Aerospace Association Requests More Discussion Before State, Commerce Finalize Space Export Controls

Citing a response from one of its member companies, AIA’s comments in the docket criticized the “overwhelming majority of spacecraft parts and components” categorized under exports controls, saying they require too many licenses or license exceptions for exports to all countries but Canada. The AIA member company asked Commerce to “evaluate” the list and “expand the list of parts and components that do not pose a threat to National Security and Regional Stability,” such as “environmental control and life support systems” and “spacecraft internal and external lighting, humidity and CO2 removal systems.” The company also asked for a clarification for the term “space-based logistics,” saying the term captures cargo resupply missions to the [International Space Station]” but “is unclear beyond that application.”

SpaceX recommended that Commerce and State remove certain export control license requirements for exports “related to ocean launch and landing activities” or those that take place “outside the atmosphere,” according to its comments. SpaceX said the International Traffic in Arms Regulations and Export Administration Regulations do not “clearly identify where in the ocean the United States begins and ends, making it difficult to determine what constitutes an ‘export’” when a U.S. person is launching spacecraft from the ocean. SpaceX suggested adding an exemption to ITAR “to allow [U.S.] persons that are registered with [the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls] to ship” defense products from the U.S. into the ocean on the condition that those products don’t enter a foreign country’s waters and are returned to the U.S. after “launch or recovery activities are complete.”

Similarly, SpaceX said it is not clear whether product transfers that occur “outside Earth’s atmosphere” are “exports” or “reexports” and “whether licensing is required for such transfers or releases.” SpaceX asked that license exemptions be added to the ITAR and EAR for transfers that occur outside the Earth’s atmosphere. SpaceX also asked for “landing leg assemblies” to have less strict export controls, saying “this level of control is not necessary” for a “passive on assent” component. “They are also not required for the delivery of a payload, and do not enhance the capability of the rocket to deliver a payload to orbit,” SpaceX said.

In its comments, Northrop Grumman suggested removing “planetary rovers” from its existing export control classification number (ECCN 9A515) because rovers do not “meet the definition of a satellite, spacecraft or space vehicle.” Northrop Grumman said rovers are “designed to be ground vehicles” and should be classified under a “new 9A category” that should “address rovers and other robotic space equipment that are designed to operate in outer space but are not hardware ‘specially designed’ for a satellite or spacecraft.” Northrop Grumman also suggested Commerce “make a clear distinction” between hardware designed for satellites and spacecraft and hardware designed for a launch vehicle or missile. “These items cause licensing challenges for spacecraft manufacturers in having to obtain multiple export authorizations (DDTC/BIS) for technical data/technology required for one spacecraft program,” Northrop Grumman said, asking Commerce to “minimize this multijurisdiction licensing burden.” Northrop Grumman also recommended that Commerce provide a definition for “'Space Vehicle' in both the ITAR and EAR to clarify the differences between a ‘Space Launch Vehicle,' ‘Spacecraft’ and ‘Space Vehicle.’”

Northrop Grumman added that space-related manufacturers have not saved any money or seen a “cost benefit” from export control reform. The company said that many of the categories are growing “more complex,” causing business to use “more resources” to classify their products and technology. However, it said “future regulatory changes” that address the “existing ambiguities and minimize the need for export authorizations under the ITAR and EAR” would likely “result in quantifiable cost savings.”

Boeing requested that “launch vehicle dispensers” and “satellite-to-satellite interstage adapters” be added to the list of export controls that Commerce should review, in its comments. The company said clarifying those two items in the controls would “better delineate militarily critical items versus commercial commodities and technologies,” and suggested separating the two under different categories: satellite dispensers should be placed under export control classification number 9A604 and satellite-to-satellite interstage adapters should be controlled under classification number 9A515.x. In addition, Boeing said “electric propulsion systems” and “star trackers” should be included in U.S. export control categories since both have entered “normal commercial use” in “communications satellite programs” after Commerce made its most recent revisions to the control list. Boeing said electric propulsion systems, in “widespread use” on commercial communications satellites, should be controlled under EAR. Boeing also said star trackers are “commonly used” on the same satellites and should transition from control under ITAR to EAR.

The Satellite Industry Association also recommended changes to the electric propulsion systems and star trackers export control categories, suggesting that both be moved from the U.S. Munitions List to the Commerce Control List. SIA also suggested USML’s category IV include the phrase “specially designed” in its description “to account for standard launch integration technologies that are usable with a wide variety of payloads and launch vehicles.”

Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory suggested adding several space-related technologies to State's and Commerce’s list of items to review, including satellite thrusters, gyroscopes, internal navigations systems, spacecraft antenna systems, star trackers and astrocompasses, according to its comments. The lab also suggested adding a category that provides “control guidance” for “mass spectrometers,” spectral sensors and magnetometers.