| Home > 107th Congressional Documents > H.Doc.107-236 A REPORT ON THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT TO IRAN ...
H.Doc.107-236 A REPORT ON THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY WITH RESPECT TO IRAN ...
107th Congress, 2d Session - - - - - - - - - - - House Document 107-235 PERIODIC REPORT ON THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY CAUSED BY THE LAPSE OF THE EXPORT ADMINISTRATION ACT OF 1979 __________ MESSAGE from THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES transmitting A SIX MONTH PERIODIC REPORT ON THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY DECLARED BY EXECUTIVE ORDER 13222 OF AUGUST 17, 2001 TO DEAL WITH THE THREAT TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY, FOREIGN POLICY, AND ECONOMY OF THE UNITED STATES CAUSED BY THE LAPSE OF THE EXPORT ADMINISTRATION ACT OF 1979, PURSUANT TO 50 U.S.C. 1641(c) AND 50 U.S.C. 1703(c) <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT> June 26, 2002.--Message and accompanying papers referred to the Committee on International Relations and ordered to be printed __________ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 99-011 WASHINGTON : 2002 To the Congress of the United States: As required by section 204(c) of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1703(c)) and section 401(c) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)), I transmit herewith a 6-month report prepared by my Administration, on the national emergency declared by Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, to deal with the threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States caused by the lapse of the Export Administration Act of 1979. George W. Bush. The White House, June 25, 2002. Periodic Report on the National Emergency Caused by the Lapse of the Export Administration Act of 1979 for August 19, 2001 to February 19, 2002 On August 17, 2001, in Executive Order 13222, I declared a national emergency under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) to deal with the threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States caused by the lapse of the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (EAA) (50 U.S.C. App. 2401 et seq.), and the systems of controls maintained under that Act. In that order, I continued in effect, to the extent permitted by law, the provisions of the EAA, the Export Administrations Regulations (EAR) (15 C.F.R. et seq.), and the delegations of authority set forth in Executive Order 12002 of July 7, 1977 (as amended by Executive Order 12755 of March 12, 1991, and Executive Order 13026 of November 15, 1996), Executive Order 12214 of May 2, 1980, Executive Order 12851 of June 11, 1993, and Executive Order 12938 of November 14, 1994, as amended. I issued Executive Order 13222 pursuant to the authority vested in me as President of the Constitution and laws of the United States, including, but not limited to, IEEPA. I also submitted a report to Congress pursuant to section 204(b) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1703(b)). Section 204 of IEEPA requires follow-up reports, with respect to actions and changes, to be submitted every 6 months. Additionally, section 401(c) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)) requires that the President, within 90 days after the end of each 6-month period following a declaration of a national emergency, to report to the Congress on the total expenditures directly attributable to that declaration. To comply with these requirements, I am submitting the following combined activities and expenditures report for the 6-month period from August 19, 2001, to February 19, 2002. Detailed information on export control activities is contained in the most recent Export Administration Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2001 and the January 2002 Report on Foreign Policy Export Controls, required by section 14 and section 6(f) of the EAA, respectively, which the Department of Commerce continues to submit to Congress under a policy of conforming actions under the Executive Order to the provisions of the EAA, as appropriate. Since the issuance of Executive Order 13222, the Department of Commerce has continued to administer and enforce the system of export controls, including anti-boycott provisions, containedin the EAR. In administering these controls, the Department has acted under a policy of conforming actions under Executive Order 13222 to the provisions of the EAA, insofar as appropriate. The expenses incurred by the Federal Government in the 6- month period from August 19, 2001, to February 19, 2002, that are directly attributable to the exercise of authorities conferred by the declaration of a national emergency with respect to export controls, were largely centered in the Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS). Expenditures by the Department of Commerce for the reporting period are anticipated to be $28,648,000, most of which represents program operating costs, wage and salary costs for federal personnel, and overhead expenses. There have been several significant developments in the area of export controls since the EAA expired in August 2001: A. MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENTS The Wassenaar Arrangement (WA) The Wassenaar Arrangement is a multilateral regime currently consisting of 33 member countries. Its purpose is to contribute to regional and international security and stability by promoting transparency and greater responsibility in international transfers of conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies. In October 2001, a Wassenaar General Working Group Meeting discussed the increase in general information exchange regarding regions and projects of concern, specific information exchange on dual-use goods and technologies, and the scope of dual-use notifications. In light of the events of September 11, 2001, the United States introduced a proposal to ensure that Wassenaar's focus included combating terrorism; this proposal was subsequently approved. Discussions also centered around U.S. proposals for expanded reporting of conventional arms transfers, strengthening dual-use notification procedures by establishing a denial consultation procedure, and implementation of catch-all controls. In November 2001 and February 2002, WA Expert Group meetings reviewed Wassenaar controls on conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies. The proposals discussed at the November meeting were in the areas of electronics, computers, telecommunications, encryption, andmachine tools. Proposals discussed at the February 2002 meeting focused on electronics, computers, machine tools, sensors and lasers, navigation and avionics, the definition of ``specially designed,'' and Wassenaar's munitions list. Discussions also were held to seek agreement to relax controls on microprocessors and computers in light of rapid technological advances and controllability factors. The majority of Wassenaar members advocated a complete decontrol of general purpose microprocessors and a drastic liberalization of computer controls. However, members could not come to consensus on these issues. With a few notable exceptions, there was little agreement on changes to the dual-use and munitions control lists. Further discussions in these areas will resume during the April 2002 list review. In December 2001, a special Expert Group meeting--to discuss controls on general purpose microprocessors and computers, and the annual Plenary meeting were held. Members underlined the importance of strengthening export controls and reaffirmed their commitment to maintain responsible national policies in the licensing of exports of arms and sensitive dual-use items. The Plenary approved the U.S. proposal to add prevention of the acquisition of conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies by terrorist groups as a focus of the regime. The Plenary approved a revised statement of understanding on intangible transfers of technology and software, agreed to subject two additional sub-categories of military items to mandatory arms export reporting, and agreed to a number of control list amendments. The Plenary also agreed to continue the study of options for increasing the efficiency of export controls, including a catch-all mechanism and a denial consultation procedure. These measures will be discussed during the May 2002 General Working Group Meeting. The United States also continues to participate in submissions of export data made by regime members. Wassenaar members make dual-use data submissions on a semi-annual basis in April and October. The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) The MTCR is an informal multilateral nonproliferation regime of 33 countries that have agreed to coordinate their national export controls for the prevention of missile proliferation. Each member, under its own laws and practices, adheres to the export licensing policy reflectedin the MTCR Guidelines for items found on the MTCR Equipment and Technology Annex. The United States participated in the annual MTCR Plenary held in Ottawa, Canada on September 24-28, 2001. At the Plenary, the MTCR Partners shared information about activities and programs of missile proliferation concern, agreed that the risk of proliferation of WMD and their means of delivery remained a major concern for global and regional security, and considered additional steps they can take, individually and collectively, to prevent the proliferation of delivery systems for weapons of mass destruction. To this end, the Partners held a special meeting for enforcement officers to foster greater cooperation in stopping and impeding specific shipments of missile proliferation concern. They also reaffirmed the important role played by export controls and the need to strengthen them further and implement them vigorously. The Partners also discussed ways to promote outreach to non-members on key controls and the need to strengthen them further and implement them vigorously in addition to key issues such as the global missile threat, missile related export controls and transshipment. The Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) The NSG, composed of 39 countries and the European Commission as a permanent observer, is an informal group of nations concerned with the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The NSG has established guidelines to assist member nations in administering national nuclear export control programs. Controls are focused on certain categories of goods: nuclear material, equipment and technology unique to the nuclear industry, and so-called nuclear dual-use items that have both nuclear and non-nuclear applications. At the annual NSG Plenary held in May 2001, members agreed that the two segments of the NSG organization devoted to dual- use (Commerce Department) and ``trigger list'' (Nuclear Regulatory Commission for components, and Department of Energy for technology and services) items would be combined into one administrative unit. To reflect this new structure, members agreed to establish a new Consultative Group (CG) that will meet twice a year to review the guidelines, control lists, and overall activities of the NSG. The first meeting of the CG, which replaces the NSGDual Use Regime, the Information Sharing Working Group, and the Transparency Working Group, occurred in Vienna, Austria, on November 29, 2001. It was also agreed that the NSG would consider having an intensified dialogue with non-NPT parties. At this first CG meeting, it was agreed to limit the number of items caught by a control on linear displacement measurement devices through the addition of a technical note of explanation in the NSG Guidelines. This clarification will limit the control to those more sophisticated items that are directly useful in the creation of weapons of mass destruction. Agreement also was reached to hold the first Export Enforcement Experts meeting at the 2002 NSG Plenary to be held in Prague, the Czech Republic in May 2002; to review the NSG Guidelines for ways to address the nuclear terrorism threat; and to hold the 2003 NSG Plenary in South Korea. The Australia Group (AG) The AG is an informal multilateral nonproliferation regime that seeks to impede the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons through the harmonization of export controls, an exchange of information on global proliferation activities, and outreach to nonmembers. The 33-member countries meet annually and communicate intersessionally to review and refine the list of controlled chemicals, biological agents, and related equipment and technology. At the October 2001 AG Plenary Session, the Group reaffirmed the members' continued collective belief in the AG's viability, importance and compatibility with the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and Biological Weapons Convention (BWC). Responding to the terrorist events of September 11, AG participants also agreed that strengthening the regime to better counter CBW proliferation and CBW terrorism should be a priority. Participants agreed to several proposals aimed at plugging loopholes in current AG export controls; they also agreed that export controls, regional nonproliferation and countering CBW terrorism will be the main focus of the Group for the foreseeable future. Members also continued to agree that full adherence to the CWC and Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) by all governments will be a key to achieving a permanent global ban on chemical and biological weapons, and that all states adhering to theseConventions must take steps to ensure that their national activities support these goals. The Group welcomed Bulgaria as its newest member and reaffirmed its commitment to continue its active outreach program of briefings for non-AG countries, and to promote regional consultations on export controls and nonproliferation to further awareness and understanding of national policies in these areas. At a February 2002 intercessional meeting, an understanding was reached on two Department of Commerce proposals that would create export controls on biotechnology, and change the criteria for controls on chemical process valves. Three other Commerce proposals that would expand controls on shipments of dual-use chemicals, biological agents, and related equipment to include items useful in terrorist activities were favorably considered. These proposals were considered in detail at a Technical Experts Meeting in March 2002. AG export controls currently focus on items that can support militarily significant, state-run programs. The United States is seeking to augment AG controls with measures directed at commodities and technology that can be used to support terrorist activities. The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) The CWC is an international arms control and nonproliferation treaty that bans chemical weapons and monitors the legitimate production, processing, consumption, export, and import of certain toxic chemicals and precursors that could contribute to the development of weapons of mass destruction. Certain export control provisions of the Convention are reflected in the EAR. B. ENCRYPTION/HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTER POLICY Encryption To conform with Wassenaar changes, the Administration
Other Popular 107th Congressional Documents Documents:
|GovRecords.org presents information on various agencies of the United States Government. Even though all information is believed to be credible and accurate, no guarantees are made on the complete accuracy of our government records archive. Care should be taken to verify the information presented by responsible parties. Please see our reference page for congressional, presidential, and judicial branch contact information. GovRecords.org values visitor privacy. Please see the privacy page for more information.|
Supreme Court Decisions
104th Congressional Documents
105th Congressional Documents
106th Congressional Documents
107th Congressional Documents
108th Congressional Documents
1994 Presidential Documents