Amendment to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Export Exemption for Technical Data, 52625-52626 [2010-21450]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 166 / Friday, August 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
PART 129—REGISTRATION AND
LICENSING OF BROKERS
8. The authority citation for part 129
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: Sec. 38, Pub. L. 104–164, 110
Stat. 1437, (22 U.S.C. 2778).
§ 129.7
[Amended]
9. Section 129.7 is amended by
removing paragraph (e).
■
§ 129.8
[Amended]
10. Section 129.8 is amended by
removing paragraph (c).
■
Dated: August 18, 2010.
Ellen O. Tauscher,
Under Secretary, Arms Control and
International Security, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2010–21451 Filed 8–26–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–25–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 125
[Public Notice: 7135]
RIN 1400–AC59
Amendment to the International Traffic
in Arms Regulations: Export
Exemption for Technical Data
Department of State.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of State is
amending the International Traffic in
Arms Regulations (ITAR) to clarify an
exemption for technical data. The
clarification is that the exemption
covers technical data, regardless of
media or format, sent or taken by a U.S.
person who is an employee of a U.S.
corporation or a U.S. Government
agency to a U.S. person employed by
that U.S. corporation or to a U.S.
Government agency outside the United
States.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective August 27, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Director Charles Shotwell, Office of
Defense Trade Controls Policy,
Department of State, Telephone (202)
663–2792 or Fax (202) 261–8199; E-mail
DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov. ATTN:
Regulatory Change, Section 125.4.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
November 24, 2009, the Department
published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) to add language
clarifying 22 CFR 125.4(b)(9) to allow
technical data, including classified
information, and regardless of media or
format, sent or taken by a U.S. person
who is an employee of a U.S.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:41 Aug 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
corporation or a U.S. Government
agency, to a U.S. person employed by
that U.S. corporation or to a U.S.
Government agency outside the United
States under certain specified
circumstances reflected in 22 CFR
125.4(b)(9)(i) through (iii) (74 FR
61292). This amendment will add after
the word ‘‘information’’ the words ‘‘and
regardless of media or format.’’ Also, the
words ‘‘sent by a U.S. corporation to a
U.S. person employed by that
corporation overseas or to a U.S.
Government agency’’ has been replaced
by ‘‘sent or taken by a U.S. person who
is an employee of a U.S. corporation or
a U.S. Government agency to a U.S.
person employed by that corporation or
to a U.S. Government agency outside the
United States.’’ Thus, the exemption
will explicitly allow hand carrying
technical data by a U.S. person
employed by a U.S. corporation or a
U.S. Government agency to a U.S.
person employed by that U.S.
corporation or to a U.S. Government
agency outside the United States, as
long as certain criteria in §§ 125.4(b)(9)
and 125.4(b)(9)(i)–(iii) are met. The
word ‘‘overseas’’ will be replaced by
‘‘outside the United States’’ at
§§ 125.4(b)(9), 125.4(b)(9)(i),
125.4(b)(9)(ii), and 125.4(b)(9)(iii). Also,
§ 125.4(b)(9)(iii) will be amended to add
the words ‘‘or taken’’ after the word
‘‘sent.’’ As stated in 22 CFR 125.4(a), this
exemption does not apply to exports to
proscribed destinations under 22 CFR
126.1.
The Proposed Rule had a comment
period ending January 25, 2010. Nine
parties filed comments by January 25
recommending changes. Having
thoroughly reviewed and evaluated the
comments and the recommended
changes, the Department has
determined that it will, and hereby
does, adopt the Proposed Rule, with
minor edits, and promulgates it as a
Final Rule. The Department’s evaluation
of the written comments and
recommendations follows:
Comment Analysis
One commenting party recommended
that ‘‘sent or taken’’ be changed to ‘‘sent,
taken or accessed.’’ This
recommendation was deemed not
necessary since it is implied the U.S.
person who is an employee of a U.S.
corporation or the U.S. person who is an
employee of a U.S. Government agency
taking the technical data outside of the
United States may access the technical
data.
One commenting party inquired
whether a U.S. corporation
(manufacturer) could use the exemption
to send (orally or via e-mail) technical
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52625
data to an employee of a U.S.
Government agency outside the United
States, as well as what steps the U.S.
manufacturer would take to ensure that
22 CFR 125.4(b)(9)(i)–(ii) are met. The
U.S. corporation (in compliance with 22
CFR part 122) is able to use the
exemption to send (orally or via e-mail)
technical data to a U.S. person
employed by a U.S. Government agency
outside the United States, so long as the
U.S. company takes reasonable
precautions to ensure that conditions in
22 CFR 125.4(b)(9)(i) through (ii) are
met:
1. The technical data will be used
outside of the United States solely by
U.S. persons; and
2. The U.S. person outside of the
United States is employed by a U.S.
Government agency.
Two commenting parties
recommended that it be explicit that the
technical data could be for ‘‘personal
use’’ by the U.S. person claiming the
exemption. That recommendation was
not adopted since it introduced
uncertainty about uses beyond those
related to employment.
One commenting party pointed out
that when technical data is exported
from a U.S. port using an exemption, the
ITAR does not require the report of such
an export using the Automated Export
System (AES); instead, the exporter is to
provide electronic notification directly
to the Directorate of Defense Trade
Controls (DDTC) (see 22 CFR
123.22(b)(3)(iii)). The commenting party
recommended that if the system to
electronically file directly to DDTC is
not going to be implemented, then
DDTC should arrange for AES to be the
reporting mechanism. The commenting
party also recommended that if
classified technical data is being
exported under the provisions of the
Department of Defense National
Industrial Security Program Operating
Manual, an Electronic Export
Information should be filed within AES.
For exports of technical data using
exemptions, there is no system to
electronically file directly to DDTC.
DDTC is reviewing carefully the
possibility of having all exports of
technical data using an exemption be
reported using an Electronic Export
Information within Census Bureau’s
Automated Export System.
Two commenting parties
recommended the exemption at
§ 125.4(b)(9) be expanded so the
exporter would be a U.S. person who is
an employee of any entity, organization,
or group incorporated or organized to do
business in the United States. Also, the
recipient would be a U.S. person
employed by that entity, organization,
E:\FR\FM\27AUR1.SGM
27AUR1
52626
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 166 / Friday, August 27, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
or group. Consequently, another
recommendation is to revise
§ 125.4(b)(9)(ii) to state ‘‘the U.S. person
outside the United States is an
employee of the U.S. Government or is
directly employed by the same U.S.
entity, organization, or group and not by
a foreign subsidiary; and * * *.’’ The
commenting party recommended that
the exemption include accredited
institutions of higher learning in the
United States in order to facilitate
research. This recommendation was not
adopted because the Department prefers
narrowing this exemption to an exporter
that is a U.S. person who is an employee
of a U.S. corporation or a U.S.
Government agency, and a recipient
outside the United States that is a U.S.
person employed by that U.S.
corporation or U.S. Government agency.
The narrowing of this exemption affords
more control of the technical data.
One commenting party recommended
the exemption be expanded at
§ 125.4(b)(9) to include recipients that
are a U.S. prime contractor or U.S.
subcontractor of that U.S. corporation.
Consequently, another recommendation
is to revise § 125.4(b)(9)(ii) to state, ‘‘If
the U.S. person outside the United
States is an employee of the U.S.
Government or is directly employed by
the U.S. corporation and not by a
foreign subsidiary, or is directly
employed by the U.S. corporation’s U.S.
prime contractor or U.S. subcontractor,
and not a foreign subsidiary, provided
the U.S. prime contractor’s or U.S.
subcontractor’s employee is a U.S.
person.’’ Expanding the recipients to a
U.S. person employed by the U.S.
corporation’s U.S. prime contractor or
U.S. subcontractor allows the exemption
to become unwieldy as to the recipient
responsible for the technical data.
One commenting party recommended
the proposed amendment without any
changes because it explicitly addressed
technical data that is hand carried
outside of the United States.
Regulatory Analysis and Notices
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES
Administrative Procedure Act
This amendment involves a foreign
affairs function of the United States and,
therefore, is not subject to the
procedures contained in 5 U.S.C. 553
and 554.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Since this amendment is not subject
to 5 U.S.C. 553, it does not require
analysis under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This amendment does not involve a
mandate that will result in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:41 Aug 26, 2010
Jkt 220001
expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
in any year and it will not significantly
or uniquely affect small governments.
Therefore, no actions were deemed
necessary under the provisions of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996
This proposed amendment has been
found not to be a major rule within the
meaning of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132
This proposed amendment will not
have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 13132,
it is determined that this amendment
does not have sufficient federalism
implications to require consultations or
warrant the preparation of a federalism
summary impact statement. The
regulations implementing Executive
Order 12372 regarding
intergovernmental consultation on
Federal programs and activities do not
apply to this amendment.
Executive Order 12866
This proposed amendment is exempt
from review under Executive Order
12866, but has been reviewed internally
by the Department of State to ensure
consistency with the purposes thereof.
Executive Order 12988
The Department of State has reviewed
the proposed amendments in light of
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988 to eliminate ambiguity,
minimize litigation, establish clear legal
standards, and reduce burden.
Executive Order 13175
The Department of State has
determined that this rulemaking will
not have tribal implications, will not
impose substantial direct compliance
costs on Indian tribal governments, and
will not pre-empt tribal law.
Accordingly, the requirement of Section
5 of Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule does not impose
any new reporting or recordkeeping
requirements subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 125
Arms and munitions, Classified
information, Exports.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth
above, Title 22, Chapter I, Subchapter
M, part 125 is amended as follows:
■
PART 125—LICENSES FOR THE
EXPORT OF TECHNICAL DATA AND
CLASSIFIED DEFENSE ARTICLES
1. The authority citation for part 125
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 2 and 38, Pub. L. 90–629,
90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778); E.O.
11958, 42 FR 4311; 3 CFR, 1977 Comp. p.79;
22 U.S.C. 2651a.
2. Section 125.4 is amended by
revising paragraphs (b)(9) to read as
follows:
■
§ 125.4 Exemptions of general
applicability.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(9) Technical data, including
classified information, and regardless of
media or format, sent or taken by a U.S.
person who is an employee of a U.S.
corporation or a U.S. Government
agency to a U.S. person employed by
that U.S. corporation or to a U.S.
Government agency outside the United
States. This exemption is subject to the
limitations of § 125.1(b) of this
subchapter and may be used only if:
(i) The technical data is to be used
outside the United States solely by a
U.S. person;
(ii) The U.S. person outside the
United States is an employee of the U.S.
Government or is directly employed by
the U.S. corporation and not by a
foreign subsidiary; and
(iii) The classified information is sent
or taken outside the United States in
accordance with the requirements of the
Department of Defense National
Industrial Security Program Operating
Manual (unless such requirements are
in direct conflict with guidance
provided by the Directorate of Defense
Trade Controls, in which case the latter
guidance must be followed).
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: August 18, 2010.
Ellen O. Tauscher,
Under Secretary, Arms Control and
International Security, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2010–21450 Filed 8–26–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–25–P
E:\FR\FM\27AUR1.SGM
27AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 166 (Friday, August 27, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52625-52626]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-21450]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 125
[Public Notice: 7135]
RIN 1400-AC59
Amendment to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations:
Export Exemption for Technical Data
AGENCY: Department of State.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of State is amending the International Traffic
in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to clarify an exemption for technical data.
The clarification is that the exemption covers technical data,
regardless of media or format, sent or taken by a U.S. person who is an
employee of a U.S. corporation or a U.S. Government agency to a U.S.
person employed by that U.S. corporation or to a U.S. Government agency
outside the United States.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective August 27, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Director Charles Shotwell, Office of
Defense Trade Controls Policy, Department of State, Telephone (202)
663-2792 or Fax (202) 261-8199; E-mail DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov.
ATTN: Regulatory Change, Section 125.4.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 24, 2009, the Department
published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to add language
clarifying 22 CFR 125.4(b)(9) to allow technical data, including
classified information, and regardless of media or format, sent or
taken by a U.S. person who is an employee of a U.S. corporation or a
U.S. Government agency, to a U.S. person employed by that U.S.
corporation or to a U.S. Government agency outside the United States
under certain specified circumstances reflected in 22 CFR
125.4(b)(9)(i) through (iii) (74 FR 61292). This amendment will add
after the word ``information'' the words ``and regardless of media or
format.'' Also, the words ``sent by a U.S. corporation to a U.S. person
employed by that corporation overseas or to a U.S. Government agency''
has been replaced by ``sent or taken by a U.S. person who is an
employee of a U.S. corporation or a U.S. Government agency to a U.S.
person employed by that corporation or to a U.S. Government agency
outside the United States.'' Thus, the exemption will explicitly allow
hand carrying technical data by a U.S. person employed by a U.S.
corporation or a U.S. Government agency to a U.S. person employed by
that U.S. corporation or to a U.S. Government agency outside the United
States, as long as certain criteria in Sec. Sec. 125.4(b)(9) and
125.4(b)(9)(i)-(iii) are met. The word ``overseas'' will be replaced by
``outside the United States'' at Sec. Sec. 125.4(b)(9),
125.4(b)(9)(i), 125.4(b)(9)(ii), and 125.4(b)(9)(iii). Also, Sec.
125.4(b)(9)(iii) will be amended to add the words ``or taken'' after
the word ``sent.'' As stated in 22 CFR 125.4(a), this exemption does
not apply to exports to proscribed destinations under 22 CFR 126.1.
The Proposed Rule had a comment period ending January 25, 2010.
Nine parties filed comments by January 25 recommending changes. Having
thoroughly reviewed and evaluated the comments and the recommended
changes, the Department has determined that it will, and hereby does,
adopt the Proposed Rule, with minor edits, and promulgates it as a
Final Rule. The Department's evaluation of the written comments and
recommendations follows:
Comment Analysis
One commenting party recommended that ``sent or taken'' be changed
to ``sent, taken or accessed.'' This recommendation was deemed not
necessary since it is implied the U.S. person who is an employee of a
U.S. corporation or the U.S. person who is an employee of a U.S.
Government agency taking the technical data outside of the United
States may access the technical data.
One commenting party inquired whether a U.S. corporation
(manufacturer) could use the exemption to send (orally or via e-mail)
technical data to an employee of a U.S. Government agency outside the
United States, as well as what steps the U.S. manufacturer would take
to ensure that 22 CFR 125.4(b)(9)(i)-(ii) are met. The U.S. corporation
(in compliance with 22 CFR part 122) is able to use the exemption to
send (orally or via e-mail) technical data to a U.S. person employed by
a U.S. Government agency outside the United States, so long as the U.S.
company takes reasonable precautions to ensure that conditions in 22
CFR 125.4(b)(9)(i) through (ii) are met:
1. The technical data will be used outside of the United States
solely by U.S. persons; and
2. The U.S. person outside of the United States is employed by a
U.S. Government agency.
Two commenting parties recommended that it be explicit that the
technical data could be for ``personal use'' by the U.S. person
claiming the exemption. That recommendation was not adopted since it
introduced uncertainty about uses beyond those related to employment.
One commenting party pointed out that when technical data is
exported from a U.S. port using an exemption, the ITAR does not require
the report of such an export using the Automated Export System (AES);
instead, the exporter is to provide electronic notification directly to
the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) (see 22 CFR
123.22(b)(3)(iii)). The commenting party recommended that if the system
to electronically file directly to DDTC is not going to be implemented,
then DDTC should arrange for AES to be the reporting mechanism. The
commenting party also recommended that if classified technical data is
being exported under the provisions of the Department of Defense
National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual, an Electronic
Export Information should be filed within AES. For exports of technical
data using exemptions, there is no system to electronically file
directly to DDTC. DDTC is reviewing carefully the possibility of having
all exports of technical data using an exemption be reported using an
Electronic Export Information within Census Bureau's Automated Export
System.
Two commenting parties recommended the exemption at Sec.
125.4(b)(9) be expanded so the exporter would be a U.S. person who is
an employee of any entity, organization, or group incorporated or
organized to do business in the United States. Also, the recipient
would be a U.S. person employed by that entity, organization,
[[Page 52626]]
or group. Consequently, another recommendation is to revise Sec.
125.4(b)(9)(ii) to state ``the U.S. person outside the United States is
an employee of the U.S. Government or is directly employed by the same
U.S. entity, organization, or group and not by a foreign subsidiary;
and * * *.'' The commenting party recommended that the exemption
include accredited institutions of higher learning in the United States
in order to facilitate research. This recommendation was not adopted
because the Department prefers narrowing this exemption to an exporter
that is a U.S. person who is an employee of a U.S. corporation or a
U.S. Government agency, and a recipient outside the United States that
is a U.S. person employed by that U.S. corporation or U.S. Government
agency. The narrowing of this exemption affords more control of the
technical data.
One commenting party recommended the exemption be expanded at Sec.
125.4(b)(9) to include recipients that are a U.S. prime contractor or
U.S. subcontractor of that U.S. corporation. Consequently, another
recommendation is to revise Sec. 125.4(b)(9)(ii) to state, ``If the
U.S. person outside the United States is an employee of the U.S.
Government or is directly employed by the U.S. corporation and not by a
foreign subsidiary, or is directly employed by the U.S. corporation's
U.S. prime contractor or U.S. subcontractor, and not a foreign
subsidiary, provided the U.S. prime contractor's or U.S.
subcontractor's employee is a U.S. person.'' Expanding the recipients
to a U.S. person employed by the U.S. corporation's U.S. prime
contractor or U.S. subcontractor allows the exemption to become
unwieldy as to the recipient responsible for the technical data.
One commenting party recommended the proposed amendment without any
changes because it explicitly addressed technical data that is hand
carried outside of the United States.
Regulatory Analysis and Notices
Administrative Procedure Act
This amendment involves a foreign affairs function of the United
States and, therefore, is not subject to the procedures contained in 5
U.S.C. 553 and 554.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Since this amendment is not subject to 5 U.S.C. 553, it does not
require analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This amendment does not involve a mandate that will result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any year and it
will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore,
no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This proposed amendment has been found not to be a major rule
within the meaning of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132
This proposed amendment will not have substantial direct effects on
the States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive
Order 13132, it is determined that this amendment does not have
sufficient federalism implications to require consultations or warrant
the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The
regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding
intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities do
not apply to this amendment.
Executive Order 12866
This proposed amendment is exempt from review under Executive Order
12866, but has been reviewed internally by the Department of State to
ensure consistency with the purposes thereof.
Executive Order 12988
The Department of State has reviewed the proposed amendments in
light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 to
eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal
standards, and reduce burden.
Executive Order 13175
The Department of State has determined that this rulemaking will
not have tribal implications, will not impose substantial direct
compliance costs on Indian tribal governments, and will not pre-empt
tribal law. Accordingly, the requirement of Section 5 of Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule does not impose any new reporting or
recordkeeping requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. Chapter 35.
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 125
Arms and munitions, Classified information, Exports.
0
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, Title 22, Chapter I,
Subchapter M, part 125 is amended as follows:
PART 125--LICENSES FOR THE EXPORT OF TECHNICAL DATA AND CLASSIFIED
DEFENSE ARTICLES
0
1. The authority citation for part 125 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 2 and 38, Pub. L. 90-629, 90 Stat. 744 (22
U.S.C. 2752, 2778); E.O. 11958, 42 FR 4311; 3 CFR, 1977 Comp. p.79;
22 U.S.C. 2651a.
0
2. Section 125.4 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(9) to read as
follows:
Sec. 125.4 Exemptions of general applicability.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(9) Technical data, including classified information, and
regardless of media or format, sent or taken by a U.S. person who is an
employee of a U.S. corporation or a U.S. Government agency to a U.S.
person employed by that U.S. corporation or to a U.S. Government agency
outside the United States. This exemption is subject to the limitations
of Sec. 125.1(b) of this subchapter and may be used only if:
(i) The technical data is to be used outside the United States
solely by a U.S. person;
(ii) The U.S. person outside the United States is an employee of
the U.S. Government or is directly employed by the U.S. corporation and
not by a foreign subsidiary; and
(iii) The classified information is sent or taken outside the
United States in accordance with the requirements of the Department of
Defense National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (unless
such requirements are in direct conflict with guidance provided by the
Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, in which case the latter
guidance must be followed).
* * * * *
Dated: August 18, 2010.
Ellen O. Tauscher,
Under Secretary, Arms Control and International Security, Department of
State.
[FR Doc. 2010-21450 Filed 8-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-25-P