Testing for commodity jurisdiction requests in the State Department’s Defense Export Control and Compliance System (DECCS) won’t begin until the week of March 25, the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls said in an updated message on its website. The message had previously said testing would begin March 20 (see 1903200046). “Another announcement will be posted when the system is available for testing,” DDTC said.
Testing for the State Department’s new system for commodity jurisdiction (CJ) requests began March 20, according to a recent post on the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls website. “The application incorporates the existing web-based system into the updated [Defense Export Control and Compliance System] platform, while maintaining user ability to submit CJ requests electronically. The system will be open through March 26th to collect user feedback,” DDTC said. Questions may be directed to the IT Modernization Team at PM_DDTCProjectTeam@state.gov, DDTC said.
The State Department is increasing civil monetary penalties for violations of the Arms Export Control Act to account for inflation, it said in a notice published in the March 19 Federal Register. For violations of AECA Section 38(e) (control of arms exports and imports) the maximum penalty will rise to $1,163,217 (from $1,134,602). Penalties for incentive payments in offset agreement violations under Section 39A(c) will rise to the greater of $845,764 or five times the payment, up from $824,959 or five times the payment; and penalties for transactions with countries supporting acts of terrorism under Section 40(k) will rise to $1,006,699, from $981,935.
The Bureau of Industry and Security seeks comments on the burden of its collection of information on defense offset agreements, it said in a notice. By law, U.S. companies must tell Commerce about offset agreements worth more than $5,000,000 associated with sales of weapons defense equipment to foreign countries or firms. Offsets, which are “required by most major trading partners when purchasing U.S. military equipment,” are industrial or commercial compensation practices in sales of defense articles or services under the Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms regulations. Comments on the burden and ways to improve the information collection are due May 13.
A State Department policy change that lifts statutory debarments on companies that have export privileges still banned is a practical step toward rewarding past violators who aren't yet ready for complete reinstatement, lawyers say. The policy change, announced in a March 4 notice, came as State lifted a debarment against Colorado-based Rocky Mountain Instrument Company (RMI) -- stemming from 2010 violations of the Arms Export Control Act -- without reinstating RMI’s export privileges.
The State Department seeks comments by May 7 on a proposed change to its procedures for submitting voluntary disclosures of violations of the Arms Export Control Act. “Historically, respondents to this information collection submitted their disclosures to [the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC)] in writing via hard copy documentation. However, as part of an IT modernization project designed to streamline the collection and use of information by DDTC, a discrete form has been developed for the submission of voluntary disclosures. This will allow both DDTC and respondents submitting a disclosure to more easily track submissions,” it said. As it sends the new information collection procedure to OMB for approval, State seeks comments on whether the information collection is necessary, how it can be improved, and how the burden on industry can be reduced.
Rep. Norma Torres, D-Calif., said in a letter on March 5 that she is seeking support from other members for her bill that will “maintain current firearm export policies” instead of adopting a proposal by the Trump administration that she said would create less oversight for gun exports. The administration's proposal, Torres wrote, would transfer oversight for firearms exports from the Department of State to the Department of Commerce, which would not require American gun and ammunition manufacturers to register with the State Department. “Firearms sales would be approved with little to no congressional oversight,” wrote Torres, who introduced the Prevent Crime and Terrorism Act that she said would nix the proposal. “If we are not careful, some of those firearms could end up in the hands of dictators, terrorists, and narco-traffickers.”