22 C.F.R. § 129.9

Guidance

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Any person desiring guidance on whether an activity constitutes a brokering activity within the scope of this part 129 may request in writing guidance from the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls. The request for guidance shall identify the applicant and registrant code (if applicable) and describe fully the activities that will be undertaken, including:

(1) The specific activities to be undertaken by the applicant and any other U.S. or foreign person;

(2) The name, nationality, and geographic location of all U.S. and foreign persons who may participate in the activities;

(3) A description of each defense article or defense service that may be involved, including:

(i) The U.S. Munitions List category and sub-category for each article;

(ii) The name or military nomenclature of each defense article;

(iii) Whether the defense article is significant military equipment;

(iv) Estimated quantity of each defense article;

(v) Estimated U.S. dollar value of defense articles and defense services; and

(vi) Security classification;

(4) End-user and end-use; and

(5) A copy of any agreement or documentation, if available, between or among the requester and other persons who will be involved in the activity or related transactions that describes the activity to be taken by such persons.

(b) If at the time of submission certain information is not yet available, this circumstance must be stated and explained. The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls will take the completeness of the information into account in providing guidance on whether the activities constitute brokering activities. The guidance will constitute an official determination by the Department of State. The guidance shall not substitute for approval when required under § 129.4.

(c) Persons desiring guidance on other aspects of this part may also request guidance from the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls in a similar manner by submitting a description of the relevant facts or copies of relevant documentation.

[78 FR 52693, Aug. 26, 2013]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2016–2017 · leading case: Matthew A. Goldstein, Pllc v. United States Dep't of State, 153 F. Supp. 3d 319 (D.D.C. 2016).
Matthew A. Goldstein, Pllc v. United States Dep't of State, 153 F. Supp. 3d 319 (D.D.C. 2016). · cites it 4× “” 22 C.F.R. § 129.9 . But the new section goes on to require that the requester “identify the applicant and registrant code (if applicable) and describe fully the activities that will be undertaken,” listing specific information that a requester must provide — including the…”
Matthew A. Goldstein, PLLC v. United States Dep't of State, 851 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “22 C.F.R. § 129.9 . The State Department has established an optional process under the ITAR for requesting an official determination on whether a particular activity constitutes brokering.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.