23662 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 77 / Friday, April 20, 2012 / Notices 

Dated: April 17, 2012. 

Tracey L. Thompson, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9539 Filed 4–19–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XB170 

Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management 

Council; Public Meeting 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Social and Economic 

Sub-Committee of the Mid-Atlantic 

Fishery Management Council’s 

(Council) Scientific and Statistical 

Committee (SSC) will meet with the 

Council’s Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and 

Butterfish Advisory Panel (AP). The 

purpose of the meeting is to develop 

Fishery Performance Reports for the 

Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish 

fisheries in preparation for setting 

specifications for 2013. 

DATES: The meeting will be held on 

Monday, May 7, 2012, from 8:30 a.m. to 

6 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the Four Points by Sheraton BWI, 7032 

Elm Road, Baltimore, MD 21240; 

telephone: (410) 859–3300. 

Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery 

Management Council, 800 N. State 

Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; 

telephone: (302) 674–2331. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher M. Moore Ph.D., Executive 

Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery 

Management Council, 800 N. State 

Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; 

telephone: (302) 526–5255. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

purpose of the meeting is to create 

fishery performance reports by the 

Council’s Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and 

Butterfish Advisory Panel (AP). The 

intent of these reports is to facilitate a 

venue for structured input from the 

Advisory Panel members for the 

Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish 

specifications process, including 

recommendations by the Council and its 

Scientific and Statistical Committee 

(SSC). 

Although non-emergency issues not 

contained in this notice may come 

before this group for discussion, those 

issues may not be the subject of formal 

action during this meeting. 

Special Accommodations: 

The meeting is physically accessible 

to people with disabilities. Requests for 

sign language interpretation or other 

auxiliary aids should be directed to 

M. Jan Saunders at the Mid-Atlantic 

Council Office, (302) 526–5251, at least 

5 days prior to the meeting date. 

Dated: April 17, 2012. 

Tracey L. Thompson, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9540 Filed 4–19–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

RIN 0648–XB171 

North Pacific Fishery Management 

Council; Public Meeting 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. 

SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery 

Management Council’s (NPFMC) Crab 

Plan Team (CPT) will meet in May in 

Anchorage, AK. 

DATES: The meeting will be held May 7– 

10, 2012, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the Anchorage Hilton Hotel, 500 West 

Third Avenue, Dillingham Room, 

Anchorage, AK. 

Council address: North Pacific 

Fishery Management Council, 605 W. 

4th Avenue, Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 

99501–2252. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Diana Stram, NPFMC; telephone: (907) 

271–2809. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Plan 

Team meeting agenda includes: Review 

of workshop reports on modeling and 

recruitment and recommendations on 

recruitment time frames for BMSY, 

Tanner crab model review and 

recommendations on use in 

specifications in 2012/13, review of 

rebuilding projections for Tanner crab, 

final OFL and ABC specification for 

Norton Sound red king crab, Aleutian 

Islands golden king crab, Pribilof 

Islands golden king crab and Adak red 

king crab for 2012/13,review data for 

AIGKC model and plans for model 

review in September, recommend 

appropriate stock boundary for the 

Pribilof Islands blue king crab stock, 

review of methodology to set OFL for St 

Matthew and Pribilof Islands blue king 

crab stocks, snow crab model proposals 

for 2012/13, discuss proposed crab 

bycatch limits in groundfish fisheries, 

handling mortality study, BMSY study, 

growth and maturity study, economic 

SAFE report overview, and Bristol Bay 

red king crab spawning effects paper. 

The Agenda is subject to change, and 

the latest version will be posted at 

http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/npfmc/ 

PDFdocuments/membership/PlanTeam/ 

Crab/CPTagenda512.pdf. 

Although non-emergency issues not 

contained in this agenda may come 

before this group for discussion, those 

issues may not be the subject of formal 

action during this meeting. Action will 

be restricted to those issues specifically 

listed in this notice and any issues 

arising after publication of this notice 

that require emergency action under 

section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act, provided the public has been 

notified of the Council’s intent to take 

final action to address the emergency. 

Special Accommodations 

These meetings are physically 

accessible to people with disabilities. 

Requests for sign language 

interpretation or other auxiliary aids 

should be directed to Gail Bendixen at 

(907) 271–2809 at least 7 working days 

prior to the meeting date. 

Dated: April 17, 2012. 

Tracey L. Thompson, 

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable 

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9541 Filed 4–19–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

United States Patent and Trademark 

Office 

[Docket No. PTO–P–2012–0012] 

Notice of Request for Comments on 

the Feasibility of Placing Economically 

Significant Patents Under a Secrecy 

Order and the Need To Review Criteria 

Used in Determining Secrecy Orders 

Related to National Security 

AGENCY: United States Patent and 

Trademark Office, Department of 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notice of request for comments. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to a request from 

Congress, the United States Patent and 

Trademark Office (USPTO) is seeking 

comments as to whether the United 

States should identify and bar from 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 77 / Friday, April 20, 2012 / Notices 23663 

publication and issuance certain patent 

applications as detrimental to the 

nation’s economic security. The USPTO 

is also seeking comments on the 

desirability of changes to the existing 

procedures for reviewing applications 

that might be detrimental to national 

security. 

DATES: Those wishing to submit written 

comments should submit those 

comments for consideration by June 19, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be sent by electronic mail message via 

the Internet addressed to 

SecrecyOrder.Comments@USPTO.gov. 

Comments may also be submitted by 

mail addressed to: Mail Stop 

Congressional Relations, Attention: Jim 

Moore, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandra, VA 

22313–1450. Although comments may 

be submitted by mail, the USPTO 

prefers to receive comments via the 

Internet. 

After the comment period, the written 

comments will be available for public 

inspection at the Office of Policy and 

External Affairs in the Executive Library 

located in the Madison West Building, 

10th Floor, 600 Dulany Street, 

Alexandria, Virginia, 22314. Contact: 

Mona Scott at mona.scott@uspto.gov or 

(571) 272–5777. 

In addition, the comments from the 

public will also be available via the 

USPTO Internet Web site (address: 

http://www.uspto.gov). 

Because comments will be made 

available for public inspection, 

information that is not desired to be 

made public, such as an address or 

phone number should not be included 

in the comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim 

Moore, Office of Policy and External 

Affairs, by phone (571) 272–7300; by 

email at james.moore@uspto.gov; or by 

mail addressed to: Mail Stop OPEA, 

United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, 

Virginia 22313–1450, ATTN: James 

Moore. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Recently, 

Congress has asked whether the 

currently performed screening of patent 

applications for national security 

concerns should be extended to protect 

economically significant patents from 

discovery by foreign entities. The 

Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related 

Agencies Subcommittee’s report on the 

2012 Appropriations Bill stated: 

‘‘By statute, patent applications are 

published no earlier than 18 months after the 

filing date, but it takes an average of about 

three years for a patent application to be 

processed. This period of time between 

publication and patent award provides 

worldwide access to the information 

included in those applications. In some 

circumstances, this information allows 

competitors to design around U.S. 

technologies and seize markets before the 

U.S. inventor is able to raise financing and 

secure a market.’’ H.R. Rpt. 112–169, at page 

18 (July 20, 2011) 

The Subcommittee instructed the 

USPTO to proceed to study these issues, 

stating that the ‘‘PTO, in consultation 

with appropriate agencies, shall develop 

updated criteria to evaluate the national 

security applications of patentable 

technologies [and] to evaluate and 

update its procedures with respect to its 

review of applications for foreign filing 

licenses that could potentially impact 

economic security.’’ H.R. Rpt. 112–169, 

at page 19 (July 20, 2011) In this 

context, the Subcommittee describes 

‘‘economic security’’ as ensuring that 

the United States receives the first 

benefits of innovations conceived 

within this country, so as to promote 

domestic development, future 

innovation and continued economic 

expansion. 

To carry out this study, the USPTO is 

seeking comments from the innovation 

community on the question of whether 

an economic security screening 

procedure, which borrows from the 

current national security screening 

procedure, should be considered. The 

USPTO is also seeking comments on 

whether the criteria used in the national 

security screening procedure adequately 

perform the desired function. 

1. Background 

A. Secrecy Orders 

Currently, all patent applications are 

screened, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 181, to 

determine whether the publication or 

disclosure of the application might be 

detrimental to national security. Such 

applications are routed to the 

Department of Defense and other 

agencies designated by the President as 

a ‘‘defense agency of the United States’’ 

for review prior to publication. The 

defense agency then makes a 

substantive determination as to whether 

the application in question should be 

placed under a secrecy order for such 

period as the national interest requires. 

These agencies also provide the USPTO 

with criteria used to determine what 

applications should be screened as well. 

The owner of an application which has 

been placed under a secrecy order has 

a statutory right to appeal from the order 

to the Secretary of Commerce. 

The criteria used to determine 

whether an application should be 

placed under a secrecy order for 

national security reasons have been set 

by numerous statutes, each controlling 

the disclosure of a certain type of 

subject matter. For example, all atomic 

energy information is classified 

pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 

1954 unless a positive action is taken to 

declassify it. The regulations 

implementing the Atomic Energy Act 

are promulgated by the Department of 

Energy, and are set forth at 10 CFR Part 

810. Other applicable statutes governing 

the movement of material or 

information to a destination outside the 

legal jurisdiction of the United States 

include the Arms Export Control Act of 

1968 (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), the Export 

Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. 

App. 2401–2420) (in force pursuant to 

the Presidential Notice of August 12, 

2011, titled ‘‘Continuation of Emergency 

Regarding Export Control Regulations,’’ 

76 Fed. Reg. 50661), and the Defense 

Authorization Act of 1984 (10 U.S.C. 

130). 

B. Effects of Secrecy Orders on Foreign 

Patent Protection and Exports 

A secrecy order severely restricts the 

applicant’s ability to obtain patent 

coverage outside of the United States. A 

secrecy order prevents U.S. publication 

and patent issuance, pursuant to 35 

U.S.C. 181 and 35 U.S.C. 

122(b)(2)(A)(ii). A secrecy order also 

prevents any foreign or international 

filing of the application, with very 

limited exceptions as set forth in 37 CFR 

5.5. An applicant having a patent 

application under a secrecy order in the 

United States who violates that order 

through publication, disclosure, or filing 

of a foreign patent application shall be 

subject to abandonment of the United 

States patent application, pursuant to 35 

U.S.C. 182. 

Under 35 U.S.C. 184, foreign filings 

are prohibited for applications under 

secrecy orders without the concurrence 

of the reviewing agency that requested 

the secrecy order. For United States 

applicants desiring to file a patent 

application in a foreign country and 

maintain priority of invention back to 

the United States filing date, a foreign 

application for patent must be filed 

within one year of the United States 

filing date, in accordance with Article 4 

of the Paris Convention. If the secrecy 

order is lifted after that one-year period, 

the United States applicant may file a 

patent application in a foreign country; 

however, applicant will not be accorded 

the priority of the United States filing 

date. 

Where a secrecy order is applied to an 

international application, the 

application will not be forwarded to the 

International Bureau as long as the 

secrecy order remains in effect (PCT 

Article 27(8) and 35 U.S.C. 368). If the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
23664 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 77 / Friday, April 20, 2012 / Notices 

secrecy order remains in effect, the 

international application will be 

declared withdrawn (abandoned) 

because the Record Copy of the 

international application was not 

received in time by the International 

Bureau (37 CFR 5.3(d), PCT Article 

12(3), and PCT Rule 22.3). It is, 

however, possible to prevent 

abandonment within the United States 

if the international application 

designates the United States under the 

requirements of 35 U.S.C. 371(c); see 

MPEP 1832. 

Additionally, a secrecy order based 

upon national security operates in 

tandem with United States export 

control as set forth by statute in the 

Export Administration Regulations, 15 

U.S.C. 734.3(b)(1). The export of a 

product covered by one of the categories 

for which a patent application would be 

placed under a secrecy order is subject 

to control by the defense agency that 

regulates such subject matter. If a new 

category of secrecy order subject matter 

is to be created (economic security) the 

question of whether export of that 

subject matter would be regulated by a 

United States agency would need to be 

addressed. In such a case, a domestic 

entity having a patent application 

placed under an economic secrecy order 

could be restricted from exporting any 

product covered by that application 

until the secrecy order is lifted by the 

USPTO operating in concert with the 

relevant United States agency. 

C. Currently Available Procedures to 

Assist Maintaining Secrecy Until Patent 

Issuance 

Many foreign jurisdictions publish 

full applications at eighteen months. 

Recent proposed legislation would 

instruct the United States Patent and 

Trademark Office to publish only an 

abstract of the application or otherwise 

amend 35 U.S.C. 122(b)(2)(B)(i). In the 

United States two procedures are 

available to prevent a patent application 

from publication. 

First, an applicant may request 

nonpublication of the application until 

such time as the application issues as a 

patent. Under 35 U.S.C. 122(b)(2)(B)(i), 

an applicant may request 

nonpublication upon filing of the patent 

application. An applicant making such 

a request must certify that the invention 

disclosed in the application has not and 

will not be the subject of an application 

filed in another country, or filed under 

a multilateral international agreement 

that requires publication of applications 

18 months after filing. 

The second procedure that can 

prevent a patent application from 

publication is a secrecy order under 35 

U.S.C. 181 and 35 U.S.C. 

122(b)(2)(A)(ii). A secrecy order is a 

Governmental directive, rather than a 

private elective, which prevents an 

applicant from obtaining patent 

protection and makes the application 

secret until the Government deems it 

advisable to the application to proceed 

to issuance. A secrecy order is effective 

to restrict publication, disclosure, or 

filing of a foreign patent application, for 

such period as the national interest 

requires. In contrast, a nonpublication 

request restricts publication of the 

patent application only up to the date of 

the issuance of a patent, and may be 

rescinded by the applicant at an earlier 

date. 

An alternative to preventing 

publication of a patent application is to 

expedite its prosecution, which reduces 

the time between disclosure and patent 

issuance. Prioritized examination, as 

authorized by Section 11(h) of the 

Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, sets 

an aggregate time goal of 12 months for 

an application to reach final disposition, 

which may be a final rejection or an 

allowance of the claims. By submitting 

a request upon filing the patent 

application, accompanied by the proper 

fees, a patent applicant may potentially 

receive an issued patent prior to the 18- 

month publication date. 

2. Scope of Requested Comments 

The Subcommittee has raised the 

concern of a potential risk of loss of 

competitive advantage during the period 

of time between publication and patent 

grant. Taking into account the current 

procedures through which an applicant 

may elect to defer publication of a 

patent application until patent issuance 

or expedite its prosecution, this Notice 

seeks to obtain feedback on whether the 

United States Government should 

institute a new regulatory scheme, 

modeled from that applied to national 

security concerns. This new procedure 

would institute a secrecy order that 

forbids applicants from disclosing 

subject matter deemed to be detrimental 

to national economic security for such 

period as the national interest requires. 

Interested members of the public are 

invited to submit written comments on 

issues that they believe relevant to 

whether, and under what 

circumstances, the United States should 

extend the current framework for 

placing patent applications under an 

order of secrecy to establish an 

additional screening program based on 

economic factors. The USPTO has not 

taken a position, nor is it predisposed to 

any particular views, on the following 

questions. 

Comments on one or more of the 

following would be helpful: 

Questions on Economic Security-Based 

Secrecy Orders 

1. Should the USPTO institute a plan 

to identify patent applications relating 

to critical technologies or technologies 

important to the United States economy 

to be placed under secrecy orders? 

2. Which governmental body should 

be designated by the President to 

provide the USPTO with the final 

determination as to which applications 

should receive this treatment? 

3. Which mechanisms should a 

governmental body use, at the time a 

patent application is filed, to determine 

that publication at 18-months of that 

particular application would be 

detrimental to national economic 

security? 

4. What criteria should be used in 

determining that dissemination of a 

patent application would be detrimental 

to national economic security such that 

an application should be placed under 

a secrecy order? 

5. Would regulations authorizing 

economic secrecy orders be covered by 

the current statutory authority provided 

to the USPTO, or would such orders 

require a new statutory framework? 

6. What would be the effect of 

establishing a new regulatory scheme 

based on economic security on 

businesses, industries, and the 

economy? 

7. How could Government agencies 

best perform such a determination while 

remaining in compliance with 

applicable laws and treaty obligations? 

8. How would such a policy affect the 

public notice function that underlies the 

policy of publication, including the 

ability of United States inventors and 

innovators to timely access the newest 

technical information upon which to 

build and stay ahead? 

9. What would be the impact on 

United States innovators, companies, 

and employers? How would such a 

secrecy order affect United States 

businesses that currently have 

substantial business operations or sales 

in foreign countries? 

10. Are the procedures currently 

available before the USPTO, such as 

nonpublication requests and prioritized 

examination, sufficient to minimize 

risks to applicants and allay concerns 

with 18-month publication of their 

invention? If not, why? 

11. What are the risks that an 

economic secrecy order regime would 

influence other nations to implement 

similar laws? Would the global 

implementation of an economic secrecy 

order regime benefit or hinder the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 77 / Friday, April 20, 2012 / Notices 23665 

progress of innovation in the United 

States? 

12. How would such a secrecy order 

regime affect international efforts 

toward a more harmonized patent 

system? 

13. Should the USPTO consider 

limiting what is published at 18 

months? 

This Notice also poses the following 

questions to determine the adequacy of 

the criteria used to place various 

technologies under secrecy orders for 

national security reasons. 

Questions on National Security-Based 

Secrecy Orders 

14. How should criteria currently 

used by United States defense agencies 

to screen patent applications for 

potential national security-based 

secrecy orders pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 181 

properly encompass the scope of 

invention, which may have a bearing on 

ensuring the United States maintains its 

technical advantages in defense-related 

fields? 

15. Are there examples where 

technologies that could relate to United 

States defense capabilities that were 

excluded from consideration for a 

secrecy order? 

16. What is the competitive cost to 

expanding the scope of the criteria used 

to screen applications for security order 

consideration? 

17. Among patent practitioners, is 

there a common practice of attempting 

to avoid consideration for a secrecy 

order by drafting the patent disclosure 

in such a way as to not raise national 

security implications of an invention? 

Dated: April 16, 2012. 

David J. Kappos, 

Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual 

Property and Director of the United States 

Patent and Trademark Office. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9503 Filed 4–19–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM 

PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR 

SEVERELY DISABLED 

Procurement List Additions 

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From 

People Who Are Blind or Severely 

Disabled. 

ACTION: Additions to the Procurement 

List. 

SUMMARY: This action adds a product 

and service to the Procurement List that 

will be furnished by nonprofit agencies 

employing persons who are blind or 

have other severe disabilities. 

DATES: Effective Date: 5/21/2012. 

ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase 

From People Who Are Blind or Severely 

Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 

1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, 

Arlington, Virginia, 22202–3259. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Barry S. Lineback, Telephone: (703) 

603–7740, Fax: (703) 603–0655, or email 

CMTEFedReg@AbilityOne.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Additions 

On 2/24/2012 (77 FR 11072–11073), 

the Committee for Purchase From 

People Who Are Blind or Severely 

Disabled published notice of proposed 

additions to the Procurement List. 

After consideration of the material 

presented to it concerning capability of 

qualified nonprofit agencies to provide 

the product and service and impact of 

the additions on the current or most 

recent contractors, the Committee has 

determined that the product and service 

listed below are suitable for 

procurement by the Federal Government 

under 41 U.S.C. 8501–8506 and 41 CFR 

51–2.4. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 

I certify that the following action will 

not have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The major factors considered for this 

certification were: 

1. The action will not result in any 

additional reporting, recordkeeping or 

other compliance requirements for small 

entities other than the small 

organizations that will furnish the 

product and service to the Government. 

2. The action will result in 

authorizing small entities to furnish the 

product and service to the Government. 

3. There are no known regulatory 

alternatives which would accomplish 

the objectives of the Javits-WagnerO’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501–8506) in 

connection with the product and service 

proposed for addition to the 

Procurement List. 

End of Certification 

Accordingly, the following product 

and service are added to the 

Procurement List: 

Product 

NSN: 6510–00–786–3736—Pad, Isopropyl 

Alcohol Impregnated, 1′′ x 1.375′′. 

NPA: Lighthouse of Central Florida, Orlando, 

FL. 

Contracting Activity: Defense Logistics 

Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, 

PA. 

Coverage: C–List for 25% of the requirement 

of the Department of Defense, as 

aggregated by the Defense Logistics 

Agency Troop Support, Philadelphia, 

PA. 

Service 

Service Type/Location: Janitorial Service, 

U.S. Coast Guard Sector New Orleans, 

200 Hendee Street, New Orleans, LA. 

NPA: The Arc of Greater New Orleans, 

Metairie, LA. 

Contracting Activity: Department of 

Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, 

SILC East, Norfolk, VA. 

Barry S. Lineback, 

Director, Business Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9588 Filed 4–19–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6353–01–P 

COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM 

PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR 

SEVERELY DISABLED 

Procurement List Proposed Additions 

AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From 

People Who Are Blind or Severely 

Disabled 

ACTION: Proposed additions to the 

Procurement List. 

SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing 

to add services to the Procurement List 

that will be provided by nonprofit 

agencies employing persons who are 

blind or have other severe disabilities. 

Comments Must be Received On or 

Before: 5/21/2012. 

ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase 

From People Who Are Blind or Severely 

Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 

1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, 

Arlington, Virginia 22202–3259. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR TO SUBMIT

COMMENTS CONTACT: Barry S. Lineback, 

Telephone: (703) 603–7740, Fax: (703) 

603–0655, or email 

CMTEFedReg@AbilityOne.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice is published pursuant to 41 

U.S.C. 8503(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51–2.3. Its 

purpose is to provide interested persons 

an opportunity to submit comments on 

the proposed actions. 

Additions 

If the Committee approves the 

proposed additions, the entities of the 

Federal Government identified in this 

notice will be required to procure the 

services listed below from nonprofit 

agencies employing persons who are 

blind or have other severe disabilities. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 

I certify that the following action will 

not have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The major factors considered for this 

certification were: 

1. If approved, the action will not 

result in any additional reporting, 

recordkeeping or other compliance 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES