82_FR_52475 82 FR 52258 - Group Registration of Unpublished Works: Extension of Comment Period

82 FR 52258 - Group Registration of Unpublished Works: Extension of Comment Period

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 217 (November 13, 2017)

Page Range52258-52259
FR Document2017-24511

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to its October 12, 2017 notice of proposed rulemaking, regarding the creation of a new group registration option for unpublished works to replace the existing ``unpublished collections'' registration option.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document, the Office also clarifies that the new group registration option is not intended for group registration of unpublished photographs; that is the subject of a separate proposed rulemaking, which would permit submission of up to 750 photographs on one application.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 217 (Monday, November 13, 2017) 
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 217 (Monday, November 13, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52258-52259]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24511]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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Group Registration of Unpublished Works: Extension of Comment 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registration option for unpublished works to replace the existing 
``unpublished collections'' registration option.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intended for group registration of unpublished photographs; that is the 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 [email protected], [email protected], and [email protected].

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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    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

[[Page 52259]]

with the public comments received in that rulemaking. The Office fully 
intends to finalize that rule before finalizing the GRUW final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    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

52258 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 217 / Monday, November 13, 2017 / Proposed Rules § 514.12 When does a notice of late § 514.17 How are fingerprint processing ADDRESSES: For reasons of government submission and/or a proposed late fee fees collected by the Commission? efficiency, the Copyright Office is using become a final order of the Commission (a) Fees for processing fingerprint the regulations.gov system for the and final agency action? cards will be billed monthly to each submission and posting of public If the recipient fails to appeal under Tribe for cards processed during the comments in this proceeding. All subchapter H of this chapter, the notice prior month. Tribes shall pay the comments are therefore to be submitted and the proposed late fee shall become amount billed within forty-five (45) electronically through regulations.gov. a final order of the Commission and days of the date of the bill. Specific instructions for submitting final agency action. (b) The Chair may suspend fingerprint comments are available on the § 514.13 How are late submission fees card processing for a tribe that has a bill Copyright Office Web site at https:// paid, and can interest be assessed? remaining unpaid for more than forty- www.copyright.gov/rulemaking/ (a) Late fees assessed under this part five (45) days. groupunpublished/. If electronic shall be paid by the person or entity (c) Remittances and other submission of comments is not feasible assessed and shall not be treated as an communications about fingerprint due to lack of access to a computer and/ operating expense of the operation. processing fees shall be sent to the or the Internet, please contact the Office (b) The Commission shall transfer the Commission by the methods provided for special instructions using the contact late fee paid under this subchapter to for in the rates of fees notice published information below. the U.S. Treasury. in the Federal Register. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (c) Interest shall be assessed at rates Dated: November 2, 2017. Robert J. Kasunic, Associate Register of established from time to time by the Jonodev O. Chaudhuri, Copyrights and Director of Registration Secretary of the Treasury on amounts Policy and Practice; Erik Bertin, Deputy Chairman. remaining unpaid after their due date. Director of Registration Policy and Kathryn Isom-Clause, § 514.14 What happens if the fees imposed Practice; or Regan A. Smith, Deputy Vice Chair. exceed the statutory maximum or if the General Counsel, by telephone at 202– E. Sequoyah Simermeyer, 707–8040 or by email at rkas@loc.gov, Commission does not expend the full amount of fees collected in a fiscal year? Associate Commissioner. ebertin@loc.gov, and resm@loc.gov. [FR Doc. 2017–24363 Filed 11–9–17; 8:45 am] (a) The total amount of all fees SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As imposed during any fiscal year shall not BILLING CODE 7565–01–P detailed in an October 12, 2017 notice exceed the statutory maximum imposed of proposed rulemaking (‘‘NPRM’’),1 the by Congress. The Commission shall U.S. Copyright Office is proposing to credit pro-rata any fees collected in LIBRARY OF CONGRESS create a new group registration option excess of this amount against amounts for a limited number of unpublished otherwise due. Copyright Office works (‘‘GRUW’’). Under that proposal, (b) To the extent that revenue derived applicants will be allowed to include up from fees imposed under the schedule 37 CFR Parts 201 and 202 to five works in each submission. This established under this paragraph are not new group registration option will [Docket No. 2017–15] expended or committed at the close of replace the current ‘‘unpublished any fiscal year, such funds shall remain Group Registration of Unpublished collections’’ option. available until expended to defray the Works: Extension of Comment Period After publication of the NPRM, there costs of operations of the Commission. was some understandable confusion AGENCY: U.S. Copyright Office, Library about the scope of the NPRM among the § 514.15 May tribes submit fingerprint of Congress. cards to the NIGC for processing? photographer community, who feared ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; that the GRUW option would limit them Tribes may submit fingerprint cards to extension of comment period. to submitting five unpublished the Commission for processing by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the photographs per application. To clarify, SUMMARY: The U.S. Copyright Office is the Office does not intend to impose Commission may charge a fee to process extending the deadlines for the fingerprint cards on behalf of the tribes. such a limit on photographers. On submission of written comments in December 1, 2016, the Office issued a § 514.16 How does the Commission adopt response to its October 12, 2017 notice separate notice of proposed rulemaking the fingerprint processing fee? of proposed rulemaking, regarding the amending the existing option for group (a) The Commission shall review creation of a new group registration registration of photographs that would annually the costs involved in option for unpublished works to replace create an electronic application for processing fingerprint cards and, by a the existing ‘‘unpublished collections’’ group registration for published vote of not less than two of its members, registration option. In this document, photographs, and also create an shall adopt the fingerprint processing the Office also clarifies that the new analogous application for group fee no later than November 1st of each group registration option is not intended registration for unpublished year. for group registration of unpublished photographs.2 Under that separate (b) The Commission shall publish the photographs; that is the subject of a proposed rule, photographers would be fingerprint processing fee in a notice in separate proposed rulemaking, which asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS permitted to include up to 750 the Federal Register. would permit submission of up to 750 photographs on each such application, (c) The fingerprint processing fee photographs on one application. rather than the five works proposed shall be based on fees charged by the DATES: The comment period for the under the new GRUW option. See Federal Bureau of Investigation and notice of proposed rulemaking generally 81 FR at 86649. The Office is costs incurred by the Commission. published on October 12, 2017 (82 FR working on the group registration of Commission costs include Commission 47415), is extended. Comments must be photographs final rule in conjunction personnel, supplies, equipment costs, made in writing and must be received and postage to submit the results to the in the U.S. Copyright Office no later 1 82 FR 47415 (Oct. 12, 2017). requesting tribe. than November 17, 2017. 2 81 FR 86643 (Dec. 1, 2016). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:51 Nov 09, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13NOP1.SGM 13NOP1

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 217 / Monday, November 13, 2017 / Proposed Rules 52259 with the public comments received in confidential business information (CBI) I. Background that rulemaking. The Office fully or other information whose disclosure is A. NOX RACT for Cement Kilns intends to finalize that rule before restricted by statute. Multimedia finalizing the GRUW final rule. submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be On March 12, 2008, EPA strengthened Dated: November 7, 2017. accompanied by a written comment. the NAAQS for ground level ozone, The written comment is considered the setting both the primary and secondary Sarang V. Damle, official comment and should include standards to a level of 0.075 parts per General Counsel and Associate Register of Copyrights. discussion of all points you wish to million (ppm), or 75 parts per billion make. EPA will generally not consider (ppb), averaged over an 8-hour period [FR Doc. 2017–24511 Filed 11–9–17; 8:45 am] (hereafter referred to as the 2008 ozone BILLING CODE 1410–30–P comments or comment contents located NAAQS). On May 21, 2012 (77 FR outside of the primary submission (i.e. 30088), EPA designated 45 areas as on the web, cloud, or other file sharing nonattainment under the 2008 ozone ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION system). For additional submission NAAQS, including three areas or AGENCY methods, please contact the person portions of areas in Maryland. Under identified in the FOR FURTHER section 182 of the CAA, states must 40 CFR Part 52 INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the review and revise the RACT [EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0309; FRL–9968–49– full EPA public comment policy, requirements in their SIP to ensure that Region 3] information about CBI or multimedia these requirements would still be submissions, and general guidance on considered RACT under the new, more Approval and Promulgation of Air making effective comments, please visit stringent NAAQS. Major stationary Quality Implementation Plans; http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ sources of ozone precursor emissions Maryland; Reasonably Available commenting-epa-dockets. located in ozone nonattainment areas Control Technology for Cement Kilns, classified as moderate and above (and Revisions to Portland Cement FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: sources located in the Ozone Transport Manufacturing Plant and Natural Gas Marilyn Powers, (215) 814–2308, or by Region (OTR), of which the entire state Compression Station Regulations, and email at powers.marilyn@epa.gov. of Maryland is a part) are subject to Removal of Nitrogen Oxides Reduction RACT requirements. See sections SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On and Trading Program Replaced by 182(b)(2) and 184(b)(2) of the CAA. November 24, 2015, the State of Other Programs and Regulations Section 182(f) of the CAA specifically Maryland, through the Maryland AGENCY: Environmental Protection Department of the Environment (MDE), requires RACT for major stationary Agency (EPA). submitted a SIP revision for approval sources of NOX.2 The cement kilns in ACTION: Proposed rule. into the Maryland SIP. The submission Maryland are major stationary sources is comprised of three State actions of NOX and are therefore required to be SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection evaluated for NOX RACT under the 2008 pertaining to amendments to COMAR Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a ozone NAAQS. 26.11.01.10, COMAR 26.11.09.08, state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maryland. COMAR 26.11.29, and COMAR B. Repeal of NOX Budget Trading This revision pertains to reasonably 26.11.30. The amendments address the Program Requirements Under the NOX available control technology (RACT) for requirement for NOX RACT for cement SIP Call cement kilns, revisions to and kilns for the 2008 ozone national In October 1998, EPA finalized the recodification of certain provisions for ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), ‘‘Finding of Significant Contribution Portland cement manufacturing plants the removal of COMAR provisions and Rulemaking for Certain States in the (cement plants) and internal combustion related to the obsolete NOX Budget Ozone Transport Assessment Group (IC) engines at natural gas compression Trading Program under the NOX SIP Region for Purposes of Reducing stations, and removal of the obsolete Call 1 (that has been replaced by other Regional Transport of Ozone’’— Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Reduction and trading programs), the consolidation of commonly called the NOx SIP Call. The Trading Program that has been replaced all existing and new requirements for NOx SIP Call was designed to mitigate by other trading programs or addressed cement kilns into one COMAR significant transport of NOX, one of the in other regulations. This action is being regulation, the consolidation of all precursors of ozone. The NOX Budget taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). existing and new requirements for IC Trading Program was established under DATES: Written comments must be engines into one COMAR regulation, the the NOX SIP Call to allow electric received on or before December 13, addition of new particulate matter (PM) generating units (EGUs) greater than 25 2017. monitoring requirements, and the megawatts and industrial non-electric ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, addition of an alternate monitoring generating units (or non-EGUs) with a identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– option for visible emissions at cement rated heat input greater than 250 million OAR–2016–0309 at http:// kilns. On February 17, 2017, MDE British thermal units per hour (MMBtu/ www.regulations.gov, or via email to provided a letter to EPA clarifying the hr) (referred to as large non-EGUs) to stahl.cynthia@epa.gov. For comments NOX RACT limits and withdrawing participate in a regional NOX cap and asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the from EPA’s consideration a provision of trade program.3 The NOX SIP call also online instructions for submitting its regulation for natural gas 2 A major stationary source of NO in a marginal X comments. Once submitted, comments compression stations. or moderate ozone nonattainment area, or in an cannot be edited or removed from ozone transport region, is a source that emits or has Regulations.gov. For either manner of 1 See Finding of Significant Contribution and the potential to emit 100 tons of NOX. 3 In the cap and trade program established under submission, EPA may publish any Rulemaking for Certain States in the Ozone the NOX SIP Call, a regional ozone season NOX cap, comment received to its public docket. Transport Assessment Group Region for Purposes of or budget, was established, which was allocated as Do not submit electronically any Reducing Regional Transport of Ozone, 63 FR NOX allowances to subject sources in the affected information you consider to be 57371 (October 27, 1998). Continued VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:51 Nov 09, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13NOP1.SGM 13NOP1


Document Created: 2017-11-10 01:18:18
Document Modified: 2017-11-10 01:18:18
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionProposed Rules
ActionNotice of proposed rulemaking; extension of comment period.
DatesThe 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.
ContactRobert 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 [email protected], [email protected], and [email protected]
FR Citation82 FR 52258 
CFR Citation37 CFR 201
37 CFR 202
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR