60388 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

from disclosure to subjects or others 

related to these activities. Specifically, 

the exemptions are required to preclude 

subjects of these activities from 

frustrating these processes; to avoid 

disclosure of activity techniques; to 

protect the identities and physical safety 

of confidential informants and law 

enforcement personnel; to ensure DHS’ 

ability to obtain information from third 

parties and other sources; to protect the 

privacy of third parties; and to safeguard 

classified information. Disclosure of 

information to the subject of the inquiry 

could also permit the subject to avoid 

detection or apprehension. 

The exemptions proposed here are 

standard law enforcement and national 

security exemptions exercised by a large 

number of federal law enforcement and 

intelligence agencies. In appropriate 

circumstances, where compliance 

would not appear to interfere with or 

adversely affect the law enforcement 

purposes of this system and the overall 

law enforcement process, the applicable 

exemptions may be waived on a case by 

case basis. 

A notice of system of records for DHS/ 

FEMA–012 Suspicious Activity 

Reporting System of Records is also 

published in this issue of the Federal 

Register. 

List of Subjects in 6 CFR Part 5 

Freedom of information; Privacy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, DHS proposes to amend 

Chapter I of Title 6, Code of Federal 

Regulations, as follows: 

PART 5—DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS 

AND INFORMATION 

1. The authority citation for Part 5 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat. 2135; 

(6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.); 5 U.S.C. 301. Subpart 

A also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552. Subpart B 

also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552a. 

2. Add at the end of Appendix C to 

Part 5, the following new paragraph 

‘‘60’’: 

Appendix C to Part 5—DHS Systems of 

Records Exempt From the Privacy Act 

* * * * * 

60. The DHS/FEMA–012 Suspicious 

Activity Reporting System of Records 

consists of electronic and paper records and 

will be used by DHS and its components. The 

DHS/FEMA–012 Suspicious Activity 

Reporting System of Records is a repository 

of information held by DHS in connection 

with its several and varied missions and 

functions, including, but not limited to the 

enforcement of civil and criminal laws; 

investigations, inquiries, and proceedings 

there under; and national security and 

intelligence activities. The DHS/FEMA–012 

Suspicious Activity Reporting System of 

Records contains information that is 

collected by, on behalf of, in support of, or 

in cooperation with DHS and its components 

and may contain personally identifiable 

information collected by other Federal, state, 

local, tribal, foreign, or international 

government agencies. The Secretary of 

Homeland Security has exempted this system 

from the following provisions of the Privacy 

Act, subject to limitations set forth in 5 

U.S.C. 552a(c)(3); (d); (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), 

(e)(4)(H), (e)(4)(I); and (f) pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a (k)(2). Exemptions from these particular 

subsections are justified, on a case-by-case 

basis to be determined at the time a request 

is made, for the following reasons: 

(a) From subsection (c)(3) (Accounting for 

Disclosures) because release of the 

accounting of disclosures could alert the 

subject of an investigation of an actual or 

potential criminal, civil, or regulatory 

violation to the existence of that investigation 

and reveal investigative interest on the part 

of DHS as well as the recipient agency. 

Disclosure of the accounting would therefore 

present a serious impediment to law 

enforcement efforts and/or efforts to preserve 

national security. Disclosure of the 

accounting would also permit the individual 

who is the subject of a record to impede the 

investigation, to tamper with witnesses or 

evidence, and to avoid detection or 

apprehension, which would undermine the 

entire investigative process. 

(b) From subsection (d) (Access to Records) 

because access to the records contained in 

this system of records could inform the 

subject of an investigation of an actual or 

potential criminal, civil, or regulatory 

violation to the existence of that investigation 

and reveal investigative interest on the part 

of DHS or another agency. Access to the 

records could permit the individual who is 

the subject of a record to impede the 

investigation, to tamper with witnesses or 

evidence, and to avoid detection or 

apprehension. Amendment of the records 

could interfere with ongoing investigations 

and law enforcement activities and would 

impose an unreasonable administrative 

burden by requiring investigations to be 

continually reinvestigated. In addition, 

permitting access and amendment to such 

information could disclose security-sensitive 

information that could be detrimental to 

homeland security. 

(c) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and 

Necessity of Information) because in the 

course of investigations into potential 

violations of federal law, the accuracy of 

information obtained or introduced 

occasionally may be unclear, or the 

information may not be strictly relevant or 

necessary to a specific investigation. In the 

interests of effective law enforcement, it is 

appropriate to retain all information that may 

aid in establishing patterns of unlawful 

activity. 

(f) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (e)(4)(H), 

and (e)(4)(I) (Agency Requirements) and (f) 

(Agency Rules), because portions of this 

system are exempt from the individual access 

provisions of subsection (d) for the reasons 

noted above, and therefore DHS is not 

required to establish requirements, rules, or 

procedures with respect to such access. 

Providing notice to individuals with respect 

to existence of records pertaining to them in 

the system of records or otherwise setting up 

procedures pursuant to which individuals 

may access and view records pertaining to 

themselves in the system would undermine 

investigative efforts and reveal the identities 

of witnesses, and potential witnesses, and 

confidential informants. 

Dated: September 9, 2011. 

Mary Ellen Callahan, 

Chief Privacy Officer, Department of 

Homeland Security. 

[FR Doc. 2011–24935 Filed 9–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–17–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

7 CFR Part 27 

[Doc. #AMS–CN–10–0073; CN–10–005] 

RIN 0581–AD16 

Revision of Cotton Futures 

Classification Procedures 

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 

USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Agricultural Marketing 

Service (AMS) is proposing to update 

the procedures for cotton futures quality 

classification services by using SmithDoxey classification data in the cotton 

futures classification process. In 

addition, references to a separate and 

optional review of cotton futures 

certification would be eliminated to 

reflect current industry practices. These 

proposed changes in procedures for 

cotton futures quality classification 

services, as well as proposed 

conforming changes, reflect advances in 

cotton fiber quality measurement and 

data processing made since the 

regulations were last updated in 1992. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 31, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Interested persons may 

comment on the proposed rule using the 

following procedures: 

• Internet: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

• Mail: Darryl Earnest, Deputy 

Administrator, Cotton & Tobacco 

Programs, AMS, USDA, STOP 0224, 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20250–0224. 

Comments should be submitted in 

triplicate. All comments should 

reference the docket number, date, and 

page number of this issue of the Federal 

Register. 

All comments will be available for 

public inspection at Cotton & Tobacco 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2011 / Proposed Rules 60389 

Program, AMS, USDA, Room 2637–S, 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20250 during regular 

business. Comments, including the 

identity of the commenter can also be 

reviewed on: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. A copy of this 

notice may be found at: http:// 

www.ams.usda.gov/cotton/ 

rulemaking.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Darryl Earnest, Deputy Administrator, 

Cotton & Tobacco Programs, AMS, 

USDA, STOP 0224, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250– 

0224. Telephone (202) 720–2145, 

facsimile (202) 690–1718, or e-mail 

darryl.earnest@ams.usda.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposed rule has been determined to 

be not significant for purposes of 

Executive Order 12866, and, therefore, 

has not been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). 

Executive Order 12988 

This proposed rule has been reviewed 

under Executive Order 12988, Civil 

Justice Reform. It is not intended to 

have retroactive effect. There are no 

administrative procedures which must 

be exhausted prior to any judicial 

challenge to the provisions of this rule. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Pursuant to requirements set forth in 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 

U.S.C. 601–612), AMS has considered 

the economic impact of this action on 

small entities and has determined that 

its implementation will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Fees paid by users of the service are not 

changed by this action; implementation 

of the new procedures indicates the 

existing fees remain sufficient to fully 

reimburse AMS for provision of the 

services. 

The purpose of the RFA is to fit 

regulatory actions to the scale of 

businesses subject to such actions so 

that small businesses will not be 

disproportionately burdened. There are 

approximately sixty cotton merchant 

organizations of various sizes active in 

trading U.S. cotton. Cotton merchants 

voluntarily use the AMS cotton futures 

classification services annually under 

the Cotton Futures Act (Act) (7 U.S.C. 

15b). Many of these cotton merchants 

are small businesses under the criteria 

established by the Small Business 

Administration (13 CFR 121.201). 

Revisions being proposed reflect the 

progress made in quality determination 

and data dissemination. The proposed 

process changes in the classification of 

cotton futures will yield increases of 

efficiency to the benefit of the cotton 

marketing industry. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

In compliance with Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) 

regulations (5 CFR part 1320) which 

implement the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520) the 

information collection requirements 

contained in the regulation to be 

amended have been previously 

approved by OMB and were assigned 

control number 0581–0029. 

Background 

AMS Cotton and Tobacco Programs is 

proposing to revise procedures for 

providing services related to the 

classification of cotton futures as 

authorized by Act by using Smith-Doxey 

classification data in the cotton futures 

classification process. The Act requires 

USDA-certified quality measurements 

for each bale included in futures 

contracts for the purpose of verifying 

that each bale meets the minimum 

quality requirements for cotton futures 

trading. 

USDA was first directed to provide 

cotton classification services to 

producers of cotton under the SmithDoxey Act of April 13, 1937 (Pub. L. 75– 

28). Therefore, the original classification 

of a cotton bale’s sample and quality 

data which results from this 

classification is commonly referred to as 

the Smith-Doxey classification or SmithDoxey data. While cotton classification 

is not mandatory, practically every 

cotton bale grown in the United States 

today is classed by USDA under the 

authority of the Cotton Statistics and 

Estimates Act (7 U.S.C. 471–476) and 

the U.S. Cotton Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 

51–65) and under regulations found in 

7 CFR part 28—Cotton Classing, Testing, 

and Standards. The U.S. cotton industry 

uses Smith-Doxey classification data to 

assign quality-adjusted market values to 

U.S. cotton and market U.S. cotton both 

domestically and internationally. 

Although the Smith-Doxey classification 

and the futures classification are 

independent measures of cotton quality 

that serve different purposes, the SmithDoxey data is used by the cotton 

merchant community to indicate which 

bales may be tenderable against a cotton 

futures contract. 

USDA’s cotton classification 

capabilities have dramatically improved 

as a result of the extensive technological 

progress, increasing data accuracy and 

operational efficiency. In addition to the 

increased accuracy and reliability of 

Smith-Doxey data, improvements in 

data management and the desire to 

increase operational efficiencies have 

prompted the Cotton and Tobacco 

Programs to propose the use of SmithDoxey classification data in the cotton 

futures classification process. 

Currently, the futures classification 

process is a two-step process that occurs 

after the Smith-Doxey classification in 

which an initial futures classification is 

immediately verified by a review— 

commonly referred to as a final futures 

classification. When verified by a 

futures classification, Smith-Doxey 

classification data will serve as the 

initial futures classification with the 

verifying futures classification serving 

as the final futures classification, 

reducing the number of futures 

classifications required in many 

instances. Verification of Smith-Doxey 

classing data is necessary because 

certain quality characteristics— 

especially color—are known to change 

over time and when cotton is subjected 

to certain environmental conditions. 

In cases where the comparison of 

Smith-Doxey data and futures 

classification data fail to pass preestablished tolerances, the first futures 

classification becomes the initial futures 

classification and a second futures 

classification (final futures 

classification) will be required. The use 

of Smith-Doxey classification data will 

significantly reduce the need for yet 

another cotton futures classification. 

The proposed changes would improve 

operational efficiency while potentially 

improving the integrity and accuracy of 

classification data provided to the 

cotton industry. 

For the reasons set forth above, this 

proposal would amend 7 CFR part 27— 

Cotton Classification Under Cotton 

Futures Legislation, which establishes 

the procedures for determining cotton 

classification for cotton submitted for 

futures certification. Specific changes 

required to implement the proposed 

futures classification procedure include 

the elimination of outdated procedures 

in sections 27.61–27.67, 27.69 and 27.72 

used to guide optional reviews of 

futures classifications and the 

elimination of references to fees charged 

for ‘‘initial classification and 

certification’’, ‘‘review classification and 

certification’’ and ‘‘combination 

services’’ in section 27.80. Conforming 

changes would also remove references 

to eliminated sections 27.9, 27.14, 

27.21., 27.36 and 27.47 and apply 

current organizational terminology in 

paragraph (h) of section 27.2 and section 

27.39. 

As stated above, the cotton futures 

classification includes a process by 

which an initial futures classification is 

followed up by a futures final 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
60390 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 189 / Thursday, September 29, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

classification. While not mandatory, this 

two-stage process has been deemed 

appropriate by the industry. Therefore, 

sections 27.61–27.67, 27.69 and 27.72, 

which address optional reviews of 

futures classifications, are irrelevant. 

Furthermore, reference to ‘‘initial 

classification and certification’’ fees in 

paragraph (a) of section 27.80 are 

removed to avoid confusion with SmithDoxey classifications and to reflect that 

initial classification fees are already 

specified in paragraph (b) of 7 CFR 

28.909. Likewise, reference to ‘‘review 

classification and certification’’ fees in 

paragraph (b) of section 27.80 are 

removed since fees for review 

classifications are already specified in 

7 CFR 28.911. 

The term ‘‘combination services’’ in 

paragraph (d) of section 27.80 reflects 

the current practice of performing an 

‘‘initial’’ futures classification and an 

immediate ‘‘review’’ futures 

classification. Since Smith-Doxey 

classification data will serve as the 

initial futures classification when 

verified by a ‘‘review’’ futures 

classification, these services will be 

simply defined as ‘‘futures classification 

services.’’ 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 27 

Commodity futures, Cotton. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble it is proposed that 7 CFR part 

27 be amended as follows: 

PART 27—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for 7 CFR 

part 27 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 15b, 7 U.S.C. 4736, 7 

U.S.C. 1622(g). 

2. In § 27.2, paragraph (h) is revised 

to read as follows: 

§ 27.2 Terms defined. 

* * * * * 

(h) Cotton Quality Assurance 

Division. The Cotton Quality Assurance 

Division at Memphis, Tennessee, shall 

provide supervision of futures cotton 

classification. 

* * * * * 

3. Section 27.9 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 27.9 Classing Offices; Cotton Quality 

Assurance Division. 

Classing Offices shall be maintained 

at points designated for the purpose by 

the Administrator. The Cotton Quality 

Assurance Division shall provide 

supervision of futures cotton 

classification and perform other duties 

as assigned by the Deputy 

Administrator. 

4. Section 27.14 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 27.14 Filing of classification requests. 

Requests for futures classification 

shall be filed with the Cotton Quality 

Assurance Division within 10 days after 

sampling and before classification of the 

samples. 

§ 27.21 [Removed and Reserved] 

5. Section 27.21 is removed and 

reserved. 

6. Section 27.36 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 27.36 Classification determinations 

based on official standards. 

All cotton shall be classified on the 

basis of the official cotton standards of 

the United States in effect at the time of 

such classification. 

7. Section 27.39 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 27.39 Issuance of classification records. 

Except as otherwise provided in this 

section, as soon as practicable after the 

classification of cotton has been 

completed by the Cotton and Tobacco 

Programs, the Cotton Quality Assurance 

Division shall issue an electronic cotton 

classification record showing the results 

of such classification. Each electronic 

record shall bear the date of its issuance. 

The electronic record shall show the 

identification of the cotton according to 

the information in the possession of the 

Cotton and Tobacco Programs, the 

classification of the cotton and such 

other facts as the Deputy Administrator 

may require. 

8. Section 27.47 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 27.47 Tender or delivery of cotton; 

conditions. 

Subject to the provisions of §§ 27.52 

through 27.55, no cotton shall be 

tendered or delivered on a basis grade 

contract unless on or prior to the date 

fixed for delivery under such contract, 

and in advance of final settlement of the 

contract, the person making the tender 

shall furnish to the person receiving the 

same a valid outstanding cotton 

classification record complying with the 

regulations in this subpart, showing 

such cotton to be tenderable on a basis 

grade contract. 

§ 27.61 [Removed and Reserved] 

9. The undesignated center heading 

preceding § 27.61 is removed and 

§ 27.61 is removed and reserved.— 

27.67, 27.69 and 27.72 are removed and 

reserved. 

§§ 27.62–27.67 [Removed and Reserved] 

10. Sections 27.62 through 27.67 are 

removed and reserved. 

§ 27.69 [Removed and Reserved] 

11. Section 27.69 is removed and 

reserved. 

§ 27.72 [Removed and Reserved] 

12. Section 27.72 is removed and 

reserved. 

13. Section 27.80 is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 27.80 Fees; review classification, futures 

classification and supervision. 

For services rendered by the Cotton 

Division pursuant to this subpart, 

whether the cotton involved is 

tenderable or not, the person requesting 

the services shall pay fees as follows: 

(a) [Reserved] 

(b) [Reserved] 

(c) [Reserved] 

(d) Futures classification—$3.50 per 

bale. 

Dated: September 23, 2011. 

David R. Shipman, 

Acting Administrator, Agricultural Marketing 

Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–25078 Filed 9–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

7 CFR Parts 305 and 319 

[Docket No. APHIS–2009–0100] 

RIN 0579–AD35 

Irradiation Treatment; Location of 

Facilities in the Southern United States 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend 

the phytosanitary treatment regulations 

to provide generic criteria for new 

irradiation treatment facilities in the 

Southern States of the United States. 

This action would allow irradiation 

facilities to be located anywhere in 

these States, subject to approval, rather 

than only in the currently approved 

locations. We are also proposing to 

allow for the irradiation treatment of 

certain imported fruit from India and 

Thailand upon arrival in the United 

States. This action would facilitate the 

importation of fruit requiring irradiation 

treatment while continuing to provide 

protection against the introduction of 

pests of concern into the United States. 

DATES: We will consider all comments 

that we receive on or before November 

28, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by either of the following methods: 


jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS