Washington

The US government has compromised on export restrictions applying to researchers building satellites and other space hardware. But space scientists will still face obstacles in working with foreign colleagues, experts say.

Feeling blue: projects such as Gravity Probe-B have been hurt by export-control rules. Credit: LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION

The State Department issued an interim rule on its International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) on 29 March. Since 1999, satellites have been under the jurisdiction of ITAR. Scientists have grown concerned about their possible liability under the rules, which can require licensing not only for the export of satellites and spacecraft instruments, but also for technical discussions about them. As a result, some foreign-born researchers at US universities have been barred from fully participating in international space missions (see Nature 404, 321; 2000).

University lobby groups had pushed for a blanket ITAR exemption for scientists engaged in “fundamental research” where information is in the public domain. The new rule is “certainly not everything the universities wanted”, according to Tim Brightbill, an attorney with law firm Wiley Rein & Fielding, who advises academic and commercial clients on ITAR compliance.

Under the new rule, US universities will not need ITAR licences if they export satellite hardware or information to members of NATO, the European Union or the European Space Agency, and countries listed as “major non-NATO allies”, such as Japan and Israel. But they still need a licence for exports and exchange of technical information with other foreign nationals, including researchers from India or China. And collaborators in approved countries would have to guarantee that no researchers from unapproved countries were receiving ITAR-restricted information.

Supporters of stiff export controls, who opposed NASA in negotiations over how much to ease the ITAR restrictions, are unlikely to concede any more ground, says Jack Shane, also of Wiley Rein & Fielding. Sensitivity about terrorism will weaken the case of those who favour open access.

The State Department issued the regulation as an 'interim final rule', however, leaving the door open for additional public comment on it.