Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 29 / Wednesday, February 12, 2014 / Notices 8441 

1Commission regulations referred to herein are 

found at 17 CFR Ch. 1 (2010). Commission 

regulations are accessible on the Commission’s Web 

site, www.cftc.gov. 

Estimated Total Annual Non-hour 

Respondent Cost Burden: $130,138. 

There are no capital start-up, 

maintenance, or recordkeeping costs 

associated with this information 

collection. However, this collection 

does have annual (non-hour) cost 

burden in the form of service fees 

associated with deposit accounts and 

returned payments as well as postage 

costs. 

There are service fees for setting up a 

deposit account at the USPTO, for not 

maintaining the minimum balance 

required for the deposit account, and for 

returned payments. The service charge 

to establish a deposit account is $10, 

and the USPTO estimates that it 

processes 284 Deposit Account 

Application Forms annually, for a total 

of $2,840 per year. There is also a $25 

service charge for deposit accounts that 

are below the minimum balance ($1,000 

minimum balance for an unrestricted 

deposit account or $300 minimum 

balance for a restricted deposit account) 

at the end of the month. The USPTO 

estimates that it assesses 4,000 of these 

low balance charges annually, for a total 

of $100,000 per year. There is a $50 

service charge for processing a payment 

refused (including a check returned 

‘‘unpaid’’) or charged back by a 

financial institution. The USPTO 

estimates that it assesses 129 of these 

returned payment charges annually, for 

a total of $6,450 per year. The total 

estimated service fees for this collection 

are $109,290 per year. 

Customers may incur postage costs 

when submitting the Credit Card 

Payment Form and other paper forms or 

requests to the USPTO by mail. 

Customers generally send the Credit 

Card Payment Form to the USPTO along 

with other documents related to the fee 

or service being paid for by credit card, 

but some customers may submit just the 

Credit Card Payment Form without 

additional supporting documents. The 

USPTO estimates that roughly 5 percent 

of the 103,115 paper Credit Card 

Payment Forms submitted annually may 

be mailed in by themselves, or 

approximately 5,156 per year. The 

USPTO estimates that it will receive an 

additional 37,391 submissions per year 

that may be mailed, including Deposit 

Account Replenishments and Refund 

Requests, for a total of 42,547 mailed 

submissions per year. The USPTO 

estimates that the first-class postage cost 

for a mailed submission will be 49 

cents, for a total postage cost of 

approximately $20,848 per year. 

The total annual (non-hour) 

respondent cost burden for this 

collection in the form of service fees and 

postage costs is estimated to be 

approximately $130,138 per year. 

IV. Request for Comments 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and/or 

included in the request for OMB 

approval. All comments will become a 

matter of public record. 

The USPTO is soliciting public 

comments to: (a) Evaluate whether the 

proposed collection of information is 

necessary for the proper performance of 

the functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; (b) Evaluate the 

accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the 

burden of the proposed collection of 

information, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions used; 

(c) Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) Minimize the burden 

of the collection of information on those 

who are to respond, including through 

the use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

Dated: February 7, 2014. 

Susan K. Fawcett, 

Records Officer, USPTO, Office of the Chief 

Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2014–03070 Filed 2–11–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities Under OMB Review 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, this notice 

announces that the Information 

Collection Request (ICR) abstracted 

below has been forwarded to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review and comment. The ICR describes 

the nature of the information collection 

and its expected costs and burden. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before March 14, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted to OMB within 30 days of the 

notice’s publication. Comments, 

identified by ‘‘Practice by Former 

Members and Employees of the 

Commission Pursuant to 17 CFR 

140.735.6,’’ should be mailed to the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for the 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, 725 17th Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20503. 

Comments may be also be submitted, 

regarding the burden estimated or any 

other aspect of the information 

collection, including suggestions for 

reducing the burden, identified by 

‘‘Practice by Former Members and 

Employees of the Commission Pursuant 

to 17 CFR 140.735.6,’’ by any of the 

following methods: 

• Agency Web site, via its Comments 

Online process: http://

comments.cftc.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

through the Web site. 

• Mail: Send to Melissa D. Jurgens, 

Secretary, Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, 1155 21st Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20581. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as 

Mail, above. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov/search/index.jsp. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments. 

All comments must be submitted in 

English, or if not, accompanied by an 

English translation. Comments will be 

posted as received to http://

www.cftc.gov. You should submit only 

information that you wish to make 

available publicly. If you wish the 

Commission to consider information 

that is exempt from disclosure under the 

Freedom of Information Act, a petition 

for confidential treatment of the exempt 

information may be submitted according 

to the procedures set forth in section 

145.9 of the Commission’s regulations.1

The Commission reserves the right, 

but shall have no obligation, to review, 

pre-screen, filter, redact, refuse or 

remove any or all of your submission 

from www.cftc.gov that it may deem to 

be inappropriate for publication, such as 

obscene language. All submissions that 

have been redacted or removed that 

contain comments on the merits of the 

rulemaking will be retained in the 

public comment file and will be 

considered as required under the 

Administrative Procedure Act and other 

applicable laws, and may be accessible 

under the Freedom of Information Act. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

P. Dolan at (202) 418–5220; FAX: (202) 

418–5524; email: jdolan@cftc.gov, and 

refer to OMB Control No. 3038–0025. 

This contact can also provide a copy of 

the ICR. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

8442 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 29 / Wednesday, February 12, 2014 / Notices 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Practice by Former Members 

and Employees of the Commission 

(OMB Control No. 3038–0025). This is 

a request for extension of a currently 

approved information collection. 

Abstract: Commission Rule 140.735–6 

governs the practice before the 

Commission of former members and 

employees of the Commission and is 

intended to ensure that the Commission 

is aware of any existing conflict of 

interest. The rule generally requires 

former members and employees who are 

employed or retained to represent any 

person before the Commission within 

two years of the termination of their 

CFTC employment, to file a brief written 

statement with the Commission’s Office 

of General Counsel. The proposed rule 

was promulgated pursuant to the 

Commission’s rulemaking authority 

contained in section 8a(5) of the 

Commodity Exchange Act, 7 U.S.C. 

12a(5) (1994), as amended. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for the CFTC’s regulations 

were published on December 30, 1981. 

See 46 FR 63035 (Dec. 30, 1981). The 

Federal Register notice with a 60-day 

comment period soliciting comments on 

this collection of information was 

published on December 11, 2013 (78 FR 

75333). 

Burden statement: The respondent 

burden for this collection is estimated to 

average .10 hours per response to file 

the brief written statement. This 

estimate include the time needed to 

review instructions; develop, acquire, 

install, and utilize technology and 

systems for the purposes of collecting, 

validating, and verifying information, 

processing and maintaining information 

and disclosing and providing 

information; adjust the existing ways to 

comply with any previously applicable 

instructions and requirements; train 

personnel to be able to respond to a 

collection of information; and transmit 

or otherwise disclose the information. 

Respondents/Affected Entities: 3. 

Estimated number of responses: 4.5. 

Estimated total annual burden on 

respondents: .10 hours. 

Frequency of collection: On occasion. 

(Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

Dated: February 7, 2014. 

Christopher J. Kirkpatrick, 

Deputy Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2014–03048 Filed 2–11–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

[Docket No. DARS–2014–0014] 

Negotiation of a Reciprocal Defense 

Procurement Memorandum of 

Understanding With the Republic of 

Slovenia 

AGENCY: Department of Defense. 

ACTION: Request for public comments. 

SUMMARY: On behalf of the U.S. 

Government, DoD is contemplating 

negotiating and concluding a Reciprocal 

Defense Procurement (RDP) 

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) 

with the Republic of Slovenia (hereafter 

‘‘Slovenia’’). DoD is requesting industry 

feedback regarding its experience in 

public defense procurements conducted 

by or on behalf of the Slovenian 

Ministry of Defense or Armed Forces. 

DATES: Submit written comments to the 

address shown below on or before 

March 14, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to 

Defense Procurement and Acquisition 

Policy, Attn: Mr. Victor Deal, 3060 

Defense Pentagon, Room 5E621, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060; or by 

email to Victor.T.Deal3.civ@mail.mil. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Victor Deal, Senior Analyst, Office of 

the Under Secretary of Defense for 

Acquisition, Technology and Logistics 

(OUSD(AT&L)), Defense Procurement 

and Acquisition Policy, Contract Policy 

and International Contracting; Room 

5E621, 3060 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060; telephone 

(703) 697–9351. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The RDP 

MOUs that DoD has with 23 

‘‘qualifying’’ countries are concluded at 

the level of the Secretary of Defense and 

his counterpart. The purpose of RDP 

MOUs is to promote rationalization, 

standardization, and interoperability of 

conventional defense equipment with 

allies and other friendly governments. 

These MOUs provide a framework for 

ongoing communication regarding 

market access and procurement matters 

that enhance effective defense 

cooperation. 

RDP MOUs generally include 

language by which the Parties agree that 

their defense procurements will be 

conducted in accordance with certain 

implementing procedures. These 

procedures relate to— 

• Publication of notices of proposed 

purchases; 

• The content and availability of 

solicitations for proposed purchases; 

• Notification to each unsuccessful 

offeror; 

• Feedback, upon request, to 

unsuccessful offerors concerning the 

reasons they were not allowed to 

participate in a procurement or were not 

awarded a contract; and 

• Providing for the hearing and 

review of complaints arising in 

connection with any phase of the 

procurement process to ensure that, to 

the extent possible, complaints are 

equitably and expeditiously resolved. 

Based on the MOU, each country 

affords the other country certain 

benefits on a reciprocal basis consistent 

with national laws and regulations. The 

benefits that the United States accords 

to the products of qualifying countries 

include— 

• Offers of qualifying country end 

products are evaluated without applying 

the price differentials otherwise 

required by the Buy American statute 

and the Balance of Payments Program; 

• The chemical warfare protection 

clothing restrictions in 10 U.S.C. 2533a 

and the specialty metals restriction in 

10 U.S.C. 2533b(a)(1) do not apply to 

products manufactured in a qualifying 

country; and 

• Customs, taxes, and duties are 

waived for qualifying country end 

products and components. 

If DoD (for the U.S. Government) 

concludes an RDP MOU with the 

Republic of Slovenia, then Slovenia 

would be listed as one of the ‘‘qualifying 

countries’’ in the definition of 

‘‘qualifying country’’ at DFARS 225.003, 

and offers of products of Slovenia or 

that contain components from Slovenia 

would be afforded the benefits available 

to all qualifying countries. This also 

means that U.S. products would be 

exempt from any analogous ‘‘Buy 

Slovenia’’ and ‘‘Buy European Union’’ 

laws or policies applicable to 

procurements by the Slovenian Ministry 

of Defense or Armed Forces. 

While DoD is evaluating Slovenia’s 

laws and regulations in this area, DoD 

would benefit from U.S. industry’s 

experience in participating in Slovenia’s 

public defense procurements. DoD is, 

therefore, asking U.S. firms that have 

participated or attempted to participate 

in procurements by or on behalf of 

Slovenia’s Ministry of Defense or Armed 

Forces to let us know if the 

procurements were conducted with 

transparency, integrity, fairness, and 

due process in accordance with 

published procedures, and if not, the 

nature of the problems encountered. 

DoD is also interested in comments 

relating to the degree of reciprocity that 

exists between the United States and 

Slovenia when it comes to the openness 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES