On January 23, 2020, the Department of State issued a final rule containing changes to its International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). We all remember the ITAR. They are the regulations that strike fear into the hearts of all who would export “defense articles” outside the United States. Many launch vehicles are on the U.S. Munitions List in Category IV as defense articles. If you wish to export a defense article you need State’s authorization. Is the launch of a launch vehicle an export for purposes of the ITAR? In its rulemaking, State’s discussion contained an interesting phrase that reminded me of a provision in the Commercial Space Launch Act (CSLA), at 51 USC 50919(f).
State noted:
Both the ITAR and the EAR impose license requirements on exports and reexports. Items not subject to the ITAR or to the exclusive licensing jurisdiction of any other set of regulations are subject to the EAR.
State’s reference to an “exclusive licensing jurisdiction” should refer to the FAA. Although a launch or reentry vehicle may leave the country when it goes to space, its operator should not require State’s authorization to conduct the launch itself under the ITAR. Section 50919(f) states:
A launch vehicle, reentry vehicle, or payload that is launched or reentered is not, because of the launch or reentry, an export or import, respectively, for purposes of a law controlling exports or imports, except that payloads launched pursuant to foreign trade zone procedures as provided for under the Foreign Trade Zones Act (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u) shall be considered exports with regard to customs entry.
In short, a launch or reentry vehicle, or a payload, is not an export “for purposes of a law controlling exports;” and the law controlling exports at issue here is ITAR.
When Congress passed the CSLA in 1984, the House Committee on Science and Technology reviewed the laws a launch operator needed to comply with before the CSLA’s passage. One of those laws was the Arms Export Control Act, which the State Department implements through the ITAR. The House Science Committee noted that it
carefully evaluated the existing legal framework that may be used to govern commercial launch activities and concluded that significant deficiencies exist within it. … With the emergence of commercial launch activities, the interpretation of these laws and regulations has been extended to cover these activities. In some cases this was appropriate; in others it was not. The case with the Arms Export Control Act and its implementing regulations, the [ITAR,] illustrates this situation.
The ITAR is a statutory mechanism for the regulation of U.S. armaments and is designed to address foreign policy and national security concerns. … Such control was not intended to apply to the launch into space of items having commercial purposes, yet ITAR licensing has been used by the Administration as a temporary solution to the lack of regulatory control over commercial launch operations.
The inappropriateness and inadequacy of this regulatory mechanism, according to the Committee, especially with respect to technical safety, was demonstrated by the experiences of the first commercial launch operators seeking federal approval. The Committee found that the situation created confusion, unnecessary burdens, and serious impediments to the fledgling industry.
Thus, according to the Committee report, the new Commercial Space Launch Act established “a single, comprehensive regulatory mechanism” for launch operations. The Senate committee report echoed similar sentiments, also describing the CSLA as the “exclusive authority” for licensing launch. (The committee reports are likely the source of the FAA’s AST “one-stop shop” moniker.)
Perhaps the State Department’s oblique reference is intended to capture both the history and the statutory carve-out of launch, reentry and payloads from ITAR authority.