[amsat-bb] Re: Understanding ITAR
John B. Stephensen
kd6ozh at comcast.net
Sun Oct 4 00:53:28 PDT 2009
One purpose of ITAR is preventing technological advances useful to our
military (including satellites) from getting into enemy hands. Security
people always want regulations to be as broad as possible. Even if 99% of
the technology is available elsewhere they want it examined in order to
catch the 1% that could be a problem.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Ress" <bill at hsmicrowave.com>
To: "Wayne Estes" <w9ae at charter.net>
Cc: <amsat-bb at amsat.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 22:03 UTC
Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Understanding ITAR
> Hi Wayne,
> The State Department defines what is considered a "munition" in the ITAR
> regulations. See: http://pmddtc.state.gov/
> The criteria is obviously determined by the State Department with
> direction from the Congress. The article just tries to describe some
> examples without trying to justify or explain why something is or isn't
> a munition.
> The main point of the article is that any communications satellite,
> whether it is an Amateur, a university or a commercial satellite is
> considered by ITAR to be a munition controlled by ITAR export
> regulations. That's a fact and to understand the criteria is to
> understand the thinking of the authors of the regulation (State
> Department and the Congress), which I can't do.
> To be sure, export regulations can be complicated and at times appear to
> us as being irrational. But the fact remains, ITAR is an export law that
> we at AMSAT have to comply with.
> Regards...Bil - N6GHz
> Wayne Estes wrote:
>> I just read the article about ITAR in the Jan/Feb 2009 AMSAT Journal. I
>> have to say that the article didn't help me understand ITAR at all. It
>> seems to have skipped the first several steps in the explanation.
>> For example, what criteria are used to judge that a device has dual use
>> as a munition? It is not at all obvious to my feeble mind how a 23 GHz
>> amplifier or IHU-3 (computer) can be judged to have dual use as a
>> What criteria does ITAR law use to EXCLUDE devices that have obvious
>> dual uses as munitions? For example, GSM cell phones have been used to
>> remotely control explosive devices that killed thousands of U.S.
>> servicemen. Are they not regulated because they are too ubiquitous to
>> Wayne Estes W9AE
>> Oakland, Oregon, USA, CN83ik
>> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
>> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite
>> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
> Sent via AMSAT-BB at amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
More information about the AMSAT-BB