        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 226
        RIN 0648-BC56
        Endangered and Threatened Species; Proposed Designation of Critical Habitat for the Arctic Ringed Seal; Public Hearings

          AGENCY:
          National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Notice of public hearings.

          SUMMARY:

          We, NMFS, announce the specific dates and locations for four public hearings in Alaska, one each in Nome, Anchorage, Kotzebue, and Barrow, on our proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the threatened Arctic subspecies (Phoca hispida hispida) of the ringed seal (Phoca hispida) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which published in the Federal Register on December 9, 2014. We also announce that a hearing will be held in Bethel, AK.

          DATES:

          Written comments on the proposed rule must be received by March 9, 2015. For specific dates of the public hearings, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

          ADDRESSES:

          Five public hearings will be held in Alaska, one each in Nome, Anchorage, Kotzebue, Barrow, and Bethel: For specific locations of these hearings, see SUPPLMENTARY INFORMATION.
          You may submit written comments on the proposed rule, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2013-0114, by any one of the following methods:

          • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2013-0114, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Address written comments to Jon Kurland, Assistant Regional Administrator for Protected Resources, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668.

            Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on http://www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

          Electronic copies of the proposed rule, list of references and supporting documents, and the draft economic report (i.e., Regulatory Impact Review (RIR)/4(b)(2) Preparatory Assessment/Initial Regulatory Flexibility Act (IRFA) report) prepared for this action are available from http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2013-0114 or from the NMFS Alaska Region Web site at http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Tamara Olson, NMFS Alaska Region, (907) 271-2373; Jon Kurland, NMFS Alaska Region, (907) 586-7638; or Marta Nammack, NMFS Office of Protected Resources, (301) 427-8469.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Background
        On December 9, 2014, we published a proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the threatened Arctic ringed seal under the ESA (79 FR 73010). At that time, we opened a public comment period on the proposed rule through March 9, 2015, and announced that four public hearings will be held on the proposed rule in Alaska, one each in Anchorage, Barrow, Kotzebue, and Nome. In this notice, we announce the specific dates and locations for these four public hearings (see Public Hearing Schedule). We also announce that a fifth public hearing will be held in Bethel, AK.
        Public Hearings

        During each public hearing, a brief opening presentation on the proposed rule will be provided before accepting public testimony. Written comments may be submitted at the hearing or via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES) until the scheduled close of the comment period on March 9, 2015. In the event that attendance at the public hearings is large, the time allotted for oral statements may be limited. Oral and written statements receive equal consideration. There are no limits on the length of written comments submitted to us.
        Public Hearing Schedule

        The specific date and location for the hearing in Bethel, AK, will be announced in a subsequent Federal Register notice. The dates and locations for the other four hearings are as follows:
        1. Nome: January 28, 2015, from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. at Old St. Joe's, 407 Bering Street, Nome, AK.
        2. Anchorage: February 2, 2015, 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. at the Z. J. Loussac Public Library, Wilda Marston Theatre, 3600 Denali Street, Anchorage, AK.
        3. Kotzebue: February 17, 2015, 4 p.m. to 7 p.m., at the Northwest Arctic Borough Assembly Chambers, 163 Lagoon Street, Kotzebue, AK.
        4. Barrow: February 23, 2015, 7 p.m. to 10 p.m., at the Iñupiat Heritage Center, 5421 North Star Street, Barrow, AK.
        Special Accommodations

        These hearings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other accommodations should be directed to Tamara Olson (see ADDRESSES) as soon as possible, but no later than 7 business days prior to the hearing date.

          Authority:
           16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.

          Dated: January 7, 2015.
          Donna S. Wieting,
          Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2015-00368 Filed 1-12-15; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 679
        RIN 0648-BH05
        Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Reclassifying Squid Species in the BSAI and GOA

          AGENCY:
          National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Notice of availability of fishery management plan amendments; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The North Pacific Fishery Management Council submitted Amendment 117 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI FMP) and Amendment 106 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA FMP), (collectively Amendments 117/106) to the Secretary of Commerce for review. If approved, Amendments 117/106 would classify squid in these fishery management plans (FMPs) under the ecosystem component (EC) category. This action is necessary to ensure the squid complex is accurately classified in the FMPs based on the best available scientific information. Amendments 117/106 are intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the FMPs, and other applicable laws.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received no later than May 29, 2018.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2017-0090, by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2017-0090, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries Division, Alaska Region NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. Mail comments to P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668.

            Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter“N/A” in the required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).

          Electronic copies of Amendments 117/106 and the Environmental Assessment/Regulatory Impact Review prepared for this action (collectively the “Analysis”) may be obtained from www.regulations.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Megan Mackey, 907-586-7228.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires that each regional fishery management council (“regional council”) submit any fishery management plan amendment it prepares to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary). The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving a fishery management plan amendment, immediately publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing that the amendment is available for public review and comment. This notice announces that proposed Amendments 117/106 to the FMPs are available for public review and comment.

        NMFS manages the groundfish fisheries in the exclusive economic zone under the FMPs. The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) prepared the FMPs under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. Regulations governing U.S. fisheries and implementing the FMPs appear at 50 CFR parts 600 and 679.

        Section 3.1.2 of the FMPs define two broad classifications for stocks or stock complexes (i.e., species or species groups). The first classification is for stocks “in the fishery” that include target stocks in need of conservation and management that fishers seek to catch, and non-target stocks in need of conservation and management that are caught incidentally during the pursuit of target stocks. The second classification is for ecosystem component (EC) species that do not require conservation and management, but may be listed in an FMP in order to achieve ecosystem management objectives. Under the groundfish FMPs, NMFS must establish an overfishing level (OFL), an acceptable biological catch (ABC) and a total allowable catch (TAC) for each stock or stock complex (i.e., species or species group) that are not in the EC.
        The FMPs define the OFL as the level above which overfishing is occurring for a species or species group. NMFS manages fisheries in an effort to ensure that no OFLs are exceeded in any year. The FMPs define the ABC as the level of a species or species group's annual catch that accounts for the scientific uncertainty in the estimate of OFL and any other scientific uncertainty. The ABC cannot exceed the OFL. The FMPs define the TAC as the annual catch target for a species or species group, derived from the ABC by considering social and economic factors and management uncertainty.
        In 2010, Amendments 96/87 to the BSAI and GOA FMPs, respectively, established the EC category and designated prohibited species (salmon, steelhead trout, crab, halibut, and herring) and forage fish species (as defined in Table 2c to 50 CFR part 679 and § 679.20(i)) as EC species in the groundfish FMPs. Additional detail is provided in the final rule implementing Amendments 96/87, and is not repeated here (75 FR 61639, October 6, 2010).

        In 2015, NMFS implemented Amendments 100/91 to the BSAI and GOA FMPs, respectively, to add grenadiers (family Macrouridae) to the EC category (80 FR 11897, March 5, 2015). The Council and NMFS added grenadiers to the FMPs in the EC category because grenadiers did not require conservation and management, but acknowledged their role in the ecosystem and limited the groundfish fisheries' potential impact on grenadiers. Adding grenadiers to the EC category allowed for improved data collection and catch monitoring appropriate for grenadiers given their abundance, distribution, and catch. Additional detail is provided in the final rule implementing Amendments 100/91, and is not repeated here (80 FR 11897, March 5, 2015).
        Squids are currently classified as “in the fishery” in section 3.1.2 of the groundfish FMPs. Since 2010, the Council's non-target committee, Plan Teams, and Scientific and Statistical Committee have recommended that the Council explore reclassifying squids as EC category species because there is no demand for squid and squid have not been targeted or open to directed fishing in either the BSAI or GOA for many years (see Analysis section 1.2). Further, there is no conservation concern for squids because they are extremely short-lived and highly productive, the current fishing mortality is considered insignificant at a population level, and they are unlikely to be overfished in the absence of a directed fishery (see Analysis section 3.2.5).
        Under the groundfish FMPs, NMFS must establish an overfishing level (OFL), an acceptable biological catch (ABC) and a TAC for squids. Current OFLs and ABCs for squids are based on average catch calculations. While these limits are based on the best available scientific information, they are poorly linked to abundance.  Most squids in the BSAI and GOA are associated with the pelagic environment, occurring in the water column and are almost certainly underestimated as described in section 3.2 of the Analysis.
        Because squid have only been taken as incidental catch in recent years, historical removal levels are likely to be much lower than maximum sustainable yield. Ecosystem models indicating the amount of predator consumption of squids in the BSAI and GOA, provide further evidence that the catch-based estimates of OFLs and ABCs for squids are highly underestimated (see section 3.2.2 of the Analysis).
        Under the current stock classification for squids, if the total TAC of squid is caught in the BSAI or GOA, retention is prohibited in that management area for the remainder of the year. If directed fisheries for groundfish species which incidentally catch squid would cause squid to exceed its OFL, NMFS may close those fisheries to directed fishing for those groundfish species in a management area to prevent exceeding the squid OFL (see regulations at § 679.20(d)(3)).
        Section 3.2.3 of the Analysis provides a detailed description of incidental catch of squids in the BSAI and GOA groundfish fisheries. Historically, the Bering Sea pollock fishery has taken the largest amount of squids relative to the TAC, ABC, and OFL for BSAI squids. Although NMFS has not closed the Bering Sea pollock fishery, or other groundfish fisheries in the BSAI or GOA, to directed fishing to prevent exceeding an OFL for squids, the Bering Sea pollock fishery has undertaken measures to avoid the incidental harvest of squids and exceeding the OFL for squids in the BSAI.
        Section 302(h)(1) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act requires a council to prepare an FMP for each fishery under its authority that is in need of conservation and management. “Conservation and management” is defined in section 3(5) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The National Standard (NS) guidelines at § 600.305(c) (revised on October 18, 2016, 81 FR 71858), provide direction for determining which stocks will require conservation and management and provide direction to regional councils and NMFS for how to consider these factors in making this determination. Specifically, the guidelines direct regional councils and NMFS to consider a non-exhaustive list of ten factors when deciding whether stocks require conservation and management.
        Section 2.2.1 in the Analysis considers each of the ten factors' relevance to squids. The analysis showed that squids are an important component of the marine environment, particularly due to their importance as prey for marine mammals, fish and other squids. However, despite being classified as a target species, there are currently no directed fisheries for squids. Squids are not important to commercial, recreational or subsistence users, and the fisheries for BSAI and GOA squids are not an important fishery to the Nation or regional economy. There are no developing fisheries for squids in the EEZ off Alaska nor in waters of the State of Alaska (State). Currently, the State adopts the MRAs established in the Federal fisheries for fisheries in State waters. In the absence of a directed fishery, squids are unlikely to become overfished. Therefore, maintaining squids in the FMPs for conservation and management is not likely to improve or maintain the condition of the stock.
        In June of 2017, the Council recommended and NMFS proposes Amendments 117/106 to reclassify squids as EC category species in the FMPs. Based on a review of the scientific information, and after considering the revised NS guidelines, the Council and NMFS determined that squids are not in need of conservation and management, and that classifying squids in the EC category is an appropriate action.
        While the Council determined that squids are not in need of conservation and management as defined by the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and after considering the revised NS guidelines, the Council and NMFS determined that there are benefits to retaining squids as an EC species complex in the FMPs, especially given their ecological importance in the BSAI and GOA.
        Amendments 117/106 would amend section 3.1.2 of the FMPs to establish the squids EC species complex in the FMPs. Amendments 117/106 would allow NMFS to prohibit directed fisheries for squids and limit the retention and commercial exchange of squids. By virtue of being classified as EC species, catch specifications for squids (OFL, ABC, and TAC) would no longer be required.

        NMFS is soliciting public comments on proposed Amendments 117/106 through the end of the comment period (see DATES). NMFS intends to publish in the Federal Register and seek public comment on a proposed rule that would implement Amendments 117/106, following NMFS' evaluation of the proposed rule under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

        Respondents do not need to submit the same comments on Amendments 117/106 and the proposed rule. All relevant written comments received by the end of the applicable comment period, whether specifically directed to the FMP amendments or the proposed rule will be considered by NMFS in the approval/disapproval decision for Amendments 117/106 and addressed in the response to comments in the final decision. Comments received after end of the applicable comment period will not be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on Amendments 117/106. To be considered, comments must be received, not just postmarked or otherwise transmitted, by the last day of the comment period (see DATES).

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

          Dated: March 22, 2018.
          Jennifer M. Wallace,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2018-06084 Filed 3-26-18; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
        GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
        NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
        48 CFR Part 19 and 35
        [FAR Case 2012-015; Docket 2012-0015; Sequence 1]
        RIN 9000-AM33
        Federal Acquisition Regulation; Small Business Set Asides for Research and Development Contracts

          AGENCY:
          Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to clarify that contracting officers shall set aside acquisitions for research and development, when there is also a reasonable expectation, as a result of market research, that there are small businesses capable of providing the best scientific and technological approaches.

          DATES:
          Interested parties should submit written comments to the Regulatory Secretariat at one of the addressees shown below on or before October 9, 2012 to be considered in the formation of the final rule.

          ADDRESSES:
          Submit comments in response to FAR Case 2012-015 by any of the following methods:
          • Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by searching for “FAR Case 2012-015.” Select the link “Submit a Comment” that corresponds with “FAR Case 2012-015.” Follow the instructions provided at the “Submit a Comment” screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “FAR Case 2012-015” on your attached document.
          • Fax: 202-501-4067.
          • Mail: General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat (MVCB), ATTN: Hada Flowers, 1275 First Street, NE., 7th Floor, Washington, DC 20417.

            Instructions: Please submit comments only and cite FAR Case 2012-015, in all correspondence related to this case. All comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal and/or business confidential information provided.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Mr. Karlos Morgan, Procurement Analyst, at 202-501-2364, for clarification of content. For information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the Regulatory Secretariat at 202-501-4755. Please cite FAR Case 2012-015.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        I. Background
        DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to amend the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to revise paragraph (b)(2) of FAR 19.502-2, “Total small business set-asides,” to clarify that contracting officers shall set aside acquisitions for research and development (R&D) in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold when the market research conducted in accordance with FAR part 10 indicates there are small businesses capable of providing the best scientific and technological approaches. It is also proposed that FAR 35.004 be amended to include a reference to this FAR cite, because this area of the FAR addresses the steps Federal agencies may use to expand sources for R&D support.
        This proposed rule responds to a request from the Small Business Administration (SBA) to review the last sentence in FAR 19.502(b)(2) which reads: “In making R&D small business set-asides, there must also be a reasonable expectation of obtaining from small businesses the best scientific and technological sources consistent with the demands of the proposed acquisition for the best mix of cost, performances, and schedules.” The SBA advises that this language has been interpreted as an additional and unique condition that must be met before a contracting officer can proceed with a small business set-aside for research and development.
        FAR 19.502-2(b) establishes the general requirements for a total small business set-asides above the simplified acquisition threshold: (1) That offers will be obtained from at least two responsible small business concerns offering the products of different small business concerns; and (2) That the award from the set-aside will be made at fair market prices.
        This rule proposes to further clarify that the basis for the contracting officer's decision to set-aside or not to set-aside an acquisition for R&D support above the simplified acquisition threshold lies in the objective evidence obtained from the market research conducted. This clarification is intended to remove the potential barrier for small business previously noted by the SBA, as the requirement to conduct market research in advance of a small business set-aside is not a new or additional requirement, and applies to all small business set-asides.
        II. Discussion and Analysis
        DoD, GSA, and NASA are proposing to amend FAR 19.502-2, “Setting aside acquisitions” by redesignating the last sentence in paragraph (b)(2) as a new paragraph (b)(3), to clarify that for R&D small business set-asides, there must be a reasonable expectation that, as a result of the market research performed, small businesses are capable of providing the best scientific and technological approaches. The additional statement “consistent with the demands of the proposed acquisition for the best mix of cost, performance, and schedules” has been removed.
        FAR 35.004 is also amended to add a new reference at the end of paragraph (b) to 19.502(b)(3), for guidance on R&D set-asides.
        III. Executive Order 12866 and 13563
        Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.
        IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act

        The Department of Defense (DoD), the General Services Administration (GSA), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) do not expect this proposed rule to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., because this change will not have a significant effect beyond the internal operating procedures of the Federal Government nor will it have a significant cost or administrative impact on contractors or offerors. Therefore, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not been performed. DoD, GSA, and NASA invite comments from small business concerns and other interested parties on the expected impact of this rule on small entities.
        DoD, GSA, and NASA will also consider comments from small entities concerning the existing regulations in subparts affected by the rule in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Interested parties must submit such comments separately and should cite 5 U.S.C 610 (FAR Case 2015-015), in correspondence.
        V. Paperwork Reduction Act
        The proposed rule does not contain any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).

          List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 19 and 35
          Government procurement.

          Dated: August 7, 2012.
          Laura Auletta,
          Director, Office of Governmentwide Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition Policy, Office of Governmentwide Policy.

        Therefore, DoD, GSA, and NASA propose amending 48 CFR parts 19 and 35 as set forth below:

          PART 19—SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAMS
          1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 19 and 35 is revised to read as follows:

            Authority:
            40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and 51 U.S.C. 20113.

          2. Amend section 19.502-2 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

            19.502-2
            Total small business set-asides.

            (b) Before setting aside an acquisition under this paragraph, refer to 19.203(c). The contracting officer shall set aside any acquisition over the simplified acquisition threshold for small business participation when there is a reasonable expectation—
            (1) That offers will be obtained from at least two responsible small business concerns offering the products of different small business concerns (see paragraph (c) of this section);
            (2) That award will be made at fair market prices. Total small business set-asides shall not be made unless such a reasonable expectation exists (see 19.502-3 as to partial set-asides). Although past acquisition history of an item or similar items is always important, it is not the only factor to be considered in determining whether a reasonable expectation exists; and
            (3) When considering research and development small business set-asides, as a result of the market research performed in accordance with part 10, that there are small businesses capable of providing the best scientific and technological approaches.

            3. Amend section 35.004 by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:

            35.004
            Publicizing requirements and expanding research and development sources.

            (c) See 19.502(b)(3) for information regarding set-asides of R&D requirements.

      [FR Doc. 2012-19628 Filed 8-9-12; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6820-14-P


        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        Fish and Wildlife Service
        50 CFR Part 17
        [Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0051; 450 003 0115]
        Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List 10 Sturgeon Species as Endangered or Threatened

          AGENCY:
          Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

          ACTION:
          Notice of petition finding and initiation of status review.

          SUMMARY:
          We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 90-day finding on a petition to list 10 sturgeon species as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific and commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. Therefore, with the publication of this notice, we are initiating a review of the status of these species to determine if listing these 10 species is warranted. To ensure that this status review is comprehensive, we request scientific and commercial data and other information regarding these species. At the conclusion of this review, we will issue a 12-month finding on the petition, as provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act.

          DATES:

          To allow us adequate time to conduct this review, we request that we receive information on or before November 25, 2013. After this date, you must submit information directly to the office listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section below. Please note that we may not be able to address or incorporate information that we receive after the above requested date.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit information by one of the following methods:
          • Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In the Search field, enter Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0051, which is the docket number for this action. Then click on the Search button. You may submit a comment by clicking on “Comment Now!” If your comments will fit in the provided comment box, please use this feature of http://www.regulations.gov, as it is most compatible with our comment review procedures. If you attach your comments as a separate document, our preferred file format is Microsoft Word. If you attach multiple comments (such as form letters), our preferred format is a spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel.
          • By Hard Copy: U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0051, Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.

          We will not accept comments by email or fax. We will post all comments on http://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any personal information you provide us (see the Information Requested section, below, for more information).

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Janine Van Norman, Chief, Branch of Foreign Species, Endangered Species Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Room 420, Arlington, VA 22203; telephone 703-358-2171; facsimile 703-358-1735. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Information Requested

        For the status review to be complete and based on the best available scientific and commercial information, we request information on 10 sturgeon species (see list in Table 1, below) from government agencies (including foreign national and provincial governments within the range of each of these species), the scientific community, industry, and any other interested parties. We seek information on:
        (1) Each species' biology, range, and population trends, including:
        (a) Habitat requirements for feeding, breeding, and sheltering;
        (b) Genetics and taxonomy;
        (c) Historical and current range, including distribution patterns, particularly regarding their seasonal migrations;
        (d) Historical and current population levels, and current and projected population trends;
        (e) Potential threats to each species such as harvest or other threats not identified; and
        (f) Past and ongoing conservation measures for each species or its habitat.

        (2) The factors that are the basis for making a listing determination for a species or subspecies under section 4(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), which are:
        (a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of their habitat or range;
        (b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes, particularly data on hunting;
        (c) Disease or predation;
        (d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
        (e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting their continued existence.
        (3) The potential effects of climate change on each species and its habitat.
        Please include sufficient information with your submission (such as full references) to allow us to verify any scientific or commercial information you include. Submissions merely stating support for or opposition to the action under consideration without providing supporting information, although noted, will not be considered in making a determination. Section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that determinations as to whether any species is an endangered or threatened species must be made “solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.”

        You may submit your information concerning this status review by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. If you submit information via http://www.regulations.gov, your entire submission—including any personal identifying information—will be posted on the Web site. If you submit a hard copy that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the top of your document that we withhold this personal identifying information from public review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will post all hard copy submissions on http://www.regulations.gov.

        Information and supporting documentation that we received and used in preparing this finding will be available to review at http://www.regulations.gov, or you may make an appointment during normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Program, Branch of Foreign Species (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
        Background

        Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act requires that we make a finding on whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. We are to base this finding on information provided in the petition, supporting information submitted with the petition, and information otherwise available in our files. To the maximum extent practicable, we are to make this finding within 90 days of our receipt of the petition and publish our notice of the finding promptly in the Federal Register.
        Our standard for substantial scientific or commercial information within the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-day petition finding is “that amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted” (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we find that substantial scientific or commercial information was presented, we are required to promptly initiate a species status review, which we subsequently summarize in our 12-month finding.
        Petition History

        On March 12, 2012, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) received a petition dated March 8, 2012, from WildEarth Guardians and Friends of Animals to list as endangered or threatened under the Act the following 15 sturgeon species: Adriatic sturgeon (Acipenser naccarii); Baltic sturgeon (A. sturio); Russian sturgeon (A. gueldenstaedtii); ship sturgeon (A. nudiventris); Persian sturgeon (A. persicus); stellate sturgeon (A. stellatus); Siberian sturgeon (A. baerii); Yangtze sturgeon (A. dabryanus); Chinese sturgeon (A. sinensis); Sakhalin sturgeon (A. mikadoi); Amur sturgeon (A. schrenckii); Kaluga sturgeon (Huso dauricus); Syr Darya sturgeon (Pseudoscaphirhynchus fedtschenkoi); dwarf sturgeon (P. hermanni); and Amu Darya sturgeon (P. kaufmanni). The petition states that all 15 petitioned sturgeon species are affected by similar threats, which are primarily: Both legal and illegal harvest for meat and/or roe; habitat loss and degradation including dams or dam construction, and water pollution. The petition is available at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/petitions/sturgeon15_petition2012.pdf.

        NMFS acknowledged receipt of this petition in a letter dated April 14, 2012, and informed the petitioners that NMFS would determine, under section 4 of the Act, whether the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. Although the petition was initially sent to NMFS, as a result of subsequent discussions between NMFS and the Service regarding the August 28, 1974, Memorandum of Understanding pertaining to “Jurisdictional Responsibilities and Listing Procedures Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,” we have determined that 10 of the 15 petitioned sturgeon species are within the jurisdiction of the Service. Therefore, in April 2012, the Service notified WildEarth Guardians that we have jurisdiction over the 10 sturgeon species, listed below, that are the subject of this 90-day finding.

        This 90-day finding considers whether the petitioned action may be warranted for the following 10 sturgeon species included in the petition: Siberian sturgeon (Acipenser baerii), Yangtze sturgeon (A. dabryanus), Russian sturgeon (A. gueldenstaedtii), ship sturgeon (A. nudiventris), Persian sturgeon (A. persicus), Amur sturgeon (A. schrenckii), stellate sturgeon (A. stellatus), Syr-Darya sturgeon (Pseudoscaphirhynchus fedtschenkoi), dwarf sturgeon (P. hermanni), and the Amu Darya sturgeon (P. kaufmanni). The best available information regarding the current ranges and population trends is summarized in Table 1, below.

          Table 1—List of Species in This 90-Day Finding

            Species
            IUCN Status
            Population trend
            Current range

            Siberian sturgeon (Acipenser baerii)
            Endangered
            Decreasing
            China; Kazakhstan; Mongolia; Russia.

            Yangtze sturgeon (Acipenser dabryanus)
            Critically Endangered
            Decreasing
            China.

            Russian sturgeon (Acipenser gueldenstaedtii)
            Critically Endangered
            Decreasing
            Azerbaijan; Bulgaria; Georgia; Iran; Kazakhstan; Moldova; Romania; Russia; Serbia; Turkey; Turkmenistan; Ukraine.

            Ship sturgeon (Acipenser nudiventris)
            Critically Endangered
            Decreasing
            Azerbaijan; Georgia; Hungary; Iran; Kazakhstan; Russia; Serbia; Turkey.

            Persian sturgeon (Acipenser persicus)
            Critically Endangered
            Decreasing
            Azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Russia, Turkey.

            Amur sturgeon (Acipenser schrenckii)
            Critically Endangered
            Decreasing
            China; Russia.

            Stellate sturgeon (Acipenser stellatus)
            Critically Endangered
            Decreasing
            Azerbaijan; Bulgaria; Iran; Kazakhstan; Moldova; Romania; Russia; Serbia; Turkey; Turkmenistan; Ukraine.

            Syr Darya sturgeon (Pseudoscaphirhynchus fedtschenkoi)
            Critically Endangered
            Unknown
            Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan.

            Dwarf sturgeon (Pseudoscaphirhynchus hermanni)
            Critically Endangered
            Decreasing
            Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan.

            Amu Darya sturgeon (Pseudoscaphirhynchus kaufmanni)
            Critically Endangered
            Decreasing
            Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan.

        Introduction
        These 10 sturgeon species are either anadromous (spend part of their lives in salt water and return to rivers to breed) or live solely in fresh water. Many sturgeon species are prized for their roe, which is made into caviar. The primary factors indicated in the petition as affecting these species include overharvest and damming of rivers, which affect the continued survival of all the petitioned sturgeon with the exception, at least at present, of those in the Amur River basin.
        In 1997, Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) agreed to include all sturgeon species not already in the CITES Appendices in Appendix II. The listing became effective in April 1998. All 10 species of sturgeon in this finding were included in CITES Appendix II at that time. Pursuant to Article II, paragraph 2(a) of CITES, Appendix II includes species that are not necessarily threatened now with extinction, but may become so unless trade in specimens of such species is subject to strict regulation in order to avoid utilization incompatible with their survival. In addition, Appendix II also includes species that may be listed due to their similarity in appearance with other species that are regulated under the treaty (CITES Article II 2(b)). Some of the 10 species of sturgeon in this finding were listed in accordance with the CITES criteria under paragraph 2(a) of Article II, while others were listed based upon the similarity of appearance provision.
        CITES is a multinational agreement between governments. CITES Parties (signatory countries) regulate and monitor international trade in CITES-listed species (that is, their import, export, and re-export) through a system of permits and certificates. CITES lists species in one of three appendices—Appendix I, II, or III.
        Evaluation of Information for a 90-Day Finding on a Petition
        Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and its implementing regulations at 50 CFR 424 set forth the procedures for adding a species to, or removing a species from, the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants. A species may be determined to be an endangered or threatened species due to one or more of the five factors described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act:
        (A) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range;
        (B) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes;
        (C) Disease or predation;
        (D) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
        (E) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.

        In making this 90-day finding, we evaluated whether information regarding threats to each species, as presented in the petition and other information available in our files, is substantial, thereby indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. Our evaluation of this information is presented in Appendix A. in Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0051 on http://www.regulations.gov.

        Finding
        On the basis of our review under section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Act, we determine that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that listing these 10 sturgeon species as endangered or threatened may be warranted. This finding is based on information provided in the petition regarding the five factors: The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range (Factor A); overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes (Factor B); disease and predation (Factor C); the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D); and other natural or manmade factors affecting the species' continued existence (Factor E).
        The primary factors identified in the petition as affecting these species are dams constructed within their range that fragment their habitat (Factor A); pollution that causes health and reproduction issues (Factor A); severe levels of overharvest (Factor B); and the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms (Factor D) to address those threats. The petitioners also note that all of the petitioned species are affected by more than one factor (Petition, p. 50).
        These species occur in several countries, and the factors affecting these species are complex and interrelated. Because we have found that the petition presents substantial information indicating that listing these 10 sturgeon species may be warranted, we are initiating a status review to determine whether listing these 10 sturgeon species under the Act as endangered or threatened is warranted.

        The “substantial information” standard for a 90-day finding differs from the Act's “best scientific and commercial data available” standard that applies to a 12-month finding (status review) as to whether a petitioned action is warranted. A 90-day finding is not a status assessment of the species and does not constitute a status review under the Act. In a 12-month finding, we will determine whether a petitioned action is warranted after we have completed a thorough status review of the species, which is conducted following a substantial 90-day finding. Because the Act's standards for 90-day and 12-month findings are different, as described above, a substantial 90-day finding does not mean that the 12-month finding will result in a warranted finding.
        References Cited

        A complete list of all references cited in this 90-day finding is available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2013-0051 or upon request from the Branch of Foreign Species, Endangered Species Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
        Author
        The primary author of this finding is Amy Brisendine, Branch of Foreign Species, Endangered Species Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
        Authority

        The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

          Dated: September 9, 2013.
          Stephen D. Guertin,
          Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

      [FR Doc. 2013-22879 Filed 9-23-13; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4310-55-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        [I.D. 091802B]
        Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings

          AGENCY:
          National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

          ACTION:
          Notice of public meetings.

          SUMMARY:
          The 81st meeting of the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) will convene October 8 through 10, 2002, in Honolulu, HI.  The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) Advisory Panels will meet on October 10 through 12, 2002, and the Council will hold its 115th meeting October 14 through 17, 2002, in Honolulu, HI.

          DATES:

          The SSC meeting will be held on October 8, 2002, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. and on October 9-10, 2002, from 8:30 a.m. to 12 noon.  The Commercial, Recreational, Subsistence/Indigenous and Ecosystem and Habitat Advisory Panels will meet on October 10, 2002, from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m., on October 11 from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., and on October 12, 2002, from 9 a.m. to 12 noon.  The Council's Standing Committees will meet on October 14, 2002, from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.  The full Council meeting will be held on October 15, 2002, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., October 16 from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., and October 17, 2002, from 8:30 a.m. to 12 noon.  See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific dates and times for these meetings.

          ADDRESSES:
          The 81st SSC, the Advisory Panel, and the Standing Committee meetings will be held at the Council Office Conference Room, 1164 Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI; telephone: 808 522-8220.  The Council meeting will be held at the Pier 11 Gallery, 700 Fort Street, Aloha Tower, Honolulu, HI; telephone: 808-522-8220.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director; telephone:  808-522-8220.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Dates and Times
        SSC
        The SSC will discuss and may make recommendations to the Council on the agenda items below.  The order in which agenda items will be addressed may change.  Public comment periods will be provided throughout the meeting agenda.  The SSC will meet as late as necessary to complete scheduled business.
        Tuesday, October 8, 2002
        1. Introduction
        2.  Approval of draft agenda and assignment of rapporteurs
        3.  Approval of the minutes of the 80th meeting
        4.  NMFS cetacean surveys in the Hawaiian Exclusive Economic Zone
        5.  Applied social impact analysis
        6.  Crustaceans fisheries (Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI) Lobsters
        A. Report on NWHI lobster research
        7.  Bottomfish fisheries
        A. Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology research and Hawaii Undersea Research Laboratory research
        B. Management of Guam offshore bottomfish
        8.  Ensuring management decisions uses best available science
        Wednesday, October 9, 2002
        9.  Pelagic fisheries
        A. Hawaii and American Samoa 2002 quarterly longline reports
        B. American Samoa limited entry program
        C. American Samoa longline fishery scientific data program
        D. Recreational fisheries
        (1) Hawaii Marine Recreational Fisheries Survey

        (2) International Billfish Angling Survey and the Billfish Tagging Program
        (3) Statutory data needs for fishery management
        E. Sea Turtle conservation and management
        (1) Honolulu Lab mitigation turtle research
        (2) New Biological Opinion
        (3) Pacific sea turtle recovery plan teams
        (4) EIS for Hawaii Section 10 permit
        F. International meetings and issues
        (1) Standing Committee on Tuna and Billfish (SCTB15)
        (2) Prep-Con Scientific Coordinating Group
        (3) Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission
        G. Informational needs for pen raising of tuna
        Thursday, October 10, 2002
        10. Ecosystems and habitat
        A. Valuation of Hawaii's coral reef resources
        B. Hawaii marine management gap analysis
        C. State of Hawaii reef fish catch and effort data
        D. New minimum sizes for Hawaii reef fish
        E. Pacific Regional Live Reef Fish Trade Management Workshop
        11. Other business
        12. Summary of recommendations to the Council
        Advisory Panels
        The Commercial, Recreational, Subsistence/Indigenous and Ecosystem and Habitat sub-panels will meet jointly on Thursday, October 10, 2002, from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m.  Sub-panels will meet individually on Friday, October 11, 2002, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. but reconvene jointly on Saturday, October 12, 2002, from 9 a.m. to 12:00 noon to finalize recommendations.  The agenda for the Advisory Panel meetings will include the items listed below. Public comment periods will be provided throughout the agenda.  The order in which agenda items are addressed may change.  The Advisory Panels will meet as late as necessary to complete scheduled business.
        Thursday, October 10, 2002
        1.  Welcome and introductions
        2.  Advisory appointments
        3.  Report on tuna quality, seafood safety, and Food and Drug Administration regulations
        4. NMFS International Billfish Angling Survey and tagging program
        5.  Report on recreational fisheries
        A. Regional/national/world round up
        B. Fisheries Data Management Plan
        6.  Commercial round up: regional/national/world
        7.  Fishery development and research
        A. Community Demonstration Projects
        B. Report on Saltonstall-Kennedy Funding
        C. Pelagic Fisheries Research Program
        D. Cooperative Research Plans for Western Pacific Region
        Friday, October 11, 2002
        8.  Sub-panel break-out sessions to discuss issues and develop recommendations
        Saturday, October 12, 2002
        9.  Joint panel session to review and finalize recommendations to the Council
        Committee Meetings
        The following Standing Committees of the Council will meet on October 14, 2002.  Enforcement/Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m.; Fishery Rights of Indigenous People from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m.; International Fisheries/Pelagics from 10 a.m. to 12 noon; Bottomfish from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m.; Crustaceans from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m.; Ecosystem and Habitat from 3 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.; and Executive/Budget and Program from 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m.
        In addition, the Council will hear recommendations from its advisory panels, plan teams, scientific and statistical committee, and other ad hoc groups.  Public comment periods will be provided throughout the meeting agenda.  The order in which agenda items are addressed may change.  The Council will meet as late as necessary to complete scheduled business.
        The agenda during the full Council meeting will include the items listed below.
        Tuesday, October 15, 2002
        1.  Introductions
        2.  Approval of agenda
        3.  Approval of 113th and 114th meeting minutes
        4.  Island reports
        A. American Samoa
        B. Guam
        C. Hawaii
        D. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
        5.  Federal Fishery agency and organization reports
        A. Department of Commerce
        (1) NMFS
        (a) Southwest Region, Pacific Islands Area Office (PIAO)
        (b) Southwest Fisheries Science Center, La Jolla and Honolulu Laboratories
        (2) NOAA General Counsel, Southwest Region
        (3) National Ocean Service
        (a) National Marine Sanctuaries, NWHI Reserve Designation
        B. Department of the Interior
        (1) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
        C. U.S. State Department
        6. Enforcement and VMS
        A. U.S. Coast Guard activities
        B. NMFS activities
        C. NWHI Reserve VMS projectG. Status of violations
        7. Crustaceans fisheries
        A. NWHI lobster research
        8. Observer and monitoring programs
        A. NMFS PIAO
        (1) American Samoa longline fishery scientific data program
        (2) Bottomfish
        (3) Hawaii longline
        B. Native observer program
        Wednesday, October 16, 2002
        9.  Pelagic fisheries
        A. Quarterly 2002 Hawaii and American Samoa longline reports
        B. American Samoa limited entry program
        C. Recreational fisheries
        (1) Hawaii Marine Recreational Fisheries Survey
        (2) Managing Hawaii's recreational fisheries
        D. Sea turtle conservation and management
        (1) Honolulu Lab mitigation turtle research
        (2) New Biological Opinion
        (3) Pacific sea turtle recovery plan
        (4) Litigation
        E. International meetings and issues
        (1) Report on the 15th meeting of the SCTB15
        (2) Prep-Con Scientific Coordinating Group
        F. Pen raising of tuna off Big Island
        G. Fishing in Pacific Remote Island Areas (PRIA)
        (1) New rule for troll and handline for pelagic vessels off the PRIA)
        (2) Activities at Palmyra Atoll
        10.  Bottomfish
        A. Guam offshore bottomfish management
        B. Report on Main Hawaiian Island catch and effort
        11. Indigenous fishery rights
        A. Status of marine conservation plans
        B. Community demonstration projects program
        (1) Selection of projects from first solicitation
        (2) Second solicitation for program
        C. Community development program
        12. Program planning
        A. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) reauthorization
        B. Status of NMFS Pacific Island Region
        C. NOAA strategic planning
        D. Social science research planning

        E. Report on statutory data needs for fishery management
        F. Education initiatives
        Thursday, October, 17, 2002
        13. Ecosystems and habitats
        A. Report on State of Hawaii NWHI Marine Reserve
        B. Reserve request for NWHI bottomfish impact analysis
        C. Proposed designation of NWHI as a National Marine Sanctuary
        D. Report on Hawaii reef fish commercial catch data
        E. Report on US Coral Reef Task Force
        F. Report on Caribbean Coral reef Fisheries Management Workshop
        G. Status of NWHI reef assessment and monitoring program 2002
        H. Report on Secretariat for the Pacific Community Pacific Regional Live Reef Fish Trade Management Workshop
        14. Administrative matters
        A. Financial reports
        B. Administrative reports
        C. Upcoming meetings and workshops including the 116th Council meeting
        D. Advisory Panel, SSC, Plan Team, NWHI Reserve and Sea Turtle Working Group Appointments
        15. Election of officers
        16. Other business
        Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before the Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal Council action during this meeting.  Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this document and any issue arising after publication of this document that requires emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.
        Special Accommodations
        These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities.  Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, 808-522-8220 (voice) or 808-522-8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

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

          Dated: September 23, 2002.
          Virginia M. Fay,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 02-24521 Filed 9-26-02; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
        Transportation Security Administration
        49 CFR Part 1507
        [Docket No. TSA-2004-18984, Amendment 1507-1]
        RIN 1652-AA36
        Privacy Act of 1974: Implementation of Exemptions; Registered Traveler Operations Files

          AGENCY:
          Transportation Security Administration (TSA), DHS.

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

          SUMMARY:
          TSA proposes to exempt the Registered Traveler Operations Files (DHS/TSA 015) from several provisions of the Privacy Act. Public comment is invited.

          DATES:
          Submit comments by October 8, 2004.

          ADDRESSES:
          You must identify the TSA docket number when you submit comments to this rulemaking, using any one of the following methods:

            Comments Filed Electronically: You may submit comments through the docket Web site at http://dms.dot.gov. Please be aware that anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the applicable Privacy Act Statement published in the Federal Register on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or you may visit http://dms.dot.gov.

          You also may submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking portal at http://www.regulations.gov.

            Comments Submitted by Mail, Fax, or In Person: Address or deliver your written, signed comments to the Docket Management System, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room Plaza 401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001; Fax: 202-493-2251.

            Reviewing Comments in the Docket: You may review the public docket containing comments in person in the Dockets Office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Dockets Office is located on the plaza level of the NASSIF Building at the Department of Transportation address above. Also, you may review public dockets on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

          See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for format and other information about comment submissions.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Conrad Huygen, Privacy Act Officer, TSA Office of Information Management Programs, TSA-17, West Tower, 11th Floor, 601 S. 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220; telephone (571) 227-1954; facsimile (571) 227-2912.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Comments Invited

        TSA invites interested persons to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. We also invite comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy, or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in this document. See ADDRESSES above for information on where to submit comments.

        With each comment, please include your name and address, identify the docket number at the beginning of your comments, and give the reason for each comment. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. You may submit comments and material electronically, in person, or by mail as provided under ADDRESSES, but please submit your comments and material by only one means. If you submit comments by mail or delivery, submit them in two copies, in an unbound format, no larger than 8.5 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing.
        If you want TSA to acknowledge receipt of your comments on this rulemaking, include with your comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the docket number appears. We will stamp the date on the postcard and mail it to you.
        Except for comments containing confidential information and SSI, we will file in the public docket all comments we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with TSA personnel concerning this rulemaking. The docket is available for public inspection before and after the comment closing date.
        We will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed late to the extent practicable. We may change this rulemaking in light of the comments we receive.
        Availability of Rulemaking Document
        You may obtain an electronic copy using the Internet by—

        (1) Searching the Department of Transportation's electronic Docket Management System (DMS) Web page (http://dms.dot.gov/search);
        (2) Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html; or
        (3) Visiting the TSA's Law and Policy Web page at http://www.tsa.dot.gov/public/index.jsp.

        In addition, copies are available by writing or calling the individual in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Make sure to identify the docket number of this rulemaking.
        Background
        TSA plans to conduct a pilot program at a limited number of airports to test and evaluate the merits of a registered traveler program (RT), in which travelers may volunteer to undergo a limited security threat assessment in order to expedite the pre-boarding process. In the RT pilot, TSA would positively identify volunteer travelers using advanced identification technology and then conduct a security threat assessment to ensure that the volunteer does not pose a security threat. TSA believes that this process has the potential to enhance the allocation of its limited security resources on individuals who are more likely to pose a security threat. However, it is important to note that all travelers who volunteer and are deemed eligible for the RT pilot program will be required to undergo physical screening at the screening checkpoint in the selected pilot locations.
        Summary of Proposed Rule
        In conjunction with the establishment of a new system of records to facilitate the RT Pilot Program, Registered Traveler Operations Files (DHS/TSA 015), TSA proposes to exempt portions of the system from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3) (accounting of disclosures), (d) (access to records), (e)(1) (relevancy of necessary information), (e)(4)(G), (H) and (I) (agency requirements), and (f) (agency rules) pursuant to exemptions (k)(1) and (k)(2) of the Act. These exemptions are being claimed in accordance with the Privacy Act so that the security aspects of the system may properly function and to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of classified and law enforcement information.
        Paperwork Reduction Act
        The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that TSA consider the impact of paperwork and other information collection burdens imposed on the public. We have determined that there are no current or new information collection requirements associated with this proposed rule.
        Analysis of Regulatory Impacts
        This proposal is not a “significant regulatory action” within the meaning of Executive Order 12886. Because the economic impact should be minimal, further regulatory evaluation is not necessary. Moreover, I certify that this proposal would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, because the reporting requirements themselves are not changed and because it applies only to information on individuals.
        Unfunded Mandates
        Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), (Pub. L. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48), requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of certain regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector. UMRA requires a written statement of economic and regulatory alternatives for proposed and final rules that contain Federal mandates. A “Federal mandate” is a new or additional enforceable duty, imposed on any State, local, or tribal government, or the private sector. If any Federal mandate causes those entities to spend, in aggregate, $100 million or more in any one year the UMRA analysis is required. This proposal would not impose Federal mandates on any State, local, or tribal government or the private sector.
        Executive Order 13132, Federalism
        TSA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We determined that this action 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, and therefore would not have federalism implications.
        Environmental Analysis
        TSA has reviewed this action for purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347) and has determined that this action will not have a significant effect on the human environment.
        Energy Impact

        The energy impact of this document has been assessed in accordance with the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) Public Law 94-163, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6362). We have determined that this rulemaking is not a major regulatory action under the provisions of the EPCA.

          List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 1507
          Privacy, Transportation Security.

        The Proposed Amendment
        In consideration of the foregoing, the Transportation Security Administration proposes to amend Part 1507 of Chapter XII, Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

          PART 1507 PRIVACY ACT—EXEMPTIONS
          1. The authority cited for part 1507 is revised to read as follows:

            Authority:
            49 U.S.C. 114(l)(1), 40113, 5 U.S.C. 552a(j) and (k).

          2. Section 1507.3 is revised by adding a new paragraph (i) to read as follows:

            § 1507.3
            Exemptions.

            (i) Registered Traveler Operations Files (DHS/TSA 015)

            The purpose of this system is to pre-screen and positively identify volunteer travelers using advanced identification technologies and conduct security threat assessment to ensure that the volunteer does not pose a security threat. This system may expedite the pre-boarding process for the traveler and improve the allocation of TSA's security resources on individuals who may pose a security threat. Pursuant to exemptions (k)(1) and (k)(2) of the Privacy Act, DHS/TSA 015 is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 552a(c)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4)(G), (H) and (I), and (f). Exemptions from the particular subsections are justified for the following reasons:
            (1) From subsection (c)(3) (Accounting for Disclosures) because release of the accounting of disclosures could alert the subject of heightened security concerns relating to an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation to the existence of an investigative interest on the part of the Transportation Security Administration as well as the recipient agency. Disclosure of the accounting would therefore present a serious impediment to transportation security law enforcement efforts and efforts to preserve national security. Disclosure of the accounting would also permit the individual who is the subject of a record to impede the program suitability determination, which undermines the entire system.
            (2) From subsection (d) (Access to Records) because access to some of the records contained in this system of records could permit the individual who is the subject of a record to impede the program suitability determination. Amendment of the records would interfere with ongoing security assessment investigations and program suitability determinations and impose an impossible administrative burden by requiring such investigations to be continuously reinvestigated. The information contained in the system may also include classified information, the release of which would pose a threat to national defense and/or foreign policy. In addition, permitting access and amendment to such information also could disclose security-sensitive information that could be detrimental to transportation security.
            (3) From subsection (e)(1) (Relevancy and Necessity of Information) because in the course of screening applicants for program suitability, TSA must be able to review information from a variety of sources. What information is relevant and necessary may not always be apparent until after the evaluation is completed. In the interests of transportation security, it is appropriate to include a broad range of information that may aid in determining an applicant's suitability for the RT program.
            (4) From subsections (e)(4)(G), (H) and (I) (Agency Requirements), and (f) (Agency Rules), because this system is exempt from the access and amendment provisions of subsection (d).

            Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on August 30, 2004.
            Susan T. Tracey,
            Chief Administrative Officer.

      [FR Doc. 04-20252 Filed 9-7-04; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-62-P