81 FR 63437 - Special Local Regulation; San Diego Sharkfest Swim; San Diego Bay, CA
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Coast Guard Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 179 (September 15, 2016)
Coast Guard
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 179 (September 15, 2016)
| Page Range | 63437-63440 | |
| FR Document | 2016-22227 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 179 (Thursday, September 15, 2016)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 63437-63440] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-22227] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. USCG-2016-0777] RIN 1625-AA08 Special Local Regulation; San Diego Sharkfest Swim; San Diego Bay, CA AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is temporarily changing the enforcement date and the location of the special local regulation for the annual San Diego Sharkfest Swim event held on the navigable waters of San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA. The change of enforcement date and the location for the special local regulation is necessary to provide for the safety of life on navigable waters during the event. This action will restrict vessel traffic in the waters of the San Diego Bay, California, from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. on October 2, 2016, from Fifth Avenue Landing to Tidelands Park, Coronado, CA. We invite your comments on this proposed rulemaking. [[Page 63438]] DATES: Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before September 22, 2016. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by docket number USCG- 2016-0777 using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Robert Cole, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, Coast Guard; telephone 619-278-7656, email [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Table of Abbreviations DHS Department of Homeland Security FR Federal Register NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking TFR Temporary Final Rule LNM Local Notice to Mariners COTP Captain of the Port SMIB Safety Marine Information Broadcast II. Background, Purpose and Legal Basis The San Diego Sharkfest Swim race is an annual recurring event listed in Table 1, Item 10 of 33 CFR 100.1101, Southern California Annual Marine Events for the San Diego COTP Zone. Special local regulations exist for the marine event to allow for special use of the San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA for this event. 33 U.S.C. 1233, authorizes the Coast Guard to establish and define special local regulations to promote the safety of life on the navigable waters during regattas or marine parades. III. Discussion of Proposed Rule The San Diego Sharkfest Swim race is an annual event normally held on a weekend day in September or October on the waters of San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA. 33 CFR 100.1101 lists the annual marine events and special local regulations in Southern California within the San Diego COTP Zone. The enforcement date and regulated location for this marine event are listed in Table 1, Item 10 of Section 100.1101. The date listed in the Table indicates that the marine event will occur on a Saturday in September or October, on the waters of San Diego Bay, California, from Seaport Village to Coronado Ferry Landing. However, this proposed temporary rule will change the event date to Sunday, October 2, 2016, and the location from Fifth Avenue Landing to Tidelands Park, to reflect the actual date and location of the event. The regulations in 33 CFR 100.1101 will be temporarily suspended for Table 1, Item 10 of that section and a temporary regulation will be inserted as Table 1, Item 19 of that section in order to reflect that the special local regulation will be effective and enforced from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. on October 2, 2016. This change is needed to accommodate the sponsor's event plan and ensure that adequate regulations are in place to protect the safety of vessels and individuals that may be present in the regulated area. No other portion of Table 1 of Sec. 100.1101 or other provisions in Sec. 100.1101 shall be affected by this regulation. The special local regulations are necessary to provide for the safety of the crew, spectators, participants, and other vessels and users of the San Diego Bay waterway. Persons and vessels will be prohibited from anchoring, blocking, loitering, or impeding within this regulated waterway unless authorized by the COTP, or his designated representative, during the proposed times. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will publish information on the event in the weekly LNM. The proposed regulatory text appears at the end of this document. IV. Regulatory Analysis We developed this proposed rule after considering numerous statutes and Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders and we discuss First Amendment rights of protestors. A. Regulatory Planning and Review Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This NPRM has not been designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order 12866. Accordingly, the NPRM has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. This regulatory action determination is based on the size, location, duration, and time-of-day of the special local regulation. Optional waterway routes exist to allow boaters to travel around the marine event area, without impacting the race, once the last swimmer has cleared the middle of the channel. Moreover, the Coast Guard would publish a Local Notice to Mariners about the zone. B. Impact on Small Entities The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended, requires federal agencies to consider the potential impact of regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in the impacted portion of the San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA, from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. on October 2, 2016. This proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: Traffic will be allowed to pass around the regulated area once the last swimmer has cleared the middle of the channel with the permission of the COTP, or his designated representative, and the special local regulation is limited in size and duration. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will publish event information on the Internet in the weekly LNM marine information report, as well as provide a SMIB via marine radio during the event. If you think that your business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment (see ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree this rule would economically affect it. Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this proposed rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. [[Page 63439]] C. Collection of Information This proposed rule calls for no new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Government A rule has implications for federalism under E.O. 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this proposed rule under that Order and determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in E.O. 13132. Also, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it would not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this proposed rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above. E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this proposed rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this proposed rule elsewhere in this preamble. F. Environment We have analyzed this proposed rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves establishment of marine event special local regulations on the navigable waters of the San Diego Bay. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2-1 of the Commandant Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination will be available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. G. Protest Activities The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels. V. Public Participation and Request for Comments We view public participation as essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate instructions. We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70 FR 15086). Documents mentioned in this NPRM as being available in the docket, and all public comments, will be in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally, if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will be notified when comments are posted or a final rule is published. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Waterways. .For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: PART 100--SAFETY OF LIFE ON NAVIGABLE WATERS 0 1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233. 0 2. In Sec. 100.1101, in Table 1 to Sec. 100.1101, suspend item ``10'' and add temporary item ``19'' to read as follows: Sec. 100.1101 Southern California Annual Marine Events for the San Diego Captain of the Port Zone. * * * * * (b) * * * (5) * * * Table 1 to Sec. 100.1101 [* * *] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * * * * * * * ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 19. San Diego Sharkfest Swim ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sponsor............................... Enviro-Sports Productions, Inc. Event Description..................... Swim Race. Date.................................. October 2, 2016. Location.............................. San Diego Bay, CA. [[Page 63440]] Regulated Area........................ The waters of San Diego Bay, CA from Fifth Avenue Landing to Tidelands Park, Coronado, CA. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dated: September 1, 2016. J.R. Buzzella, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego. [FR Doc. 2016-22227 Filed 9-14-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-04-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 179 / Thursday, September 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 63437
b. How would this modification affect record of this proceeding, including, to and on the envelope, and mail your
the costs the Rule imposes on the extent practicable, on the public comment to the following address:
businesses, including small businesses? Commission Web site, at https:// Federal Trade Commission, Office of the
c. How would this modification affect www.ftc.gov/policy/public-comments. Secretary, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue
the benefits to consumers? As a matter of discretion, the NW., Suite CC–5610 (Annex H),
2. Should the Rule be modified to Commission tries to remove individuals’ Washington, DC 20580, or deliver your
delete any of the existing examples or home contact information from comment to the following address:
include additional examples to illustrate comments before placing them on the Federal Trade Commission, Office of the
proper methods for disposing of Commission Web site. Because your Secretary, Constitution Center, 400 7th
consumer information? Why or why comment will be made public, you are Street SW., 5th Floor, Suite 5610
not? If so, what examples should be solely responsible for making sure that (Annex H), Washington, DC 20024.
included and what sources should they your comment does not include any Visit the Commission Web site at
be drawn from? sensitive personal information, such as https://www.ftc.gov to read this
a. What evidence supports such a a Social Security number, date of birth, document and the news release
modification? driver’s license number or other state describing it. The FTC Act and other
b. How would this modification affect identification number or foreign country laws that the Commission administers
the costs the Rule imposes on equivalent, passport number, financial permit the collection of public
businesses, including small businesses? account number, or payment card comments to consider and use in this
c. How would this modification affect number. You are also solely responsible proceeding as appropriate. The
the benefits to consumers? for making sure that your comment does Commission will consider all timely
3. Should the Rule be modified to not include any sensitive health and responsive public comments that it
reference or incorporate any other information, such as medical records or receives on or before November 21,
information destruction standards or other individually identifiable health 2016. For information on the
frameworks? If so, which standards information. Commission’s privacy policy, including
should be incorporated or referenced In addition, do not include any routine uses permitted by the Privacy
and how should they be referenced or ‘‘[t]rade secret or any commercial or Act, see https://www.ftc.gov/site-
incorporated by the Rule? Should such financial information which is . . . information/privacy-policy.
standards be considered safe harbors for privileged or confidential,’’ as discussed
in Section 6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. By direction of the Commission.
compliance with the Rule?
a. What evidence supports such a 46(f), and FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR Donald S. Clark,
modification? 4.10(a)(2). In particular, do not include Secretary.
b. How would this modification affect competitively sensitive information [FR Doc. 2016–22198 Filed 9–14–16; 8:45 am]
the costs the Rule imposes on such as costs, sales statistics, BILLING CODE 6750–01–P
businesses, including small businesses? inventories, formulas, patterns, devices,
c. How would this modification affect manufacturing processes, or customer
the benefits to consumers? names.
4. Under the current Disposal Rule, If you want the Commission to give DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
‘‘Consumer information does not your comment confidential treatment, SECURITY
include information that does not you must file it in paper form, with a
identify individuals, such as aggregate request for confidential treatment, and Coast Guard
information or blind data.’’ Should the you must follow the procedure
Rule be modified to change the explained in FTC Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 33 CFR Part 100
definition of ‘‘consumer information’’? 4.9(c). In particular, the written request
[Docket No. USCG–2016–0777]
Should the definition of ‘‘consumer for confidential treatment that
information’’ include information that accompanies the comment must include
RIN 1625–AA08
can be reasonably linked to an the factual and legal basis for the
individual in light of changes in request, and must identify the specific Special Local Regulation; San Diego
relevant technology or market practices? portions of the comments to be withheld Sharkfest Swim; San Diego Bay, CA
Should the Rule be modified to define from the public record. Your comment
‘‘aggregate information’’ or ‘‘blind will be kept confidential only if the FTC AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
data’’? General Counsel grants your request in ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
a. What evidence supports such a accordance with the law and the public
modification? interest. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
b. How would this modification affect Postal mail addressed to the temporarily changing the enforcement
the costs the Rule imposes on Commission is subject to delay due to date and the location of the special local
businesses, including small businesses? heightened security screening. As a regulation for the annual San Diego
c. How would this modification affect result, we encourage you to submit your Sharkfest Swim event held on the
the benefits to consumers? comment online. To make sure that the navigable waters of San Diego Bay, San
Commission considers your online Diego, CA. The change of enforcement
IV. Instructions for Submitting comment, you must file it at https:// date and the location for the special
Comments ftcpublic.commentworks.com/ftc/ local regulation is necessary to provide
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
You can file a comment online or on disposalrule by following the for the safety of life on navigable waters
paper. For the Commission to consider instructions on the web-based form. If during the event. This action will
your comment, we must receive it on or this document appears at http:// restrict vessel traffic in the waters of the
before November 21, 2016. Write wwww.regulations.gov, you also may file San Diego Bay, California, from 9:00
‘‘Disposal Rule, 16 CFR part 682, Project a comment through that Web site. a.m. to 10:00 a.m. on October 2, 2016,
No. 165410’’ on the comment. Your If you file your comment on paper, from Fifth Avenue Landing to Tidelands
comment, including your name and write ‘‘Disposal Rule, 16 CFR part 682, Park, Coronado, CA. We invite your
your state, will be placed on the public Project No. 165410’’ on your comment comments on this proposed rulemaking.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:41 Sep 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_63616/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 179 / Thursday, September 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules 63439
C. Collection of Information F. Environment We encourage you to submit
We have analyzed this proposed rule comments through the Federal
This proposed rule calls for no new eRulemaking Portal at http://
collection of information under the under Department of Homeland
Security Management Directive 023–01 www.regulations.gov. If your material
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 cannot be submitted using http://
U.S.C. 3501–3520). and Commandant Instruction
M16475.lD, which guide the Coast www.regulations.gov, contact the person
D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Guard in complying with the National in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
Government Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 CONTACT section of this document for
U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have alternate instructions.
A rule has implications for federalism determined that this action is one of a We accept anonymous comments. All
under E.O. 13132, Federalism, if it has category of actions that do not comments received will be posted
a substantial direct effect on the States, individually or cumulatively have a without change to http://
on the relationship between the national significant effect on the human www.regulations.gov and will include
government and the States, or on the environment. This proposed rule any personal information you have
distribution of power and involves establishment of marine event provided. For more about privacy and
responsibilities among the various special local regulations on the the docket, you may review a Privacy
levels of government. We have analyzed navigable waters of the San Diego Bay. Act notice regarding the Federal Docket
this proposed rule under that Order and It is categorically excluded from further Management System in the March 24,
determined that it is consistent with the review under paragraph 34(h) of Figure 2005, issue of the Federal Register (70
fundamental federalism principles and 2–1 of the Commandant Instruction. An FR 15086).
preemption requirements described in environmental analysis checklist Documents mentioned in this NPRM
E.O. 13132. supporting this determination and a as being available in the docket, and all
Categorical Exclusion Determination public comments, will be in our online
Also, this proposed rule does not have
will be available in the docket where docket at http://www.regulations.gov
tribal implications under Executive
indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek and can be viewed by following that
Order 13175, Consultation and
any comments or information that may Web site’s instructions. Additionally, if
Coordination with Indian Tribal
lead to the discovery of a significant you go to the online docket and sign up
Governments, because it would not have
environmental impact from this for email alerts, you will be notified
a substantial direct effect on one or
proposed rule. when comments are posted or a final
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
rule is published.
between the Federal Government and G. Protest Activities
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100
power and responsibilities between the The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters. Marine safety, Navigation (water),
Federal Government and Indian tribes. Reporting and recordkeeping
If you believe this proposed rule has Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER requirements, Waterways.
implications for federalism or Indian
INFORMATION CONTACT section to For the reasons discussed in the
tribes, please contact the person listed
coordinate protest activities so that your preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
message can be received without amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:
CONTACT section above.
jeopardizing the safety or security of
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act people, places or vessels. PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON
NAVIGABLE WATERS
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act V. Public Participation and Request for
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Comments ■ 1. The authority citation for part 100
Federal agencies to assess the effects of We view public participation as continues to read as follows:
their discretionary regulatory actions. In essential to effective rulemaking, and Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233.
particular, the Act addresses actions will consider all comments and material ■ 2. In § 100.1101, in Table 1 to
that may result in the expenditure by a received during the comment period. § 100.1101, suspend item ‘‘10’’ and add
State, local, or tribal government, in the Your comment can help shape the temporary item ‘‘19’’ to read as follows:
aggregate, or by the private sector of outcome of this rulemaking. If you
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or submit a comment, please include the § 100.1101 Southern California Annual
more in any one year. Though this docket number for this rulemaking, Marine Events for the San Diego Captain of
proposed rule will not result in such an indicate the specific section of this the Port Zone.
expenditure, we do discuss the effects of document to which each comment * * * * *
this proposed rule elsewhere in this applies, and provide a reason for each (b) * * *
preamble. suggestion or recommendation. (5) * * *
TABLE 1 TO § 100.1101
[* * *]
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
* * * * * * *
19. San Diego Sharkfest Swim
Sponsor ............................................................................................... Enviro-Sports Productions, Inc.
Event Description ................................................................................ Swim Race.
Date ..................................................................................................... October 2, 2016.
Location ............................................................................................... San Diego Bay, CA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:41 Sep 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_63616/page/3.svg)
![63440 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 179 / Thursday, September 15, 2016 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1 TO § 100.1101—Continued
[* * *]
Regulated Area ................................................................................... The waters of San Diego Bay, CA from Fifth Avenue Landing to Tidelands
Park, Coronado, CA.
Dated: September 1, 2016. Specific instructions for submitting information is referred to herein as
J.R. Buzzella, comments are available on the ‘‘extraneous PII.’’
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Copyright Office Web site at http:// As explained below, this proposed
Port San Diego. copyright.gov/rulemaking/pii/. If rule would treat these two categories of
[FR Doc. 2016–22227 Filed 9–14–16; 8:45 am] electronic submission of comments is PII differently.
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P not feasible due to lack of access to a With respect to requested PII—
computer and/or the internet, please information that the Copyright Office
contact the Office using the contact purposely collects as part of
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS information below for special registration—the Copyright Act imposes
instructions. certain obligations on the Office to
U.S. Copyright Office FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
preserve that information as part of the
Cindy Abramson, Assistant General public record. The Act requires the
37 CFR Parts 201 and 204 Counsel, by email at ciab@loc.gov, or Register to ensure that ‘‘records of . . .
Abioye Mosheim, Attorney Advisor, by registrations . . . are maintained, and
[Docket No. 2016–7]
email at abmo@loc.gov. Each can be that indexes of such records are
Removal of Personally Identifiable contacted by telephone by calling 202– prepared,’’ and that ‘‘[s]uch records and
Information From Registration Records 707–8350. indexes . . . be open to public
inspection,’’ thus creating a public
AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: record. 17 U.S.C. 705(a), 705(b). The
of Congress. I. Background public record of copyright registrations
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. serves several important functions.
This proposed rule would create Chief among these is that the record
SUMMARY: The United States Copyright procedures to request removal of certain provides essential facts relevant to the
Office (‘‘Office’’) is proposing new rules ‘‘personally identifiable information’’ copyright claim and information that a
related to personally identifiable (‘‘PII’’) from the Office’s registration potential user of a copyrighted work can
information (‘‘PII’’) that may be found in records. PII is generally considered to be use to locate the work’s owner. The
the Office’s registration records. First, any information that has the potential to registration record can also be a
the proposed rule will allow an author, identify a specific individual. The valuable aid for determining the term of
claimant of record, or the authorized proposed rule concerns two distinct copyright protection, by providing
agent of the author or claimant of categories of PII as discussed below. information such as the author’s date of
record, to request the removal of certain The Office requests and receives death, the publication date for the work,
PII that is requested by the Office and certain types of PII during the or the year of creation of the work.
collected on a registration application, registration process (e.g., dates of birth, A separate provision of the Act
such as home addresses or personal addresses, telephone numbers, fax requires the Register of Copyrights to
phone numbers, from the Office’s numbers, and email addresses). The ‘‘compile and publish . . . catalogs of
internet-accessible public catalog, while collection of some of that information is all copyright registrations.’’ 17 U.S.C.
retaining it in the Office’s offline mandated by statute or regulation; other 707(a). For most of the Office’s history,
records as required by law. Second, the information is optional.1 This this catalog was maintained in paper
proposed rule will codify an existing information is referred to herein as form as the Catalog of Copyright Entries
practice regarding extraneous PII that ‘‘requested PII.’’ (‘‘CCE’’). Starting in 1994, however, the
applicants erroneously include on The Office does not request, but Office began providing the public with
registration applications even though sometimes receives, additional PII when access to a computerized database of
the Office has not requested it, such as applicants choose to include post-1977 copyright registration and
driver’s license numbers, social security information such as driver’s license recordation catalog entries via the
numbers, banking information, and numbers, social security numbers, internet. Then, in 1996, the Office
credit card information. Under the banking information, and credit card decided to end publication of the
proposed rule, the Office would, upon information on their registration printed CCE and publish copyright
request, remove such extraneous PII applications. Such information is registration information solely via an
both from the Office’s internet- extraneous and unnecessary for the online public catalog. See 61 FR 52465
accessible public catalog and its offline processing and maintenance of (Oct. 7, 1996).
records. copyright registration records. This Initially, the PII revealed in the online
DATES: Written comments must be public catalog was limited to names
received no later than 11:59 p.m. 1 The Copyright Act requires the Office to gather and, when volunteered, the author’s
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Eastern Time on October 17, 2016. the name and address of the copyright claimant; the year of birth. By 2007, however, with
name of the author(s), for works that are not
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government
anonymous or pseudonymous; the nationality or
the advent of the Copyright Office’s
efficiency, the Copyright Office is using domicile of the author(s); and the date(s) of death online registration system (‘‘eCO’’), a
the regulations.gov system for the for deceased author(s). See 17 U.S.C. 409. The Act broader range of PII was pushed from
submission and posting of public also gives the Register of Copyrights the authority the Office’s registration records into the
to require applicants to supply any other
comments in this proceeding. All information ‘‘bearing upon the preparation or
online public catalog, including the
comments are therefore to be submitted identification of the work or the existence, postal address of the claimant, and the
electronically through regulations.gov. ownership, or duration of copyright.’’ Id. name, postal address, email address and
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:41 Sep 14, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15SEP1.SGM 15SEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_63616/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-09 13:18:28
Document Modified: 2018-02-09 13:18:28
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Notice of proposed rulemaking. | |
| Dates | Comments and related material must be received by the Coast Guard on or before September 22, 2016. | |
| Contact | If you have questions on this rule, call or email Lieutenant Robert Cole, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, Coast Guard; telephone 619-278-7656, email [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 63437 | |
| RIN Number | 1625-AA08 | |
| CFR Associated | Marine Safety; Navigation (water); Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Waterways |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR