19030 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2012 / Notices 

appear on the Employment Eligibility 

Verification (Form I–9). Therefore, 

employers may not request proof of 

Syrian citizenship when completing the 

Employment Eligibility Verification 

(Form I–9). If presented with EADs that 

are unexpired on their face, employers 

should accept such EADs as valid ‘‘List 

A’’ documents so long as the EADs 

reasonably appear to be genuine and to 

relate to the employee. Refer to the 

‘‘Note to All Employees’’ section for 

important information about your rights 

if your employer rejects lawful 

documentation, requires additional 

documentation, or otherwise 

discriminates against you because of 

your citizenship or immigration status, 

or national origin. 

Note to All Employers 

Employers are reminded that the laws 

requiring employment eligibility 

verification and prohibiting unfair 

immigration-related employment 

practices remain in full force. This 

notice does not supersede or in any way 

limit applicable employment 

verification rules and policy guidance, 

including those rules setting forth 

reverification requirements. For 

questions, employers may call the 

USCIS Customer Assistance Office at 1– 

800–357–2099. The USCIS Customer 

Assistance Office accepts calls in 

English and Spanish only. Employers 

may also call the Department of Justice 

(DOJ), Office of Special Counsel for 

Immigration-Related Unfair 

Employment Practices (OSC), Employer 

Hotline at 1–800–255–8155. 

Note to Employees 

Employees or applicants may call the 

DOJ OSC Worker Information Hotline at 

1–800–255–7688 for information 

regarding employment discrimination 

based upon citizenship or immigration 

status and national origin, unfair 

documentary practices related to the 

Employment Eligibility Verification 

(Form I–9), and discriminatory practices 

related to E-Verify. Employers must 

accept any document or combination of 

documents acceptable for the 

Employment Eligibility Verification 

(Form I–9) completion if the 

documentation reasonably appears to be 

genuine and to relate to the employee. 

Employers may not require extra or 

additional documentation beyond what 

is required for the Employment 

Eligibility Verification (Form I–9) 

completion. Further, employees who 

receive an initial mismatch via E-Verify 

must be given an opportunity to 

challenge the mismatch, and employers 

are prohibited from taking adverse 

action against such employees based on 

the initial mismatch unless and until EVerify returns a final non-confirmation. 

The Hotline accepts calls in multiple 

languages. Additional information is 

available on the OSC Web site at http:// 

www.justice.gov/crt/about/osc/. 

Note Regarding Federal, State and 

Local Government Agencies (Such as 

Departments of Motor Vehicles) 

State and local government agencies 

are permitted to create their own 

guidelines when granting certain 

benefits. Each state may have different 

laws, requirements, and determinations 

about what documents you need to 

provide to prove eligibility for certain 

benefits. If you are applying for a state 

or local government benefit, you may 

need to provide the state or local 

government agency with documents that 

show you are a TPS beneficiary and/or 

show you are authorized to work based 

on TPS. Examples are: 

(1) Your EAD that has a valid 

expiration date; and/or 

(2) A copy of your Application for 

Temporary Protected Status Approval 

Notice (Form I–797), if you receive one 

from USCIS. 

Check with the state or local agency 

regarding which document(s) the agency 

will accept. You may also provide the 

agency with a copy of this notice. 

Some benefit-granting agencies use 

the Systematic Alien Verification for 

Entitlements (SAVE) Program to verify 

the current immigration status of 

applicants for public benefits. If such an 

agency has denied your application 

based solely or in part on a SAVE 

response following completion of all 

required SAVE verification steps, the 

agency must offer you the opportunity 

to appeal the decision in accordance 

with the agency’s procedures. If the 

agency has completed all SAVE 

verification and you do not believe the 

response is correct, you may make an 

InfoPass appointment for an in-person 

interview at a local USCIS office. 

Detailed information on how to make 

corrections, make an appointment, or 

submit a written request can be found 

at the SAVE Web site at www.uscis.gov/ 

save, then by choosing ‘‘How to Correct 

Your Records’’ from the menu on the 

right. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7498 Filed 3–28–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–97–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

[CBP Dec. No. 12–06] 

Automated Commercial Environment 

Required for the Transmission of 

Advance Ocean and Rail Cargo 

Information 

AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Various U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection (CBP) regulations 

require the transmission of advance 

cargo information to CBP through a 

CBP-approved electronic data 

interchange (EDI) system. CBP recently 

completed the testing of the Automated 

Commercial Environment (ACE) for the 

transmission of advance ocean and rail 

cargo information. This notice 

announces that, after a six month 

transition period, ACE will be the only 

CBP-approved EDI for submitting 

required advance information for ocean 

and rail cargo. 

DATES: On September 29, 2012, ACE 

will be the only CBP-approved EDI for 

transmitting to CBP required advance 

information for ocean and rail cargo. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Susan Maskell, Office of International 

Trade, Susan.Maskell@dhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 343(a) of the Trade Act of 

2002, as amended by the Maritime 

Transportation Security Act of 2002 (19 

U.S.C. 2071 note) (referred to in this 

notice as the Trade Act), directed U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to 

promulgate regulations providing for the 

mandatory transmission of electronic 

cargo information by way of a CBPapproved electronic data interchange 

(EDI) system before the cargo is brought 

into or departs the United States by any 

mode of commercial transportation 

(ocean, air, rail or truck). The required 

cargo information is that which is 

reasonably necessary to enable high-risk 

shipments to be identified for purposes 

of ensuring cargo safety and security 

and preventing smuggling pursuant to 

the laws enforced and administered by 

CBP. To effectuate the provisions of the 

Trade Act, CBP published a final rule in 

the Federal Register in 2003, requiring 

the advance electronic transmission of 

information pertaining to cargo prior to 

its being brought into, or sent from, the 

United States by sea, air, rail or truck. 

See Required Advance Electronic 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2012 / Notices 19031 

1The Trade Act, enacted on August 6, 2002, was 

amended by the Maritime Transportation Security 

Act of 2002, enacted on November 25, 2002. On 

October 31, 2002, CBP published a final rule to 

require the advance and accurate presentation of 

certain manifest information before cargo is laden 

aboard a vessel at a foreign port. This rule was 

promulgated under the authority of 19 U.S.C. 1431. 

CBP encouraged the presentation of this 

information electronically. See 67 FR 66318. This 

final rule is known to the trade as the ‘‘24 hour 

rule.’’ 

2For specific information about the requirements 

to provide advance cargo information to CBP, 

please see the following sections of title 19 CFR: 4.7 

Inward foreign manifest, production on demand, 

contents and form, advance filing of cargo 

declaration; 4.7a Inward manifest, information 

required, alternative forms; 4.7c Vessel stow plan; 

4.7d Container status messages; 123.91 Electronic 

information for rail cargo required in advance of 

arrival; and Part 149 Importer Security Filing. 

3For more information on the types of compatible 

software utilized to transmit the required advance 

data, please see the Implementation of the Test 

section of the October 20, 2010 M1 notice (75 FR 

64737 at 64738). 

Presentation of Cargo Information, 68 

FR 68140, December 5, 2003.1

Section 203 of the Security and 

Accountability for Every Port Act of 

2006, Public Law 109–347, 120 Stat. 

1884 (SAFE Port Act) directed the 

Secretary of Homeland Security, acting 

through the Commissioner of CBP, to 

promulgate regulations to require the 

electronic transmission to the 

Department of Homeland Security of 

additional data elements for improved 

high-risk targeting, including 

appropriate security elements of entry 

data, as determined by the Secretary. 

This additional data was to be provided 

as advanced information with respect to 

cargo destined for importation into the 

United States prior to loading of such 

cargo on vessels at foreign seaports. In 

2008, pursuant to the Trade Act and the 

SAFE Port Act, CBP published an 

interim final rule in the Federal 

Register requiring importers and 

carriers to submit additional 

information pertaining to maritime 

cargo before the cargo is brought into 

the United States by means of a CBPapproved electronic interchange system. 

See Importer Security Filing and 

Additional Carrier Requirements, 73 FR 

71730, November 25, 2008. The interim 

final rule is known to the trade as the 

‘‘Importer Security Filing’’ (ISF) or ‘‘10 

+ 2’’ rule. 

Advance Ocean and Rail Cargo Data 

The CBP regulations pertaining to the 

submission of the data required in 

advance of arrival for ocean and rail 

cargo are set forth in title 19 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 4, 123, 

and 149.2 Sections 4.7(b)(2), 4.7(b)(3)(i), 

123.91(a), and 149.2 pertain to the 

method of transmission of the advance 

ocean and rail data relevant to this 

notice. They generally require the 

transmission of the advance data 

through the EDI system approved by 

CBP. 

Section 4.7(b)(2), pertaining to 

vessels, provides that the electronic 

cargo declaration information must be 

transmitted through the CBP Automated 

Manifest System (AMS) or any 

electronic data interchange system 

approved by CBP to replace the AMS 

system for this purpose. Section 

4.7(b)(3)(i), also pertaining to vessels, 

provides that a non-vessel operating 

common carrier (NVOCC) must 

electronically transmit the 

corresponding required cargo 

declaration information directly to CBP 

through the vessel AMS system (or other 

system approved by CBP for this 

purpose), or in the alternative, fully 

disclose and present the required cargo 

declaration information for the related 

cargo to the vessel carrier which is 

required to present this information to 

CBP via the vessel AMS system (or other 

CBP approved system). 

Section 123.91(a) requires rail carriers 

to use a CBP-approved electronic data 

interchange system to submit the 

required advance information. 

Section 149.2, pertaining to maritime 

cargo, requires the Importer Security 

Filing data elements to be submitted 

through a CBP-approved electronic 

interchange system. 

M1 Test for Ocean and Rail Data 

Transmission 

CBP recently conducted a National 

Customs Automation Program (NCAP) 

test, known as M1, concerning the 

transmission of required advance ocean 

and rail data through ACE. The test was 

announced in two Federal Register 

notices (M1 notices). See 75 FR 64737, 

October 20, 2010 and 76 FR 42721, July 

19, 2011. 

CBP sought participants that were 

transmitting the required advance ocean 

and rail data to CBP in different formats 

to facilitate their transition to ACE in a 

controlled environment.3 M1 test 

participants were chosen based on the 

specific type of software format they 

used to transmit the required advance 

data. The goal of the M1 test was to 

ensure that each transmission format 

was fully compatible with ACE. By 

working with this select group of 

participants, CBP was able to verify that 

each transmission format functioned 

properly with ACE and to develop 

effective processes and guidelines. 

These processes and guidelines will 

enable the rest of the affected trade 

community to quickly and efficiently 

transition to ACE. The M1 participants 

began submitting live data through ACE 

on November 30, 2011. 

CBP stated in the M1 notices that 

upon the successful completion of the 

M1 test, CBP would publish another 

notice to announce that after a transition 

period, ACE would be the only CBPapproved EDI for transmitting required 

advance data for ocean and rail cargo. 

M1 Test Results 

The M1 test has been successfully 

completed. To date, 24 trade 

participants have completed the 

certification testing described in the M1 

test notice and are transmitting their 

advance ocean and rail cargo 

information in ACE. Another 11 trade 

participants are currently involved in 

certification testing. The port of 

Baltimore, Maryland began utilizing 

ACE for processing ocean cargo on 

November 30, 2011. The ports of 

Buffalo, New York and Brownsville, 

Texas began using ACE for processing 

ocean and rail cargo on December 5, 

2011. To date, 91 ports are using ACE 

for ocean and/or rail processing. 

CBP verified that all electronic data 

interchanges are compatible with ACE 

and has prepared ACE Implementation 

Guidelines, which are posted at 

www.CBP.gov. The ACE Implementation 

Guidelines include the appropriate 

standards needed for each referenced 

type of software to work with ACE. 

These standards will enable transmitters 

to conform their own software to ACE 

or to acquire new software that is 

compatible with ACE. In addition to the 

ACE Implementation Guidelines, CBP 

has posted informational notices, user 

guides, and Web-based training at www.

CBP.gov. 

ACE as the Only CBP-Approved EDI for 

Required Advance Ocean and Rail 

Cargo Information 

For purposes of sections 4.7(b)(2), 

4.7(b)(3)(i), 123.91(a), and 149.2 of title 

19 CFR, beginning on September 29, 

2012, ACE will be the only CBPapproved EDI for transmitting the 

required advance information for ocean 

and rail cargo. Until this date, a 

transition period is in effect during 

which ACE or AMS may be used to 

transmit the required advance 

information for ocean and rail cargo. 

CBP will continue to work with the 

affected trade community to ensure a 

complete and efficient transition to 

ACE. CBP encourages all transmitters to 

undergo the ACE certification process 

described in the M1 notices during the 

transition period to ensure total ACE 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

19032 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 61 / Thursday, March 29, 2012 / Notices 

4Participants were required to undergo the 

certification process, described in detail in the 

October 20, 2010 M1 notice, as a prerequisite for 

participating in the M1 test. See 75 FR 64737 at 

64739. 

5For more information on the additional 

functionalities available through ACE, please see 

the ACE Functionality section of the October 20, 

2010 M1 notice (75 FR 64737 at 64739). 

functionality.4 Total ACE functionality 

means that the transmitter will retain all 

of the existing functionality currently 

available as well as the new 

functionalities only available through 

ACE.5 Transmitters should contact the 

Client Representative Branch at 571– 

468–5500 to make arrangements to 

begin the ACE certification process. 

Although AMS will continue to 

operate during the transition period and 

may still be used in the normal course 

of business for other purposes, it will no 

longer be available for purposes related 

to transmitting to CBP required advance 

ocean and rail cargo information 

beginning on September 29, 2012. 

Dated: March 26, 2012. 

Thomas Winkowski, 

Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs and 

Border Protection. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7558 Filed 3–28–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–14–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Geological Survey 

Announcement of National Geospatial 

Advisory Committee Meeting 

AGENCY: U.S. Geological Survey, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of meeting. 

SUMMARY: The National Geospatial 

Advisory Committee (NGAC) will meet 

on April 17–18, 2012 at the American 

Institute of Architects Building, 1735 

New York Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20006. The meeting will be held in 

the Gallery Room. The NGAC, which is 

composed of representatives from 

governmental, private sector, non-profit, 

and academic organizations, was 

established to advise the Federal 

Geographic Data Committee on 

management of Federal geospatial 

programs, the development of the 

National Spatial Data Infrastructure, and 

the implementation of Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

Circular A–16. Topics to be addressed at 

the meeting include: 

—FGDC Guidance to the NGAC 

—FGDC Update 

—Innovative Strategies 

—National Enhanced Elevation 

Assessment 

—Landsat 

—Subcommittee Reports 

The meeting will include an 

opportunity for public comment on 

April 18. Comments may also be 

submitted to the NGAC in writing. 

Members of the public who wish to 

attend the meeting must register in 

advance. Please register by contacting 

Arista Maher at the U.S. Geological 

Survey (703–648–6283, amaher@usgs.

gov). Registrations are due by April 13, 

2012. While the meeting will be open to 

the public, seating may be limited due 

to room capacity. 

DATES: The meeting will be held from 

8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. on April 17 and from 

8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. on April 18. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Mahoney, U.S. Geological Survey (206– 

220–4621). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Meetings 

of the National Geospatial Advisory 

Committee are open to the public. 

Additional information about the NGAC 

and the meeting is available at www.

fgdc.gov/ngac. 

Dated: March 22, 2012. 

Ivan DeLoatch, 

Executive Director, Federal Geographic Data 

Committee. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7479 Filed 3–28–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4311–AM–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[DN 2888] 

Certain Semiconductor Integrated 

Circuit Devices and Products 

Containing Same Notice of Receipt of 

Complaint; Solicitation of Comments 

Relating to the Public Interest 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has received a complaint 

entitled Certain Semiconductor 

Integrated Circuit Devices and Products 

Containing Same, DN 2888; the 

Commission is soliciting comments on 

any public interest issues raised by the 

complaint or complainant’s filing under 

section 210.8(b) of the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

210.8(b)). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James R. Holbein, Secretary to the 

Commission, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–2000. The public version of the 

complaint can be accessed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

at http://edis.usitc.gov, and will be 

available for inspection during official 

business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) 

in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. 

International Trade Commission, 500 E 

Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, 

telephone (202) 205–2000. 

General information concerning the 

Commission may also be obtained by 

accessing its Internet server (http:// 

www.usitc.gov). The public record for 

this investigation may be viewed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

at http://edis.usitc.gov. Hearingimpaired persons are advised that 

information on this matter can be 

obtained by contacting the 

Commission’s TDD terminal on (202) 

205–1810. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Commission has received a complaint 

and a submission pursuant to section 

210.8(b) of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure filed on behalf 

of Microchip Technology Incorporated 

on March 23, 2012. The complaint 

alleges violations of section 337 of the 

Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in 

the importation into the United States, 

the sale for importation, and the sale 

within the United States after 

importation of certain semiconductor 

integrated circuit devices and products 

containing same. The complaint names 

as respondents Intersil Corporation of 

CA; Zilker Labs, Inc. of TX; and 

Techwell, Inc. of CA. 

Proposed respondents, other 

interested parties, and members of the 

public are invited to file comments, not 

to exceed five (5) pages in length, 

inclusive of attachments, on any public 

interest issues raised by the complaint 

or section 210.8(b) filing. Comments 

should address whether issuance of the 

relief specifically requested by the 

complainant in this investigation would 

affect the public health and welfare in 

the United States, competitive 

conditions in the United States 

economy, the production of like or 

directly competitive articles in the 

United States, or United States 

consumers. 

In particular, the Commission is 

interested in comments that: 

(i) Explain how the articles 

potentially subject to the requested 

remedial orders are used in the United 

States; 

(ii) Identify any public health, safety, 

or welfare concerns in the United States 

relating to the requested remedial 

orders; 

(iii) Identify like or directly 

competitive articles that complainant, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES