Jun
24
Registration Follies
Posted by Clif Burns at 9:59 pm on June 24, 2010
Category: DDTC • ITAR • Part 122
Regular readers are no doubt familiar with this blog’s occasional posts poking fun of press releases from defense manufacturers noting that the company had “achieved” registration with the State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (“DDTC”). A common feature of many of these press releases is to try to portray registration under Part 122 of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations as an endorsement by DDTC of the company’s export compliance expertise and procedures.
Well, I think a new bar was set by this press release from Virginia-based Zestron Corporation
ZESTRON process and service solutions, recently renewed its official International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) registration with the US Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls.
After several weeks of careful review of ZESTRON’s corporate structure, security, record keeping and procedures for handling sensitive military and intelligence applications, the company successfully passed the system’s strict requirements. The renewal of this registration demonstrates that ZESTRON is dedicated to adhering to the regulations that control the export and import of defense-related articles and services on the United States Munitions List.
Honestly, that doesn’t just take the cake. It takes the table the cake is on, the house where the table is, and the city in which the house is located. There is no scrutiny by DDTC of corporate structure, much less “several weeks” of such scrutiny. Nor is there any review of a company’s procedures for handling military and intelligence applications. And don’t get me started on the import business in the press release. The only strict requirement that a registered company has passed is that it was able to fill out the registration form correctly and submit it with the required fee.
Here’s a new export reform proposal: the DDTC should revoke the registration of any company that issues a press release incorrectly describing the significance of registration.
Permalink
Copyright © 2010 Clif Burns. All Rights Reserved.
(No republication, syndication or use permitted without my consent.)
4 Comments:
At least they’ve cleaned up their language a little since the previous press release touting their ITAR certification:
”
ZESTRON’s ITAR renewal was the result of several weeks of planning to meet the systems crucial security requirements. The ITAR protocol demands PCB inspection by specially ITAR-trained personnel as well as a secured FTP file transfer with file access enabled only by authorized individuals.
“With the ongoing trend in North America to assemble more military-based electronics, it is essential for our company to be fully compliant. ZESTRON’s ITAR certification is frequently requested during and after cleaning evaluations and therefore is a very important factor to ensure our customers’ need for adequate internal security procedures,†said Dr. Wack, President of ZESTRON worldwide.
”
Although of course they might need to tone down the fanfare on their 2010 objectives, which amongst other things includes:
“A “borderless engineering†campaign and ever-evolving global knowledgebase, providing customers with the most comprehensive list of cleaning and compatibility data available. “
It seems to me that a company “dedicated to adhering to the regulations that control the export and import of defense-related articles and services on the United States Munitions List” would regularly visit places like, oh, I don’t know, perhaps the Export Law Blog. And if they did, then they would know the shame of issuing such press releases.
But they clearly do not know the shame. So I must deduce that do not read the Export Law Blog, and by extension, are potentially not “dedicated to adhering to the regulations that control the export and import of defense-related articles and services on the United States Munitions List”.
Perhaps Zestron’s press release presages a useful development, such as requiring registrants to demonstrate some regulatory competence by having a trained EO on board before accepting their registration.
Reading between the lines in the posting by “Hugh”, it sounds like they underwent a review required to receive classified information. Or at the very least they’re confusing ITAR registration and those requirements under NISPOM.
So not only should they hope no one at the DDTC reads their posting, they should hope no one they receive classified info from reads it.
