8560 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 22 / Thursday, February 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules

be allotted at Woodbury in compliance

with the Commission’s minimum

distance separation requirements with a

site restriction of 13.0 kilometers (8.1

miles) southeast to avoid short-spacings

to the licensed sites of Station

WSTR(FM), Channel 231C, Smyrna,

Georgia, and Station WYSF(FM),

Channel 233C, Birmingham, Alabama.

The coordinates for Channel 233A at

Woodbury are 32–54–40 North Latitude

and 84–28–24 West Longitude.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before March 12, 2001, reply comments

on or before March 27, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In

addition to filing comments with the

FCC, interested parties should serve the

petitioner, or its counsel or consultant,

as follows: Bernice P. Hedrick, P.O. Box

27, 317 Stonegables Court, Gray, Georgia

31032 (Petitioner).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sharon P. McDonald, Mass Media

Bureau, (202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

01–13, adopted January 10, 2001, and

released January 19, 2001. The full text

of this Commission decision is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the FCC

Reference Information Center (Room

CY–A257), 445 12th Street, SW.,

Washington, DC. The complete text of

this decision may also be purchased

from the Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20036.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to

this proceeding. Members of the public

should note that from the time a Notice

of Proposed Rule Making is issued until

the matter is no longer subject to

Commission consideration or court

review, all ex parte contacts are

prohibited in Commission proceedings,

such as this one, which involve channel

allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for

rules governing permissible ex parte

contacts.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 01–2751 Filed 1–31–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

48 CFR Parts 904, 952 and 970

RIN 1991–AB54

Acquisition Regulations; Conditional

Payment of Fee, Profit, and Other

Incentives

AGENCY: Department of Energy, (DOE).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

and opportunity for public comment.

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy

(DOE) proposes to amend its

Acquisition Regulation to: Implement,

in part, the requirements of Section

3147 of the National Defense

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000

relating to the safeguarding of classified

information; establish more objective

standards and procedures for

considering and applying reductions of

fee or other amounts payable for

contractor performance failures relating

to environment, safety, and health

(ES&H); and make related technical and

conforming amendments.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before the close of

business March 5, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments (3 copies) should

be addressed to: Michael L. Righi, U.S.

Department of Energy, Office of

Procurement and Assistance

Management, MA–51, 1000

Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20585.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael L. Righi at

michael.l.righi@hq.doe.gov or (202)

586–8175.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

II. Section by Section Analysis

III. Public Comments

IV. Procedural Requirements

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866

B. Review Under Executive Order 12988

C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility

Act

D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction

Act

E. Review Under the National

Environmental Policy Act

F. Review Under Executive Order 13132

G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995

H. Review Under the Treasury and General

Government Appropriations Act of 1999

I. Background

In addition to other performance

requirements specified in their

contracts, the Department’s management

and operating contractors and other

designated contractors are subject to

minimum performance requirements

relating to environment, safety, and

health (ES&H), and to safeguarding

Restricted Data and other classified

information. As a general rule, such

performance requirements are so

fundamental to the accomplishment of

the Department’s overall mission

objectives that meeting expected levels

of performance is considered a

prerequisite for the payment of fee,

profit, or a share of cost savings under

DOE contracts which are subject to such

requirements.

In March 1999, the Department

amended its Acquisition Regulation to

revise its fee policies and related

procedures for management and

operating contracts and other designated

contracts. The objectives of the

Department’s fee policy are to ensure

that fees: are reasonable and

commensurate with performance,

business and cost risks; create and

implement tailored incentives for

performance-based management

contracts; are structured to attract best

business partners; and afford flexibility

to provide incentives to contractors to

perform better at less cost. The rule

prescribed the use of a clause entitled,

‘‘Conditional Payment of Fee, Profit, or

Incentives.’’ The clause at 48 CFR

970.5204–86 establishes the portion of

total available fee, profit, or incentives

that is subject to recovery by DOE due

to a contractor’s failure to meet

minimum requirements for a specified

level of performance, including cost

performance, with an emphasis on

requirements relating to ES&H, and the

prevention of catastrophic performance

failures.

Section 3147 of the National Defense

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000

(42 U.S.C. 2282b) requires, in part, that

DOE contracts include a clause which

provides for an appropriate reduction in

the fees or amounts paid to the

contractor under the contract in the

event of a violation by the contractor or

contractor employee of any rule,

regulation, or order relating to the

safeguarding or security of Restricted

Data or other classified or sensitive

information. The statute also prescribes

that the clause must specify various

degrees of violations and the amount of

the reduction attributable to each degree

of violation. It is noted that since there

is currently no rule, regulation or order

which defines the term ‘‘sensitive

information,’’ as used in the Act, this

category of information is not addressed

in this proposed regulation.

In May 2000, the Secretary of Energy

announced an initiative to improve

contractor performance management by

requiring greater responsibility and

accountability from both the

Department’s senior managers and its

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 22 / Thursday, February 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules 8561

contractors. Due to the potentially

serious consequences which can result

from performance failures relating to the

Department’s ES&H and safeguards and

security programs, a major provision of

the Secretary’s initiative is to better

define objective standards and

procedures for considering and applying

fee reductions for contractor

performance failures relating to ES&H

and the safeguarding of Restricted Data

and classified information.

In consideration of the foregoing, the

Department proposes to amend its

Acquisition Regulation to implement

the aforementioned statutory

requirements relating to the

safeguarding of Restricted Data and

other classified information and the

Secretary’s initiative for improving

contractor performance management

relating to ES&H. The proposed

amendments to the Acquisition

Regulation would apply to all DOE

contracts and would be accomplished

by use of one of two clauses.

This proposed rule would add a

clause entitled, ‘‘Conditional Payment

of Fee or Profit—Safeguarding

Restricted Data and Other Classified

Information.’’ This clause would be

prescribed for use in all DOE contracts

which involve or are likely to involve

classified information, except for DOE

management and operating contracts

and other contracts designated by the

Procurement Executive, or designee.

The clause would provide for

reductions of earned fee or profit that is

otherwise payable under applicable

contracts for contractor violations of

laws, regulations, or directives relating

to the safeguarding of Restricted Data

and other classified information. As

proposed, the clause sets forth the

conditions which may precipitate a

reduction of fee or profit, percentage

reduction ranges which correlate to

three degrees of violations relating to

the safeguarding of Restricted Data or

other classified information, and the

methodology to be used in determining

the amount of earned fee or profit that

will be subject to reduction under the

clause.

For DOE management and operating

contracts and other contracts designated

by the Procurement Executive, or

designee, the clause at 48 CFR

970.5204–86, would be renamed

‘‘Conditional Payment of Fee, Profit, or

Other Incentives—Facility Management

Contracts’’, and would be amended to

provide for reductions of earned fee,

fixed fee, profit, or share of cost savings

which may otherwise be payable under

the contract: for performance failures

relating to ES&H; and, for contracts that

involve or are likely to involve

classified information, for contractor

violations of laws, regulations, or DOE

directives relating to the safeguarding of

Restricted Data and other classified

information. As proposed, the clause

sets forth: the conditions that may

precipitate a reduction of earned or

fixed fee, profit, or share of cost savings

under the contract; percentage fee,

profit, or share of cost savings reduction

ranges which correlate to three degrees

of performance failures relating to ES&H

and to the safeguarding of Restricted

Data and other classified information;

and the methodology to be used in

determining the amount of earned or

fixed fee, profit, or share of cost savings

that will be subject to reduction under

the clause.

II. Section-by-Section Analysis

1. Section 904.402 would be amended

to prescribe the Department’s

implementation of Section 3147 of the

National Defense Authorization Act for

Fiscal Year 2000 for DOE contracts

which involve or are likely to involve

the use of classified information, except

DOE management and operating

contracts and other contracts designated

by the Procurement Executive, or

designee. The section is also proposed

to be amended to prescribe related

coordination and approval

requirements.

2. Section 904.404 would be amended

to add a prescription for the use of the

new contract clause entitled,

‘‘Conditional Payment of Fee or Profit—

Safeguarding Restricted Data and Other

Classified Information.’’

3. Section 952.204–XX would be

added to incorporate the text of the new

contract clause entitled, ‘‘Conditional

Payment of Fee or Profit—Safeguarding

Restricted Data and Other Classified

Information.’’

4. Section 970.0404–2 would be

amended to prescribe the Department’s

implementation of Section 3147 of the

National Defense Authorization Act for

Fiscal Year 2000 for DOE management

and operating contracts and other

contracts designated by the Procurement

Executive, or designee.

5. Section 970.15404–4–1 would be

amended to prescribe the Department’s

policy pertaining to the payment of

earned fee, fixed fee, profit, or share of

cost savings under applicable DOE

contracts for achieving minimum

performance requirements relating to

ES&H and to the safeguarding of

Restricted Data and other classified

information.

6. Section 970.15404–4–11 would be

amended to revise the prescription for

use of the clause at 48 CFR 970.5204–

86.

7. Section 970.5204–86 would be

amended to revise the title of the clause,

and to provide for contractual

implementation of the Department’s

policy prescribed at amended

970.15404–4–1 (see paragraph 5.).

8. Technical and conforming

amendments would be made to various

sections as a result of the amendments

described in paragraphs 1. through 7.

III. Public Comments

Interested persons are invited to

participate by submitting data, views or

arguments with respect to the new

regulation proposed in this notice.

Three copies of written comments

should be submitted to the address

indicated in the ADDRESSES section of

this notice. All comments received will

be available for public inspection as part

of the administrative record on file for

this rulemaking in the Department of

Energy Reading Room, Room 1E–090,

Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585,

(202) 586–3142, between the hours 9

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays. All

written comments received by the date

indicated in the DATES section of this

notice of proposed rulemaking and all

other relevant information in the record

will be carefully assessed and fully

considered prior to the publication of

the final rule. Any information or data

considered to be exempt from public

disclosure by law must be so identified

and submitted in writing, one copy, as

well as one complete copy from which

the information believed to be exempt

from disclosure is deleted. The

Department will determine if the

information or data is exempt from

disclosure.

IV. Procedural Requirements

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866

Today’s regulatory action has been

determined not to be a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under Executive

Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and

Review,’’ (58 FR 51735, October 4,

1993). Accordingly, this action was not

subject to review under that Executive

Order by the Office of Information and

Regulatory Affairs of the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB).

B. Review Under Executive Order 12988

With respect to the review of existing

regulations and the promulgation of

new regulations, section 3(a) of

Executive Order 12988, ‘‘Civil Justice

Reform,’’ 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996),

imposes on Executive agencies the

general duty to adhere to the following

requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting

8562 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 22 / Thursday, February 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules

errors and ambiguity; (2) write

regulations to minimize litigation; (3)

provide a clear legal standard for

affected conduct rather than a general

standard; and (4) promote simplification

and burden reduction. With regard to

the review required by section 3(a),

section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988

specifically requires that Executive

agencies make every reasonable effort to

ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly

specifies the preemptive effect, if any;

(2) clearly specifies any effect on

existing Federal law or regulation; (3)

provides a clear legal standard for

affected conduct while promoting

simplification and burden reduction; (4)

specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5)

adequately defines key terms; and (6)

addresses other important issues

affecting clarity and general

draftsmanship under any guidelines

issued by the Attorney General. Section

3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires

Executive agencies to review regulations

in light of applicable standards in

section 3(a) and section 3(b) to

determine whether they are met or it is

unreasonable to meet one or more of

them. The Department has completed

the required review and determined

that, to the extent permitted by law, the

regulations meet the relevant standards

of Executive Order 12988.

C. Review Under the Regulatory

Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5

U.S.C. 601, et seq., requires that a

Federal agency prepare a regulatory

flexibility analysis for any rule for

which the agency is required to publish

a general notice of proposed

rulemaking. Such an analysis is not

required, however, if the agency

certifies that the rule would not, if

promulgated, have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities (5 U.S.C.

605(b)).

The Department certifies that today’s

proposal will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. This rule,

which implements, in part, the

requirements of Section 3147 of the

National Defense Authorization Act for

Fiscal Year 2000, applies predominantly

to DOE’s management and operating

contractors which are not small entities.

The rule will not directly regulate small

entities, diminish any preference

accorded to small businesses in Federal

or DOE procurement programs, or

impose requirements which may result

in increased administrative costs to

contractors.

D. Review Under the Paperwork

Reduction Act

This proposed rule does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by the Office of

Management and Budget under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3507 et seq.).

E. Review Under the National

Environmental Policy Act

The Department has concluded that

promulgation of this proposed rule falls

into a class of actions which would not

individually or cumulatively have

significant impact on the human

environment, as determined by

Department of Energy regulations (10

CFR part 1021, subpart D) implementing

the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).

Specifically, this proposed rule is

categorically excluded from NEPA

review because the amendments to the

DEAR would be strictly procedural

(categorical exclusion A6). Therefore,

this proposed rule does not require an

environmental impact statement or

environmental assessment pursuant to

NEPA.

F. Review Under Executive Order 13132

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,

August 10, 1999) requires agencies to

develop an accountable process to

ensure meaningful and timely input by

State and local officials in the

development of regulatory policies that

have ‘‘federalism implications.’’ As

defined in the Executive Order, policies

that have federalism implications

include regulations that have substantial

direct effects on the States, on the

relationship between the national

government and the States, or on the

distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. The Department

has examined this proposed rule and

has determined that it would not have

a substantial direct effect on the States,

on the relationship between the national

government and the States, or on the

distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government. No further action

is required by Executive Order 13132.

G. Review Under the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) generally

requires a Federal agency to perform a

detailed assessment of costs and

benefits of any rule imposing a Federal

Mandate with costs to State, local or

tribal governments, or to the private

sector, of $100 million or more. This

rulemaking affects private sector

entities, and the impact is less than

$100 million.

H. Review Under the Treasury and

General Government Appropriations

Act, 1999

Section 654 of the Treasury and

General Government Appropriations

Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires

Federal agencies to issue a Family

Policymaking Assessment for any

proposed rule or policy that may affect

family well-being. Today’s rule does not

impact on the autonomy or integrity of

the family institution. Accordingly, the

Department has concluded that it is not

necessary to prepare a Family

Policymaking Statement.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 904,

952, and 970

Government procurement.

Issued in Washington, DC on January 10,

2001.

T.J. Glauthier,

Deputy Secretary, Department of Energy.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, DOE proposes to amend

Chapter 9 of Title 48 of the Code of

Federal Regulations as set forth below.

1. The authority citation for parts 904

and 952 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.; 41 U.S.C.

418b; 50 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.

PART 904—ADMINISTRATIVE

MATTERS

2. Section 904.402 is amended by

adding a new paragraph (c) to read as

follows:

904.402 General.

* * * * *

(c)(1) Section 3147 of the National

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal

Year 2000 (42 U.S.C. 2282b) requires

that applicable DOE contracts include a

clause which provides for an

appropriate reduction in the fees or

amounts paid to the contractor under

the contract in the event of a violation

by the contractor or any contractor

employee of any rule, regulation, or

order relating to the safeguarding or

security of Restricted Data or other

classified information. The clause is

required to specify various degrees of

violations and the amount of the

reduction attributable to each degree of

violation. The clause prescribed in 48

CFR 904.404(d)(5) shall be used for this

purpose unless the clause prescribed at

48 CFR 970.15404–4–11(b) is used.

(2) The clause entitled ‘‘Conditional

Payment of Fee or Profit—Safeguarding

Restricted Data and Other Classified

Information’’ provides for reductions of

fee or profit that is earned by the

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 22 / Thursday, February 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules 8563

contractor and that may otherwise be

payable under the contract depending

upon the severity of the contractor’s

failure to comply with contract terms or

conditions relating to the safeguarding

of Restricted Data or other classified

information. However, when reviewing

performance failures that occur during

the performance of the contract that

would otherwise warrant a potential

reduction of earned fee, the contracting

officer may consider mitigating factors

that may warrant a reduction below the

applicable range specified in the clause,

including a determination that no

reduction should be made. Such factors

may include situations in which a

contractor self-identifies a problem

requiring corrective action, and is

actively working to correct the problem.

(3) The contracting officer must obtain

the concurrence of the Head of the

Contracting Activity—

(i) Prior to effecting any reduction of

fee or amounts otherwise payable to the

contractor in accordance with the terms

and conditions of the clause entitled,

‘‘Conditional Payment of Fee or Profit—

Safeguarding Restricted Data and Other

Classified Information;’’ and

(ii) For determinations that no

reduction of fee is warranted for a

particular performance failure(s) that

would otherwise be subject to a

reduction.

3. Section 904.404 is amended by

adding a new paragraph (d)(5) to read as

follows:

904.404 Contract clause.

(d) * * *

(5) Except as prescribed in 48 CFR

970.15404–4–11(b), the clause at 48 CFR

952.204–XX, Conditional Payment of

Fee or Profit—Safeguarding Restricted

Data and Other Classified Information,

shall be inserted in all contracts which

contain the clause at 48 CFR 952.204–

2, Security.

PART 952—SOLICITATION

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT

CLAUSES

4. Section 952.204–XX is added in

Subchapter H to read as follows:

952.204–XX Conditional Payment of Fee or

Profit—Safeguarding Restricted Data and

Other Classified Information.

As prescribed in 48 CFR (DEAR)

904.404(d)(5) insert the following

clause.

Conditional Payment of Fee or Profit—

Safeguarding Restricted Data and Other

Classified Information (Month and Year TBD)

(a) General. (1) The payment of fee or profit

(i.e., award fee, fixed fee, and incentive fee

or profit) under this contract is dependent

upon the contractor’s compliance with the

terms and conditions of this contract relating

to the safeguarding of Restricted Data and

other classified information (i.e., Formerly

Restricted Data and National Security

Information) including compliance with

applicable law, regulation, and DOE

directives. The term ‘‘contractor’’ as used in

this clause to address failure to comply shall

mean ‘‘contractor or contractor employee.’’

(2) In addition to other remedies available

to the Federal Government, if the contractor

fails to comply with the terms and conditions

of this contract relating to the safeguarding of

Restricted Data and other classified

information, the contracting officer may

unilaterally reduce the amount of earned fee,

fixed fee, or profit which is otherwise

payable to the contractor in accordance with

the terms and conditions of this clause.

(3) Any reduction in the amount of fee or

profit earned by the contractor will be

determined by the severity of the contractor’s

failure to comply with contract terms and

conditions relating to the safeguarding of

Restricted data or other classified

information pursuant to the degrees specified

in paragraph (c) of this clause.

(b) Reduction Amount. (1) If it is found

that the contractor has failed to comply with

contract terms and conditions relating to the

safeguarding of Restricted Data or other

classified information, the contractor’s

earned or fixed fee, or profit may be reduced.

Such reduction shall not be less than 51%

nor greater than 100% of the total fee or

profit earned for a first degree performance

failure, not less than 26% nor greater than

50% for a second degree performance failure,

and up to 25% for a third degree performance

failure. The contracting officer may consider

mitigating factors that may warrant a

reduction below the specified range,

including a determination that no reduction

should be made (see 48 CFR 904.402(c)).

(2)(i) For purposes of this clause, the

contracting officer will at the time of contract

award allocate the total amount of fee or

profit that is available under this contract to

equal periods of [insert 6 or 12] months to

run sequentially for the entire term of the

contract (i.e., from the effective date of the

contract to the expiration date of the contract,

including all options). The amount of fee or

profit to be allocated to each period shall be

equal to the average monthly fee or profit that

is available or otherwise payable during the

entire term of the contract, multiplied by the

number of months established above for each

period.

(ii) The total amount of fee or profit that

is subject to reduction under this clause, in

combination with any reduction made under

any other clause in the contract that provides

for a reduction to the fee or profit, shall not

exceed the amount of fee or profit that is

earned by the contractor in the period

established pursuant to paragraph (b)(2)(i) of

this clause in which a performance failure

warranting a reduction occurs.

(3) For performance-based firm-fixed-price

contracts, the contracting officer will at the

time of contract award include negative

monetary incentives in the contract for

contractor violations relating to the

safeguarding of Restricted Data and other

classified information.

(c) Safeguarding Restricted Data and Other

Classified Information. The degrees of

performance failures relating to the

contractor’s obligations under this contract

for safeguarding of Restricted Data and other

classified information are as follows:

(1) First Degree: Performance failures that

have been determined, in accordance with

applicable DOE regulation or directive, to

have resulted in, or that can reasonably be

expected to result in, exceptionally grave

damage to the national security. The

following performance failures or

performance failures of similar import will be

considered first degree:

(i) Non-compliance with applicable laws,

regulations, and DOE directives actually

resulting in, or creating a risk of, loss,

compromise, or unauthorized disclosure of

Restricted Data or other classified

information classified as Top Secret.

(ii) Contractor actions that result in a

breakdown of the safeguards and security

management system that can reasonably be

expected to result in the loss, compromise, or

unauthorized disclosure of Restricted Data,

or other classified information which is

classified as Top Secret.

(iii) Failure to implement corrective

actions stemming from the loss, compromise,

or unauthorized disclosure of Restricted Data

or other classified information classified as

Top Secret.

(2) Second Degree: Performance failures

that have been determined, in accordance

with applicable DOE regulation or directive,

to have actually resulted in, or that can

reasonably be expected to result in, serious

damage to the national security. The

following performance failures or

performance failures of similar import will be

considered second degree:

(i) Non-compliance with applicable laws,

regulations, and DOE directives actually

resulting in, or creating risk of, loss,

compromise, or unauthorized disclosure of

Restricted Data or other classified

information which is classified as Secret.

(ii) Contractor actions that result in a

breakdown of the safeguards and security

management system that can reasonably be

expected to result in the loss, compromise, or

unauthorized disclosure of Restricted Data,

or other classified information which is

classified as Secret.

(iii) Failure to promptly report the loss,

compromise, or unauthorized disclosure of

Restricted Data or other classified

information regardless of classification.

(iv) Failure to implement corrective actions

stemming from the loss, compromise, or

unauthorized disclosure of Restricted Data or

other classified information classified as

Secret.

(3) Third Degree: Performance failures that

have been determined, in accordance with

applicable DOE regulation or directive, to

have actually resulted in, or that can

reasonably be expected to result in, undue

risk to the common defense and security. In

addition, this category includes performance

failures that result from a lack of contractor

management and/or employee attention to

the proper safeguarding of Restricted Data

and other classified information. These

performance failures may be indicators of

8564 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 22 / Thursday, February 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules

future, more severe performance failures and/

or conditions, and if identified and corrected

early would prevent serious incidents. The

following performance failures or

performance failures of similar import will be

considered third degree:

(i) Non-compliance with applicable laws,

regulations, and DOE directives actually

resulting in, or creating risk of, loss,

compromise, or unauthorized disclosure of

Restricted Data or other classified

information which is classified as

Confidential.

(ii) Failure to promptly report alleged or

suspected violations of laws, regulations, or

directives pertaining to the safeguarding of

Restricted Data or other classified

information.

(iii) Failure to identify or execute

corrective actions to mitigate or eliminate

identified vulnerabilities and reduce residual

risk relating to the protection of Restricted

Data or other classified information in

accordance with the contractor’s Safeguards

and Security Plan or other security plan, as

applicable.

(iv) Contractor actions that result in

performance failures which unto themselves

pose minor risk, but when viewed in the

aggregate indicate degradation in the

integrity of the contractor’s safeguards and

security management system relating to the

protection of Restricted Data and other

classified information.

(End of Clause)

PART 970—DOE MANAGEMENT AND

OPERATING CONTRACTS

5. The authority citation for Part 970

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 2201; 42 U.S.C. 7101

et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.

6. Section 970.0404–2 is amended by

adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:

970.0404–2 General.

* * * * *

(f) For DOE management and

operating contracts and other contracts

designated by the Procurement

Executive, or designee, the clause

entitled, ‘‘Conditional Payment of Fee,

Profit, and Other Incentives—Facility

Management Contracts,’’ implements

the requirements of Section 3147 of the

National Defense Authorization Act for

Fiscal Year 2000 (see 48 CFR

904.402(c)(1)) for the use of a contract

clause which provides for an

appropriate reduction in the fee or

amount paid to the contractor under the

contract in the event of a violation by

the contractor or any contractor

employee of any rule, regulation, or

order relating to the safeguarding or

security of Restricted Data or other

classified information. The clause, in

part, provides for reductions in the

amount of fee, profit, or share of cost

savings that is otherwise earned by the

contractor for performance failures

relating to the safeguarding of Restricted

Data and other classified information.

7. Section 970.1504–1–2 is amended

by adding new paragraph (i) to read as

follows:

970.1504–1–2 Fee policy.

* * * * *

(i)(1) In addition to other performance

requirements specified in the contract,

DOE management and operating

contractors and other contracts

designated by the Procurement

Executive, or designee, are subject to

minimum performance requirements

relating to environment, safety, and

health (ES&H), and to the safeguarding

of Restricted Data and other classified

information. Minimum performance

requirements relating to ES&H will be

set forth in a DOE approved Integrated

Safety Management System (ISMS), or

similar document, as required by the

terms and conditions of the contract. As

applicable, requirements relating to the

safeguarding of Restricted Data and

other classified information will be set

forth in the clauses of the contract

entitled ‘‘Security’’ and ‘‘Laws,

Regulations, and DOE Directives,’’ and

in other terms and conditions that may

be included in the contract which

prescribe requirements for the

safeguarding of Restricted Data and

other classified information.

(2) If the contractor fails to obtain

DOE approval of the ISMS, fails to

achieve the minimum performance

requirements of the contract relating to

ES&H, or violates any law, regulation, or

directive relating to the safeguarding of

Restricted Data and other classified

information, otherwise earned fee, fixed

fee, profit, or share of cost savings may

be unilaterally reduced by the DOE

Operations Office/Field Manager, or

designee, in accordance with the terms

and conditions of the clause entitled

‘‘Conditional Payment of Fee, Profit,

and Other Incentives—Facility

Management Contracts.’’

(3) The clause entitled ‘‘Conditional

Payment of Fee, Profit, and Other

Incentives—Facility Management

Contracts,’’ provides for reductions of

earned fee, fixed fee, profit, or share of

cost savings under the contract

depending upon the severity of a

contractor performance failure relating

to ES&H requirements and, if

applicable, for the safeguarding of

Restricted Data and other classified

information. However, when reviewing

performance failures that occur during

the performance of the contract that

would otherwise warrant a potential

reduction of earned fee, fixed fee, profit,

or share of cost savings, the DOE

Operations Office/Field Manager, or

designee, may consider mitigating

factors that may warrant a reduction

below the applicable range specified in

the clause, including a determination

that no reduction should be made. Such

factors may include situations in which

a contractor self-identifies a problem

requiring corrective action, and is

actively working to correct the problem.

(4) The DOE Operations Office/Field

Manager, or designee, must obtain the

concurrence of the Cognizant Secretarial

Officer—

(i) Prior to effecting any reduction of

fee or profit in accordance with the

terms and conditions of the clause

entitled, ‘‘Conditional Payment of Fee,

Profit, and Other Incentives—Facility

Management Contracts;’’ and

(ii) For determinations that no

reduction of fee or profit is warranted

for a particular performance failure(s)

that would otherwise be subject to a

reduction.

970.1504–1–3 [Amended]

8. Section 970.1504–1–3 is amended

in paragraph (c)(1) by revising

‘‘Conditional Payment of Fee, Profit, or

Incentives’’ to read ‘‘Conditional

Payment of Fee, Profit, and Other

Incentives—Facility Management

Contracts.’’

9. Section 970.1504–5 is amended by

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

970.1504–5 Solicitation provision contract

clauses.

* * * * *

(b) (1) The contracting officer shall

insert the clause at 48 CFR 970.5204–86,

Conditional Payment of Fee, Profit, and

Other Incentives—Facility Management

Contracts, in all DOE management and

operating contracts and other contracts

determined by the Procurement

Executive, or designee.

(2) The contracting officer shall

include the clause with its Alternate I in

contracts which do not contain the

clause at 48 CFR 952.204–2, Security.

(3) The contracting officer shall

include the clause with its Alternate II

in contracts which are awarded on a

cost-plus-award-fee, incentive fee, or

multiple fee basis.

* * * * *

970.5215–1 [Amended]

10. Section 970.5215–1 is amended in

paragraph (c)(3) by revising

‘‘Conditional Payment of Fee, Profit, or

Incentives’’ to read ‘‘Conditional

Payment of Fee, Profit, and Other

Incentives—Facility Management

Contracts.’’

11. Section 970.5215–3 is revised to

read as follows:

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 22 / Thursday, February 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules 8565

970.5215–3 Conditional payment of fee,

profit, and other incentives—facility

management contracts.

As prescribed in 48 CFR 970.15404–

4–11(b)(1), insert the following clause:

970.5204.86 Conditional Payment of Fee,

Profit, and Other Incentives—Facility

Management Contracts (Month and Year

TBD)

(a) General. (1) The payment of earned fee,

fixed fee, profit, or share of cost savings

under this contract is dependent upon the

contractor’s development of, and

performance under, an approved Integrated

Safety Management System (ISMS), and the

contractor’s or contractor employee’s

compliance with the terms and conditions of

this contract relating to the safeguarding of

Restricted Data and other classified

information.

(2) The minimum performance

requirements of this contract relating to

environment, safety, and health (ES&H) will

be set forth in an approved ISMS, or similar

document, as required by the terms and

conditions of this contract. These minimum

requirements are: (i) implementation of the

DOE-approved ISMS; (ii) compliance with

applicable laws, regulations, and DOE

directives; (iii) accomplishment of annual

performance commitments relating to ES&H

and (iv) prevention of catastrophic

performance failures (e.g., fatality; serious

workplace-related injury or illness to one or

more federal, contractor, or subcontractor

employees or the general public; significant

damage to the environment).

(3) Requirements of this contract relating to

the safeguarding of Restricted Data and other

classified information will be set forth in the

clauses of this contract entitled, ‘‘Security’’

and ‘‘Laws, Regulations, and DOE

Directives,’’ as well as other terms and

conditions that may be prescribed elsewhere

in this contract.

(4) If the contractor fails to obtain approval

of the ISMS, or otherwise fails to achieve the

minimum performance requirements of this

contract relating to ES&H or to the

safeguarding of Restricted Data and other

classified information during any

performance evaluation period established

under the contract pursuant to the clause of

this contract entitled, ‘‘Total Available Fee:

Base Fee Amount and Performance Fee

Amount,’’ otherwise earned fee, fixed fee,

profit or share of cost savings may be

unilaterally reduced by the DOE Operations

Office/Field Manager, or designee.

(b) Reduction Amount. (1) The amount of

earned fee, fixed fee, profit, or share of cost

savings that is subject to reduction will be

determined by the severity of the

performance failure relating to ES&H or to

the safeguarding of Restricted Data and other

classified information pursuant to the

degrees specified in paragraphs (c) and (d) of

this clause.

(2) If it is found that the facts and

circumstances warrant a reduction of earned

fee, fixed fee, profit, or share of cost savings,

such reduction shall not be less than 51%

nor greater than 100% of the amount of

earned fee, fixed fee, profit, or the

contractor’s share of cost savings for a first

degree performance failure, not less than

26% nor greater than 50% for a second

degree performance failure, and up to 25%

for a third degree performance failure. The

DOE Operations Office/Field Manager, or

designee, may consider mitigating factors

that may warrant a reduction below the

applicable range, including a determination

that no reduction should be made (see 48

CFR 970.15404–4–1(h)).

(3)(i) The amount of fee, fixed fee, profit,

or share of cost savings that is otherwise

earned by a contractor during an evaluation

period may be reduced in accordance with

this clause if it is determined that a

performance failure warranting a reduction

under this clause occurs within the

evaluation period.

(ii) The amount of reduction under this

clause, in combination with any reduction

made under any other clause in the contract,

shall not exceed the amount of fee, fixed fee,

profit, or the contractor’s share of cost

savings that is otherwise earned during the

evaluation period.

(iii) For the purposes of this clause, earned

fee, fixed fee, profit, or share of cost savings

shall mean the amount determined by the

contracting officer or fee determining official

as otherwise payable based on the

contractor’s performance during an

evaluation period. Where the contract

provides for one or more financial incentives

which extend beyond a single evaluation

period, this amount shall also include any

provisional incentive amounts determined

otherwise payable, or if provisional payments

are not provided for, the allocable amount of

any incentive determined otherwise payable

at the conclusion of a subsequent evaluation

period. The allocable amount shall be the

total amount of the earned incentive divided

by the number of evaluation periods over

which it is earned.

(iv) The Government will effect the

reduction at the end of the evaluation period

in which the performance failure occurs

(unless the Government is not aware of the

failure; in this case the Government will

effect the reduction as soon as practical),

except for that portion of the reduction

requiring an allocation. The Government will

effect this portion of the reduction at the end

of the evaluation period in which it

determines the total amount earned under

the incentive. If at any time a reduction

causes the sum of the payments the

contractor has received for fee, fixed fee,

profit, or share of cost savings to exceed the

sum of fee, fixed fee, profit, or share of cost

savings the contractor has earned

(provisionally or otherwise), the contractor

shall immediately return the excess to the

Government. (What the contractor ‘‘has

earned’’ reflects any reduction made under

this or any other clause of the contract.)

(v) At the end of the contract:

(A) The Government will pay the

contractor the amount by which the sum of

fee, fixed fee, profit, or share of cost savings

the contractor has earned exceeds the sum of

the payments the contractor has received; or

(B) The contractor shall return to the

Government the amount by which sum of the

payments the contractor has received exceed

the sum of fee, fixed fee, profit, or share of

cost savings the contractor has earned. (What

the contractor ‘‘has earned’’ reflects any

reduction made under this or any other

clause of the contract.)

(c) Environment, Safety and Health

(ES&H). The degrees of ES&H performance

failures under which reductions of earned or

fixed fee, profit, or share of cost savings will

be determined are as follows:

(1) First Degree: Performance failures that

are considered catastrophic or could threaten

the successful completion of a program or

project. The following performance failures

or performance failures of similar import will

be considered first degree:

(i) Failure to develop and obtain required

DOE approval of a Safety Management

System.

(ii) Failure to comply with an approved

Safety Management System which results in

any of the following performance failures:

(A) Fatality.

(B) Serious workplace-related injury or

illness to one or more Federal, contractor, or

subcontractor workers or member(s) of the

public.

(C) Significant damage to the environment.

(D) Contractor actions leading to a Type A

accident investigation (reference DOE O

225.1A, ‘‘Accident Investigations.’’).

(E) Breakdown of the safety management

system creating risk of a Type A performance

failure.

(F) Non-compliance with applicable

environmental, safety, and health laws,

regulations, and DOE directives posing a

Type A risk.

(G) Failure to notify DOE of an imminent

danger situation after discovery.

(H) Failure to report performance failures

that could warrant consideration of a Type A

or Type B investigation.

(iii) Failure to implement corrective

action(s) in response to the occurrence of any

first degree performance failure.

(2) Second Degree: Performance failures

that are significantly adverse to safety or

could result in significant additional cost to

the Federal Government. The following

performance failures or performance failures

of similar import will be considered second

degree:

(i) Contractor actions leading to a Type B

accident investigation (reference DOE O

225.1A, ‘‘Accident Investigations’’).

(ii) Breakdown of the safety management

system creating the risk of a Type B

performance failure.

(iii) Non-compliance with applicable

environmental, safety, and health law,

regulation, or DOE directive creating risk of

a Type B performance failure.

(iv) Failure to execute DOE approved

implementation plans in response to Defense

Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

recommendations.

(v) Failure to meet key program milestones

designed to substantially reduce risk to

workers, the public, and the environment.

(vi) Failure to implement corrective

action(s) in response to the occurrence of any

second degree performance failure.

(3) Third Degree: Performance failures that

result from lack of management and/or

worker attention to safety. These

performance failures may be indicators of

8566 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 22 / Thursday, February 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules

future, more severe performance failures and/

or conditions, and if identified and corrected

early can prevent serious accidents. The

following performance failures or

performance failures of similar import will be

considered third degree:

(i) Failure to implement corrective actions

resulting from oversight evaluations,

assessments, and inspections.

(ii) Failure to implement actions designed

to integrate lessons-learned into work

planning and execution.

(iii) Failure to implement corrective

actions resulting from self-assessments.

(iv) Contractor actions that result in a lapse

in Safety Management System

implementation posing less than a Type B

risk.

(v) Non-compliance with applicable

environmental, safety, and health laws,

regulations, and DOE directives posing less

than a Type B risk.

(vi) Contractor actions that result in

performance failures which unto themselves

pose minor risk, but when viewed in the

aggregate indicate degradation in the

integrity of the safety management system.

(vii) Failure to implement corrective

action(s) in response to the occurrence of any

third degree performance failure.

(d) Safeguarding Restricted Data and Other

Classified Information. The degrees of

performance failures relating to the

contractor’s and contractor employee’s

obligations under this contract for the

safeguarding of Restricted Data and other

classified information under which

reductions of fee, profit, or share of cost

savings will be determined are as follows:

(1) First Degree: Performance failures that

have been determined, in accordance with

applicable DOE regulation or directive, to

have resulted in, or that can reasonably be

expected to result in, exceptionally grave

damage to the national security. The

following performance failures or

performance failures of similar import will be

considered first degree:

(i) Non-compliance with applicable laws,

regulations, and DOE directives actually

resulting in, or creating a risk of, loss,

compromise, or unauthorized disclosure of

Restricted Data or other classified

information classified as Top Secret.

(ii) Contractor actions that result in a

breakdown of the safeguards and security

management system that can reasonably be

expected to result in the loss, compromise, or

unauthorized disclosure of Restricted Data,

or other classified information which is

classified as Top Secret.

(iii) Failure to implement corrective

actions stemming from the loss, compromise,

or unauthorized disclosure of Restricted Data

or other classified information classified as

Top Secret.

(2) Second Degree: Performance failures

that have been determined, in accordance

with applicable DOE regulation or directive,

to have actually resulted in, or that can

reasonably be expected to result in, serious

damage to the national security. The

following performance failures or

performance failures of similar import will be

considered second degree:

(i) Non-compliance with applicable laws,

regulations, and DOE directives actually

resulting in, or creating risk of, loss,

compromise, or unauthorized disclosure of

Restricted Data or other classified

information which is classified as Secret.

(ii) Contractor actions that result in a

breakdown of the safeguards and security

management system that can reasonably be

expected to result in the loss, compromise, or

unauthorized disclosure of Restricted Data,

or other classified information which is

classified as Secret.

(iii) Failure to promptly report the loss,

compromise, or unauthorized disclosure of

Restricted Data or other classified

information regardless of classification.

(iv) Failure to implement corrective actions

stemming from the loss, compromise, or

unauthorized disclosure of Restricted Data or

other classified information classified as

Secret.

(3) Third Degree: Performance failures that

have been determined, in accordance with

applicable DOE regulation or directive, to

have actually resulted in, or that can

reasonably be expected to result in, undue

risk to the common defense and security. In

addition, this category includes performance

failures that result from a lack of contractor

management and/or employee attention to

the proper safeguarding of Restricted Data

and other classified information. These

performance failures may be indicators of

future, more severe performance failures and/

or conditions, and if identified and corrected

early would prevent serious incidents. The

following performance failures or

performance failures of similar import will be

considered third degree:

(i) Non-compliance with applicable laws,

regulations, and DOE directives actually

resulting in, or creating risk of, loss,

compromise, or unauthorized disclosure of

Restricted Data or other classified

information which is classified as

Confidential.

(ii) Failure to promptly report alleged or

suspected violations of laws, regulations, or

directives pertaining to the safeguarding of

Restricted Data or other classified

information.

(iii) Failure to identify or execute

corrective actions to mitigate or eliminate

identified vulnerabilities and reduce residual

risk relating to the protection of Restricted

Data or other classified information in

accordance with the contractor’s Safeguards

and Security Plan or other security plan, as

applicable.

(iv) Contractor actions that result in

performance failures which unto themselves

pose minor risk, but when viewed in the

aggregate indicate degradation in the

integrity of the contractor’s safeguards and

security management system relating to the

protection of Restricted Data and other

classified information.

(End of Clause)

Alternate I (Month and Year TBD). As

prescribed in 48 CFR 970.15404–4–11(b)(2),

replace paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) of the basic

clause with the following paragraphs (a) and

(b)(1), and delete paragraph (d).

(a) General. (1) The payment of earned fee,

fixed fee, profit, or share of cost savings

under this contract is dependent upon the

contractor’s development of, and

performance under, an approved Integrated

Safety Management System (ISMS).

(2) The minimum performance

requirements of this contract relating to

environment, safety, and health (ES&H) will

be set forth in an approved ISMS, or similar

document, as required by the terms and

conditions of this contract. These minimum

requirements are: (i) implementation of the

DOE-approved ISMS; (ii) compliance with

applicable laws, regulations, and DOE

directives; (iii) accomplishment of annual

performance commitments relating to ES&H;

and (iv) prevention of catastrophic

performance failures (e.g., fatality; serious

workplace-related injury or illness to one or

more federal, contractor, or subcontractor

employees or the general public; significant

damage to the environment).

(3) If the contractor fails to obtain approval

of the ISMS, or otherwise fails to achieve the

minimum performance requirements of this

contract relating to ES&H during the

performance evaluation period, otherwise

earned fee, fixed fee, profit or share of cost

savings may be unilaterally reduced by the

DOE Operations Office/Field Manager, or

designee.

(b) Reduction Amount. (1) The amount of

earned fee, fixed fee, profit, or share of cost

savings that is subject to reduction will be

determined by the severity of the

performance failure relating to ES&H

pursuant to the degrees specified in

paragraphs (c) of this clause.

Alternate II (Month and Year TBD). As

prescribed in 48 CFR 970.15404–4–11(b)(3),

insert the following as paragraphs (e) and (f)

in contracts awarded on a cost-plus-award

fee, incentive fee or multiple fee basis (if

Alternate I is also used, redesignate the

following as paragraphs (d) and (e)).

(e) Minimum requirements for specified

level of performance. (1) At a minimum the

contractor must perform the following:

(i) The requirements with specific

incentives which do not require the

achievement of cost efficiencies in order to

be performed at the level of performance set

forth in the Statement of Work, Work

Authorization Directive, or similar document

unless an otherwise minimal level of

performance has been established in the

specific incentive;

(ii) All of the performance requirements

directly related to requirements specifically

incentivized which do not require the

achievement of cost efficiencies in order to

be performed at a level of performance such

that the overall performance of these related

requirements is at an acceptable level; and

(iii) All other requirements at a level of

performance such that the total performance

of the contract is not jeopardized.

(2) The evaluation of the Contractor’s

achievement of the level of performance shall

be unilaterally determined by the

Government. To the extent that the

Contractor fails to achieve the minimum

performance levels specified in the Statement

of Work, Work Authorization Directive, or

similar document, during the performance

evaluation period, the DOE Operations/Field

Office Manager, or designee, may reduce any

otherwise earned fee, fixed fee, profit, or

shared net savings for the performance

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 22 / Thursday, February 1, 2001 / Proposed Rules 8567

evaluation period. Such reduction shall not

result in the total of earned fee, fixed fee,

profit, or shared net savings being less than

25% of the total available fee amount. Such

25% shall include base fee, if any.

(f) Minimum requirements for cost

performance. (1) Requirements incentivized

by other than cost incentives must be

performed within their specified cost

constraint and must not adversely impact the

costs of performing unrelated activities.

(2) The performance of requirements with

a specific cost incentive must not adversely

impact the costs of performing unrelated

requirements.

(3) The contractor’s performance within

the stipulated cost performance levels for the

performance evaluation period shall be

determined by the Government. To the extent

the contractor fails to achieve the stipulated

cost performance levels, the DOE Operations/

Field Office Manager, or designee, may

reduce in whole or in part any otherwise

earned fee, fixed fee, profit, or shared net

savings for the performance evaluation

period. Such reduction shall not result in the

total of earned fee, fixed fee, profit or shared

net savings being less than 25% of the total

available fee amount. Such 25% shall

include base fee, if any.

[FR Doc. 01–1330 Filed 1–31–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 622

[I.D. 011601A]

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of

Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish

Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Coastal

Migratory Pelagic Resources of the

Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic;

Public Hearings

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public hearings;

request for comments.

SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery

Management Council (Council) will

convene public hearings to receive

comments on the proposed Charter

Vessel/Headboat Permit Moratorium

Amending the Reef Fish Fishery

Management Plan (FMP) and Coastal

Migratory Pelagics FMP (Draft

Amendment).

DATES: Written comments will be

accepted until 5 p.m., March 23, 2001.

The public hearings will be held in

February. For specific dates and times

see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to, and copies of the Draft

Amendment are available from, the Gulf

of Mexico Fishery Management Council,

3018 U.S. Highway 301, North, Suite

1000, Tampa, FL 33619. The public

hearings will be held in the State of

Texas in Port Isabel, Port Aransas, and

Galveston; in Larose, LA; in Biloxi, MS;

in Orange Beach, AL; and in the State

of Florida in Panama City, Key West,

Naples, and Madeira Beach. For specific

location, see SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Wayne Swingle, Executive Director,

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management

Council; telephone: (813) 228-2815.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

public hearings will be convened to

review new alternatives added by

Council members at the November, 2000

Council meeting to the Draft

Amendment. The additions principally

include alternatives for a charter vessel

quota for red snapper based on charter

vessel landings for various periods in

lieu of implementing the permit

moratorium. The Council retained all of

the alternatives proposed by the Ad Hoc

Charter Vessel/Headboat Advisory Panel

along with the preferred alternatives

selected by the Council in September.

The public hearing document includes

a number of alternatives under each of

the following issues: Duration of

moratorium; a new Gulf permit for the

Reef Fish and Coastal Migratory Pelagics

Fisheries FMPs; initial eligibility

requirements for permits and/or

endorsements; annual permit and

endorsement transfers during the

moratorium; vessel passenger restriction

on permit transfers; annual reissuance

of permits not renewed (or permanently

revoked); appeals process under the

moratorium; and, reporting

requirements to maintain the new gulf

permit/endorsement.

Dates, Times, and Locations for Public

Hearings

Public hearings for the Draft

Amendment are scheduled as follows:

1. Monday, February 5, 2001 - 7

p.m.—Laguna Madre Learning Center,

Port Isabel High School, Highway 100,

Port Isabel, TX 78578; telephone: 956-

943-0052;

2. Tuesday, February 6, 2001 - 7

p.m.—Port Aransas Community Center,

408 North Allister, Port Aransas, TX

78376; telephone: 361-749-4111;

3. Wednesday February 7, 2001 - 7

p.m.—Texas A&M University, 200

Seawolf Parkway, Galveston, TX 77553;

telephone: 409-740-4416;

4. Monday, February 12 , 2001 - 7

p.m.—Larose Regional Park, 307 East

5th Street, Larose, LA 70373; telephone:

504-693-7380;

5. Tuesday, February 13, 2001 - 6

p.m.—MS Department of Marine

Resources, 1141 Bayview Drive, Biloxi,

MS 39530; telephone: 228-374-5000;

6. Wednesday, February 14, 2001 - 7

p.m.—Hilton Beachfront Garden Inn,

23092 Perdido Beach Boulevard, Orange

Beach, AL 36561; telephone: 334-974-

1600;

7. Thursday, February 15, 2001 - 7

p.m.—National Marine Fisheries

Service, 3500 Delwood Beach Road,

Panama City, FL 32408; telephone: 850-

234-6541;

8. Monday, February 19, 2001 - 7

p.m.—Holiday Inn Beachside, 3841

North Roosevelt Boulevard, Key West,

FL 33040; telephone: 305-294-2571;

9. Tuesday, February 20, 2001 - 7

p.m.—Naples Depot Civic Cultural

Center, 1051 Fifth Avenue South,

Naples, FL 34102; telephone: 941-262-

1776; and

10. Wednesday February 21, 2001 - 7

p.m.—Madeira Beach City Hall, 300

Municipal Drive, Madeira Beach, FL

33708; telephone: 727-391-9951.

The Council will also hear public

testimony at the March Council Meeting

during the week of March 26-29, 2001,

before taking final action on the Draft

Amendment. The exact date for public

testimony will be published at a later

time.

Special Accommodations

These meetings are physically

accessible to people with disabilities.

Requests for sign language

interpretation or other auxiliary aids

should be directed to Anne Alford at the

Council (see ADDRESSES) by January 29,

2001.

Dated: January 23, 2001.

Bruce C. Morehead,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 01–2692 Filed 1–31–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–S