Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2010 / Notices 66799 

1The ‘‘Phase I Parties’’ are the Program Suppliers, 

Joint Sports Claimants, Public Television 

Claimants, Commercial Television Claimants 

(represented by National Association of 

Broadcasters), Music Claimants (represented by 

American Society of Composers, Authors and 

Publishers, Broadcast Music, Inc., and SESAC, Inc.), 

Canadian Claimants, National Public Radio, and the 

Devotional Claimants. In Phase I of a cable royalty 

distribution proceeding, royalties are allocated 

among certain categories of broadcast programming 

that have been retransmitted by cable systems. The 

categories have traditionally been movies and 

syndicated television series, sports programming, 

commercial and noncommercial broadcaster-owned 

programming, religious programming, music, public 

radio programming, and Canadian programming. In 

Phase II of a cable royalty distribution proceeding, 

royalties are allocated among claimants within each 

of the Phase I categories. 

1The ‘‘Phase I Claimants’’ are the Program 

Suppliers, Joint Sports Claimants, Broadcaster 

Claimants Group, Music Claimants (American 

Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, 

Broadcast Music, Inc., and SESAC, Inc.), and 

Devotional Claimants. In Phase I of a satellite 

royalty distribution proceeding, royalties are 

allocated among certain categories of broadcast 

programming that have been retransmitted by 

satellite systems. The categories have traditionally 

been movies and syndicated television series, sports 

programming, commercial broadcaster-owned 

programming, religious programming, and music. 

Public Television Claimants, Canadian Claimants, 

and National Public Radio, which traditionally have 

received Phase I shares of cable royalties, do not 

claim Phase I shares of the satellite royalty funds. 

In Phase II of a satellite royalty distribution 

proceeding, royalties are allocated among claimants 

within each of the Phase I categories. 

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

crb@loc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each year 

cable systems must submit royalty 

payments to the Register of Copyrights 

as required by the statutory license set 

forth in section 111 of the Copyright Act 

for the retransmission to cable 

subscribers of over-the-air television 

and radio broadcast signals. See 17 

U.S.C. 111(d). These royalties are then 

distributed to copyright owners whose 

works were included in a qualifying 

transmission and who timely filed a 

claim for royalties. Allocation of the 

royalties collected occurs in one of two 

ways. In the first instance, these funds 

will be distributed through a negotiated 

settlement among the parties. 17 U.S.C. 

111(d)(4)(A). If the claimants do not 

reach an agreement with respect to the 

royalties, the Copyright Royalty Judges 

(‘‘Judges’’) must conduct a proceeding to 

determine the distribution of any 

royalties that remain in controversy. 17 

U.S.C. 111(d)(4)(B). 

On September 22, 2010, 

representatives of the Phase I claimant 

categories (the ‘‘Phase I Parties’’) 1 filed 

with the Judges a motion requesting a 

partial distribution of 50% of the 2008 

cable royalty funds pursuant to Section 

801(b)(3)(C) of the Copyright Act. 17 

U.S.C. 801(b)(3)(C). Under that section 

of the Copyright Act, before ruling on a 

partial distribution motion the Judges 

must publish a notice in the Federal 

Register seeking responses to the 

motion to ascertain whether any 

claimant entitled to receive such royalty 

fees has a reasonable objection to the 

proposed distribution. Consequently, 

this Notice seeks comments from 

interested claimants on whether any 

reasonable objection exists that would 

preclude the distribution of 50% of the 

2008 cable royalty funds to the Phase I 

Parties. The Judges must be advised of 

the existence and extent of all such 

objections by the end of the comment 

period. The Judges will not consider any 

objections with respect to the partial 

distribution motion that come to their 

attention after the close of that period. 

The Judges also seek comment on the 

existence and extent of any 

controversies to the 2008 cable royalty 

funds at Phase I or Phase II with respect 

to those funds that would remain if the 

partial distribution is granted. 

The Motion of Phase I Claimants for 

Partial Distribution is posted on the 

Copyright Royalty Board Web site at 

http://www.loc.gov/crb. 

Dated: October 20, 2010. 

James Scott Sledge, 

Chief U.S. Copyright Royalty Judge. 

[FR Doc. 2010–27332 Filed 10–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–72–P 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

Copyright Royalty Board 

[Docket No. 2010–7 CRB SD 2008] 

Distribution of the 2008 Satellite 

Royalty Funds 

AGENCY: Copyright Royalty Board, 

Library of Congress. 

ACTION: Notice requesting comments. 

SUMMARY: The Copyright Royalty Judges 

are soliciting comments on a motion of 

Phase I claimants for partial distribution 

in connection with the 2008 satellite 

royalty funds. The Judges are also 

requesting comments as to the existence 

of Phase I and Phase II controversies 

with respect to the distribution of 2008 

satellite royalty funds. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

November 29, 2010. 

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 

Library of Congress, James Madison 

Memorial Building, LM–401, 101 

Independence Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20559–6000. If 

delivered by a commercial courier, 

comments must be delivered to the 

Congressional Courier Acceptance Site 

located at 2nd and D Street, NE., 

Washington, DC. 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: On 

October 6, 2010, representatives of the 

Phase I claimant categories (the ‘‘Phase 

I Claimants’’) 1 filed with the Judges a 

motion requesting a partial distribution 

of 50% of the 2008 satellite royalty 

funds pursuant to section 801(b)(3)(C) of 

the Copyright Act. 17 U.S.C. 

801(b)(3)(C). That section requires that 

the Judges publish a notice in the 

Federal Register seeking responses to 

the motion for partial distribution to 

ascertain whether any claimant entitled 

to receive such fees has a reasonable 

objection to the requested distribution 

before ruling on the motion. 

Consequently, this Notice seeks 

comments from interested claimants on 

whether any reasonable objection exists 

that would preclude the distribution of 

50% of the 2008 satellite royalty funds 

to the Phase I Claimants. The Judges 

must be advised of the existence and 

extent of all such objections by the end 

of the comment period. The Judges will 

not consider any objections with respect 

to the partial distribution motion that 

come to their attention after the close of 

that period. 

The Judges also seek comment on the 

existence and extent of any 

controversies to the 2008 satellite 

royalty funds at Phase I or Phase II with 

respect to those funds that would 

remain if the motion for partial 

distribution is granted. 

The Motion of the Phase I Claimants 

for Partial Distribution is posted on the 

Copyright Royalty Board Web site at 

http://www.loc.gov/crb. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES

66800 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2010 / Notices 

Dated: October 25, 2010. 

James Scott Sledge, 

Chief U.S. Copyright Royalty Judge. 

[FR Doc. 2010–27333 Filed 10–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–72–P 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

[NOTICE: (10–143)] 

Notice of Information Collection 

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Notice of information collection. 

SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration, as part of its 

continuing effort to reduce paperwork 

and respondent burden, invites the 

general public and other Federal 

agencies to take this opportunity to 

comment on proposed and/or 

continuing information collections, as 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(2)(A)). 

DATES: All comments should be 

submitted within 60 calendar days from 

the date of this publication. 

ADDRESSES: All comments should be 

addressed to Lori Parker, National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration, 

Washington, DC 20546–0001. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

copies of the information collection 

instrument(s) and instructions should 

be directed to Lori Parker, NASA PRA 

Officer, NASA Headquarters, 300 E 

Street, SW., JF0000, Washington, DC 

20546, (202) 358–1351, 

Lori.Parker@nasa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

As required in Section 305(b) of the 

National Aeronautics and Space Act of 

1958 and the NASA Supplement to the 

Federal Acquisition Regulation, NASA 

R&D contracts require contractor/ 

recipient reporting of new technologies 

to NASA using NASA eNTRe system for 

electronic submissions and NASA Form 

1679 for paper submissions. 

II. Method of Collection 

NASA will utilize a Web-base on-line 

form to collect this information. 

Approximately 65 per cent of the 

responses will be collected 

electronically. 

III. Data 

Title: AST–Technology Utilization. 

OMB Number: 2700–0009. 

Type of Review: Regular. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit and not-for profit institutions. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

1,283. 

Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour 

for manual responses and 0.75 hour for 

electronic responses. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 1,075. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost: $0. 

IV. Request for Comments 

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of NASA, including 

whether the information collected has 

practical utility; (2) the accuracy of 

NASA’s estimate of the burden 

(including hours and cost) of the 

proposed collection of information; (3) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (4) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on respondents, including automated 

collection techniques or the use of other 

forms of information technology. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and 

included in the request for OMB 

approval of this information collection. 

They will also become a matter of 

public record. 

Lori Parker, 

NASA PRA Clearance Officer 

[FR Doc. 2010–27447 Filed 10–28–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

[Notice (10–142)] 

National Environmental Policy Act; 

Wallops Flight Facility Shoreline 

Restoration and Infrastructure 

Protection Program 

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Notice of availability of the 

Final Programmatic Environmental 

Impact Statement (PEIS) for the Wallops 

Flight Facility (WFF) Shoreline 

Restoration and Infrastructure 

Protection Program (SRIPP). 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act, as amended, 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the 

Council on Environmental Quality 

Regulations for Implementing the 

Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 

Parts 1500–1508), and NASA’s NEPA 

policy and procedures (14 CFR Part 

1216, subpart 1216.3), NASA has 

prepared and issued the Final PEIS for 

the proposed SRIPP at WFF. The U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Bureau of 

Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, 

and Enforcement (BOEMRE), and the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have 

served as Cooperating Agencies in 

preparing the Final PEIS. 

NASA is proposing to implement a 

fifty-year design-life storm damage 

reduction project at its WFF on Wallops 

Island, Virginia. WFF is continuously 

faced with storm damage resulting in 

the implementation of emergency 

repairs. The project would be conducted 

to reduce the need for these emergency 

repairs and the potential for storminduced physical damage to the over $1 

billion in Federal and State assets on 

Wallops Island. The Final PEIS 

examines in detail three project action 

alternatives, each expected to provide 

substantial damage reduction from 

storms with intensities ranging up to 

approximately the 100-year return 

interval storm. Although some 

reduction in flooding can be expected 

under each alternative, the primary 

purpose of the proposal is not flood 

protection, rather it is moving 

destructive wave energy further away 

from the Wallops Island shoreline and 

the infrastructure behind it. 

Alternative One, NASA’s preferred 

alternative, would include extending 

the existing Wallops Island seawall up 

to a maximum of 1,400 meters (m) 

(4,600 feet [ft]) south and placing an 

estimated 2.5 million cubic meters 

(MCM) (3.2 million cubic yards [MCY]) 

along the shoreline. Alternative Two 

would include the same seawall 

extension as Alternative One; however 

the sand placed along the shoreline 

would be less at approximately 2.2 

MCM (2.9 MCY). Under this alternative, 

NASA would also construct a groin 

perpendicular to the shoreline at the 

south end of the project site to limit the 

volume of nearshore sand being 

transported from the restored Wallops 

Island beach to the south. Alternative 

Three would entail the same seawall 

extension as in Alternatives One and 

Two; however sand placement would be 

the least of the Alternatives at 

approximately 2.1 MCM (2.8 MCY). 

NASA would construct a single 

detached breakwater parallel to the 

shoreline at the south end of the project 

site to retain sand under Alternative 

Three. Under all three project 

alternatives, NASA would obtain the 

sand required for its initial beach 

nourishment from an unnamed shoal 

(referred to as Shoal A) located in 

Federal waters approximately 23 

kilometers (km) (14 miles [mi]) east of 

Wallops Island. Sand for an expected 

nine future renourishment cycles could 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES