This webinar hosted by KTN Global Alliance and UK Science and Innovation Network in USA on 9 June 2021 was particularly for the UK research and business community working in dual-use technologies, products and services to gain a better understanding in US export control laws to help enable collaboration with the US. It also presented the findings of a report commissioned by the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and produced by Holland & Knight.

2. www.ktn-uk.org
Dr Sandeep Sandhu
Head of Stakeholder Relationships
sandeep.sandhu@ktn-uk.org
Demystifying US Export
Control Regulations for Dual -
Use Technologies

3. 16:00 – Welcome & Introduction | Sandeep Sandhu, KTN, Karla Hagan, UK Science and Innovation
Network
16:10 – Opening Remarks | Joe White MBE, UK Tech Envoy to the US and San Francisco Consul
General
16:20 – Findings from USA Export Control Regulations Report | Ron Oleynik and Antonia Tzinova,
Holland & Knight
16:40 – Questions and fireside chat with Holland & Knight by Nick Hooper, UK Science and Innovation
Network
17.00 – Q&A from the audience | Nick Hooper, UK Science and Innovation Network
17:25 – Conclusions & Wrap-up | Nick Hooper, UK Science and Innovation Network
Agenda

4. KTN exists to connect
innovators with new partners
and new opportunities
beyond their existing thinking –
accelerating ambitious ideas
into real-world solutions.

5. Find out more
https://ktn-uk.org/news/a-guide-for-companies-
and-universities-interested-in-partnering-with-the-
us-in-rd/

6. ©KTN All rights reserved | www.ktn-uk.org
Dr Sandeep Sandhu
Head of Stakeholder Relationships
sandeep.sandhu@ktn-uk.org
Thank you

7. Copyright © 2021 Holland & Knight LLP. All Rights Reserved
U.S. EXPORT CONTROLS:
A GUIDE FOR U.K. COMPANIES AND UNIVERSITIES INTERESTED IN
PARTNERING WITH THE U.S. IN R&D
Ronald A. Oleynik | Antonia Tzinova | Dariya Golubkova
June 8, 2021

8. Outline
 U.S. Export Controls: Regulators, Regulations, Controls
 ITAR versus EAR
 “Technology”
 “Deemed” Exports
 University Research and Export Controls
 Fundamental Research Exception
2

9. U.S. and UK Export Controls
» Both parties to the Wassenaar Arrangement
− U.S. bi-furcated controls
˗ U.S. Munitions List (ITAR) tracks the Wassenaar Arrangement Munitions List
˗ Commerce Control List (EAR) tracks the Wassenaar Dual-Use Goods and Technologies
− U.K. Strategic Export Control Lists: The Consolidated List of Strategic Military and Dual-use
Items that Require Export Authorisation from Great Britain and Northern Ireland
» U.S. unilateral controls
− goods and technologies not on the Wassenaar Lists
− national security; foreign policy; or other strategic reason
− U.S. will try to negotiate with its partners post-designation
3

10. U.S. Regulators, Regulations, Controls
4
Regulator Regulations Controls
Defense
Exports
DDTC
Directorate of Defense Trade Controls
Department of State
ITAR
International Traffic in Arms
Regulation, 22 C.F.R. Parts 120-130
USML
(U.S. Munitions List)
Commercial
Exports
BIS
Bureau of Industry and Services
Department of Commerce
EAR
Export Administration Regulations,
15 C.F.R. Parts 730-774
CCL
(Commerce Control List)
EAR99
Economic
Sanctions
OFAC
Department of Treasury
Office of Foreign Assets Control
Executive Orders
OFAC Regulations, 31 C.F.R.
Parts 500-599
UN Sanctions
SDN List /
Embargoes
(Sanctioned Persons /
Destinations)

11. ITAR versus EAR
5
ITAR EAR
Responsible Agency Department of State (DDTC) Department of Commerce (BIS)
Controlled Items • defense articles
• defense services
• technical data
• civilian and dual-use goods and technologies
• Military technology moved from USML to CCL
Controlled Actions • export, reexport, and transfer (in-country)
• temporary import
• brokering activities
• export, reexport, and transfer (in-country)
• temporary import
In Rem Jurisdiction “See-through Rule”
• ITAR-controlled content triggers ITAR
jurisdiction over entire item
“Black Box” Treatment
• Overall function of item
• Exception: de minimis U.S. content for certain
technologies
Destination Controls all defense articles are controlled, no matter the
foreign country of destination
export control depends on destination and reason for
control
License Exceptions Various exemptions and exceptions, but ITAR
registration required as a prerequisite
Various exceptions, no registration required
Registration required not required
License Applications filed through DECCS online portal filed through SNAP-R online portal

12. “Technology”
» Definition
− EAR
• “Technology” is the information necessary for the “development”; “production”; “use”; operation; installation; maintenance;
repair; overhaul; or refurbishing of a controlled item.
• Controls may vary based on how the “technology” is utilized (e.g., technology necessary to “use” a commodity versus
technology necessary to “design” or “produce” a commodity)
• Certain “published” unclassified “technology” is not subject to the EAR.
− ITAR
• “technical data” – Information, . . . , which is required for the design, development, production, manufacture, assembly,
operation, repair, testing, maintenance or modification of defense articles. This includes information in the form of
blueprints, drawings, photographs, plans, instructions or documentation
• “defense services”
1) The furnishing of assistance (including training) to foreign persons, whether in the U.S. or abroad, in the design, development,
engineering, manufacture, production, assembly, testing, repair, maintenance, modification, operation, demilitarization, destruction,
processing or use of defense articles;
2) The furnishing to foreign persons of any technical data controlled under this subchapter (see §120.10), whether in the United States
or abroad;
» Emerging and foundational technologies (Export Control Reform Act of 2018)
− New series of emerging technologies added to the CCL
6

13. “Deemed” Exports
The transfer of controlled information to a non-U.S. person
− Can occur within the United States
− Can happen through a demonstration, oral briefing, or a lab visit; in an email; or by
posting to a company’s or university’s internal or external website.
− Standard for determining whether research undertaken at a U.S. company or university
delivers the kind of knowledge the U.S. government considers crucial for U.S. national
security and, as such, warrants control.
7

14. University Research and Export Controls
8
− General Educational Information – outside the scope of export controls
• instruction in catalogue courses and associated teaching laboratories of academic
institutions
• information concerning general scientific, mathematical, or engineering principles
commonly taught in schools, colleges, and universities
− Publicly Available Information
• published information, i.e., information that has been made public, without any further
restrictions on further dissemination
• Through subscriptions, libraries, trade shows, public dissemination
− Results of Fundamental Research
• research in the science, math, and engineering fields, that is ordinarily published and
broadly shared, and that is not restricted for any national security or proprietary reasons

15. Fundamental Research Exception
9
From a research project perspective, it is essential to distinguish the information or product that results
from the fundamental research from the conduct that occurs within the context of the fundamental
research.
Results of the fundamental research are not subject to export controls. However, an export license may
be required if, during the conduct of the research, export controlled technology is released to a foreign
national.

16. Fundamental Research Exception
» FRE does not apply when research results are restricted for proprietary reasons, or
are subject to specific U.S. Government dissemination controls
− Specific EAR examples
˗ required pre-publication review by the government, with right to withhold permission for publication;
˗ restrictions on pre-publication dissemination of information to non-U.S. citizens or other categories of
persons; or
˗ restrictions on participation of non-U.S. citizens or other categories of persons in the research.
» Compliance Recommendations and Common Pitfalls
10

17. FY2019 U.S. Exports to the UK
− Export applications (excluding deemed exports)
• average processing time - 16 days, as compared to the overall average of 23 days.
• approval rate - 89.5% (or 1,688 applications), compared to the overall average of 85.5%
− Deemed exports
• filed applications - British Nationals’ applications account for only 2.4% of total filed applications
• approved - no denial to British Nationals since 2015
− Exports to UK subject to a license requirement
• only 1.9% of the U.S. exports to the U.K. required a BIS license
− Most common license exceptions
• encryption commodities
• software, and technology (~ 57.3% of license exceptions utilized)
• temporary export – third most commonly used license exception
11

18. Practice Education Bar Admission
Panelist Bio
12
Antonia Tzinova
Antonia Tzinova
Partner
202.419.2661
Antonia.Tzinova@hklaw.com
Washington, D.C.
Antonia I. Tzinova is an attorney in Holland & Knight's Washington, D.C., office. Ms. Tzinova
practices in the areas of international trade, foreign direct investment and industrial security. She
advises on defense and high-technology exports; U.S. trade embargoes and economic
sanctions; and customs matters. She regularly represents clients before the Committee on
Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and advises on measures to mitigate Foreign
Ownership, Control, or Influence (FOCI) in cross border mergers and acquisitions of U.S.
government and defense contractors. She counsels foreign investors on structuring investments
in the defense, high-tech and critical infrastructure sectors of the U.S. economy.
Full Bio available here.
• CFIUS and Industrial Security
• International Trade
• Mergers and Acquisitions
• The George Washington
University Law School, J.D.,
with honors
• Sofia University Law School
(Bulgaria), Jurist and Masters
in Law (J.D./LL.M. equivalent),
International Law and
International Affairs
• District of Columbia
• Maryland

19. Practice Education Bar Admission
Panelist Bio
13
Ronald A. Oleynik
Ronald A. Oleynik
Partner
Washington, D.C.
T 202.457.7183
ron.oleynik@hklaw.com
Ronald A. Oleynik is a partner practicing in Holland & Knight's Washington, D.C., office in the area of international trade
regulation. His experience includes a broad range of industrial security, customs, export and international trade matters.
In the area of U.S. export control, Mr. Oleynik counsels a broad range of clients on licensing, compliance, and
enforcement issues under the export control regimes of the departments of State, Commerce and Treasury
In the area of industrial security, Mr. Oleynik has been involved in a significant percentage of all foreign investment review
proceedings before the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), and is one of the leading
practitioners in the area of foreign direct investment in the U.S. defense industry under the U.S. regulations regarding
Foreign Ownership, Control and Influence (FOCI).
He represents a wide array of clients in trade litigation before the U.S. Department of Commerce and International Trade
Commission regarding Antidumping and Countervailing Duty investigations and reviews, Section 232 national security
investigations and Section 332 investigations.
Read more: https://www.hklaw.com/Ronald-Oleynik/
• Aviation
• International Trade
• Cuba Action Team
• China Practice
• International and Cross Border
Transactions
• The George Washington
University Law School, J.D.
• University of Connecticut,
B.A., Political Science
• The George Washington
University, M.A.,
International Affairs
• District of Columbia

20. Practice Education Bar Admission
Panelist Bio
14
Dariya Golubkova
Dariya Golubkova
Associate
202.469.5498
Dariya.Golubkova@hklaw.com
Washington, D.C.
Dariya V. Golubkova is a Washington, D.C., attorney and a member of Holland & Knight's
International Trade Group. Her practice comprises a broad range of international trade
regulatory and transactional matters, including economic sanctions, export controls, customs,
and industrial security matters. She has experience in assisting clients in complying with U.S.
export control laws, such as the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and the Export
Administration Regulations (EAR), and U.S. economic sanctions programs, particularly those
involving the Russian Federation. She also has experience representing clients before the
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).
Leveraging her prior experience as a federal judicial law clerk, she also represents clients before
the U.S. Court of International trade.
Full Bio available here.
• International Trade
• CFIUS and Industrial Security
• Brooklyn Law School, J.D.
• The George Washington
University, B.A., Political
Science, cum laude
• New York