10 U.S.C. § 130

Authority to withhold from public disclosure certain technical data

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Defense may withhold from public disclosure any technical data with military or space application in the possession of, or under the control of, the Department of Defense, if such data may not be exported lawfully outside the United States without an approval, authorization, or license under the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.) or the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.). However, technical data may not be withheld under this section if regulations promulgated under either such Act authorize the export of such data pursuant to a general, unrestricted license or exemption in such regulations.(b) Regulations under this section shall be published in the Federal Register for a period of no less than 30 days for public comment before promulgation. Such regulations shall address, where appropriate, releases of technical data to allies of the United States and to qualified United States contractors, including United States contractors that are small business concerns, for use in performing United States Government contracts.(c) In this section, the term “technical data with military or space application” means any blueprints, drawings, plans, instructions, computer software and documentation, or other technical information that can be used, or be adapted for use, to design, engineer, produce, manufacture, operate, repair, overhaul, or reproduce any military or space equipment or technology concerning such equipment.(Added Pub. L. 98–94, title XII, § 1217(a), Sept. 24, 1983, 97 Stat. 690, § 140c; amended Pub. L. 99–145, title XIII, § 1303(a)(3), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 738; renumbered § 130 and amended Pub. L. 99–433, title I, §§ 101(a)(3), 110(d)(6), Oct. 1, 1986, 100 Stat. 994, 1003; Pub. L. 100–26, § 7(k)(3), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 284; Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIV, § 1484(b)(1), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1715; Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title X, § 1081(b)(3)(A), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2418.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

The Export Administration Act of 1979, referred to in subsec. (a), is Pub. L. 96–72, Sept. 29, 1979, 93 Stat. 503, which was classified principally to chapter 56 (§ 4601 et seq.) of Title 50, War and National Defense, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title XVII, § 1766(a), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 2232, except for sections 11A, 11B, and 11C thereof (50 U.S.C. 4611, 4612, 4613).

The Arms Export Control Act, referred to in subsec. (a), is Pub. L. 90–629, Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1320, which is classified principally to chapter 39 (§ 2751 et seq.) of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 2751 of Title 22 and Tables.

Amendments

2016—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 114–328 substituted “(50 U.S.C. 4601 et seq.)” for “(50 U.S.C. App. 2401–2420)”.

1990—Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 101–510 substituted “Regulations under this section” for “(1) Within 90 days after September 24, 1983, the Secretary of Defense shall propose regulations to implement this section. Such regulations” in subsec. (b) and redesignated former subsec. (b)(2) as subsec. (c).

1987—Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 100–26 inserted “the term” after “In this section,”.

1986—Pub. L. 99–433 renumbered section 140c of this title as this section and substituted “Authority” for “Secretary of Defense: authority” in section catchline.

1985—Subsec. (b)(1). Pub. L. 99–145 substituted “September 24, 1983” for “enactment of this section”.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1987–2022 · leading case: Newport Aeronautical Sales v. Dep't of the Air Force, 684 F.3d 160 (D.C. Cir. 2012).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Newport Aeronautical Sales v. Dep't of the Air Force, 684 F.3d 160 (D.C. Cir. 2012). · cites it 8× “The nondisclosure statute the Air Force invokes is 10 U.S.C. § 130 . Under § 130(a), the Department of Defense (DOD) may withhold certain “technical data with military or space application” that cannot be exported without a specific license under the relevant export control…”

Maydak v. U.S. Dep't of Just., 254 F. Supp. 2d 23 (D.D.C. 2003). “) Exemption S On the DLA’s advise, the EOPOTSP withheld the two referred records pursuant to FOIA exemption 3, described as “briefing slides,” claiming that they were protected from disclosure under 10 U.S.C. § 130 (1998). See exemption 3 discussion supra at 40-41.”

Am. Friends Serv. Comm. v. Dep't of Def. Operating Through the Def. Logistics Agency, 831 F.2d 441 (3rd Cir. 1987). · cites it 2× “In this case the other statute is 10 U.S.C.A. § 130 (a) (West Supp.1987), which authorizes the Secretary of Defense to withhold technical data with military or space application .”

Freedom Watch, Inc. v. Nat'l Sec. Agency, 197 F. Supp. 3d 165 (D.D.C. 2016). · cites it 2× “” 10 U.S.C. § 130 (B)(a)(l). Section 424 authorizes withholding of sensitive information related to, inter alia, the Defense Intelligence Agency (“DIA”) and the “number of persons employed by or assigned or detailed to [DIA] or [their] name[s] [or] official title[s] — ”10 U.”

Colonial Trading Corp. v. Dep't of the Navy, 735 F. Supp. 429 (D.D.C. 1990). · cites it 2× “The defendant contends that it is entitled to withhold the unclassified drawings pursuant to exemption 3 because 10 U.S.C. § 130 , and the DOD’s implementing directive, 3 prohibits such disclosure.”

Int'l Couns. Bureau v. United States Dep't of Def., 906 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2012). “The Department of Defense previously argued that Exemption 3 applied to portions of the videos where identifying information of military personnel appeared, because 10 U.S.C. § 130 (b) allows an agency to withhold identifying information of armed forces assigned to certain units.”

Newport Aeronautical Sales v. Dep't of the Air Force, 660 F. Supp. 2d 60 (D.D.C. 2009). · cites it 13× “The statute relied on by the Air Force in this case is 10 U.S.C. § 130 , “Authority to Withhold From Public Disclosure Certain Technical Data.”

Stand. Space Platforms Corp. v. United States, 35 Fed. Cl. 505 (Fed. Cl. 1996). “Second, defendant represents that the responsive documents contain unclassified technical data with military or space applications subject to export controls, see 10 U.S.C. § 130 (1994), requiring the entry of a protective order to preserve the restricted nature of the…”

Verduzco v. Gen. Dynamics, Convair Div., 742 F. Supp. 559 (S.D. Cal. 1990). “Verduzco points to a federal statute, 10 U.S.C. § 130 , which authorizes the Secretary of Defense to withhold from the public technical data with military application as evidence of a public interest in preventing unauthorized access to classified information.”

Bordell v. Gen. Elec. Co., 922 F.2d 1057 (2d Cir. 1991). “See 10 U.S.C. § 130 (1988); 42 U.S.C. § 2168 (1988).”

Bordell v. Gen. Elec. Co., 732 F. Supp. 327 (N.D.N.Y. 1990). “NNPI, defined and protected under 10 U.S.C. § 130 , includes information on shipboard and prototype naval nuclear propulsion plants, technical requirements pertaining to how those plants are designed, analyzed, and operated, and standards and practices that apply to nuclear…”

Newport Aeronautical Sales v. Dep't of the Air Force (D.D.C. 2009). · cites it 11× “The statute relied on by the Air Force in this case is 10 U.S.C. § 130 , “Authority to Withhold From Public Disclosure Certain Technical Data.”

Show all 15 citing cases →

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.