More than 50 Democrats urged the Biden administration to keep State Department export controls over 3D printed guns, saying their transfer to the Commerce Department is “profoundly dangerous” and will allow “anyone to build untraceable firearms on demand.” The lawmakers, led by Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Rep. Grace Meng of New York, urged the administration to “place strict regulatory controls” over the weapons and their technical data.

The State Department fined a U.S. aerospace and technology company $13 million for illegally exporting technical data to several countries, including China, according to a May 3 order. Honeywell International sent drawings of parts for military-related items, including for engines of military jets and bombers, the agency said, all of which were controlled under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. After discovering the violations, issuing a self-disclosure to the State Department and bolstering its compliance program, the company again illegally exported technical drawings, failing to abide by its improved compliance requirements, the order said.

Although a court opinion last week cleared the way for exports of 3D-printed guns to be removed from State Department jurisdiction, the guns will continue to be covered under the agency’s U.S. Munitions List until the ruling is made official, the State Department said.

The Bureau of Industry and Security fined a U.S. thermal imaging camera producer more than $300,000 after it violated the Export Administration Regulations by providing false and incomplete statements in support of a commodity jurisdiction (CJ) request (see 2103040065). The company, FLIR Systems, sought a determination that one of its newly developed products was subject to the EAR rather than the State Department’s International Traffic in Arms Regulations and withheld information in order to support that determination, BIS said. Along with the fine, FLIR agreed to conduct two BIS-monitored internal audits and won’t be granted export licenses until the audits are completed and the fine is paid, BIS said in an April 29 notice.

The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit removed a preliminary injunction against the State Department in an April 27 decision, allowing the agency move 3D-printed weapons off the U.S. Munitions List and onto the Commerce Control List. A State rule issued in 2020 would have made that change, but it was partly blocked as part a lawsuit filed by 20 states.

Export Compliance Daily is providing readers with the top stories for April 12-16 in case you missed them. You can find any article by searching on the title or by clicking on the hyperlinked reference number.

Three top Senate Democrats urged President Joe Biden to reverse a Trump-era rule that transferred export controls of firearms, ammunition and other defense items from the State Department to the Commerce Department, saying the transfer creates less oversight over dangerous weapons exports. The January 2020 rule (see 2001170030) put in place “less-restrictive controls” over a range of lethal weapons, Sens. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, Dianne Feinstein of California and Patrick Leahy of Vermont said in an April 19 letter. They also said the transfer eliminated Congress’ ability to “be aware of and legally disapprove” of sales above $1 million.

The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls’ Defense Export Control and Compliance System will undergo scheduled system maintenance April 19, DDTC said April 15. The system’s registration and licensing applications will be unavailable to industry from 6 a.m. to 8 a.m. EDT. DDTC said users should make sure their work in progress is saved before the downtime.

The State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls issued new guidance and frequently asked questions for the increased export controls against Russia announced in March (see 2103170022). The April 12 guidance provides a summary of the changes to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations and answers common questions about impacts to export licenses, license reviews and which activities are caught by the restrictions.

The recent U.S. decision to increase sanctions and export controls on Russia, although largely narrow, could have significant implications for exporters doing business in Russia, law firms said. U.S. companies should pay close attention to new restrictions on certain controlled services and the potential impacts of the restrictions on disclosure and reporting requirements, the firms said.