[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 193 (Friday, October 4, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61873-61935]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23496]

Vol. 78

Friday,

No. 193

October 4, 2013

Part II

Department of Commerce

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bureau of Industry and Security

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

15 CFR Parts 734, 738, 740, et al.

 Revisions to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) To Make the
Commerce Control List (CCL) Clearer; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 78 , No. 193 / Friday, October 4, 2013 /
Rules and Regulations

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Parts 734, 738, 740, 742, 748, 750, 772, and 774

[Docket No. 110818512-3478-02]
RIN 0694-AF37

Revisions to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) To Make
the Commerce Control List (CCL) Clearer

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This final rule implements changes that were proposed on
November 29, 2012 in a proposed rule entitled Revisions to the Export
Administration Regulations (EAR) To Make the Commerce Control List
(CCL) Clearer. The changes in the November 29 proposed rule were
informed by public comments received in response to an advance notice
of proposed rulemaking entitled Commerce Control List: Revising
Descriptions of Items and Foreign Availability published as part of the
President's Export Control Reform (ECR) Initiative on December 9, 2010.
This final rule implements changes that can be made to the CCL without
requiring changes to multilateral export control regime guidelines or
lists.
    This final rule also makes conforming changes and minor
clarifications as a result of the publication of two final rules
implementing the Export Control Reform Initiative: the April 16, 2013
final rule entitled Revisions to the Export Administration Regulations:
Initial Implementation of Export Control Reform; and the July 8, 2013
final rule entitled Revisions to the Export Administration Regulations:
Military Vehicles; Vessels of War; Submersible Vessels, Oceanographic
Equipment; Related Items; and Auxiliary and Miscellaneous Items that
the President Determines No Longer Warrant Control under the United
States Munitions List.
    Lastly, this final rule is making revisions to the EAR as a result
of public comments received in response to the November 29 proposed
rule and to a notice of inquiry (NOI) entitled Request for Public
Comments on Shipping Tolerances for Export Licenses Issued by the
Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), that BIS published on July 5,
2012.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective on October 15, 2013,
except that amendatory instructions 25, 28, 31 and 35.c to Supplement
No. 1 to part 774 are effective January 6, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy Mooney or Robert Monjay,
Regulatory Policy Division, Bureau of Industry and Security, Department
of Commerce, Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    This final rule implements changes proposed on November 29, 2012 in
a proposed rule entitled Revisions to the Export Administration
Regulations (EAR) To Make the Commerce Control List (CCL) Clearer. The
changes in the November 29 proposed rule were also informed by public
comments received in response to an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking entitled Commerce Control List: Revising Descriptions of
Items and Foreign Availability as part of the President's Export
Control Reform (ECR) Initiative that was published by BIS on December
9, 2010 (75 FR 76664). The December 9 notice sought, among other
things, public comments on how descriptions of items controlled on the
Commerce Control List (CCL) could be made clearer.
    Although the revisions proposed in the November 29 proposed rule
originated with the ECR initiative, the November 29 proposed rule and
this final rule are consistent with Executive Order 13563. Executive
Order 13563 requires agencies to review their ``existing significant
regulations, and consider how best to promote retrospective analysis of
rules that may be outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively
burdensome, and to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal them in
accordance with what has been learned.'' In response to this
requirement, on August 23, 2011, Commerce released a plan for the
review of its regulations. This proposed rule was identified by the
Department as part of its plan for the retrospective analysis of
regulations and is being implemented today in final form with the
publication of this final rule. The Department's plan may be found at:
http://open.commerce.gov/news/2011/08/23/commerce-plan-retrospective-analysis-existing-rules.
    This rule implements changes that can be made to the CCL without
requiring a multilateral regime change. For certain changes BIS
identified that would make the CCL clearer, but would require a
multilateral export control regime change to implement, the U.S.
Government is developing regime change proposals for consideration by
the relevant multilateral export control regimes. BIS will implement
those changes, if approved by the multilateral export control regimes,
in separate rulemakings.
    To better facilitate intelligibility of the provisions implemented
by BIS, this final rule identifies new phrases or headings within
double quotations. The EAR identifies terms defined in part 772 with
double quotations as well. Not all the terms in double quotations in
this final rule are defined in part 772. The additional double
quotations around new phrases, headings, or commonly used words, are
used in the Background section of this final rule to assist in the
readability of the text.
    The descriptions of the changes implemented in this final rule are
organized under the four subject headings used in the November 29
proposed rule and two additional subject headings. The descriptions
include summaries of the public comments received and BIS's responses
to those comments. The fifth subject heading describes changes that are
being implemented as a result of comments received in response to a
notice of inquiry (NOI) that BIS published on July 5, 2012 (77 FR
39679), entitled Request for Public Comments on Shipping Tolerances for
Export Licenses Issued by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS).
The sixth subject heading describes clarifications to the final rule
published on April 16, 2013 (78 FR 22660) entitled Revisions to the
Export Administration Regulations: Initial Implementation of Export
Control Reform (the April 16 (initial implementation) rule). The public
comments BIS received in response to the notice of inquiry prompted BIS
to include these changes in this final rule because they are not only
responsive to the public comments, but they will also make the CCL
clearer and easier to use.
    The six headings are:
    (1) Clarifications to existing CCL controls, including the use of
the terms ``parts'' and ``components'' on the CCL;
    (2) Changes to conform the CCL to the multilateral export control
regime control lists and previous amendments to the EAR;
    (3) Structural changes to improve the clarity of the CCL;
    (4) Removal of fourteen Export Control Classification Numbers
(ECCNs) subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC);
    (5) Revisions to Shipping Tolerances and removal of all ``Unit''
paragraphs; and
    (6) Clarifications to the April 16 (initial implementation) rule.

    The public comment period for the November 29 proposed rule closed
on January 28, 2013. BIS received 10 public comments in response. When
referring to specific comments, BIS identifies those as Commenters No.
1 through No. 10. The comments, including the table for the Record of
Public Comments, can be found on the BIS Web site at http://efoia.bis.doc.gov/index.php/electronic-foia/index-of-documents.
    Most commenters thought the cumulative impact of the November 29
proposed rule would be beneficial for exporters and would improve the
clarity of the CCL. BIS did not accept some of the comments and
addressed others in ways different than the recommendation. Commenter
No. 7, for example, commended and fully supported the effort by BIS to
modify the CCL in order to make all sections consistent and the CCL
easier to read and interpret. Commenter No. 7 agreed with BIS that the
cumulative impact of the proposed changes should improve clarity, and
hence understanding, of the CCL. Commenter No. 7 expressed support for
the rule, and noted that the increased ease of use of the CCL would
especially benefit exporters of items that may transfer to the CCL as a
result of Export Control Reform. Commenter No. 9 noted that the CCL
contains a number of ambiguities and inconsistencies that require
attention. Commenter No. 9 endorsed the recommendations specified in
the November 29 proposed rule, asserting that the modifications, if
implemented, will improve the overall clarity of the CCL. Commenter No.
3, however, was critical of BIS's proposal to remove fourteen NRC
ECCNs. Commenter No. 8 objected to the proposed ``parts'' and
``components'' changes and questioned whether the changes in the
November 29 rule were too extensive for industry to be able to review
in a single proposed rule.
    Some comments identified specific changes that needed to be made to
achieve the objectives of certain proposed changes. Others identified
formatting errors or typos in the November 29 rule. Some commenters
also suggested additional changes that were not specifically proposed
in the November 29 rule, either by specifically identifying additional
changes or highlighting where additional review should be conducted
under the CCL clean-up effort. BIS has incorporated some of these
changes, for example the formatting errors and typos, although other
changes may need to be addressed in subsequent reviews of the CCL. An
effective control list is not static; therefore, although this final
rule implements a large number of changes to improve the CCL, no single
rule, including this final rule, can eliminate the need for review of
the CCL to ensure that it is clear and the scope reflects the current
national security and foreign policy interests of the United States.
    Some comments addressed issues outside the scope of the November 29
proposed rule. BIS did not address these comments in this final rule,
but it provides a brief overview of the issues raised by the commenters
for transparency. Commenter No. 5 submitted comments that were
submitted previously on July 23, 2012 in response to a BIS proposed
rule dealing with personal protective equipment and the proposed ``600
series'' ECCN 1A613. This comment is not addressed in this final rule
because it is outside the scope of the November 29 rule, but this
comment is being evaluated along with other comments received in
response to the June 7, 2012 proposed rule as BIS prepares the final
rule for publication. Another comment received that was outside the
scope of the November 29 proposed rule dealt with the proposed
definition of ``components'' that was set forth in the proposed rule
published on July 15, 2011 (76 FR 41958). BIS completed its review,
responded to comments received on the definition of ``components,'' and
published a definition of ``components'' in the April 16 (initial
implementation) rule. Lastly, one commenter made a number of
suggestions regarding the meaning and use of the term ``specially
designed'' and regarding other design related terms on the CCL. These
comments are outside the scope of the November 29 proposed rule. BIS
proposed a definition of ``specially designed'' in a proposed rule
published on June 19, 2012, and also an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking published on the same day that requested comments on the
feasibility of enumerating ``specially designed'' components on the
CCL. BIS reviewed and responded to comments received on the definition
of ``specially designed'' submitted in response to the June 19 proposed
rule. A final definition of ``specially designed'' was published in the
April 16 (initial implementation) rule. BIS is still evaluating where
it may be feasible to remove the term ``specially designed'' from non-
``600 series'' ECCNs on the CCL.

(1) Clarifications to Existing CCL Controls, Including the Use of the
Terms ``parts'' and ``components'' on the CCL

    The majority of changes proposed in the November 29 rule and being
implemented in this final rule amend the CCL without changing the scope
of the controls. The bulk of the changes this final rule is making to
the CCL are non-substantive and will provide additional regulatory
guidance to people classifying items subject to the EAR. One proposed
change from the November 29 rule that is being implemented in this
final rule will clarify the scope of ECCNs by providing clearer
definitions of the terms ``part'' and ``component,'' which is discussed
below. However, this final rule does include changes that would affect
the scope of one ECCN. Specifically, this final rule removes ECCN 8A918
and adds certain marine boilers to ECCN 8A992, where they would be
controlled for AT and UN reasons.
    BIS proposed in the November 29 proposed rule changes to align the
regulations with the definitions of ``part'' and ``component'' included
in a proposed rule published on July 15, 2011 (76 FR 41958) entitled
``Proposed Revisions to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR):
Control of Items the President Determines No Longer Warrant Control
Under the United States Munitions List (USML)'' (hereinafter ``the July
15 (framework) rule''), which were made final in the April 16 (initial
implementation) rule. The changes that are implemented in this final
rule include adding additional references to ``part'' (although scaled
back considerably compared to what was proposed in the November 29
proposed rule), and ``component'' in certain ECCNs to clarify that the
scope of those ECCNs also extends to ``parts'' and ``components'' even
if previously those ECCNs may have only referenced either ``part'' or
``component,'' but not both terms together. The proposed definitions of
``part'' and ``component'' were provided in the November 29 proposed
rule as a reference, along with a discussion of the context for the
need to make certain conforming changes. The November 29 proposed rule
indicated that the conforming changes would not be published in final
form until the revised definitions of ``part'' and ``component'' were
published in final form, which occurred, as noted above in this
paragraph, in the April 16 (initial implementation) rule that is
effective on October 15, 2013. Because of the relationship between this
final rule and the initial implementation rule, this final rule's
effective date is coordinated to become effective on the same day as
the initial implementation rule.
    As was noted in the November 29 proposed rule, BIS is not
attempting to add additional references to ``parts'' and ``components''
in this final rule that would change the scope of what the

affected ECCNs control. In the past, BIS had not drawn clear
distinctions between what was a ``part'' or ``component'' because both
terms were undefined on the CCL. Having newly defined terms for
``part'' and ``component'' makes the CCL clearer and allows for more
nuanced controls to be developed, but making the necessary conforming
changes to the current CCL control text to conform to those new
definitions, while not changing the intended scope of those existing
ECCNs is also an important part to the Export Control Reform effort.
BIS encouraged the public to participate in this process by reviewing
the proposed changes in this area included in the November 29 rule.
    In the November 29 rule, BIS indicated that if, however, the public
believes any of the proposed changes would change the present scope of
the affected ECCNs, then the public should submit comments that
identify such changes and explain how the changes would cause the ECCNs
to deviate from their present scope. One commenter did submit comments
that were highly critical of these changes and questioned BIS's
assumptions, in particular whether such conforming changes would not
change the scope of these ECCNs. BIS addresses this comment below in
detail, including discussing the additional review conducted by BIS and
the other agencies that reviewed this rule that led to a significant
reduction in the number of ECCNs where ``parts'' are being added in
this final rule. In addition, in the November 29 proposed rule, the
public was encouraged to review the entire CCL to identify and comment
on any other ECCN that uses the terms ``parts'' or ``components'' where
additional changes may be warranted to conform to the intended scope of
those ECCNs. Certain commenters conducted such analysis and made
suggestions for additional changes that are addressed or implemented in
this final rule. These public comments and additional reviews conducted
by BIS and the other agencies helped to improve this final rule.
    The following describes the changes included in this final rule,
the comments received that pertained to changes proposed in the
November 29 rule, and any additional changes that are being implemented
in this final rule as a result of BIS's review of the comments and
additional analysis conducted of the CCL.
    The clarifying changes being implemented in this final rule are as
follows:
(A) Revisions to ECCN Headings To Clarify Meaning
    Revision to the headings of thirty-one ECCNs. In Supplement No. 1
to part 774--The Commerce Control List, this final rule revises, to
enhance clarity, the headings of the following thirty-one ECCNs: 0A018,
1A995, 1B018 1B115, 1C350, 1C355, 1C992, 2A291, 2A991, 2B005, 2B201,
2B109, 2B991, 2B992, 3B991, 3B992, 4A994, 5A991, 5A992, 5D992, 5E992,
6A997, 6A998, 6B995, 6D993, 7A103, 7A107, 8A992, 9A004, 9A106 and
9B991. This final rule also clarifies the relationship between the
headings and the ``items'' paragraph in the List of Items Controlled
section of these thirty-one ECCNs. For example, in certain ECCNs, the
entries include an ``items'' paragraph, but the ECCN heading does not
direct people to review the ``items'' paragraph. This rule will add the
phrase ``(see List of Items Controlled)'' to these ECCN headings. For
other ECCNs listed above, the heading includes the phrase ``(see List
of Items Controlled),'' but the placement of the phrase is not correct
in terms of what BIS intended to control in the ECCN. If the phrase
appears at the end of the heading, then that means the ``items''
paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section is the exclusive,
complete list of the items the ECCN controls. If, however, the phrase
appears in the middle of the heading, then that means only that portion
of the heading prior to the phrase ``(see List of Items Controlled)''
is specifically identified in the ``items'' paragraph in the List of
Items Controlled section, and that the remaining part of the heading
(i.e., the rest of the heading after the phrase ``(see List of Items
Controlled)'') is an exclusive, complete description.
    The placement of the phrase ``(see List of Items Controlled)'' is
important for ``parts'' and ``components'' referred to in ECCN
headings. If ``parts'' and ``components'' references appear before the
phrase, the entry only controls ``parts'' and ``components''
specifically identified in the ``items'' paragraph in the List of Items
Controlled section. If, however, the phrase is in the middle of the
heading and the reference to ``parts'' and ``components'' appears after
the phrase--such as ``and specially designed ``parts'' and
``components'' therefor''--that means the ECCN would control
``specially designed'' ``parts'' and ``components'' for any item
identified in the ``items'' paragraph in the List of Items Controlled
section. This rule does not address the definition of ``specially
designed,'' which was published in the April 16 (initial
implementation) rule, but rather the relationship between these
headings and the ``items'' paragraph in each of these respective ECCNs.
    Revisions to fourteen ECCNs. In addition, this rule adds the phrase
``as follows'' to the headings of the following fourteen ECCNs: 0A981,
2B201, 5D991, 5D992, 5E992, 6A992, 6A994, 6A995, 6A997, 6A998, 6B995,
6C994, 6D993 and 9B991, to ensure consistency with the structure of
other ECCNs on the CCL. The phrase ``as follows'' is used on some of
the multilateral export control regime control lists, which is why the
phrase appears on the CCL, including in some ECCNs that reflect
controls applied unilaterally by the United States based on domestic
foreign policy to conform to the structure of the regime-based ECCNs.
The multilateral export control regimes do not use the phrase ``(see
List of Items Controlled),'' but this phrase is used in many of the
multilateral-based ECCNs on the CCL. BIS seeks greater consistency in
how CCL headings are constructed, in particular how these two phrases
are used in the ECCN headings. Commenter No. 8 to the November 29
proposed rule recommended, where the two phrases appear together at the
end of the heading, that the use of ``as follows'' serves no purposes
and therefore should be removed. Although BIS agrees there is
redundancy in such cases, BIS desires to maintain consistency with the
Wassenaar Arrangement, which uses the term ``as follows'' while at the
same time using the CCL convention of directing the public to the
``items'' paragraph when needed. Thus, BIS is not accepting the
recommendation in this comment, but will continue to consider whether
additional changes should be made, including whether multilateral
regime change proposals or discussions in this area may be warranted.
    ECCN 1C011. This final rule is removing the cross reference from
the heading of 1C011 to 1C111 because this text is no longer needed as
a result of the addition of Supplement No. 4 to Part 774--Commerce
Control List Order of Review in the initial implementation rule. Under
Step 5 of the new CCL Order of Review, if an item is not classified by
a ``600 series'' ECCN, then starting from the beginning of the product
group you should analyze each ECCN to determine whether any other ECCN
in that product group describes the item. This new CCL Order of Review
makes the relationship clear between these two ECCNs, so there is no
need to qualify the heading of 1C011 with the phrase ``other than those
specified in 1C111.'' Therefore, this final rule

removes those phrases from the heading of 1C011.
    ECCN 1D993. This rule revises the heading of 1D993 to remove the
term ``equipment'' to be consistent with the definition of
``equipment'' added to the EAR in the April 16 (initial implementation)
rule. This ECCN currently refers to equipment or materials, but the
only ECCNs cross referenced in the heading are for controls on
materials, so the term equipment is not needed in 1D993. BIS did not
receive any comments on this change, so BIS is implementing this
change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCNs 0D001, 3D980, 3E980, 4D980 and 4E980. This rule revises the
headings of ECCNs 0D001, 3D980, 3E980, 4D980 and 4E980, by removing the
term ``items'' and adding the term ``commodities'' in its place. BIS
makes this change because in the context of these five ECCN headings,
the term ``commodities'' is more accurate and specific regarding the
scope of these entries. BIS did not receive any comments on this
change, so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in this final
rule.
    ECCN 2B998. The heading of 2B998 uses the undefined term ``units.''
To add greater specificity regarding what the term ``unit'' is intended
to cover in this ECCN, this rule modifies the heading by removing the
term ``units'' and adding the term ``circuit boards.'' This change will
clarify that ``circuit boards'' are the items covered under the heading
of 2B998. BIS did not receive any comments on this change, so BIS is
implementing this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCNs 3A980 and 3A981. This rule adds the term ``therefor''
immediately before the term ``n.e.s.'' to the headings of ECCNs 3A980
and 3A981. This rule makes this change to emphasize that these ECCNs
refer only to components of the subject voice print equipment and
polygraph equipment. BIS did not receive any comments on this change,
so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 9A004. Commenter No. 7 suggested the term ``specifically
designed'' should be replaced with ``specially designed'' on the CCL
wherever it occurs. The November 29 proposed rule did not propose this
change to ECCN 9A004. Commenter No. 7 noted that ECCN 9A004 still uses
specifically designed ``parts'' and ``components'' as opposed to
``specially designed.'' For consistency this commenter suggested
``specially designed'' should be used all the time on the CCL. As part
of the Export Control Reform Initiative, BIS will review the use of
``specifically designed'' on the CCL as it corresponds to the USML
categories, and how those categories are revised during the USML-to-CCL
regulatory process.
(B) Clarification of the Use of the Terms ``parts'' and ``components''
on the CCL
    The July 15 (framework) rule included proposed definitions for the
terms ``part'' and ``component.'' The April 16 (initial implementation)
rule included a final definition for the terms ``part'' and
``component.'' Specifically, the initial implementation rule, and the
July 15 (framework) proposed rule, defined ``parts'' as ``any single
unassembled element of a component, accessory, or attachment which is
not normally subject to disassembly without the destruction or the
impairment of design use. Examples include threaded fasteners (e.g.,
screws, bolts, nuts, nut plates, studs, inserts), other fasteners
(e.g., clips, rivets, pins), common hardware (e.g., washers, spacers,
insulators, grommets, bushings), springs and wire.''
    The April 16 (initial implementation) rule, and the July 15
(framework) rule, defined ``components'' as an item that is useful only
when used in conjunction with an ``end item.'' Note that components are
also commonly referred to as assemblies. For purposes of this new
definition that was added to the EAR on April 16, 2013, in the initial
implementation final rule that becomes effective on October 15, 2013,
an assembly and a component are the same. Additionally, there are now
two types of ``components'': ``Major components'' and ``minor
components.'' A ``major component'' includes any assembled element
which forms a portion of an ``end item'' without which the end item is
inoperable. For example, for an automobile, components include the
engine, transmission, and battery. If you do not have all those items,
the automobile will not function, or function as effectively. A ``minor
component'' includes any assembled element of a ``major component.''
Note also that ``components'' consist of ``parts.'' ' References in the
CCL to ``components'' include both ``major components'' and ``minor
components.''
    Another example for applying the definition of ``component'' in the
automobile context would be a fuel pump and the engine. Under this
additional example, the fuel pump is a minor component of an
automobile, as it is an assembled element of a ``major component,'' the
engine. While the car will not function without the fuel pump, it is
not a ``major component'' because it is integrated into a ``major
component,'' the engine.
    The July 15 (framework) rule indicated BIS would review the use of
these two terms on the CCL and would likely make clarifications to CCL
entries to conform to the proposed definitions included in the July 15
(framework) rule under a separate rule. The November 29 proposed rule
addressed the use of the terms ``parts'' and ``components'' on the CCL
to ensure these terms were being used in a manner consistent with the
final definitions included in the April 16 (initial implementation)
rule. BIS received a variety of different comments on these proposed
changes that are addressed here.
    The terms ``parts'' and ``components'' sometimes have been used
interchangeably in various ECCNs, which may have been the source of
some confusion. The final definitions included in the initial
implementation rule were developed to provide clear, distinct
definitions for both these terms and other terms such as ``end item,''
``system,'' ``accessories,'' and ``attachments,'' to align with the
definitions of these terms in the International Traffic in Arms
Regulations (ITAR). See 22 CFR Sec.  121.8. Such distinctions are
significant for purposes of determining whether an ECCN applies to an
item.
    If an ECCN does not include a control on ``parts'' or
``components,'' then that ECCN would not, by definition, apply to the
export of any particular ``parts'' or ``components.'' However, as
mentioned above, the terms ``parts'' and components'' have sometimes
been used interchangeably. Therefore, to ensure that once the
definition of ``part'' and ``component'' are added to the EAR the scope
of existing controls is not narrowed, the November 29 rule proposed
adding additional references to ``parts'' or ``components,'' in
particular for ECCNs that are based on the multilateral export control
regime control lists. The November 29 rule took a cautious approach,
possibly erring on the side of potential over control versus under
control when making these conforming changes for ``parts'' and
``components,'' in particular for the addition of ``parts'' to entries
that only identified components.
    Under the current EAR, many of the ECCNs based on the multilateral
control lists reference ``components,'' but not ``parts.'' For these
entries where parts were not referenced, the U.S. Government had to
take into account in drafting the November 29 rule how the U.S.
Government has interpreted these ECCNs as well as how the other
multilateral regime members have

interpreted these ECCNs to determine whether the intent of the U.S.
Government and the other regime members was for these entries to
include ``parts.'' In certain contexts BIS has determined the intent of
the U.S. Government and the respective multilateral regimes is to also
control ``parts.'' However, in other contexts after further review, BIS
has determined the addition of ``parts'' is not needed, and therefore
this final rule does not add references to ``parts.'' The Departments
of State and Defense, along with other agencies that reviewed this
final rule, assisted BIS in making these determinations. These
determinations were focused on making sure that the conforming changes
for ``parts'' and ``components'' being implemented in this final rule
are consistent with past practice and would not result in a change in
existing controls.
    As noted in the November 29 rule, over the mid- to long-term, BIS
will work with the other U.S. Government agencies involved in the
multilateral regimes, in particular the Department of State as the lead
representative to the multilateral export control regimes, to raise in
the respective multilateral export control regimes whether certain
ECCNs should be limited to ``components'' or ``parts'' or some other
subset of ``components,'' such as major components or minor components.
    Based on the public comments received, there appears to be some
degree of disparate interpretation regarding whether some of these
ECCNs are intended to also include ``parts.'' For example, Commenter
No. 8 believes that in the vast majority of contexts, these ECCNs are
not intended to reach ``parts.'' However, Commenters No. 6 and 7
supported the conforming changes, including those involving the
addition of ``parts.'' Because BIS in the past had not defined or
clearly distinguished between these two terms, it is not surprising to
BIS that certain commenters would arrive at differing determinations
regarding whether current ECCNs that do not include ``parts'' are
intended to also include ``parts.''
    Many unilateral ECCNs on the CCL refer to ``parts'' but not
``components.'' For unilateral ECCNs, BIS has more discretion in
whether these ECCNs should control ``parts'' and ``components.''
However, for consistency with the approach implemented for the
multilateral-based ECCNs in this final rule, and to ensure the scope of
the unilateral ECCNs is not changed, this final rule is adding
references to ``parts'' and ``components'' as needed in the unilateral
ECCNs to reflect how BIS has interpreted the scope of these ECCNs in
the past. These changes proposed in the November 29 rule were not
opposed by any of the public comments received.
    Consistent with the April 16, 2013 final definitions of ``part''
and ``component'' included in the initial implementation rule, BIS is
implementing a number of changes to the CCL to incorporate the terms
``parts'' and ``components'' in specific ECCNs. However, as noted
above, BIS has significantly scaled back the number of ``parts''
additions included in the final rule. The primary purpose of these ECCN
changes is to conform to those definitions and to ensure that no
substantive changes are made to the current U.S. Government
interpretation of these ECCNs.
Public Comments Received for Clarifying the Use of the Terms ``parts''
and ``components'' on the CCL
    The following discusses the comments received regarding the
clarification of the use of the terms ``parts'' and ``components'' on
the CCL.
    Two commenters supported the ``parts'' and ``components'' changes.
Commenter No. 6 noted that the definition of ``part'' and ``component''
is a welcome clarification.'' Commenter No. 7 also indicated these
changes should resolve ambiguities about ECCN coverage and enable
companies to correctly classify items falling under each of these
designations. BIS agrees with these comments. Commenters No. 6 and 7
support BIS's rationale for these changes and provide additional
rationale highlighting the benefits and need to make these changes.
    One commenter opposed the ``parts'' and ``components'' changes.
Commenter No. 8 opposed the ``parts'' and ``components'' changes
because central to the proposed ``parts'' and ``components'' changes
are the definitions of ``specially designed'' and ``component,''
respectively. This commenter noted that it is difficult to gauge the
impact of the proposed changes in this area set forth in this rule
without knowing the definitions of these terms. BIS acknowledges that
these other terms have been proposed in other proposed rules being
implemented under the ECR Initiative. BIS made this explicit in the
November 29 proposed rule by including references to the definitions of
``part'' and ``component'' included in the July 15 (framework) rule.
The public was informed in the November 29 proposed rule that those
proposed definitions should be used as they evaluate the clarifying
changes that were proposed in the November 29 proposed rule, and was
given ample opportunity to review and comment on those proposed
definitions. The April 16 (initial implementation) final rule that
includes the definitions for these terms was informed by such public
comments. The definitions of ``part'' and ``component'' included in the
initial implementation rule did not substantively change from what was
originally proposed in the July 15 (framework) rule.
    Commenter No. 8 also stated as part of their rationale that the
proposed rule tries to accomplish far too much at one time. BIS
acknowledges that the proposed rule was large. However, the proposed
rule clearly identified the proposed changes and the rationale for the
various clarifying changes to ``parts'' and ``components.'' The public,
including all potentially affected industries, was given adequate
notice to review the proposed changes and submit comments. Certain
specific examples were provided by commenters, such as Commenter No. 6
that noted in certain places the importance of the use of ``and'' or
``or'' as it related to certain technology ECCNs. BIS made clarifying
changes to certain technology ECCNs as a result of these comments
regarding ``and'' or ``or.'' The specific technology ECCNs that were
revised to address the ``and'' or ``or'' issue are discussed elsewhere
in this rule under the specific ECCNs.
    Over time if the public identifies additional entries where changes
should be made to ``parts'' and ``components,'' BIS may make additional
clarifications to such controls, including implementation of
multilateral export control regime changes, if approved by the relevant
regime.
    Commenter No. 8 also opposed these changes, asserting that these
changes will cost exporters substantially more time to evaluate whether
the numerous additions of ``parts'' or ``components'' will change the
scope of an ECCN in a material way for their operations. This commenter
noted that a substantial amount of time will also be required for
exporters to evaluate the numerous inherent ambiguities the additions
create in given ECCNs. BIS does not agree that the addition of ``part''
or ``component'' references by this rule will require exporters to
spend substantially more time to determine the scope of the potentially
relevant ECCN. Interested members of the public had adequate notice to
review the proposed changes and submit comments as the November 29
proposed rule included a 60-day public comment review period. The
preamble to the rule also identified changes to ``parts'' and
``components''

and provided a considerable amount of detail regarding what was
changing and why. Based on the comments received, BIS and the other
agencies as mentioned above conducted a review of all the ``parts'' and
'' components'' changes, which resulted in a significant scaling back
of the ``parts'' changes. The proposed rule and the comments received
along with the subsequent U.S. Government review led to a better final
rule that more clearly achieves the stated objectives for the
conforming ``parts'' and ``components'' changes.
    As noted earlier, exporters and any other affected party may also
submit additional suggestions for clarifications to the CCL at any
time, so if in the future someone wishes to submit suggestions for
further clarifying the use of ``parts'' and ``components,'' they may do
that at any time consistent with Sec.  756.1(a)(1) of the EAR.
    Commenter No. 8 also requested that BIS publish several proposed
rules proposing ``parts'' and ``components'' to be evaluated for each
industry or related ECCNs. This commenter suggested that one option
would be to propose ``parts'' and ``components'' rules for fewer ECCNs
at a time, and possibly only pertaining to similar products or
industries, so that BIS can be more confident that exporters will have
identified and evaluated any unintended scope changes and ambiguities
that may arise. BIS does not believe that such an approach is warranted
based on the reasons noted above.
    Commenter No. 8 also questioned BIS's premise that these changes
were limited to making clarifications to the CCL. This commenter argued
that references to ``parts'' and ``components'' will significantly
change the scope of many well established ECCNs. This commenter
disputed BIS's assertion that the addition of the term ``parts'' or
``components'' to numerous ECCNs, to ensure they include both terms,
will not change the CCL substantively. BIS stated in the November 29
proposed rule that one of the objectives was to not change the scope of
the ECCNs. As a result of this concern raised by Commenter No. 8, BIS
and the other agencies reevaluated the ``parts'' and ``components''
changes and were able to identify a large number of ECCNs where the
``parts'' additions were not needed, and thus are not being implemented
in this final rule. This change also addresses the clarity issues
raised by Commenter No. 8. This reevaluation confirmed that the
remaining ECCNs included in this rule where ``parts'' are being added
need ``parts'' to be added in order to maintain the intended scope of
control.
    However, Commenter No. 8 also argued that ``parts'' and
``components'' cover very different things, so BIS cannot interpret
them interchangeably. The commenter noted that even if BIS sometimes
interprets the terms ``parts'' and ``components'' interchangeably, the
new proposed definitions of those terms describe very different items
and will, therefore, require that those terms cover different items. To
add one or the other of those terms to an ECCN in which it does not
currently appear will dramatically change the scope and coverage of the
ECCN. BIS agrees that the terms ``part'' and ``component'' under the
new definitions will be distinct. Prior to the addition of a definition
for ``part'' and ``component'' by the initial implementation rule, BIS
had not used the same level of specificity in interpreting the scope of
the undefined terms parts and components as used on the CCL. If the
entry used the term ``part,'' BIS typically also interpreted the entry
to extend to components. Similarly, when the entry used the term
``components,'' BIS in the context of certain entries interpreted those
entries to extend also to parts. More importantly, because the terms
part and component were not defined, this was not perceived as an
issue. However, now that the two terms are defined, and as indicated in
the comment cover different commodities, there is a need to specify in
the context of each ECCN what was intended.
    Commenter No. 8 also argued that treating ``parts'' and
``components'' as interchangeable is counter to the ECR goal of
harmonizing terms and concepts across the USML and CCL. This commenter
noted that the USML maintains separate definitions of ``part'' and
``component.'' Because one of the goals of export control reform is to
harmonize terms and concepts across regulatory regimes, the notion that
``parts'' and ``components'' are ``interchangeable'' terms in the EAR
will potentially create confusion and drafting problems as items move
from the USML to CCL, or as well as when the planned consolidation of
the two control lists eventually occurs. BIS does not agree that
treating the undefined terms ``parts'' and ``components'' as
interchangeable is counter to the ECR goal of harmonizing terms and
concepts across the USML and CCL. BIS is making the changes as part of
the larger effort to begin the harmonization between the EAR and the
ITAR of key terms. If BIS did not make the changes, then ``parts'' that
are within the scope of the word ``components'' throughout the CCL
would become decontrolled once the EAR adopted in Part 772 the ITAR's
definition of ``part.'' Thus, this conforming change will bring the
non-``600 series'' into alignment with the structure of both the ITAR
and the ``600 series'' ECCNs. As noted above, Commenters No. 6 and 7
view the greater specificity as a benefit to exporters, so although
these ``parts'' and ``components'' changes are integral to the larger
USML-to-CCL process now under way under the ECR Initiative, these
changes will also make the overall CCL clearer.
    Commenter No. 8 also noted that adding one term or another to an
ECCN's heading as a matter of course to ensure the heading includes
both terms will inevitably create new ambiguities in interpreting an
ECCN. BIS clearly described the intent of these changes in the proposed
rule and then requested the public to review each of these changes and
to identify any changes that either were not consistent with how they
interpret the scope of these ECCNs or created any perceived ambiguity.
BIS received comments on this issue that related to ECCNs 1C007, 2A292
and 6A992, 2B116, and 3A001 and analyzed them as follows:
    ECCN 1C007. Commenter No. 7 suggested BIS replace ``components'' in
1C007 with the term ``ingredients,'' which the commenter thought makes
more sense in this materials category. BIS did not propose this change
in the November 29 rule, but understands the rationale for the
suggestion. However, BIS is addressing the commenter's suggestion by
not adding quotes around the term components in 1C007.e. BIS is not
adding quotes around the reference to ``components'' in 1C007.e,
because the controls are for ``carbon and nitrogen components,'' which
is interpreted as a single term for purposes of 1C007.e, in this final
rule. This is similar to the rationale provided below for why quotes
are not being used in ECCNs 3A001.b, 3A982 and 3D982 in this final
rule.
    ECCNs 2A292 and 6A992. BIS received comments from Commenter No. 8
in response to the proposed changes to the ``unit'' paragraph in ECCNs
2A292 and 6A992. However, as noted elsewhere in this final rule, BIS is
not implementing the proposed changes to the ``unit'' paragraphs
because this final rule is removing the ``unit'' paragraph from all
ECCNs on the CCL as part of the effort to simplify the shipping
tolerance provisions under the EAR that are also being implemented in
this final rule. For these reasons, BIS is not implementing the changes
suggested in the comments to 2A292 and 6A992.

    ECCN 2B116. Commenter No. 8 noted a specific ECCN example (2B116)
as a basis for their concern regarding the use of ``parts.'' This
commenter noted that the November 29 rule proposed to add ``parts'' to
2B116, which currently covers only ``components'' for relevant
vibration test systems. This commenter was concerned that none of items
listed in 2B116, however, would likely be considered a ``part'' under
the new definition. This commenter believed that if implemented,
exporters would then be left with uncertainty as to whether an item
that could be considered a ``part'' of a covered vibration system is
controlled. BIS does not believe any changes for clarity need to be
made for 2B116. The subsequent review conducted by the U.S. Government
of the ``parts'' changes determined in the context of 2B116 that
``parts'' is needed in order to maintain the intended scope of control.
Moreover, BIS believes with ``(see List of Items Controlled)''
appearing at the end of the entry, there should be no confusion as to
what is controlled because only the items listed are controlled. This
interpretation also aligns with the original Missile Technology Control
Regime (MTCR) text and interpretation regarding the scope of this
entry. Therefore, for the reasons noted above, BIS is implementing the
changes, as proposed; in this final rule.
    ECCN 3A001. Commenter No. 8 also noted ECCN 3A001.c as an example
of their specific concerns about the use of ``parts.'' This commenter
thought this change would result in new compliance obligations for
companies that deal in less complex elements (``parts'') of a covered
wave device. The subsequent review conducted by the U.S. Government of
the ``parts'' changes determined in the context of 3A001 that ``parts''
is not needed in order to maintain the current scope of control.
Therefore, BIS is not implementing this change to 3A001 and to all
other ECCNs where the subsequent review determined ``parts'' was not
needed in order to maintain the current scope of control.
    Commenter No. 8 also noted that the ``parts'' and ``components''
changes are not consistent with multilateral regime control lists. This
commenter asserted the proposed rule makes changes to many ECCNs that
are governed by multilateral export control regimes, including WA,
which BIS acknowledges is a correct statement. Commenter No. 8
indicated that adding ``parts'' to CCL headings represents a
significant change and marked expansion of scope of the current entries
and is not consistent with specific WA language. This commenter
believed the U.S. Government should submit this change to the Wassenaar
Arrangement. This commenter believes these proposed changes will
require consent of WA members before they can be made. The same is true
with other proposed changes to other CCL entries that are based on
other multilateral regimes, such as the Australia Group (AG). This
commenter encouraged BIS to consult with the other regime members
before these changes are made because failing to do so could lead to a
different scope of coverage in the U.S.
    The United States is a member of the four major multilateral export
control regimes. In accordance with the terms of membership of these
regimes, the CCL is consistent with the control lists used by the
respective multilateral export control regimes, although there is
national discretion in how those lists are implemented in the various
member countries' controls. BIS's interpretation of the usage of the
term ``parts,'' which informed the proposed changes included in the
November 29 proposed rule, was that ``parts'' generally fall under
``components'' for the typical WA control text. BIS applies this same
interpretation to the other multilateral control lists, which also
informed the changes included in the November 29 proposed rule.
However, based on the concerns raised by Commenter No. 8, the U.S.
Government, including the Department of State, conducted an additional
review of the ``parts'' and ``components'' changes that were included
in the November 29 rule. This review, as noted above, resulted in a
significant reduction in the number of ECCNs where ``parts'' is added
in this final rule, in particular for many of the Wassenaar
Arrangement-based ECCNs. In the remaining ECCNs where ``parts'' is
being added, the U.S. Government has determined that the intent in the
context of these ECCNs, including the multilateral based ECCNs, is that
``parts'' is needed in order to maintain the current scope of control.
    In the future, if one of the respective multilateral regimes
specifies under one of the multilateral-based entries that such entries
are intended to only reach ``components'' or some other formulation,
BIS will implement those changes to the respective entries on the CCL
consistent with the U.S. Government's multilateral regime commitments.
    The November 29 rule proposed changes implemented in this final
rule revise one hundred and one ECCNs on the CCL where the term
``parts'' or ``components'' is used, as identified and described in the
paragraphs below in more detail.
    ``Parts'' is used, but ``specially designed'' ``components'' or
`components' as follows'' is intended or ``specially designed''
``parts'' and ``components'' is intended. In three ECCNs, the term
``parts'' is used, but the term ``specially designed'' ``components''
is intended. This final rule removes the term ``parts'' and replaces it
with the terms ``specially designed'' ``components'' in the following
three ECCNs: 0A979, 3A980, and 3A981. This rule removes the term
``part'' and replaces it with the terms ``specially designed''
``parts'' and ``components'' in the following four ECCNs: 0A982, 0A983,
0A985, and 0A986. In ECCNs 0A984 and 0A987, the term ``parts'' is used,
but the term ``components'' or `` ``components'' as follows'' is
intended. This rule removes the term ``parts'' and replaces it with the
term ``components'' or `` ``components'' as follows'' in these ECCNs.
BIS is implementing these changes, as proposed, in this final rule.
    The hybrid term ``component parts'' is used, but ``parts'' and
``components'' is intended. In certain ECCNs, the hybrid undefined term
``component parts'' is used, but the intent is ``parts'' and
``components.'' This final rule changes ECCN 3A201 to bring its meaning
into alignment with this intent by changing ``component parts'' to
``parts'' and ``components.'' BIS is implementing these changes, as
proposed, in this final rule. This same issue appears in some of the
``xY018'' ECCNs on the CCL, but given that those ECCNs will be
addressed in the ongoing USML-to-CCL process as those items in the
``xY018'' ECCNs are moved to the ``600 series'' ECCNs, the November 29
proposed rule did not propose making changes to those ``xY018''
entries.
    ``Parts'' or ``components'' is used, but ``parts'' and
``components'' is intended. Because the terms ``parts'' and
``components'' are currently used interchangeably in the context of
several entries on the CCL, maintaining current controls while adopting
definitions for these words requires the use of both words in each of
the seventy-two ECCNs where one of those terms is currently used but
both terms are intended. This will ensure that existing ECCNs maintain
the same controls that existed when the terms were undefined, so that
``parts'' and ``components'' will encompass all subsidiary elements of
a complete system in the context of these ECCNs. The November 29 rule
proposed adding ``parts'' or ``components'' to one hundred and forty-
six ECCNs, but after further review conducted by the U.S.

Government, BIS determined only seventy-two ECCNs needed ``parts'' or
``components'' added in order to maintain the current scope of control.
The significant reduction in the number of these changes is from the
reduction in the number of ECCNs where ``parts'' is being added in this
final rule. BIS, in consultation with the other agencies and
multilateral export control regimes, intends to revise these entries in
the future to further refine the CCL controls, but BIS has determined
the changes being implemented in this final rule are the only ones
needed at this time and are consistent with the current multilateral
regime control lists.
    This final rule will insert ``parts'' and add quotation marks in
the following sixty-four ECCNs (in the November 29 proposed rule
``parts'' was to be added in one hundred and twenty-seven ECCNs):
1A001, 1A002, 1A102, 1A995, 1B003, 1B101, 1B102, 1B115, 1B117, 1B118,
1B119, 1C117, 2A991, 2B109, 2B116, 2B229, 2B351, 2B352, 2B992, 2B998,
2D351, 3A101, 3A201, 3A292, 3A999, 3B991, 3B992, 3D991, 3E982, 3E991,
4A101, 4A994, 5A991, 6A107, 6A203, 6A991, 6B995, 6E001, 6E002, 6E993,
7A101, 7A102, 7A103, 7A104, 7A105, 7A107, 7D101, 7E101, 8A002, 8A992,
9A004, 9A010, 9A011, 9A106, 9A108, 9A109, 9A111, 9A120, 9B001, 9B002,
9B009, 9B115, 9B116 and 9E003. BIS is implementing these changes as
proposed, except for the following sixty-three ECCNs: 1A004, 1A005,
1A006, 1A008, 1B001,1C007, 1C230, 2A001 (although BIS is adding a new
Note to 2A001.a to clarify this paragraph includes a control on roller
bearing and roller elements ``specially designed'' for the items
specified therein), 2B001, (not implemented for heading), 2B003, 2B004,
2B005, 3A001, 3A003, 3A233, 3A982, 3A991, 3B001, 3B002, 3D982, 3E001,
3E003, 4A001, 4A003, 4A004, 5A001, 5B001, 5E001, 5A002, 5A992, 6A001,
6A002, 6A003, 6A004, 6A005, 6A006, 6A008, 6A102, 6A205, 6A992, 6A995,
6A996, 6A998, 6B008, 6D001, 7A001, 7A002, 7A003, 7A004, 7A005, 7A008,
7D001, 7E001, 7E002, 9A002, 9A003, 9A005, 9A006, 9A008, 9A012, 9B003,
9B010, and 9D004 (not implemented for 9D004.e) that will not be changed
based on the subsequent U.S. Government review of the ``parts'' and
``components'' changes, in this final rule.
    ECCN 3A001. After further review of the proposed changes, including
a review of input received from BIS's TACs, BIS decided to not add
quotes around the first reference to ``components'' in the phrase
``electronic components'' in the heading of ECCN 3A001 to avoid
creating confusion over the meaning of the phrase. ``Electronic
components;'' although undefined; is interpreted as a single term for
purposes of 3A001. For similar reasons, BIS is not adding quotes around
the reference to ``components'' in 3A001.b because the controls are for
microwave or millimeter wave components, which is interpreted as a
single term for purposes of 3A001.b, as well as the references to the
phrase microwave or millimeter wave components in the headings of ECCNs
3A982 and 3D982 in this final rule.
    This final rule inserts ``components'' and adds quotation marks in
the following eight ECCNs: 2A994, 2B201, 5A980, 6A203, 6B995, 8A992,
9A106, and 9A991. In this final rule, BIS is implementing these changes
as proposed, except 2A292, 2B001 (in the heading), and 9A012 will not
be changed based on the subsequent U.S. Government review of the
``parts'' and ``components'' changes included in the November 29 rule.
    This final rule will add quotation marks to the existing term
``components'' in the following fifty-two ECCNs: 1A004, 1A005, 1A006,
1A008, 1B001, 1C007, 2A001, 2B003, 2B004, 3A003, 3B001, 3B002, 3E001,
4A001, 4A003, 4A004, introductory text of Note 1, the N.B.2 and Note 2
that immediately follows the Category 5 Part 1--Telecommunications,
5A001, 5A002, 5A992, 5B001, 5E001, 6A001, 6A002, 6A003, 6A004, 6A005,
6A006, 6A008, 6A992, 6A995, 6A996, 6A998, 6B008, 6D001, 7A001, 7A002,
7A003, 7A004, 7A005, 7A008, 7E001, 7E002, 9A002, 9A003, 9A005, 9A006,
9A008, 9B003, 9B010, 9A012, 9D003 and 9E003.
    This final rule will reposition the term ``parts'' before
``components'' and will add quotation marks to the existing terms
``parts'' and ``components'' in the following ten ECCNs: 1C002, 2A983,
2A984, 3A001, 4A994, 7A994, 9A106, 9A991, 9B990, and 9E003. BIS is
implementing these changes, as proposed, in this final rule, except
1A004, 3A001, and 6A992 will not be changed based on the subsequent
U.S. Government review of the ``parts'' and ``components'' changes
included in the November 29 rule.
    ECCN 1C350 and 1C355. After further review of the proposed changes
to ECCNs 1C350 and 1C355, including reviewing input received from BIS's
TACs, BIS decided to not add the term ``parts'' to ECCNs 1C350 and
1C355. BIS decided it would be better to replace the term
``components'' in these two ECCNs with the alternative term
``ingredients.'' This change will more clearly reflect the intent of
these two ECCNs and avoid potential confusion with the new definition
of ``component.''
    ECCN 9E003. Commenter No. 6 noted that although they supported the
addition of the conforming changes for ``parts'' and ``components,''
for certain technology entries using ``and'' instead of ``or'' between
``parts'' and ``components'' may inadvertently allow the release of
certain technology. This commenter noted that the proposed rules used
the phrases ``parts'' or ``components'' and ``parts'' and
``components'' interchangeably. The commenter further asserted that
there are cases where this may cause some readers to read the control
as being narrower than intended, specifically in ECCNs 9E003.a.7,
9E003.a.8, and 9E003.c. In the case of the proposed wording for
9E003.a.7, Commenter No. 6 asserted this could be interpreted to mean
that the ``technology'' is ``required'' only if it applies to both
``parts'' and ``components'', which is narrower than the ``technology''
for either item. This commenter recommended using ``or'' in these three
items paragraphs of 9E003. However, as a result of this comment, BIS
also evaluated the other entries where conforming changes for ``parts''
and ``components'' were being made and determined that ``and'' should
also be replaced with ``or'' in the following two ECCNs: 2B201 note to
.a, and 9B009 heading.
(C) Clarification of the Use of the Term ``assemblies'' on the CCL as
Components
    In the ``component'' definition added to the EAR in the April 16
(initial implementation) rule, it states that ``components are also
commonly referred to as assemblies. For purposes of this definition, an
assembly and a component are the same.'' BIS has reviewed the CCL to
ensure the term ``assemblies'' is not being used redundantly on the
CCL. This review identified five ECCNs (5A991, 9A002, 9A003, 9B002, and
9D004) where the terms ``assemblies'' and ``components'' are being used
in the same ECCN, but where the term ``assemblies'' should be removed
to avoid the incorrect interpretation that assemblies are different
from components. This final rule adds the term ``electronic'' before
the term ``assemblies'' in 5A991 under ``items'' paragraphs (c.1) and
(g) to distinguish the particular type of assembly that is intended to
be controlled under this entry. As was noted in the November 29
proposed rule, with regard to ECCNs 9A002, 9A003, 9B002, and 9D004, the
U.S. Government intends to develop a proposal to submit to the
Wassenaar Arrangement that would propose the

removal of the term ``assemblies'' from these ECCNs or, in the
alternative, propose the addition of more descriptive terms, such as
``electronic'' to clarify the scope of those other multilateral-based
ECCNs.
    This final rule removes reference to the term ``assemblies'' in
ECCN 6A998 and adds the term ``components'' in its place. As described
above, this rule also adds the term ``parts'' to 6A998. BIS is
implementing these changes as proposed, with the one exception, in this
final rule.
 (D) Revisions to the Following ECCNs, Including Changes Made as a
Result of Comments
    ECCN 1A005. Commenter No. 7 noted that ``specially designed'' does
not consistently appear in quotation marks, as exemplified by 1A005.
This commenter believes that to conform to the new definition of
``specially designed'' added in the initial implementation rule, the
term should be in quotes in 1A005 and wherever else the term
``specially designed'' is used on the CCL. BIS agrees and is adding
quotes wherever the term ``specially designed'' is used on the CCL in
this final rule.
    ECCN 1B001. Commenter No. 7 requested that BIS clarify in this
final rule whether the July 15 (framework) rule proposed definition of
``accessories'' applies to 1B001 and to other places it is used on the
CCL. This commenter also requested that BIS add quotation marks around
``accessories'' in 1B001 and wherever else on the CCL the term
``accessories'' is used. The definition for ``accessories'' was added
to the EAR in the initial implementation rule, and will apply to 1B001
and wherever the term ``accessories'' is used on the CCL. Therefore,
BIS in this final rule accepts these comments and is adding quotation
marks to wherever the term ``accessories'' is used in this rule. Note
that ``accessories'' and ``attachments'' are defined as separate terms
in part 772, but the definition is the same for ``accessories'' and
``attachments'' and each definition cross references the other. For the
same reason that BIS is adding quotation marks around ``accessories,''
BIS is also adding quotation marks around ``attachments'' in this final
rule.
    ECCN 1C996. This final rule will amend 1C996 by revising the
heading to add the phrase ``not controlled by 1C006,'' to clarify the
scope of 1C996 as it relates to 1C006. BIS did not receive any comments
on this change, so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in
this final rule.
    ECCN 2A994. As an additional clarification to existing controls,
Commenter No. 4 suggested adding an ECCN-specific definition of
``portable electric generator'' to 2A994. This commenter was aware of
past advisory opinion guidance provided by BIS that had interpreted the
term ``portable electric generator'' for purposes of 2A994. BIS is
aware of this past advisory opinion and agrees it would be beneficial
to add an ECCN-specific definition based on that previously provided
guidance. This new ECCN-specific definition added by this final rule
makes it clear that the generators that are in 2A994 are portable--
5,000 lbs or less on wheels or transportable in a 2\1/2\ ton truck
without a special set up requirement.
    ECCN 2B350. This final rule amends 2B350 by revising the ``Related
Definitions'' paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section to
indicate for purposes of this entry that the term `chemical warfare
agents' includes those agents ``subject to the ITAR'' (see 22 CFR parts
120 through 130). In addition, this rule adds a note at the end of the
``items'' paragraph in the List of Items Controlled section to provide
a reminder and cross reference to the Note for exporters, reexporters
and transferors, stating the following: ``See Categories V and XIV of
the United States Munitions List for all chemicals that are `` `subject
to the ITAR' (see 22 CFR parts 120 through 130).''
    Commenter No. 8 requested BIS to specify whether the definition for
the ``chemical warfare agents'' proposed for 2B350 also applies to
1A004 and 2B351. The 2B350 definition is an ECCN-specific definition,
so it does not apply to 1A004 or 2B351. If the definition were intended
to also apply to other ECCNs, then adding a definition of ``chemical
warfare agents'' to 772 would be the appropriate change to make, but as
noted that was not intended in the November 29 proposed rule.
    Commenter No. 8 also indicated the ``chemical warfare agents''
definition scope proposed for ECCN 2B350 is not correct in terms of its
reference to USML categories referenced. Specifically, Commenter No. 8
was concerned that proposing that the ITAR-controlled chemicals are
only found in USML Categories V and XIV is not correct because such
chemicals could conceptually fall within USML Category XXI and possibly
others. In drafting the November 29 proposed rule, BIS consulted with
the Department of State on the appropriate USML categories to reference
in the 2B350 definition. In reviewing this comment and preparing this
final rule, BIS also consulted with the Department of State. BIS
acknowledges USML Category XXI, which is a temporary holding category
on the USML, could be applicable, but USML Category XXI could also be
applicable for any other USML-related cross reference provided on the
CCL. For this reason, BIS does not add references to USML category XXI.
Based on the interagency review of this comment and the draft final
rule, no additional USML categories need to be added to the `chemical
warfare agents' definition in ECCN 2B350. For the reasons noted above
in responding to the commenter, BIS is implementing this change, as
proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 2B996. This final rule amends 2B996 by revising the heading to
clarify that dimensional inspection or measuring systems or equipment
not controlled by 2B006 or 2B206 are controlled under this ECCN.
Certain dimensional inspection or measuring systems or equipment
controlled under 2B206 would also be controlled under 2B996. To clarify
the relationship between 2B996 and 2B206, this rule adds 2B206 to the
exclusion in 2B996. BIS did not receive any comments on this change, so
this change is implemented, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 2B999. Commenter No. 1 requested BIS clarify the scope of
2B999.g for fittings. The commenter asked BIS to clarify whether or not
304 and 316 stainless steel pipe fittings, which do not fall under
2A292.a, are classified under 2B999.g. This commenter noted that
currently, manufacturers have differing interpretations. Some classify
fittings under 2B999 and others EAR99. Confusion comes from some
thinking 2B999.g includes fittings because ``fittings are simply
shorter pieces of pipe.'' However, others may classify fittings as
EAR99 because they are not specified in 2B999.g. Lastly, this commenter
noted that whether the fittings are EAR99 or 2B999.g the same license
requirements apply. BIS addressed this commenter's suggestion for
removing 2B999 elsewhere in this rule and addressed the request for
clarification here regarding the scope of 2B999.g. BIS confirms here
that fittings are considered part of ``piping'' for purposes of 2B999.
BIS also adds a new note to 2B999.g to clarify the scope of this item.
    ECCN 6A002. This final rule revises the STA (License Exception
``Strategic Trade Authorization'') paragraph in the License Exceptions
section, which as proposed in the November 29 rule and as implemented
in the final rule, is now

in its own section called Special Conditions for License Exception STA.
This final rule removes the phrase, ``to any of the eight destinations
listed in Sec.  740.20(c)(2) of the EAR'' from the end of the current
STA paragraph and adds it to the introductory text of the STA
paragraph. BIS makes this change to clarify the 6A002 ``items''
paragraphs that are not eligible for License Exception STA to any of
the eight destinations listed in Sec.  740.20(c)(2). BIS did not
receive any comments on this change, so BIS is implementing this
change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 6E001 and 6E002. This final rule removes the term
``equipment'' and replaces it with the term ``items'' in the ``NP'' and
``RS'' controls paragraphs in the License Requirements section of 6E001
and 6E002. This clarification is made as a conforming change to the new
``equipment'' definition added in the April 16 (initial implementation)
rule. The clarification is made because the ``NP'' and RS'' items
include paragraph references to other ECCNs that control items other
than equipment and therefore the broader term ``items'' is intended in
these two controls paragraphs in 6E001 and 6E002.
    ECCN 8A918. This final rule removes the marine boilers from 8A918
and moves these items to two new ``items'' paragraphs in the List of
Items Controlled section of 8A992. This rule adds a new ``items''
paragraph (l) to 8A992 for marine boilers designed to have any of the
characteristics in the new 8A992.l.1 or .l.2. This rule adds ``items''
paragraph (m) to 8A992 for ``components,'' ``parts,'' ``accessories,''
and ``attachments'' for marine boilers that would be described in
8A992.l. This rule's movement of these commodities from 8A918 to
8A992.l and .m will remove the Regional Stability (RS) Column 2 control
on these commodities. The Anti-Terrorism (AT) and United Nations (UN)
controls will be retained for the commodities moved to 8A992.l and .m.
BIS proposed this change in the November 29 rule because these marine
boilers do not warrant an RS control or a separate ECCN entry and can
therefore be added under ECCN 8A992 to be controlled with other types
of marine commodities warranting an AT control. BIS did not receive any
comments on this change, so BIS is implementing this change, as
proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 9A980. This final rule revises 9A980 by removing the term
``parts'' from the heading of the ECCN and adding a new heading note to
clarify the scope of the ECCN. The Crime Control (CC) parts that would
have been classified under this entry if exported alone are already
accounted for on the CCL and controlled for CC reasons. The new heading
note clarifies that in order for a vehicle to be classified as a
nonmilitary mobile crime scene laboratory under ECCN 9A980, the vehicle
must contain one or more analytical or laboratory items controlled for
Crime Control (CC) reasons on the CCL, such as items controlled under
ECCN 3A980 or 3A981. This new heading note does not change the scope of
the ECCN, but clarifies the scope of this ECCN and the relationship to
other CC ECCNs. BIS did not receive any comments on this change, so BIS
is implementing this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 9A991. In reviewing the conforming changes for ``parts'' and
``components,'' Commenter No. 6 raised concerns regarding whether the
proposed changes to 9A991.d should be implemented due to a concern that
the proposed wording may inadvertently classify some aircraft ``parts''
and ``components'' as EAR99 while an aircraft is in development.
Commenter No. 6 asserted that under the proposed wording, the ``parts''
and ``components'' to be controlled are only those for ``aircraft''
that meet requirements of 9A991.a or .b. ECCN 9A991.a controls specific
military aircraft, and ECCN 9A991.b controls ``civil aircraft.'' Prior
to receiving a civil airworthiness certificate, developmental aircraft
do not meet the definition of ``civil aircraft'' in Sec.  772.1 of the
EAR. The commenter stated that it would follow that ``parts'' and
``components'' ``specially designed'' for pre-certification non-
military aircraft or in countries where such certificates are not
granted are not described in 9A991.d, and barring any other control,
would be classified EAR99. Once the aircraft is certified, these parts
would move to 9A991.d. Commenter No. 6 indicated they believed this is
not the intent of the control. BIS agrees that this is not the intent
of the control. BIS reviewed this issue and determined it was better to
revise 9A991.b by replacing the term ``civil aircraft'' with the term
``aircraft n.e.s.'' This revision to 9A991.b would describe more
precisely the scope of the ECCN and would be consistent with how BIS
now interprets the ECCN. Aircraft subject to the ITAR will remain ITAR
controlled. Aircraft subject to the EAR and controlled by ECCN 9A610.a
will continue to be controlled by that ECCN. Aircraft described in ECCN
9A991.a will continue to be controlled by that subparagraph. ECCN
9A911.b will continue to control all other aircraft at all stages of
their development or production, and regardless of whether they have a
certification from an aviation authority. This final rule also makes a
conforming change to the change in 9A991.b by revising the regional
stability (RS) 1 control in ECCNs 7D001, 7E001, 7E002, and 7E101. These
ECCNs are amended by removing the term ``civil aircraft'' and replacing
it with the more accurate phrase 9A991.b aircraft. This change is not
substantive and is limited to conforming to the clarification made to
9A991.b and to add greater specificity in these three RS controls. For
additional clarity, this final rule also adds the conjunction ``and''
to the RS control between the terms ``inertial navigation system'' or
``inertial equipment'' in 7D001, 7E001, 7E002 and 7E101, along with
other clarifying text to the RS control in 7E101 to clarify the scope
of this RS control by adding the terms ``required'' and ``specially
designed.''
    xY999 ECCNs. Commenter No. 1 suggested BIS remove all xY999 ECCNs
where items controlled are only AT-controlled. BIS evaluated this
change in drafting the November 29 proposed rule and considered
implementing the removal of certain xY999 entries in this final rule.
However, in evaluating these possible removals with the other agencies
involved in the review process of the November 29 rule, it was
determined that additional analysis is needed before moving forward
with these removals. This determination also took into account the
minimal impact that such removals would have, given that the only xY999
ECCNs under consideration for removal are those where the license
requirements would be redundant with EAR99 items. BIS is still
evaluating whether it may be possible to remove some or all of the
``xY999'' ECCNs on the CCL that may have redundant license requirements
with EAR99 items.
(E) Addition of ``Related Controls'' To Aid in Classification
    Most ECCNs on the CCL contain a ``related controls'' paragraph in
the List of Items Controlled section that provides cross references to
related ECCNs to assist the public in classifying items that are
subject to the EAR. In some ECCNs, the ``related controls'' paragraph
also includes cross-references to the export controls other U.S.
Government agencies administer.
    The November 29 rule proposed adding a number of additional
``related controls'' paragraphs or revising existing ``related
controls'' paragraphs to assist the public in classifying items. This
final rule implements those changes, along with certain additional
``related

controls'' changes in response to BIS's review of the public comments.
In the November 29 proposed rule, BIS advised that in responding to the
proposed rule, the public may also provide suggestions for additional
``related controls'' that would assist the public in classifying items.
This final rule is revising the ``related controls'' paragraphs in the
following twelve ECCNs: 1A985, 1B117, 1B118, 1B119, 1B225, 1C117,
1C233, 2B105, 2B116, 3A230, 7A103 and 9B009 that were proposed in the
November 29 rule. In addition, as a result of the review of public
comments, this final rule is also revising the ``related controls''
paragraphs in the following three ECCNs: 2A226, 2A292 and 2B350 as
follows:
    ECCN 2A226. Commenter No. 9 suggested adding ECCN 2B999 to the
``related controls'' paragraph of 2A226. This commenter noted that
2A226 references other valve ECCNs (2A292 and 2B350), but has no
reference to 2B999. BIS agrees that adding 2B999 would be helpful, so
this final rule is implementing this change.
    ECCN 2A292. Commenter No. 9 suggested adding ECCNs 2B350 and 2B999
to the ``related controls'' paragraph of 2A292. This commenter noted
2A292 references to one other valve ECCN (2A226), but has no reference
to 2B350 or 2B999. BIS agrees that adding 2B350 and 2B999 would be
helpful, so this final rule is implementing this change.
    ECCN 2B350. Commenter No. 9 suggested adding ECCNs to the ``related
controls'' paragraph of ECCN 2B350 instead of using N/A. The commenter
was concerned that the use of ``N/A'' may lead you to mistakenly
conclude that there are no applicable technology ECCNs or any other
potential valve ECCNs. BIS agrees that adding ECCNs 2A226, 2A292,
2A293, 2B231 and 2B999 to the ``related controls'' paragraph of 2B350
would be helpful, so this final rule is implementing this change.
    ECCN 2B999. Commenter No. 9 suggested adding ECCNs 2A226 and 2A292
to the ``related controls'' of 2B999. This commenter noted that 2B999
refers to a number of other ECCNs, including 2B350, but it does not
refer to the other valve ECCNs (2A226 and 2A292). BIS does not accept
this change because it is clear within the context of this ECCN 2B999
that the only valves that are controlled are those referenced in the
long list of ``items.'' BIS is also still evaluating whether it may be
possible to remove 2B999, along with similar ``xY999'' ECCNs on the CCL
that have redundant license requirements with EAR99 items. Additional
analysis is needed, however, before any such ``xY999'' ECCNs can be
removed from the CCL, as noted above.
    Commenter No. 9 also suggested BIS conduct a review of all the
``related controls'' on the CCL to identify additional changes to make
and address inconsistencies. This commenter recommended BIS review the
``related controls'' section of each ECCN in Groups A, B or C to
identify all related ECCNs. The ``related controls'' then should be
updated accordingly to include similar ECCNs of Groups A, B or C as
well as the applicable software and technology ECCNs of Groups D and E.
BIS agrees that regular review of the ``related controls'' paragraphs
should be conducted. BIS has already conducted a review of all the
``related controls'' paragraphs on the CCL, and these are the changes
that were proposed in the November 29 rule. In evaluating the comments
received in response to the November 29 proposed rule, BIS also
identified additional ``related controls'' changes that are being
implemented in this final rule, as described above for ECCNs 2A226,
2A292, and 2B350. BIS will continue conducting regular reviews of the
``related controls'' paragraphs and make updates as necessary on the
CCL. Note, however, that although the ``related controls'' paragraphs
are a useful tool for classifying related items under the CCL, the
``related controls'' paragraphs are not exhaustive or determinative of
an item's control status. They are not part of the control text for a
specific ECCN. Related controls are a method of identifying other ECCN
entries that may be applicable to a particular item, including
highlighting in certain cases when a related item may be subject to the
exclusive jurisdiction of another agency of the U.S. Government.
However, to determine whether an item is classified under another entry
on the CCL or another control list, such as the Nuclear Trigger List or
the United States Munitions List (USML), a person classifying an item
should review the other ECCN or other control lists as applicable to
determine the jurisdictional and classification status of a particular
item.
    Supplement No. 4 to part 774--Commerce Control List Order of
Review--was added to the EAR in the initial implementation rule, and
identifies the proper order of review for reviewing the CCL.
    ECCNs 7A005 and 7A994. This final rule also revises the ``related
controls'' paragraphs in ECCNs 7A005 and 7A994 and includes the
substance of the amended related control paragraph as a new ``license
requirement note'' in 7A994. This change will clarify the relationship
between 7A005 and 7A994 and provide guidance on the appropriate
classification for GPS equipment. The added text in 7A005 and 7A994
will alert persons classifying GPS items that ``typically commercially
available GPS do not employ encryption or adaptive antenna and are
classified as 7A994.'' BIS did not receive any comments on this change,
so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
(F) Addition of the Term ``subject to the ITAR'' to the EAR.
    This final rule adds the term ``subject to the ITAR'' to Sec.
772.1 (Definitions of terms as used in the EAR). This defined term is
added to parallel the use of the term ``subject to the EAR'' that is
commonly used in the EAR, along with simplifying many of the references
to the export jurisdiction of the Department of State that are included
in the EAR. The vast majority of these references to the export control
jurisdiction of the Department of State are on the CCL. This final rule
will therefore add the following definition of ``subject to the ITAR''
in Sec.  772.1:
    A term used in the EAR to describe those commodities, software,
technology (e.g., technical data) and defense services over which the
U.S. Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC)
exercises regulatory jurisdiction under the International Traffic in
Arms Regulations (ITAR) (see 22 CFR 120-130).
    This final rule makes conforming changes to the rest of the EAR,
including several ECCNs and Sec. Sec.  734.4 (De minimis U.S. content),
734.6 (Assistance available from BIS for determining licensing and
other requirements), and 740.6 (Technology and software under
restriction (TSR)), by adding ``subject to the ITAR'' where the export
control jurisdiction of the Department of State is referenced. In
addition to making the conforming change in Sec.  734.6, this rule
revises the references to the ITAR to clarify that, in order to
determine whether an item is ``subject to the ITAR,'' you should review
the ITAR's United States Munitions List (see 22 CFR Sec. Sec.  120.6
and 121.1). If the item is within the scope of a USML category, then
the item is a defense article subject to the ITAR. If it is not, then
it is not subject to the ITAR. The revised text also clarifies that you
may also submit a request to the Department of State, Directorate of
Defense Trade Controls, for a formal jurisdictional determination
regarding

the commodity, software, technology, or activity at issue (see 22 CFR
Sec.  120.4). BIS did not receive any comments on this change, so BIS
is implementing this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
(H) Addition of Paragraph To Clarify the Jurisdiction of Items Subject
to the EAR When Sold, Leased or Loaned by the Department of Defense to
a Foreign Country or International Organization Under the Foreign
Military Sales (FMS) Program
    This final rule adds a new paragraph (b)(1)(vi) to Sec.  734.3,
which identifies items subject to the EAR. This new paragraph was not
proposed in the November 29 rule, but the change is being made in this
final rule as a clarification to the addition of Sec.  734.3(e) in the
initial implementation final rule published on April 16, 2013. While
not effective until October 15, 2013, Sec.  734.3(e) specifies that
items subject to the EAR may be exported, reexported, or transferred in
country under licenses, agreements, or other approvals from the
Department of State's Directorate of Defense Trade Controls pursuant to
Sec. Sec.  120.5(b) and 126.6(c) of the International Traffic in Arms
Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR 120.5(b) and 126.6(c)) or under actions made
by the Department of State's Office of Regional Security and Arms
Transfers.
    New paragraph (b)(1)(vi) clarifies that items that would otherwise
be subject to the EAR and that are sold, leased or loaned by the
Department of Defense to a foreign country or international
organization under the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Program of the Arms
Export Control Act, pursuant to a Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA)
authorizing such transfers, are not ``subject to the EAR'' but rather,
are subject to the authority of the Arms Export Control Act. New
paragraph (b)(1)(vi) clarifies that the terms and conditions of the LOA
would govern the export, reexport, or other transfer of the items.
Lastly, because the heading for new paragraph (b)(1)(vi) refers to the
Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of State, BIS is adding a
cross reference from new paragraph (b)(1)(vi) to paragraph (b)(1)(i),
along with a cross reference from (b)(1)(i) to (b)(1)(vi).
(I) Corrections and Minor Clarifications to Existing CCL Text and
Proposed Text Included in the November 29 Proposed Rule
    The November 29 rule also included minor corrections and
clarifications to the CCL, such as to correct certain misspellings and
typographical errors and make other minor updates to the CCL. BIS did
not receive any comments on these changes, so BIS is implementing these
changes, as proposed, in this final rule for the following two ECCNs:
6C992 and 9B002.
    In the public comments received in response to the November 29
rule, the public identified some additional corrections or minor
clarifications that should be made to existing CCL text or to some of
the proposed text included in the November 29 rule. BIS has accepted
some of these suggested changes, so BIS is implementing these changes
in this final rule for the following ECCNs: 1C002 (to correct a
formatting error in 1C002.c.1.a where ``10\9\'' was incorrectly
proposed as ``109''); 2B352 (to correct a formatting error in 2B352.d.2
where ``(0.2 m\2\)'' was incorrectly proposed as ``(0.2 m2)''); 9E003
(to insert an omitted ``Related Controls) paragraph number (2)''); and
1A002 (to remove an extra ``and'' that was not needed and modify the
punctuation).
    Commenter No. 8 suggested that the heading of 1A002 should also end
in the word ``therefor.'' BIS does not accept this change because the
current entry is consistent with the Wassenaar Arrangement WA dual-use
list entry 1.A.2. In addition, the term is not needed in the context of
this entry.
    ECCN 5A991 (and similar changes to 5A001, 6A008 and 7A005). This
rule changes the spelling of the word ``antennae'' in the ``items''
paragraph (f) of 5A991. This term should be spelled as ``antennas'' to
reflect common American English usage in this ECCN. BIS also accepted
Commenter No. 8's suggestion that a review should be conducted of the
entire CCL to identify any additional places where this same issue
occurs and standardize this usage. BIS identified five other references
on the CCL where this correction needs to be made: ECCN 5A001.d and the
Note to 5A001.d; ECCN 6A008 in the decontrol note for (PAR), 6A008.e;
and ECCN 7A005 in the Note to 7A005.b. This final rule is implementing
these additional five corrections to address this incorrect word usage
on the CCL.
    This final rule does not implement the related change to the
``unit'' paragraph of 5A001 because the ``unit'' paragraph will no
longer be used in ECCNs under the simplified structure being
implemented in this rule for calculating shipping tolerances under the
EAR. As described below, this final rule removes all ``unit''
paragraphs from the CCL, so the proposed change to the ``unit''
paragraph of 5A001 is no longer required, along with any proposed
changes to the ``unit'' paragraph that was included in the November 29
rule.

(2) Changes To Conform the CCL to the Multilateral Export Control
Regime Control Lists and Previous Amendments to the EAR

    This final rule is also making the following changes to conform the
CCL to the multilateral export control regime control lists and to
conform the CCL to the intent of past amendments to the EAR. These are
cases where a previous amendment to the EAR was intended to effect a
change, but the change was not implemented as intended, or where a
conforming change should have been made to the CCL, but was
inadvertently not made. In general, the public did not raise specific
concerns regarding the changes described under this heading (2). The
comments that were received highlighted additional specific examples
that also warranted attention in the final rule: Commenter No. 8, as
was discussed above under heading (1)(B)(Clarifying the use of the
terms ``parts'' and ``components'' on the CCL), raised a concern that
the proposed changes were not consistent with the multilateral export
control regimes and that a regime change proposal would need to be
approved before BIS implemented such changes to multilateral-based
ECCNs, such as those controlled by the Wassenaar Arrangement. BIS does
not agree with this comment for the reasons discussed above under
heading (1)(B). BIS considered discussing these two comments here, but
because the ``parts'' and ``components'' changes were described above
under heading (1)(B), BIS decided to also include these two comments
under the earlier discussion to group them with the other comments and
BIS responses on the ``parts'' and ``components'' changes being
implemented in this final rule.
(A) Conforming Changes for Limitations on Use of TSR for Wassenaar Very
Sensitive List Items
    In implementing its commitment to exercise vigilance in the
licensing of items listed on the Wassenaar Very Sensitive List, the
United States has limited the use of License Exception TSR to a list of
specifically identified countries for certain ECCNs. These limitations
are contained in the TSR paragraph in the License Exception section of
nine ECCNs (i.e., ECCNs 1E001, 5D001, 5E001, 6D001, 6D003, 6E001,
6E002, 8D001 and 8E001) that control items on the Wassenaar Very
Sensitive List and for which TSR has been authorized for some, or all
of the ECCN.
    The TSR paragraph limitation was introduced in 1998, upon

implementation of the Wassenaar Arrangement (63 FR 2452), with a list
of sixteen destinations eligible for TSR for Wassenaar Very Sensitive
List items. Approximately one year later, Japan was added to the TSR
paragraph limitation (64 FR 10852). In 2008, Australia and Norway were
added to the TSR paragraph in ECCN 1E001, with the explanation that
their original exclusion had been an oversight. Australia and Norway
were not added to the other TSR paragraphs with Wassenaar Very
Sensitive List limitations, creating an inconsistency.
    This final rule adopts a standardized list of countries under the
EAR for the nine ECCNs. The use of this standardized list of countries
simplifies the use of the TSR License Exception for these nine ECCNs
and aid the public's understanding regarding which countries are
eligible and not eligible to receive National Security (NS) controlled
technology under these nine ECCNs. Commenter No. 7 supported the
proposed change. BIS has recently determined that the thirty-six
countries listed in License Exception Strategic Trade Authorization,
Section 740.20(c)(1) of the EAR, are eligible for License Exception
authorization for Wassenaar Very Sensitive List items. These 36
countries are: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria,
Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France,
Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland,
Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, Turkey, and the United Kingdom. This final rule revises
the list of countries in the TSR paragraph for the nine ECCNs to state
``those countries listed in Sec.  740.20(c)(1) (License Exception
STA).'' The 17 countries (19 countries in 1E001) that were previously
identified as being eligible for License Exception TSR under these
ECCNs were a subset of the 36 STA-eligible countries. Therefore, this
final rule adds the remaining 19 countries, except for 1E001 where this
final rule adds the remaining 17 countries, as eligible countries to
receive this type of technology through application of License
Exception TSR under these ECCNs.
 (B) ECCN Changes To Conform to the Multilateral Export Control Regimes
    Commenters No. 5 and 7 noted they supported what they said was the
``BIS'' effort to conform the CCL to multilateral export control regime
control lists. Commenter No. 7 also noted they appreciated all the
changes to make CCL language consistent with the MTCR, but they
requested confirmation that their understanding of the intent and scope
of the following proposed changes in the November 29 rule is correct:
``missiles'' is replaced with rockets, missiles and UAVs to ensure
Category 1 and 2 UAVs are captured; only UAV range is specified in
1A101 and 9D105 to capture Category 1 and 2 MTCR items; UAV and payload
are specified in 1D103 to only capture Category 1 subsystems; and UAVs
are not included in 7E104 because the MTCR Annex is specific to
optimization of rocket system trajectory, and does not include a
control related to UAVs. Commenter No. 7's description of the intent
and scope of these changes from the November 29 rule is correct. BIS
received no other comments regarding these proposed changes, so BIS is
implementing these changes, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 1A101. This final rule amends 1A101 by replacing the term
``missiles'' in the heading with the phrase ``rockets, missiles, or
unmanned aerial vehicles capable of achieving a ``range'' equal to or
greater than 300 km'' to conform to the Missile Technology Control
Regime (MTCR) Annex. BIS did not receive any comments on this change,
so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 1D103. This final rule amends 1D103 by replacing the term
``missiles'' in the heading with the phrase ``rockets, missiles, or
unmanned aerial vehicles capable of delivering at least a 500 kg
payload to a ``range'' equal to or greater than 300 km'' to conform to
the MTCR Annex. BIS did not receive any comments on this change, so BIS
is implementing this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 1E001. This final rule amends 1E001 by removing ECCN 1A008
from the heading and NS controls paragraph. This change is made to
conform to the Wassenaar Arrangement List of Dual-Use Goods and
Technologies that does not extend to technology for 1A008. This change
was not proposed in the November 29 rule, but was identified by BIS as
an additional change that needed to be implemented to conform to the
Wassenaar Arrangement. Therefore, BIS is implementing these changes in
this final rule.
    ECCNs 2E001 and 2E002. Commenter No. 6 suggested expanding the
scope of the exclusion in the headings in 2E001 and 2E002 by adding
ECCN 2B999 to the list of commodities controlled in 2B that are not
within the scope of 2E001 and 2E002. To support their position, this
commenter noted that 2E001 and 2E002 control ``technology'' for all
isostatic presses, regardless of capability. They further noted that
even commercial MIG welders and industrial sewage pumps (e.g., ECCNs
2B999.d and 2B999.j) are thus controlled. Commenter No. 6 asserted that
given 2E001 and 2E002 are generally associated with high levels of
control, there may be confusion when ``production'' ``technology'' for
a MIG welder is classified 2E001, but the commodity is classified under
an AT-only control. BIS agrees with Commenter No. 6 and is implementing
these two changes in this final rule. The change being implemented in
the final rule will exclude technology for 2B999, but the overall
impact on the number of licenses received by BIS is expected to be
minimal.
    ECCN 5D101. This final rule amends 5D101 by removing the term
``items'' from the heading and adding the term ``equipment'' in its
place. This rule will make this change to be consistent with the MTCR
Annex. BIS did not receive any comments on this change, so BIS is
implementing this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCNs 6A002 and 6A003. This final rule amends 6A002 and 6A003 by
correcting a spelling error in the headings of these two ECCNs to
remove the term ``therefore'' and replace it with ``therefor.'' These
changes are being made to conform to the Wassenaar Arrangement List of
Dual-Use Goods and Technologies that uses the term ``therefor'' for
both of these entries. These two changes were not proposed in the
November 29 rule, but were identified by BIS as additional changes that
needed to be implemented to conform to the Wassenaar Arrangement.
Therefore, BIS is implementing these changes in this final rule.
    ECCN 6D102. This final rule amends 6D102 by removing the term
``goods'' from the heading and adding the term ``equipment'' in its
place. This rule makes this change to be consistent with the MTCR
Annex. BIS did not receive any comments on this change, so BIS is
implementing this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 6D994. This final rule removes 6D994 to conform to a previous
amendment to the EAR that imposed a control for these same items under
6D003.c. BIS's intention when 6D994 was added to the CCL was to impose
a control on this software until a control could be approved at the
Wassenaar Arrangement and implemented in the EAR. When the final rule
to add this software to 6D003.c was published, the intention was to
remove 6D994. However, this entry was inadvertently retained at the
time 6D003.c was added to the CCL, which may have caused

confusion for exporters trying to classify this type of software
because the software meets the description of two software ECCNs. To
address this oversight, this final rule removes 6D994 from the CCL,
leaving 6D003.c as the control ECCN. BIS did not receive any comments
on this change, so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in
this final rule.
    ECCN 7D101. This final rule amends 7D101 by revising the heading to
include 7A117 in the list of ECCNs for which 7D101 controls the
software. 7A117 is a reference to a USML control based on the MTCR
Annex. 7D101 controls the software of certain commodities controlled
for MT reasons. This change is made to conform to the MTCR Annex. BIS
did not receive any comments on this change, so BIS is implementing
this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 7E104. This final rule amends 7E104 by replacing the term
``missiles'' in the heading with the phrase ``rockets or missiles
capable of achieving a ``range'' equal to or greater than 300 km'' to
conform to the MTCR Annex. BIS did not receive any comments on this
change, so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in this final
rule.
    ECCN 9A107. This final rule amends 9A107 by revising the heading to
replace the word ``engines'' with the word ``motors.'' This change is
made to conform to the MTCR Annex. BIS did not receive any comments on
this change, so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in this
final rule.
    ECCN 9A110. This final rule amends 9A110 by revising the heading to
include 9A109 in the list of ECCNs for which 9A110 controls the
composite structures, laminates and manufactures thereof. 9A109 is a
reference to a USML control based on the MTCR Annex. 9A110 controls the
software of certain commodities controlled for MT reasons. This rule
also amends 9A110 by replacing the defined term ``missiles'' with the
phrase ``rockets, missiles, or unmanned aerial vehicles capable of
achieving a ``range'' equal to or greater than 300 km.'' These changes
are made to conform to the MTCR Annex. BIS did not receive any comments
on these changes, so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in
this final rule.
    ECCN 9A118. This final rule amends 9A118 by inserting the phrase
``missiles, and unmanned aerial vehicles capable of achieving a
``range'' ``equal to or greater than 300 km'' into the heading to
conform to the MTCR Annex. Commenter No. 7 identified a typographical
error in 9A118 where the word ``of'' was used, but the word ``to'' was
intended. BIS accepts this change and is correcting the error in this
final rule, so the parameter correctly reads, ``capable of achieving a
range equal to or greater than 300 km.''
    ECCNs 9B001, 9B002, 9B003 and 9B004. Commenter No. 6 noted that the
relationship between these four ECCNs and ECCN 9A001 could be made
clearer as it relates to the MT controlled portions of these four
ECCNs. This commenter noted that, as currently written, the equipment
described in these four ECCNs is controlled for MT reasons if it is
applicable to any engine whose characteristics are described in 9A001.
However, this commenter suggested that rather than referencing 9A101
obliquely through reference to 9A001 in the MT control(s) paragraphs in
9B001, 9B002, 9B003, and 9B004, BIS should add the following sentence
to the MT control(s) paragraph in these four ECCNs: ``MT applies only
to equipment for engines that meet the characteristics described in
9A101.'' BIS agrees that revising the MT control(s) paragraph in these
four ECCNs would be helpful, but BIS decided to use different control
text than to what was proposed by Commenter No. 6. BIS will revise the
MT control(s) paragraph in these four ECCNs to indicate that the MT
control applies to equipment for engines controlled under 9A001 for MT
reasons and for engines controlled under 9A101. These changes are being
implemented in this final rule.
    ECCN 9B115. This final rule amends 9B115 by revising the heading to
include 9A103 in the list of ECCNs for which 9B115 controls the
``production equipment.'' 9A103 is a reference to a USML control based
on the MTCR Annex. 9B115 controls the ``production equipment'' of
certain commodities controlled for MT reasons. This change is made to
conform to the MTCR Annex. BIS did not receive any comments on this
change, so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in this final
rule.
    ECCN 9B116. This final rule amends 9B116 by revising the heading to
include 9A103 in the list of ECCNs for which 9B116 controls the
``production equipment.'' 9A103 is a reference to a USML control based
on the MTCR Annex. 9B116 controls the ``production equipment'' of
certain commodities controlled for MT reasons. This change is made to
conform to the MTCR Annex. BIS did not receive any comments on this
change, so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in this final
rule.
    ECCN 9D103. This final rule amends 9D103 by revising the heading to
include ECCNs 9A009, 9A107 and 9A109, and to expand the reference to
9A105 from 9A105.a to the entire ECCN in the list of ECCNs for which
9D103 controls certain ``software.'' ECCNs 9A009, 9A105, 9A107, and
9A109 are references to USML controls based on the MTCR Annex. 9D103 is
a reference to a USML control based on the MTCR Annex. This change is
made to conform to the MTCR Annex. BIS did not receive any comments on
this change, so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in this
final rule.
    ECCN 9D104. This final rule amends 9D104 by revising the heading to
include ECCNs 9A006, 9A007, 9A008, 9A009, 9A010, 9A115, 9A116, and
9A106.e in the list of ECCNs for which 9D104 controls the ``software.''
9A006, 9A007, 9A008, 9A009, 9A010, 9A115 and 9A116 are references to
USML controls based on the MTCR Annex. 9A106.e is controlled on the CCL
for MT reasons. 9D104 controls the ``software'' of certain commodities
controlled for MT reasons. This change is made to conform to the MTCR
Annex. BIS did not receive any comments on this change, so BIS is
implementing this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    ECCN 9D105. This final rule amends 9D105 by replacing the term
``missiles'' in the heading with the phrase ``rockets, missiles, or
unmanned aerial vehicles capable of achieving a ``range'' equal to or
greater than 300 km'' to conform to the MTCR Annex. BIS did not receive
any comments on this change, so BIS is implementing this change, as
proposed, in this final rule.

(3) Structural Changes To Improve the Clarity of the CCL

    ECCNs on the CCL follow the same basic paragraph structure,
although not all ECCNs contain the same paragraphs. The common
paragraph structure is intended to allow the public to quickly review
ECCNs and to identify relevant paragraphs in each ECCN. This final rule
is implementing changes to the standard section headings that are used
in most ECCNs on the CCL. These changes affect most of the ECCNs on the
CCL, but are being implemented through instructions instead of setting
out each revision in the regulatory text. BIS is making the changes in
this manner to save on the cost of implementing these structural
changes. BIS's decision also took into account that the changes are not
ECCN specific and are more focused on how the ECCN information is being
communicated to the public. Each of the structural changes this rule
implements improves the clarity of the CCL and is further described
below. Commenter No. 6 noted that the clarification and background in
the November 29 proposed rule on the placement of the phrase ``(see
List of Items Controlled)''

is greatly appreciated, as is the addition of the phrase ``as follows
(see List of Items Controlled)'' where necessary. Commenter No. 8
questioned the use of ``as follows'' because they believed it was
redundant in ECCNs that also use ``(see List of Items Controlled)'' at
the end of the ECCN. BIS agrees that the use of the phrase ``as
follows'' in this case is redundant. BIS is, however, not accepting
this change in the final rule because ``as follows'' is used on the
Wassenaar Arrangement's control lists and because ``(see List of Items
Controlled)'' is a CCL convention.
    Commenter No. 7 noted they supported the structural changes, such
as explicit references to Part 740, License Exceptions, references to
Country Chart, and adding Reporting Requirements section to affected
ECCNs. This commenter noted that these structural changes will increase
understanding of license exceptions and the standardized structure will
make it easier for exporters to use and comply with EAR. BIS agrees.
Receiving no other comments on these changes, BIS implements these
changes, as proposed, in this final rule.
    BIS also implements in this final rule these same structural
changes to the new ECCNs added in the April 16 (initial implementation)
rule and the July 8, 2013 final rule, Revisions to the Export
Administration Regulations: Military Vehicles; Vessels of War;
Submersible Vessels, Oceanographic Equipment; Related Items; and
Auxiliary and Miscellaneous Items that the President Determines No
Longer Warrant Control under the United States Munitions List (July 8
(implementation) rule) (78 FR 22660). These are not corrections to the
initial implementation rule and the July 8 (implementation) rule, but
rather are conforming changes being made as a result of the changes
included in this final rule. This final rule also includes
clarifications to the April 16 (initial implementation) rule that are
not limited to conforming changes with this final rule, but those are
described below under (6) Clarifications to the April 16 (initial
implementation) rule.
    Although the November 29 proposed rule was published before the
initial implementation rule and the July 8 (implementation) rule, those
final rules were published without the structural changes described
here. At the time of publication of those final rules, their new ``600
series'' ECCNs were consistent with the existing structure of the CCL.
This final rule makes these structural changes to the ECCNs added in
those two rules and adopts them for all subsequent rules that add new
ECCNs described here.
    This final rule also includes clarifications to the April 16
(initial implementation) rule that are not limited to conforming
changes with this final rule. These changes are described below under
the heading ``(6) Clarifications to the April 16 (initial
implementation) rule.''
(A) Revision of License Exceptions Section Heading
    This final rule revises the License Exceptions section heading to
add greater specificity. Specifically, this rule revises the section
heading by changing it from ``License Exceptions'' to the more specific
section heading of ``List-Based License Exceptions (See Part 740 for a
description of all license exceptions).'' This rule also adds a
parenthetical after the revised section heading to provide a cross
reference to the license exceptions part of the EAR. This rule adds
this cross reference because a definitive determination of whether a
license exception may be used for a specific ECCN can only be made
after also reviewing the applicable license exception provisions in
part 740 of the EAR. BIS did not receive any comments on this change,
so BIS is implementing this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    This final rule also makes this change to the following ECCNs:
9A610, 9A619, 9B610, 9B619, 9C610, 9C619, 9D610, 9D619, 9E610, and
9E619, as added in the April 16 (initial implementation) rule (78 FR
22718), which goes into effect on October 15, 2013. In addition, this
final rule makes this change to the following ECCNs: 0A606, 0A617,
0B606, 0B617, 0C606, 0C617, 0D606, 0D617, 0D617, 0E606, 0E617, 8A609,
8A620, 8B609, 8B620, 8C609, 8D609, 8D620, 8E609, and 8E620, as added
July 8 (implementation) rule (78 FR 40892), which goes into effect on
January 6, 2014.
(B) Removal of the License Exception STA Paragraphs
    In order to implement the changes described above under (A)
Revision of License Exceptions section heading, this final rule is also
removing the License Exception STA paragraph in the License Exceptions
section of the following seventy-nine ECCNs: 0A606, 0A617, 0B606,
0B617, 0C606, 0C617, 0D606, 0D617, 0D617, 0E606, 0E617, 1A002, 1C001,
1C007, 1C010, 1C012, 1D002, 1E001, 1E002, 2D001, 2E001, 2E002, 3A002,
3B001, 3D001, 3E001, 4A001, 4D001, 4E001, 5A001, 5B001, 5D001, 5E001,
6A001, 6A002, 6A003, 6A004, 6A006, 6A008, 6B008, 6D001, 6D003, 6E001,
6E002, 7D003, 7E001, 7E002, 8A001, 8A002, 8A609, 8A620, 8B609, 8B620,
8C609, 8D001, 8D002, 8E001, 8E002, 8D609, 8D620, 8E609, 8E620, 9A610,
9A619, 9B001, 9B610, 9B619, 9C610, 9C619, 9D001, 9D002, 9D004, 9D610,
9D619, 9E001, 9E002, 9E003, 9E610, and 9E619. This rule moves the text
of those License Exception STA paragraphs to a new section titled
``Special Conditions for STA.'' This rule is creating this new section
immediately following the proposed ``List-Based License Exceptions (See
Part 740 for a description of all license exceptions)'' instruction
because the License Exception STA paragraphs do not perform the same
function as the other list-based license exception paragraphs. This
rule is not implementing any changes to the regulatory text included in
the current License Exception STA paragraphs of these ECCNs. These STA
changes include the thirty ``600 series'' ECCNs referenced above
(0A606, 0A617, 0B606, 0B617, 0C606, 0C617, 0D606, 0D617, 0D617, 0E606,
0E617, 8A609, 8A620, 8B609, 8B620, 8C609, 8D609, 8D620, 8E609, 8E620,
9A610, 9A610, 9B610, 9B619, 9C610, 9C619, 9D610, 9D619, 9E610 and
9E619) that were not included in the November 29 proposed rule, but are
now included because ten of these ECCNs were published in the initial
implementation rule and will be in the EAR on the effective date of
this final rule, and the other twenty have been published in the July 8
(implementation) rule. The July 8 (implementation) rule is not
effective until January 6, 2014, but the changes being implemented in
this rule will align these twenty ``600 series'' ECCNs with structural
changes being made to the ECCN headings when that rule does become
effective. The changes implemented in this rule are limited to adding a
new section heading and moving the existing License Exception STA
paragraphs in these seventy-nine ECCNs to the new STA section heading.
BIS did not receive any comments on this change, so BIS is implementing
this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
(C) Adding a Cross-Reference After Country Chart
    This final rule is revising the ``Country Chart'' paragraph heading
in the License Requirements section to add a parenthetical to indicate
where the public can find the Country Chart. The revised Country Chart
paragraph heading will now read ``Country Chart (See Supp. No. 1 to
part 738).'' Not all ECCNs include a Country Chart paragraph and a
small number of ECCNs do not rely on the Commerce Country Chart for
determining destination-based

license requirements. Most ECCNs, however, are structured to refer to
the information contained in the Country Chart paragraph in Supplement
No. 1 to part 738 to identify destination-based license requirements.
The changes in this rule will clarify that for the ECCNs that use this
structure, exporters, reexporters and transferors need to refer to the
Country Chart in Supplement No. 1 to part 738 to determine destination-
based license requirements. For experienced exporters, reexporters, and
transferors, this structure is well understood. The new cross
references are primarily intended for those exporters, reexporters, and
transferors who are new to the EAR and who may not as readily
understand the relationship between this standard ECCN paragraph and
Supplement No. 1 to part 738. The new parenthetical phrase at the end
of the Country Chart paragraph will make the relationship explicit. BIS
did not receive any comments on this change, so BIS is implementing
this change, as proposed, in this final rule.
    This final rule also makes this change to the following ECCNs:
9A610, 9A619, 9B610, 9B619, 9C610, 9C619, 9D610, 9D619, 9E610, and
9E619, as added in the April 16 (initial implementation) rule (78 FR
22718), which goes into effect on October 15, 2013. In addition, this
final rule also makes this change to the following ECCNs: 0A606, 0A617,
0B606, 0B617, 0C606, 0C617, 0D606, 0D617, 0D617, 0E606, 0E617, 8A609,
8A620, 8B609, 8B620, 8C609, 8D609, 8D620, 8E609, and 8E620, as added
July 8 (implementation) rule (78 FR 40892), which goes into effect on
January 6, 2014.
(D) Adding a New ``Reporting Requirements'' Section to Certain ECCNs
    Some ECCNs include references to reporting requirements, which are
typically found either in License Requirement notes or in notes to the
``items'' paragraphs in the List of Items Controlled section. BIS has
adopted a standardized paragraph structure for ECCNs, as much as
possible, to assist the public in classifying items. A standardized
paragraph structure helps the public classify items by putting the
information contained in an ECCN into a useable and easily recognizable
format. The current reporting requirements, which are found in various
sections and paragraphs of the individual ECCNs, deviate from this type
of standardized structure. To address this issue, this final rule is
adding a new section heading called Reporting Requirements where the
existing reporting requirements found in ECCNs will be consolidated.
This rule is not making any changes to the scope of current reporting
requirements. This standardized structure will aid in compliance with
the reporting requirements and assist exporters in more quickly and
easily identifying ECCNs subject to reporting requirements. The rule is
adding the new Reporting Requirements section heading immediately
before the License Exceptions section.
    To implement this change in Supplement No. 1 to part 774 (the
Commerce Control List), this final rule removes the ``License
Requirements Notes'' paragraphs in the License Requirements section in
the following forty-three ECCNs: 1A002, 1C007, 1C010, 1D002, 1E001,
1E002, 2B003, 2D001, 2E001, 2E002, 3A002, 3B001, 3D001, 3E001, 4A001,
4E001, 5A001, 5B001, 5D001, 5E001, 6A001, 6A002, 6A003, 6A004, 6A006,
6A008, 6B008, 6D001, 6D003, 6E001, 6E002, 8A001, 8A002, 8D001, 8D002,
8E001, 8E002, 9B001, 9D001, 9D002, 9E001, 9E002 and 9E003. In forty-two
of these ECCNs and in six additional ECCNs: 1C001, 4D001, 7D002, 7D003,
7E001, 7E002, this rule adds the new section entitled ``REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS See Sec.  743.1 of the EAR for reporting requirements for
exports under License Exceptions, Special Comprehensive Licenses, and
Validated End-User authorizations'' after the License Requirements
section in each of these respective ECCNs. BIS is adding the
``REPORTING REQUIREMENTS'' paragraph to ECCNs 1C001, 4D001, 7D002,
7D003, 7E001 and 7E002 to alert exporters that reporting requirements
were imposed on these ECCNs in the April 16 (initial implementation)
rule through the changes to Sec.  743.1 and the addition of the
Wassenaar Arrangement Sensitive and Very Sensitive Lists as Supplements
Nos. 6 and 7 to Part 774. In ECCN 6A003, this rule adds a Reporting
Requirement section with a more detailed statement describing the
specific reporting requirement applicable to that ECCN. This rule also
changes the new Reporting Requirements section to ensure that the text
conforms to the listing of authorizations in Sec.  743.1 that require
reporting to BIS. Lastly, this rule removes the License Requirement
Note in 3B001, but does not add a Reporting Requirements section
because 3B001 is not identified in Sec.  743.1, so the reference is no
longer needed.
    Commenter No. 8 requested that additional explanation be provided
regarding the role of other License Requirements Notes on the CCL and
whether such notes should be renamed to better reflect their role in
those ECCNs. This commenter noted that unlike other elements of an
ECCN, the EAR does not address what significance exporters should give
such notes when interpreting an ECCN. This commenter noted that it
would stand to reason that these notes are commentary relevant to
``License Requirements'' section. That section, however, addresses
reasons why export of an item might require a license, whereas notes
often purport to address substantive scope of an ECCN. BIS does not
believe any additional renaming of the License Requirements Notes is
needed at this time, but BIS will continue to review this issue as an
additional option for making the CCL clearer. At this time, the License
Requirements Notes tend to have an ECCN-specific meaning, typically
describing in greater detail the scope of the ECCN or the license
requirements applicable to a specific ECCN.
    Commenter No. 8 also provided the example of the License
Requirement Note 1 to 1C351, which states that certain medical products
containing most ECCN 1C351 toxins are excluded from 1C351, to
illustrate his concern and request for guidance. Commenter No. 8
asserted that this creates the impression 1C351 would control medical
products containing some toxins listed in that ECCN, or possibly even
other items covered by 1C351. The ``items'' paragraph of 1C351,
however, covers only stand-alone viruses, bacteria, toxins and fungi.
The EAR require that all items controlled under a given ECCN be set out
in a positive list in the ``items'' paragraph, but ECCN 1C351's
``items'' paragraph does not identify any item that contains a toxin,
virus, etc., contrary to the implication created by License Requirement
Note 1. The commenter also contended that BIS takes the position that
ECCN 1C351 does control items containing such ECCN 1C351 items. In
addition to the general response above on the comment for renaming the
License Requirements Notes, BIS provides this specific guidance on the
meaning of the License Requirement Note in 1C351. The License
Requirement Note is explicit regarding what is excluded from 1C351 and
what is classified as 1C991 by specifying in the last sentence of the
License Requirement Note that ``vaccines, immunotoxins, certain medical
products, and diagnostic and food testing kits excluded from the scope
of this entry are controlled under ECCN 1C991.'' Other products may be
1C351, such as tissue samples that have pathogens. However, if this
person or

any other person has a question regarding the classification of a
particular material or the applicability of a License Requirements
Note, he or she may submit a commodity classification request to BIS
using the SNAP-R online submission system. BIS did not receive any
other comments on this change, so BIS is implementing it, as proposed,
in this final rule.
    (E) Section 738.2(d)(2)(Reading an ECCN). Commenter No. 8 noted
that the explanations in the November 29 proposed rule of the
relationship between the heading of an ECCN and its ``items''
paragraph, and the significance of the placement of the phrase ``(see
List of Items Controlled)'' in the heading, are at odds with the
instructions on reading an ECCN in Sec.  738.2(d)(2) of the EAR.
Section 738.2(d)(2) states that the ``items'' paragraph in the List of
Items Controlled section is the list of items controlled under that
ECCN and that if the header is a complete list, the ``items'' paragraph
consists solely of a note directing the reader to review the heading.
    BIS accepts this comment and revises Sec.  738.2(d)(2) of the EAR
to address the commenter's concerns, and adds new paragraphs
(d)(2)(iv)(C)(1), (2), and (3) to provide examples of the three
different uses of the phrase ``(see List of Items Controlled)'' in ECCN
headings. Understanding the relationship between the heading and the
``items'' paragraph is important when classifying items that are
``subject to the EAR'' on the CCL and these examples will assist the
public's understanding of these provisions of the EAR. These revisions
reflect that the ECCN heading is a list of the items controlled in the
ECCN and that the ``items'' paragraph in the List of Items Controlled
section will completely describe portions of the ECCN heading subject
to control if the phrase ``(see List of Items Controlled)'' is in the
heading. If the phrase ``(see List of Items Controlled)'' does not
appear in the heading, the heading is complete. An example of such a
heading is ECCN 4E980 ``[t]echnology'' for the ``development,''
``production'' or ``use'' of commodities controlled by 4A980. ECCNs
0A982, 3A292, 5D101, 8D001, and 9A002 are other examples where the
heading is the exclusive description of the items classified under
those respective ECCNs.
    If the phrase ``(see List of Items Controlled)'' appears at the end
of the heading, the ``items'' paragraph in the List of Items Controlled
section is a complete, exclusive description of the items controlled
under that ECCN and the heading is merely for reference purposes. An
example of an ECCN where all of the heading text precedes the phrase
``(see List of Items Controlled)'' is ECCN 8A002 Marine systems,
equipment, ``parts'' and ``components,'' as follows (see List of Items
Controlled). ECCNs 1A001, 3A001, 6A001, 7A004, and 9A012 are other
examples where all of the heading text precedes the phrase ``(see List
of Items Controlled).''
    If the phrase ``(see List of Items Controlled)'' appears in the
middle of the heading, the ``items'' paragraph in the List of Items
Controlled section is a description of the items controlled under that
ECCN for the portion of the heading that preceded the phrase. However,
any portion of the heading that follows the phrase ``(see List of Items
Controlled)'' is to be read in addition to the ``items'' paragraph. An
example of such a heading is ECCN 2B992 Non-``numerically controlled''
machine tools for generating optical quality surfaces, (see List of
Items Controlled) and ``specially designed'' ``parts'' and
``components'' therefor. ECCNs 1A006, 3B992, 4A001, 6A006, and 7A001
are other examples where the phrase ``(see List of Items Controlled)''
appears in the middle of the ECCN heading. BIS has identified seven
additional ECCNs that require the phrase ``(see List of Items
Controlled)'' in the ECCN headings: 1C350, 1C355, 1C992, 2A991, 3B992,
5A992, and 9A004. In each of these ECCNs, the heading is not a complete
description of the items controlled under that ECCN and the ``items''
paragraph of the List of Items Controlled section details the items
controlled. Therefore, BIS implements the changes suggested by the
commenter in this final rule.
(F) Addition of Guidance on the Use of Quotation Marks on the CCL
    In addition to the changes described below for Sec.  774.1, this
final rule also revises this section to add a new paragraph (d)
entitled Conventions related to the use of quotation marks on the CCL.
This new paragraph provides guidance on the use of quotation marks on
the CCL. This guidance is not a substantive change to the CCL and is
limited to providing guidance on BIS's current practice as it relates
to the use of quotation marks on the CCL. BIS did not propose this in
the November 29 proposed rule, but identified this as an additional
non-substantive clarification that could be made to the CCL. Therefore,
BIS is implementing this change in this final rule.
    As background for this new guidance, part 772 includes definitions
for terms used in the EAR. Throughout the EAR, but most prevalent in
the CCL, BIS uses the convention of double quotes to identify terms
that are defined in part 772. If a term on the CCL uses double quotes,
it means it is a defined term in part 772. However, the absence of
double quotes does not mean that a term used on the CCL is not defined
in part 772. Because the CCL includes many terms that are defined in
part 772, BIS's practice is to use double quotes for certain defined
terms and when it is needed for consistency with multilateral export
control regime based entries, such as many derived from control lists,
in particular for the Wassenaar Arrangement that also uses the double
quotes convention. However, because of the large number of defined
terms used on the CCL and a desire to avoid hindering readability by
placing quotes around too many terms used in particular ECCNs, BIS's
practice is to not add double quotes around certain terms, such as