United States Government Inter-Agency Anti-Counterfeiting Working Group: Request for Public Comments Regarding Strategy to Eliminate Counterfeit Products from the United States Government Supply Chain, 48905-48907 [2011-20204]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
however, did not collect poverty
population data for the 50 states, the
District of Columbia or Puerto Rico. The
Bureau of the Census has other data for
making U.S. poverty population
determinations in those areas.
LSC management has proposed to the
LSC Board of Directors (‘‘Board’’) that
LSC request an update to the statutory
mandate in light of the elimination of
poverty data from almost all of the 2010
census. LSC management has proposed
that LSC make recommendations to the
President and to Congress that: (1) The
determination of the number of
individuals in poverty in each
geographic area be made by the Bureau
of the Census, without any reference to
the decennial census as the basis for
that determination; (2) funding be
reallocated among geographic areas
every three years based on updated
poverty population determinations by
the Bureau of the Census; and (3) the
first reallocation be phased in over two
years, in Fiscal Year 2013 and Fiscal
Year 2014.
LSC management presented this
proposal to the Board’s Operations and
Regulations Committee (‘‘Committee’’)
on July 20, 2011, which also received a
presentation of recommendations from
the National Legal Aid and Defender
Association (‘‘NLADA’’). The
Committee then presented
management’s proposal to the full board
on July 21, 2011. The Board adopted the
recommendation of management and
the Committee that LSC publish
management’s proposal in the Federal
Register for comment. The committee
will meet to consider all comments
received and make a recommendation to
the Board for a final decision by early
September of 2011.
LSC management’s proposal
‘‘Management Recommendation on
Funding Reallocation Issues’’ (July 13,
2011) and NLADA’s recommendations
can both be found at: https://
www.lsc.gov/about/
mattersforcomment.php.
LSC invites public comment on this
issue. Interested parties may submit
comments to LSC within 30 days.
Dated: August 3, 2011.
Victor M. Fortuno,
Vice President & General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2011–20162 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7050–01–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Aug 08, 2011
Jkt 223001
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET
United States Government InterAgency Anti-Counterfeiting Working
Group: Request for Public Comments
Regarding Strategy to Eliminate
Counterfeit Products from the United
States Government Supply Chain
Executive Office of the
President, Office of Management and
Budget.
ACTION: Request for written submissions
from the public.
AGENCY:
The Federal Government is
currently undertaking a significant effort
to eliminate counterfeit products from
the U.S. Government supply chain. In
June 2010, Vice President Biden and
White House Intellectual Property
Enforcement Coordinator, Victoria
Espinel, announced the Joint Strategic
Plan on Intellectual Property
Enforcement, laying out a coordinated
government-wide approach to
strengthening intellectual property
enforcement and directing the
establishment of an inter-agency
working group. Recent reports issued by
the Department of Commerce and the
Government Accountability Office have
found that counterfeits have infiltrated
many sectors of the U.S. Government
supply chain and have the potential to
cause serious disruptions in national
defense, critical infrastructure and other
vital applications. This working group
will develop a framework for reducing
vulnerability to counterfeits that is
flexible enough to accommodate the
wide variety of missions across Federal
agencies. This cross-functional working
group will identify any gaps in legal
authority, regulation, policy and
guidance that undermine the security of
U.S. Government supply chain from
counterfeit parts. The working group’s
examination will include reviewing
current industry standards, the ability of
prime contractors and their suppliers to
authenticate or trace at-risk items to the
original manufacturer, government
evaluation and detection capabilities
and limitations, and contractual
enforcement of authenticity.
DATES: Submissions must be received on
or before September 16, 2011 at 5 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Public comment should be
electronically submitted to https://
www.regulations.gov, docket number
OMB–2011–0003. The regulations.gov
Web site is a Federal E–Government
Web site that allows the public to find,
review and submit comments on
documents that agencies have published
in the Federal Register and that are
open for comment. If you are unable to
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00117
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48905
provide submissions to https://
www.regulations.gov, please contact
James Schuelke at (202) 395–1808 to
arrange for an alternate method of
transmission. Submissions filed via the
regulations.gov Web site will be
available to the public for review and
inspection. If you want to submit
confidential business information that
supports your comments, please contact
Michael Lewis at
intellectualproperty@omb.eop.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Lewis, Office of the Intellectual
Property Enforcement Coordinator, at
(202) 395–1808.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The core
members of the Working Group are the
Office of the Intellectual Property
Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) in the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) of the Executive Office of the
President; Department of Defense (DoD);
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA); and the
General Services Administration (GSA).
These core members, along with other
government components, have
partnered to identify areas of common
interest and compare progress and best
practices to ultimately eliminate
counterfeits in the government-wide
supply chains. The working group will
work to accomplish the following
objectives:
• Objective #1—Develop procedures
for program managers to identify items
at risk for counterfeiting or requiring
authentication of legitimacy. These
procedures will, to the greatest extent
practicable, utilize current industry
standards.
• Objective #2—Examine whether
additional administrative actions,
including regulatory actions, are needed
to require suppliers to take stronger
anti-counterfeiting measures.
• Objective #3—Examine when and
how product and package traceability,
reporting and marking processes can be
used by prime contractors, their
suppliers, Federal government
personnel and potentially other
customers to confirm production
authority by the original manufacturer
of at-risk items.
• Objective #4—Examine
government/industry evaluation
capabilities and determine whether
improvement is needed.
• Objective #5—Develop an anticounterfeiting training and outreach
strategy for the Federal workforce.
• Objective #6—Examine whether
additional measures are needed to
protect the rights and interests of the
United States, recoup costs and
prosecute offenders.
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
48906
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Notices
The purpose of the request for
comments and recommendations is to
solicit feedback and best practices from
industry, academia, research
laboratories, and other stakeholders on
issues related to identifying areas of
common interest and compare progress
and best practices to ultimately
eliminate counterfeits in Federal
Government supply chains. This request
for comments and for recommendations
is divided into six categories. Responses
to this request for comments may be
directed to any or all of the six
categories.
Request for Comments Categories
Category 1: General
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
The U.S. Government Inter-Agency
Anti-Counterfeiting Working group
seeks written comment submissions on
the following topics:
• Describe functional responsibilities,
procedures and programs specifically
designed to address prevention,
identification and control of suspect/
counterfeit items.
• Describe any procedures for the
disposal of items identified as suspect/
counterfeit items. Do these procedures
include segregation, evaluation of
safety/mission impact, extent of
condition, removal, destruction or
return to the vendor?
• Describe both internal and/or
external notification procedures used
when a suspect/counterfeit item is
discovered. Identify suspect/counterfeit
industry information exchanges to
which you report counterfeit items.
• Describe any testing and inspection
procedures used to authenticate a
procured item.
• Describe any rules or procedures
that can improve the use and
functionality of the GovernmentIndustry Data Exchange Program
(GIDEP).
• Recommend best practices for
identifying counterfeit products
entering the U.S. Government supply
chain and for curbing their entry into
that supply chain.
Category 2: Objective #1—Establish
procedures for program managers to
identify items at risk for counterfeiting
or requiring authentication of
legitimacy. These procedures will, to the
greatest extent practicable, utilize
current industry standards.
• Describe methodologies for
determining the functional criticality of
parts and whether critical parts have
unintentional or intentional
vulnerabilities that may subject them to
counterfeiting. For critical parts,
describe the consequences of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Aug 08, 2011
Jkt 223001
counterfeiting and the likelihood that
counterfeiting will occur.
• As the likelihood of the
counterfeiting of critical parts increases,
describe ways to establish more
stringent traceability requirements for
direct suppliers and their subcontractors
to assure and support evidence of part
authenticity.
• Describe processes for the
verification of direct suppliers’
trustworthiness for consistent delivery
of authentic and conforming parts that
meet specifications.
• Describe procedures for tracking
parts and materials received from
suppliers to the original manufacturer,
or other acceptable source, to
authenticate that they meet the
requirements of the customer’s
specifications.
• Describe procedures that you follow
to ensure that counterfeit parts are not
incorporated into products during the
manufacturing processes, including the
means of identifying suspect parts
during receiving inspection and
preventing their acceptance.
• Describe effective international and
industry standards used in anticounterfeiting risk management efforts.
Category 3: IPEC Objective #2—Examine
Whether Regulations Are Needed To
Require Suppliers To Take Stronger
Anti-Counterfeiting Measures
• Describe contractual requirements
used by customers to assure the
authenticity of the products upon
delivery. Describe the provisions of
these requirements, if any. Describe any
process or procedures used to flow
authenticity requirements down to
suppliers. Describe any conflicts
between requirements from different
customers.
• Are contract clauses that notify
suppliers that they are prohibited from
providing suspect/counterfeit items
effective?
• Describe any special quality
assurance provisions that may be
contained in anti-counterfeiting contract
clauses that require parties to confirm
compliance.
• Describe effective methods for
addressing counterfeit prevention
during the source selection process.
• Describe any risk factors used in
determining risk for counterfeit items/
commodity groups.
• Describe procedures for processing
potentially counterfeit items. Describe
any requirements imposed on suppliers
when potential counterfeit items are
identified.
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Category 4: IPEC Objective #3—Examine
When and How Product and Package
Traceability, Reporting and Marking
Processes Can Be Used by Prime
Contractors, Their Suppliers, Federal
Government Personnel and Potentially
Other Customers To Confirm Production
Authority by the Original Manufacturer
of At-Risk Items
• Describe procedures that require the
labeling, stamping or marking of
authentic parts and/or part packaging
prior to purchasing parts and material
for installation in products.
• Describe the use of part markings to
address the following:
(1) Identification of distributors and/
or suppliers who have a documentation
system, and receiving inspection system
that ensures the traceability of their
parts to a production or design
authority-approved source, and
(2) Methods of screening part
markings to identify unfamiliar
distributors and/or suppliers to
determine if the parts present a
potential risk of being unapproved by a
production or design authority.
• Describe procedures for establishing
product and packaging identification
and authenticity documentation
requirements for at-risk items and
applying these requirements to
suppliers to ensure traceability of
product authenticity throughout the
supply chain.
• Describe how the use of enhanced
product/package identification marking
methods (such as marking products/
packages with globally unique item
identifiers (UIIs) using international
standards, and then registering these
UIIs and their product/package pedigree
information in a database to enable
tracking them back to their originating
source as they transit the supply chain)
might help reduce or eliminate
counterfeits in the supply chain. Does
the use of these identification marking
methods impose a substantial burden on
manufacturers/suppliers? Identify the
types of incentives that would
encourage manufacturers/suppliers to
consistently use identification markings.
• Describe how the use of advanced
technology for ensuring the integrity of
products delivered in the supply chain
(including such techniques as digital
signatures, hologram tags, tamperresistant and tamper-evident packaging)
might help reduce or eliminate
counterfeits in the supply chain.
• Describe any techniques that may
be employed when product
authentication cannot be confirmed by
use of product and packaging
identification and authenticity
documentation requirements.
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 153 / Tuesday, August 9, 2011 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Category 5: IPEC Objective #4—Examine
Government/Industry Evaluation
Capabilities and Determine Whether
Improvement Is Needed.
• List physical inspection, nondestructive examination, and laboratory
testing equipment that your
organization owns and operates and that
is capable of authenticating a suspected
counterfeit part.
• Describe specific products that can
be inspected/tested using this
equipment and how the inspection/
testing technique(s) can be used to
distinguish counterfeit product from
authentic product.
• List any laboratory/testing
certifications or accreditations that your
facility(ies) maintains.
• List any governmental or industry
customers that employ your testing
facilities.
• Describe handling and storage
techniques that your facility employs to
prevent comingling, tampering and
unauthorized release of suspect
counterfeit items.
• How much capacity would your
facility be able to manage—how many
parts per day can you handle? Can your
test facility handle classified
information?
Category 6: IPEC Objective #5—
Establish an Anti-Counterfeiting
Training and Outreach Strategy for the
Federal Workforce
• Does your organization provide
anti-counterfeit training for employees?
Identify the type of training that is
available. List the types of employees
who receive anti-counterfeit training
(e.g., Buyers, Inspectors, Engineers,
Project Managers).
Æ Did you model your training after
another industry standard or company,
or outsource the training? If so, please
describe.
Æ How frequently do you provide
anti-counterfeiting training to your
employees?
Æ How do you educate/train your
new hires?
Æ What is the venue and medium for
this training? (e.g., Classroom, Webbased, Reading materials)
Æ How long are the training sessions?
• How do you track and benchmark
the effectiveness of your training in anticounterfeiting?
• What training resources do you
provide to suppliers or customers on
anti-counterfeit tactics and strategies for
your industry or products?
• Do you formally test recipients on
the contents of the training and/or
provide formal qualifications/
certifications upon completion of the
training?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:06 Aug 08, 2011
Jkt 223001
• Describe the scope and contents of
your anti-counterfeiting training.
Request for Information Response
Guidelines: Responses to this Request
for Comments must be submitted
electronically to https://
www.regulations.gov docket number
OMB–2011–0003.
To submit comments via https://
www.regulations.gov, enter docket
number OMB–2011–0003 on the home
page and click ‘‘search’’. The site will
provide a search-results page listing all
documents associated with this docket.
Find a reference to this notice by
selecting ‘‘Notice’’ under ‘‘Document
Type’’ on the left side of the searchresults page, and click on the link
entitled ‘‘Submit a Comment.’’ (For
further information on using the
https://www.regulations.gov Web site,
please consult the resources provided
on the Web site by clicking on ‘‘How to
Use This Site’’ on the left side of the
home page.)
The https://www.regulations.gov site
provides the option of providing
comments by filling in a ‘‘Type
Comment and Upload File’’ field, or by
attaching a document. It is expected that
most comments will be provided in an
attached document. If a document is
attached, it is sufficient to type ‘‘See
attached’’ in the ‘‘Type Comment and
Upload File’’ field. If you want to
submit confidential business
information that supports your
comments, please contact Michael
Lewis at
intellectualproperty@omb.eop.gov.
Victoria Espinel,
United States Intellectual Property
Enforcement Coordinator.
[FR Doc. 2011–20204 Filed 8–8–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. NRC–2011–0065]
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Submission for the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
Review; Comment Request
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of
information collection and solicitation
of public comment.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) has recently
submitted to OMB for review the
following proposal for the collection of
information under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48907
U.S.C. chapter 35). The NRC hereby
informs potential respondents that an
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and
that a person is not required to respond
to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. The NRC published a Federal
Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period on this information collection on
May 3, 2011.
(1) Type of submission, new, revision,
or extension: Extension.
(2) The title of the information
collection: Grant and Cooperative
Agreement Provisions.
(3) Current OMB approval number:
3150–0107.
(4) The form number if applicable:
Not applicable.
(5) How often the collection is
required: Technical performance reports
are required every six months; other
information is submitted on occasion, as
needed.
(6) Who will be required or asked to
report: Grant and Cooperative
Agreement Recipients.
(7) An estimate of the number of
annual responses: 1064 (714 responses
+ 350 recordkeepers).
(8) The estimated number of annual
respondents: 350.
(9) An estimate of the total number of
hours needed annually to complete the
requirement or request: 8,077 (7,540
reporting hours plus 537 recordkeeping
hours).
(10) Abstract: The Division of
Contracts is responsible for awarding
grants and cooperative agreements
(financial assistance) for the NRC. The
Division of Contracts collects
information from assistance recipients
in accordance with grant and
cooperative agreement provisions in
order to administer NRC’s financial
assistance program. The information
collected under the provisions ensures
that the Government’s rights are
protected, the agency adheres to public
laws, the work proceeds on schedule,
and that disputes between the
Government and the recipient are
settled.
The public may examine and have
copied for a fee publicly available
documents, including the final
supporting statement, at the NRC’s
Public Document Room, Room O–1F21,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. OMB
clearance requests are available at the
NRC Web site: https://www.nrc.gov/
public-involve/doc-comment/omb/
index.html. The document will be
available on the NRC home page site for
60 days after the signature date of this
notice.
E:\FR\FM\09AUN1.SGM
09AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 153 (Tuesday, August 9, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48905-48907]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20204]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
United States Government Inter-Agency Anti-Counterfeiting Working
Group: Request for Public Comments Regarding Strategy to Eliminate
Counterfeit Products from the United States Government Supply Chain
AGENCY: Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and
Budget.
ACTION: Request for written submissions from the public.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Government is currently undertaking a significant
effort to eliminate counterfeit products from the U.S. Government
supply chain. In June 2010, Vice President Biden and White House
Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, Victoria Espinel,
announced the Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectual Property
Enforcement, laying out a coordinated government-wide approach to
strengthening intellectual property enforcement and directing the
establishment of an inter-agency working group. Recent reports issued
by the Department of Commerce and the Government Accountability Office
have found that counterfeits have infiltrated many sectors of the U.S.
Government supply chain and have the potential to cause serious
disruptions in national defense, critical infrastructure and other
vital applications. This working group will develop a framework for
reducing vulnerability to counterfeits that is flexible enough to
accommodate the wide variety of missions across Federal agencies. This
cross-functional working group will identify any gaps in legal
authority, regulation, policy and guidance that undermine the security
of U.S. Government supply chain from counterfeit parts. The working
group's examination will include reviewing current industry standards,
the ability of prime contractors and their suppliers to authenticate or
trace at-risk items to the original manufacturer, government evaluation
and detection capabilities and limitations, and contractual enforcement
of authenticity.
DATES: Submissions must be received on or before September 16, 2011 at
5 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Public comment should be electronically submitted to https://www.regulations.gov, docket number OMB-2011-0003. The regulations.gov
Web site is a Federal E-Government Web site that allows the public to
find, review and submit comments on documents that agencies have
published in the Federal Register and that are open for comment. If you
are unable to provide submissions to https://www.regulations.gov, please
contact James Schuelke at (202) 395-1808 to arrange for an alternate
method of transmission. Submissions filed via the regulations.gov Web
site will be available to the public for review and inspection. If you
want to submit confidential business information that supports your
comments, please contact Michael Lewis at
intellectualproperty@omb.eop.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Lewis, Office of the
Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, at (202) 395-1808.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The core members of the Working Group are
the Office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC)
in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of the Executive Office of
the President; Department of Defense (DoD); National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA); and the General Services Administration
(GSA). These core members, along with other government components, have
partnered to identify areas of common interest and compare progress and
best practices to ultimately eliminate counterfeits in the government-
wide supply chains. The working group will work to accomplish the
following objectives:
Objective 1--Develop procedures for program
managers to identify items at risk for counterfeiting or requiring
authentication of legitimacy. These procedures will, to the greatest
extent practicable, utilize current industry standards.
Objective 2--Examine whether additional
administrative actions, including regulatory actions, are needed to
require suppliers to take stronger anti-counterfeiting measures.
Objective 3--Examine when and how product and
package traceability, reporting and marking processes can be used by
prime contractors, their suppliers, Federal government personnel and
potentially other customers to confirm production authority by the
original manufacturer of at-risk items.
Objective 4--Examine government/industry
evaluation capabilities and determine whether improvement is needed.
Objective 5--Develop an anti-counterfeiting
training and outreach strategy for the Federal workforce.
Objective 6--Examine whether additional measures
are needed to protect the rights and interests of the United States,
recoup costs and prosecute offenders.
[[Page 48906]]
The purpose of the request for comments and recommendations is to
solicit feedback and best practices from industry, academia, research
laboratories, and other stakeholders on issues related to identifying
areas of common interest and compare progress and best practices to
ultimately eliminate counterfeits in Federal Government supply chains.
This request for comments and for recommendations is divided into six
categories. Responses to this request for comments may be directed to
any or all of the six categories.
Request for Comments Categories
Category 1: General
The U.S. Government Inter-Agency Anti-Counterfeiting Working group
seeks written comment submissions on the following topics:
Describe functional responsibilities, procedures and
programs specifically designed to address prevention, identification
and control of suspect/counterfeit items.
Describe any procedures for the disposal of items
identified as suspect/counterfeit items. Do these procedures include
segregation, evaluation of safety/mission impact, extent of condition,
removal, destruction or return to the vendor?
Describe both internal and/or external notification
procedures used when a suspect/counterfeit item is discovered. Identify
suspect/counterfeit industry information exchanges to which you report
counterfeit items.
Describe any testing and inspection procedures used to
authenticate a procured item.
Describe any rules or procedures that can improve the use
and functionality of the Government-Industry Data Exchange Program
(GIDEP).
Recommend best practices for identifying counterfeit
products entering the U.S. Government supply chain and for curbing
their entry into that supply chain.
Category 2: Objective 1--Establish procedures for program
managers to identify items at risk for counterfeiting or requiring
authentication of legitimacy. These procedures will, to the greatest
extent practicable, utilize current industry standards.
Describe methodologies for determining the functional
criticality of parts and whether critical parts have unintentional or
intentional vulnerabilities that may subject them to counterfeiting.
For critical parts, describe the consequences of counterfeiting and the
likelihood that counterfeiting will occur.
As the likelihood of the counterfeiting of critical parts
increases, describe ways to establish more stringent traceability
requirements for direct suppliers and their subcontractors to assure
and support evidence of part authenticity.
Describe processes for the verification of direct
suppliers' trustworthiness for consistent delivery of authentic and
conforming parts that meet specifications.
Describe procedures for tracking parts and materials
received from suppliers to the original manufacturer, or other
acceptable source, to authenticate that they meet the requirements of
the customer's specifications.
Describe procedures that you follow to ensure that
counterfeit parts are not incorporated into products during the
manufacturing processes, including the means of identifying suspect
parts during receiving inspection and preventing their acceptance.
Describe effective international and industry standards
used in anti-counterfeiting risk management efforts.
Category 3: IPEC Objective 2--Examine Whether Regulations Are
Needed To Require Suppliers To Take Stronger Anti-Counterfeiting
Measures
Describe contractual requirements used by customers to
assure the authenticity of the products upon delivery. Describe the
provisions of these requirements, if any. Describe any process or
procedures used to flow authenticity requirements down to suppliers.
Describe any conflicts between requirements from different customers.
Are contract clauses that notify suppliers that they are
prohibited from providing suspect/counterfeit items effective?
Describe any special quality assurance provisions that may
be contained in anti-counterfeiting contract clauses that require
parties to confirm compliance.
Describe effective methods for addressing counterfeit
prevention during the source selection process.
Describe any risk factors used in determining risk for
counterfeit items/commodity groups.
Describe procedures for processing potentially counterfeit
items. Describe any requirements imposed on suppliers when potential
counterfeit items are identified.
Category 4: IPEC Objective 3--Examine When and How Product and
Package Traceability, Reporting and Marking Processes Can Be Used by
Prime Contractors, Their Suppliers, Federal Government Personnel and
Potentially Other Customers To Confirm Production Authority by the
Original Manufacturer of At-Risk Items
Describe procedures that require the labeling, stamping or
marking of authentic parts and/or part packaging prior to purchasing
parts and material for installation in products.
Describe the use of part markings to address the
following:
(1) Identification of distributors and/or suppliers who have a
documentation system, and receiving inspection system that ensures the
traceability of their parts to a production or design authority-
approved source, and
(2) Methods of screening part markings to identify unfamiliar
distributors and/or suppliers to determine if the parts present a
potential risk of being unapproved by a production or design authority.
Describe procedures for establishing product and packaging
identification and authenticity documentation requirements for at-risk
items and applying these requirements to suppliers to ensure
traceability of product authenticity throughout the supply chain.
Describe how the use of enhanced product/package
identification marking methods (such as marking products/packages with
globally unique item identifiers (UIIs) using international standards,
and then registering these UIIs and their product/package pedigree
information in a database to enable tracking them back to their
originating source as they transit the supply chain) might help reduce
or eliminate counterfeits in the supply chain. Does the use of these
identification marking methods impose a substantial burden on
manufacturers/suppliers? Identify the types of incentives that would
encourage manufacturers/suppliers to consistently use identification
markings.
Describe how the use of advanced technology for ensuring
the integrity of products delivered in the supply chain (including such
techniques as digital signatures, hologram tags, tamper-resistant and
tamper-evident packaging) might help reduce or eliminate counterfeits
in the supply chain.
Describe any techniques that may be employed when product
authentication cannot be confirmed by use of product and packaging
identification and authenticity documentation requirements.
[[Page 48907]]
Category 5: IPEC Objective 4--Examine Government/Industry
Evaluation Capabilities and Determine Whether Improvement Is Needed.
List physical inspection, non-destructive examination, and
laboratory testing equipment that your organization owns and operates
and that is capable of authenticating a suspected counterfeit part.
Describe specific products that can be inspected/tested
using this equipment and how the inspection/testing technique(s) can be
used to distinguish counterfeit product from authentic product.
List any laboratory/testing certifications or
accreditations that your facility(ies) maintains.
List any governmental or industry customers that employ
your testing facilities.
Describe handling and storage techniques that your
facility employs to prevent comingling, tampering and unauthorized
release of suspect counterfeit items.
How much capacity would your facility be able to manage--
how many parts per day can you handle? Can your test facility handle
classified information?
Category 6: IPEC Objective 5--Establish an Anti-Counterfeiting
Training and Outreach Strategy for the Federal Workforce
Does your organization provide anti-counterfeit training
for employees? Identify the type of training that is available. List
the types of employees who receive anti-counterfeit training (e.g.,
Buyers, Inspectors, Engineers, Project Managers).
[cir] Did you model your training after another industry standard
or company, or outsource the training? If so, please describe.
[cir] How frequently do you provide anti-counterfeiting training to
your employees?
[cir] How do you educate/train your new hires?
[cir] What is the venue and medium for this training? (e.g.,
Classroom, Web-based, Reading materials)
[cir] How long are the training sessions?
How do you track and benchmark the effectiveness of your
training in anti-counterfeiting?
What training resources do you provide to suppliers or
customers on anti-counterfeit tactics and strategies for your industry
or products?
Do you formally test recipients on the contents of the
training and/or provide formal qualifications/certifications upon
completion of the training?
Describe the scope and contents of your anti-
counterfeiting training.
Request for Information Response Guidelines: Responses to this
Request for Comments must be submitted electronically to https://www.regulations.gov docket number OMB-2011-0003.
To submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov, enter docket
number OMB-2011-0003 on the home page and click ``search''. The site
will provide a search-results page listing all documents associated
with this docket. Find a reference to this notice by selecting
``Notice'' under ``Document Type'' on the left side of the search-
results page, and click on the link entitled ``Submit a Comment.'' (For
further information on using the https://www.regulations.gov Web site,
please consult the resources provided on the Web site by clicking on
``How to Use This Site'' on the left side of the home page.)
The https://www.regulations.gov site provides the option of
providing comments by filling in a ``Type Comment and Upload File''
field, or by attaching a document. It is expected that most comments
will be provided in an attached document. If a document is attached, it
is sufficient to type ``See attached'' in the ``Type Comment and Upload
File'' field. If you want to submit confidential business information
that supports your comments, please contact Michael Lewis at
intellectualproperty@omb.eop.gov.
Victoria Espinel,
United States Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator.
[FR Doc. 2011-20204 Filed 8-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P