BIS Technical Advisory Committees

Home >Policies and Regulations > BIS TAC Site

Materials Technical Advisory Committee

September 7, 2006

The MTAC meeting was held on 7 September 2006 in the Department of Commerce (DoC) building, room 3884. The meeting was called to order at 10:30 AM by the Chairman with Ms. Regan Alberda as the Acting Designated Federal Official. Dr. Kimberly Orr, the DFO for the MTAC, was unable to attend. The meeting consisted of an open session only with non-MTAC/public visitors in attendance. The meeting agenda consisted of three topics: Introductions, opening remarks, report form the Composite Working Group, and report from the last Chemical Weapons Convention.

Attendance:

Material TAC Members:

Dr. James Estep, Chairman

Mr. Anthony Lubiniecki

Mr. Tom May

Mr. Tim Dunn - DSTA

Ms. Regan Alberda, Acting Designated Federal Official – DoC/BIS

Dr. Doug Brown – Director, CBC, DoC

Mr. Matt Borman, Acting Under Secretary

Ms. Yvette Springer, Govt. Liaison – DoC

Visitors:

Ed Freedman, DoC/BIS

Mr. Kevin Kurland – Director, Office of Technology Evaluation

Janet Gamble - Boeing

Gordie Boezer, Deputy Director ITAC, IDA

Kenneth W. Hutton – Hyperion Catalysis Int’l, Inc

Christopher Wilker – NCITD

Jennifer Watts – Treaty Compliance Division, DOC

The meeting was opened at 10:30 AM with introductions including the introduction of Ms. Regan Alberda, Policy Analyst/BISDoC, who was the acting Designated Federal Officer. Following introductions, Mr. Borman gave an update on recent position changes within the Department of Commerce then discussed the People’s Republic of China (PRC) revisions and clarifications of export (15 CFR Parts 740, 742, 744, 748) that was opened for comment in July 2006. The comment period closes on 3 November 2006. He urged TAC members to solicit their organizations and industry in general for comments before the deadline. The proposed changes were designed to increase commerce with the PRC, while not supporting current/ongoing military modernization efforts. Some important features of the new language are the identification of “validated” end users –who will be provided authorized shipping without a license application if certain conditions are met (company has to apply through advisory committee, parties be willing to accept on-site inspections, and the US company must have a good export control record). Also included are some additional ECCNs that could go to military use, so these items will be included for control. There may be a need to redefine the definition of military end use. The rule also expands the use of end-user certificates (used now by the Australia Group). The overall objective of the rule changes is to facilitate trade with PRC with legitimate end users.

The next topic Mr. Borman discussed was the Australia Group chemicals review. There is currently no language that permits or requires a comprehensive review and updating of the list of scheduled chemicals. There is a sense within the USG that such a review would be of value, but how and when to undertake such a review is still under discussion. Other questions would be how long to conduct the review (at or less than a year) and what frequency would be desirable. Mr. Boezer added that this is an excellent opportunity to initiate this and asked if the TAC membership thought this would be desirable. This was discussed and a consensus was that this would be of value.

The next agenda item was an update on the Composite Materials Working Group by Mr. Tom May. There was a face-to-face meeting on 3 August. The meeting was designed to outline the frequency and type of meetings the committee would hold. The decision was to meet twice a month probably for the first year. The focus was to systematically review all the material ECCN on an item-by-item basis starting with 1C010, 1C990 and 1C120. The China Rule is not going to contain a formal recommendation on composite materials. In the area of General Technology, referenced by 1E001, Bill Root is working this through the RPTAC. The committee is now up to approximately 50 companies. A copy of Mr. May’s presentation is attached to these minutes.

The next item was the introduction of Mr. Kevin Kurland, Director of the Office of Technology Evaluation. The creation of the Office was a part of the reorganization of the Bureau. Mr. Kurland discussed the responsibilities of the office, the plans for staffing (hiring 4 people to include an engineer and an economist), and how it fits into the overall program of the BIS. The office is to draw on expertise within the TACs. The focus of the office is to be the analytical arm of the Department to evaluate the effectiveness of the export controls on the prevention of the transfer of dual-use technology/equipment. The first items to be evaluated are microchips and semi conductors.

Following the OTE discussion, Mr. Ed Freeman discussed changes to the Chemical Weapons Convention that took place in April 2006. The changes are primarily in the sampling and analysis and reporting aspects of the regulation. There are two testing laboratories in the U.S. ( Edgewood and LLNL). There have been two exercises to evaluate the sampling and analysis challenge testing protocols with two volunteer facilities against schedule 2 chemicals to verify the new software only provides information on the target chemicals and restricts information on other compounds. The U.S. published requirements for taking samples in 22 CFR 103 under DoC overview. The new language for sample and analysis includes a statement that says at schedule 2 facilities “sampling shall be taken.” Details of these changes are spelled out in a Federal Registry notice (www.cwc.gov for full document).

The last item discussed was the establishment of the next meeting, which was scheduled for 30 November 2006.

The meeting was adjourned.

Attachment:

Chemical and Biological Controls Division’s Australia Group Accomplishments

Since September 11, 2001, the Chemical and Biological Controls (CBC) Division has worked with our interagency colleagues to draft, negotiate, and obtain international consensus for the following Australia Group changes. These changes were implemented in the EAR in the cited Federal Register notices.

Major Regime and/or U.S. Regulatory Changes with Significant Impact

At the June 2002 Australia Group (AG) Plenary, the AG agreed to adopt formal guidelines for the licensing of sensitive chemical and biological commodities. The guidelines are public, consistent with the AG’s strong commitment to transparency, and all countries are encouraged, via outreach, to adhere to them in the interest of international peace and security. See Federal Register notice dated June 10, 2003 for additional details regarding changes to the Export Administration Regulations as a result of this agreement.
In addition, at the June 2002 meeting, AG participants also agreed to formally adopt ‘Catch-All’ provisions for the licensing of non-listed items. This was the first time that an export control regime agreed to include a ‘Catch-All’ licensing requirement in its public documents, reflecting the resolve of participating national governments to use all available means at their disposal to fight the spread of chemical and biological weapons. See Federal Register notice dated March 30, 2005 for additional details regarding changes to the Export Administration Regulations as a result of this agreement.
Also, at the June 2002 meeting, AG participating countries agreed to expand the license requirement for the export of AG-listed biological agents to apply to all destinations worldwide, with an exception for intra-European Union (EU) trade. See Federal Register notice dated June 10, 2003. Note: Since the EAR already included a worldwide licensing requirement for these biological agents, the rule made no changes in the existing EAR licensing provisions for these agents. See also Federal Register notice dated May 31, 2002 for the expansion of U.S. licensing requirements on the export of human pathogens and toxins, animal and plant pathogens, and genetically modified organisms to Canada.
Finally, on April 14 th, 2005, the Department of Commerce published a Federal Register notice expanding the licensing requirement for Chemical and Biological (CB) Equipment to include all non-Australia Group (AG) countries. The new controls are intended to bring the United States into compliance with the adopted AG licensing guidelines. As of September 7 th, 2005, Commerce has approved 189 licenses for the export of CB equipment to countries for which a license was not required prior to the publication of this rule. CBC estimates that this rule will result in approximately 500 additional license applications per year.
Specific Entry Changes

The following Australia Group agreements adopting control list changes provide a substantial increase in security against countries of concern and terrorists seeking to acquire chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction.
At the October 2001 AG Plenary and in subsequent intersessional discussions, AG participating governments agreed to:

Tighten controls on chemical equipment (valves) useful for the production of chemical agents. See Federal Register notices dated May 31 st, 2002 and August 2, 2002.
Expand controls on critical components which can be used to convert non-controlled chemical equipment into controlled equipment. See Federal Register notice dated May 31 st, 2002.
Broaden licensing requirements for biological protective equipment (suits) by expanding controls to hoods, as well as full and half suits, that are dependent on a tethered external air supply and operated under positive pressure. See Federal Register notice dated May 31, 2002.
Tighten licensing requirements for biological equipment (freeze dryers) by changing the control threshold from 50 kilograms of ice per 24 hours to 10 kilograms of ice per 24 hours. See Federal Register notice May 31, 2002.
At the June 2002 Plenary and in subsequent intersessional discussions, AG participating governments agreed to:

Tighten controls on small biological fermenters useful for the production of biological agents by terrorists by lowering the control threshold from 100 liters to 20 liters. See Federal Register notice dated June 10, 2003.

Add new controls on technology of the development or production of biological agents and dual-use biological equipment and on the transfer of controlled technology by intangible means. Note: Since U.S. controls in these two areas were already present in the EAR, no changes were made to the EAR as a result of these two agreements. See Federal Register notice dated June 10, 2003 for additional details.
Add new controls on eight (8) additional biological toxins. See Federal Register notice June 10, 2003.

Tighten controls on biological filtration equipment (tangential cross flow) by lowering the control threshold for such equipment for total filtration area from 5 m 2 to 1 m 2 and by adding a new control filtration equipment components with filtration area equal to or greater than 0.2 m 2. See Federal Register notice dated June 10, 2003.
At the June 2003 Plenary and in subsequent intersessional discussions, AG participating governments agreed to:

Add new controls on additional biological agents as follow: twelve new viruses and two new bacteria added to the list of controlled human and zoonotic pathogens; two viruses added to the list of controlled animal pathogens. See Federal Register notice dated March 18, 2004.

At the June 2004 Plenary and in subsequent intersessional discussions, AG participating governments agreed to:

Add new controls on additional plant pathogens as follows: three new bacteria and two new viruses added to the list of controlled plant pathogens. See Federal Register notice dated December 29, 2004.

Add new controls on the chemical weapons precursor sodium hexafluorosilicate and eight other new chemical weapons precursors. See Federal Register notice December 29, 2004.
Add a new factor to the agreed “Guidelines for Transfers of Sensitive Chemical or Biological Items” requiring AG participating countries to take into consideration the extent and effectiveness of the export control system in the importing country and in any intermediary countries through which the items being exported or reexported will transit or be transhipped en route to the importing country. See Federal Register notice dated December 29, 2004.
At the April 2005 Plenary and in subsequent intersessional discussions, AG participating governments agreed to: