This difference in who makes licensing decisions underscores the weight the two systems assign to economic and commercial interests relative to national security concerns. Under State’s system, Commerce is not involved, underscoring the primacy of national security and foreign policy concerns. Commerce’s system is more transparent to the license applicant than State’s system. Evolution of Export Controls for Commercial Satellites

Export control of commercial communications satellites has been a matter of contention over the years among U.S. satellite manufacturers and the agencies involved in their export licensing jurisdiction—the Departments of Commerce, Defense, State, and the intelligence community. Commercial communications satellites were contained on the industrial list. 1.) In April 1995, the Chairman of the President’s Export Council met with the Secretary of State to discuss issues related to the jurisdiction of commercial communications satellites and the impact of sanctions that affected the export to and launch of satellites from China. The process of planning a satellite launch takes several years, and there is concern that technical discussions between U.S. and foreign representatives may lead to the transfer of information on militarily sensitive components. Technology transfer control plans are prepared by the exporter and approved by Defense. Observations on the Current Export Control System

The addition of new controls over satellites transferred to Commerce’s jurisdiction in 1996 addressed some of the key areas where the Commerce procedures are less stringent than those at State.
Why GAO Did This Study

GAO discussed the military sensitivity of commercial communications satellites and the implications of the 1996 change in export licensing jurisdiction, focusing on: (1) key elements in the export control systems of the Departments of Commerce and State; (2) how export controls for commercial satellites have evolved over the years; (3) the concerns and issues debated over the transfer of commercial communications satellites to the export licensing jurisdiction of Commerce; (4) the safeguards that may be applied to commercial satellite exports; and (5) observations on the current export control system.

What GAO Found

GAO noted that: (1) the U.S. export control system--comprised of both the Commerce and State systems--is about managing risk; (2) exports to some countries involve less risk than to other countries and exports of some items involve less risk than others; (3) the planning of a satellite launch with technical discussions and exchanges of information taking place over several years involves risk no matter which agency is the licensing authority; (4) recently, events have focused concern on the appropriateness of Commerce jurisdiction over communication satellites; (5) this is a difficult judgment; (6) by design, Commerce's system gives greater weight to economic and commercial concerns, implicitly accepting greater security risks; and (7) by design, State's systems gives primacy to national security and foreign policy concerns, lessening--but not eliminating--the risk of damage to U.S. national security interests.