80042 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 244 / Tuesday, December 21, 2010 / Notices 

meeting and hearing locations, see 

supplementary information. 

Council Address: Pacific Fishery 

Management Council, 7700 NE 

Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, 

OR 97220. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Chuck Tracy, telephone: (503) 820– 

2280. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Schedule for Document Completion and 

Availability 

February 17, 2011: ‘‘Review of 2010 

Ocean Salmon Fisheries’’ will be mailed 

to the public and posted on the Council 

Web site at http://www.pcouncil.org. 

March 3, 2011: ‘‘Preseason Report I– 

Stock Abundance Analysis for 2011 

Ocean Salmon Fisheries’’ will be mailed 

to the public and posted on the Council 

Web site at http://www.pcouncil.org. 

March 22, 2011: ‘‘Preseason Report II– 

Analysis of Proposed Regulatory 

Alternatives for 2011 Ocean Salmon 

Fisheries’’ and public hearing schedule 

will be mailed to the public and posted 

on the Council Web site at http:// 

www.pcouncil.org. The report will 

include a description of the adopted 

salmon management alternatives and a 

summary of their biological and 

economic impacts. 

April 22, 2011: ‘‘Preseason Report III– 

Analysis of Council-Adopted Ocean 

Salmon Management Measures for 2011 

Ocean Salmon Fisheries’’ will be mailed 

to the public and posted on the Council 

Web site at http://www.pcouncil.org. 

May 1, 2011: Federal regulations for 

2011 ocean salmon regulations will be 

published in the Federal Register and 

implemented. 

Meetings and Hearings 

January 18–21, 2011: The Salmon 

Technical Team (STT) will meet at the 

Pacific Council office in a public work 

session to draft ‘‘Review of 2010 Ocean 

Salmon Fisheries’’ and to consider any 

other estimation or methodology issues 

pertinent to the 2011 ocean salmon 

fisheries. 

February 22–25, 2011: The STT will 

meet at the Pacific Council office in a 

public work session to draft ‘‘Preseason 

Report I–Stock Abundance Analysis for 

2011 Ocean Salmon Fisheries’’ and to 

consider any other estimation or 

methodology issues pertinent to the 

2011 ocean salmon fisheries. 

March 28–29, 2011: Public hearings 

will be held to receive comments on the 

proposed ocean salmon fishery 

management options adopted by the 

Pacific Council. Written comments 

received at the public hearings, and a 

summary of oral comments at the 

hearings will be provided to the Council 

at its April meeting. 

All public hearings begin at 7 p.m. at 

the following locations: 

March 28, 2011: Chateau Westport, 

Beach Room, 710 W Hancock, Westport, 

WA 98595, telephone: (360) 268–9101. 

March 28, 2011: Red Lion Hotel, 

Umpqua Room, 1313 N Bayshore Drive, 

Coos Bay, OR 97420, telephone: (541) 

267–4141. 

March 29, 2011: Red Lion Eureka, 

Evergreen Room, 1929 Fourth Street, 

Eureka, CA 95501, telephone: (707) 

445–0844. 

Although non-emergency issues not 

contained in the STT meeting agendas 

may come before the STT for 

discussion, those issues may not be the 

subject of formal STT action during 

these meetings. STT action will be 

restricted to those issues specifically 

listed in this document and to any 

issues arising after publication of this 

document requiring emergency action 

under Section 305(c) of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act, provided the public 

has been notified of the STT’s intent to 

take final action to address the 

emergency. 

Special Accommodations 

The meetings are physically 

accessible to people with disabilities. 

Requests for sign language 

interpretation or other auxiliary aids 

should be directed to Ms. Carolyn Porter 

at (503) 820–2280 (voice), or (503) 820– 

2299 (fax) at least 5 days prior to the 

meeting date. 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Dated: December 16, 2010. 

Tracey L. Thompson, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31954 Filed 12–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Office of the Secretary 

National Telecommunications and 

Information Administration 

International Trade Administration 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology 

[Docket No. 101214614–0614–01] 

RIN 0660–XA22 

Information Privacy and Innovation in 

the Internet Economy 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, U.S. 

Department of Commerce; National 

Telecommunications and Information 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce; International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce; National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, U.S. 

Department of Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice and request for public 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Commerce’s Internet Policy Task Force 

is conducting a comprehensive review 

of the nexus between privacy policy and 

innovation in the Internet economy. On 

April 23, 2010, the Department 

published a Notice of Inquiry seeking 

comment from all Internet stakeholders 

on the impact of current privacy laws in 

the United States and around the world 

on the pace of innovation in the 

information economy. The Department 

now seeks further comment on its report 

entitled, ‘‘Commercial Data Privacy and 

Innovation in the Internet Economy: A 

Dynamic Policy Framework,’’ available 

at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ 

internetpolicytaskforce/. Through this 

Notice requesting comments on the 

report, the Department hopes to spur 

further discussion with Internet 

stakeholders that will lead to the 

development of a series of 

Administration positions that will help 

develop an action plan in this important 

area. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

January 28, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be 

submitted by mail to the National 

Telecommunications and Information 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Room 4725, Washington, DC 

20230. Submissions may be in any of 

the following formats: HTML, ASCII, 

Word, rtf, or pdf. Online submissions in 

electronic form may be sent to 

privacynoi2010@ntia.doc.gov. Paper 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 244 / Tuesday, December 21, 2010 / Notices 80043 

1Notice of Inquiry, Information Privacy and 

Innovation in the Internet Economy, 75 FR 21226 

(Apr. 23, 2010), available at http:// 

www.ntia.doc.gov/frnotices/2010/ 

FR_PrivacyNOI_04232010.pdf. Comments received 

in response to this Notice of Inquiry are posted at 

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/comments/100402174- 

0175-01/. 

2The Public Meeting Notice, 75 FR 19942 (Apr. 

16, 2010), and the meeting agenda are available at 

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/internetpolicytaskforce/. 

3The report is available at http:// 

www.ntia.doc.gov/internetpolicytaskforce/. 

submissions should include a three and 

one-half inch computer diskette or 

compact disc (CD). Diskettes or CDs 

should be labeled with the name and 

organizational affiliation of the filer and 

the name of the word processing 

program used to create the document. 

Comments will be posted at http:// 

www.ntia.doc.gov/ 

internetpolicytaskforce/. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

questions about this Notice contact: 

Aaron Burstein, Office of Policy 

Analysis and Development, National 

Telecommunications and Information 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Room 4725, Washington, DC 

20230; telephone (202) 482–1880; e-mail 

aburstein@ntia.doc.gov; or Manu 

Bhardwaj, Office of Policy Analysis and 

Development, National 

Telecommunications and Information 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone 

(202) 482–4985; e-mail 

mbhardwaj@ntia.doc.gov. Please direct 

media inquires to NTIA’s Office of 

Public Affairs at (202) 482–7002. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Recognizing the vital importance of 

the Internet to U.S. innovation, 

prosperity, education, and political and 

cultural life, the Department has made 

it a top priority to ensure that the 

Internet remains open for innovation. 

The Department established the Internet 

Policy Task Force to identify leading 

public policy and operational 

challenges in the Internet environment. 

The Task Force leverages expertise 

across many bureaus, including those 

responsible for domestic and 

international information and 

communications technology policy, 

international trade, cyber security 

standards and best practices, 

intellectual property, business advocacy 

and export control. 

Moreover, the Obama Administration 

has launched an initiative to develop an 

interagency policy structure for 

commercial data privacy issues. The 

Commerce Department’s General 

Counsel Cameron Kerry and the Justice 

Department’s Assistant Attorney 

General for the Office of Legal Policy 

Christopher H. Schroeder chair a 

recently launched subcommittee of the 

National Science and Technology 

Council that the White House has 

chartered to work on Privacy and 

Internet Policy issues. Through that 

vehicle, the Administration is engaging 

agencies throughout the U.S. 

Government in a conversation on 

commercial data privacy to ensure that 

the Administration speaks with one 

voice and takes advantage of its many 

areas of expertise to promote the 

development of strategic and 

comprehensive Internet privacy 

policies. 

Background: The Department has 

launched the Privacy and Innovation 

Initiative to identify policies that will 

enhance: (1) The clarity, transparency, 

scalability and flexibility needed to 

foster innovation in the information 

economy; and (2) the public confidence 

necessary for full citizen participation 

with the Internet. On April 23, 2010, the 

Department published a Notice of 

Inquiry seeking public comment from 

all Internet stakeholders, including the 

commercial, academic and civil society 

sectors, on the impact of current privacy 

laws in the United States and around 

the world on the pace of innovation in 

the information economy.1 Through that 

Notice of Inquiry, the Department 

sought to understand whether current 

privacy laws serve consumer interests 

and fundamental democratic values. 

The Department also held a symposium 

on May 7, 2010, to discuss stakeholder 

views and to facilitate further public 

discussion on privacy policy in the 

United States.2

The Department has now prepared a 

report, entitled ‘‘Commercial Data 

Privacy and Innovation in the Internet 

Economy: A Dynamic Policy 

Framework,’’ as a vehicle to spur further 

discussion with Internet stakeholders on 

this important area of policy 

development.3

Request for Comment: This Notice 

seeks input on the report. The questions 

below, which also appear in Appendix 

A of the report, are intended to assist in 

identifying issues. They should not be 

construed as a limitation on comments 

that parties may submit. Comments that 

contain references, studies, research and 

other empirical data that are not widely 

published should include copies of the 

referenced materials with the submitted 

comments. 

(1) Should baseline commercial data 

privacy principles, such as 

comprehensive FIPPs, be enacted by 

statute or other means, to address how 

current privacy law is enforced? 

(2) How should baseline privacy 

principles be enforced? Should they be 

enforced by non-governmental entities 

in addition to being the basis for FTC 

enforcement actions? 

(3) As policymakers consider baseline 

commercial data privacy legislation, 

should they seek to grant the FTC the 

authority to issue more detailed rule? 

What criteria are useful for deciding 

which FIPPs require further 

specification through rulemaking under 

the Administrative Procedure Act? 

(4) Should baseline commercial data 

privacy legislation include a private 

right of action? 

(5) What is the best way of promoting 

transparency so as to promote informed 

choices? The Task Force is especially 

interested in comments that address the 

benefits and drawbacks of legislative, 

regulatory, and voluntary private sector 

approaches to promoting transparency. 

(6) What incentives could be provided 

to encourage the development and 

adoption of practical mechanisms to 

protect consumer privacy, such as PIAs, 

to bring about clearer descriptions of an 

organization’s data collection, use, and 

disclosure practices? 

(7) What are the elements of a 

meaningful PIA in the commercial 

context? Who should define these 

elements? 

(8) What processes and information 

would be useful to assess whether PIAs 

are effective in helping companies to 

identify, evaluate, and address 

commercial data privacy issues? 

(9) Should there be a requirement to 

publish PIAs in a standardized and/or 

machine-readable format? 

(10) What are consumers’ and 

companies’ experiences with systems 

that display information about 

companies’ privacy practices in contexts 

other than privacy policies? 

(11) What are the relative advantages 

and disadvantages of different 

transparency-enhancing techniques in 

an online world that typically involves 

data from multiple sources being 

presented through a single user 

interface? 

(12) Do these (dis)advantages change 

when one considers the increasing use 

of devices with more limited user 

interface options? 

(13) Are purpose specifications a 

necessary or important method for 

protecting commercial privacy? 

(14) Currently, how common are 

purpose specification clauses in 

commercial privacy policies? 

(15) Do industry best practices 

concerning purpose specification and 

use limitations exist? If not, how could 

their development be encouraged? 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
80044 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 244 / Tuesday, December 21, 2010 / Notices 

(16) What incentives could be 

provided to encourage companies to 

state clear, specific purposes for using 

personal information? 

(17) How should purpose 

specifications be implemented and 

enforced? 

(18) How can purpose specifications 

and use limitations be changed to meet 

changing circumstances? 

(19) Who should be responsible for 

demonstrating that a private sector 

organization’s data use is consistent 

with its obligations? What steps should 

be taken if inconsistencies are found? 

(20) Are technologies available to 

allow consumers to verify that their 

personal information is used in ways 

that are consistent with their 

expectations? 

(21) Are technologies available to help 

companies monitor their data use, to 

support internal accountability 

mechanisms? 

(22) How should performance against 

stated policies and practices be 

assessed? 

(23) What incentives could be 

provided to encourage companies to 

adopt technologies that would facilitate 

audits of information use against the 

company’s stated purposes and use 

limitations? 

(24) Should the FTC be given 

rulemaking authority triggered by 

failure of a multi-stakeholder process to 

produce a voluntary enforceable code 

within a specified time period? 

(25) How can the Commerce 

Department best encourage the 

discussion and development of 

technologies such as ‘‘Do Not Track’’? 

(26) Under what circumstances 

should the PPO recommend to the 

Administration that new policies are 

needed to address failure by a multistakeholder process to produce an 

approved code of conduct? 

(27) How can cooperation be fostered 

between the National Association of 

Attorneys General, or similar entities, 

and the PPO? 

(28) Do FIPPs require further 

regulatory elaboration to enforce, or are 

they sufficient on their own? 

(29) What should be the scope of FTC 

rulemaking authority? 

(30) Should FIPPs be considered an 

independent basis for FTC enforcement, 

or should FTC privacy investigations 

still be conducted under Federal Trade 

Commission Act Section 5 ‘‘unfair and 

deceptive’’ jurisdiction, buttressed by 

the explicit articulation of the FIPPs? 

(31) Should non-governmental 

entities supplement FTC enforcement of 

voluntary codes? 

(32) At what point in the development 

and of a voluntary, enforceable code of 

conduct should the FTC review it for 

approval? Potential options include 

providing an ex ante ‘‘seal of approval,’’ 

delaying approval until the code is in 

use for a specific amount of time, and 

delaying approval until enforcement 

action is taken against the code. 

(33) What steps or conditions are 

necessary to make a company’s 

commitment to follow a code of conduct 

enforceable? 

(34) What factors should breach 

notification be predicated upon (e.g., a 

risk assessment of the potential harm 

from the breach, a specific threshold 

such as number of records, etc.)? 

(35) Are there lessons from sectorspecific privacy laws—their 

development, their contents, or their 

enforcement—that could inform U.S. 

commercial data privacy policy? 

(36) Should a preemption provision of 

national FIPPs-based commercial data 

privacy policy be narrowly tailored to 

apply to specific practices or subject 

matter, leaving states free to regulate 

emerging technologies? Or should 

national policy, in the case of 

legislation, contain a broad preemption 

provision? 

(37) How could a preemption 

provision ensure that federal law is no 

less protective than any existing state 

laws? What are useful criteria for 

comparatively assessing how protective 

different laws are? 

(38) To what extent should state 

Attorneys General be empowered to 

enforce national commercial data 

privacy legislation? 

(39) Should national FIPPs-based 

commercial data privacy legislation 

preempt state unfair and deceptive trade 

practices laws? 

(40) The Task Force seeks case studies 

and statistics that provide evidence of 

concern—or comments explaining why 

concerns are unwarranted—about cloud 

computing data privacy and security in 

the commercial context. We also seek 

data that links any such concerns to 

decisions to adopt, or refrain from 

adopting, cloud computing services. 

(41) The Task Force also seeks input 

on whether the current legal protections 

for transactional information and 

location information raise questions 

about what commercial data privacy 

expectations are reasonable and whether 

additional protections should be 

mandated by law. The Task Force also 

invites comments that discuss whether 

privacy protections for access to 

location information need clarification 

in order to facilitate the development, 

deployment and widespread adoption of 

new location-based services. 

(42) The Task Force seeks information 

from the law enforcement community 

regarding the use of ECPA today and 

how investigations might be affected by 

proposed amendments to ECPA’s 

provisions. 

Dated: December 16, 2010. 

Gary Locke, 

Secretary of Commerce. 

Lawrence E. Strickling, 

Assistant Secretary for Communications and 

Information. 

Francisco J. Sa ́nchez, 

Under Secretary of Commerce for 

International Trade. 

Patrick Gallagher, 

Director, National Institute of Standards and 

Technology. 

[FR Doc. 2010–31971 Filed 12–20–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–60–P 

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND 

COMMUNITY SERVICE 

Notice of Establishment of the White 

House Council for Community 

Solutions 

AGENCY: Corporation for National and 

Community Service (CNCS). 

ACTION: Notice of establishment of the 

White House Council for Community 

Solutions. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 

U.S.C. Appendix 2), the Chief Executive 

Officer, CNCS, announces the 

establishment of the White House 

Council for Community Solutions by 

Presidential Executive Order. The 

Council will focus on highlighting ways 

to enlist more Americans and leaders 

across sectors to help catalyze change in 

communities and have an impact in 

addressing our nation’s important goals 

in education, youth development and 

employment. 

DATES: The White House Council for 

Community Solutions was established 

on December 14, 2010 by Presidential 

Executive Order. 

ADDRESSES: The public is invited to 

submit written statements to the 

Council by electronic mail: Send written 

statements to the Council’s electronic 

mailbox at 

WhiteHouseCouncil@cns.gov. 

The public can follow the Council’s 

work by visiting its Web site: http:// 

www.serve.gov/communitysolutions. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susannah Washburn, Executive 

Director, White House Council for 

Community Solutions, Corporation for 

National and Community Service, 1201 

New York Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20525, swashburn@cns.gov. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES