Where Industry and Security Intersect
What's New | Sitemap | Search
Washington, DC 20230
30 October 2007
- The SITAC meeting was held at the Department of Commerce in Room 3884 from 9:30 am to 12:30 pm.
- The open session covered the following topics which was followed by a brief closed session:
1. Introductions
2. Remarks from the Bureau of Industry and Security Management
3. Industry Presentations
4. New Business
5. Closed Session
6. Meeting Adjournment
- John Goodrich opened the meeting with an introduction of all of the attendees. The general session is normally attended by industry and government members as well as the press (Sam Gilston-Export Practioner). The Department of Defense was represented by Gordon Anderson and Wayne Hovis. The Department of State was represented by John Albert, Lisa Sampsen-Wenger, and Greg Tarr. This was the first SITAC meeting where participants were able to phone in to the meeting. The teleconference participants in this meeting were Dr. Fagaly (Tristan Technologies based in California), Scott Johnson (Pressco Technology in Ohio), Ke Wang (GE Healthcare- Life Sciences in New Jersey), Donald Weadon (Weadon and Associates in District of Columbia), and Dr. Wong (General Motors in Michigan).
- Shortly after the introductions, John Goodrich introduced Bernie Kritzer who summarized licensing statistics for sensors and cameras. He stated that in FY 2007 there were a total 2642 export applications processed valued at $159,618,723. Of these 2197 were approved, 221 were RWA’d, 3 were rejected, and 2364 were shipped against. The average processing time was 33 days. The top ten destinations requesting commercial U.S. infrared cameras (by value) were in descending order the UK, Germany, Australia, Mexico, Japan, Russian Federation, Spain, South Korea, France, and the PRC. Mr. Kritzer also summarized the FY2006 statistics for sensors and cameras as well for comparison purposes. He explained that there were a total of 2840 export applications processed valued at $115,761,884. Of these, 2658 were approved, 174 were RWA’d, 8 were rejected, and 1346 were shipped against. The average processing time was 34 days. The top ten destinations requesting commercial US infrared cameras (by value) were in descending order Germany, Japan, UK, Mexico, Italy, the Netherlands, South Korea, Australia, Brazil, and Russian Federation. He mentioned that between FY 2006 and FY 2007, the Department of Commerce saw a 7% decrease in licensing volume. Noting that this decreasing trend has steadily occurred since 2001 despite an increase in world demand for infrared cameras.
- Bernie Kritzer than described mentioned that the 320x240 focal plane arrays are used in commercial systems and have become the standard format in the infrared industry. He commented that larger format arrays are being produced and incorporated into commercial systems abroad and sold throughout the European Union. A major producer of infrared cameras utilizing microbolometers is Wuhan Guide, Dali, and SAT which are located in the PRC and using established distribution companies such as Land Instruments to promote their sales of their camera.
- Bernie Kritzer summarized the agenda for the meeting stating that he appreciated the attendance of everyone including the representatives from JDS Uniphase and Varian who were scheduled to provide briefings on their latest products. Mr. Kritzer also explained that on October 19th the first set of validated end users were approved in accordance with the China Rule. He also explained that the Federal Register was publishing in volume 72, a notice requesting comments on a proposed plan to require biannual reporting of exports of certain microbolometer based cameras that may be decontrolled to certain destinations in the future.
- John Goodrich thanked Bernie Kritzer for his comments. George Gasparian (Judson) asked Mr. Kritzer if he knew the ultimate destination of the license applications which were denied. The information he had been provided did not mention the reasons or locations for the denials, however. Mr. Goodrich commented that both industry and the USG did a lot of work to support such denials. Mr. Goodrich asked for the next meeting include discussions on (1) what happens to the annual report which the TAC chairs write, (2) how to access the information link on the federal register website which allows public comment on proposed EAR changes, and (3) how the powers and legal authority behind the TACs and the federal advisory committee act (FACA). He also requested that members who believe their terms are expiring should email Chris Costanzo with their intentions to renew their memberships if they would like to continue to be on the membership committee.
- John Goodrich introduced Jim Thompson who discussed general Wassenaar plans. He mentioned that changes agreed to in 2006 by the Wassenaar members had finally received interagency clearance and would be published within the first two weeks of November. The next WA meeting is planned for the Spring lasting for two weeks. He also mentioned that there were intercessional meetings as well. Of the 60 proposals submitted by all WA member countries in 2005, 20 were from the US. In 2006, there were 40 proposal submitted with the US accounting for 14 of them.
- Chris Costanzo handed out the 2007 the Department of Commerce and Industry proposals. He mentioned that were a total of 30 proposals, across all categories, submitted by the Department of Commerce to the Department of State for consideration. The Department of Defense submitted a total of 18 proposals to the Department of State for review as well. Of the 30 Department of Commerce proposals, six addressed Category 6 issues. Three of these proposals sought decontrols for 6A003.b.4 firefighting cameras, cameras with small pixel counts, and enhanced vision systems for aircraft. The fourth proposal clarified the 6C002.a text for optical sensor materials incorporating CdTe, CdZnTe, or HgCdTe. The fifth proposal seeks a decontrol for silicon carbide blanks less than 600 mm in diameter currently controlled in 6C004.d. The sixth proposal aims to clarify the 6A005.b.6 note which does not capture lasers with a pulse duration equal to 1 nanosecond. Of DoD’s 18 proposals, 7 pertained to Category 6 items. Their proposals were focused on terahertz radar controls (6A3b5), camera software (6D3c), optical equipment used in spectrometry and chromatography items (6A2), controls for readout circuits (6A2f), semiconductor laser stacked arrays (6A5d), infrared scene generators (ML14), and optical finishing machines (2B2).
- John Goodrich called for a short break while the first presentation was being prepared for the slide projector.
- John Goodrich resumed the meeting and introduced the presenters from Varian. He asked them to explain why they were making their presentation. They explained that Chris Costanzo invited them to give a presentation so that the interagency attendees would have an opportunity to hear and discuss the pending commodity jurisdiction request on their infrared spectrometer. Mr. Goodrich then asked Ms. Sampsen-Wenger to explain at a high level what the commodity jurisdiction process entailed. She provided an excellent overview citing parts 120.3 and 120.4 of the International Traffic in Arms regulations (ITAR).
- Mr. Goodrich introduced William McGlone, John Nieberding, and Ellen Miseo representing Varian Inc. Ms. Miseo gave the technical presentation with Mr. Nieberding providing the export compliance concerns of Varian. Mr. McGlone was retained as legal council for Varian and is with the law firm of Latham and Watkins. The presentation highlight the commercial development and capabilities of the Lancer imaging camera, the infrared microscope utilizing the Lancer camera, and finally the large sample upgrade for the microscope. In addition, the presentation highlight the foreign availability of the sensor and similar systems. During the discussions, it became evident that industry unanimously supported a dual use determination and failed to see how the Department of Defense could make a case for listing this scientific apparatus on the munitions list. The Department of State representatives listen attentively to both the USML and CCL arguments and at the end of the discussion the offer was made by the Varian representatives to meet with anyone who would like to discuss in more detail the specifics of their system.
- After the Varian presentation, Mr. Goodrich invited the JDS Uniphase (JDSU) representatives, Erik Zucker (Director of Product Development - High Power Lasers) and Marcia Davis (Senior Trade Specialist), to begin their presentation. Erik Zucker gave the presentation with a brief overview of their company and concerns it has toward competition in the laser market. It ended with a proposal for changes to the current regulations governing semiconductor laser stacks. The following key points were made by JDSU. First, they explain that laser power is growing annually at a rate of 15% over the last 15 years. They argue that telecom and laser manufacturers have global operations where low tech assembly operations are located in Asia and high tech wafer fabrication operations are performed in the West. They would like to increase the control limit for certain semiconductor lasers identified in 6A005.b.2.a from 10 Watts CW to 30 Watts CW and decontrol assembly processes which are common between low and high tech semiconductor lasers. The JDSU representatives asked Chris Costanzo whether or not a proposal could be submitted this year. This would be discussed within the interagency and a decision would be made shortly as all proposals would have to be forwarded to Vienna soon.
- John Goodrich asked if there was any new business that individuals would like to discuss and then Mr. Goodrich adjourned the open session.