Australia’s Department of Defense’s export controls division will be closed noon on Dec. 20 until Jan. 2, 2020, the agency said in a Dec. 2 notice. Applications will not be processed during that time. Applications received after Dec. 2 may not be completed before the agency closes and will continue to be processed after Jan. 2, the notice said. The agency urges applicants to contact the Defense Export Controls division “should you urgently require a permit” after Dec. 2.
Export Compliance Daily is providing readers with some of the top stories for Nov. 18-22 in case you missed them.
The Department of State published its 2019 fall agenda, including a new mention of an amendment to Category XVI of the U.S. Munitions List for Nuclear Weapons Related Articles. The change will “better harmonize” the State Department’s rules with the Department of Energy’s part 810 regulations. The rule will also ensure that items that provide the U.S. with “critical military or intelligence advantages” are listed on the USML and “remain subject to … export controls at all times.” The State Department plans to issue the rule in December.
The Department of Commerce published its fall 2019 regulatory agenda for the Bureau of Industry and Security. The agenda includes a new mention of its intent to potentially control certain additive manufacturing equipment, or 3D printing, used in “energetic materials” as part of BIS’s effort to restrict sales of emerging technologies (see 1911210051). The notice of proposed rulemaking aims to gather feedback from industries while “discussions are ongoing” at the Wassenaar Arrangement. BIS said it aims to issue the proposed rule in November.
A U.S. defense technology manufacturer said it takes U.S. export controls “very seriously” and vowed to improve its compliance after it settled for $1 million with the State Department for export violations. The company, AeroVironment, illegally exported goods and technical data in violation of the Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (see 1911200054). “We understand the importance of protecting our technology while making it available to help protect our allies,” Melissa Brown, AeroVironment’s vice president and general counsel, said in a Nov. 21 statement. “We will continue to enhance our export controls and appreciate the Department of State’s acknowledgement of the corrective actions we have already taken.”
A U.S. manufacturer of defense technology products was fined $1 million by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls and agreed to improve its compliance program after it violated the Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, DDTC said in a Nov. 20 enforcement order. The company, AeroVironment, illegally exported goods and technical data to Canada, Australia, France, Thailand and Britain, according to a charging letter. The company also violated terms and conditions of licenses and did not keep records of ITAR-controlled sales.
Export Compliance Daily is providing readers with some of the top stories for Nov. 12-15 in case they were missed.
Due to an upcoming change, companies should make sure they have written policies for complying with the International Traffic in Arms Regulations before registering, renewing or amending their ITAR registrations, according to a Nov. 13 post from Export Solutions. That change relates to the submission of ITAR registrations as part of the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls’ effort to update its processes for administration of the ITAR, the post said. The change will “most likely” take effect before 2020, Export Solutions said.
The Trump administration completed its review of its final rule to move export controls of firearms from the State Department to the Commerce Department, clearing the way for the regulatory changes to potentially be completed this year.
The State Department plans to publish its guidance for exports of surveillance technology by early January and will make several changes based on industry comments, officials said. Changes include the elimination of a “kill switch” suggestion and an effort to revise the definition for “surveillance,” which some companies complained was too broad.