The Government Accountability Office is urging the Bureau of Industry and Security to provide other agencies involved in reviewing export licenses with access to all relevant information and to consult with those agencies prior to changing license conditions.
According to a recent GAO report, BIS administers export controls for dual-use items, certain firearms and related munitions, and specified commercial satellite items. To implement these controls BIS imposes licensing requirements, screens license applications against internal watch lists, performs end-use checks, and conducts investigations of possible violations of export control laws and regulations.
External agencies, including the departments of Defense, Energy, and State, play roles in reviewing dual-use export license applications to mitigate national security risks and other foreign policy concerns. Through this process each agency makes an independent recommendation as to the decision to approve, deny, or return the license application without action.
However, GAO states, the data systems BIS uses do not provide reviewing agencies easy access to all relevant information on the legitimacy and reliability of parties to export transactions. BIS processes export license applications using the unclassified Commerce USXPORTS Exporter Support System, but interagency referrals made in CUESS are then transmitted to DOD, DOE, and State for their review and licensing recommendations via the classified USXPORTS system. DOD officials noted that USXPORTS was intended to serve as the official export licensing database for all agencies but that BIS does not use it as the system of record.
Further, GAO adds, there have been instances when BIS officials removed export license conditions recommended by reviewing officials, which are often crafted to mitigate specific national security concerns, without consulting with those officials. For example, DOD officials identified seven licenses where BIS removed one or more license conditions that had been agreed to through the dispute resolution process, though BIS countered that in most of those cases that happened because the conditions did not comply with a memorandum it sent reviewing agencies years before providing guidance on standard terms, conditions, and riders on BIS licenses.
GAO notes that BIS concurred with its recommendations for improvement but did not specify when or how any associated changes might be made.
Copyright © 2025 Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg, P.A.; WorldTrade Interactive, Inc. All rights reserved.