Regulations of U.S. export controls have recently become “more difficult to apply,” according to a study released May 6 by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. The study, which focuses broadly on methods that Chinese companies use to transfer technology from the U.S., said regulators are facing more difficulty predicting which “early-stage technologies developed for commercial purposes” could be used for future military purposes. The study also briefly touched on the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act, signed into law in 2018, which allows the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. to review transactions by foreign entities in the U.S. to determine their impact on national security. The study said FIRRMA leaves some methods of Chinese technology transfers “unaddressed,” including “investments in U.S. critical technologies based outside” the U.S.

A former consultant for the Arms Trade Treaty said President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the pact may "haunt" the U.S. for years and could place U.S. exporters’ supply chains at risk. Rachel Stohl -- in a May 3 commentary on WarOnTheRocks.com, a national security website -- wrote that while U.S. exporters still will be subject to “strict U.S. export control laws,” exporters “could see their supply chains or access to customers put at risk if a trading partner puts limits" on countries not party to the treaty.

The State Department's update to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations for U.S. government transfers (see 1904180024) marks "a huge and long awaited improvement," Arent Fox lawyers said in a blog post. Still, when exporting to countries on behalf of the U.S. government goods that will be received by someone outside the U.S. government, "you will still need to get a license or other approval in most cases," the firm said. According to Crowell Moring lawyers, the most significant change is "the government’s expanded use of contractor personnel in supporting [U.S. government] missions often involving foreign parties," according to a firm alert. "The exemption now expressly covers defense services and other exports by 'persons or entities in a contractual relationship with the U.S. Government' where use of the defense article or performance of the defense service is within the scope of such contract and where any one of three specified conditions exist and assure government control and oversight of the transfer."

Correction: A national security memorandum regarding U.S. policy on conventional arms transfers that mandated enhanced trade promotion and regulatory simplification was issued April 19, 2018 (see 1904220049).

The State Department is seeking Office of Management and Budget approval of the information it will collect through an “online case management system” that will consolidate several Directorate of Defense Trade Controls licensing forms, it said in a notice. The new DS-7788 will be used to review and adjudicate requests to export or temporarily import defense articles, defense services and related technical data. After the new system is implemented, DDTC will discontinue the use of several forms consolidated into the new DS-7788: the DSP-5, DSP-6, DSP-85, DSP-73, DSP-61, DSP-62, DSP-74, DS-6004 and DS-4294. Comments are due to State by June 18.

The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security is amending the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to add to the Unverified List 50 entities with addresses in China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Malaysia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Thirty-seven of the 50 additions are located in China. The agency's final rule also removes 10 entities and adds one address for a person currently on the list. The Unverified List includes entities for which the U.S. government failed to complete satisfactory end-use checks, and therefore could not verify the entities' bona fides. Additions to the list are as follows:

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency issued a policy memorandum April 8 clarifying its implementation of a reduced administrative surcharge for Foreign Military Sales activities. For the purposes of a reduction in the rate from 3.5% to 3.2% that took effect July 1, 2018, the “implementation date or the date when the initial deposit from the purchaser is received” is used “to determine which Letters of Offer and Acceptance (LOAs), amendments, and modifications are eligible for the Administrative Surcharge Rate of 3.2%,” the policy memo says. “The implementation guidance that accompanied DSCA policy memorandum 18-27 erroneously instructed the Implementing Agencies to apply the 3.2% Admin surcharge rate to all new FMS and Building Partner Capacity (BPC) cases and new line items added via LOA amendment 'accepted' on or after 1 June 2018,” DSCA said. “Regardless of the acceptance date, all FMS and BPC cases and new lines added via LOA amendments ‘implemented’ on or after 1 June 2018 are eligible for the 3.2% surcharge rate.” DSCA attached revised guidance on what activities are eligible for the new, lower rate.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission recently issued a regulatory issue summary to clarify requirements for annual and quarterly reporting for exports of nuclear equipment and materials. According to the NRC, “based upon discussions with exporters that did not submit quarterly reports,” exporters may be confused about the different annual and quarterly reporting requirements. Annual reporting requirements are for exports under a general license for U.S.-origin goods listed in Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 110; quarterly licenses are for exports under a general or specific license for goods listed in Annex II of the Additional Protocol to the International Atomic Energy Agency agreement. “The two reporting requirements reference two distinct lists of equipment subject to reporting which share some items in common. Thus, the export of some components” may require both an annual report and a quarterly report because they appear on both lists, the NRC said. “Reporting under one of these requirements does not obviate the need to report under the other if both apply.”

The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security is looking for candidates for its seven Technical Advisory Committees, the agency said in a notice. "Industry representatives are selected from firms producing a broad range of items currently controlled for national security, nonproliferation, foreign policy, and short supply reasons or that are proposed for such controls," BIS said. "Representation from the private sector is balanced to the extent possible among large and small firms." Six of the TACs advise the Commerce Department on the "technical parameters for export controls and the administration of those controls within specified areas." The other TAC "focuses on the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and procedures for implementing the EAR." TAC members can serve a term of up to four consecutive years and must obtain secret-level clearances prior to appointment, BIS said. Resumes should be sent to Yvette Springer at Yvette.Springer@bis.doc.gov.

The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security said the Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee (SITAC) scheduled a partially open meeting April 30 in Washington. The public session will include an remarks from BIS management and industry presentations. The open session will be accessible via teleconference to 20 participants on a first-come, first-served basis. To join via teleconference, submit inquiries by April 23 to Yvette Springer at Yvette.Springer@bis.doc.gov. A limited number of seats will also be available for in-person attendance at the public session.