31702 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 131 / Monday, July 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 
(i) In an appendix to the Convention 
on International Trade in Endangered 
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (27 UST 1087; TIAS 8249); 
(ii) As an endangered or threatened 
species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); or 
(iii) Pursuant to any State law that 
provides for the conservation of species that are indigenous to the State and are threatened with extinction. 
* * * * * 
■4. Section 357.3 is added to read as 
follows: 
§ 357.3 Declaration requirement. 
(a) Any person importing any plant 
shall file upon importation a declaration 
that contains: 
(1) The scientific name of any plant 
(including the genus and species of the plant) contained in the importation; 
(2) A description of the value of the 
importation and the quantity, including the unit of measure, of the plant; and 
(3) The name of the country from 
which the plant was taken. 
(b) The declaration relating to a plant 
product shall also contain: 
(1) If the species of plant used to 
produce the plant product that is the subject of the importation varies, and the species used to produce the plant product is unknown, the name of each species of plant that may have been used to produce the plant product; 
(2) If the species of plant used to 
produce the plant product that is the subject of the importation is commonly taken from more than one country, and the country from which the plant was taken and used to produce the plant product is unknown, the name of each country from which the plant may have been taken; and 
(3) If a paper or paperboard plant 
product includes recycled plant product, the average percent recycled content without regard for the species or country of origin of the recycled plant product, in addition to the information for the non-recycled plant content otherwise required by this section. 
(Approved by the Office of Management and 
Budget under control number 0579–0349) 
■5. Section 357.4 is added to read as 
follows: 
§ 357.4 Exceptions from the declaration requirement. 
Plants and products containing plant 
materials are excepted from the 
declaration requirement if: 
(a) The plant is used exclusively as 
packaging material to support, protect, or carry another item, unless the packaging material itself is the item being imported; or (b) The plant material in a product 
represents no more than 5 percent of the total weight of the individual product unit, provided that the total weight of the plant material in [an entry of such products][a product unit] does not exceed [2.9 kilograms] [or other amount]; or, if the weight cannot be determined, the value of the plant material in the individual product unit represents no more than 10 percent of the declared value of the product, provided that the total quantity of plant material in [an entry of such products][a product unit] has a volume of less than [1 board foot (that is, 12 x 12 x 1 inches or 30.48 x 30.48 x 2.54 centimeters)] [or other amount]. 
(c) A product will not be eligible for 
an exception under paragraph (b) of this section if it contains plant material listed: 
(1) In an appendix to the Convention 
on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (27 UST 1087; TIAS 8249); 
(2) As an endangered or threatened 
species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); or 
(3) Pursuant to any State law that 
provides for the conservation of species that are indigenous to the State and are threatened with extinction. 
■6. Section 357.5 is added to read as 
follows: 
§ 357.5 Time limit for submission of plant 
declarations. 
In the case of commodities for which 
a plant declaration is required, the 
declaration must be submitted within 3 business days of importation. 
Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd day of 
July 2018. 
Greg Ibach, Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory 
Programs. 
[FR Doc. 2018–14630 Filed 7–6–18; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service 
7 CFR Part 357 
[Docket No. APHIS–2018–0017] 
RIN 0579–AE36 
Lacey Act Implementation Plan: 
Composite Plant Materials 
AGENCY : Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service, USDA. 
ACTION : Advance notice of proposed 
rulemaking and request for comments. SUMMARY : The Food, Conservation and 
Energy Act of 2008 amended the Lacey 
Act to provide, among other things, that importers submit a declaration at the time of importation for certain plants 
and plant products. The declaration requirements of the Lacey Act became effective on December 15, 2008, and enforcement of those requirements is being phased in. We are soliciting public comment on regulatory options that could address certain issues that have arisen with the implementation of the declaration requirement for composite plant materials. 
DATES : We will consider all comments 
that we receive on or before September 7, 2018. 
ADDRESSES : You may submit comments 
by either of the following methods: 
•Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 
http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2018-0017. 
•Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: 
Send your comment to Docket No. APHIS–2018–0017, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A–03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737–1238. 
Supporting documents and any 
comments we receive on this docket may be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2018-0017 or in our reading 
room, which is located in Room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call (202) 799–7039 before coming. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Ms. 
Parul Patel, Senior Agriculturalist, Permitting and Compliance Coordination, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 60, Riverdale, MD 20737– 1231; (301) 851–2351. 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : 
Background 
The Lacey Act (16 U.S.C. 3371 et 
seq.), first enacted in 1900 and significantly amended in 1981, is the United States’ oldest wildlife protection statute. The Act combats, among other things, trafficking in illegally taken wildlife, fish, or plants. The Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008, effective May 22, 2008, amended the Lacey Act by expanding its protection to a broader range of plants and plant products than were previously covered. (Section 8204, Prevention of Illegal Logging Practices). The Lacey Act now makes it unlawful to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:21 Jul 06, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM 09JYP1sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS31703 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 131 / Monday, July 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 
1To view the advance notice of proposed 
rulemaking and the comments we received, go to 
http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2010-0129. purchase in interstate or foreign 
commerce any plant, with some limited exceptions, taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law of the United States or an Indian tribe, or in violation of any State or foreign law that protects plants or that regulates certain specified plant-related activities. The Lacey Act also now makes it unlawful to make or submit any false record, account, or label for, or any false identification of, any plant. 
In addition, Section 3 of the Lacey 
Act, as amended, makes it unlawful, as of December 15, 2008, to import certain plants, including plant products, without an import declaration. The import declaration serves as a tool for combatting the illegal trade in timber and timber products by ensuring importers provide required information. Through the declaration requirement, the importer maintains accountability for exercising reasonable care regarding the content of the shipment before it arrives in the United States. Information from the declaration is also used to monitor implementation of Lacey Act requirements. The declaration must contain the scientific name of the plant, value of the importation, quantity of the plant, and name of the country from which the plant was harvested. 
On June 30, 2011, the Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Serviced (APHIS) published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) in the Federal Register (76 FR 38330, Docket No. APHIS–2010–0129),
1soliciting 
public comment on several regulatory options to address certain issues that have arisen with the implementation of the declaration requirement. These options included establishing certain exceptions to the declaration requirement. We solicited comments on these options for 60 days ending on August 29, 2011, and received 37 comments by that date. The comments received were from academics, environmental groups, importers and exporters, industry associations, a trade union, representatives of foreign governments, and private citizens. 
The first regulatory option we 
discussed in the 2011 ANPR was the possibility of establishing a limited exception to the plant declaration requirement for imported products containing minimal amounts of plant material. The Lacey Act does not explicitly address whether the declaration requirement is intended to apply to such products, but it is questionable whether the regulatory 
objectives of the Lacey Act are furthered by applying this requirement to minimal amounts of non-listed (i.e., not of 
conservation concern) plant materials contained in an otherwise non-plant product. In a separate document published today in the Federal Register, 
we are proposing to establish an exception to the Lacey Act plant declaration requirement for such products. 
This notice addresses the second 
regulatory option that was discussed in the 2011 ANPR that related to a separate de minimis exception that related to composite plant products. This exception would cover composite plant materials that are not otherwise considered de minimis quantities under the first regulatory option. Many composite plant materials are currently manufactured in a manner that makes identification of the genus, species, and country of harvest of all of the plant content difficult and perhaps expensive. While provisions in the Lacey Act’s declaration requirement address how to complete a declaration in situations in which the species or country of harvest of plant material used in an imported product varies (16 U.S.C. 3372(f)(2)(A) and (B)), these provisions may not relieve the difficulties and expense faced by importers of some composite plant materials. In the 2011 ANPR, we solicited comments on defining the term composite plant materials and on two possible approaches to incorporating such a definition into a separate de minimis exception from the declaration requirement specifically for such composite plant materials. 
Specifically, we invited comment on 
the possibility of defining composite plant materials as plant products and plant-based components of products where the original plant material is mechanically or chemically broken down and subsequently re-composed or used as an extract in a manufacturing process. Such a definition would need to be broad enough to include various complex composite materials (e.g., pulp, 
paper, paperboard, medium density fiberboard, high density fiberboard, and particleboard), and also need to include exceptions for species listed in an appendix to the Convention on 
International Trade in Endangered Species; as an endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973; or pursuant to any State law that provides for the conservation of species that are indigenous to the State and are threatened with extinction. 
Of the 37 commenters on the ANPR, 
16 specifically addressed the potential approaches for composite plant materials. Most of those commenters 
supported defining the term composite plant materials because such a definition would provide additional guidance to importers. Several commenters requested that the definition be written in a way to exclude certain products, such as plant- derived perfume components and seaweed products. One commenter expressed concern that, under the definition we suggested in the ANPR, any wood product other than a log or piece of sawn timber that has not been subsequently attached somehow to other wood material could be defined as composite. Another commenter opposed the definition as contrary to the spirit and letter of the Lacey Act but did not address any specific aspects of the definition. 
We also invited comments on two 
possible approaches to incorporating such a definition into a de minimis exception from the declaration requirement for composite plant materials. In the first approach, if the plant product being imported is composed in whole or in part of a composite plant material, importers would be exempted from identifying the genus, species, and country of harvest of up to a given percentage of the composite plant material content, measured on the basis of either weight or volume. 
In the second approach, where the 
plant product being imported is composed in whole or in part of a composite plant material, the declaration would have to contain the average percent composite plant content, measured on the basis of either weight or volume, without regard for the species or country of harvest of the plant, in addition to information as to genus, species, and country of harvest for any non-composite plant content. 
Many of the commenters preferred the 
second approach to incorporating the definition into a de minimis exception to the plant declaration as the easiest to implement and least burdensome on importers. However, two commenters opposed omitting species and harvest location from the declaration for composite plant materials because they believed that omission would permanently exclude those products from the declaration requirement and 
would therefore be contrary to the intent of the Lacey Act. One of these commenters stated that while small amounts of diverse plant material may enter production streams unknowingly, the bulk of wood fiber used to make fiberboard, medium-density fiberboard, high-density fiberboard, and similar materials is purposefully processed into 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:21 Jul 06, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM 09JYP1sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS31704 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 131 / Monday, July 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 
wood chips with the direct intent of 
producing a composite product. The commenter further stated that in order for this process to be economically feasible, the majority of the raw materials are sourced within close proximity of the mill or plant. The commenter stated that this practice greatly limits the number of species that could be included in the product. 
We have decided to publish another 
ANPR to solicit comments addressing the following questions: 
•Is the scope of the proposed 
definition for composite plant materials appropriate, and if not, how could it be revised? 
•What would be an appropriate 
threshold for a de minimis exception from the declaration requirement for composite plant materials under the first approach identified above? We especially invite comment on the feasibility of providing importers an exemption from identifying in a declaration the genus, species, and country of harvest for up to 5 percent of the composite plant material in a product being imported so long as it does not include material from plants of conservation concern that are listed in an appendix to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species; as an endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973; or pursuant to any State law that provides for the conservation of species that are indigenous to the State and are threatened with extinction. We also invite comment on whether that percentage should be higher or lower, and why. Additional data on why commenters support either the 5 percent threshold or an alternative threshold would be useful for the rulemaking process. We note that where a paper or paperboard plant product includes recycled plant product the statute only requires that the importer identify an average percent of recycled content without regard for the species or country of harvest of a recycled product, 
in addition to the information otherwise required for the non-recycled plant content. 
•Would the second approach 
discussed above, in which the declaration would have to contain the average percent composite plant content, measured on the basis of either weight or volume (in addition to information as to genus, species, and country of harvest for any non- composite plant content) be appropriate as a de minimis exception to the Lacey Act declaration requirement and consistent with the statute? Would such an approach affect U.S. manufacturers who export finished products to Europe and other market nations that may require their traders to authenticate the source of wood or wood products? 
•Would an alternative approach to 
either of those described above concerning the import declaration requirement be appropriate in the case of composite products, and why? 
•What specific activities would 
affected entities (including importers and their suppliers) need to engage in in order to identify the species and country of harvest of plants in composite plant materials and thereby comply with the declaration requirement for products containing such plant materials? 
•How would those specific activities 
be affected by various levels of a de minimis exception to the declaration requirement products containing composite plant materials? 
•In commenting on any of the 
approaches described above or proposing an alternative threshold, comments should take into consideration that a de minimis exception to a statutory requirement is being proposed, which means that the exception should be appropriately limited and consistent with the statute. 
This action has been determined to be 
significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. 
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 3371 et seq.; 7 CFR 
2.22, 2.80, and 371.2(d). 
Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd day of 
July 2018. 
Greg Ibach, Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory 
Programs. 
[FR Doc. 2018–14625 Filed 7–6–18; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 
10 CFR Part 431 
[EERE–2017–BT–TP–0029] 
Energy Conservation Program: Test 
Procedure for Water-Source Heat Pumps 
AGENCY : Office of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. 
ACTION : Extension of public comment 
period. 
SUMMARY : On June 22, 2018, the U.S. 
Department of Energy (‘‘DOE’’) published in the Federal Register a 
request for information (RFI) to consider whether to amend DOE’s test procedure for commercial water-source heat pumps (‘‘WSHPs’’). This notice announces an extension of the public comment period for submitting comments on the RFI or any other subject within the scope of the RFI. The comment period is extended to September 21, 2018. 
DATES : The comment period for the RFI 
published on June 22, 2018 (83 FR 29048) is extended. Written comments and information are requested and will be accepted on or before September 21, 2018. 
ADDRESSES : Interested persons are 
encouraged to submit comments using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments. Alternatively, interested persons may submit comments, identified by docket number EERE–2017–BT–TP–0029, by any of the following methods: 
•Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 
www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments. 
•Email: to WSHP2017TP0029@
ee.doe.gov. Include the docket number 
EERE–2017–BT–TP–0029 in the subject line of the message. 
•Postal Mail: Appliance and 
Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–5B, Test Procedure RFI for Water-Source Heat Pumps, Docket No. EERE–2017– BT–TP–0029, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585– 0121. Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible, please submit all items on a compact disc (‘‘CD’’), in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies. 
•Hand Delivery/Courier: Appliance 
and Equipment Standards Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Office, 950 L’Enfant Plaza SW, 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 287–1445. If possible, please submit all items on a CD, in which case it is not necessary to include printed copies. 
No telefacsimilies (faxes) will be 
accepted. 
Docket: The docket for this activity, 
which includes Federal Register notices, comments, and other supporting documents/materials, is available for review at http://www.regulations.gov. All documents in 
the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. However, 
some documents listed in the index, such as those containing information that is exempt from public disclosure, may not be publicly available. 
The docket web page can be found at: 
https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrowser?rpp=25&po=0&D=EERE-2017- BT-TP-0029. The docket web page 
contains instructions on how to access 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:21 Jul 06, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM 09JYP1sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS