Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 15233 

within a 4.3-mile radius of Palmdale 

Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42. This Class 

D airspace area is effective during the 

specific dates and times established in 

advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective 

date and time will thereafter be continuously 

published in the Airport/Facility Directory. 

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace 

Designated as an Extension to a Class D 

Surface Area. 

* * * * * 

AWP CA E4 Palmdale, CA [Amended] 

Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42 

(Lat. 34°37′46′′ N., long. 118°05′04′′ W.) 

Palmdale VORTAC 

(Lat. 34°37′53′′ N., long. 118°03′50′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from the 

surface within 2.6 miles each side of the ILS 

localizer east course, extending from the 4.3- 

mile radius of Palmdale Regional Airport/ 

USAF Plant 42 to 6.5 miles east of the LOM, 

and within 1.8 miles south of and parallel to 

the Palmdale VORTAC 099° radial extending 

from the 4.3-mile radius of the airport to 7 

miles east of the VORTAC. This Class E 

airspace area is effective during the specific 

dates and times established in advance by a 

Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time 

will thereafter be continuously published in 

the Airport/Facility Directory. 

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace areas 

extending upward from 700 feet or more 

above the surface of the earth. 

* * * * * 

AWP CA E5 Palmdale, CA [Modify] 

Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF Plant 42 

(Lat. 34°37′46′′ N., long. 118°05′04′′ W.) 

Palmdale VORTAC 

(Lat. 34°37′53′′ N., long. 118°03′50′′ W.) 

Lancaster, Gen. William J. Fox Airfield, CA 

(Lat. 34°44′28′′ N., long. 118°13′07′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within 1.8 miles south 

and 6.1 miles north of the Palmdale VORTAC 

298° radial extending from the VORTAC to 

15.6 miles northwest, and within 1.8 miles 

each side of the 310° bearing from the Gen. 

William. J. Fox Airfield extending from a 4- 

mile radius of Gen. William J. Fox Airfield 

to 9.1 miles northwest of the Airfield, and 

within 5.2 miles south and 10.4 miles north 

of the Palmdale VORTAC 298° and 118° 

radials extending from 9.6 miles northwest to 

11.3 miles southeast of the VORTAC, and 

within 8 miles south and 4 miles north of the 

086° bearing from Palmdale Regional 

Airport/USAF Plant 42 extending 21.7 miles 

east of Palmdale Regional Airport/USAF 

Plant 42. That airspace extending upward 

from 1,200 feet above the surface bounded by 

a line beginning at lat. 35°36′30′′ N., long. 

118°45′03′′ W.; to lat. 35°44′00′′ N., long. 

117°53′03′′ W.; to lat. 36°07′00′′ N., long. 

117°53′03′′ W.; to lat. 36°07′00′′ N., long. 

117°35′03′′ W.; to lat. 35°47′46′′ N., long. 

116°55′23′′ W.; to lat. 35°21′36′′ N., long. 

116°55′23′′ W.; to lat. 35°34′30′′ N., long. 

116°29′43′′ W.; to lat. 35°34′30′′ N., long. 

116°23′33′′ W.; to lat. 35°28′35′′ N., long. 

116°18′48′′ W.; to lat. 35°21′30′′ N., long. 

116°13′03′′ W.; to lat. 34°43′00′′ N., long. 

116°13′03′′ W.; thence west along lat. 

34°43′00′′ N., to the southeast boundary of V– 

21, thence along the southeast boundary of 

V–21 to lat. 34°30′00′′ N., thence west along 

lat. 34°30′00′′ N., to long. 118°20′03′′ W.; 

thence north along long. 118°20′03′′ W., to 

the south boundary of V–137, thence west 

along the south boundary of V–137 to long. 

118°45′03′′ W.; thence to the point of 

beginning. 

Issued in Seattle, Washington, on March 8, 

2011. 

John Warner, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, Western 

Service Center. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6336 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

19 CFR Part 351 

[Docket No. 110315198–1198–01] 

RIN 0625–AA86 

Proposed Modification to Regulation 

Concerning the Revocation of 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Orders 

AGENCY: Import Administration, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed Modification to 

Regulation; Request for Comments. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(‘‘the Department’’) proposes to modify 

our regulations which govern the 

revocation of antidumping and 

countervailing duty orders, in whole or 

in part, and the termination of 

suspended antidumping and 

countervailing duty investigations. The 

modification, if adopted, would 

eliminate the provision for revocation of 

an antidumping or countervailing duty 

order with respect to individual 

exporters or producers based on those 

individual exporters or producers 

having received antidumping margins of 

zero for three consecutive years, or 

countervailing duty rates of zero for five 

consecutive years. 

DATES: To be assured of consideration, 

comments must be received no later 

than April 20, 2011. 

Submission of Comments: As 

specified above, to be assured of 

consideration, comments must be 

received no later than April 20, 2011. 

All comments must be submitted 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket 

No. ITA–2011–0001, unless the 

commenter does not have access to the 

Internet. Commenters that do not have 

access to the Internet may submit the 

original and two copies of each set of 

comments by mail or hand delivery/ 

courier. All comments should be 

addressed to Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration, Room 1870, 

Department of Commerce, 14th Street 

and Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20230. The comments 

should also be identified by Regulation 

Identifier Number (RIN) 0625–AA86. 

The Department will consider all 

comments received before the close of 

the comment period. The Department 

will not accept comments accompanied 

by a request that part or all of the 

material be treated confidentially 

because of its business proprietary 

nature or for any other reason. All 

comments responding to this notice will 

be a matter of public record and will be 

available for inspection at Import 

Administration’s Central Records Unit 

(Room 7046 of the Herbert C. Hoover 

Building) and online at http:// 

www.Regulations.gov and on the 

Department’s Web site at http:// 

www.trade.gov/ia/. 

Any questions concerning file 

formatting, document conversion, 

access on the Internet, or other 

electronic filing issues should be 

addressed to Andrew Lee Beller, Import 

Administration Webmaster, at (202) 

482–0866, e-mail address: webmastersupport@ita.doc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James Maeder at (202) 482–3330, Mark 

Ross at (202) 482–4794, or Jonathan 

Zielinski at (202) 482–4384. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Department proposes to modify 

its regulations that provide for 

revocation of antidumping and 

countervailing duty orders pursuant to 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the 

Act). Currently, 19 CFR 351.222 

provides requirements and procedures 

for the Department to determine in the 

context of an administrative review, 

based on an absence of dumping or 

countervailable subsidization, whether 

to (1) revoke an order in whole, or (2) 

partially revoke an order with respect to 

an individual exporter or producer. The 

Department proposes to eliminate the 

latter category of revocations as it 

pertains to revocations from an 

antidumping or countervailing duty 

order based on individual exporters or 

producers having received antidumping 

margins of zero for three consecutive 

years, or countervailing duty rates of 

zero for five consecutive years. The 

Department will retain, with some 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

15234 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

conforming modifications, the former 

category of revocations. The Department 

is not proposing any change with 

respect to revocations as described 

under paragraphs (g) through (l) of 19 

CFR 351.222. To implement this 

modification, the Department would 

withdraw 19 CFR 351.222(b)(2) and (3) 

(dumping) and 351.222(c)(3) and (4) 

(countervailable subsidy), and make 

conforming modifications as necessary 

to the remaining paragraphs of 19 CFR 

351.222. 

Company-specific revocations are not 

required by the Act. Accordingly, the 

Department has considered several 

factors in issuing this proposal. First, 

pursuant to the existing regulation, the 

Department is required to expend 

additional resources, including 

additional mandatory verifications, in 

conducting administrative reviews 

where a request for company-specific 

revocation is being considered. Second, 

while the Department annually 

conducts administrative reviews of 

hundreds of foreign companies subject 

to antidumping or countervailing duty 

orders, only a small fraction of the 

reviewed companies are ultimately 

found to be eligible for a companyspecific revocation under the 

regulations at issue here. Third, to the 

extent that eligible companies maintain 

antidumping duty or countervailing 

duty rates of zero percent, the proposal 

would not change the amount of duties 

applied to entries subject to 

antidumping or countervailing duty 

orders. Finally, the Department has 

considered the fact that many of the 

companies for which reviews have been 

requested may not have the opportunity 

to amass the three antidumping rates of 

zero percent (demonstrating an absence 

of dumping for three consecutive years) 

or five countervailing duty rates of zero 

percent (demonstrating an absence of 

countervailable subsidies for five 

consecutive years) necessary to be 

eligible for a company-specific 

revocation. Pursuant to the Act, the 

Department frequently limits the 

examination of companies for which 

reviews have been requested, as it is not 

practicable to examine all companies. 

Companies not selected for review will 

normally receive an antidumping or 

countervailing duty rate based upon the 

average of the rates calculated for the 

individually reviewed companies. 

Rather than administering the companyspecific revocation regulations in a 

manner that does not afford equitable 

opportunity to all companies to seek 

revocation, and in light of the additional 

factors noted, the Department proposes 

to eliminate the company-specific 

revocation regulations. 

In addition, the Department proposes 

to clarify 19 CFR 351.222(f)(2) to make 

it clear that a request for revocation that 

does not conform with the requirements 

of paragraph (e) does not require the 

Secretary to undertake the actions 

provided for in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) 

through (f)(2)(vi). Finally, the 

Department proposes to correct a 

grammatical error in the third sentence 

of 19 CFR 351.222(a) (change ‘‘have’’ to 

‘‘has’’) and delete 19 CFR 351.222(m) (a 

transition rule related to the Uruguay 

Round Agreements Act that is no longer 

applicable). 

Classification 

Executive Order 12866 

The rule has been determined to be 

not significant for purposes of Executive 

Order 12866. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Chief Counsel for Regulation has 

certified to the Chief Counsel for 

Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration (‘‘SBA’’) under the 

provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), that the proposed 

rule would not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small business entities. A 

summary of the need for, objectives of, 

and legal basis for this rule is provided 

in the preamble, and is not repeated 

here. 

The entities upon which this 

rulemaking could have an impact 

include foreign exporters and 

producers, some of whom are affiliated 

with U.S. companies, and U.S. 

importers. Some of these entities may be 

considered small entities under the SBA 

small business size standard. Although 

the Department is not able to estimate 

the number of small entities this 

proposed rule will affect, the 

Department anticipates that it will not 

be a substantial number. For example, 

while the Department annually 

conducts administrative reviews of 

hundreds of foreign companies subject 

to antidumping or countervailing duty 

orders, only a small fraction of the 

reviewed companies could be 

considered eligible for a companyspecific revocation under the 

regulations at issue here (i.e., 19 CFR 

351.222(b)(2) and (3) (dumping) and 

351.222(c)(3) and (4) (countervailable 

subsidy)). In the past five years, despite 

conducting administrative reviews of 

well over five hundred companies, only 

15 companies (of various sizes) have 

obtained a company-specific revocation 

under the relevant portions of 19 CFR 

351.222. Also, in relation to the 

proposed rule’s economic impact on 

small entities, the Department does not 

anticipate it will be significant because 

the proposed rule will have no effect on 

any antidumping or countervailing duty 

liability determined for any party. This 

is because the proposed rule does not 

involve any aspect of the calculation of 

an antidumping or countervailing duty 

margin. Rather, as explained above, the 

proposed rule eliminates the possibility 

for foreign exporters or producers to 

obtain company-specific revocations 

based upon an absence of dumping for 

three consecutive years or 

countervailable subsidization for five 

consecutive years. Consequently, the 

amount of duties applied to entries 

subject to antidumping or 

countervailing duty orders will not 

change as a result of the proposed rule. 

Since this proposed modification to 

19 CFR 351.222, if adopted, will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities, 

an Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis is not required and, therefore, 

has not been prepared. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not contain a collection 

of information for purposes of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, as 

amended (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 351 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Antidumping, Business and 

industry, Cheese, Confidential business 

information, Countervailing duties, 

Freedom of information, Investigations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: March 8, 2011. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import 

Administration. 

For the reasons stated, 19 CFR part 

351 is proposed to be amended as 

follows: 

PART 351—ANTIDUMPING AND 

COUNTERVAILING DUTIES 

1. The authority citation for 19 CFR 

part 351 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 1202 

note; 19 U.S.C. 1303 note; 19 U.S.C. 1671 et 

seq.; and 19 U.S.C. 3538. 

2. In § 351.222, revise paragraphs (a), 

(b), (c), and (f), remove paragraph (m), 

and redesignate paragraph (n) as 

paragraph (m) to read as follows: 

§ 351.222 Revocation of orders; 

termination of suspended investigations. 

(a) Introduction. ‘‘Revocation’’ is a 

term of art that refers to the end of an 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 15235 

antidumping or countervailing 

proceeding in which an order has been 

issued. ‘‘Termination’’ is the companion 

term for the end of a proceeding in 

which the investigation was suspended 

due to the acceptance of a suspension 

agreement. Generally, a revocation or 

termination may occur only after the 

Department or the Commission has 

conducted one or more reviews under 

section 751 of the Act. This section 

contains rules regarding requirements 

for a revocation or termination; and 

procedures that the Department will 

follow in determining whether to revoke 

an order or terminate a suspended 

investigation. 

(b) Revocation or termination based 

on absence of dumping. (1) In 

determining whether to revoke an 

antidumping duty order or terminate a 

suspended antidumping investigation, 

the Secretary will consider: 

(i) Whether all exporters and 

producers covered at the time of 

revocation by the order or the 

suspension agreement have sold the 

subject merchandise at not less than 

normal value for a period of at least 

three consecutive years; and 

(ii) Whether the continued 

application of the antidumping duty 

order is otherwise necessary to offset 

dumping. 

(2) If the Secretary determines, based 

upon the criteria in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) 

and (ii) of this section, that the 

antidumping duty order or suspension 

of the antidumping duty investigation is 

no longer warranted, the Secretary will 

revoke the order or terminate the 

investigation. 

(c) Revocation or termination based 

on absence of countervailable subsidy. 

(1)(i) In determining whether to revoke 

a countervailing duty order or terminate 

a suspended countervailing duty 

investigation, the Secretary will 

consider: 

(A) Whether the government of the 

affected country has eliminated all 

countervailable subsidies on the subject 

merchandise by abolishing for the 

subject merchandise, for a period of at 

least three consecutive years, all 

programs that the Secretary has found 

countervailable; 

(B) Whether exporters and producers 

of the subject merchandise are 

continuing to receive any net 

countervailable subsidy from an 

abolished program referred to in 

paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) of this section; 

and 

(C) Whether the continued 

application of the countervailing duty 

order or suspension of countervailing 

duty investigation is otherwise 

necessary to offset subsidization. 

(ii) If the Secretary determines, based 

upon the criteria in paragraphs 

(c)(1)(i)(A) through (C) of this section, 

that the countervailing duty order or 

suspension of the countervailing duty 

investigation is no longer warranted, the 

Secretary will revoke the order or 

terminate the suspended investigation. 

(2)(i) In determining whether to 

revoke a countervailing duty order or 

terminate a suspended countervailing 

duty investigation, the Secretary will 

consider: 

(A) Whether all exporters and 

producers covered at the time of 

revocation by the order or the 

suspension agreement have not applied 

for or received any net countervailable 

subsidy on the subject merchandise for 

a period of at least five consecutive 

years; and 

(B) Whether the continued 

application of the countervailing duty 

order or suspension of the 

countervailing duty investigation is 

otherwise necessary to offset 

subsidization. 

(ii) If the Secretary determines, based 

upon the criteria in paragraphs 

(c)(2)(i)(A) and (B) of this section, that 

the countervailing duty order or the 

suspension of the countervailing duty 

investigation is no longer warranted, the 

Secretary will revoke the order or 

terminate the suspended investigation. 

* * * * * 

(e) Request for revocation or 

termination—(1) Antidumping 

proceeding. During the third and 

subsequent annual anniversary months 

of the publication of an antidumping 

order or suspension of an antidumping 

investigation, any exporter or producer 

may request in writing that the 

Secretary revoke an order or terminate 

a suspended investigation under 

paragraph (b) of this section if the 

person submits with the request: 

(i) Certifications for all exporters and 

producers covered by the order or 

suspension agreement that they sold the 

subject merchandise at not less than 

normal value during the period of 

review described in Sec. 351.213(e)(1), 

and that in the future the person will 

not sell the merchandise at less than 

normal value; and 

(ii) Certifications for all exporters and 

producers covered by the order or 

suspension agreement that, during each 

of the consecutive years referred to in 

paragraph (b) of this section, they sold 

the subject merchandise to the United 

States in commercial quantities. 

(2) Countervailing duty proceeding. (i) 

During the third and subsequent annual 

anniversary months of the publication 

of a countervailing duty order or 

suspension of a countervailing duty 

investigation, the government of the 

affected country may request in writing 

that the Secretary revoke an order or 

terminate a suspended investigation 

under paragraph (c)(1) of this section if 

the government submits with the 

request its certification that it has 

satisfied, during the period of review 

described in § 351.213(e)(2), the 

requirements of paragraph (c)(1)(i) of 

this section regarding the abolition of 

countervailable subsidy programs, and 

that it will not reinstate for the subject 

merchandise those programs or 

substitute other countervailable subsidy 

programs; 

(ii) During the fifth and subsequent 

annual anniversary months of the 

publication of a countervailing duty 

order or suspended countervailing duty 

investigation, the government of the 

affected country may request in writing 

that the Secretary revoke an order or 

terminate a suspended investigation 

under paragraph (c)(2) of this section if 

the government submits with the 

request: 

(A) Certifications for all exporters and 

producers covered by the order or 

suspension agreement that they have 

not applied for or received any net 

countervailable subsidy on the subject 

merchandise for a period of at least five 

consecutive years (see paragraph 

(c)(2)(i) of this section); 

(B) Those exporters’ and producers’ 

certifications that they will not apply for 

or receive any net countervailable 

subsidy on the subject merchandise 

from any program the Secretary has 

found countervailable in any proceeding 

involving the affected country or from 

other countervailable programs (see 

paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section); and 

(C) A certification from each exporter 

or producer that, during each of the 

consecutive years referred to in 

paragraph (c)(2) of this section, that 

person sold the subject merchandise to 

the United States in commercial 

quantities. 

(f) Procedures. (1) Upon receipt of a 

timely request for revocation or 

termination under paragraph (e) of this 

section, the Secretary will consider the 

request as including a request for an 

administrative review and will initiate 

and conduct a review under § 351.213. 

(2) When the Secretary is considering 

a request for revocation or termination 

under paragraph (e) of this section, in 

addition to the requirements of 

§ 351.221 regarding the conduct of an 

administrative review, the Secretary 

will: 

(i) Publish with the notice of 

initiation under § 351.221(b)(1), notice 

of ‘‘Request for Revocation of Order’’ or 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

15236 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

‘‘Request for Termination of Suspended 

Investigation’’ (whichever is applicable); 

(ii) Conduct a verification under 

§ 351.307; 

(iii) Include in the preliminary results 

of review under § 351.221(b)(4) the 

Secretary’s decision whether there is a 

reasonable basis to believe that the 

requirements for revocation or 

termination are met; 

(iv) If the Secretary decides that there 

is a reasonable basis to believe that the 

requirements for revocation or 

termination are met, publish with the 

notice of preliminary results of review 

under § 351.221(b)(4) notice of ‘‘Intent to 

Revoke Order’’ or ‘‘Intent to Terminate 

Suspended Investigation’’ (whichever is 

applicable); 

(v) Include in the final results of 

review under § 351.221(b)(5) the 

Secretary’s final decision whether the 

requirements for revocation or 

termination are met; and 

(vi) If the Secretary determines that 

the requirements for revocation or 

termination are met, publish with the 

notice of final results of review under 

§ 351.221(b)(5) notice of ‘‘Revocation of 

Order’’ or ‘‘Termination of Suspended 

Investigation’’ (whichever is applicable). 

(3) If the Secretary revokes an order, 

the Secretary will order the suspension 

of liquidation terminated for the 

merchandise covered by the revocation 

on the first day after the period under 

review, and will instruct the Customs 

Service to release any cash deposit or 

bond. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–6019 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

28 CFR Part 16 

[Docket No. OAG 140; AG Order No. 3259– 

2011] 

RIN 1105–AB27 

Freedom of Information Act 

Regulations 

AGENCY: Department of Justice. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule proposes revisions 

to the Department’s regulations under 

the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). 

The regulations are being revised to 

update and streamline the language of 

several procedural provisions, and to 

incorporate certain of the changes 

brought about by the amendments to the 

FOIA under the OPEN Government Act 

of 2007. Additionally, the regulations 

are being updated to reflect 

developments in the case law and to 

include current cost figures to be used 

in calculating and charging fees. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

postmarked and electronic comments 

must be submitted on or before April 20, 

2011. Comments received by mail will 

be considered timely if they are 

postmarked on or before that date. The 

electronic Federal Docket Management 

System will accept comments until 

Midnight Eastern Time at the end of that 

day. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http// 

www.regulations.gov. 

• FAX: (202) 514–1009. Send your 

comments to the attention of Caroline A. 

Smith. 

• Mail: Caroline A. Smith, Office of 

Information Policy, U.S. Department of 

Justice, 1425 New York Ave., Suite 

11050, Washington, DC 20530–0001. 

To ensure proper handling, please 

reference OAG Docket No. 140 on your 

correspondence. 

See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 

further instructions for submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Caroline A. Smith, 202–514–3642. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Posting of Public Comments: Please 

note that all comments received are 

considered part of the public record and 

made available for public inspection 

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

Such information includes personal 

identifying information (such as your 

name, address, etc.) voluntarily 

submitted by the commenter. 

You are not required to submit 

personal identifying information in 

order to comment on this rule. 

Nevertheless, if you still want to submit 

personal identifying information (such 

as your name, address, etc.) as part of 

your comment, but do not want it to be 

posted online, you must include the 

phrase ‘‘PERSONAL IDENTIFYING 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You also must locate 

all the personal identifying information 

you do not want posted online in the 

first paragraph of your comment and 

identify what information you want 

redacted. 

If you want to submit confidential 

business information as part of your 

comment but do not want it to be posted 

online, you must include the phrase 

‘‘CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS 

INFORMATION’’ in the first paragraph 

of your comment. You also must 

prominently identify confidential 

business information to be redacted 

within the comment. If a comment has 

so much confidential business 

information that it cannot be effectively 

redacted, all or part of that comment 

may not be posted on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Personal identifying information and 

confidential business information 

identified and located as set forth above 

will be placed in the agency’s public 

docket file, but not posted online. If you 

wish to inspect the agency’s public 

docket file in person by appointment, 

please see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT paragraph. 

The reason that the Department is 

requesting electronic comments before 

Midnight Eastern Time on the day the 

comment period closes is because the 

inter-agency Regulations.gov/Federal 

Docket Management System (FDMS) 

which receives electronic comments 

terminates the public’s ability to submit 

comments at Midnight on the day the 

comment period closes. Commenters in 

time zones other than Eastern may want 

to take this fact into account so that 

their electronic comments can be 

received. The constraints imposed by 

the Regulations.gov/FDMS system do 

not apply to U.S. postal comments 

which will be considered as timely filed 

if they are postmarked before Midnight 

on the day the comment period closes. 

Discussion 

This rule proposes revisions to the 

Department’s regulations under the 

FOIA to update and streamline the 

language of several procedural 

provisions and to incorporate certain of 

the changes brought about by the 

amendments to the FOIA under the 

OPEN Government Act of 2007, Public 

Law 110–175, 121 Stat. 2524. 

Additionally, the regulations are being 

updated to reflect developments in the 

case law and to include current cost 

figures to be used in calculating and 

charging fees. 

The revisions of the FOIA regulations 

in subpart A of part 16 incorporate 

changes to the language and structure of 

the regulations. Revised provisions 

include § 16.1 (General Provisions), 

§ 16.2 (Proactive disclosure of 

Department records), § 16.3 

(Requirements for making requests), 

§ 16.5 (Timing of responses to requests), 

§ 16.6 (Responses to requests), § 16.7 

(Confidential commercial information), 

and § 16.8 (Administrative appeals). In 

addition, current § 16.7 (Classified 

Information) is to be deleted and 

subsequent sections renumbered 

accordingly. 

Proposed revisions of the 

Department’s fee schedule can be found 

at § 16.10(c) and (d). The duplication 

charge for photocopying will decrease to 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS