### 69288 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Notices

appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Overview of this information

(1) Type of Information Collection: Approval of an Existing Collection.

(2) Title of the Form: Voluntary Appeal File.

(3) Agency Form Number, if any, and the applicable component of the department sponsoring the collection:

Form Number: 1110–0043. Sponsor: Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division of the FBI, Department of Justice (DOJ).

(4) Affected Public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract:

Primary: Any individual requesting entry into the Voluntary Appeal File (VAF) of the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Section.

Brief Abstract: Under 28 CFR, § 25.9(b)(1), (2), and (3), the NICS must destroy all identifying information on
allowed transactions within 24 hours of the Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) being notified of the transaction’s proceed status. If a potential purchaser is delayed or denied a firearm then successfully appeals the decision, the
NICS Section cannot retain a record of the overturned appeal or the supporting
documentation. If the record cannot be updated, the purchaser continues to be delayed or denied, and if that individual appeals the decision, the documentation must be resubmitted for every subsequent purchase. As such, the Voluntary Appeal File (VAF) was
mandated to be created and maintained by the NICS Section for the purpose of preventing future lengthy delays or
erroneous denials of a firearm transfer. An individual wishing to request entry into the VAF may obtain a VAF brochure from the NICS Section, an FFL, or the NICS Section Web site: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/

nics.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond:

It is estimated that annually 7,542 individuals will request entry into the VAF. It takes an average of 5 minutes to read and complete all areas of the application, an estimated 2 hours for the process of fingerprinting including travel, and 25 minutes to mail the form
for a total of 2.5 hours estimated burden to the respondent. (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the
collection:

The number of persons requesting entry into the VAF is estimated to be 7,542 individuals annually. The time it takes each individual to complete the process is 2.5 hours. The total public burden hours are 7,542 respondents multiplied by 2.5 hours which equals 18,855 total burden hours.

If additional information is required, contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Policy and Planning Staff, Justice Management Division, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street, NE., Room 2E–508, Washington, DC 20530.

Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, PRA, United States Department of Justice.

[FR Doc. 2011–28803 Filed 11–7–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE P**

**LIBRARY OF CONGRESS**

**Copyright Office**

**[Docket No. 2011–1]**

**Cable Statutory License: Specialty**
**Station List**

**AGENCY :**  Copyright Office, Library of Congress.

**ACTION :**  Notice of objections and specialty station filings.

**SUMMARY :**  Periodically, the Copyright Office (‘‘Office’’) seeks to update its list of specialty stations related to the use of the cable compulsory license. In response to the publication of an initial list of specialty stations for this purpose in April of this year, the Office received objections filed by the Motion Picture
Association of America to the identification of certain stations as being entitled to specialty station status in
accordance with the Federal Communications Commission’s (‘‘FCC’’) definition of specialty station in effect on June 24, 1981. Consequently, before compiling the final list, the Office is providing an opportunity for response to the filed objections. The Office is also publishing for comment a new list of television stations reported in filed affidavits received after publication of
the initial list in which the owner or
licensee of the television station attests that the station qualifies as a specialty
station under the FCC’s former rules.

**DATES :**  Objections to the newly designated specialty stations must be filed no later than December 8, 2011. Responses to any objections filed to the newly designated specialty stations must be received no later than January 9, 2012. Responses to any of the MPAA objections noted herein must also be
filed with the Office no later than January 9, 2012.

**ADDRESSES :**  All comments and reply
comments shall be submitted electronically. A comment page containing a comment form is posted on the Copyright Office Web site at http://www.copyright.gov/docs/ssl. The Web site interface requires submitters to complete a form specifying name and organization, as applicable, and to upload comments as an attachment via a browser button. To meet accessibility standards, all objections, comments, or other filings must be uploaded in a single file in either the Adobe Portable Document File (PDF) format that contains searchable, accessible text (not an image); Microsoft Word; WordPerfect; Rich Text Format (RTF); or ASCII text file format (not a scanned document). The maximum file size is 6 megabytes (MB). The name of the submitter and organization should appear on both the form and the face of the filings. All objections, comments, and other filings will be posted publicly on the Copyright Office Web site exactly as they are received, along with names and organizations. If electronic submission of objections, comments, or other filings is not feasible, please contact Tracie Coleman of the Licensing Division at (202)–707–8150 for special

instructions.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Ben Golant, Assistant General Counsel, and Tanya M. Sandros, Deputy General Counsel, Copyright GC/I&R, P.O. Box 70400, Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024. Telephone: (202) 707–8380. Telefax: (202) 707–8366.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Under the cable statutory license, a cable operator may retransmit the signal of a distant
television station identified as a specialty station at the base rate rather than at the higher 3.75% rate that isincurred for the carriage of a nonpermitted signal. 37 CFR 256.2(c). Specialty station status is determined by reference to the former regulations of the FCC which defined a specialty
station as ‘‘a commercial television broadcast station that generally carries foreign-language, religious, and/or automated programming in one-third of the hours of an average broadcast week and one-third of the weekly prime-time hours.’’ 47 CFR 76.5(kk) (1981). The specialty station designation was part of a complex regulatory structure which governed the carriage of distant network station signals in the 1970s. However,


### 69289 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Notices

the FCC no longer determines whether a station qualifies as a specialty station. It repealed its distant signal carriage
rules in 1981 and has not reviewed its specialty station policy since that time. Nevertheless, the Office still keeps an
active list because it is relevant to the calculation of royalties under Section

111.

The Office published its first specialty station list in 1990 under a procedure
which allowed the owner of the station
to file an affidavit with the Office attesting to the fact that the station’s programming comports with the 1981 FCC definition, and hence, qualifies it as a specialty station. 55 FR 40021 (October 1, 1990). The Office noted at that time that it would periodically update the list.

Accordingly, on January 28, 2011, the Office published a Notice in the Federal Register asking the owner, or a valid agent of the owner, to file a sworn affidavit stating that the station’s programming satisfies the FCC’s former requirements for specialty station status. 76 FR 5213 (January 28, 2011). The
Office received affidavits from 63
broadcast stations for which the owner
or licensee of the television station had filed the requested affidavit. The Office then published an initial specialty
station list in the Federal Register on April 22, 2011. 76 FR 22733 (April 22, 2011).

Objections. In the aforementioned Notice, the Office stated that any party objecting to any claim to specialty
station status must submit comments with the Office stating his or her objections within thirty days of publication of this Notice in the Federal Register. The Motion Picture Association of America, Inc. (‘‘MPAA’’) has made such a filing and objected to the inclusion of the following stations for the following reasons:

• Stations offering full days of syndicated programming, including during prime time, cannot be identified as specialty stations: WBQD–LP, Davenport, IA WYNA–CA, Albany, NY

• Stations carrying the multicast signals of, and featuring the same programs as, a Public Broadcasting
Service affiliate cannot be identified as specialty stations: K241C–D, Bellingham, WA: translator

that carries multicast signals of Public Broadcasting Service affiliate KBTC, Bellingham, WA to Vancouver, BC. K241C–D offers the same programs at the same times that they are broadcast by KBTC.

• Stations offering home shopping programming throughout the day, and during prime time as well as stations solely broadcasting infomercials cannot be identified as specialty stations: KBCB–TV, Bellingham, WA: Home

Shopping Network affiliated station. KHTV–LP, Los Angeles, CA: Home

Shopping Network affiliated station. WNJJ–LD, Paterson, NJ: broadcasts only

infomercials.

• Stations currently licensed and silent cannot be identified as specialty

stations:
KDBK–LP, Caliente, CA. KEBK–LP, Bakersfield, CA. KFIQ–LP, Lubbock, TX. KILA–LP, Cherry Valley, CA. KMRZ–LP, Moreno Valley, CA . KRMV–LP, Walnut, CA. KRPE–LP, Banning, CA. KRVD–LP, Banning, CA. KSCZ–LP, Greenfield, CA . KSGO–LP, Chico, CA . WXOX–LP, Cleveland, OH.

• ABC and Fox affiliates offering syndicated programming throughout the day in English should not be identified as specialty stations: WPRU–LP, Aguadilla, PR. WSJX–LP, Aguadilla, PR. WVXF(TV), Charlotte Amalie, USVI.

• Stations offering a radio programming format should not be identified as specialty stations: KFMP–LP, Lubbock, TX. WLFM–LP, Chicago, IL.

• The following Port Jervis, NY
licensed stations for which there is no evidence of construction or the type of programming broadcast should not be identified as specialty stations:

W20CM.

W26DB. W34d1. W42DQ.

W49DK.

W52DW.

W59EA. Before compiling a new list of specialty stations, television broadcast stations that have filed affidavits attesting to their specialty station status should have the opportunity to rebut any objections filed to their identification as a specialty station and clarify their status for the purposes expressed herein. On this point, it should be noted that over twenty years ago, the Office implemented policies and procedures concerning notice to the public regarding specialty stations, the point of which was to provide all interested parties with a chance to comment on those stations claiming specialty status. The goal was to establish a set of facts so that cable systems can make an
informed decision as to whether copyright owners might continue to contest the carriage of a particular station on a specialty basis. It was the
Office’s intention at that time that the notice, publication, and objection procedures would give all parties a chance to cooperate in their assessment of the specialty stations on the list. 54 FR 38461, 38464 (September 18, 1989). To that end, the Office contacted the representatives of stations for which it had received written objections and gave them an opportunity to respond. See 56 FR 61056 (November 29, 1991). Today, the Office is requesting written comments in response to the objections received from MPAA, which may be
viewed at http://www.copyright.gov/docs/specialtystations/objections-PS2011.pdf.

In addition to this notice, the Office
will also contact each of the broadcast stations informing it that an objection has been filed to its representation that it is a specialty station and advising that it may respond to that objection. Responses from the broadcaster must be
filed with the Office no later than January 9, 2012. A broadcaster that has
determined that its station should not be considered as a specialty station at this time may inform the Office of this fact
and the station will not be included on the final list. However, unless a
broadcaster asks to be removed from the list of specialty stations, it will be
included on the final list with an annotation to denote that an objection
had been filed to the station’s characterizing itself as a specialty

station.

The Office will place in the public file together with the relevant affidavit any objection received and response thereto. With regard to the treatment of contested specialty stations after this proceeding concludes, it is important to note that the Licensing Division
examiners will look at these stations in the same way they have done in the past. That is, if a cable operator claims specialty station status for a contested station on the list, the examiner will inform the operator by letter that a particular party objects to the ‘‘specialty
characterization.’’ See 54 FR 38461, 38464 (September 18, 1989). The cable operator then has the opportunity to file
an amended Statement of Account and recalculate royalties, if the operator so
chooses.

MPAA also contended that the Register has the authority to determine whether a particular station is properly identified as a specialty station. In its objection, MPAA referred to the standards set forth in 17 U.S.C. 411(b)(1) regarding the use of a registration certificate for purposes of filing an infringement suit, noting that the


### 69290 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Notices

certificate of registration would not be valid for this purpose if the application
contained inaccurate information which, ‘‘if known would have caused the Register of Copyrights to refuse registration.’’ MPAA maintained that the same principle should apply in the case of specialty stations where the
Office has accurate information to make
a final determination as to whether a particular station should be characterized as a specialty station. The Office, however, has not made such determinations in the past and has stated that ‘‘it should not itself verify the specialty station status of particular stations,’’ 54 FR 38466 (September 18, 1989), although it has relied on rulings made by the Federal Communications Commission with respect to the retransmission of English-speaking

stations in Puerto Rico. See, e.g., letter from Marilyn Kretsinger, Assistant General Counsel, to Christopher Cinnamon on February 14, 1997. Rather, the Office provides periodically an updated annotated list so that ‘‘cable systems can make an informed decision as to whether MPAA or any other party might contest the system’s carriage of a particular station on a specialty basis.’’ 56 FR 61056 (November 29, 1991). These policies and practices do not support MPAA’s contention that the
Office can make determinations regarding the specialty status of a particular station. Nevertheless, the
Office seeks comment on MPAA’s contention that 17 U.S.C. 411(b)(1) provides authority for or is relevant to
whether the Office can make a final
determination on the classification of a broadcast station as a specialty station.

New Specialty Station Claims. Since the publication of the initial list, the
Office has received 24 additional affidavits, attesting to the specialty
station status of the 24 identified
stations. Because the Office has received
a substantial number of late filed affidavits, the Office finds it necessary to seek input from the public regarding the asserted specialty station status of these particular stations. Any interested party may file an objection to these newly listed stations. Such objections are due no later than December 8, 2011 and [a list will be] will be posted on the Office’s Web site shortly after that deadline. The Office will also accept responses to these objections. Such responses are due January 9, 2012. After comments or objections are received in response to this Notice, the Office plans to publish a final list of specialty stations that shall be effective January 1, 2012, for the accounting period 2012/1
and thereafter. The Office also notes that while the current practice is to accept late filed affidavits after the publication of the final list, it will be reexamining this practice in an upcoming rulemaking proceeding.

New List of Additional Specialty
Stations: Call Letter and Cities of

License
KCGI–CA, Cape Girardeau, MO . KCSO–LD, Sacramento, CA. W07DP–D35, Harrisburg, PA . W14DFD–TV14, Elliotsburg, PA . W16COD–TV16, Middleburg, PA . W29CO–TV29, Sharon, PA . W45BT–TV45, Brookville, PA. W46EJ–D21, Clarksburg, WV. WAQP, Saginaw, MI . WBNF–CA, Buffalo, NY . WDWO–CA, Detroit, MI . WDYR–CA, Dyersburg, TN. WINM, Angola, IN. WKBS–TV47, Altoona, PA. WMBC–TV, Newton, NJ . WNYB, Jamestown, NY . WPCB–TV40, Greensburg, PA. WRAY–TV, Wilson, NC . WRLM, Canton, OH . WTCT–Marion, IL . WTLJ, Muskegon, MI. WXLI, Greensboro, NC . XERV–TV, Reynosa, Tamaulipas,

Mexico. XHAB–TV, Matamoros, Tamaulipas,

Mexico.

Dated: November 2, 2011.

Maria A. Pallante, Register of Copyrights.

[FR Doc. 2011–28939 Filed 11–7–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 1410–30–P**

**MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE**
**CORPORATION**

**[MCC 11–11]**

**Report on Countries That Are Candidates for Millennium Challenge**  **Account Eligibility in Fiscal Year 2012**
**and Countries That Would Be Candidates But For Legal Prohibitions** 

**AGENCY :**  Millennium Challenge Corporation.

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  Section 608(d) of the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003 requires the Millennium Challenge Corporation to publish a report that
identifies countries that are ‘‘candidate countries’’ for Millennium Challenge Account assistance during FY 2012. The report is set forth in full below and updates the report published September 7, 2011 (76 FR 55419) to reflect the issuance of presidential determinations that waived sanctions with respect to certain countries under Section 110 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106–386), as amended.

Dated: November 2, 2011.
Melvin F. Williams, Jr., VP/General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, Millennium Challenge Corporation.

Report on Countries that are Candidates for Millennium Challenge Account Eligibility for Fiscal Year 2012
and Countries that would be Candidates but for Legal Prohibitions

Summary

This report to Congress is provided in accordance with section 608(a) of the Millennium Challenge Act of 2003, as amended, 22 U.S.C. 7701, 7707(a) (the ‘‘Act’’).

The Act authorizes the provision of Millennium Challenge Account (MCA)
assistance for countries that enter into a Millennium Challenge Compact with the United States to support policies and programs that advance the progress of such countries to achieve lasting economic growth and poverty reduction. The Act requires the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) to take a number of steps in selecting countries with which MCC will seek to enter into a compact, including (a) Determining the countries that will be eligible for MCA assistance for fiscal year 2012 (FY12) based on a country’s demonstrated commitment to (i) Just and democratic governance, (ii) economic freedom, and (iii) investments in its people; and (b) considering the opportunity to reduce poverty and generate economic growth in the country. These steps include the submission of reports to the congressional committees specified in the Act and the publication of notices in
the Federal Register that identify:

The countries that are ‘‘candidate
countries’’ for MCA assistance for FY12 based on per capita income levels and eligibility to receive assistance under U.S. law, and countries that would be candidate countries but for specified legal prohibitions on assistance (section 608(a) of the Act);

The criteria and methodology that the MCC Board of Directors (Board) will use to measure and evaluate the relative policy performance of the ‘‘candidate countries’’ consistent with the requirements of subsections (a) and (b) of section 607 of the Act in order to determine ‘‘MCA eligible countries’’ from among the ‘‘candidate countries’’ (section 608(b) of the Act); and

The list of countries determined by the Board to be ‘‘MCA eligible countries’’ for FY12, identification of such countries with
which the Board will seek to enter into compacts, and a justification for such eligibility determination and selection for compact negotiation (section 608(d) of the Act).