18742 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions that do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. This proposed 

rule is categorically excluded, under 

figure 2–1, paragraph (34) (g), of the 

Instruction because it involves the 

establishment of a safety zone. 

A preliminary environmental analysis 

checklist and categorical exclusion 

determination are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or 

information that may lead to the 

discovery of a significant environmental 

impact from this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR Part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapters 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

2. Add § 165.T09–0163 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T09–0163 Safety Zone; Bay Swim V, 

Presque Isle Bay, Erie, PA. 

(a) Location. The safety zone will 

encompass all waters of Presque Isle 

Bay, Erie, PA starting from Vista 3 in 

Presque Isle State Park at position 

42°07′29.30′′ N, 80°08′48.82′′ W and 

extend in a straight line 1,000 feet wide 

to the Erie Yacht Club at position 

42°07′21.74′′ N, 80°07′58.30′′ W. (NAD 

83) 

(b) Effective and Enforcement Period. 

This regulation is effective and will be 

enforced from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. on 

June 30, 2012. 

(c) Regulations. 

(1) In accordance with the general 

regulations in section 165.23 of this 

part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring 

within this safety zone is prohibited 

unless authorized by the Captain of the 

Port Buffalo or his designated on-scene 

representative. 

(2) This safety zone is closed to all 

vessel traffic, except as may be 

permitted by the Captain of the Port 

Buffalo or his designated on-scene 

representative. 

(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of 

the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any 

Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or 

petty officer who has been designated 

by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act 

on his behalf. The on-scene 

representative of the Captain of the Port 

Buffalo is any Coast Guard 

commissioned, warrant or petty officer 

who has been designated by the Captain 

of the Port Buffalo to act on his behalf. 

(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter 

or operate within the safety zone shall 

contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo 

or his on-scene representative to obtain 

permission to do so. The Captain of the 

Port Buffalo or his on-scene 

representative may be contacted via 

VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given 

permission to enter or operate in the 

safety zone must comply with all 

directions given to them by the Captain 

of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene 

representative. 

Dated: March 6, 2012. 

S.M. Wischmann, 

Captain, U. S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Buffalo. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7395 Filed 3–27–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

Copyright Office 

37 CFR Parts 201 and 203 

[Docket No. 2012–1] 

Copyright Office Fees 

AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of 

Congress. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Copyright Office is 

proposing the adoption of new fees for 

the registration of claims, recordation of 

documents, special services, Licensing 

Division services, and processing of 

FOIA requests. The proposed fees 

would recover a significant part of the 

costs to the Office for services that 

benefit both copyright owners and the 

public, and provide full cost recovery 

for many services which benefit only or 

primarily the user of that service. As 

part of the fee setting process, the Office 

is providing an opportunity to the 

public to comment on the proposed 

changes before submitting the fee 

schedule to Congress for review. 

DATES: Comments must be received in 

the Office of the General Counsel of the 

Copyright Office no later than May 14, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: The Copyright Office 

strongly prefers that comments be 

submitted electronically. A comment 

page containing a comment form is 

posted on the Copyright Office Web site 

at http://www.copyright.gov/docs/ 

newfees/comments/. The Web site 

interface requires submitters to 

complete a form specifying name and 

organization, as applicable, and to 

upload comments as an attachment via 

a browse button. To meet accessibility 

standards, all comments must be 

uploaded in a single file not to exceed 

six megabytes (MB) in one of the 

following formats: The Adobe Portable 

Document File (PDF) format that 

contains searchable, accessible text (not 

an image); Microsoft Word; 

WordPerfect; Rich Text Format (RTF); or 

ASCII text file format (not a scanned 

document). The form and face of the 

comments must include both the name 

of the submitter and the organization. 

All comments will be posted publicly 

on the Copyright Office Web site exactly 

as they are received, along with names 

and organizations. If electronic 

submission of comments is not feasible, 

please contact the Copyright Office at 

(202) 707–8380 for special instructions. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Megan Rivet, Budget Analyst, or Tanya 

Sandros, Deputy General Counsel, at 

(202) 707–8380. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Copyright Act (the ‘‘Copyright Act’’ or 

‘‘Act’’) provides that the Register of 

Copyrights may, by regulation, adjust 

fees for certain, enumerated services 

based upon a study of costs incurred by 

the Copyright Office. The study must 

consider the timing of any adjustment as 

well as the authority to use such fees 

consistent with the budget. The 

Register’s proposed changes are subject 

to review by Congress. However, the 

Register may implement the changes at 

the end of 120 days after submitting 

them to Congress in conjunction with an 

economic analysis unless, within that 

120 day period, Congress enacts a law 

stating in substance that Congress does 

not approve the schedule. The Act 

further authorizes the Register to 

establish fees for services that are not 

enumerated in the statute, including, for 

example, the cost of preparing copies of 

Copyright Office records, based on the 

cost of providing the service. The 

Register is not required to submit these 

additional fees to Congress. See 17 

U.S.C. 708(a)–(b). 

Congress amended the Copyright Act 

in 1997 to allow the Register to set fees 

for Copyright Office services. Since this 

time, the Office has undertaken a fee 

study approximately every three years; 

the last one was undertaken in 2008 and 

implemented in 2009. See 74 FR 32805 

(July 9, 2009). A new fee study was 

initiated on October 1, 2011 at the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules 18743 

direction of the newly appointed 

Register of Copyrights. The study was 

identified in the Register’s public report, 

‘‘Priorities and Special Projects for the 

United States Copyright Office’’ as a key 

project for fiscal year 2012. See http:// 

www.copyright.gov/docs/priorities.pdf. 

In executing the study, the Office is 

acutely aware of its fiscal 

responsibilities as an agency of the 

federal government, including the 

responsibility to set sound monetary 

policies and develop a budget derived 

primarily from fees for services. 

However, the Office is also deeply 

cognizant of its responsibility to authors 

and other copyright owners, and to 

users of copyrighted works, to price 

services in a manner that encourages 

participation in the Nation’s registration 

and recordation systems and ensures a 

robust database of copyright information 

for purposes of commerce and the 

public good. Indeed, the Copyright Act 

requires that fees ‘‘shall be fair and 

equitable and give due consideration to 

the objectives of the copyright system.’’ 

17 U.S.C. 708(b)(4). 

The Register may not adjust fees more 

than that necessary to cover the 

reasonable costs incurred by the 

Copyright Office for its services plus a 

reasonable inflation adjustment to 

account for any estimated increase in 

costs. In fact, the Office’s fees have not 

historically recovered full costs for all 

services. When fees were adjusted in 

2009, the Office was recovering 

approximately 61.4% of its costs for 

services. In fiscal year 2011, fee receipts 

covered only 59.5% of the Office’s costs, 

a recovery rate that is insufficient by 

any standard. 

In the study at hand, the Office has 

calculated its true costs using a 

traditional methodology. The cost study 

uses an activity based costing 

methodology to calculate full costs of 

each Copyright Office service. The study 

includes a review of both direct and 

indirect costs associated with fee 

services in fiscal 2011. Most copyright 

activities are labor intensive and staff 

costs are tracked for each of the various 

fee services. The study requires directly 

assigning non-personnel costs that are 

associated with just one fee service. 

Once direct costs were applied, 

administrative and indirect costs related 

to fee services were allocated 

proportionately. The Office also 

considered statutory fee setting 

requirements, economic factors, and the 

objectives of the copyright system in 

arriving at the proposed fees. 

The Office also sought comments 

from the public in a Notice of Inquiry 

published on January 24, 2012 on two 

specific issues: (1) Whether special 

consideration should be provided to 

individual author-claimants registering 

a single work, and (2) the identification 

of any special services and 

corresponding fees the Office should 

expand, improve or add to its offerings 

at this time, including, for example, 

additional expedited services and fee 

options. 77 FR 3506 (January 24, 2012). 

The proposed fee schedule published 

today reflects the public’s comments on 

these issues. 

The Office also acknowledges that 

commenters offered many additional 

interesting proposals that we appreciate 

but will not address today in the context 

of this fee study. Many of these 

proposals are not ready for action 

because the Office is considering them 

in the context of other major projects 

that are technical or legal in nature. 

Such proposals include, for example, 

the question of whether photographers 

may pay a flat fee for registration of 

photographs in the context of a business 

to business submission model; the 

question of whether copyright 

registration certificates and/or recorded 

documents can be made available online 

for free; and the question of whether the 

Office should accept deposits of works 

in electronic formats that may be 

insufficient for the Library’s ‘‘best 

edition’’ requirement. The Office greatly 

appreciates these issues and suggestions 

and it will continue to consider them 

outside of this fee study. 

The purpose of this Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking is to offer the 

public an opportunity to comment on 

the Register’s proposed fee adjustments, 

all of which would be implemented 

early in fiscal year 2013. 

I. Registration, Recordation, and 

Related Service Fees 

1. Basic registration. The Office will 

soon eliminate Form CO and will offer 

two options for filing basic registrations 

beginning this summer: online filings 

and the traditional paper application. 

See 76 FR 60774 (September 30, 2011). 

The Office receives approximately 87% 

of new copyright claims electronically 

through its online filing system. Such 

filings are far less costly to process. 

Nevertheless, the Office understands 

that some claimants have good reasons 

for preferring paper forms, despite the 

higher cost to the claimant, and the 

Office will continue to offer this option. 

However, the Office will continue to 

charge a higher fee for filing a claim 

using a paper application to encourage 

the use of the online filing option. 

Online filing is the option that is most 

efficient to the Office as well as the 

claimant. On average, a claimant who 

files an application online will receive 

a registration (or a denial of a 

registration) within 3 months, while a 

claimant filing with paper forms will 

wait about 10 months. 

The Office is also proposing to offer 

a reduced fee to a single author who is 

also the claimant for the online filing of 

a claim in a single work that is not a 

work made for hire, for the policy 

reasons discussed below and after 

considering the comments received 

from the public in response to the 

January 24, 2012 Notice of Inquiry. The 

Copyright Office is committed to 

maintaining an affordable copyright 

registration system. No author or 

copyright owner should be deterred 

from registering a copyright because the 

cost of registration is too high, and the 

Office is mindful that there is not 

endless elasticity in pricing; pricing is a 

factor in whether one chooses to 

register. Many of the works that come 

from independent creators are critical to 

the Nation’s economy and the Library of 

Congress’ mint record and collection of 

American creativity. The copyright law 

itself is designed to promote and protect 

authorship and this includes facilitating 

registration for the establishment of a 

public record of copyright claims and to 

enable the copyright owner to seek all 

the remedies available in the Copyright 

Act. Similarly, users of copyrighted 

works rely on the Copyright Office 

registration records to identify copyright 

owners when they require licenses. If 

individual authors do not register and 

are therefore not part of the public 

database, they more than any other 

group of copyright owners may be 

difficult to find. 

Commenters to the Notice of Inquiry 

support a separate and lower fee for 

single authors. They note, as did the 

Office, that such applications are easier 

to process; that registration provides 

important remedies for the author; and 

that registration benefits the public by 

creating a more robust public record. 

The Office therefore sees a clear 

benefit to offering a lower fee to these 

claimants as an incentive to register 

their works. The details for filing such 

a claim will be fully set forth in a 

separate notice of proposed rulemaking 

later this year. 

In setting the fees for basic 

registration, the Office closely examined 

its costs and recent success in 

recovering them. In fiscal year 2011, the 

Office recovered only 64% of its cost to 

process an online claim and only 58% 

of its cost to process paper applications. 

In light of these figures, the Office 

proposes increasing fees for both 

options for filing claims in order to 

recover a larger percentage of the 

Office’s cost, but at levels that will still 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
18744 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

encourage copyright owners to register 

their works. As mentioned above, 

elasticity is an important consideration 

in setting fees. Copyright registration is 

a voluntary system, not required by law, 

and pricing that is unaffordable or 

which exceeds the reasonable 

expectation of a copyright owner will 

discourage or prevent participation in 

the system—to the public’s detriment. 

At this time, the Office proposes 

raising the fee for an online claim from 

$35 to $65 and the fee for filing a claim 

using a paper application from $65 to 

$100, but adopting a new fee of $45 for 

single authors filing an online claim for 

a single work that is not a work made 

for hire. As specified in the chart at the 

end of this document, the Office is also 

proposing to raise the registration fees 

for group registrations, mask works, and 

vessel hulls based upon the principles 

discussed above in order to recover a 

greater percentage of the basic costs for 

processing these claims. 

2. Renewals. The Office is proposing 

a reduction in the fee for filing a 

renewal claim from $115 to $100. 

Renewal registration was required in the 

28th year for works published or 

registered prior to 1978. The law no 

longer requires registration for the 

renewal term to vest. Renewal 

registration primarily serves those 

parties who need a certificate of 

registration for various commercial 

purposes. The cost study reveals that 

the actual cost of processing these 

claims is quite high. To set a fee to 

recover full cost would be prohibitive 

and negate the goals of the Office in 

encouraging registration of these older 

claims, many of which may still be 

commercially viable, and incorporating 

these claims into the public record. 

Similarly, the Office is proposing to 

reduce the fee for filing a Renewal 

Addendum, the necessary filing for 

renewal when basic registration for the 

work was not made during the original 

term, from $220 to $100 to avoid 

deterring these registrations. 

3. Recordation. As outlined in the 

Register’s Priorities and Special Projects 

document, the Office will reengineer the 

business processes for its recordation 

services, which allow copyright owners 

and other people to publicly record in 

the Copyright Office certain documents 

related to copyright interests, including, 

for example, assignments, licenses, 

mortgages and wills. There are some 

legal benefits to recording these 

documents but it is not required by law. 

The Office has begun discussions with 

stakeholders on topics including 

searchability and the feasibility of 

connecting to privately held records and 

databases, among others, and a plan will 

be finalized in the next 18 months. 

However, as of this writing, the Office 

is accepting paper submissions and, 

through a limited pilot, filings 

submitted on flashsticks. In either case, 

the basic cost of accepting, reviewing, 

indexing and recording a document, 

especially documents that are hundreds 

of pages long and have multiple titles, 

has not been recovered in recent years. 

For this reason, the Office is proposing 

an increase in the basic recordation fee 

from $105 to $120 and a slight increase 

in the fee for processing documents 

with multiple titles from $30 to $35 to 

approach full cost recovery. 

4. Other related services. Other 

services including, for example, a 

receipt for a deposit under section 407 

of the Act and certification of Copyright 

Office records, primarily benefit only 

the user of that service. In these 

instances, no overriding principles of 

public policy dictate the recovery of less 

than the direct cost of providing the 

service. This approach is supported by 

the Office of Management and Budget’s 

guidance to Federal agencies on 

approaches to establishing fees for 

services, which states: ‘‘It is the 

objective of the United States 

government to * * * promote efficient 

allocation of the Nation’s resources by 

establishing charges for special benefits 

provided to the recipient that are at least 

as great as costs to the Government of 

providing the special benefits.’’ See 

OMB Circular No. A–25 Revised at 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ 

circulars_a025. The Office is therefore 

proposing to increase its fees for 

optional services and for services that 

are for personal or commercial purposes 

to recover fully its direct costs in most 

instances. One major exception is the 

fee for reference search reports, for 

which the Office proposes to increase 

fees but to recover only partial costs. 

Historically, the fees for a reference 

search report have recovered only a 

small portion of the costs of the service. 

The Office concludes that it cannot set 

a fee at full cost recovery as a practical 

matter because the cost would be too 

high and it would be far out of the range 

of fees charged by private-sector 

providers of this service. A very high fee 

would prejudice requestors who, for 

legal reasons, need their searches 

prepared and certified by the Copyright 

Office. Therefore, the Office has 

adjusted its fees for reference search 

reports upward to recover more but not 

all of its direct costs for the service. The 

proposed fee is a $400 minimum with 

an additional fee of $200 for every hour 

after the first two hours. 

II. Service Fees 

The Copyright Office provides a 

number of services not enumerated in 

the Copyright Act and, as stated above, 

the Register has statutory authority to 

establish fees for such services. These 

include fees for expedited service 

(‘‘special handling’’), secure test 

processing, requests to reconsider 

rejections of claims, and fees for 

reproducing Copyright Office records, 

among others. The proposed fees reflect 

the costs of providing these services, 

Office-wide cost recovery, and policy 

considerations. Many cost adjustments 

reflect inflationary increases for the 

service. In other cases, the fees have not 

been adjusted, e.g., basic photocopying 

costs; or costs have decreased and the 

fees have been lowered, e.g., copying to 

CDs or DVDs. While this notice will not 

discuss proposed adjustments to fees 

that are set to recover costs or account 

for inflation, the Office believes further 

clarification is useful to understand the 

change in the fee schedule for the 

following services: 

1. Expedited handling. The Office 

offers expedited services for processing 

claims; recording documents; searching, 

retrieving and copying Copyright Office 

records; and certifying registrations and 

other documents in an advanced 

timeframe. The proposed fees for these 

services will increase slightly to capture 

increased costs due to inflation. These 

fees continue to reflect the cost of the 

service, plus a premium payment that 

reflects the value of the expedited 

service to the customer and the 

disruption to the Office’s regular 

statutory services. 

In reviewing the fees for expedited 

services, the Office considered 

comments it received in response to the 

January 24, 2012 Notice of Inquiry as to 

whether the Office should offer 

additional services for expedited 

handling of claims that do not fit into 

the current categories for ‘‘Special 

Handling.’’ Historically Special 

Handling has been limited to cases 

where a compelling need for the service 

exists due to pending or prospective 

litigation, customs matters, or contracts 

or publishing deadlines that necessitate 

the expedited issuance of a certificate of 

registration. One suggestion was to drop 

the ‘‘compelling need’’ requirement for 

special handling and to offer a tiered fee 

schedule for special handling based on 

the turnaround time for processing the 

claim. The Office believes the concept 

of expedited services warrants further 

analysis and it will publish a separate 

public notice to address the issues fully. 

A decision on this issue, however, will 

not affect the fee for the service in the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules 18745 

near future. The Office also considered 

the suggestion to adopt a tiered system 

for handling expedited claims, an 

option it will continue to consider but 

will not implement at this point in time, 

in part due to limited resources. 

2. Secure test processing. The Office 

offers a special service for inspecting 

deposits of secure tests. The Office 

provides a private review of the full 

deposit of a secure test and compares it 

with the accompanying identifying 

material that does not disclose secret 

materials. The review process may 

include one or more staff depending on 

the number of claims being processed at 

any one time. For this reason, the 

proposed fee for this labor intensive 

service reflects an upward adjustment 

based on the processing cost to the 

Office and the number of staff doing the 

review; as such, the Office proposes a 

$250 fee per staff member per hour. 

3. Requests for reconsideration of 

rejections of claims. A claimant whose 

work is rejected for registration may 

request reconsideration of its claim 

through a two-tiered administrative 

process. A staff attorney in the 

Registration Program who is not 

involved in the initial review of the 

claim handles the first request for 

reconsideration. If the work is not 

registered at this stage, the claimant may 

make a second request for 

reconsideration. Second requests are 

considered by the Review Board 

consisting of the Register of Copyrights, 

the General Counsel, and the Associate 

Register for the Registration Program or 

their qualified delegates. The fees for 

the first and second reconsideration of 

a single claim are not scheduled for 

change, in part because the Office 

recognizes that an increase in fees may 

prohibit a claimant from pursuing 

subsequent review. However, the Office 

is eliminating its practice of allowing 

the joinder of multiple related claims 

into a single request for reconsideration 

because there is no reduced cost in 

processing such claims, each of which 

must be analyzed separately. Instead, 

the fee for a request for reconsideration 

will cover only the works in a single 

original claim for registration. 

III. Licensing Fees 

The Licensing Division of the 

Copyright Office is responsible for 

administering various aspects of the 

statutory licenses set forth in sections 

111–122 of the Copyright Act, including 

the processing of the statements of 

account filed along with royalties for 

use of the cable and satellite statutory 

licenses in accordance with sections 111 

and 119, respectively. The Licensing 

Division also receives quarterly 

statements of account and royalties from 

companies that import and distribute or 

manufacture and distribute digital audio 

recording devices and media pursuant 

to Chapter 10 of the Act. In addition, 

this division accepts for recordation 

certain contracts and licensing 

agreements, notices of intent to use the 

statutory licenses in sections 112 and 

114, and notices of intent to use musical 

works pursuant to the section 115 

compulsory license, and it provides 

search and copying services to the 

public. Proposed fees are based either 

on a separate cost study related to the 

budget and expenditures of the 

Licensing Division or, in the case where 

the Licensing Division offers services 

that parallel other services in the 

Copyright Office, fees are based on the 

cost study covering the Copyright Office 

services. Fees which are being 

established for the first time are more 

fully explained below: 

1. Filing fee for Cable and Satellite 

Statements of Account. In 2010, 

Congress enacted the Satellite 

Television Extension and Localism Act 

(‘‘STELA’’) which, for the first time, 

granted authority to the Office to set fees 

for filing cable and satellite statements 

of account. Prior to 2010, the cost of 

processing the statements was covered 

completely by the royalty fees collected 

under the statutory licenses for the 

benefit of the copyright owners. STELA 

allows the Office to apportion the cost 

of processing the statements of account 

equally between the copyright owners 

and the statutory licensees. According 

to section 708(a), fees ‘‘shall be 

reasonable and may not exceed one-half 

of the cost necessary to cover reasonable 

expenses incurred by the Copyright 

Office for the collection and 

administration of the statements of 

account and any royalty fees deposited 

with such statements.’’ 

In conducting its cost study, the 

Office took into account the 

reengineering efforts of the Licensing 

Division (the purpose of which is to 

develop an online filing system) and the 

equities associated with apportioning 

costs fairly among the licensees. 

Consequently, the Office is proposing a 

three-tiered fee schedule that 

corresponds to the filing of the different 

types of cable statements of account. 

The fee for licensees who file a SA1 

form and currently pay only $52 each 

accounting period is set at $15, the low 

end of the scale; whereas the fee for 

cable systems filing the SA2 form is set 

slightly higher at $20 because of the 

review of the basic calculation of the 

royalty fee for this group. Licensees who 

file the more complicated cable 

statements of account, the SA3 form, 

necessarily are expected to pay a 

correspondingly higher fee because of 

the time associated with reviewing the 

information on the forms, especially the 

classification of community groups and 

television stations. Thus, the proposed 

fee for filing the SA3 form is set at $500. 

Overall, these fees represent 

approximately one-half the cost on 

average of processing the current filings. 

The Office also recognizes that the 

proposed fees account for certain 

reengineering costs that may decline 

over time. Consequently, the Office 

anticipates initiating another targeted 

cost study after it has gained experience 

with the new electronic filing system. 

The new fee schedule also includes a 

$75 filing fee for a satellite statement of 

account. In this case, there is a single 

statement of account applicable to all 

satellite carriers and a single fee for 

filing that statement. The filing fee of 

$75 is set at this level because the forms 

require some examination beyond that 

afforded to the SA1 and SA2 forms filed 

by cable operators, but they do not 

require the particularized examination 

that is afforded to the complex Form 

SA3 cable statement of account. As with 

the filing fees for the cable statements of 

account, the filing fee for the satellite 

statement of account represents no more 

than half the cost of processing this 

form. 

2. Fee for filing Notices of Intention to 

Make and Distribute Phonorecords 

electronically. The Office accepts 

Notices of Intention to Obtain a 

Compulsory License for use of the 

statutory license to make and distribute 

phonorecords when the notice cannot 

be served on the copyright owner or 

when the Copyright Office records do 

not include the name and address of the 

copyright owner. Historically, this 

statutory license was used to obtain the 

rights to use a particular musical work 

to make a cover record, and the Office 

received very few such notices. 

The advent of the digital age, 

however, changed the law and how 

businesses utilize the section 115 

license. Today, the license is viewed as 

an acceptable way to license the 

reproduction and electronic distribution 

of the musical work embedded in a 

digital phonorecord. Consequently, the 

use of the license has expanded 

exponentially and the Office has 

responded by investing in the 

development of an online filing system. 

The Office is optimistic that the first 

iteration of the online filing system will 

be operational at the time the proposed 

fees become final. In anticipation of that 

day, the Office has undertaken a cost 

study to determine a basic filing fee and 

the costs for additional titles for an 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
18746 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

electronic notice which, based on recent 

experience and the comments to the 

Office’s earlier Notice of Inquiry 

regarding additional services and fees, 

can include tens of thousands of titles. 

Based on this cost study, the Office is 

proposing to set the fee at $75 for each 

Notice with a single title. Notices with 

additional titles will incur an additional 

$20 fee per ten titles for a paper 

submission and an additional $10 fee 

per hundred titles for an online 

submission (which works out to $0.10 

per additional title). In light of the low 

proposed fee for additional titles for 

filing a Notice online, the Office does 

not see a need to consider a cap on the 

total fees for any one Notice filed in this 

manner as suggested in a comment to 

the Office’s January 24, 2012 Notice of 

Inquiry. As with the filing fees for the 

cable and satellite statements of 

account, the Office will reevaluate the 

fees for electronic filings in the future 

after gaining experience with the 

systems and the related costs. 

IV. FOIA Fees 

The Copyright Office last adjusted its 

fees for services associated with the 

Freedom of Information Act in 1999. 

See 64 FR 29518 (June 1, 1999). Fees are 

set in accordance with the guidelines 

established by the Office of Management 

and Budget in accordance with the OMB 

Uniform Freedom of Information Act 

Fee Schedule and Guidelines. 52 FR 

10,012 (March 27, 1987). Currently, the 

Office has an hourly search fee of $65 

for entities other than educational 

institutions, non-commercial scientific 

institutions, and representatives of the 

news media which mirrored the fee for 

searching Copyright Office records in 

1999 when the fee was revised. Today’s 

proposed increase in the FOIA fee 

schedule brings this and other FOIA 

fees up to date. 

The OMB guidelines allow agencies to 

recoup the full allowable direct costs 

they incur and provide that separate 

rates may be established for searching 

the records and reviewing responsive 

records to determine, e.g., the 

applicability of an exemption. In both 

cases, where a single class of reviewers 

is typically involved in providing the 

service, agencies may establish a 

reasonable agency-wide average fee. 

Accordingly, the Office proposes 

adoption of a two-tiered fee structure for 

searches to reflect the direct costs of the 

service depending upon the level of the 

personnel conducting the search. The 

proposed fee for a search based on a 

FOIA request is set at $15 for the first 

half hour and $7.50 for each additional 

15 minutes if conducted by 

administrative staff, and $35 for the first 

half hour and $17.50 for each additional 

15 minutes if conducted by professional 

staff. Similarly, the Office is proposing 

to adopt new fees for reviewing the 

documents at the same rates as those 

proposed for a FOIA search. However, 

the fees for reviewing the documents 

will be based on 15 minute units and 

without a minimum fee. In addition, the 

Office is proposing to remove the 

separate fee for a copy of a certificate of 

copyright registration and the separate 

fee for certification services, currently 

listed in §§ 203.6(b)(1) and (4), 

respectively. The OMB guidelines state 

that such services are not covered by 

FOIA or its fee structure and that an 

agency should recover the full costs of 

such services. Therefore, the Office 

proposes that the FOIA fees for these 

services should be the same as the 

Copyright Office fees for these same 

services listed in the proposed schedule. 

V. Schedule of Proposed Fees 

The chart below sets forth the current 

and proposed fees for services related to 

Registration, Recordation; Special 

Services; the Licensing Division; and 

FOIA requests. 

SCHEDULE OF PROPOSED FEES

Current fee Proposed new 

fee 

Registration, Recordation and Related Services 

(1) Registration of a basic claim in an original work of authorship: 

Single author, same claimant, one work, not a work made for hire, filed electronically ......................... $35 $45 

All other claims filed electronically ........................................................................................................... 35 65 

Forms PA, SR, TX, VA, SE (paper filing) ................................................................................................ 65 100 

(2) Registration of a claim in a group of contributions to periodicals (Form GR/CP), published photographs, or database updates (paper filing) .................................................................................................. 65 100 

(3) Registration of a renewal claim (Form RE): 

(i) Claim without Addendum ..................................................................................................................... 115 100 

(ii) Addendum (in addition to the fee for the Claim) ................................................................................ 220 100 

(4) Registration of a claim in a group of serials (Form SE/Group) [per issue, minimum 2 issues] ............... 25 35 

(5) Registration of a claim in a group of daily newspapers or qualified newsletters (Form G/DN) ................ 80 150 

(6) Registration of a claim in a restored copyright (Form GATT) ................................................................... 65 100 

(7) Preregistration of certain unpublished works ............................................................................................. 115 140 

(8) Registration of a correction or amplification to a claim (Form CA) ........................................................... 100 130 

(9) Registration of a claim in a mask work (Form MW) .................................................................................. 105 120 

(10) Registration of a claim in a vessel hull (Form D/VH) .............................................................................. 220 400 

(11) Providing an additional certificate of registration ..................................................................................... 35 40 

(12) Certification of other Copyright Office records (per hour) ....................................................................... 165 200 

(13) Search report prepared from official records (for up to 2 hours) ............................................................ 330 400 

(i) Additional hours of searching (per hour) ............................................................................................. 165 200 

(ii) Estimate of search fee ........................................................................................................................ 115 200 

(14) Retrieval of in-process or completed Copyright Office records or other Copyright Office materials: 

(i) Retrieval of paper records (per hour, 1 hour minimum) ...................................................................... 165 200 

(ii) Retrieval of digital records (per hour, 1⁄2 hour minimum/quarter hour increments) ............................ 165 200 

(15) Recordation of document, including a Notice of Intention to Enforce (NIE) (single title) ....................... 105 120 

Additional titles (per group of 1 to 10 titles) ............................................................................................. 30 35 

(16) Recordation of an Interim Designation of Agent to Receive Notification of Claimed Infringement 

under § 512(c)(2) (OSP) ............................................................................................................................... 105 105 

Additional names (per group of 1 to 10 titles) ......................................................................................... 30 35 

(17) Issuance of a receipt for a § 407 deposit ................................................................................................ 30 30 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules 18747 

SCHEDULE OF PROPOSED FEES—Continued 

Current fee Proposed new 

fee 

Special Services 

(1) Service charge for deposit account overdraft ............................................................................................ 165 250 

(2) Service charge for dishonored deposit account replenishment check ...................................................... 85 100 

(3) Service charge for an uncollectible or non-negotiable payment ............................................................... 25 30 

(4) Requests for Reconsideration of Refusals to Register Claims: 

(i) First Request (per claim) ..................................................................................................................... 250 250 

(ii) Second Request (per claim) ............................................................................................................... 500 500 

(5) Secure test processing charge (per staff member per hour) .................................................................... 165 250 

(6) Copying of Copyright Office records by staff: ............................................................................................ ............................ variable 

Photocopy (b&w, 81⁄2 x 11) (per page, minimum: $12) ........................................................................... 0.50 0.50 

Photocopy (b&w, 11 x 17) (per page, minimum: $12) ............................................................................. 1 1 

Photocopy (color, 81⁄2 x 11) (per page, minimum: $12) .......................................................................... 2 2 

Photocopy (color, 11 x 17) (per page, minimum: $12) ............................................................................ 4 4 

Audiocassette (first 30 minutes) ............................................................................................................... 75 75 

Additional 15 minute increments .............................................................................................................. 20 20 

Videocassette (first 30 minutes) ............................................................................................................... 75 75 

Additional 15 minute increments .............................................................................................................. 20 20 

CD or DVD ............................................................................................................................................... 100 30 

Flash Drive ............................................................................................................................................... N/A 30 

Other formats not available in the Copyright Office, dependent upon availability of equipment and 

media, at cost from provider ................................................................................................................. variable at cost 

(7) Special handling fee for a claim ................................................................................................................ 760 800 

For multiple claims with one deposit where special handling is requested only for a single claim, handling fee in addition to the basic registration fee for each claim using the same deposit ................... 50 50 

(8) Special handling fee for recordation of a document .................................................................................. 480 550 

(9) Handling fee of extra deposit copy for certification ................................................................................... 45 50 

(10) Full-term retention of a published deposit ............................................................................................... 470 540 

(11) Expedited search report (for up to 2 hours) ............................................................................................ 890 1,000 

Additional hours of searching (per hour) .................................................................................................. 445 500 

(12) Expedited retrieval, certification and copying services (surcharge, per hour) ........................................ 265 305 

(13) Notice to Libraries and Archives .............................................................................................................. 50 50 

Each additional title .................................................................................................................................. 20 20 

(14) Service charge for Federal Express mailing ............................................................................................ 40 45 

(15) Service charge for delivery of documents via facsimile (per page, 7 page maximum) .......................... 1 1 

FOIA Fees 

(1) Search of Copyright Office records: 

(i) Search prepared by administrative staff (per 15 min., 1⁄2 hour min.) ................................................. 1 65 7.50 

(ii) Search prepared by professional staff (per 15 min, 1⁄2 hour min.) ..................................................... 1 65 17.50 

(2) Review of documents: 

(i) Performed by administrative staff (per 15 min.) .................................................................................. N/A 7.50 

(ii) Performed by professional staff (15 min.) ........................................................................................... N/A 17.50 

Licensing Division Services 

(1) Processing of a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions 

pursuant to § 111: 

(i) Form SA1 ............................................................................................................................................. N/A 15 

(ii) Form SA2 ............................................................................................................................................ N/A 20 

(iii) Form SA3 ........................................................................................................................................... N/A 500 

(2) Processing of a statement of account based on secondary transmissions of primary transmissions 

pursuant to § 119 or § 122: .......................................................................................................................... N/A 75 

(3) Statement of Account Amendment (Cable Television Systems and Satellite Carriers, 17 U.S.C. § 111, 

§ 119, and § 122; Digital Audio Recording Devices or Media, 17 U.S.C. § 1003) ...................................... 100 150 

(4) Filing fee for recordation of a licensing agreement (17 U.S.C. § 118) ...................................................... 140 140 

(5) Recordation of a Notice of Intention to Make and Distribute Phonorecords with a single title (17 U.S.C. 

§ 115) ............................................................................................................................................................ 60 75 

(i) Additional titles (per group of 1 to 10 titles), paper filing .................................................................... 20 20 

(ii) Additional titles (per group of 1 to 100 titles), online filing ................................................................. N/A 10 

(6) Recordation of Certain Contracts by Cable TV Systems Located Outside the 48 Contiguous States .... 50 50 

(7) Section 112/114, Notice of Digital Transmission of Sound Recording ..................................................... 25 40 

Amended Notice of Digital Transmission of Sound Recording ................................................................ 25 40 

(8) Photocopy of Licensing record by staff (b&w) (per page) [minimum: $12] ............................................... 0.50 0.50 

(9) Search report prepared from Licensing records (per hour) ....................................................................... 165 200 

(10) Certification of search report (per hour) .................................................................................................. 165 200 

1 Current fees are based on an hourly rate. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
18748 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

VI. Technical Amendments 

The Office will adopt technical 

amendments as needed to conform 

existing regulations to the changes 

proposed in this notice. 

VII. Request for Comments 

The Copyright Office is publishing the 

proposed new fee schedule to provide 

the public with an opportunity to 

comment. The Office anticipates 

implementation of the new fees with the 

beginning of the new fiscal year, 

October 1, 2012. 

Dated: March 21, 2012. 

Maria A. Pallante, 

Register of Copyrights. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7428 Filed 3–27–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0507; FRL–9340–9] 

RIN 2070–ZA16 

Dicloran and Formetanate; Proposed 

Tolerance Actions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to revoke 

certain tolerances for the fungicide 

dicloran and the insecticide formetanate 

hydrochloride because, in follow-up to 

voluntary requests from registrants, 

domestic registrations were voluntarily 

amended to delete specific uses, leaving 

no dicloran and formetanate 

hydrochloride registrations for those 

uses. Also, in accordance with current 

Agency practice, EPA is proposing to 

make minor revisions to the tolerance 

expressions for dicloran and 

formetanate hydrochloride and to 

specific tolerance nomenclatures for 

dicloran. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 29, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0507, by 

one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket 

Facility’s normal hours of operation 

(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket Facility telephone number is 

(703) 305–5805. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 

0507. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the docket 

without change and may be made 

available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through regulations.gov or 

email. The regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

regulations.gov, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the comment that is placed in 

the docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the docket index available 

at http://www.regulations.gov. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either in the 

electronic docket at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPP 

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 

4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 

2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The 

hours of operation of this Docket 

Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Docket Facility telephone 

number is (703) 305–5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph Nevola, Pesticide Re-evaluation 

Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone 

number: (703) 308–8037; email address: 

nevola.joseph@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. Potentially 

affected entities may include, but are 

not limited to: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. To determine whether 

you or your business may be affected by 

this action, you should carefully 

examine the applicability provisions in 

Unit II.A. If you have any questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult the person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS