Revision of Regulations Implementing the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); Updates Following the Fifteenth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES, 30399-30429 [2014-11329]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 101 (Tuesday, May 27, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30399-30429]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11329]



[[Page 30399]]

Vol. 79

Tuesday,

No. 101

May 27, 2014

Part IV





Department of the Interior





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





 Fish and Wildlife Service





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





50 CFR Parts 13,17, 23, et al.





 Revision of Regulations Implementing the Convention on International 
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); Updates 
Following the Fifteenth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to 
CITES; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 79 , No. 101 / Tuesday, May 27, 2014 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 30400]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Parts 13, 17, and 23, and Appendix A to Chapter I

[Docket No. FWS-R9-IA-2010-0083; 96300-1671-0000-R4]
RIN 1018-AW82


Revision of Regulations Implementing the Convention on 
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 
(CITES); Updates Following the Fifteenth Meeting of the Conference of 
the Parties to CITES

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS or Service), are 
revising the regulations that implement the Convention on International 
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES or Treaty or 
Convention) by incorporating certain provisions adopted at the 
fourteenth and fifteenth meetings of the Conference of the Parties 
(CoP14 and CoP15) to CITES and clarifying and updating certain other 
provisions. These changes will bring U.S. regulations in line with new 
resolutions and revisions to resolutions adopted at meetings of the 
Conference of the Parties that took place in June 2007 (CoP14) and 
March 2010 (CoP15). The revised regulations will help us more 
effectively promote species conservation, help us continue to fulfill 
our responsibilities under the Treaty, and help those affected by CITES 
to understand how to conduct lawful international trade.

DATES: This rule is effective June 26, 2014. The incorporation by 
reference of the material listed in this rule is approved by the 
Director of the Federal Register as of June 26, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert R. Gabel, Chief, Division of 
Management Authority; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax 
Drive, Suite 212; Arlington, VA 22203 (telephone, (703) 358-2093; fax, 
(703) 358-2280).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

Why We Need To Publish a Final Rule

    As a Party to CITES, the United States is obligated to implement 
the Convention effectively. Over the 40-year history of CITES, online 
markets and other technological advances have made it possible to sell 
and ship wildlife anywhere in the world, and issues of wildlife use 
have grown more complex. As international wildlife trade evolves, so 
does implementation of the Convention. The CITES Parties meet every 2 
to 3 years to vote on resolutions and decisions that interpret and 
implement the text of the Treaty and on amendments to the lists of 
species in the CITES Appendices. To keep pace with these changes, and 
ensure that U.S. businesses and individuals understand the requirements 
for lawful international trade in CITES specimens, it is necessary for 
us to periodically update our CITES-implementing regulations.

What is the effect of this final rule?

    The final rule will bring U.S. regulations in line with new 
resolutions and revisions to resolutions adopted at meetings of the 
Conference of the Parties that took place in June 2007 (CoP14) and 
March 2010 (CoP15). Updates include: New or revised definitions for 
certain specimens in trade; clarified marking requirements for certain 
specimens in trade; amended restrictions for export of Appendix-I 
specimens bred in captivity for commercial purposes; eased restrictions 
on the allowed use of CITES specimens after import into the United 
States; updated requirements for humane transport of live specimens; 
and streamlined requirements for registered operations breeding 
Appendix-I animals for commercial purposes. The revised regulations 
will help us more effectively promote conservation of wildlife and 
plants in trade, help us continue to fulfill our responsibilities under 
the Treaty, and help those affected by CITES to understand how to 
conduct lawful international trade.

The Basis for Our Action

    The Endangered Species Act designates responsibility for CITES 
implementation to the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. As the lead agency for implementation 
of CITES in the United States, the Service has promulgated regulations 
(50 CFR part 23) to inform the public about CITES requirements. We 
revise our CITES-implementing regulations as needed to ensure they are 
as up-to-date and accurate as possible.

Background

    CITES was negotiated in 1973 in Washington, DC, at a conference 
attended by delegations from 80 countries. The United States ratified 
the Treaty on September 13, 1973, and it entered into force on July 1, 
1975, after it had been ratified by 10 countries. Currently 180 
countries have ratified, accepted, approved, or acceded to CITES; these 
countries are known as Parties.
    Section 8A of the Endangered Species Act, as amended in 1982 (16 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (ESA), designates the Secretary of the Interior as 
the U.S. Management Authority and U.S. Scientific Authority for CITES. 
These authorities have been delegated to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service. The original U.S. regulations implementing CITES took effect 
on May 23, 1977 (42 FR 10462, February 22, 1977), after the first 
meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP) was held. The CoP meets 
every 2 to 3 years to vote on proposed resolutions and decisions that 
interpret and implement the text of the Treaty and on amendments to the 
lists of species in the CITES Appendices. The last major revision of 
U.S. CITES regulations was in 2007 (72 FR 48402, August 23, 2007) and 
incorporated provisions from applicable resolutions and decisions 
adopted at meetings of the Conference of the Parties up to and 
including the thirteenth meeting (CoP13), which took place in 2004. In 
2008, through a direct final rule, we incorporated certain provisions 
adopted at CoP14 regarding international trade in sturgeon caviar (73 
FR 40983, July 17, 2008).
    Proposed rule and comments received: We published a proposed rule 
on March 8, 2012 (77 FR 14200), to revise the regulations that 
implement CITES. We accepted public comments on the proposed rule for 
60 days, until May 7, 2012.
    We received 37 comments in response to the proposed rule, 34 of 
which were substantive. We received comments from individuals, 
organizations, and State natural resource agencies. Of the substantive 
comments we received, 22 were from falconers and falconer 
organizations, 3 were from State natural resource agencies and regional 
associations, and 9 were from non-governmental organizations not 
associated with falconry.
    General comments: A number of commenters provided general comments 
on U.S. CITES-implementing regulations, including the proposed 
revisions, and also provided comments on specific sections of the 
proposed rule. General comments are discussed here; we have addressed 
comments specific to a particular section of the regulations in the 
corresponding section of this preamble (see Section-by-Section 
Analysis).
    Several commenters recognized the importance of harmonizing U.S.

[[Page 30401]]

regulations with provisions adopted by the Parties to CITES. One 
commenter believed that the proposed changes would promote species 
conservation and facilitate legal possession and trade of CITES 
wildlife while providing means to better detect and reduce illicit 
possession and trade. Two commenters appreciated that we have relaxed 
what they considered to be overly restrictive regulation of 
international trade in the revision of 50 CFR part 23 published in 
2007.
    One commenter stated that, given our obligations under the ESA and 
CITES, the Service should take a conservative and precautionary 
approach in promulgating CITES regulations and generally choose 
protective measures over expanding trade. Another commenter stated that 
the original basis for CITES was that sustainable trade was a positive 
force for conservation of wildlife but that today this is no longer the 
case. The purpose of CITES is to ensure that international trade in 
wildlife and plants does not threaten the survival of species. We work 
with other CITES Parties to guard against over-exploitation of listed 
species due to international trade and believe that use of natural 
resources in a biologically sustainable and legal manner can support 
conservation efforts. We have developed our CITES-implementing 
regulations on this basis.
    One commenter asserted that some of the proposed changes, if 
adopted, will have serious negative consequences for the safari-based 
conservation system in developing countries. The same commenter stated 
that the regulations are difficult to navigate and should be more user 
friendly and that some of the proposed changes are likely to result in 
technical violations and, therefore, seizure and forfeiture of 
trophies. We can see no basis for the commenter's assertions regarding 
impacts of the final rule in developing countries. We strive to make 
our regulations as clear and straightforward as possible and believe 
that this final rule lays out, in a user-friendly manner, what is 
required for lawful international trade in CITES specimens. However, we 
welcome specific suggestions for making the regulations easier to 
navigate.
    We also received a number of general comments regarding 
international trade in raptors. One commenter stated that the Service 
has wrongfully treated domestically bred raptors as ``wild taken'' when 
they are in fact private property. Another commenter stated that the 
purpose of CITES is to control trade in wild specimens and that, except 
for the California condor, there are no wild Appendix-I raptors 
currently endangered or threatened with extinction. The commenter 
recommended that regulation of trade in Appendix-I raptors and all 
raptors from captive populations should be lessened or eliminated 
entirely.
    As a Party to CITES we are obligated to regulate international 
trade in specimens of CITES-listed species (including Appendix-I 
raptors) in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. CITES 
regulates international trade in wildlife and plants, including parts, 
products, and derivatives, to ensure that trade is legal and does not 
threaten the survival of species in the wild. This does not mean that 
only wild-caught specimens are, or should be, regulated. Both wild-
caught and captive-bred specimens are subject to CITES provisions, 
including provisions that specifically pertain to specimens that are 
bred in captivity.
    Several commenters noted that possession of raptors in the United 
States is regulated at both State and Federal levels and is monitored 
by the Service's Migratory Bird Program. Therefore, they believe that 
U.S. regulation of international trade in raptors should be no more 
restrictive than what is required by CITES. Several commenters stated 
that unnecessarily restricting trade in captive-bred raptors increases 
the incentive to take raptors from the wild illegally, reduces genetic 
exchange, discourages captive breeding and conservation, increases 
costs, and makes U.S. breeders less competitive in the world market. 
One commenter noted that the falconry community has demonstrated great 
responsibility and value to the conservation of wild raptors.
    We recognize and appreciate the contribution that the falconry 
community has made to the conservation of wild raptors. Our regulations 
do not go beyond what is required by CITES, and we do not believe that 
we are unnecessarily restricting trade in captive-bred raptors. With 
this final rule we have, in fact, eased restrictions on trade in 
Appendix-I specimens bred in captivity (see the preamble discussions 
for Sec. Sec.  23.5 and 23.18) by revising the definition of ``bred for 
noncommercial purposes'' and allowing for the possibility of 
noncommercial trade from a commercial breeding operation whether or not 
it is registered with the CITES Secretariat.
    One commenter asked why he is required to have a CITES permit to 
travel from the United States to Canada to hunt with his personally 
owned, captive-bred hybrid falcon since there is no trade or commerce 
involved. He also objected to having to cross at specific ports, pay 
fees, and have his bird inspected by FWS at border crossings. The 
activity described by the commenter is ``trade'' under CITES. ``Trade'' 
is defined in the Treaty as ``export, re-export, import, and 
introduction from the sea.'' Regulation of international trade in CITES 
species, including captive-bred and hybrid specimens, is required 
whether or not the export, re-export, import, or introduction from the 
sea is commercial. CITES regulates trade through a system of permits 
and certificates, and Parties establish an inspection process at ports 
of entry and exit as part of this system. Inspection officials at ports 
of entry and exit verify that CITES specimens are accompanied by valid 
CITES documents and take enforcement action when trade does not comply 
with the Convention. Inspection fees are outside the scope of this 
regulation and are therefore not addressed here.

Section-by-Section Analysis

    In the following parts of the preamble, we discuss the substantive 
issues in sections for which we received public comments, and we 
provide responses to those comments. For an explanation of the changes 
to sections for which we did not receive comments, please see the 
preamble to the proposed rule (77 FR 14200, March 8, 2012).

What are the changes to 50 CFR Part 13?

    Application procedures (Sec.  13.11): This section describes 
application procedures for Service permits. One commenter asserted that 
the statement in Sec.  13.11(c) indicating that the Service ``will 
process all applications as quickly as possible'' is not specific 
enough and should be amended to say that the Service has 15 working 
days from receipt of applications to process and issue permits. This 
section (Sec.  13.11) contains information about application procedures 
not just for CITES permits but also for other types of permits issued 
by the Service, including, for example, injurious wildlife permits and 
permits under the ESA, the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1361 
et seq.), the Wild Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 4901-4916), and the 
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712). Some of these 
applications are more complex and require more extensive review than 
others. For some applications under the ESA and the Marine Mammal 
Protection Act, we are required to publish a notice in the Federal 
Register and seek public comment before making a decision on a permit 
application. While we strive to process all applications as quickly as

[[Page 30402]]

possible, not all applications can be processed within the timeframe 
suggested by the commenter.

What are the changes to 50 CFR Part 17?

    50 CFR part 17 contains special rules for some species classified 
as ``threatened'' under the ESA. Most of the special rules that pertain 
to species that are also listed under CITES were written before the 
publication of our 2007 CITES regulations. Some of the rules included 
detailed CITES requirements because those requirements were not 
contained in 50 CFR part 23 prior to 2007. We believe it is more 
appropriate to include CITES requirements in 50 CFR part 23. Therefore, 
we have removed specific CITES requirements from the special rules in 
50 CFR part 17 and, if they were not there already, inserted them into 
our CITES regulations in 50 CFR part 23. These changes, with a few 
exceptions described in our proposed rule (77 FR 14200, March 8, 2012), 
do not alter the requirements of the special rules because the 
requirements added to or already contained in 50 CFR part 23 are 
functionally the same as those currently contained in the special 
rules. Under the special rules, specimens may only be imported into the 
United States if the requirements in 50 CFR part 23 have been met.
    One commenter supported the removal of detailed information on 
CITES provisions for personal and household effects from the special 
rules in part 17 and pointing the readers instead to the appropriate 
sections in part 23. Another commenter stated that he objected to the 
proposal to ``shift some of the special rules in part 17 to part 23'' 
and noted that part 17 and part 23 have different mandates and part 23 
should only implement CITES provisions, nothing more. The commenter is 
correct that the regulations in part 17 implement provisions of the ESA 
and the regulations in part 23 implement CITES. This is, in fact, the 
reason we have made the changes proposed. We removed components of the 
special rules in part 17 that are CITES requirements and inserted them 
into the CITES regulations in part 23. The special rules will remain in 
part 17; only the CITES components of those rules have been moved to 
part 23. We believe this will make clear what is required under CITES 
(in 50 CFR part 23) for trade in a particular specimen and what is 
required under the ESA (in 50 CFR part 17). As stated above, these 
changes do not alter the requirements of the special rules because the 
special rules require that the provisions in 50 CFR part 23 must also 
be met. Likewise, as detailed in Sec.  23.3, trade in specimens of 
CITES species that are also listed under the ESA or covered by other 
U.S. laws must meet both the CITES requirements in 50 CFR part 23 and 
requirements in other applicable U.S. regulations.

What are the changes to 50 CFR Part 23?

    Deciding if the regulations apply to your proposed activity (Sec.  
23.2): We had proposed adding a paragraph to the table in Sec.  23.2 to 
clarify that if a CITES specimen you possess or want to enter into 
intrastate or interstate commerce is subject to restrictions on its use 
after import then the regulations in part 23 apply. One commenter 
objected to this clarification and stated that adding restrictions to 
this section for intrastate or interstate commerce would be going 
beyond the intent of CITES and the mandate of part 23. The restrictions 
on the use after import of certain CITES specimens are described in 
Sec.  23.55 and have been in place since 2007. We were merely referring 
the reader to Sec.  23.55 to determine whether the specimen in question 
is subject to restrictions on its use after import, and highlighting 
that if it is subject to such restrictions, then the regulations in 
part 23 apply. We note that, in fact, this rule narrows appropriately 
the restrictions contained in Sec.  23.55 (see the preamble discussion 
and the regulatory text for Sec.  23.55).
    Upon further evaluation, we have decided to remove the table from 
Sec.  23.2 and replace it with a simple statement. Although the table 
was intended to assist the reader in determining whether the 
regulations in part 23 apply to his or her activity we believe it may 
be causing confusion. Therefore, we are removing the table and adding 
in its place the following sentence: ``If you are engaging in 
activities with specimens of CITES-listed species these regulations 
apply to you.''
    Definitions (Sec.  23.5): Whenever possible we define terms using 
the wording of the Treaty and the resolutions.
    Definitions of ``bred for noncommercial purposes'' and 
``cooperative conservation program'': Article VII, paragraph 4, of the 
Treaty states that specimens of Appendix-I wildlife species bred in 
captivity for commercial purposes shall be deemed to be specimens of 
species included in Appendix II. Such specimens can therefore be traded 
without the need for an import permit (see Sec. Sec.  23.18 and 23.46). 
It also provides in Article VII, paragraph 5, that specimens that are 
bred in captivity may be traded under an exemption certificate (see 
Sec. Sec.  23.18 and 23.41). Although the Treaty does not use the term 
``bred for noncommercial purposes'' in Article VII, paragraph 5, the 
Parties have agreed to use this term as the intended meaning of 
paragraph 5 because Article VII, paragraph 4, addresses specimens bred 
for commercial purposes.
    Our current regulations contain definitions of ``bred for 
noncommercial purposes'' and ``cooperative conservation program.'' 
These terms were defined based on the interpretation of Article VII, 
paragraph 5, adopted at CoP11 in Resolution Conf. 11.14 and 
subsequently (until CoP14) contained in Resolution Conf. 12.10. Our 
definition of ``bred for noncommercial purposes'' specifies that a 
specimen only qualifies to be treated as bred for noncommercial 
purposes, and therefore eligible for an exemption certificate, if every 
donation, exchange, or loan of the specimen is between facilities that 
are involved in a cooperative conservation program. At CoP14, the 
Parties removed the definition of ``bred for noncommercial purposes'' 
from Resolution Conf. 12.10 (including the reference to cooperative 
conservation programs) because it was considered to be outside the 
scope of the resolution, which addresses the procedure for registering 
and monitoring operations that breed Appendix-I animal species for 
commercial purposes. The deletion of this paragraph from the resolution 
leaves it to Parties to adopt their own interpretation of Article VII, 
paragraph 5.
    The changes adopted at CoP14, and our experiences since publication 
of our current regulations, led us to reconsider our definition of 
``bred for noncommercial purposes.'' We are amending our definition of 
``bred for noncommercial purposes'' by removing the requirement that 
the trade be conducted between facilities that are involved in a 
cooperative conservation program and, consequently, removing from our 
regulations the definition of ``cooperative conservation program,'' 
consistent with recent amendments to CITES resolutions. The change 
allows an Appendix-I specimen that was bred in captivity to be traded 
under a CITES exemption certificate when each donation, exchange, or 
loan of the specimen is noncommercial, including situations where the 
donation, exchange, or loan is not between two facilities that are 
participating in a cooperative conservation program. Our amendment to 
the definition is consistent with current CITES resolutions. (See also 
the discussion in the preamble for Sec.  23.18.)

[[Page 30403]]

    Several commenters opposed the removal of the definition of 
``cooperative conservation program'' and the requirement that, to 
qualify for an exemption certificate, trade in a specimen bred for 
noncommercial purposes must be between facilities participating in a 
cooperative conservation program. One commenter believed this provision 
should be retained to promote species conservation and argued that we 
had not provided a sufficient explanation or justification for its 
removal. Another stated that linking breeding operations to 
conservation efforts is the least that should be required of those 
engaged in trade of captive-bred specimens of Appendix-I species.
    We are removing this requirement because we believe it is overly 
restrictive. While we agree with the commenters that it is important to 
promote species conservation, we understand that it is not always 
feasible for a breeding operation to participate in or support a 
recovery activity in cooperation with a range country, sometimes due to 
political realities or civil unrest, for example. In addition, there 
are circumstances under which Appendix-I animals may be bred-in-
captivity for noncommercial purposes (including, for example, 
noncommercial breeding by hobbyists) where we do not believe it is 
reasonable to prohibit trade under Article VII, paragraph 5, solely 
because the breeding facility is not participating in a cooperative 
conservation program. We will continue to scrutinize this trade 
carefully, to ensure that each donation, exchange, or loan of a 
specimen traded under Article VII, paragraph 5, is noncommercial. 
Another commenter asked that, if we delete the reference to cooperative 
conservation programs as proposed, that we amend the definition of 
``bred for noncommercial purposes'' by adding to the end the phrase 
``where the purpose is directed towards noncommercial use.'' We have 
declined to accept this suggestion as we consider it to be redundant.
    Another commenter stated that we should remove both the definition 
of ``cooperative conservation program'' and ``bred for noncommercial 
purposes'' since neither of these terms is currently defined by CITES, 
and retaining or modifying a definition not used by CITES goes beyond 
CITES provisions and the part 23 mandate. We disagree that we should 
only provide definitions for terms defined by CITES and that doing so 
is beyond the part 23 ``mandate.'' The purpose of part 23 is to 
explain, as clearly as possible, how we implement the Treaty and what 
is required for legal international trade in CITES-listed species. 
Where we feel it is useful, we have provided definitions for terms used 
in the regulations to clarify the intended meaning in this context.
    Two commenters suggested that falconry be specifically cited as an 
example of an activity that would qualify as ``bred for noncommercial 
purposes.'' We have not accepted this suggestion. Although there may be 
situations in which falconry birds are bred for noncommercial purposes, 
this is not always the case. Birds used in falconry are also bred and 
traded for economic gain, including for profit.
    Coral definitions: We are amending our definitions of ``coral 
(dead),'' ``coral fragments,'' ``coral (live),'' and ``coral sand'' in 
Sec.  23.5 to more closely align with the definitions in the Annex to 
Resolution Conf. 11.10 (Rev. CoP15). Due to problems we have 
encountered in the implementation of the requirements for trade in 
stony corals, we are further revising the definitions of ``coral 
fragments'' and ``coral sand'' to clarify the size of a specimen that 
meets the definition of ``coral fragments'' or ``coral sand'' and may 
therefore be considered exempt from the provisions of CITES. The same 
clarification regarding ``coral fragments'' was adopted by the Parties 
at CoP15.
    Two commenters expressed concern that the proposed changes to the 
definition of ``coral fragments'' will allow a broadening of the subset 
of coral specimens that could be considered fragments, and therefore 
exempt from CITES provisions. The commenters suggested that we 
substitute the word ``all'' for ``any'' in the definition, so that it 
reads ``. . . between 2 and 30 mm measured in all directions.'' It was 
our intent, and the intent of the Parties at CoP15, to limit ``coral 
fragments'' to specimens smaller than 30 mm. We believe that the change 
proposed by the commenters further clarifies that intent. We agree that 
``all'' is more precise and, to be consistent, have made the suggested 
change to the definitions of both ``coral fragments'' and ``coral 
sand.''
    Definition of ``ranched wildlife'': The United States participated 
in a working group established to evaluate the use of source code ``R'' 
(for ``specimens originating from a ranching operation'') for species 
other than crocodilians and, if necessary, propose a revised definition 
of source code ``R'' for consideration at CoP15. At CoP15, based on the 
recommendations of the working group, the Parties adopted a revised 
definition of source code ``R.'' In our proposed rule (77 FR 14200, 
March 8, 2012), we indicated our intention to incorporate the new 
definition into Sec.  23.5, consistent with the change to Resolution 
Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15) adopted at CoP15.
    Two individual State natural resource agencies and one State 
natural resource agency organization endorsed this change and stated 
that the new definition more closely describes the way in which their 
alligator programs operate and will allow them to export alligator 
skins produced in their States under the ``R'' source code. Two 
commenters strongly objected to the incorporation of the new definition 
into U.S. regulations and stated that ranching is merely a subset of 
wild take. Another commenter asked us to provide further rationale for 
incorporating the new definition into our regulations and noted that it 
is unclear how adoption of the new definition may impact protected 
species in the wild and, in addition, that allowing wild-sourced 
specimens to be traded as ``ranched'' will make it impossible to track 
the full impact of wild collection. The commenter urged us to maintain 
a clear distinction between specimens derived from a ranching operation 
in accordance with Resolution Conf. 11.16 (Rev. CoP15) and wild-sourced 
specimens.
    We agree with those commenters who supported incorporation of the 
new definition of source code ``R'' into our regulations because it 
more accurately describes production systems often employed for certain 
species, such as the American alligator. We also agree with the comment 
suggesting that ranching production is associated with wild harvest. We 
note that, before a permit can be issued for specimens entering 
international trade as a result of either ranching production or wild 
harvest, a non-detriment finding must be made. Thus, the Scientific 
Authority will evaluate the impact of both of these activities on wild 
populations. We also believe it is important to have consistent 
application and implementation of CITES terms, which we intend to 
achieve by incorporation of the revised definition.
    Incorporation by reference (Sec.  23.9): We are adding this new 
section to contain information on materials incorporated by reference, 
currently located in Sec.  23.23. We believe that moving the 
information regarding materials incorporated by reference into its own 
section will make it easier for readers to locate and reference, and 
easier for us to update, as needed, in the future.
    Prohibitions (Sec.  23.13): We are adding text to this section to 
clarify that violation of any of the provisions of 50 CFR part 23, 
including use of CITES

[[Page 30404]]

specimens imported into the United States contrary to what is allowed 
under Sec.  23.55, is unlawful. One commenter expressed support for 
this clarification.
    Another commenter stated that this provision would make it unlawful 
to use any CITES specimen for any purposes contrary to conditions 
imposed under Sec.  23.55 and that this is too broad, as Sec.  23.55 
only applies to Appendix-I and certain Appendix-II specimens. The 
commenter seems to have misinterpreted the provisions in Sec.  23.55. 
The table in Sec.  23.55 lays out the allowed use of any CITES specimen 
after it has been imported into the United States. The vast majority of 
CITES specimens (including most Appendix-II and -III specimens) may be 
used for any lawful purpose after import, and this is stated in 
paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) of Sec.  23.55. However, the import and 
subsequent use of many Appendix-I specimens and certain Appendix-II 
specimens may be only for noncommercial purposes, and this information 
is also provided in Sec.  23.55. We are not adding new prohibitions 
here. The restrictions on use after import of certain CITES specimens 
have been in place since 2007. We simply want to clarify that violation 
of any of the provisions of 50 CFR part 23 is unlawful.
    One commenter stated that, if an imported raptor was injured or for 
some reason unable to perform as a falconry bird, these changes would 
prevent the use of the raptor for breeding because FWS considers 
breeding to be commercial. We reiterate that we are not adding new 
prohibitions with regard to use after import. In fact, this final rule 
appropriately narrows the current restrictions that have been in place 
since 2007 (see the preamble discussion and the regulatory text for 
Sec.  23.55). In addition, we do not consider all breeding to be 
commercial and refer the commenter to the discussions in the preamble 
for Sec. Sec.  23.5 and 23.18 with regard to trade in Appendix-I 
specimens bred for commercial and noncommercial purposes.
    Documents for the export of Appendix-I wildlife and plants (Sec.  
23.18): Sections 23.18 and 23.19 contain decision trees to help readers 
determine what type of CITES document is needed for export of an 
Appendix-I specimen and where in the regulations they can find 
information regarding the different types of documents. We have 
reevaluated our requirements for export of Appendix-I wildlife and are 
amending the decision tree in Sec.  23.18 accordingly. (See also the 
preamble discussion for Sec.  23.5 regarding the definition of ``bred 
for noncommercial purposes.'')
    As noted previously, Article VII, paragraph 4, of the Treaty states 
that specimens of Appendix-I wildlife species bred in captivity for 
commercial purposes shall be deemed to be specimens of species included 
in Appendix II. Such specimens can therefore be traded without the need 
for an import permit. Our regulations required commercial breeders of 
Appendix-I wildlife to be registered with the CITES Secretariat in 
order to export Appendix-I specimens, regardless of the purpose of the 
import. The decision tree in Sec.  23.18 asks, at several points, 
whether the export of the specimen is for noncommercial purposes. 
However, because of the way the decision tree is structured, export of 
specimens bred in captivity (according to CITES criteria) at commercial 
operations that are not registered with the CITES Secretariat was 
prohibited, even in small numbers when the intended use of the 
specimens in the importing country is noncommercial.
    Based on our experience since publication of our regulations in 
2007, we have concluded that this interpretation is overly restrictive. 
The exemptions contained in Article VII allow alternatives to the 
procedures contained in Articles III, IV, and V for trade in CITES-
listed species when certain criteria are met. However, if an Appendix-I 
specimen does not qualify for an exemption under Article VII, it should 
not, solely on that basis, also be deemed ineligible for a permit or 
certificate under Article III. For this reason, we are amending our 
regulations to allow for this possibility. We are amending the decision 
tree in Sec.  23.18 by eliminating the boxes that ask if the export is 
for noncommercial purposes, which eliminates the requirement that 
commercial operations breeding Appendix-I species must be registered 
with the Secretariat to export specimens under any circumstances. We 
believe this change reflects the appropriate implementation of Articles 
III and VII.
    One commenter stated that the CITES Secretariat has confirmed that 
an Appendix-I specimen can be exported from a commercial breeding 
facility, not registered with the Secretariat, for a noncommercial 
purpose. We agree with this interpretation and note that our revisions 
to this section remove the requirement that commercial operations 
breeding Appendix-I species must, in all cases, be registered with the 
Secretariat to export their specimens.
    Several commenters opposed this change and asserted that commercial 
breeders should not be allowed to participate in noncommercial trade. 
They expressed concern that allowing such trade would cause enforcement 
difficulties by blurring the distinction between commercial and 
noncommercial facilities. One commenter stated that all facilities 
breeding Appendix-I specimens should be registered with the CITES 
Secretariat to facilitate national and international oversight and that 
commercial facilities that are not registered should not be allowed to 
export Appendix-I specimens. The commenter argued that our proposed 
revisions seem to be contrary to the intent of CITES, which is to limit 
the trade in Appendix-I specimens for commercial purposes.
    We agree that trade in Appendix-I specimens must be subject to 
particularly strict regulation, as stated in the Treaty, and we will 
continue to monitor the trade in Appendix-I specimens very carefully. 
The Treaty does allow for trade in Appendix-I specimens that are bred 
in captivity for commercial purposes, and we implement this provision 
by requiring that operations breeding Appendix-I specimens for 
commercial purposes are registered with the CITES Secretariat, as 
agreed by the Parties in Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15). The 
Treaty also allows for trade in Appendix-I specimens bred in captivity 
for noncommercial purposes, and we recognize that there are 
circumstances under which a commercial breeding operation may engage in 
trade where each donation, exchange, or loan of a specimen is 
noncommercial. We will continue to scrutinize such trade and will 
exercise our right and responsibility under the Treaty to verify 
whether the Management Authority of the importing country has made the 
appropriate determination of whether an import is not for primarily 
commercial purposes.
    Several commenters suggested that language be added to the decision 
tree to indicate that falconry and propagation for falconry are 
considered ``primarily noncommercial.'' We do not agree that falconry 
and breeding of birds for use in falconry can always be considered 
activities that are ``primarily noncommercial'' and have therefore 
declined to accept this suggestion. Some commenters also recommended 
that we adopt a policy that five or fewer birds exported for falconry 
purposes will generally be considered noncommercial trade. We have not 
adopted this suggestion. Determinations regarding the commercial or 
noncommercial nature of a proposed activity are made on a case-by-case 
basis after review of all relevant factors (see Sec.  23.62).

[[Page 30405]]

    Several commenters expressed their belief that birds bred for 
falconry should qualify for a bred-in-captivity certificate and be 
traded under the source code ``C'' and not ``F.'' They stated that 
source code ``F'' is not appropriate for U.S. captive-bred raptors 
because it implies possible impacts to wild populations. One commenter 
also noted that use of source code ``F'' creates conflict with other 
countries, particularly in Europe, that do not implement Resolution 
Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15).
    The Parties have agreed, in Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15), 
that the exemption in Article VII, paragraph 4, should be implemented 
through the registration by the Secretariat of operations that breed 
specimens of Appendix-I species in captivity for commercial purposes. 
Such specimens are ``deemed to be specimens of species included in 
Appendix II'' and therefore can be traded under an export permit, 
without the need for an import permit. Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. 
CoP15) states that source code ``D'' should be used on permits for 
Appendix-I animals originating at an operation registered with the 
Secretariat and exported under the provisions of Article VII, paragraph 
4.
    Article VII, paragraph 5, of the Treaty provides that specimens 
that are bred in captivity may be traded under an exemption certificate 
(see Sec.  23.41). As noted previously, although the Treaty does not 
use the term ``bred for noncommercial purposes'' in Article VII, 
paragraph 5, the Parties have agreed to use this term as the intended 
meaning of paragraph 5 because Article VII, paragraph 4, addresses 
specimens bred for commercial purposes. Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. 
CoP15) states that source code ``C'' should be used on permits for 
Appendix-I animals bred in captivity and exported under the provisions 
of Article VII, paragraph 5.
    We implement these provisions as follows. The exemptions provided 
in Article VII, paragraphs 4 and 5, allow for trade in Appendix-I 
specimens without the need for an import permit when the specimens have 
been bred in captivity and certain conditions are met. To qualify for 
these exemptions, an Appendix-I animal must have been bred in 
captivity, in accordance with CITES criteria in Resolution Conf. 10.16 
(Rev.) and U.S. regulations in Sec.  23.63, and it must have been 
either: (1) Bred for commercial purposes at a facility registered with 
the CITES Secretariat (Article VII, paragraph 4); or (2) bred for 
noncommercial purposes (Article VII, paragraph 5). Specimens exported 
under Article VII, paragraph 4 (i.e., those bred for commercial 
purposes at a facility registered with the CITES Secretariat), are 
``deemed to be'' Appendix-II specimens, and we therefore issue an 
export permit with the source code ``D.'' For specimens exported under 
Article VII, paragraph 5 (i.e., those bred in captivity for 
noncommercial purposes), we issue a bred-in-captivity certificate with 
the source code ``C.'' When an Appendix-I specimen bred in captivity is 
exported under an exemption document (an export permit with a source 
code ``D'' or a bred-in-captivity certificate with a source code 
``C''), no import permit is required.
    We also allow for trade in Appendix-I specimens produced in 
captivity that do not qualify for the exemptions in Article VII. 
However, such specimens must be traded under Article III of the Treaty, 
and an import permit is required. These specimens are given the source 
code ``F,'' because neither source code ``C'' nor ``D'' applies.
    One commenter noted that Article VII, paragraph 4, of the Treaty 
states that specimens of Appendix-I species bred or propagated for 
commercial purposes shall be deemed to be specimens of species included 
in Appendix II and questioned why we stated in the proposed rule that 
such specimens are still included in Appendix I. The commenter stated 
that there is no CITES provision that a specimen bred at a registered 
facility and ``deemed to be'' Appendix II for export reverts back to 
Appendix I on arrival in the importing country.
    The language in Article VII, paragraph 4, stating that Appendix-I 
specimens bred in captivity are deemed to be specimens of species 
included in Appendix II allows such specimens to be traded 
commercially. It means that a Management Authority may grant an export 
permit or a re-export certificate without requiring the prior issuance 
of an import permit. It does not mean that the species has been 
transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II. As we indicated in the 
proposed rule, the species remains listed in Appendix I, and therefore 
the specimens are not eligible for any exemption limited specifically 
to an Appendix-II species or taxon, such as less-restrictive provisions 
for personal and household effects.
    Information required on CITES documents (Sec.  23.23): This section 
details information that must be included on CITES documents. We 
require that CITES export and re-export documents for live wildlife 
contain a specific condition that the document is only valid if the 
transport complies with certain humane-transport standards. The CITES 
Guidelines for transport and preparation for shipment of live wild 
animals and plants (CITES Guidelines) and the International Air 
Transport Association (IATA) Live Animals Regulations were incorporated 
by reference into our regulations at Sec.  23.23(c)(7) in 2007. At 
CoP14, recognizing that IATA regulations are amended annually and are 
therefore more responsive to changing needs, and that it is important 
to provide humane transport conditions for plants as well as wildlife, 
the Parties agreed to promote the full and effective use of IATA's Live 
Animals Regulations (for animals) and Perishable Cargo Regulations (for 
plants) as the standards for the preparation and transport of live 
specimens. Therefore, we are removing reference to the outdated CITES 
Guidelines and incorporating by reference the 13th edition of the IATA 
Perishable Cargo Regulations as the standard for the transport of 
CITES-listed plants. We are further updating our regulations by 
incorporating by reference the 40th edition of the IATA Live Animals 
Regulations to replace the 33rd edition that is incorporated by 
reference in our current regulations. One commenter supported the 
updating of our humane-transport standards. For the convenience of the 
reader, we have moved the information on materials incorporated by 
reference into a new section, Sec.  23.9 (please see the preamble text 
for Sec.  23.9). Another commenter supported our proposal to amend 
Sec.  23.23(c)(16) to allow the use of official signature stamps on 
CITES documents, in recognition of this global practice.
    Validity of CITES documents (Sec.  23.26): We are adding three 
additional circumstances in Sec.  23.26(d) for which we may request 
verification of a CITES document. When the CITES Secretariat receives 
information about a quota for publication, there may be technical 
problems or questions about technical or administrative aspects of the 
quota that need clarification. Under guidelines contained in Resolution 
Conf. 14.7 (Rev. CoP15), if the Secretariat is unable to resolve these 
issues with the Party concerned, the Secretariat is directed to publish 
the quota with an annotation to indicate its concerns. We may request 
verification of a CITES document if it is issued for a species with an 
annotated quota that raises concerns about the validity of the 
shipment. We may also request verification of a CITES document for a 
shipment of captive-bred Appendix-I wildlife when the specimens did not 
originate from a breeding operation that is registered with the CITES 
Secretariat and we have reason to believe the import is for

[[Page 30406]]

commercial purposes. In addition, if we receive a CITES export document 
on which the actual quantity exported has not been validated or 
certified at the time of export, we may request verification of the 
document.
    Two commenters strongly supported inclusion of the three additional 
circumstances under which we may seek verification of a CITES document. 
Another commenter urged us to include two more circumstances related to 
permits authorizing the export of specimens subject to a quota. Another 
commenter did not see a reason to restrict the Management Authority to 
a formal list of circumstances under which it may request verification 
of a CITES document and noted that any indication of wrongdoing should 
give the Management Authority the authority to verify the authenticity 
of a permit. We agree that there may be more circumstances, in addition 
to those listed in Sec.  23.26(d), under which we may request 
verification of a CITES document from the CITES Secretariat or a 
foreign Management Authority. The circumstances listed in Sec.  
23.26(d) are provided as common examples, and the list is not intended 
to be exhaustive. We direct the commenters to the first sentence of 
that paragraph (d), which indicates that such circumstances include, 
but are not limited to, those listed in Sec.  23.26(d).
    One commenter was concerned that the proposed changes regarding 
permits where the quantity had not been validated upon export do not go 
far enough. He suggested that we incorporate the language adopted at 
CoP15, in Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15), which states that Parties 
``should liaise'' with the exporting country's Management Authority and 
consider any ``extenuating circumstances'' to determine the 
acceptability of the document in question. We have declined to accept 
this suggestion as we consider it to be redundant. The text in Sec.  
23.26(d) informs the public of circumstances under which we may request 
verification of a CITES document; lack of validation is one of those 
circumstances.
    Requirements for a bred-in-captivity certificate (Sec.  23.41): 
Although we did not propose changes to this text, one commenter 
objected to the language in Sec.  23.41(d)(2), which states that to 
qualify for a bred-in-captivity certificate a specimen must be bred for 
noncommercial purposes or be part of a traveling exhibition. The 
commenter believes this provision is contrary to Article VII, paragraph 
5, of the Treaty and to Resolution Conf. 10.16 (Rev.). To clarify, the 
requirement in Sec.  23.41(d)(2) that a specimen must be bred for 
noncommercial purposes or be part of a traveling exhibition to qualify 
for a bred-in-captivity certificate applies only to Appendix-I 
specimens and not to specimens of species listed in Appendix II or III. 
For Appendix-I specimens, we will only issue bred-in-captivity 
certificates for specimens bred in captivity for noncommercial 
purposes, in accordance with Article VII, paragraph 5, of the Treaty, 
including specimens that are part of a traveling exhibition, as 
provided in Article VII, paragraph 7. Article VII, paragraph 7, allows 
for the issuance of an exemption document for Appendix-I specimens that 
form part of a traveling exhibition in certain circumstances, including 
that they are either pre-Convention specimens (Article VII, paragraph 
2) or bred in captivity for noncommercial purposes (Article VII, 
paragraph 5). We refer the commenter to the discussion in the preamble 
for Sec.  23.18, where we describe in detail the way in which we 
implement the various CITES provisions related to trade in Appendix-I 
specimens under the exemption in Article VII, paragraph 5.
    Wildlife hybrids (Sec.  23.43): Section 23.43 allows for an 
exemption from CITES document requirements for hybrid wildlife 
specimens that meet specific criteria. We are adding language to 
clarify that an individual who is unable to clearly demonstrate that 
his or her wildlife specimen meets the criteria for an exempt hybrid 
must obtain a CITES document. One commenter expressed support for this 
clarification.
    International travel with personally owned live wildlife (Sec.  
23.44): Since publication of our current regulations in 2007, there has 
been some confusion regarding the purpose and appropriate use of 
certificates of ownership for personally owned live wildlife (also 
known as ``pet passports''). We are clarifying that such documents are 
to be used for frequent, short-term travel by an individual when 
accompanied by his or her personally owned live wildlife (e.g., for 
vacations, to attend competitions, or for similar purposes of 
relatively short duration) and that this individual is to return with 
the wildlife to his or her country of usual residence at the end of the 
trip. We received one comment in support of this clarification.
    One commenter expressed dissatisfaction with the process for 
renewing a certificate of ownership for personally owned, live 
wildlife. The commenter objected to having to complete an entire 
application when only a few items needed to be updated and to having to 
submit his original certificate along with the application for renewal, 
thus preventing cross-border travel while awaiting issuance of the new 
certificate. In addition, the commenter noted that having the renewed 
certificate issued before the end of the period of validity of his 
existing certificate effectively shortens the period of validity to 
less than 3 years. He also considered the estimated time of 30 minutes 
for completion of Form 3-200-64 to be ``overly conservative'' and 
stated that ``a more realistic, but still conservative estimate'' would 
be at least 60 minutes.
    Form 3-200-64, the application form for issuance of a certificate 
of ownership for personally owned live wildlife, asks for detailed 
information regarding the animal to be covered under the certificate. 
When a certificate holder wishes to renew a certificate of ownership, 
however, he or she should complete and submit Form 3-200-52, the 
application for re-issuance or renewal of a permit. This is a 
simplified application on which the applicant can certify that there 
have been no changes to the original application or that there have 
been changes as noted on an attached page. We ask that individuals 
allow 30 to 60 days for processing of applications, and we do require 
submission of the original certificate before we will issue a new one. 
If applying well in advance (more than 60 days before expiration of the 
certificate), an applicant could submit a copy and continue to use the 
original certificate, keeping in mind that he or she must return to the 
United States before the certificate expires. Once travel is completed 
and the animal has re-entered the United States, the original 
certificate must be returned to the Management Authority. As stated 
above, we will not issue a new certificate until we have received the 
original certificate. We thank the commenter for his input regarding 
the length of time needed to complete Form 3-200-64. We are in the 
process of reviewing all of our application forms and will take his 
comments into consideration during that process.
    Registration of a commercial breeding operation for Appendix-I 
wildlife (Sec.  23.46): Article VII, paragraph 4, of the Treaty states 
that specimens of Appendix-I animal species bred in captivity for 
commercial purposes shall be deemed to be specimens of species included 
in Appendix II. For such specimens, a Management Authority may grant an 
export permit or a re-export certificate without requiring the prior 
issuance of an import permit, thus allowing the specimens to be traded 
commercially. However, the species

[[Page 30407]]

remains listed in Appendix I, and therefore the specimens are not 
eligible for any exemption limited specifically to an Appendix-II 
species or taxon.
    Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15) provides guidelines for 
registering and monitoring operations that breed Appendix-I animals for 
commercial purposes. Section 23.46 implements the resolution by 
establishing a procedure for operations that breed Appendix-I animals 
for commercial purposes to become registered with the CITES 
Secretariat. At CoP15, the Parties adopted changes to the registration 
process to address the sometimes lengthy delays that can occur when an 
objection is raised regarding an application to register a breeding 
facility. We are revising Sec.  23.46(b) to incorporate changes to the 
registration process adopted at CoP15, and we expect that these changes 
will significantly reduce potential delays.
    Under Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15), registered commercial 
breeding operations are to be monitored by the Management Authority, in 
collaboration with the Scientific Authority, and the Management 
Authority is to advise the CITES Secretariat of any major change in the 
nature of an operation or in the products it is producing for export. 
Our regulations include an annual reporting requirement to facilitate 
monitoring of registered operations. We are eliminating the annual 
reporting requirement in Sec.  23.46 and establishing instead a process 
for renewal of registrations every 5 years. The registration renewal is 
intended to be less burdensome for the registrants, yet will allow us 
to monitor these facilities and identify major changes in their 
operating practices. One commenter supported these changes.
    We received a number of comments from falconers and falconry 
organizations regarding our proposed requirement for renewal of 
registrations for commercial breeding operations for Appendix-I 
wildlife. Many of these commenters expressed either opposition or very 
limited support for requiring renewal of registrations. Five commenters 
noted that there is no requirement under CITES for renewal of 
registrations and expressed their belief that, once a facility is 
registered, the registration should not expire. While Resolution Conf. 
12.10 (Rev. CoP15) does not specifically recommend renewal of 
registrations or expiration dates for registrations, it does state that 
Parties should monitor the management of each registered captive-
breeding operation under its jurisdiction and advise the CITES 
Secretariat of any major changes in the operation. It is left to the 
Parties to determine how they will accomplish such monitoring. Our 
regulations (Sec.  23.46(e)(3)) require annual reporting by registered 
facilities to allow us to monitor the management of these operations to 
ensure that they continue to meet the criteria for registration. We are 
eliminating the annual reporting requirement and establishing in its 
place a 5-year renewal process that we believe will reduce the burden 
on both the registered operations and the Service while providing for 
the monitoring that is required under CITES. We also note that there is 
a provision in Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15) for removing 
breeding operations from the Secretariat's registry, particularly if 
they fail to continue to meet requirements, so registrations are not 
necessarily meant to continue in perpetuity.
    Some of the commenters stated that the renewal requirement would 
create a significant burden on registered operations. They noted that 
raptor breeders are already monitored by the Service, through the 
Migratory Bird Program (MBP), and therefore the process for renewal of 
a registration would be redundant. They argued that the annual report 
and individual transactions forms provided to MBP should suffice for 
any monitoring requirement for CITES. Two commenters were more 
supportive of a simple registration update form and associated fee, if 
the required data submission was simply a reference to the current MBP 
data. One commenter suggested that if renewal of a registration is 
mandated by the Service, a one-page application with accompanying 
photocopies of the past five annual reports from the operation to the 
MBP should be all that is required.
    The regulations in Sec.  23.46, regarding the process for 
registering a commercial breeding operation for Appendix-I wildlife, 
apply to operations breeding any Appendix-I species, not just raptors 
and other falconry birds. Although it is true, as one commenter has 
noted, that all of the U.S. facilities currently registered with the 
CITES Secretariat are breeding raptors, we do not anticipate that this 
will always be the case. Therefore, we need to establish registration 
and reporting procedures that will work not just for facilities 
breeding raptors, but for any commercial breeding operation that may be 
registered in the future. It is not our intention, however, to increase 
the burden for raptor breeders.
    We understand that U.S. raptor breeders are regulated under the 
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and must provide reports to the MBP on 
specific activities related to the breeding of native raptors (as 
defined in part 21 of this subchapter). It is also true, however, that 
not all CITES-listed, Appendix-I raptors are covered by the MBTA. There 
is no requirement for an operation breeding birds that are not covered 
by the MBTA (including raptors that are not native raptors under the 
definition in part 21) to provide reports to the MBP on activities 
associated with those birds. We agree that, for operations breeding 
native raptors, documents submitted to the MBP would include most, if 
not all, of the information needed for the renewal of a CITES 
registration. If an applicant requesting renewal of a registration is 
breeding native raptors and reporting to the MBP, he or she can inform 
us on the application for renewal, and we will obtain copies of the 
relevant documents, covering the past 5-year period, from MBP. A 
registered operation that is breeding Appendix-I species that are not 
covered by the MBTA, and therefore not covered in reports provided to 
the MBP, will need to include updated information relevant to those 
species in its renewal application.
    Four commenters that opposed renewal of registrations expressed 
concern about whether the Management Authority could process 
registration applications in a consistent and timely manner. They 
asserted that the Service has underestimated the cost and negative 
effect this requirement will have on both the breeders and the 
Management Authority and stated their belief that registration renewal 
will put registered breeding operations at risk every 5 years due to 
potential delays in the renewal application process.
    We are establishing a simplified renewal process that will be much 
less burdensome and take much less time than the initial registration 
process. We expect that most renewals will be completed within 30 to 60 
days, provided that the renewal application contains all of the 
information requested. The criteria for renewal are the same as the 
criteria for registration of a new operation. However, unlike the 
process for initially registering a commercial breeding operation, the 
renewal process does not require us to contact the CITES Secretariat, 
and there will therefore be no consultation with other CITES Parties, 
as required for the initial registration. The same application used to 
request registration (Form 3-200-65) will be used for renewals. 
Applicants for renewal will not need to respond to all of the 
questions. Instead, they will be asked to identify any changes in their 
operation, such as new breeding facilities or

[[Page 30408]]

changes in breeding stock, that have occurred over the last 5 years. 
Operations breeding only U.S. native raptors, that have no updates to 
report beyond the information included in the annual reports and 
transfer documents they have submitted to the MBP, can state as much on 
their renewal application and we will obtain copies from MBP of their 
reports covering the relevant 5-year period. We consider that this 
process will allow us to meet our obligations under CITES and will 
cause only a minimal burden on registered operations. If necessary, 
upon renewal or at any time we receive significant new information on a 
registered operation, we will provide the updated information to the 
CITES Secretariat.
    One commenter was opposed to the language in Sec.  23.46(f), which 
states that requests for renewal of a registration should be submitted 
at least 3 months before the registration expires. The commenter 
asserted that, in the absence of such a provision, the registration 
would remain in effect until renewed or denied, if the application was 
received at any time before expiration.
    Although we recommend, in Sec.  23.46(f), that applicants submit 
requests for renewal at least 3 months before the registration expires, 
we do not require that they do so. We included this language to 
encourage registrants to apply for renewal early enough so that their 
registration does not expire while we are reviewing their renewal 
request, thus disrupting their ability to export specimens for which 
they are registered. The commenter may be referring to language in the 
Service's general permitting regulations in 50 CFR part 13. Under Sec.  
13.22, if an application to renew a permit is submitted at least 30 
days before the permit expires, continuation of some permitted activity 
is allowed, subject to certain conditions, until the Service acts on 
the request for renewal. However, this provision does not apply to any 
permitted activities authorized under CITES (see Sec.  13.22(c)(3)). 
Registrations will now have an expiration date and will be void after 
that date. To avoid disruption of permitted activities, registrations 
must be renewed before the expiration date. As stated earlier, we do 
not anticipate that the renewal process will take longer than 30 to 60 
days, provided we have received all of the necessary documentation. The 
recommendation that an application for renewal of a registration be 
submitted 3 months before the registration expires is intended to allow 
us time to make sure the application is complete, including obtaining 
information from MBP (if necessary), to help ensure that the facility 
can continue operations without disruptions or delays.
    One commenter questioned why the Service was proposing to eliminate 
the annual reporting requirement for CITES-registered operations 
breeding Appendix-I specimens and replace it with a 5-year renewal 
process. The commenter stated that we had not explained why the 
information currently required on an annual basis was no longer 
relevant. Another commenter supported a requirement that registrations 
be renewed, but urged us to limit the length of time a registration is 
valid to 3 years, instead of 5, stating that conditions at captive 
breeding facilities can change dramatically over a 5-year period. A 
third commenter asserted that neither the current annual reporting 
requirement nor the proposed registration renewal are sufficient to 
monitor registered facilities and urged us to engage in ``unannounced 
compliance checks'' on a regular basis.
    We expect that the same information provided in an annual report 
will be provided, for a 5-year period, in a renewal application. 
Consolidation and submission of information on a 5-year cycle will give 
us with the information necessary for monitoring activities at 
registered operations while at the same time reducing the time and 
resources needed both by the Service, for collecting and reviewing 
reports, and by the registered operations, for preparing and submitting 
reports. Further, by establishing a renewal process, and therefore an 
expiration date, for registration of commercial operations, we will be 
able to more easily and formally address any potential problems that 
might be identified.
    We are establishing a 5-year registration (instead of a 3-year 
registration as recommended by the commenter) based on our experience, 
since 2007, with trade from CITES-registered breeding operations in the 
United States. Once registered, an operation must still obtain CITES 
documents for any specimens it wishes to export. The information 
provided in an application for an export permit gives us an indication 
of changes that may be occurring at a registered operation and gives us 
some understanding of the current status of operations at the facility. 
If, in reviewing permit applications, we believe that further 
evaluation of the operation is warranted, we have the authority to do 
so, including conducting inspections of the facility. Under newly 
designated Sec.  23.46(e)(3) and Sec.  13.21(e)(2), anyone obtaining a 
CITES permit or authorization agrees, as a condition of their permitted 
activity, to allow the Service to enter their operation at any 
reasonable hour to inspect wildlife held or to inspect, audit, or copy 
applicable records. However, due to the likelihood that we will be in 
contact with a registered operation multiple times over the course of 
their registration, we do not believe the additional burden on the 
Service or the registrant of a 3-year renewal cycle is necessary or 
beneficial. If we encounter problems or difficulties associated with 
the 5-year renewal cycle for registrations, we will reevaluate the 
process and propose changes.
    We also received comments on this section that were not related to 
the changes we had proposed regarding the process for initial 
registration or the renewal of existing registrations. Two commenters 
expressed concern about the way in which we implement the requirement 
in Sec.  23.46(d)(2) that a breeding operation must provide sufficient 
information for us to determine that its parental stock was legally 
acquired. They stated that the Service asks for documentation that 
founding stock, not the parental (breeding) stock, at the facility was 
legally removed from the wild or imported into the United States. These 
commenters argued that Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15) does not 
require this level of documentation and that it is an unreasonable 
burden on breeding operations, especially since ``there is no 
laundering of wild-taken young raptors going through breeding 
projects.''
    The terms ``parental stock'' and ``founder stock'' are sometimes 
used interchangeably. We define ``parental stock'' in Sec.  23.5 as 
``the original breeding or propagating specimens that produced the 
subsequent generations of captive or cultivated specimens.'' We believe 
that this definition is consistent with the Treaty and with CITES 
resolutions. When an applicant is asked to provide documentation on the 
legal acquisition of the parental stock, we are asking that they show 
that the specimens that were either removed from the wild or imported 
into the United States to establish a breeding operation were legally 
obtained. We agree with the commenters that breeding operations are not 
likely to be laundering illegally obtained specimens. We attribute 
this, at least in part, to the oversight and documentation requirements 
that have been established to ensure that such activities do not occur.
    Two commenters stated that we should eliminate the existing 
requirement for a registered facility to

[[Page 30409]]

provide an import permit. It is not clear from the comments what 
requirement they are referencing. Once a breeding operation is 
registered for certain Appendix-I species, specimens of those species 
that are bred at the facility are treated as if they are specimens of a 
species listed in Appendix II for permitting purposes. This means that, 
under CITES, only an export permit is required; there is no requirement 
for the issuance of an import permit. However, some Parties have 
stricter domestic measures and require import permits in situations 
where an import permit is not required under the Treaty. For example, 
countries in the European Union routinely require import permits for 
Appendix-II species, and the Russian Federation has recently notified 
the CITES Parties (see Notification to the Parties No. 2013/008) that, 
regardless of the origin of the birds, it will only allow the import of 
certain falcons if the Russian Management Authority has issued an 
import permit. For this reason, we advise exporters to communicate with 
the Management Authority of the importing country well in advance of 
export to make sure they understand and comply with all requirements. 
It is the responsibility of the exporter to ensure that all legal 
requirements (not just for CITES) in both the importing and exporting 
country have been met before exporting any CITES-listed specimen.
    Replacement documents (Sec.  23.52): A Management Authority may 
issue a replacement CITES document when the original document has been 
lost, damaged, stolen, or accidentally destroyed. Section 23.52 
contains provisions for issuance and acceptance of replacement CITES 
documents. We are clarifying the procedures and amending the criteria 
for issuance and acceptance of replacement CITES documents by the 
United States. We are more closely aligning the criteria for issuance 
and acceptance of replacement CITES documents by the United States with 
those for issuance and acceptance of retrospective documents found at 
Sec.  23.53. Amendments to the criteria include: Requirements that 
specimens are presented to the appropriate official at the time of 
import and that the request for a replacement document is made at that 
time; the need for proof of original valid documents; and a statement 
of responsibility. We are also clarifying that an individual who 
qualifies to receive multiple single-use CITES documents under a master 
file or annual program may not use one of the documents issued under a 
master file or annual program as a replacement document, but must apply 
for and receive a separate replacement document.
    One commenter supported the proposed changes to Sec.  23.52. 
Another commenter was opposed to all of the changes proposed for this 
section and disagreed with our suggestion that the criteria for 
issuance and acceptance of replacement documents should be more closely 
aligned with the criteria for issuance and acceptance of retrospective 
documents. The commenter expressed concern that for replacement permits 
for recreational hunting trophies ``the conditions and timelines will 
be challenging to fulfill'' and stated that we should propose 
regulations to facilitate the issuance of retrospective and replacement 
permits instead of making it an ``onerous undertaking.''
    We agree that the criteria for issuance and acceptance of 
replacement CITES documents are, and should be, different from those 
for retrospective CITES documents, and our regulations reflect those 
differences. We note that in the preamble to Resolution Conf. 12.3 
(Rev. CoP15), the Parties recognize that ``the efforts of importing 
countries to fulfill their obligations under Article VIII, paragraph 1 
(b), may be seriously obstructed by the retrospective issuance of 
permits or certificates for specimens having left the exporting or re-
exporting country without such documents'' and that ``the retrospective 
issuance of permits and certificates has an increasingly negative 
impact on the possibilities for properly enforcing the Convention and 
leads to the creation of loopholes for illegal trade.'' With regard to 
replacement documents, the resolution states that, when a permit or 
certificate has been cancelled, lost, stolen, or destroyed, the issuing 
Management Authority should ``immediately'' inform the Management 
Authority of the country of destination (as well as the Secretariat for 
commercial shipments). Based on our experience since the publication of 
our 2007 CITES regulations, we identified a need to clarify what is 
required for issuance and acceptance of a replacement document. As we 
noted in our proposed rule, we have experienced situations in which 
importers or their agents have attempted to submit ``replacement'' 
documents when no document had ever been issued or when the original 
document was invalid. In addition, individuals have significantly 
delayed submission of required documents for clearance of a shipment 
while they tried to obtain a replacement document without our 
knowledge. We believe the revised provisions in this section will help 
individuals understand the process for obtaining a replacement document 
if their CITES document has been lost, damaged, stolen, or accidentally 
destroyed and will help us to meet our obligations under the Treaty.
    Retrospective CITES documents (Sec.  23.53): In certain limited 
circumstances, CITES documents may be issued and accepted to authorize 
an export or re-export that has already occurred or to correct 
technical errors on a document accompanying a shipment that has already 
occurred. We are adding text to clarify that we may issue or accept a 
retrospective document in circumstances where a technical error was 
made by the issuing Management Authority at the time the original 
document was issued. As we have for replacement documents, we clarify 
in this section that an individual may not use a CITES document issued 
under a master file or an annual program as a retrospective document, 
but must apply for and receive a separate retrospective document (see 
the discussion in the preamble for replacement documents, Sec.  23.52). 
We also clarify that ``personal or household effects'' in Sec.  
23.53(d)(7)(i) means specimens that meet the definition of ``personal 
effect'' or ``household effect'' in Sec.  23.5. One commenter supported 
these changes.
    Use of CITES specimens after import into the United States (Sec.  
23.55): This section provides conditions for the import and subsequent 
use of certain CITES specimens. Its purpose is to prevent commercial 
use of specimens after import into the United States when the trade 
allowed under CITES is only for a noncommercial purpose. Under Article 
II of the Treaty, trade in Appendix-I specimens ``must only be 
authorized in exceptional circumstances.'' Unless an Appendix-I 
wildlife or plant specimen qualifies for an exemption under Article VII 
of the Treaty, it can be imported only when the use is not for 
primarily commercial purposes. The import and subsequent use of 
Appendix-I specimens and certain Appendix-II specimens, including 
transfer, donation, or exchange, may be only for noncommercial 
purposes. Other Appendix-II specimens and any Appendix-III specimen may 
be used for any otherwise lawful purpose after import, unless the trade 
allowed under CITES is only for noncommercial purposes. See the 
preambles in our previous rulemaking documents, 71 FR 20167, April 19, 
2006 (proposed rule), and 72 FR 48402, August 23, 2007 (final rule), 
for further discussion.
    Since publication of our regulations in 2007, we have given further

[[Page 30410]]

consideration to the allowed use of a specimen within the United States 
when the listing status of the species changes after a specimen has 
been imported. We are amending this section to clarify that the allowed 
use after import into the United States is determined by the status of 
the specimen under CITES and the ESA at the time it is imported, except 
for a CITES specimen that was imported before the species was listed in 
Appendix I, or listed in Appendix II with an annotation disallowing 
commercial use, or listed in Appendix II or III and threatened under 
the ESA. Where an individual can clearly demonstrate that his or her 
specimen was imported with no restrictions on its use after import, 
prior to the species being listed under CITES with restrictions on its 
use after import, we will continue to allow use of the specimens as 
allowed at the time of import.
    We have considered the individual who may, for example, have 
imported Appendix-II specimens that had no restrictions on their 
domestic use and be lawfully utilizing the specimens as part of a 
commercial breeding operation. Under our current regulations, he or she 
may be precluded from continuing such activities if the species is 
subsequently listed in Appendix I. We do not believe it is necessary 
for ensuring the conservation and sustainable use of the species to 
retroactively apply current import/export restrictions to domestic 
activities involving specimens that were legally imported prior to the 
imposition of those restrictions. Therefore, where an individual can 
clearly demonstrate that his or her specimens were legally imported 
prior to the Appendix-I listing, we will not treat those specimens as 
specimens of an Appendix-I species with regard to their use within the 
United States.
    Consistent with our current regulations, we continue to believe 
that restrictions on the allowed use after import of specimens of 
Appendix-I species may be relaxed if the status of the species improves 
and it is subsequently listed in Appendix II or removed from the 
Appendices. If the status of a species has changed so that it no longer 
requires the strict protections (including the prohibition on 
commercial trade) provided by an Appendix-I listing, and it is not 
listed under the ESA, we see no conservation need for requiring that 
specimens imported when the species was listed in Appendix I continue 
to be used only for noncommercial purposes. Other applicable laws, 
however, may continue to restrict use of the specimen.
    Under this final rule, if an Appendix-II specimen is imported with 
no restrictions on its use (i.e., it is not protected under the ESA and 
it is not subject to an annotation requiring that it be used only for 
noncommercial purposes) and the species is subsequently transferred to 
Appendix I, if you can clearly demonstrate that your specimen was 
imported prior to the Appendix-I listing, use of the specimen within 
the United States will not change (i.e., it will not be restricted to 
noncommercial use) with the change in the status of the species under 
CITES. As is currently the case, the allowed use of an Appendix-I 
specimen imported for noncommercial purposes may change if the species 
is subsequently transferred to Appendix II or removed from the 
Appendices. In such a case, the allowed use of the specimen within the 
United States will be determined by the current listing status of the 
species, not the status of the species at the time it was imported.
    One commenter opposed any regulation of the use after import of 
CITES specimens, stating that it is beyond the control of CITES. The 
same commenter suggested that trophy trade ``deserves preferential 
treatment'' because of its conservation value and lack of biological 
consequence after lawful import. The commenter stated that 
``unnecessary restrictions on long-term use have a negative effect on 
the trade and the benefits of the trade.''
    Other commenters expressed support for restricting the use after 
import of certain specimens and for some of the proposed changes. One 
commenter stated that we should retain the current restriction on 
domestic trade of all Appendix-I specimens, including those that were 
imported into the United States as Appendix-II specimens. Another 
commenter expressed support for our current treatment of specimens 
imported when the species was listed in Appendix I and then 
subsequently transferred to Appendix II (which we did not propose to 
revise). The commenter stated that allowing a change in treatment of 
such specimens within the United States was pragmatic from an 
enforcement point of view and noted that the change in listing status 
would mean that the previous conservation concerns would no longer 
exist. However, the same commenter was opposed to our proposed change 
in treatment for specimens imported when the species was listed in 
Appendix II and subsequently transferred to Appendix I, stating that it 
does not make sense to change the rules for one category on the basis 
of conservation and enforcement and then not apply the same logic to 
another category. The commenter believes that allowing an individual to 
demonstrate that a specimen was imported before the species was 
transferred to Appendix I creates a loophole for illegal use of 
wildlife. One commenter, although not necessarily opposed to the 
proposed revisions, questioned the logistics of implementing and 
enforcing the changes. Two commenters urged us to retain the option of 
restricting domestic commercial use of specimens if there are 
reasonable grounds to conclude that doing so is necessary for the 
conservation of the species. One of them cautioned that domestic 
markets for specimens of Appendix-I species can be strong drivers of 
poaching and illegal trade.
    This issue has been the subject of considerable discussion. The 
changes to this section are intended to be a balance of fairness to 
individuals who have complied with the law in their acquisition of 
CITES-listed specimens and the conservation needs of listed species. We 
recognized in our 2007 regulations that there is no conservation 
benefit to be derived from a prohibition on the commercial use of 
specimens imported when the species was listed in Appendix I or in 
Appendix II with an annotation prohibiting commercial use after the 
species has been transferred to Appendix II or the annotation removed--
or possibly delisted altogether. We did not propose changes to the 
regulations with regard to these specimens because it is not reasonable 
to prohibit the commercial use of such specimens, but allow the import 
and commercial use of other specimens of the same species, as would be 
possible under an Appendix-II listing or if the species has been 
removed from the Appendices altogether.
    Upon further reflection, we conclude that it would similarly not 
result in a conservation benefit to disallow the commercial use within 
the United States of specimens imported when the species was listed in 
Appendix II if the species is subsequently transferred to Appendix I. 
We have further evaluated this section since publication of our 2007 
regulations and do not believe there is a basis to retrospectively 
apply restrictions on the use of specimens imported when the species 
was listed in Appendix II because the required findings for allowing 
the trade in those specimens were made prior to import and did not 
include a determination regarding commerciality. We consider this to be 
comparable to the exemption in Article VII, paragraph 2, for pre-
Convention specimens, which allows a specimen of an Appendix-I species 
to be

[[Page 30411]]

traded for commercial purposes if it was acquired prior to listing 
under the Convention. Allowing specimens imported when the species was 
listed in Appendix II to continue to be used for commercial purposes 
within the United States, even after the species has been transferred 
to Appendix I or has an annotation added to the Appendix-II listing 
that prohibits commercial trade, recognizes the legal framework that 
applied to the specimens at the time they were traded. The arguments 
for prohibiting commercial use of specimens imported when the species 
was listed in Appendix II, after it has been listed in Appendix I or 
annotated to prohibit commercial use, could be as aptly applied to pre-
Convention specimens, but the Convention allows that pre-Convention 
specimens are not subject to its requirements (if the Management 
Authority issues a certificate to that effect), whether the species is 
listed in Appendix I, II, or III.
    It is important to emphasize that our regulations in Sec.  23.55 
apply only to use within the United States. If a species has been 
transferred from Appendix II to Appendix I, specimens imported when the 
species was listed in Appendix II become Appendix-I specimens and 
international trade in such specimens must be in accordance with the 
Treaty requirements for trade in Appendix-I specimens. It is only the 
allowed use within the United States that does not change under our 
revised regulations.
    We do not believe that it should be difficult for individuals 
engaged in commercial activities to provide the documentation necessary 
to demonstrate that their specimens were acquired prior to the 
Appendix-I listing. However, we will assess these situations carefully 
to determine if this change results in undue enforcement challenges.
    We are making minor changes to the text in the proposed rule for 
the table in Sec.  23.55, for clarity and precision. We added the 
phrase ``without an annotation for noncommercial purposes'' immediately 
following ``Appendix II'' in paragraph (c) of Sec.  23.55, to draw a 
clear distinction between the Appendix-II specimens covered by 
paragraph (b) and those covered by paragraph (c). We also further 
revised the text in the right-hand column of the table in Sec.  23.55 
associated with paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) to make it easier to read 
and understand.
    Factors considered in making a finding of not for primarily 
commercial purposes (Sec.  23.62): We did not propose changes to this 
section, but one commenter has expressed concern that, although the 
determination of whether or not an Appendix-I specimen is to be used 
for ``primarily commercial purposes'' is to be made by the importing 
country, the U.S. Management Authority considers it is also a duty of 
the exporting country, which is contrary to CITES provisions. We agree 
with the commenter that it is the responsibility of the Management 
Authority in the importing country, prior to issuing an import permit, 
to determine whether an Appendix-I specimen is to be used for primarily 
commercial purposes. However, as noted previously, we will exercise our 
right and responsibility under the Treaty to verify whether the 
Management Authority of the importing country has made the appropriate 
determination of whether an import is not for primarily commercial 
purposes.
    Trade in native CITES furbearer species (Sec.  23.69): Our previous 
regulations at Sec.  23.69 defined ``CITES furbearers'' to mean bobcat 
(Lynx rufus), river otter (Lontra canadensis), Canada lynx (Lynx 
canadensis), and the Alaskan populations of gray wolf (Canis lupus) and 
brown bear (Ursus arctos). For consistency and clarity, we have further 
amended our definition of ``CITES furbearers'' to include all U.S. 
populations of gray wolf and brown bear. All five of the species 
included in our definition of ``CITES furbearers'' are listed in CITES 
Appendix II. Certain populations of three of these species, Canada 
lynx, gray wolf, and brown bear, are also listed under the ESA. We 
initially considered that only the Alaskan populations of gray wolf and 
brown bear should be included in our definition of ``CITES furbearers'' 
because the Alaskan populations are not ESA-listed. However, the same 
is true for the Canada lynx, which is included in our definition 
throughout its U.S. range. Upon further review, we believe it is more 
appropriate to base the definition of ``CITES furbearers'' on the CITES 
listings of these species. The definition in Sec.  23.69 includes those 
native furbearers for which States may request approval of a CITES 
export program. Although the State of Alaska is the only State that 
currently has CITES export approval for gray wolf or brown bear, we do 
not want to prohibit other States from seeking export approval for 
these species in the future if the legal and conservation status of 
their populations change. Section 23.69 details the CITES requirements 
for import, export, or re-export of fur skins from CITES furbearers and 
the requirements that must be met for export approval of State or 
tribal programs for CITES furbearers. We remind readers that activities 
involving specimens from populations of CITES furbearers that are 
protected under the ESA must also meet the requirements for ESA-listed 
species in part 17 and elsewhere in this title (see Sec.  23.3).
    We received support for the amendment of our definition of ``CITES 
furbearers'' from two commenters who believed it to be a sensible 
change and noted that it would facilitate possible future requests from 
States for CITES export approvals if the legal and conservation status 
of listed species changes. One of these commenters recommended that we 
also include the American black bear in our definition of ``CITES 
furbearer'' in this section. Although we are not necessarily opposed to 
this suggestion, we have not received requests from States wishing to 
develop a CITES export program for black bear. If there are States 
interested in developing such a program in the future, we will work 
with them to explore the possibility of including the American black 
bear in our definition of ``CITES furbearers'' and creating a CITES 
export program for black bear.
    Tagging of CITES fur skins and crocodilian skins (Sec. Sec.  23.69 
and 23.70): We are amending Sec.  23.70 to incorporate changes to the 
tagging requirements for crocodilian skins adopted by the Parties at 
CoP15. We are also amending Sec. Sec.  23.69 and 23.70 to clarify the 
appropriate use of CITES replacement tags for CITES fur skins and 
crocodilian skins. These sections specify that skins with broken, cut, 
or missing tags may not be exported and provide a procedure for 
obtaining replacement tags where this is the case. However, the 
regulations are not intended to allow for the use of CITES replacement 
tags in place of tags that have been deliberately removed to facilitate 
processing or for other reasons. Replacement tags are intended to be 
used to replace CITES tags that have been inadvertently cut or damaged, 
or where the original CITES tags are lost. Although CITES tags 
sometimes break during transport or processing and may sometimes fail 
as a result of a defect, it has been our experience that the failure 
rate is very low (less than 5 percent) and that replacement tags are 
needed infrequently. We are also amending the phrases in Sec.  23.69, 
paragraphs (c)(3) and (c)(3)(i), and in Sec.  23.70, paragraphs (d)(3) 
and (d)(3)(i), referring to ``broken, cut, or missing'' tags to be more 
consistent with the terminology used in Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. 
CoP15).
    Two commenters supported the amendments to this section consistent 
with the changes to Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15). However, they 
and

[[Page 30412]]

another commenter expressed concern about our clarifications regarding 
the proper use of replacement tags. They noted that tags are sometimes 
deliberately removed for processing and asked that we develop a policy 
to recognize that ``lawfully acquired and documented hides'' whose tags 
have been removed for finishing should qualify for replacement tags. 
One of these commenters also noted that the current process for 
obtaining replacement tags is time-consuming and ``frequently 
negatively impacts business transactions,'' and asked that a protocol 
be developed to allow tanners to obtain replacement tags from FWS in a 
timely manner. The commenter stated that, when a tanner attempts to 
export skins from which he has removed the tags due to the particular 
processing used, he is limited as to the proportion of skins with 
replacement tags that can be included in an individual shipment. The 
commenter believes this limitation is arbitrary.
    As for all CITES species, before we can issue a CITES document to 
allow export of CITES furbearer skins or crocodilian skins, we must 
find that the specimens were legally acquired and that the export is 
not detrimental to the survival of the species. We have worked with 
States and Tribes to develop procedures that allow us to make the 
necessary findings for native species programmatically (i.e., at the 
State or tribal level) rather than on a permit-by-permit basis. When 
States and Tribes have established a management program that ensures 
sustainable harvest and they have the means to identify or mark 
specimens that have been legally taken under their system, we are able 
to make findings for specimens harvested within their jurisdiction, 
thereby approving their program. A tag issued by the State or Tribe 
demonstrates that a particular specimen was harvested under an approved 
program and that the appropriate findings have been made. As noted 
previously, the regulations are not intended to allow for the use of 
CITES replacement tags in place of tags that have been deliberately 
removed to facilitate processing. We are always willing, however, to 
work with State and tribal governments to explore ways to improve our 
established procedures. The comment regarding limitations on the 
proportion of skins with replacement tags in a particular shipment 
appears to be a reference to the special rule for threatened 
crocodilians (50 CFR 17. 42(c)) under the ESA. The special rule states 
that, if a shipment of threatened crocodilian skins contains more that 
25 percent replacement tags, the U.S. Management Authority will consult 
with the Management Authority of the re-exporting country before 
clearing the shipment (see 50 CFR 17.42(c)(3)(i)(C)). We note that this 
provision applies only to threatened crocodilians (as defined in Sec.  
17.42(c)(1)(i)) and not to the American alligator.
    The same two commenters suggested that we delete the second 
sentence in Sec.  23.70(e)(2), which describes information to be 
included on a marked American alligator skull. With this sentence 
deleted, Sec.  23.70(e)(2) would read, ``Each American alligator skull 
must be marked as required by State and tribal law or regulation.'' 
They argue that this would allow each State or Tribe to determine 
whether marking of individual skulls is necessary. We fully support 
this suggestion. Marking of skulls is not a CITES requirement, and it 
was included in our regulations because we were aware that some States 
and Tribes required that American alligator skulls be marked. We agree 
that it is appropriate to allow each State and Tribe to decide whether 
or not to require marking of skulls and are incorporating the 
recommended revision into this rule.
    These commenters also requested that we remove the requirement in 
Sec.  23.70(f)(1) that crocodilian parts, other than meat and skulls, 
must be packed in transparent, sealed containers. They note that 
certain parts, particularly alligator backstrips, are large and heavy 
and would be more easily transported in sealed wooden crates or 
cardboard boxes that would be less likely than transparent plastic or 
vinyl containers to crack or split during handling. We believe that 
this is a reasonable suggestion. However, the recommendation that 
tails, feet, backstrips, and other parts be exported in transparent, 
sealed containers was accepted by the CITES Parties at CoP9 (1994) and 
is currently contained in Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15). Because 
it is not just a U.S. requirement, changing this provision, both in 
terms of what the United States allows on export and what other 
countries allow upon import, cannot be achieved by simply revising our 
regulations. We will, however, explore with other Parties the 
possibility of revising Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15) at CoP17 to 
update the provisions for transport of crocodilian parts.
    Sport-hunted trophies (Sec.  23.74): At the time our current 
regulations were written, the CITES Parties had not defined ``sport-
hunted trophy.'' We therefore developed the definition in Sec.  
23.74(b) based on our experience with international trade in these 
items and the commonly understood meaning of the term from the 
dictionary and other wildlife regulations. (See 72 FR 48402, August 23, 
2007, for further background.)
    Prior to CoP15, as part of its regular review of resolutions, the 
Secretariat suggested that the Parties consider developing a definition 
of ``hunting trophy'' that could be added to a CITES resolution. The 
United States participated in discussions through an online forum prior 
to CoP15 and in a working group established at CoP15 to consider a 
CITES definition of ``hunting trophy.'' At CoP15, the Parties adopted a 
definition of ``hunting trophy'' in Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15). 
The major difference between the definition in our CITES regulations 
and the definition adopted by the Parties is that the definition in 
Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15) allows manufactured items derived 
from the hunted animal to be considered part of a hunting trophy, 
whereas our definition in 50 CFR part 23 specifically excludes such 
items. We continue to have concerns about the possible import of fully 
manufactured products as part of a hunting trophy that were actually 
purchased at a store or from a taxidermist, for example, and were not 
made from the sport-hunted trophy animal. Therefore, we have 
incorporated into Sec.  23.74(b) the definition contained in Resolution 
Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15) with some additional text to clarify the 
conditions under which we will allow the import into the United States 
of manufactured items as part of a hunting trophy.
    Five commenters expressed strong opposition to incorporating the 
definition of ``hunting trophy'' adopted at CoP15 because they do not 
believe that manufactured items should be considered part of a trophy. 
Some noted that the Parties have not yet agreed on the treatment of 
hunting trophies with respect to CITES provisions for personal and 
household effects and purpose codes on permits, and they argued that we 
should wait for those discussions to be concluded before revising our 
definition. Others pointed to the ``rise of sport-hunting as a loophole 
for illegal trade'' and expressed concern that the proposed change 
would present enforcement challenges and could allow laundering of 
commercial items as sport-hunted trophies. One commenter did not 
believe that we had provided sufficient justification for including 
products manufactured from the trophy animal in the definition of 
``sport-hunted trophy.'' Another commenter noted that the United States 
has the

[[Page 30413]]

authority to adopt stricter domestic measures and should do so in this 
case.
    Although it is true that discussions regarding CITES provisions for 
treatment of personal and household effects and the use of purpose 
codes on CITES documents are ongoing, the definition of ``hunting 
trophy'' is not dependent on the outcome of those discussions. We share 
the concern that adopting the definition of ``hunting trophy'' in 
Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15) could result in enforcement 
challenges and trade in commercial products as hunting trophies. For 
these reasons, we are adding the provisions in Sec.  23.74(b)(4) to 
describe the conditions under which we will allow import of 
manufactured or handicraft items as part of a sport-hunted trophy. Our 
new definition is consistent with the definition adopted by CITES 
Parties, but provides us additional measures to ensure that this trade 
is limited to items made from the sport-hunted animal for the personal 
use of the hunter.
    Two commenters expressed support for the definition of ``hunting 
trophy'' adopted at CoP15 and for incorporation of the new definition 
into U.S. regulations. These commenters objected, however, to the 
additional text we have proposed to clarify the circumstances under 
which we would allow import into the United States of manufactured 
items as part of a hunting trophy.
    Both commenters objected to the requirement in Sec.  23.74(b)(4)(i) 
that items manufactured from the sport-hunted animal be contained in 
the same shipment as raw or tanned parts of the animal, noting that the 
definition in Res. Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP15) allows for the possibility 
that manufactured items made from a sport-hunted animal are the only 
items a hunter wishes to export and import. As we have stated 
previously, we have concerns about the import of fully manufactured 
products as a hunting trophy when the items were not actually made from 
the sport-hunted trophy animal. Requiring that manufactured items be 
contained in the same shipment as raw or tanned parts helps provide 
assurance that these items were, in fact, manufactured from the sport-
hunted trophy animal. One commenter objected to the requirement that 
these manufactured items must be for the personal use of the hunter. To 
meet both the CITES definition of ``hunting trophy'' in Res. Conf. 12.3 
(Rev. CoP15) and our definition of ``sport-hunted trophy'' in Sec.  
23.74, the animal must have been killed by the hunter for his or her 
personal use. If we are to consider items manufactured from the trophy 
animal to be part of the sport-hunted trophy, they must therefore also 
be for the personal use of the hunter.
    Both commenters objected to the text in Sec.  23.74(b)(4)(ii), 
which states that the quantity of manufactured items imported as a 
sport-hunted trophy must be no more than could ``reasonably be expected 
given the number of animals taken by the hunter.'' One felt this 
provision was too broad and the other felt that it provides too much 
discretion for inspectors to determine ``reasonable quantities.'' These 
same commenters also objected to the text in Sec.  23.74(b)(4)(iii) 
requiring that the accompanying CITES document contain a complete 
itemization and description of all items included in the sport-hunted 
trophy shipment. We disagree with these comments and believe that the 
provisions in Sec.  23.74(b)(4) provide reasonable measures for us to 
ensure that the expansion of our existing definition of ``sport-hunted 
trophy,'' to include items manufactured from the trophy animal, will 
not result in negative impacts to populations subject to sport hunting.
    The definition of ``sport-hunted trophy'' has been the subject of 
considerable discussion and debate both here in the United States and 
at CITES meetings. We have been active participants in those 
discussions and have carefully considered whether and how to change our 
existing definition in Sec.  23.74. As we indicated in the preamble to 
our proposed rule, we will carefully monitor imports of sport-hunted 
trophies, particularly imports of manufactured items as parts of sport-
hunted trophies, to evaluate the impact of this change. If we identify 
problems with implementation of the new definition that result in 
increased conservation risks to these species, we will revisit our 
definition of ``sport-hunted trophy'' and propose revisions as needed.
    We are moving the CITES marking requirements for African elephant 
trophies and the definition of ``lip mark area'' from the African 
elephant special rule (50 CFR 17.40(e)) into Sec.  23.74. (See the 
discussion in the preamble on proposed changes to 50 CFR part 17.) In 
addition, at CoP15, the Parties adopted a change to the accepted 
methods for marking of elephant ivory to allow the use of new 
technologies for permanent marking, including the use of lasers. We are 
incorporating this change and clarifying the marking requirements for 
elephant ivory consistent with Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev. CoP15). Two 
commenters expressed support for these changes.
    One commenter noted the difference between requirements for 
reporting the year on marks or tags for different species and suggested 
that the year on a mark or tag should represent the year of harvest in 
all cases, as recommended in Resolution Conf. 14.7. We agree with the 
commenter that it would be helpful to standardize the marking 
requirements for sport-hunted trophies, to the extent possible. 
However, we note that Resolution Conf. 14.7 provides general guidance 
with regard to nationally established export quotas. The marking 
requirements in Sec.  23.74 are for specimens of species for which the 
Parties have adopted resolutions specific to trade in those species 
(i.e., elephant, leopard, markhor, and black rhinoceros, each of which 
contains marking requirements). The marking requirements in Sec.  23.74 
mirror the requirements in the various resolutions specific to trade in 
these specimens. In response to the comment, we are adding a 
clarification to the marking requirements for African elephant hunting 
trophies to indicate that the year included in the formula for marking 
(in Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev. CoP15)) is the year in which the 
elephant was harvested for export. We will continue to work with other 
CITES Parties to clarify and standardize marking requirements for 
sport-hunted trophies, where practicable.
    Trade in vicu[ntilde]a (Sec.  23.75): We are adding a new section 
to the regulations to address the requirements for international trade 
in specimens of vicu[ntilde]a. Certain populations of vicu[ntilde]a are 
listed in Appendix II for the exclusive purpose of allowing 
international trade in wool sheared from live animals, cloth made from 
that wool, and products made from the cloth or wool. The CITES Parties 
have adopted specific requirements for labeling of these vicu[ntilde]a 
products in international trade. These requirements are currently 
contained in our special rule for threatened vicu[ntilde]a in 50 CFR 
part 17. We believe it is more appropriate to include these specific 
CITES requirements in our CITES regulations, and therefore we are 
removing them from part 17 and inserting them into a new section (Sec.  
23.75) in part 23. (See the discussion in the preamble regarding 
changes to part 17.) One commenter expressed support for these proposed 
changes.

Required Determinations

    Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563): 
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. The Office 
of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule is 
not significant.

[[Page 30414]]

    Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while 
calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote 
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most 
innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends. 
The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches 
that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for 
the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and 
consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further 
that regulations must be based on the best available science and that 
the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open 
exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent 
with these requirements.
    Regulatory Flexibility Act: Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
(as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever a Federal agency is required to publish a 
notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare 
and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis 
that describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small 
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions) (5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is 
required if the head of an agency certifies that the rule would not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Thus, for a regulatory flexibility analysis to be required, 
impacts must exceed a threshold for ``significant impact'' and a 
threshold for a ``substantial number of small entities.'' See 5 U.S.C. 
605(b). SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require 
Federal agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for 
certifying that a rule would not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities.
    The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) defines a small 
business as one with annual revenue or employment that meets or is 
below an established size standard. We expect that the majority of the 
entities involved with international trade in CITES specimens would be 
considered small as defined by the SBA. The declared value for U.S. 
international trade in CITES wildlife (not including plants) was $819 
million in 2000, $428 million in 2001, $345 million in 2002, $394 
million in 2003, $1.5 billion in 2004 (including one export of a single 
panda to China with a declared value of $1 billion), $737 million in 
2005, $748 million in 2006, $1.0 billion in 2007, $846 million in 2008, 
$637 million in 2009, $665 million in 2010, and $871 million in 2011.
    These new regulations create no substantial fee or paperwork 
changes in the permitting process. The regulatory changes are not major 
in scope and will create only a modest financial or paperwork burden on 
the affected members of the general public. The change from the current 
annual reporting requirement for registered facilities breeding 
Appendix-I wildlife to a 5-year renewal requirement actually reduces 
the paperwork burden for these facilities.
    This final rule will benefit businesses engaged in international 
trade by providing updated and clearer regulations for the 
international trade of CITES specimens. We do not expect these benefits 
to be significant under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The authority 
to enforce CITES requirements already exists under the ESA and is 
carried out by regulations contained in 50 CFR part 23. The 
requirements that must be met to import, export, and re-export CITES 
species are based on the text of CITES, which has been in effect in the 
United States since 1975.
    We therefore certify that this final rule will not have a 
significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities 
as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 
A Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required. Accordingly, a Small 
Entity Compliance Guide is not required.
    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act: This rule is 
not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act. This rule:
    a. Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or 
more. This rule provides the importing and exporting community in the 
United States with updated and more clearly written regulations 
implementing CITES. This rule will not have a negative effect on this 
part of the economy. It will affect all importers, exporters, and re-
exporters of CITES specimens equally, and the benefits of having 
updated guidance on complying with CITES requirements will be evenly 
spread among all businesses, whether large or small. There is not a 
disproportionate share of benefits for small or large businesses.
    b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, tribal, or local 
government agencies; or geographic regions. This final rule will result 
in a small increase in fees for registered operations breeding 
Appendix-I species due to the requirement for renewal of registrations 
every 5 years.
    c. Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, 
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of 
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This 
rule will assist U.S. businesses and individuals traveling abroad in 
ensuring that they are meeting all current CITES requirements, thereby 
decreasing the possibility that shipments may be delayed or even seized 
in another country that has implemented CITES resolutions not yet 
incorporated into U.S. regulations.
    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act: Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.):
    a. This final rule will not significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments. A Small Government Agency Plan is not required. As the 
lead agency for implementing CITES in the United States, we are 
responsible for monitoring import and export of CITES wildlife and 
plants, including their parts, products, and derivatives, and issuing 
import and export documents under CITES. The structure of the program 
imposes no unfunded mandates. Therefore, this rule will have no effect 
on small governments' responsibilities.
    b. This rule will not produce a Federal requirement of $100 million 
or greater in any year and is not a ``significant regulatory action'' 
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
    Takings: Under Executive Order 12630, this rule does not have 
significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is 
not required because this final rule will not further restrict the 
import, export, or re-export of CITES specimens. Rather, the rule 
updates and clarifies the regulations for the import, export, and re-
export of CITES specimens, which will assist the importing and 
exporting community in conducting international trade in CITES 
specimens.
    Federalism: These revisions to part 23 do not contain significant 
Federalism implications. A federalism summary impact statement under 
Executive Order 13132 is not required.
    Civil Justice Reform: Under Executive Order 12988, the Office of 
the Solicitor has determined that this final rule does not unduly 
burden the judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) 
and 3(b)(2) of the Order. Specifically, this rule has been reviewed to 
eliminate errors and ensure clarity, has been written to minimize 
potential disagreements, provides a clear legal

[[Page 30415]]

standard for affected actions, and specifies in clear language the 
effect on existing Federal law or regulation.
    Paperwork Reduction Act: This rule contains a collection of 
information that OMB has approved under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). We may not conduct or sponsor and a 
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless 
it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    OMB approved the information collection requirements associated 
with CITES permit applications and reports and assigned OMB Control 
Number 1018-0093, which expires May 31, 2017. This approval includes 
the application for the initial registration of commercial facilities 
that breed CITES Appendix-I animals (FWS Form 3-200-65) as well as 
other CITES requirements. This rule does not change the information 
collection requirements currently approved under 1018-0093. OMB has 
reviewed the following new requirements and assigned OMB Control Number 
1018-0150, which expires April 30, 2017. When this final rule is 
effective, we will incorporate burden for the new information 
collections into OMB Control No. 1018-0093 and discontinue OMB Control 
Number 1018-0150.
     Renewal of Registration for Commercial Breeding Operations 
(Sec.  23.46). We are limiting the length of time a registration is 
valid to no more than 5 years. Applicants will use FWS Form 3-200-65, 
the same form used to request the initial registration, to request 
renewal of a registration. We will use the information collected 
through the renewal process to determine if an operation still meets 
the requirements for registration under CITES.
     Reporting take of grizzly bears (Sec.  17.40(b)(1)(i)(B)). 
Grizzly bears may be taken in self-defense or in defense of others, but 
such taking must be reported by the individual who has taken the bear 
or his designee within 5 days of occurrence to the appropriate Service 
Law Enforcement Office and to appropriate State and tribal authorities.
     Reporting take of mountain lions (Sec.  17.40(h)(5)). 
Free-living mountain lions in Florida may be taken for human safety 
reasons. Such take must be reported in writing within 5 days to the 
Service's Office of Law Enforcement.
     Marking of vicu[ntilde]a products (Sec.  23.75(f)), beluga 
sturgeon caviar (Sec.  23.71), and African elephant sport-hunted 
trophies (Sec.  23.74(e)(2)). CITES requires that specimens of these 
species in international trade are marked or labeled in a specific 
manner. Export permits, issued by the range countries for these 
species, must include the required marking/labeling information in 
order for the documents to be considered valid and for the United 
States to allow the import. Foreign export permits are reviewed by U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife inspectors at the time of import. These marking 
requirements are not new. All were contained in special rules in 50 
part 17 (17.40 and 17.44). They are CITES marking requirements that 
were included in the special rules in part 17 at a time when we did not 
have such detailed information in our CITES regulations (prior to 
publication of the 2007 revisions to part 23). We are moving them from 
part 17 into part 23 to make a clear distinction between CITES 
requirements and ESA requirements.
     Beluga sturgeon exemption (Sec.  17.44(y)(5)). Our 
regulations allow for aquaculture facilities in countries where beluga 
sturgeon do not naturally occur to request an exemption from ESA 
permitting requirements for trade in beluga sturgeon caviar if they 
meet certain conditions. The facility must provide information 
demonstrating that it meets these conditions (i.e.; they are using best 
management practices, they do not rely on wild beluga sturgeon for 
brood stock, and they have entered into a formal agreement with a 
beluga sturgeon range State to enhance the survival of wild beluga 
sturgeon). Facilities granted such an exemption must file biennial 
reports with the Service documenting continued compliance with these 
conditions.
     Exempt wildlife hybrids (Sec.  23.43(f)(2)). Our 
regulations allow the international trade of certain wildlife hybrids 
without CITES documents, if an individual can provide documentation at 
the port of entry/exit that his or her animal meets the criteria for 
the exemption. This provision has been in place since 2007. With this 
final rule we have provided examples of the type of documentation an 
individual could use to demonstrate that his/her animal qualifies for 
the exemption. The information provided must clearly identify the 
specimen and demonstrate its recent lineage. Such information may 
include, but is not limited to, the following:
    (1) Records that identify the name and address of the breeder and 
identify the specimen by birth or hatch date and by sex, band number, 
microchip number, or other mark.
    (2) A certified pedigree issued by an internationally recognized 
association that contains scientific names of the animals in the 
specimen's recent lineage and clearly illustrates its genetic history. 
If the pedigree contains codes, a key or guide that explains the 
meaning of the codes must be provided.
     Exception to use of CITES specimens after import (Sec.  
23.55). Our regulations provide an exception to the restrictions on use 
after import into the United States of certain CITES specimens. To take 
advantage of this exception, documentation (written records or other 
documentary evidence) must be provided that clearly demonstrates the 
specimen was imported prior to the CITES listing, with no restrictions 
on its use after import. If documentation does not clearly demonstrate 
that this exception applies, the specimen may be used only for 
noncommercial purposes. OMB Control No.: 1018-0150.
    Title: Renewal of Registration for Appendix I Commercial Breeding 
Operations (CITES) and Other CITES Requirements, 50 CFR 17 and 23.
    Service Form Number(s): 3-200-65.
    Description of Respondents: Registered commercial facilities that 
breed Appendix-I (CITES) animals; individuals; businesses; and State, 
local, and tribal government agencies.
    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.
    Frequency of Collection: Once every 5 years for renewal of 
registration; on occasion for other requirements.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Completion
                                                     Number of       Number of       time per      Total annual
                    Activity                          annual          annual         response      burden hours*
                                                    respondents      responses        (hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Renewal of Registration (FWS Form 3-200-65).....               5               5           20                100
Report Take--Grizzly Bears......................              25              25             .25               6
Report Take--Mountain Lions.....................              15              15             .25               4
Marking/Labeling:
    Vicuna products.............................              20             150             .5               75
    African Elephant Sport-Hunted Trophies......             450             450             .5              225
    Beluga Sturgeon Caviar......................               1               1             .5                1

[[Page 30416]]

 
Beluga Sturgeon Exemption.......................               1               1           16                 16
Exempt Wildlife Hybrids.........................              75             150             .5               75
Exception to Restrictions on Use of Certain                  500             500             .5              250
 CITES Specimens After Import into the United
 States.........................................
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
        Totals..................................           1,092           1,297  ..............             752
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*rounded.

    Total Annual Non-hour Cost Burden: $250 (application fee of $50 for 
each renewal of registration for commercial breeding facilities).
    During the proposed rule stage, we solicited comments on the new 
information collection (FWS Form 3-200-65). We received 9 comments, all 
from falconers and raptor breeders, regarding information collection 
requirements for renewal of registrations for breeding facilities. We 
responded to all comments in the preamble (see the sections on 
International travel with personally owned live wildlife (Sec.  23.44) 
and Registration of a commercial breeding operation for Appendix-I 
wildlife (Sec.  23.46)), and provide a summary here.
    One falconer expressed dissatisfaction with the process for 
renewing a certificate of ownership for personally owned, live wildlife 
(Sec.  23.44). The commenter objected to having to complete an entire 
application when only a few items needed to be updated. He also 
considered the estimated time of 30 minutes for completion of Form 3-
200-64 to be ``overly conservative'' and stated that ``a more 
realistic, but still conservative estimate'' would be at least 60 
minutes.
    Form 3-200-64, the application form for issuance of a certificate 
of ownership for personally owned live wildlife, asks for detailed 
information regarding the animal to be covered under the certificate. 
When a certificate holder wishes to renew a certificate of ownership, 
however, he or she should complete and submit Form 3-200-52, the 
application for re-issuance or renewal of a permit. This is a 
simplified application on which the applicant can certify that there 
have been no changes to the original application or that there have 
been changes as noted on an attached page. We thank the commenter for 
his input regarding the length of time needed to complete Form 3-200-
64. We have reviewed all of our application forms and took his comments 
into consideration during the renewal process for OMB Control Number 
1018-0093.
    Some of the commenters stated that the new requirement for renewal 
of commercial breeding operation for Appendix-I wildlife (Sec.  23.46) 
would create a significant burden on registered operations. They noted 
that raptor breeders are already monitored by the Service, through the 
Migratory Bird Program (MBP), and therefore the process for renewal of 
a registration would be redundant. They argued that the annual report 
and individual transactions forms provided to MBP should suffice for 
any monitoring requirement for CITES. Two commenters were more 
supportive of a simple registration update form and associated fee, if 
the required data submission was simply a reference to the current MBP 
data. One commenter suggested that if renewal of a registration is 
mandated by the Service, a one-page application with accompanying 
photocopies of the past five annual reports from the operation to the 
MBP should be all that is required.
    The regulations in Sec.  23.46, regarding the process for 
registering a commercial breeding operation for Appendix-I wildlife, 
apply to operations breeding any Appendix-I species, not just raptors 
and other falconry birds. Although it is true, as one commenter has 
noted, that all of the U.S. facilities currently registered with the 
CITES Secretariat are breeding raptors, we do not anticipate that this 
will always be the case. Therefore, we need to establish registration 
and reporting procedures that will work not just for facilities 
breeding raptors, but for any commercial breeding operation that may be 
registered in the future. It is not our intention, however, to increase 
the burden for raptor breeders.
    We understand that U.S. raptor breeders are regulated under the 
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and must provide reports to the MBP on 
specific activities related to the breeding of native raptors (as 
defined in part 21 of this subchapter). It is also true, however, that 
not all CITES-listed, Appendix-I raptors are covered by the MBTA. There 
is no requirement for an operation breeding birds that are not covered 
by the MBTA (including raptors that are not native raptors under the 
definition in part 21) to provide reports to the MBP on activities 
associated with those birds. We agree that, for operations breeding 
native raptors, documents submitted to the MBP would include most, if 
not all, of the information needed for the renewal of a CITES 
registration. If an applicant requesting renewal of a registration is 
breeding native raptors and reporting to the MBP, he or she can inform 
us on the application for renewal, and we will obtain copies of the 
relevant documents, covering the past 5-year period, from MBP. A 
registered operation that is breeding Appendix-I species that are not 
covered by the MBTA, and therefore not covered in reports provided to 
the MBP, will need to include updated information relevant to those 
species in its renewal application.
    You may send comments on any aspect of these information collection 
requirements to the Service Information Collection Clearance Officer, 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Mail Stop 2042-
PDM, Arlington, VA 22203.
    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): This final rule has been 
analyzed under the criteria of the National Environmental Policy Act 
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Department of the Interior procedures for 
compliance with NEPA (Departmental Manual (DM) and 43 CFR part 46), and 
Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing the 
procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508). This final rule does 
not amount to a major Federal action significantly affecting the 
quality of the human environment. An environmental impact statement or 
evaluation is not required. This final rule is a regulation that is of 
an administrative, legal, technical, or procedural nature, and its 
environmental effects are too broad, speculative, or conjectural to 
lend themselves to meaningful analysis under NEPA. The FWS has 
determined that this final rule is categorically excluded from further 
NEPA review as provided by 516 DM 2, Appendix 1.9,

[[Page 30417]]

of the Department of the Interior National Environmental Policy Act 
Revised Implementing Procedures and 43 CFR 46.210(i). No further 
documentation will be made.
    Government-to-Government Relationship with Tribes: Under the 
President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, ``Government-to-Government 
Relations with Native American Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951) and 
512 DM 2, we have evaluated possible effects on Federally recognized 
Indian Tribes and have determined that there are no effects. Individual 
tribal members must meet the same regulatory requirements as other 
individuals who trade internationally in CITES species.
    Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use: On May 18, 2001, the President 
issued Executive Order 13211 on regulations that significantly affect 
energy supply, distribution, or use. This rule revises the current 
regulations in 50 CFR part 23 that implement CITES. The regulations 
provide procedures to assist individuals and businesses that import, 
export, and re-export CITES wildlife and plants, and their parts, 
products, and derivatives, to meet international requirements. This 
final rule will not significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, 
and use. Therefore, this action is a not a significant energy action 
and no Statement of Energy Effects is required.

List of Subjects

50 CFR Part 13

    Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Fish, Imports, 
Plants, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Transportation, 
Wildlife.

50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

50 CFR Part 23

    Animals, Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Fish, Foreign 
trade, Forest and forest products, Imports, Incorporation by reference, 
Marine mammals, Plants, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Transportation, Treaties, Wildlife.

Regulation Promulgation

    For the reasons given in the preamble, under the authority of 16 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq., we amend title 50, chapter I, of the Code of 
Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 13--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 13 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 668a, 704, 712, 742j-l, 1374(g), 1382, 
1538(d), 1539, 1540(f), 3374, 4901-4916; 18 U.S.C. 42; 19 U.S.C. 
1202; 31 U.S.C. 9701.


Sec.  13.3  [Amended]

0
2. Section 13.3 is amended by removing the words `` `Endangered Species 
Convention' (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered 
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora)'' from the first sentence and adding 
in their place the words `` `Convention on International Trade in 
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)'.''

0
3. Section 13.11 is amended by:
0
a. Adding the words ``the Service's permits Web page at https://www.fws.gov/permits/; and the'' immediately following the colon in the 
first sentence of paragraph (b)(3);
0
b. Removing the words ``Room 700'' from the first sentence of paragraph 
(b)(3) and adding in their place the words ``Room 212'';
0
c. Adding the word ``street'' immediately before the word ``address'' 
in the last sentence of paragraph (b)(3); and
0
d. Adding an entry to the table in paragraph (d)(4) under the section 
titled ``Endangered Species Act/CITES/Lacey Act'' immediately following 
the entry for ``CITES Registration of Commercial Breeding Operations 
for Appendix-I Wildlife'' to read as set forth below.


Sec.  13.11  Application procedures.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (4) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Permit
              Type of permit                         CFR Citation             application fee     Amendment fee
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Endangered Species Act/CITES/Lacey Act
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
--Renewal of Registration of Commercial    50 CFR 23.......................                50   ................
 Breeding Operations for Appendix-I
 wildlife.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


0
4. Section 13.12(b) is amended by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text to read as set forth below;
0
b. In the table, under the heading ``Threatened wildlife and plant 
permits:'' removing the entry for ``American alligator--buyer or 
tanner''; and
0
c. In the table, removing the final entry, ``Endangered Species 
Convention permits.''


Sec.  13.12  General information requirements on applications for 
permits.

* * * * *
    (b) Additional information required on permit applications. As 
stated in paragraph (a)(3) of this section, certain additional 
information is required on all permit applications. For CITES permit 
applications, see part 23 of this subchapter. Additional information 
required on applications for other types of permits may be found by 
referring to the sections of this subchapter cited in the following 
table:
* * * * *

PART 17--[AMENDED]

0
5. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; and 4201-4245, 
unless otherwise noted.


Sec.  17.9  [Amended]

0
6. Section 17.9(a)(2) is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``Office of'' and adding in their place the words 
``Division of''; and
0
b. Removing the words ``Room 700'' and adding in their place the words 
``Room 212''.

[[Page 30418]]

Sec.  17.21  [Amended]

0
7. Section 17.21(g)(2) is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``Office of'' in the first sentence and adding in 
their place the words ``Division of''; and
0
b. Adding the words ``Room 212,'' in the first sentence immediately 
following the words ``Fairfax Drive,''.

0
8. Section 17.40 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b)(1)(i)(B) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Removing the words ``Assistant Regional Director, Division of Law 
Enforcement, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service'' from paragraphs 
(b)(1)(i)(C)(3), (b)(1)(i)(D), and (b)(1)(ii)(A) and adding in their 
place the words ``U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service law enforcement 
office'';
0
c. Removing paragraph (e)(1)(iv);
0
d. Revising paragraph (e)(3)(iii)(D) to read as set forth below;
0
e. Revising the heading of paragraph (f) to read as set forth below;
0
f. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (h)(5) to read as set forth 
below;
0
g. Revising the heading of paragraph (m) to read as set forth below;
0
h. Removing the first sentence following the heading of paragraph (m);
0
i. Revising paragraphs (m)(1)(ii) and (m)(1)(iii) to read as set forth 
below;
0
j. Revising paragraph (m)(2) to read as set forth below;
0
k. Removing the words ``an information notice'' from the introductory 
text of paragraph (m)(3) and adding in their place the words ``a public 
bulletin'';
0
l. Removing paragraphs (m)(3)(i) and (m)(3)(iv); and
0
m. Redesignating paragraphs (m)(3)(ii) and (m)(3)(iii) as paragraphs 
(m)(3)(i) and (m)(3)(ii).


Sec.  17.40  Special rules--mammals.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) Grizzly bears may be taken in self-defense or in defense of 
others, but such taking shall be reported by the individual who has 
taken the bear or his designee within 5 days of occurrence to the 
Resident Agent in Charge, Office of Law Enforcement, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, 2900 4th Avenue North, Suite 301, Billings, MT 59101 
(406-247-7355), if occurring in Montana or Wyoming, or the Special 
Agent in Charge, Office of Law Enforcement, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, P.O. Box 9, Sherwood, OR 97140 (503-521-5300), if occurring in 
Idaho or Washington, and to appropriate State and Tribal authorities. 
Grizzly bears taken in self-defense or in defense of others, including 
the parts of such bears, shall not be possessed, delivered, carried, 
transported, shipped, exported, received, or sold, except by Federal, 
State, or Tribal authorities.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (D) The trophy is legibly marked in accordance with part 23 of this 
subchapter.
* * * * *
    (f) Leopard (Panthera pardus) * * *
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (5) Any take pursuant to paragraph (h)(4) of this section must be 
reported in writing to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of 
Law Enforcement, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, LE-3000, Arlington, VA 22203, 
within 5 days. * * *
* * * * *
    (m) Vicu[ntilde]a (Vicugna vicugna).
    (1) * * *
    (ii) Import, export, and re-export. Except as provided in paragraph 
(m)(2) of this section, it is unlawful to import, export, or re-export, 
or present for export or re-export without valid permits as required 
under parts 17 and 23 of this subchapter, any vicu[ntilde]a or 
vicu[ntilde]a parts and products. For import of embryos, blood, other 
tissue samples, or live vicu[ntilde]a, permits required under Sec.  
17.32 and part 23 will be issued only for bona fide scientific research 
contributing to the conservation of the species in the wild.
    (iii) Other activities. Except as provided in paragraph (m)(2) of 
this section, it is unlawful to sell or offer for sale, deliver, 
receive, carry, transport, or ship in interstate or foreign commerce 
and in the course of a commercial activity any vicu[ntilde]a or 
vicu[ntilde]a parts and products.
* * * * *
    (2) What activities involving vicu[ntilde]a are allowed by this 
rule? You may import, export, or re-export, or conduct interstate or 
foreign commerce in raw wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as, cloth 
made from such wool, or manufactured or handicraft products and 
articles made from or consisting of such wool or cloth without a 
threatened species permit issued according to Sec.  17.32 only when the 
following provisions have been met:
    (i) The specimens originated from a population listed in CITES 
Appendix II.
    (ii) The provisions in parts 13, 14, and 23 of this subchapter are 
met, including the specific labeling provisions in part 23.
    (iii) Personal and household effects. Under the provisions of this 
special rule, raw wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as, cloth made 
from such wool, or manufactured or handicraft products and articles 
made from or consisting of such wool or cloth are not granted the 
personal or household effects exemption described in part 23 of this 
subchapter. In addition to the provisions of this paragraph (m)(2), 
such specimens may only be imported, exported, or re-exported when 
accompanied by a valid CITES document.
    (iv) Labeling of wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as. Any 
shipment of raw wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as must be sealed 
with a tamper-proof seal and have the following:
    (A) An identification tag with a code identifying the country of 
origin of the raw vicu[ntilde]a wool and the CITES export permit 
number; and
    (B) The vicu[ntilde]a logotype as defined in 50 CFR part 23 and the 
words ``VICU[Ntilde]A--COUNTRY OF ORIGIN'', where country of origin is 
the name of the country from which the raw vicu[ntilde]a wool was first 
exported.
    (v) At the time of import, the country of origin and each country 
of re-export involved in the trade of a particular shipment have not 
been identified by the CITES Conference of the Parties, the CITES 
Standing Committee, or in a Notification from the CITES Secretariat as 
a country from which Parties should not accept permits.
* * * * *

0
9. Section 17.44 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the heading of paragraph (y) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Removing the first sentence following the heading of paragraph (y);
0
c. Revising paragraph (y)(3)(i)(A) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Revising paragraph (y)(3)(ii) to read as set forth below;
0
e. Removing paragraph (y)(4)(iii);
0
f. Redesignating paragraphs (y)(4)(iv) through (y)(4)(vi) as 
(y)(4)(iii) through (y)(4)(v);
0
g. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (y)(4)(iii) to read as set 
forth below;
0
h. Revising the fourth sentence of paragraph (y)(5) introductory text 
to read as set forth below;
0
i. Removing the words ``an information bulletin'' from the introductory 
text of paragraph (y)(6) and adding in their place the words ``a public 
bulletin''; and
0
j. Removing the words ``Room 700'' in the NOTE to paragraph (y)(6) and 
adding in their place the words ``Room 212''.

[[Page 30419]]

Sec.  17.44  Special rules--fishes.

* * * * *
    (y) Beluga sturgeon (Huso huso). * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) Beluga sturgeon caviar, including beluga sturgeon caviar in 
interstate commerce in the United States, must be labeled in accordance 
with the CITES labeling requirements in 50 CFR part 23.
* * * * *
    (ii) Personal and household effects. You may import, export, or re-
export, or conduct interstate or foreign commerce in beluga sturgeon 
specimens that qualify as personal or household effects under 50 CFR 
part 23 without a threatened species permit otherwise required under 
Sec.  17.32. Trade suspensions or trade restrictions administratively 
imposed by the Service under paragraphs (y)(6) or (y)(7) of this 
section may also apply to personal and household effects of beluga 
sturgeon caviar.
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (iii) CITES compliance. Trade in beluga sturgeon specimens must 
comply with CITES requirements in 50 CFR part 23. Except for specimens 
that qualify as personal or household effects under 50 CFR part 23, all 
beluga sturgeon specimens, including those exempted from threatened 
species permits under this special rule, must be accompanied by valid 
CITES documents upon import, export, or re-export. Beluga sturgeon 
caviar, including beluga sturgeon caviar in interstate commerce in the 
United States, must be labeled in accordance with the CITES labeling 
requirements in 50 CFR part 23.
    (5) * * * Facilities outside the littoral states wishing to obtain 
such exemptions must submit a written request to the Division of 
Management Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax 
Drive, Room 212, Arlington, VA 22203, and provide information that 
shows at a minimum, all of the following: * * *
* * * * *

0
10. Section 17.62 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(4), and removing the undesignated paragraph 
and paragraphs (1) through (8) following paragraph (a)(4); and
0
b. Revising the third sentence of paragraph (c)(3), and adding a 
sentence to the end of that paragraph, to read as set forth below.


Sec.  17.62  Permits for scientific purposes or for the enhancement of 
propagation or survival.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (4) When the activity applied for involves a species also regulated 
by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild 
Fauna and Flora, additional requirements in part 23 of this subchapter 
must be met.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * * If the specimens are of taxa also regulated by the 
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna 
and Flora, specific information must be entered on the Customs 
declaration label affixed to the outside of each shipping container or 
package. See part 23 of this subchapter for requirements for trade in 
CITES specimens between registered scientific institutions.
* * * * *

0
11. Section 17.72 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(4), and removing the undesignated paragraph 
and paragraphs (1) through (8) following paragraph (a)(4); and
0
b. Revising the third sentence of paragraph (c)(3), and adding a 
sentence to the end of that paragraph, to read as set forth below.


Sec.  17.72  Permits--general.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (4) When the activity applied for involves a species also regulated 
by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild 
Fauna and Flora, additional requirements in part 23 of this subchapter 
must be met.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * * If the specimens are of taxa also regulated by the 
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna 
and Flora, specific information must be entered on the Customs 
declaration label affixed to the outside of each shipping container or 
package. See part 23 of this subchapter for requirements for trade in 
CITES specimens between registered scientific institutions.
* * * * *

PART 23--[AMENDED]

0
12. The authority citation for part 23 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Convention on International Trade in Endangered 
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (March 3, 1973), 27 U.S.T. 1087; and 
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.


0
13. Section 23.2 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  23.2  How do I decide if these regulations apply to my shipment 
or me?

    If you are engaging in activities with specimens of CITES-listed 
species these regulations apply to you.

0
14. Section 23.5 is amended by:
0
a. Amending the definition of Bred for noncommercial purposes by 
removing the words ``and is conducted between facilities that are 
involved in a cooperative conservation program'' from the end of the 
sentence;
0
b. Removing the definition of Cooperative conservation program;
0
c. Revising the definitions of Coral (dead), Coral fragments, Coral 
(live), and Coral sand to read as set forth below;
0
d. Revising the first sentence, and adding a sentence to the end, of 
the definition of Coral rock to read as set forth below;
0
e. Adding, in alphabetical order, a definition of Coral (stony) to read 
as set forth below;
0
f. Revising the definition of Cultivar to read as set forth below;
0
g. Revising the definition of Introduction from the sea to read as set 
forth below; and
0
h. Adding, in alphabetical order, a definition of Ranched wildlife to 
read as set forth below.


Sec.  23.5  How are the terms used in these regulations defined?

* * * * *
    Coral (dead) means pieces of stony coral that contain no living 
coral tissue and in which the structure of the corallites (skeletons of 
the individual polyps) is still intact and the specimens are therefore 
identifiable to the level of species or genus. See also Sec.  
23.23(c)(13).
    Coral fragments, including coral gravel and coral rubble, means 
loose pieces of broken finger-like stony coral between 2 and 30 mm 
measured in all directions that contain no living coral tissue and are 
not identifiable to the level of genus (see Sec.  23.92 for 
exemptions).
    Coral (live) means pieces of stony coral that are alive and are 
therefore identifiable to the level of species or genus. See also Sec.  
23.23(c)(13).
    Coral rock means hard consolidated material greater than 30 mm 
measured in any direction that consists of pieces of stony coral that 
contain no living coral tissue and possibly also cemented sand, 
coralline algae, or other sedimentary rocks. * * * See also Sec.  
23.23(c)(13).
    Coral sand means material that consists entirely or in part of 
finely crushed stony coral no larger than 2 mm measured in all 
directions that contains no living coral tissue and is not

[[Page 30420]]

identifiable to the level of genus (see Sec.  23.92 for exemptions).
    Coral (stony) means any coral in the orders Helioporacea, 
Milleporina, Scleractinia, Stolonifera, and Stylasterina.
* * * * *
    Cultivar means a horticulturally derived plant variety that: has 
been selected for a particular character or combination of characters; 
is distinct, uniform, and stable in these characters; and when 
propagated by appropriate means, retains these characters. The cultivar 
name and description must be formally published in order to be 
recognized under CITES.
* * * * *
    Introduction from the sea means transportation into a country of 
specimens of any species that were taken in the marine environment not 
under the jurisdiction of any country, i.e., taken in those marine 
areas beyond the areas subject to the sovereignty or sovereign rights 
of a country consistent with international law, as reflected in the 
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
* * * * *
    Ranched wildlife means specimens of animals reared in a controlled 
environment that were taken from the wild as eggs or juveniles where 
they would otherwise have had a very low probability of surviving to 
adulthood. See also Sec.  23.34.
* * * * *


Sec.  23.7  [Amended]

0
15. Section 23.7 is amended by:
0
a. In paragraph (a) under the ``Office to contact'' table heading, 
removing the words ``Room 700'' and adding in their place the words 
``Room 212''; and
0
b. In paragraph (b) under the ``Office to contact'' table heading, 
removing the words ``Room 750'' and adding in their place the words 
``Room 110''.


Sec.  23.8  [Amended]

0
16. Section 23.8 is amended by removing the words ``Numbers 1018-0093 
and 1018-0137'' from the end of the first sentence and adding in their 
place the words ``Number 1018-0093''.

0
17. Section 23.9 is added to subpart A to read as set forth below:


Sec.  23.9  Incorporation by reference.

    (a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this part 
with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register in accordance 
with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may inspect copies at the 
U.S. Management Authority, Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax 
Dr., Room 212, Arlington, VA 22203 or at the National Archives and 
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of 
this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    (b) International Air Transport Association (IATA), 800 Place 
Victoria, P.O. Box 113, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H4Z 1M1, 1-800-716-
6326, https://www.iata.org.
    (1) Live Animals Regulations (LAR) 40th edition, effective October 
1, 2013, into Sec. Sec.  23.23, 23.26, and 23.56.
    (2) Perishable Cargo Regulations (PCR) 13th edition, effective July 
1, 2013, into Sec. Sec.  23.23, 23.26, and 23.56.

0
18. Section 23.13 is amended by:
0
a. Redesignating paragraph (d) as paragraph (f);
0
b. Adding a new paragraph (d) and a new paragraph (e) to read as set 
forth below; and
0
c. In the newly redesignated paragraph (f), removing the words ``(a) 
through (c)'' and adding in their place the words ``(a) through (e)''.


Sec.  23.13  What is prohibited?

* * * * *
    (d) Use any specimen of a species listed in Appendix I, II, or III 
of CITES for any purpose contrary to what is allowed under Sec.  23.55.
    (e) Violate any other provisions of this part.
* * * * *

0
19. Section 23.18 is amended by revising the decision tree to read as 
follows:


Sec.  23.18  What CITES documents are required to export Appendix-I 
wildlife?

* * * * *
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 30421]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27MY14.000


0
20. Section 23.19 is amended by revising the decision tree to read as 
follows:


Sec.  23.19  What CITES documents are required to export Appendix-I 
plants?

* * * * *
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 30422]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR27MY14.001

0
21. Section 23.23 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``on a form printed'' in the first sentence of 
paragraph (b) and adding in their place the word ``issued'';
0
b. Revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Revising paragraph (c)(7) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (c)(12) to read as set 
forth below;
0
e. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (c)(13) to read as set 
forth below;
0
f. Redesignating paragraphs (c)(13)(i)(B) and (c)(13)(i)(C) as 
(c)(13)(i)(C) and (c)(13)(i)(D);
0
g. Revising paragraph (c)(13)(i)(B) to read as set forth below;
0
h. Adding the words ``or signature stamp'' immediately following the 
words ``original handwritten signature'' in the first sentence of 
paragraph (c)(16);
0
i. Revising paragraph (c)(18) to read as set forth below;
0
j. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (c)(21) to read as set 
forth below;
0
k. Removing the word ``calendar'' from paragraph (e)(5)(i);
0
l. Adding a new paragraph (e)(10)(iv) to read as set forth below; and
0
m. Removing the words ``include hybrids'' from paragraph (f)(2)(ii) and

[[Page 30423]]

adding in their place the words ``treat hybrids as Appendix-I 
specimens''.


Sec.  23.23  What information is required on U.S. and foreign CITES 
documents?

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Required information                     Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Appendix.................  The CITES Appendix in which the species,
                                subspecies, or population is listed (see
                                Sec.   23.21 when a Party has taken a
                                reservation on a listing). For products
                                that contain or consist of more than one
                                CITES species, the Appendix in which
                                each species is listed must be indicated
                                on the CITES document.
 
                              * * * * * * *
(7) Humane transport of live   If the CITES document authorizes the
 specimens.                     export or re-export of live specimens, a
                                statement that the document is valid
                                only if the transport conditions comply
                                with the International Air Transport
                                Association Live Animals Regulations or
                                the International Air Transport
                                Association Perishable Cargo Regulations
                                (incorporated by reference, see Sec.
                                23.9). A shipment containing live
                                animals must comply with the
                                requirements of the Live Animals
                                Regulations (LAR). A shipment containing
                                live plants must comply with the
                                requirements for plants in the
                                Perishable Cargo Regulations (PCR).
 
                              * * * * * * *
(12) Quantity................  The quantity of specimens authorized in
                                the shipment and, if appropriate, the
                                unit of measurement using the metric
                                system. For products that contain or
                                consist of more than one CITES species,
                                the quantity of each species must be
                                indicated on the CITES document.
 
                              * * * * * * *
(13) Scientific name.........  The scientific name of the species,
                                including the subspecies when needed to
                                determine the level of protection of the
                                specimen under CITES. For products that
                                contain or consist of more than one
                                CITES species, the scientific name of
                                each species must be indicated on the
                                CITES document. Scientific names must be
                                in the standard nomenclature as it
                                appears in the CITES Appendices or the
                                references adopted by the CoP. A list of
                                current references is available from the
                                CITES website or us (see Sec.   23.7). A
                                CITES document may contain higher-taxon
                                names in lieu of the species name only
                                under one of the following
                                circumstances:
                               (i) * * *
                               (B) If the species cannot be determined
                                for worked specimens of black coral,
                                specimens may be identified at the genus
                                level. If the genus cannot be determined
                                for worked specimens of black coral, the
                                scientific name to be used is the order
                                Antipatharia. Raw black coral and live
                                black coral must be identified to the
                                level of species.
 
                              * * * * * * *
(18) Source..................  The source of the specimen. For products
                                that contain or consist of more than one
                                CITES species, the source code of each
                                species must be indicated on the CITES
                                document. For re-export, unless there is
                                information to indicate otherwise, the
                                source code on the CITES document used
                                for import of the specimen must be used.
                                See Sec.   23.24 for a list of codes.
 
                              * * * * * * *
(21) Validation or             Except as provided for replacement (Sec.
 certification.                  23.52(f)) or retrospective (Sec.
                                23.53(f)) CITES documents, the actual
                                quantity of specimens exported or re-
                                exported: * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Type of document             Additional required information
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
(10) * * *
                               (iv) For products that contain or consist
                                of more than one CITES species, the
                                information in paragraphs (e)(10)(i)
                                through (iii) of this section for each
                                species must be indicated on the CITES
                                document.
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec.  23.24  [Amended]

0
22. Section 23.24 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``which should be'' in the first sentence of the 
introductory text and adding in their place the words ``which may be'';
0
b. Adding the words ``(see Sec.  23.5)'' immediately following the 
words ``Captive-bred'' in paragraph (d)(2)(i);
0
c. Removing paragraph (d)(2)(iii);
0
d. Removing the words ``to be used'' in paragraph (f) and adding in 
their place the words ``may be used''; and
0
e. Removing the words ``(wildlife that originated from a ranching 
operation).'' in paragraph (g) and adding in their place the words 
``(see Sec.  23.5).''.

0
23. Section 23.26 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (c)(8) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (d)(4) through (d)(8) as (d)(5) through 
(d)(9);
0
c. Adding new paragraph (d)(4) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Further redesignating newly designated paragraphs (d)(7) through 
(d)(9) as paragraphs (d)(8) through (d)(10);
0
e. Adding new paragraph (d)(7) to read as set forth below; and

[[Page 30424]]

0
f. Adding new paragraph (d)(11) to read as set forth below.


Sec.  23.26  When is a U.S. or foreign CITES document valid?

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Conditions for an acceptable CITES
          Key phrase                            document
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
(8) Humane transport.........  Live wildlife or plants were transported
                                in compliance with the International Air
                                Transport Association Live Animals
                                Regulations (for animals) or the
                                International Air Transport Association
                                Perishable Cargo Regulations (for
                                plants) (incorporated by reference, see
                                Sec.   23.9).
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (d) * * *
    (4) The CITES document includes a species for which the Secretariat 
has published an annotated quota.
* * * * *
    (7) We know or have reasonable grounds to believe that an Appendix-
I specimen was not bred at a facility registered with the CITES 
Secretariat and that the purpose of the import is commercial.
* * * * *
    (11) The export permit or re-export certificate does not contain 
validation or certification by an inspecting official at the time of 
export of the actual quantity exported or re-exported.

0
24. Section 23.27 is amended by:
0
a. Adding two sentences to the end of paragraph (a) to read as set 
forth below; and
0
b. Adding the words ``exporting or re-exporting'' immediately following 
the words ``Officials in each'' in the first sentence of paragraph (c).


Sec.  23.27  What CITES documents do I present at the port?

    (a) * * * Article VI, paragraph 6, of the Treaty requires that the 
Management Authority of the importing country cancel and retain the 
export permit or re-export certificate and any corresponding import 
permit presented. In the United States, for imports of CITES-listed 
plant specimens, CITES inspecting officials cancel and submit original 
CITES documents to the U.S. Management Authority.
* * * * *
0
25. Section 23.34 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``Exempt plant material'' from the left-hand 
column of paragraph (b)(3) and adding in their place the words ``Grown 
from exempt plant material'';
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(6) through (b)(8) as paragraphs (b)(7) 
through (b)(9);
0
c. Adding a new paragraph (b)(6) to read as set forth below; and
0
d. Revising footnote 1 at the end of paragraph (b) to read as set forth 
below.


Sec.  23.34  What kinds of records may I use to show the origin of a 
specimen when I apply for a U.S. CITES document?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Source of specimen                    Types of records
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
(6) Ranched wildlife.........  (i) Records, such as permits, licenses,
                                and tags, that demonstrate that the
                                specimen was legally removed from the
                                wild under relevant Federal, tribal,
                                State, or local wildlife conservation
                                laws or regulations:
                               (A) If taken on private or tribal land,
                                permission of the landowner if required
                                under applicable law.
                               (B) If taken in a national, State, or
                                local park, refuge or other protected
                                area, permission from the applicable
                                agency, if required.
                               (ii) Records that document the rearing of
                                specimens at the facility:
                               (A) Number of specimens (by sex and age-
                                or size-class) at the facility.
                               (B) How long the specimens were reared at
                                the facility.
                               (C) Signed and dated statement by the
                                owner or manager of the facility that
                                the specimens were reared at the
                                facility in a controlled environment.
                               (D) Marking system, if applicable.
                               (E) Photographs or video of the facility.
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ If the wildlife was born in captivity from an egg collected 
in the wild or from parents that mated or exchanged genetic material 
in the wild, see paragraphs (b)(6) and (b)(9) of this section. If 
the plant was propagated from a non-exempt propagule collected from 
a wild plant, see paragraph (b)(9) of this section.
* * * * *

0
26. Section 23.36 is amended by:
0
a. Adding, in alphabetical order, two entries to the table in paragraph 
(b)(1), to read as set forth below;
0
b. In paragraph (b)(1) of the table, removing the entry ``Export of 
Skins/Products of Bobcat, Canada Lynx, River Otter, Brown Bear, Gray 
Wolf, and American Alligator Taken under an Approved State or Tribal 
Program'' and adding in its place the entry ``Export of Skins of 
Bobcat, Canada Lynx, River Otter, Brown Bear, Gray Wolf, and American 
Alligator Taken under an Approved State or Tribal Program'';
0
c. In paragraph (b)(1) of the table, removing the entry ``Trophies by 
Taxidermists'' and adding in its place the entry ``Trophies by Hunters 
or Taxidermists''; and
0
d. In the last entry of paragraph (b)(1), adding the words ``(Live 
Animals/Samples/Parts/Products)'' immediately following the words 
``Wildlife, Removed from the Wild''.


Sec.  23.36  What are the requirements for an export permit?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *

[[Page 30425]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Type of application for an export permit             Form No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) CITES:
 
                              * * * * * * *
Caviar/Live Eggs/Meat of Paddlefish or Sturgeon, From an        3-200-80
 Aquaculture Facility...................................
 
                              * * * * * * *
Master File for the Export of Live Animals Bred in              3-200-85
 Captivity..............................................
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *


Sec.  23.40  [Amended]

0
27. Section 23.40 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``include hybrids in the listing'' from paragraph 
(d)(2)(iii) and adding in their place the words ``treat hybrids as 
Appendix-I specimens'';
0
b. Adding the words ``or spore'' in paragraph (e)(1) immediately 
following the words ``from a wild seed'';
0
c. Removing the words ``include hybrids in the listing'' from paragraph 
(e)(2) and adding in their place the words ``treat hybrids as Appendix-
I specimens''; and
0
d. Adding the words ``(See Sec.  23.47.)'' after the last sentence in 
paragraph (e)(2).


Sec.  23.41  [Amended]

0
28. Section 23.41 is amended by adding the words ``, 3-200-80, or 3-
200-85'' immediately following the words ``Form 3-200-24'' in paragraph 
(c).


Sec.  23.42  [Amended]

0
29. Section 23.42 is amended by removing the words ``include hybrids'' 
from paragraph (b) and adding in their place the words ``treat hybrids 
as Appendix-I specimens''.

0
30. Section 23.43 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(2) and adding a 
new paragraph (f)(3) to read as set forth below.


Sec.  23.43  What are the requirements for a wildlife hybrid?

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (2) For import, export, or re-export of an exempt wildlife hybrid 
without CITES documents, you must provide information at the time of 
import or export to clearly demonstrate that your specimen has no 
purebred CITES specimens in the previous four generations of its 
ancestry. If you are unable to clearly demonstrate this, you must 
obtain CITES documents. The information you provide must clearly 
identify the specimen and demonstrate its recent lineage. Such 
information may include, but is not limited to, the following:
    (i) Records that identify the name and address of the breeder and 
identify the specimen by birth or hatch date and by sex, band number, 
microchip number, or other mark.
    (ii) A certified pedigree issued by an internationally recognized 
association that contains scientific names of the animals in the 
specimen's recent lineage and clearly illustrates its genetic history. 
If the pedigree contains codes, you must provide a key or guide that 
explains the meaning of the codes.
    (3) Although a CITES document is not required for an exempt 
wildlife hybrid, you must follow the clearance requirements for 
wildlife in part 14 of this subchapter, including the prior 
notification requirements for live wildlife.

0
31. Section 23.44 is amended by revising the section heading and adding 
a new paragraph (e)(7) to read as set forth below.


Sec.  23.44  What are the requirements for traveling internationally 
with my personally owned live wildlife?

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (7) You must return the wildlife to the United States before the 
certificate expires.

0
32. Section 23.46 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``facilitate a dialogue for resolution of the 
identified problems within 60 days.'' from the end of the last sentence 
of paragraph (b)(3) and adding in their place the words ``allow a 
further 30 days for resolution of the identified problems.'';
0
b. Revising paragraph (b)(4) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Removing paragraphs (b)(5) and (b)(6);
0
d. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(7) through (b)(12) as paragraphs (b)(5) 
through (b)(10);
0
e. Revising the first sentence of newly redesignated paragraph (b)(7), 
and adding a sentence following the first sentence of that paragraph to 
read as set forth below;
0
f. Adding a sentence immediately following the first sentence of newly 
redesignated paragraph (b)(8) to read as set forth below;
0
g. Amending the last sentence of newly redesignated paragraph (b)(8) by 
removing the words ``, and the Animals Committee will review the 
operation to determine whether it should remain registered'';
0
h. Amending newly redesignated paragraph (b)(10) by removing the words 
``bred at a commercial breeding operation that is registered with the 
CITES Secretariat as provided in this section'' and adding in their 
place the words ``bred in captivity (see Sec.  23.63)'';
0
i. Removing paragraph (e)(3);
0
j. Redesignating paragraph (e)(4) as paragraph (e)(3);
0
k. Adding a new paragraph (e)(4) to read as set forth below;
0
l. Redesignating paragraphs (f) through (h) as paragraphs (h) through 
(j);
0
m. Adding a new paragraph (f) to read as set forth below;
0
n. Adding a new paragraph (g) to read as set forth below; and
0
o. Removing the words ``Form 3-200-24'' from newly designated paragraph 
(i) and adding in their place the words ``the appropriate form (see 
Sec.  23.36)''.


Sec.  23.46  What are the requirements for registering a commercial 
breeding operation for Appendix-I wildlife and commercially exporting 
specimens?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) If the objection is not withdrawn or the identified problems 
are not resolved within the 30-day period, the Secretariat will submit 
the application to the Standing Committee at its next regular meeting. 
The Standing Committee will determine whether the objection is 
justified and decide whether to accept the application.
* * * * *
    (7) If a Party believes that a registered operation does not meet 
the bred-in-captivity requirements, it may, after consultation with the 
Secretariat and the Party concerned, propose to the Standing Committee 
that the operation be deleted from the register. At its following 
meeting, the Standing Committee will consider the concerns raised by 
the objecting Party, and any

[[Page 30426]]

comments from the registering Party and the Secretariat, and determine 
whether the operation should be deleted from the register. * * *
    (8) * * * In the United States, we will monitor registered 
operations, in part, by requiring each operation to apply for renewal 
and demonstrate that it continues to qualify for registration at least 
once every 5 years. (See paragraphs (e)(4) and (f) of this section.) * 
* *
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (4) Registrations will be valid for a period not to exceed 5 years. 
Registrants who wish to remain registered must request renewal before 
the end of the period of validity of the registration.
    (f) U.S. application to renew a registration. Requests for renewal 
of a registration should be submitted at least 3 months before the 
registration expires. Complete Form 3-200-65 and submit it to the U.S. 
Management Authority.
    (g) Criteria for renewal of U.S. registrations. To renew your 
registration, you must provide sufficient information for us to find 
that your proposed activity continues to meet all of the criteria in 
paragraph (d) of this section.
* * * * *

0
33. Section 23.47 is amended by adding a sentence to the end of 
paragraph (a) to read as set forth below.


Sec.  23.47  What are the requirements for export of an Appendix-I 
plant artificially propagated for commercial purposes?

    (a) * * * This section does not apply to hybrids of one or more 
Appendix-I species or taxa that are not annotated to treat hybrids as 
Appendix-I specimens (see Sec.  23.40).
* * * * *

0
34. Section 23.52 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the last sentence of paragraph (a) and adding in its place 
two new sentences to read as set forth below;
0
b. Adding a new paragraph (b)(6) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Revising the introductory text of paragraph (d) to read as set forth 
below;
0
d. Redesignating paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) as (d)(1)(i) and 
(d)(1)(ii);
0
e. Adding new introductory text to paragraph (d)(1) to read as set 
forth below;
0
f. Adding a new paragraph (d)(1)(iii) to read as set forth below; and
0
g. Adding a new paragraph (d)(2) to read as set forth below.


Sec.  23.52  What are the requirements for replacing a lost, damaged, 
stolen, or accidentally destroyed CITES document?

    (a) * * * To renew a U.S. CITES document, see part 13 of this 
subchapter. To amend a U.S. CITES document, see part 13 of this 
subchapter if the activity has not yet occurred or, if the activity has 
already occurred, see Sec.  23.53 of this part.
    (b) * * *
    (6) In the United States, you may not use an original single-use 
CITES document issued under a CITES master file or CITES annual program 
as a replacement document for a shipment that has already left the 
country.
* * * * *
    (d) Criteria. The criteria in this paragraph (d) apply to the 
issuance and acceptance of U.S. and foreign documents.
    (1) When applying for a U.S. replacement document, you must provide 
sufficient information for us to find that your proposed activity meets 
all of the following criteria:
    (i) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (iii) The specimens were presented to the appropriate official for 
inspection at the time of import and a request for a replacement CITES 
document was made at that time.
    (2) For acceptance of foreign CITES replacement documents in the 
United States, you must provide sufficient information for us to find 
that your proposed activity meets all of the following criteria:
    (i) The specimens were presented to the appropriate official for 
inspection at the time of import and a request for a replacement CITES 
document was made at that time.
    (ii) The importer or the importer's agent submitted a signed, 
dated, and notarized statement at the time of import that describes the 
circumstances that resulted in the CITES document being lost, damaged, 
stolen, or accidentally destroyed.
    (iii) The importer or the importer's agent provided a copy of the 
original lost, stolen, or accidentally destroyed document at the time 
of import showing that the document met the requirements in Sec. Sec.  
23.23, 23.24, and 23.25.
* * * * *

0
35. Section 23.53 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Adding a new paragraph (b)(8) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Revising paragraph (d)(6)(ii) to read as set forth below; and
0
d. Adding the words ``as defined in Sec.  23.5'' to the end of the 
sentence in paragraph (d)(7)(i).


Sec.  23.53  What are the requirements for obtaining a retrospective 
CITES document?

    (a) Retrospective CITES documents may be issued and accepted in 
certain limited situations after an export or re-export has occurred, 
but before the shipment is cleared for import. When specific conditions 
are met, a retrospective CITES document may be issued to authorize 
trade that has taken place without a CITES document or to correct 
certain technical errors in a CITES document after the authorized 
activity has occurred.
    (b) * * *
    (8) In the United States, you may not use a U.S. CITES document 
issued under a CITES master file or CITES annual program as a 
retrospective CITES document.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (6) * * *
    (ii) The Management Authority made a technical error when issuing 
the CITES document that was not prompted by information provided by the 
applicant.
* * * * *

0
36. Section 23.55 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text to read as set forth below;
0
b. Revising the table's headings to read as set forth below;
0
c. Revising paragraph (c) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Revising the text in the first block of the right-hand column of the 
table, which corresponds to paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) in the left-
hand column of the table, to read as set forth below;
0
e. Adding the word ``lawful'' immediately before the word ``purpose'' 
in the second block of the right-hand column of the table, which 
corresponds to paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) in the left-hand column of 
the table;
0
f. Redesignating paragraph (d)(5) as (d)(6);
0
g. Adding a new paragraph (d)(5) to read as set forth below; and
0
h. Revising paragraph (f) to read as set forth below.


Sec.  23.55  How may I use a CITES specimen after import into the 
United States?

    In addition to the provisions in Sec.  23.3, you may only use CITES 
specimens after import into the United States for the following 
purposes:

[[Page 30427]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Allowed use within the United
      If the species is listed in                     States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) * * *..............................  The specimen may be used only
                                          for noncommercial purposes
                                          (see Sec.   23.5).
(b) * * *
(c) Appendix II without an annotation    Exception:
 for noncommercial purposes, or          If the specimen was lawfully
 Appendix III, and threatened under the   imported, with no restrictions
 ESA, except as provided in a special     on its use after import,
 rule in Sec.  Sec.   17.40 through       before the species was listed
 17.48 or under a permit granted under    as described in paragraphs
 Sec.  Sec.   17.32 or 17.52.             (a), (b), or (c) of this
                                          section, you may continue to
                                          use the specimen as indicated
                                          for paragraphs (d), (e) and
                                          (f) of this section provided
                                          you can clearly demonstrate
                                          (using written records or
                                          other documentary evidence)
                                          that your specimen was
                                          imported prior to the CITES
                                          listing, with no restrictions
                                          on its use after import. If
                                          you are unable to clearly
                                          demonstrate that this
                                          exception applies, the
                                          specimen may be used only for
                                          noncommercial purposes.
 
                              * * * * * * *
(d) * * *
(5) Certificate for artificially
 propagated plants with a source code
 of ``A'' for artificially propagated
 hybrid specimens derived from one or
 more unannotated Appendix-I species or
 other taxa.
 
                              * * * * * * *
(f) Appendix III, other than those in
 paragraph (c) of this section.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


0
37. Section 23.56 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as 
set forth below.


Sec.  23.56  What U.S. CITES document conditions do I need to follow?

    (a) * * *
    (2) For export and re-export of live wildlife and plants, transport 
conditions must comply with the International Air Transport Association 
Live Animals Regulations (for animals) or the International Air 
Transport Association Perishable Cargo Regulations (for plants) 
(incorporated by reference, see Sec.  23.9).
* * * * *


Sec.  23.64  [Amended]

0
38. In Sec.  23.64, paragraph (g)(4)(ii) is amended by adding the words 
``or spores'' immediately following the words ``to collect seeds''.
0
39. Section 23.69 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the heading of the section and the first sentence of 
paragraph (a) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Revising the first two sentences of paragraph (c)(3) to read as set 
forth below;
0
c. Removing the words ``broken, cut, or missing'' from the first 
sentence of paragraph (c)(3)(i) and adding in their place the words 
``inadvertently removed, damaged, or lost'';
0
d. Removing the words ``is broken or cut'' from the third sentence of 
paragraph (c)(3)(i) and adding in their place the words ``has been 
inadvertently removed or damaged'';
0
e. Removing the word ``missing'' in the fourth sentence of paragraph 
(c)(3)(i) and adding in its place the word ``lost'';
0
f. Adding the words ``or to export products made from fur skins'' 
immediately following the words ``approved program'' in paragraph 
(e)(2); and
0
g. Adding the words ``or products made from fur skins'' immediately 
following the words ``To re-export fur skins'' in paragraph (e)(3).


Sec.  23.69  How can I trade internationally in fur skins and fur skin 
products of bobcat, river otter, Canada lynx, gray wolf, and brown bear 
harvested in the United States?

    (a) * * * For purposes of this section, CITES furbearers means 
bobcat (Lynx rufus), river otter (Lontra canadensis), Canada lynx (Lynx 
canadensis), gray wolf (Canis lupus), and brown bear (Ursus arctos) 
harvested in the United States. * * *
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) Fur skins without a CITES tag permanently attached may not be 
exported or re-exported. If the CITES tag has been inadvertently 
removed, damaged, or lost you may obtain a replacement tag. * * *
* * * * *

0
40. Section 23.70 is amended by:
0
a. Adding the word ``tamper-resistant,'' immediately following the word 
``Be'' in paragraph (d)(1)(i);
0
b. Revising paragraph (d)(1)(ii) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Adding the word ``skin'' immediately before the words ``production 
or harvest'' in paragraph (d)(1)(iii);
0
d. Revising paragraph (d)(2) to read as set forth below;
0
e. Removing the first two sentences of paragraph (d)(3) introductory 
text and adding one sentence in their place to read as set forth below;
0
f. Removing the words ``broken, cut, or missing'' from the first 
sentence of paragraph (d)(3)(i) and adding in their place the words 
``inadvertently removed, damaged, or lost'';
0
g. Removing the words ``is broken or cut'' from the fourth sentence of 
paragraph (d)(3)(i) and adding in their place the words ``has been 
inadvertently removed or damaged'';
0
h. Removing the word ``missing'' in the fifth sentence of paragraph 
(d)(3)(i) and adding in its place the word ``lost'';
0
i. Adding the word ``skin'' immediately before the words ``production 
or harvest'' in the first sentence of paragraph (d)(3)(ii);
0
j. Removing the second sentence in paragraph (e)(2);
0
k. Adding the words ``, except for products made from American 
alligators,'' immediately following the words ``State or tribal 
program'' in paragraph (h)(1);
0
l. Adding the words ``or to export products made from American 
alligators,'' immediately following the words ``approved program,'' in 
paragraph (h)(2);
0
m. Redesignating paragraph (h)(3) as paragraph (h)(4); and
0
n. Adding a new paragraph (h)(3) to read as set forth below.


Sec.  23.70  How can I trade internationally in American alligator and 
other crocodilian skins, parts, and products?

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (ii) Be permanently stamped with the two-letter ISO code for the 
country of origin, a unique serial number, a standardized species code 
(available on our Web site; see Sec.  23.7), and for

[[Page 30428]]

specimens of species from populations that have been transferred from 
Appendix I to Appendix II for ranching, the year of skin production or 
harvest. For American alligator, the export tags include the US-CITES 
logo, an abbreviation for the State or Tribe of harvest, a standard 
species code (MIS = Alligator mississippiensis), the year of skin 
production or harvest, and a unique serial number.
* * * * *
    (2) Skins, flanks, and chalecos must be individually tagged.
    (3) Skins without a non-reusable tag permanently attached may not 
be exported or re-exported. * * *
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (3) To re-export crocodilian specimens, complete Form 3-200-73 and 
submit it to either FWS Law Enforcement or the U.S. Management 
Authority.
* * * * *

0
41. Section 23.71 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Adding a sentence to the end of paragraphs (b)(1)(i), (b)(1)(iv), 
and (b)(1)(v) to read as set forth below;
0
c. Revising paragraph (b)(1)(ii) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Adding a sentence to the end of paragraph (b)(2)(iv) to read as set 
forth below;
0
e. Revising paragraph (b)(3)(iii) to read as set forth below;
0
f. Removing the words ``and caviar products that consist'' from 
paragraph (g) and adding in their place the words ``that consists'';
0
g. Adding the words ``or Form 3-200-80'' immediately following the 
words ``Form 3-200-76'' in the third sentence of paragraph (h);
0
h. Removing the words ``to FWS Law Enforcement'' from the end of the 
last sentence in paragraph (h) and adding in their place the words 
``either to FWS Law Enforcement or the U.S. Management Authority''; and
0
i. Adding new paragraph (i) to read as set forth below.


Sec.  23.71  How can I trade internationally in sturgeon caviar?

    (a) U.S. and foreign provisions. For the purposes of this section, 
sturgeon caviar or caviar means the processed roe of any species of 
sturgeon or paddlefish (order Acipenseriformes). It does not include 
sturgeon or paddlefish eggs contained in shampoos, cosmetics, lotions, 
or other products for topical application. The import, export, or re-
export of sturgeon caviar must meet the requirements of this section 
and the other requirements of this part. The import, export, or re-
export of Acipenseriformes specimens other than caviar must meet the 
other requirements of this part. See subparts B and C for prohibitions 
and application procedures.
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) * * * In the United States, the design of the label will be 
determined by the labeler in accordance with the requirements of this 
section.
    (ii) Primary container means any container (tin, jar, pail or other 
receptacle) in direct contact with the caviar.
* * * * *
    (iv) * * * In the United States, this may be done by the person who 
harvested the roe.
    (v) * * * This includes any facility where caviar is removed from 
the container in which it was received and placed in a different 
container.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iv) * * * This is either the calendar year in which caviar was 
harvested or, for caviar imported from shared stocks subject to quotas, 
the quota year in which it was harvested.
* * * * *
    (3) * * *
    (iii) Lot identification number or, for caviar that is being re-
exported, the CITES document number under which it was imported may be 
used in place of the lot identification number.
* * * * *
    (i) CITES register of exporters and of processing and repackaging 
plants. The CITES Secretariat maintains a ``Register of licensed 
exporters and of processing and repackaging plants for specimens of 
sturgeon and paddlefish species'' on its Web site. If you hold a 
current import-export license issued by FWS Law Enforcement and wish to 
be added to the CITES register, you may submit your contact information 
and processing or repackaging plant codes to the U.S. Management 
Authority for submission to the CITES Secretariat.

0
42. Section 23.74 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (b) to read as set forth below;
0
b. Revising paragraph (d) to read as set forth below; and
0
c. Adding a new paragraph (e) to read as set forth below.


Sec.  23.74  How can I trade internationally in personal sport-hunted 
trophies?

* * * * *
    (b) Sport-hunted trophy means a whole dead animal or a readily 
recognizable part or derivative of an animal specifically identified on 
accompanying CITES documents that meets the following criteria:
    (1) Is raw, processed, or manufactured;
    (2) Was legally obtained by the hunter through hunting for his or 
her personal use;
    (3) Is being imported, exported, or re-exported by or on behalf of 
the hunter as part of the transfer from its country of origin 
ultimately to the hunter's country of usual residence; and
    (4) Includes worked, manufactured, or handicraft items made from 
the sport-hunted animal only when:
    (i) Such items are contained in the same shipment as raw or tanned 
parts of the sport-hunted animal and are for the personal use of the 
hunter;
    (ii) The quantity of such items is no more than could reasonably be 
expected given the number of animals taken by the hunter as shown on 
the license or other documentation of the authorized hunt accompanying 
the shipment; and
    (iii) The accompanying CITES documents (export document and, if 
appropriate, import permit) contain a complete itemization and 
description of all items included in the shipment.
* * * * *
    (d) Quantity. The following provisions apply to the issuance and 
acceptance of U.S. and foreign documents for sport-hunted trophies 
originating from a population for which the Conference of the Parties 
has established an export quota. The number of trophies that one hunter 
may import in any calendar year for the following species is:
    (1) No more than two leopard (Panthera pardus) trophies.
    (2) No more than one markhor (Capra falconeri) trophy.
    (3) No more than one black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis) trophy.
    (e) Marking or tagging. (1) The following provisions apply to the 
issuance and acceptance of U.S. and foreign documents for sport-hunted 
trophies originating from a population for which the Conference of the 
Parties has established an export quota. Each trophy imported, 
exported, or re-exported must be marked or tagged in the following 
manner:
    (i) Leopard and markhor: Each raw or tanned skin must have a self-
locking tag inserted through the skin and permanently locked in place 
using the locking mechanism of the tag. The tag must indicate the 
country of origin, the number of the specimen in relation to the annual 
quota, and the calendar year in which the specimen was taken in the 
wild. A mounted sport-hunted trophy

[[Page 30429]]

must be accompanied by the tag from the skin used to make the mount.
    (ii) Black rhinoceros: Parts of the trophy, including, but not 
limited to, skin, skull, or horns, whether mounted or loose, should be 
individually marked with reference to the country of origin, species, 
the number of the specimen in relation to the annual quota, and the 
year of export.
    (iii) Crocodilians: See marking requirements in Sec.  23.70.
    (iv) The export permit or re-export certificate or an annex 
attached to the permit or certificate must contain all the information 
that is given on the tag.
    (2) African elephant (Loxodonta africana). The following provisions 
apply to the issuance and acceptance of U.S. and foreign documents for 
sport-hunted trophies of African elephant. The trophy ivory must be 
legibly marked by means of punch-dies, indelible ink, or other form of 
permanent marking, under a marking and registration system established 
by the country of origin, with the following formula: The country of 
origin represented by the corresponding two-letter ISO country code; 
the last two digits of the year in which the elephant was harvested for 
export; the serial number for the year in question; and the weight of 
the ivory in kilograms. The mark must be highlighted with a flash of 
color and placed on the lip mark area. The lip mark area is the area of 
a whole African elephant tusk where the tusk emerges from the skull and 
which is usually denoted by a prominent ring of staining on the tusk in 
its natural state.

0
43. Section 23.75 is added to subpart E to read as set forth below:


Sec.  23.75  How can I trade internationally in vicu[ntilde]a (Vicugna 
vicugna)?

    (a) U.S. and foreign general provisions. The import, export, or re-
export of specimens of vicu[ntilde]a must meet the requirements of this 
section and the other requirements of this part (see subparts B and C 
of this part for prohibitions and application procedures). Certain 
populations of vicu[ntilde]a are listed in Appendix II for the 
exclusive purpose of allowing international trade in wool sheared from 
live vicu[ntilde]as, cloth made from such wool, and products 
manufactured from such wool or cloth. All other specimens of 
vicu[ntilde]a are deemed to be specimens of a species included in 
Appendix I.
    (b) Vicu[ntilde]a Convention means the Convenio para la 
Conservaci[oacute]n y Manejo de la Vicu[ntilde]a, of which 
vicu[ntilde]a range countries are signatories.
    (c) Vicu[ntilde]a logotype means the logotype adopted by the 
vicu[ntilde]a range countries under the Vicu[ntilde]a Convention.
    (d) Country of origin for the purposes of the vicu[ntilde]a label 
means the name of the country where the vicu[ntilde]a wool in the cloth 
or product originated.
    (e) Wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as, cloth from such wool, 
and products manufactured from such wool or cloth may be imported from 
Appendix-II populations only when they meet the labeling requirements 
in paragraph (f) of this section.
    (f) Labeling requirements. Except for cloth containing CITES pre-
Convention wool of vicu[ntilde]a, you may import, export, or re-export 
vicu[ntilde]a cloth only when the reverse side of the cloth bears the 
vicu[ntilde]a logotype and the selvages bear the words 
``VICU[Ntilde]A--COUNTRY OF ORIGIN''. Specimens of other products 
manufactured from vicu[ntilde]a wool or cloth must bear a label that 
has the vicu[ntilde]a logotype and the designation ``VICU[Ntilde]A--
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN--ARTESANIA''. Each specimen must bear such a label. 
For import into the United States of raw wool sheared from live 
vicu[ntilde]a, see the labeling requirements in 50 CFR 17.40(m).

0
44. Section 23.84 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the word ``four'' and adding in its place the word 
``three'' in the first sentence of paragraph (b);
0
b. Removing the words ``assist the Nomenclature Committee in the 
development and maintenance of'' in paragraph (b)(2)(i) and adding in 
their place the words ``develop and maintain'';
0
c. Adding paragraph (b)(2)(iii) to read as set forth below; and
0
d. Removing paragraph (b)(3).


Sec.  23.84  What are the roles of the Secretariat and the committees?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) The CoP appoints a specialist in zoological nomenclature to 
the Animals Committee and a specialist in botanical nomenclature to the 
Plants Committee. These specialists are ex officio and non-voting, and 
are responsible for developing or identifying standard nomenclature 
references for wildlife and plant taxa and making recommendations on 
nomenclature to Parties, the CoP, other committees, working groups, and 
the Secretariat.

0
45. Section 23.92 is amended by:
0
a. Removing the words ``paragraph (b)'' and adding in their place the 
words ``paragraphs (b) and (c)'' in paragraph (a);
0
b. Removing the words ``and do not need CITES documents'' from the 
first sentence of paragraph (b);
0
c. Revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as set forth below;
0
d. Adding the introductory text of a new paragraph (c) and a paragraph 
(c)(1) to read as set forth below; and
0
e. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(8) as paragraphs (c)(2) 
through (c)(7).


Sec.  23.92  Are any wildlife or plants, and their parts, products, or 
derivatives, exempt?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Plant hybrids. Specimens of an Appendix-II or -III plant taxon 
with an annotation that specifically excludes hybrids.
    (c) The following are exempt from CITES document requirements when 
certain criteria are met.
    (1) Plant hybrids. Seeds and pollen (including pollinia), cut 
flowers, and flasked seedlings or tissue cultures of hybrids that 
qualify as artificially propagated (see Sec.  23.64) and that were 
produced from one or more Appendix-I species or taxa that are not 
annotated to treat hybrids as Appendix-I specimens.
* * * * *

Appendix A to 50 CFR Chapter I--[Removed]

0
46. Remove Appendix A to Chapter I.

    Dated: March 27, 2014
Rachel Jacobson,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2014-11329 Filed 5-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P