38532 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 4, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

(b) Enforcement. During the loading of 

the fireworks, and until the start of the 

fireworks displays on October 9 and 10, 

2009, this regulation will be enforced 

within a radius of 100 feet around the 

fireworks launch sites. From 9:30 p.m. 

until 9:50 p.m. on October 9 and 10, 

2009, this regulation will be enforced 

within a radius of 1,000 feet around the 

fireworks launch sites. 

(b) Definitions. As used in this 

section, ‘‘designated representative’’ 

means a Coast Guard Patrol 

Commander, including a Coast Guard 

coxswain, petty officer, or other officer 

operating a Coast Guard vessel and a 

Federal, State, and local officer 

designated by or assisting the Captain of 

the Port San Francisco (COTP) in the 

enforcement of the safety zone. 

(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general 

regulations in § 165.23, entry into, 

transiting, or anchoring within this 

safety zone is prohibited unless 

authorized by the COTP or the COTP’s 

designated representative. 

(2) The safety zone is closed to all 

vessel traffic, except as may be 

permitted by the COTP or a designated 

representative. 

(3) Vessel operators desiring to enter 

or operate within the safety zone must 

contact the COTP or a designated 

representative to obtain permission to 

do so. Vessel operators given permission 

to enter or operate in the safety zone 

must comply with all directions given to 

them by the COTP or the designated 

representative. Persons and vessels may 

request permission to enter the safety 

zones on VHF–16 or through the 24- 

hour Command Center at telephone 

(415) 399–3547. 

(d) Effective period. This section is 

effective from 8:45 a.m. through 10 p.m. 

on October 9 and 8:45 a.m. through 10 

p.m. on October 10, 2009. 

Dated: July 16, 2009. 

P.M. Gugg, 

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

Port San Francisco. 

[FR Doc. E9–18494 Filed 8–3–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

Copyright Royalty Board 

37 CFR Part 351 

[Docket No. RM 2009–5] 

Proceedings of the Copyright Royalty 

Board; Remand 

AGENCY: Copyright Royalty Board, 

Library of Congress. 

ACTION: Interim rule and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The Copyright Royalty Board 

is issuing an interim regulation to 

amend its procedural regulations to 

include a provision governing remands 

of final determinations pursuant to the 

Copyright Act, which sets forth in 

significant detail the procedural 

structure to be followed by the 

Copyright Royalty Judges in making 

determinations to distribute royalty fees 

and establish royalty rates and terms 

under the various statutory licenses of 

the Copyright Act. The Judges have 

adopted regulations governing the 

conduct of these proceedings. 

DATES: Effective Date: August 4, 2009. 

Comments are due no later than 

September 3, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent 

electronically to crb@loc.gov. In the 

alternative, send an original, five copies, 

and an electronic copy on a CD either 

by mail or hand delivery. Please do not 

use multiple means of transmission. 

Comments may not be delivered by an 

overnight delivery service other than the 

U.S. Postal Service Express Mail. If by 

mail (including overnight delivery), 

comments must be addressed to: 

Copyright Royalty Board, P.O. Box 

70977, Washington, DC 20024–0977. If 

hand delivered by a private party, 

comments must be brought to the 

Copyright Office Public Information 

Office, Library of Congress, James 

Madison Memorial Building, Room LM– 

401, 101 Independence Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20559–6000. If 

delivered by commercial courier, 

comments must be delivered between 

8:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. to the 

Congressional Courier Acceptance Site 

located at 2nd and D Street, NE., 

Washington, DC, and the envelope must 

be addressed to: Copyright Royalty 

Board, Library of Congress, James 

Madison Memorial Building, LM–403, 

101 Independence Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20559–6000. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard Strasser, Senior Attorney, or 

Gina Giuffreda, Attorney Advisor, by 

telephone at (202) 707–7658 or e-mail at 

crb@loc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

803 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C., sets 

forth in significant detail the procedural 

structure to be followed by the 

Copyright Royalty Judges in making 

determinations to distribute royalty fees 

and establish royalty rates and terms 

under the various statutory licenses of 

the Copyright Act. Pursuant to the 

authority granted us in 17 U.S.C. 

803(b)(6), the Judges have adopted 

regulations, set forth in Subchapter B, 

Chapter III of title 37 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations, governing the 

conduct of these proceedings. Every 

proceeding to distribute royalty fees or 

establish royalty rates and terms results 

in a final determination of the Judges 

that is reviewable by the United States 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit, 17 U.S.C. 803(d). The 

Court of Appeals may, inter alia, vacate 

a determination or portion thereof, and 

remand to the Judges for further action. 

Until today, the Judges did not have any 

procedural regulations in place for 

handling the disposition of a remand. 

On July 7, 2009, and again on July 10, 

2009, the Court of Appeals issued 

decisions reviewing the first two royalty 

rate proceedings conducted under the 

Copyright Royalty Judges system. See 

SoundExchange, Inc. v. Librarian of 

Congress, No. 08–1078, 2009 WL 

1930180 (D.C. Cir. July 7, 2009); 

Intercollegiate Broadcast System, Inc. v. 

Copyright Royalty Board, No. 07–1123, 

07–1168, 07–1172, 07–1174, 07–1177, 

07–1178, 2009 WL 1978453 (D.C. Cir. 

July 10, 2009). Although the Court 

affirmed the determinations of the 

Judges in the main, each case remanded 

an issue for further consideration by the 

Judges. Lacking any regulations 

governing the procedures for disposing 

of remands, the adoption of today’s 

interim regulation is necessary for these 

and any future cases. 

The interim regulation provides that, 

within 45 days of the date of issuance 

of the mandate of a decision of the Court 

of Appeals remanding a determination 

of the Judges, the parties to the 

proceeding shall submit, in writing, 

their proposals setting forth the 

procedures and schedule to be followed 

in addressing the remand. The interim 

rule is purposely flexible to permit the 

Judges, and the parties, to address the 

particulars of each remand before the 

Judges in an effort to promote 

administrative efficiency and reduce 

costs. 

Interested parties are encouraged to 

offer comments as to the interim 

regulation as well as propose any 

additional procedures or regulations 

necessary for the handling of remands. 

List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 351 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Copyright. 

Interim Regulation 

■ For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Copyright Royalty Judges 

are amending part 351 of 37 CFR as 

follows: 


rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 148 / Tuesday, August 4, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 38533 

1Request of the United States Postal Service to 

Add Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 6 to 

Competitive Product List and Notice of 

Establishment of Rates and Class Not of General 

Applicability, July 2, 2009. 2Errata to Request of the United States Postal 

Service to Add Express Mail & Priority Mail 

Contract 6 to Competitive Product List and Notice 

of Establishment of Rates and Class Not of General 

Applicability, July 6, 2009 (Request). 3See Notice of the United States Postal Service 

of Filing Under Seal of Revised Financial Analysis 

Workbooks for Express Mail & Priority Mail 

Contract 6, July 8, 2009 (Revised Workbooks). 4Attachment A to the Request. The analysis that 

accompanies the Governors’ Decision notes, among 

other things, that the contract is not risk free, but 

concludes that the risks are manageable. 

5Attachment B to the Request. 

6Attachment C to the Request. 

7Attachment D to the Request. 

8Attachment E to the Request. 

9PRC Order No. 239, Notice and Order 

Concerning Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 

6 Negotiated Service Agreement, July 7, 2009 (Order 

No. 239). 

10Chairman’s Information Request No. 1 and 

Notice of Filing of Questions under Seal, July 14, 

2009 (CHIR No.1). 

11See Notice of the United States Postal Service 

of Filing Response to Chairman’s Information 

Request No.1 Under Seal, July 20, 2009 (Response 

to CHIR No. 1). 

12Public Representative Comments in Response 

to United States Postal Service Request to Add 

Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 6 to 

Competitive Product List and Notice of 

Establishment of Rates and Class Not of General 

Applicability, July 15, 2009 (Public Representative 

Comments). 

PART 351—PROCEEDINGS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 351 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 17 U.S.C. 803. 

■ 2. Part 351 is amended by adding 

§ 351.15 to read as follows: 

§ 351.15 Remand. 

In the event of a remand from the 

United States Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia Circuit of a final 

determination of the Copyright Royalty 

Judges, the parties to the proceeding 

shall within 45 days from the issuance 

of the mandate from the Court of 

Appeals file with the Judges written 

proposals for the conduct and schedule 

of the resolution of the remand. 

Dated: July 16, 2009. 

James Scott Sledge, 

U.S. Chief Copyright Royalty Judge. 

James H. Billington, 

The Librarian of Congress. 

[FR Doc. E9–18462 Filed 8–3–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–72–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

39 CFR Part 3020 

[Docket Nos. MC2009–31 and CP2009–42; 

Order No. 255] 

Express Mail and Priority Mail Contract 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is adding 

Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 6 

to the Competitive Product List. This 

action is consistent with changes in a 

recent law governing postal operations. 

Republication of the lists of market 

dominant and competitive products is 

also consistent with new requirements 

in the law. 

DATES: Effective August 4, 2009 and is 

applicable beginning July 27, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 

202–789–6820 and 

stephen.sharfman@prc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory 

History, 74 FR 33481 (July 13, 2009). 

I. Introduction 

II. Background 

III. Information Request 

IV. Comments 

V. Commission Analysis 

VI. Ordering Paragraphs 

I. Introduction 

The Postal Service seeks to add a new 

product identified as Express Mail & 

Priority Mail Contract 6 to the 

Competitive Product List. For the 

reasons discussed below, the 

Commission approves the Request. 

II. Background 

On July 2, 2009, the Postal Service 

filed a formal request pursuant to 39 

U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 3020.30, et seq., 

to add Express Mail & Priority Mail 

Contract 6 to the Competitive Product 

List.1 On July 6, 2009, the Postal Service 

filed a revised version of its filing which 

includes attachments inadvertently 

omitted from the July 2, 2009 request.2

The Postal Service asserts that the 

Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 6 

product is a competitive product ‘‘not of 

general applicability’’ within the 

meaning of 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3). Id. at 

1. The Request has been assigned 

Docket No. MC2009–31. 

The Postal Service 

contemporaneously filed a contract 

related to the proposed new product 

pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 

CFR 3015.5. Id. The contract has been 

assigned Docket No. CP2009–42. 

On July 8, 2009, the Postal Service 

filed under seal revised versions of the 

financial analysis workbooks originally 

filed under seal on July 2, 2009.3

In support of its Request, the Postal 

Service filed the following materials: (1) 

A redacted version of the Governors’ 

Decision authorizing the new product 

which also includes an analysis of 

Express Mail & Priority Mail Contract 6 

and certification of the Governors’ 

vote; 4 (2) a redacted version of the 

contract which, among other things, 

provides that the contract will expire 3 

years from the effective date, which is 

proposed to be 1 day after the 

Commission issues all regulatory 

approvals; 5 (3) requested changes in the 

Mail classification Schedule product 

list; 6 (4) a Statement of Supporting 

Justification as required by 39 CFR 

3020.32; 7 and (5) certification of 

compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a).8

In the Statement of Supporting 

Justification, Mary Prince Anderson, 

Manager, Sales and Communications, 

Expedited Shipping, asserts that the 

service to be provided under the 

contract will cover its attributable costs, 

make a positive contribution to 

institutional costs, and increase 

contribution toward the requisite 5.5 

percent of the Postal Service’s total 

institutional costs. Id., Attachment D. 

Thus, Ms. Anderson contends there will 

be no issue of subsidization of 

competitive products by market 

dominant products as a result of this 

contract. Id. W. Ashley Lyons, Manager, 

Regulatory Reporting and Cost Analysis, 

Finance Department, certifies that the 

contract complies with 39 U.S.C. 

3633(a). See Id., Attachment E. 

The Postal Service filed much of the 

supporting materials, including the 

unredacted Governors’ Decision and the 

unredacted contract, under seal. In its 

Request, the Postal Service maintains 

that the contract and related financial 

information, including the customer’s 

name and the accompanying analyses 

that provide prices, terms, conditions, 

and financial projections, should remain 

confidential. Id. at 2–3. 

In Order No. 239, the Commission 

gave notice of the two dockets, 

appointed a public representative, and 

provided the public with an opportunity 

to comment.9

III. Information Request 

On July 14, 2009, the Chairman issued 

an information request seeking 

responses to six questions.10 The 

information request was filed under 

seal. Id. On July 20, 2009, the Postal 

Service filed its responses to CHIR No. 

1.11

IV. Comments 

Comments were filed by the Public 

Representative.12 No filings were 

submitted by other interested parties. 

The Public Representative states that the 

Postal Service’s filing complies with 

applicable Commission rules of practice 


rmajette on DSK29S0YB1PROD with RULES