Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 95 / Tuesday, May 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules 30509 

43See 37 CFR 202.19(c)(5). 

44The Library’s Motion Picture, Broadcasting, 

and Recorded Sound Division currently allows 

Library patrons to listen to digitized versions of 

sound recordings in its Recorded Sound Collection 

via either one of five dedicated computers located 

in the Recorded Sound Reference Center’s main 

listening room in the Madison Building, or at an 

additional terminal located in a private listening 

room set off from the main listening room. See 

generally Guidelines for Listening to Sound 

Recordings, Library of Congress, https://

www.loc.gov/rr/record/rrinstructions.html. Public 

use of these facilities is by appointment only; in 

advance of the appointment, the Library digitizes 

any requested materials and copies those materials 

onto a server located at the Packard Campus of the 

National Audio-Visual Conservation Center of the 

Library, located in Culpeper, Virginia. The content 

is then downloaded to the Madison Building 

terminals via a 75-mile dedicated fiber optic cable 

network that connects the Packard Campus to the 

Library’s Capitol Hill facilities. In describing this 

arrangement, the Copyright Office does not mean to 

suggest an opinion on the copyright implications of 

such a system. 

45https://www.loc.gov/preservation/resources/rfs/

TOC.html. 

under section 407. Demands would 

issue only for sound recordings that are 

fixed and published solely in onlineonly electronic format. In the case of a 

sound recording published in both 

physical and electronic form, the 

publisher would be required to deposit 

the physical format as the ‘‘best 

edition,’’ rather than the electronic 

version.43

As with online-only books, it seems 

that many, if not most, published sound 

recordings are available not only via 

subscription services, but also for 

purchase and download. As explained 

above, this is distinct from electronic 

serials, many of which are accessible to 

end users only through a subscription 

service. The Office invites comment on 

this difference as it may relate to the 

advisability of extending on-demand 

deposit requirements to online-only 

sound recordings, including the need 

for such mandatory deposit to further 

the Library’s collection and preservation 

goals. 

Under any rule requiring mandatory 

deposit of online-only sound recordings, 

the Library would provide public access 

to such recordings. The Library 

currently has a system by which 

authorized users can access and listen to 

digitized copies of physical sound 

recordings collected through other 

means at the Madison Building of the 

Library of Congress. Currently, users 

may access such recordings through six 

dedicated computer terminals.44 The 

Library, however, expects to modify this 

system to bring it into compliance with 

the policies identified in the 2010 

interim rule before it is used to provide 

access to any online-only sound 

recordings obtained via mandatory 

deposit. Those policies are: 

• Access to electronic works received 

through mandatory deposit will be as 

similar as possible to the access 

provided to analog works. 

• Access to electronic works received 

through mandatory deposit will be 

limited, at any one time, to two Library 

of Congress authorized users. 

• Library of Congress authorized 

users will access the electronic works 

via a secure server over a secure 

network that serves Capitol Hill 

facilities and remote Library of Congress 

locations. The term ‘‘Library of Congress 

authorized users’’ includes Library staff, 

contractors, and registered researchers, 

and Members, staff and officers of the 

U.S. House of Representatives and the 

U.S. Senate. The Library will not make 

the copyrighted works available to the 

public over the Internet without rights 

holders’ permissions. 

• Users may not reproduce or 

distribute (i.e., download or email) 

copies of deposited electronic works 

until the Library has explored the 

advisability of permitting these options 

and the security and feasibility of the 

implementing technologies. As part of 

this process, the Library will seek 

comment from the public, including 

copyright owners and publishers, before 

adopting additional policies governing 

electronic copying or distribution by 

electronic transmission. 

Again, although, with the exception of 

the policy regarding printing of 

electronic works, the above policies are 

identical to those articulated in the 2010 

interim rule, the Library believes that in 

the future it may be able to comply with 

these policies using different technical 

means than are currently available. In 

addition, no ‘‘best edition’’ criteria exist 

yet for online-only sound recordings. 

Here too, however, the Library is 

proposing that the criteria specified in 

the Library’s ‘‘Recommended Formats 

Statement’’ 45 for digital audio works 

could be adapted for this purpose. 

III. Subjects of Inquiry 

The Office invites written comments 

on the general subjects below. A party 

choosing to respond to this notice of 

inquiry need not address every subject, 

but the Office requests that responding 

parties clearly identify and separately 

address each subject for which a 

response is submitted. In responding, 

please identify your particular interest 

in and experience with these issues. 

1. Please comment on the efficacy of 

the 2010 interim rule, including 

whether it adequately addresses the 

digital collection and preservation 

needs of the Library of Congress, 

whether it has adequately addressed the 

concerns of affected parties, and 

whether it is a good framework for 

further developing section 407. 

2. Please comment on the Library’s 

adopted policies as to the interim rule 

and/or their application to online-only 

books and/or sound recordings. 

3. Please comment on the information 

technology, security, and/or other 

requirements that should apply to the 

Library’s receipt and storage of, and 

public access to, any online-only books 

and/or sound recordings collected 

under section 407. 

4. Please provide comments and 

observations regarding the application 

of ‘‘best edition’’ requirements to 

online-only books and/or sound 

recordings, including whether and how 

the ‘‘best edition’’ criteria for electronic 

serials found in part 202 of 37 CFR, 

appendix B, or the guidelines from the 

Library’s Recommended Formats 

Statement, might or might not be 

adapted to address these additional 

categories of online-only works. 

Dated: May 11, 2016. 

Maria A. Pallante, 

Register of Copyrights, U.S. Copyright Office. 

[FR Doc. 2016–11613 Filed 5–16–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0070 FRL–9945–23– 

Region 9] 

Approval of California State Air Plan 

Revisions, Eastern Kern Air Pollution 

Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Eastern Kern Air 

Pollution Control District (EKAPCD) 

portion of the California State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern administrative 

changes of a previously approved 

regulation and emissions of volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs) from 

aerospace coating assembly and coating 

operations and metal, plastic and 

pleasure craft parts and products 

coating operations. We are proposing to 

approve local rules to regulate these 

activities under the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or the Act). 

DATES: Any comments on this proposal 

must arrive by June 16, 2016. 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
30510 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 95 / Tuesday, May 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

1S. Rep. No. 114–52, 12 (2015) (explaining that 

the one-year deadline for investigations conducted 

on the Board’s own initiative does not include any 

Board proceeding conducted subsequent to the 

investigation). 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2016–0070 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Steckel.Andrew@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, the EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Vanessa Graham, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4120, graham.vanessa@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. This 

proposal addresses the following 

EKAPCD rules: Rule 103.1, ‘‘Inspection 

of Public Records,’’ Rule 410.4, ‘‘Metal, 

Plastic, and Pleasure Craft Parts and 

Products Coating Operations,’’ and Rule 

410.8, ‘‘Aerospace Assembly and 

Coating Operations.’’ In the Rules and 

Regulations section of this Federal 

Register, we are approving these local 

rules in a direct final action without 

prior proposal because we believe these 

SIP revisions are not controversial. If we 

receive adverse comments, however, we 

will publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule and address the 

comments in subsequent action based 

on this proposed rule. Please note that 

if we receive adverse comment on a 

particular rule, we may adopt as final 

those rules that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

We do not plan to open a second 

comment period, so anyone interested 

in commenting should do so at this 

time. If we do not receive adverse 

comments, no further activity is 

planned. For further information, please 

see the direct final action. 

Dated: April 4, 2016. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2016–11513 Filed 5–16–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Surface Transportation Board 

49 CFR Part 1122 

[Docket No. EP 731] 

Rules Relating to Board-Initiated 

Investigations 

AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: Through this Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, the Surface 

Transportation Board (Board or STB) is 

proposing rules for investigations 

conducted on the Board’s own initiative 

pursuant to the Surface Transportation 

Board Reauthorization Act of 2015. 

DATES: Comments are due by June 15, 

2016. Replies are due by July 15, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and replies may 

be submitted either via the Board’s efiling format or in the traditional paper 

format. Any person using e-filing should 

attach a document and otherwise 

comply with the instructions at the E– 

FILING link on the Board’s Web site, at 

http://www.stb.dot.gov. Any person 

submitting a filing in the traditional 

paper format should send an original 

and 10 copies to: Surface Transportation 

Board, Attn: EP 731, 395 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20423–0001. Copies of 

written comments and replies will be 

available for viewing and self-copying at 

the Board’s Public Docket Room, Room 

131, and will be posted to the Board’s 

Web site. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Scott M. Zimmerman at (202) 245–0386. 

[Assistance for the hearing impaired is 

available through the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1– 

800–877–8339.] 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 12 

of the STB Reauthorization Act 

authorizes the Board to investigate, on 

its own initiative, issues that are ‘‘of 

national or regional significance’’ and 

are subject to the Board’s jurisdiction 

under 49 U.S.C. Subtitle IV, Part A. 

Under the statute, the Board must issue 

rules implementing this investigative 

authority not later than one year after 

the date of enactment of the STB 

Reauthorization Act (by December 18, 

2016). 

The Board accordingly proposes 

regulations, to be set forth at 49 CFR 

part 1122, establishing procedures for 

investigations conducted on the Board’s 

own initiative pursuant to Section 12 of 

the STB Reauthorization Act. The 

proposed regulations would not apply 

to other types of investigations that the 

Board may conduct. 

Introduction 

The STB Reauthorization Act 

provides a basic framework for 

conducting investigations on the 

Board’s own initiative, as follows: 

Within 30 days after initiating an 

investigation, the Board must provide 

notice to parties under investigation 

stating the basis for such investigation. 

The Board may only investigate issues 

that are of national or regional 

significance. Parties under investigation 

have a right to file a written statement 

describing all or any facts and 

circumstances concerning a matter 

under investigation, and the Board has 

an obligation to separate the 

investigative and decisionmaking 

functions of Board staff to the extent 

practicable. 

Investigations must be dismissed if 

they are not concluded with 

‘‘administrative finality within one year 

after commencement.’’ 1 In any such 

investigation, Board staff must make 

available to the parties under 

investigation and the Board Members 

any recommendations made as a result 

of the investigation and a summary of 

the findings that support such 

recommendations. Within 90 days of 

receiving the recommendations and 

summary of findings, the Board must 

either dismiss the investigation if no 

further action is warranted, or initiate a 

proceeding to determine whether a 

provision of 49 U.S.C. Subtitle IV, Part 

A has been violated. Any remedy that 

the Board may order as a result of such 

a proceeding may only be applied 

prospectively. 

The STB Reauthorization Act further 

requires that the rules issued under 

Section 12 must comply with the 

requirements of 49 U.S.C. 11701(d) (as 

amended by the STB Reauthorization 

Act), satisfy due process requirements, 

and take into account ex parte 

constraints. 

Summary of Proposed Rules 

To implement this statutory 

framework for investigations, the Board 

is proposing a three-stage process, 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS