52258 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 217 / Monday, November 13, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

1 82 FR 47415 (Oct. 12, 2017). 

2 81 FR 86643 (Dec. 1, 2016). 

§ 514.12 When does a notice of late 

submission and/or a proposed late fee 

become a final order of the Commission 

and final agency action? 

If the recipient fails to appeal under 

subchapter H of this chapter, the notice 

and the proposed late fee shall become 

a final order of the Commission and 

final agency action. 

§ 514.13 How are late submission fees 

paid, and can interest be assessed? 

(a) Late fees assessed under this part 

shall be paid by the person or entity 

assessed and shall not be treated as an 

operating expense of the operation. 

(b) The Commission shall transfer the 

late fee paid under this subchapter to 

the U.S. Treasury. 

(c) Interest shall be assessed at rates 

established from time to time by the 

Secretary of the Treasury on amounts 

remaining unpaid after their due date. 

§ 514.14 What happens if the fees imposed 

exceed the statutory maximum or if the 

Commission does not expend the full 

amount of fees collected in a fiscal year? 

(a) The total amount of all fees 

imposed during any fiscal year shall not 

exceed the statutory maximum imposed 

by Congress. The Commission shall 

credit pro-rata any fees collected in 

excess of this amount against amounts 

otherwise due. 

(b) To the extent that revenue derived 

from fees imposed under the schedule 

established under this paragraph are not 

expended or committed at the close of 

any fiscal year, such funds shall remain 

available until expended to defray the 

costs of operations of the Commission. 

§ 514.15 May tribes submit fingerprint 

cards to the NIGC for processing? 

Tribes may submit fingerprint cards to 

the Commission for processing by the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation and the 

Commission may charge a fee to process 

fingerprint cards on behalf of the tribes. 

§ 514.16 How does the Commission adopt 

the fingerprint processing fee? 

(a) The Commission shall review 

annually the costs involved in 

processing fingerprint cards and, by a 

vote of not less than two of its members, 

shall adopt the fingerprint processing 

fee no later than November 1st of each 

year. 

(b) The Commission shall publish the 

fingerprint processing fee in a notice in 

the Federal Register. 

(c) The fingerprint processing fee 

shall be based on fees charged by the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation and 

costs incurred by the Commission. 

Commission costs include Commission 

personnel, supplies, equipment costs, 

and postage to submit the results to the 

requesting tribe. 

§ 514.17 How are fingerprint processing 

fees collected by the Commission? 

(a) Fees for processing fingerprint 

cards will be billed monthly to each 

Tribe for cards processed during the 

prior month. Tribes shall pay the 

amount billed within forty-five (45) 

days of the date of the bill. 

(b) The Chair may suspend fingerprint 

card processing for a tribe that has a bill 

remaining unpaid for more than fortyfive (45) days. 

(c) Remittances and other 

communications about fingerprint 

processing fees shall be sent to the 

Commission by the methods provided 

for in the rates of fees notice published 

in the Federal Register. 

Dated: November 2, 2017. 

Jonodev O. Chaudhuri, 

Chairman. 

Kathryn Isom-Clause, 

Vice Chair. 

E. Sequoyah Simermeyer, 

Associate Commissioner. 

[FR Doc. 2017–24363 Filed 11–9–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7565–01–P 

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

Copyright Office 

37 CFR Parts 201 and 202 

[Docket No. 2017–15] 

Group Registration of Unpublished 

Works: Extension of Comment Period 

AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library 

of Congress. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

extension of comment period. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Copyright Office is 

extending the deadlines for the 

submission of written comments in 

response to its October 12, 2017 notice 

of proposed rulemaking, regarding the 

creation of a new group registration 

option for unpublished works to replace 

the existing ‘‘unpublished collections’’ 

registration option. In this document, 

the Office also clarifies that the new 

group registration option is not intended 

for group registration of unpublished 

photographs; that is the subject of a 

separate proposed rulemaking, which 

would permit submission of up to 750 

photographs on one application. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

notice of proposed rulemaking 

published on October 12, 2017 (82 FR 

47415), is extended. Comments must be 

made in writing and must be received 

in the U.S. Copyright Office no later 

than November 17, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: For reasons of government 

efficiency, the Copyright Office is using 

the regulations.gov system for the 

submission and posting of public 

comments in this proceeding. All 

comments are therefore to be submitted 

electronically through regulations.gov. 

Specific instructions for submitting 

comments are available on the 

Copyright Office Web site at https://

www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/ 

groupunpublished/. If electronic 

submission of comments is not feasible 

due to lack of access to a computer and/ 

or the Internet, please contact the Office 

for special instructions using the contact 

information below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert J. Kasunic, Associate Register of 

Copyrights and Director of Registration 

Policy and Practice; Erik Bertin, Deputy 

Director of Registration Policy and 

Practice; or Regan A. Smith, Deputy 

General Counsel, by telephone at 202– 

707–8040 or by email at rkas@loc.gov, 

ebertin@loc.gov, and resm@loc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As 

detailed in an October 12, 2017 notice 

of proposed rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’),1 the 

U.S. Copyright Office is proposing to 

create a new group registration option 

for a limited number of unpublished 

works (‘‘GRUW’’). Under that proposal, 

applicants will be allowed to include up 

to five works in each submission. This 

new group registration option will 

replace the current ‘‘unpublished 

collections’’ option. 

After publication of the NPRM, there 

was some understandable confusion 

about the scope of the NPRM among the 

photographer community, who feared 

that the GRUW option would limit them 

to submitting five unpublished 

photographs per application. To clarify, 

the Office does not intend to impose 

such a limit on photographers. On 

December 1, 2016, the Office issued a 

separate notice of proposed rulemaking 

amending the existing option for group 

registration of photographs that would 

create an electronic application for 

group registration for published 

photographs, and also create an 

analogous application for group 

registration for unpublished 

photographs.2 Under that separate 

proposed rule, photographers would be 

permitted to include up to 750 

photographs on each such application, 

rather than the five works proposed 

under the new GRUW option. See 

generally 81 FR at 86649. The Office is 

working on the group registration of 

photographs final rule in conjunction 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 217 / Monday, November 13, 2017 / Proposed Rules 52259 

1See Finding of Significant Contribution and 

Rulemaking for Certain States in the Ozone 

Transport Assessment Group Region for Purposes of 

Reducing Regional Transport of Ozone, 63 FR 

57371 (October 27, 1998). 

2A major stationary source of NOX in a marginal 

or moderate ozone nonattainment area, or in an 

ozone transport region, is a source that emits or has 

the potential to emit 100 tons of NOX. 

3 In the cap and trade program established under 

the NOX SIP Call, a regional ozone season NOX cap, 

or budget, was established, which was allocated as 

NOX allowances to subject sources in the affected 

Continued 

with the public comments received in 

that rulemaking. The Office fully 

intends to finalize that rule before 

finalizing the GRUW final rule. 

Dated: November 7, 2017. 

Sarang V. Damle, 

General Counsel and Associate Register of 

Copyrights. 

[FR Doc. 2017–24511 Filed 11–9–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0309; FRL–9968–49– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; Reasonably Available 

Control Technology for Cement Kilns, 

Revisions to Portland Cement 

Manufacturing Plant and Natural Gas 

Compression Station Regulations, and 

Removal of Nitrogen Oxides Reduction 

and Trading Program Replaced by 

Other Programs and Regulations 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

state implementation plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Maryland. 

This revision pertains to reasonably 

available control technology (RACT) for 

cement kilns, revisions to and 

recodification of certain provisions for 

Portland cement manufacturing plants 

(cement plants) and internal combustion 

(IC) engines at natural gas compression 

stations, and removal of the obsolete 

Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Reduction and 

Trading Program that has been replaced 

by other trading programs or addressed 

in other regulations. This action is being 

taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 13, 

2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2016–0309 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

stahl.cynthia@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, 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. 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: 

Marilyn Powers, (215) 814–2308, or by 

email at powers.marilyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

November 24, 2015, the State of 

Maryland, through the Maryland 

Department of the Environment (MDE), 

submitted a SIP revision for approval 

into the Maryland SIP. The submission 

is comprised of three State actions 

pertaining to amendments to COMAR 

26.11.01.10, COMAR 26.11.09.08, 

COMAR 26.11.29, and COMAR 

26.11.30. The amendments address the 

requirement for NOX RACT for cement 

kilns for the 2008 ozone national 

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), 

the removal of COMAR provisions 

related to the obsolete NOX Budget 

Trading Program under the NOX SIP 

Call 1 (that has been replaced by other 

trading programs), the consolidation of 

all existing and new requirements for 

cement kilns into one COMAR 

regulation, the consolidation of all 

existing and new requirements for IC 

engines into one COMAR regulation, the 

addition of new particulate matter (PM) 

monitoring requirements, and the 

addition of an alternate monitoring 

option for visible emissions at cement 

kilns. On February 17, 2017, MDE 

provided a letter to EPA clarifying the 

NOX RACT limits and withdrawing 

from EPA’s consideration a provision of 

its regulation for natural gas 

compression stations. 

I. Background 

A. NOX RACT for Cement Kilns 

On March 12, 2008, EPA strengthened 

the NAAQS for ground level ozone, 

setting both the primary and secondary 

standards to a level of 0.075 parts per 

million (ppm), or 75 parts per billion 

(ppb), averaged over an 8-hour period 

(hereafter referred to as the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS). On May 21, 2012 (77 FR 

30088), EPA designated 45 areas as 

nonattainment under the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS, including three areas or 

portions of areas in Maryland. Under 

section 182 of the CAA, states must 

review and revise the RACT 

requirements in their SIP to ensure that 

these requirements would still be 

considered RACT under the new, more 

stringent NAAQS. Major stationary 

sources of ozone precursor emissions 

located in ozone nonattainment areas 

classified as moderate and above (and 

sources located in the Ozone Transport 

Region (OTR), of which the entire state 

of Maryland is a part) are subject to 

RACT requirements. See sections 

182(b)(2) and 184(b)(2) of the CAA. 

Section 182(f) of the CAA specifically 

requires RACT for major stationary 

sources of NOX.2 The cement kilns in 

Maryland are major stationary sources 

of NOX and are therefore required to be 

evaluated for NOX RACT under the 2008 

ozone NAAQS. 

B. Repeal of NOX Budget Trading 

Program Requirements Under the NOX

SIP Call 

In October 1998, EPA finalized the 

‘‘Finding of Significant Contribution 

and Rulemaking for Certain States in the 

Ozone Transport Assessment Group 

Region for Purposes of Reducing 

Regional Transport of Ozone’’— 

commonly called the NOx SIP Call. The 

NOx SIP Call was designed to mitigate 

significant transport of NOX, one of the 

precursors of ozone. The NOX Budget 

Trading Program was established under 

the NOX SIP Call to allow electric 

generating units (EGUs) greater than 25 

megawatts and industrial non-electric 

generating units (or non-EGUs) with a 

rated heat input greater than 250 million 

British thermal units per hour (MMBtu/ 

hr) (referred to as large non-EGUs) to 

participate in a regional NOX cap and 

trade program.3 The NOX SIP call also 


asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS