Nuanced Data Collection, Partnerships Key to Preventing IUU Fishing: Panel

In December 2022, NOAA Fisheries published a proposed rule to revise SIMP to ensure that U.S. seafood imports don't come from illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing (see 2212270034). However, the agency withdrew the proposed rule in November (see 2311140039) after hearing concerns from stakeholders about the rule, according to Sally Yozell, director of the environmental security program at the Stimson Center. Instead, NOAA Fisheries opted to conduct a broad program review of SIMP to enhance the program’s overall impact and effectiveness, Yozell said.

NOAA Fisheries could release its plans to modify SIMP in late September or early October, according to Alexa Cole, director of NOAA’s Office of International Affairs, Trade and Commerce.

In response to the proposed rulemaking, the Stimson Center and nonprofit FishWise conducted a two-part workshop series in the first half of 2024 that brought together over 80 government and nongovernmental organization stakeholders to discuss improving the seafood import monitoring control program.

The July 30 webinar discussed the major themes expressed during the previous sessions, with NOAA Fisheries and other governmental officials pledging to be transparent as the proposed rule process moves forward.

Among the themes was the need to continue to develop the technology for data collection so that subsequent data analysis can be more nuanced.

SIMP in its current form still processes PDFs of scanned paper files, which can make it easier for mistakes or falsification to occur, according to Yozell. Furthermore, these scanned files also prevent the implementation of technology that can perform risk analytics through machine learning and artificial intelligence, she said.

“The goal here is that if we’re able to increase both the data that we have alongside our capabilities to analyze it, then it becomes really useful and actionable, as opposed to collecting more information in a fashion that’s not as readily analyzable,” said Sara Lewis, director of programs for FishWise. “So, by processing data from multiple sources, including historical data, supply chain data and third-party data, these automated systems really lend themselves to monitoring and adapting to a dynamic risk environment, which is what we see within seafood supply chains. The risks in terms of mislabeling and fraud and IUU are not staying the same for long periods of time.”

Said Virginia McPherson, civil enforcement director for CBP’s Office of Trade: “I think that the bigger theme is … the underlying data that we receive. Getting good data, getting correct data, getting data as early in the process as possible, in order to make those admissibility determinations and reviews before the goods get here. So it’s the data, working with our partner government agencies, and you, the trade, to get that information to help us do our job.”

Another theme was further cross-collaboration between agencies as importers continue to do their part to ensure that seafood is lawfully produced and harvested.

That cross-collaboration among federal agencies means observing how existing successful risk-based control technology, such as the FDA's PREDICT tool, which uses AI to determine which imports are higher risk and should be held for inspection, can be developed at other agencies such as CBP. Cross-collaboration also includes interagency conversations where different staff members contribute their expertise to develop a holistic view of the supply chain for seafood.

Cross-collaboration also means having federal agencies put forth a united public front to bolster enforcement.

As NOAA continues with its next steps for this proposed rule, “certainly there will need to be changes in CBP’S ACE system as we collect the data going forward,” CBP's McPherson said. “As we’re out there talking to the trade about the changes of what’s going to need to be required or what new data elements may be required to be submitted in ACE,” NOAA and CBP should do that together and have that united face, she said.

Meanwhile, importers need to continue to be vigilant in ensuring their supply chains are following the law.

“It isn’t really about getting federal governments to verify the information [in the import documents]. It’s about the importer having knowledge and responsibility for the supply chain for the products that they’re bringing into the U.S. market,” NOAA's Cole said. “That requires due diligence and engagement with the partners that you’re working with and ensuring that they have the right information, the documentation that shows that the underlying harvest was conducted pursuant to a lawful authority, [and] the necessary permit … as [seafood] is transmitted from one person to another, that it’s moving through with accurate documentation.”

Importers also need to ensure that the information that suppliers provide actually matches up with who they are, Cole said, and they should check that suppliers are conducting their own due diligence when it comes to the lawful production and harvest of seafood.

Panelists also said that federal agencies should pursue regulation that harmonizes with other regulations globally, such as those of the European Union, where importers are required to submit data 72 hours in advance for frozen seafood and four hours in advance for fresh seafood so that EU customs authorities can potentially deny entry of shipments suspected to contain IUU seafood almost on a real-time basis. The EU has also developed a catch certification system where import documents must be validated by the flag state to certify that the products were caught in compliance with domestic fishing laws and appropriate international conservation and management measures.

In response to a question about what could make enforcement more actionable, one effort could be to collect data that might serve as a proxy for risk, such as the length of time that a vessel’s crew members may be at sea (see 2401220076), according to Anne Zollner, DOL division chief for trade policy and negotiations.

“Traceability is going to be really key to making change for the people who make up the human side of the supply chain,” Zollner said.

While collecting labor data of crew members “is not something that I think NOAA would be responsible for, SIMP is a piece of the puzzle. It is uniquely positioned to collect this information that could then be used in this whole of government approach."

Another questioner asked whether there will be a rulemaking that strengthens the implementation of President Joe Biden’s executive order banning on Russian seafood (see 2312220007), as the initial implementation is relying on importer self-declarations.

Responded Cole: “The SIMP comprehensive review is not focusing on the Russian seafood ban. That isn’t one of the key issues there, but certainly we understand that there is the potential for SIMP data to be useful in the enforcement of the Russian seafood ban, and so that’s certainly been among the many things that we are thinking about in our SIMP comprehensive review.”

McPherson said CBP could require additional data: “It is something that we are looking at, the self-certification statement … . We know that we’re going to need additional data elements, such as where the fishing occurred. Some data today is a very specific list of products. It doesn’t always match up with the list of products that OFAC issued in their determination, but we do talk about that a lot, the overlap of data. The goal is not to receive the same data element for CBP purposes and then receive it again for NOAA purposes under the SIMP. So it’s something that we talk about.”