International Traffic in Arms: Revisions to Definitions of Defense Services, Technical Data, and Public Domain; Definition of Product of Fundamental Research; Electronic Transmission and Storage of Technical Data; and Related Definitions, 31525-31538 [2015-12844]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
hearing,’’ which are conducted pursuant
to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 556 and
557. The CSA sets forth the criteria for
scheduling a drug or other substance
and for removing a drug or substance
from the schedules of controlled
substances. Such actions are exempt
from review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
pursuant to section 3(d)(1) of Executive
Order 12866 and the principles
reaffirmed in Executive Order 13563.
Executive Order 12988
This regulation meets the applicable
standards set forth in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 Civil
Justice Reform to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize
litigation, provide a clear legal standard
for affected conduct, and promote
simplification and burden reduction.
Executive Order 13132
This rulemaking does not have
federalism implications warranting the
application of Executive Order 13132.
The rule does not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and the States, or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Executive Order 13175
This rule does not have tribal
implications warranting the application
of Executive Order 13175. This rule
does not have substantial direct effects
on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Administrator, in accordance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601–612) (RFA), has reviewed
this proposed rule and by approving it
certifies that it will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The purpose of this rule is to remove
[123I]ioflupane from the list of schedules
of the CSA. This action will remove
regulatory controls and administrative,
civil, and criminal sanctions applicable
to controlled substances for handlers
and proposed handlers of
[123I]ioflupane. Accordingly, it has the
potential for some economic impact in
the form of cost savings.
If finalized, the proposed rule will
affect all persons who would handle, or
propose to handle, [123I]ioflupane. Due
to the wide variety of unidentifiable and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
unquantifiable variables that potentially
could influence the distribution and
administration rates of new molecular
entities, the DEA is unable to determine
the number of entities and small entities
which might handle [123I]ioflupane.
Although the DEA does not have a
reliable basis to estimate the number of
affected entities and quantify the
economic impact of this proposed rule,
a qualitative analysis indicates that, if
finalized, this rule is likely to result in
some cost savings for the healthcare
industry. The affected entities will
continue to meet existing Federal and/
or state requirements applicable to those
who handle radiopharmaceutical
substances, including licensure,
security, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements, which in many cases are
more stringent than the DEA’s
requirements. However, the DEA
estimates cost savings will be realized
from the removal of the administrative,
civil, and criminal sanctions for those
entities handling or proposing to handle
[123I]ioflupane, in the form of saved
registration fees, and the elimination of
additional physical security,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements.
Because of these facts, this rule will
not result in a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
On the basis of information contained
in the ‘‘Regulatory Flexibility Act’’
section above, the DEA has determined
and certifies pursuant to the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA),
2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq., that this action
would not result in any federal mandate
that may result ‘‘in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100,000,000 or more (adjusted for
inflation) in any one year * * * .’’
Therefore, neither a Small Government
Agency Plan nor any other action is
required under provisions of UMRA.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose a new
collection of information requirement
under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501–3521. This action would
not impose recordkeeping or reporting
requirements on State or local
governments, individuals, businesses, or
organizations. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31525
List of Subjects in 21 CFR part 1308
Administrative practice and
procedure, Drug traffic control,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set out above, 21 CFR
part 1308 is proposed to be amended to
read as follows:
PART 1308—SCHEDULES OF
CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 1308 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 811, 812, 871(b),
unless otherwise noted.
2. In § 1308.12, revise paragraph (b)(4)
to read as follows:
■
§ 1308.12
Schedule II.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(4) Coca leaves (9040) and any salt,
compound, derivative or preparation of
coca leaves (including cocaine (9041)
and ecgonine (9180) and their salts,
isomers, derivatives and salts of isomers
and derivatives), and any salt,
compound, derivative, or preparation
thereof which is chemically equivalent
or identical with any of these
substances, except that the substances
shall not include:
(i) Decocainized coca leaves or
extraction of coca leaves, which
extractions do not contain cocaine or
ecgonine; or
(ii) [123I]ioflupane.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: May 6, 2015.
Michele M. Leonhart,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015–13455 Filed 6–2–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–09–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Parts 120, 123, 125, and 127
[Public Notice 9149]
RIN 1400–AD70
International Traffic in Arms: Revisions
to Definitions of Defense Services,
Technical Data, and Public Domain;
Definition of Product of Fundamental
Research; Electronic Transmission
and Storage of Technical Data; and
Related Definitions
Department of State.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
As part of the President’s
Export Control Reform (ECR) initiative,
the Department of State proposes to
amend the International Traffic in Arms
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31526
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Regulations (ITAR) to update the
definitions of ‘‘defense article,’’
‘‘defense services,’’ ‘‘technical data,’’
‘‘public domain,’’ ‘‘export,’’ and
‘‘reexport or retransfer’’ in order to
clarify the scope of activities and
information that are covered within
these definitions and harmonize the
definitions with the Export
Administration Regulations (EAR), to
the extent appropriate. Additionally, the
Department proposes to create
definitions of ‘‘required,’’ ‘‘technical
data that arises during, or results from,
fundamental research,’’ ‘‘release,’’
‘‘retransfer,’’ and ‘‘activities that are not
exports, reexports, or retransfers’’ in
order to clarify and support the
interpretation of the revised definitions
that are proposed in this rulemaking.
The Department proposes to create new
sections detailing the scope of licenses,
unauthorized releases of information,
and the ‘‘release’’ of secured
information, and revises the sections on
‘‘exports’’ of ‘‘technical data’’ to U.S.
persons abroad. Finally, the Department
proposes to address the electronic
transmission and storage of unclassified
‘‘technical data’’ via foreign
communications infrastructure. This
rulemaking proposes that the electronic
transmission of unclassified ‘‘technical
data’’ abroad is not an ‘‘export,’’
provided that the data is sufficiently
secured to prevent access by foreign
persons. Additionally, this proposed
rule would allow for the electronic
storage of unclassified ‘‘technical data’’
abroad, provided that the data is
secured to prevent access by parties
unauthorized to access such data. The
revisions contained in this proposed
rule are part of the Department of State’s
retrospective plan under Executive
Order 13563 first submitted on August
17, 2011.
DATES: The Department of State will
accept comments on this proposed rule
until August 3, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may
submit comments within 60 days of the
date of publication by one of the
following methods:
• Email: DDTCPublicComments@
state.gov with the subject line, ‘‘ITAR
Amendment—Revisions to Definitions;
Data Transmission and Storage.’’
• Internet: At www.regulations.gov,
search for this notice by using this rule’s
RIN (1400–AD70).
Comments received after that date
may be considered, but consideration
cannot be assured. Those submitting
comments should not include any
personally identifying information they
do not desire to be made public or
information for which a claim of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
confidentiality is asserted because those
comments and/or transmittal emails
will be made available for public
inspection and copying after the close of
the comment period via the Directorate
of Defense Trade Controls Web site at
www.pmddtc.state.gov. Parties who
wish to comment anonymously may do
so by submitting their comments via
www.regulations.gov, leaving the fields
that would identify the commenter
blank and including no identifying
information in the comment itself.
Comments submitted via
www.regulations.gov are immediately
available for public inspection.
Mr.
C. Edward Peartree, Director, Office of
Defense Trade Controls Policy,
Department of State, telephone (202)
663–1282; email DDTCResponseTeam@
state.gov. ATTN: ITAR Amendment—
Revisions to Definitions; Data
Transmission and Storage. The
Department of State’s full retrospective
plan can be accessed at https://
www.state.gov/documents/organization/
181028.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The
Directorate of Defense Trade Controls
(DDTC), U.S. Department of State,
administers the International Traffic in
Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR parts
120 through 130). The items subject to
the jurisdiction of the ITAR, i.e.,
‘‘defense articles’’ and ‘‘defense
services,’’ are identified on the ITAR’s
U.S. Munitions List (USML) (22 CFR
121.1). With few exceptions, items not
subject to the export control jurisdiction
of the ITAR are subject to the
jurisdiction of the Export
Administration Regulations (‘‘EAR,’’ 15
CFR parts 730 through 774, which
includes the Commerce Control List
(CCL) in Supplement No. 1 to part 774),
administered by the Bureau of Industry
and Security (BIS), U.S. Department of
Commerce. Both the ITAR and the EAR
impose license requirements on exports
and reexports. Items not subject to the
ITAR or to the exclusive licensing
jurisdiction of any other set of
regulations are subject to the EAR.
BIS is concurrently publishing
comparable proposed amendments (BIS
companion rule) to the definitions of
‘‘technology,’’ ‘‘required,’’ ‘‘peculiarly
responsible,’’ ‘‘published,’’ results of
‘‘fundamental research,’’ ‘‘export,’’
‘‘reexport,’’ ‘‘release,’’ and ‘‘transfer (incountry)’’ in the EAR. A side-by-side
comparison on the regulatory text
proposed by both Departments is
available on both agencies’ Web sites:
www.pmddtc.state.gov and
www.bis.doc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1. Revised Definition of Defense Article
The Department proposes to revise
the definition of ‘‘defense article’’ to
clarify the scope of the definition. The
current text of § 120.6 is made into a
new paragraph (a), into which software
is added to the list of things that are a
‘‘defense article’’ because software is
being removed from the definition of
‘‘technical data.’’ This is not a
substantive change.
A new § 120.6(b) is added to list those
items that the Department has
determined should not be a ‘‘defense
article,’’ even though they would
otherwise meet the definition of
‘‘defense article.’’ All the items
described were formerly excluded from
the definition of ‘‘technical data’’ in
§ 120.10. These items are declared to be
not subject to the ITAR to parallel the
EAR concept of ‘‘not subject to the
EAR’’ as part of the effort to harmonize
the ITAR and the EAR. This does not
constitute a change in policy regarding
these items or the scope of items that are
defense articles.
2. Revised Definition of Technical Data
The Department proposes to revise
the definition of ‘‘technical data’’ in
ITAR § 120.10 in order to update and
clarify the scope of information that
may be captured within the definition.
Paragraph (a)(1) of the revised definition
defines ‘‘technical data’’ as information
‘‘required’’ for the ‘‘development,’’
‘‘production,’’ operation, installation,
maintenance, repair, overhaul, or
refurbishing of a ‘‘defense article,’’
which harmonizes with the definition of
‘‘technology’’ in the EAR and the
Wassenaar Arrangement. This is not a
change in the scope of the definition,
and additional words describing
activities that were in the prior
definition are included in parentheticals
to assist exporters.
Paragraph (a)(1) also sets forth a
broader range of examples of formats
that ‘‘technical data’’ may take, such as
diagrams, models, formulae, tables,
engineering designs and specifications,
computer-aided design files, manuals or
documentation, or electronic media,
that may constitute ‘‘technical data.’’
Additionally, the revised definition
includes certain conforming changes
intended to reflect the revised and
newly added defined terms proposed
elsewhere in this rule.
The proposed revised definition also
includes a note clarifying that the
modification of the design of an existing
item creates a new item and that the
‘‘technical data’’ for the modification is
‘‘technical data’’ for the new item.
Paragraph (a)(2) of the revised
definition defines ‘‘technical data’’ as
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
also including information that is
enumerated on the USML. This will be
‘‘technical data’’ that is positively
described, as opposed to ‘‘technical
data’’ described in the standard catch-all
‘‘technical data’’ control for all
‘‘technical data’’ directly related to a
‘‘defense article’’ described in the
relevant category. The Department
intends to enumerate certain controlled
‘‘technical data’’ as it continues to move
the USML toward a more positive
control list.
Paragraph (a)(3) of the revised
definition defines ‘‘technical data’’ as
also including classified information
that is for the ‘‘development,’’
‘‘production,’’ operation, installation,
maintenance, repair, overhaul, or
refurbishing of a ‘‘defense article’’ or a
600 series item subject to the EAR.
Paragraph (a)(5) of the revised definition
defines ‘‘technical data’’ as also
including information to access secured
‘‘technical data’’ in clear text, such as
decryption keys, passwords, or network
access codes. In support of the latter
change, the Department also proposes to
add a new provision to the list of
violations in § 127.1(b)(4) to state that
any disclosure of these decryption keys
or passwords that results in the
unauthorized disclosure of the
‘‘technical data’’ or software secured by
the encryption key or password is a
violation and will constitute a violation
to the same extent as the ‘‘export’’ of the
secured information. For example, the
‘‘release’’ of a decryption key may result
in the unauthorized disclosure of
multiple files containing ‘‘technical
data’’ hosted abroad and could therefore
constitute a violation of the ITAR for
each piece of ‘‘technical data’’ on that
server.
Paragraph (b) of the revised definition
of ‘‘technical data’’ excludes nonproprietary general system descriptions,
information on basic function or
purpose of an item, and telemetry data
as defined in Note 3 to USML Category
XV(f) (§ 121.1). Items formerly identified
in this paragraph, principles taught in
schools and ‘‘public domain’’
information, have been moved to the
new ITAR § 120.6(b).
The proposed definition removes
software from the definition of
‘‘technical data.’’ Specific and catch-all
controls on software will be added
elsewhere throughout the ITAR as
warranted, as it will now be defined as
a separate type of ‘‘defense article.’’
3. Proposed Definition of Required
The Department proposes a definition
of ‘‘required’’ in a new § 120.46.
‘‘Required’’ is used in the definition of
‘‘technical data’’ and has, to this point,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
been an undefined term in the ITAR.
The word is also used in the controls on
technology in both the EAR and the
Wassenaar Arrangement, as a defined
term, which the Department is now
proposing to adopt:
. . . [O]nly that portion of [technical data]
that is peculiarly responsible for achieving or
exceeding the controlled performance levels,
characteristics, or functions. Such required
[technical data] may be shared by different
products.
The proposed definition of ‘‘required’’
contains three notes. These notes
explain how the definition is to be
applied.
Note 1 provides that the definition
explicitly includes information for
meeting not only controlled
performance levels, but also
characteristics and functions. All items
described on the USML are identified by
a characteristic or function.
Additionally, some descriptions include
a performance level. As an example,
USML Category VIII(a)(1) controls
aircraft that are ‘‘bombers’’ and contains
no performance level. The characteristic
of the aircraft that is controlled is that
it is a bomber, and therefore, any
‘‘technical data’’ peculiar to making an
aircraft a bomber is ‘‘required.’’
Note 2 states that, with the exception
of ‘‘technical data’’ specifically
enumerated on the USML, the
jurisdictional status of unclassified
‘‘technical data’’ is the same as that of
the commodity to which it is directly
related. Specifically, it explains that
‘‘technical data’’ for a part or component
of a ‘‘defense article’’ is directly related
to that part or component, and if the
part or component is subject to the EAR,
so is the ‘‘technical data.’’
Note 3 establishes a test for
determining if information is peculiarly
responsible for meeting or achieving the
controlled performance levels,
characteristics or functions of a
‘‘defense article.’’ It uses the same catchand-release concept that the Department
implemented in the definition of
‘‘specially designed.’’ It has a similarly
broad catch of all information used in or
for use in the ‘‘development,’’
‘‘production,’’ operation, installation,
maintenance, repair, overhaul, or
refurbishing of a ‘‘defense article.’’ It has
four releases that mirror the ‘‘specially
designed’’ releases, and one reserved
paragraph for information that the
Department determines is generally
insignificant. The first release is for
information identified in a commodity
jurisdiction determination. The second
release is reserved. The third release is
for information that is identical to
information used in a non-defense
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31527
article that is in ‘‘production,’’ and not
otherwise enumerated on the ITAR. The
fourth release is for information that
was developed with knowledge that it is
for both a ‘‘defense article’’ and a nondefense article. The fifth release is
information that was developed for
general purpose commodities.
In the companion rule, BIS proposes
to make Note 3 into a stand-alone
definition for ‘‘peculiarly responsible’’
as it has application outside of the
definition of ‘‘required.’’ The substance
of Note 3 and the BIS definition of
‘‘peculiarly responsible’’ are identical.
DDTC asks for comments on the
placement of this concept.
4. Proposed Definitions of Development
and Production
The Department proposes to add
§ 120.47 for the definition of
‘‘development’’ and § 120.48 for the
definition of ‘‘production.’’ These
definitions are currently in Notes 1 and
2 to paragraph (b)(3) in § 120.41, the
definition of ‘‘specially designed.’’
Because ‘‘technical data’’ is now
defined, in part, as information
‘‘required’’ for the ‘‘development’’ or
‘‘production’’ of a ‘‘defense article,’’ and
these words are now used in the
definition of a ‘‘defense service,’’ it is
appropriate to define these terms. The
adoption of these definitions is also
done for the purpose of harmonization
because these definitions are also used
in the EAR and by the Wassenaar
Arrangement.
5. Revised Definition of Public Domain
The Department proposes to revise
the definition of ‘‘public domain’’ in
ITAR § 120.11 in order to simplify,
update, and introduce greater versatility
into the definition. The existing version
of ITAR § 120.11 relies on an
enumerated list of circumstances
through which ‘‘public domain’’
information might be published. The
Department believes that this definition
is unnecessarily limiting in scope and
insufficiently flexible with respect to
the continually evolving array of media,
whether physical or electronic, through
which information may be
disseminated.
The proposed definition is intended
to identify the characteristics that are
common to all of the enumerated forms
of publication identified in the current
rule—with the exception of ITAR
§ 120.11(a)(8), which is addressed in a
new definition for ‘‘technical data that
arises during, or results from,
fundamental research’’—and to present
those common characteristics in a
streamlined definition that does not
require enumerated identification
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31528
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
within the ITAR of every current or
future qualifying publication scenario.
Additionally, the proposed definition
incorporates phrases such as ‘‘generally
accessible’’ and ‘‘without restriction
upon its further dissemination’’ in order
to better align the definition found in
the EAR and more closely aligned with
the definition in the Wassenaar
Arrangement control lists.
The proposed definition requires that
information be made available to the
public without restrictions on its further
dissemination. Any information that
meets this definition is ‘‘public
domain.’’ The definition also retains an
exemplary list of information that has
been made available to the public
without restriction and would be
considered ‘‘public domain.’’ These
include magazines, periodicals and
other publications available as
subscriptions, publications contained in
libraries, information made available at
a public conference, meeting, seminar,
trade show, or exhibition, and
information posted on public Web sites.
The final example deems information
that is submitted to co-authors, editors,
or reviewers or conference organizers
for review for publication to be ‘‘public
domain,’’ even prior to actual
publication. The relevant restrictions do
not include copyright protections or
generic property rights in the
underlying physical medium.
Paragraph (b) of the revised definition
explicitly sets forth the Department’s
requirement of authorization to release
information into the ‘‘public domain.’’
Prior to making available ‘‘technical
data’’ or software subject to the ITAR,
the U.S. government must approve the
release through one of the following: (1)
The Department; (2) the Department of
Defense’s Office of Security Review; (3)
a relevant U.S. government contracting
authority with authority to allow the
‘‘technical data’’ or software to be made
available to the public, if one exists; or
(4) another U.S. government official
with authority to allow the ‘‘technical
data’’ or software to be made available
to the public.
The requirements of paragraph (b) are
not new. Rather, they are a more explicit
statement of the ITAR’s requirement
that one must seek and receive a license
or other authorization from the
Department or other cognizant U.S.
government authority to release ITAR
controlled ‘‘technical data,’’ as defined
in § 120.10. A release of ‘‘technical
data’’ may occur by disseminating
‘‘technical data’’ at a public conference
or trade show, publishing ‘‘technical
data’’ in a book or journal article, or
posting ‘‘technical data’’ to the Internet.
This proposed provision will enhance
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
compliance with the ITAR by clarifying
that ‘‘technical data’’ may not be made
available to the public without
authorization. Persons who intend to
discuss ‘‘technical data’’ at a conference
or trade show, or to publish it, must
ensure that they obtain the appropriate
authorization.
Information that is excluded from the
definition of ‘‘defense article’’ in the
new § 120.6(b) is not ‘‘technical data’’
and therefore does not require
authorization prior to release into the
‘‘public domain.’’ This includes
information that arises during or results
from ‘‘fundamental research,’’ as
described in the new § 120.49; general
scientific, mathematical, or engineering
principles commonly taught in schools,
and information that is contained in
patents.
The Department also proposes to add
a new provision to § 127.1 in paragraph
(a)(6) to state explicitly that the further
dissemination of ‘‘technical data’’ or
software that was made available to the
public without authorization is a
violation of the ITAR, if, and only if, it
is done with knowledge that the
‘‘technical data’’ or software was made
publicly available without an
authorization described in ITAR
§ 120.11(b)(2). Dissemination of publicly
available ‘‘technical data’’ or software is
not an export-controlled event, and does
not require authorization from the
Department, in the absence of
knowledge that it was made publicly
available without authorization.
‘‘Technical data’’ and software that is
made publicly available without proper
authorization remains ‘‘technical data’’
or software and therefore remains
subject to the ITAR. As such, the U.S.
government may advise a person that
the original release of the ‘‘technical
data’’ or software was unauthorized and
put that person on notice that further
dissemination would violate the ITAR.
6. Proposed Definition of Technical
Data That Arises During, or Results
From, Fundamental Research
The Department proposes to move
‘‘fundamental research’’ from the
definition of ‘‘public domain’’ in ITAR
§ 120.11(a)(8) and define ‘‘technical data
that arises during, or results from,
fundamental research’’ in a new ITAR
§ 120.49. The Department believes that
information that arises during, or results
from fundamental research is
conceptually distinguishable from the
information that would be captured in
the revised definition of ‘‘public
domain’’ that is proposed in this rule.
Accordingly, the Department proposes
to address this concept with its own
definition. The new definition of
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
‘‘technical data that arises during, or
results from, fundamental research’’ is
consistent with the prior ITAR
§ 120.11(a)(8), except that the
Department has expanded the scope of
eligible research to include research that
is funded, in whole or in part, by the
U.S. government.
7. Revised Definition of Export
The Department proposes to revise
the definition of ‘‘export’’ in ITAR
§ 120.17 to better align with the EAR’s
revised definition of the term and to
remove activities associated with a
defense article’s further movement or
release outside the United States, which
will now fall within the definition of
‘‘reexport’’ in § 120.19. The definition is
revised to explicitly identify that ITAR
§§ 126.16 and 126.17 (exemptions
pursuant to the Australia and UK
Defense Trade Cooperation Treaties)
have their own definitions of ‘‘export,’’
which apply exclusively to those
exemptions. It also explicitly references
the new § 120.49, ‘‘Activities that are
Not Exports, Reexports, or Retransfers,’’
which excludes from ITAR control
certain transactions identified therein.
Paragraph (a)(1) is revised to parallel
the definition of ‘‘export’’ in proposed
paragraph (a)(1) of § 734.13 of the EAR.
Although the wording has changed, the
scope of the control is the same. The
provision excepting travel outside of the
United States by persons whose
personal knowledge includes ‘‘technical
data’’ is removed, but the central
concept is unchanged. The ‘‘release’’ of
‘‘technical data’’ to a foreign person
while in the United States or while
travelling remains a controlled event.
Paragraph (a)(2) includes the control
listed in the current § 120.17(a)(4)
(transfer of technical data to a foreign
person). The proposed revisions replace
the word ‘‘disclosing’’ with ‘‘releasing,’’
and the paragraph is otherwise revised
to parallel proposed paragraph (a)(2) of
§ 734.13 of the EAR. ‘‘Release’’ is a
newly defined concept in § 120.50 that
encompasses the previously undefined
term ‘‘disclose.’’
Paragraph (a)(3) includes the control
listed in the current § 120.17(a)(2)
(transfer of registration, control, or
ownership to a foreign person of an
aircraft, vessel, or satellite). It is revised
to parallel proposed paragraph (a)(3) of
§ 734.13 of the EAR.
Paragraph (a)(4) includes the control
listed in the current § 120.17(a)(3)
(transfer in the United States to foreign
embassies).
Paragraph (a)(5) maintains the control
on performing a ‘‘defense service.’’
Paragraph (a)(6) is added for the
‘‘release’’ or transfer of decryption keys,
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
passwords, and other items identified in
the new paragraph (a)(5) of the revised
definition of ‘‘technical data’’ in
§ 120.10. This paragraph makes
‘‘release’’ or transfer of information
securing ‘‘technical data’’ an ‘‘export.’’
Making the release of decryption keys
and other information securing
technical data in an inaccessible or
unreadable format an export allows the
Department to propose that providing
someone with encrypted ‘‘technical
data’’ would not be an ‘‘export,’’ under
certain circumstances. Provision of a
decryption key or other information
securing ‘‘technical data’’ is an ‘‘export’’
regardless of whether the foreign person
has already obtained access to the
secured ‘‘technical data.’’ Paragraph
(a)(6) of the definitions of export and
reexport in this rule and the BIS
companion rule present different
formulations for this control and the
agencies request input from the public
on which language more clearly
describes the control. The agencies
intend, however, that the act of
providing physical access to unsecured
‘‘technical data’’ (subject to the ITAR)
will be a controlled event. The mere act
of providing access to unsecured
technology (subject to the EAR) will not,
however, be a controlled event unless it
is done with ‘‘knowledge’’ that such
provision will cause or permit the
transfer of controlled ‘‘technology’’ in
clear text or ‘‘software’’ to a foreign
national.
Paragraph (a)(7) is added for the
release of information to a public
network, such as the Internet. This
makes more explicit the existing control
in (a)(4), which includes the publication
of ‘‘technical data’’ to the Internet due
to its inherent accessibility by foreign
persons. This means that before posting
information to the Internet, you should
determine whether the information is
‘‘technical data.’’ You should review the
USML, and if there is doubt about
whether the information is ‘‘technical
data,’’ you may request a commodity
jurisdiction determination from the
Department. If so, a license or other
authorization, as described in
§ 120.11(b), will generally be required to
post such ‘‘technical data’’ to the
Internet. Posting ‘‘technical data’’ to the
Internet without a Department or other
authorization is a violation of the ITAR
even absent specific knowledge that a
foreign national will read the ‘‘technical
data.’’
Paragraph (b)(1) is added to clarify
existing ITAR controls to explicitly state
that disclosing ‘‘technical data’’ to a
foreign person is deemed to be an
‘‘export’’ to all countries in which the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
foreign person has held citizenship or
holds permanent residency.
8. Revised Definition of Reexport
The Department proposes to revise
the definition of ‘‘reexport’’ in ITAR
§ 120.19 to better align with the EAR’s
revised definition and describe transfers
of items subject to the jurisdiction of the
ITAR between two foreign countries.
The activities identified are the same as
those in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of
the revised definition of ‘‘export,’’
except that the shipment, release or
transfer is between two foreign
countries or is to a third country
national foreign person outside of the
United States.
9. Proposed Definition of Release
The Department proposes to add
§ 120.50, the definition of ‘‘release.’’
This term is added to harmonize with
the EAR, which has long used the term
to cover activities that disclose
information to foreign persons.
‘‘Release’’ includes the activities
encompassed within the undefined term
‘‘disclose.’’ The activities that are
captured include allowing a foreign
person to inspect a ‘‘defense article’’ in
a way that reveals ‘‘technical data’’ to
the foreign persons and oral or written
exchanges of ‘‘technical data’’ with a
foreign person. The adoption of the
definition of ‘‘release’’ does not change
the scope of activities that constitute an
‘‘export’’ and other controlled
transactions under the ITAR.
10. Proposed Definition of Retransfer
The Department proposes to add
§ 120.51, the definition of ‘‘retransfer.’’
‘‘Retransfer’’ is moved out of the
definition of ‘‘reexport’’ in § 120.19 to
better harmonize with the EAR, which
controls ‘‘exports,’’ ‘‘reexports’’ and
‘‘transfers (in country)’’ as discrete
events. Under this new definition, a
‘‘retransfer’’ occurs with a change of end
use or end user within the same foreign
territory. Certain activities may fit
within the definition of ‘‘reexport’’ and
‘‘retransfer,’’ such as the disclosure of
‘‘technical data’’ to a third country
national abroad. Requests for both
‘‘reexports’’ and ‘‘retransfers’’ of
‘‘defense articles’’ will generally be
processed through a General
Correspondence or an exemption.
11. Proposed Activities That Are Not
Exports, Reexports, or Retransfers
The Department proposes to add
§ 120.52 to describe those ‘‘activities
that are not exports, reexports, or
retransfers’’ and do not require
authorization from the Department. It is
not an ‘‘export’’ to launch items into
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31529
space, provide ‘‘technical data’’ or
software to U.S. persons while in the
United States, or move a ‘‘defense
article’’ between the states, possessions,
and territories of the United States. The
Department also proposes to add a new
provision excluding from ITAR
licensing requirements the transmission
and storage of encrypted ‘‘technical
data’’ and software.
The Department recognizes that ITARcontrolled ‘‘technical data’’ may be
electronically routed through foreign
servers unbeknownst to the original
sender. This presents a risk of
unauthorized access and creates a
potential for inadvertent ITAR
violations. For example, email
containing ‘‘technical data’’ may,
without the knowledge of the sender,
transit a foreign country’s Internet
service infrastructure en route to its
intended and authorized final
destination. Any access to this data by
a foreign person would constitute an
unauthorized ‘‘export’’ under ITAR
§ 120.17. Another example is the use of
mass data storage (i.e., ‘‘cloud storage’’).
In this case, ‘‘technical data’’ intended
to be resident in cloud storage may,
without the knowledge of the sender, be
physically stored on a server or servers
located in a foreign country or multiple
countries. Any access to this data, even
if unintended by the sender, would
constitute an ‘‘export’’ under ITAR
§ 120.17.
The intent of the proposed ITAR
§ 120.52(a)(4) is to clarify that when
unclassified ‘‘technical data’’ transits
through a foreign country’s Internet
service infrastructure, a license or other
approval is not mandated when such
‘‘technical data’’ is encrypted prior to
leaving the sender’s facilities and
remains encrypted until received by the
intended recipient or retrieved by the
sender, as in the case of remote storage.
The encryption must be accomplished
in a manner that is certified by the U.S.
National Institute for Standards and
Technology (NIST) as compliant with
the Federal Information Processing
Standards Publication 140–2 (FIPS 140–
2). Additionally, the Department
proposes that the electronic storage
abroad of ‘‘technical data’’ that has been
similarly encrypted would not require
an authorization, so long as it is not
stored in a § 126.1 country or in the
Russian Federation. This will allow for
cloud storage of encrypted data in
foreign countries, so long as the
‘‘technical data’’ remains continuously
encrypted while outside of the United
States.
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
31530
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
12. Revised Exemption for the Export of
Technical Data for U.S. Persons Abroad
The Department proposes to revise
§ 125.4(b)(9) to better harmonize
controls on the ‘‘release’’ of controlled
information to U.S. persons abroad and
to update the provisions. The most
significant update is that foreign
persons authorized to receive ‘‘technical
data’’ in the United States will be
eligible to receive that same ‘‘technical
data’’ abroad, when on temporary
assignment on behalf of their employer.
The proposed revisions clarify that a
person going abroad may use this
exemption to ‘‘export’’ ‘‘technical data’’
for their own use abroad. The proposed
revisions also clarify that the ‘‘technical
data’’ must be secured while abroad to
prevent unauthorized ‘‘release.’’ It has
been long-standing Department practice
to hold U.S. persons responsible for the
‘‘release’’ of ‘‘technical data’’ in their
possession while abroad. However,
given the nature of ‘‘technical data’’ and
the proposed exception from licensing
for transmission of secured ‘‘technical
data,’’ the Department has determined it
is necessary to implement an affirmative
obligation to secure data while abroad.
13. Proposed Scope of License
The Department proposes to add
§ 123.28 to clarify the scope of a license,
in the absence of a proviso, and to state
that authorizations are granted based on
the information provided by the
applicant. This means that while
providing false information to the U.S.
government as part of the application
process for the ‘‘export,’’ ‘‘reexport,’’ or
‘‘retransfer’’ of a ‘‘defense article’’ is a
violation of the ITAR, it also may void
the license.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
14. Revised Definition of Defense
Service
Proposed revisions of the ‘‘defense
service’’ definition were published on
April 13, 2011, RIN 1400–AC80 (see
‘‘International Traffic in Arms
Regulations: Defense Services,’’ 76 FR
20590) and May 24, 2013 (see 78 FR
31444, RIN 1400–AC80). In those rules,
the Department explained its
determination that the scope of the
current definition is overly broad,
capturing certain forms of assistance or
services that no longer warrant ITAR
control.
The Department reviewed comments
on that first proposed definition and,
when the recommended changes added
to the clarity of the regulation, the
Department accepted them. For the
Department’s evaluation of those public
comments and recommendations
regarding the April 13, 2011, proposed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
rule (the first revision), see 78 FR 31444,
May 24, 2013. The Department’s
evaluation of the written comments and
recommendations in response to the
May 24, 2013 proposed rule (the second
revision) follows.
Parties commenting on the second
revision expressed concern that the
definition of ‘‘defense service’’ in
paragraph (a)(1) was premised on the
use of ‘‘other than public domain
information.’’ The observation was
made that with the intent of removing
from the definition of a ‘‘defense
service’’ the furnishing of assistance
using ‘‘public domain’’ information, but
not basing the assistance on the use of
‘‘technical data,’’ the Department was
continuing to require the licensing of
activities akin to those that were based
on the use of ‘‘public domain’’
information. The Department has fully
revised paragraph (a)(1) to remove the
use of the ‘‘other than public domain
information’’ or ‘‘technical data’’ from
the determination of whether an activity
is a ‘‘defense service.’’ Furthermore, the
Department has added a new provision
declaring that the activities described in
paragraph (a)(1) are not a ‘‘defense
service’’ if performed by a U.S. person
or foreign person in the United States
who does not have knowledge of U.S.origin ‘‘technical data’’ directly related
to the ‘‘defense article’’ that is the
subject of the assistance or training or
another ‘‘defense article’’ described in
the same USML paragraph prior to
performing the service. A note is added
to clarify that a person will be deemed
to have knowledge of U.S.-origin
‘‘technical data’’ if the person
previously participated in the
‘‘development’’ of a ‘‘defense article’’
described in the same USML paragraph,
or accessed (physically or
electronically) that ‘‘technical data.’’ A
note is also added to clarify that those
U.S. persons abroad who only received
U.S.-origin ‘‘technical data’’ as a result
of their activities on behalf of a foreign
person are not included within the
scope of paragraph (a)(1). A third note
is added to clarify that DDTC-authorized
foreign person employees in the United
States who provide ‘‘defense services’’
on behalf of their U.S. employer are
considered to be included with the U.S.
employer’s authorization, and need not
be listed on the U.S. employer’s
technical assistance agreement or
receive a separate authorization for
those services. The Department also
removed the activities of design,
development, and engineering from
paragraph (a)(1) and moved them to
paragraph (a)(2).
Commenting parties recommended
revising paragraph (a)(1) to remove the
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
provision of ‘‘technical data’’ as a
‘‘defense service,’’ because there are
already licensing requirements for the
‘‘export’’ of ‘‘technical data.’’ The
Department confirms that it eliminated
from the definition of a ‘‘defense
service’’ the act of furnishing ‘‘technical
data’’ to a foreign person. Such activity
still constitutes an ‘‘export’’ and would
require an ITAR authorization. New
paragraph (a)(1) is concerned with the
furnishing of assistance, whereas the
‘‘export’’ of ‘‘technical data’’ alone,
without the furnishing of assistance, is
not a ‘‘defense service.’’ The ‘‘export’’ of
‘‘technical data’’ requires an
authorization (Department of State form
DSP–5 or DSP–85) or the use of an
applicable exemption.
Commenting parties recommended
the definition be revised to explicitly
state that it applies to the furnishing of
assistance by U.S. persons, or by foreign
persons in the United States. The
Department partially accepted this
recommendation. However, the
Department notes that ITAR § 120.1(c)
provides that only U.S. persons and
foreign governmental entities in the
United States may be granted a license
or other approval pursuant to the ITAR,
and that foreign persons may only
receive a ‘‘reexport’’ or ‘‘retransfer’’
approval or approval for brokering
activities. Therefore, approval for the
performance of a defense service in the
United States by a foreign person must
be obtained by a U.S. person, such as an
employer, on behalf of the foreign
person. Regarding a related
recommendation, the Department also
notes that the furnishing of a type of
assistance described by the definition of
a ‘‘defense service’’ is not an activity
within the Department’s jurisdiction
when it is provided by a foreign person
outside the United States to another
foreign person outside the United States
on a foreign ‘‘defense article’’ using
foreign-origin ‘‘technical data.’’
In response to commenting parties,
the Department specified that the
examples it provided for activities that
are not ‘‘defense services’’ are not
exhaustive. Rather, they are provided to
answer the more frequent questions the
Department receives on the matter. The
Department removed these examples
from paragraph (b) and included them
as a note to paragraph (a).
A commenting party recommended
that paragraphs (a)(5) and (a)(6),
regarding the furnishing of assistance in
the integration of a spacecraft to a
launch vehicle and in the launch failure
analysis of a spacecraft or launch
vehicle, respectively, be removed, and
that those activities be described in the
USML categories covering spacecraft
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
and launch vehicles, on the basis that a
general definition should not have such
program-specific clauses. As discussed
in the May 13, 2014 interim final rule
revising USML Category XV (79 FR
27180), the Department accepted this
recommendation and revised paragraph
(f) of USML Category XV and paragraph
(i) of USML Category IV accordingly.
The revision includes the
recommendation of commenting parties
to specifically provide that the service
must be provided to a foreign person in
order for it to be a licensable activity.
Commenting parties recommended
the Department define the term ‘‘tactical
employment,’’ so as to clarify what
services would be captured by
paragraph (a)(3). The Department
determined that employment of a
‘‘defense article’’ should remain a
controlled event, due to the nature of
items now controlled in the revised
USML categories. After ECR, those items
that remain ‘‘defense articles’’ are the
most sensitive and militarily critical
equipment that have a significant
national security or intelligence
application. Allowing training and other
services to foreign nationals in the
employment of these ‘‘defense articles’’
without a license would not be
appropriate. Therefore, the Department
removed the word ‘‘tactical’’ and
converted the existing exemption for
basic operation of a ‘‘defense article,’’
authorized by the U.S. government for
‘‘export’’ to the same recipient, into an
exclusion from paragraph (a)(3).
A commenting party recommended
the Department address the instance of
the integration or installation of a
‘‘defense article’’ into an item, much as
it addressed the instance of the
integration or installation of an item
into a ‘‘defense article.’’ Previously, the
Department indicated this would be the
subject of a separate rule, and addressed
the ‘‘export’’ of such items in a
proposed rule (see 76 FR 13928), but
upon review the Department accepted
this recommendation, and revised
paragraph (a)(2), the note to paragraph
(a)(2), and the note to paragraph (a)
accordingly. In addition, the
Department has changed certain
terminology used in the paragraph:
instead of referring to the ‘‘transfer’’ of
‘‘technical data,’’ the paragraph is
premised on the ‘‘use’’ of ‘‘technical
data.’’ This change is consistent with
removing from the definition of a
‘‘defense service’’ the furnishing of
‘‘technical data’’ to a foreign person
when there is not also the furnishing of
assistance related to that ‘‘technical
data.’’
A commenting party requested
clarification of the rationale behind
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
selectively excepting from the ‘‘defense
services’’ definition the furnishing of
services using ‘‘public domain’’
information. The Department did so in
paragraph (a)(1), and now excludes
those services performed by U.S.
persons who have not previously had
access to any U.S. origin ‘‘technical
data’’ on the ‘‘defense article’’ being
serviced. In contrast, the Department
did not do so in paragraphs (a)(2) and
(a)(3) and former paragraphs (a)(5) and
(a)(6). In the case of paragraph (a)(2), the
rationale for not doing so is that the
activities involved in the development
of a ‘‘defense article,’’ or in integrating
a ‘‘defense article’’ with another item,
inherently involve the advancement of
the military capacity of another country
and therefore constitute activities over
which the U.S. government has
significant national security and foreign
policy concerns. To the extent that an
activity listed in paragraph (a)(1), such
as modification or testing, is done in the
‘‘development’’ of a ‘‘defense article,’’
such activities constitute
‘‘development’’ and are within the
scope of paragraph (a)(2). With regard to
paragraph (a)(3), the furnishing of
assistance (including training) in the
employment of a ‘‘defense article’’ is a
type of activity that the Department
believes warrants control as a ‘‘defense
service,’’ due to the inherently military
nature of providing training and other
services in the employment of a
‘‘defense article’’ (changes to paragraph
(a)(3) are described above). The services
described in former paragraphs (a)(5)
and (a)(6) (and now in USML Categories
IV(i) and XV(f)) are pursuant to Public
Law 105–261.
A commenting party recommended
limiting paragraph (a)(2) to the
integration of ECCN 9A515 and 600
series items into defense articles, saying
that the regulations should focus on
items subject to the EAR with a military
or space focus. The Department’s focus
with this provision is in fact the
‘‘defense article.’’ Items that are to be
integrated with a ‘‘defense article,’’
which may not themselves be defense
articles, may be beyond the authority of
the Department to regulate. The
Department did not accept this
recommendation.
A commenting party recommended
limiting the definition of integration to
changes in the function of the ‘‘defense
article,’’ and to exclude modifications in
fit. For the purposes of illustration, this
commenting party used one of the
examples provided by the Department
in the note to paragraph (a)(2): The
manufacturer of the military vehicle
will need to know the dimensions and
electrical requirements of the dashboard
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31531
radio when designing the vehicle. In
this instance, paragraph (a)(2) would not
apply, as this example addresses the
manufacture of a ‘‘defense article,’’
which is covered by paragraph (a)(1). If
the radio to be installed in this vehicle
is subject to the EAR, the provision to
the manufacturer of information
regarding the radio is not within the
Department’s licensing jurisdiction. In
an instance of a service entailing the
integration of an item with a ‘‘defense
article,’’ where there would be
modification to any of the items, the
Department believes such assistance
would inherently require the use of
‘‘technical data.’’ Therefore, this
exclusion would be unacceptably broad.
However, the Department has accepted
the recommendation to clarify the
definition and exclude changes to fit to
any of the items involved in the
integration activity, provided that such
services do not entail the use of
‘‘technical data’’ directly related to the
‘‘defense article.’’ Upon review, changes
to fit are not an aspect of integration,
which is the ‘‘engineering analysis
needed to unite a ‘defense article’ and
one or more items,’’ and therefore are
not captured in paragraph (a)(2). The
modifications of the ‘‘defense article’’ to
accommodate the fit of the item to be
integrated, which are within the activity
covered by installation, are only those
modifications to the ‘‘defense article’’
that allow the item to be placed in its
predetermined location. Any
modifications to the design of a
‘‘defense article’’ are beyond the scope
of installation. Additionally, while
minor modifications may be made to a
‘‘defense article’’ without the activity
being controlled under (a)(2) as an
integration activity, all modifications of
defense articles, regardless of
sophistication, are activities controlled
under (a)(1) if performed by someone
with prior knowledge of U.S.-origin
‘‘technical data.’’ ‘‘Fit’’ is defined in
ITAR § 120.41: ‘‘The fit of a commodity
is defined by its ability to physically
interface or connect with or become an
integral part of another commodity’’
(see, Note 4 to paragraph (b)(3)).
Commenting parties recommended
revising paragraph (a)(2) to provide that
such assistance described therein would
be a ‘‘defense service’’ only if U.S.origin ‘‘technical data’’ is exported. The
law and regulations do not mandate this
limitation. Section 38 of the Arms
Export Control Act provides that the
President is authorized to control the
‘‘export’’ of defense articles and defense
services. The ITAR, in defining ‘‘defense
article,’’ ‘‘technical data,’’ and ‘‘export,’’
does not provide the qualifier ‘‘U.S.-
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
31532
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
origin’’ (see ITAR §§ 120.6, 120.10, and
120.17, respectively). In the instance
described by the commenting party, of
the integration of a commercial item
into a foreign-origin ‘‘defense article,’’
the Department retains jurisdiction
when the service is provided by a U.S.
person.
A commenting party recommended
revising paragraph (a)(2) so that the
paragraph (a)(1) exception of the
furnishing of assistance using ‘‘public
domain’’ information is not nullified by
paragraph (a)(2), as most of the activities
described in paragraph (a)(1) involve
integration as defined in the note to
paragraph (a)(2). The Department
believes each of the activities described
in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) are
sufficiently well defined to distinguish
them one from the other. Therefore, the
Department does not agree that
paragraph (a)(2) nullifies the intention
of paragraph (a)(1), and does not accept
this recommendation.
A commenting party requested
clarification that providing an item
subject to the EAR for the purposes of
integration into a ‘‘defense article’’ is
not a ‘‘defense service.’’ The provision
of the item in this instance,
unaccompanied by assistance in the
integration of the item into a ‘‘defense
article,’’ is not within the scope of ‘‘the
furnishing of assistance,’’ and therefore
is not a defense service.
Commenting parties recommended
clarification on whether the servicing of
an item subject to the EAR that has been
integrated with a ‘‘defense article’’
would be a ‘‘defense service.’’ The
Department notes that such activity is
not a ‘‘defense service,’’ provides it as
an example of what is not a ‘‘defense
service’’ in the note to paragraph (a),
and also notes that it would be
incumbent on the applicant to ensure
that in providing this service, ‘‘technical
data’’ directly related to the ‘‘defense
article’’ is not used.
Commenting parties expressed
concern over the potential negative
effect of paragraph (a)(2) and the
definition in general on universitybased educational activities and
scientific communication, and
recommended clarification of the
relationship between the definition of
‘‘defense services’’ and the exemption
for the ‘‘export’’ of ‘‘technical data’’ at
ITAR § 125.4(b)(10). Disclosures of
‘‘technical data’’ to foreign persons who
are bona-fide and full time regular
employees of universities continue to be
exports for which ITAR § 125.4(b)(10) is
one licensing exemption. The
Department believes that, in most cases,
the normal duties of a university
employee do not encompass the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
furnishing of assistance to a foreign
person, in the activities described in
paragraph (a). Therefore, in the context
of employment with the university, the
Department does not perceive that the
foreign person’s use of the ‘‘technical
data’’ would be described by ITAR
§ 120.9(a)(2), or any part of paragraph
(a).
In response to the recommendation of
one commenting party, the Department
added a note clarifying that the
installation of an item into a ‘‘defense
article’’ is not a ‘‘defense service,’’
provided no ‘‘technical data’’ is used in
the rendering of the service.
A commenting party recommended
clarification of the licensing process for
the ‘‘export’’ of an EAR 600 series item
that is to be integrated into a ‘‘defense
article.’’ The Department of Commerce
has ‘‘export’’ authority over the 600
series item, and the exporter must
obtain a license from the Department of
Commerce, if necessary. The exporter
must also obtain an approval from the
Department of State to provide any
‘‘defense service,’’ including integration
assistance pursuant to paragraph (a)(2).
A commenting party recommended
removing ‘‘testing’’ as a type of ‘‘defense
service,’’ stating it was not included in
the definition of ‘‘organizational-level
maintenance.’’ In including testing as
part of the former definition but not of
the latter, the Department does not
perceive an inconsistency or conflict. To
the extent that certain testing is within
the definition of organization-level
maintenance, that testing is explicitly
excluded, as organizational-level
maintenance is not covered under the
definition of a ‘‘defense service.’’
However, all other testing remains a
‘‘defense service.’’ The Department
intends for the furnishing of assistance
to a foreign person, whether in the
United States or abroad, in the testing of
defense articles to be an activity
requiring Department approval under
the conditions of paragraph (a)(1). The
Department did not accept this
recommendation.
Commenting parties provided
recommendations for revising the
definitions of ‘‘public domain’’
information and ‘‘technical data.’’ Those
definitions are proposed in this rule as
well. To the extent that evaluation of the
proposed changes to ‘‘defense services’’
hinges on these terms, the Department
invites commenting parties to submit
analyses of the impact of these revised
definitions on the revised ‘‘defense
service’’ definition in this proposed
rule.
Commenting parties recommended
clarification of the regulation regarding
the furnishing of assistance and training
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
in organizational-level (basic-level)
maintenance. The Department
harmonized paragraph (a)(1) and the
example regarding organizational-level
maintenance by revising the Note to
Paragraph (a), which sets forth activities
that are not ‘‘defense services,’’ so that
it specifically provides that ‘‘the
furnishing of assistance (including
training) in organizational-level (basiclevel) maintenance of a defense article’’
is an example of an activity that is not
a defense service.
In response to commenting parties,
the Department clarifies that the
example of employment by a foreign
person of a natural U.S. person as not
constituting a ‘‘defense service’’ is
meant to address, among other
scenarios, the instance where such a
person is employed by a foreign defense
manufacturer, but whose employment
in fact does not entail the furnishing of
assistance as described in ITAR
§ 120.9(a). By ‘‘natural person,’’ the
Department means a human being, as
may be inferred from the definition of
‘‘person’’ provided in ITAR § 120.14.
In response to the recommendation of
a commenting party, the Department
confirms that, as stated in a Department
of Commerce notice, ‘‘Technology
subject to the EAR that is used with
technical data subject to the ITAR that
will be used under the terms of a
Technical Assistance Agreement (TAA)
or Manufacturing License Agreement
(MLA) and that would otherwise require
a license from [the Department of
Commerce] may all be exported under
the TAA or MLA’’ (see 78 FR 22660). In
DDTC publication Guidelines for
Preparing Electronic Agreements
(Revision 4.2), Section 20.1.d., the
following conditions are stipulated: The
technology subject to the EAR will be
used with ‘‘technical data’’ subject to
the ITAR and described in the
agreement, and the technology subject
to the EAR will be used under the terms
of a TAA or MLA (see https://
www.pmddtc.state.gov/licensing/
agreement.html).
Request for Comments
The Department invites public
comment on any of the proposed
definitions set forth in this rulemaking.
With respect to the revisions to ITAR
§ 120.17, the Department recognizes the
increasingly complex nature of
telecommunications infrastructure and
the manner in which data is
transmitted, stored, and accessed, and
accordingly seeks public comment with
special emphasis on: (1) How
adequately the proposed regulations
address the technical aspects of data
transmission and storage; (2) whether
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
the proposed regulations mitigate
unintended or unauthorized access to
transmitted or stored data; and (3)
whether the proposed regulations
impose an undue financial or
compliance burden on the public.
The public is also asked to comment
on the effective date of the final rule.
Export Control Reform rules that revised
categories of the USML and created new
600 series ECCN have had a six-month
delayed effective date to allow for
exporters to update the classification of
their items. In general, rules effecting
export controls have been effective on
the date of publication, due to the
impact on national security and foreign
policy. As this proposed rule and the
companion proposed rule from the
Bureau of Industry and Security revise
definitions within the ITAR and the
EAR and do not make any changes to
the USML or CCL, the Department
proposes (should the proposed rule be
adopted) a 30-day delayed effective date
to allow exporters to ensure continued
compliance.
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 U.S.
government and that rules
implementing this function are exempt
from sections 553 (rulemaking) and 554
(adjudications) of the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA). Although the
Department is of the opinion that this
proposed rule is exempt from the
rulemaking provisions of the APA, the
Department is publishing this rule with
a 60-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
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Since the Department is of the
opinion that this proposed rule is
exempt from the rulemaking provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 553, there is no requirement
for an analysis under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996
For purposes of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (the ‘‘Act’’), a major rule is a rule
that the Administrator of the OMB
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs finds has resulted or is likely to
result in: (1) An annual effect on the
economy of $100,000,000 or more; (2) a
major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries,
federal, state, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions; or (3)
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises in domestic and
foreign markets.
The Department does not believe this
rulemaking will have an annual effect
on the economy of $100,000,000 or
more, nor will it result in a major
increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries,
federal, state, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions, or have
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or on the
ability of United States-based
enterprises to compete with foreignbased enterprises in domestic and
foreign markets. The proposed means of
solving the issue of data protection are
both familiar to and extensively used by
the affected public in protecting
sensitive information.
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 proposed
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 proposed
amendment.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess costs and
benefits of available regulatory
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31533
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributed impacts, and equity).
The executive orders stress the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This proposed rule has been
designated a ‘‘significant regulatory
action,’’ although not economically
significant, under section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866. Accordingly,
the proposed rule has been reviewed by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB).
Executive Order 12988
The Department of State has reviewed
the proposed 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.
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 preempt tribal law.
Accordingly, Executive Order 13175
does not apply to this rulemaking.
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; however, the
Department of State seeks public
comment on any unforeseen potential
for increased burden.
List of Subjects
22 CFR 120 and 125
Arms and munitions, Classified
information, Exports.
22 CFR 123
Arms and munitions, Exports,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
22 CFR Part 127
Arms and munitions, Exports, Crime,
Law, Penalties, Seizures and forfeitures.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth
above, title 22, chapter I, subchapter M,
parts 120, 123, 125, and 127 are
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 120—PURPOSE AND
DEFINITIONS
1. The authority citation for part 120
continues to read as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
31534
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Authority: Secs. 2, 38, and 71, Pub. L. 90–
629, 90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778,
2797); 22 U.S.C. 2794; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; Pub.
L. 105–261, 112 Stat. 1920; Pub. L. 111–266;
Section 1261, Pub. L. 112–239; E.O. 13637,
78 FR 16129.
2. Section 120.6 is amended by
designating the current text as
paragraph (a), revising the first sentence
of newly designated paragraph (a), and
adding paragraph (b) to read as follows:
■
§ 120.6
Defense article.
(a) Defense article means any item,
software, or technical data designated in
§ 121.1 of this subchapter. * * *
(b) The following are not defense
articles and thus not subject to the
ITAR:
(1) [Reserved]
(2) [Reserved]
(3) Information and software that:
(i) Are in the public domain, as
described in § 120.11;
(ii) Arise during, or result from,
fundamental research, as described in
§ 120.46;
(iii) Concern general scientific,
mathematical, or engineering principles
commonly taught in schools, and
released by instruction in a catalog
course or associated teaching laboratory
of an academic institution; or
(iv) Appear in patents or open
(published) patent applications
available from or at any patent office,
unless covered by an invention secrecy
order.
Note to paragraph (b): Information that is
not within the scope of the definition of
technical data (see § 120.10) and not directly
related to a defense article, or otherwise
described on the USML, is not subject to the
ITAR.
3. Section 120.9 is revised to read as
follows:
■
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 120.9
Defense service.
(a) Defense service means:
(1) The furnishing of assistance
(including training) to a foreign person
(see § 120.16), whether in the United
States or abroad, in the production,
assembly, testing, intermediate- or
depot-level maintenance (see § 120.38),
modification, demilitarization,
destruction, or processing of a defense
article (see § 120.6), by a U.S. person or
foreign person in the United States, who
has knowledge of U.S.-origin technical
data directly related to the defense
article that is the subject of the
assistance, prior to performing the
service;
Note 1 to paragraph (a)(1): ‘‘Knowledge of
U.S.-origin technical data’’ for purposes of
paragraph (a)(1) can be established based on
all the facts and circumstances. However, a
person is deemed to have ‘‘knowledge of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
U.S.-origin technical data’’ directly related to
a defense article if the person participated in
the development of a defense article
described in the same USML paragraph or
accessed (physically or electronically)
technical data directly related to the defense
article that is the subject of the assistance,
prior to performing the service.
Note 2 to paragraph (a)(1): U.S. persons
abroad who only receive U.S.-origin
technical data as a result of their activities on
behalf of a foreign person are not included
within paragraph (a)(1).
Note 3 to paragraph (a)(1): Foreign person
employees in the United States providing
defense services as part of Directorate of
Defense Trade Controls-authorized
employment need not be listed on the U.S.
employer’s technical assistance agreement or
receive separate authorization to perform
defense services on behalf of their authorized
U.S. employer.
(2) The furnishing of assistance
(including training) to a foreign person
(see § 120.16), whether in the United
States or abroad, in the development of
a defense article, or the integration of a
defense article with any other item
regardless of whether that item is
subject to the ITAR or technical data is
used;
Note to paragraph (a)(2): ‘‘Integration’’
means any engineering analysis (see
§ 125.4(c)(5) of this subchapter) needed to
unite a defense article and one or more items.
Integration includes the introduction of
software to enable operation of a defense
article, and the determination during the
design process of where an item will be
installed (e.g., integration of a civil engine
into a destroyer that requires changes or
modifications to the destroyer in order for the
civil engine to operate properly; not plug and
play). Integration is distinct from
‘‘installation.’’ Installation means the act of
putting an item in its predetermined place
without the use of technical data or any
modifications to the defense article involved,
other than to accommodate the fit of the item
with the defense article (e.g., installing a
dashboard radio into a military vehicle where
no modifications (other than to accommodate
the fit of the item) are made to the vehicle,
and there is no use of technical data.). The
‘‘fit’’ of an item is defined by its ability to
physically interface or connect with or
become an integral part of another item. (see
§ 120.41).
(3) The furnishing of assistance
(including training) to a foreign person
(see § 120.16), regardless of whether
technical data is used, whether in the
United States or abroad, in the
employment of a defense article, other
than basic operation of a defense article
authorized by the U.S. government for
export to the same recipient;
(4) Participating in or directing
combat operations for a foreign person
(see § 120.16), except as a member of the
regular military forces of a foreign
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
nation by a U.S. person who has been
drafted into such forces; or
(5) The furnishing of assistance
(including training) to the government
of a country listed in § 126.1 of this
subchapter in the development,
production, operation, installation,
maintenance, repair, overhaul or
refurbishing of a defense article or a part
component, accessory or attachments
specially designed for a defense article.
Note to paragraph (a): The following are
examples of activities that are not defense
services:
1. The furnishing of assistance (including
training) in organizational-level (basic-level)
maintenance (see § 120.38) of a defense
article;
2. Performance of services by a U.S. person
in the employment of a foreign person,
except as provided in this paragraph;
3. Servicing of an item subject to the EAR
(see § 120.42) that has been integrated or
installed into a defense article, or the
servicing of an item subject to the EAR into
which a defense article has been installed or
integrated, without the use of technical data,
except as described in paragraph (a)(5) of this
section;
4. The installation of any item into a
defense article, or the installation of a
defense article into any item;
5. Providing law enforcement, physical
security, or personal protective services
(including training and advice) to or for a
foreign person (if such services necessitate
the export of a defense article a license or
other approval is required for the export of
the defense article, and such services that
entail the employment or training in the
employment of a defense article are
addressed in paragraph (a)(3) of this section);
6. The furnishing of assistance by a foreign
person not in the United States;
7. The furnishing of medical, logistical
(other than maintenance), translation,
financial, legal, scheduling, or administrative
services;
8. The furnishing of assistance by a foreign
government to a foreign person in the United
States, pursuant to an arrangement with the
Department of Defense; and
9. The instruction in general scientific,
mathematical, or engineering principles
commonly taught in schools, colleges, and
universities.
(b) [Reserved]
4. Section 120.10 is revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 120.10
Technical data.
(a) Technical data means, except as
set forth in paragraph (b) of this section:
(1) Information required for the
development (see § 120.47) (including
design, modification, and integration
design), production (see § 120.48)
(including manufacture, assembly, and
integration), operation, installation,
maintenance, repair, overhaul, or
refurbishing of a defense article.
Technical data may be in any tangible
or intangible form, such as written or
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
oral communications, blueprints,
drawings, photographs, plans, diagrams,
models, formulae, tables, engineering
designs and specifications, computeraided design files, manuals or
documentation, electronic media or
information gleaned through visual
inspection;
Note to paragraph (a)(1): The modification
of an existing item creates a new item and
technical data for the modification is
technical data for the development of the
new item.
(2) Information enumerated on the
USML (i.e., not controlled pursuant to a
catch-all USML paragraph);
(3) Classified information for the
development, production, operation,
installation, maintenance, repair,
overhaul, or refurbishing of a defense
article or a 600 series item subject to the
EAR;
(4) Information covered by an
invention secrecy order; or
(5) Information, such as decryption
keys, network access codes, or
passwords, that would allow access to
other technical data in clear text or
software (see § 127.1(b)(4) of this
subchapter).
(b) Technical data does not include:
(1) Non-proprietary general system
descriptions;
(2) Information on basic function or
purpose of an item; or
(3) Telemetry data as defined in note
3 to USML Category XV(f) (see § 121.1
of this subchapter).
■ 5. Section 120.11 is revised to read as
follows:
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 120.11
Public domain.
(a) Except as set forth in paragraph (b)
of this section, unclassified information
and software are in the public domain,
and are thus not technical data or
software subject to the ITAR, when they
have been made available to the public
without restrictions upon their further
dissemination such as through any of
the following:
(1) Subscriptions available without
restriction to any individual who
desires to obtain or purchase the
published information;
(2) Libraries or other public
collections that are open and available
to the public, and from which the public
can obtain tangible or intangible
documents;
(3) Unlimited distribution at a
conference, meeting, seminar, trade
show, or exhibition, generally accessible
to the interested public;
(4) Public dissemination (i.e.,
unlimited distribution) in any form (e.g.,
not necessarily in published form),
including posting on the Internet on
sites available to the public; or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
(5) Submission of a written
composition, manuscript or
presentation to domestic or foreign coauthors, editors, or reviewers of
journals, magazines, newspapers or
trade publications, or to organizers of
open conferences or other open
gatherings, with the intention that the
compositions, manuscripts, or
publications will be made publicly
available if accepted for publication or
presentation.
(b) Technical data or software,
whether or not developed with
government funding, is not in the public
domain if it has been made available to
the public without authorization from:
(1) The Directorate of Defense Trade
Controls;
(2) The Department of Defense’s
Office of Security Review;
(3) The relevant U.S. government
contracting entity with authority to
allow the technical data or software to
be made available to the public; or
(4) Another U.S. government official
with authority to allow the technical
data or software to be made available to
the public.
Note 1 to § 120.11: Section 127.1(a)(6) of
this subchapter prohibits, without written
authorization from the Directorate of Defense
Trade Controls, U.S. and foreign persons
from exporting, reexporting, retransfering, or
otherwise making available to the public
technical data or software if such person has
knowledge that the technical data or software
was made publicly available without an
authorization described in paragraph (b) of
this section.
Note 2 to § 120.11: An export, reexport, or
retransfer of technical data or software that
was made publicly available by another
person without authorization is not a
violation of this subchapter, except as
described in § 127.1(a)(6) of this subchapter.
6. Section 120.17 is revised to read as
follows:
■
§ 120.17
Export.
(a) Except as set forth in § 120.52,
§ 126.16, or § 126.17 of this subchapter,
export means:
(1) An actual shipment or
transmission out of the United States,
including the sending or taking of a
defense article outside of the United
States in any manner;
(2) Releasing or otherwise transferring
technical data or software (source code
or object code) to a foreign person in the
United States (a ‘‘deemed export’’);
(3) Transferring by a person in the
United States of registration, control, or
ownership of any aircraft, vessel, or
satellite subject to the ITAR to a foreign
person;
(4) Releasing or otherwise transferring
a defense article to an embassy or to any
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
31535
agency or subdivision of a foreign
government, such as a diplomatic
mission, in the United States;
(5) Performing a defense service on
behalf of, or for the benefit of, a foreign
person, whether in the United States
or abroad;
(6) Releasing or otherwise transferring
information, such as decryption keys,
network access codes, passwords, or
software, or providing physical access,
that would allow access to other
technical data in clear text or software
to a foreign person regardless of whether
such data has been or will be
transferred; or
(7) Making technical data available
via a publicly available network (e.g.,
the Internet).
(b) Any release in the United States of
technical data or software to a foreign
person is a deemed export to all
countries in which the foreign person
has held citizenship or holds permanent
residency.
■ 7. Section 120.19 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 120.19
Reexport.
(a) Except as set forth in § 120.52,
reexport means:
(1) An actual shipment or
transmission of a defense article from
one foreign country to another foreign
country, including the sending or taking
of a defense article to or from such
countries in any manner;
(2) Releasing or otherwise transferring
technical data or software to a foreign
person of a country other than the
foreign country where the release or
transfer takes place (a ‘‘deemed
reexport’’);
(3) Transferring by a person outside of
the United States of registration, control,
or ownership of any aircraft, vessel, or
satellite subject to the ITAR to a foreign
person outside the United States; or
(4) Releasing or otherwise transferring
outside of the United States
information, such as decryption keys,
network access codes, password, or
software, or providing physical access,
that would allow access to other
technical data in clear text or software
to a foreign person regardless of whether
such data has been or will be
transferred.
(b) [Reserved]
§ 120.41
[Amended]
8. Section 120.41 is amended by
reserving Note 1 to paragraph (b)(3) and
Note 2 to paragraph (b)(3).
■ 9. Section 120.46 is added to read as
follows:
■
§ 120.46
Required.
(a) As applied to technical data, the
term required refers to only that portion
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
31536
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
of technical data that is peculiarly
responsible for achieving or exceeding
the controlled performance levels,
characteristics, or functions. Such
required technical data may be shared
by different products.
Note 1 to paragraph (a): The references to
‘‘characteristics’’ and functions’’ are not
limited to entries on the USML that use
specific technical parameters to describe the
scope of what is controlled. The
‘‘characteristics’’ and ‘‘functions’’ of an item
listed are, absent a specific regulatory
definition, a standard dictionary’s definition
of the item. For example, USML Category
VIII(a)(1) controls aircraft that are ‘‘bombers.’’
No performance level is identified in the
entry, but the characteristic of the aircraft
that is controlled is that it is a bomber. Thus,
any technical data, regardless of significance,
peculiar to making an aircraft a bomber as
opposed to, for example, an aircraft
controlled under ECCN 9A610.a or ECCN
9A991.a, would be technical data required
for a bomber and thus controlled under
USML Category VIII(i).
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Note 2 to paragraph (a): The ITAR and the
EAR often divide within each set of
regulations or between each set of
regulations:
1. Controls on parts, components,
accessories, attachments, and software; and
2. Controls on the end items, systems,
equipment, or other items into which those
parts, components, accessories, attachments,
and software are to be installed or
incorporated.
With the exception of technical data
specifically enumerated on the USML, the
jurisdictional status of unclassified technical
data is the same as the jurisdictional status
of the defense article or item subject to the
EAR to which it is directly related. Thus, if
technology is directly related to the
production of an ECCN 9A610.x aircraft
component that is to be integrated or
installed in a USML Category VIII(a) aircraft,
the technology is controlled under ECCN
9E610, not USML Category VIII(i).
Note 3 to paragraph (a): Technical data is
‘‘peculiarly responsible for achieving or
exceeding the controlled performance levels,
characteristics, or functions’’ if it is used in
or for use in the development (including
design, modification, and integration design),
production (including manufacture,
assembly, and integration), operation,
installation, maintenance, repair, overhaul,
or refurbishing of a defense article unless:
1. The Department of State has determined
otherwise in a commodity jurisdiction
determination;
2. [Reserved];
3. It is identical to information used in or
with a commodity or software that:
i. Is or was in production (i.e., not in
development); and
ii. Is not a defense article;
4. It was or is being developed with
knowledge that it is for or would be for use
in or with both defense articles and
commodities not on the U.S. Munitions List;
or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
5. It was or is being developed for use in
or with general purpose commodities or
software (i.e., with no knowledge that it
would be for use in or with a particular
commodity).
(b) [Reserved]
10. Section 120.47 is added to read as
follows:
■
§ 120.47
Development.
Development is related to all stages
prior to serial production, such as:
design, design research, design analyses,
design concepts, assembly and testing of
prototypes, pilot production schemes,
design data, process of transforming
design data into a product,
configuration design, integration design,
and layouts. Development includes
modification of the design of an existing
item.
■ 11. Section 120.48 is added to read as
follows:
§ 120.48
Production.
Production means all production
stages, such as product engineering,
manufacture, integration, assembly
(mounting), inspection, testing, and
quality assurance. This includes ‘‘serial
production’’ where commodities have
passed production readiness testing
(i.e., an approved, standardized design
ready for large scale production) and
have been or are being produced on an
assembly line for multiple commodities
using the approved, standardized
design.
■ 12. Section 120.49 is added to read as
follows:
§ 120.49 Technical data that arises during,
or results from, fundamental research.
(a) Technical Data arising during, or
resulting from, fundamental research.
Unclassified information that arises
during, or results from, fundamental
research and is intended to be published
is not technical data when the research
is:
(1) Conducted in the United States at
an accredited institution of higher
learning located; or
(2) Funded, in whole or in part, by the
U.S. government.
Note 1 to paragraph (a): The inputs used
to conduct fundamental research, such as
information, equipment, or software, are not
‘‘technical data that arises during or results
from fundamental research’’ except to the
extent that such inputs are technical data that
arose during or resulted from earlier
fundamental research.
Note 2 to paragraph (a): There are
instances in the conduct of research, whether
fundamental, basic, or applied, where a
researcher, institution, or company may
decide to restrict or protect the release or
publication of technical data contained in
research results. Once a decision is made to
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
maintain such technical data as restricted or
proprietary, the technical data becomes
subject to the ITAR.
(b) Prepublication review. Technical
data that arises during, or results from,
fundamental research is intended to be
published to the extent that the
researchers are free to publish the
technical data contained in the research
without any restriction or delay,
including U.S. government-imposed
access and dissemination controls or
research sponsor proprietary
information review.
Note 1 to paragraph (b): Although
technical data arising during or resulting
from fundamental research is not considered
‘‘intended to be published’’ if researchers
accept restrictions on its publication, such
technical data will nonetheless qualify as
technical data arising during or resulting
from fundamental research once all such
restrictions have expired or have been
removed.
Note 2 to paragraph (b): Research that is
voluntarily subjected to U.S. government
prepublication review is considered intended
to be published for all releases consistent
with any resulting controls.
Note 3 to paragraph (b): Technical data
resulting from U.S. government funded
research which is subject to governmentimposed access and dissemination or other
specific national security controls qualifies as
technical data resulting from fundamental
research, provided that all governmentimposed national security controls have been
satisfied.
(c) Fundamental research definition.
Fundamental research means basic or
applied research in science and
engineering, the results of which
ordinarily are published and shared
broadly within the scientific
community. This is distinguished from
proprietary research and from industrial
development, design, production, and
product utilization, the results of which
ordinarily are restricted for proprietary
or national security reasons.
(1) Basic research means experimental
or theoretical work undertaken
principally to acquire new knowledge of
the fundamental principles of
phenomena or observable facts, not
primarily directed towards a specific
practical aim or objective.
(2) Applied research means the effort
that:
(i) Normally follows basic research,
but may not be severable from the
related basic research;
(ii) Attempts to determine and exploit
the potential of scientific discoveries or
improvements in technology, materials,
processes, methods, devices, or
techniques; and
(iii) Attempts to advance the state of
the art.
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
13. Section 120.50 is added to read as
follows:
■
§ 120.50
Release.
(a) Except as set forth in § 120.52,
technical data and software are released
through:
(1) Visual or other inspection by
foreign persons of a defense article that
reveals technical data or software to a
foreign person; or
(2) Oral or written exchanges with
foreign persons of technical data in the
United States or abroad.
(b) [Reserved]
■ 14. Section 120.51 is added to read as
follows:
§ 120.51
Retransfer.
Except as set forth in § 120.52 of this
subchapter, a retransfer is a change in
end use or end user of a defense article
within the same foreign country.
■ 15. Section 120.52 is added to read as
follows:
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 120.52 Activities that are not exports,
reexports, or retransfers.
(a) The following activities are not
exports, reexports, or retransfers:
(1) Launching a spacecraft, launch
vehicle, payload, or other item into
space;
(2) While in the United States,
releasing technical data or software to a
U.S. person;
(3) Shipping, moving, or transferring
defense articles between or among the
United States, the District of Columbia,
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands or any territory, dependency, or
possession of the United States as listed
in Schedule C, Classification Codes and
Descriptions for U.S. Export Statistics,
issued by the Bureau of the Census; and
(4) Sending, taking, or storing
technical data or software that is:
(i) Unclassified;
(ii) Secured using end-to-end
encryption;
(iii) Secured using cryptographic
modules (hardware or software)
compliant with the Federal Information
Processing Standards Publication 140–2
(FIPS 140–2) or its successors,
supplemented by software
implementation, cryptographic key
management and other procedures and
controls that are in accordance with
guidance provided in current U.S.
National Institute for Standards and
Technology publications; and
(iv) Not stored in a country proscribed
in § 126.1 of this subchapter or the
Russian Federation.
(b) For purposes of this section, endto-end encryption means the provision
of uninterrupted cryptographic
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
protection of data between an originator
and an intended recipient, including
between an individual and himself or
herself. It involves encrypting data by
the originating party and keeping that
data encrypted except by the intended
recipient, where the means to access the
data in unencrypted form is not given to
any third party, including to any
Internet service provider, application
service provider or cloud service
provider.
(c) The ability to access technical data
or software in encrypted form that
satisfies the criteria set forth in
paragraph (a)(4) of this section does not
constitute the release or export of such
technical data or software.
Note to § 120.52: See § 127.1 of this
subchapter for prohibitions on the release or
transfer of technical data or software, in any
form, to any person with knowledge that a
violation will occur.
PART 123—LICENSES FOR THE
EXPORT AND TEMPORARY IMPORT
OF DEFENSE ARTICLES
16. The authority citation for part 123
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 2, 38, and 71, 90, 90 Stat.
744 (22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778, 2797); 22 U.S.C.
2753; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 2776; Pub.
L. 105–261, 112 Stat. 1920; Sec. 1205(a), Pub.
L. 107–228; Section 1261, Pub. L. 112–239;
E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
17. Section 123.28 is added to read as
follows:
■
§ 123.28
Scope of a license.
Unless limited by a condition set out
in a license, the export, reexport,
retransfer, or temporary import
authorized by a license is for the item(s),
end-use(s), and parties described in the
license application and any letters of
explanation. DDTC grants licenses in
reliance on representations the
applicant made in or submitted in
connection with the license application,
letters of explanation, and other
documents submitted.
PART 124—AGREEMENTS, OFFSHORE PROCUREMENT, AND OTHER
DEFENSE SERVICES
18. The authority citation for part 124
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 2, 38, and 71, 90, 90 Stat.
744 (22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778, 2797); 22 U.S.C.
2651a; 22 U.S.C. 2776; Section 1514, Pub. L.
105–261; Pub. L. 111–266; Section 1261, Pub.
L. 112–239; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
19. Section 124.1 is amended by
adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:
■
§ 124.1 Manufacturing license agreements
and technical assistance agreements.
*
PO 00000
*
*
Frm 00051
*
Fmt 4702
*
Sfmt 4702
31537
(e) Unless limited by a condition set
out in an agreement, the export,
reexport, retransfer, or temporary import
authorized by a license is for the item(s),
end-use(s), and parties described in the
agreement, license, and any letters of
explanation. DDTC approves agreements
and grants licenses in reliance on
representations the applicant made in or
submitted in connection with the
agreement, letters of explanation, and
other documents submitted.
PART 125—LICENSES FOR THE
EXPORT OF TECHNICAL DATA AND
CLASSIFIED DEFENSE ARTICLES
20. The authority citation for part 125
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 2 and 38, 90, 90 Stat. 744
(22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778); 22 U.S.C. 2651a; E.O.
13637, 78 FR 16129.
21. Section 125.4 is amended by
revising paragraph (b)(9) to read as
follows:
■
§ 125.4 Exemptions of general
applicability.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(9) Technical data, including
classified information, regardless of
media or format, exported by or to a
U.S. person or a foreign person
employee of a U.S. person, travelling or
on temporary assignment abroad subject
to the following restrictions:
(i) Foreign persons may only export or
receive such technical data as they are
authorized to receive through a separate
license or other approval.
(ii) The technical data exported under
this authorization is to be possessed or
used solely by a U.S. person or
authorized foreign person and sufficient
security precautions must be taken to
prevent the unauthorized release of the
technology. Such security precautions
include encryption of the technical data,
the use of secure network connections,
such as virtual private networks, the use
of passwords or other access restrictions
on the electronic device or media on
which the technical data is stored, and
the use of firewalls and other network
security measures to prevent
unauthorized access.
(iii) The U.S. person is an employee
of the U.S. government or is directly
employed by a U.S. person and not by
a foreign subsidiary.
(iv) Technical data authorized under
this exception may not be used for
foreign production purposes or for
defense services unless authorized
through a license or other approval.
(v) The U.S. employer of foreign
persons must document the use of this
exemption by foreign person employees,
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
31538
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 106 / Wednesday, June 3, 2015 / Proposed Rules
including the reason that the technical
data is needed by the foreign person for
their temporary business activities
abroad on behalf of the U.S. person.
(vi) 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 such
guidance must be followed).
*
*
*
*
*
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
PART 127—VIOLATIONS AND
PENALTIES
SUMMARY:
22. The authority citation for part 127
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Sections 2, 38, and 42, 90, 90
Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778, 2791); 22
U.S.C. 401; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 2779a;
22 U.S.C. 2780; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
23. Section 127.1 is amended by
adding paragraphs (a)(6) and (b)(4) to
read as follows:
■
§ 127.1
Violations.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
(a) * * *
(6) To export, reexport, retransfer, or
otherwise make available to the public
technical data or software if such person
has knowledge that the technical data or
software was made publicly available
without an authorization described in
§ 120.11(b) of this subchapter.
(b) * * *
(4) To release or otherwise transfer
information, such as decryption keys,
network access codes, or passwords,
that would allow access to other
technical data in clear text or to
software that will result, directly or
indirectly, in an unauthorized export,
reexport, or retransfer of the technical
data in clear text or software. Violation
of this provision will constitute a
violation to the same extent as a
violation in connection with the export
of the controlled technical data or
software.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: May 20, 2015.
Rose E. Gottemoeller,
Under Secretary, Arms Control and
International Security, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2015–12844 Filed 6–2–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–25–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
24 CFR Parts 91 and 576
[Docket No. FR–5474–N–02]
RIN 2506–AC29
Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG)
Program, Solicitation of Comment on
Specific Issues
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Community Planning and
Development, HUD.
ACTION: Regulatory review; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
On December 5, 2011, HUD
published an interim rule entitled
‘‘Homeless Emergency Assistance and
Rapid Transition to Housing: Emergency
Solutions Grants Program and
Consolidated Plan Conforming
Amendments’’ (interim rule). The
comment period for the interim rule
ended on February 3, 2012. Because
recipients and subrecipients have now
had more experience implementing the
interim rule, HUD recognizes that they
may have additional input and
comments for HUD to consider in its
development of the ESG final rule (final
rule). Therefore, this document takes
comments for 60 days to allow
additional time for public input, and for
HUD to solicit specific comment on
certain issues.
DATES: Comment due date: August 3,
2015.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are
invited to submit comments responsive
to this request for information to the
Regulations Division, Office of General
Counsel, Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 451 7th Street SW.,
Room 10276, Washington, DC 20410–
7000. Communications must refer to the
above docket number and title and
should contain the information
specified in the ‘‘Request for
Comments’’ of this notice.
Electronic Submission of Comments.
Interested persons may submit
comments electronically through the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. HUD strongly
encourages commenters to submit
comments electronically. Electronic
submission of comments allows the
commenter maximum time to prepare
and submit a comment, ensures timely
receipt by HUD, and enables HUD to
make them immediately available to the
public. Comments submitted
electronically through the https://
www.regulations.gov Web site can be
viewed by interested members of the
public. Commenters should follow
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
instructions provided on that site to
submit comments electronically.
Submission of Hard Copy Comments.
Comments may be submitted by mail or
hand delivery. To ensure that the
information is fully considered by all of
the reviewers, each commenter
submitting hard copy comments, by
mail or hand delivery, should submit
comments or requests to the address
above, addressed to the attention of the
Regulations Division. Due to security
measures at all federal agencies,
submission of comments or requests by
mail often result in delayed delivery. To
ensure timely receipt of comments,
HUD recommends that any comments
submitted by mail be submitted at least
2 weeks in advance of the public
comment deadline. All hard copy
comments received by mail or hand
delivery are a part of the public record
and will be posted to https://
www.regulations.gov without change.
Note: To receive consideration as public
comments, comments must be submitted
through one of the two methods specified
above. Again, all submissions must refer to
the docket number and title of the rule.
No Facsimile Comments. Facsimile
(fax) comments are not acceptable.
Public Inspection of Comments. All
comments submitted to HUD regarding
this notice will be available, without
charge, for public inspection and
copying between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.
weekdays at the above address. Due to
security measures at the HUD
Headquarters building, an advance
appointment to review the documents
must be scheduled by calling the
Regulation Division at 202–708–3055
(this is not a toll-free number). Copies
of all comments submitted will also be
available for inspection and
downloading at https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Norm Suchar, Director, Office of Special
Needs Assistance Programs, Office of
Community Planning and Development,
Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 7th Street SW., Room
7262, Washington, DC 20410–7000,
telephone number (202) 708–4300 (this
is not a toll-free number). Persons with
hearing or speech impairments may
access this number through TTY by
calling the toll-free Federal Relay
Service at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\03JNP1.SGM
03JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 106 (Wednesday, June 3, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31525-31538]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12844]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Parts 120, 123, 125, and 127
[Public Notice 9149]
RIN 1400-AD70
International Traffic in Arms: Revisions to Definitions of
Defense Services, Technical Data, and Public Domain; Definition of
Product of Fundamental Research; Electronic Transmission and Storage of
Technical Data; and Related Definitions
AGENCY: Department of State.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: As part of the President's Export Control Reform (ECR)
initiative, the Department of State proposes to amend the International
Traffic in Arms
[[Page 31526]]
Regulations (ITAR) to update the definitions of ``defense article,''
``defense services,'' ``technical data,'' ``public domain,''
``export,'' and ``reexport or retransfer'' in order to clarify the
scope of activities and information that are covered within these
definitions and harmonize the definitions with the Export
Administration Regulations (EAR), to the extent appropriate.
Additionally, the Department proposes to create definitions of
``required,'' ``technical data that arises during, or results from,
fundamental research,'' ``release,'' ``retransfer,'' and ``activities
that are not exports, reexports, or retransfers'' in order to clarify
and support the interpretation of the revised definitions that are
proposed in this rulemaking. The Department proposes to create new
sections detailing the scope of licenses, unauthorized releases of
information, and the ``release'' of secured information, and revises
the sections on ``exports'' of ``technical data'' to U.S. persons
abroad. Finally, the Department proposes to address the electronic
transmission and storage of unclassified ``technical data'' via foreign
communications infrastructure. This rulemaking proposes that the
electronic transmission of unclassified ``technical data'' abroad is
not an ``export,'' provided that the data is sufficiently secured to
prevent access by foreign persons. Additionally, this proposed rule
would allow for the electronic storage of unclassified ``technical
data'' abroad, provided that the data is secured to prevent access by
parties unauthorized to access such data. The revisions contained in
this proposed rule are part of the Department of State's retrospective
plan under Executive Order 13563 first submitted on August 17, 2011.
DATES: The Department of State will accept comments on this proposed
rule until August 3, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may submit comments within 60 days of the
date of publication by one of the following methods:
Email: DDTCPublicComments@state.gov with the subject line,
``ITAR Amendment--Revisions to Definitions; Data Transmission and
Storage.''
Internet: At www.regulations.gov, search for this notice
by using this rule's RIN (1400-AD70).
Comments received after that date may be considered, but
consideration cannot be assured. Those submitting comments should not
include any personally identifying information they do not desire to be
made public or information for which a claim of confidentiality is
asserted because those comments and/or transmittal emails will be made
available for public inspection and copying after the close of the
comment period via the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls Web site
at www.pmddtc.state.gov. Parties who wish to comment anonymously may do
so by submitting their comments via www.regulations.gov, leaving the
fields that would identify the commenter blank and including no
identifying information in the comment itself. Comments submitted via
www.regulations.gov are immediately available for public inspection.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. C. Edward Peartree, Director,
Office of Defense Trade Controls Policy, Department of State, telephone
(202) 663-1282; email DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov. ATTN: ITAR
Amendment--Revisions to Definitions; Data Transmission and Storage. The
Department of State's full retrospective plan can be accessed at https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/181028.pdf.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls
(DDTC), U.S. Department of State, administers the International Traffic
in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR parts 120 through 130). The items
subject to the jurisdiction of the ITAR, i.e., ``defense articles'' and
``defense services,'' are identified on the ITAR's U.S. Munitions List
(USML) (22 CFR 121.1). With few exceptions, items not subject to the
export control jurisdiction of the ITAR are subject to the jurisdiction
of the Export Administration Regulations (``EAR,'' 15 CFR parts 730
through 774, which includes the Commerce Control List (CCL) in
Supplement No. 1 to part 774), administered by the Bureau of Industry
and Security (BIS), U.S. Department of Commerce. Both the ITAR and the
EAR impose license requirements on exports and reexports. Items not
subject to the ITAR or to the exclusive licensing jurisdiction of any
other set of regulations are subject to the EAR.
BIS is concurrently publishing comparable proposed amendments (BIS
companion rule) to the definitions of ``technology,'' ``required,''
``peculiarly responsible,'' ``published,'' results of ``fundamental
research,'' ``export,'' ``reexport,'' ``release,'' and ``transfer (in-
country)'' in the EAR. A side-by-side comparison on the regulatory text
proposed by both Departments is available on both agencies' Web sites:
www.pmddtc.state.gov and www.bis.doc.gov.
1. Revised Definition of Defense Article
The Department proposes to revise the definition of ``defense
article'' to clarify the scope of the definition. The current text of
Sec. 120.6 is made into a new paragraph (a), into which software is
added to the list of things that are a ``defense article'' because
software is being removed from the definition of ``technical data.''
This is not a substantive change.
A new Sec. 120.6(b) is added to list those items that the
Department has determined should not be a ``defense article,'' even
though they would otherwise meet the definition of ``defense article.''
All the items described were formerly excluded from the definition of
``technical data'' in Sec. 120.10. These items are declared to be not
subject to the ITAR to parallel the EAR concept of ``not subject to the
EAR'' as part of the effort to harmonize the ITAR and the EAR. This
does not constitute a change in policy regarding these items or the
scope of items that are defense articles.
2. Revised Definition of Technical Data
The Department proposes to revise the definition of ``technical
data'' in ITAR Sec. 120.10 in order to update and clarify the scope of
information that may be captured within the definition. Paragraph
(a)(1) of the revised definition defines ``technical data'' as
information ``required'' for the ``development,'' ``production,''
operation, installation, maintenance, repair, overhaul, or refurbishing
of a ``defense article,'' which harmonizes with the definition of
``technology'' in the EAR and the Wassenaar Arrangement. This is not a
change in the scope of the definition, and additional words describing
activities that were in the prior definition are included in
parentheticals to assist exporters.
Paragraph (a)(1) also sets forth a broader range of examples of
formats that ``technical data'' may take, such as diagrams, models,
formulae, tables, engineering designs and specifications, computer-
aided design files, manuals or documentation, or electronic media, that
may constitute ``technical data.'' Additionally, the revised definition
includes certain conforming changes intended to reflect the revised and
newly added defined terms proposed elsewhere in this rule.
The proposed revised definition also includes a note clarifying
that the modification of the design of an existing item creates a new
item and that the ``technical data'' for the modification is
``technical data'' for the new item.
Paragraph (a)(2) of the revised definition defines ``technical
data'' as
[[Page 31527]]
also including information that is enumerated on the USML. This will be
``technical data'' that is positively described, as opposed to
``technical data'' described in the standard catch-all ``technical
data'' control for all ``technical data'' directly related to a
``defense article'' described in the relevant category. The Department
intends to enumerate certain controlled ``technical data'' as it
continues to move the USML toward a more positive control list.
Paragraph (a)(3) of the revised definition defines ``technical
data'' as also including classified information that is for the
``development,'' ``production,'' operation, installation, maintenance,
repair, overhaul, or refurbishing of a ``defense article'' or a 600
series item subject to the EAR. Paragraph (a)(5) of the revised
definition defines ``technical data'' as also including information to
access secured ``technical data'' in clear text, such as decryption
keys, passwords, or network access codes. In support of the latter
change, the Department also proposes to add a new provision to the list
of violations in Sec. 127.1(b)(4) to state that any disclosure of
these decryption keys or passwords that results in the unauthorized
disclosure of the ``technical data'' or software secured by the
encryption key or password is a violation and will constitute a
violation to the same extent as the ``export'' of the secured
information. For example, the ``release'' of a decryption key may
result in the unauthorized disclosure of multiple files containing
``technical data'' hosted abroad and could therefore constitute a
violation of the ITAR for each piece of ``technical data'' on that
server.
Paragraph (b) of the revised definition of ``technical data''
excludes non-proprietary general system descriptions, information on
basic function or purpose of an item, and telemetry data as defined in
Note 3 to USML Category XV(f) (Sec. 121.1). Items formerly identified
in this paragraph, principles taught in schools and ``public domain''
information, have been moved to the new ITAR Sec. 120.6(b).
The proposed definition removes software from the definition of
``technical data.'' Specific and catch-all controls on software will be
added elsewhere throughout the ITAR as warranted, as it will now be
defined as a separate type of ``defense article.''
3. Proposed Definition of Required
The Department proposes a definition of ``required'' in a new Sec.
120.46. ``Required'' is used in the definition of ``technical data''
and has, to this point, been an undefined term in the ITAR. The word is
also used in the controls on technology in both the EAR and the
Wassenaar Arrangement, as a defined term, which the Department is now
proposing to adopt:
. . . [O]nly that portion of [technical data] that is peculiarly
responsible for achieving or exceeding the controlled performance
levels, characteristics, or functions. Such required [technical
data] may be shared by different products.
The proposed definition of ``required'' contains three notes. These
notes explain how the definition is to be applied.
Note 1 provides that the definition explicitly includes information
for meeting not only controlled performance levels, but also
characteristics and functions. All items described on the USML are
identified by a characteristic or function. Additionally, some
descriptions include a performance level. As an example, USML Category
VIII(a)(1) controls aircraft that are ``bombers'' and contains no
performance level. The characteristic of the aircraft that is
controlled is that it is a bomber, and therefore, any ``technical
data'' peculiar to making an aircraft a bomber is ``required.''
Note 2 states that, with the exception of ``technical data''
specifically enumerated on the USML, the jurisdictional status of
unclassified ``technical data'' is the same as that of the commodity to
which it is directly related. Specifically, it explains that
``technical data'' for a part or component of a ``defense article'' is
directly related to that part or component, and if the part or
component is subject to the EAR, so is the ``technical data.''
Note 3 establishes a test for determining if information is
peculiarly responsible for meeting or achieving the controlled
performance levels, characteristics or functions of a ``defense
article.'' It uses the same catch-and-release concept that the
Department implemented in the definition of ``specially designed.'' It
has a similarly broad catch of all information used in or for use in
the ``development,'' ``production,'' operation, installation,
maintenance, repair, overhaul, or refurbishing of a ``defense
article.'' It has four releases that mirror the ``specially designed''
releases, and one reserved paragraph for information that the
Department determines is generally insignificant. The first release is
for information identified in a commodity jurisdiction determination.
The second release is reserved. The third release is for information
that is identical to information used in a non-defense article that is
in ``production,'' and not otherwise enumerated on the ITAR. The fourth
release is for information that was developed with knowledge that it is
for both a ``defense article'' and a non-defense article. The fifth
release is information that was developed for general purpose
commodities.
In the companion rule, BIS proposes to make Note 3 into a stand-
alone definition for ``peculiarly responsible'' as it has application
outside of the definition of ``required.'' The substance of Note 3 and
the BIS definition of ``peculiarly responsible'' are identical. DDTC
asks for comments on the placement of this concept.
4. Proposed Definitions of Development and Production
The Department proposes to add Sec. 120.47 for the definition of
``development'' and Sec. 120.48 for the definition of ``production.''
These definitions are currently in Notes 1 and 2 to paragraph (b)(3) in
Sec. 120.41, the definition of ``specially designed.'' Because
``technical data'' is now defined, in part, as information ``required''
for the ``development'' or ``production'' of a ``defense article,'' and
these words are now used in the definition of a ``defense service,'' it
is appropriate to define these terms. The adoption of these definitions
is also done for the purpose of harmonization because these definitions
are also used in the EAR and by the Wassenaar Arrangement.
5. Revised Definition of Public Domain
The Department proposes to revise the definition of ``public
domain'' in ITAR Sec. 120.11 in order to simplify, update, and
introduce greater versatility into the definition. The existing version
of ITAR Sec. 120.11 relies on an enumerated list of circumstances
through which ``public domain'' information might be published. The
Department believes that this definition is unnecessarily limiting in
scope and insufficiently flexible with respect to the continually
evolving array of media, whether physical or electronic, through which
information may be disseminated.
The proposed definition is intended to identify the characteristics
that are common to all of the enumerated forms of publication
identified in the current rule--with the exception of ITAR Sec.
120.11(a)(8), which is addressed in a new definition for ``technical
data that arises during, or results from, fundamental research''--and
to present those common characteristics in a streamlined definition
that does not require enumerated identification
[[Page 31528]]
within the ITAR of every current or future qualifying publication
scenario. Additionally, the proposed definition incorporates phrases
such as ``generally accessible'' and ``without restriction upon its
further dissemination'' in order to better align the definition found
in the EAR and more closely aligned with the definition in the
Wassenaar Arrangement control lists.
The proposed definition requires that information be made available
to the public without restrictions on its further dissemination. Any
information that meets this definition is ``public domain.'' The
definition also retains an exemplary list of information that has been
made available to the public without restriction and would be
considered ``public domain.'' These include magazines, periodicals and
other publications available as subscriptions, publications contained
in libraries, information made available at a public conference,
meeting, seminar, trade show, or exhibition, and information posted on
public Web sites. The final example deems information that is submitted
to co-authors, editors, or reviewers or conference organizers for
review for publication to be ``public domain,'' even prior to actual
publication. The relevant restrictions do not include copyright
protections or generic property rights in the underlying physical
medium.
Paragraph (b) of the revised definition explicitly sets forth the
Department's requirement of authorization to release information into
the ``public domain.'' Prior to making available ``technical data'' or
software subject to the ITAR, the U.S. government must approve the
release through one of the following: (1) The Department; (2) the
Department of Defense's Office of Security Review; (3) a relevant U.S.
government contracting authority with authority to allow the
``technical data'' or software to be made available to the public, if
one exists; or (4) another U.S. government official with authority to
allow the ``technical data'' or software to be made available to the
public.
The requirements of paragraph (b) are not new. Rather, they are a
more explicit statement of the ITAR's requirement that one must seek
and receive a license or other authorization from the Department or
other cognizant U.S. government authority to release ITAR controlled
``technical data,'' as defined in Sec. 120.10. A release of
``technical data'' may occur by disseminating ``technical data'' at a
public conference or trade show, publishing ``technical data'' in a
book or journal article, or posting ``technical data'' to the Internet.
This proposed provision will enhance compliance with the ITAR by
clarifying that ``technical data'' may not be made available to the
public without authorization. Persons who intend to discuss ``technical
data'' at a conference or trade show, or to publish it, must ensure
that they obtain the appropriate authorization.
Information that is excluded from the definition of ``defense
article'' in the new Sec. 120.6(b) is not ``technical data'' and
therefore does not require authorization prior to release into the
``public domain.'' This includes information that arises during or
results from ``fundamental research,'' as described in the new Sec.
120.49; general scientific, mathematical, or engineering principles
commonly taught in schools, and information that is contained in
patents.
The Department also proposes to add a new provision to Sec. 127.1
in paragraph (a)(6) to state explicitly that the further dissemination
of ``technical data'' or software that was made available to the public
without authorization is a violation of the ITAR, if, and only if, it
is done with knowledge that the ``technical data'' or software was made
publicly available without an authorization described in ITAR Sec.
120.11(b)(2). Dissemination of publicly available ``technical data'' or
software is not an export-controlled event, and does not require
authorization from the Department, in the absence of knowledge that it
was made publicly available without authorization.
``Technical data'' and software that is made publicly available
without proper authorization remains ``technical data'' or software and
therefore remains subject to the ITAR. As such, the U.S. government may
advise a person that the original release of the ``technical data'' or
software was unauthorized and put that person on notice that further
dissemination would violate the ITAR.
6. Proposed Definition of Technical Data That Arises During, or Results
From, Fundamental Research
The Department proposes to move ``fundamental research'' from the
definition of ``public domain'' in ITAR Sec. 120.11(a)(8) and define
``technical data that arises during, or results from, fundamental
research'' in a new ITAR Sec. 120.49. The Department believes that
information that arises during, or results from fundamental research is
conceptually distinguishable from the information that would be
captured in the revised definition of ``public domain'' that is
proposed in this rule. Accordingly, the Department proposes to address
this concept with its own definition. The new definition of ``technical
data that arises during, or results from, fundamental research'' is
consistent with the prior ITAR Sec. 120.11(a)(8), except that the
Department has expanded the scope of eligible research to include
research that is funded, in whole or in part, by the U.S. government.
7. Revised Definition of Export
The Department proposes to revise the definition of ``export'' in
ITAR Sec. 120.17 to better align with the EAR's revised definition of
the term and to remove activities associated with a defense article's
further movement or release outside the United States, which will now
fall within the definition of ``reexport'' in Sec. 120.19. The
definition is revised to explicitly identify that ITAR Sec. Sec.
126.16 and 126.17 (exemptions pursuant to the Australia and UK Defense
Trade Cooperation Treaties) have their own definitions of ``export,''
which apply exclusively to those exemptions. It also explicitly
references the new Sec. 120.49, ``Activities that are Not Exports,
Reexports, or Retransfers,'' which excludes from ITAR control certain
transactions identified therein.
Paragraph (a)(1) is revised to parallel the definition of
``export'' in proposed paragraph (a)(1) of Sec. 734.13 of the EAR.
Although the wording has changed, the scope of the control is the same.
The provision excepting travel outside of the United States by persons
whose personal knowledge includes ``technical data'' is removed, but
the central concept is unchanged. The ``release'' of ``technical data''
to a foreign person while in the United States or while travelling
remains a controlled event.
Paragraph (a)(2) includes the control listed in the current Sec.
120.17(a)(4) (transfer of technical data to a foreign person). The
proposed revisions replace the word ``disclosing'' with ``releasing,''
and the paragraph is otherwise revised to parallel proposed paragraph
(a)(2) of Sec. 734.13 of the EAR. ``Release'' is a newly defined
concept in Sec. 120.50 that encompasses the previously undefined term
``disclose.''
Paragraph (a)(3) includes the control listed in the current Sec.
120.17(a)(2) (transfer of registration, control, or ownership to a
foreign person of an aircraft, vessel, or satellite). It is revised to
parallel proposed paragraph (a)(3) of Sec. 734.13 of the EAR.
Paragraph (a)(4) includes the control listed in the current Sec.
120.17(a)(3) (transfer in the United States to foreign embassies).
Paragraph (a)(5) maintains the control on performing a ``defense
service.''
Paragraph (a)(6) is added for the ``release'' or transfer of
decryption keys,
[[Page 31529]]
passwords, and other items identified in the new paragraph (a)(5) of
the revised definition of ``technical data'' in Sec. 120.10. This
paragraph makes ``release'' or transfer of information securing
``technical data'' an ``export.'' Making the release of decryption keys
and other information securing technical data in an inaccessible or
unreadable format an export allows the Department to propose that
providing someone with encrypted ``technical data'' would not be an
``export,'' under certain circumstances. Provision of a decryption key
or other information securing ``technical data'' is an ``export''
regardless of whether the foreign person has already obtained access to
the secured ``technical data.'' Paragraph (a)(6) of the definitions of
export and reexport in this rule and the BIS companion rule present
different formulations for this control and the agencies request input
from the public on which language more clearly describes the control.
The agencies intend, however, that the act of providing physical access
to unsecured ``technical data'' (subject to the ITAR) will be a
controlled event. The mere act of providing access to unsecured
technology (subject to the EAR) will not, however, be a controlled
event unless it is done with ``knowledge'' that such provision will
cause or permit the transfer of controlled ``technology'' in clear text
or ``software'' to a foreign national.
Paragraph (a)(7) is added for the release of information to a
public network, such as the Internet. This makes more explicit the
existing control in (a)(4), which includes the publication of
``technical data'' to the Internet due to its inherent accessibility by
foreign persons. This means that before posting information to the
Internet, you should determine whether the information is ``technical
data.'' You should review the USML, and if there is doubt about whether
the information is ``technical data,'' you may request a commodity
jurisdiction determination from the Department. If so, a license or
other authorization, as described in Sec. 120.11(b), will generally be
required to post such ``technical data'' to the Internet. Posting
``technical data'' to the Internet without a Department or other
authorization is a violation of the ITAR even absent specific knowledge
that a foreign national will read the ``technical data.''
Paragraph (b)(1) is added to clarify existing ITAR controls to
explicitly state that disclosing ``technical data'' to a foreign person
is deemed to be an ``export'' to all countries in which the foreign
person has held citizenship or holds permanent residency.
8. Revised Definition of Reexport
The Department proposes to revise the definition of ``reexport'' in
ITAR Sec. 120.19 to better align with the EAR's revised definition and
describe transfers of items subject to the jurisdiction of the ITAR
between two foreign countries. The activities identified are the same
as those in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of the revised definition of
``export,'' except that the shipment, release or transfer is between
two foreign countries or is to a third country national foreign person
outside of the United States.
9. Proposed Definition of Release
The Department proposes to add Sec. 120.50, the definition of
``release.'' This term is added to harmonize with the EAR, which has
long used the term to cover activities that disclose information to
foreign persons. ``Release'' includes the activities encompassed within
the undefined term ``disclose.'' The activities that are captured
include allowing a foreign person to inspect a ``defense article'' in a
way that reveals ``technical data'' to the foreign persons and oral or
written exchanges of ``technical data'' with a foreign person. The
adoption of the definition of ``release'' does not change the scope of
activities that constitute an ``export'' and other controlled
transactions under the ITAR.
10. Proposed Definition of Retransfer
The Department proposes to add Sec. 120.51, the definition of
``retransfer.'' ``Retransfer'' is moved out of the definition of
``reexport'' in Sec. 120.19 to better harmonize with the EAR, which
controls ``exports,'' ``reexports'' and ``transfers (in country)'' as
discrete events. Under this new definition, a ``retransfer'' occurs
with a change of end use or end user within the same foreign territory.
Certain activities may fit within the definition of ``reexport'' and
``retransfer,'' such as the disclosure of ``technical data'' to a third
country national abroad. Requests for both ``reexports'' and
``retransfers'' of ``defense articles'' will generally be processed
through a General Correspondence or an exemption.
11. Proposed Activities That Are Not Exports, Reexports, or Retransfers
The Department proposes to add Sec. 120.52 to describe those
``activities that are not exports, reexports, or retransfers'' and do
not require authorization from the Department. It is not an ``export''
to launch items into space, provide ``technical data'' or software to
U.S. persons while in the United States, or move a ``defense article''
between the states, possessions, and territories of the United States.
The Department also proposes to add a new provision excluding from ITAR
licensing requirements the transmission and storage of encrypted
``technical data'' and software.
The Department recognizes that ITAR-controlled ``technical data''
may be electronically routed through foreign servers unbeknownst to the
original sender. This presents a risk of unauthorized access and
creates a potential for inadvertent ITAR violations. For example, email
containing ``technical data'' may, without the knowledge of the sender,
transit a foreign country's Internet service infrastructure en route to
its intended and authorized final destination. Any access to this data
by a foreign person would constitute an unauthorized ``export'' under
ITAR Sec. 120.17. Another example is the use of mass data storage
(i.e., ``cloud storage''). In this case, ``technical data'' intended to
be resident in cloud storage may, without the knowledge of the sender,
be physically stored on a server or servers located in a foreign
country or multiple countries. Any access to this data, even if
unintended by the sender, would constitute an ``export'' under ITAR
Sec. 120.17.
The intent of the proposed ITAR Sec. 120.52(a)(4) is to clarify
that when unclassified ``technical data'' transits through a foreign
country's Internet service infrastructure, a license or other approval
is not mandated when such ``technical data'' is encrypted prior to
leaving the sender's facilities and remains encrypted until received by
the intended recipient or retrieved by the sender, as in the case of
remote storage. The encryption must be accomplished in a manner that is
certified by the U.S. National Institute for Standards and Technology
(NIST) as compliant with the Federal Information Processing Standards
Publication 140-2 (FIPS 140-2). Additionally, the Department proposes
that the electronic storage abroad of ``technical data'' that has been
similarly encrypted would not require an authorization, so long as it
is not stored in a Sec. 126.1 country or in the Russian Federation.
This will allow for cloud storage of encrypted data in foreign
countries, so long as the ``technical data'' remains continuously
encrypted while outside of the United States.
[[Page 31530]]
12. Revised Exemption for the Export of Technical Data for U.S. Persons
Abroad
The Department proposes to revise Sec. 125.4(b)(9) to better
harmonize controls on the ``release'' of controlled information to U.S.
persons abroad and to update the provisions. The most significant
update is that foreign persons authorized to receive ``technical data''
in the United States will be eligible to receive that same ``technical
data'' abroad, when on temporary assignment on behalf of their
employer. The proposed revisions clarify that a person going abroad may
use this exemption to ``export'' ``technical data'' for their own use
abroad. The proposed revisions also clarify that the ``technical data''
must be secured while abroad to prevent unauthorized ``release.'' It
has been long-standing Department practice to hold U.S. persons
responsible for the ``release'' of ``technical data'' in their
possession while abroad. However, given the nature of ``technical
data'' and the proposed exception from licensing for transmission of
secured ``technical data,'' the Department has determined it is
necessary to implement an affirmative obligation to secure data while
abroad.
13. Proposed Scope of License
The Department proposes to add Sec. 123.28 to clarify the scope of
a license, in the absence of a proviso, and to state that
authorizations are granted based on the information provided by the
applicant. This means that while providing false information to the
U.S. government as part of the application process for the ``export,''
``reexport,'' or ``retransfer'' of a ``defense article'' is a violation
of the ITAR, it also may void the license.
14. Revised Definition of Defense Service
Proposed revisions of the ``defense service'' definition were
published on April 13, 2011, RIN 1400-AC80 (see ``International Traffic
in Arms Regulations: Defense Services,'' 76 FR 20590) and May 24, 2013
(see 78 FR 31444, RIN 1400-AC80). In those rules, the Department
explained its determination that the scope of the current definition is
overly broad, capturing certain forms of assistance or services that no
longer warrant ITAR control.
The Department reviewed comments on that first proposed definition
and, when the recommended changes added to the clarity of the
regulation, the Department accepted them. For the Department's
evaluation of those public comments and recommendations regarding the
April 13, 2011, proposed rule (the first revision), see 78 FR 31444,
May 24, 2013. The Department's evaluation of the written comments and
recommendations in response to the May 24, 2013 proposed rule (the
second revision) follows.
Parties commenting on the second revision expressed concern that
the definition of ``defense service'' in paragraph (a)(1) was premised
on the use of ``other than public domain information.'' The observation
was made that with the intent of removing from the definition of a
``defense service'' the furnishing of assistance using ``public
domain'' information, but not basing the assistance on the use of
``technical data,'' the Department was continuing to require the
licensing of activities akin to those that were based on the use of
``public domain'' information. The Department has fully revised
paragraph (a)(1) to remove the use of the ``other than public domain
information'' or ``technical data'' from the determination of whether
an activity is a ``defense service.'' Furthermore, the Department has
added a new provision declaring that the activities described in
paragraph (a)(1) are not a ``defense service'' if performed by a U.S.
person or foreign person in the United States who does not have
knowledge of U.S.-origin ``technical data'' directly related to the
``defense article'' that is the subject of the assistance or training
or another ``defense article'' described in the same USML paragraph
prior to performing the service. A note is added to clarify that a
person will be deemed to have knowledge of U.S.-origin ``technical
data'' if the person previously participated in the ``development'' of
a ``defense article'' described in the same USML paragraph, or accessed
(physically or electronically) that ``technical data.'' A note is also
added to clarify that those U.S. persons abroad who only received U.S.-
origin ``technical data'' as a result of their activities on behalf of
a foreign person are not included within the scope of paragraph (a)(1).
A third note is added to clarify that DDTC-authorized foreign person
employees in the United States who provide ``defense services'' on
behalf of their U.S. employer are considered to be included with the
U.S. employer's authorization, and need not be listed on the U.S.
employer's technical assistance agreement or receive a separate
authorization for those services. The Department also removed the
activities of design, development, and engineering from paragraph
(a)(1) and moved them to paragraph (a)(2).
Commenting parties recommended revising paragraph (a)(1) to remove
the provision of ``technical data'' as a ``defense service,'' because
there are already licensing requirements for the ``export'' of
``technical data.'' The Department confirms that it eliminated from the
definition of a ``defense service'' the act of furnishing ``technical
data'' to a foreign person. Such activity still constitutes an
``export'' and would require an ITAR authorization. New paragraph
(a)(1) is concerned with the furnishing of assistance, whereas the
``export'' of ``technical data'' alone, without the furnishing of
assistance, is not a ``defense service.'' The ``export'' of ``technical
data'' requires an authorization (Department of State form DSP-5 or
DSP-85) or the use of an applicable exemption.
Commenting parties recommended the definition be revised to
explicitly state that it applies to the furnishing of assistance by
U.S. persons, or by foreign persons in the United States. The
Department partially accepted this recommendation. However, the
Department notes that ITAR Sec. 120.1(c) provides that only U.S.
persons and foreign governmental entities in the United States may be
granted a license or other approval pursuant to the ITAR, and that
foreign persons may only receive a ``reexport'' or ``retransfer''
approval or approval for brokering activities. Therefore, approval for
the performance of a defense service in the United States by a foreign
person must be obtained by a U.S. person, such as an employer, on
behalf of the foreign person. Regarding a related recommendation, the
Department also notes that the furnishing of a type of assistance
described by the definition of a ``defense service'' is not an activity
within the Department's jurisdiction when it is provided by a foreign
person outside the United States to another foreign person outside the
United States on a foreign ``defense article'' using foreign-origin
``technical data.''
In response to commenting parties, the Department specified that
the examples it provided for activities that are not ``defense
services'' are not exhaustive. Rather, they are provided to answer the
more frequent questions the Department receives on the matter. The
Department removed these examples from paragraph (b) and included them
as a note to paragraph (a).
A commenting party recommended that paragraphs (a)(5) and (a)(6),
regarding the furnishing of assistance in the integration of a
spacecraft to a launch vehicle and in the launch failure analysis of a
spacecraft or launch vehicle, respectively, be removed, and that those
activities be described in the USML categories covering spacecraft
[[Page 31531]]
and launch vehicles, on the basis that a general definition should not
have such program-specific clauses. As discussed in the May 13, 2014
interim final rule revising USML Category XV (79 FR 27180), the
Department accepted this recommendation and revised paragraph (f) of
USML Category XV and paragraph (i) of USML Category IV accordingly. The
revision includes the recommendation of commenting parties to
specifically provide that the service must be provided to a foreign
person in order for it to be a licensable activity.
Commenting parties recommended the Department define the term
``tactical employment,'' so as to clarify what services would be
captured by paragraph (a)(3). The Department determined that employment
of a ``defense article'' should remain a controlled event, due to the
nature of items now controlled in the revised USML categories. After
ECR, those items that remain ``defense articles'' are the most
sensitive and militarily critical equipment that have a significant
national security or intelligence application. Allowing training and
other services to foreign nationals in the employment of these
``defense articles'' without a license would not be appropriate.
Therefore, the Department removed the word ``tactical'' and converted
the existing exemption for basic operation of a ``defense article,''
authorized by the U.S. government for ``export'' to the same recipient,
into an exclusion from paragraph (a)(3).
A commenting party recommended the Department address the instance
of the integration or installation of a ``defense article'' into an
item, much as it addressed the instance of the integration or
installation of an item into a ``defense article.'' Previously, the
Department indicated this would be the subject of a separate rule, and
addressed the ``export'' of such items in a proposed rule (see 76 FR
13928), but upon review the Department accepted this recommendation,
and revised paragraph (a)(2), the note to paragraph (a)(2), and the
note to paragraph (a) accordingly. In addition, the Department has
changed certain terminology used in the paragraph: instead of referring
to the ``transfer'' of ``technical data,'' the paragraph is premised on
the ``use'' of ``technical data.'' This change is consistent with
removing from the definition of a ``defense service'' the furnishing of
``technical data'' to a foreign person when there is not also the
furnishing of assistance related to that ``technical data.''
A commenting party requested clarification of the rationale behind
selectively excepting from the ``defense services'' definition the
furnishing of services using ``public domain'' information. The
Department did so in paragraph (a)(1), and now excludes those services
performed by U.S. persons who have not previously had access to any
U.S. origin ``technical data'' on the ``defense article'' being
serviced. In contrast, the Department did not do so in paragraphs
(a)(2) and (a)(3) and former paragraphs (a)(5) and (a)(6). In the case
of paragraph (a)(2), the rationale for not doing so is that the
activities involved in the development of a ``defense article,'' or in
integrating a ``defense article'' with another item, inherently involve
the advancement of the military capacity of another country and
therefore constitute activities over which the U.S. government has
significant national security and foreign policy concerns. To the
extent that an activity listed in paragraph (a)(1), such as
modification or testing, is done in the ``development'' of a ``defense
article,'' such activities constitute ``development'' and are within
the scope of paragraph (a)(2). With regard to paragraph (a)(3), the
furnishing of assistance (including training) in the employment of a
``defense article'' is a type of activity that the Department believes
warrants control as a ``defense service,'' due to the inherently
military nature of providing training and other services in the
employment of a ``defense article'' (changes to paragraph (a)(3) are
described above). The services described in former paragraphs (a)(5)
and (a)(6) (and now in USML Categories IV(i) and XV(f)) are pursuant to
Public Law 105-261.
A commenting party recommended limiting paragraph (a)(2) to the
integration of ECCN 9A515 and 600 series items into defense articles,
saying that the regulations should focus on items subject to the EAR
with a military or space focus. The Department's focus with this
provision is in fact the ``defense article.'' Items that are to be
integrated with a ``defense article,'' which may not themselves be
defense articles, may be beyond the authority of the Department to
regulate. The Department did not accept this recommendation.
A commenting party recommended limiting the definition of
integration to changes in the function of the ``defense article,'' and
to exclude modifications in fit. For the purposes of illustration, this
commenting party used one of the examples provided by the Department in
the note to paragraph (a)(2): The manufacturer of the military vehicle
will need to know the dimensions and electrical requirements of the
dashboard radio when designing the vehicle. In this instance, paragraph
(a)(2) would not apply, as this example addresses the manufacture of a
``defense article,'' which is covered by paragraph (a)(1). If the radio
to be installed in this vehicle is subject to the EAR, the provision to
the manufacturer of information regarding the radio is not within the
Department's licensing jurisdiction. In an instance of a service
entailing the integration of an item with a ``defense article,'' where
there would be modification to any of the items, the Department
believes such assistance would inherently require the use of
``technical data.'' Therefore, this exclusion would be unacceptably
broad. However, the Department has accepted the recommendation to
clarify the definition and exclude changes to fit to any of the items
involved in the integration activity, provided that such services do
not entail the use of ``technical data'' directly related to the
``defense article.'' Upon review, changes to fit are not an aspect of
integration, which is the ``engineering analysis needed to unite a
`defense article' and one or more items,'' and therefore are not
captured in paragraph (a)(2). The modifications of the ``defense
article'' to accommodate the fit of the item to be integrated, which
are within the activity covered by installation, are only those
modifications to the ``defense article'' that allow the item to be
placed in its predetermined location. Any modifications to the design
of a ``defense article'' are beyond the scope of installation.
Additionally, while minor modifications may be made to a ``defense
article'' without the activity being controlled under (a)(2) as an
integration activity, all modifications of defense articles, regardless
of sophistication, are activities controlled under (a)(1) if performed
by someone with prior knowledge of U.S.-origin ``technical data.''
``Fit'' is defined in ITAR Sec. 120.41: ``The fit of a commodity is
defined by its ability to physically interface or connect with or
become an integral part of another commodity'' (see, Note 4 to
paragraph (b)(3)).
Commenting parties recommended revising paragraph (a)(2) to provide
that such assistance described therein would be a ``defense service''
only if U.S.-origin ``technical data'' is exported. The law and
regulations do not mandate this limitation. Section 38 of the Arms
Export Control Act provides that the President is authorized to control
the ``export'' of defense articles and defense services. The ITAR, in
defining ``defense article,'' ``technical data,'' and ``export,'' does
not provide the qualifier ``U.S.-
[[Page 31532]]
origin'' (see ITAR Sec. Sec. 120.6, 120.10, and 120.17, respectively).
In the instance described by the commenting party, of the integration
of a commercial item into a foreign-origin ``defense article,'' the
Department retains jurisdiction when the service is provided by a U.S.
person.
A commenting party recommended revising paragraph (a)(2) so that
the paragraph (a)(1) exception of the furnishing of assistance using
``public domain'' information is not nullified by paragraph (a)(2), as
most of the activities described in paragraph (a)(1) involve
integration as defined in the note to paragraph (a)(2). The Department
believes each of the activities described in paragraphs (a)(1) and
(a)(2) are sufficiently well defined to distinguish them one from the
other. Therefore, the Department does not agree that paragraph (a)(2)
nullifies the intention of paragraph (a)(1), and does not accept this
recommendation.
A commenting party requested clarification that providing an item
subject to the EAR for the purposes of integration into a ``defense
article'' is not a ``defense service.'' The provision of the item in
this instance, unaccompanied by assistance in the integration of the
item into a ``defense article,'' is not within the scope of ``the
furnishing of assistance,'' and therefore is not a defense service.
Commenting parties recommended clarification on whether the
servicing of an item subject to the EAR that has been integrated with a
``defense article'' would be a ``defense service.'' The Department
notes that such activity is not a ``defense service,'' provides it as
an example of what is not a ``defense service'' in the note to
paragraph (a), and also notes that it would be incumbent on the
applicant to ensure that in providing this service, ``technical data''
directly related to the ``defense article'' is not used.
Commenting parties expressed concern over the potential negative
effect of paragraph (a)(2) and the definition in general on university-
based educational activities and scientific communication, and
recommended clarification of the relationship between the definition of
``defense services'' and the exemption for the ``export'' of
``technical data'' at ITAR Sec. 125.4(b)(10). Disclosures of
``technical data'' to foreign persons who are bona-fide and full time
regular employees of universities continue to be exports for which ITAR
Sec. 125.4(b)(10) is one licensing exemption. The Department believes
that, in most cases, the normal duties of a university employee do not
encompass the furnishing of assistance to a foreign person, in the
activities described in paragraph (a). Therefore, in the context of
employment with the university, the Department does not perceive that
the foreign person's use of the ``technical data'' would be described
by ITAR Sec. 120.9(a)(2), or any part of paragraph (a).
In response to the recommendation of one commenting party, the
Department added a note clarifying that the installation of an item
into a ``defense article'' is not a ``defense service,'' provided no
``technical data'' is used in the rendering of the service.
A commenting party recommended clarification of the licensing
process for the ``export'' of an EAR 600 series item that is to be
integrated into a ``defense article.'' The Department of Commerce has
``export'' authority over the 600 series item, and the exporter must
obtain a license from the Department of Commerce, if necessary. The
exporter must also obtain an approval from the Department of State to
provide any ``defense service,'' including integration assistance
pursuant to paragraph (a)(2).
A commenting party recommended removing ``testing'' as a type of
``defense service,'' stating it was not included in the definition of
``organizational-level maintenance.'' In including testing as part of
the former definition but not of the latter, the Department does not
perceive an inconsistency or conflict. To the extent that certain
testing is within the definition of organization-level maintenance,
that testing is explicitly excluded, as organizational-level
maintenance is not covered under the definition of a ``defense
service.'' However, all other testing remains a ``defense service.''
The Department intends for the furnishing of assistance to a foreign
person, whether in the United States or abroad, in the testing of
defense articles to be an activity requiring Department approval under
the conditions of paragraph (a)(1). The Department did not accept this
recommendation.
Commenting parties provided recommendations for revising the
definitions of ``public domain'' information and ``technical data.''
Those definitions are proposed in this rule as well. To the extent that
evaluation of the proposed changes to ``defense services'' hinges on
these terms, the Department invites commenting parties to submit
analyses of the impact of these revised definitions on the revised
``defense service'' definition in this proposed rule.
Commenting parties recommended clarification of the regulation
regarding the furnishing of assistance and training in organizational-
level (basic-level) maintenance. The Department harmonized paragraph
(a)(1) and the example regarding organizational-level maintenance by
revising the Note to Paragraph (a), which sets forth activities that
are not ``defense services,'' so that it specifically provides that
``the furnishing of assistance (including training) in organizational-
level (basic-level) maintenance of a defense article'' is an example of
an activity that is not a defense service.
In response to commenting parties, the Department clarifies that
the example of employment by a foreign person of a natural U.S. person
as not constituting a ``defense service'' is meant to address, among
other scenarios, the instance where such a person is employed by a
foreign defense manufacturer, but whose employment in fact does not
entail the furnishing of assistance as described in ITAR Sec.
120.9(a). By ``natural person,'' the Department means a human being, as
may be inferred from the definition of ``person'' provided in ITAR
Sec. 120.14.
In response to the recommendation of a commenting party, the
Department confirms that, as stated in a Department of Commerce notice,
``Technology subject to the EAR that is used with technical data
subject to the ITAR that will be used under the terms of a Technical
Assistance Agreement (TAA) or Manufacturing License Agreement (MLA) and
that would otherwise require a license from [the Department of
Commerce] may all be exported under the TAA or MLA'' (see 78 FR 22660).
In DDTC publication Guidelines for Preparing Electronic Agreements
(Revision 4.2), Section 20.1.d., the following conditions are
stipulated: The technology subject to the EAR will be used with
``technical data'' subject to the ITAR and described in the agreement,
and the technology subject to the EAR will be used under the terms of a
TAA or MLA (see https://www.pmddtc.state.gov/licensing/agreement.html).
Request for Comments
The Department invites public comment on any of the proposed
definitions set forth in this rulemaking. With respect to the revisions
to ITAR Sec. 120.17, the Department recognizes the increasingly
complex nature of telecommunications infrastructure and the manner in
which data is transmitted, stored, and accessed, and accordingly seeks
public comment with special emphasis on: (1) How adequately the
proposed regulations address the technical aspects of data transmission
and storage; (2) whether
[[Page 31533]]
the proposed regulations mitigate unintended or unauthorized access to
transmitted or stored data; and (3) whether the proposed regulations
impose an undue financial or compliance burden on the public.
The public is also asked to comment on the effective date of the
final rule. Export Control Reform rules that revised categories of the
USML and created new 600 series ECCN have had a six-month delayed
effective date to allow for exporters to update the classification of
their items. In general, rules effecting export controls have been
effective on the date of publication, due to the impact on national
security and foreign policy. As this proposed rule and the companion
proposed rule from the Bureau of Industry and Security revise
definitions within the ITAR and the EAR and do not make any changes to
the USML or CCL, the Department proposes (should the proposed rule be
adopted) a 30-day delayed effective date to allow exporters to ensure
continued compliance.
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 U.S. government and that rules implementing this
function are exempt from sections 553 (rulemaking) and 554
(adjudications) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Although the
Department is of the opinion that this proposed rule is exempt from the
rulemaking provisions of the APA, the Department is publishing this
rule with a 60-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 the Department is of the opinion that this proposed rule is
exempt from the rulemaking provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553, there is no
requirement for an analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed 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
For purposes of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 (the ``Act''), a major rule is a rule that the
Administrator of the OMB Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
finds has resulted or is likely to result in: (1) An annual effect on
the economy of $100,000,000 or more; (2) a major increase in costs or
prices for consumers, individual industries, federal, state, or local
government agencies, or geographic regions; or (3) significant adverse
effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and foreign markets.
The Department does not believe this rulemaking will have an annual
effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more, nor will it result in a
major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries,
federal, state, or local government agencies, or geographic regions, or
have significant adverse effects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United
States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in
domestic and foreign markets. The proposed means of solving the issue
of data protection are both familiar to and extensively used by the
affected public in protecting sensitive information.
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 proposed 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 proposed amendment.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess costs
and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributed impacts, and equity). The executive orders stress
the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing
costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This
proposed rule has been designated a ``significant regulatory action,''
although not economically significant, under section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866. Accordingly, the proposed rule has been reviewed by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
Executive Order 12988
The Department of State has reviewed the proposed 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.
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 preempt
tribal law. Accordingly, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
rulemaking.
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; however, the Department of State seeks public comment on any
unforeseen potential for increased burden.
List of Subjects
22 CFR 120 and 125
Arms and munitions, Classified information, Exports.
22 CFR 123
Arms and munitions, Exports, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
22 CFR Part 127
Arms and munitions, Exports, Crime, Law, Penalties, Seizures and
forfeitures.
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above, title 22, chapter I,
subchapter M, parts 120, 123, 125, and 127 are proposed to be amended
as follows:
PART 120--PURPOSE AND DEFINITIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 120 continues to read as follows:
[[Page 31534]]
Authority: Secs. 2, 38, and 71, Pub. L. 90-629, 90 Stat. 744 (22
U.S.C. 2752, 2778, 2797); 22 U.S.C. 2794; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; Pub. L.
105-261, 112 Stat. 1920; Pub. L. 111-266; Section 1261, Pub. L. 112-
239; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
0
2. Section 120.6 is amended by designating the current text as
paragraph (a), revising the first sentence of newly designated
paragraph (a), and adding paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 120.6 Defense article.
(a) Defense article means any item, software, or technical data
designated in Sec. 121.1 of this subchapter. * * *
(b) The following are not defense articles and thus not subject to
the ITAR:
(1) [Reserved]
(2) [Reserved]
(3) Information and software that:
(i) Are in the public domain, as described in Sec. 120.11;
(ii) Arise during, or result from, fundamental research, as
described in Sec. 120.46;
(iii) Concern general scientific, mathematical, or engineering
principles commonly taught in schools, and released by instruction in a
catalog course or associated teaching laboratory of an academic
institution; or
(iv) Appear in patents or open (published) patent applications
available from or at any patent office, unless covered by an invention
secrecy order.
Note to paragraph (b): Information that is not within the scope
of the definition of technical data (see Sec. 120.10) and not
directly related to a defense article, or otherwise described on the
USML, is not subject to the ITAR.
0
3. Section 120.9 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 120.9 Defense service.
(a) Defense service means:
(1) The furnishing of assistance (including training) to a foreign
person (see Sec. 120.16), whether in the United States or abroad, in
the production, assembly, testing, intermediate- or depot-level
maintenance (see Sec. 120.38), modification, demilitarization,
destruction, or processing of a defense article (see Sec. 120.6), by a
U.S. person or foreign person in the United States, who has knowledge
of U.S.-origin technical data directly related to the defense article
that is the subject of the assistance, prior to performing the service;
Note 1 to paragraph (a)(1): ``Knowledge of U.S.-origin
technical data'' for purposes of paragraph (a)(1) can be established
based on all the facts and circumstances. However, a person is
deemed to have ``knowledge of U.S.-origin technical data'' directly
related to a defense article if the person participated in the
development of a defense article described in the same USML
paragraph or accessed (physically or electronically) technical data
directly related to the defense article that is the subject of the
assistance, prior to performing the service.
Note 2 to paragraph (a)(1): U.S. persons abroad who only
receive U.S.-origin technical data as a result of their activities
on behalf of a foreign person are not included within paragraph
(a)(1).
Note 3 to paragraph (a)(1): Foreign person employees in the
United States providing defense services as part of Directorate of
Defense Trade Controls-authorized employment need not be listed on
the U.S. employer's technical assistance agreement or receive
separate authorization to perform defense services on behalf of
their authorized U.S. employer.
(2) The furnishing of assistance (including training) to a foreign
person (see Sec. 120.16), whether in the United States or abroad, in
the development of a defense article, or the integration of a defense
article with any other item regardless of whether that item is subject
to the ITAR or technical data is used;
Note to paragraph (a)(2): ``Integration'' means any engineering
analysis (see Sec. 125.4(c)(5) of this subchapter) needed to unite
a defense article and one or more items. Integration includes the
introduction of software to enable operation of a defense article,
and the determination during the design process of where an item
will be installed (e.g., integration of a civil engine into a
destroyer that requires changes or modifications to the destroyer in
order for the civil engine to operate properly; not plug and play).
Integration is distinct from ``installation.'' Installation means
the act of putting an item in its predetermined place without the
use of technical data or any modifications to the defense article
involved, other than to accommodate the fit of the item with the
defense article (e.g., installing a dashboard radio into a military
vehicle where no modifications (other than to accommodate the fit of
the item) are made to the vehicle, and there is no use of technical
data.). The ``fit'' of an item is defined by its ability to
physically interface or connect with or become an integral part of
another item. (see Sec. 120.41).
(3) The furnishing of assistance (including training) to a foreign
person (see Sec. 120.16), regardless of whether technical data is
used, whether in the United States or abroad, in the employment of a
defense article, other than basic operation of a defense article
authorized by the U.S. government for export to the same recipient;
(4) Participating in or directing combat operations for a foreign
person (see Sec. 120.16), except as a member of the regular military
forces of a foreign nation by a U.S. person who has been drafted into
such forces; or
(5) The furnishing of assistance (including training) to the
government of a country listed in Sec. 126.1 of this subchapter in the
development, production, operation, installation, maintenance, repair,
overhaul or refurbishing of a defense article or a part component,
accessory or attachments specially designed for a defense article.
Note to paragraph (a): The following are examples of activities
that are not defense services:
1. The furnishing of assistance (including training) in
organizational-level (basic-level) maintenance (see Sec. 120.38) of
a defense article;
2. Performance of services by a U.S. person in the employment of
a foreign person, except as provided in this paragraph;
3. Servicing of an item subject to the EAR (see Sec. 120.42)
that has been integrated or installed into a defense article, or the
servicing of an item subject to the EAR into which a defense article
has been installed or integrated, without the use of technical data,
except as described in paragraph (a)(5) of this section;
4. The installation of any item into a defense article, or the
installation of a defense article into any item;
5. Providing law enforcement, physical security, or personal
protective services (including training and advice) to or for a
foreign person (if such services necessitate the export of a defense
article a license or other approval is required for the export of
the defense article, and such services that entail the employment or
training in the employment of a defense article are addressed in
paragraph (a)(3) of this section);
6. The furnishing of assistance by a foreign person not in the
United States;
7. The furnishing of medical, logistical (other than
maintenance), translation, financial, legal, scheduling, or
administrative services;
8. The furnishing of assistance by a foreign government to a
foreign person in the United States, pursuant to an arrangement with
the Department of Defense; and
9. The instruction in general scientific, mathematical, or
engineering principles commonly taught in schools, colleges, and
universities.
(b) [Reserved]
0
4. Section 120.10 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 120.10 Technical data.
(a) Technical data means, except as set forth in paragraph (b) of
this section:
(1) Information required for the development (see Sec. 120.47)
(including design, modification, and integration design), production
(see Sec. 120.48) (including manufacture, assembly, and integration),
operation, installation, maintenance, repair, overhaul, or refurbishing
of a defense article. Technical data may be in any tangible or
intangible form, such as written or
[[Page 31535]]
oral communications, blueprints, drawings, photographs, plans,
diagrams, models, formulae, tables, engineering designs and
specifications, computer-aided design files, manuals or documentation,
electronic media or information gleaned through visual inspection;
Note to paragraph (a)(1): The modification of an existing item
creates a new item and technical data for the modification is
technical data for the development of the new item.
(2) Information enumerated on the USML (i.e., not controlled
pursuant to a catch-all USML paragraph);
(3) Classified information for the development, production,
operation, installation, maintenance, repair, overhaul, or refurbishing
of a defense article or a 600 series item subject to the EAR;
(4) Information covered by an invention secrecy order; or
(5) Information, such as decryption keys, network access codes, or
passwords, that would allow access to other technical data in clear
text or software (see Sec. 127.1(b)(4) of this subchapter).
(b) Technical data does not include:
(1) Non-proprietary general system descriptions;
(2) Information on basic function or purpose of an item; or
(3) Telemetry data as defined in note 3 to USML Category XV(f) (see
Sec. 121.1 of this subchapter).
0
5. Section 120.11 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 120.11 Public domain.
(a) Except as set forth in paragraph (b) of this section,
unclassified information and software are in the public domain, and are
thus not technical data or software subject to the ITAR, when they have
been made available to the public without restrictions upon their
further dissemination such as through any of the following:
(1) Subscriptions available without restriction to any individual
who desires to obtain or purchase the published information;
(2) Libraries or other public collections that are open and
available to the public, and from which the public can obtain tangible
or intangible documents;
(3) Unlimited distribution at a conference, meeting, seminar, trade
show, or exhibition, generally accessible to the interested public;
(4) Public dissemination (i.e., unlimited distribution) in any form
(e.g., not necessarily in published form), including posting on the
Internet on sites available to the public; or
(5) Submission of a written composition, manuscript or presentation
to domestic or foreign co-authors, editors, or reviewers of journals,
magazines, newspapers or trade publications, or to organizers of open
conferences or other open gatherings, with the intention that the
compositions, manuscripts, or publications will be made publicly
available if accepted for publication or presentation.
(b) Technical data or software, whether or not developed with
government funding, is not in the public domain if it has been made
available to the public without authorization from:
(1) The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls;
(2) The Department of Defense's Office of Security Review;
(3) The relevant U.S. government contracting entity with authority
to allow the technical data or software to be made available to the
public; or
(4) Another U.S. government official with authority to allow the
technical data or software to be made available to the public.
Note 1 to Sec. 120.11: Section 127.1(a)(6) of this subchapter
prohibits, without written authorization from the Directorate of
Defense Trade Controls, U.S. and foreign persons from exporting,
reexporting, retransfering, or otherwise making available to the
public technical data or software if such person has knowledge that
the technical data or software was made publicly available without
an authorization described in paragraph (b) of this section.
Note 2 to Sec. 120.11: An export, reexport, or retransfer of
technical data or software that was made publicly available by
another person without authorization is not a violation of this
subchapter, except as described in Sec. 127.1(a)(6) of this
subchapter.
0
6. Section 120.17 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 120.17 Export.
(a) Except as set forth in Sec. 120.52, Sec. 126.16, or Sec.
126.17 of this subchapter, export means:
(1) An actual shipment or transmission out of the United States,
including the sending or taking of a defense article outside of the
United States in any manner;
(2) Releasing or otherwise transferring technical data or software
(source code or object code) to a foreign person in the United States
(a ``deemed export'');
(3) Transferring by a person in the United States of registration,
control, or ownership of any aircraft, vessel, or satellite subject to
the ITAR to a foreign person;
(4) Releasing or otherwise transferring a defense article to an
embassy or to any agency or subdivision of a foreign government, such
as a diplomatic mission, in the United States;
(5) Performing a defense service on behalf of, or for the benefit
of, a foreign
person, whether in the United States or abroad;
(6) Releasing or otherwise transferring information, such as
decryption keys, network access codes, passwords, or software, or
providing physical access, that would allow access to other technical
data in clear text or software to a foreign person regardless of
whether such data has been or will be transferred; or
(7) Making technical data available via a publicly available
network (e.g., the Internet).
(b) Any release in the United States of technical data or software
to a foreign person is a deemed export to all countries in which the
foreign person has held citizenship or holds permanent residency.
0
7. Section 120.19 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 120.19 Reexport.
(a) Except as set forth in Sec. 120.52, reexport means:
(1) An actual shipment or transmission of a defense article from
one foreign country to another foreign country, including the sending
or taking of a defense article to or from such countries in any manner;
(2) Releasing or otherwise transferring technical data or software
to a foreign person of a country other than the foreign country where
the release or transfer takes place (a ``deemed reexport'');
(3) Transferring by a person outside of the United States of
registration, control, or ownership of any aircraft, vessel, or
satellite subject to the ITAR to a foreign person outside the United
States; or
(4) Releasing or otherwise transferring outside of the United
States information, such as decryption keys, network access codes,
password, or software, or providing physical access, that would allow
access to other technical data in clear text or software to a foreign
person regardless of whether such data has been or will be transferred.
(b) [Reserved]
Sec. 120.41 [Amended]
0
8. Section 120.41 is amended by reserving Note 1 to paragraph (b)(3)
and Note 2 to paragraph (b)(3).
0
9. Section 120.46 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 120.46 Required.
(a) As applied to technical data, the term required refers to only
that portion
[[Page 31536]]
of technical data that is peculiarly responsible for achieving or
exceeding the controlled performance levels, characteristics, or
functions. Such required technical data may be shared by different
products.
Note 1 to paragraph (a): The references to ``characteristics''
and functions'' are not limited to entries on the USML that use
specific technical parameters to describe the scope of what is
controlled. The ``characteristics'' and ``functions'' of an item
listed are, absent a specific regulatory definition, a standard
dictionary's definition of the item. For example, USML Category
VIII(a)(1) controls aircraft that are ``bombers.'' No performance
level is identified in the entry, but the characteristic of the
aircraft that is controlled is that it is a bomber. Thus, any
technical data, regardless of significance, peculiar to making an
aircraft a bomber as opposed to, for example, an aircraft controlled
under ECCN 9A610.a or ECCN 9A991.a, would be technical data required
for a bomber and thus controlled under USML Category VIII(i).
Note 2 to paragraph (a): The ITAR and the EAR often divide
within each set of regulations or between each set of regulations:
1. Controls on parts, components, accessories, attachments, and
software; and
2. Controls on the end items, systems, equipment, or other items
into which those parts, components, accessories, attachments, and
software are to be installed or incorporated.
With the exception of technical data specifically enumerated on
the USML, the jurisdictional status of unclassified technical data
is the same as the jurisdictional status of the defense article or
item subject to the EAR to which it is directly related. Thus, if
technology is directly related to the production of an ECCN 9A610.x
aircraft component that is to be integrated or installed in a USML
Category VIII(a) aircraft, the technology is controlled under ECCN
9E610, not USML Category VIII(i).
Note 3 to paragraph (a): Technical data is ``peculiarly
responsible for achieving or exceeding the controlled performance
levels, characteristics, or functions'' if it is used in or for use
in the development (including design, modification, and integration
design), production (including manufacture, assembly, and
integration), operation, installation, maintenance, repair,
overhaul, or refurbishing of a defense article unless:
1. The Department of State has determined otherwise in a
commodity jurisdiction determination;
2. [Reserved];
3. It is identical to information used in or with a commodity or
software that:
i. Is or was in production (i.e., not in development); and
ii. Is not a defense article;
4. It was or is being developed with knowledge that it is for or
would be for use in or with both defense articles and commodities
not on the U.S. Munitions List; or
5. It was or is being developed for use in or with general
purpose commodities or software (i.e., with no knowledge that it
would be for use in or with a particular commodity).
(b) [Reserved]
0
10. Section 120.47 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 120.47 Development.
Development is related to all stages prior to serial production,
such as: design, design research, design analyses, design concepts,
assembly and testing of prototypes, pilot production schemes, design
data, process of transforming design data into a product, configuration
design, integration design, and layouts. Development includes
modification of the design of an existing item.
0
11. Section 120.48 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 120.48 Production.
Production means all production stages, such as product
engineering, manufacture, integration, assembly (mounting), inspection,
testing, and quality assurance. This includes ``serial production''
where commodities have passed production readiness testing (i.e., an
approved, standardized design ready for large scale production) and
have been or are being produced on an assembly line for multiple
commodities using the approved, standardized design.
0
12. Section 120.49 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 120.49 Technical data that arises during, or results from,
fundamental research.
(a) Technical Data arising during, or resulting from, fundamental
research. Unclassified information that arises during, or results from,
fundamental research and is intended to be published is not technical
data when the research is:
(1) Conducted in the United States at an accredited institution of
higher learning located; or
(2) Funded, in whole or in part, by the U.S. government.
Note 1 to paragraph (a): The inputs used to conduct fundamental
research, such as information, equipment, or software, are not
``technical data that arises during or results from fundamental
research'' except to the extent that such inputs are technical data
that arose during or resulted from earlier fundamental research.
Note 2 to paragraph (a): There are instances in the conduct of
research, whether fundamental, basic, or applied, where a
researcher, institution, or company may decide to restrict or
protect the release or publication of technical data contained in
research results. Once a decision is made to maintain such technical
data as restricted or proprietary, the technical data becomes
subject to the ITAR.
(b) Prepublication review. Technical data that arises during, or
results from, fundamental research is intended to be published to the
extent that the researchers are free to publish the technical data
contained in the research without any restriction or delay, including
U.S. government-imposed access and dissemination controls or research
sponsor proprietary information review.
Note 1 to paragraph (b): Although technical data arising during
or resulting from fundamental research is not considered ``intended
to be published'' if researchers accept restrictions on its
publication, such technical data will nonetheless qualify as
technical data arising during or resulting from fundamental research
once all such restrictions have expired or have been removed.
Note 2 to paragraph (b): Research that is voluntarily subjected
to U.S. government prepublication review is considered intended to
be published for all releases consistent with any resulting
controls.
Note 3 to paragraph (b): Technical data resulting from U.S.
government funded research which is subject to government-imposed
access and dissemination or other specific national security
controls qualifies as technical data resulting from fundamental
research, provided that all government-imposed national security
controls have been satisfied.
(c) Fundamental research definition. Fundamental research means
basic or applied research in science and engineering, the results of
which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within the scientific
community. This is distinguished from proprietary research and from
industrial development, design, production, and product utilization,
the results of which ordinarily are restricted for proprietary or
national security reasons.
(1) Basic research means experimental or theoretical work
undertaken principally to acquire new knowledge of the fundamental
principles of phenomena or observable facts, not primarily directed
towards a specific practical aim or objective.
(2) Applied research means the effort that:
(i) Normally follows basic research, but may not be severable from
the related basic research;
(ii) Attempts to determine and exploit the potential of scientific
discoveries or improvements in technology, materials, processes,
methods, devices, or techniques; and
(iii) Attempts to advance the state of the art.
[[Page 31537]]
0
13. Section 120.50 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 120.50 Release.
(a) Except as set forth in Sec. 120.52, technical data and
software are released through:
(1) Visual or other inspection by foreign persons of a defense
article that reveals technical data or software to a foreign person; or
(2) Oral or written exchanges with foreign persons of technical
data in the United States or abroad.
(b) [Reserved]
0
14. Section 120.51 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 120.51 Retransfer.
Except as set forth in Sec. 120.52 of this subchapter, a
retransfer is a change in end use or end user of a defense article
within the same foreign country.
0
15. Section 120.52 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 120.52 Activities that are not exports, reexports, or
retransfers.
(a) The following activities are not exports, reexports, or
retransfers:
(1) Launching a spacecraft, launch vehicle, payload, or other item
into space;
(2) While in the United States, releasing technical data or
software to a U.S. person;
(3) Shipping, moving, or transferring defense articles between or
among the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands or any
territory, dependency, or possession of the United States as listed in
Schedule C, Classification Codes and Descriptions for U.S. Export
Statistics, issued by the Bureau of the Census; and
(4) Sending, taking, or storing technical data or software that is:
(i) Unclassified;
(ii) Secured using end-to-end encryption;
(iii) Secured using cryptographic modules (hardware or software)
compliant with the Federal Information Processing Standards Publication
140-2 (FIPS 140-2) or its successors, supplemented by software
implementation, cryptographic key management and other procedures and
controls that are in accordance with guidance provided in current U.S.
National Institute for Standards and Technology publications; and
(iv) Not stored in a country proscribed in Sec. 126.1 of this
subchapter or the Russian Federation.
(b) For purposes of this section, end-to-end encryption means the
provision of uninterrupted cryptographic protection of data between an
originator and an intended recipient, including between an individual
and himself or herself. It involves encrypting data by the originating
party and keeping that data encrypted except by the intended recipient,
where the means to access the data in unencrypted form is not given to
any third party, including to any Internet service provider,
application service provider or cloud service provider.
(c) The ability to access technical data or software in encrypted
form that satisfies the criteria set forth in paragraph (a)(4) of this
section does not constitute the release or export of such technical
data or software.
Note to Sec. 120.52: See Sec. 127.1 of this subchapter for
prohibitions on the release or transfer of technical data or
software, in any form, to any person with knowledge that a violation
will occur.
PART 123--LICENSES FOR THE EXPORT AND TEMPORARY IMPORT OF DEFENSE
ARTICLES
0
16. The authority citation for part 123 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 2, 38, and 71, 90, 90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C.
2752, 2778, 2797); 22 U.S.C. 2753; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 2776;
Pub. L. 105-261, 112 Stat. 1920; Sec. 1205(a), Pub. L. 107-228;
Section 1261, Pub. L. 112-239; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
0
17. Section 123.28 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 123.28 Scope of a license.
Unless limited by a condition set out in a license, the export,
reexport, retransfer, or temporary import authorized by a license is
for the item(s), end-use(s), and parties described in the license
application and any letters of explanation. DDTC grants licenses in
reliance on representations the applicant made in or submitted in
connection with the license application, letters of explanation, and
other documents submitted.
PART 124--AGREEMENTS, OFF-SHORE PROCUREMENT, AND OTHER DEFENSE
SERVICES
0
18. The authority citation for part 124 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 2, 38, and 71, 90, 90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C.
2752, 2778, 2797); 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 2776; Section 1514,
Pub. L. 105-261; Pub. L. 111-266; Section 1261, Pub. L. 112-239;
E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
0
19. Section 124.1 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 124.1 Manufacturing license agreements and technical assistance
agreements.
* * * * *
(e) Unless limited by a condition set out in an agreement, the
export, reexport, retransfer, or temporary import authorized by a
license is for the item(s), end-use(s), and parties described in the
agreement, license, and any letters of explanation. DDTC approves
agreements and grants licenses in reliance on representations the
applicant made in or submitted in connection with the agreement,
letters of explanation, and other documents submitted.
PART 125--LICENSES FOR THE EXPORT OF TECHNICAL DATA AND CLASSIFIED
DEFENSE ARTICLES
0
20. The authority citation for part 125 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 2 and 38, 90, 90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C. 2752,
2778); 22 U.S.C. 2651a; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
0
21. Section 125.4 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(9) to read as
follows:
Sec. 125.4 Exemptions of general applicability.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(9) Technical data, including classified information, regardless of
media or format, exported by or to a U.S. person or a foreign person
employee of a U.S. person, travelling or on temporary assignment abroad
subject to the following restrictions:
(i) Foreign persons may only export or receive such technical data
as they are authorized to receive through a separate license or other
approval.
(ii) The technical data exported under this authorization is to be
possessed or used solely by a U.S. person or authorized foreign person
and sufficient security precautions must be taken to prevent the
unauthorized release of the technology. Such security precautions
include encryption of the technical data, the use of secure network
connections, such as virtual private networks, the use of passwords or
other access restrictions on the electronic device or media on which
the technical data is stored, and the use of firewalls and other
network security measures to prevent unauthorized access.
(iii) The U.S. person is an employee of the U.S. government or is
directly employed by a U.S. person and not by a foreign subsidiary.
(iv) Technical data authorized under this exception may not be used
for foreign production purposes or for defense services unless
authorized through a license or other approval.
(v) The U.S. employer of foreign persons must document the use of
this exemption by foreign person employees,
[[Page 31538]]
including the reason that the technical data is needed by the foreign
person for their temporary business activities abroad on behalf of the
U.S. person.
(vi) 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 such guidance must
be followed).
* * * * *
PART 127--VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES
0
22. The authority citation for part 127 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sections 2, 38, and 42, 90, 90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C.
2752, 2778, 2791); 22 U.S.C. 401; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 2779a;
22 U.S.C. 2780; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
0
23. Section 127.1 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(6) and (b)(4) to
read as follows:
Sec. 127.1 Violations.
(a) * * *
(6) To export, reexport, retransfer, or otherwise make available to
the public technical data or software if such person has knowledge that
the technical data or software was made publicly available without an
authorization described in Sec. 120.11(b) of this subchapter.
(b) * * *
(4) To release or otherwise transfer information, such as
decryption keys, network access codes, or passwords, that would allow
access to other technical data in clear text or to software that will
result, directly or indirectly, in an unauthorized export, reexport, or
retransfer of the technical data in clear text or software. Violation
of this provision will constitute a violation to the same extent as a
violation in connection with the export of the controlled technical
data or software.
* * * * *
Dated: May 20, 2015.
Rose E. Gottemoeller,
Under Secretary, Arms Control and International Security, Department of
State.
[FR Doc. 2015-12844 Filed 6-2-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-25-P