[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 24 (Friday, February 5, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6210-6222]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-02216]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Parts 300 and 600

[Docket No. 150507434-5999-01]
RIN 0648-BF09


Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act; Seafood 
Import Monitoring Program

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act (MSA), this proposed rule would establish filing and 
recordkeeping procedures relating to the importation of certain fish 
and fish products, in order to implement the MSA's prohibition on the 
import and trade, in interstate or foreign commerce, of fish taken, 
possessed, transported or sold in violation of any foreign law or 
regulation. The information to be filed is proposed to be collected at 
the time of entry, and makes use of an electronic single window 
consistent with the Safety and Accountability for Every (SAFE) Port Act 
of 2006 and other applicable statutes. Specifically, NMFS proposes to 
integrate collection of catch and landing documentation for certain 
fish and fish products within the government-wide International Trade 
Data System (ITDS) and require electronic information collection 
through the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) maintained by the 
Department of Homeland Security, Customs and Border Protection (CBP). 
Under these procedures, NMFS would require an annually renewable 
International Fisheries Trade Permit (IFTP) and specific data for 
certain fish and fish products to be filed and retained as a condition 
of import to enable the United States to exclude the entry into 
commerce of products of illegal fishing activities. The information to 
be collected and retained will help authorities verify that the fish or 
fish products were lawfully acquired by providing information that 
traces

[[Page 6211]]

each import shipment from point of harvest to entry-into commerce. The 
rule will also decrease the incidence of seafood fraud by collecting 
information at import and requiring retention of documentation so that 
the information reported (e.g., regarding species and harvest location) 
can be verified. This proposed rule stipulates the catch and landing 
data for imports of certain fish and fish products which would be 
required to be submitted electronically to NMFS through ACE and the 
requirements for recordkeeping concerning such imports.

DATES: Written comments must be received by April 5, 2016. Public 
webinars will take place from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. eastern standard time 
on February 18 and 24, 2016. An in-person public listening session will 
be held in Boston, Massachusetts from 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. eastern 
standard time on March 7, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action, identified by NOAA-NMFS-
2015-0122, may be submitted by either of the following methods:
     Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015-0122, click the 
``Comment Now!'' icon, complete the required fields, and enter or 
attach your comments.
     Mail: Mark Wildman, International Fisheries Division, 
Office for International Affairs and Seafood Inspection, NOAA 
Fisheries, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.
    All comments received are a part of the public record and will 
generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change. All 
personal identifying information (for example, name and address) 
voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do 
not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or 
protected information.
    NMFS will accept anonymous comments. Enter N/A in the required 
fields if you wish to remain anonymous. Attachments to electronic 
comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or 
Adobe portable document file (PDF) formats only.
    Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other 
aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this 
proposed rule may be submitted to the NOAA Fisheries Office for 
International Affairs and Seafood Inspection and by email to OIRA 
[email protected] or fax to (202) 395-7285.
    Information on how to participate in the February 18 and 24, 2016 
public webinars will be posted online at www.iuufishing.noaa.gov. The 
March 7, 2016 public listening session will take place at the Seafood 
Expo North America, Boston Convention and Exhibition Center, Room 104A, 
415 Summer Street, Boston, MA 02210. All information about these public 
information sessions will be posted online at www.iuufishing.noaa.gov.

Special Accommodations

    The March 7, 2016 public listening session is physically accessible 
to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation 
or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Mark Wildman, at (301) 
427-8350, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Wildman, Office for International 
Affairs and Seafood Inspection, NOAA Fisheries (phone (301) 427-8350, 
or email [email protected]).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 17, 2014, the White House released a Presidential 
Memorandum entitled ``Establishing a Comprehensive Framework to Combat 
Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing and Seafood Fraud.'' Among 
other actions, the Memorandum established a Presidential Task Force on 
Combating Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing and 
Seafood Fraud (Task Force), co-chaired by the Departments of State and 
Commerce, with membership including a number of other Federal agency 
and White House offices: The Departments of Agriculture, Defense, 
Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Interior, and Justice; 
the Federal Trade Commission; the U.S. Agency for International 
Development; the Council on Environmental Quality; the Office of 
Management and Budget; the Office of Science and Technology Policy; the 
National Security Council; and the Office of the U.S. Trade 
Representative.
    The Task Force was directed to report to the President 
``recommendations for the implementation of a comprehensive framework 
of integrated programs to combat IUU fishing and seafood fraud that 
emphasizes areas of greatest need.'' Those recommendations were 
provided to the President through the National Ocean Council, and NMFS 
requested comments from the public on how to effectively implement the 
recommendations of the Task Force (79 FR 75536, December 18, 2014). 
Oversight for implementing the recommendations of the Task Force has 
been charged to the National Ocean Council Standing Committee on IUU 
Fishing and Seafood Fraud (NOC Committee).
    Recommendation 14 concerns the development of a risk-based 
traceability program (including defining operational standards and the 
types of information to be collected) as a means to combat IUU fishing 
and seafood fraud. Recommendation 15 calls for the implementation of 
the first phase of that risk-based traceability program that tracks 
fish and fish products identified as being at risk of IUU fishing or 
seafood fraud from point of harvest to point of entry into U.S. 
commerce. The first step taken to address Recommendations 14 and 15 was 
the identification of those species likely to be at risk of IUU fishing 
or seafood fraud. See At-Risk Species section below for further detail. 
The second step taken is this proposed rulemaking, which would 
establish data reporting and related operational requirements at the 
point of entry into U.S. commerce for imported fish and fish products 
of at-risk species. The data reporting requirements would apply to 
importers of record. The importers of record are the importers as 
identified in CBP entry filings for shipments containing the designated 
at-risk species. Customs brokers may fulfill these requirements on 
behalf of the importer of record at the importer of record's request. 
This rule implements MSA section 307(1)(Q), which makes it unlawful to 
import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase in 
interstate or foreign commerce any fish taken, possessed, transported, 
or sold in violation of any foreign law or regulation or any treaty or 
binding conservation measure to which the United States is a party. See 
16 U.S.C. 1857(1)(Q).
    As indicated in the Task Force's recommendations to the President, 
it is the goal of the U.S. government ``to eventually expand the 
program to all seafood at first point of sale or import.'' The process 
for expansion will account for, among other factors, consideration of 
authorities needed for more robust implementation, stakeholder input, 
and the cost-effectiveness of program expansion. By December 2016, the 
NOC Committee will issue a report that includes an evaluation of the 
program as set out in a final rule and implemented to date, as well as 
recommendations of how and under what timeframe it would be expanded.

International Trade Data System (ITDS)

    The SAFE Port Act (Pub. L. 109-347) requires all Federal agencies 
with a role

[[Page 6212]]

in import admissibility decisions to participate in a single window 
system that allows information to be collected electronically through 
ITDS. Department of the Treasury has the U.S. Government lead on ITDS 
development and partner government agency integration. CBP developed 
the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) as single window for the 
collection and dissemination of information to support ITDS. To comply 
with SAFE Port Act, NMFS is in the process of establishing ITDS as the 
electronic means of collecting NMFS-required catch and trade data at 
the point of entry for imports subject to existing trade monitoring 
programs. (80 FR 81251, December 29, 2015.) NMFS anticipates completing 
the final ITDS rule prior to finalizing this rule that would require 
entry filers, when importing at-risk species, to submit data elements 
at the point of entry into U.S. commerce and use the CBP ACE portal for 
submission of import data and/or document images (as applicable for HTS 
codes covered under multiple programs).
    This proposed rule would also require the importer of record to 
obtain a permit to import a designated at-risk species (see 
International Fisheries Trade Permit section below for more detail). 
At-risk species, and some products derived from such species, would be 
identified by Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) codes (in combination 
with other codes where applicable), and entries filed under these codes 
would be subject to the additional data requirements set forth in this 
proposed rule. While some HTS codes will have a direct correspondence 
to the at-risk species, other applicable HTS codes, particularly for 
processed products, may be broader (i.e., potentially including species 
other than those designated at-risk.) In such cases, supplementary 
product identifiers supplied at entry filing (e.g., acceptable market 
name, scientific name) would be used to determine if the shipment 
includes at-risk species and is subject to additional data collection. 
NMFS is proposing to exclude highly processed fish products (fish oil, 
slurry, sauces, sticks, balls, cakes, puddings, and other similar 
highly processed fish products) from the additional data requirements 
in cases for which the species of fish comprising the product or the 
harvesting event(s) or aquaculture operation(s) of the shipment of the 
product cannot be feasibly identified.
    Additional species and products may be subsequently identified for 
inclusion in the Seafood Traceability Program as part of the continuing 
process to implement Recommendations 14 and 15. Use of ITDS and the ACE 
portal is envisioned as the mechanism for implementing additional data 
collection requirements for imports of all fish species, if a decision 
is made to expand the Seafood Traceability Program, through future 
rulemaking, to include all fish species.

Entry Into U.S. Commerce

    This proposed rule addresses only the collection of information on 
imported fish and fish products at the point of entry into U.S. 
commerce. For imported fish and fish products, entry into commerce is 
the landing on, bringing into, or introduction into, or attempted 
landing on, bringing into, or introduction into, any place subject to 
the jurisdiction of the United States, whether or not such landing, 
bringing, or introduction constitutes an importation within the meaning 
of the customs laws of the United States. See 16 U.S.C. 1802(22) (A) 
and (B). ``Imported fish and fish products'' do not include transit 
shipments that are not being imported into the United States and 
therefore do not enter U.S. commerce. However, the permitting, 
reporting and recordkeeping requirements of this proposed rule would 
apply only in cases of entries for consumption, withdrawals from a 
bonded warehouse for consumption or withdrawals from a foreign trade 
zone for consumption.
    For U.S. domestic wild capture fisheries, entry into U.S. commerce 
occurs at the first point of landing or sale or transfer to a dealer or 
processor in the United States. In the case of harvesting vessels that 
process at-sea, transfer their catch to a processor at-sea, transfer 
their catch to a carrier or tender vessel at-sea, or transship their 
catch in port, entry into commerce is the offloading of the transferred 
and/or processed product for transshipment in an established U.S. port 
or roadstead. For U.S. domestic aquaculture products, entry into U.S. 
commerce is the first sale to a processing facility or directly to a 
consumer market.
    For the designated at-risk species, equivalent information is 
already being collected at the point of entry into commerce for the 
products of U.S. domestic fisheries pursuant to various Federal and/or 
State fishery management and reporting programs. For this reason, this 
proposed rule does not duplicate data reporting and record retention 
requirements already in place for products of U.S. domestic fisheries, 
and instead focuses on accessing the data necessary to establish 
traceability from point of harvest to entry into U.S. commerce for 
imported fish and fish products. Together, the requirements already in 
place for products of U.S. domestic fisheries and the requirements 
proposed in this rule for imported fish and fish products provide a 
framework for the designated at-risk species to trace seafood, whether 
domestic or imported, back to the point of harvest or capture to verify 
that seafood entering U.S. commerce is both legally caught and not 
fraudulently represented.
    With respect to aquaculture, U.S. domestic aquaculture is largely 
regulated at the state level. NOAA understands that U.S. states 
generally do not collect with respect to products of U.S. aquaculture 
operations the data this rule proposes to collect on imports. This is a 
concern as the IUU Task Force Action Plan calls for a traceability 
program that applies without regard to whether seafood is domestic or 
imported to ensure that seafood entering U.S. commerce is not the 
product of IUU fishing or fraud. NMFS is aware of gaps in the 
collection of traceability information for domestic aquaculture-raised 
shrimp and abalone, and is working with its federal and state partners 
to identify and implement measures to address those gaps. While it 
remains NMFS' full intention to include shrimp and abalone in the final 
rule, implementation of measures to address those gaps may affect the 
timing of implementation of the reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements for imports of shrimp and abalone. In particular, if gaps 
remain unaddressed by the time of publication of a final rule, NMFS 
intends to delay implementation of the rule for shrimp and abalone 
until such time as, working with its state and federal partners, it is 
able to determine that the gaps have been addressed and publishes a 
notice in the Federal Register specifying implementation of this rule 
for those species.

At-Risk Species

    A working group including representatives from NMFS and other 
Federal agency partners solicited comment on principles to be applied 
in the identification of fish species likely to be most at risk of IUU 
fishing or seafood fraud (80 FR 24246, April 30, 2015). Taking into 
consideration public comment received, the working group evaluated the 
strength and utility of various indicators of IUU fishing or seafood 
fraud as well as their measurability and the robustness of data 
available to assess them. The working group endeavored to minimize 
overlap of principles to ensure that alignment with multiple principles 
did not overstate associated risk, and also to

[[Page 6213]]

distinguish between risk of IUU fishing and risk of seafood fraud.
    The working group identified the following draft principles: 
Enforcement capability, existence of a catch documentation scheme, 
complexity of the supply chain, known species substitution, history of 
mislabeling (other than misidentification of species), and history of 
fisheries violations. Applying those principles to a base list of 
species, thirteen fish species/species groups were identified as likely 
to be most at risk of IUU fishing or seafood fraud. NMFS solicited 
public comment on the draft principles and draft list of at-risk 
species (80 FR 45955, August 3, 2015). After taking into consideration 
public comment, NMFS issued final principles and applied those 
principles to determine a list of at-risk species (80 FR 66867, October 
30, 2015). Public comments received in response to each of the above 
notices can be viewed through the docket created on the Federal e-
Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-
NMFS-2014-0090.
    Pursuant to the process described above, NMFS issued a list of at-
risk species and species groups that includes: Abalone; Atlantic Cod; 
Pacific Cod; Blue Crab; Red King Crab; Dolphinfish (Mahi Mahi); 
Grouper; Red Snapper; Sea Cucumber; Shrimp; Sharks; Swordfish; and 
Albacore, Bigeye, Skipjack, and Yellowfin Tuna. Although bluefin tuna 
species were determined to be at a lower risk of IUU fishing and 
seafood fraud than other tuna species and were not included on the list 
of at-risk species, the reporting and recordkeeping requirements 
proposed in this rule apply to HTS codes for fish and fish products of 
all tuna species including bluefin tuna. NMFS notes that bluefin tuna 
was historically a target of IUU fishing, and in response, two regional 
fisheries organizations implemented a catch documentation scheme which 
together include two of the three species world-wide. While NMFS 
continues to view the bluefin tuna to be at considerably lower risk of 
IUU fishing and seafood fraud than other tuna species and has made no 
modification to the list of at-risk species published on October 30, it 
proposes to cover bluefin tuna in this proposed rule (and has therefore 
included the HTS codes for bluefin tuna in the above list) in order to 
establish consistent treatment of tuna species, and avoid possible 
concerns that one species of tuna may be treated less favorably than 
others.
    Although NOAA has, as discussed, previously sought comment on the 
list of species to which this rule will apply (80 FR 45955, August 3, 
2015), NOAA recognizes that the public may further comment on the list 
of species and species groups, including whether any species should be 
added or deleted. It would be helpful if such comments include 
information on the factors established in Recommendations 14 and 15 of 
the IUU Task Force Action Plan. Because NOAA responded on October 30, 
2015 (80 FR 66867) to comments received on the proposed list that was 
published on August 3, 2015 (80 FR 45955), NOAA requests that comments 
not be submitted on this proposal that are duplicative of those 
submitted on the list of species and contain no new information.
    Under this proposed rule, importers would therefore be subject to 
the permitting, reporting and recording keeping requirements, which are 
described below, with respect to imports of the species and species 
groups as proposed, subject to revision at the time of issuance of the 
final rule. Entries of the fish and fish product of species covered by 
this rule filed under the following HTS codes would be designated in 
ACE as requiring the additional data in order to obtain release of the 
inbound shipment:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 HTS code                                                              Commodity description
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0301940100...............................  TUNA BLUEFIN ATLANTIC, PACIFIC LIVE.
0301950000...............................  TUNA BLUEFIN SOUTHERN LIVE.
0302310000...............................  TUNA ALBACORE FRESH.
0302320000...............................  TUNA YELLOWFIN FRESH.
0302330000...............................  TUNA SKIPJACK FRESH.
0302340000...............................  TUNA BIGEYE FRESH.
0302350100...............................  TUNA BLUEFIN ATLANTIC, PACIFIC FRESH.
0302360000...............................  TUNA BLUEFIN SOUTHERN FRESH.
0302470010...............................  SWORDFISH STEAKS FRESH.
0302470090...............................  SWORDFISH FRESH.
0302510010...............................  GROUNDFISH COD ATLANTIC FRESH.
0302510090...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FRESH.
0302810010...............................  SHARK DOGFISH FRESH.
0302810090...............................  SHARK NSPF FRESH.
0302895058...............................  SNAPPER (LUTJANIDAE SPP.) FRESH.
0302895061...............................  GROUPER FRESH.
0302895072...............................  DOLPHINFISH FRESH.
0303410000...............................  TUNA ALBACORE FROZEN.
0303420020...............................  TUNA YELLOWFIN WHOLE FROZEN.
0303420040...............................  TUNA YELLOWFIN EVISCERATED HEAD-ON FROZEN.
0303420060...............................  TUNA YELLOWFIN EVISCERATED HEAD-OFF FROZEN.
0303430000...............................  TUNA SKIPJACK FROZEN.
0303440000...............................  TUNA BIGEYE FROZEN.
0303450110...............................  TUNA BLUEFIN ATLANTIC FROZEN.
0303450150...............................  TUNA BLUEFIN PACIFIC FROZEN.
0303460000...............................  TUNA BLUEFIN SOUTHERN FROZEN.
0303490200...............................  TUNA NSPF FROZEN.
0303570010...............................  SWORDFISH STEAKS FROZEN.
0303570090...............................  SWORDFISH FROZEN.
0303630010...............................  GROUNDFISH COD ATLANTIC FROZEN.
0303630090...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FROZEN.
0303810010...............................  SHARK DOGFISH FROZEN.
0303810090...............................  SHARK NSPF FROZEN.
0303890067...............................  SNAPPER (LUTJANIDAE SPP.) FROZEN.
0303890070...............................  GROUPER FROZEN.
0304440010...............................  GROUNDFISH COD ATLANTIC FILLET FRESH.

[[Page 6214]]

 
0304440015...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FILLET FRESH.
0304450000...............................  SWORDFISH FILLET FRESH.
0304530010...............................  GROUNDFISH COD ATLANTIC MEAT FRESH.
0304530010...............................  GROUNDFISH COD ATLANTIC MEAT FRESH.
0304530015...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF MEAT FRESH.
0304530015...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF MEAT FRESH.
0304540000...............................  SWORDFISH MEAT FRESH.
0304711000...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FILLET BLOCKS FROZEN >4.5KG.
0304711000...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FILLET BLOCKS FROZEN >4.5KG.
0304715000...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FILLET FROZEN.
0304715000...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FILLET FROZEN.
0304870000...............................  TUNA NSPF FILLET FROZEN.
0304895055...............................  DOLPHINFISH FILLET FROZEN.
0304895055...............................  DOLPHINFISH FILLET FROZEN.
0304911000...............................  SWORDFISH MEAT FROZEN >6.8KG.
0304919000...............................  SWORDFISH MEAT FROZEN NOT >6.8KG.
0304951010...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF MINCED FROZEN >6.8KG.
0304951010...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF MINCED FROZEN >6.8KG.
0304991190...............................  TUNA NSPF MEAT FROZEN >6.8KG.
0305320010...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FILLET DRIED/SALTED/BRINE.
0305494020...............................  GROUNDFISH COD, CUSK, HADDOCK, HAKE, POLLOCK SMOKED.
0305510000...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF DRIED.
0305620010...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF SALTED MOISTURE CONTENT >50%.
0305620025...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF SALTED MOISTURE CONTENT BET 45-50%.
0305620030...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF SALTED MOISTURE CONTENT BET 43-45%.
0305620045...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF SALTED MOISTURE CONTENT NOT >43%.
0305620050...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FILLET SALTED MOISTURE >50%.
0305620060...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FILLET SALTED MOISTURE CONTENT 45-50%.
0305620070...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FILLET SALTED MOISTURE CONTENT 43-45%.
0305620080...............................  GROUNDFISH COD NSPF FILLET SALTED MOISTURE NOT >43%.
0305710000...............................  SHARK FINS.
0306142000...............................  CRABMEAT NSPF FROZEN.
0306144010...............................  CRAB KING FROZEN.
0306144090...............................  CRAB NSPF FROZEN.
0306160003...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN <15.
0306160006...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 15/20.
0306160009...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 21/25.
0306160012...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 26/30.
0306160015...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 31/40.
0306160018...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 41/50.
0306160021...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 51/60.
0306160024...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 61/70.
0306160027...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN >70.
0306160040...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER PEELED FROZEN.
0306170003...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN <15.
0306170006...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 15/20.
0306170009...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 21/25.
0306170012...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 26/30.
0306170015...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 31/40.
0306170018...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 41/50.
0306170021...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 51/60.
0306170024...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN 61/70.
0306170027...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER SHELL-ON FROZEN >70.
0306170040...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER PEELED FROZEN.
0306260020...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER SHELL-ON FRESH/DRIED/SALTED/BRINE.
0306260040...............................  SHRIMP COLD-WATER PEELED FRESH/DRIED/SALTED/BRINE.
0306270020...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER SHELL-ON FRESH/DRIED/SALTED/BRINE.
0306270040...............................  SHRIMP WARM-WATER PEELED FRESH/DRIED/SALTED/BRINE.
0308110000...............................  SEA CUCUMBERS LIVE/FRESH.
0308190000...............................  SEA CUCUMBERS FROZEN/DRIED/SALTED/BRINE.
1604141010...............................  TUNA NSPF IN ATC (FOIL OR FLEXIBLE) IN OIL.
1604141091...............................  TUNA ALBACORE IN ATC (OTHER) IN OIL.
1604141099...............................  TUNA NSPF IN ATC (OTHER) IN OIL.
1604142251...............................  TUNA ALBACORE IN ATC (FOIL OR FLEXIBLE) NOT IN OIL IN QUOTA.
1604142259...............................  TUNA ALBACORE IN ATC (OTHER) NOT IN OIL IN QUOTA.
1604142291...............................  TUNA NSPF IN ATC (FOIL OR FLEXIBLE) NOT IN OIL IN QUOTA.
1604142299...............................  TUNA NSPF IN ATC (OTHER) NOT IN OIL IN QUOTA.
1604143051...............................  TUNA ALBACORE IN ATC (FOIL/FLEXIBLE) NOT IN OIL OVER QUOTA.
1604143059...............................  TUNA ALBACORE IN ATC (OTHER) NOT IN OIL OVER QUOTA.
1604143091...............................  TUNA NSPF IN ATC (FOIL OR FLEXIBLE) NOT IN OIL OVER QUOTA.
1604143099...............................  TUNA NSPF IN ATC (OTHER) NOT IN OIL OVER QUOTA.
1604144000...............................  TUNA NSPF NOT IN ATC NOT IN OIL >6.8KG.
1604145000...............................  TUNA NSPF NOT IN ATC NOT IN OIL NOT >6.8KG.
1605100510...............................  CRAB PRODUCTS PREPARED DINNERS IN ATC.

[[Page 6215]]

 
1605100590...............................  CRAB PRODUCTS PREPARED DINNERS NOT IN ATC.
1605102010...............................  CRABMEAT KING IN ATC.
1605102051...............................  CRABMEAT SWIMMING (CALLINECTES) IN ATC.
1605104002...............................  CRABMEAT KING FROZEN.
1605104025...............................  CRABMEAT SWIMMING (CALLINECTES) FROZEN.
1605104025...............................  CRABMEAT SWIMMING (CALLINECTES) FROZEN.
1605211000...............................  SHRIMPS AND PRAWNS, NOT IN AIRTIGHT CONTAINERS.
1605291000...............................  SHRIMPS AND PRAWNS, OTHER.
1605570500...............................  ABALONE PRODUCTS PREPARED DINNERS.
1605576000...............................  ABALONE PREPARED/PRESERVED.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the above listed HTS codes that may be used to make entry for 
designated at-risk species and for species which are not so designated, 
the scientific name of the species in the shipment, or a disclaimer, 
will be required to discern whether the shipment offered for entry is 
subject to additional data collection under the proposed traceability 
program. This proposed rule does not cover highly processed fish 
products (fish oil, slurry, sauces, sticks, balls, cakes, puddings, and 
other similar highly processed fish products) for which the species of 
fish comprising the product or the harvesting event(s) or aquaculture 
operation(s) of the shipment of the product cannot be feasibly 
identified and therefore HTS codes for such fish and fish products have 
not been included in the list above. However other program requirements 
(e.g., TTVP) may have data reporting requirements applicable to these 
codes.
    Regulatory requirements for reporting and recordkeeping already 
exist for certain products subject to this rule. In particular, tuna 
products would be subject to this proposed rule and are now subject to 
the Tuna Tracking and Verification Program (TTVP) (See http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/dolphinsafe/tunaHTScodes.htm), which monitors 
compliance under the Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act 
(DPCIA) (16 U.S.C. 1385). NMFS seeks to avoid any duplication of 
reporting and recordkeeping by ensuring that those entities currently 
subject to the TTVP requirements will only have to report the required 
information to the ACE portal once (and, similarly, those entities 
subject to both sets of requirements will only keep one set of records 
for purposes of tracking and verification). Furthermore, in light of 
the similarity in underlying reporting and recordkeeping requirements 
of the IUU fishing seafood fraud traceability program and the TTVP 
program, which verifies whether tuna product marketed as ``dolphin 
safe'' meets the eligibility conditions for the dolphin safe label, 
NMFS intends to ensure that any future changes to the IUU fishing and 
risk of seafood fraud requirements such as converting certain 
recordkeeping requirements to a reporting requirement, as discussed 
below, will be replicated in the TTVP program (through the inclusion of 
appropriate HTS codes) so that entities serving the U.S. tuna product 
market will not be subject to conflicting reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements. Comments regarding HTS codes should address the extent to 
which the listed codes accurately reflect the potential universe of 
products associated with the list of at-risk species and the cost 
effectiveness of including more or fewer codes.

Data for Reporting and Recordkeeping

    The working group considered the minimum types of information that 
should be reported in order to determine that imports of at-risk 
species are not products of illegal fishing or are fraudulently 
represented. The area of harvest or the location of the aquaculture 
facility, and the time at which the harvest took place, represents the 
initial ``link'' in the supply chain. At-risk species entering U.S. 
commerce will be traced to their harvest and its authorization. 
Information on each point of transshipment and processing throughout 
the fish or fish product's chain of custody culminating at the point of 
entry into U.S. commerce can also be used to trace product back to 
point of harvest.
    The data to be reported for at-risk species would be in addition to 
the information required by CBP as part of normal entry processing via 
the ACE portal. To avoid duplication, the interagency working group 
considered data that are already collected by CBP on the entry/entry 
summary, and data that are, or will be, collected via ACE by NMFS and 
other ITDS partner government agencies (e.g., Food and Drug 
Administration, Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of State).
    NMFS issued a notice (80 FR 37601, July 1, 2015) to request public 
input on the minimum types of information necessary for an effective 
seafood traceability program to combat IUU fishing and seafood fraud, 
as well as the operational standards related to collecting, verifying 
and securing that data. A number of respondents from the trade 
community expressed concern that any additional documentation and the 
electronic collection of data would create a burden to the industry, 
and could compromise the confidential relationships between buyers and 
suppliers. While changes will need to be made that may pose a challenge 
in the near term for some industry members, it is anticipated that the 
long-term benefits of electronic data collection will outweigh these 
challenges. To address concerns about data confidentiality, data 
security will be given the highest priority. Information collected via 
ACE and maintained in CBP systems is highly sensitive commercial, 
financial and proprietary information, generally exempt from disclosure 
pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)) and 
prohibited from disclosure by the Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. 1905). 
NMFS further notes that information required to be submitted to the 
agency under the MSA is subject to MSA confidentiality of information 
requirements at 16 U.S.C. 1881a(b).
    Several comments expressed the desire for all fish species to be 
included in the initial phase of the traceability program, not just the 
subset of identified at-risk species. Others commented that monitoring 
and control should not stop at the point of entry into U.S. commerce, 
but carry all the way through to the final retail consumer, where many 
feel that most fraud occurs, especially in terms of mislabeling. 
Although this proposed rule is the initial phase, and is designed in 
such a way that it can be expanded to eventually include all species, 
as warranted by risk analysis, it is not designed to expand 
traceability from the point of entry into commerce to the final 
consumer. As noted earlier, the MSA makes it unlawful to import, 
export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase in interstate or 
foreign commerce any fish taken, possessed,

[[Page 6216]]

transported or sold in violation of any foreign law or regulation. 
Other state and Federal agencies have broader authority regarding 
mislabeling and other misrepresentation of food products and consumer 
protection that may be applied at other points in the supply chain up 
to the final sale.
    The comments reflected almost universal support for the use of 
scientific names for accurate species identification, with the addition 
of FDA-approved market names on consumer labeling for user-
friendliness. Many of the comments suggested that the United Nations 
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Fishing Area alone is not 
sufficient to identify a precise location of harvest, and that fishing 
location should be more closely defined by including the country of 
origin (for product harvested within another country's waters), 
regional designation, or even GPS coordinates.
    The domestic fishing community also expressed the desire for 
importers to be held to the same documentation standards that apply to 
U.S. fisheries because they feel that they ``already provide a 
staggering amount of information and demonstrate a high degree of 
traceability.'' The NOC Committee agrees that data regarding fish and 
fish products from both domestic and foreign sources must be required 
to enable officials to determine lawful harvest and, also, reduce the 
incidence of fraud. Much of the data needed to combat IUU fishing is 
already being collected in many foreign fisheries, and using the 
single-window ITDS system at the point of entry would help streamline 
and unify the data reporting and verification process, and provide the 
needed inter-operability of information exchange across the supply 
chain.
    After consideration of comments as outlined above, NMFS proposes 
that, at the point of entry for species covered by this rule, importers 
of record would be required to report the following information for 
each entry in addition to other information that CBP and other 
agencies, including NMFS, currently require:
     Information on the entity(ies) harvesting or producing the 
fish (as applicable): Name and flag state of harvesting vessel(s) and 
evidence of authorization; Unique vessel identifier(s) (if available); 
Type(s) of fishing gear; Name(s) of farm or aquaculture facility.
     Information on the fish that was harvested and processed, 
including: Species of fish (scientific name, acceptable market name, 
and ASFIS number); Product description(s); Name(s) of product; Quantity 
and/or weight of the product(s).
     Information on where and when the fish were harvested and 
landed: Area(s) of wild-capture or aquaculture harvest; Harvest 
date(s); Location(s) of aquaculture facility; Point of first landing; 
Date of first landing; Name of entity(ies) (processor, dealer, vessel) 
to which fish was landed. Such information may be contained, for 
example, in catch certificates, landing reports, and port inspection 
reports. Entries may comprise products from more than one harvest event 
and each event relevant to entry must be reported.
     The NMFS IFTP number issued to the importer of record for 
the entry.
    Additional information on each point in the chain of custody 
regarding the shipment of the fish or fish product to point of entry 
into U.S. commerce would be established as a recordkeeping requirement 
on the part of the importer of record to ensure that information is 
readily available to NMFS to allow it to trace the fish or fish product 
from the point of entry into U.S. commerce back to the point of harvest 
to verify the information that is reported upon entry. Such information 
would include records regarding each custodian of the fish and fish 
product, including, as applicable, transshippers, processors, storage 
facilities, and distributors. The information contained in the records 
must be provided to NMFS upon request and be sufficient for NMFS to 
conduct a trace back to verify the veracity of the information that is 
reported on entry. NMFS expects that typical supply chain records that 
are kept in the normal course of businesses, including declarations by 
harvesting/carrier vessels, bills of lading and forms voluntarily used 
or required under foreign government or international monitoring 
programs which include such information as the identity of the 
custodian, the type of processing, and the weight of the product, would 
provide sufficient information for NMFS to conduct a trace back. In 
addition to relying on such records, the trade may choose to use model 
forms that NMFS has developed to track and document chain of custody 
information through the supply chain. NMFS seeks comments on proposed 
model forms it has developed for this purpose which are available in 
the docket for this rulemaking at www.regulations.gov.
    Due to technological limitations of automated data processing for 
imaged documents and requirements associated with the phase-in of ITDS, 
this proposed rule requires that chain of custody information be 
retained by the importer of record and made available to NMFS upon 
request. However, NMFS recognizes the conservation value of requiring 
reporting of key chain of custody data elements for the purpose of 
real-time verification and compliance risk assessment if those data can 
be accessed and analyzed using automated processes. While constraints 
on the expansion of information collected through message sets prior to 
full operationalization of ITDS by December 31, 2016 preclude the 
inclusion in this proposed rule of a reporting requirement for chain of 
custody information in that manner, NMFS will identify (including based 
on its experience with audits conducted pursuant to this rule) key 
chain of custody data elements that pose conservation benefits for 
real-time reporting by one year from full implementation of the final 
rule, and implement through subsequent rulemaking the reporting of key 
chain of custody data via message set into the ITDS system.
    As explained above, NMFS proposes that the importer of record, or 
entry filer acting on their behalf, report the data required under the 
proposed program via the ACE portal as part of the CBP entry/entry 
summary process. To this end, importers of record who enter the 
designated at-risk species would be required to supply the data 
required to be reported under this proposed rule electronically through 
the ACE Partner Government Agency Message Set for NMFS (NMFS Message 
Set) and/or the DIS. The format for the NMFS Message Set would be 
designated for each of the affected commodities (by HTS code) and 
specified in the following documents that would be jointly developed by 
NMFS and CBP and made available to importers and other entry filers by 
CBP (http://www.cbp.gov/trade/ace/catair):

 CBP and Trade Automated Interface Requirements--Appendix PGA
 CBP and Trade Automated Interface Requirements--PGA Message 
Set
 Automated Broker Interface (ABI) Requirements--Implementation 
Guide for NMFS

    In developing software for assembling and transferring the 
additional data to ACE, importers may wish to consider interoperability 
with existing traceability systems that are prevalent in the private 
sector supply chain or which may exist for certain commodities subject 
to catch/trade documentation schemes under the auspices of a regional 
fishery management organization (RFMO). While NMFS does not endorse any 
particular private sector traceability system, use of such systems may 
facilitate the collection of the

[[Page 6217]]

required information along the supply chain in order to report this 
information through ACE. However, importers of record are still 
responsible for the accuracy of the information in their import 
transactions, irrespective of whether integration software or other 
automated supply chain solutions are utilized.
    Where RFMO catch/documentation schemes apply to the affected at-
risk species, including those that have been implemented by NMFS 
through regulation (e.g., the swordfish statistical document of the 
International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas), it is 
anticipated that compliance with the entry data collection requirements 
of these schemes would for the most part meet the data reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements of the traceability program proposed here. 
However, ITDS provides sufficient flexibility to collect additional 
data in cases where the data requirements of the seafood traceability 
program proposed by this rule would exceed those of an RFMO scheme 
applicable to the same species. NMFS will work with CBP to avoid 
duplication of reporting requirement in cases where more than one 
reporting program applies to a particular fish or fish product, and to 
ensure that all the data are reported to meet the requirements of each 
applicable reporting program.

International Fisheries Trade Permit (IFTP)

    The ITDS proposed rule would establish the IFTP to consolidate 
existing permits under the highly migratory species international trade 
program (HMS ITP) and Antarctic marine living resources (AMLR) program, 
and would require a permit for the TTVP. (80 FR 81251, December 29, 
2015). (See Intersection with Other Applicable Requirements section 
below for further detail on the existing trade monitoring programs.) 
This proposed rule would extend the IFTP requirement in the ITDS 
proposed rule to include importers of record identified in CBP entry 
filings for shipments containing the designated at-risk species covered 
by this rule. Requiring the IFTP would allow NMFS to identify, and have 
current contact information for, importers of the at-risk species 
covered by this rule. This will enable NMFS to provide information 
about data reporting and recordkeeping requirements applicable to at-
risk species; alert permit holders in advance of any pending changes to 
data reporting and recordkeeping requirements, including additional 
data elements or at-risk species; and minimize the potential for 
disruptions in trade and costly delays in release of shipments.
    To obtain the IFTP, U.S. importers of record for designated at-risk 
species covered by this rule and seafood products derived from such 
species would electronically submit their application and fee for the 
IFTP via the National Permitting System Web site designated by NMFS. 
The fee charged for the IFTP would be calculated, at least annually, in 
accordance with procedures set forth in Chapter 9 of the NOAA Finance 
Handbook for determining the administrative costs for special products 
and services (http://www.corporateservices.noaa.gov/finance/Finance%20Handbook.html); the permit fee would not exceed such costs. 
An importer of record who is required to have an IFTP only needs one 
IFTP. Separate permits are not required, for example, if the imported 
species are covered under more than one program or the importer trades 
in more than one covered species.

Reporting and Recordkeeping

    This proposed rule would require that an IFTP holder (i.e., 
importer of record as identified on CBP entry/entry summary) report 
certain data for entries of at-risk species covered by this rule. NMFS 
would provide detailed information to permit holders regarding 
submission of such data, as well as on recordkeeping, in a compliance 
guide for industry that will be prepared in advance of NMFS' 
implementation of a final rule. (The guide may include information on 
electronic filing through ITDS.) The IFTP holder/importer of record 
would be required to maintain or have access to, and make available for 
inspection, electronic or paper versions of records associated with an 
entry for at-risk species at their place of business for a period of 
five years after the date of entry.
    NMFS believes the costs of this rule will be relatively minor. 
Nonetheless, NMFS recognizes that the public may comment on this aspect 
of the proposed rule and possibly suggest alternative approaches. 
Section 2.6 of the Draft Regulatory Impact Review and Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis discusses several alternatives that 
were considered and ultimately rejected by NMFS. Any comments on these 
alternatives or any other modifications to the proposed reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements should explain how they maintain the rule's 
effectiveness at combating IUU fishing and seafood fraud.
    This proposed rule recognizes that the importer of record may be 
different from the entity that actually completes CBP entry filings 
(i.e., customs broker). An importer of record must obtain an IFTP and 
is responsible for complying with all of the requirements of this rule. 
The importer could arrange for a customs broker to submit required data 
elements for at-risk species through ACE. The customs broker would have 
to report the IFTP number of the importer of record along with the 
other required data elements for the specific entry but would not need 
to obtain an IFTP. However, the importer of record must still comply 
with the record keeping and inspection requirements of this rule.

Verification of Entries

    To implement this proposed regulation, business rules would be 
programmed into ACE to automatically validate that the importer of 
record has satisfied all of the NMFS Message Set and document image 
requirements as applicable to HTS codes subject to multiple programs 
(e.g., all data fields are populated and conform to format and coding 
specifications, required image files are attached). Absent validation 
of the NMFS requirements in ACE, the entry filed would be rejected and 
the entry filer would be notified of the deficiencies that must be 
addressed in order for the entry to be certified by ACE prior to 
release by NMFS and CBP. In addition to automated validation of the 
data submitted, entries may be subject to verification by NMFS that the 
supplied data elements are true and can be corroborated via auditing 
procedures (e.g., vessel was authorized by the flag state, legal catch 
was landed to an authorized entity, processor receipts correspond to 
outputs). For shipments selected for verification, if verification of 
the data cannot be completed by NMFS pre-release, NMFS may request that 
CBP place a hold on a shipment pending verification by NMFS or allow 
conditional release, contingent upon timely provision of records by the 
importer of record to allow data verification. Entries for which timely 
provision of records is not provided to NMFS or that cannot be verified 
as lawfully acquired and non-fraudulent by NMFS, will be subject to 
enforcement or other appropriate action by NMFS in coordination with 
CBP. Such responses could include a re-delivery order for the shipment, 
exclusion from entry into commerce of the shipment, or enforcement 
action against the entry filer or importer of record.
    To select entries for verification, NMFS would work with CBP to 
develop a specific program within ITDS to

[[Page 6218]]

screen information for the covered commodities based on risk criteria. 
For example, risk-based screening and targeting procedures can be 
programmed to categorize entries by volume and certain attributes 
(e.g., ocean area of catch, vessel type or gear), and then randomly 
select entries for verification on a percentage basis within groups of 
entries defined by the associated attributes. In applying these 
procedures, NMFS would implement a verification scheme, including 
levels of inspection sufficient to assure that imports of the at-risk 
species are not products of illegal fisheries and are not fraudulently 
represented. Given the volume of imports, and the perishable nature of 
seafood, it would not likely be cost-effective for most verifications 
to be conducted on a pre-release basis. However, the verification 
scheme may involve targeted operations on a pre-release basis that are 
focused on particular products or ports of concern.
    A verification program as described above will facilitate a 
determination of whether imported seafood has been lawfully acquired 
and not misrepresented and deter the infiltration of illegally 
harvested and misrepresented seafood into the supply chain. In addition 
to market access deterrence, there may be price effects in that illegal 
or would be fraudulent seafood must be diverted to lower value markets. 
Taken together, market access and price effects would reduce the 
incentives for illegal fishing operations and for seafood fraud. 
Conversely, authorized fisheries stand to benefit from import 
monitoring programs that aim to identify and exclude products of IUU 
fishing and seafood fraud, both through enhanced market share and 
potentially higher prices.

Voluntary Third Party Certifications and Trusted Trader Program

    NMFS is considering how voluntary third party seafood certification 
programs could simplify entry filing for designated at-risk species or 
could be used to meet reporting requirements under this proposed rule. 
NMFS requests comment on how interoperability of third party data 
systems could be applied to meet the data reporting requirements on a 
pre-arrival basis or at the point of entry. Such interoperable systems 
would have to provide the information necessary for NMFS to trace 
product to the harvest event and therefore be sufficient to identify 
product that is the result of IUU fishing or is misrepresented.
    Additionally, NMFS is considering how a Trusted Trader program 
might be used to streamline entry processing for designated at-risk 
species. The Trusted Trader Program is intended to streamline entry 
processing consistent with ensuring that all traders in the supply 
chain comply with applicable U.S. regulations. Participants in the 
Trusted Trader Program would collect or have access to the same data as 
non-participants, but may not need to provide it prior to entry. NMFS 
requests comment regarding the potential design and use of a Trusted 
Trader Program in connection with the requirements proposed in this 
rule, in particular how it could be used to streamline entry while 
allowing the United States to determine that imported seafood has been 
lawfully acquired and not misrepresented and to deter the infiltration 
of illegally harvested and misrepresented seafood into the supply 
chain.

Consideration of the European Union Catch Certification Scheme

    The European Union (EU) adopted the IUU Regulation on September 29, 
2008, which included a catch certification scheme for importation and 
exportation of fishery products. The EU's IUU regulations do not 
include a traceability scheme equivalent to that as contemplated by the 
IUU Task Force and as proposed in this rule. However, NMFS is 
interested in comments on how some of the elements inherent in the EU's 
IUU regulations may be adapted to this rule as a means of facilitating 
compliance and reducing burden for exporters, either through the design 
of the traceability process itself or as part of a trusted trader 
program.

Implementation Timeframe

    NMFS requests specific comment on the implementation date for the 
data reporting and recordkeeping requirements for at-risk species under 
this proposed rule. While some firms may have adequate information 
systems already in place, other firms may need lead time to develop and 
implement mechanisms for transmitting the required information along 
the supply chain so that the data are available for entry filers to 
submit via ACE. NMFS anticipates that this proposed rule would become 
effective in September 2016, consistent with timeframes described in 
the IUU and Seafood Fraud Task Force Action Plan, but that the date by 
which importers are required to comply with the requirements in the 
rule will be sometime after that. NMFS seeks comment on an appropriate 
implementation date or dates, taking into account any time firms may 
require to adapt to their practices to comply with the requirements of 
this rule as well as logistical considerations such as compliance with 
anticipated revisions to ITDS that will allow chain of custody 
information to be submitted electronically. As an initial estimate, 
NMFS anticipates that firms may need between 90 days and 12 months to 
adapt their practices to comply with the requirements of this rule and 
proposes an implementation date of somewhere between 90 days and 12 
months following publication of the final rule.
    In addition to seeking comments on the implementation timeframe for 
this first phase of the traceability program, feedback is also sought 
on the lead time needed for seafood trade participants to implement 
potential expansion of this rule, either by inclusion of additional 
species and/or additional data elements. NMFS proposes to implement 
changes to reporting or recordkeeping requirements for species and data 
elements through notice and comment rulemaking procedures. Future 
proposed rules would specify the changes to reporting or recordkeeping 
requirements and would direct potentially affected parties to the 
pertinent CBP documents (Appendix PGA, PGA Message Set, Implementation 
Guide for NMFS) as described in the Customs and Trade Automated 
Interface Requirements (CATAIR) available at: http://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ACE%20NMFS%20PGA%20MS%20Guidelines%20-%20July%2022%202015.pdf) that would be developed jointly by NMFS and 
CBP to provide the implementation details (e.g., species by HTS code, 
data elements, message set format, DIS requirements).

International Cooperation and Assistance

    Subject to the availability of resources, NMFS intends to provide 
assistance to exporting nations to support compliance with the 
requirements of this proposed rule, including by providing assistance 
to build capacity to: (1) Undertake effective fisheries management; (2) 
strengthen fisheries governance structures and enforcement bodies to 
combat IUU fishing and seafood fraud; and (3) establish, maintain, or 
support systems to enable export shipments of fish and fish products to 
be traced back to point of harvest.

Intersection With Other Applicable Requirements

    The proposed requirements for additional data collection at entry 
into U.S. commerce for imported at-risk species could intersect with 
data collection requirements applicable to imports of those same 
species under

[[Page 6219]]

several other authorities. Some of these authorities are related to 
combating IUU fishing, while other authorities are aimed at other 
concerns such as managing bycatch.
    NMFS has previously issued regulations to implement programs for 
fishery products subject to RFMO documentation requirements and/or 
catch documentation under domestic laws. These regulations pertain to 
trade monitoring under three main programs: The HMS ITP, which 
regulates trade in specified commodities of tuna, swordfish, billfish, 
and shark fins under the MSA and requirements adopted by several tuna 
RFMOs to which the United States is a contracting party; the AMLR 
program, which regulates trade in Antarctic and Patagonian toothfish 
and other fishery products managed under the Convention on the 
Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR); and TTVP, 
which regulates trade of purse seine harvested in frozen and/or 
processed tuna products under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. 
Monitoring authority, conducted under the TTVP, is also provided for 
tuna products by the DPCIA, which specifies the conditions under which 
tuna products are eligible to be labeled as dolphin-safe.
    Many of these monitoring programs require parties who import into 
or export, and/or re-export from the U.S. regulated species to: Obtain 
a permit from NMFS, obtain documentation on the flag-nation 
authorization for the harvest from the foreign exporter, and submit 
this information to NMFS. Depending on the commodity, specific 
information may also be required, for example: The flag nation of the 
harvesting vessel, the ocean area of catch, the fishing gear used, the 
name of the harvesting vessel and details and authorizations related to 
harvest, landing, transshipment and export/re-export.
    In addition to these three programs, NMFS may implement or 
recommend trade measures for certain commodities under several other 
authorities. The High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act 
(HSDFMPA) (16 U.S.C. 1826d-k) sets forth a process for identification 
and certification of nations for IUU fishing, bycatch of protected 
living marine resources, and unsustainable shark fishing. Certain fish 
and fish products from identified nations that do not receive positive 
certifications could be subject to denial of port privileges and/or 
import prohibitions under the authority provided in the High Seas 
Driftnet Fisheries Enforcement Act (HSDFEA) (16 U.S.C. 1826a-c). There 
are also identification and/or certification procedures in other 
statutes, including the Pelly Amendment to the Fishermen's Protective 
Act (22 U.S.C. 1978) and the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (ATCA) (16 
U.S.C. 971 et seq.). These procedures may result in trade restrictions 
or other measures for fishery products from a certified country that 
are associated with the activity that resulted in the certification. 
Further, import prohibitions for certain fishery products could also be 
applied under provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) (16 
U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) and other statutes, depending on the circumstances 
of the fish harvest and the conservation concerns of the United States.
    Multilateral efforts to combat IUU fishing may also result in 
requirements to take trade action. The United States is a member or 
contracting party to several RFMOs that have established procedures to 
identify nations and/or vessels whose fishing activities undermine the 
effectiveness of the conservation and management measures adopted by 
the organization. Fishery products exported by such nations or 
harvested by such vessels may be subject to import prohibitions. 
Relevant RFMO statutes include the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act (16 
U.S.C. 971 et seq.), the Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention 
Act (AMLRCA) (16 U.S.C. 2431 et seq.), the Western and Central Pacific 
Fisheries Convention Implementation Act (WCPFCIA) (16 U.S.C. 6901 et 
seq.), and the Tuna Conventions Act (TCA) (16 U.S.C. 951 et seq.). 
Implementation of such RFMO-derived trade measures may require the 
collection of information about certain fish products from certain 
countries, including the United States, and some of these existing 
measures do involve the at-risk species designated in this proposed 
rule.
    For existing programs involving collection and reporting of trade 
information that overlap with the at-risk species proposed for data 
collection in this current rulemaking, NMFS has examined the data 
required under those existing programs and has adjusted the NMFS 
Message Set specified in the ABI Implementation Guide to ensure that 
all regulatory requirements are met while avoiding duplication. 
Likewise, NMFS has avoided duplication between the at-risk species data 
reporting and recordkeeping requirements contained in this proposed 
rule and any documentation requirements affecting designated at-risk 
species that have been implemented pursuant to other existing programs. 
Should future trade monitoring requirements be applied for designated 
at-risk species under any statutory authority, NMFS will consider how 
to avoid duplication of data collection accordingly. However, entry 
filers should carefully examine the data reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements contained in this proposed rule and other applicable 
rules, as further explained in the ABI Implementation Guide, for the 
commodities that comprise the shipment to ensure that all regulatory 
requirements are met for all trade-related programs that are 
applicable. The ABI Implementation Guide will be updated by NMFS and 
CBP to provide the trade with a single comprehensive resource 
addressing all applicable program requirements for imports of fish and 
fish products subject to data reporting and recordkeeping requirements 
under NMFS statutory authority. NMFS would welcome public comment as to 
whether there are any additional duplicative data reporting or 
recordkeeping requirements which have not been identified.

Classification

    This proposed rule is published under the authority of the 
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 
1801 et seq. The NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this 
proposed action is consistent with the provisions of this and other 
applicable laws, subject to further consideration after public comment.

Executive Order 12866

    This proposed rule has been determined to be significant for the 
purposes of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 because it may raise novel 
legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's 
priorities, or the principles set forth in E.O. 12866. NMFS has 
prepared a regulatory impact review of this action, which is available 
from NMFS (see ADDRESSES). This analysis describes the economic impact 
this proposed action, if adopted, would have on U.S. businesses and 
consumers. NMFS invites the public to comment on this proposal and the 
supporting analysis.
    The regulatory action being considered, and its legal basis, is 
described in the preamble of this proposed rule. This proposed rule 
would require a permit (IFTP) for importers of at-risk species. 
Additionally, information pertaining to the harvest and landing of the 
product prior to U.S. import would be required at the point of entry 
into U.S. commerce, and certain records must be retained. With regard 
to the possible economic effects of this action, NMFS

[[Page 6220]]

anticipates that U.S. entities would not be significantly affected by 
this action because it does not directly restrict trade in the 
designated at-risk species and does not pose entirely new burdens with 
regard to the collection and submission of information necessary to 
determine product admissibility. Some of the data proposed to be 
collected at entry or to be subject to recordkeeping requirements is 
already collected by the seafood industry in order to comply with food 
safety and product labeling requirements. In addition, the majority of 
the countries exporting fish and fish products derived from the 
designated at-risk species to the U.S. market also export a number of 
these same fish and fish products to the European Union (E.U.) market. 
Consequently, many harvesting states, port states, and intermediary/
exporting states that would be affected by this rule may already have 
comparable information collection systems in place to satisfy the 
requirements of E.U. regulation on IUU fishing.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This proposed rule has been determined to be significant for the 
purposes of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 because it may raise novel 
legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's 
priorities, or the principles set forth in E.O. 12866. An Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was prepared, as required by 
section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The IRFA describes 
the economic impact this proposed rule will have on small entities and 
includes a description of the action, why it is being considered, and 
the legal basis for this action. The purpose of the RFA is to relieve 
small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental entities 
of burdensome regulations and recordkeeping requirements. Major goals 
of the RFA are: (1) To increase agency awareness and understanding of 
the impact of their regulations on small business, (2) to require 
agencies to communicate and explain their findings to the public, and 
(3) to encourage agencies to use flexibility and to provide regulatory 
relief to small entities. The RFA emphasizes predicting impacts on 
small entities as a group distinct from other entities and the 
consideration of alternatives that may minimize the impacts while still 
achieving the stated objective of the action. Below is a summary of the 
IRFA for the proposed rule which was prepared in conjunction with a 
Regulatory Impact Review (RIR). The IRFA/RIR is available from NMFS 
(see ADDRESSES).
    The primary objective of this proposed rule is to collect or have 
access to additional data on imported fish and fish products to 
determine that it has been lawfully acquired and is not fraudulent and 
to deter illegally caught or misrepresented seafood from entering into 
U.S. commerce. These data reporting and recordkeeping requirements 
affect inter alia importers of seafood products, many of which are 
small businesses. Given the level of imports contributing to the annual 
supply of seafood, collecting and evaluating information about fish and 
fish products sourced overseas are a part of normal business practices 
for U.S. seafood dealers. The permitting, electronic reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements proposed by this rulemaking would build on 
current business practices (e.g., information systems to facilitate 
product recalls, to maintain product quality, or to reduce risks of 
food borne illnesses) and are not estimated to pose significant adverse 
or long-term economic impacts on small entities.
    If this rule is finalized, NMFS estimates there will be 
approximately 2,000 new applicants for the IFTP, with an estimated 
industry-wide increase in annual costs to importers of $60,000 in 
permit fees. Data sets to be submitted electronically to determine 
product admissibility are, to some extent, either already collected by 
the trade in the course of supply chain management, already required to 
be collected and submitted under existing trade monitoring programs 
(e.g., tuna, swordfish, toothfish), or collected in support of third 
party certification schemes voluntarily adopted by the trade. 
Incremental costs are likely to consist of developing interoperable 
systems to ensure that the data are transmitted along with the product 
to ensure the information is available to the entry filer.
    The proposed rule would apply to U.S. entities that import fish and 
fish products derived from the designated at-risk species. This 
proposed rule would be implemented so as to avoid duplication or 
conflict with any other Federal rules. To the extent that the proposed 
requirements overlap with other reporting requirements applicable to 
the designated at-risk species, this will be been taken into account to 
avoid collecting data more than once or by means other than the single 
window (ACE portal). As stated above, this rule is intended to allow 
NMFS to determine that imported seafood has been lawfully acquired and 
is not fraudulently represented and to deter illegally caught or 
misrepresented seafood from entering into U.S. commerce. Given the 
large volume of fish and fish product imports to the U.S. market, the 
number of exporting countries, and the fact that traceability systems 
are being increasingly used within the seafood industry, it is not 
expected that this rule would significantly affect the overall volume 
of trade or alter trade flows in the U.S. market for fish and fish 
products that are legally harvested and accurately represented.
    NMFS considered several alternatives in this rulemaking: The 
requirements described in the proposed rule, a no-action alternative 
and various combinations of data reporting and recordkeeping for the 
supply chain information applicable to the at-risk species. NMFS 
prefers the proposed rule approach, because it would implement the 
initial phase of a traceability program as envisioned by 
Recommendations 14 and 15 of the Task Force. In addition, it is 
consistent with the existing requirement that all applicable U.S. 
government agencies are required to implement ITDS under the authority 
of the SAFE Port Act and Executive Order 13659, Streamlining the 
Export/Import Process (79 FR 10657, February 28, 2014). Also, the 
proposed traceability program takes into account the burden of data 
collection from the trade and the government requirements for 
admissibility determinations.

National Environmental Policy Act

    Under NOAA Administrative Order (NAO 216-6), the promulgation of 
regulations that are procedural and administrative in nature are 
categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an Environmental 
Assessment. These proposed regulations to implement a seafood 
traceability program are procedural and administrative in nature in 
that they would impose reporting and recordkeeping requirements for 
ongoing authorized catch and trade activities. Fishing activity and 
trade in seafood products are not further restricted relative to any 
existing laws or regulations, either foreign or domestic. Given the 
procedural and administrative nature of this rulemaking, an 
Environmental Assessment was not prepared.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule contains a collection-of-information requirement 
subject to review and approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
(PRA). This requirement has been submitted to OMB for approval. The 
information collection burden for the requirements proposed under this 
rule

[[Page 6221]]

(IFTP, harvest and landing data submitted at entry, image files 
submitted at entry, and provision of records of supply chain 
information) as applicable to imports of the designated at-risk species 
are estimated to be an increase of 18,542 hours and $278,130. 
Recordkeeping/reporting costs (permit application fees at $30 each) 
will total $60,000. This proposed rule does not anticipate any other 
information collection burden than what is identified in this section, 
and therefore is not requesting approval from OMB for the burden 
associated with any other aspects of the rule.
    Public comment is sought regarding: Whether this proposed data 
reporting is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of 
the agency, including whether the information shall have practical 
utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to enhance the 
quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and 
ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information, including 
through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of 
information technology. The public may also wish to comment on how 
alternative compliance schedules for these reporting and record keeping 
requirements may affect burden. Draft model forms are also available on 
both www.regulations.gov and www.reginfo.gov for public review and 
comment. Send comments on these or any other aspects of the collection 
of information to the NOAA Fisheries Office for International Affairs 
and Seafood Inspection at the ADDRESSES above, and by email to 
[email protected]">OIRA_[email protected] or fax to (202) 395-7285.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is 
required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to penalty for 
failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the 
requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays 
a currently valid OMB control number.

List of Subjects

50 CFR Part 300

    Exports, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Illegal, unreported 
or unregulated fishing, Foreign relations, Imports, International trade 
permits, Treaties.

50 CFR Part 600

    Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business 
information, Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Foreign relations, 
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Statistics.

    Dated: February 1, 2016.
Samuel D. Rauch III,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 300, subpart 
R, as proposed to be added December 29, 2015, (80 FR 81251), is 
proposed to be further amended and 50 CFR part 600 is proposed to be 
amended as follows:

50 CFR CHAPTER III--INTERNATIONAL FISHING AND RELATED ACTIVITIES

PART 300--INTERNATIONAL FISHERIES REGULATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for 50 CFR part 300 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 951 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.; 16 
U.S.C. 5501 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 2431 et seq.; 31 U.S.C. 9701 et seq.

0
2. Further amend Sec.  300.321, proposed to be added December 29, 2015, 
(80 FR 81251), by adding a definition for ``Seafood Traceability 
Program'' in alphabetical order, and revising the definitions of 
``Catch and Statistical Document/Documentation'', ``Documentation and 
data sets required under this subpart'' and ``Fish or fish products 
regulated under this subpart'' to read as follows:


Sec.  300.321  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Catch and Statistical Document/Documentation means a document or 
documentation, in paper or electronic form, accompanying regulated 
seafood imports and exports that is submitted by importers and 
exporters to document compliance with TTVP, AMLR, and HMS ITP trade 
documentation programs as described in Sec.  216.24(f) of this title, 
and subparts G and M of this part, or the Seafood Traceability Program 
as described in this subpart.
    Documentation and data sets required under this subpart refers to 
documentation and data that must be submitted by an importer or 
exporter to NMFS at the time of, or in advance of, the import, export, 
or re-export, as well as documentation and data that must be retained 
by the importer or exporter of record in conjunction with a filing, for 
seafood products regulated under the TTVP, AMLR, and HMS ITP programs 
as described in Sec.  216.24(f) of this title, and subparts G and M of 
this part, or the Seafood Traceability Program as described in this 
subpart.
    Fish or fish products regulated under this subpart means species 
and products containing species regulated under this subpart, the AMLR 
program, the HMS ITP, or the TTVP.
* * * * *
    Seafood Traceability Program means the data reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements established under Sec.  300.324 of this 
title.
* * * * *
0
3. Further revise Sec.  300.323, proposed to be added December 29, 
2015, (80 FR 81251), to read as follows:


Sec.  300.323  Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements.

    A person entering for consumption or withdrawal from a foreign 
trade zone or bonded warehouse for consumption, exporting, or re-
exporting fish or fish products regulated under this subpart from any 
ocean area, or any area of jurisdiction for aquaculture facilities, 
must file all data sets, reports, and documentation required under the 
AMLR program, HMS ITP, TTVP and Seafood Traceability Program and under 
other regulations that incorporate by reference the requirements of 
this subpart. A paper or electronic copy of all required reports and 
documentation, and all supporting records upon which an entry filing or 
export declaration is made, must be maintained by the importer of 
record, and made available for inspection, at the importer of record's 
place of business for a period of five years from the date of the 
import, export or re-export.
0
4. Further redesignate Sec.  300.324, proposed to be added December 29, 
2015, (80 FR 81251), as Sec.  300.325 and add new Sec.  300.324 to read 
as follows:


Sec.  300.324  Seafood Traceability Program.

    This section establishes a Seafood Traceability Program which 
comprises data reporting requirements at point of entry for imported 
fish or fish products and recordkeeping requirements. The data reported 
and retained will facilitate: A determination that the fish or fish 
products are not misrepresented or the product of IUU fishing, 
including that they were not taken in violation of any foreign law or 
regulation, and exclusion of products from entry into U.S. commerce 
that are misrepresented or the product of IUU fishing. The data 
reporting and recordkeeping requirements under the program enable 
verification of the product offered for entry back to the harvesting 
event(s).
    (a) The following species or species groups are subject to this 
Seafood Traceability Program: Abalone; Atlantic Cod; Pacific Cod; Blue 
Crab; Red King Crab; Dolphinfish (Mahi Mahi); Grouper; Red Snapper; Sea 
Cucumber; Shrimp Sharks; Swordfish; Tunas (Albacore, Bigeye, Skipjack, 
Yellowfin,

[[Page 6222]]

and Bluefin). The harmonized tariff schedule numbers applicable to 
these species or species groups are listed in the documents referenced 
in paragraph (c) of this section. Data required to be reported and 
retained under this program is not required for HTS codes applicable to 
fish oil, slurry, sauces, sticks, balls, cakes, pudding and other 
similar highly processed fish products for which the species of fish 
comprising the product or the harvesting event(s) or aquaculture 
operation(s) of the shipment of the product cannot currently be 
feasibly identified.
    (b) In addition to data reporting requirements applicable pursuant 
to other authorities and requirements set out elsewhere in U.S. law and 
regulation (e.g., under other NMFS programs or CBP requirements) to the 
particular commodity offered for entry, the importer of record is 
required to provide the following data set in ACE at the time of entry 
for each entry containing the species or species groups listed under 
paragraph (a) of this section:
    (1) Information on the entity(ies) harvesting or producing the 
fish: Name and flag state of harvesting vessel(s) and evidence of 
authorization; Unique vessel identifier(s) (if available); Type(s) of 
fishing gear; Name(s) of farm or aquaculture facility.
    (2) Information on the fish that was harvested and processed: 
Species of fish (scientific name, acceptable market name, and ASFIS 
number); Product description(s); Name of product(s); Quantity and/or 
weight of the product(s).
    (3) Information on where and when the fish were harvested and 
landed: Area(s) of wild-capture or aquaculture location; Date(s) of 
harvest or trip(s); Location of aquaculture facility; Point(s) of first 
landing; Date(s) of first landing; Name of entity(ies) (processor, 
dealer, vessel) to which fish was landed. Some entries may comprise 
products from more than one harvest event and each event relevant to 
the shipment must be documented.
    (4) The NMFS-issued IFTP number for the importer of record.
    (c) The importer of record, either directly or through an entry 
filer, is required to submit the data under paragraph (b) of this 
section through ACE as a message set and/or image files in conformance 
with the procedures and formats prescribed by NMFS and Customs and 
Border Protection and made available at: http://www.cbp.gov/trade/ace/catair.
    (d) Import shipments of fish or fish products subject to this 
program may be selected for inspection and/or the information or 
records supporting entry may be selected for audit, on a pre- or post- 
release basis, in order to verify the information submitted at entry.
    (e) In addition to the entry recordkeeping requirements specified 
at 19 CFR part 16, the importer of record is required to maintain 
records containing information on the chain of custody of the fish or 
fish products sufficient to trace the fish or fish product from point 
of entry into U.S. commerce to the point of harvest, including 
information that identifies each custodian of the fish or fish product 
(such as any transshipper, processor, storage facility or distributor). 
Such records may include widely used commercial documents such as 
declarations by the harvesting/carrier vessels or bills of lading. 
Regardless of whether data is reported at entry or maintained by the 
importer, the importer must retain records in electronic or paper 
format under the recordkeeping requirements specified in Sec.  300.323.
0
5. Revise redesignated Sec.  300.325, proposed to be added December 29, 
2015, (80 FR 81251), as Sec.  300.324, to read as follows:


Sec.  300.325  Prohibitions.

    In addition to the prohibitions specified in Sec.  300.4, Sec.  
300.117, Sec.  300.189, Sec.  600.725 and Sec.  635.71 of this title, 
it is unlawful for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United 
States to:
    (a) violate any provision of this subpart, or any permit issued 
under this subpart.
    (b) Import species listed in Sec.  300.324(a) without a valid IFTP 
or without submitting complete and accurate information as required 
under Sec.  300.324(b)-(c).

50 CFR CHAPTER VI--FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT, NATIONAL 
OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

PART 600--MAGNUSON-STEVENS ACT PROVISIONS

0
6. The authority citation for part 600 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  5 U.S.C. 561 and 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

0
7. In Sec.  600.725, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  600.725  General prohibitions.

* * * * *
    (a) Possess, have custody or control of, ship, transport, offer for 
sale, sell, purchase, land, import, export or re-export, any fish or 
parts thereof taken or retained in violation of the Magnuson-Stevens 
Act or any other statute administered by NOAA or any regulation or 
permit issued there under, or import, export, transport, sell, receive, 
acquire, or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce any fish taken, 
possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any foreign law or 
regulation, or any treaty or in contravention of binding conservation 
measure adopted by an international agreement or organization to which 
the United States is a party.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-02216 Filed 2-4-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P