Where Industry and Security Intersect
What's New | Sitemap | Search
The meeting was called to order by Mr. Howard Pfeifer at 9:30am with welcoming remarks.
Introduction of persons present was made around the room.
TransTAC members in attendance: (Industry) Mr. Mark Holland, Mr. Michael Osborne, Mr. Howard Pfeifer (TransTAC Chair), Mr. David Salome, Mr. Donald Stevenson and Mr. Todd Zarfos; (Government) Mr. Dan Squire, Mr. Paul Sellers, Mr. Anthony Lombardi and Ms. Yvette Springer.
Others present: The complete list of attendees is attached at the end of these minutes.
Opening remarks
Mr. Bernie Kritzer started discussion by welcoming everyone to the TransTAC.
TransTAC members and other interested persons were thanked for participation in the TransTAC and their support of government interests in the national security, foreign policy and economic wellbeing of the United States of America. Industry attendees are encouraged to apply for appointment as members of the TransTAC.
Personnel changes at BIS were discussed including appointment of Mr. Chris Padilla as the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration pending confirmation hearings.
A new office has been established for Technology Evaluation and the Office of Non-Proliferation Controls and Treaty Compliance have added additional staff. A new Deemed Export Advisory Committee has been established.
Industry proposals for consideration by interagency review for Wassenaar Arrangement 2007 should be submitted by the end of September so interagency review may be accomplished.
Trends in licensing, there has been a slow but consistent increase in license applications. And there has been a significant increase in Commodity Classifications.
Discussion on the proposed China “catch-all” rule (ref: 71 FR 38313). There are two central pieces to the rule, the first being a new type of authorization for Validated End-Users (VEU), and second establishes a license requirement for 47 AT level ECCNs when the end user is known to the Chinese military.
For VEU the end-user’s name would be published with a list of items that would be authorized for export to the particular end-user without any other export authority required.
For the 47 items specified, if the exported knows an item to be exported will be used for a military purpose in China they must submit a license application. There was a question whether the term “military end-use” should be better defined.
Questions or comments should be sent into BIS by November 3, 2006, the end of the comment period published in the Federal Register.
A question was posed asking if the TransTAC should establish a comprehensive systematic review of items on the Commerce Control List under the purview of the TransTAC, i.e. items in Categories 7, 8 and 9, and related items. This request would entail review of current items on the CCL for out of date nomenclature or obsolete controls. Does the TransTAC have an estimate of how long a review such as this may take to accomplish? A response by the next meeting of the TransTAC is requested.
Update on Regulatory Overview
Mr. Bill Arvin started discussion on Regulatory updates.
Comment that the proposed China ‘catch-all’ rule for items that could contribute to the military capability of China still has an open comment period that currently expires 03 November 2006.
This past summer there was a proposed rule about anti-boycott penalty guidelines (71 FR 37517, 71 FR 38321), two well informed comments were received and will be reviewed carefully.
A final rule was published rescinding Libya’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism (71 FR 51714).
A final rule was published revising the Commerce Control List to implement changes agreed to in the Wassenaar Arrangement 2005 Plenary meeting (71 FR 52956).
A proposed rule (70 FR 29660) for a license requirement for items on the CCL controlled for MT reasons being sent to Canada has been designated an economically significant rule for purposes of Executive Order 12866. A cost benefit analysis will be conducted due to the economically significant designation.
Update on Missile Technology Control Regime
Mr. Dennis Krepp started discussion on MTCR issues.
The 2006 plenary is coming up. There are approximately 25 proposals on the table for the plenary. The proposals consist of some editorial changes, better identification of controls for gyros and magnetic heading sensors.
TransTAC industry member comment that we are not seeing MTCR proposals posted on the TransTAC members only website for review and comment. Can MTCR proposals be posted on the TransTAC members access only website?
Comment that the MTCR Annex as published in the ITAR is out of date by as much as 5 or 6 years but as published it is still the law that Industry must adhere to. The latest MTCR Annex is available at www.mtcr.info, regardless the Annex published in the ITAR is the law.
Update on Wassenaar Arrangement Proposals
Mr. Jim Thompson and Mr. Brian Baker started discussion on Wassenaar Arrangement (WA) issues.
The proposals that are being considered are available in greater detail on the TransTAC member website are referenced here:
Category 1: 1.A.2; 1.A.3; 1.B.1.f; 1.C.8; and 1.C.10 (2 places).
Category 6: 6.A.8.
Category 7: 7.A.1; 7.A.2; 7.A.8. 7.B.3.g was accepted.
Category 8: 8.A.2.a; and 8.A.2.r.
Category 9: 9.A.2; 9.A.13; 9.D.4; and ML9.B.4.
A request for proposals for WA 2007 should be submitted by the end of September. Proposals do not have to be ‘perfect’ but need to be submitted to create a placeholder for the item. Proposals may be submitted at any time, if they are not timely for the current year they can be proposed in following years.
Jurisdictional Technical Working Group Status
Mr. Todd Zarfos started discussion on the status of the Jurisdictional TWG.
The Jurisdictional TWG is still encouraging submittal by industry of examples of transactions that have been affected by jurisdictional issues. Rules of Engagement are desired by industry and government. By providing the information requested it is expected government will be able to establish Rules of Engagement that are equitable and understandable to industry. [Action Item 11 below].
There is activity in both Commerce and State Depts looking into whether TACs from both agencies could work together on jurisdictional issues.
The J-TWG will draft a consolidated issue statement and proposed improvements for near-term review by J-TWG members prior to finalization and presentation to the TransTAC.
Composites Technical Working Group Establishment
Ms. Kim DePew started discussion on the status of the Composites TWG.
The Composites TWG, co-sponsored by the TransTAC and Materials TAC, has established a Charter, logistics for the team and identification of next steps. Next steps have been to prioritize ECCNs that are specific to composites, and related ECCNs, for systematic and comprehensive review for clarity, obsolescence, interpretation and possible proposal for new controls.
A number of telephone conferences and a face-to-face meetings are being held on a regular schedule. Participation by both industry and government has been excellent.
TransTAC 2006 Goals and Other Items of Interest
A goal to expand industry membership. A request for additional membership applications is being maintained on an ongoing basis.
A goal for increased active support to multilateral control functions. A request for members to actively provide support to multilateral control reviews such as the Missile Technology Control Regime and the Wassenaar Arrangement is being maintained on an ongoing basis.
A goal to actively participate in review of current regulations. The members were encouraged to provide written comment and feedback through the TransTAC to the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) on items listed on the Commerce Control List (CCL), specifically Category’s 7, 8 or 9 is being maintained on an ongoing basis.
A follow-on request was reiterated from the welcoming remarks asking if the TransTAC would be interested in performing ongoing comprehensive reviews of all items on the CCL within the TransTAC purview. Feedback of this proposal is requested for the next meeting of the TransTAC.
An update to the written proposal from Mr. Mike Osborne on for changes to TSU for aircraft incident investigations was presented to the TransTAC.
Open Action Items
Action 1: (November 2003) Mr. Gene Christiansen to review the proposed change to license exception “TSU” for disclosure of technical data to non-U.S. civil aviation authorities and NTSB type foreign organizations in support of flight incident investigations.
Update 9/21/04: Mr. Osborne to provide additional refinements to proposal and identify which export license exception should be modified.
Update 12/8/04: Mr. Osborne provided a proposed change to the license exception TSU. Mr. Christiansen has the action to review within BIS.
The proposal has been provided to Commerce Regulations Division and to DOD for comment.
Update 3/17/05: Mr. Gene Christiansen to continue review within BIS and other government agencies.
Update 5/18/05: Mr. Gene Christiansen to continue review within BIS and other government agencies.
Update 9/7/2005: Mr. Osborne has provided information to Mr. Christiansen and has requested Gene review it internally in Commerce for consideration for inter-agency review. Mr. Osborne will also work with Ms. Julie Ann Felgar, Boeing to be sure that the proposal covers all applicable civil aircraft systems.
Update 11/09/2005: A revised white paper, with further clarification, was presented by Mr. Mike Osborne.
Update 02/09/2006: Discussed the intent and clarification of the White Paper from last meeting. The discussion asked for lists of items typically requested in an investigation, and whether requests are for use technology or include development or production technology?
Update 05/03/2006: The request for industry to provide lists of items typically requested in an investigation was reiterated.
Update 09/13/2006: Mr. Mike Osborne distributed a White Paper outlining a proposed change to the wording of License Exception TSU (ref: 15 CFR 740.13). Mike asked all TransTAC members to review the White paper for concurrence and a unified position to be forwarded to BIS. And reiteration of the request for industry to provide examples of items typically requiring an export license and requested during aircraft incident investigations.
Action 4: (February 2004) TRANSTAC Team will validate whether the current multi-dome combustion controls are realistic or provide any changes that are required, for instance with respect to temperature vs. number of domes.
Update May 2004: This was provided in the handout. There is a follow up action to have other engine manufacturers not represented on the TRANSTAC review the proposal. (Mr. Gene Christiansen).
Update September 2004: Mr. Howard Pfeifer to coordinate putting the proposed changes into Wassenaar proposal format.
Update 3/17/05: Still open
Update 5/18/05: Pending TransTAC member input.
Update 9/7/2005: Still pending TransTAC member input. Also, want to request input from Mr. Brostmeyer and Ms. DePew.
Update 11/09/2005: Pending additional input and clarification from industry whether to revise current controls or impose new controls on multidomed combustors, multipoint fuel injection combustors and/or thermally decoupled combustors.
Update 02/09/2006: GE provided a proposal for changes to 9E003.a.2. Proposal to make a combustor exit temperature change from 2800 F to 3000 F due to typical civil uses today. All other industry members need to provide comment.
Update 05/03/2006: The request for industry to provide comment on the proposal for changing combustor exit temperature from 2800 F to 3000 F was reiterated.
Update 09/13/2006: Industry is working to provide a consolidated position.
Action 5: (February 2004) TRANSTAC Team: Review 9E003.a.4 and 9E003.a.5 on whether temperature range is correct and whether this needs to be clarified with respect to hot spot, average or some other defined gas path or hardware temperature.
Update: This was provided in the handout at the May 2004 TRANSTAC meeting. There is a follow up action to solicit inputs from GE and other engine manufacturers (Mr. Gene Christiansen).
Update September 2004: Mr. Howard Pfeifer to coordinate putting the proposed changes into Wassenaar proposal format.
Update 3/17/05: Still open.
Update 5/18/05: Pending TransTAC member input.
Update 9/7/2005: Still pending TransTAC member input. Also, requesting input from Mr. Brostmeyer and Ms. DePew.
Update 11/9/2005: DTSA persons in attendance requested the TransTAC work on a clarification of what constitutes “hot section” in a turbine engine. Ms. Kim DePew provided a proposed definition of “hot section” for TransTAC propulsion member review. Require further discussion of the proposal and definition of design point parameters between all major engine manufacturers.
Update 02/09/2006: GE provided a revision of the proposal from the last meeting for changes to the definition of hot section parts in 9E003.a.4 and 9E003.a.5. Proposal would apply to aero, industrial, civil, defense and marine turbine engines. All other industry members need to provide comment.
Update 05/03/2006: The request for industry to provide comment on the proposal for clarifying the definition of hot section parts was reiterated.
Update 09/13/2006: Industry is working to provide a consolidated position based on General Electric’s proposed clarification of ‘Hot Section’.
Action 10: (rewritten 3/17/05): Mr. Martling, Cessna, and Mr. Pfeifer: Report to TRANSTAC on any helicopter power transfer system issues and on whether the CCL (9E003.d) needs to change. Would like to know if there are differentiating features or capabilities between military and commercial use helicopter power transfer systems.
Update 5/18/05: Pending TransTAC member input.
Update 9/7/2005: Pending TransTAC member input.
Update 11/09/2005: Pending TransTAC member input. Include DTSA in distribution.
Update 02/09/2006: Are there differences in civil and defense helicopter power transfer systems? What are they? Still require input from helicopter manufacturers. Include Mr. Ed Auger in any input.
Update 05/03/2006: Ms. Elaine Vaught, Bell Helicopter, agreed to review 9E003.d.
Update 09/13/2006: Pending industry input.
Action 11: For TRANSTAC membership: provide examples where US business interests have been negatively affected by jurisdictional issues between State and Commerce (December 2004)
Update 3/17/05: This was discussed in committee. Boeing representatives noted new contract language containing considerable financial penalties for reduced utility of aircraft as a result of ITAR controls.
Update 5/18/05: Pending TransTAC member input. The Jurisdictional TWG may add to this Item.
Update 9/7/2005: The Jurisdictional TWG has picked up this action item. TransTAC members and Industry members are invited to provide examples to the TransTAC.
Update 11/09/2005: This item transferred to the J-TWG. The J-TWG continues to request examples.
Update 02/09/2006: The J-TWG is still requesting examples.
Update 05/03/2006: The request for industry to provide examples of transactions that have been negatively affected by jurisdictional issues was reiterated.
Update 09/13/2006: This is the same issue as above for the Jurisdictional TWG. Industry is re-encouraged to provide examples.
Action 12: Mr. Stevenson of Honeywell to investigate foreign design capability for Fly By Wire (FBW) flight control.
Update 3/17/05: White paper was presented to Committee. Closed.
Update 5/18/05: Mr. Stevenson still working.
Update 9/7/2005: Mr. Stevenson has submitted information to Commerce. The next step is to write a new proposal requesting decontrol based on foreign availability, Mr. Stevenson has offered to start the proposal.
Update 11/09/2005: A white paper for the proposal was distributed. DOC to distribute white paper for interagency review.
Update 02/09/2006: The white paper is currently queued for review in BIS and interagency. Any additional industry input is welcome.
Update 05/03/2006: The BIS interagency review is continuing.
Update 09/13/2006: The BIS interagency review is continuing.
Action 14: Mr. Stevenson of Honeywell to investigate availability of Heads Up Displays and 3D Displays.
Update 11/09/2005: Pending TransTAC member and industry input.
Update 02/09/2006: Pending TransTAC member and industry input.
Update 05/03/2006: Pending TransTAC member and industry input.
Update 09/13/2006: Pending TransTAC member and industry input. Note the proposal for the TransTAC to review CCL items may accomplish the same end result.
No new Action Items.
Next Meeting
The next TransTAC meeting, for the fourth quarter of 2006, is set for 9:30 am Thursday November 9, 2006 at the U.S. Department of Commerce.
The first quarterly meeting for 2007 is tentatively scheduled Wednesday, February 7, 2007.
TransTAC Members are reminded that meetings typically work through lunch and are trending toward four to five hours in length and should plan accordingly.
The meeting adjourned at 1:00pm.
Attendees
September 13, 2006 TransTAC
NAME ORGANIZATION
Howard M. Pfeifer
TransTAC Industry Member, Chair Pratt & Whitney
Todd Zarfos
TransTAC Industry Member Boeing
Michael Osborne
TransTAC Industry Member Honeywell
David Salome
TransTAC Industry Member Honeywell
Donald Stevenson
TransTAC Industry Member Honeywell
Mark Holland
TransTAC Industry Member General Electric
Dan Squire
(Acting) TransTAC Designated Federal Official DOC / BIS
Anthony Lomabardi
TransTAC Government Member OSD / DTSA
Paul Sellers
TransTAC Government Member IDA
Yvette Springer
TransTAC Government Liaison DOC / BIS
Bernie Kritzer DOC / BIS
Bill Root Consultant
Brian Baker DOC / BIS
Brian Martling Cessna
Dennis Krepp DOC / BIS
Ed Auger OSD / DTSA
Gary L. Stanley Global Legal Services
Janelle Gamble Boeing
Jennifer Geraldine DOC / BIS
Jennifer Heine Florida Turbine Technology
Jennifer Watts DOC / BIS
Jessica Hass Arent Fox
Jim Thompson DOC / BIS
Jon Montgomery DOC / BIS
Julia Sorrentino Greenberg Traurig
Kathy Humenik Boeing
Ken Tucker Boeing
Kenneth Hutton Hyperion Catalysis
Kim DePew GE Aircraft Engines
Matt Borman DOC / BIS
Michael Gries Rockwell Collins
Michael Holloway Cessna
Mona Hazera Boeing
Narinder Chauhan DOC / BIS
Sam Gilston Washington Tariff & Trade Letter
Sean Mentus MK Technology
William Arvin DOC / BIS
William S. Kennedy Rolls-Royce NA