Export Alert: New Destination Control Statement Required

August 17, 2016 by Leave a comment

Under current law, the US regulations require exporters to include a destination control statement (“DCS”), on each commercial invoice that accompanies an export shipment.  The export control documents that are required to show this statement include the invoice, the bill of lading, the air waybill, and any other export control document that accompanies the shipment from its point of origin in the United States to the ultimate consignee or end-user abroad.

This is sometimes known as the ‘non-diversion statement’ because the current version includes language stating that “diversion contrary to U.S. law is prohibited.”  The purpose of the DCS was to alert parties outside the United States that the item is subject to the US export regulations.

The rules have always held that compliance with the comparable ITAR requirement was an acceptable means of compliance where the shipment included both ITAR and EAR-controlled articles.  The comparable ITAR requirement requires slightly different language.  Many people nonetheless found the different language in each regulation to be confusing.

The Commerce Department has changed their DCS language to harmonize it with the ITAR-required-language.  This is meant to make compliance easier.  Starting on the implementation date of the rule (November 15, 2016), exporters of articles subject to BIS jurisdiction (those with ECCNs) should use the following destination control statement on all exports:

“These items are controlled by the U.S. Government and authorized for export only to the country of ultimate destination for use by the ultimate consignee or end-user(s) herein identified. They may not be resold, transferred, or otherwise disposed of, to any other country or to any person other than the authorized ultimate consignee or end-user(s), either in their original form or after being incorporated into other items, without first obtaining approval from the U.S. government or as otherwise authorized by U.S. law and regulations”

In addition, the DCS should show the Export Commodity Classification Number (ECCN) for any 9×515 or ‘600 series’ (nx6nn) items being exported.

There are exceptions to this DCS requirement for EAR 99 exports and also for exports under license exceptions BAG (baggage) and GFT (gift parcels and humanitarian donations), but typically these do not apply to exports of aircraft parts.

Another important change that will take effect with the November 15th implementation affects where the DCS goes.  Under the old BIS rules, it went on the export control documents.  Now the DCS only needs to go on the commercial invoice.

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , ,

Expediting Export: License Exceptions and “600 Series” ECCNs.

December 22, 2014 by 2 Comments

We recently had a member ask about the applicability of export license exceptions to the new “600 Series” ECCNs.  Attendees of our workshops, and regular readers of this blog, know that we frequently recommend taking advantage of export license exceptions whenever possible.  Using such exceptions can save money and time, and are particularly important for AOG customers when time is of the essence and waiting for an export license is simply not an option.

As those familiar with export know, a particular article’s ECCN helps us determine when an export license will be required for export to certain countries.  The “600 Series” ECCNs have been created as part of the ongoing Export Control Reform initiative.  These ECCNs control those articles that formerly appeared on the USML and were therefore considered ITAR controlled.  Those ECCNs of most concern to us are ECCN 9A610 “Military aircraft and related commodities, other than those enumerated in 9A991.a” and 9A619 “Military gas turbine engines and related commodities.”  We will use “600 Series” in this post to refer to those two ECCNs.

This shift from State Department control (under the ITAR) to Commerce Department control has been a welcome change for exporters.  However, as the creation of the new “600 Series” ECCNs suggest, these transitioned articles, formerly controlled as defense articles under the ITAR,  warrant some different level of control than those ordinary dual-use parts that were already subject to Commerce Department control.  This makes intuitive sense, as these are military parts that warrant some enhanced level of control, but which do not provide a “critical military or intelligence advantage.”

Given that articles in the “600 Series” ECCNs now occupy a sort of middle ground—subject to the somewhat less-restrictive level of control of the Commerce Department, yet still warranting additional control due to their nature as military parts—we should expect the applicability of commonly used license exceptions to be subject to some limitations.

In our workshops we typically recommend the use three primary license exceptions: Civil End-Users (CIV), Servicing and Replacement of Parts and Equipment (RPL), and Aircraft, Vessels, and Spacecraft (AVS).  We will primarily focus on the applicability of these three exceptions.

The first exception, CIV, can be dispensed with quickly.  CIV is designated on the Commerce Control List (CCL) “600 Series” ECCNs as “CIV: N/A.”  License exception CIV applies to those articles controlled only for National Security (NS) reasons.  Because the articles under ECCNs 9A610 and 9A619 are military articles they are controlled for additional reasons, including Regional Stability (RS) and Missile Technology (MT).  License exception CIV is therefore not applicable to these “600 Series” ECCNs. Strike one.

Skipping over exception RPL briefly, exception AVS can also be dispensed of quickly. License exception AVS permits the export of equipment and spare parts for permanent use on an aircraft and exports to planes of U.S. or Canadian registry and U.S. or Canadian Airlines’ installations or agents.  However, the Export Administration Regulations specifically omit exception AVS as a permissible exception from its list of license exceptions applicable to the “600 Series.”  We can add license exception AVS to our list of exceptions unavailable for use with “600 Series” articles.  Strike two.

Down to our final commonly used license exception, we return to exception RPL.  License exception RPL permits export for the one-for-one replacement of parts, components, accessories and attachments as well as export for servicing and replacement of commodities that are defective or that an end user or ultimate consignee has found unacceptable.

In short, RPL works two ways.  The first way is that a part may be exported to replace a previously legally exported part.  The parts must be identical, and the core must be returned to the exporter or destroyed (and as a best practice proof of such destruction provided). The second way is a return of an article that is either defective or in need of servicing or repair (i.e., the part has been found “unacceptable”).  Upon servicing the part is then returned under exception RPL.

Luckily for us, license exception RPL is permissible for use with “600 Series” articles! Use of this exception can greatly increase an exporter’s ability to service its customer.

Such use is not without limitations though.  Recall again that “600 Series” ECCNs occupy a special in-between zone of export control.  Use of exception RPL is therefore limited with respect to certain countries.  No “600 Series” ECCN article may be exported under license exception RPL to any destination identified in Country Group D:5.  Country Group D:5 countries are those with which the U.S. maintains an arms embargo, and can be located on the Country Group List, Supplement 1 to 15 C.F.R. Part 740.  Although not a grand slam, RPL is a valuable license exception for “600 Series” articles.

Two other less-commonly used exceptions may also be available for export of “600 Series” articles.

The first is Shipments of Limited Value (LVS).  LVS is a list based exception like CIV and therefore appears on the CCL in the ECCN information.  Both 9A610 and 9A619 are limited to shipments valued at less than $1500. This low dollar value makes exception LVS of limited practical application to “600 Series” articles.  It is also forbidden to split or otherwise manipulate or structure a transaction to attempt to evade license requirements using LVS.  Those seeking to use exception LVS should consult their export compliance department.

The second less common exception is exception Strategic Trade Authorization (STA). STA is best suited to those exporters with a regular and recurring shipment of articles requiring a license.  Due to the complexity of exception STA, we will be addressing that exception as it relates to “600 Series” ECCNs in a subsequent blog post.

Available license exceptions are clearly limited in the case of parts listed as ECCN 9A610 or 9A619.  Of the three primary exceptions—CIV, RPL, and AVS—only RPL is permissible, and even then with restrictions.  Knowing the available license exceptions, however, can both help you service your customer and ensure you remain compliant.

The Export Administration Regulations provide a handy cheat sheet listing the license exceptions generally applicable to “600 Series” articles at 15 C.F.R. § 740.2(a)(13).  Unless you are already familiar with the regulations, however, this reference should be used only as a starting point in your inquiry.  You should consult your export compliance officer or legal counsel to ensure full compliance with the regulations when using more complicated license exceptions.

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Exporting under Russia-Ukraine Sanctions

August 19, 2014 by

Recently, we have had several questions from members regarding export of aircraft parts to Russia and the Ukraine. As most readers no doubt know, the United States and the EU, in response to the conflict in eastern Ukraine, have imposed various economic sanctions on certain persons and businesses in Russia.  When sanctions like these are imposed, those companies doing business with customers in Russia and Ukraine wisely want to know whether and what type of affect these sanctions may have on their business.

Questions regarding business relations in Russian and Ukraine typically take one of two forms: The first, can I do business with the customer at all?  The second, can I export this particular part to the customer?

To answer these questions, we first need to know what sanctions have been imposed and to whom they apply. We then need to recall our basic export compliance principles and apply those principles to determine whether the part itself can be exported.  Those who have attended ASA workshops in the past may recognize these steps as part of the process of export compliance.

The United States, through the Treasury Department, has issued several rounds of sanctions directed at specific industries and parties.  For the most part, the targeted industries have been companies in the Russian financial and energy sectors, while the individuals mainly officials and individuals with ties to Vladimir Putin.

However, companies in the financial and energy sectors are the only ones that have been targeted.  Importantly, Avia Group and Avia Group Nord, business aviation groups, were also targeted with U.S. sanctions.  This means that although not yet a focal point, the aviation industry can by targeted if the United States deems it necessary, and so is a good reminder that exporters of aircraft parts need to be aware.  The Treasury Department maintains an up to date list of Ukraine-related sanctions on its website.

Although it appears that the Russian aviation sector has not been highly targeted by the United States yet, these sanctions illustrate the importance of knowing your customer. Further, simply because the United States has not sanctioned an organization does not mean they may not be sanctioned by another body.  For instance, the EU recently issued sanctions against Dobrolet, a low-cost Russian carrier.  If you are based in the the EU, you should review the European Union’s restrictive measures in force to ensure you remain compliant with EU sanctions.

As our industry well knows, wealthy entities and individuals, such as those named in sanctions, frequently own or operate their own aircraft.  Given the wealth and high-ranking status of individuals and companies named, it is  important to review the Treasury Department Office of Foreign Asset Control’s Specially Designated Nationals list.  Furthermore, it is important to take this step with every transaction, because new individuals and entities can be added at any time, whether announced as a new round of sanctions or not.

Once we have determined whether sanctions apply to our prospective customer, we can rely on our export compliance program to take us the rest of the way.  The exporter must determine whether the article it plans to export is ITAR or EAR controlled.  Once the appropriate export regime is determined the exporter must determine whether an export license is required for the particular part or whether any license exceptions apply.  If a license is required, the exporter should apply as usual.  Be aware that both the State Department DDTC and the Commerce Department BIS may deny export license applications for high-tech items that could contribute to Russian military capability.  In most cases, however, articles for civil aviation may still be exported.

The highly publicized nature of these sanctions rightfully causes many companies to hesitate before undertaking an export transaction to the listed countries.  This hesitation is appropriate, given the already complex nature of export compliance. But these delays can also help the exporter to ensure that the transaction is undertaken correctly and legally.

The good news is that an effective export compliance system will enable you to easily comply with whatever sanctions and restrictions are enacted.  An effective compliance system should find the exporter following the same steps, reviewing the same lists, and performing the same analyses with every export transaction.  An export compliance program that is second nature to the exporter’s employees will ensure that no matter what sanctions are issued, or against whom, your company will remain compliant. Our law firm has helped many companies establish effective export compliance programs.  If you have questions regarding compliance, please feel free to contact us.

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

The New “600 Series” ECCNs Effective Today!

October 15, 2013 by 1 Comment

As of today, October 15, a significant change to the export regulations will remove many articles from the ITARs and move them to the Commerce Department’s export jurisdiction.  This is a tremendous benefit for the civil aviation industry, which has found it difficult at times to correctly classify parts under the right export regime.  This change means that most dual use items (article used on both civil and defense aircraft) are transferred to the export jurisdiction of the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) where they will be regulated under the Export Administration Regulations (EARs).

Note that the rule change was largely aimed at aircraft parts, and non-aviation items may not be affected by this change.

So after the change, which aircraft parts remain subject to Directorate of Defense Trade Control (DDTC) export jurisdiction? Here is a partial list:

  • Certain enumerated articles (and their parts) that are specially designed for controlled aircraft:
  • Inertial Navigation Systems (INS)
  • Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs)
  • Attitude and Heading Reference Systems (AHRS)
  • Parts for DoD-funded developmental aircraft
  • Parts for B-1B, B-2, F-15SE, F/A-18E/F/G [parts for earlier models are subject to the EAR], F-22, F-35, F-117
  • Parts found in a positive list:
  • List is published at 22 C.F.R. 121.1 – VIII(h)
  • List includes articles with defense-specific purposes, like:
    • Threat-adaptive flight control systems;
    • Wing folding systems;
    • Certain high velocity gearboxes;
    • Defense-specific parts, like tail hooks, wing folding systems and bomb racks;
    • Certain technical related to export-controlled items;
    • Classified items;
    • “Commodities, software, and technical data subject to the EAR (§ 120.42 of this subchapter) used in or with defense articles controlled in this category.”

These above-referenced parts remain on the United States Munition List (USML), which is part of the International Trade in Arms Regulations (ITARs).  So their exports will continue to be subject to ITAR control.  But what is important is what is no longer on this list!

Parts that were previously described on the USML and were thus subject to DDTC/ITAR export jurisdiction but that are now moved to BIS/EAR jurisdiction have mostly been moved to the 600 series Export Commodity Classification Numbers (ECCNs).  These are ECCNs with the number “6” in the middle spot of the five-character ECCN. The 600-series is designated for Wassenaar Arrangement Munitions List (WAML) articles and for former USML articles.

As of today, the Commerce Control List (CCLs) on the Commerce Department website did not include the 600-series ECCNs, and the fact that the government is shut down suggests that they might not be updated soon.  But you can still see the new ECCNs by looking at the Federal Register publication of the final rule.

Many aircraft parts that are no longer regulated under the DDTC ITARs are moved to ECCN 9A610.  If an article remains on the USML, like an Attitude and Heading Reference Systems (AHRS), then its unclassified software may have moved to a BIS/EAR 600 series ECCN; the unclassified software and technology indirectly related to such USML articles move to new ECCNs 9D610/9E610 (aircraft software/technology) or 9D619/9E619 (engine software/technology).  There is also new ECCN for military commodities outside the US that are derived from “600 series” controlled content (ECCN 0A919 – Category 0 includes miscellaneous items).

In some cases, the precise placement of an article may depend on whether it is “specially designed” for 600-series articles or for non-600 series articles.  BIS has provided an online decision tree-based tool to help with the “specially designed” determination and it is available at http://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/specially-designed-tool.

Licenses from BIS will still be required to export and reexport most 600 series items worldwide (except to Canada), unless an EAR license exception is available.  If you have an article that was subject to the DDTC/ITAR jurisdiction and has been moved to BIS/EAR jurisdiction, then your existing ITAR licenses may remain valid.  Details on how this works and when your license may remain valid are available in last week’s post about grandfathering existing export licenses.

Got questions?  ASA provides export training through its workshops and through its Annual Conference.  We look forward to seeing you at one of our upcoming events!  The Washington Aviation Group continues to provide export legal advice.  So if you need to get really creative, please give the Washington Aviation Group a call and let them work with you to find a solution.

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , ,

US Updates the List of Anti-Boycott Countries – Are You Doing Business There?

February 14, 2013 by 1 Comment

Under the U.S. Anti-Boycott rules, U.S. persons are probited from complying with certain aspects of unsanctioned foreign boycotts.  The anti-boycott rules include elements in both the Export Administration Regulations (EARs) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations.

EAR Rules

The antiboycott laws were adopted to forbid U.S. companies from participating in foreign boycotts that the United States does not sanction. They preventing U.S. businesses from being used to implement foreign policies of other nations which are contrary to U.S. foreign policy.  Currently, the most prevalent boycotts that are contrary to foreign policy are the boycotts of Israel.  Under the EARs, prohibited conduct includes:

  • Agreements to refuse or actual refusal to do business with or in Israel.
  • Agreements to discriminate or actual discrimination against other persons based on race, religion, sex, national origin or nationality.
  • Agreements to furnish or actual furnishing of information about business relationships with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies.
  • Agreements to furnish or actual furnishing of information about the race, religion, sex, or national origin of another person.

The EAR requires U.S. persons to file quarterly reports to disclose any requests to advance an unsanctioned foreign boycott.  If you have been asked to participate in, or take an action in support of, an unsanctioned foreign boycott then you should file a quarterly report on BIS form 621-P for a single transactions or BIS form 6051P for multiple transactions experienced in the same calendar quarter.  The forms are available on-line in a fillable pdf format, or you can also obtain paper copies of the reporting forms by calling the Office of Antiboycott Compliance in Washington, DC at (202) 482-2448.

Tax Reporting Rules

A lesser known aspect of the U.S. antiboycott rules is that any person or business that has operations in, or related to, a country that is known for violating the U.S. anti-boycott rules must report those operations to the Treasury Department.  Such reports are filed with tax returns on IRS form 5713.  This form is also available online.

How do you know whether you are doing business (“operations in or related to”) in such a country?  First of all, the Department of the Treasury publishes a current list of countries which require or may require participation in, or cooperation with, an international boycott.  The current list is:

  • Iraq
  • Kuwait
  • Lebanon
  • Libya
  • Qatar
  • Saudi Arabia
  • Syria
  • United Arab Emirates
  • Yemen

In addition, the anti-boycott provisions also require reporting if you are asked to participate in an unsanctioned boycott, even if the source of the request was from a country other than the above-listed countries.

Second, you must assess whether you have operations in or related to one of these affected countries.  The IRS guidance on the subject explains it like this:

The term “operations” means all forms of business or commercial activities and transactions (or parts of transactions), whether or not productive of income, including, but not limited to: selling; purchasing; leasing; licensing; banking, financing, and similar activities; extracting; processing; manufacturing; producing; constructing; transporting; performing activities related to the activities above (for example, contract negotiating, advertising, site selecting, etc.); and performing services, whether or not related to the activities above.

Operations in a boycotting country. You are considered to have operations “in a boycotting country” if you have an operation that is carried out, in whole or in part, in a boycotting country, either for or with the government, a company, or a national of a boycotting country.Operations with the government, a company, or a national of a boycotting country. You are considered to have operations “with the government, a company, or a national of a boycotting country” if you have an operation that is carried on outside a boycotting country either for or with the government, a company, or a national of a boycotting country.

Operations related to a boycotting country. You are considered to have operations “related to a boycotting country” if you have an operation that is carried on outside a boycotting country for the government, a company, or a national of a nonboycotting country if you know or have reason to know that specific goods or services produced by the operation are intended for use in a boycotting country, or for use by or for the benefit of the government, a company, or a national of a boycotting country, or for use in forwarding or transporting to a boycotting country.

If you cooperate with or participate in an international boycott, you may lose a portion of the following:

  • The foreign tax credit (section 908(a)),
  • Deferral of taxation of earnings of a CFC (section 952(a)(3)),
  • Deferral of taxation of IC-DISC income (section 995(b)(1)(F)(ii)),
  • Exemption of foreign trade income of a FSC (section 927(e)(2), as in effect before its repeal), and
  • Exclusion of extraterritorial income from gross income (section 941(a)(5), as in effect before its repeal).

If you suspect that your business relationships may affect your tax liability, then you should consult with a qualified tax advisor for more details.

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , ,

US Proposes New Export Rules Affecting Aircraft Parts

November 11, 2011 by Leave a comment

Tired of trying to determine whether your dual-use parts are controlled as DDTC/ITAR parts or BIS/EAR parts?  Stymied by the difficult or impossible task of properly classifying your dual-use aircraft parts for export purposes?  The government is here to help!

The U.S. Government has determined that certain aircraft parts that have traditionally been controlled under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITARs) no longer warrant control under the ITARs.  These are all items that were controlled under Category VIII (aircraft and related items) of the United States Munitions List (USML).  Those parts would be moved to the control of the BIS Commerce Control List (CCL) under the terms of a proposed rule.  The proposed rule would make it easier to export these military parts and also it may reduce the confusion over dual-use parts in these categories.

The proposed rule defines a set of new Export Control Classification Numbers (ECCNs) 9A610, 9B610, 9C610, 9D610, and 9E610. Part of the value of this change is that some items were difficult to definitively classify as either defense-related or civil aircraft parts.  This switch will make the proper classification of these parts easier because they will all be controlled under the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) rules that apply to civil aircraft parts, so BIS rulings on them will be definitive and will not be subject to countermand or conflicting interpretations by the State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC).

 

  • ‘‘Military Aircraft’’ ‘‘specially designed’’ for a military use that are not enumerated in USML paragraph VIII(a).

Note 1: This includes trainer aircraft; cargo aircraft; utility fixed wing aircraft; military helicopters; observation aircraft; military non-expansive balloons and other lighter than air aircraft and unarmed military aircraft, regardless of origin or designation, manufactured before 1956 and unmodified since manufacture.

Note 2: Aircraft with modifications made to incorporate safety of flight features or other FAA or NTSB modifications such as transponders and air data recorders are ‘‘unmodified’’ for the purposes of this paragraph

  • Pressure refuelers, pressure refueling ‘‘equipment,’’ ‘‘equipment’’ ‘‘specially designed’’ to facilitate operations in confined areas, and ground equipment ‘‘specially designed’’ for aircraft controlled by either USML paragraph VIII(a) or ECCN 9A610.a.
  • Military crash helmets and protective masks, pressurized breathing equipment and partial pressure suits for use in aircraft controlled by either USML paragraph VIII(a) or ECCN 9A610.a, anti-g suits, liquid oxygen converters ‘‘specially designed’’ for aircraft controlled by either USML subcategory VIII(a) or ECCN 9A610.a, and catapults and cartridge actuated devices for emergency escape of personnel from aircraft controlled by either USML subcategory VIII(a) or ECCN 9A610.a.
  • Canopies, harnesses, platforms, electronic release mechanisms ‘‘specially designed’’ for use with aircraft controlled by either USML paragraph VIII(a) or ECCN 9A610.a, parachutes and paragliders ‘‘specially designed’’ or modified for military use, and ‘‘equipment’’ ‘‘designed’’ or modified for military high altitude parachutists, such as suits, special helmets, breathing systems, and navigation equipment.
  • Automatic piloting systems for parachuted loads; equipment ‘‘specially designed’’ for military use for controlled opening jumps at any height, including oxygen equipment.
  • Ground effect machines (GEMS), including surface effect machines and air cushion vehicles, ‘‘specially designed’’ for use by a military.
  • Military aircraft instrument flight trainers that are not ‘‘specially designed’’ to simulate combat. (See USML Cat IX for controls on such trainers that are ‘‘specially designed’’ to simulate combat).
  • [UAV] Apparatus and devices designed or modified for the handling, control, activation or launching of UAVs or drones controlled by either USML paragraph VIII(a) or ECCN 9A610.a, and capable of a range equal to or greater than 300 km.
  • [UAV] Radar altimeters designed or modified for use in UAVs or drones controlled by either USML paragraph VIII(a) or ECCN 9A610.a., and capable of delivering at least 500 kilograms payload to a range of at least 300 km.
  • [UAV] Hydraulic, mechanical, electro-optical, or electromechanical flight control systems (including fly-by-wire systems) and attitude control equipment designed or modified for UAVs or drones controlled by either USML paragraph VIII(a) or ECCN 9A610.a., and capable of delivering at least 500 kilograms payload to a range of at least 300 km.
  • ‘‘Parts,’’ ‘‘components,’’ ‘‘accessories and attachments’’ that are ‘‘specially designed’’ for a commodity subject to control in the non-UAV items above or a defense article in USML Category VIII and not elsewhere specified on the USML or the CCL.

Note 1: Forgings, castings, and other unfinished products, such as extrusions and machined bodies, that have reached a stage in manufacturing where they are clearly identifiable by material composition, geometry, or function as commodities controlled by ECCN 9A610.x are controlled by ECCN 9A610.x.

Note 2: ‘‘Parts,’’ ‘‘components,’’ ‘‘accessories and attachments’’ specified in USML subcategory VIII(f) or VIII(h) are subject to the controls of that paragraph. ‘‘Parts,’’ ‘‘components,’’ ‘‘accessories and attachments’’ specified in ECCN 9A610.y are subject to the controls of that paragraph.

  • Specific ‘‘parts,’’ ‘‘components,’’ ‘‘accessories and attachments’’ ‘‘specially designed’’ for a commodity subject to control in this ECCN or a defense article in USML Category VIII and not elsewhere specified in the USML or the CCL, and other aircraft commodities ‘‘specially designed’’ for a military use, as follows:

y.1. Aircraft tires;
y.2. Analog cockpit gauges and indicators;
y.3. Audio selector panels;
y.4. Check valves for hydraulic and pneumatic systems;
y.5. Crew rest equipment;
y.6. Ejection seat mounted survival aids;
y.7. Energy dissipating pads for cargo (for pads made from paper or cardboard);
y.8. Filters and filter assemblies for hydraulic, oil and fuel systems;
y.9. Galleys;
y.10. Hydraulic and fuel hoses, straight and unbent lines, fittings, clips, couplings, nutplates, and brackets;
y.11. Lavatories;
y.12. Life rafts;
y.13. Magnetic compass, magnetic azimuth detector;
y.14. Medical litter provisions;
y.15. Mirrors, cockpit;
y.16. Passenger seats including palletized seats;
y.17. Potable water storage systems;
y.18. Public address (PA) systems;
y.19. Steel brake wear pads (does not include sintered mix or carbon/carbon materials)
y.20. Underwater beacons;
y.21. Urine collection bags/pads/cups/pumps;
y.22. Windshield washer and wiper systems;
y.23. Filtered and unfiltered cockpit panel knobs, indicators, switches, buttons, and dials;
y.24. Lead-acid and Nickel-Cadmium batteries; and
y.25. Propellers, propeller systems, and propeller blades used with reciprocating engines.
y.26. to y.98. [RESERVED]
y.99. Commodities that would otherwise be controlled elsewhere in this entry but that (i) Have been determined to be subject to the EAR in a commodity jurisdiction determination issued by the U.S. Department of State and (ii) are not otherwise identified elsewhere on the CCL.

Parts distributors should check these lists and make sure that they represent reasonable representations of the parts that do not need to be subject to State Department licensing oversight at the time of export.  Any distributor who feels that this list is incomplete should make sure to provide comments both to the government and to ASA.

The proposed rule was published in the November 7th Federal Register.  The proposal is open for public comment.  Comments are due by December 22, 2011.

 

Filed under Uncategorized Tagged with , , , , , , ,