Amendment to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Filing, Retention, and Return of Export Licenses and Filing of Export Information, 68311-68313 [2011-28548]

Download as PDF 68311 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 214 / Friday, November 4, 2011 / Rules and Regulations Dated: November 1, 2011. John Oliver, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service. PART 902—NOAA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: OMB CONTROL NUMBERS ■ For the reasons set out in the preamble, 15 CFR part 902 is amended as follows: ■ 1. The authority citation for part 902 continues to read as follows: § 902.1 OMB control numbers assigned pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act. * * * Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. CFR part or section where the information collection requirement is located * 2. In § 902.1, the table in paragraph (b), under 50 CFR, is amended by revising the OMB control numbers for §§ 622.5, 622.8, and 622.18, to read as follows: * * (b) * * * * * Current OMB control number (all numbers begin with 0648–) * * * * * * * * * * 622.5 ......................................................................................................... ¥0013, ¥0016, ¥0392, and ¥0593. * * * * * * 622.8 ......................................................................................................... ¥0205 and ¥0593. * * * * * * * 622.18 ....................................................................................................... ¥0205 and ¥0593. * * * * 50 CFR * * * [FR Doc. 2011–28662 Filed 11–3–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–22–P DEPARTMENT OF STATE 22 CFR Part 123 RIN 1400–AC91 [Public Notice 7674] Amendment to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Filing, Retention, and Return of Export Licenses and Filing of Export Information Department of State. Final rule. AGENCY: ACTION: The Department of State is amending the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to reflect changes in the requirements for the return of licenses. Applicants are no longer required to return certain expired DSP–5s. This change will reduce the administrative burden on applicants. DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 4, 2011. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicholas Memos, Office of Defense Trade Controls Policy, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Department of State, (202) 663–2829 or FAX (202) 261– 8199; Email memosni@state.gov, Attn: ITAR Amendment—License Return. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of State is amending § 123.22(c) to institute changes in the requirements for the return of licenses. jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:20 Nov 03, 2011 Jkt 226001 * * With this change, applicants with DSP– 5 licenses that have been issued electronically by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) and decremented electronically by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) through the Automated Export System (AES) are no longer required to return them to DDTC when they expire, to include when the total authorized value or quantity has been shipped. The return of these licenses is redundant and unnecessary as all of the export information has been captured and saved electronically. If a DSP–5 license issued electronically is decremented physically in one or more instance the license must be returned to the Department of State. All other DSP–5 licenses that do not meet the criteria described above, and all DSP–61, DSP–73, and DSP–85 licenses, and DSP–94 authorizations, must be returned by the applicant, or the government agency with which the license or authorization was filed, to DDTC, as these licenses and authorizations are not decremented electronically, even if an Electronic Export Information is filed via AES. New § 123.22(c)(3) addresses the return of the DSP–94 authorization. New § 123.22(c)(4) provides that licenses issued but not used by the applicant do not need to be returned to DDTC. New § 123.22(c)(5) provides that licenses which have been revoked by DDTC are considered expired. PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Section 123.21(b) is amended to conform to the changes to § 123.22(c). This rule was first presented as a proposed rule for public comment on July 14, 2011. That comment period ended August 29, 2011. Three comments were received. The Department’s evaluation of the written comments and recommendations are as follows. One commenting party recommended the Department revise the provision regarding the return of the DSP–85, as the issued license is not held by the applicant, but by an officer of the Defense Security Service. The Department accepted this recommendation, and has revised § 123.22(c)(2) to provide that ‘‘the government agency with which the license or authorization was filed’’ may also return an expired license or authorization to the Department. One commenting party recommended revising the sentence in § 123.22(c)(1) addressing the maintenance of records. The commenting party correctly pointed out that, as drafted in the proposed rule, the requirement to maintain records of an electronically issued and decremented DSP–5 pertained only when the license was fully decremented or expired, when in fact the requirement, per ITAR § 122.5, is for record maintenance on an ongoing basis. Section (c)(1) is revised accordingly. One commenting party recommended revising a section of the ITAR not the subject of this rule. The Department, E:\FR\FM\04NOR1.SGM 04NOR1 68312 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 214 / Friday, November 4, 2011 / Rules and Regulations though, takes this opportunity to address the recommendation. The commenting party recommended revising ITAR § 123.22(a)(1) to allow the exporter to present to CBP an electronically issued DSP–5 license at the time of permanent export, and not prior to filing the license in the Automated Export System. This procedure is a requirement set by CBP, for enforcement purposes, and not by the Department. One commenting party recommended the elimination of the requirement to return any expired license to the Department, stating that it is inefficient, redundant of other recordkeeping requirements, and not in keeping with the Department’s initiative to provide end-to-end electronic licensing. The Department observes that while it has instituted electronic processes for the majority of defense trade licensing transactions, it has not completed this initiative. Therefore, certain requirements cannot be completed electronically by the public. This includes providing the Department with a record of certain expired licenses. As an alternative, the commenting party suggested providing D-Trade, the Department’s electronic licensing system, as a means of returning certain expired licenses, but D-Trade is currently not configured to support this function. The Department also observes that the recordkeeping requirement of ITAR § 122.5 pertains to registrants; for enforcement purposes, the Department also must have record of which exports were completed from approved authorizations. For the foregoing reasons, the Department did not accept this commenting party’s recommendation. Having thoroughly reviewed and evaluated the written comments and recommended changes, the Department has determined that it will accept, and hereby does adopt with the noted changes, the proposed rule as a final rule. jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES Regulatory Analysis and Notices Administrative Procedure Act The Department of State is of the opinion that controlling the import and export of defense articles and services is a foreign affairs function of the United States Government and that rules implementing this function are exempt from § 553 (Rulemaking) and § 554 (Adjudications) of the Administrative Procedure Act. Although the Department is of the opinion that this rule is exempt from the rulemaking provisions of the APA, the Department published this rule with a 45-day VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:20 Nov 03, 2011 Jkt 226001 provision for public comment and without prejudice to its determination that controlling the import and export of defense services is a foreign affairs function. Regulatory Flexibility Act Since this amendment is not subject to the notice-and-comment procedures of 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. Executive Order 13175 The Department has determined that this rule 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 requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply to this rule. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 This 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 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 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Executive Order 13563 The Department of State has considered this rule in light of Executive Order 13563, dated January 18, 2011, and affirms that this regulation is consistent with the guidance therein. Executive Order 12988 The Department of State has reviewed the amendment 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. Paperwork Reduction Act This 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 123 Arms and munitions, Exports. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, Title 22, Chapter I, Subchapter M, part 123 is amended as follows: PART 123—LICENSES FOR THE EXPORT OF DEFENSE ARTICLES 1. The authority citation for part 123 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: Secs. 2, 38, and 71, Pub. L. 90– 629, 90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778, 2797); 22 U.S.C. 2753; E.O. 11958, 42 FR 4311; 3 CFR, 1977 Comp. p. 79; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 2776; Pub. L. 105–261, 112 Stat. 1920; Sec 1205(a), Pub. L. 107–228. 2. Section 123.21 is amended by revising the section heading and paragraph (b) to read as follows: ■ § 123.21 Duration, renewal, and disposition of licenses. * * * * * (b) Unused, expired, suspended, or revoked licenses must be handled in accordance with § 123.22(c) of this subchapter. ■ 3. Section 123.22 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: § 123.22 Filing, retention, and return of export licenses and filing of export information. * The Department of State does not consider this rule to be a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. The Department PO 00000 is of the opinion that controlling the import and export of defense articles and services is a foreign affairs function of the United States Government and that rules governing the conduct of this function are exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 12866. * * * * (c) Return of licenses. Per § 123.21 of this subchapter, all DSP licenses issued by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) must be disposed of in accordance with the following: E:\FR\FM\04NOR1.SGM 04NOR1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 214 / Friday, November 4, 2011 / Rules and Regulations jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with RULES (1) A DSP–5 license issued electronically by DDTC and decremented electronically by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection through the Automated Export System (AES) is not required to be returned to DDTC. If a DSP–5 license issued electronically is decremented physically in one or more instance the license must be returned DDTC. A copy of the DSP–5 license must be maintained by the applicant in accordance with § 122.5 of this subchapter. (2) DSP–5, DSP–61, DSP–73, and DSP–85 licenses issued by DDTC but not decremented electronically by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection through AES (e.g., oral or visual technical data releases or temporary import and export licenses retained in accordance with paragraph (a)(2) of this section), must be returned by the applicant, or the government agency with which the license was filed, to DDTC upon expiration, to include when the total authorized value or quantity has been shipped. A copy of the license must be maintained by the applicant in accordance with § 122.5 of this subchapter. AES does not decrement the DSP–61, DSP–73, and DSP–85 licenses. Submitting the Electronic Export Information is not considered to be decremented electronically for these licenses. (3) A DSP–94 authorization filed with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection must be returned by the applicant, or the government agency with which the authorization was filed, to DDTC upon expiration, to include when the total authorized value or quantity has been shipped, or when all shipments against the Letter of Offer and Acceptance have been completed. AES does not decrement the DSP–94 authorization. Submitting the Electronic Export Information is not considered to be decremented electronically for the DSP– 94. A copy of the DSP–94 must be maintained by the applicant in accordance with § 122.5 of this subchapter. (4) A license issued by DDTC but not used by the applicant does not need to be returned to DDTC, even when expired. (5) A license revoked by DDTC is considered expired and must be handled in accordance with paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section. Dated: October 27, 2011. Ellen O. Tauscher, Under Secretary, Arms Control and International Security, Department of State. [FR Doc. 2011–28548 Filed 11–3–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710–25–P VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:20 Nov 03, 2011 Jkt 226001 68313 articles and services to Libya, except where not prohibited under UNSC embargo and determined to be in the interests of the national security and foreign policy of the United States. DEPARTMENT OF STATE 22 CFR Part 126 [Public Notice: 7675] RIN 1400–AC97 Resolution 2009 To the existing exceptions to the arms embargo, delineated in resolutions 1970 and 1973, resolution 2009 adds the supply, sale, or transfer to Libya of arms AGENCY: Department of State. and related materiel, including ACTION: Final rule. technical assistance, intended solely for security or disarmament assistance to SUMMARY: The Department of State is the Libyan authorities, and small arms, amending the International Traffic in light weapons, and related materiel for Arms Regulations (ITAR) to update the the sole use of UN personnel, policy regarding Libya to reflect the representatives of the media, and additional modifications to the United Nations Security Council arms embargo humanitarian and development workers and associated personnel. License of Libya adopted in September 2011. applications submitted pursuant to DATES: Effective Date: This rule is these exceptions are notified in advance effective November 4, 2011. to the Committee of the Security FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Council concerning Libya, and are Charles B. Shotwell, Director, Office of eligible for approval in the absence of a Defense Trade Controls Policy, negative decision by the Committee Department of State, by telephone: (202) within five working days of such a 663–2792; fax: (202) 261–8199; or email: notification. DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov. ATTN: Accordingly, the ITAR is amended to Part 126, Libya. reflect these exceptions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 16, 2011, the United Nations Regulatory Analysis and Notices Security Council adopted resolution Administrative Procedure Act 2009, which modifies the arms embargo The Department of State is of the against Libya put in place by the opinion that controlling the import and adoption in February and March of export of defense articles and services is resolutions 1970 and 1973, respectively. a foreign affairs function of the United States Government and that rules Resolutions 1970 and 1973, and the May 2011 ITAR Amendment Regarding implementing this function are exempt from § 553 (Rulemaking) and § 554 Libya (Adjudications) of the Administrative On February 26, 2011, the United Procedure Act. Since this rule is exempt Nations Security Council adopted from 5 U.S.C. 553, it is the view of the Resolution 1970, paragraph 9 of which Department of State that the provisions provides that UN member states shall of § 553(d) do not apply to this immediately take the necessary rulemaking. Therefore, this rule is measures to prevent the sale, supply, or effective upon publication. The transfer of arms and related materiel of Department also finds that, given the all types to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, national security issues surrounding with certain exceptions. On March 17, U.S. policy towards Libya, that notice 2011, the UN Security Council adopted and public procedure on this rule would Resolution 1973, paragraph 4 of which be impracticable, unnecessary, or authorizes member states to take all contrary to the public interest. See 5 necessary measures, notwithstanding U.S.C. 808(2). the arms embargo established by Regulatory Flexibility Act paragraph 9 of Resolution 1970, to protect civilians and civilian populated Since this amendment is not subject areas under threat of attack in Libya. On to the notice-and-comment procedures May 24, 2011, the Department amended of 5 U.S.C. 553, it does not require the ITAR to implement the Security analysis under the Regulatory Council’s actions by adding Libya to Flexibility Act. § 126.1(c), which identifies countries Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 subject to UN Security Council arms This amendment does not involve a embargoes. See 76 FR 30001. The mandate that will result in the Department also revised the previous expenditure by State, local, and Tribal policy on Libya contained in § 126.1(k) governments, in the aggregate, or by the to announce a policy of denial for all private sector, of $100 million or more requests for licenses or other approvals in any year and it will not significantly to export or otherwise transfer defense Amendment to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations: Libya and UNSCR 2009 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04NOR1.SGM 04NOR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 214 (Friday, November 4, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68311-68313]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28548]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

22 CFR Part 123

RIN 1400-AC91
[Public Notice 7674]


Amendment to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations: 
Filing, Retention, and Return of Export Licenses and Filing of Export 
Information

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of State is amending the International Traffic 
in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to reflect changes in the requirements for 
the return of licenses. Applicants are no longer required to return 
certain expired DSP-5s. This change will reduce the administrative 
burden on applicants.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 4, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nicholas Memos, Office of Defense 
Trade Controls Policy, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Department 
of State, (202) 663-2829 or FAX (202) 261-8199; Email 
memosni@state.gov, Attn: ITAR Amendment--License Return.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of State is amending Sec.  
123.22(c) to institute changes in the requirements for the return of 
licenses. With this change, applicants with DSP-5 licenses that have 
been issued electronically by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls 
(DDTC) and decremented electronically by the U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection (CBP) through the Automated Export System (AES) are no 
longer required to return them to DDTC when they expire, to include 
when the total authorized value or quantity has been shipped. The 
return of these licenses is redundant and unnecessary as all of the 
export information has been captured and saved electronically. If a 
DSP-5 license issued electronically is decremented physically in one or 
more instance the license must be returned to the Department of State.
    All other DSP-5 licenses that do not meet the criteria described 
above, and all DSP-61, DSP-73, and DSP-85 licenses, and DSP-94 
authorizations, must be returned by the applicant, or the government 
agency with which the license or authorization was filed, to DDTC, as 
these licenses and authorizations are not decremented electronically, 
even if an Electronic Export Information is filed via AES.
    New Sec.  123.22(c)(3) addresses the return of the DSP-94 
authorization.
    New Sec.  123.22(c)(4) provides that licenses issued but not used 
by the applicant do not need to be returned to DDTC.
    New Sec.  123.22(c)(5) provides that licenses which have been 
revoked by DDTC are considered expired.
    Section 123.21(b) is amended to conform to the changes to Sec.  
123.22(c).
    This rule was first presented as a proposed rule for public comment 
on July 14, 2011. That comment period ended August 29, 2011. Three 
comments were received. The Department's evaluation of the written 
comments and recommendations are as follows.
    One commenting party recommended the Department revise the 
provision regarding the return of the DSP-85, as the issued license is 
not held by the applicant, but by an officer of the Defense Security 
Service. The Department accepted this recommendation, and has revised 
Sec.  123.22(c)(2) to provide that ``the government agency with which 
the license or authorization was filed'' may also return an expired 
license or authorization to the Department.
    One commenting party recommended revising the sentence in Sec.  
123.22(c)(1) addressing the maintenance of records. The commenting 
party correctly pointed out that, as drafted in the proposed rule, the 
requirement to maintain records of an electronically issued and 
decremented DSP-5 pertained only when the license was fully decremented 
or expired, when in fact the requirement, per ITAR Sec.  122.5, is for 
record maintenance on an ongoing basis. Section (c)(1) is revised 
accordingly.
    One commenting party recommended revising a section of the ITAR not 
the subject of this rule. The Department,

[[Page 68312]]

though, takes this opportunity to address the recommendation. The 
commenting party recommended revising ITAR Sec.  123.22(a)(1) to allow 
the exporter to present to CBP an electronically issued DSP-5 license 
at the time of permanent export, and not prior to filing the license in 
the Automated Export System. This procedure is a requirement set by 
CBP, for enforcement purposes, and not by the Department.
    One commenting party recommended the elimination of the requirement 
to return any expired license to the Department, stating that it is 
inefficient, redundant of other recordkeeping requirements, and not in 
keeping with the Department's initiative to provide end-to-end 
electronic licensing. The Department observes that while it has 
instituted electronic processes for the majority of defense trade 
licensing transactions, it has not completed this initiative. 
Therefore, certain requirements cannot be completed electronically by 
the public. This includes providing the Department with a record of 
certain expired licenses. As an alternative, the commenting party 
suggested providing D-Trade, the Department's electronic licensing 
system, as a means of returning certain expired licenses, but D-Trade 
is currently not configured to support this function. The Department 
also observes that the recordkeeping requirement of ITAR Sec.  122.5 
pertains to registrants; for enforcement purposes, the Department also 
must have record of which exports were completed from approved 
authorizations. For the foregoing reasons, the Department did not 
accept this commenting party's recommendation.
    Having thoroughly reviewed and evaluated the written comments and 
recommended changes, the Department has determined that it will accept, 
and hereby does adopt with the noted changes, the proposed rule as a 
final rule.

Regulatory Analysis and Notices

Administrative Procedure Act

    The Department of State is of the opinion that controlling the 
import and export of defense articles and services is a foreign affairs 
function of the United States Government and that rules implementing 
this function are exempt from Sec.  553 (Rulemaking) and Sec.  554 
(Adjudications) of the Administrative Procedure Act. Although the 
Department is of the opinion that this rule is exempt from the 
rulemaking provisions of the APA, the Department published this rule 
with a 45-day provision for public comment and without prejudice to its 
determination that controlling the import and export of defense 
services is a foreign affairs function.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Since this amendment is not subject to the notice-and-comment 
procedures of 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.

Executive Order 13175

    The Department has determined that this rule 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 requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply to 
this rule.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

    This 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 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

    The Department of State does not consider this rule to be a 
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866, section 
3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. The Department is of the opinion 
that controlling the import and export of defense articles and services 
is a foreign affairs function of the United States Government and that 
rules governing the conduct of this function are exempt from the 
requirements of Executive Order 12866.

Executive Order 13563

    The Department of State has considered this rule in light of 
Executive Order 13563, dated January 18, 2011, and affirms that this 
regulation is consistent with the guidance therein.

Executive Order 12988

    The Department of State has reviewed the amendment 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.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This 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 123

    Arms and munitions, Exports.

    Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, Title 22, Chapter I, 
Subchapter M, part 123 is amended as follows:

PART 123--LICENSES FOR THE EXPORT OF DEFENSE ARTICLES

0
1. The authority citation for part 123 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 2, 38, and 71, Pub. L. 90-629, 90 Stat. 744 (22 
U.S.C. 2752, 2778, 2797); 22 U.S.C. 2753; E.O. 11958, 42 FR 4311; 3 
CFR, 1977 Comp. p. 79; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 2776; Pub. L. 105-
261, 112 Stat. 1920; Sec 1205(a), Pub. L. 107-228.


0
2. Section 123.21 is amended by revising the section heading and 
paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  123.21  Duration, renewal, and disposition of licenses.

* * * * *
    (b) Unused, expired, suspended, or revoked licenses must be handled 
in accordance with Sec.  123.22(c) of this subchapter.

0
3. Section 123.22 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  123.22  Filing, retention, and return of export licenses and 
filing of export information.

* * * * *
    (c) Return of licenses. Per Sec.  123.21 of this subchapter, all 
DSP licenses issued by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) 
must be disposed of in accordance with the following:

[[Page 68313]]

    (1) A DSP-5 license issued electronically by DDTC and decremented 
electronically by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection through the 
Automated Export System (AES) is not required to be returned to DDTC. 
If a DSP-5 license issued electronically is decremented physically in 
one or more instance the license must be returned DDTC. A copy of the 
DSP-5 license must be maintained by the applicant in accordance with 
Sec.  122.5 of this subchapter.
    (2) DSP-5, DSP-61, DSP-73, and DSP-85 licenses issued by DDTC but 
not decremented electronically by the U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection through AES (e.g., oral or visual technical data releases or 
temporary import and export licenses retained in accordance with 
paragraph (a)(2) of this section), must be returned by the applicant, 
or the government agency with which the license was filed, to DDTC upon 
expiration, to include when the total authorized value or quantity has 
been shipped. A copy of the license must be maintained by the applicant 
in accordance with Sec.  122.5 of this subchapter. AES does not 
decrement the DSP-61, DSP-73, and DSP-85 licenses. Submitting the 
Electronic Export Information is not considered to be decremented 
electronically for these licenses.
    (3) A DSP-94 authorization filed with the U.S. Customs and Border 
Protection must be returned by the applicant, or the government agency 
with which the authorization was filed, to DDTC upon expiration, to 
include when the total authorized value or quantity has been shipped, 
or when all shipments against the Letter of Offer and Acceptance have 
been completed. AES does not decrement the DSP-94 authorization. 
Submitting the Electronic Export Information is not considered to be 
decremented electronically for the DSP-94. A copy of the DSP-94 must be 
maintained by the applicant in accordance with Sec.  122.5 of this 
subchapter.
    (4) A license issued by DDTC but not used by the applicant does not 
need to be returned to DDTC, even when expired.
    (5) A license revoked by DDTC is considered expired and must be 
handled in accordance with paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this 
section.

    Dated: October 27, 2011.
 Ellen O. Tauscher,
 Under Secretary, Arms Control and International Security, Department 
of State.
[FR Doc. 2011-28548 Filed 11-3-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-25-P