at
this time because of limitations of the
legacy Export Control Automated
Support System (ECASS). ECASS,
which has been operational since the
early 1980s, is the computer system that
BIS uses for internal processing of
license applications, classification
requests, encryption review requests
and License Exception AGR
notifications. BIS will consider these
comments in connection with its multiyear incremental ECASS redesign and
deployment of the ECASS Redesign
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 163 / Thursday, August 21, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
(ECASS–R) system. However, the
expectation is that the changes proposed
in these two comments, if adopted, will
not be implemented until the final stage
of the ECASS–R system deployment
when the legacy ECASS system is
retired. This is because the legacy
ECASS system architecture is an
outdated ‘‘monolithic’’ design; although
the new ECASS–R system is being
implemented in modules incrementally,
the legacy system must be retired in its
entirety to implement broad data
element changes cost effectively.
These two comments are:
• Increase the number of characters
permitted in the line item field; and
• Increase the number of characters
permitted in the technical note field.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
Comment Related to the Ability of
SNAP–R To Accept Data Required by
the Export Administration Regulations
One commenter stated that BIS
should change the computer/
microprocessor performance field to
accommodate APP (adjusted peak
performance) rather than MTOPS
(millions of theoretical operations per
second).
In April 2006, the EAR were amended
to replace the computer performance
metric composite theoretical
performance (CTP) measured in
millions of theoretical operations per
second (MTOPS) with a new metric
called adjusted peak performance (APP)
measured in weighted teraFLOPS (WT).
In November 2007, another EAR
amendment replaced CTP with APP for
microprocessor performance
measurement. In the preamble to the
April 2004 rule, BIS noted that a
computer with a CTP of 190,000
MTOPS would have an APP of
approximately 0.75 WT. A change of
this magnitude requires an adjustment
to the range of values that may be
entered into the relevant field in SNAP–
R. Currently SNAP–R will accept a
range of values ranging from 0.0000001
to 9.9999999 WT. After considering
applications and licenses currently in
its database and estimating the rate of
future increases in computer
performance, BIS believes that SNAP–R
as currently configured is adequate for
data input of currently available
computers and microprocessors.
However, BIS estimates that computers
with a performance level of 10 WT or
greater are likely to be available
sometime in the year 2009 or 2010.
Therefore, BIS will begin the change
control review process to modify
SNAP–R to accept values exceeding 10
WT in the APP field.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:30 Aug 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
Comments Concerning Electronically
‘‘Attaching’’ Files to SNAP–R
Submissions
BIS received comments concerning
the requirements for electronically
‘‘attaching’’ documents to the SNAP–R
submissions. These comments are:
• Expand the size of supporting
documents allowed via SNAP (SNAP–
R). Exporters must use both paper and
electronic means for submission of a
single application.
• Not all submissions are paper and
exporters must use both paper and
electronic means for submission of a
single application.
BIS contacted the commenter who
provided this comment for clarification
and queried its licensing officers to
identify instances of the problems
alluded to in these comments. With the
information obtained from those
sources, BIS concluded that these
comments are intended to address the
following three issues:
• A submitter may not have a PDF
version of the document. In one
instance identified by a BIS licensing
officer, the only electronic copy was in
JPEG (joint photography experts group)
format.
• A document may be too large to fit
into the submitter’s scanner.
• The submitter’s PDF file is larger
than the maximum file size that SNAP–
R accepts for attachments.
BIS believes that no changes to the
rule or to SNAP–R are needed because
of the issues raised in these comments.
BIS selected PDF as the file format for
attachments in SNAP–R because it is
widely available, low cost and BIS can
effectively implement security measures
that provide a high level of protection
against the Adobe related attack vectors.
BIS notes that PDF files are widely used
for transmission of technical
documents. Although some documents
are too large to scan in desktop
scanners, commercial services that can
scan such documents exist. SNAP–R
will accept attachment files up to 10 Mb
in size. BIS has reviewed the SNAP–R
submissions that it has received and
determined that the typical file size is
approximately 5 Mb. SNAP–R does not
place a limit on the number of files that
may be attached to a submission. In
some cases, the submitter may be able
to split the file into more than one file
to get below the file size limitations.
Finally, BIS notes that one of the criteria
under which BIS will authorize paper
submissions is ‘‘BIS has determined that
urgency, a need to implement U.S.
government policy or a circumstance
outside the submitting party’s control
justify allowing paper submissions in a
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
49327
particular instance.’’ BIS believes that
this criterion provides it with adequate
discretion to authorize paper
submissions in instances where
circumstances truly make attaching PDF
files impracticable.
Comment Related to SNAP–R
Registration Procedures
One commenter stated a two-week
period to issue a Personal Identification
Number is not suitable if SNAP (SNAP–
R) is mandatory.
BIS agrees that, in nearly all cases,
two weeks should not be needed to
issue a PIN. BIS believes that most PINs
are issued substantially less than two
weeks time. BIS encourages persons
who believe that the issuance of a PIN
is taking inordinately long to contact the
Export Management and Compliance
Division at 202 482 2148 or 202 482
0062.
Changes in This Final Rule Compared
to the Proposed Rule
After review of the comments, BIS is
making no changes to the substantive
points of the proposed rule in response
to the comments. BIS is making only the
following technical and conforming
changes compared to the proposed rule.
The proposed rule did not state
whether the applications for a Special
Iraq Reconstruction License (SIRL)
would be required to be filed via SNAP–
R. SIRL applications are similar to
Special Comprehensive License (SCL)
applications. This final rule explicitly
states the SNAP–R filing is not required
for SIRLS, thereby giving the two
similar applications the same treatment.
In § 740.17, footnote number 4 is
revised to refer to §§ 748.1, 748.4 and
748.6, the sections that govern license
application submission under this rule.
In § 742.2(e)(1), the reference to the
BIS form 748–P is changed to a
reference to an application.
In § 750.7(h)(3), 750.8(b), and 750.9(a)
the reference to § 748(c) is replaced with
§ 748.1(d)(2) because this rule removes
§ 748.2(c) and includes the relevant
information in § 748.1(d)(2).
Rulemaking Requirements
1. This rule has been determined to be
significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866.
2. Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, no person is required
to respond to nor be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with a collection
of information, subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.) (PRA), unless that collection of
information displays a currently valid
Office of Management and Budget
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
49328
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 163 / Thursday, August 21, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
(OMB) Control Number. This regulation
involves collections previously
approved by the OMB under control
number 0694–0088, ‘‘Simplified
Network Application Processing
System’’ which carries a burden hour
estimate of 58 minutes to prepare and
submit form BIS–748. Miscellaneous
and recordkeeping activities account for
12 minutes per submission. This
proposed rule would require persons
seeking authorization to submit paper
filings to state, either in the additional
information block on the paper form or
an attachment, which of the criteria for
paper submissions they meet and the
reasons therefore. BIS believes that
requests seeking authorization to submit
paper filings would impose a minimal
burden on applicants as the information
requirements are small and the number
of requests is expected to be low.
Applicants making a request would
identify one or more of the 5 criteria
under which BIS would authorize a
paper submission, and provide the
factual basis for the authorization to
submit on paper. BIS estimates that only
a small number of submissions will seek
authorization to file on paper. In 2008,
more than 96% of all submissions
affected by this rule were submitted to
BIS via SNAP–R. Therefore, BIS
estimates that this requirement will
make no material change of the
estimated time of 58 minutes needed to
prepare and submit a BIS–748. Send
comments regarding these burden
estimates or any other aspect of these
collections of information, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to
David Rostker, OMB Desk Officer, by
e-mail at david_rostker@omb.eop.gov or
by fax to (202) 395–7285; and to the
Regulatory Policy Division, Bureau of
Industry and Security, Department of
Commerce, Room H 2705, 14th Street
and Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
3. This rule does not contain policies
with Federalism implications as that
term is defined in Executive Order
13132.
4. The Chief Counsel for Regulation at
the Department of Commerce certified
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy at the
Small Business Administration that this
rule, if adopted, would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The factual basis was published in the
proposed rule and is not repeated here.
BIS received no comments that
addressed the economic impact of this
rule on small entities, therefore a final
regulatory flexibility analysis was not
prepared.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:30 Aug 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
List of Subjects
15 CFR Parts 740, 750 and 748
Administrative practice and
procedure, Exports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
15 CFR Part 742
Exports, Terrorism.
15 CFR Part 744
Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Terrorism.
15 CFR Part 754
Agricultural commodities, Exports,
Forests and forest products, Horses,
Petroleum, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
15 CFR Part 764
Administrative practice and
procedure, Exports, Law enforcement,
Penalties.
15 CFR Part 772
Exports.
Accordingly, parts 740, 742, 744, 748,
750, 754, 764 and 772 of the Export
Administration Regulations (15 CFR
730–774) are amended as follows:
I
PART 740—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 15 CFR
part 740 is revised to read as follows:
I
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; Sec. 901–911, Public Law
106–387; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR,
1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025,
3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August
3, 2006, 71 FR 44551 (August 7, 2006); Notice
of July 23, 2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008).
2. In § 740.8 revise paragraph (b)(2) to
read as follows:
I
§ 740.8
(KMI).
Key management infrastructure
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(2) For such classification requests,
indicate ‘‘License Exception KMI’’ in
Block 9 on the application. Submit the
request to BIS in accordance with
§§ 748.1 and 748.3 of the EAR and send
a copy of the request to: Attn: ENC
Encryption Request Coordinator, 9800
Savage Road, Suite 6940, Fort Meade,
MD 20755–6000.
*
*
*
*
*
I 3. In § 740.9 revise the first sentences
of paragraphs (a)(4)(i) and (a)(4)(iii) to
read as follows:
§ 740.9 Temporary imports, exports and
reexports (TMP).
*
*
*
(a) * * *
PO 00000
Frm 00022
*
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
(4) * * *
(i) * * * If the exporter or the
reexporter wishes to sell or otherwise
dispose of the items abroad, except as
permitted by this or other applicable
provision of the EAR, the exporter or
reexporter must request authorization
by submitting a license application to
BIS in accordance with §§ 748.1, 748.4
and 748.6 of the EAR.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) * * * If the exporter wishes to
retain an item abroad beyond the 12
months authorized by paragraph (a) of
this section, the exporter must request
authorization by submitting a license
application in accordance with §§ 748.1,
748.4 and 748.6 of the EAR to BIS 90
days prior to the expiration of the 12
month period.
*
*
*
*
*
I 4. In § 740.12, revise paragraph
(a)(2)(iii)(C) to read as follows:
§ 740.12 Gift parcels and humanitarian
donations (GFT).
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) * * *
(C) Parties seeking authorization to
exceed these frequency limits due to
compelling humanitarian concerns (e.g.,
for certain gifts of medicine) should
submit a license application in
accordance with §§ 748.1, 748.4 and
748.6 of the EAR to BIS with complete
justification.
*
*
*
*
*
I 5. In § 740.15, revise footnote 4 to
paragraph (c), introductory text to read
as follows:
§ 740.15
*
*
Aircraft and vessels (AVS).
*
*
*
4 Where
a license is required, see §§ 748.1,
748.4 and 748.6 of the EAR.
*
*
*
*
*
6. In § 740.17 revise paragraph (d)(1)
to read as follows:
I
§ 740.17 Encryption commodities and
software (ENC).
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(1) Instructions for requesting review.
Review requests submitted to BIS must
be submitted as described in §§ 748.1
and 748.3 of the EAR. See paragraph
(e)(5)(ii) of this section for the mailing
address for the ENC Encryption Request
Coordinator. To ensure that your review
request is properly routed, insert the
phrase ‘‘License Exception ENC’’ in
Block 9 (Special Purpose) of the
application. Also, place an ‘‘X’’ in the
box marked ‘‘Classification Request’’ in
Block 5 (Type of Application) of Form
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 163 / Thursday, August 21, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
BIS–748P or select ‘‘Commodity
Classification’’ if filing electronically.
Neither the electronic nor paper forms
provide a separate block to check for the
submission of encryption review
requests. Failure to properly complete
these items may delay consideration of
your review request.
*
*
*
*
*
7. In § 740.18 revise paragraph (c)(2)
to read as follows:
I
§ 740.18
Agricultural commodities (AGR).
PART 742—[AMENDED]
8. The authority citation for 15 CFR
part 742 is revised to read as follows:
I
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.;
42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22
U.S.C. 7210; Sec 1503, Public Law 108–11,
117 Stat. 559; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3
CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12851, 58 FR
33181, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O.
12938, 59 FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p.
950; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996
Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3
CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Presidential
Determination 2003–23 of May 7, 2003, 68
FR 26459, May 16, 2003; Notice of July 23,
2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008); Notice of
November 8, 2007, 72 FR 63963 (November
13, 2007).
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
§ 742.2 Proliferation of chemical and
biological weapons.
*
*
*
(e) * * *
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
*
Jkt 214001
*
*
*
10. In § 742.15, revise paragraph
(b)(2)(i) to read as follows:
I
Encryption items.
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(2) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(i) Procedures for requesting review.
To request review of your mass market
encryption products, you must submit
to BIS and the ENC Encryption Request
Coordinator the information described
in paragraphs (a) through (e) of
Supplement No. 6 to this part 742, and
you must include specific information
describing how your products qualify
for mass market treatment under the
criteria in the Cryptography Note (Note
3) of Category 5, Part 2 (‘‘Information
Security’’), of the Commerce Control
List (Supplement No. 1 to part 774 of
the EAR). Submit review requests to BIS
in accordance with §§ 748.1 and 748.3
of the EAR. To ensure that your review
request is properly routed, insert the
phrase ‘‘Mass market encryption’’ in
Block 9 (Special Purpose) and place an
‘‘X’’ in the box marked ‘‘Classification
Request’’ in Block 5 (Type of
Application) Block 5 does not provide a
separate item to check for the
submission of encryption review
requests. Failure to properly complete
these items may delay consideration of
your review request. Submissions to the
ENC Encryption Request Coordinator
should be directed to the mailing
address indicated in § 740.17(e)(5)(ii) of
the EAR. BIS will notify you if there are
any questions concerning your request
for review (e.g., because of missing or
incomplete support documentation).
*
*
*
*
*
11. In Supplement No. 6 to part 742
revise the first sentence to read as
follows:
I
Supplement No. 6 to Part 742
Guidelines for Submitting Review
Requests for Encryption Items
Review requests for encryption items must
include all of the documentation described in
this supplement and be submitted to BIS in
accordance with §§ 748.1 and 748.3 of the
EAR.
*
16:30 Aug 20, 2008
*
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(2) Procedures. You must provide
prior notification of exports and
reexports under License Exception AGR
by submitting a completed application
in accordance with § 748.1 of the EAR.
The following blocks must be
completed, as appropriate: Blocks 1, 2,
3, 4, 5 (by marking box 5 ‘‘Other’’), 14,
16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22 (a), (e), (f), (g), (h),
(i), (j), 23, and 25 according to the
instructions described in Supplement
No. 1 to part 748 of the EAR. If your
commodity is fertilizer, western red
cedar or live horses, you must confirm
that BIS has previously classified your
commodity as EAR99 by placing the
Commodity Classification Automatic
Tracking System (CCATS) number in
Block 22(d). BIS will not initiate the
registration of an AGR notification
unless the application is complete.
*
*
*
*
*
9. Revise the first sentence of
§ 742.2(e)(1) to read as follows:
*
§ 742.15
*
I
(1) Supplement No. 1 to part 748 of
the EAR provides general instructions
for completing license applications
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
*
*
Frm 00023
*
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
49329
PART 744—[AMENDED]
The authority citation for part 744 is
revised to read as follows:
I
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.;
42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22
U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR,
1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181,
3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12938, 59
FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 950; E.O.
12947, 60 FR 5079, 3 CFR, 1995 Comp., p.
356; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996
Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3
CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 208; E.O. 13222, 66 FR
44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O.
13224, 66 FR 49079, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p.
786; Notice of July 23, 2008, 73 FR 43603
(July 25, 2008); Notice of November 8, 2007,
72 FR 63963 (November 13, 2007).
12. Revise § 744.21(d) to read as
follows:
I
§ 744.21 Restrictions on certain military
end-uses in the People’s Republic of China.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) License application procedure.
When submitting a license application
pursuant to this section, you must state
in the ‘‘additional information’’ block of
the application that ‘‘this application is
submitted because of the license
requirement in § 744.21 of the EAR
(Restrictions on Certain Military Enduses in the People’s Republic of
China).’’ In addition, either in the
additional information block or in an
attachment to the application, you must
include all known information
concerning the military end-use of the
item(s). If you submit an attachment
with your license application, you must
reference the attachment in the
‘‘additional information’’ block of the
application.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 748—[AMENDED]
13. The authority citation for 15 CFR
part 748 is revised to read as follows:
I
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767,
3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66
FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice
of July 23, 2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008).
14. In § 748.1, revise paragraph (a) and
add a paragraph (d) to read as follows:
I
§ 748.1
General provisions.
(a) Scope. In this part, references to
the Export Administration Regulations
or EAR are references to 15 CFR chapter
VII, subchapter C. The provisions of this
part involve requests for classifications
and advisory opinions, export license
applications, encryption review
requests, reexport license applications,
and certain license exception notices
subject to the EAR. All terms,
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
49330
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 163 / Thursday, August 21, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
conditions, provisions, and instructions,
including the applicant and consignee
certifications, contained in electronic or
paper form(s) are incorporated as part of
the EAR. For the purposes of this part,
the term ‘‘application’’ refers to both
electronic applications and the Form
BIS–748P: Multipurpose Application.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Electronic Filing Required. All
export and reexport license applications
(other than Special Comprehensive
License or Special Iraq Reconstruction
License applications), encryption
review requests, license exception AGR
notifications, and classification requests
and their accompanying documents
must be filed via BIS’s Simplified
Network Application Processing system
(SNAP–R), unless BIS authorizes
submission via the paper forms BIS
748–P (Multipurpose Application
Form), BIS–748P–A (Item Appendix)
and BIS–748P–B, (End-User Appendix).
Only original paper forms may be used.
Facsimiles or reproductions are not
acceptable.
(1) Reasons for authorizing paper
submissions. BIS will process paper
applications notices or requests if the
submitting party meets one or more of
the following criteria:
(i) BIS has received no more than one
submission (i.e. the total number of
export license applications, reexport
license applications, encryption review
requests, license exception AGR
notifications, and classification
requests) from that party in the twelve
months immediately preceding its
receipt of the current submission;
(ii) The party does not have access to
the Internet;
(iii) BIS has rejected the party’s
electronic filing registration or revoked
its eligibility to file electronically;
(iv) BIS has requested that the party
submit a paper copy for a particular
transaction; or
(v) BIS has determined that urgency,
a need to implement U.S. government
policy or a circumstance outside the
submitting party’s control justify
allowing paper submissions in a
particular instance.
(2) Procedure for requesting
authorization to file paper applications,
notifications, or requests. The applicant
must state in Block 24 or as an
attachment to the paper application
(Form BIS 748–P) which of the criteria
in paragraph (d)(1) of this section it
meets and the facts that support such
statement. Submit the completed
application, notification or request to
Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S.
Department of Commerce, 14th Street
and Pennsylvania, NW., Room H2705,
Washington DC 20230.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:30 Aug 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
(3) BIS decision. If BIS authorizes or
requires paper filing pursuant to this
section, it will process the application,
notification or request in accordance
with Part 750 of the EAR. If BIS rejects
a request to file using paper, it will
return the Form BIS–748P and all
attachments to the submitting party
without action and will state the reason
for its decision.
§ 748.2
[Amended]
15. In § 748.2, remove paragraph (c).
I 16. In § 748.3 revise; paragraph (b)
introductory text, the final sentence of
paragraph (b)(1), paragraph (b)(2) and
first sentence of paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
I
§ 748.3 Classification requests, advisory
opinions, and encryption review requests.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * * Submit classification
requests in accordance with the
procedures in § 748.1.
(1) * * * Classification requests must
be supported by any descriptive
literature, brochures, precise technical
specifications or papers that describe
the items in sufficient technical detail to
enable classification by BIS submitted
as PDF files attached to the SNAP–R
submission unless a paper submission is
authorized pursuant to § 748.1 of the
EAR.
(2) When submitting a classification
request, you must complete Blocks 1
through 5, 14, 22(a), (b), (c), (d), and (i),
24, and 25 on the application. You must
provide a recommended classification
in Block 22(a) and explain the basis for
your recommendation based on the
technical parameters specified in the
appropriate ECCN in Block 24. If you
are unable to determine a recommended
classification for your item, include an
explanation in Block 24, identifying the
ambiguities or deficiencies that
precluded you from making a
recommended classification.
(c) * * * Advisory opinion requests
must be in writing and be submitted to
the address listed in § 748.1(d)(2). * * *
*
*
*
*
*
I 17. In § 748.4, revise the third
sentence of paragraph (b)(1) and the first
sentence of paragraph (b)(2)(ii) to read
as follows.
§ 748.4 Basic guidance related to applying
for a license.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * * (1) * * * If there is any
doubt about which persons should be
named as parties to the transaction, the
applicant should disclose the names of
all such persons and the functions to be
performed by each in Block 24 of the
application. * * *
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(2) * * *
(ii) * * * Block 7 of the application
(documents on file with applicant) must
be marked ‘‘other’’ and Block 24
(Additional information) must be
marked ‘‘748.4(b)(2)’’ to indicate that
the power of attorney or other written
authorization is on file with the agent.
*
*
*
*
*
I 18. In § 748.5, revise the first sentence
of the introductory paragraph and the
second sentence of paragraph (b) to read
as follows:
§ 748.5
Parties to the transaction.
The following parties may be entered
on the application. * * *
(a) * * *
(b) * * * If a person and address is
listed in Block 15 of the application, the
Bureau of Industry and Security will
send the license to that person instead
of the applicant.
*
*
*
*
*
I 19. In § 748.6, revise paragraph (a), the
first sentence of paragraph (b) and
paragraph (e) to read as follows:
§ 748.6 General instructions for license
applications.
(a) Instructions. General instructions
for filling out license applications are in
Supp. No. 1 to this part. Special
instructions for applications involving
certain transactions are listed in § 748.8
and described fully in Supp. No. 2 to
this part.
(b) * * * Each application has an
application control number. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Attachments to applications.
Documents required to be submitted
with applications filed via SNAP–R
must be submitted as PDF files using the
procedures described in SNAP–R.
Documents required to be submitted
with paper applications must bear the
application control number to which
they relate and, if applicable, be stapled
to the paper form. Where necessary, BIS
may require you to submit additional
information beyond that stated in the
EAR confirming or amplifying
information contained in your license
application.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 750—[AMENDED]
20. The authority citation for part 750
is revised to read as follows:
I
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; Sec. 1503, Public Law
108–11, 117 Stat. 559; E.O. 13026, 61 FR
58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O.
13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p.
783; Presidential Determination 2003–23 of
May 7, 2003, 68 FR 26459, May 16, 2003;
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 163 / Thursday, August 21, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Notice of July 23, 2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25,
2008).
26. In § 754.4, revise paragraphs
(d)(1), (d)(2), and the introductory text
of paragraph (d)(3) to read as follows:
I
21. Revise the last sentence of
§ 750.7(h)(3) to read as follows:
§ 754.4
§ 750.7
*
I
Issuance of licenses.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(3) * * * The written request must be
submitted to BIS at the address listed in
§ 748.1(d)(2) of the EAR.
*
*
*
*
*
I 22. Revise the second sentence of
§ 750.8(b) to read as follows:
§ 750.8 Revocation or suspension of
licenses.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * * The license must be
returned to BIS at the address listed in
§ 748.1(d)(2) of the EAR, Attn: ‘‘Return
of Revoked/Suspended License’’.
*
*
*
*
*
I 23. Revise the first sentence of
§ 750.9(a) to read as follows:
§ 750.9
Duplicate licenses.
(a) * * * If a license is lost, stolen or
destroyed, you, as the licensee, may
obtain a duplicate of the license by
submitting a letter to the BIS at the
address listed in § 748.1(d)(2) of the
EAR, Attention: ‘‘Duplicate License
Request’’.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 754—[AMENDED]
24. The authority citation for 15 CFR
part 754 is revised to read as follows:
I
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 10 U.S.C. 7420; 10 U.S.C.
7430(e); 30 U.S.C. 185(s), 185(u); 42 U.S.C.
6212; 43 U.S.C. 1354; 46 U.S.C. app. 466c;
E.O. 11912, 41 FR 15825, 3 CFR, 1976 Comp.,
p. 114; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001
Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 3, 2006, 71
FR 44551 (August 7, 2006); Notice of July 23,
2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008).
25. In § 754.2, revise paragraphs (g)(1)
and (g)(5)(i) to read as follows:
I
§ 754.2
Crude oil.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(1) Applicants must submit their
applications in accordance with
§§ 748.1, 748.4 and 748.6 of the EAR.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) * * *
(i) BIS will issue licenses for
approved applications in the order in
which the applications are received,
with the total quantity authorized for
any one license not to exceed 25 percent
of the annual authorized volume of
California heavy crude oil.
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:30 Aug 20, 2008
Jkt 214001
Unprocessed Western Red Cedar.
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1) Applicants requesting to export
unprocessed western red cedar must
apply for a license in accordance with
§ 748.1, 748.4 and 748.6 of the EAR,
submit any other documents as may be
required by BIS, and submit a statement
from an authorized representative of the
exporter, reading as follows:
I, (Name) (Title) of (Exporter)
HEREBY CERTIFY that to the best of my
knowledge and belief the (Quantity)
(cubic meters or board feed scribner) of
unprocessed western red cedar timber
that (Exporter) proposes to export was
not harvested from State or Federal
lands under contracts entered into after
October 1, 1979.
llllllllllllllllll
l
Signature
llllllllllllllllll
l
Date
(2) In Blocks 16 and 18 of the
application, ‘‘Various’’ may be entered
when there is more than one purchaser
or ultimate consignee.
(3) For each application submitted,
and for each export shipment made
under a license, the exporter must
assemble and retain for the period
described in part 762 of the EAR, and
produce or make available for
inspection, the following:
*
*
*
*
*
I 27. In § 754.5 revise the second
sentence of paragraph (b)(2) to read as
follows:
§ 754.5
Horses for export by sea.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * * You must provide a
statement in the additional information
section of the application certifying that
no horse under consignment is being
exported for the purpose of slaughter.
*
*
*
*
*
I 28. In Supplement No. 2 to Part 754,
revise footnote number 2 to read as
follows:
Supplement No. 2 to Part 754—Western
Red Cedar
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025,
3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August
3, 2006, 71 FR 44551 (August 7, 2006); Notice
of July 23, 2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008).
30. In § 764.7, revise the second
sentence of paragraph (b)(2)(i) to read as
follows:
I
§ 764.7 Activities involving items that may
have been illegally exported or reexported
to Libya.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * * License applications should
be submitted in accordance with
§§ 748.1, 748.4 and 748.6 of the EAR,
and should fully describe the relevant
activity within the scope of § 764.2(e) of
this part which is the basis of the
application.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 772—[AMENDED]
31. The authority citation for 15 CFR
part 772 is revised to read as follows:
I
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025,
3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August
3, 2006, 71 FR 44551 (August 7, 2006); Notice
of July 23, 2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008).
32. In § 772.1 revise the second
sentence of the definition of the term
‘‘Other party authorized to receive
license.’’
I
§ 772.1 Definitions of terms as used in the
Export Administration Regulations (EAR).
*
*
*
*
*
Other party authorized to receive
license. * * * If a person and address
is listed in Block 15 of the application,
the Bureau of Industry and Security will
send the license to that person instead
of the applicant.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 7, 2008.
Christopher R. Wall,
Assistant Secretary for Export
Administration.
[FR Doc. E8–18852 Filed 8–20–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–33–P
2 Report commodities on license
applications in the units of quantity
indicated.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 764—[AMENDED]
29. The authority citation for 15 CFR
part 764 is revised to read as follows:
I
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
49331
E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM
21AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 163 (Thursday, August 21, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 49323-49331]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18852]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
15 CFR Parts 740, 742, 744, 748, 750, 754, 764 and 772
[Docket No. 0612242559-8545-02]
RIN 0694-AD94
Mandatory Electronic Filing of Export and Reexport License
Applications, Classification Requests, Encryption Review Requests, and
License Exception AGR Notifications
AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule requires that export and reexport license
applications, classification requests, encryption review requests,
License Exception AGR notifications and related documents be submitted
to the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) via its Simplified Network
Application Process (SNAP-R) system. This requirement does not apply to
applications for Special Comprehensive Licenses or in certain
situations in which BIS authorizes paper submissions.
DATES: Effective date October 20, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this rule
contact William Arvin, e-mail warvin@bis.doc.gov or tel. 202-482-2440.
For information about registering for or using the SNAP-R system
contact Lisa Williams at 202-482-2148.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
BIS administers a system of export and reexport controls in
accordance with the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). In doing
so, BIS requires that parties wishing to engage in certain transactions
apply for licenses, submit encryption review requests, or submit
certain notifications to BIS. BIS also reviews, upon request,
specifications of various items and determines their proper
classification under the EAR. Currently, members of the public submit
these applications, requests and notifications to BIS in one of three
ways: via SNAP-R, via BIS's Electronic License Application Information
Network (ELAIN), or via the paper BIS Multipurpose Application Form BIS
748-P and its two appendices, the BIS 748-P A (item appendix) and the
BIS 748-P B (end user appendix). In many instances, BIS needs
additional documents to act on the submission. For documents that
relate to paper submissions, the documents can be mailed or delivered
to BIS with the BIS 748-P form. For submissions made electronically via
ELAIN, the documents must be sent to BIS separately and matched up with
the applications when they arrive.
In 2006, BIS replaced its then existing Simplified Network
Application Processing system (SNAP) with an improved system referred
to as ``SNAP Redesign (SNAP-R)''. The improvements include the ability
to include documents related to a submission in the form of PDF
(portable document format) files as ``attachments'' to the submission.
Other improvements include a feature that allows BIS personnel to
securely request additional information from the submitting party and
for the party to submit that information in a manner that ties the
chain of communication to the submission.
BIS believes that use of SNAP-R will reduce processing times and
simplify compliance with and administration of export controls. SNAP-R
provides not only improved efficiency in submission and processing, but
improved end-user security through rights management and an updated
application and security infrastructure.
Therefore, beginning October 20, 2008 all export and reexport
license applications (other than Special Comprehensive License and
Special Iraq Reconstruction License applications), classification
requests, encryption review requests, License Exception AGR
notifications, and ``attached'' related documents must be submitted to
BIS via its Simplified Network Application Process Redesign (SNAP-R)
system unless BIS authorizes paper submissions. This rule also sets
forth the criteria under which BIS authorizes paper submissions.
Changes Made by This Rule
The changes that this rule makes center on part 748 of the EAR,
which sets forth the principal procedures governing the submission of
the applications, review requests and notifications affected by this
rule. The changes are in Sec. 748.1 ``General provisions,'' Sec.
748.3 ``Classification requests, advisory opinions, and encryption
review requests,'' and in Sec. 748.6 ``General instructions for
license applications.'' The rule also makes conforming changes to a
number of EAR provisions that currently employ language related to the
paper forms.
Substantive Changes
Section 748.1 is revised to emphasize electronic filing over paper
and to set forth the basic requirement that license
[[Page 49324]]
applications (other than Special Comprehensive License or Special Iraq
Reconstruction License applications), encryption review requests,
License Exception AGR notifications, and classification requests and
any accompanying documents must be submitted via SNAP-R unless BIS
authorizes submission via paper. Revised section 748.1 continues to
specify that for paper submissions, only original BIS paper forms may
be used and that reproductions or facsimiles are not acceptable.
Section 748.1 also sets forth the criteria under which BIS will
authorize paper submissions. Those criteria are: (1) BIS has received
no more than one submission from the party in the twelve months
immediately preceding the current submission, i.e., the combined total
of the party's license applications (other than Special Comprehensive
Licenses), encryption review requests, License Exception AGR
notifications, and classification requests could not exceed one; (2)
the party does not have access to the Internet; (3) BIS has rejected
the party's electronic filing registration or revoked its eligibility
to file electronically; (4) BIS has requested that the party submit on
paper for a particular transaction; or (5) BIS has determined that
urgency, a need to implement government policy or a circumstance
outside the submitting party's control justifies allowing paper
submissions on a particular instance.
Parties who wish to submit on paper must submit the BIS Form 748-P.
In addition to the information relevant to the substance of the
submission itself, the submitter must include, either on the form or as
an attachment, a statement explaining which of the five foregoing
criteria justifies a paper submission and provide supporting
information. If BIS agrees that at least one of the criteria is met, it
will process the submission in accordance with its regular procedures.
If BIS finds that none of the criteria asserted by the submitter are
met, it will return the form without action and inform the submitter of
the reason for rejecting the request to file on paper. A decision by
BIS to reject the request to file on paper is subject to appeal under
part 756 of the EAR. This rule also moves the address for paper
submissions from Sec. 748.2 to Sec. 748.1.
Section 748.3 is revised to replace instructions about where and
how to submit classification requests, with a reference to the
procedures in Sec. 748.1 and to require that documents submitted with
the classification request be submitted in PDF format as attachments to
the SNAP-R submission unless BIS had authorized a paper submission
pursuant to Sec. 748.1 of the EAR. Section 748.3 continues to state
requirements about the kinds of information that must be included in
classification requests.
Section 748.6 is revised to require that any documents submitted in
support of any license application submitted via SNAP-R be submitted
via the SNAP-R system as PDF (portable document format) files. Section
748.6 also is revised to remove the statement that application control
numbers are preprinted on the paper forms. The paper forms will
continue to bear a preprinted application control number, but for
electronic submissions, application control numbers are communicated to
the submitter electronically once BIS accepts the submission.
Conforming Changes
Prior to publication of this rule, a number of EAR provisions
stated that a particular submission must be made on the BIS 748-P paper
form or its electronic equivalent. If such a provision referred to a
classification request or encryption review request, this rule revises
that provision to state that the submission must be made in accordance
with Sec. Sec. 748.1 and 748.3. If such a provision referred to a
license application (other than a Special Comprehensive License
application or Special Iraq Reconstruction License), this rule also
would revise that provision to state that the submission must be in
accordance with Sec. Sec. 748.1, 748.4 and 748.6. The changes
described in this paragraph are to be made in:
Sec. 740.8(b)(2), relating to classification requests
pursuant to License Exception ``Key Management Infrastructure (KMI)'';
Sec. 740.9(a)(4)(i) and (iii), relating to authorizations
to sell or dispose of or to retain abroad more than one year items
exported under License Exception ``Temporary imports, exports and
reexports (TMP)'';
Sec. 740.12(a)(2)(iii)(C), relating to applications to
exceed the frequency limits for individual gift parcels under License
Exception ``Gift parcels and humanitarian donations (GFT)'';
Sec. 740.15, footnote number 4, relating to certain
exports to U.S. or Canadian vessels;
Sec. 740.17(d)(1), relating to the submission of
encryption review requests under License Exception ``Encryption
commodities and software (ENC)'';
Sec. 742.15(b)(2)(i), relating to submission of review
requests for certain encryption items;
Supplement No. 6 to part 742, relating to submission of
review requests for certain ``mass market'' encryption commodities and
software;
Sec. 754.2(g)(1), relating to applications for export of
certain California crude oil;
Sec. 754.4(d)(1), relating to applications to export
unprocessed Western Red Cedar; and
Sec. 764.7(b)(2)(i), relating to applications to take
certain actions with respect to certain items in Libya.
This rule replaces the requirement to use the form BIS 748-P in
Sec. 740.18(c)(2) when submitting notice to the government in advance
of shipments under License Exception ``Agricultural Commodities (AGR)''
with a requirement to submit such notices in accordance with Sec.
748.1 of the EAR.
This rule also replaces references to the BIS 748-P Multipurpose
Application Form with the word ``application'' in provisions that
describe certain information that must be submitted with particular
types of license applications. This change emphasizes that the same
information is required regardless of whether an application is
submitted on paper or electronically. The change described in this
paragraph is made in:
Sec. 742.2(e)(1), relating to certain license
requirements imposed for chemical and biological weapons proliferation
concerns;
Sec. 744.21(d), relating to applications to export or
reexport certain items to known military end-uses in the People's
Republic of China;
Sec. 748.4(b)(1), relating to disclosure of parties on a
license application;
Sec. 748.4(b)(2)(ii), relating to written authority of
certain agents to submit on a principal's behalf;
Sec. 748.5 introductory paragraph and paragraph (b),
relating to parties on the application;
Sec. 754.4(d)(2) and (d)(3), relating to applications for
export of unprocessed western red cedar;
Sec. 754.5(b)(2), relating to applications to export
horses by sea;
Supplement No. 2 to Part 754, relating to applications for
export of western red cedar: and
Sec. 772.1, definition of ``Other party authorized to
receive license.''
This rule removes the reference to date time stamping in Sec.
754.2(g)(5)(i) by BIS of applications to export crude oil because that
process occurs only with paper applications. However, the rule retains
the policy in Sec. 754.2(g)(5)(i) of issuing licenses for approved
applications in the order in which the applications are received.
This rule also changes the references to Sec. 748.2(c) as a source
of BIS's address
[[Page 49325]]
in Sec. Sec. 748.3, 750.7(h)(3), 750.8(b) and 750.9(a) to a reference
to Sec. 748.1(h)(3) because the rule removes Sec. 748.2(c) and
includes the address in Sec. 748.1(h)(3).
Public Comments
Comments Related to Lack of Direct Data Interface Between SNAP-R and
Corporate Databases
BIS received comments on the proposed rule from eleven commenters.
Eight commenters stated that SNAP-R should be modified to include
capability for direct data transfer from corporate databases. Five of
these eight stated that SNAP-R should not be made mandatory until it
includes such a function. Two of the eight stated that a direct data
interface was needed but did not state that they were opposed to making
use of SNAP-R mandatory without such an interface. One of the eight
supported making use of SNAP-R mandatory, but noted the need for a
direct data interface. Four of the eight commenters stated that
``rather than terminate ELAIN replace it with a program interface that
incorporates SNAP-R data formats and document attachment
capabilities.''
The eight commenters who addressed direct data transfer offered the
following points in support of the need for a direct data interface.
Not all of the eight commenters offered all of these points and some of
these points were offered by more than one commenter.
Lack of a direct interface forces users to go outside
corporate computer systems that provide internal compliance checks, a
practice that creates a compliance risk because it reduces management's
ability to see the information and removes a basis for analysis and
audits of best practices throughout the corporation.
Manual data entry is a potential source of errors and is
inefficient and costly. One commenter estimated that it will have to
spend $50,000 in additional labor costs to do data entry in SNAP-R.
Other government programs that require submission of
export related information to the government have direct data
interfaces. Commenters specifically mentioned the D-TRADE (used for
State Department export license applications) and the Automated Export
System (used to collect shippers' export data).
The application of current Internet technologies
(including file transfer and XML data formats) to parallel the SNAP-R
Web site make the development of a SNAP-R automated interface a very
modest information systems project.
Allowing direct data interface would allow large users to
employ their own business compliance rules in the application
submission process. In some cases, these internal rules might be
stricter than the minimum EAR requirements.
Allowing direct data interface would allow large users to
incorporate automated denied persons list screening, automated status
checking, message handling and notifications into the industry side of
the system.
Although BIS addressed the impact of the rule on small
entities, it did not address the fact that a large percentage of
submissions come from a small number of submitters and the burden that
manual data entry would impose on them.
BIS acknowledges the convenience and potential cost savings that
can be provided to the public by a direct data transmission from the
applicants' computer systems to BIS. However, BIS must also consider
the security requirements of its computer systems. These security needs
are based on both Federal information system security requirements and
a statutory provision that precludes BIS from disclosing certain
information in those systems, except as provided by law. As a
government agency, BIS must comply with these requirements in a manner
that treats similarly situated parties in a similar manner.
The data provided to BIS through the submissions affected by this
rule can include sensitive international trade information about
pricing, technical design or the identity of potential customers. The
systems that contain the data are high security impact systems in
accordance with Federal Information Processing Standards Publication
199, Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information
Systems and the National Institute of Standards and Technology Special
Publication (SP) 800-60, Guide for Mapping Types of Information and
Information Systems to Security Categories. These standards did not
exist when ELAIN was created in the 1980s.
In addition to the need to comply with government standards for
high security impact systems, BIS is obligated to implement the
provisions of Section 12(c) of the Export Administration Act of 1979,
as amended (EAA). Section 12(c) of the EAA prohibits the release of
information that was obtained for the purpose of consideration of or
that concerns license applications without a determination that the
release of such information is in the national interest. To meet this
obligation, BIS, among other things, makes efforts to guard against
unauthorized access to its computer systems that contain information
that is protected by Section 12(c) of the EAA.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Although the EAA expired in August 2001, the President has
ordered that ``the provisions of the [EAA] and the provisions for
administration of the [EAA] shall be carried out * * * so as to
continue in full force and effect * * * the export control system.''
Executive Order 13222 (Aug. 17, 2001). The Department has
determined, and federal courts have agreed, that this order has the
effect of preserving the confidentiality requirements of Section
12(c). See e.g. Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control v. U.S.
Dept. of Commerce, 317 F.3d 275 (DC Cir. 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meeting these obligations poses ever increasing challenges for BIS.
Over the last decade, the number and sophistication of cyber attacks on
government systems has increased. BIS is a confirmed target of these
attacks and in order to prevent the loss or compromise of the data that
it is obligated to protect, BIS has adopted stringent measures.
BIS requires extraordinary IT Security measures due to its: (1)
International trade data which per FIPS-199 referenced above, carries a
``high'' security impact level, and (2) confirmation by the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) U.S. Computer Emergency Response Team
(USCERT) that BIS is a target of international actors engaging in broad
federal level cyber espionage. The former requires data security
exceeding even the requirements of personal privacy information; the
latter requires security infrastructure over and above that provided by
commercially available products.
The general nature of the cyber-espionage threat is that BIS has
been and continues to be the target of attempts by external actors to
exfiltrate data. The history and pattern of these attacks support the
premise that their frequency and sophistication are likely to increase.
BIS bases its information technology security planning upon that
premise.
The most effective BIS response to the cyber-espionage threat is to
implement a compartmentalized network and security infrastructure to
secure mission critical export control system applications and data
from foreign intrusions. Physical and logical segregation is the same
concept applied to classified systems and data protection. BIS has
implemented this approach for the same reasons that it is applied in
classified environments--the cyber espionage vulnerabilities exceed the
protections provided by commercial products in a non-compartmentalized
environment. As confirmed with DHS and other independent federal and
[[Page 49326]]
private security experts, a compartmentalized system is the only
approach which will, with a high degree of certainty, yield results.
Selective targeted IT security measures have not been and are not
effective because of the breadth, resources, sophistication and nature
of the attack methods. For example, the BIS compartmentalization
includes, but is not limited to, export control system segregation from
general internet access, and particular e-mail message formats and
attachments. This not only allows BIS to continue to mitigate, with
100% effectiveness, the risk of BIS systems losing sensitive data, but
to ensure its systems are not used to launch an attack against the
exporter community or other agencies.
Finally, this security posture must be implemented with the
principle that any direct computer interface standard to be implemented
for the purpose of submitting data to BIS should not arbitrarily
exclude any party.
With these considerations in mind, BIS has assessed options for
accomplishing the goals of the commenters without breaching its
security and fairness obligations. This examination included, but was
not limited to, review of procedures used by the other agencies
referenced by the commenters.
For example, one method to achieve the commenters' objectives would
be to allow direct data interface between private sector computer
systems and the BIS licensing systems. BIS rejected this alternative.
Allowing a system of unknown security standards to interface directly
with a high impact security system is, in BIS's view, inconsistent with
the security controls specified in National Institute of Standards and
Technology publication 800-53A, Guide for Assessing the Security
Controls in Federal Information Systems. This position is reinforced by
the information provided by Federal and private security sources, and
the knowledge BIS has acquired in responding to previous attempts by
outside parties to gain access to data in its information systems. BIS
has determined that this method would pose an unacceptable risk of
compromise and unauthorized system and data access.
BIS also considered the option of allowing data transmission from
private sector computers to a logically and physically segregated BIS
computer that would be isolated from BIS systems that would store
sensitive data. There are options to mitigate but not to eliminate the
risk posed by malicious code which may be embedded in transmissions and
data content. Given sufficient time and resources, BIS could implement
an isolation and containment solution that would provide an acceptable
level of risk mitigation. However, the cost of the solution would
increase as the number of unique user systems authorized to interface
directly with BIS computer systems increased. The possibility of
concealing harmful code in a data transmission and the corresponding
costs and technical challenges of detecting and removing that code
exist regardless of the data interface method or format; they will
simply differ in nature if BIS applies an XML schema as suggested by
one commenter.
Because costs and complexity would increase as the number of unique
user systems increased, providing opportunity for direct data
transmission to all parties who submitted comments requesting direct
data transmission to BIS would not be cost effective given current
information technology security requirements and capabilities.
Moreover, BIS could not in fairness limit such costs and complexity by
restricting direct data transmission to a few parties or to a limited
number of service providers. Doing so would favor some private sector
parties over others and could be viewed as fostering a government
protected oligopoly.
After considering the foregoing factors, BIS concludes that
eliminating the ELAIN system and requiring use of the SNAP-R Web based
data entry system is the best available alternative given current
information technology capabilities and fiscal constraints.
Accordingly, BIS intends to discontinue use of ELAIN and require the
use of the SNAP-R system unless one of the reasons for authorizing
paper submissions set forth in this rule applies in particular case.
Comment Related to Cost Reduction Afforded by SNAP-R
One commenter noted that use of SNAP-R would likely reduce costs
and processing time compared to paper forms.
BIS agrees. One of the main advantages of an electronic system such
as SNAP-R is reduced costs and processing time.
Comments Proposing Changes to SNAP-R That Are Not Related to the
Proposed Rule
BIS received several comments proposing changes to SNAP-R that do
not address the issues in the proposed rule. BIS will consider these
comments as it further develops the SNAP-R system and may implement
them as resources become available. These comments are:
SNAP-R should provide status checking ability similar to
STELA, either in addition to STELA or instead of STELA;
Licensing officers should be able to enter remarks about
the status of a submission that would be readable by the applicant;
SNAP-R should list the licensing officer assigned to the
application;
SNAP-R should allow edits to the commodity field after the
field is saved by the user;
Improve SNAP-R rights management to allow better
management oversight via access to all of the company's submissions,
employee reassignments, assignment of access rights, systematic peer
review and coordination of export control compliance policies, and
practices among affiliated companies (Consider the United Kingdom's
SPIRE system as an example);
Allow exporters to designate third parties to submit on
their behalf and to monitor the activities of those third parties;
Include application control numbers or reference numbers
in the drop down menu;
Interact with the National Security Agency (NSA) so that
encryption requests submitted via SNAP-R are automatically routed to
NSA instead of requiring applicant to submit a copy of its SNAP-R
submission to NSA; and
Revise the ``View Messages'' screen in SNAP-R to add
columns that show the (submitter's) reference number and the
application control number and allow the submitter to sort the display
on these columns.
These comments embody proposals to make SNAP-R more useful or
effective. BIS believes that they need not be addressed in connection
with this rule. BIS will consider these comments in connection with its
future efforts to improve SNAP-R.
Comments Proposing Changes That Cannot Be Implemented at This Time
Because of Legacy System Limitations
Two comments proposed changes to SNAP-R that cannot be implemented
at this time because of limitations of the legacy Export Control
Automated Support System (ECASS). ECASS, which has been operational
since the early 1980s, is the computer system that BIS uses for
internal processing of license applications, classification requests,
encryption review requests and License Exception AGR notifications. BIS
will consider these comments in connection with its multi-year
incremental ECASS redesign and deployment of the ECASS Redesign
[[Page 49327]]
(ECASS-R) system. However, the expectation is that the changes proposed
in these two comments, if adopted, will not be implemented until the
final stage of the ECASS-R system deployment when the legacy ECASS
system is retired. This is because the legacy ECASS system architecture
is an outdated ``monolithic'' design; although the new ECASS-R system
is being implemented in modules incrementally, the legacy system must
be retired in its entirety to implement broad data element changes cost
effectively.
These two comments are:
Increase the number of characters permitted in the line
item field; and
Increase the number of characters permitted in the
technical note field.
Comment Related to the Ability of SNAP-R To Accept Data Required by the
Export Administration Regulations
One commenter stated that BIS should change the computer/
microprocessor performance field to accommodate APP (adjusted peak
performance) rather than MTOPS (millions of theoretical operations per
second).
In April 2006, the EAR were amended to replace the computer
performance metric composite theoretical performance (CTP) measured in
millions of theoretical operations per second (MTOPS) with a new metric
called adjusted peak performance (APP) measured in weighted teraFLOPS
(WT). In November 2007, another EAR amendment replaced CTP with APP for
microprocessor performance measurement. In the preamble to the April
2004 rule, BIS noted that a computer with a CTP of 190,000 MTOPS would
have an APP of approximately 0.75 WT. A change of this magnitude
requires an adjustment to the range of values that may be entered into
the relevant field in SNAP-R. Currently SNAP-R will accept a range of
values ranging from 0.0000001 to 9.9999999 WT. After considering
applications and licenses currently in its database and estimating the
rate of future increases in computer performance, BIS believes that
SNAP-R as currently configured is adequate for data input of currently
available computers and microprocessors. However, BIS estimates that
computers with a performance level of 10 WT or greater are likely to be
available sometime in the year 2009 or 2010. Therefore, BIS will begin
the change control review process to modify SNAP-R to accept values
exceeding 10 WT in the APP field.
Comments Concerning Electronically ``Attaching'' Files to SNAP-R
Submissions
BIS received comments concerning the requirements for
electronically ``attaching'' documents to the SNAP-R submissions. These
comments are:
Expand the size of supporting documents allowed via SNAP
(SNAP-R). Exporters must use both paper and electronic means for
submission of a single application.
Not all submissions are paper and exporters must use both
paper and electronic means for submission of a single application.
BIS contacted the commenter who provided this comment for
clarification and queried its licensing officers to identify instances
of the problems alluded to in these comments. With the information
obtained from those sources, BIS concluded that these comments are
intended to address the following three issues:
A submitter may not have a PDF version of the document. In
one instance identified by a BIS licensing officer, the only electronic
copy was in JPEG (joint photography experts group) format.
A document may be too large to fit into the submitter's
scanner.
The submitter's PDF file is larger than the maximum file
size that SNAP-R accepts for attachments.
BIS believes that no changes to the rule or to SNAP-R are needed
because of the issues raised in these comments. BIS selected PDF as the
file format for attachments in SNAP-R because it is widely available,
low cost and BIS can effectively implement security measures that
provide a high level of protection against the Adobe related attack
vectors. BIS notes that PDF files are widely used for transmission of
technical documents. Although some documents are too large to scan in
desktop scanners, commercial services that can scan such documents
exist. SNAP-R will accept attachment files up to 10 Mb in size. BIS has
reviewed the SNAP-R submissions that it has received and determined
that the typical file size is approximately 5 Mb. SNAP-R does not place
a limit on the number of files that may be attached to a submission. In
some cases, the submitter may be able to split the file into more than
one file to get below the file size limitations. Finally, BIS notes
that one of the criteria under which BIS will authorize paper
submissions is ``BIS has determined that urgency, a need to implement
U.S. government policy or a circumstance outside the submitting party's
control justify allowing paper submissions in a particular instance.''
BIS believes that this criterion provides it with adequate discretion
to authorize paper submissions in instances where circumstances truly
make attaching PDF files impracticable.
Comment Related to SNAP-R Registration Procedures
One commenter stated a two-week period to issue a Personal
Identification Number is not suitable if SNAP (SNAP-R) is mandatory.
BIS agrees that, in nearly all cases, two weeks should not be
needed to issue a PIN. BIS believes that most PINs are issued
substantially less than two weeks time. BIS encourages persons who
believe that the issuance of a PIN is taking inordinately long to
contact the Export Management and Compliance Division at 202 482 2148
or 202 482 0062.
Changes in This Final Rule Compared to the Proposed Rule
After review of the comments, BIS is making no changes to the
substantive points of the proposed rule in response to the comments.
BIS is making only the following technical and conforming changes
compared to the proposed rule.
The proposed rule did not state whether the applications for a
Special Iraq Reconstruction License (SIRL) would be required to be
filed via SNAP-R. SIRL applications are similar to Special
Comprehensive License (SCL) applications. This final rule explicitly
states the SNAP-R filing is not required for SIRLS, thereby giving the
two similar applications the same treatment.
In Sec. 740.17, footnote number 4 is revised to refer to
Sec. Sec. 748.1, 748.4 and 748.6, the sections that govern license
application submission under this rule.
In Sec. 742.2(e)(1), the reference to the BIS form 748-P is
changed to a reference to an application.
In Sec. 750.7(h)(3), 750.8(b), and 750.9(a) the reference to Sec.
748(c) is replaced with Sec. 748.1(d)(2) because this rule removes
Sec. 748.2(c) and includes the relevant information in Sec.
748.1(d)(2).
Rulemaking Requirements
1. This rule has been determined to be significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866.
2. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is
required to respond to nor be subject to a penalty for failure to
comply with a collection of information, subject to the requirements of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (PRA),
unless that collection of information displays a currently valid Office
of Management and Budget
[[Page 49328]]
(OMB) Control Number. This regulation involves collections previously
approved by the OMB under control number 0694-0088, ``Simplified
Network Application Processing System'' which carries a burden hour
estimate of 58 minutes to prepare and submit form BIS-748.
Miscellaneous and recordkeeping activities account for 12 minutes per
submission. This proposed rule would require persons seeking
authorization to submit paper filings to state, either in the
additional information block on the paper form or an attachment, which
of the criteria for paper submissions they meet and the reasons
therefore. BIS believes that requests seeking authorization to submit
paper filings would impose a minimal burden on applicants as the
information requirements are small and the number of requests is
expected to be low. Applicants making a request would identify one or
more of the 5 criteria under which BIS would authorize a paper
submission, and provide the factual basis for the authorization to
submit on paper. BIS estimates that only a small number of submissions
will seek authorization to file on paper. In 2008, more than 96% of all
submissions affected by this rule were submitted to BIS via SNAP-R.
Therefore, BIS estimates that this requirement will make no material
change of the estimated time of 58 minutes needed to prepare and submit
a BIS-748. Send comments regarding these burden estimates or any other
aspect of these collections of information, including suggestions for
reducing the burden, to David Rostker, OMB Desk Officer, by e-mail at
david_rostker@omb.eop.gov or by fax to (202) 395-7285; and to the
Regulatory Policy Division, Bureau of Industry and Security, Department
of Commerce, Room H 2705, 14th Street and Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20230.
3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined in Executive Order 13132.
4. The Chief Counsel for Regulation at the Department of Commerce
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy at the Small Business
Administration that this rule, if adopted, would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual
basis was published in the proposed rule and is not repeated here. BIS
received no comments that addressed the economic impact of this rule on
small entities, therefore a final regulatory flexibility analysis was
not prepared.
List of Subjects
15 CFR Parts 740, 750 and 748
Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
15 CFR Part 742
Exports, Terrorism.
15 CFR Part 744
Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Terrorism.
15 CFR Part 754
Agricultural commodities, Exports, Forests and forest products,
Horses, Petroleum, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
15 CFR Part 764
Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Law enforcement,
Penalties.
15 CFR Part 772
Exports.
0
Accordingly, parts 740, 742, 744, 748, 750, 754, 764 and 772 of the
Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR 730-774) are amended as
follows:
PART 740--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 740 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
Sec. 901-911, Public Law 106-387; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR,
1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p.
783; Notice of August 3, 2006, 71 FR 44551 (August 7, 2006); Notice
of July 23, 2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008).
0
2. In Sec. 740.8 revise paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 740.8 Key management infrastructure (KMI).
* * * * *
(b) * * *
* * * * *
(2) For such classification requests, indicate ``License Exception
KMI'' in Block 9 on the application. Submit the request to BIS in
accordance with Sec. Sec. 748.1 and 748.3 of the EAR and send a copy
of the request to: Attn: ENC Encryption Request Coordinator, 9800
Savage Road, Suite 6940, Fort Meade, MD 20755-6000.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 740.9 revise the first sentences of paragraphs (a)(4)(i)
and (a)(4)(iii) to read as follows:
Sec. 740.9 Temporary imports, exports and reexports (TMP).
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(i) * * * If the exporter or the reexporter wishes to sell or
otherwise dispose of the items abroad, except as permitted by this or
other applicable provision of the EAR, the exporter or reexporter must
request authorization by submitting a license application to BIS in
accordance with Sec. Sec. 748.1, 748.4 and 748.6 of the EAR.
* * * * *
(iii) * * * If the exporter wishes to retain an item abroad beyond
the 12 months authorized by paragraph (a) of this section, the exporter
must request authorization by submitting a license application in
accordance with Sec. Sec. 748.1, 748.4 and 748.6 of the EAR to BIS 90
days prior to the expiration of the 12 month period.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 740.12, revise paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(C) to read as follows:
Sec. 740.12 Gift parcels and humanitarian donations (GFT).
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) * * *
(C) Parties seeking authorization to exceed these frequency limits
due to compelling humanitarian concerns (e.g., for certain gifts of
medicine) should submit a license application in accordance with
Sec. Sec. 748.1, 748.4 and 748.6 of the EAR to BIS with complete
justification.
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 740.15, revise footnote 4 to paragraph (c), introductory
text to read as follows:
Sec. 740.15 Aircraft and vessels (AVS).
* * * * *
\4\ Where a license is required, see Sec. Sec. 748.1, 748.4 and
748.6 of the EAR.
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 740.17 revise paragraph (d)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 740.17 Encryption commodities and software (ENC).
* * * * *
(d) * * *
* * * * *
(1) Instructions for requesting review. Review requests submitted
to BIS must be submitted as described in Sec. Sec. 748.1 and 748.3 of
the EAR. See paragraph (e)(5)(ii) of this section for the mailing
address for the ENC Encryption Request Coordinator. To ensure that your
review request is properly routed, insert the phrase ``License
Exception ENC'' in Block 9 (Special Purpose) of the application. Also,
place an ``X'' in the box marked ``Classification Request'' in Block 5
(Type of Application) of Form
[[Page 49329]]
BIS-748P or select ``Commodity Classification'' if filing
electronically. Neither the electronic nor paper forms provide a
separate block to check for the submission of encryption review
requests. Failure to properly complete these items may delay
consideration of your review request.
* * * * *
0
7. In Sec. 740.18 revise paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 740.18 Agricultural commodities (AGR).
* * * * *
(c) * * *
* * * * *
(2) Procedures. You must provide prior notification of exports and
reexports under License Exception AGR by submitting a completed
application in accordance with Sec. 748.1 of the EAR. The following
blocks must be completed, as appropriate: Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (by
marking box 5 ``Other''), 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22 (a), (e), (f),
(g), (h), (i), (j), 23, and 25 according to the instructions described
in Supplement No. 1 to part 748 of the EAR. If your commodity is
fertilizer, western red cedar or live horses, you must confirm that BIS
has previously classified your commodity as EAR99 by placing the
Commodity Classification Automatic Tracking System (CCATS) number in
Block 22(d). BIS will not initiate the registration of an AGR
notification unless the application is complete.
* * * * *
PART 742--[AMENDED]
0
8. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 742 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22
U.S.C. 7210; Sec 1503, Public Law 108-11, 117 Stat. 559; E.O. 12058,
43 FR 20947, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 179; E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 3
CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12938, 59 FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp.,
p. 950; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O.
13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Presidential
Determination 2003-23 of May 7, 2003, 68 FR 26459, May 16, 2003;
Notice of July 23, 2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008); Notice of
November 8, 2007, 72 FR 63963 (November 13, 2007).
0
9. Revise the first sentence of Sec. 742.2(e)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 742.2 Proliferation of chemical and biological weapons.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) Supplement No. 1 to part 748 of the EAR provides general
instructions for completing license applications
* * * * *
* * * * *
0
10. In Sec. 742.15, revise paragraph (b)(2)(i) to read as follows:
Sec. 742.15 Encryption items.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
* * * * *
(2) * * *
* * * * *
(i) Procedures for requesting review. To request review of your
mass market encryption products, you must submit to BIS and the ENC
Encryption Request Coordinator the information described in paragraphs
(a) through (e) of Supplement No. 6 to this part 742, and you must
include specific information describing how your products qualify for
mass market treatment under the criteria in the Cryptography Note (Note
3) of Category 5, Part 2 (``Information Security''), of the Commerce
Control List (Supplement No. 1 to part 774 of the EAR). Submit review
requests to BIS in accordance with Sec. Sec. 748.1 and 748.3 of the
EAR. To ensure that your review request is properly routed, insert the
phrase ``Mass market encryption'' in Block 9 (Special Purpose) and
place an ``X'' in the box marked ``Classification Request'' in Block 5
(Type of Application) Block 5 does not provide a separate item to check
for the submission of encryption review requests. Failure to properly
complete these items may delay consideration of your review request.
Submissions to the ENC Encryption Request Coordinator should be
directed to the mailing address indicated in Sec. 740.17(e)(5)(ii) of
the EAR. BIS will notify you if there are any questions concerning your
request for review (e.g., because of missing or incomplete support
documentation).
* * * * *
0
11. In Supplement No. 6 to part 742 revise the first sentence to read
as follows:
Supplement No. 6 to Part 742 Guidelines for Submitting Review Requests
for Encryption Items
Review requests for encryption items must include all of the
documentation described in this supplement and be submitted to BIS
in accordance with Sec. Sec. 748.1 and 748.3 of the EAR.
* * * * *
PART 744--[AMENDED]
0
The authority citation for part 744 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22
U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 12058, 43 FR 20947, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 179;
E.O. 12851, 58 FR 33181, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 608; E.O. 12938, 59
FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 950; E.O. 12947, 60 FR 5079, 3 CFR,
1995 Comp., p. 356; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p.
228; E.O. 13099, 63 FR 45167, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p. 208; E.O. 13222,
66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 13224, 66 FR 49079, 3
CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 786; Notice of July 23, 2008, 73 FR 43603 (July
25, 2008); Notice of November 8, 2007, 72 FR 63963 (November 13,
2007).
0
12. Revise Sec. 744.21(d) to read as follows:
Sec. 744.21 Restrictions on certain military end-uses in the People's
Republic of China.
* * * * *
(d) License application procedure. When submitting a license
application pursuant to this section, you must state in the
``additional information'' block of the application that ``this
application is submitted because of the license requirement in Sec.
744.21 of the EAR (Restrictions on Certain Military End-uses in the
People's Republic of China).'' In addition, either in the additional
information block or in an attachment to the application, you must
include all known information concerning the military end-use of the
item(s). If you submit an attachment with your license application, you
must reference the attachment in the ``additional information'' block
of the application.
* * * * *
PART 748--[AMENDED]
0
13. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 748 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66
FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of July 23, 2008, 73 FR
43603 (July 25, 2008).
0
14. In Sec. 748.1, revise paragraph (a) and add a paragraph (d) to
read as follows:
Sec. 748.1 General provisions.
(a) Scope. In this part, references to the Export Administration
Regulations or EAR are references to 15 CFR chapter VII, subchapter C.
The provisions of this part involve requests for classifications and
advisory opinions, export license applications, encryption review
requests, reexport license applications, and certain license exception
notices subject to the EAR. All terms,
[[Page 49330]]
conditions, provisions, and instructions, including the applicant and
consignee certifications, contained in electronic or paper form(s) are
incorporated as part of the EAR. For the purposes of this part, the
term ``application'' refers to both electronic applications and the
Form BIS-748P: Multipurpose Application.
* * * * *
(d) Electronic Filing Required. All export and reexport license
applications (other than Special Comprehensive License or Special Iraq
Reconstruction License applications), encryption review requests,
license exception AGR notifications, and classification requests and
their accompanying documents must be filed via BIS's Simplified Network
Application Processing system (SNAP-R), unless BIS authorizes
submission via the paper forms BIS 748-P (Multipurpose Application
Form), BIS-748P-A (Item Appendix) and BIS-748P-B, (End-User Appendix).
Only original paper forms may be used. Facsimiles or reproductions are
not acceptable.
(1) Reasons for authorizing paper submissions. BIS will process
paper applications notices or requests if the submitting party meets
one or more of the following criteria:
(i) BIS has received no more than one submission (i.e. the total
number of export license applications, reexport license applications,
encryption review requests, license exception AGR notifications, and
classification requests) from that party in the twelve months
immediately preceding its receipt of the current submission;
(ii) The party does not have access to the Internet;
(iii) BIS has rejected the party's electronic filing registration
or revoked its eligibility to file electronically;
(iv) BIS has requested that the party submit a paper copy for a
particular transaction; or
(v) BIS has determined that urgency, a need to implement U.S.
government policy or a circumstance outside the submitting party's
control justify allowing paper submissions in a particular instance.
(2) Procedure for requesting authorization to file paper
applications, notifications, or requests. The applicant must state in
Block 24 or as an attachment to the paper application (Form BIS 748-P)
which of the criteria in paragraph (d)(1) of this section it meets and
the facts that support such statement. Submit the completed
application, notification or request to Bureau of Industry and
Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Pennsylvania,
NW., Room H2705, Washington DC 20230.
(3) BIS decision. If BIS authorizes or requires paper filing
pursuant to this section, it will process the application, notification
or request in accordance with Part 750 of the EAR. If BIS rejects a
request to file using paper, it will return the Form BIS-748P and all
attachments to the submitting party without action and will state the
reason for its decision.
Sec. 748.2 [Amended]
0
15. In Sec. 748.2, remove paragraph (c).
0
16. In Sec. 748.3 revise; paragraph (b) introductory text, the final
sentence of paragraph (b)(1), paragraph (b)(2) and first sentence of
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 748.3 Classification requests, advisory opinions, and encryption
review requests.
* * * * *
(b) * * * Submit classification requests in accordance with the
procedures in Sec. 748.1.
(1) * * * Classification requests must be supported by any
descriptive literature, brochures, precise technical specifications or
papers that describe the items in sufficient technical detail to enable
classification by BIS submitted as PDF files attached to the SNAP-R
submission unless a paper submission is authorized pursuant to Sec.
748.1 of the EAR.
(2) When submitting a classification request, you must complete
Blocks 1 through 5, 14, 22(a), (b), (c), (d), and (i), 24, and 25 on
the application. You must provide a recommended classification in Block
22(a) and explain the basis for your recommendation based on the
technical parameters specified in the appropriate ECCN in Block 24. If
you are unable to determine a recommended classification for your item,
include an explanation in Block 24, identifying the ambiguities or
deficiencies that precluded you from making a recommended
classification.
(c) * * * Advisory opinion requests must be in writing and be
submitted to the address listed in Sec. 748.1(d)(2). * * *
* * * * *
0
17. In Sec. 748.4, revise the third sentence of paragraph (b)(1) and
the first sentence of paragraph (b)(2)(ii) to read as follows.
Sec. 748.4 Basic guidance related to applying for a license.
* * * * *
(b) * * * (1) * * * If there is any doubt about which persons
should be named as parties to the transaction, the applicant should
disclose the names of all such persons and the functions to be
performed by each in Block 24 of the application. * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) * * * Block 7 of the application (documents on file with
applicant) must be marked ``other'' and Block 24 (Additional
information) must be marked ``748.4(b)(2)'' to indicate that the power
of attorney or other written authorization is on file with the agent.
* * * * *
0
18. In Sec. 748.5, revise the first sentence of the introductory
paragraph and the second sentence of paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 748.5 Parties to the transaction.
The following parties may be entered on the application. * * *
(a) * * *
(b) * * * If a person and address is listed in Block 15 of the
application, the Bureau of Industry and Security will send the license
to that person instead of the applicant.
* * * * *
0
19. In Sec. 748.6, revise paragraph (a), the first sentence of
paragraph (b) and paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 748.6 General instructions for license applications.
(a) Instructions. General instructions for filling out license
applications are in Supp. No. 1 to this part. Special instructions for
applications involving certain transactions are listed in Sec. 748.8
and described fully in Supp. No. 2 to this part.
(b) * * * Each application has an application control number. * * *
* * * * *
(e) Attachments to applications. Documents required to be submitted
with applications filed via SNAP-R must be submitted as PDF files using
the procedures described in SNAP-R. Documents required to be submitted
with paper applications must bear the application control number to
which they relate and, if applicable, be stapled to the paper form.
Where necessary, BIS may require you to submit additional information
beyond that stated in the EAR confirming or amplifying information
contained in your license application.
* * * * *
PART 750--[AMENDED]
0
20. The authority citation for part 750 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
Sec. 1503, Public Law 108-11, 117 Stat. 559; E.O. 13026, 61 FR
58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR,
2001 Comp., p. 783; Presidential Determination 2003-23 of May 7,
2003, 68 FR 26459, May 16, 2003;
[[Page 49331]]
Notice of July 23, 2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008).
0
21. Revise the last sentence of Sec. 750.7(h)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 750.7 Issuance of licenses.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(3) * * * The written request must be submitted to BIS at the
address listed in Sec. 748.1(d)(2) of the EAR.
* * * * *
0
22. Revise the second sentence of Sec. 750.8(b) to read as follows:
Sec. 750.8 Revocation or suspension of licenses.
* * * * *
(b) * * * The license must be returned to BIS at the address listed
in Sec. 748.1(d)(2) of the EAR, Attn: ``Return of Revoked/Suspended
License''.
* * * * *
0
23. Revise the first sentence of Sec. 750.9(a) to read as follows:
Sec. 750.9 Duplicate licenses.
(a) * * * If a license is lost, stolen or destroyed, you, as the
licensee, may obtain a duplicate of the license by submitting a letter
to the BIS at the address listed in Sec. 748.1(d)(2) of the EAR,
Attention: ``Duplicate License Request''.
* * * * *
PART 754--[AMENDED]
0
24. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 754 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
10 U.S.C. 7420; 10 U.S.C. 7430(e); 30 U.S.C. 185(s), 185(u); 42
U.S.C. 6212; 43 U.S.C. 1354; 46 U.S.C. app. 466c; E.O. 11912, 41 FR
15825, 3 CFR, 1976 Comp., p. 114; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR,
2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 3, 2006, 71 FR 44551 (August 7,
2006); Notice of July 23, 2008, 73 FR 43603 (July 25, 2008).
0
25. In Sec. 754.2, revise paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(5)(i) to read as
follows:
Sec. 754.2 Crude oil.
* * * * *
(g) * * *
* * * * *
(1) Applicants must submit their applications in accordance with
Sec. Sec. 748.1, 748.4 and 748.6 of the EAR.
* * * * *
(5) * * *
(i) BIS will issue licenses for approved applications in the order
in which the applications are received, with the total quantity
authorized for any one license not to exceed 25 percent of the annual
authorized volume of California heavy crude oil.
* * * * *
0
26. In Sec. 754.4, revise paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2), and the
introductory text of paragraph (d)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 754.4 Unprocessed Western Red Cedar.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) Applicants requesting to export unprocessed western red cedar
must apply for a license in accordance with Sec. 748.1, 748.4 and
748.6 of the EAR, submit any other documents as may be required by BIS,
and submit a statement from an authorized representative of the
exporter, reading as follows:
I, (Name) (Title) of (Exporter) HEREBY CERTIFY that to the best of
my knowledge and belief the (Quantity) (cubic meters or board feed
scribner) of unprocessed western red cedar timber that (Exporter)
proposes to export was not harvested from State or Federal lands under
contracts entered into after October 1, 1979.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Signature
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
(2) In Blocks 16 and 18 of the application, ``Various'' may be
entered when there is more than one purchaser or ultimate consignee.
(3) For each application submitted, and for each export shipment
made under a license, the exporter must assemble and retain for the
period described in part 762 of the EAR, and produce or make available
for inspection, the following:
* * * * *
0
27. In Sec. 754.5 revise the second sentence of paragraph (b)(2) to
read as follows:
Sec. 754.5 Horses for export by sea.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * * You must provide a statement in the additional
information section of the application certifying that no horse under
consignment is being exported for the purpose of slaughter.
* * * * *
0
28. In Supplement No. 2 to Part 754, revise footnote number 2 to read
as follows:
Supplement No. 2 to Part 754--Western Red Cedar
\2\ Report commodities on license applications in the units of
quantity indicated.
* * * * *
PART 764--[AMENDED]
0
29. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 764 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August
3, 2006, 71 FR 44551 (August 7, 2006); Notice of July 23, 2008, 73
FR 43603 (July 25, 2008).
0
30. In Sec. 764.7, revise the second sentence of paragraph (b)(2)(i)
to read as follows:
Sec. 764.7 Activities involving items that may have been illegally
exported or reexported to Libya.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * * License applications should be submitted in accordance
with Sec. Sec. 748.1, 748.4 and 748.6 of the EAR, and should fully
describe the relevant activity within the scope of Sec. 764.2(e) of
this part which is the basis of the application.
* * * * *
PART 772--[AMENDED]
0
31. The authority citation for 15 CFR part 772 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice of August
3, 2006, 71 FR 44551 (August 7, 2006); Notice of July 23, 2008, 73
FR 43603 (July 25, 2008).
0
32. In Sec. 772.1 revise the second sentence of the definition of the
term ``Other party authorized to receive license.''
Sec. 772.1 Definitions of terms as used in the Export Administration
Regulations (EAR).
* * * * *
Other party authorized to receive license. * * * If a person and
address is listed in Block 15 of the application, the Bureau of
Industry and Security will send the license to that person instead of
the applicant.
* * * * *
Dated: August 7, 2008.
Christopher R. Wall,
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-18852 Filed 8-20-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P