6554 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

This rule was not subject to Office of

Management and Budget review under

Executive Order 12866, dated

September 30, 1993.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

DoD certifies that this final rule will

not 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 pertains only to

companies in which the Director of

Defense Procurement has determined

that the People’s Republic of China or

the People’s Liberation Army of the

People’s Republic of China owns more

than 50 percent interest.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act does

not apply because the rule does not

impose any 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 212,

225, and 252

Government procurement.

Michele P. Peterson,

Executive Editor, Defense Acquisition

Regulations Council.

Interim Rule Adopted as Final With

Changes

Accordingly, the interim rule

amending 48 CFR parts 212, 225, and

252, which was published at 64 FR 8727

on February 23, 1999, is adopted as a

final rule with the following changes:

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR

parts 212, 225, and 252 continues to

read as follows:

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

Chapter 1.

PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION

2. Sections 225.771–2 through

225.771–4 are revised and section

225.771–5 is added to read as follows:

225.771–2 Legal authority.

This section implements Section 8120

of the DoD Appropriations Act for fiscal

year 1999 (Pub. L. 105–262), as

amended by Section 144 of Title I,

Division C, of the Omnibus

Consolidated and Emergency

Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999

(Pub. L. 105–277).

225.771–3 Prohibition on contract award.

If using fiscal year 1999 funds made

available by Title III (Procurement) or

Title IV (Research, Development, Test

and Evaluation) of Pub. L. 105–262, do

not award or renew a contract with any

company in which the Director of

Defense Procurement has determined

that the People’s Republic of China or

the People’s Liberation Army of the

People’s Republic of China owns more

than 50 percent interest.

225.771–4 Procedures.

(a) Forward any information that the

People’s Republic of China or the

People’s Liberation Army of the

People’s Republic of China owns more

than 50 percent interest in a company,

through the head of the agency, to the

Director, Defense Procurement, ATTN:

OUSD (AT&L) DP/FC, 3060 Defense

Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–3060.

(b) Upon verification of the

information, the Director of Defense

Procurement will ask the General

Services Administration to list the

company as ineligible on the List of

Parties Excluded from Federal

Procurement and Nonprocurement

Programs.

225.771–5 Solicitation provision.

Use the provision at 252.225–7017,

Prohibition on Award to Companies

Owned by the People’s Republic of

China, in solicitations for contracts that

will use fiscal year 1999 funds made

available by Title III or IV of Pub. L.

105–262.

PART 252—SOLICITATION

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT

CLAUSES

3. Section 252.225–7017 is revised to

read as follows:

252.225–7017 Prohibition on Award to

Companies Owned by the People’s

Republic of China.

As prescribed in 225.771–5, use the

following provision:

Prohibition on Award to Companies Owned

by the People’s Republic of China (FEB 2000)

(a) Definition. ‘‘People’s Republic of

China,’’ as used in this provision, means the

government of the People’s Republic of

China, including its political subdivisions,

agencies, and instrumentalities.

(b) Prohibition on award. Section 8120 of

the Department of Defense Appropriations

Act for fiscal year 1999 (Pub. L. 105–262), as

amended by Section 144 of Title I, Division

C, of the Omnibus Consolidated and

Emergency Supplemental Appropriations

Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277), prohibits the

award of a contract under this solicitation to

any company in which the Director of

Defense Procurement (Office of the Under

Secretary of Defense (Acquisition,

Technology, and Logistics)) has determined

that the People’s Republic of China or the

People’s Liberation Army of the People’s

Republic of China owns more than 50

percent interest.

(c) Representation. By submission of an

offer, the offeror represents that the People’s

Republic of China or the People’s Liberation

Army of the People’s Republic of China does

not own more than 50 percent interest in the

offeror.

(End of provision)

[FR Doc. 00–2943 Filed 2–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

48 CFR Part 219 and Appendix I to

Chapter 2

[DFARS Case 99–D307]

Defense Federal Acquisition

Regulation Supplement; MentorProtege Program Improvements

AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).

ACTION: Interim rule with request for

comments.

SUMMARY: The Acting Director of

Defense Procurement has issued an

interim rule amending the Defense

Federal Acquisition Regulation

Supplement (DFARS) to implement

Section 811 of the National Defense

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000.

Section 811 amends statutory provisions

pertaining to the DoD Pilot MentorProtege Program.

DATES: Effective date: February 10, 2000.

Comment date: Comments on the

interim rule should be submitted in

writing to the address shown below on

or before April 10, 2000, to be

considered in the formation of the final

rule.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties should

submit written comments to: Defense

Acquisition Regulations Council, Attn:

Ms. Susan Schneider, PDUSD (AT&L)

DP (DAR), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense

Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–3062.

Telefax (703) 602–0350.

E-mail comments submitted via the

Internet should be addressed to:

dfars@acq.osd.mil

Please cite DFARS Case 99–D307 in

all correspondence related to this rule.

E-mail comments should cite DFARS

Case 99–D307 in the subject line.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Susan Schneider, (703) 602–0326.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

This interim rule revises DFARS

Subpart 219.71 and Appendix I to

implement Section 811 of the National

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal

Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65). Section

811 amends statutory provisions

pertaining to the DoD Pilot MentorProtege Program. The amendments

revise the procedures for reimbursement

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 6555

of costs to mentor firms for assistance

provided to protege firms; require both

mentor and protege firms to submit

progress reports; require the Defense

Contract Management Command to

conduct annual performance reviews of

mentor-protege agreements; extend the

period for entering into mentor-protege

agreements until September 30, 2002;

and extend the period during which

mentor firms may incur costs under the

Program until September 30, 2005.

This rule was not subject to Office of

Management and Budget review under

Executive Order 12866, dated

September 30, 1993.

B. 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. The

rule changes procedures for

administering and monitoring the

Mentor-Protege Program, but maintains

the primary objective of providing

incentives for major DoD contractors to

assist small disadvantaged business

concerns and qualified organizations

employing the severely disabled in

enhancing their capabilities to satisfy

Government and commercial contract

requirements. Therefore, DoD has not

performed and initial regulatory

flexibility analysis. DoD invites

comments from small businesses and

other interested parties. DoD also will

consider comments from small entities

concerning the affected DFARS subparts

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

comments should be submitted

separately and should cite DFARS Case

99–D307.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act (44

U.S.C. 3501, et seq.) applies because the

interim rule contains new information

collection requirements. Under the

emergency processing provisions of 44

U.S.C. 3507(j) as implemented at 5 CFR

1320.13, the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) has granted emergency

approval of the information collection

requirements through July 31, 2000,

under OMB Clearance Number 0704–

0412. DoD will obtain the OMB

approval required by 44 U.S.C.

3507(a)(2) prior to publication of the

final rule.

1. Comments: Comments are invited.

Particular comments are solicited on:

a. Whether the collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

agency, including whether the

information will have practical utility;

b. The accuracy of the agency’s

estimate of the burden of the

information collection;

c. Ways to enhance the quality,

utility, and clarity of the information to

be collected; and

d. Ways to minimize the burden of the

information collection on respondents,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology.

2. Title, Associated Form, and OMB

Number: DoD Pilot Mentor-Protege

Program, Defense Federal Acquisition

Regulation Supplement Appendix I;

OMB Number 0704–0412.

3. Needs and Uses: The new

information collection required by

Appendix I, Policy and Procedures for

the DoD Pilot Mentor-Protege Program,

is required by Section 811 of the

National Defense Authorization Act for

Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65).

DoD will use the information to assess

whether the purposes of the Pilot

Mentor-Protege Program have been

attained and to prepare the reports to

Congress required by Section 811 of

Public Law 106–65.

4. Affected Public: Businesses or other

for-profit entities.

5. Annual Burden Hours: 435.

6. Number of Respondents: 145.

7. Responses Per Respondent: 1.

8. Number of Responses: 145.

9. Average Burden Per Response: 3

hours (1 reporting hour; 2 recordkeeping

hours).

10. Frequency: Annually.

11. Supplementary Information:

DFARS Appendix I requires a protege

firm to report on its progress under a

mentor-protege agreement by concurring

with or rebutting its mentor firm’s yearend report. The protege firm also must

provide data on its employment,

revenues, and participation in DoD

contracts. The report is required

annually during the protege firm’s

Program participation term and for 2

fiscal years after the expiration of the

Program participation term.

D. Determination to Issue an Interim

Rule

A determination has been made under

the authority of the Secretary of Defense

that urgent and compelling reasons exist

to publish this interim rule prior to

affording the public an opportunity to

comment. This interim rule implements

Section 811 of the National Defense

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000.

Section 811 amends statutory provisions

pertaining to the DoD Pilot MentorProtege Program. Section 811 became

effective on October 5, 1999. DoD will

consider comments received in response

to this interim rule in the formation of

the final rule.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 219

Government procurement.

Michele P. Peterson,

Executive Editor, Defense Acquisition

Regulations Council.

Therefore, 48 CFR part 219 and

Appendix I to Chapter 2 are amended as

follows:

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR

Part 219 and Appendix I to Subchapter

I continues to read as follows:

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

Chapter 1.

PART 219—SMALL BUSINESS

PROGRAMS

2. Subpart 219.71 is revised to read as

follows:

Subpart 219.71—Pilot Mentor-Protege

Program

Sec.

219.7100 Scope.

219.7101 Policy.

219.7102 General.

219.7103 Procedures.

219.7103–1 General.

219.7103–2 Contracting officer

responsibilities.

219.7104 Developmental assistance costs

eligible for reimbursement or credit.

219.7105 Reporting.

219.7106 Performance reviews.

219.7100 Scope.

This subpart implements the Pilot

Mentor-Protege Program established

under Section 831 of the National

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal

Year 1991 (Pub. L. 101–510; 10 U.S.C.

2302 note). The purpose of the Program

is to provide incentives for DoD

contractors to assist small

disadvantaged businesses in enhancing

their capabilities and to increase

participation of such firms in

Government and commercial contracts.

Qualified organizations employing the

severely disabled, as defined in Section

8064A of Pub. L. 102–172, are also

eligible to participate as protege firms.

219.7101 Policy.

DoD policy and procedures for

implementation of the Program are

contained in Appendix I, Policy and

Procedures for the DoD Pilot MentorProtege Program.

219.7102 General.

The Program includes—

(a) Mentor firms that are prime

contractors with at least one active

subcontracting plan negotiated under

FAR Subpart 19.7.

6556 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

(b) Protege firms that are small

disadvantaged business (SDB) concerns

as defined at 219.001(1), or qualified

organizations employing the severely

disabled, eligible for receipt of Federal

contracts and selected by the mentor

firm.

(c) Mentor-protege agreements that

establish a developmental assistance

program for a protege firm.

(d) Incentives that DoD may provide

to mentor firms, including:

(1) Reimbursement for developmental

assistance costs through—

(i) A separately priced contract line

item on a DoD contract; or

(ii) A separate contract, upon written

determination by the Director, Small

and Disadvantaged Business Utilization,

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense

(Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics)

SADBU, OUSD (AT&L)), that unusual

circumstances justify reimbursement

using a separate contract; or

(2) Credit toward SDB subcontracting

goals, established under a

subcontracting plan negotiated under

FAR Subpart 19.7, for developmental

assistance costs that are not reimbursed.

219.7103 Procedures.

219.7103–1 General.

The procedures for application,

acceptance, and participation in the

Program are in Appendix I, Policy and

Procedures for the DoD Pilot MentorProtege Program. The Director, SADBU,

OUSD (AT&L), approves contractors as

mentor firms, approves mentor-protege

agreements, and forwards approved

mentor-protege agreements to the

contracting officer when program

funding is available through a DoD

program manager.

219.7103–2 Contracting officer

responsibilities.

Contracting officers must—

(a) Negotiate an advance agreement on

the treatment of developmental

assistance costs for either credit or

reimbursement if the mentor firm

proposes such an agreement, or delegate

authority to negotiate to the

administrative contracting officer (see

FAR 31.109).

(b) Modify (without consideration)

applicable contract(s) to incorporate the

clause at 252.232–7005, Reimbursement

of Subcontractor Advance Payments—

DoD Pilot Mentor-Protege Program,

when a mentor firms provides advance

payments to a protege firm under the

Program and the mentor firm requests

reimbursement of advance payments.

(c) Modify (without consideration)

applicable contract(s) to incorporate

other than customary progress payments

for small disadvantaged businesses in

accordance with FAR 32.504(c) if a

mentor firm provides such payments to

a protege firm and the mentor firm

requests reimbursement.

(d) Modify applicable contract(s) to

establish a contract line item for

reimbursement of developmental

assistance costs if—

(1) A DoD program manager has made

funds available for that purpose; and

(2) The contractor has an approved

mentor-protege agreement.

(e) Negotiate and award a separate

contract for reimbursement of

developmental assistance cost if—

(1) A DoD program manager has made

funds available for that purpose;

(2) The contractor has an approved

mentor-protege agreement; and

(3) The Director, SADBU, OUSD

(AT&L), has made a determination in

accordance with 219.7102(d)(1)(ii).

(f) Authorized reimbursement for

costs of assistance furnished to a protege

firm in excess of $1,000,000 in a fiscal

year only after receipt of a written

determination from the Director,

SADBU, OUSD (AT&L).

(g) Advise contractors of reporting

requirements in Appendix I.

(h) Provide a copy of the approved

Mentor-Protege agreement to the

Defense Contract Management

Command administrative contracting

officer responsible for conducting the

annual performance review (see

Appendix I, Section I–112).

219.7104 Developmental assistance costs

eligible for reimbursement or credit.

(a) Development assistance provided

under an approved mentor-protege

agreement is distinct from, and must not

duplicate, any effort that is the normal

and expected product of the award and

administration of the mentor firm’s

subcontracts. The mentor firm must

accumulate and charge costs associated

with the latter in accordance with its

approved accounting practices. Mentor

firm costs that are eligible for

reimbursement are set forth in

Appendix I.

(b) Before incurring any costs under

the Program, mentor firms must

establish the accounting treatment of

developmental assistance costs eligible

for reimbursement or credit. Advance

agreements are encouraged. To be

eligible for reimbursement under the

Program, the mentor firm must incur the

costs before October 1, 2005.

(c) If the mentor firm is suspended or

debarred while performing under an

approved mentor-protege agreement, the

mentor firm may not be reimbursed or

credited for developmental assistance

costs incurred more than 30 days after

the imposition of the suspension or

debarment.

(d) Developmental assistance costs

incurred by a mentor firm before

October 1, 2005, that are eligible for

crediting under the Program, may be

credited toward subcontracting plan

goals as set forth in Appendix I.

219.7105 Reporting.

Mentor and protege firms must report

on the progress made under mentorprotege agreements as indicated in

Appendix I, Section I–111.

219.7106 Performance reviews.

The Defense Contract Management

Command will conduct annual

performance reviews of all mentorprotege agreements as indicated in

Appendix I, Section I–112.

3. Appendix I to Chapter 2 is revised

to read as follows:

Appendix I—Policy and Procedures for the

DOD Pilot Mentor-Protege Program

I–100 Purpose.

I–101 Definitions.

I–101.1 Emerging SDB concern.

I–101.2 Historically Black college or

university.

I–101.3 Minority institution of higher

education.

I–102 General procedures.

I–103 Program duration.

I–104 Eligibility requirements for a protege

firm.

I–105 Selection of protege firms.

I–106 Approval process for companies to

participate in the Program as mentor

firms.

I–107 Mentor-protege agreements.

I–108 Reimbursement procedures.

I–109 Credit for unreimbursed

developmental assistance costs.

I–110 Advance agreements on the treatment

of developmental assistance costs.

I–111 Reporting requirements.

I–112 Agreement reviews.

I–100 Purpose.

(a) This Appendix I to 48 CFR Chapter 2

implements the Pilot Mentor-Protege

Program (hereinafter referred to as the

‘‘Program’’) established under Section 831 of

Pub. L. 101–510, the National Defense

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991 (10

U.S.C. 2302 note). The purpose of the

Program is to—

(1) Provide incentives to major DoD

contractors, performing under at least one

active approved subcontracting plan

negotiated with DoD or another Federal

agency, to assist small disadvantaged

business (SDB) concerns or qualified

organizations employing the severely

disabled (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘protege

firms’’) in enhancing their capabilities to

satisfy DoD and other contract and

subcontract requirements;

(2) Increase the overall participation of

protege firms as subcontractors and suppliers

under DoD contracts, other Federal agency

contracts, and commercial contracts; and

(3) Foster the establishment of long-term

business relationships between protege firms

and such contractors.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 6557

(b) Under the Program, eligible companies

approved as mentor firms will enter into

mentor-protege agreements with eligible

protege firms to provide appropriate

developmental assistance to enhance the

capabilities of the protege firms to perform as

subcontractors and suppliers. According to

the law, DoD may provide the mentor firm

with either cost reimbursement or credit

against SDB subcontracting goals established

under contracts with DoD or other Federal

agencies.

(c) DoD will measure the overall success of

the Program by the extent to which the

Program results in—

(1) An increase in the dollar value of

subcontracts awarded to protege firms by

mentor firms under DoD contracts;

(2) An increase in the dollar value of

contract and subcontract awards to protege

firms (under DoD contracts, contracts

awarded by other Federal agencies, and

commercial contracts) from the date of their

entry into the Program until 2 years after the

conclusion of the agreement;

(3) An increase in the number and dollar

value of subcontracts awarded to a protege

firm (or former protege firm) by its mentor

firm (or former mentor firm);

(4) An increase in subcontracting with SDB

concerns in industry categories where SDBs

traditionally have not participated within the

mentor firm’s vendor base;

(5) The involvement of emerging SDBs in

the Program; and

(6) An increase in the employment level of

protege firms from the date of entry into the

Program until 2 years after the completion of

the agreement.

(d) This policy sets forth the procedures for

participation in the Program applicable to

companies that are interested in receiving—

(1) Reimbursement through a separate

contract line item in a DoD contract or a

separate contract with DoD; or

(2) Credit toward SDB subcontracting goals

for costs incurred under the Program.

I–101 Definitions.

I–101.1 Emerging SDB concern.

A small disadvantaged business whose size

is no greater than 50 percent of the numerical

size standard applicable to the standard

industrial code for the supplies or services

that the protege firm provides or would

provide to the mentor firm.

I–101.2 Historically Black college or

university.

An institution determined by the Secretary

of Education to meet the requirements of 34

CFR 608.2. The term also means any

nonprofit research institution that was an

integral part of such a college or university

before November 14, 1986.

I–101.3 Minority institution of higher

education.

An institution meeting the definition of

‘‘Minority Institution’’ at FAR 26.301.

I–102 General procedures.

(a) At any time between October 1, 1991,

and September 30, 2002, companies

interested in becoming mentor firms that

want to take credit toward SDB

subcontracting goals for costs incurred for

providing developmental assistance to one or

more protege firms must apply to DoD for

participation in the Program pursuant to the

application process set forth at I–106(a).

(b) At any time between October 1, 1991,

and September 30, 2002, companies

interested in becoming mentor firms that are

able to identify funding from a DoD program

manager(s) to provide developmental

assistance to one or more protege firms must

apply to DoD for participation in the

Program, pursuant to the application process

set forth at I–106(d).

I–103 Program duration.

Activities under the Program may occur

only during the following periods:

(a) From October 1, 1991, until September

30, 2002, companies that have been approved

for participation in the Program as mentor

firms pursuant to I–102, General Procedures,

may enter into mentor-protege agreements,

pursuant to I–107, Mentor Protege

Agreements.

(b) From October 1, 1991, until September

30, 2005, DoD may reimburse a mentor firm’s

costs of providing developmental assistance

to its protege firm only if a DoD program

manager has identified the funding for such

costs and—

(1)(i) For mentor-protege agreements

entered into prior to October 1, 1999, the

mentor firm incurs such costs after DoD and

the mentor firm enter into a separate

contract, cooperative agreement, or other

agreement; or

(ii) For mentor-protege agreements entered

into on or after October 1, 1999, the mentor

firm incurs such costs after DoD and the

mentor firm enter into a separate contract

based upon a determination by the Director,

Small and Disadvantaged Business

Utilization, Office of the Under Secretary of

Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and

Logistics) (SADBU, OUSD (AT&L)), that

unusual circumstances justify using a

separate contract; or

(2) The mentor firm incurs such costs

pursuant to the execution of a separately

priced contract line item added to a DoD

contract(s).

(c) From October 1, 1991, until September

30, 2005, a mentor firm may receive credit

toward the attainment of its goals for

subcontract awards to SDBs, for

unreimbursed costs incurred in providing

developmental assistance to its protege firms,

only it such costs are incurred pursuant to an

approved mentor-protege agreement.

I–104 Eligibility requirements for a protege

firm.

(a) An entity may qualify as a protege firm

if it is—

(1) An SDB concern as defined at 219.001,

paragraph (1) of the definition of ‘‘small

disadvantaged business concern,’’ that is—

(i) Eligible for the award of Federal

contracts; and

(ii) A small business according to the Small

Business Administration (SBA) size standard

for the Standard Industrial Classification

(SIC) code that represents the contemplated

supplies or services to be provided by the

protege firm to the mentor firm; or

(2) A qualified organization employing the

severely disabled as defined in Pub. L. 102–

172, section 8064A.

(b) A protege firm may self-certify to a

mentor firm that it meets the eligibility

requirements in paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this

section. Mentor firms may rely in good faith

on a written representation that the entity

meets the requirements of paragraph (a)(1) or

(2) of this section, except for a protege’s

status as a small disadvantaged business

concern (see FAR 19.703(b)).

(c) A protege firm may have only one

active DoD mentor-protege agreement.

I–105 Selection of protege firms.

(a) Mentor firms will be solely responsible

for selecting protege firms. Mentor firms are

encouraged to identify and select protege

firms that are defined as emerging SDB

concerns.

(b) The selection of protege firms by

mentor firms may not be protested, except as

in paragraph (c) of this section.

(c) In the event of a protest regarding the

size or disadvantaged status of an entity

selected to be a protege firm as defined in I–

104(a)(1), the mentor firm must refer the

protest to the SBA to resolve in accordance

with 13 CFR Part 121 (with respect to size)

or 13 CFR 124 (with respect to disadvantaged

status).

(d) For purposes of the Small Business Act,

no determination of affiliation or control

(either direct or indirect) may be found

between a protege firm and its mentor firm

on the basis that the mentor firm has agreed

to furnish (or has furnished) to its protege

firm, pursuant to a mentor-protege

agreement, any form of developmental

assistance described in I–107(f).

(e) If at any time pursuant to paragraph (c)

of this section, the SBA determines that an

SDB protege firm is not an SDB concern,

assistance that the mentor firm furnishes to

such a concern after the date of the

determination may not be considered

assistance furnished under the Program.

I–106 Approval process for companies to

participate in the Program as mentor firms.

(a) On or after October 1, 1991, a company

that is interested in becoming a mentor firm

that is seeking credit toward SDB

subcontracting goals for costs incurred under

the Program must submit a request to the

Director, SADBU, OUSD (AT&L), for

approval as a mentor firm under the Program.

The Director will evaluate the request based

on the extent to which the company’s

proposal addresses the items listed in

paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. To the

maximum extent possible, a company should

limit its request to not more than 10 pages,

single-spaced. A company may identify more

than one protege in its request for approval

under the Program. The request must include

the information required in paragraphs (b)

and (c) of this section and may cover one or

more proposed mentor-protege relationships.

(b) A company must indicate whether it is

interested in participating in the Program

pursuant to I–100(d)(1) or (2) and must

submit the following information:

(1) A statement that the company is

currently performing under at least one

6558 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

active approved subcontracting plan

negotiated with DoD or another Federal

agency pursuant to FAR 19.702, and that the

company is currently eligible for the award

of Federal contracts.

(2) The number of proposed mentorprotege relationships covered by the request

for approval as a mentor firm.

(3) A summary of the company’s historical

and recent activities and accomplishments

under its SDB program.

(4) The total dollar amount of DoD

contracts and subcontracts that the company

received during the 2 preceding fiscal years.

(Show prime contracts and subcontracts

separately per year.)

(5) The total dollar amount of all other

Federal agency contracts and subcontracts

that the company received during the 2

preceding fiscal years. (Show prime contracts

and subcontracts separately per year.)

(6) The total dollar amount of subcontracts

that the company awarded under DoD

contracts during the 2 preceding fiscal years.

(7) The total dollar amount of subcontracts

that the company awarded under all other

Federal agency contracts during the 2

preceding fiscal years.

(8) The total dollar amount and percentage

of subcontracts that the company awarded to

all SDB firms under DoD contracts and other

Federal agency contracts during the 2

preceding fiscal years. (Show DoD

subcontract awards separately.) If the

company presently is required to submit a

Standard Form (SF) 295, Summary

Subcontract Report, the request must include

copies of the final reports for the 2 preceding

fiscal years.

(9) The number and total dollar amount of

subcontracts that the company awarded to

the identified protege firm(s) during the 2

preceding fiscal years (if any). (Show DoD

subcontract awards and other Federal agency

subcontract awards separately.)

(c) In addition to the information required

in paragraph (b) of this section, companies

must submit the following information for

each proposed mentor-protege relationship:

(1) Information on the company’s ability to

provide developmental assistance to the

identified protege firm and how that

assistance will potentially increase

subcontracting opportunities in industry

categories where SDBs are not dominant in

the company’s vendor base.

(2) A letter of intent indicating that both

the mentor firm and the protege firm will

negotiate a mentor-protege agreement. The

letter of intent must be signed by both parties

and must contain the following information:

(i) The name, address, and telephone

number of both parties.

(ii) The protege firm’s business

classification, based upon the SIC code(s)

that represents the contemplated supplies or

services to be provided by the protege firm

to the mentor firm.

(iii) A statement that the protege firm

meets the eligibility criteria in I–104(a)(1) or

(2).

(iv) A preliminary assessment of the

developmental needs of the protege firm, and

the proposed developmental assistance the

mentor firm envisions providing the protege

firm to address those needs and enhance the

protege firm’s ability to perform successfully

under contracts or subcontracts with DoD

and other Federal agencies and commercial

contracts.

(v) an estimate of the dollar amount and

type of subcontracts that the mentor firm will

award to the protege firm, and the period of

time over which the mentor firm will make

those awards.

(vi) Information as to whether the protege

firm’s development will be concentrated on

a single major system, a service or supply

program, research and development

programs, initial production, or mature

systems, or in the mentor firm’s overall

contract base.

(3) An estimate of the cost of the

developmental assistance program and the

period of time over which the mentor firm

will provide assistance.

(4) A statement from the protege firm

indicating its commitment to comply with

the requirements for reporting and for review

of the agreement during the duration of the

agreement and for 2 years thereafter.

(d) A company that has identified Program

funds to be made available through a DoD

program manager must provide the

information in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this

section through the appropriate program

manager and the cognizant Director, SADBU,

to the Director, SADBU, OUSD(AT&L), with

a letter signed by the appropriate program

manager indicating the amount of funding

that has been identified for the

developmental assistance program. The

company must submit a justification and

endorsement from the cognizant Director,

SADBU, when requesting—

(1) Reimbursement of developmental costs

in excess of $1,000,000;

(2) Reimbursement through a separate

contract; or

(3) A Program participation term greater

than 3, but not more than 5, years.

(e) Companies seeking credit toward SDB

subcontracting goals for the cost of

developmental assistance, or reimbursement

with funds made available by a DoD program

manager, must submit four copies of the

information specified in paragraphs (b) and

(c) of this section to the Director, SADBU,

OUSD(AT&L), ATTN: Pilot Mentor-Protege

Program Manager, 1777 North Kent Street,

Suite 9100, Arlington, VA 22209. Upon

receipt of this information, the Director,

SADBU, OUSD(AT&L), will review and

evaluate each request and, to the maximum

extent possible, within 30 days advise each

applicant of approval or rejection of its

request to become a mentor firm.

(f) A company approved as a mentor firm,

either for credit or for reimbursement

through funds made available by a DoD

program manager, proceed with the

negotiation of the mentor-protege agreement

with the identified protege firm(s).

(g) Companies that apply for participation

in the Program pursuant to paragraph (e) of

this section, and are not approved, will be

provided the reasons and an opportunity to

submit additional information for

reconsideration.

(h) A company may not be approved for

participation in the Program as a mentor firm

if, at the time of requesting participation in

the Program, it is currently debarred or

suspended from contracting with the Federal

Government pursuant to FAR subpart 9.4.

(i) If the mentor firm is suspended or

debarred while performing under an

approved mentor-protege agreement, the

mentor firm—

(1) May continue to provide assistance to

its protege firms pursuant to approved

mentor-protege agreements entered into prior

to the imposition of such suspension or

debarment;

(2) May not be reimbursed or take credit for

any costs of providing developmental

assistance to its protege firm, incurred more

than 30 days after the imposition of such

suspension or debarment; and

(3) Must promptly give notice of its

suspension or debarment to its protege firm

and the Director, SADBU, OUSD (AT&L).

I–107 Mentor-protege agreements.

(a) A signed mentor-protege agreement for

each mentor-protege relationship identified

under I–106(b)(2) must be submitted to the

Director, SADBU, OUSD (AT&L), and

approved before developmental assistance

costs may be incurred. To the maximum

extent possible, such mentor-protege

agreements will be approved within 5

business days of receipt.

(b) Each signed mentor-protege agreement

submitted for approval under the Program

must include—

(1) The name, address, and telephone

number of the mentor firm and the protege

firm and a point of contact within the mentor

firm who will administer the developmental

assistance program;

(2) The SIC code that represents the

contemplated supplies or services to be

provided by the protege firm to the mentor

firm and a statement that, at the time the

agreement is submitted for approval, the

protege firm, if an SDB concern, does not

exceed the size standard for the appropriate

SIC code;

(3) A developmental program for the

protege firm specifying the type of assistance

identified in paragraph (f) of this section that

will be provided. The developmental

program also must include—

(i) Factors to assess the protege firm’s

developmental progress under the Program,

including milestones for providing the

identified assistance;

(ii) The anticipated number, dollar value,

and type of subcontracts to be awarded the

protege firm consistent with the extent and

nature of the mentor firm’s business, and the

period of time over which the subcontracts

will be awarded; and

(iii) The dollar value of the technical

assistance program, broken out per year;

(4) A program participation term for the

agreement that does not exceed 3 years.

Requests for an extension of the agreement

for a period not to exceed an additional 2

years are subject to the approval of the

Director, SADBU, OUSD (AT&L), and are

contingent upon the endorsement and

submission of justification for such an

extension from the cognizant Director,

SADBU. The justification must detail the

unusual circumstances that warrant a term in

excess of 3 years;

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 6559

(5) Procedures for the mentor firm to notify

the protege firm in writing at least 30 days

in advance of the mentor firm’s intent to

voluntarily withdraw its participation in the

Program. A mentor firm may voluntarily

terminate its mentor-protege agreement(s)

only if it no longer wants to be a participant

in the Program as a mentor firm. Otherwise,

a mentor firm must terminate a mentorprotege agreement for cause;

(6) Procedures for a protege firm to notify

the mentor firm in writing at least 30 days

in advance of the protege firm’s intent to

voluntarily terminate the mentor-protege

agreement;

(7) Procedures for the mentor firm to

terminate the mentor-protege agreement for

cause which provide that—

(i) The mentor firm must furnish the

protege firm a written notice of the proposed

termination, stating the specific reasons for

such action, at least 30 days in advance of

the effective date of such proposed

termination;

(ii) The protege firm must have 30 days to

respond to such notice of proposed

termination, and may rebut any findings

believed to be erroneous and offer a remedial

program;

(iii) Upon prompt consideration of the

protege firm’s response, the mentor firm must

either withdraw the notice of proposed

termination and continue the protege firm’s

participation, or issue the notice of

termination; and

(iv) The decision of the mentor firm

regarding termination for cause, conforming

with the requirements of this section, will be

final and is not reviewable by DoD; and

(8) Additional terms and conditions as may

be agreed upon by both parties.

(c) Mentor firms must send a copy of any

termination notices to the Director, SADBU,

OUSD (AT&L), and the Defense Contract

Management Command administrative

contracting officer responsible for conducting

the annual performance review, and, where

funding is made available through a DoD

program manager, must provide a copy to the

program manager and to the contracting

officer.

(d) Termination of a mentor-protege

agreement will not impair the obligations of

the mentor firm to perform pursuant to its

contractual obligations under Government

contracts and subcontracts. Termination of

all or part of the mentor-protege agreement

will not impair the obligations of the protege

firm to perform pursuant to its contractual

obligations under any contract awarded to

the protege firm by the mentor firm.

(e) Only developmental assistance

provided after DoD approval of the mentorprotege agreement may be reimbursed.

(f) The mentor-protege agreement may

provide for the mentor firm to furnish any or

all of the following types of developmental

assistance:

(1) Assistance by mentor firm personnel

in—

(i) General business management,

including organizational management,

financial management, and personnel

management, marketing, business

development, and overall business planning;

(ii) Engineering and technical matters such

as production inventory control and quality

assurance; and

(iii) Any other assistance designed to

develop the capabilities of the protege firm

under the developmental program.

(2) Award of subcontracts under DoD

contracts or other contracts on a

noncompetitive basis.

(3) Payment of progress payments for the

performance of subcontracts by a protege

firm in amounts as provided for in the

subcontract; but in no event may any such

progress payment exceed 100 percent of the

costs incurred by the protege firm for the

performance of the subcontract. Provision of

progress payments by a mentor firm to an

SDB protege firm at a rate other than the

customary rate for SDBs must be

implemented in accordance with FAR

32.504(c).

(4) Advance payments under such

subcontracts. The mentor firm must

administer advance payments in accordance

with FAR subpart 32.4.

(5) Loans.

(6) Investment(s) in the protege firm in

exchange for an ownership interest in the

protege firm, not to exceed 10 percent of the

total ownership interest. Investment may

include, but are not limited to, cash, stock,

and contribution in kind.

(7) Assistance that the mentor firm obtains

for the protege firm from one or more of the

following:

(i) Small Business Development Centers

established pursuant to Section 21 of the

Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 648).

(ii) Entities providing procurement

technical assistance pursuant to 10 U.S.C.

Chapter 142 (Procurement Technical

Assistance Centers).

(iii) Historically Black colleges and

universities.

(iv) Minority institutions of higher

education.

(g) A mentor firm may not require a protege

firm to enter into a mentor-protege agreement

as a condition for award of a contract by the

mentor firm, including a subcontract under a

DoD contract awarded to the mentor firm.

I–108 Reimbursement procedures.

(a) DoD will reimburse a mentor firm only

for the cost of developmental assistance

incurred by the mentor firm and provided to

a protege firm under I–107(f)(1) and (7), and

pursuant to an approved mentor-protege

agreement. For agreements entered into prior

to October 1, 1999, DoD will provide

reimbursement only through a separate

contract, cooperative agreement, or other

agreement entered into between DoD and the

mentor firm, awarded for the purpose of

providing developmental assistance to one or

more protege firms; a separately priced

contract line item in a DoD contract; or

inclusion of program costs in indirect

expense pools. For agreements entered into

on or after October 1, 1999, DoD will provide

reimbursement only through a separately

priced contract line item in a DoD contract;

or through a separate contract if the Director,

SADBU, OUSD(AT&L), determines the

unusual circumstances justify reimbursement

using a separate contract. No other means for

the reimbursement of the costs of

developmental assistance provided under I–

107(f)(1) and (7) are authorized under the

Program.

(b) Costs included in indirect expense

pools will be reimbursed only to the extent

that the costs are otherwise reasonable,

allocable, and allowable.

(c) Assistance provided in the form of

progress payments to SDB protege firms in

excess of the customary progress payment

rate for SDBs, will be reimbursed only if

implemented in accordance with FAR

32.504(c).

(d) Assistance provided in the form of

advance payments will be reimbursed only if

the payments have been provided to a

protege firm under subcontract terms and

conditions similar to those in the clause at

FAR 52.232.12, Advance Payments.

Reimbursements of any advance payments

will be made pursuant to the inclusion of the

clause at FARS 252.232–7005,

Reimbursement of Subcontractor Advance

Payments—DoD Pilot Mentor-Protege

Program, in appropriate contracts. In

requesting reimbursement, the mentor firm

agrees that the risk of any financial loss due

to the failure or inability of a protege firm to

repay any unliquidated advance payments

will be the sole responsibility of the mentor

firm.

(e) No other forms of developmental

assistance are authorized for reimbursement

under the Program.

(f) The total amount reimbursed to a

mentor firm for costs of assistance furnished

to a protege firm in a fiscal year may not

exceed $1,000,000 unless the Director,

SADBU, OUSD(AT&L), determines in writing

that unusual circumstances justify

reimbursement at a higher amount. Request

for authority to reimburse in excess of

$1,000,000 must detail the unusual

circumstances and must be endorsed and

submitted by the program manager and the

cognizant Director, SADBU.

I–109 Credit for unreimbursed developmental

assistance costs.

(a) Developmental assistance costs

incurred by a mentor firm for providing

assistance to a protege firm pursuant to an

approved mentor-protege agreement, that

have not been reimbursed through a separate

contract, cooperative agreement, or other

agreement entered into between DoD and the

mentor firm, or through a separately priced

contract line item added to a DoD contract,

may be credited as if it were a subcontract

award for determining the performance of the

mentor firm in attaining an SDB

subcontracting goal established under any

contract containing a subcontracting plan

pursuant to the clause at FAR 52.219–9,

Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

(b) For crediting purposes only, costs that

have been reimbursed through inclusion in

indirect expense pools may also be credited

as subcontract awards for determining the

performance of the mentor firm in attaining

an SDB subcontracting goal established

under any contract containing a

subcontracting plan pursuant to the clause at

FAR 52.219–9. However, costs that have not

6560 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

been reimbursed because they are not

reasonable, allocable, or allowable under I–

108(b), will not be recognized for crediting

purposes.

(c) Other costs that are not eligible for

reimbursement pursuant to I–108(a) may be

recognized for credit only if requested,

identified, and incorporated in an approved

mentor-protege agreement.

(d) The amount of credit a mentor firm may

receive for any such unreimbursed

developmental assistance costs must be equal

to—

(1) Four times the total amount of such

costs attributable to assistance provided by

small business development centers,

historically Black colleges and universities,

minority institutions, and procurement

technical assistance centers.

(2) Three times the total amount of such

costs attributable to assistance furnished by

the mentor’s employees.

(3) Two times the total amount of other

such costs incurred by the mentor in carrying

out the developmental assistance program.

(e) A mentor firm may receive credit

toward the attainment of an SDB

subcontracting goal for each subcontract

awarded for a product or a service by the

mentor firm to an entity that qualifies as a

protege firm pursuant to I–104(a). With

respect to a former SDB protege firm(s), a

mentor may take credit for awards to such

concern(s) that, except for its size would be

a small business concern owned and

controlled by socially and economically

disadvantaged individuals, but only if—

(1) The size of such business concern is not

more than two time the appropriate size

standard;

(2) The business concern formerly had a

mentor-protege agreement with such mentor

firm that was not terminated for cause; and

(3) The credit is taken not later than

October 1, 2005.

(f) Amounts credited toward the SDB

goal(s) for unreimbursed costs under the

Program must be separately identified from

the amounts credited toward the goal

resulting from the award of actual

subcontracts to protege firms. The

combination of the two must equal the

mentor firm’s overall accomplishment

toward the SDB goal(s).

(g) Adjustments may be made to the

amount of credit claimed under paragraphs

(a) and (b) of this section if the Director,

SADBU, OUSD(AT&L), determines that—

(1) A mentor firm’s performance in the

attainment of its SDB subcontracting goals

through actual subcontract awards declined

from the prior fiscal year without justifiable

cause; and

(2) Imposition of such a limitation on

credit appears to be warranted to prevent

abuse of this incentive for the mentor firm’s

participation in the Program.

(h) The mentor firm must be afforded the

opportunity to explain the decline in SDB

participation before imposition of any such

limitation on credit. In making the final

decision to impose a limitation on credit, the

Director, SADBU, OUSD (AT&L), must

consider—

(1) The mentor firm’s overall SDB

participation rates (in terms of percentages of

subcontract awards and dollars awarded) as

compared to the participation rates existing

during the 2 fiscal years prior to the firm’s

admission to the Program;

(2) The mentor firm’s aggregate prime

contract awards during the prior 2 fiscal

years and the total amount of subcontract

awards under such contracts; and

(3) Such other information the mentor firm

may wish to submit.

(i) The decision of the Director, SADBU,

OUSD (AT&L), regarding the imposition of a

limitation on credit will be final.

(j) Any prospective limitation on credit

imposed by the Director, SADBU, OUSD

(AT&L), must be expressed as a percentage of

otherwise eligible credit, will apply

beginning on a specific date in the future,

and will continue until a date certain during

the current fiscal year.

(k) Any retroactive limitation on credit

imposed by the Director, SADBU, OUSD

(AT&L), must reflect the actual costs incurred

for developmental assistance (not exceeding

the maximum amount reimbursed).

(l) For purposes of calculating any

incentives to be paid to be a mentor firm for

exceeding an SDB subcontracting goal

pursuant to the clause at FAR 52.219–26,

Small Disadvantaged Business Participation

Program—Incentive Subcontracting,

incentives will be paid only if an SDB

subcontracting goal has been exceeded as a

result of actual subcontract awards to SDBs

(i.e., excluding credit under paragraphs (a),

(b), and (c) of this section).

(m) Developmental assistance costs that are

incurred pursuant to an approved mentorprotege agreement, and have been charged to,

but not reimbursed through, a separate

contract, cooperative agreement, or other

agreement entered into between DoD and the

mentor firm, or through a separately priced

contract line item added to a DoD contract,

will not be otherwise reimbursed, as either a

direct or indirect cost, under any other DoD

contract, irrespective of whether the costs

have been recognized for credit against SDB

subcontracting goals.

(n) Developmental assistance provided

under an approved mentor-protege agreement

is distinct from, and must not duplicate, any

effort that is the normal and expected

product of the award and administration of

the mentor firm’s subcontracts. Costs

associated with the latter must be

accumulated and charged in accordance with

the contractor’s approved accounting

practices; they are not considered

developmental assistance costs eligible for

either credit or reimbursement under the

Program.

I–110 Advance agreements on the treatment

of developmental assistance costs.

Pursuant to FAR 31.109, approved mentor

firms seeking either reimbursement or credit

are strongly encouraged to enter into an

advance agreement with the contracting

officer responsible for determining final

indirect cost rates under FAR 42.705. The

purpose of the advance agreement is to

establish the accounting treatment of the

costs of the developmental assistance

pursuant to the mentor-protege agreement

prior to the incurring of any costs by the

mentor firm. An advance agreement is an

attempt by both the Government and the

mentor firm to avoid possible subsequent

dispute based on questions related to

reasonableness, allocability, or allowability

of the costs of developmental assistance

under the Program. Absent an advance

agreement, mentor firms are advised to

establish the accounting treatment of such

costs and address the need for any changes

to their cost accounting practices that may

result from the implementation of a mentorprotege agreement, prior to incurring any

costs, and irrespective of whether costs will

be reimbursed or credited.

I–111 Reporting requirements.

(a) Mentor firms must report on the

progress made under active mentor-protege

agreements semiannually for the periods

ending March 31st and September 30th. The

September 30th report must address the

entire fiscal year. Reports are due 30 days

after the close of each reporting period. The

report must include—

(1) Data on performance under the mentorprotege agreement, including dollars

obligated, expenditures, credit taken under

the Program, SDB subcontract awards under

DoD contracts, developmental assistance

provided, impact of the agreement, and

progress of the agreement (A recommended

format and guidance for this submission are

available via the Internet at http://

www.acq.osd.mil/sadbu/mentor protege);

and

(2) A copy of the SF 294, Subcontracting

Report for Individual Contracts, for each

contract where developmental assistance was

credited, with a statement in Block 15

identifying—

(i) The amount of dollars credited to the

SDB subcontract goal as a result of

developmental assistance provided to protege

firms under the Program; and

(ii) The number and dollar value of

subcontracts awarded to the protege firm(s),

broken out per protege.

(3) In addition to the reporting

requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this

section, for commercial companies and

companies participating in the DoD Test

Program for Negotiation of Comprehensive

Small Business Subcontracting Plans,

indicate in Block 15 of the SF 295—

(i) The total dollars credited to the SDB

goal as a result of developmental assistances

provided to a protege firm(s) under the

Program; and

(ii) The total dollar amount of subcontracts

awarded to the protege firm(s), broken out

per protege.

(b) The protege firm must report on

progress made under the mentor-protege

agreement annually by October 31st. The

protege firm must concur with or rebut its

mentor’s report that covers the period ending

September 30th and must provide data on the

firm’s employment, annual revenue, and

annual participation in DoD contracts. The

report is required annually during the

protege firm’s Program participation term

and for 2 fiscal years after the expiration of

the Program participation term.

(c) Progress reports must be submitted as

follows:

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 28 / Thursday, February 10, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 6561

(1) For agreements that provide credit

toward SDB subcontracting goals for costs

incurred under the Program, to the Director,

SADBU, OUSD (AT&L), and the Defense

Contract Management Command (DCMC)

administrative contracting officer.

(2) For agreements that provide for

reimbursement of costs incurred under the

Program, to the Director, SADBU, OUSD

(AT&L), the contracting officer, the DCMC

administrative contracting officer, the

program office, and the cognizant Director,

SADBU.

I–112 Agreement reviews.

The Defense Contract Management

Command will conduct annual performance

reviews of the progress and accomplishments

realized under approved mentor-protege

agreements. These reviews must verify data

provided on the semiannual reports and must

provide information as to—

(a) Whether all costs reimbursed to the

mentor firm under the agreement were

reasonably incurred to furnish assistance to

the protege firm in accordance with the

mentor-protege agreement and applicable

regulations and procedures;

(b) Whether the mentor firm and protege

firm accurately reported progress made by

the protege firm in employment, revenues,

and participation in DoD contracts during the

Program participation term and for 2 fiscal

years following the expiration of the

agreement; and

(c) The amount of reimbursement, if any,

that the mentor firm is eligible to receive in

the remaining Program participation term of

the agreement.

[FR Doc. 00–2946 Filed 2–9–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 000119015–0015–01; I.D.

010500A]

RIN 0648–AM32

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic

Zone Off Alaska; Steller Sea Lion

Protection Measures for the Pollock

Fisheries Off Alaska; Correction

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

SUMMARY: This document contains

corrections to the emergency interim

rule to implement reasonable and

prudent alternatives to avoid the

likelihood that the pollock fisheries off

Alaska will jeopardize the continued

existence of the western population of

Steller sea lions or adversely modify

their critical habitat that was published

in the Federal Register on January 25,

2000.

DATES: Effective February 4, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent

Lind, 907–586–7650.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An

emergency interim rule was published

in the Federal Register on January 25,

2000 (65 FR 3892), implementing

reasonable and prudent alternatives to

avoid the likelihood that the pollock

fisheries off Alaska will jeopardize the

continued existence of the western

population of Steller sea lions or

adversely modify their critical habitat.

Correction

PART 679—[CORRECTED]

On page 3902, in Table 20 to 50 CFR

part 679, titled Steller Sea Lion

Protection Areas in the Aleutian Islands

Subarea:

In the entry for ‘‘Seguam Island’’, in

the fifth column of the table, remove the

Longitude ‘‘172 33.06 W’’, and add in its

place ‘‘172 33.60 W’’.

Dated: February 3, 2000.

Penelope D. Dalton,

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 00–3004 Filed 2–4–00; 4:46 pm]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 679

[Docket No. 991223348–9348–01; I.D.

020700A]

Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic

Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Cod by

Vessels Catching Pacific Cod for

Processing by the Offshore

Component in the Western Regulatory

Area of the Gulf of Alaska

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Closure.

SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed

fishing for Pacific cod by vessels

catching Pacific cod for processing by

the offshore component in the Western

Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska

(GOA). This action is necessary to

prevent exceeding the interim amount

of the Pacific cod total allowable catch

(TAC) apportioned to vessels catching

Pacific cod for processing by the

offshore component of the Western

Regulatory Area of the GOA.

DATES: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local

time (A.l.t.), February 7, 2000, until

2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrew Smoker, 907–586–7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS

manages the groundfish fishery in the

GOA exclusive economic zone

according to the Fishery Management

Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of

Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North

Pacific Fishery Management Council

under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and

Management Act. Regulations governing

fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance

with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50

CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.

In accordance with § 679.20(c)(2)(i),

the interim Pacific cod TAC

apportioned to vessels catching Pacific

cod for processing by the offshore

component in the Western Regulatory

Area was established as 473 metric tons

(mt), by the Interim 2000 Harvest

Specifications of Groundfish for the

GOA (65 FR 65, January 3, 2000).

In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i),

the Administrator, Alaska Region,

NMFS (Regional Administrator), has

determined that the interim amount of

the Pacific cod TAC apportioned to

vessels catching Pacific cod for

processing by the offshore component of

the Western Regulatory Area of the GOA

will be reached. Therefore, the Regional

Administrator is establishing a directed

fishing allowance of 450 mt, and is

setting aside the remaining 23 mt as

bycatch to support other anticipated

groundfish fisheries. In accordance with

§ 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional

Administrator finds that this directed

fishing allowance will soon be reached.

Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting

directed fishing for Pacific cod by

vessels catching Pacific cod for

processing by the offshore component in

the Western Regulatory Area of the

GOA.

Maximum retainable bycatch amounts

may be found in the regulations at

§ 679.20(e) and (f).

Classification

This action responds to the interim

TAC limitations and other restrictions

on the fisheries established in the

interim 2000 harvest specifications for

groundfish in the GOA. It must be

implemented immediately to prevent

overharvesting the interim amount of

the Pacific cod TAC apportioned to

vessels catching Pacific cod for

processing by the offshore component in

the Western Regulatory Area of the