FOIA Improvement Act; Rules of General Application, 86575-86577 [2016-28819]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 231 / Thursday, December 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
PART 375—THE COMMISSION
1. The authority citation for part 375
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 551–557; 15 U.S.C.
717–717w, 3301–3432; 16 U.S.C. 791–825r,
2601–2645; 42 U.S.C. 7101–7352.
2. In § 375.309, paragraph (h) is added
and reserved, and paragraph (i) is added
to read as follows
■
§ 375.309
Counsel.
Delegations to the General
*
*
*
*
*
(h) [Reserved]
(i) Deny or grant, in whole or in part,
an appeal of a Freedom of Information
Act determination by the Director of the
Office of External Affairs.
PART 388—INFORMATION AND
REQUESTS
3. The authority citation for part 388
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301–305, 551, 552 (as
amended), 553–557; 42 U.S.C. 7101–7352.
4. Amend § 388.106 by adding
paragraph (b)(24) to read as follows
■
§ 388.106 Requests for Commission
records available in the Public Reference
Room and from the Commission’s Web site,
https://www.ferc.gov.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(24) Records that have been requested
three or more times and determined
eligible for public disclosure will be
made publicly available on the
Commission’s Web site or through other
electronic means.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Amend § 388.107 by revising
paragraph (e) to read as follows
§ 388.107 Commission records exempt
from public disclosure.
*
*
*
*
(e) Interagency or intraagency
memoranda or letters which would not
be available by law to a party other than
an agency in litigation with the agency,
except that the deliberative process
privilege shall not exempt any record 25
years or older.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Amend § 388.108 by revising
paragraph (c)(4) and adding paragraph
(c)(5) to read as follows:
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
§ 388.108 Requests for Commission
records not available through the Public
Reference Room (FOIA requests).
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(4) The Director will consider whether
partial disclosure of information is
possible whenever it is determined that
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:50 Nov 30, 2016
Jkt 241001
a document is exempt and will take
reasonable steps to segregate and release
nonexempt information.
(5) The Director will only withhold
information where it is reasonably
foreseeable that disclosure would harm
an interest protected by an exemption or
disclosure is prohibited by law or
otherwise exempted from disclosure
under FOIA Exemption 3.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 7. Amend § 388.109 by adding
paragraph (f) to read as follows
§ 388.109
Fees for record requests.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) The Commission will not charge
search fees (or duplication fees for
requesters with preferred fee status)
where, after extending the time limit for
unusual circumstances, as described in
§ 388.110, the Director does not provide
a timely determination.
(1) If there are unusual circumstances,
as described in § 388.110, and there are
more than 5,000 responsive pages to the
request, the Commission may charge
search fees (or, for requesters in
preferred fee status, may charge
duplication fees) where the requester
received timely written notice and the
Commission has discussed with the
requester via written mail, electronic
mail, or telephone (or made not less
than 3 good-faith attempts to do so) how
the requester could effectively limit the
scope of the request; or
(2) If a court determines that
exceptional circumstances exist, the
Commission’s failure to comply with a
time limit will be excused for the length
of time provided by the court order.
■ 8. Amend § 388.110 by revising
paragraph (a) and adding paragraph
(b)(5) to read as follows:
§ 388.110 Procedure for appeal of denial of
requests for Commission records not
publicly available or not available through
the Public Reference Room, denial of . . .
fee waiver or reduction, and denial of
requests for expedited processing.
*
*
*
*
*
(a)(1) Determination letters shall
indicate that a requester may seek
assistance from the FOIA Public
Liaison. A person whose request for
records, request for fee waiver, or
request for expedited processing is
denied in whole or in part may seek
dispute resolution services from the
Office of Government Information
Services, or may appeal the
determination to the General Counsel or
General Counsel’s designee within 90
days of the determination.
(2) Appeals filed pursuant to this
section must be in writing, addressed to
the General Counsel of the Commission,
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
86575
and clearly marked ‘‘Freedom of
Information Act Appeal.’’ Such an
appeal received by the Commission not
addressed and marked as indicated in
this paragraph will be so addressed and
marked by Commission personnel as
soon as it is properly identified and
then will be forwarded to the General
Counsel. Appeals taken pursuant to this
paragraph will be considered to be
received upon actual receipt by the
General Counsel.
(3) The General Counsel or the
General Counsel’s designee will make a
determination with respect to any
appeal within 20 working days after the
receipt of such appeal. An appeal of the
denial of expedited processing will be
considered as expeditiously as possible
within the 20 working day period. If, on
appeal, the denial of the request for
records, fee reduction, or expedited
processing is upheld in whole or in part,
the General Counsel or the General
Counsel’s designee will notify the
person making the appeal of the
provisions for judicial review of that
determination.
(b) * * *
(5) Whenever the Commission
extends the time limit, pursuant to
paragraph (b)(1) of this section, by more
than ten additional working days, the
written notice will notify the requester
of the right to seek dispute resolution
services from the Office of Government
Information Services.
[FR Doc. 2016–28811 Filed 11–30–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
19 CFR Part 201
FOIA Improvement Act; Rules of
General Application
United States International
Trade Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The United States
International Trade Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) issues a final rule
amending its Rules of Practice and
Procedure concerning rules of general
application to reflect amendments to the
Freedom of Information Act (‘‘FOIA’’)
made by the FOIA Improvement Act of
2016 (‘‘Improvement Act’’). Among
other things, the Improvement Act
requires the Commission to amend its
FOIA regulations to extend the deadline
for administrative appeals for FOIA
decisions, to add information on dispute
resolution services, and to amend the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\01DER1.SGM
01DER1
86576
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 231 / Thursday, December 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
way the Commission charges fees for
FOIA requests.
DATES: This regulation is effective
January 3, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa
R. Barton, Secretary, telephone (202)
205–2000 or Brian R. Battles, Esquire,
Office of the General Counsel, United
States International Trade Commission,
telephone (202) 708–4737. Hearingimpaired individuals are advised that
information on this matter can be
obtained by contacting the
Commission’s TDD terminal at 202–
205–1810. General information
concerning the Commission may also be
obtained by accessing its Web site at
https://www.usitc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
preamble below is designed to assist
readers in understanding these
amendments to the Commission’s Rules
of Practice and Procedure.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Background
Section 335 of the Tariff Act of 1930
(19 U.S.C. 1335) authorizes the
Commission to adopt such reasonable
procedures, rules, and regulations as it
deems necessary to carry out its
functions and duties.
This rulemaking amends the
Commission’s existing Rules of Practice
and Procedure and reflects changes to
the FOIA by the Improvement Act. The
Improvement Act addresses a range of
procedural issues. Among other things,
it requires that agencies establish a
minimum of 90 days for requesters to
file an administrative appeal and that
they provide dispute resolution services
at various times throughout the FOIA
process. The Improvement Act also
updates how fees are charged.
The United States International Trade
Commission amends 19 CFR part 201 as
follows:
• By amending § 201.18:
Æ To change the appeals deadline
from sixty days to ninety days;
Æ To indicate that the Commission’s
FOIA Public Liaison is available to offer
dispute resolution services and to
provide contact information for the
Commission’s FOIA Public Liaison and
the Office of Government Information
Services.
• By amending § 201.20, to add new
paragraphs (c)(5), (c)(6), and (c)(7) to
provide additional limitations on the
fees charged by the Commission.
Good Cause for Final Adoption
The Commission ordinarily
promulgates amendments to the Code of
Federal Regulations in accordance with
the notice-and-comment rulemaking
procedure in section 553 of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:50 Nov 30, 2016
Jkt 241001
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5
U.S.C. 553). That procedure entails
publication of notice of proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register that
solicits public comment on the
proposed amendments, consideration by
the Commission of public comments on
the content of the amendments, and
publication of the final amendments at
least 30 days prior to their effective
date.
In this instance, however, the
Commission has determined that the
notice and public comment procedure is
unnecessary. Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the
APA authorizes agencies to dispense
with notice and comment procedures
for rules when the agency finds that
there is ‘‘good cause’’ in concluding that
those procedures are ‘‘impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.’’ Under this section, an agency,
upon finding good cause, may issue a
final rule without seeking comment
prior to the rulemaking. The proposed
amendments are required by statute, do
not involve Commission discretion, and
provide additional protections to the
public. Given these factors, the
Commission finds good cause to
conclude that the notice and public
comment procedure are unnecessary.
Regulatory Analysis of Proposed
Amendments to the Commission’s Rules
The Commission has determined that
these rules do not meet the criteria
described in section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4,
1993) and thus do not constitute a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ for
purposes of the Executive Order.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is inapplicable to this
rulemaking because it is not one for
which a notice of proposed rulemaking
is required under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) or any
other statute.
These rules do not contain federalism
implications warranting the preparation
of a federalism summary impact
statement pursuant to Executive Order
13132 (64 FR 43255, August 4, 1999).
No actions are necessary under title II
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995, Pubic Law 104–4 (2 U.S.C.
1531–1538) because the rules will not
result in the expenditure by state, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100,000,000
or more in any one year (adjusted
annually for inflation), and will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments.
These rules are not ‘‘major rules’’ as
defined by section 251 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et
seq.). Moreover, they are exempt from
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the reporting requirements of that Act
because they contain rules of agency
organization, procedure, or practice that
do not substantially affect the rights or
obligations of non-agency parties.
These rules are not subject to section
3504(h) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), since they do
not contain any new information
collection requirements.
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 201
Administrative practice and
procedure, Claims, Classified
information, Confidential business
information, Freedom of information,
Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
As stated in the preamble, part 201 of
chapter II, title 19 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 201—RULES OF GENERAL
APPLICATION
1. The authority citation for part 201
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 1335; 19 U.S.C. 2482,
unless otherwise noted.
2. In § 201.18, paragraphs (b) and (f)
are revised to read as follows:
■
§ 201.18
denial.
Denial of requests, appeals from
*
*
*
*
*
(b) An appeal from a denial of a
request must be received within ninety
days of the date of the letter of denial
and shall be made to the Commission
and addressed to the Chairman, United
States International Trade Commission,
500 E Street SW., Washington, DC
20436. Any such appeal shall be in
writing, and shall indicate clearly in the
appeal, and if the appeal is in paper
form on the envelope, that it is a
‘‘Freedom of Information Act Appeal.’’
An appeal may be made either in paper
form, or electronically by contacting the
Commission at https://www.usitc.gov/
foia.htm.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) A response to an appeal will advise
the requester that the Commission’s
FOIA Public Liaison officer and the
Office of Government Information
Services both offer mediation services to
resolve disputes between FOIA
requesters and Federal agencies as a
non-exclusive alternative to litigation.
The requester may contact the
Commission’s FOIA Public Liaison
officer by telephone (202–205–2595) or
email (foia.se.se@usitc.gov) or the Office
of Government Information Services at
National Archives and Records
Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road—
OGIS, College Park, Maryland 20740–
6001.
E:\FR\FM\01DER1.SGM
01DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 231 / Thursday, December 1, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
3. In § 201.20, add paragraphs (c)(5)
through (7) to read as follows:
■
§ 201.20
Fees.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(5) The Commission will not charge
fees if it fails to comply with any time
limit under the FOIA or these
regulations, and if it has not timely
notified the requester, in writing, that an
unusual circumstance exists. If an
unusual circumstance exists, and timely
written notice is given to the requester,
the Commission will have an additional
10 working days to respond to the
request before fees are automatically
waived under this paragraph.
(6) If the Commission determines that
unusual circumstances apply and that
more than 5,000 pages are necessary to
respond to a request, it may charge fees
if it has provided a timely written notice
to the requester and discusses with the
requester via mail, Email, or telephone
how the requester could effectively limit
the scope of the request (or make at least
three good faith attempts to do so).
(7) If a court has determined that
exceptional circumstances exist, a
failure to comply with time limits
imposed by these regulations or FOIA
shall be excused for the length of time
provided by court order.
*
*
*
*
*
By order of the Commission.
Issued: November 25, 2016.
Katherine M. Hiner,
Acting Supervisory Attorney.
[FR Doc. 2016–28819 Filed 11–30–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
31 CFR Part 1010
RIN 1506–AB27
Supplemental Information Regarding
the Final Rule Imposing the Fifth
Special Measure Against FBME Bank,
Ltd.
Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network (‘‘FinCEN’’).
ACTION: Supplement to final rule.
AGENCY:
In its September 20, 2016
order, the U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia remanded to
FinCEN the final rule imposing a
prohibition on covered financial
institutions from opening or
maintaining correspondent accounts for,
or on behalf of, FBME Bank, Ltd. In its
memorandum opinion accompanying
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:50 Nov 30, 2016
Jkt 241001
that order, the Court stated that the
agency had not responded meaningfully
to FBME’s comments regarding the
agency’s treatment of aggregate
Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) data.
The Court found that those comments
challenged FinCEN’s interpretation of
SAR data on at least four distinct
grounds. In this supplement to the final
rule, FinCEN provides further
explanation addressing FBME’s
comments.
DATES: December 1, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
FinCEN Resource Center at (800) 767–
2825 or regcomments@fincen.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In its September 20, 2016 order, the
U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia remanded to FinCEN the final
rule imposing a prohibition on covered
financial institutions from opening or
maintaining correspondent accounts for,
or on behalf of, FBME Bank, Ltd.
(FBME). In its memorandum opinion
accompanying that order, the Court
stated that the agency had not
responded meaningfully to FBME’s
comments regarding the agency’s
treatment of aggregate SAR data. In this
supplement to the final rule, FinCEN
notes that FBME’s comments regarding
FinCEN’s use of SARs in the rulemaking
process reflect a misunderstanding of
SARs generally and how FinCEN
analyzed and used SARs in this
rulemaking.
As an initial matter, FBME overstates
the centrality of the use of SARs in
FinCEN’s determination that FBME is of
primary money laundering concern. As
reflected in the agency’s Notice of
Finding (NOF), Final Rule, and
Administrative Record, far from being
the only evidence that informed
FinCEN’s determination that FBME is of
primary money laundering concern, the
agency’s analysis of SARs simply
affirmed FinCEN’s concern surrounding
FBME’s involvement in money
laundering that was informed by other
information in the Administrative
Record. For instance, as detailed in the
NOF, this information included: (1) An
FBME customer’s receipt of a deposit of
hundreds of thousands of dollars from
a financier for Lebanese Hezbollah; (2)
providing financial services to a
financial advisor for a major
transnational organized crime figure; (3)
FBME’s facilitation of funds transfers to
an FBME account involved in fraud
against a U.S. person, with the FBME
customer operating the alleged fraud
scheme later being indicted in the
United States District Court for the
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
86577
Northern District of Ohio; and (4)
FBME’s facilitation of U.S. sanctions
evasion through its extensive customer
base of shell companies, including at
least one FBME customer that was a
front company for a U.S.-sanctioned
Syrian entity, the Scientific Studies and
Research Center, which used its FBME
account to process transactions through
the U.S. financial system.
Set forth below are summaries of
FBME’s four arguments in its comments
surrounding FinCEN’s interpretation of
SARs and the agency’s responses.
1. FBME argues that SARs are so overinclusive—‘‘sweeping in [so many]
transactions that are perfectly
legitimate’’—that ‘‘categorically’’
viewing SARs as indicative of illicit
transactions is ‘‘invalid and improper.’’
In its January 26, 2016 comments,
FBME asserted that:
To paint FBME as posing a significant
threat to U.S. and other financial institutions,
FinCEN relies on limited and misleading
statistical data regarding ‘‘suspicious wire
transfers’’ as well as biased reports from
financial institutions seeking to offload
responsibility for their own actions. During
the hearing before Judge Cooper, FinCEN
revealed that the statistical data relied upon
in the NOF was based on SARs. But such
reliance is categorically invalid and
improper. To begin, we know of no instance,
prior to this proceeding, in which FinCEN
has equated any particular SARs data or rate
as indicative of a problem under Section 311
[of the USA PATRIOT Act]. Nor is such use
valid. To the contrary, it ignores the purpose
of a SAR, which involves a designedly low
threshold for the sake of erring on the side
of over-inclusion—sweeping in transactions
that are perfectly legitimate, simply to ensure
there is scrutiny of them to ensure against
any issue. It is spurious in this light to take
a SAR or any number of them as evidencing
the illegitimacy of any transaction or set
thereof—not to mention as evidence that a
particular bank is one of ‘‘primary money
laundering concern’’ under Section 311.1
Contrary to FBME’s assumptions,
FinCEN analyzed the SARs as
qualitative evidence of activity
conducted by FBME that reflected one
of FinCEN’s primary concerns about
FBME—specifically, a ‘‘[s]ignificant
[v]olume’’ of ‘‘[o]bscured [t]ransactions’’
as indicated in part by the size and
number of ‘‘[w]ire transfers related to
suspected shell company activities.’’
NOF, 79 FR at 42640. While FinCEN
recognizes that actual wrongdoing does
not necessarily underlie the suspicious
activity described in any particular
SAR, many of the SARs relating to
FBME described typical indicators of
shell company activity. As FinCEN has
explained, it is particularly concerned,
among other things, by the lack of
1 FBME’s
E:\FR\FM\01DER1.SGM
January 26, 2016 Comments, pp. 50–51.
01DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 231 (Thursday, December 1, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 86575-86577]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28819]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
19 CFR Part 201
FOIA Improvement Act; Rules of General Application
AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States International Trade Commission
(``Commission'') issues a final rule amending its Rules of Practice and
Procedure concerning rules of general application to reflect amendments
to the Freedom of Information Act (``FOIA'') made by the FOIA
Improvement Act of 2016 (``Improvement Act''). Among other things, the
Improvement Act requires the Commission to amend its FOIA regulations
to extend the deadline for administrative appeals for FOIA decisions,
to add information on dispute resolution services, and to amend the
[[Page 86576]]
way the Commission charges fees for FOIA requests.
DATES: This regulation is effective January 3, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa R. Barton, Secretary, telephone
(202) 205-2000 or Brian R. Battles, Esquire, Office of the General
Counsel, United States International Trade Commission, telephone (202)
708-4737. Hearing-impaired individuals are advised that information on
this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal
at 202-205-1810. General information concerning the Commission may also
be obtained by accessing its Web site at https://www.usitc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The preamble below is designed to assist
readers in understanding these amendments to the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure.
Background
Section 335 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1335) authorizes
the Commission to adopt such reasonable procedures, rules, and
regulations as it deems necessary to carry out its functions and
duties.
This rulemaking amends the Commission's existing Rules of Practice
and Procedure and reflects changes to the FOIA by the Improvement Act.
The Improvement Act addresses a range of procedural issues. Among other
things, it requires that agencies establish a minimum of 90 days for
requesters to file an administrative appeal and that they provide
dispute resolution services at various times throughout the FOIA
process. The Improvement Act also updates how fees are charged.
The United States International Trade Commission amends 19 CFR part
201 as follows:
By amending Sec. 201.18:
[cir] To change the appeals deadline from sixty days to ninety
days;
[cir] To indicate that the Commission's FOIA Public Liaison is
available to offer dispute resolution services and to provide contact
information for the Commission's FOIA Public Liaison and the Office of
Government Information Services.
By amending Sec. 201.20, to add new paragraphs (c)(5),
(c)(6), and (c)(7) to provide additional limitations on the fees
charged by the Commission.
Good Cause for Final Adoption
The Commission ordinarily promulgates amendments to the Code of
Federal Regulations in accordance with the notice-and-comment
rulemaking procedure in section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) (5 U.S.C. 553). That procedure entails publication of notice of
proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register that solicits public
comment on the proposed amendments, consideration by the Commission of
public comments on the content of the amendments, and publication of
the final amendments at least 30 days prior to their effective date.
In this instance, however, the Commission has determined that the
notice and public comment procedure is unnecessary. Section
553(b)(3)(B) of the APA authorizes agencies to dispense with notice and
comment procedures for rules when the agency finds that there is ``good
cause'' in concluding that those procedures are ``impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' Under this section,
an agency, upon finding good cause, may issue a final rule without
seeking comment prior to the rulemaking. The proposed amendments are
required by statute, do not involve Commission discretion, and provide
additional protections to the public. Given these factors, the
Commission finds good cause to conclude that the notice and public
comment procedure are unnecessary.
Regulatory Analysis of Proposed Amendments to the Commission's Rules
The Commission has determined that these rules do not meet the
criteria described in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) and thus do not constitute a ``significant
regulatory action'' for purposes of the Executive Order.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is
inapplicable to this rulemaking because it is not one for which a
notice of proposed rulemaking is required under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) or any
other statute.
These rules do not contain federalism implications warranting the
preparation of a federalism summary impact statement pursuant to
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 4, 1999).
No actions are necessary under title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995, Pubic Law 104-4 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538) because the
rules will not result in the expenditure by state, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100,000,000 or more in any one year (adjusted annually for inflation),
and will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
These rules are not ``major rules'' as defined by section 251 of
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (5
U.S.C. 801 et seq.). Moreover, they are exempt from the reporting
requirements of that Act because they contain rules of agency
organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect
the rights or obligations of non-agency parties.
These rules are not subject to section 3504(h) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), since they do not contain any
new information collection requirements.
List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 201
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Classified
information, Confidential business information, Freedom of information,
Privacy, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
As stated in the preamble, part 201 of chapter II, title 19 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 201--RULES OF GENERAL APPLICATION
0
1. The authority citation for part 201 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 19 U.S.C. 1335; 19 U.S.C. 2482, unless otherwise
noted.
0
2. In Sec. 201.18, paragraphs (b) and (f) are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 201.18 Denial of requests, appeals from denial.
* * * * *
(b) An appeal from a denial of a request must be received within
ninety days of the date of the letter of denial and shall be made to
the Commission and addressed to the Chairman, United States
International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436.
Any such appeal shall be in writing, and shall indicate clearly in the
appeal, and if the appeal is in paper form on the envelope, that it is
a ``Freedom of Information Act Appeal.'' An appeal may be made either
in paper form, or electronically by contacting the Commission at https://www.usitc.gov/foia.htm.
* * * * *
(f) A response to an appeal will advise the requester that the
Commission's FOIA Public Liaison officer and the Office of Government
Information Services both offer mediation services to resolve disputes
between FOIA requesters and Federal agencies as a non-exclusive
alternative to litigation. The requester may contact the Commission's
FOIA Public Liaison officer by telephone (202-205-2595) or email
(foia.se.se@usitc.gov">foia.se.se@usitc.gov) or the Office of Government Information Services
at National Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road--
OGIS, College Park, Maryland 20740-6001.
[[Page 86577]]
0
3. In Sec. 201.20, add paragraphs (c)(5) through (7) to read as
follows:
Sec. 201.20 Fees.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(5) The Commission will not charge fees if it fails to comply with
any time limit under the FOIA or these regulations, and if it has not
timely notified the requester, in writing, that an unusual circumstance
exists. If an unusual circumstance exists, and timely written notice is
given to the requester, the Commission will have an additional 10
working days to respond to the request before fees are automatically
waived under this paragraph.
(6) If the Commission determines that unusual circumstances apply
and that more than 5,000 pages are necessary to respond to a request,
it may charge fees if it has provided a timely written notice to the
requester and discusses with the requester via mail, Email, or
telephone how the requester could effectively limit the scope of the
request (or make at least three good faith attempts to do so).
(7) If a court has determined that exceptional circumstances exist,
a failure to comply with time limits imposed by these regulations or
FOIA shall be excused for the length of time provided by court order.
* * * * *
By order of the Commission.
Issued: November 25, 2016.
Katherine M. Hiner,
Acting Supervisory Attorney.
[FR Doc. 2016-28819 Filed 11-30-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P