Workshop on Electronic Filing of Certificates as Included in Proposed Rule on Certificates of Compliance, 37968-37973 [2014-15241]
Download as PDF
37968
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules
does not warrant preparation of a
regulatory evaluation as the anticipated
impact is so minimal. Since this is a
routine matter that will only affect air
traffic procedures and air navigation, it
is certified this proposed rule, when
promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
The FAA’s authority to issue rules
regarding aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1,
Section 106, describes the authority for
the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the agency’s
authority. This rulemaking is
promulgated under the authority
described in Subtitle VII, Part A,
Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that
section, the FAA is charged with
prescribing regulations to assign the use
of the airspace necessary to ensure the
safety of aircraft and the efficient use of
airspace. This regulation is within the
scope of that authority as it would
modify controlled airspace at Central
Airport, Pasco, WA.
This proposal will be subject to an
environmental analysis in accordance
with FAA Order 1050.1E,
‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final
regulatory action.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the
authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to
amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9X, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points,
dated August 7, 2013, and effective
September 15, 2013 is amended as
follows:
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
■
Paragraph 5000
Class D airspace.
*
*
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
13:51 Jul 02, 2014
Jkt 232001
Paragraph 6002 Class E airspace designated
as surface areas.
*
*
*
*
ANM WA E2 Pasco, WA [Modified]
Pasco, Tri-Cities Airport, WA
(Lat. 46°15′53″ N., long. 119°07′09″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from the
surface within a 4.3-mile radius of Tri-Cities
Airport and that airspace within 4.8-mile
radius of the airport from the 256° bearing
from the airport clockwise to the 11° bearing
from the airport and that airspace within a
5.8-mile radius of the airport from the 11°
bearing from the airport clockwise to the 83°
bearing from the airport and within 5.8-mile
radius of the airport from 213° bearing
clockwise to the 256° bearing from the
airport. This Class D airspace area is effective
during the specific dates and times
established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the
Airport/Facility Directory.
Paragraph 6004 Class E airspace areas
designated as an extension to Class D or
Class E surface area.
*
*
*
*
*
ANM WA E4 Pasco, WA [Removed]
Pasco, Tri-Cities Airport, WA
(Lat. 46°15′53″ N., long. 119°07′09″ W.)
Pasco VOR/DME
(Lat. 46°15′47″ N., long. 119°06′57″ W.)
*
*
*
*
*
ANM WA E5 Pasco, WA [Modified]
Pasco, Tri-Cities Airport, WA
(Lat. 46°15′53″ N., long. 119°07′09″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within 7.8-mile radius
of the Tri-Cities Airport, and that airspace
within an 11-mile radius of the airport from
the 265° bearing from the airport clockwise
to 16° bearing from the airport, and that
airspace from the 54° bearing from the airport
clockwise to the 112° from the airport, and
that airspace 3.5 miles either side of the 35°
bearing of the airport extending from the 11
mile radius to 13mile northeast of the airport,
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
and that airspace and that airspace 4.0 miles
either side of the 133° bearing extending from
the airport to 13 miles southeast of the
airport, and that airspace 4 miles southeast
and 9 miles northwest of the 226° bearing
from the airport extending from the airport
15 miles southwest; that airspace extending
upward from 1,200 feet above the surface
bounded by a line beginning at lat. 45°49′00″
N., long. 118°00′00″ W.; to lat. 45°49′00″ N.,
long. 119°45′00″ W.; to lat. 47°00′00″ N.,
long. 119°45′00″ W., to lat. 47°00′00″ N.,
long. 118°00′00″ W.; thence to the point of
origin.
Issued in Seattle, Washington, on June 23,
2014.
Christopher Ramirez,
Manager (A), Operations Support Group,
Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2014–15692 Filed 7–2–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
*
Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas
extending upward from 700 feet or more
above the surface of the earth.
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR
part 71 continues to read as follows:
■
§ 71.1
ANM WA D Pasco, WA [Modified]
Pasco, Tri-Cities Airport, WA
(Lat. 46°15′53″ N., long. 119°07′09″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from the
surface to and including 2,900 feet MSL
within a 4.3-mile radius of Tri-Cities Airport,
and that airspace within a 4.8-mile radius of
the airport from the 256° bearing from the
airport clockwise to the 11° bearing from the
airport, and that airspace within a 5.8-mile
radius of the airport from the 11° bearing
from the airport clockwise to the 83° bearing
from the airport, and within a 5.8-mile radius
of the airport from the 213° bearing clockwise
to the 256° bearing from the airport.2sp This
Class D airspace area is effective during the
specific dates and times established in
advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective
date and time will thereafter be continuously
published in the Airport/Facility Directory.
Sfmt 4702
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY
COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 1110
[CPSC Docket No. CPSC–2013–0017]
Workshop on Electronic Filing of
Certificates as Included in Proposed
Rule on Certificates of Compliance
Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
ACTION: Announcement of meeting and
request for comments.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC, Commission,
or we) staff is holding a workshop on
aspects of the Commission’s proposed
rule on Certificates of Compliance
(certificates), which the Commission
published on May 13, 2013. Among
other things, the Commission proposed
to require electronic filing of certificates
for regulated imported consumer
products with U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) at the time of filing the
CBP entry or the time of filing the entry
and entry summary, if both are filed
together. The workshop will focus on
this aspect of the proposed rule. We
invite interested parties to participate
in, or attend the workshop, and to
submit written comments.
DATES: The workshop will be held from
9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Thursday, September
18, 2014. Individuals interested in
presenting information and
participating on a panel at the workshop
should register by Friday, August 8,
2014; all other individuals who wish to
attend the workshop should register by
Friday, September 5, 2014. The
workshop will be available via webcast,
but viewers will not be able to interact
with the panelists and presenters.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Written comments must be received by
Friday, October 31, 2014.
ADDRESSES: CPSC staff will hold the
workshop in the Hearing Room at
CPSC’s headquarters at: 4330 East West
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814. You
may attend the workshop free of charge.
Individuals interested in presenting
information or attending the workshop
should register online at: https://
www.cpsc.gov/meetingsignup.html, and
click on the link titled, ‘‘Workshop on
Electronic Filing of Certificates of
Compliance for Imported Consumer
Products.’’ More information about the
workshop will be posted at: https://
www.cpsc.gov/meetingsignup.html.
You may submit comments related to
the workshop and electronic filing of
certificates, identified by Docket No.
CPSC–2013–0017, by any of the
methods below:
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the
following way:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
The Commission does not accept
comments submitted by electronic mail
(email), except through: https://
www.regulations.gov. The Commission
encourages you to submit electronic
comments by using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal, as described above.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions by:
Mail/Hand delivery/Courier,
preferably in five copies, to: Office of the
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commission, Room 820, 4330 East West
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814;
telephone (301) 504–7923.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number for this notice. All
comments received may be posted
without change, including any personal
identifiers, contact information, or other
personal information provided, to:
https://www.regulations.gov. Do not
submit confidential business
information, trade secret information, or
other sensitive or protected information
electronically. Submit such information
separately in writing.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to: https://
www.regulations.gov, and insert
‘‘Docket No. CPSC–2013–0017’’, into the
‘‘Search’’ box, and follow the prompts.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Celestine Kish, Office of Import
Surveillance, 4330 East West Highway,
Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone 301–
987–2547; email: ckish@cpsc.gov.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:51 Jul 02, 2014
Jkt 232001
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. What is CPSC’s authority to regulate
importation of consumer products?
Section 17 of the Consumer Product
Safety Act (CPSA) (15 U.S.C. 2066) and
section 14 of the Federal Hazardous
Substances Act (FHSA) (15 U.S.C. 1273)
authorize the Commission to regulate
the importation of consumer products
and substances that are within the
CPSC’s jurisdiction. Among other
authorities, section 17 of the CPSA
authorizes the Commission to refuse
admission and to destroy any product
imported or offered for import that,
among other things, is not accompanied
by a required certificate, fails to comply
with an applicable consumer product
safety rule, or has a product defect that
constitutes a substantial product hazard
within the meaning of section 15(a)(2) of
the CPSA (15 U.S.C. 2064(a)(2)). CPSC
works with CBP to review and inspect
cargo and to clear compliant consumer
products offered for importation into the
United States. CPSC also works with
CBP to enforce CPSC regulations and to
destroy products that violate the law
and cannot be reconditioned for import.
B. What statutory requirements apply to
certificates of compliance?
When a certificate is needed. Section
14(a) of the CPSA (15 U.S.C. 2063(a)), as
amended by the Consumer Product
Safety Improvement Act of 2008
(CPSIA), requires that regulated
consumer products be certified as
compliant with CPSC’s regulations by
the manufacturer (including an
importer)1 and the private labeler of the
consumer product (if such product bears
a private label). A regulated consumer
product is one that is subject to a
consumer product safety rule under the
CPSA or similar rule, ban, standard, or
regulation under any other law enforced
by the Commission that is imported for
consumption or warehousing, or
distributed in commerce. Section 3(a)(8)
of the CPSA (15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(8))
defines ‘‘distribute in commerce’’ to
mean ‘‘to sell in commerce, to introduce
or deliver for introduction into
commerce, or to hold for sale or
distribution after introduction into
commerce.’’ Section 14(a)(1)(a) of the
1 Section 3(a)(11) of the CPSA defines
‘‘manufacturer’’ as any person who manufactures or
imports a consumer product. As such, any statutory
obligation assigned to a manufacturer, by definition,
applies to an importer. Thus, the statutory
obligation to issue a certificate for children’s and
non-children’s products falls to the manufacturer,
importer, or the private labeler of a consumer
product, if the product is privately labeled under
section 3(a)(12) of the CPSA.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37969
CPSA requires that a certificate for a
regulated non-children’s product
(General Certificate of Conformity, or
GCC) be based on a test of each product
or on a reasonable testing program.
Additionally, every manufacturer
(including an importer) and private
labeler, if there is one, of a children’s
product that is subject to a children’s
product safety rule, must have the
children’s product tested by a CPSCaccepted third party conformity
assessment body (laboratory). Based on
such third party testing, manufacturers
and private labelers must issue a
certificate (Children’s Product
Certificate, or CPC) that certifies that the
children’s product is compliant with all
applicable rules. Section 14(a)(2) of the
CPSA requires that testing and
certification for regulated children’s
products be conducted before importing
such children’s products for
consumption or warehousing or before
distributing such children’s products in
commerce.
Content of certificates. Sections
14(g)(1) and (2) of the CPSA contain
certificate content requirements.
Certificates (‘‘certificates’’ collectively
refers to GCCs and CPCs) must identify
the manufacturer (including the
importer) or private labeler issuing the
certificate, as well as any third party
conformity assessment body on whose
testing the certificate depends. At a
minimum, certificates are required to
include: the date and place of
manufacture; The date and place where
the product was tested; each party
identified on the certificate’s name, full
mailing address, and telephone number;
and contact information for the
individual responsible for maintaining
records of test results. Additionally,
section 14(g) of the CPSA requires that
every certificate be legible and that all
content be in English. Content may be
in any other language as well.
Availability of certificates. Section
14(g)(3) of the CPSA establishes
certificate availability requirements. The
statute requires that every certificate
‘‘accompany the applicable product or
shipment of products covered by the
same certificate’’ and that a copy of the
certificate be furnished to each
distributor or retailer of the product.
(emphasis added). Thus, the statute
requires that domestically produced and
imported products be accompanied by a
certificate. Section 14(g)(3) of the CPSA
additionally provides that upon request,
the manufacturer (including the
importer) or private labeler issuing the
certificate must furnish a copy of the
certificate to the Commission.
Accordingly, only presenting a
certificate of compliance ‘‘on demand’’
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
37970
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
by the Commission does not satisfy the
statutory requirement that the certificate
‘‘accompany’’ the product or shipment.
Finally, section 14(g)(4) of the CPSA
states that in consultation with the
Commissioner of Customs, the CPSC
may, by rule, provide for the electronic
filing of certificates up to 24 hours
before the arrival of an imported
product. Upon request, the
manufacturer (including the importer)
or private labeler issuing the certificate
must furnish a copy of the certificate to
the Commission or to CBP.
In addition to the statutory authority
in section 14 of the CPSA, which
requires certificates for regulated
products, section 3 of the CPSIA gives
the Commission general implementing
authority regarding certificates. Section
3 of the CPSIA provides: ‘‘[t]he
Commission may issue regulations, as
necessary, to implement this Act and
the amendments made by this Act.’’
C. What regulatory actions has the
commission taken regarding
certificates?
Existing 1110 rule. The Commission
promulgated a direct final rule for
‘‘certificates of compliance’’ on
November 18, 2008 (73 FR 68328),
which is codified at 16 CFR part 1110
(the existing 1110 rule). The
Commission published the existing
1110 rule shortly after the CPSIA was
enacted on August 14, 2008, to clarify
for stakeholders the certificate
requirements imposed by the newly
amended sections 14(a) and 14(g). The
existing part 1110 rule clarified
certificate requirements by, for example:
• Limiting the parties who must issue
a certificate to the importer, for products
manufactured outside the United States,
and, in the case of domestically
manufactured products, to the
manufacturer;
• Allowing certificates to be in hard
copy or electronic form;
• Clarifying requirements for an
electronic form of certificate; and
• Clarifying certificate content
requirements.
The existing 1110 rule did not change
the statutory requirement that
certificates ‘‘accompany’’ the applicable
product or shipment of products
covered by the certificate. However, the
existing 1110 rule provides another
means of meeting the ‘‘accompany’’
requirement, by allowing use of
electronic certificates in lieu of paper
certificates. Section 1110.13(a)(1) of the
existing 1110 rule states:
An electronic certificate satisfies the
‘‘accompany’’ requirement if the certificate is
identified by a unique identifier and can be
accessed via a World Wide Web URL or other
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:51 Jul 02, 2014
Jkt 232001
electronic means, provided the URL or other
electronic means and the unique identifier
are created in advance and are available,
along with access to the electronic certificate
itself, to the Commission or to the Customs
authorities as soon as the product or
shipment itself is available for inspection.
Related Commission rules. Since the
existing 1110 rule was promulgated in
2008, the Commission implemented the
testing and labeling requirements in
section 14 of the CPSA, including two
key rules in 2011, which are related to
product certification: (1) Testing and
Labeling Pertaining to Product
Certification, 16 CFR part 1107 (the
Testing Rule or the 1107 rule); and (2)
Conditions and Requirements for
Relying on Component Part Testing or
Certification, or Another Party’s
Finished Product Testing or
Certification, to Meet Testing and
Certification Requirements, 16 CFR part
1109 (the Component Part Rule or the
1109 rule). Both rules were published in
the Federal Register on November 8,
2011 (76 FR 69482 and 76 FR 69546,
respectively). The Testing Rule,
effective February 8, 2013, sets forth
requirements for the testing,
certification, and optional labeling of
regulated children’s products. The
Component Part Rule, effective
December 8, 2011, allows for
component part testing and certification
to meet testing and certification
requirements for children’s and nonchildren’s products. The Component
Part Rule also sets forth criteria for a
manufacturer, importer, or private
labeler to certify a regulated consumer
product based on another party’s testing
or certification.
Proposed amendment to 1110 rule.
On May 13, 2013, the Commission
issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPR) to amend the existing 1110 rule
(78 FR 28080). The NPR proposed to
clarify certificate requirements in light
of the Testing and Component Part
Rules and to implement section 14(g)(4)
of the CPSA, which allows the
Commission, in consultation with the
Commissioner of Customs, to require
that certificates for imported products
be filed electronically with CBP up to 24
hours before arrival of an imported
product. As explained in section IV of
this notice, the workshop will focus on
the requirement for importers to file
electronic certificates with CBP upon
entry. In the NPR, proposed § 1110.13(a)
states that to meet the statutory
requirement that certificates
‘‘accompany’’ products or product
shipments, for regulated finished
products that are imported for
consumption or warehousing, ‘‘the
importer must file the required GCC or
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
CPC electronically with the CBP at the
time of filing the CBP entry or the time
of filing the entry and entry summary,
if both are filed together.’’ 78 FR at
28108. The NPR also sought comment
on allowing filing certificates at a time
earlier than entry, at manifest. 78 FR at
28090.
Regarding the technology involved in
filing electronic certificates, the
Commission proposed filing certificates
in the form of an image, a pdf file, or
in the form of data elements that can be
uploaded into CBP’s database and
electronically provided to CPSC for
review. Id. The NPR stated that the
Commission prefers data elements so
that the information can be uploaded
and searchable in a database. The
Commission recognized that electronic
filing of certificates would require
software upgrades that may need to be
completed in stages by CBP, CPSC, and
stakeholders. The NPR noted that CBP’s
technology would be used to file
certificates electronically and that the
Commission would need CBP’s
assistance and cooperation in
implementing electronic filing of
certificates at entry. Id.
II. What are we trying to accomplish by
requiring electronic certificates to be
filed at entry?
The preamble to the NPR states that
electronically filing certificate
information would aid the Commission
in enforcing the certificate requirement
and give the Commission the ability to
search certificate content information
for enforcement and inspection
purposes. 78 FR at 28089. Using
electronic filing of certificate data
would expedite clearance of consumer
products at the ports and increase the
safety of consumer products entering
the United States through improved and
more efficient enforcement. Currently,
CPSC analyzes certain import data
provided by CBP about shipments of
consumer products arriving at U.S. ports
of entry and then makes risk-based
decisions about which products to clear
for importation and which products to
hold for inspection purposes. In a pilot
project initiated in late 2011, CPSC
improved its import-related functions
by developing a software system known
as the RAM (risk assessment
methodology), to review CBP’s import
data. The RAM allows CPSC to analyze
CBP’s import data more rapidly to
identify low-risk cargo to expedite
clearance and to focus CPSC’s limited
resources on high-risk cargo requiring
further inspection. CPSC believes that
the RAM pilot program successfully
allows staff to identify rapidly certain
high-risk cargo for hold and inspection
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules
and permit low-risk cargo to be cleared
through the ports. CPSC can make this
assessment at the time of entry, often
before products reach U.S. ports,
depending upon when the entry
documentation is filed with CBP.
CPSC seeks to implement the RAM
program beyond the pilot stage. A fully
funded and implemented RAM program
would allow CPSC to analyze CBP’s
import data for all consumer products
under CPSC’s jurisdiction upon entering
the United States. In the NPR to amend
16 CFR part 1110, CPSC proposed to
include data elements from certificates
in the RAM’s import risk analysis
because this data will assist CPSC in
making better and more efficient riskbased decisions for clearance and
inspections. As the RAM is currently
being used, the addition of certificate
data would enable CPSC to automate
review of certificate data and to more
efficiently clear low-risk cargo at the
time of entry. At the same time, CPSC
can identify high-risk cargo for hold and
inspection at the ports. For most
consumer products, clearance at the
ports would be expedited by a fully
expanded RAM program that
incorporates certificate data.
The proposed timing of filing
electronic certificates is significant
because this timing would align with
the receipt of CBP’s import data, by
requiring certificates to be filed at a
point in the entry process when CBP
still has control over the products
offered for importation. Along with
CBP’s data, CPSC would receive
certificate data at a time when we can
make admissibility decisions more
quickly and can react to certificate data
to prevent noncompliant goods from
potentially being sold to consumers.
The earlier that CPSC receives
certificate data in the import process,
the more quickly CPSC can review and
clear products for importation.
Importantly, after the Commission
issued the NPR on May 13, 2013,
President Obama, on February 19, 2014,
issued Executive Order 13659,
Streamlining the Export/Import Process
for America’s Businesses (EO 13659),
which requires certain federal agencies
to significantly enhance their use of
technology to modernize and simplify
the trade processing infrastructure.
Specifically, EO 13659 requires
applicable government agencies to use
CBP’s International Trade Data System
(ITDS), and its supporting systems, such
as CBP’s Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE), to create a ‘‘single
window’’ through which businesses will
electronically submit import-related
data for clearance. EO 13659 envisions
and is working toward a simpler, more
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:51 Jul 02, 2014
Jkt 232001
efficient portal for trade use, to the
benefit of both the trade and those
government agencies with related
authorities and responsibilities.
Participating agencies have until
December 31, 2016, to use systems such
as ACE as the primary means of
receiving standardized import data. As
an independent agency CPSC is not
bound by EO 13659. However,
importers and CPSC both have a strong
interest in CPSC continuing to play a
leadership role in this area. Electronic
filing of certificate data will further
important EO objectives, as well as aid
CPSC in focusing the agency’s resources
to clear products more efficiently and
improve enforcement of our safety
regulations at the ports.
III. Additional Background on CBP’s
Automated Commercial Environment
(ACE)
Before the NPR was issued, CPSC staff
discussed with CBP the capability of
CPB’s staff to accept certificate data into
ACE and provide the information to
CPSC’s RAM for review. ACE
functionality was being upgraded to
accept PDF images (Document Imaging
System, or DIS) and electronic data
elements (PGA Message Set) for
participating government agency (PGA)
import-related forms or other data
collection. Currently, CBP is conducting
several test programs for PGAs, using
DIS and PGA Message Set. See, e.g., 77
FR 20835 (Apr. 6, 2012) (DIS test); 78 FR
75931 (Dec. 13, 2013) (PGA Message Set
test). CPSC staff is discussing the
possibility of participating in CBP’s
PGA Message Set test to pilot
submission of electronic certificates of
compliance. CPSC and CBP will provide
additional notice, if such a pilot
program involving CPSC is imminent.
IV. What are we trying to accomplish
with the workshop?
The goal of the workshop is for CPSC
to receive practical and procedural
information from stakeholders, about
electronic filing of certificates at entry
into CBP’s ACE system. CPSC staff has
been reviewing the comments received
in response to the 1110 rule NPR. Some
comments reflect misunderstandings
about CPSA certificate requirements,
CPSC’s ability and intent to implement
electronic filing of certificates, and the
logistics involved in implementing
electronic filing. Moreover, on March
17, 2014, Acting Chairman Adler
received a letter from 32 trade
associations urging a ‘‘stakeholder
forum’’ to ‘‘engage with CBP,
stakeholders and technical experts’’ on
implementation of electronic filing.
Accordingly, in response to stakeholder
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37971
feedback and request, CPSC staff is
conducting a workshop to:
• Listen closely to stakeholders’
concerns related to the electronic filing
of certificates, as well as to provide
stakeholders the requested opportunity
to give CPSC additional information on
electronic filing of certificates that may
assist the Commission with developing
a final rule and with implementing
electronic filing, if such a requirement
is finalized;
• Clarify for stakeholders certain
issues related to the 1110 rulemaking;
• Provide background on CPSC’s
pilot-scale RAM system and its
consistency with the ‘‘single window’’
approach for import data and risk
management set forth in EO 13659; and
• Provide CBP with an opportunity to
discuss ACE and the DIS and PGA
Message Set tests with stakeholders.
V. What topics will the workshop and
the related comment period address?
Stakeholder comments and
presentations should address the topics
below:
A. Stakeholders’ Current Certificate and
Import Procedures
• Current certificate and import
procedures, including how
manufacturers and importers are
meeting the requirement that certificates
‘‘accompany’’ products or product
shipments.
• Procedures and processes for
creating and populating certificates that
may influence implementation of an
electronic certificate requirement, such
as when and where certificates are
created and maintained, matching
certificates to those product units
covered by the certificate, multiple
entries for certain data components (i.e.,
products covered by the certificate,
applicable regulations, multiple testing
sites for various tests), and
complications or efficiencies achieved
in certificate creation and maintenance
by using component part testing.
• Challenges that certifiers encounter,
in particular customs brokers who also
serve as importers of record, in using
the Component Part Rule, which allows
certifiers to rely on the testing or
certification of another party to issue a
required certificate. This aspect of the
Component Part Rule was specifically
written to assist parties such as
importers.
• Current challenges in meeting
certificate requirements that may be
resolved, minimized, or exacerbated if
an electronic filing requirement for
certificates were implemented.
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
37972
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Stakeholders’ Anticipated Challenges
in Meeting an Electronic Filing
Requirement
• The NPR proposed that certificates
be filed as a document image, in PDF
format, or as data elements. The NPR
stated CPSC’s preference for data
elements because they are searchable. If
CPSC participates in CBP’s test
programs, please address whether the
agency or stakeholders would benefit
from participating in CBP’s DIS test and
the PGA Message Set test. Document
imaging does not provide the same
efficiencies that data elements provide
because the review of document images
would be difficult to automate. Based on
a review of the comments on the 1110
NPR, stakeholders appear to favor data
elements as well. We welcome
stakeholder input on how to focus
resources if we participate in CBP test
programs.
• If certificates were required to be
filed as data elements, stakeholders
would need to transmit certificate data
to ACE via the Automated Broker
Interface (ABI). Please discuss
challenges your industry may face using
ABI to transfer certificate data to CBP.
Include a discussion of upgrading ABI,
automation of certificate processes,
costs, and timing for the relevant
industry.
• Some stakeholders have noted that
matching certificate information to
particular products is complicated and
challenging based on the number and
variety of products offered. Please
discuss whether stakeholders require
more flexibility in organizing
certificates to meet an electronic filing
requirement, including whether and
how certificate data can be streamlined
to meet the needs of electronic filing on
a per-line-item imported basis.
• Describe any practical and logistical
problems, if any, your industry may face
in implementing electronic filing of
certificates. For each challenge
described, please offer solutions or
suggestions that would achieve the goal
of electronic certificates, consistent with
EO 13659. Please comment on how the
government-wide transition to
electronic filing exclusively as
contemplated by EO 13659 might
influence any concerns you might have
with CPSC’s proposed approach for
filing certificates electronically.
• If the Commission finalizes a rule
requiring electronic filing of certificates
for imported products, the requirement
would likely need to be phased in over
time. For example, the requirement
could be phased in based on the port of
entry, by regulated product, by
Harmonized Tariff Schedule for the U.S.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:51 Jul 02, 2014
Jkt 232001
codes, or by entry type. Please provide
any comments or feedback on organized
and logical approaches to phasing in an
electronic filing requirement for
certificate data.
• What, if any, exceptions should the
Commission allow from any
requirement to file an electronic
certificate and why?
C. CBP’s DIS and PGA Message Set
Tests in ACE
• Provide questions and concerns for
CBP pertaining to CPSC’s certificate
requirement.
D. CPSC’s RAM Pilot
• Provide questions or concerns for
CPSC regarding the RAM as the RAM
Pilot relates to clearing products for
importation and enforcement efforts. As
part of any input on this topic, please
consider the goals of EO 13659 as they
relate to risk management, including
seeking common risk management
principles and methods.
VI. What topics will not be discussed in
the workshop and the related comment
period?
Although the NPR to amend 16 CFR
part 1110 contained many proposals,
the September 18, 2014 workshop is
devoted to electronic filing of
certificates at import. Therefore, the
topics listed below are out of scope for
the workshop:
• User fees (we plan to engage
industry on this topic as part of our
outreach, specifically through the
Border Interagency Executive Council’s
External Engagement Committee, as
well as through notice and comment
rulemaking, should the Commission
receive authority from Congress with
respect to user fees);
• Category and scope of products
required to be certified;
• Format for certificates other than at
import;
• Certificate content requirements;
• Recordkeeping requirements;
• Requirements for component part
certificates; and
• Ancillary issues, such as testing,
labeling, and laboratory accreditation.
VII. Details Regarding the Workshop
A. When and where will the workshop
be held?
CPSC staff will hold the workshop
from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on September 18,
2014, in the Hearing Room at CPSC’s
headquarters: 4330 East West Highway,
Fourth Floor, Bethesda, MD 20814. The
workshop will also be available through
a webcast, but viewers will not be able
to interact with the panelists and
presenters.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
B. How do you register for the
workshop?
If you would like to attend the
workshop, but you do not wish to make
a presentation or participate on a panel,
we ask that you register by September
5, 2014. (See the ADDRESSES section of
this document for the Web site link and
instructions on where to register.) Please
be aware that seating will be on a firstcome, first-served basis. The workshop
will also be available through a webcast,
but viewers will not be able to interact
with the panelists and presenters.
If you would like to make a
presentation at the workshop, you
should register by August 8, 2014. (See
the ADDRESSES section of this document
for the Web site link and instructions on
where to register.) When you register,
please indicate that you would like to
make a presentation. CPSC staff will
contact you regarding the proposed
content of your presentation and
presentation guidelines. We will select
individuals to make presentations based
on considerations such as:
• The regulatory scope of the industry
involved;
• The individual’s demonstrated
familiarity or expertise with the topic;
• The practical utility of the
information to be presented; and
• The individual’s viewpoint or
ability to represent certain interests
(such as large manufacturers, small
manufacturers, consumer organizations,
and the scope of the regulated industry).
We would like the presentations to
represent and address a wide variety of
interests.
Although we will make an effort to
accommodate all persons who wish to
make a presentation, the time allotted
for presentations will depend upon the
number of persons who wish to speak
on a given topic and the agenda. We
recommend that individuals and
organizations with common interests
consolidate or coordinate their
presentations, and request time for a
joint presentation. If you wish to make
a presentation and want to make copies
of your presentation or other handouts
available, you should bring copies to the
workshop. We expect to notify those
who are selected to make a presentation
or participate in a panel at least two
weeks before the workshop. Please
inform Ms. Celestine Kish, ckish@
cpsc.gov, 301–987–2547, if you need
any special equipment to make a
presentation.
If you need special accommodations
because of disability, please contact Ms.
Celestine Kish, ckish@cpsc.gov, 301–
987–2547, at least 10 days before the
workshop.
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules
In addition, we encourage written or
electronic comments. Written or
electronic comments will be accepted
until October 31, 2014. Please note that
all comments should be restricted to the
topics covered by the workshop, as
described in this Announcement.
Dated: June 25, 2014.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014–15241 Filed 7–2–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355–01–P
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
17 CFR Parts 1, 15, 17, 19, 32, 37, 38,
140, and 150
RIN 3038–AD99; 3038–AD82
Position Limits for Derivatives and
Aggregation of Positions
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking;
extension of comment periods.
AGENCY:
On December 12, 2013, the
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) published
in the Federal Register a notice of
proposed rulemaking (the ‘‘Position
Limits Proposal’’) to establish
speculative position limits for 28
exempt and agricultural commodity
futures and options contracts and the
physical commodity swaps that are
economically equivalent to such
contracts. On November 15, 2013, the
Commission published in the Federal
Register a notice of proposed
rulemaking (the ‘‘Aggregation
Proposal’’) to amend existing
regulations setting out the Commission’s
policy for aggregation under its position
limits regime. In addition, the
Commission directed staff to hold a
public roundtable on June 19, 2014, to
consider certain issues regarding
position limits for physical commodity
derivatives. In order to provide
interested parties with an opportunity to
comment on the issues to be discussed
at the roundtable, the Commission
published notice in the Federal Register
on May 29, 2014, that the comment
periods for the Position Limits Proposal
and the Aggregation Proposal were
reopened, starting June 12, 2014 (one
week before the roundtable) and ending
July 3, 2014 (two weeks following the
roundtable). To provide commenters
with a sufficient period of time to
respond to questions raised and points
made at the roundtable, the Commission
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:51 Jul 02, 2014
Jkt 232001
is now further extending the comment
period. Comments should be limited to
the issues of hedges of a physical
commodity by a commercial enterprise,
including gross hedging, crosscommodity hedging, anticipatory
hedging, and the process for obtaining a
non-enumerated exemption; the setting
of spot month limits in physicaldelivery and cash-settled contracts and
a conditional spot-month limit
exemption; the setting of non-spot limits
for wheat contracts; the aggregation
exemption for certain ownership
interests of greater than 50 percent in an
owned entity; and aggregation based on
substantially identical trading strategies.
DATES: The comment periods for the
Aggregation Proposal published
November 15, 2013, at 78 FR 68946, and
for the Position Limits Proposal
published December 12, 2013, at 78 FR
75680, will close on August 4, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by RIN 3038–AD99 for the
Position Limits Proposal or RIN 3038–
AD82 for the Aggregation Proposal, by
any of the following methods:
• Agency Web site: https://
comments.cftc.gov;
• Mail: Secretary of the Commission,
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, Three Lafayette Centre,
1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC
20581;
• Hand delivery/courier: Same as
mail, above; or
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow
instructions for submitting comments.
Please submit your comments using
only one method. All comments must be
submitted in English, or if not,
accompanied by an English translation.
Comments will be posted as received to
https://www.cftc.gov. You should submit
only information that you wish to make
available publicly. If you wish the
Commission to consider information
that may be exempt from disclosure
under the Freedom of Information Act,
a petition for confidential treatment of
the exempt information may be
submitted under § 145.9 of the
Commission’s regulations (17 CFR
145.9).
The Commission reserves the right,
but shall have no obligation, to review,
pre-screen, filter, redact, refuse or
remove any or all of your submission
from https://www.cftc.gov that it may
deem to be inappropriate for
publication, such as obscene language.
All submissions that have been redacted
or removed that contain comments on
the merits of the rulemaking will be
retained in the public comment file and
will be considered as required under the
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37973
Administrative Procedure Act and other
applicable laws, and may be accessible
under the Freedom of Information Act.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen Sherrod, Senior Economist,
Division of Market Oversight, (202) 418–
5452, ssherrod@cftc.gov; or Riva Spear
Adriance, Senior Special Counsel,
Division of Market Oversight, (202) 418–
5494, radriance@cftc.gov; Commodity
Futures Trading Commission, Three
Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20581.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Commission has long established
and enforced speculative position limits
for futures and options contracts on
various agricultural commodities as
authorized by the Commodity Exchange
Act (‘‘CEA’’).1 The part 150 position
limits regime 2 generally includes three
components: (1) The level of the limits,
which set a threshold that restricts the
number of speculative positions that a
person may hold in the spot-month,
individual month, and all months
combined,3 (2) exemptions for positions
that constitute bona fide hedging
transactions and certain other types of
transactions,4 and (3) rules to determine
which accounts and positions a person
must aggregate for the purpose of
determining compliance with the
position limit levels.5 The Position
Limits Proposal generally sets out
proposed changes to the first and
second component of the position limits
regime and would establish speculative
position limits for 28 exempt and
agricultural commodity futures and
option contracts, and physical
commodity swaps that are
‘‘economically equivalent’’ to such
contracts (as such term is used in CEA
section 4a(a)(5)).6 The Aggregation
Proposal generally sets out proposed
changes to the third component of the
position limits regime.7
In order to provide interested parties
with an opportunity to comment on the
Aggregation Proposal during the
comment period on the Position Limits
Proposal, the Commission extended the
comment period for the Aggregation
Proposal to February 10, 2014, the same
17
U.S.C. 1 et seq.
17 CFR part 150. Part 150 of the
Commission’s regulations establishes federal
position limits on futures and option contracts in
nine enumerated agricultural commodities.
3 See 17 CFR 150.2.
4 See 17 CFR 150.3.
5 See 17 CFR 150.4.
6 See Position Limits for Derivatives, 78 FR 75680
(Dec. 12, 2013).
7 See Aggregation of Positions, 78 FR 68946 (Nov.
15, 2013).
2 See
E:\FR\FM\03JYP1.SGM
03JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 128 (Thursday, July 3, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37968-37973]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15241]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 1110
[CPSC Docket No. CPSC-2013-0017]
Workshop on Electronic Filing of Certificates as Included in
Proposed Rule on Certificates of Compliance
AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety Commission.
ACTION: Announcement of meeting and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC, Commission,
or we) staff is holding a workshop on aspects of the Commission's
proposed rule on Certificates of Compliance (certificates), which the
Commission published on May 13, 2013. Among other things, the
Commission proposed to require electronic filing of certificates for
regulated imported consumer products with U.S. Customs and Border
Protection (CBP) at the time of filing the CBP entry or the time of
filing the entry and entry summary, if both are filed together. The
workshop will focus on this aspect of the proposed rule. We invite
interested parties to participate in, or attend the workshop, and to
submit written comments.
DATES: The workshop will be held from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Thursday,
September 18, 2014. Individuals interested in presenting information
and participating on a panel at the workshop should register by Friday,
August 8, 2014; all other individuals who wish to attend the workshop
should register by Friday, September 5, 2014. The workshop will be
available via webcast, but viewers will not be able to interact with
the panelists and presenters.
[[Page 37969]]
Written comments must be received by Friday, October 31, 2014.
ADDRESSES: CPSC staff will hold the workshop in the Hearing Room at
CPSC's headquarters at: 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814. You
may attend the workshop free of charge. Individuals interested in
presenting information or attending the workshop should register online
at: https://www.cpsc.gov/meetingsignup.html, and click on the link
titled, ``Workshop on Electronic Filing of Certificates of Compliance
for Imported Consumer Products.'' More information about the workshop
will be posted at: https://www.cpsc.gov/meetingsignup.html.
You may submit comments related to the workshop and electronic
filing of certificates, identified by Docket No. CPSC-2013-0017, by any
of the methods below:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments. The Commission does not accept
comments submitted by electronic mail (email), except through: https://www.regulations.gov. The Commission encourages you to submit electronic
comments by using the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as described above.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions by:
Mail/Hand delivery/Courier, preferably in five copies, to: Office
of the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330
East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301) 504-7923.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and docket number for this notice. All comments received may be posted
without change, including any personal identifiers, contact
information, or other personal information provided, to: https://www.regulations.gov. Do not submit confidential business information,
trade secret information, or other sensitive or protected information
electronically. Submit such information separately in writing.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to: https://www.regulations.gov, and insert
``Docket No. CPSC-2013-0017'', into the ``Search'' box, and follow the
prompts.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Celestine Kish, Office of Import
Surveillance, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone
301-987-2547; email: ckish@cpsc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. What is CPSC's authority to regulate importation of consumer
products?
Section 17 of the Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) (15 U.S.C.
2066) and section 14 of the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA) (15
U.S.C. 1273) authorize the Commission to regulate the importation of
consumer products and substances that are within the CPSC's
jurisdiction. Among other authorities, section 17 of the CPSA
authorizes the Commission to refuse admission and to destroy any
product imported or offered for import that, among other things, is not
accompanied by a required certificate, fails to comply with an
applicable consumer product safety rule, or has a product defect that
constitutes a substantial product hazard within the meaning of section
15(a)(2) of the CPSA (15 U.S.C. 2064(a)(2)). CPSC works with CBP to
review and inspect cargo and to clear compliant consumer products
offered for importation into the United States. CPSC also works with
CBP to enforce CPSC regulations and to destroy products that violate
the law and cannot be reconditioned for import.
B. What statutory requirements apply to certificates of compliance?
When a certificate is needed. Section 14(a) of the CPSA (15 U.S.C.
2063(a)), as amended by the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of
2008 (CPSIA), requires that regulated consumer products be certified as
compliant with CPSC's regulations by the manufacturer (including an
importer)\1\ and the private labeler of the consumer product (if such
product bears a private label). A regulated consumer product is one
that is subject to a consumer product safety rule under the CPSA or
similar rule, ban, standard, or regulation under any other law enforced
by the Commission that is imported for consumption or warehousing, or
distributed in commerce. Section 3(a)(8) of the CPSA (15 U.S.C.
2052(a)(8)) defines ``distribute in commerce'' to mean ``to sell in
commerce, to introduce or deliver for introduction into commerce, or to
hold for sale or distribution after introduction into commerce.''
Section 14(a)(1)(a) of the CPSA requires that a certificate for a
regulated non-children's product (General Certificate of Conformity, or
GCC) be based on a test of each product or on a reasonable testing
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Section 3(a)(11) of the CPSA defines ``manufacturer'' as any
person who manufactures or imports a consumer product. As such, any
statutory obligation assigned to a manufacturer, by definition,
applies to an importer. Thus, the statutory obligation to issue a
certificate for children's and non-children's products falls to the
manufacturer, importer, or the private labeler of a consumer
product, if the product is privately labeled under section 3(a)(12)
of the CPSA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, every manufacturer (including an importer) and
private labeler, if there is one, of a children's product that is
subject to a children's product safety rule, must have the children's
product tested by a CPSC-accepted third party conformity assessment
body (laboratory). Based on such third party testing, manufacturers and
private labelers must issue a certificate (Children's Product
Certificate, or CPC) that certifies that the children's product is
compliant with all applicable rules. Section 14(a)(2) of the CPSA
requires that testing and certification for regulated children's
products be conducted before importing such children's products for
consumption or warehousing or before distributing such children's
products in commerce.
Content of certificates. Sections 14(g)(1) and (2) of the CPSA
contain certificate content requirements. Certificates
(``certificates'' collectively refers to GCCs and CPCs) must identify
the manufacturer (including the importer) or private labeler issuing
the certificate, as well as any third party conformity assessment body
on whose testing the certificate depends. At a minimum, certificates
are required to include: the date and place of manufacture; The date
and place where the product was tested; each party identified on the
certificate's name, full mailing address, and telephone number; and
contact information for the individual responsible for maintaining
records of test results. Additionally, section 14(g) of the CPSA
requires that every certificate be legible and that all content be in
English. Content may be in any other language as well.
Availability of certificates. Section 14(g)(3) of the CPSA
establishes certificate availability requirements. The statute requires
that every certificate ``accompany the applicable product or shipment
of products covered by the same certificate'' and that a copy of the
certificate be furnished to each distributor or retailer of the
product. (emphasis added). Thus, the statute requires that domestically
produced and imported products be accompanied by a certificate. Section
14(g)(3) of the CPSA additionally provides that upon request, the
manufacturer (including the importer) or private labeler issuing the
certificate must furnish a copy of the certificate to the Commission.
Accordingly, only presenting a certificate of compliance ``on demand''
[[Page 37970]]
by the Commission does not satisfy the statutory requirement that the
certificate ``accompany'' the product or shipment.
Finally, section 14(g)(4) of the CPSA states that in consultation
with the Commissioner of Customs, the CPSC may, by rule, provide for
the electronic filing of certificates up to 24 hours before the arrival
of an imported product. Upon request, the manufacturer (including the
importer) or private labeler issuing the certificate must furnish a
copy of the certificate to the Commission or to CBP.
In addition to the statutory authority in section 14 of the CPSA,
which requires certificates for regulated products, section 3 of the
CPSIA gives the Commission general implementing authority regarding
certificates. Section 3 of the CPSIA provides: ``[t]he Commission may
issue regulations, as necessary, to implement this Act and the
amendments made by this Act.''
C. What regulatory actions has the commission taken regarding
certificates?
Existing 1110 rule. The Commission promulgated a direct final rule
for ``certificates of compliance'' on November 18, 2008 (73 FR 68328),
which is codified at 16 CFR part 1110 (the existing 1110 rule). The
Commission published the existing 1110 rule shortly after the CPSIA was
enacted on August 14, 2008, to clarify for stakeholders the certificate
requirements imposed by the newly amended sections 14(a) and 14(g). The
existing part 1110 rule clarified certificate requirements by, for
example:
Limiting the parties who must issue a certificate to the
importer, for products manufactured outside the United States, and, in
the case of domestically manufactured products, to the manufacturer;
Allowing certificates to be in hard copy or electronic
form;
Clarifying requirements for an electronic form of
certificate; and
Clarifying certificate content requirements.
The existing 1110 rule did not change the statutory requirement
that certificates ``accompany'' the applicable product or shipment of
products covered by the certificate. However, the existing 1110 rule
provides another means of meeting the ``accompany'' requirement, by
allowing use of electronic certificates in lieu of paper certificates.
Section 1110.13(a)(1) of the existing 1110 rule states:
An electronic certificate satisfies the ``accompany''
requirement if the certificate is identified by a unique identifier
and can be accessed via a World Wide Web URL or other electronic
means, provided the URL or other electronic means and the unique
identifier are created in advance and are available, along with
access to the electronic certificate itself, to the Commission or to
the Customs authorities as soon as the product or shipment itself is
available for inspection.
Related Commission rules. Since the existing 1110 rule was
promulgated in 2008, the Commission implemented the testing and
labeling requirements in section 14 of the CPSA, including two key
rules in 2011, which are related to product certification: (1) Testing
and Labeling Pertaining to Product Certification, 16 CFR part 1107 (the
Testing Rule or the 1107 rule); and (2) Conditions and Requirements for
Relying on Component Part Testing or Certification, or Another Party's
Finished Product Testing or Certification, to Meet Testing and
Certification Requirements, 16 CFR part 1109 (the Component Part Rule
or the 1109 rule). Both rules were published in the Federal Register on
November 8, 2011 (76 FR 69482 and 76 FR 69546, respectively). The
Testing Rule, effective February 8, 2013, sets forth requirements for
the testing, certification, and optional labeling of regulated
children's products. The Component Part Rule, effective December 8,
2011, allows for component part testing and certification to meet
testing and certification requirements for children's and non-
children's products. The Component Part Rule also sets forth criteria
for a manufacturer, importer, or private labeler to certify a regulated
consumer product based on another party's testing or certification.
Proposed amendment to 1110 rule. On May 13, 2013, the Commission
issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) to amend the existing 1110
rule (78 FR 28080). The NPR proposed to clarify certificate
requirements in light of the Testing and Component Part Rules and to
implement section 14(g)(4) of the CPSA, which allows the Commission, in
consultation with the Commissioner of Customs, to require that
certificates for imported products be filed electronically with CBP up
to 24 hours before arrival of an imported product. As explained in
section IV of this notice, the workshop will focus on the requirement
for importers to file electronic certificates with CBP upon entry. In
the NPR, proposed Sec. 1110.13(a) states that to meet the statutory
requirement that certificates ``accompany'' products or product
shipments, for regulated finished products that are imported for
consumption or warehousing, ``the importer must file the required GCC
or CPC electronically with the CBP at the time of filing the CBP entry
or the time of filing the entry and entry summary, if both are filed
together.'' 78 FR at 28108. The NPR also sought comment on allowing
filing certificates at a time earlier than entry, at manifest. 78 FR at
28090.
Regarding the technology involved in filing electronic
certificates, the Commission proposed filing certificates in the form
of an image, a pdf file, or in the form of data elements that can be
uploaded into CBP's database and electronically provided to CPSC for
review. Id. The NPR stated that the Commission prefers data elements so
that the information can be uploaded and searchable in a database. The
Commission recognized that electronic filing of certificates would
require software upgrades that may need to be completed in stages by
CBP, CPSC, and stakeholders. The NPR noted that CBP's technology would
be used to file certificates electronically and that the Commission
would need CBP's assistance and cooperation in implementing electronic
filing of certificates at entry. Id.
II. What are we trying to accomplish by requiring electronic
certificates to be filed at entry?
The preamble to the NPR states that electronically filing
certificate information would aid the Commission in enforcing the
certificate requirement and give the Commission the ability to search
certificate content information for enforcement and inspection
purposes. 78 FR at 28089. Using electronic filing of certificate data
would expedite clearance of consumer products at the ports and increase
the safety of consumer products entering the United States through
improved and more efficient enforcement. Currently, CPSC analyzes
certain import data provided by CBP about shipments of consumer
products arriving at U.S. ports of entry and then makes risk-based
decisions about which products to clear for importation and which
products to hold for inspection purposes. In a pilot project initiated
in late 2011, CPSC improved its import-related functions by developing
a software system known as the RAM (risk assessment methodology), to
review CBP's import data. The RAM allows CPSC to analyze CBP's import
data more rapidly to identify low-risk cargo to expedite clearance and
to focus CPSC's limited resources on high-risk cargo requiring further
inspection. CPSC believes that the RAM pilot program successfully
allows staff to identify rapidly certain high-risk cargo for hold and
inspection
[[Page 37971]]
and permit low-risk cargo to be cleared through the ports. CPSC can
make this assessment at the time of entry, often before products reach
U.S. ports, depending upon when the entry documentation is filed with
CBP.
CPSC seeks to implement the RAM program beyond the pilot stage. A
fully funded and implemented RAM program would allow CPSC to analyze
CBP's import data for all consumer products under CPSC's jurisdiction
upon entering the United States. In the NPR to amend 16 CFR part 1110,
CPSC proposed to include data elements from certificates in the RAM's
import risk analysis because this data will assist CPSC in making
better and more efficient risk-based decisions for clearance and
inspections. As the RAM is currently being used, the addition of
certificate data would enable CPSC to automate review of certificate
data and to more efficiently clear low-risk cargo at the time of entry.
At the same time, CPSC can identify high-risk cargo for hold and
inspection at the ports. For most consumer products, clearance at the
ports would be expedited by a fully expanded RAM program that
incorporates certificate data.
The proposed timing of filing electronic certificates is
significant because this timing would align with the receipt of CBP's
import data, by requiring certificates to be filed at a point in the
entry process when CBP still has control over the products offered for
importation. Along with CBP's data, CPSC would receive certificate data
at a time when we can make admissibility decisions more quickly and can
react to certificate data to prevent noncompliant goods from
potentially being sold to consumers. The earlier that CPSC receives
certificate data in the import process, the more quickly CPSC can
review and clear products for importation.
Importantly, after the Commission issued the NPR on May 13, 2013,
President Obama, on February 19, 2014, issued Executive Order 13659,
Streamlining the Export/Import Process for America's Businesses (EO
13659), which requires certain federal agencies to significantly
enhance their use of technology to modernize and simplify the trade
processing infrastructure. Specifically, EO 13659 requires applicable
government agencies to use CBP's International Trade Data System
(ITDS), and its supporting systems, such as CBP's Automated Commercial
Environment (ACE), to create a ``single window'' through which
businesses will electronically submit import-related data for
clearance. EO 13659 envisions and is working toward a simpler, more
efficient portal for trade use, to the benefit of both the trade and
those government agencies with related authorities and
responsibilities.
Participating agencies have until December 31, 2016, to use systems
such as ACE as the primary means of receiving standardized import data.
As an independent agency CPSC is not bound by EO 13659. However,
importers and CPSC both have a strong interest in CPSC continuing to
play a leadership role in this area. Electronic filing of certificate
data will further important EO objectives, as well as aid CPSC in
focusing the agency's resources to clear products more efficiently and
improve enforcement of our safety regulations at the ports.
III. Additional Background on CBP's Automated Commercial Environment
(ACE)
Before the NPR was issued, CPSC staff discussed with CBP the
capability of CPB's staff to accept certificate data into ACE and
provide the information to CPSC's RAM for review. ACE functionality was
being upgraded to accept PDF images (Document Imaging System, or DIS)
and electronic data elements (PGA Message Set) for participating
government agency (PGA) import-related forms or other data collection.
Currently, CBP is conducting several test programs for PGAs, using DIS
and PGA Message Set. See, e.g., 77 FR 20835 (Apr. 6, 2012) (DIS test);
78 FR 75931 (Dec. 13, 2013) (PGA Message Set test). CPSC staff is
discussing the possibility of participating in CBP's PGA Message Set
test to pilot submission of electronic certificates of compliance. CPSC
and CBP will provide additional notice, if such a pilot program
involving CPSC is imminent.
IV. What are we trying to accomplish with the workshop?
The goal of the workshop is for CPSC to receive practical and
procedural information from stakeholders, about electronic filing of
certificates at entry into CBP's ACE system. CPSC staff has been
reviewing the comments received in response to the 1110 rule NPR. Some
comments reflect misunderstandings about CPSA certificate requirements,
CPSC's ability and intent to implement electronic filing of
certificates, and the logistics involved in implementing electronic
filing. Moreover, on March 17, 2014, Acting Chairman Adler received a
letter from 32 trade associations urging a ``stakeholder forum'' to
``engage with CBP, stakeholders and technical experts'' on
implementation of electronic filing. Accordingly, in response to
stakeholder feedback and request, CPSC staff is conducting a workshop
to:
Listen closely to stakeholders' concerns related to the
electronic filing of certificates, as well as to provide stakeholders
the requested opportunity to give CPSC additional information on
electronic filing of certificates that may assist the Commission with
developing a final rule and with implementing electronic filing, if
such a requirement is finalized;
Clarify for stakeholders certain issues related to the
1110 rulemaking;
Provide background on CPSC's pilot-scale RAM system and
its consistency with the ``single window'' approach for import data and
risk management set forth in EO 13659; and
Provide CBP with an opportunity to discuss ACE and the DIS
and PGA Message Set tests with stakeholders.
V. What topics will the workshop and the related comment period
address?
Stakeholder comments and presentations should address the topics
below:
A. Stakeholders' Current Certificate and Import Procedures
Current certificate and import procedures, including how
manufacturers and importers are meeting the requirement that
certificates ``accompany'' products or product shipments.
Procedures and processes for creating and populating
certificates that may influence implementation of an electronic
certificate requirement, such as when and where certificates are
created and maintained, matching certificates to those product units
covered by the certificate, multiple entries for certain data
components (i.e., products covered by the certificate, applicable
regulations, multiple testing sites for various tests), and
complications or efficiencies achieved in certificate creation and
maintenance by using component part testing.
Challenges that certifiers encounter, in particular
customs brokers who also serve as importers of record, in using the
Component Part Rule, which allows certifiers to rely on the testing or
certification of another party to issue a required certificate. This
aspect of the Component Part Rule was specifically written to assist
parties such as importers.
Current challenges in meeting certificate requirements
that may be resolved, minimized, or exacerbated if an electronic filing
requirement for certificates were implemented.
[[Page 37972]]
B. Stakeholders' Anticipated Challenges in Meeting an Electronic Filing
Requirement
The NPR proposed that certificates be filed as a document
image, in PDF format, or as data elements. The NPR stated CPSC's
preference for data elements because they are searchable. If CPSC
participates in CBP's test programs, please address whether the agency
or stakeholders would benefit from participating in CBP's DIS test and
the PGA Message Set test. Document imaging does not provide the same
efficiencies that data elements provide because the review of document
images would be difficult to automate. Based on a review of the
comments on the 1110 NPR, stakeholders appear to favor data elements as
well. We welcome stakeholder input on how to focus resources if we
participate in CBP test programs.
If certificates were required to be filed as data
elements, stakeholders would need to transmit certificate data to ACE
via the Automated Broker Interface (ABI). Please discuss challenges
your industry may face using ABI to transfer certificate data to CBP.
Include a discussion of upgrading ABI, automation of certificate
processes, costs, and timing for the relevant industry.
Some stakeholders have noted that matching certificate
information to particular products is complicated and challenging based
on the number and variety of products offered. Please discuss whether
stakeholders require more flexibility in organizing certificates to
meet an electronic filing requirement, including whether and how
certificate data can be streamlined to meet the needs of electronic
filing on a per-line-item imported basis.
Describe any practical and logistical problems, if any,
your industry may face in implementing electronic filing of
certificates. For each challenge described, please offer solutions or
suggestions that would achieve the goal of electronic certificates,
consistent with EO 13659. Please comment on how the government-wide
transition to electronic filing exclusively as contemplated by EO 13659
might influence any concerns you might have with CPSC's proposed
approach for filing certificates electronically.
If the Commission finalizes a rule requiring electronic
filing of certificates for imported products, the requirement would
likely need to be phased in over time. For example, the requirement
could be phased in based on the port of entry, by regulated product, by
Harmonized Tariff Schedule for the U.S. codes, or by entry type. Please
provide any comments or feedback on organized and logical approaches to
phasing in an electronic filing requirement for certificate data.
What, if any, exceptions should the Commission allow from
any requirement to file an electronic certificate and why?
C. CBP's DIS and PGA Message Set Tests in ACE
Provide questions and concerns for CBP pertaining to
CPSC's certificate requirement.
D. CPSC's RAM Pilot
Provide questions or concerns for CPSC regarding the RAM
as the RAM Pilot relates to clearing products for importation and
enforcement efforts. As part of any input on this topic, please
consider the goals of EO 13659 as they relate to risk management,
including seeking common risk management principles and methods.
VI. What topics will not be discussed in the workshop and the related
comment period?
Although the NPR to amend 16 CFR part 1110 contained many
proposals, the September 18, 2014 workshop is devoted to electronic
filing of certificates at import. Therefore, the topics listed below
are out of scope for the workshop:
User fees (we plan to engage industry on this topic as
part of our outreach, specifically through the Border Interagency
Executive Council's External Engagement Committee, as well as through
notice and comment rulemaking, should the Commission receive authority
from Congress with respect to user fees);
Category and scope of products required to be certified;
Format for certificates other than at import;
Certificate content requirements;
Recordkeeping requirements;
Requirements for component part certificates; and
Ancillary issues, such as testing, labeling, and
laboratory accreditation.
VII. Details Regarding the Workshop
A. When and where will the workshop be held?
CPSC staff will hold the workshop from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on
September 18, 2014, in the Hearing Room at CPSC's headquarters: 4330
East West Highway, Fourth Floor, Bethesda, MD 20814. The workshop will
also be available through a webcast, but viewers will not be able to
interact with the panelists and presenters.
B. How do you register for the workshop?
If you would like to attend the workshop, but you do not wish to
make a presentation or participate on a panel, we ask that you register
by September 5, 2014. (See the ADDRESSES section of this document for
the Web site link and instructions on where to register.) Please be
aware that seating will be on a first-come, first-served basis. The
workshop will also be available through a webcast, but viewers will not
be able to interact with the panelists and presenters.
If you would like to make a presentation at the workshop, you
should register by August 8, 2014. (See the ADDRESSES section of this
document for the Web site link and instructions on where to register.)
When you register, please indicate that you would like to make a
presentation. CPSC staff will contact you regarding the proposed
content of your presentation and presentation guidelines. We will
select individuals to make presentations based on considerations such
as:
The regulatory scope of the industry involved;
The individual's demonstrated familiarity or expertise
with the topic;
The practical utility of the information to be presented;
and
The individual's viewpoint or ability to represent certain
interests (such as large manufacturers, small manufacturers, consumer
organizations, and the scope of the regulated industry).
We would like the presentations to represent and address a wide variety
of interests.
Although we will make an effort to accommodate all persons who wish
to make a presentation, the time allotted for presentations will depend
upon the number of persons who wish to speak on a given topic and the
agenda. We recommend that individuals and organizations with common
interests consolidate or coordinate their presentations, and request
time for a joint presentation. If you wish to make a presentation and
want to make copies of your presentation or other handouts available,
you should bring copies to the workshop. We expect to notify those who
are selected to make a presentation or participate in a panel at least
two weeks before the workshop. Please inform Ms. Celestine Kish,
ckish@cpsc.gov, 301-987-2547, if you need any special equipment to make
a presentation.
If you need special accommodations because of disability, please
contact Ms. Celestine Kish, ckish@cpsc.gov, 301-987-2547, at least 10
days before the workshop.
[[Page 37973]]
In addition, we encourage written or electronic comments. Written
or electronic comments will be accepted until October 31, 2014. Please
note that all comments should be restricted to the topics covered by
the workshop, as described in this Announcement.
Dated: June 25, 2014.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014-15241 Filed 7-2-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P