Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 145 / Tuesday, July 29, 1997 / Proposed Rules 40497

conjunction with non-U.S. satellite

systems and foreign satellite service

providers file certain information

regarding the foreign service, markets,

and satellite systems. This is not

estimated to be a significant economic

burden for these entities.

E. Federal Rules That Overlap,

Duplicate or Conflict With These Rules

15. None.

F. Description, Potential Impact and

Number of Small Facilities Affected

16. The proposed rules would apply

to all earth stations or service providers

(including small entities) that seek

authorization under Part 25 and Part

100 of the Commission’s rules to operate

with a non-U.S. licensed satellite. These

proposals are intended to ensure that

U.S. satellite systems can compete

effectively in international markets and

that competition in the United States is

maximally enhanced. Copies of this

Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

will be sent to the Chief Counsel for

Advocacy of the Small Business

Administration.

G. Any Significant Alternative

Minimizing Impact on Small Entities

Consistent With Stated Objectives

17. The Further Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking solicits comment on other

alternatives to achieve the

Commission’s objectives.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 25

Satellites.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–20016 Filed 7–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–U

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

48 CFR Part 236

[DFARS Case 97–D015]

Defense Federal Acquisition

Regulation Supplement; ArchitectEngineer Selection process

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: Proposed rule with request for

comments.

SUMMARY: The Director of Defense

Procurement is proposing to amend the

Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation

Supplement (DFARS) to streamline the

process for selection of firms for

architect-engineer contracts.

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule

should be submitted in writing to the

address shown below on or before

September 29, 1997, to be considered in

the formulation of the final rule.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties should

submit written comments to: Defense

Acquisition Regulations Council, Attn:

Ms. Amy Williams, PDUSD (A&T) DP

(DAR), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense

Pentagon, Washington DC 20301–3062.

Telefax number (703) 602–0350. Please

cite DFARS Case 97–D015 in all

correspondence related to this issue.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Amy Williams, (703) 602–0131.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

This rule proposes revisions to

DFARS 236.602 to streamline the

process for selection of firms for

architect-engineer contracts. The rule

eliminates requirements for formal

constitution and minimum size of

preselection boards; eliminates special

approval requirements for selection of

firms for contracts exceeding $500,000;

and changes the criteria for inclusion of

firms on a preselection list from ‘‘the

maximum practicable number of

qualified firms’’ to ‘‘the qualified firms

that have a reasonable chance of being

considered as most highly qualified by

the selection board.’’

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

This proposed rule is not expected 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.,

because the rule streamlines, but does

not significantly alter, the process for

selection of firms for architect-engineer

contracts. An Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis has, therefore, not

been performed. Comments are invited

from small businesses and other

interested parties. Comments from small

entities concerning the affected DFARS

subpart also will be considered in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Such

comments should be submitted

separately and should cite DFARS Case

97–D015 in correspondence.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply, because this proposed rule

does not impose any information

collection requirements that require

approval of the Office of Management

and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3401, et

seq.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 236

Government procurement.

Michele P. Peterson,

Executive Editor, Defense Acquisition

Regulations Council.

Therefore, 48 CFR part 236 is

proposed to be amended as follows:

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

Chapter 1.

PART 236—CONSTRUCTION AND

ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS

2. Section 236.602–2 is revised to read

as follows:

§ 236.602–2 Evaluation boards

(a) Preselection boards may be used to

identify to the selection board the

qualified firms that have a reasonable

chance of being considered as most

highly qualified by the selection board.

3. Section 236–4 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 236.602–4 Selection authority.

(a) The selection authority shall be at

a level appropriate for the dollar value

and nature of the proposed contract.

(c) A finding that some of the firms on

the selection report are unqualified does

not preclude approval of the report,

provided that a minimum of three most

highly qualified firms remains. The

reasons for finding a firm or firms

unqualified must be recorded.

[FR Doc. 97–19906 Filed 7–28–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[I.D. 072297A]

RIN: 0648-AJ71

Amendment 49 to the Fishery

Management Plan for Groundfish

Fishery of the Gulf of Alaska

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce

ACTION: Notice of availability of an

amendment to a fishery management

plan; request for comments.

SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery

Management Council (Council) has

submitted Amendment 49 to the Fishery

Management Plan for Groundfish of the

Gulf of Alaska for Secretarial review.

Amendment 49 would require all

vessels fishing for groundfish in the

Gulf of Alaska (GOA) to retain all
40498 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 145 / Tuesday, July 29, 1997 / Proposed Rules

pollock and Pacific cod beginning

January 1, 1998, and all shallow-water

flatfish beginning January 1, 2003.

Amendment 49 also would establish

minimum utilization standards for all

at-sea processors—for pollock and

Pacific cod beginning January 1, 1998,

and for shallow-water flatfish beginning

January 1, 2003. Comments from the

public are requested.

DATES: Comments on Amendment 49

must be submitted on or before

September 29, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments on Amendment

49 should be submitted to Ronald J.

Berg, Chief, Fisheries Management

Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O.

Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668,

Attn: Lori Gravel, or delivered to the

Federal Building, 709 West 9th. Street,

Juneau, AK. Copies of Amendment 49

and the Environmental Assessment/

Regulatory Impact Review/Initial

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis prepared

for the amendment are available from

NMFS at the above address, or by

calling the Alaska Region, NMFS, at

907–586–7228.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent

Lind, 907-586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires that

each Regional Fishery Management

Council submit any fishery management

plan (FMP) or plan amendment it

prepares to NMFS for review and

approval, disapproval, or partial

approval. The Magnuson-Stevens Act

also requires that NMFS, upon receiving

an FMP or amendment, immediately

publish a document announcing that the

FMP or amendment is available for

public review and comment. NMFS will

consider the public comments received

during the comment period in

determining whether to approve the

FMP or amendment.

Amendment 49 is the result of over 3

years of specific discussions and

analyses of alternative solutions to the

discard problem occurring in the

groundfish fisheries off Alaska. The

expressed intent of the Council is to

implement a program that ‘‘would

provide an incentive for fishermen to

avoid unwanted catch, increase

utilization of fish that are taken, and

thus reduce discards of whole fish.’’

While such discards are counted against

the overall total allowable catch

established for each species and do not

represent a direct biological concern,

they do represent foregone harvest

opportunities for other fishing

operations which might otherwise target

and utilize those fish. In addition, high

levels of discards represent an

important social policy issue, which the

fishing industry and the Council feel the

necessity to address.

In September 1996, after extensive

debate and public testimony, the

Council adopted an Improved

Retention/Improved Utilization (IR/IU)

program as Amendment 49 to the FMP

for the Groundfish Fishery in the Bering

Sea and Aleutian Islands Area (BSAI). A

proposed rule to implement

Amendment 49 in the BSAI was

published in the Federal Register on

June 26, 1997 (62 FR 34429). In June

1997, the Council adopted a parallel IR/

IU program as Amendment 49 for the

GOA. The retention requirement

adopted by the Council for the GOA

would require full retention of pollock

and Pacific cod beginning January 1,

1998, and full retention of shallowwater flatfish beginning January 1, 2003.

The utilization requirement adopted by

the Council would require that the

above species either be (1) processed at

sea subject to minimum recovery rates

and/or requirements to be specified by

regulation, or (2) delivered in their

entirety to onshore processing plants for

which similar minimum requirements

are to be implemented through state

regulations.

NMFS will consider the public

comments received during the comment

period in determining whether to

approve Amendment 49. A proposed

rule to implement Amendment 49 is

scheduled to be published within 15

days of this document.

Dated: July 23, 1997.

Bruce C. Morehead,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 97–19847 Filed 7-28-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F