Permissible Sharing of Client Records by Customs Brokers, 66050-66054 [2010-27106]
Download as PDF
66050
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Would this concern be minimized if the
requirement to offer capacity release is
limited to larger section 311 and
Hinshaw pipelines whose services are
predominantly interstate?
7. If section 311 and Hinshaw
pipelines are required to offer capacity
release, should the regulations be the
same as the capacity release regulations
for interstate pipelines set forth in
section 284.8 of the Commission’s
regulations? Would a subset of those
regulations be sufficient for purposes of
preventing undue discrimination and
promoting transparency, while
minimizing any burden on the pipelines
offering capacity release?
19. Finally, as we recognized in the
APS/Sequent order, the Commission has
not previously addressed the issue of
whether the buy/sell prohibition applies
to interstate service provided by section
311 and Hinshaw pipelines. Thus, until
the Commission issued that order, there
was no clear policy prohibiting such
transactions. Therefore, the Commission
will not institute any enforcement
actions with respect to prior buy/sell
transactions involving section 311 and
Hinshaw pipelines. In addition, the
Commission grants a blanket waiver of
the prohibition on buy/sell transactions
to allow existing and new buy/sell
transactions involving section 311 and
Hinshaw pipelines to continue to take
place until the Commission issues a
further order in this proceeding. This
will avoid disrupting any ongoing
relationships established through
currently existing buy/sell transactions
and also avoid discouraging beneficial
new arrangements, while the
Commission considers the policy issues
raised in this proceeding. As we
recognized in the APS/Sequent order,
capacity reassignments can promote
more efficient use of firm pipeline
capacity by enabling a holder of such
capacity to permit its capacity to be
used by another party for a higher
valued use.
III. Procedure for Comments
20. The Commission invites interested
persons to submit comments and other
information on the matters, issues, and
specific questions identified in this
notice. Comments are due 60 days from
the date of publication in the Federal
Register. Comments must refer to
Docket No. RM11–1–000, and must
include the commenter’s name, the
organization they represent, if
applicable, and their address.
21. The Commission encourages
comments to be filed electronically via
the eFiling link on the Commission’s
Web site at https://www.ferc.gov. The
Commission accepts most standard
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
word processing formats. Documents
created electronically using word
processing software should be filed in
native applications or print-to-PDF
format and not in a scanned format.
Commenters filing electronically do not
need to make a paper filing.
22. Commenters unable to file
comments electronically must mail or
hand deliver an original copy of their
comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the
Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The current
requirements are specified on the
Commission’s Web site, see, e.g., the
‘‘Quick Reference Guide for Paper
Submissions,’’ available at https://
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp, or
via phone from FERC Online Support at
202–502–6652 or toll-free at 1–866–
208–3676.
23. All comments will be placed in
the Commission’s public files and may
be viewed, printed, or downloaded
remotely as described in the Document
Availability section below. Commenters
are not required to serve copies of their
comments on other commenters.
IV. Document Availability
24. In addition to publishing the full
text of this document in the Federal
Register, the Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to
view and print the contents of this
document via the Internet through the
Commission’s Home Page (https://
www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission’s
Public Reference Room during normal
business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE.,
Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426.
25. From the Commission’s Home
Page on the Internet, this information is
available in the Commission’s document
management system, eLibrary. The full
text of this document is available on
eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word
format for viewing, printing, and
downloading. To access this document
in eLibrary, type the docket number
(excluding the last three digits) in the
docket number field.
26. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the Commission’s Web site
during normal business hours. For
assistance, please contact the
Commission’s Online Support at 1–866–
208–3676 (toll free) or 202–502–6652
(e-mail at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov)
or the Public Reference Room at 202–
502–8371, TTY 202–502–8659 (e-mail at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov).
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
By direction of the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–27156 Filed 10–26–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 111
[Docket No. USCBP–2010–0038]
RIN 1651–AA80
Permissible Sharing of Client Records
by Customs Brokers
Customs and Border
Protection, Department of Homeland
Security.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCIES:
This document proposes to
amend Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) regulations in title 19 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) pertaining
to the obligations of customs brokers to
keep clients’ information confidential.
The proposed amendment would allow
brokers, upon the client’s consent in a
written authorization, to share client
information with affiliated entities
related to the broker so that these
entities may offer non-customs business
services to the broker’s clients. The
proposed amendment would also allow
customs brokers to use a third-party to
perform photocopying, scanning, and
delivery of client records for the broker.
These proposed changes are intended to
update the regulation to reflect modern
business practices, while protecting the
confidentiality of client (importer)
information. In addition, the proposed
changes would align the regulations
with CBP’s previously published rulings
concerning brokers’ confidentiality of
client information.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 27, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket number, by one of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
via docket number USCBP–2010–0038.
• Mail: Trade and Commercial
Regulations Branch, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW.
(Mint Annex), Washington, DC 20229–
1179.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number for this rulemaking. All
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27OCP1.SGM
27OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on submitting
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Submitted
comments may also be inspected on
regular business days between the hours
of 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Trade and
Commercial Regulations Branch,
Regulations and Rulings, Office of
International Trade, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW.
(5th Floor), Washington, DC.
Arrangements to inspect submitted
comments should be made in advance
by calling Mr. Joseph Clark at (202) 325–
0118.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
legal aspects, Carrie Owens, Chief, Entry
Process & Duty Refunds Branch,
Regulations and Rulings, Office of
International Trade, (202) 325–0266. For
operational aspects, Anita Harris, Chief,
Broker Compliance Branch, Trade
Policy and Programs, Office of
International Trade, (202) 863–6069.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to
participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written data, views, or
arguments on any aspect of the
proposed rule. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) also invites comments
that relate to the economic,
environmental, or federalism effects that
might result from this proposal. If
appropriate to a specific comment, the
commenter should reference the specific
portion of the proposed rule, explain the
reason for any recommended change,
and include data, information, or
authority that support such
recommended change.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Background
The statutory provision governing
customs brokers is found in section 641,
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19
U.S.C. 1641). Specifically, section 641(f)
authorizes CBP to promulgate ‘‘rules and
regulations relating to the customs
business of customs brokers as the
Secretary * * * considers necessary to
protect importers and the revenue of the
United States * * * including rules and
regulations governing * * * the keeping
of * * * records by customs brokers
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
* * * ’’ See 19 U.S.C. 1641(f). The
implementing regulations issued under
the authority of § 641 are set forth in
part 111 of title 19 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (19 CFR part 111).
In order to meet its obligations to
protect the revenue and enforce the
customs laws, it is essential that CBP
receive full and complete information
from importers with respect to their
customs transactions. These
transactions contain confidential
business information, the unauthorized
disclosure of which could cause
competitive harm to the importer or
other companies. Brokers occupy a
unique role as conduits with respect to
import transactions. As entities that are
licensed and regulated by the U.S.
government, brokers act as
intermediaries between importers and
CBP to assure that complete and
accurate information is provided. Thus,
a special relationship exists between the
broker, its client (the importer), and
CBP. The duties and responsibilities of
customs brokers in transacting customs
business on behalf of their clients, and,
in particular, the confidential treatment
that brokers must accord their records of
such transactions, are governed by the
regulations in 19 CFR part 111 issued
under the authority of 19 U.S.C. 1641(f).
It is well settled that customs brokers
have a fiduciary duty to protect client
information. As such, brokers are
subject to certain recordkeeping
requirements set forth in part 111 of 19
CFR. In that regard, part 111 requires,
among other things, that a broker
maintain records of transactions (19
CFR 111.21), retain records (19 CFR
111.23), and make records available for
official CBP inspection (19 CFR 111.25).
Additionally, in carrying out its duties
and responsibilities, a broker is required
to exercise responsible supervision and
control over the transaction of customs
business (19 CFR 111.28(a)) (see also 19
U.S.C. 1641(b)(4)), and exercise due
diligence in handling customs business
matters (19 CFR 111.29(a)). Further, a
broker is precluded from entering into
an agreement with an unlicensed person
to transact customs business if the fees
generated from the transaction would
inure to the benefit of the unlicensed
person (19 CFR 111.36(b)).
Another significant requirement set
forth in part 111 is that brokers maintain
the confidentiality of client records. See
19 CFR 111.24. Section 111.24 of CBP
regulations (19 CFR 111.24) covers a
broad range of records as defined in
§ 163.1(a) (19 CFR 163.1(a)), and
protects client records and the
information contained in those records.
Specifically, § 111.24 currently provides
that with the exception of certain
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
66051
accredited officers or agents of the
United States and the surety involved in
a particular transaction, brokers may not
disclose client information to third
persons except when ordered to by a
court. The purpose of the regulation is
to prevent a broker from disclosing
information it receives from a client to
a third-party without the consent of the
broker’s client. It is noted that when a
broker is issued its license by CBP, it
agrees to abide by the rules governing
brokers, including rules pertaining to
the confidentiality of client records. To
overcome this confidentiality
requirement, a broker need merely
request, and receive, a written release
from the client authorizing disclosure of
that client’s information. Absent such a
release, a broker who engages in
information sharing is subject to
disciplinary action for violating the
confidentiality requirements of 19 CFR
111.24.
The issue of whether brokers may
share client information with thirdparty business entities has previously
been considered by CBP in the form of
published rulings. CBP’s longstanding
position on this matter is that absent
written client consent, a broker may not
share client information. Specifically, in
Headquarters ruling letters (HQ) 116025
(September 29, 2003) and HQ 116190
(June 14, 2004), CBP was asked whether
a broker within a family of companies
(such as related affiliates, subsidiaries,
and parent companies) may share
certain client background or aggregate
revenue information with related
affiliates who were not licensed brokers,
but who were separately-incorporated
and owned by the same parent
company. CBP has consistently held
that separately-incorporated companies
constitute separate legal entities under
the law, notwithstanding common
ownership (see HQ 223804 (June 29,
1992); HQ 114166 (February 2, 1998);
HQ 115248 (August 28, 2001)).
Therefore, CBP found that absent a
written release from the client
authorizing disclosure of client
information, section 111.24 precludes a
broker from sharing client information
with separately-incorporated affiliates of
the same parent company. In CBP’s
view, client background and aggregate
revenue information is collected and
compiled from, and connected with,
records pertaining to the business of
clients serviced by the broker. As such,
that information falls within the
protection of § 111.24. CBP’s position is
that brokers can secure waivers of
confidentiality from their clients in
order not to violate the confidentiality
requirements of section 111.24.
E:\FR\FM\27OCP1.SGM
27OCP1
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
66052
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Similarly, in HQ 114404 (March 16,
1999), CBP held that a licensed broker
must ensure that it will not disclose its
clients’ records to a parent company,
unless disclosure is authorized by the
client.
In HQ 114758 (November 7, 2000), the
question presented was whether a
licensed broker may transfer its
ancillary financial functions to a related
or affiliated company that is not a
licensed broker. In that instance, CBP
reiterated its position that disclosure to
an unauthorized party of any
information emanating from a
transaction with a client of the broker
would constitute a violation, and would
subject the violating broker to possible
penalty or other disciplinary action.
CBP found that outsourcing ancillary
financial and administrative services
would run afoul of the broker
confidentiality provisions, since the
records sought to be outsourced would
contain financial data or information
derived from clients’ files pertaining to
customs business.
In that ruling, however, CBP
acknowledged that there may be
situations in which a broker may
legitimately transfer some of its business
operations to another company. For
instance, in HQ 114411 (November 22,
1999), CBP had allowed a broker to
outsource its human resources
department to an employee leasing
company on the condition that the
leasing company would have no access
to, or involvement in, the actual
customs business work of the broker,
and that the records of the clients of the
broker would be kept confidential from
the leasing company. Relying on HQ
114411, CBP held in HQ 114758 that a
broker may outsource ancillary financial
and administrative functions provided
that the same safeguards are in place.
Specifically, the broker would be
allowed to outsource financial or
administrative functions, provided the
new service provider had no access to,
or involvement in, the actual customs
business work of the broker client. This
meant that the new service provider
could not perform any functions that
would be dependent on information or
data derived from client files. The
broker could only outsource the
aforementioned functions provided that
the records of the broker’s clients, and
the information contained in those
records would not be disclosed to the
new service provider.
Finally, in determining whether a
broker is meeting the requirements to
keep clients’ records confidential, CBP
considers how the broker is exercising
responsible supervision and control
over the customs business it conducts
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1641(b)(4). See
HQ 225006 (February 15, 1994).
CBP continues to believe that
protection of the client’s business
information remains a paramount
concern. At the same time, however,
CBP recognizes that the development of
more modern and efficient business
practices, brought about by the changing
structure and environment of the
business community, has rendered the
blanket prohibition of the current
regulation somewhat antiquated. In
particular, CBP understands that in an
effort to streamline business practices, a
broker may need to use a third-party
service provider to perform the tasks of
photocopying, scanning, and delivering
client documents to support the
business functions of the brokerage
services. CBP further acknowledges that
a broker may have a legitimate financial
interest in providing its clients
additional non-customs business
services which are offered by affiliated
entities related to the broker.
To that end, CBP believes policy
reasons favor amending § 111.24 to
update the regulation to reflect modern
business practices, while protecting the
confidentiality of client (importer)
information. Therefore, consistent with
the holdings in CBP’s previously
published rulings, this document
proposes to amend the CBP regulations
to align them with its rulings.
Explanation of Proposed Amendments
Permissible Sharing With Client
Consent/Written Authorization
With respect to a broker’s interest in
providing additional non-customs
business services to its clients, CBP
proposes to permit a broker to share
client information with affiliated
entities related to the broker so that the
related affiliate may offer non-customs
business services to the broker’s client
only on the condition that the client
provides its express consent in a written
authorization. The written authorization
must specify the information the client
authorizes the broker to share outside of
the brokerage with affiliated entities
related to the broker or with a party
bound by contract to the broker.
Requiring such consent would balance
CBP’s interest in the broker’s
maintaining confidentiality of
importers’ records with the business
interest of the broker to offer additional
non-customs business services to its
clients.
Other Third-Party Services
Photocopying and Scanning. CBP
proposes to amend 19 CFR 111.24 to
permit a broker to use a third-party
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
service provider for the limited routine
non-customs functions of photocopying
and scanning for the broker without
violating § 111.24, because these two
functions are ancillary to the conduct of
‘‘customs business.’’ It is noted,
however, that even in providing the
administrative tasks of photocopying
and scanning, business information
pertaining to the broker’s client would
be revealed in the process. Therefore, in
order to achieve a balance between the
broker’s need for a streamlined business
process, and the requirement to
maintain the confidentiality of client
information, safeguards must be in place
to ensure that the requirements arising
from 19 U.S.C. 1641 and 19 CFR 111.24
are not compromised.
In that regard, the proposed
amendment requires that the broker,
consistent with its obligations under
§ 111.29(a), exercise due diligence in the
selection of the third-party service
provider. The broker must ensure that
the requirements in § 111.36(b)
pertaining to a broker’s relations with
unlicensed persons are complied with.
Moreover, in accordance with
§ 111.28(a), a broker is required to
exercise responsible supervision and
control over its brokerage business.
Thus, the broker must ensure that the
party to whom records will be provided
for photocopying or scanning will
safeguard the information it obtains in
the course of providing the subject
services. Accordingly, the proposed
amendment requires that the broker
enter into a non-disclosure agreement
with the third-party service provider
that requires the third-party to keep the
contents and information contained in
any records pertaining to the broker’s
client confidential.
The written consent and the nondisclosure agreement as contemplated
in the proposed amendment will be
subject to the recordkeeping
requirements prescribed for brokers as
set forth in §§ 111.21(a), 111.23, and
111.25.
The proposed amendment in this
document is designed to codify CBP’s
previously published rulings and to
update the regulation so that it is
streamlined with modern and efficient
business practices, while protecting the
confidentiality of client (importer)
information.
Messenger Delivery Services. Because
messenger/delivery services are also
ancillary to the conduct of ‘‘customs
business,’’ CBP proposes to further
amend 19 CFR 111.24 to provide that a
broker may use a third-party messenger
service for transporting and/or
delivering client documents on the
broker’s behalf, if the broker safeguards
E:\FR\FM\27OCP1.SGM
27OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
the clients’ records by sealing the
documents so that the messenger cannot
view, alter, or amend them.
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires Federal
agencies to examine the impact a rule
would have on small entities. A small
entity may be a small business (defined
as any independently owned and
operated business not dominant in its
field that qualifies as a small business
per the Small Business Act); a small notfor-profit organization; or a small
governmental jurisdiction (locality with
fewer than 50,000 people).
This rule proposes to allow a broker,
upon the client’s consent in a written
authorization, to share client (importer)
information with affiliated entities
related to the broker in order to offer
non-customs business services to its
clients. If brokers choose to share client
(importer) information with an affiliated
entity related to the broker, the changes
to the regulation would potentially
benefit the broker’s client (importer)
through the availability and access to
additional non-customs business
services. This rule also proposes to
allow a broker to outsource its
photocopying and scanning tasks to a
third-party service provider, and to use
a third-party messenger service provider
for transport and delivery of client
records. To the extent that brokers
would use third-parties for copying,
scanning and messenger services, the
changes to the regulation would confer
a benefit to the broker by allowing it to
streamline its business.
The entities affected by this proposed
amendment are brokers, importers, and
third-party service providers and would
likely consist of a broad range of large,
medium, and small businesses; thus, the
number of entities subject to this
proposed rule would be considered
‘‘substantial.’’ The effects of this
amendment, however, would not rise to
the level of being considered a
‘‘significant’’ economic impact.
Accordingly, CBP believes that the
proposed amendment, if adopted,
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act. However, we
welcome comments on that assumption.
The most helpful comments are those
that can give us specific information or
examples of a direct impact on small
entities. If we do not receive comments
that demonstrate that the rule causes
small entities to incur significant direct
costs, CBP may, during the process of
drafting the final rule, certify that this
action does not have a significant
The proposed amendment in this
document does not meet the criteria for
a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as
specified in Executive Order 12866
because it will not result in
expenditures totaling $100 million or
more in any one year. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has not
reviewed this regulation under that
order. To the extent that licensed
customs brokers are able to use lower
cost third-party service providers to
perform limited administrative tasks,
this rule, if finalized, should confer
benefits to brokers. Please see the
Regulatory Flexibility Act section of this
preamble for additional information
regarding the potential economic impact
of this proposed rule.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
Executive Order 12866
The Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collected under the
provisions of this proposed rule has
been submitted for approval by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under OMB control number
1651–0034. Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act, an agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a valid
control number assigned by OMB. The
burden estimates for recordkeeping for
the non-disclosure agreement as well as
the client consent/written authorization
are presented below:
66053
Affairs, Washington, DC 20503. A copy
should also be sent to the Trade and
Commercial Regulations Branch,
Regulations and Rulings, Office of
International Trade, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW.
(5th Floor), Washington, DC 20229–
1179.
Comments are invited on:
(a) Whether the recordkeeping is
necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
(b) The accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the
recordkeeping;
(c) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the recordkeeping;
(d) Ways to minimize the burden of
the recordkeeping on respondents,
including through the use of automated
recordkeeping techniques or other forms
of information technology; and
(e) Estimates of capital or startup costs
and costs of operations, maintenance,
and purchases of services to provide
recordkeeping.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
This notice of proposed rulemaking
will not impose an unfunded mandate
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995. It will not result in costs
of $100 million or more, in the
aggregate, to any of the following: State,
local, or Native American Tribal
governments, or the private sector.
Non-Disclosure Agreement
Executive Order 13132
Estimated Number of Recordkeepers:
11,986.
Estimated Number of Responses per
Recordkeeper: 1.
Estimated Number of Total Annual
Responses: 11,986.
Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 11,986.
In accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
13132 (Federalism), this notice of
proposed rulemaking will have no
substantial effect on the States, the
current Federal-State relationship, or on
the current distribution of power and
responsibilities among local officials.
Client Consent/Written Authorization
Signing Authority
Estimated Number of Recordkeepers:
711,000.
Estimated Number of Responses per
Recordkeeper: 1.
Estimated Number of Total Annual
Responses: 711,000.
Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour.
Estimated Total Annual Burden
Hours: 711,000.
Comments concerning the accuracy of
this burden estimate and suggestions for
reducing this burden should be directed
to the Office of Management and
Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the
Department of Homeland Security,
Office of Information and Regulatory
This document is being issued in
accordance with 19 CFR 0.2(a), which
provides that the authority of the
Secretary of the Treasury with respect to
CBP regulations that are not related to
customs revenue functions was
transferred to the Secretary of Homeland
Security pursuant to section 403(1) of
the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and
that such regulations are signed by the
Secretary of Homeland Security (or her
delegate).
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 111
Customs brokers, Duties and
responsibilities, Records confidential.
E:\FR\FM\27OCP1.SGM
27OCP1
66054
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 207 / Wednesday, October 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Proposed Amendments to the CBP
Regulations
For the reasons stated above, it is
proposed to amend part 111 of title 19
of the CFR (19 CFR part 111) as set forth
below.
PART 111—CUSTOMS BROKERS
1. The general authority citation for
part 111 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202 (General
Note 3(i), Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS)), 1624, 1641.
*
*
*
*
*
2. Section 111.24 is revised to read as
follows:
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 111.24
Records confidential.
(a) Client Records. The records
referred to in this part and pertaining to
the business of the clients serviced by
the broker are considered confidential.
Except as provided in paragraphs (b)
and (c) of this section, the broker must
not disclose the contents or any
information connected with client
records to any persons other than those
clients, their surety on a particular
entry, and the Field Director, Office of
International Trade, Regulatory Audit,
the CBP port director, the Immigration
and Customs Enforcement agent, or
other duly accredited officers or agents
of the United States, except on
subpoena by a court of competent
jurisdiction.
(b) Disclosure to Affiliated Entity
Related to Broker. Upon the client’s
consent in a written authorization to
share client information outside the
brokerage, a broker may disclose only to
an affiliated entity related to the broker,
information specified in the written
authorization pertaining to the customs
business of that client so that the
affiliated entity may offer non-customs
business services to the broker’s client.
(c) Other Third-Party Service
Providers—(1) Photocopying and
Scanning Services. A broker may
provide its clients’ records to a thirdparty service provider for photocopying
and/or scanning without violating the
prohibitions set forth in the provisions
of this part pertaining to confidentiality,
provided that:
(i) The broker exercises due diligence
in accordance with § 111.29(a) of this
part in the selection of the third-party
service provider for photocopying and/
or scanning by ensuring that its
association with the third-party does not
violate the provisions in § 111.36(b) of
this part; and
(ii) The broker enters into a nondisclosure agreement with the thirdparty service provider for photocopying
and/or scanning that requires the third-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 Oct 26, 2010
Jkt 223001
party to keep the information contained
in any records pertaining to the broker’s
client confidential.
(2) Messenger Services. A broker may
provide its clients’ records to a thirdparty messenger service provider for
transport and delivery without violating
the prohibitions set forth in the
provisions of this part pertaining to
confidentiality, provided that the
clients’ records are sealed in such a
manner so that the third-party
messenger service provider may not
view, alter, or amend the documents to
be delivered.
Dated: October 21, 2010.
David V. Aguilar,
Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs and
Border Protection.
[FR Doc. 2010–27106 Filed 10–26–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Parts 35 and 36
RIN 1190–AA61; 1190–AA62; 1190–AA63;
1190–AA64
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of
Disability in State and Local
Government Services, Public
Accommodations and in Commercial
Facilities; Hearings
Civil Rights Division,
Department of Justice.
ACTION: Notice of proposed hearings.
AGENCY:
On July 26, 2010, the
Department of Justice (Department)
published four Advanced Notices of
Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRMs) in the
Federal Register to amend regulations
issued under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA). These four
ANPRMs include: Nondiscrimination
on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility
of Web Information and Services of
State and Local Government Entities
and Public Accommodations;
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of
Disability in State and Local
Government Services; Accessibility of
Next Generation 9–1–1;
Nondiscrimination on the Basis of
Disability; Movie Captioning and Video
Description; and Nondiscrimination on
the Basis of Disability by State and
Local Governments and Places of Public
Accommodation; Equipment and
Furniture. To provide an opportunity
for interested persons to express their
views directly to Department officials,
the Department will hold three public
hearings on the ANPRMs.
DATES: The hearing dates are:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1. November 18, 2010, 9:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., CST, Chicago, IL.
2. December 16, 2010, 9:30 a.m. to 4
p.m., EST, Washington, DC.
3. January 2011 in San Francisco, CA,
on a date to be announced in the near
future on the ADA Home Page at
https://www.ada.gov.
ADDRESSES: The hearing locations are:
1. Access Living, 115 West Chicago
Avenue, Chicago, IL 60654.
2. United States Access Board, 1331 F
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20004.
3. San Francisco, CA, at a location to
be announced in the near future on the
ADA Home Page at https://www.ada.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Linda Garrett, Civil Rights Program
Specialist, Disability Rights Section,
Civil Rights Division at (202) 353–0423
(TTY). This is not a toll-free number.
Information also may be obtained from
the Department’s toll-free ADA
Information Line at (800) 514–0301
(Voice) or (800) 514–0383 (TTY), 9:30
a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday, Tuesday,
Wednesday, and Friday, and 12:30 p.m.
to 5 p.m. on Thursday.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July
26, 2010, the Department published four
ANPRMs seeking public comment on
whether to revise the ADA regulations
to address Web site accessibility, movie
captioning and video description,
accessible features for Next Generation
9–1–1, and accessible equipment and
furniture. The Department has
scheduled three public hearings on the
ANPRMs to provide an opportunity to
interested persons to express their views
about the questions and issues raised in
the ANPRMs. Entities, organizations,
and individuals who wish to present
comments at a particular hearing are
encouraged to register in advance by
calling the ADA Information Line at
(800) 514–0301 (Voice) or (800) 514–
0383 (TTY) at least five business days in
advance of the hearing date.
Organizations should designate no more
than one individual to speak on behalf
of the organization. Commenters who
are not able to testify in person will
have the option to present their
comments using a speaker telephone,
telephone relay service, or video relay
service. The Department will attempt to
provide an approximate time for the
receipt of comments from those who
register in advance; however, persons
who register in advance should report to
the registration desk at the hearing at
least one-half hour prior to their
scheduled time in order to confirm the
time and order of their presentations.
Those who register to comment via
speaker telephone, telephone relay
service, or video relay service should be
E:\FR\FM\27OCP1.SGM
27OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 27, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66050-66054]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27106]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 111
[Docket No. USCBP-2010-0038]
RIN 1651-AA80
Permissible Sharing of Client Records by Customs Brokers
AGENCIES: Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland
Security.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes to amend Customs and Border Protection
(CBP) regulations in title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
pertaining to the obligations of customs brokers to keep clients'
information confidential. The proposed amendment would allow brokers,
upon the client's consent in a written authorization, to share client
information with affiliated entities related to the broker so that
these entities may offer non-customs business services to the broker's
clients. The proposed amendment would also allow customs brokers to use
a third-party to perform photocopying, scanning, and delivery of client
records for the broker. These proposed changes are intended to update
the regulation to reflect modern business practices, while protecting
the confidentiality of client (importer) information. In addition, the
proposed changes would align the regulations with CBP's previously
published rulings concerning brokers' confidentiality of client
information.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 27, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number, by one
of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments via docket number
USCBP-2010-0038.
Mail: Trade and Commercial Regulations Branch, U.S.
Customs and Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW. (Mint Annex),
Washington, DC 20229-1179.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number for this rulemaking. All
[[Page 66051]]
comments received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the ``Public Participation'' heading of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov. Submitted comments
may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9
a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Trade and Commercial Regulations Branch,
Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade, U.S. Customs
and Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW. (5th Floor), Washington, DC.
Arrangements to inspect submitted comments should be made in advance by
calling Mr. Joseph Clark at (202) 325-0118.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For legal aspects, Carrie Owens,
Chief, Entry Process & Duty Refunds Branch, Regulations and Rulings,
Office of International Trade, (202) 325-0266. For operational aspects,
Anita Harris, Chief, Broker Compliance Branch, Trade Policy and
Programs, Office of International Trade, (202) 863-6069.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written data, views, or arguments on any aspect of the
proposed rule. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites
comments that relate to the economic, environmental, or federalism
effects that might result from this proposal. If appropriate to a
specific comment, the commenter should reference the specific portion
of the proposed rule, explain the reason for any recommended change,
and include data, information, or authority that support such
recommended change.
Background
The statutory provision governing customs brokers is found in
section 641, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1641).
Specifically, section 641(f) authorizes CBP to promulgate ``rules and
regulations relating to the customs business of customs brokers as the
Secretary * * * considers necessary to protect importers and the
revenue of the United States * * * including rules and regulations
governing * * * the keeping of * * * records by customs brokers * * *
'' See 19 U.S.C. 1641(f). The implementing regulations issued under the
authority of Sec. 641 are set forth in part 111 of title 19 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR part 111).
In order to meet its obligations to protect the revenue and enforce
the customs laws, it is essential that CBP receive full and complete
information from importers with respect to their customs transactions.
These transactions contain confidential business information, the
unauthorized disclosure of which could cause competitive harm to the
importer or other companies. Brokers occupy a unique role as conduits
with respect to import transactions. As entities that are licensed and
regulated by the U.S. government, brokers act as intermediaries between
importers and CBP to assure that complete and accurate information is
provided. Thus, a special relationship exists between the broker, its
client (the importer), and CBP. The duties and responsibilities of
customs brokers in transacting customs business on behalf of their
clients, and, in particular, the confidential treatment that brokers
must accord their records of such transactions, are governed by the
regulations in 19 CFR part 111 issued under the authority of 19 U.S.C.
1641(f).
It is well settled that customs brokers have a fiduciary duty to
protect client information. As such, brokers are subject to certain
recordkeeping requirements set forth in part 111 of 19 CFR. In that
regard, part 111 requires, among other things, that a broker maintain
records of transactions (19 CFR 111.21), retain records (19 CFR
111.23), and make records available for official CBP inspection (19 CFR
111.25). Additionally, in carrying out its duties and responsibilities,
a broker is required to exercise responsible supervision and control
over the transaction of customs business (19 CFR 111.28(a)) (see also
19 U.S.C. 1641(b)(4)), and exercise due diligence in handling customs
business matters (19 CFR 111.29(a)). Further, a broker is precluded
from entering into an agreement with an unlicensed person to transact
customs business if the fees generated from the transaction would inure
to the benefit of the unlicensed person (19 CFR 111.36(b)).
Another significant requirement set forth in part 111 is that
brokers maintain the confidentiality of client records. See 19 CFR
111.24. Section 111.24 of CBP regulations (19 CFR 111.24) covers a
broad range of records as defined in Sec. 163.1(a) (19 CFR 163.1(a)),
and protects client records and the information contained in those
records. Specifically, Sec. 111.24 currently provides that with the
exception of certain accredited officers or agents of the United States
and the surety involved in a particular transaction, brokers may not
disclose client information to third persons except when ordered to by
a court. The purpose of the regulation is to prevent a broker from
disclosing information it receives from a client to a third-party
without the consent of the broker's client. It is noted that when a
broker is issued its license by CBP, it agrees to abide by the rules
governing brokers, including rules pertaining to the confidentiality of
client records. To overcome this confidentiality requirement, a broker
need merely request, and receive, a written release from the client
authorizing disclosure of that client's information. Absent such a
release, a broker who engages in information sharing is subject to
disciplinary action for violating the confidentiality requirements of
19 CFR 111.24.
The issue of whether brokers may share client information with
third-party business entities has previously been considered by CBP in
the form of published rulings. CBP's longstanding position on this
matter is that absent written client consent, a broker may not share
client information. Specifically, in Headquarters ruling letters (HQ)
116025 (September 29, 2003) and HQ 116190 (June 14, 2004), CBP was
asked whether a broker within a family of companies (such as related
affiliates, subsidiaries, and parent companies) may share certain
client background or aggregate revenue information with related
affiliates who were not licensed brokers, but who were separately-
incorporated and owned by the same parent company. CBP has consistently
held that separately-incorporated companies constitute separate legal
entities under the law, notwithstanding common ownership (see HQ 223804
(June 29, 1992); HQ 114166 (February 2, 1998); HQ 115248 (August 28,
2001)). Therefore, CBP found that absent a written release from the
client authorizing disclosure of client information, section 111.24
precludes a broker from sharing client information with separately-
incorporated affiliates of the same parent company. In CBP's view,
client background and aggregate revenue information is collected and
compiled from, and connected with, records pertaining to the business
of clients serviced by the broker. As such, that information falls
within the protection of Sec. 111.24. CBP's position is that brokers
can secure waivers of confidentiality from their clients in order not
to violate the confidentiality requirements of section 111.24.
[[Page 66052]]
Similarly, in HQ 114404 (March 16, 1999), CBP held that a licensed
broker must ensure that it will not disclose its clients' records to a
parent company, unless disclosure is authorized by the client.
In HQ 114758 (November 7, 2000), the question presented was whether
a licensed broker may transfer its ancillary financial functions to a
related or affiliated company that is not a licensed broker. In that
instance, CBP reiterated its position that disclosure to an
unauthorized party of any information emanating from a transaction with
a client of the broker would constitute a violation, and would subject
the violating broker to possible penalty or other disciplinary action.
CBP found that outsourcing ancillary financial and administrative
services would run afoul of the broker confidentiality provisions,
since the records sought to be outsourced would contain financial data
or information derived from clients' files pertaining to customs
business.
In that ruling, however, CBP acknowledged that there may be
situations in which a broker may legitimately transfer some of its
business operations to another company. For instance, in HQ 114411
(November 22, 1999), CBP had allowed a broker to outsource its human
resources department to an employee leasing company on the condition
that the leasing company would have no access to, or involvement in,
the actual customs business work of the broker, and that the records of
the clients of the broker would be kept confidential from the leasing
company. Relying on HQ 114411, CBP held in HQ 114758 that a broker may
outsource ancillary financial and administrative functions provided
that the same safeguards are in place. Specifically, the broker would
be allowed to outsource financial or administrative functions, provided
the new service provider had no access to, or involvement in, the
actual customs business work of the broker client. This meant that the
new service provider could not perform any functions that would be
dependent on information or data derived from client files. The broker
could only outsource the aforementioned functions provided that the
records of the broker's clients, and the information contained in those
records would not be disclosed to the new service provider.
Finally, in determining whether a broker is meeting the
requirements to keep clients' records confidential, CBP considers how
the broker is exercising responsible supervision and control over the
customs business it conducts pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1641(b)(4). See HQ
225006 (February 15, 1994).
CBP continues to believe that protection of the client's business
information remains a paramount concern. At the same time, however, CBP
recognizes that the development of more modern and efficient business
practices, brought about by the changing structure and environment of
the business community, has rendered the blanket prohibition of the
current regulation somewhat antiquated. In particular, CBP understands
that in an effort to streamline business practices, a broker may need
to use a third-party service provider to perform the tasks of
photocopying, scanning, and delivering client documents to support the
business functions of the brokerage services. CBP further acknowledges
that a broker may have a legitimate financial interest in providing its
clients additional non-customs business services which are offered by
affiliated entities related to the broker.
To that end, CBP believes policy reasons favor amending Sec.
111.24 to update the regulation to reflect modern business practices,
while protecting the confidentiality of client (importer) information.
Therefore, consistent with the holdings in CBP's previously published
rulings, this document proposes to amend the CBP regulations to align
them with its rulings.
Explanation of Proposed Amendments
Permissible Sharing With Client Consent/Written Authorization
With respect to a broker's interest in providing additional non-
customs business services to its clients, CBP proposes to permit a
broker to share client information with affiliated entities related to
the broker so that the related affiliate may offer non-customs business
services to the broker's client only on the condition that the client
provides its express consent in a written authorization. The written
authorization must specify the information the client authorizes the
broker to share outside of the brokerage with affiliated entities
related to the broker or with a party bound by contract to the broker.
Requiring such consent would balance CBP's interest in the broker's
maintaining confidentiality of importers' records with the business
interest of the broker to offer additional non-customs business
services to its clients.
Other Third-Party Services
Photocopying and Scanning. CBP proposes to amend 19 CFR 111.24 to
permit a broker to use a third-party service provider for the limited
routine non-customs functions of photocopying and scanning for the
broker without violating Sec. 111.24, because these two functions are
ancillary to the conduct of ``customs business.'' It is noted, however,
that even in providing the administrative tasks of photocopying and
scanning, business information pertaining to the broker's client would
be revealed in the process. Therefore, in order to achieve a balance
between the broker's need for a streamlined business process, and the
requirement to maintain the confidentiality of client information,
safeguards must be in place to ensure that the requirements arising
from 19 U.S.C. 1641 and 19 CFR 111.24 are not compromised.
In that regard, the proposed amendment requires that the broker,
consistent with its obligations under Sec. 111.29(a), exercise due
diligence in the selection of the third-party service provider. The
broker must ensure that the requirements in Sec. 111.36(b) pertaining
to a broker's relations with unlicensed persons are complied with.
Moreover, in accordance with Sec. 111.28(a), a broker is required to
exercise responsible supervision and control over its brokerage
business. Thus, the broker must ensure that the party to whom records
will be provided for photocopying or scanning will safeguard the
information it obtains in the course of providing the subject services.
Accordingly, the proposed amendment requires that the broker enter into
a non-disclosure agreement with the third-party service provider that
requires the third-party to keep the contents and information contained
in any records pertaining to the broker's client confidential.
The written consent and the non-disclosure agreement as
contemplated in the proposed amendment will be subject to the
recordkeeping requirements prescribed for brokers as set forth in
Sec. Sec. 111.21(a), 111.23, and 111.25.
The proposed amendment in this document is designed to codify CBP's
previously published rulings and to update the regulation so that it is
streamlined with modern and efficient business practices, while
protecting the confidentiality of client (importer) information.
Messenger Delivery Services. Because messenger/delivery services
are also ancillary to the conduct of ``customs business,'' CBP proposes
to further amend 19 CFR 111.24 to provide that a broker may use a
third-party messenger service for transporting and/or delivering client
documents on the broker's behalf, if the broker safeguards
[[Page 66053]]
the clients' records by sealing the documents so that the messenger
cannot view, alter, or amend them.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
Federal agencies to examine the impact a rule would have on small
entities. A small entity may be a small business (defined as any
independently owned and operated business not dominant in its field
that qualifies as a small business per the Small Business Act); a small
not-for-profit organization; or a small governmental jurisdiction
(locality with fewer than 50,000 people).
This rule proposes to allow a broker, upon the client's consent in
a written authorization, to share client (importer) information with
affiliated entities related to the broker in order to offer non-customs
business services to its clients. If brokers choose to share client
(importer) information with an affiliated entity related to the broker,
the changes to the regulation would potentially benefit the broker's
client (importer) through the availability and access to additional
non-customs business services. This rule also proposes to allow a
broker to outsource its photocopying and scanning tasks to a third-
party service provider, and to use a third-party messenger service
provider for transport and delivery of client records. To the extent
that brokers would use third-parties for copying, scanning and
messenger services, the changes to the regulation would confer a
benefit to the broker by allowing it to streamline its business.
The entities affected by this proposed amendment are brokers,
importers, and third-party service providers and would likely consist
of a broad range of large, medium, and small businesses; thus, the
number of entities subject to this proposed rule would be considered
``substantial.'' The effects of this amendment, however, would not rise
to the level of being considered a ``significant'' economic impact.
Accordingly, CBP believes that the proposed amendment, if adopted,
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
However, we welcome comments on that assumption. The most helpful
comments are those that can give us specific information or examples of
a direct impact on small entities. If we do not receive comments that
demonstrate that the rule causes small entities to incur significant
direct costs, CBP may, during the process of drafting the final rule,
certify that this action does not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Executive Order 12866
The proposed amendment in this document does not meet the criteria
for a ``significant regulatory action'' as specified in Executive Order
12866 because it will not result in expenditures totaling $100 million
or more in any one year. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
not reviewed this regulation under that order. To the extent that
licensed customs brokers are able to use lower cost third-party service
providers to perform limited administrative tasks, this rule, if
finalized, should confer benefits to brokers. Please see the Regulatory
Flexibility Act section of this preamble for additional information
regarding the potential economic impact of this proposed rule.
The Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collected under the provisions of this proposed
rule has been submitted for approval by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under OMB control number 1651-0034. Under the Paperwork
Reduction Act, an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is
not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it
displays a valid control number assigned by OMB. The burden estimates
for recordkeeping for the non-disclosure agreement as well as the
client consent/written authorization are presented below:
Non-Disclosure Agreement
Estimated Number of Recordkeepers: 11,986.
Estimated Number of Responses per Recordkeeper: 1.
Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 11,986.
Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 11,986.
Client Consent/Written Authorization
Estimated Number of Recordkeepers: 711,000.
Estimated Number of Responses per Recordkeeper: 1.
Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 711,000.
Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 711,000.
Comments concerning the accuracy of this burden estimate and
suggestions for reducing this burden should be directed to the Office
of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the Department of
Homeland Security, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Washington, DC 20503. A copy should also be sent to the Trade and
Commercial Regulations Branch, Regulations and Rulings, Office of
International Trade, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 799 9th
Street, NW. (5th Floor), Washington, DC 20229-1179.
Comments are invited on:
(a) Whether the recordkeeping is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(b) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the
recordkeeping;
(c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
recordkeeping;
(d) Ways to minimize the burden of the recordkeeping on
respondents, including through the use of automated recordkeeping
techniques or other forms of information technology; and
(e) Estimates of capital or startup costs and costs of operations,
maintenance, and purchases of services to provide recordkeeping.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This notice of proposed rulemaking will not impose an unfunded
mandate under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It will not
result in costs of $100 million or more, in the aggregate, to any of
the following: State, local, or Native American Tribal governments, or
the private sector.
Executive Order 13132
In accordance with the principles and criteria contained in
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism), this notice of proposed rulemaking
will have no substantial effect on the States, the current Federal-
State relationship, or on the current distribution of power and
responsibilities among local officials.
Signing Authority
This document is being issued in accordance with 19 CFR 0.2(a),
which provides that the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury with
respect to CBP regulations that are not related to customs revenue
functions was transferred to the Secretary of Homeland Security
pursuant to section 403(1) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and
that such regulations are signed by the Secretary of Homeland Security
(or her delegate).
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 111
Customs brokers, Duties and responsibilities, Records confidential.
[[Page 66054]]
Proposed Amendments to the CBP Regulations
For the reasons stated above, it is proposed to amend part 111 of
title 19 of the CFR (19 CFR part 111) as set forth below.
PART 111--CUSTOMS BROKERS
1. The general authority citation for part 111 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 66, 1202 (General Note 3(i), Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS)), 1624, 1641.
* * * * *
2. Section 111.24 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 111.24 Records confidential.
(a) Client Records. The records referred to in this part and
pertaining to the business of the clients serviced by the broker are
considered confidential. Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c)
of this section, the broker must not disclose the contents or any
information connected with client records to any persons other than
those clients, their surety on a particular entry, and the Field
Director, Office of International Trade, Regulatory Audit, the CBP port
director, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent, or other duly
accredited officers or agents of the United States, except on subpoena
by a court of competent jurisdiction.
(b) Disclosure to Affiliated Entity Related to Broker. Upon the
client's consent in a written authorization to share client information
outside the brokerage, a broker may disclose only to an affiliated
entity related to the broker, information specified in the written
authorization pertaining to the customs business of that client so that
the affiliated entity may offer non-customs business services to the
broker's client.
(c) Other Third-Party Service Providers--(1) Photocopying and
Scanning Services. A broker may provide its clients' records to a
third-party service provider for photocopying and/or scanning without
violating the prohibitions set forth in the provisions of this part
pertaining to confidentiality, provided that:
(i) The broker exercises due diligence in accordance with Sec.
111.29(a) of this part in the selection of the third-party service
provider for photocopying and/or scanning by ensuring that its
association with the third-party does not violate the provisions in
Sec. 111.36(b) of this part; and
(ii) The broker enters into a non-disclosure agreement with the
third-party service provider for photocopying and/or scanning that
requires the third-party to keep the information contained in any
records pertaining to the broker's client confidential.
(2) Messenger Services. A broker may provide its clients' records
to a third-party messenger service provider for transport and delivery
without violating the prohibitions set forth in the provisions of this
part pertaining to confidentiality, provided that the clients' records
are sealed in such a manner so that the third-party messenger service
provider may not view, alter, or amend the documents to be delivered.
Dated: October 21, 2010.
David V. Aguilar,
Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
[FR Doc. 2010-27106 Filed 10-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P