Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 48 / Wednesday, March 12, 1997 / Proposed Rules 11407

nonattainment area 30 days after the

effective date for the rule, or July 1,

1997, whichever is later. As of the

implementation date for the various

parties, this area will be treated as a

covered area for all purposes of the

federal RFG program for the relevant

parties. EPA asks for comment on

whether retailers and wholesale

purchaser-consumers believe they could

comply with federal RFG in less than 30

days from the effective date set for

persons other than retailers and

wholesale purchaser-consumers.

On February 18, 1997, EPA also

published a Direct Final Rule (62 FR

7164) setting an effective date for the

Phoenix ozone nonattainment area to be

a covered area in the federal RFG

program. Subsequent to publication,

EPA received several requests for a

hearing from interested parties. Thus,

EPA will soon publish in the Federal

Register a notice to indicate the

withdrawal of the Direct Final Rule.

II. Procedures for Public Participation

A. Comments and the Public Docket

The scope of EPA’s proposal is

limited to setting an effective date for

Phoenix’s opt-in to the RFG program

and not to decide whether Phoenix

should in fact opt in. For this reason,

EPA is only soliciting comments

addressing the appropriate

implementation date and whether there

is sufficient capacity to produce RFG,

and is not soliciting comments that

support or oppose Phoenix participating

in the program. EPA also asks for

comment on whether retailers and

wholesale purchaser-consumers believe

they could comply with federal RFG in

less than 30 days from the effective date

set for persons other than retailers and

wholesale purchaser-consumers. EPA

also notes that comments regarding

Arizona’s request for an RVP waiver

under section 211(c)(4), EPA opt-out

procedures, or federal enforcement

issues would not be relevant to the

limited scope of this rulemaking.

Persons with comments containing

proprietary information must

distinguish such information from other

comments to the greatest extent and

label it as ‘‘Confidential Business

Information.’’ If a person making

comments wants EPA to base the final

rule in part on a submission labeled as

confidential business information, then

a non-confidential version of the

document which summarizes the key

data or information should be placed in

the public docket. Information covered

by a claim of confidentiality will be

disclosed by EPA only to the extent

allowed by the procedures set forth in

40 CFR part 2. If no claim of

confidentiality accompanies the

submission when it is received by EPA,

it may be made available to the public

without further notice to the person

making comments.

B. Public Participation

Any person desiring to present

testimony regarding this proposed rule

at the public hearing (see DATES) should

notify the contact person listed above of

such intent as soon as possible. A signup sheet will be available at the

registration table the morning of the

hearing for scheduling testimony for

those who have not notified the contact

person. This testimony will be

scheduled on a first come, first serve

basis to follow the previously scheduled

testimony.

EPA suggests that approximately 50

copies of the statement or material to be

presented be brought to the hearing for

distribution to the audience. In

addition, EPA would find it helpful to

receive an advance copy of any

statement or material to be presented at

the hearing in order to give EPA staff

adequate time to review such material

before the hearing. Such advance copies

should be submitted to the contact

person listed previously.

The official records of the hearing will

be kept open for 30 days following the

hearing to allow submission of rebuttal

and supplementary testimony. All such

submittals should be directed to the Air

Docket, Docket No. A–97–02 (see

ADDRESSES).

Ms. Lori Stewart, Fuels

Implementation Group Leader, Fuels

and Energy Division, Office of Mobile

Sources, is hereby designated Presiding

Officer of the hearing. The hearing will

be conducted informally and technical

rules of evidence will not apply.

Because a public hearing is designed to

give interested parties an opportunity to

participate in the proceeding, there are

no adversary parties as such. Statements

by participants will not be subject to

cross examination by other participants.

A written transcript of the hearing will

be placed in the above docket for

review. Anyone desiring to purchase a

copy of the transcript should make

individual arrangements with the court

reporter recording the proceeding. The

Presiding Officer is authorized to strike

from the record statements which she

deems irrelevant or repetitious and to

impose reasonable limits on the

duration of the statement of any

witness. EPA asks that persons who

testify attempt to limit their testimony

to ten minutes, if possible. The

Administrator will base her decision

with regard to Arizona’s request on the

record of the public hearing and on any

other relevant written submissions and

other pertinent information. This

information will be available for public

inspection at the EPA Air Docket,

Docket No. A–97–02 (see ADDRESSES).

Dated: March 5, 1997.

Mary D. Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation.

[FR Doc. 97–6216 Filed 3–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 22 and 101

[WT Docket No. 97–81, FCC 97–58]

Multiple Address Systems

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This Notice of Proposed Rule

Making (NPRM) proposes to amend the

Commission’s rules in order to

streamline licensing procedures and

provide additional flexibility for

Multiple Address Systems (MAS)

licensees. These proposals were adopted

as part of the Commission’s continuing

effort to establish a flexible regulatory

framework for spectrum allocations. The

effects of these proposals would be to

maximize the use of radio frequency

spectrum allocated to MAS.

DATES: Comments are due on or before

April 21, 1997. Reply comments are due

on or before May 6, 1997.

ADDRESSES: You must send comments

and reply comments to the Office of the

Secretary, Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, DC 20554.

You may also file informal comments by

electronic mail. You should address

informal comments to bjames@fcc.gov.

You must put the docket number of this

proceeding on the subject line (‘‘WT

Docket No. 97–81’’). You must also

include your full name and Postal

Service mailing address in the text of

the message. Comments on the

information collections contained

herein should be submitted to Dorothy

Conway, Federal Communications

Commission, Room 234, 1919 M Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the

internet to dconway@fcc.gov, and to

Timothy Fain, OMB Desk Officer, 10236

NEOB, 725–17th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20503 or via the

internet to fain l t@al.eop.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob

James of the Commission’s Wireless

Telecommunications Bureau at (202)
11408 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 48 / Wednesday, March 12, 1997 / Proposed Rules

418–0680 or via email at

bjames@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s NPRM,

FCC 97–58, adopted February 19, 1997,

and released February 27, 1997. The full

text of this NPRM is available for

inspection and copying during normal

business hours in the FCC Reference

Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW.,

Washington, DC. The complete text may

be purchased from the Commission’s

copy contractor, ITS, Inc., 2100 M Street

NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037,

telephone (202) 857–3800.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This NPRM contains either a

proposed or modified information

collection. As part of the Commission’s

continuing effort to reduce paperwork

burdens, we invite the general public,

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB), and other agencies to take this

opportunity to comment on the

information collections contained in

this NPRM, as required by the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Public Law 104–13. Public and agency

comments are due at the same time as

other comments on this NPRM; OMB

comments are due 60 days after the

publication of this NPRM in the Federal

Register. Comments should address: (a)

Whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

Commission, including whether the

information shall have practical utility;

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s

burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance

the quality, utility, and clarity of the

information collected; and (d) ways to

minimize the burden of the collection of

information on the respondents,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology.

Summary of Notice

1. This NPRM seeks to further the

development and implementation of

MAS. Accordingly, this NPRM

tentatively concludes that the 932/941

MHz and 928/959 MHz MAS bands

should be designated for subscriberbased services and licensed on a

geographic basis, with service areas

based on the U.S. Department of

Commerce’s Economic Areas. In this

vein, licensees providing such

subscriber-based services would be

presumed telecommunications carriers

and would be required to meet liberal

construction/coverage requirements

with their service areas. Further, the

Commission proposes to resolve

mutually exclusive applications for the

932/941 MHz and 928/959 MHz MAS

licenses through competitive bidding.

2. In contrast to the subscriber-based

services discussed above, this NPRM

tentatively concludes that the 928/952/

956 MHz MAS bands should be

designated exclusively for private use

and seeks comment on whether these

bands should continue to be licensed on

a site-by-site basis or should be licensed

on a geographic basis. The Commission

also proposes to set aside five channel

pairs in the 932/941 MHz MAS bands,

to be licensed on a first-come, firstserved basis, for Federal Government/

Public Safety communications. 3. This NPRM also seeks to further the

development of MAS by reducing

regulatory burdens and increasing

flexibility for all MAS licensees. For

example, the Commission proposes to

simplify and streamline the MAS

licensing process. The Commission also

proposes to increase operational

flexibility by allowing MAS licensees to

provide mobile and fixed operations on

a co-primary basis with point-to-point

and point-to-multipoint operations.

Further, the Commission seeks

comment on whether 12.5 kHz or larger

blocks of spectrum should be available

to MAS licensees in order to broaden

the range of communications services

possible using MAS spectrum. 4. Finally, effective February 19, 1997,

this NPRM suspends the acceptance and

processing of MAS applications in the

932/941 MHz and 928/959 MHz bands,

and subscriber-based MAS applications

in the 928/952/956 MHz bands, except

certain pending applications,

applications for minor modifications,

and applications for license assignment

or transfer of control, during the

pendency of this rule making. This

suspension, however, does not affect

MAS applications for private, internal

communications in the 928/952/956

MHz bands.

5. This is a non-restricted notice and

comment rule making proceeding. Ex

Parte presentations are permitted,

except during the Sunshine Agenda

period, provided they are disclosed as

provided in Commission rules. See

generally 47 CFR 1.1202, 1.1203, and

1.1206(a).

6. Pursuant to applicable procedures

set forth in Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of

the Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR 1.415

and 1.419, interested parties may file

comments on or before April 21, 1997,

and reply comments on or before May

6, 1997. To file formally in this

proceeding, you must file an original

and four copies of all comments, reply

comments, and supporting comments. If

you want each Commissioner to receive

a personal copy of your comments, you

must file an original plus nine copies.

You must send comments and reply

comments to Office of the Secretary,

Federal Communications Commission,

Washington, DC 20554. You may also

file informal comments by electronics

mail. You should address informal

comments to bjames@fcc.gov. You must

put the docket number of the

proceeding on the subject line (‘‘WT

Docket No. 97–81’’). You must also

include your full name and Postal

Service mailing address in the text of

the message. Formal and informal

comments and reply comments will be

available for public inspection during

regular business hours in the F.C.C.

Reference Center of the Federal

Communications Commission, Room

239, 1919 M Street, NW., Washington,

DC 20554.

7. Authority for issuance of this

NPRM is contained in Sections 4(i),

303(r), and 309(j) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(r), and

309(j).

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 22

Communications common carriers,

Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

47 CFR Part 101

Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

Note:This attachment will not be published

in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Attachment

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

1. Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility

Act (RFA), see 5 U.S.C. 603, the Commission

has prepared this Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the expected

impact on small entities of the policies and

rules proposed in this NPRM. Written public

comments are requested on the IRFA.

Comments must be identified as responses to

the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines

for comments on the NPRM. The Secretary

shall cause a copy of this NPRM to be sent

to the Chief counsel for Advocacy of the

Small Business Administration, in

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 603(a).

A. Reason for Action

2. This NPRM requests public comment on

our proposals to maximize the use of

spectrum allocated to Multiple Address

Systems in the Microwave Service. These

proposals include: (1) Converting licensing of

MAS spectrum for which the principal use

will involve, or is reasonably likely to

involve, ‘‘subscriber-based’’ services, from

site-by-site licensing to geographic area

licensing, (2) simplifying and streamlining

the MAS licensing procedures and rules, (3)

increasing licensee flexibility to provide
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 48 / Wednesday, March 12, 1997 / Proposed Rules 11409

communication services that are responsive

to dynamic demands, and (4) employing

competitive bidding procedures (auctions) to

resolve mutually exclusive applications for

MAS spectrum for which the principal use

will involve, or is reasonably likely to

involve, ‘‘subscriber-based’’ services, In

addition, by this NPRM we temporarily

suspend the acceptance and processing of

MAS applications, with the exception of

applications in a few noted categories.

B. Objectives

3. In attempting to maximize the use of

MAS spectrum, we continue our efforts to

establish a flexible regulatory framework for

spectrum allocations that will, among other

things, provide opportunities for continued

development of competitive new service

offerings by allowing flexible use of

spectrum, expedite market entry through

modified licensing procedures, and promote

technological innovation by eliminating

unnecessary regulatory burdens.

C. Legal Basis

4. The authority for this action is contained

in Sections 4(i), 303(r), and 309(j) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as amended,

47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(r), and 309(j). See also

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553.

D. Description and Estimate of Small Entities

Affected

5. Pursuant to the Contract with America

Advancement Act of 1996, Public Law 104–

121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996), the Commission is

required to estimate in its Final Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis the number of small

entities to which a rule will apply, provide

a description of such entities, and assess the

impact of the rule on such entities. The

Regulatory Flexibility Act defines a ‘‘small

business’’ to be the same as a ‘‘small business

concern’’ under the Small Business Act

unless the Commission has developed one or

more definitions that are appropriate to its

activities. Under the Small Business Act, a

‘‘small business concern’’ is one that: (1) Is

independently owned and operated; (2) is not

dominant in its field of operation; and (3)

meets any additional criteria established by

the Small Business Administration (SBA). To

assist the Commission in this analysis,

commenters are requested to provide

information regarding how many MAS

entities, total, would be affected by the

various proposals on which the Commission

seeks comment in this NPRM. In particular,

we seek estimates of how many affected

entities will be considered ‘‘small

businesses.’’ In this regard, we ask

commenters to note that we have requested

comment regarding the establishment of a

small business definition for MAS for the

purpose of competitive bidding.

6. The proposals in the NPRM would effect

MAS licensees and applicants for licenses.

Such entities fall into two categories: (1)

Those using MAS spectrum for which the

principal use involves, will involve, or is

reasonably likely to involve, ‘‘subscriberbased’’ (commercial) services, and (2) those

using, or intending to use, MAS spectrum to

provide for their own internal

communications needs. Theoretically, it is

also possible that an entity could fall into

both categories. The spectrum uses in the two

categories differ markedly.

7. With respect to the first category, neither

the Commission nor the Small Business

Administration (SBA) has developed a

specific definition of small entities

applicable to MAS licensees that provide

commercial subscription services. The

applicable definition of small entity in this

instance appears to be the definition under

the SBA rules applicable to establishments

engaged in radiotelephone communications.

This definition provides that a small entity

is any entity employing fewer than 1,500

persons. See 13 CFR 121.201, Standard

Industrial Classification (SIC) Code 4812. The

1992 Census of Transportation,

Communications and Utilities, conducted by

the Bureau of the Census, which is the most

recent information available, shows that only

12 radiotelephone firms out of a total of 1,178

such firms operated during 1992 had 1,000

or more employees. Therefore, whether or

not any or all of these 12 firms are MAS

commercial service providers, nearly all

MAS commercial service providers are small

businesses by the Small Business

Administration’s definition. The

Commission’s licensing database indicates

that, as of November 8, 1996, there were a

total of 8,171 MAS station authorizations. Of

these, 1087 authorizations were for common

carrier service.

8. Alternatively, under the SBA rules, the

applicable definition of small entity for MAS

licensees that provide commercial

subscription services may also be applicable

to establishments primarily engaged in

furnishing telegraph and other message

communications. This definition provides

that a small entity is an entity with annual

receipts of $5 million or less. See 13 CFR

121.201, Standard Industrial Classification

(SIC) Code 4822. 1992 Census data, which is

the most recent information available,

indicates that, of the 286 firms under this

category, 247 had annual receipts of $4.999

million or less. We seek comment on whether

the appropriate definition for such MAS

licensees is SIC Code 4812, SIC Code 4822,

or both.

9. The Commission seeks comment on the

number of small entities that currently

provide commercial MAS subscription

service, and the number of small entities that

would anticipate filing applications to

provide such service under the various

proposals described in the NPRM. We seek

comment on whether we should conclude,

for purposes of the Final Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis in this matter, that all

MAS commercial communications service

providers are small entities.

10. With respect to the second category,

which consist of entities that use or seek to

use MAS spectrum to provide for their own

internal communications needs, we note that

MAS serves an essential role in a range of

industrial, business, land transportation, and

public safety activities. These radios are used

by companies of all sizes operating in

virtually all U.S. business categories. Because

of the array of users, the Commission has not

developed (nor would it be possible to

develop) a definition of small entities

specifically applicable to such MAS users.

Nor is there a precise SBA definition. In this

context we again seek comment on whether

the appropriate definition of small entity

under the SBA rules is that applicable to

radiotelephone companies: any entity

employing fewer than 1,500 persons. See 13

CFR 121.201, Standard Industrial

Classification (SIC) Code 4812. Again,

alternatively, we seek comment on the

appropriateness of defining such MAS

licensees under SIC Code 4822, concerning

establishments primarily engaged in

furnishing telegraph or other message

communications, or perhaps under both

Codes 4812 and 4822. For the purpose of

determining whether a licensee is a small

business as defined by the Small Business

Administration, each licensee would need to

be evaluated within its own business area.

The Commission’s licensing database

indicates that, as of November 8, 1996, of the

8,171 total MAS station authorizations, 7,084

authorizations were for private radio service,

and of these, 426 were for private mobile

service.

11. We seek comment on the number of

small entities that use MAS spectrum for

their internal communications needs.

Further, we seek comment on the number of

small entities that are likely to apply for

licenses, under the various proposals

described in the NPRM, to obtain spectrum

for their own internal communications

needs. Because any entity engaged in a

business or commercial activity is eligible to

hold an MAS license, the proposals in the

NPRM could prospectively affect any small

business in the United States interested in

using MAS for its own communications

needs. In other words, the universe of

prospective or possible MAS users includes

all U.S. small businesses.

12. The RFA also includes small

governmental entities as a part of the

regulatory flexibility analysis. The definition

of a small governmental entity is one with

populations of fewer than 50,000. There are

85,006 governmental entities in the nation.

This number includes such entities as states,

counties, cities, utility districts and school

districts. There are no figures available on

what portion of this number has populations

of fewer than 50,000. However, this number

includes 38,978 counties, cities and towns,

and of those, 37,566, or 96 percent, have

populations of fewer than 50,000. The

Census Bureau estimates that this ratio is

approximately accurate for all governmental

entities. Thus, of the 85,006 governmental

entities, we estimate that 96 percent, or

81,600, are small entities that may be affected

by our rules.

13. Again, we have requested comment

regarding the establishment of a refined small

business definition for MAS for the purpose

of competitive bidding. This NPRM does not

propose any definition, but merely seeks

comment on this issue.

E. Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other

Compliance Requirements

14. If we have competitive bidding to

award certain MAS licenses, as proposed,

and also establish a small business definition

for the purpose of competitive bidding, then

all small businesses that choose to participate
11410 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 48 / Wednesday, March 12, 1997 / Proposed Rules

in these services will be required to

demonstrate that they meet the criteria set

forth in quality as small businesses. See

generally 47 CFR Part 1, Subpart Q

(competitive bidding proceedings). Any

small business applicant wishing to avail

itself of small business provisions will need

to make the general financial disclosures

necessary to establish that the small business

is in fact small.

15. If this occurs, prior to auction each

small business applicant will be required to

submit an FCC Form 175, OMB Clearance

Number 3060–0600. The estimated time for

filling out an FCC Form 175 is 45 minutes.

In addition to filing an FCC Form 175, each

applicant must submit information regarding

the ownership of the applicant, any joint

venture arrangements or bidding consortia

that the applicant has entered into, and

financial information which demonstrates

that a small business wishing to qualify for

installment payments and bidding credits is

a small business. Applicants that do not have

audited financial statements available will be

permitted to certify to the validity of their

financial showings. While many small

businesses have chosen to employ attorneys

prior to filing an application to participate in

an auction, the rules are proposed so that a

small business working with the information

in a bidder information package can file an

application on its own. When an applicant

wins a license, it will be required to submit

an FCC Form 494 (common carrier) or FCC

Form 402 (private radio), which will require

technical information regarding the

applicant’s proposals for providing service.

This application will require information

provided by an engineer who will have

knowledge of the systems design. (Also, the

Commission is currently developing a single,

consolidated MAS form, FCC Form 415,

which will eventually supersede both Form

494 and Form 402.)

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate,

Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposals

16. None.

G. Significant Alternatives Minimizing the

Impact on Small Entities Consistent With the

Stated Objectives

17. The NPRM solicits comment on a

variety of proposals, some of which are

described below. Any significant alternatives

presented in the comments will be

considered. As noted, we have requested

comment regarding the establishment of a

small business definition for MAS. We also

seek comment generally on the existence of

small entities in MAS and how many total

entities, existing and potential, would be

affected by the proposed rules in the NPRM.

Finally, we request that each commenter

identify whether it is a ‘‘small business’’

under either of the two SBA definitions

described supra—either employing fewer

than 1,500 employees (for radiotelephone

communications companies) or having

annual receipts of $5 million or less (for

telegraph or other message communications

companies).

18. The Commission expects that licensing

subscriber-based MAS bands by geographic

area, as proposed, will assist small

businesses. As described supra, such

licensing makes expansion of operations

easier, and this flexibility assists all licenses,

including small business licensees. We also

believe that the proposed EA geographic area

service area is large enough to support the

services contemplated while being small

enough to be attractive to small business

entities. The NPRM also proposes a purely

private allocation for licenses using MAS

solely for internal uses. In addition, the

proposed flexible approach to the build-out

of MAS systems will assist licensees,

including small business licensees, in

designing and implementing their particular

business plans, while the partitioning and

disaggregation proposals will assist those

small businesses that might otherwise be

unable to acquire a ‘‘full’’ license as currently

configured. Finally, we believe that the

proposed spectrum auction will assist small

entities desiring to obtain MAS licenses. This

approach gets licenses to those most likely to

use them most effectively. By contrast, when

awarding licenses by lotteries it is only

coincidental when the license is awarded to

the entity best suited to using the license.

Using lotteries, therefore, creates uncertainty

for all would-be licensees, including those

that are small business. We seek comment on

all proposals and alternatives described in

the NPRM, and the impact that such

proposals and alternatives might have on

small entities.

[FR Doc. 97–6166 Filed 3–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 300

[I.D. 021197C]

International Code of Conduct for

Responsible Fisheries; Second Draft

Implementation Plan

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of availability; request

for comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces the

availability of a second Draft

Implementation Plan (Plan) for the Code

of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries

(Code) and invites review and comment.

The purpose and intended effect of this

action is to improve the document and

inform the public of its content.

DATES: Comments should be submitted

on or before April 28, 1997

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Matteo

Milazzo, International Fisheries

Division, Office of Sustainable

Fisheries, NMFS, 1315 East-West

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Matteo Milazzo, 301–713–2276.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July

25, 1996, NMFS announced the

availability of an initial Plan for the

Code in the Federal Register (61 FR

38703) and requested comments by

September 23, 1996. At the close of this

period, it became clear that several of

the public comments raised substantive

issues. During the same period, two

other relevant developments took place.

First, the Congress passed numerous

and significant amendments to the

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act in

the form of the Sustainable Fisheries

Act (SFA) and, second, NOAA/NMFS

moved into the final and substantive

phase of its long-term program planning

exercise, the NMFS Fisheries Strategic

Plan.

The requirements of the SFA and the

Strategic Plan point in the same

directions as the Code. In effect, NMFS

will implement the Code domestically

as it carries out its Congressionally

mandated responsibilities and the

objectives of the Strategic Plan.

Accordingly, NMFS has redrafted the

Plan, taking into account (1) the

comments received on the first draft; (2)

the guidance provided by Congress in

the Sustainable Fisheries Act; and (3)

the long-term program planning that is

being developed through the NMFS

Fisheries Strategic Plan.

With this notice, NMFS notifies the

public of the second draft’s availability

for comment. It includes the Agency’s

definition of a sustainable fishery, i.e.,

one in which the rate or level of fishing

mortality does not jeopardize the

capacity of the fishery to produce the

maximum sustainable yield on a

continuing basis.

For further background and rationale

for the Plan, please refer to the notice of

availability published on July 25, 1996.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Dated: March 6, 1997.

Nancy Foster,

Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 97–6193 Filed 3–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

50 CFR Part 630

[I.D.030597B]

Atlantic Tuna Fisheries; Public

Hearings

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.