[Senate Report 113-132]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
113th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 113-132
_______________________________________________________________________
Calendar No. 291
PIRATE FISHING ELIMINATION ACT
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
on
S. 267
January 8, 2014.--Ordered to be printed
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
one hundred thirteenth congress
second session
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman
BARBARA BOXER, California JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
BILL NELSON, Florida ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington ROY BLUNT, Missouri
MARK PRYOR, Arkansas MARCO RUBIO, Florida
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota DEAN HELLER, Nevada
MARK WARNER, Virginia DAN COATS, Indiana
MARK BEGICH, Alaska TIM SCOTT, South Carolina
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut TED CRUZ, Texas
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
ED MARKEY, Massachusetts RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CORY BOOKER, New Jersey
Ellen Doneski, Staff Director
John Williams, General Counsel
David Schwietert, Republican Staff Director
Nick Rossi, Republican Deputy Staff Director
Rebecca Seidel, Republican General Counsel
Calendar No. 291
113th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 113-132
======================================================================
PIRATE FISHING ELIMINATION ACT
_______
January 8, 2014.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Rockefeller, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 267]
The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to
which was referred the bill (S. 267) to prevent, deter, and
eliminate illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing through
port State measures, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill
do pass.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of S. 267, the Pirate Fishing Elimination Act, is
to make the changes to domestic law necessary for the United
States to implement the Agreement on Port State Measures to
Prevent, Deter, and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported, and
Unregulated Fishing.
Background and Needs
Many fish stocks around the world have become depleted in the
last several decades as a result of fleet overcapacity,
overfishing, and ineffective fisheries law enforcement regimes.
Coastal fishing nations are responsible for managing the fish
stocks that fall within their domestic waters, which extend 200
nautical miles from their coastline, also known as their
exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Unfortunately, many coastal
nations do not manage fish stocks sustainably, enforce their
fishery conservation and management measures effectively, or
coordinate management of shared fish stocks with other fishing
nations.
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(MSA), enacted in 1976 as the Fishery Conservation and
Management Act of 1976, provides the primary architecture for
the conservation and management of fisheries in U.S. Federal
waters.\1\ Under the MSA, the U.S. Government exercises
sovereign rights and exclusive management authority over fish
and Continental Shelf fishery resources within the United
States EEZ. The MSA vests the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary)
with overall authority for the management of these resources.
The Secretary generally carries out these responsibilities
through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The MSA calls for
Regional Fishery Management Councils established by the Act
(and the Secretary in certain cases) to develop fishery
management plans, subject to the Secretary's approval, that
follow the Act's requirements, including rebuilding overfished
stocks and setting sustainable harvest levels using catch
limits based on the best available science. The requirements of
the MSA and the fishery management plans promulgated thereunder
are enforced by the Secretary and the Secretary of the
department in which the Coast Guard is operating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16
U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 1801-1884 (2012) (first enacted as the Fishery
Conservation and Management Act of 1976, Pub. L. 94--265, 90 Stat. 331
(1976)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coordinated management of fish stocks harvested on the high
seas (i.e., waters beyond the jurisdiction of any nation) is
accomplished by nations participating in Regional Fisheries
Management Organizations (RFMOs) or through international
agreements created to guide and coordinate the fishery
management activities of multiple nations that target common
stocks in specific regions. Each nation that chooses to
participate in an RFMO or an international fishery agreement
retains its sovereignty, yet is expected to develop domestic
fisheries laws and regulations consistent with each agreement.
The United States follows this practice and seeks to enact
implementing legislation and promulgate regulations where
necessary in order to meet its commitments in RFMOs and under
international fisheries agreements. Short of such an agreement
or implementing legislation, U.S. fisheries managers seek
discussions with foreign counterparts to address concerns on
interjurisdictional stock management.
U.S. international fishery enforcement activities are
conducted by the Coast Guard and NMFS under a longstanding
interagency agreement. The Coast Guard, whose eleven statutory
missions include fisheries law enforcement\2\, is responsible
for conducting international (as well as domestic) fishery
patrols and all other at-sea enforcement, while NMFS is
responsible for dockside and landside enforcement. The Coast
Guard conducts its international enforcement operations in
close coordination with the State Department, as required by
Presidential Directive 27.\3\ NMFS and the Coast Guard also
provide input to the State Department for the negotiation of
international fishery agreements and the review and approval of
foreign fishing vessel permit applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 6 U.S.C. Sec. 468(a)(1)(D) (2012).
\3\ See generally Presidential Directive 27, Jan. 19, 1978
(establishing uniform procedures within the United States Government
for dealing with non-military incidents which could have an adverse
impact upon the conduct of U.S. foreign relations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Foreign Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing
The term ``IUU fishing'' describes a range of fishing
activities, including: the failure to report, or the
misreporting of, catches; fishing without the permission of a
coastal country; the reflagging of vessels to countries that
are unable or unwilling to adequately control their fishing
activity; and noncompliance with fishing gear and area rules.
The extent to which IUU fishing occurs is not fully known, but
some have estimated that it accounts for as much as a fourth of
the world's fish catch and, as such, represents one of the
greatest challenges to sustainable global fishery conservation
and management. It has been estimated in recent years that
worldwide IUU fish harvests are worth between $10 billion and
$23.5 billion annually, and represent between 11 million and 26
million tons.\4\ Annual IUU harvests at these levels likely
create significant ecological impacts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ David J. Agnew et al., Estimating the Worldwide Extent of
Illegal Fishing, PLoS ONE, Feb. 2009, at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Worldwide, the amount of IUU fishing appears to be increasing
as IUU fishermen attempt to avoid stricter fishing rules
created to address declining fish stocks. Preventing IUU
fishing on the high seas is difficult due to the vast areas of
ocean to monitor, enforcement resource limitations, and a high
volume of operating fishing vessels. Current international
efforts to eliminate IUU fishing are mainly led through the
United Nations (U.N.) Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO),
and are primarily focused on persuading individual nations to
better control and manage their fishing fleets. RFMOs generally
strive to follow guidelines established by the U.N. to combat
IUU fishing. The U.N. also plays an important role in
addressing labor abuses on fishing vessels.
IUU Challenges for Developing Countries
In an effort to generate revenue, the governments of many
developing coastal countries have negotiated agreements that
allow developed countries, including European countries, China,
and Russia, to harvest their fishery resources. In many
instances, officials from developing countries have oversold
fishing rights, thereby increasing potential total catches of
their fish stocks well beyond sustainable levels. Fishing under
these circumstances inevitably leads to overexploitation of
fishery resources, and this problem is exacerbated by the fact
that many developing coastal countries lack the capacity to
conduct fish stock assessments, define sustainable harvest
levels, and monitor compliance with and enforce fishery
conservation and management measures. Taken together, these
factors can result in rapid declines in abundance of local fish
stocks which, in turn, threaten the livelihoods of local
fishermen. Such circumstances have also led to illegal
trafficking, exploitation, and physical abuse of what are often
migrant workers on fishing vessels operating in the waters of
developing nations.
In some cases, these circumstances have even caused fishermen
to turn to piracy. A prime example is the coastal country of
Somalia. It has been widely reported that there are direct
connections between the significant increases in piratical
activity off the Horn of Africa in the past decade and reduced
fishing opportunities among Somali fishermen during the same
time period.\5\ The increased pirate attacks seem to have
originated as a response to foreign IUU fishing and dumping of
toxic waste in Somali waters, both of which had a negative
impact on fishing for Somali fishermen, and subsequently
expanded into a ransom-driven, hostage-taking enterprise. More
recently, it has been reported that the relationship between
Somali piracy and IUU fishing has come full circle. In July
2013, the U.N. Security Council published a special report on
Somalia which indicates that Somali pirates are now turning
from hijacking ships to providing ``private security'' for
vessels illegally fishing in Somali waters.\6\ Specifically,
the report states that in northern Somalia a number of these
individuals are reverting to prior, familiar patterns of
illicit behavior, including armed protection of fishing
activities and illegal fishing, arms trafficking, human
trafficking, and transshipment of narcotics.\7\ The U.N. report
also notes that illegal fishing has been reported to facilitate
other forms of contraband, including weapons smuggling.\8\ The
situation in Somalia makes clear that foreign IUU fishing has
broader implications beyond international fishery conservation
and management.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See, e.g., Jeffrey Gettleman, Pirates Tell Their Side: They
Want Only Money, N.Y. TIMES, Oct. 1, 2008, at A6; Paul Salopek, Somali
Pirates Say It's All about Payback, Exacting Tax for Years of Fish
Poaching, They Say Waters Became Dumping Ground, SEATTLE TIMES, Oct.
15, 2008, at A9; Todd Pittman, Somali Pirates a Far Cry from Buccaneers
of Old, ASSOCIATED PRESS ONLINE, Apr. 11, 2009; Jason Straziuso,
Fishermen See Benefits to Pirates, the Trawlers That Used to Scoop up
All the Fish, Kenyan Fishermen Say, Have Been Scared Away, L.A. TIMES,
Mar. 7, 2010, at 11; and Abdiqani Hassan, A Pirate's Life of Luxury
Comes with Risk, Scorn, Ex-fisherman Lured to Sea by Huge Ransom
Payouts, CHI. TRIB., Mar. 13, 2011, at 30.
\6\ U.N. Security Council, Security Council Committee pursuant to
resolutions 751 (1992) and 1907 (2009) concerning Somalia and Eritrea,
Report of the Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea pursuant to
Security Council resolution 2060 (2012): Somalia, 42, U.N. Doc. S/2013/
413 (Jul. 12, 2013).
\7\ Id. 41.
\8\ Id. 43.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In recent years, marine policy experts have recommended a
number of measures to combat IUU fishing, particularly along
the coasts of developing countries. These recommendations have
included ending the system of flags of convenience, improving
port inspections and strengthening port state controls, and
reducing the fishing pressure caused by large fishing fleets
from industrialized nations. These measures require resources,
including funding, staff, technology, and expertise, that
remain largely unavailable in many developing countries. Many
foreign aid organizations, such as the World Bank, attempt to
direct foreign financial and technical assistance to improve
the sustainability of coastal nations' fisheries, but the
United States has undertaken only limited efforts to assist
developing countries in targeting IUU fishing.
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Reauthorization Act of 2006 (MSRA), Pub. L. 109--479, 120 Stat.
3575 (2006), which was passed by the 109th Congress and signed
into law in January 2007, made significant improvements in the
area of international fisheries conservation. The overarching
theme of these improvements was the enhancement and expansion
of the authority of the Secretary to work through various
multilateral organizations, such as RFMOs, to address IUU
fishing and bycatch of protected living marine resources
(PLMR).
Specifically, title IV of the MSRA amended the High Seas
Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act (Moratorium
Protection Act), 16 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 1826d-1826k (2012), to
require the Secretary to produce a biennial report to Congress
which includes: the state of knowledge on the status of
international living marine resources that are shared by the
United States or are subject to a treaty or agreement to which
the United States is a party, including a list of all fish
stocks classified as overfished, overexploited, depleted,
endangered, or threatened with extinction by international or
other authorities charged with management or conservation of
living marine resources; a list of nations the United States
has identified as having vessels engaged in IUU fishing,
bycatch of PLMR, or both; a description of efforts taken by
listed nations to take appropriate corrective action; progress
in strengthening the efforts of international fishery
management organizations to end IUU fishing; and the steps
taken by the Secretary at the international level to adopt
measures comparable to those of the United States to reduce the
impacts of fishing and other practices on PLMR.
The MSRA also amended the Moratorium Protection Act to, among
other things: require the Secretary to pursue specific
improvements to strengthen international fishery management
organizations through the adoption of IUU vessel lists,
stronger port State controls, and market-related measures;
require the Secretary to promote improved monitoring and
surveillance of international fisheries; authorize the
Secretary to promulgate implementing rules relating to
certification for listed nations; and provide authority to
prohibit the importation into the United States of fish and
fish products from listed nations that fail to address
deficiencies in preventing IUU fishing and PLMR bycatch.
The Agreement on Port State Measures
Internationally, the United States has actively worked to
strengthen existing RFMOs through renegotiation of their
underlying agreements or the negotiation of new protocols. With
substantial U.S. involvement, international fishery management
organizations have adopted and shared IUU vessel lists; used
observers and technologies to monitor compliance; promoted and
used centralized vessel monitoring systems (VMS); established
trade tracking and documentation schemes; prevented trade in or
importation of IUU-caught fish or other living marine
resources; and protected vulnerable marine ecosystems.
Additionally, at the thirty-sixth session of the U.N.
Conference of the FAO in 2009, 92 participating nations,
including the United States, took a significant step towards
curtailing IUU fishing by adopting the Agreement on Port State
Measures to Prevent, Deter, and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported,
and Unregulated Fishing (Agreement on Port State Measures or
Agreement). The Agreement, of which the United States was a
primary negotiator and one of its first signatories, is the
first global instrument focused specifically on combating IUU
fishing. It sets forth minimum standards for the conduct of
dockside inspections and training of inspectors and, most
significantly, would require parties to restrict port entry and
port services to foreign vessels known or suspected of having
been involved in IUU fishing, particularly those on the IUU
vessel list maintained by an RFMO. Since all fish must be
brought to port to enter into trade, closing ports to illegal
product is an effective way to prevent, deter, and eliminate
IUU fishing. The Agreement would also require information
sharing, including the sharing of inspection results, with
Parties and other relevant actors to the Agreement when
evidence of IUU fishing is found during the course of an
inspection.
On November 14, 2011, President Obama transmitted the text of
the Agreement to the Senate for advice and consent, where it is
currently pending before the Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations. Broad ratification and implementation of the
Agreement was called for at the United Nations General Assembly
in December 2010 (Res. 65/38), at the twenty-ninth meeting of
the FAO's Committee on Fisheries in February 2012, and at the
Joint Meeting of the Tuna RFMOs in La Jolla, CA in July 2012.
Summary of Provisions
The Pirate Fishing Elimination Act, S. 267, would make the
changes to domestic law necessary for the United States to
implement the Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent,
Deter, and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated
Fishing. The Secretary would have primary responsibility for
promulgating regulations and developing procedures necessary to
carry out the purposes and requirements of the Act, with the
Coast Guard and NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service
serving as primary enforcement authorities for the requirements
of the Act and regulations promulgated thereunder. The Act
would authorize the Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is
operating, to: (1) designate ports to which foreign-flagged
fishing or fishing-related vessels may seek entry, and
establish uniform information-gathering and review processes
for granting or denying port entry and use of port services to
such vessels; (2) conduct inspections of such vessels suspected
of IUU fishing or related activities; (3) deny port entry or
port services to such vessels that have been engaged in IUU
fishing; and (4) provide notice, acting through the Secretary
of State, to relevant flag states, coastal nations, RFMOs, and
other nations and international organizations regarding a
vessel that is believed to have engaged in IUU fishing or
related activities or has been denied port entry or port
services.
Legislative History
Senator Rockefeller introduced S. 267, the Pirate Fishing
Elimination Act, on February 11, 2013. S. 267 is cosponsored by
Senators Begich, Blumenthal, Cantwell, Hirono, Merkley,
Murkowski, Nelson, Schatz, Whitehouse, and Wyden. Similar
legislation, S. 1980, was introduced by Senator Inouye during
the 112th Congress and referred to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation. On July 30, 2013, the Committee
met in open executive session and, by a voice vote, ordered S.
267 reported favorably without amendment.
Estimated Costs
In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget
Office:
S. 267--Pirate Fishing Elimination Act
S. 267 would authorize the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) to implement an international agreement
to reduce illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing.
Under the bill, NOAA would be required to identify ports that
can be used by foreign vessels, coordinate inspections of those
vessels with the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), deny port entry to
vessels that have engaged in IUU fishing, and share information
with foreign governments and other entities regarding the
results of inspections and any actions taken if IUU fishing is
discovered. S. 267 also would establish civil and criminal
penalties for entities that violate provisions in the bill.
Based on information provided by NOAA and the USCG, CBO
estimates that implementing the legislation would have no
significant impact on the federal budget. Implementing S. 267
would not significantly affect the workload of NOAA and the
USCG because those agencies already carry out the activities
required under the bill. Enacting the legislation could
increase revenues (from civil and criminal penalties) and
associated direct spending; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures
apply. However, CBO estimates that such increases would be
small and would offset each other in most years.
CBO has not reviewed S. 267 for intergovernmental and
private-sector mandates because section 4 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act excludes from the application of that act
any legislative provisions that are necessary for the
ratification or implementation of international treaty
obligations. CBO has determined that the bill falls within that
exclusion.
The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Jeff LaFave
and Sarah Puro. The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo,
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
Regulatory Impact Statement
In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the
following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the
legislation, as reported:
NUMBER OF PERSONS COVERED
S. 267 would make refinements to NOAA and the Coast Guard's
existing statutory authorities to better enable them to limit
and regulate access to U.S. ports and port services in order to
curtail IUU fishing activity. It would authorize the Secretary
to designate ports to which foreign vessels involved in fishing
or fishing-related activity may request entry, and to require
such vessels to provide advance notice for such requests. It
would generally require the Secretary and the Secretary of the
department in which the Coast Guard is operating to deny port
entry to those vessels known to have engaged in or supported
IUU fishing, as well as to prohibit vessels already in U.S.
ports from landing, transshipping, packaging, or processing
fish where there is evidence they have engaged in or supported
IUU fishing.
The provisions of the bill would generally apply with respect
to foreign vessels seeking entry to or in a port subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States, vessels of the United States
seeking entry to or in a port subject to the jurisdiction of
another party to the Agreement, and persons who are subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States.
ECONOMIC IMPACT
The legislation is not expected to have a negative impact on
the Nation's economy. IUU-caught fish significantly undercut
the value of legally, sustainably caught fish in the United
States and elsewhere around the world. Because S. 267 would
substantially curtail the entry of IUU-caught fish into the
stream of commerce in the United States, it is expected to have
a positive impact on the domestic fishing and seafood
industries.
PRIVACY
The reported bill would not have any adverse impact on the
personal privacy of individuals.
PAPERWORK
S. 267 would require a vessel covered by the Act to submit to
the Coast Guard Captain of the Port certain basic information
about the vessel when it is requesting port entry. However,
much of the information (such as a vessel's name, type, flag
state, dimensions, destination, estimated date and time of
arrival, IMO ship identification number, international radio
call sign) is already reported and available to the Coast Guard
via automated information system transmissions, the Coast
Guard's Marine Information Safety and Law Enforcement System,
and other sources. Because the bill would require that the
procedure for submitting vessel information utilize existing
Coast Guard reporting mechanisms to the maximum extent
possible, S. 267 is not expected to impose any new paperwork
requirements on private citizens or businesses.
Congressionally Directed Spending
In compliance with paragraph 4(b) of rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides that no
provisions contained in the bill, as reported, meet the
definition of congressionally directed spending items under the
rule.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short Title; Table of Contents.
This section would provide that this Act may be cited as the
``Pirate Fishing Elimination Act,'' and would set forth a table
of contents for the Act.
Section 2. Purpose.
This section provides that the purpose of the Act is to
implement the Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent,
Deter and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated
Fishing, done at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations in Rome, Italy, on November 22, 2009.
Section 3. Definitions.
This section would define the following terms: ``Agreement,''
``authorized officer,'' ``conservation and management
measures,'' ``container vessel,'' ``FAO,'' ``fish,''
``fishing,'' ``fishing-related activity,'' ``foreign vessel,''
``illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing'' or ``IUU
fishing,'' ``landing,'' ``listed IUU vessel,'' ``Party,''
``person,'' ``port,'' ``previously landed,'' ``processing,''
``regional fisheries management organization'' or ``RFMO,''
``Secretary,'' ``State,'' ``transshipment,'' ``vessel,'' and
``vessel of the United States.''
Section 4. Application.
This section would delineate the vessels and persons to which
this Act would apply, including foreign vessels seeking entry
to a port subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,
U.S. vessels seeking entry to a port subject to the
jurisdiction of another Party to the Agreement, and each person
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. The Act would
not apply to a container vessel that is not carrying fish or to
a container vessel with previously landed fish or for which the
Secretary of Commerce has no clear grounds to suspect it of
having been engaged in IUU fishing or related activities.
Section 5. Duties of the Secretary.
This section would authorize the Secretary of Commerce, in
consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of
the department in which the Coast Guard is operating, to
develop regulations and procedures as may be necessary to carry
out the purposes of this Act and to designate and publicly list
each port to which a vessel described in section 4 may seek
entry. This section would also authorize the Secretary of
Commerce to designate a point of contact to the FAO for
adhering to the Agreement's requirements regarding the
electronic exchange of information and to cooperate in
establishing information-sharing mechanisms relevant to the
Agreement. The Secretary of Commerce would also be required to
provide information regarding the legal remedies afforded to
persons affected by an action under this Act.
Section 6. Advance Notice of Vessel Arrival, Authorization, or Denial
of Port Entry.
This section would require covered vessels to submit to the
Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is
operating information required under the Agreement in advance
of the vessel's arrival to a port. It would direct the
Secretary of Commerce, coordinating with the Secretary of the
department in which the Coast Guard is operating and the
Secretary of State, to develop a procedure for such vessels to
submit this information, ideally through existing reporting
mechanisms, and to authorize or deny port entry. The Secretary
of Commerce would be authorized to deny entry to any listed IUU
vessel or any vessel that the Secretary has reasonable grounds
to believe that has engaged in IUU fishing or IUU-related
activities or has violated this Act. Such vessels would be
provided notice of the denial of port entry, as would relevant
coastal nations, RFMOs, and other international organizations.
Port entry may be permissible to such vessels if they are under
duress and require assistance, for scrapping purposes, or for
inspection or other enforcement.
Section 7. Denial of Port Services.
This section would authorize the Secretary of Commerce to
deny covered vessels that have been authorized to enter port
under section 6 use of port services (i.e., landing,
transshipment, packaging and processing of fish, refueling,
resupplying maintenance, and drydocking) if: (1) the vessel
previously entered port without section 6 authorization; (2) is
a listed IUU vessel; or (3) is under reasonable suspicion by
the Secretary of Commerce of lacking authorization to fish,
having taken fish on board in violation of foreign law or any
conservation and management measures, or engaging in IUU
fishing or IUU related activities. Port services could be
authorized for such vessels if these services are essential to
the safety of the vessel or health of its crew, for scrapping
purposes, or for inspection or other enforcement. Should the
Secretary of Commerce determine denial of port services was
based on inadequate, erroneous, or non-applicable grounds, the
Secretary would be required to notify the vessel and withdraw
the denial.
Section 8. Inspections.
This section would require the Secretary of Commerce and the
Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is
operating to conduct vessel inspections for the purposes of the
Agreement and this Act. The Secretary would be required to
prioritize these inspections based on whether the vessel has
been denied entry or use of the port in accordance with the
Agreement; a request from another relevant Party, State or RFMO
that a certain vessel be inspected; and whether there are clear
grounds to suspect the vessel of being engaged in IUU fishing
or related activities. Under this section, the Secretary of
Commerce would be required to transmit the results of an
inspection to the flag nation of the inspected vessel, and, as
appropriate, each relevant Party, nation, RFMO, international
organization, and the FAO. Should the inspection provide
reasonable grounds to believe that the vessel has engaged in
IUU fishing or related activities, the Secretary would be
authorized to take enforcement actions under this Act or other
applicable law and deny the vessel the use of port services.
Section 9. Prohibited Acts.
This section would make it unlawful for any person to impede
or refuse to permit boarding to an authorized officer
conducting investigation or enforcement activities; resist
lawful arrest; interfere with the detection of a person
violating this Act; submit false information; forcibly assault,
resist, harass, or bribe authorized observers or data
collectors; import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire,
or purchase in interstate or foreign commerce any fish or fish
product taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of
any foreign law or treaty addressing the conservation or
management of living marine resources, or any conservation and
management measures; falsify records or identifications of
fish; or carry out other acts prohibited by this Act.
Section 10. Enforcement.
This section would require the Secretary of Commerce and the
Secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is
operating to enforce the provisions of this Act and to
authorize officers to conduct the enforcement activities of
this Act. Authorized officers would be permitted to make
appropriate arrests, searches, inspections, seizures, and
detentions of persons, vessels, fish or fish products, or
information relevant to the enforcement of this Act. This
section also would set forth forfeiture procedures and
administrative, civil and criminal penalties that would be
associated with the enforcement and violation of this Act.
Section 11. International Cooperation and Assistance.
This section would require the Secretary of Commerce, as
appropriate and feasible, to provide assistance to developing
nations and international organizations of which such nations
are members with meeting their obligations under the Agreement,
including through the use of grants and the transfer of funds,
subject to the limits of available appropriations, to any
relevant foreign government, international, non-governmental,
or intergovernmental organization. The Secretary may, by
Agreement, utilize the personnel, services, equipment, and
facilities of any individual, corporation, partnership,
association, or other entity, and any Federal, State, local, or
foreign government or any entity of any such government to this
end.
Section 12. Relationship to Other Laws.
This section would provide that nothing in this Act would
displace any requirements imposed by the customs laws of the
United States or any other laws or regulations enforced or
administered by the Secretary of Homeland Security; that where
more stringent requirements regarding port entry or access to
port services exist under other Federal law, the more stringent
requirements would apply; and that nothing in this Act would
affect a vessel's entry into port, in accordance with
international law, for reasons of force majeure or distress.
Section 13. Authorization of Appropriations.
This section would authorize such sums as are necessary to be
appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce to carry out the
provisions of this Act for fiscal years 2013-2017.
Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, the Committee states that the bill as
reported would make no change to existing law.