Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 76297 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 222 and 

252 

Government procurement. 

Clare M. Zebrowski, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

■ Accordingly, the interim rule 

amending 48 CFR parts 222 and 252, 

which was published in the Federal 

Register at 75 FR 27946 on May 19, 

2010, is adopted as final with the 

following changes: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 222, and 252 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR 

chapter 1. 

PART 222—APPLICATION OF LABOR 

LAWS TO GOVERNMENT 

ACQUISITIONS 

[Sections 222.7401 through 222.7404 

redesignated as sections 222.7402 

through 222.7405] 

■ 2. Redesignate sections 222.7401 

through 222.7404 as section 222.7402 

through 222.7405 respectively. 

■ 3. Add a new section 222.7401 to read 

as follows: 

222.7401 Definition. 

Covered subcontractor, as used in this 

subpart, is defined in the clause at 

252.222–7006, Restrictions on the Use 

of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements. 

■ 4. Revise newly designated sections 

222.7403 through 222.7405 to read as 

follows: 

222.7403 Applicability. 

This requirement does not apply to 

the acquisition of commercial items 

(including commercially available offthe-shelf items). 

222.7404 Waiver. 

(a) The Secretary of Defense may 

waive, in accordance with paragraphs 

(b) through (d) of this section, the 

applicability of paragraphs (a) or (b) of 

222.7402 to a particular contract or 

subcontract, if the Secretary or the 

Deputy Secretary personally determines 

that the waiver is necessary to avoid 

harm to national security interests of the 

United States, and that the term of the 

contract or subcontract is not longer 

than necessary to avoid such harm. 

(b) The waiver determination shall set 

forth the grounds for the waiver with 

specificity, stating any alternatives 

considered, and explain why each of the 

alternatives would not avoid harm to 

national security interests. 

(c) The contracting officer shall 

submit requests for waivers in 

accordance with agency procedures. 

(d) The Secretary of Defense will 

transmit the determination to Congress 

and simultaneously publish it in the 

Federal Register, not less than 15 

business days before the contract or 

subcontract addressed in the 

determination may be awarded. 

222.7405 Contract clause. 

Use the clause at 252.222–7006, 

Restrictions on the Use of Mandatory 

Arbitration Agreements, in all 

solicitations and contracts (including 

task or delivery orders and bilateral 

modifications adding new work) valued 

in excess of $1 million utilizing funds 

appropriated or otherwise made 

available by the Defense Appropriations 

Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (Pub. L. 111– 

118), except in contracts for the 

acquisition of commercial items, 

including commercially available offthe-shelf items. 

PART 252—SOLICITATION 

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT 

CLAUSES 

■ 5. Amend section 252.222–7006 by: 

■ a. Revising the introductory text; 

■ b. Revising the clause date; and 

■ c. Revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (d) to 

read as follows: 

252.222–7006 Restrictions on the Use of 

Mandatory Arbitration Agreements. 

As prescribed in 222.7405, use the 

following clause: 

RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF 

MANDATORY ARBITRATION 

AGREEMENTS (DEC 2010) 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) Certifies, by signature of the contract, 

that it requires each covered subcontractor to 

agree not to enter into, and not to take any 

action to enforce, any provision of any 

existing agreements, as described in 

paragraph (b)(1) of this clause, with respect 

to any employee or independent contractor 

performing work related to such subcontract. 

* * * * * 

(d) The Secretary of Defense may waive the 

applicability of the restrictions of paragraph 

(b) of this clause in accordance with Defense 

Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

222.7404. 

(End of clause) 

[FR Doc. 2010–30669 Filed 12–7–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 225 and 252 

RIN 0750–AG57 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Restriction on 

Ball and Roller Bearings (DFARS Case 

2006–D029) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD) 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is issuing a final rule 

amending the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to revise the domestic source 

restriction on acquisition of ball and 

roller bearings. This final rule, which 

implements the DoD annual 

appropriations act domestic source 

restrictions, requires that each ball or 

roller bearing be manufactured in the 

United States, its outlying areas, or 

Canada, and that the cost of the bearing 

components manufactured in the United 

States, its outlying areas, or Canada, 

shall exceed 50 percent of the total cost 

of the bearing components of that ball 

or roller bearing. 

DATES: Effective Date: December 8, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Amy Williams, 703–602–0328. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The current DFARS restriction on ball 

and roller bearings (225.7009) 

implemented two statutory restrictions: 

10 U.S.C. 2534(a)(5) and annual 

appropriations act restrictions. 10 U.S.C. 

2534(a)(5) required that all ball and 

roller bearings and bearing components, 

either as end items or components of 

end items, be wholly manufactured in 

the United States or Canada. The annual 

defense appropriations act restrictions 

require that all ball and roller bearings 

be produced by a domestic source and 

be of domestic origin. This restriction 

does not apply to the acquisition of 

commercial items, either as components 

or end products, unless the commercial 

bearings themselves are purchased as 

the end products. 

II. Discussion and Analysis 

A. Analysis of Public Comments 

DoD published a proposed rule in the 

Federal Register on May 7, 2010 (75 FR 

25167). The comment period closed on 

July 6, 2010. Three respondents 

submitted comments. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
76298 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1. Nonavailablity 

Comment: One respondent 

commented that, in some cases, it is 

necessary to import foreign bearings. 

Response: Noted. This rule does not 

make any change in the existing ability 

to waive the restriction on a case-bycase basis by certifying that adequate 

domestic supplies are not available and 

that the acquisition must be made in 

order to acquire capability for national 

security purposes. 

Comment: Another respondent was of 

the opinion that there is not really a 

shortage of bearings compliant with 10 

U.S.C. 2534(a)(5), just an unwillingness 

on the part of distributors and 

wholesalers to devote the time to market 

research and tracking the supply chain 

to demonstrate the availability of 

compliant bearings. 

Response: Commercial bearings 

manufacturers make business decisions 

based on the market. Many suppliers of 

commercial bearings and bearing 

components are unwilling to track the 

origin of bearings components and 

subcomponents because the 

Government does not have enough 

market leverage for it to be in the 

business interest of the manufacturers 

and suppliers to do so. Therefore, many 

bearings must be treated as nondomestic 

because the manufacturer is unable to 

certify to domestic sourcing of the 

components. 

Comment: This respondent 

recommended retaining the requirement 

for 100 per cent domestic content for the 

following reasons: 

a. According to the respondent, 

changing the rules now to allow cheaper 

sources after using public law to create 

domestic sourcing would be detrimental 

to the companies that have recently 

invested in capacity. 

Response: The reason for changing the 

rule is statutory change. 10 U.S.C. 

2534(a)(5) is no longer in effect because 

Congress allowed the restriction to 

expire. 

Furthermore, the experience of 

Government buyers indicates that, in 

general, the current regulation has not 

prevented the loss of domestic sources, 

due to lack of Government leverage with 

regard to acquisition of commercial 

bearings. The Government continues to 

issue more and more waivers in the 

instances when bearings are no longer 

available that the manufacturer or 

distributor can certify as having 100 

percent domestic components. Bearings 

manufacturers have stated that 

manufacture of the retainer, inner race, 

and outer race are not core 

competencies. Therefore, more and 

more bearings manufacturers obtain 

these components from foreign sources, 

which are significantly cheaper, and 

then do the complex manufacture of the 

bearing in this country. The advantage 

of changing the regulation to allow some 

foreign components without the need 

for a waiver is that fewer waivers will 

be required and then the requirement 

for manufacture in the United States 

and 50 percent domestic components 

remains in effect. 

b. According to the respondent, 

quality of components is very critical to 

eliminating latent defects. The 

respondent stated that retaining a fully 

domestic source will make it easier to 

track the components and determine the 

cause of any failure. 

Response: Nothing in this rule alters 

DoD procedures for ensuring the quality 

of the products it purchases. 

c. The respondent considered that 

retaining all of this skill set is critical to 

maintaining a viable industrial base. 

According to the respondent, there is 

potential in the near future to have 

difficulty getting bearings even from 

qualifying countries, leaving China as 

the sole source of this critical 

component. The respondent was 

concerned that China may manipulate 

the market if there is no ready domestic 

supplier of bearings. 

Response: DoD has existing authority 

under 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(3) and 

implementing DFARS provisions to 

restrict procurements to domestic 

sources when it determines that a 

particular industrial capability must be 

protected for national security reasons, 

and can use this authority for bearings 

if it proves necessary. 

d. The respondent stated that the fact 

that the rule affects any small business 

supplier is worthy of consideration, not 

just when it affects a significant number. 

Response: The language in the 

preamble to the proposed rule relating 

to impact on small business entities is 

based on the statutory requirement to 

assess whether the rule will have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities within the 

meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.). The analysis, 

however, did assess both positive and 

negative impact on small business 

entities. 

2. Exemptions 

Comment: One respondent was 

concerned that the language in 252.225– 

7016 is unchanged from the currently 

existing exemption. 

a. According to the respondent, by 

allowing the same exemption and 

lowering the content requirement to 50 

per cent, a bearing used in assembly for 

a military application may be sourced 

from anywhere in the world, including 

countries that have less sophisticated 

production capabilities. The respondent 

recommended revision of the 

exemptions to require manufacture of 

domestically nonavailable ball or roller 

bearings in a designated country. 

b. The respondent also mentioned 

that when the Government needs to buy 

a spare or replacement foreign 

commercial bearing, it cannot do so 

without a waiver. 

Response: a. This case is only 

concerned with the definition of what 

constitutes a domestic bearing, based on 

statutory change. The definition of a 

domestic bearing still requires 

manufacture in the United States, its 

outlying areas, or Canada. There was no 

change in the statute regarding the 

exemptions from these requirements. 

b. The issue relating to problems of 

buying spare or replacement foreign 

commercial bearings is also a problem 

of the current regulation, and is a direct 

result of the statutory lack of exceptions 

when buying commercial ball or roller 

bearings as the end item rather than as 

a component. 

3. Waivers 

Comment: One respondent stated that 

waivers go too far. If there is no 

domestic bearing to meet the 

requirement, then the restriction should 

only be waived to allow purchase of 

bearings from designated countries. The 

respondent was concerned that the 

proposal may ease the restrictions 

beyond those found in the Buy 

American Act, thus opening the 

possibility of allowing bearings for 

defense purposes to include 

components manufactured by unreliable 

sources. The respondent noted that 

there are 2,059 FSC ball and roller 

bearings on the DLA FY 2010 waiver 

list. According to the respondent, 

sourcing is open to any country of 

origin, with price being the sole 

determining factor for award. 

Response: This rule implements 

section 8065 of the DoD Appropriations 

Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (Pub. L. 107– 

117) and the same restriction in 

subsequent DoD appropriations acts. 

While DoD interprets the phrase 

‘‘produced by a domestic source and of 

domestic origin’’ in a way that is 

comparable to the Buy American Act 

definition of ‘‘domestic end product’’, 

this does not imply that DoD is 

empowered to determine exceptions 

and waiver authority under this statute 

on any basis other than the specific 

provisions of the appropriations act. 

There is no basis provided in the 

appropriations act for restricting 

acquisitions of domestically 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 76299 

nonavailable items to the products of 

designated countries. Price is the sole 

determining factor for award after 

determination that the offered products 

meet the criteria of the solicitation. Nor 

does the respondent provide any 

evidence that the products of 

nondesignated countries are necessarily 

unreliable. Requiring a reliable product 

would be a more direct way to achieve 

the objective than prohibiting 

acquisition from nondesignated 

countries. 

4. Confusing or Inconsistent 

Comment: One respondent 

commented that the rules on bearings 

are only applied by DoD, not other 

Federal agencies, and that the rules are 

different depending on whether 

bearings are purchased as an end 

product or a component. 

Response: These inconsistencies are 

inherent within the law. The restrictions 

on bearings are contained in the annual 

defense appropriations acts, and apply 

only to DoD. Further, the law provides 

an exception for commercial bearings 

purchased as components, but does not 

allow the same exception for bearings 

when purchased as end products. 

5. Need for Qualified Suppliers (QSL) 

List and Qualified Manufacturers List 

(QML) 

Comment: One respondent 

recommended that other protections 

should be put in place in conjunction 

with this change to the domestic source 

restriction on ball and roller bearings. 

The respondent also recommended that 

the annual defense appropriations acts 

should include a requirement for the 

use of QSLs and QMLs when acquiring 

ball and roller bearings. 

Response: FAR subpart 9.2 addresses 

qualifications requirements. FAR 9.202 

provides the policy criteria that must be 

met in order for the head of the agency 

to establish a qualification requirement. 

The head of the agency must address in 

writing why a qualification requirement 

is necessary, and address the likely 

costs for testing and evaluation that will 

be incurred for a potential offeror to 

become qualified. A DoD agency that 

purchases bearings and products that 

contain bearings was concerned about 

the impact a QSL would have on 

competition. In addition, although a 

QSL would address quality issues, the 

agency does not consider that the level 

of effort associated with a QSL would be 

an economical solution to pursue. With 

regard to a QML, the agency indicated 

that a QML would add very little value 

to the purchase of bearings. The 

manufacturers are usually approved by 

the drawings, a Qualified Producers List 

(QPL), or the Engineering Service 

Activities (ESA). The recommended 

statutory change is outside the scope of 

this case. The intent of this case is to 

comply with the existing statute. 

B. Other Changes 

DoD incorporated three editorial 

changes in the final rule. 

1. The reference at 225.7009–2(b) to 

the specialty metals restriction has 

changed from ‘‘225.7002–1(b)’’ to 

‘‘225.7003–2.’’ 

2. Conforming changes are required to 

the clause dates in 252.212–7001. 

3. In paragraph (b)(2) of DFARS 

252.225–7016, ‘‘, its outlying areas’’ was 

added to ‘‘in the United States or 

Canada’’ to clarify that this requirement 

also applies to the outlying areas of the 

United States. It was not necessary to 

add this in the text in part 225, because 

in FAR 25.003, ‘‘United States’’ is 

defined to include the outlying areas. It 

could be inferred that this also applies 

in the clauses prescribed in part 225 

(see 52.202–1(a)). However, it is clearer 

to explicitly add it. 

III. Executive Order 12866 

This is a significant regulatory action 

and, therefore, was subject to review 

under section 6(b) of Executive Order 

12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 

dated September 30, 1993. This rule is 

not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804. 

IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

DoD does not expect this rule to have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

within the meaning of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. 

However, because this rule has impact 

on the application of domestic source 

restrictions, DoD has performed a final 

regulatory flexibility analysis, which is 

summarized as follows: 

This rule revises the restriction on 

ball and roller bearings to implement 

the annual defense appropriations act 

restriction. The DFARS currently 

reflects the more stringent requirement 

of 10 U.S.C. 2534(a)(5), that the bearing 

and all main bearing components must 

be manufactured in the United States or 

Canada. This restriction expired on 

October 1, 2005. This rule interprets the 

annual defense appropriations act to 

allow a 50 percent component test 

similar to the Buy American Act 

component test. 

The objective of the rule is to allow 

more flexibility to domestic bearings 

manufacturers in the acquisition of 

nondomestic components. The legal 

basis for the rule is section 8065 of the 

DoD Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 

2002 (Pub. L. 107–117) and the same 

restriction in subsequent DoD 

appropriations acts. 

One respondent stated that the fact 

that the rule affects any small business 

supplier is worthy of consideration, not 

just a significant number. The analysis, 

however, did assess both positive and 

negative impact on small business 

entities. Generally, the impact is 

considered to be positive (see next 

paragraph). No changes were made to 

the rule as a result of the comment. The 

only alternative would be to do nothing, 

which would have worse results as 

more waivers are granted for 

nonavailability of domestic bearings. 

The final rule affects manufacturers of 

bearings, bearing components, and 

noncommercial products that 

incorporate bearings. 

• Bearings. This rule applies only to 

bearings purchased as end products or 

noncommercial bearings incorporated in 

noncommercial end products or 

noncommercial components of 

noncommercial end products. Because 

this rule allows some element of 

nondomestic content in ball and roller 

bearing components, as long as the 

United States- or Canadianmanufactured bearing contains less than 

50 percent nondomestic bearing 

components, both large and small 

businesses may find greater numbers of 

sources from which to obtain ball and 

roller bearing components. Greater 

sourcing choices may enable small 

businesses to compete more 

successfully for DoD ball and roller 

bearing acquisitions. 

• Bearing components. Manufacturers 

of domestic bearing components may 

face increased competition from 

manufacturers of nondomestic bearing 

components. However, many of the 

bearing components that are being 

outsourced are no longer readily 

available from domestic sources. 

• Manufacturers of noncommercial 

products incorporating bearings. 

Manufacturers of noncommercial 

products incorporating bearings (both 

large and small businesses) will find it 

easier to acquire domestic bearings and 

will less frequently need to request 

nonavailability determinations. 

There is no significant economic 

impact on small entities as a result of 

this rule. The impact of this rule on 

small business is expected to be 

predominantly positive. If this rule is 

not implemented, the regulations will 

continue to meet the statutory 

requirements, but more domestic 

nonavailability waivers would continue 

to be required, which would mean that 

there would be no requirement to 

manufacture such bearings in the 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
76300 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

United States or Canada, or provide 

predominantly domestic components. 

V. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This final rule does not impose any 

new or modified reporting, 

recordkeeping, or information collection 

requirements that require the approval 

of the Office of Management and Budget 

under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 225 and 

252 

Government procurement. 

Clare M. Zebrowski, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

■ Therefore, 48 CFR parts 225 and 252 

are amended as follows: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 225 and 252 continues to read as 

follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR 

chapter 1. 

PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION 

■ 2. Revise section 225.7009–2 to read 

as follows: 

225.7009–2 Restriction. 

(a) Do not acquire ball and roller 

bearings unless— 

(1) The bearings are manufactured in 

the United States or Canada; and 

(2) For each ball or roller bearing, the 

cost of the bearing components mined, 

produced, or manufactured in the 

United States or Canada exceeds 50 

percent of the total cost of the bearing 

components of that ball or roller 

bearing. 

(b) The restriction at 225.7003–2 may 

also apply to bearings that are made 

from specialty metals, such as high 

carbon chrome steel (bearing steel). 

PART 252—SOLICITATION 

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT 

CLAUSES 

252.212–7001 [Amended] 

■ 3. Section 252.212–7001 is amended 

as follows: 

■ a. By revising the clause date to read 

‘‘(DEC 2010)’’; and 

■ b. In paragraph (b)(10) by removing 

‘‘(MAR 2006)’’ and adding in its place 

‘‘(DEC 2010)’’. 

■ 4. Revise section 252.225–7016 to 

read as follows: 

252.225–7016 Restriction on Acquisition 

of Ball and Roller Bearings. 

As prescribed in 225.7009–5, use the 

following clause: 

RESTRICTION ON ACQUISITION OF BALL 

AND ROLLER BEARINGS (DEC 2010) 

(a) Definitions. As used in this clause— 

(1) Bearing component means the bearing 

element, retainer, inner race, or outer race. 

(2) Component, other than a bearing 

component, means any item supplied to the 

Government as part of an end product or of 

another component. 

(3) End product means supplies delivered 

under a line item of this contract. 

(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of 

this clause— 

(1) Each ball and roller bearing delivered 

under this contract shall be manufactured in 

the United States, its outlying areas, or 

Canada; and 

(2) For each ball or roller bearing, the cost 

of the bearing components mined, produced, 

or manufactured in the United States, its 

outlying areas, or Canada shall exceed 50 

percent of the total cost of the bearing 

components of that ball or roller bearing. 

(c) The restriction in paragraph (b) of this 

clause does not apply to ball or roller 

bearings that are acquired as— 

(1) Commercial components of a 

noncommercial end product; or 

(2) Commercial or noncommercial 

components of a commercial component of a 

noncommercial end product. 

(d) The restriction in paragraph (b) of this 

clause may be waived upon request from the 

Contractor in accordance with subsection 

225.7009–4 of the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement. 

(e) If this contract includes DFARS clause 

252.225–7009, Restriction on Acquisition of 

Certain Articles Containing Specialty Metals, 

all bearings that contain specialty metals, as 

defined in that clause, must meet the 

requirements of that clause. 

(f) The Contractor shall insert the 

substance of this clause, including this 

paragraph (f), in all subcontracts, except 

those for— 

(1) Commercial items; or 

(2) Items that do not contain ball or roller 

bearings. 

(End of clause) 

[FR Doc. 2010–30670 Filed 12–7–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 622 

[Docket No. 100510220–0598–05] 

RIN 0648–AY90 

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of 

Mexico, and South Atlantic; 

Emergency Fisheries Closure in the 

Gulf of Mexico Due to the Deepwater 

Horizon MC252 Oil Spill; Amendment 4 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Temporary emergency rule; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this temporary 

emergency rule to prohibit royal red 

shrimp fishing in a specific area of the 

Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) exclusive 

economic zone (EEZ), in response to a 

fishery interaction of the Gulf shrimp 

fishery with sub-surface oil byproducts 

from the Deepwater Horizon MC252 oil 

spill. This temporary emergency rule 

supersedes the temporary emergency 

rule published December 1, 2010 (75 FR 

74648) and will remain in effect for 60 

days. The intended effect of this 

temporary emergency rule is to assure 

seafood safety and consumer confidence 

in Gulf seafood. 

DATES: This rule is effective December 3, 

2010, through 12:01 a.m., local time, 

February 2, 2011. Comments may be 

submitted through January 2, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this rule, identified by ‘‘0648–AY90’’ 

by any of the following methods: 

• Electronic Submissions: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

• Fax: 727–824–5308; Attention: 

Anik Clemens. 

• Mail: Anik Clemens, Southeast 

Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th 

Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701. 

Instructions: No comments will be 

posted for public viewing until after the 

comment period. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted to http:// 

www.regulations.gov without change. 

All Personal Identifying Information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

To submit comments through the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov, enter ‘‘NOAA– 

NMFS–2010–0244’’ in the keyword 

search, then select ‘‘Send a Comment or 

Submission.’’ NMFS will accept 

anonymous comments (enter N/A in the 

required fields, if you wish to remain 

anonymous). You may submit 

attachments to electronic comments in 

Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or 

Adobe PDF file formats only. 

Copies of the environmental 

assessment, signed on June 17, 2010, 

may be obtained from Susan Gerhart, 

Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 

13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 

33701–5505; telephone: 727–824–5305; 

e-mail: Susan.Gerhart@noaa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anik Clemens, telephone: 727–824– 

5305, fax: 727–824–5308; e-mail: 

anik.clemens@noaa.gov. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES