Comment Submitted by Nina Torabzadeh

With the overall increased use of and access to the Internet in the United States and around the world, online notification is easily the most efficient way to disseminate information. The proposed rule to post notifications for seizures and intent to forfeit on the US Department of Justice’s forfeiture website will fulfill the requirements of the authorizing statue, reduce agency costs, and make the notification process more effective. The online notification of seizure and intent to forfeit for property will only serve its purpose if advance notice is provided to known parties of interest. When something is printed in a newspaper for an extended period of time, the possibility of an interested party coming across that notification incidentally is higher than when the notification is simply posted on an Internet website. A party would have to know to visit that website or be frequently browsing that website before coming across the notification. It may be worth considering leaving the notification on the DOJ’s forfeiture website for more than thirty days to give interested parties more opportunity to be aware of and assert a claim for property. Alternatively, the CPB could ensure that the individual notification to known parties of interest would be provided in advance of the online posting so that those parties would have a full thirty days to visit the website and look up the information. Another concern is the availability of the notification of seizure and intent to forfeit in other languages. The background of the proposed rule suggests that “CPB may decide to publish notice of seizure and forfeiture in a non-English language or other community newspaper to ensure reaching a particular community that may have a particular interest in or connection to the seizure.” This is not reflected in the language of the regulation. Providing notification in a non-English language when the property was likely seized in an international trade setting is extremely importan