Yavin Thruster

h1. Export Control Review

This review uses Mach 30's draft "Export Control Review Process":https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GnT5CLXZBoSRHVLcsWU3-tOUXXcInvZHPFFrOJri3GY/pub. The "Export Control Task Force":http://mach30.org/activites/oshw-community-support/ectf/ (ECTF) is responsible for the shape of and guidance through the review process.  The project team is responsible for using the review process.

h3. 1. Define the project and related topics in writing for future reference

# Goals

## What is the vision of the project?

The Yavin Thruster will be used at at universities across the country to bring hands on experiences into their propulsion courses and by Mach 30 to demonstrate rocket propulsion as part of its educational and outreach goals.

## What ultimate purpose does it serve?

To facilitate the education of Mach 30 volunteers,undergraduate aerospace and high level high school students in Newton's laws of motion and rocket propulsion (f = ma, fundamental performance characteristics, fundamental design parameters) in a laboratory setting with instructor involvement. Unit will be able to be built with commonly available components and 3D printed parts.

## How does it fit into Mach 30’s strategy?

Continued evolution of Mach30's R&D capabilities in rocket propulsion introducing propulsion system design in addition to the testing capabilities provided by the Shepard Test Stand.

## To what use will the results of the project be put?

It will be the one half of a rocket propulsion educational kit, expanding Mach30's portfolio of open source spaceflight hardware projects. 

# Technologies

## What is the core technology the project will work on?

## What other technologies are necessary to accomplish that work?

## What words would an expert use to describe these technologies?

## What words would an average person use to describe these technologies?

# Inputs and Outputs

## What are the project’s major milestones?

## What previous projects does this one build off of?

## What future projects will build off of this one?

## Does this project make use of any specialized, pre-existing knowledge?

## Does this project have any measurable or tangible outcomes?

# Keywords

## What keywords/phrases summarize the previous answers?

## What additional keywords/phrases are relevant?

## Put those keywords into a thesaurus; what other relevant keywords appear?

h2. 2. Research the project’s relationship to relevant EC

# USML

## Follow the DDTC’s "Order of Review Decision":http://pmddtc.state.gov/licensing/dt_OrderofReview.htm tool

## Run all keywords identified in the previous steps through the text of the "USML":https://www.pmddtc.state.gov/regulations_laws/documents/official_itar/ITAR_Part_121.pdf

## Run all keywords, along with words like “ITAR”, “USML” and “export control” through Google

# CCL

## Run all keywords identified in the previous step through the text of the CCL

## Run all keywords, along with words like “EAR”, “CCL” and “export control” through Google

# MTCR

## Run all keywords identified in the previous step through the text of the MTCR

## Run all keywords, along with words like “MTCR” and “export control” through Google

h3. 3. Document findings

# Summarize the topic(s) that are explicitly mentioned in EC regulations and/or professional analysis/discussion of EC regulations

# Explain any additional concerns

# List searches and terms that turned up no relevant results

h3. 4. Triggers

# If possible, define any measurable limits the project cannot cross and an appropriate margin for error

# Specify, or guess at, any future dates when relevant information is expected to be become available

# Maintain a clear distinction between information used as-is and any changes, additions, derivations, etc added by Mach 30

h3. 5. Reevaluate if a trigger is flipped. 

Repeat this process if there are any major changes to the project. Update this report at each major milestone.