Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 55329 

maintenance of CO or any other NAAQS 

in the area. EPA finds that the 2010 

submittal meets the requirements of 

section 110(l) of the Act and proposes 

to approve it. EPA is not proposing to 

take action on the State’s CO 

background concentrations for CO 

project-level conformity analyses. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, the EPA’s role is to 

approve state choices, provided that 

they meet the criteria of the Clean Air 

Act. Accordingly, this proposed action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: August 25, 2011. 

Michael A. Bussell, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2011–22841 Filed 9–6–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0082; FRL–8886–7] 

Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions 

Filed for Residues of Pesticide 

Chemicals in or on Various 

Commodities 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: This document announces the 

Agency’s receipt of several initial filings 

of pesticide petitions requesting the 

establishment or modification of 

regulations for residues of pesticide 

chemicals in or on various commodities. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number and the pesticide petition 

number (PP) of interest as shown in the 

body of this document, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

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 

the docket ID number and the pesticide 

petition number of interest as shown in 

the body of this document. EPA’s policy 

is that all comments received will be 

included in the docket without change 

and may be made available on-line 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 e-mail. 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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

regulations.gov, your e-mail 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

55330 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

holidays. The Docket Facility telephone 

number is (703) 305–5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A 

contact person, with telephone number 

and e-mail address, is listed at the end 

of each pesticide petition summary. You 

may also reach each contact person by 

mail at Antimicrobials Division (7510P), 

Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention 

Division (7511P), and Registration 

Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide 

Programs, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001. 

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. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed at the end of the 

pesticide petition summary of interest. 

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 e-mail. 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 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

i. Identify the document by docket ID 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

ii. Follow directions. The Agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns and suggest 

alternatives. 

vii. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

viii. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to 

achieve environmental justice, the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of any group, including minority and/or 

low-income populations, in the 

development, implementation, and 

enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies. To help 

address potential environmental justice 

issues, the Agency seeks information on 

any groups or segments of the 

population who, as a result of their 

location, cultural practices, or other 

factors, may have atypical or 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health impacts or environmental 

effects from exposure to the pesticides 

discussed in this document, compared 

to the general population. 

II. What action is the agency taking? 

EPA is announcing its receipt of 

several pesticide petitions filed under 

section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 

346a, requesting the establishment or 

modification of regulations in 40 CFR 

part 174 or part 180 for residues of 

pesticide chemicals in or on various 

food commodities. The Agency is taking 

public comment on the requests before 

responding to the petitioners. EPA is not 

proposing any particular action at this 

time. EPA has determined that the 

pesticide petitions described in this 

document contain the data or 

information prescribed in FFDCA 

section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not 

fully evaluated the sufficiency of the 

submitted data at this time or whether 

the data support granting of the 

pesticide petitions. After considering 

the public comments, EPA intends to 

evaluate whether and what action may 

be warranted. Additional data may be 

needed before EPA can make a final 

determination on these pesticide 

petitions. 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a 

summary of each of the petitions that 

are the subject of this document, 

prepared by the petitioner, is included 

in a docket EPA has created for each 

rulemaking. The docket for each of the 

petitions is available on-line at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

As specified in FFDCA section 

408(d)(3), (21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3)), EPA is 

publishing notice of the petition so that 

the public has an opportunity to 

comment on this request for the 

establishment or modification of 

regulations for residues of pesticides in 

or on food commodities. Further 

information on the petition may be 

obtained through the petition summary 

referenced in this unit. 

New Tolerance 

1. PP 1E7863. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 

0433). Interregional Research Project 

Number 4 (IR–4), 500 College Rd. East, 

Suite 201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, 

requests to establish tolerances in 40 

CFR part 180 for residues of the 

insecticide dinotefuran, (RS)-1-methyl2-nitro-3-((tetrahydro-3- 

furyl)methyl)guanidine, including its 

metabolites and degradates, in or on 

berry, low growing, except strawberry, 

subgroup 13–07H at 0.2 parts per 

million (ppm); watercress at 5.0 ppm; 

onion, green, subgroup 3–07B at 6.0 

ppm; onion, bulb, subgroup 3–07A at 

0.07 ppm; peach at 0.9 ppm; vegetable, 

tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C at 0.05 

ppm; fruit, small, vine climbing, except 

fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup 13–07F at 0.9 

ppm; and tea, plucked leaves at 25.0 

ppm. Mitsui Chemicals Agro, Inc. has 

submitted practical analytical 

methodology for detecting and 

measuring levels of dinotefuran and its 

metabolites, 1-methyl-3-(tetrahydro-3- 

furymethyl)-urea (UF) and 1-methyl-3- 

(tetrahydro-3-furymethyl) guanidine 

(DN), in or on raw agricultural 

commodities. The high performance 

liquid chromatography (HPLC) method 

was validated for determination of 

dinotefuran, DN and UF in or on 

tomatoes and peppers, cucurbits, 

brassica, grapes, potatoes, mustard 

greens, and lettuce for raw agricultural 

commodity matrices and in or on 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 55331 

tomato paste and puree, grape juice and 

raisins and potato chips, granules, and 

wet peel for processed commodity 

matrices. After extraction with a water/ 

acetonitrile mixture and clean up with 

hexane and extraction columns, 

concentrations of dinotefuran and its 

metabolites were quantified after HPLC 

separation by tandem mass 

spectrometry (MS/MS) detection. 

Contact: Sidney Jackson, (703) 305– 

7610, e-mail address: 

jackson.sidney@epa.gov. 

2. PP 1E7881. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 

0541). IR–4, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 

201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to 

establish tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 

for combined residues of the insecticide 

fenpyroximate, (E)-1,1-dimethylethyl 4- 

[[[[(1,3-dimethyl-5-phenoxy-1H-pyrazol4-yl)methylene]amino] 

oxy]methyl]benzoate and its Z-isomer, 

(Z)-1,1-dimethylethyl 4-[[[[(1,3- 

dimethyl-5-phenoxy-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)

methylene]amino]oxy]methyl]benzoate, 

in or on avocado at 0.20 ppm; sapote, 

black at 0.20 ppm; canistel at 0.20 ppm; 

sapote, mamey at 0.20 ppm; mango at 

0.20 ppm; papaya at 0.20 ppm; sapodilla 

at 0.20 ppm; star apple at 0.20 ppm; 

bean, snap at 0.40 ppm; and tea, 

plucked leaves at 15 ppm. An 

enforcement method has been 

developed which involves extraction of 

fenpyroximate from crops with acetone, 

filtration, partitioning and cleanup, and 

analysis by gas chromatography (GC) 

using a nitrogen/phosphorous detector 

(NPD). Contact: Sidney Jackson, (703) 

305–7610, e-mail address: 

jackson.sidney@epa.gov. 

3. PP 1E7898. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 

0657). IR–4, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 

201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, in 

cooperation with Syngenta Crop 

Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, 

Greensboro NC 27419, requests to 

establish tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 

for residues of the herbicide Smetolachlor (free and bound), S-2- 

chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2- 

methoxy-1-methylethyl)acetamide, its 

R-enantiomer, and its metabolites, 

determined as the derivatives, 2-(2- 

ethyl-6-methylphenyl) amino-1- 

propanol and 4-(2-ethyl-6- 

methylphenyl)-2-hydroxy-5-methyl-3- 

morpholinone, in or on cilantro, leaves, 

fresh at 8.0 ppm; cilantro, leaves, dried 

at 8.0 ppm; coriander, seed at 0.13 ppm, 

and beet, garden, leaves at 1.8 ppm. 

Syngenta has developed and validated 

analytical methodology for enforcement 

purposes. This method has been 

submitted to the Agency and is in 

Pesticide Analytical Method Vol. II 

(PAM II), Method I. An extensive 

database of method validation data 

using this method on various crop 

commodities is available. Contact: 

Sidney Jackson, (703) 305–7610, e-mail 

address: jackson.sidney@epa.gov. 

4. PP 1E7904. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 

0665). IR–4, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 

201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to 

establish a tolerance in 40 CFR part 180 

for residues of the insecticide 

emamectin benzoate, 4′-epimethylamino-4′-deoxyavermectin B1

benzoate (a mixture of a minimum of 

90% 4′-epi-methylamino-4′- 

deoxyavermectin B1a and a maximum of 

10% 4′-epi-methlyamino4′deoxyavermectin B1b benzoate), and 

its metabolites 8,9 isomer of the B1a and 

B1b component of the parent insecticide, 

in or on vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 at 

0.03 ppm. Adequate analytical methods 

(HPLC-fluorescence methods) are 

available for enforcement purposes. 

Contact: Andrew Ertman, (703) 308– 

9367, e-mail address: 

ertman.andrew@epa.gov. 

5. PP 1G7889. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 

0674). Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, 

P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419– 

8300, requests to establish temporary 

tolerances in 40 CFR part 180 for 

residues of the fungicide acibenzolar Smethyl for an experimental use permit 

(EUP), in or on apple, grapefruit, and 

pears at 0.05 ppm. Syngenta Analytical 

Method AG–671A is a practical and 

valid method for the determination and 

confirmation of acibenzolar S-methyl 

(CGA245704) in raw agricultural 

commodities (RACs) and processing 

substrates from the tobacco, leafy 

(including Brassica) and fruiting 

vegetable crop groups at a limit of 

quantitation (LOQ) of 0.02 ppm. The 

method involves extraction, solid phase 

cleanup of samples with analysis by 

HPLC with ultraviolet (UV) detection or 

confirmatory LC/MS. Contact: Rose 

Mary Kearns, (703) 305–5611, e-mail 

address: kearns.rosemary@epa.gov. 

Amended Tolerance 

PP 1E7881. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 

0541). IR–4, 500 College Rd. East, Suite 

201 W, Princeton, NJ 08540, requests to 

amend the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.566 

for combined residues of the insecticide 

fenpyroximate, (E)-1,1-dimethylethyl 4- 

[[[[(1,3-dimethyl-5-phenoxy-1H-pyrazol4-yl)methylene]amino] 

oxy]methyl]benzoate and its Z-isomer, 

(Z)-1,1-dimethylethyl 4-[[[[(1,3- 

dimethyl-5-phenoxy-1H-pyrazol-4-yl)

methylene]amino]oxy]methyl]benzoate, 

in or on cucumber from 0.10 ppm to 

0.25 ppm; fruit, citrus, citrus, group 10– 

10 tolerance at 0.60 ppm; vegetable, 

fruiting, group 8–10 tolerance at 0.20 

ppm; and fruit, pome, group 11–10 

tolerance at 0.40 ppm. An enforcement 

method has been developed which 

involves extraction of fenpyroximate 

from crops with acetone, filtration, 

partitioning and cleanup, and analysis 

by GC using a nitrogen/phosphorous 

detector (NPD). Contact: Sidney Jackson, 

(703) 305–7610, e-mail address: 

jackson.sidney@epa.gov. 

New Tolerance Exemption 

PP 0F7747. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 

0139). Pace Chemicals Ltd., 8321 

Willard St., Burnaby, British Columbia, 

V3N 2X3, c/o Eliot Harrison, Lewis & 

Harrison LLC, 122 C St. NW., Suite 740, 

Washington, DC 20001, requests to 

establish an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance for residues 

of the antimicrobial dimethyl didecyl 

ammonium chloride (DDAC), in or on 

Brassica (broccoli seeds). DDAC was 

extracted from the crop matrix with 

acetonitrile followed by shaking with 

steel balls to pulverize the plant 

material. The extract was diluted with 

acetonitrile and centrifuged, then 

evaporated to 1 milliliter (ml) under a 

nitrogen stream. The extract is analyzed 

using LC–MS/LC. Contact: Tracy Lantz, 

(703) 308–6415, e-mail address: 

lantz.tracy@epa.gov. 

Amended Tolerance Exemption 

1. PP 1E7893. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 

0604). Cognis Corporation, c/o Lewis & 

Harrison LLC, 122 C Street, NW., Suite 

740, Washington, DC 20001, requests to 

amend an exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.910 and 40 CFR 180.930 to set 

maximum use levels of 2-ethylhexanol 

(CAS No. 104–76–7) of 20% in pesticide 

formulations when used as a pesticide 

inert ingredient. The petitioner believes 

no analytical method is needed because 

this information is not required for a 

tolerance exemption. Contact: John 

Redden, (703) 305–1969, e-mail address: 

redden.john@epa.gov. 

2. PP 1F7896. (EPA–HQ–OPP–2011– 

0669). AgraQuest, Inc., 1540 Drew Ave., 

Davis, CA 95618, requests to amend/ 

expand an existing exemption from the 

requirement of a tolerance in 40 CFR 

180.1209 by including the residues of 

the microbial pesticide Bacillus subtilis 

strain QST 713 variant Soil when used 

in or on all food commodities. An 

analytical method for detecting Bacillus 

subtilis strain QST 713 variant Soil is 

not applicable. It is expected that, when 

used as proposed, Bacillus subtilis 

strain QST 713 variant Soil would not 

result in residues that are of 

toxicological concern. Contact: Michael 

Glikes, (703) 305–6231, e-mail address: 

glikes.michael@epa.gov. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

55332 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 173 / Wednesday, September 7, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 

Environmental protection, 

Agricultural commodities, Feed 

additives, Food additives, Pesticides 

and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: August 28, 2011. 

Lois Rossi, 

Director, Registration Division, Office of 

Pesticide Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2011–22845 Filed 9–6–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

41 CFR Part 128–1 

[Docket No. FBI 151] 

RIN 1110–AA32 

Federal Bureau of Investigation AntiPiracy Warning Seal Program 

AGENCY: Federal Bureau of Investigation 

(FBI), Justice. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Bureau of 

Investigation (FBI) is proposing a new 

regulation providing a general 

authorization for use of the FBI AntiPiracy Warning Seal (APW Seal). The 

proposed rule will provide access to the 

APW Seal to all copyright holders, 

subject to specific conditions of use. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

postmarked and electronic comments 

must be submitted on or before 

November 7, 2011. Comments received 

by mail will be considered timely if they 

are postmarked on or before that date. 

The electronic Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS) will accept 

comments until Midnight Eastern Time 

at the end of that day. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to 

the Access Integrity Unit, Attn: Lori L. 

Bokey c/o Federal Bureau of 

Investigation, CJIS Division, Module C– 

3, 1000 Custer Hollow Road, Clarksburg, 

West Virginia 26306. To ensure proper 

handling, please reference Docket No. 

FBI 151 on your correspondence. You 

may submit comments electronically or 

view an electronic version of this 

proposed rule at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

C. Allender, FBI Office of the General 

Counsel, telephone number 202–324– 

8088. 

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 and address) voluntarily 

submitted by the commenter. 

You are not required to submit 

personal identifying information in 

order to comment on this rule. 

Nevertheless, if you want to submit 

personal identifying information (such 

as your name and address) 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 paragraph above entitled 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

The reason the Department is 

requesting electronic comments before 

Midnight Eastern Time at the end of the 

day the comment period closes is that 

the inter-agency Regulations.gov/ 

Federal Docket Management System 

(FDMS), which receives electronic 

comments, terminates the public’s 

ability to submit comments at that time. 

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, 

as stated above, will be considered as 

timely filed if they are postmarked 

before midnight on the day the 

comment period closes. 

Discussion. The FBI’s Anti-Piracy 

Warning (APW) Seal is a modified 

image of the FBI’s Official Seal with the 

words ‘‘FBI Anti-Piracy Warning’’ 

superimposed on it. On November 17, 

2003, the Attorney General approved 

the APW Seal, then referred to as the 

‘‘FBI Intellectual Property Rights Seal,’’ 

as an official insignia of the FBI to be 

used by the FBI and FBI-authorized 

entities as part of a copyright anti-piracy 

awareness campaign. This approval 

brought the APW Seal within the 

protection of Title 18 U.S. Code, Section 

701, which provides criminal sanctions 

for the unauthorized uses of such 

insignia. 

The APW Seal was designed to 

graphically enhance the impact of 

language warning users of copyrighted 

media about the potential consequences 

of intellectual property crime, and the 

FBI’s role in investigating such crime. It 

serves as a vivid and widely 

recognizable reminder of the FBI’s 

authority and mission with respect to 

the protection of intellectual property 

rights. 

Beginning in December 2003, the FBI 

implemented a pilot program in which 

the FBI entered into separate 

Memoranda of Understanding with each 

of five entertainment and software 

industry associations. Members of these 

associations were able to request 

approval to use the APW Seal from the 

association, and the association 

administered the process and recordkeeping. Largely as a result of this 

program, the APW Seal and its antipiracy message have reached a large 

segment of the public. Unfortunately, 

the pilot program also had the effect of 

excluding non-members of these five 

associations from being able to use the 

APW Seal on their works. 

In order to enhance the availability, 

use, and effectiveness of the APW Seal 

on lawful, copyright-protected works, 

this rule proposes to replace the pilot 

program with a regulation governing the 

use of the APW Seal. The image of the 

APW Seal will be made available on the 

FBI’s website, and it may be 

downloaded for use on eligible works as 

specified in the text of the proposed 

regulation below. There will be no fee 

associated with using the APW Seal. 

This regulation will be a significant 

improvement over the current program, 

which has tended to limit the use of the 

APW Seal and requires each user to 

enter into a written agreement governing 

the use. 

Regulatory Certifications 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Attorney General, in accordance 

with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 605(b)), has reviewed this 

proposed rule and, by approving it, 

certifies that this rule will not have a 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS