Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2018 / Notices 30147 

III. Requirements and Limitations for 

Participation 

Applicants who would like to 

participate in the pilot project must be 

aware of both the following 

requirements to be met by applicants 

and the following limitations set by the 

IP5 Offices. 

A. Requirements To Be Met by 

Applicants 

The following requirements must be 

met by applicants wishing to participate 

in the pilot project: 

(a) The request for participation in the 

pilot must be submitted on the standard 

participation form and filed together 

with the international application. 

(b) The participation form and the 

international application must be filed 

at the receiving Office of one of the IP5 

Offices or at the International Bureau as 

receiving Office, and the applicant must 

select one of the IP5 Offices as the main 

International Searching Authority under 

PCT Rule 35. For example, U.S. 

applicants filing with the USPTO or the 

International Bureau as receiving Office 

may select the USPTO, the EPO, the 

KIPO, or the JPO as International 

Searching Authority, subject to certain 

limitations as described in the PCT 

Applicant’s Guide, Annex C/US. 

(c) Where the participation form and 

the international application are filed 

with the USPTO, they must be filed in 

electronic form via the USPTO’s EFSWeb system. The participation form 

must be loaded into EFS-Web as a 

separate document using document 

description ‘‘Request to Participate in 

PCT CS&E Pilot.’’ This is true even 

where the participation form is prepared 

using WIPO’s ePCT system since EFSWeb only extracts the PCT Request form 

and Fee Calculation sheet from ePCT or 

PCT Safe zip files. 

(d) The participation form and the 

international application must be filed 

in English when they are filed with the 

USPTO. As noted above, the other IP5 

Offices will initially only accept 

applications filed in English and will 

announce when they are prepared to 

accept applications in languages other 

than English. 

B. Limitations Set by the IP5 Offices 

The following limitations related to 

organizational aspects of the pilot must 

be complied with for the main 

International Searching Authority to 

accept a request for participation in the 

pilot: 

(a) The applicant must not have had 

ten international applications accepted 

in the pilot by the same main 

International Searching Authority. 

(b) The main International Searching 

Authority must not have accepted 100 

international applications into the pilot. 

The USPTO, in its capacity as the main 

International Searching Authority, will 

accept 50 applications during the first 

year of the pilot, that is from July 1, 

2018, to June 30, 2019, and 50 

applications during the second year of 

the pilot, that is from July 1, 2019, to 

June 30, 2020. 

(c) The main International Searching 

Authority must not determine that there 

is a defect in the application (e.g., the 

application does not contain a sequence 

listing portion of the description and/or 

a copy of a sequence listing in computer 

readable form as provided for in the 

Administrative Instructions under the 

PCT) impeding the processing of the 

application according to the timeline for 

the collaborative process. 

IV. Duration 

The pilot project is divided into two 

phases, a preparatory phase and an 

operational phase. The preparatory 

phase started on June 2, 2016, and was 

dedicated to the administrative and 

practical preparations required for a 

smooth functioning of the pilot. The 

operational phase will start on July 1, 

2018, and will be dedicated to the 

processing of applications under the 

collaborative scheme, the monitoring of 

applications for evaluation purposes, 

and the assessment of the outcome of 

the pilot. The operational phase will last 

for a period of three years ending on 

July 1, 2021, and will include an 

evaluation of the impact of the pilot on 

examination during the subsequent 

national/regional stages. Requests for 

participation in the pilot will be 

accepted only during the first two years 

of the operational phase, i.e., from July 

1, 2018, to June 30, 2020. 

Dated: June 21, 2018. 

Andrei Iancu, 

Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual 

Property and Director of the United States 

Patent and Trademark Office. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13800 Filed 6–26–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

[Docket ID DOD–2018–OS–0039] 

Manual for Courts-Martial; Proposed 

Amendments 

AGENCY: Joint Service Committee on 

Military Justice (JSC), Department of 

Defense. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed amendments 

to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United 

States (2016 ed.) and notice of public 

meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense 

requests comments on proposed 

changes to the Manual for CourtsMartial, United States (2016 ed.) (MCM). 

The proposed changes concern the rules 

of procedure and evidence applicable in 

trials by courts-martial as well as 

amendments to portions of the MCM 

discussing the punitive articles of the 

Uniform Code of Military Justice. The 

approval authority for these changes is 

the President. These proposed changes 

have not been coordinated within the 

Department of Defense under DoD 

Directive 5500.01, ‘‘Preparing, 

Processing and Coordinating 

Legislation, Executive Orders, 

Proclamations, Views Letters, and 

Testimony,’’ June 15, 2007, and do not 

constitute the official position of the 

Department of Defense, the Military 

Departments, or any other Government 

agency. 

DATES: Comments on the proposed 

changes must be received no later than 

August 27, 2018. A public meeting for 

comments will be held on July 11, 2018, 

at 1:30 p.m. in the United States Court 

of Appeals for the Armed Forces 

building, 450 E Street NW, Washington 

DC 20442–0001. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and title, 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Department of Defense, Office 

of the Deputy Chief Management 

Officer, Directorate for Oversight and 

Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, 

Mailbox #24, Suite 08D09, Alexandria, 

VA 22350–1700. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this Federal Register 

document. The general policy for 

comments and other submissions from 

members of the public is to make these 

submissions available for public 

viewing on the internet at http://

www.regulations.gov as they are 

received without change, including any 

personal identifiers or contact 

information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lieutenant Alexandra Nica, JAGC, USN, 

Executive Secretary, JSC, (202) 685– 

7058, alexandra.nica@navy.mil. The JSC 

website is located at http://

jsc.defense.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice is provided in accordance with 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
30148 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2018 / Notices 

DoD Instruction 5500.17, ‘‘Role and 

Responsibilities of the Joint Service 

Committee (JSC) on Military Justice,’’ 

February 21, 2018. 

The JSC invites members of the public 

to comment on the proposed changes; 

such comments should address specific 

recommended changes and provide 

supporting rationale. 

This notice also sets forth the date, 

time, and location for a public meeting 

of the JSC to discuss the proposed 

changes. 

This notice is intended only to 

improve the internal management of the 

Federal Government. It is not intended 

to create any right or benefit, 

substantive or procedural, enforceable at 

law by any party against the United 

States, its agencies, its officers, or any 

person. 

The proposed amendments to the 

MCM are as follows: 

Section 1. Part II of the Manual for 

Courts-Martial, United States as 

amended by E.O. 13825 is further 

amended as follows: 

(a) R.C.M. 705(d)(1) is amended and 

reads as follows: 

‘‘(1) In general. Subject to such 

limitations as the Secretary concerned 

may prescribe pursuant to R.C.M. 

705(a), a plea agreement that limits the 

sentence that can be imposed by the 

court-martial for one or more charges 

and specifications may contain: 

(A) A limitation on the maximum 

punishment that can be imposed by the 

court-martial; 

(B) a limitation on the minimum 

punishment that can be imposed by the 

court-martial; 

(C) limitations on the maximum and 

minimum punishments that can be 

imposed by the court-martial; or, 

(D) a specified sentence or portion of 

a sentence that shall be imposed by the 

court-martial.’’ 

(b) R.C.M. 916(e) is amended and 

reads as follows: 

‘‘(e) Self-defense. 

(1) Homicide or assault cases 

involving deadly force. It is a defense to 

a homicide, assault involving deadly 

force, or battery involving deadly force 

that the accused: 

(A) Apprehended, on reasonable 

grounds, that death or grievous bodily 

harm was about to be inflicted 

wrongfully on the accused; and 

(B) Believed that the force the accused 

used was necessary for protection 

against death or grievous bodily harm. 

(2) Certain aggravated assault cases. It 

is a defense to assault with a dangerous 

weapon or assault in which substantial 

or grievous bodily harm is inflicted that 

the accused: 

(A) Apprehended, on reasonable 

grounds, that bodily harm was about to 

be inflicted wrongfully on the accused; 

and 

(B) In order to deter the assailant, 

offered but did not actually inflict or 

attempt to inflict substantial or grievous 

bodily harm. 

(3) Other assaults. It is a defense to 

any assault punishable under Article 89, 

91, or 128 and not listed in paragraphs 

(e)(1) or (2) of this rule that the accused: 

(A) Apprehended, upon reasonable 

grounds, that bodily harm was about to 

be inflicted wrongfully on the accused; 

and 

(B) Believed that the force that the 

accused used was necessary for 

protection against bodily harm, 

provided that the force used by the 

accused was less than the force 

inflicting substantial or grievous bodily 

harm.’’ 

(c) R.C.M. 920(g) is new and reads as 

follows: 

‘‘(g) Waiver. Instructions on a lesser 

included offense shall not be given 

when both parties waive such an 

instruction. After receiving applicable 

notification of those lesser included 

offenses of which an accused may be 

convicted, the parties may waive the 

reading of a lesser included offense 

instruction. A written waiver is not 

required. The accused must 

affirmatively acknowledge that he or she 

understands the rights involved and 

affirmatively waives the instruction on 

the record. The accused’s waiver must 

be made freely, knowingly, and 

intelligently. In the case of a joint or 

common trial, instructions on a lesser 

included offense shall not be given as to 

an individual accused when that 

accused and the government agree to 

waive such an instruction.’’ 

(d) R.C.M. 1208(c) is new and reads as 

follows: 

‘‘(c) Effective date of sentences. The 

effective date of portions of a sentence 

adjudged at a new trial, other trial, or 

rehearing shall be calculated without 

regard to any previous adjudged 

sentence. The effective dates shall not 

relate back to any previously adjudged 

sentence.’’ 

Section 2. Part III of the Manual for 

Courts-Martial, United States as 

amended by E.O. 13825 is further 

amended as follows: 

(a) Mil. R. Evid. 315(b)(3) is new and 

reads as follows: 

‘‘(3) ‘‘Warrant for Wire or Electronic 

Communications’’ means a warrant 

issued by a military judge pursuant to 

18 U.S.C. 2703(a), (b)(1)(A), or (c)(1)(A) 

in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 846(d)(3) 

and R.C.M. 309(b)(2) and R.C.M. 703A.’’ 

(b) Mil. R. Evid. 315(d) is amended 

and reads as follows: 

‘‘(d) Who May Authorize. A search 

authorization under this rule is valid 

only if issued by an impartial individual 

in one of the categories set forth in 

subdivisions (d)(1), (d)(2), and (d)(3). 

Only a military judge may issue a 

warrant for wire or electronic 

communications under this rule. An 

otherwise impartial authorizing official 

does not lose impartiality merely 

because he or she is present at the scene 

of a search or is otherwise readily 

available to persons who may seek the 

issuance of a search authorization; nor 

does such an official lose impartiality 

merely because the official previously 

and impartially authorized investigative 

activities when such previous 

authorization is similar in intent or 

function to a pretrial authorization 

made by the United States district 

courts. 

(1) Commander. A commander or 

other person serving in a position 

designated by the Secretary concerned 

as either a position analogous to an 

officer in charge or a position of 

command, who has control over the 

place where the property or person to be 

searched is situated or found, or, if that 

place is not under military control, 

having control over persons subject to 

military law or the law of war; 

(2) Military Judge or Magistrate. A 

military judge or magistrate if 

authorized under regulations prescribed 

by the Secretary of Defense or the 

Secretary concerned; or 

(3) Other competent search authority. 

A competent, impartial official as 

designated under regulations by the 

Secretary of Defense or the Secretary 

concerned as an individual authorized 

to issue search authorizations under this 

rule.’’ 

Section 3. Part IV of the Manual for 

Courts-Martial, United States as 

amended by E.O. 13825 is further 

amended as follows: 

(a) Paragraph 20.c is amended as 

follows: 

‘‘c. Explanation. 

(1) In general. The prevention of 

inappropriate sexual activity by trainers, 

recruiters, and drill instructors with 

recruits, trainees, students attending 

service academies, and other potentially 

vulnerable persons in the initial training 

environment is crucial to the 

maintenance of good order and military 

discipline. Military law, regulation, and 

custom invest officers, noncommissioned officers, drill instructors, 

recruiters, cadre, and others with the 

right and obligation to exercise control 

over those they supervise. In this 

context, inappropriate sexual activity 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 124 / Wednesday, June 27, 2018 / Notices 30149 

between recruits/trainees and their 

respective recruiters/trainers is 

inherently destructive to good order and 

discipline. 

(2) Prohibited activity. The 

responsibility for identifying 

relationships subject to this offense and 

those outside the scope of this offense 

is entrusted to the individual Services to 

determine and specify by appropriate 

regulations. This offense is intended to 

cover those situations which involve the 

improper use of authority by virtue of 

an individual’s position in either a 

training or recruiting environment. Not 

all contact or associations are prohibited 

by this article. Service regulations must 

consider circumstances where preexisting relationships (for example, 

marriage relationships) exist. 

Additionally, this offense only 

criminalizes activity occurring when 

there is a training or recruiting 

relationship between the accused and 

the alleged victim of this offense. 

(3) Knowledge. The accused must 

have actual or constructive knowledge 

that a person was a ‘‘specially protected 

junior member of the armed forces’’ or 

an ‘‘applicant for military service’’ (as 

those terms are defined in this offense). 

Knowledge may be proved by 

circumstantial evidence. 

(4) Consent. Consent is not a defense 

to this offense.’’ 

(d) Paragraph 69.c.(1) is amended and 

reads as follows: 

‘‘(1) ‘‘Access’’ means to gain entry to, 

instruct, cause input to, cause output 

from, cause data processing with, or 

communicate with, the logical, 

arithmetical, or memory function 

resources of a computer, computer 

system, or computer network.’’ 

(e) Paragraph 89.c.(2) is amended and 

reads as follows: 

‘‘(2) Personnel action. For purposes of 

this offense, ‘‘personnel action’’ 

means— 

(a) any action taken against a 

Servicemember that affects, or has the 

potential to affect, that Servicemember’s 

current position or career, including 

promotion, disciplinary or other 

corrective action, transfer or 

reassignment, performance evaluations, 

decisions concerning pay, benefits, 

awards, or training, relief or removal, 

separation, discharge, referral for mental 

health evaluations, and any other 

personnel actions as defined by law or 

regulation, such as DoD Directive 

7050.06 (17 April 2015); or, 

(b) any action taken against a civilian 

employee that affects, or has the 

potential to affect, that person’s current 

position or career, including promotion, 

disciplinary or other corrective action, 

transfer or reassignment, performance 

evaluations, decisions concerning pay, 

benefits, awards, or training, relief and 

removal, discharge, and any other 

personnel actions as defined by law or 

regulation such as 5 U.S.C. 2302.’’ 

Dated: June 21, 2018. 

Aaron T. Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13783 Filed 6–26–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

[Docket ID: DOD–2018–OS–0037] 

Proposed Collection; Comment 

Request 

AGENCY: Under Secretary of Defense for 

Acquisition and Sustainment, DoD. 

ACTION: Information collection notice. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the 

Defense Logistics Agency announces a 

proposed public information collection 

and seeks public comment on the 

provisions thereof. Comments are 

invited on: Whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed information collection; ways 

to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and ways to minimize the 

burden of the information collection on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

DATES: Consideration will be given to all 

comments received by August 27, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and title, 

by any of the following methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Mail: Department of Defense, Office of 

the Chief Management Officer, 

Directorate for Oversight and 

Compliance, 4800 Mark Center Drive, 

Mailbox #24 Suite 08D09, Alexandria, 

VA 22350–1700. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name, docket 

number and title for this Federal 

Register document. The general policy 

for comments and other submissions 

from members of the public is to make 

these submissions available for public 

viewing on the internet at http://

www.regulations.gov as they are 

received without change, including any 

personal identifiers or contact 

information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

request more information on this 

proposed information collection or to 

obtain a copy of the proposal and 

associated collection instruments, 

please write to ODASD (Supply Chain 

Integration), 3500 Defense Pentagon RM 

1E518, Washington DC 20301–3500, 

Anthony VanBuren, 

anthony.d.vanburen.ctr@mail.mil or 

(571) 372–5259. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: Associated Form; and OMB 

Number: Defense Materiel Disposition 

Procedures for the Sale of DoD Materiel; 

DRMS 1645, DRMS 2006, SF 114–A; 

OMB Control Number 0704–0534. 

Needs and Uses: This collection 

allows the Department of Defense (DoD) 

and its representatives to assess the 

ability of prospective purchasers to 

comply with applicable laws and 

regulations before the sale of materiel. 

Defense Reutilization and Marketing 

Service (DRMS) Form 1645, ‘‘Statement 

of Intent,’’ and Standard Form (SF) 114– 

A, ‘‘Sale of Government Property—Item 

Bid Page—Sealed Bid,’’ are used to 

identify the nature of the purchaser’s 

business, where the materials will be 

stored, and what the buyer’s intentions 

are with the materiel (i.e., use the 

materiel as intended, re-sell to others, 

scrap the materiel for recovery of 

contents, or re-refine or re-process the 

materiel). These forms are used to 

determine if DRMS Form 2006, ‘‘PreAward/Post-Award On-Site Review,’’ 

will also be needed; DRMS Form 2006 

allows DoD components to determine if 

the purchaser is capable of meeting 

environmental and hazardous material 

handling responsibilities, in compliance 

with CFR part 102 of Title 41. 

Compliance with this regulation must 

be ascertained before DoD components 

may make an award of hazardous and 

dangerous property. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit. 

Annual Burden Hours: 232. 

Number of Respondents: 72. 

Responses per Respondent: 2.63. 

Annual Responses: 189. 

Average Burden per Response: 1.23 

hours. 

Frequency: On occasion. 

Dated: June 21, 2018. 

Shelly E. Finke, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13838 Filed 6–26–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES