        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 622
        [Docket No. 150226189-5189-01]
        RIN 0648-BE91
        Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Red Snapper Management Measures

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS proposes to implement management measures described in a framework action to the Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP) prepared by the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) Fishery Management Council (Council) (2015 Gulf red snapper framework action). If implemented, this proposed rule would increase the commercial and recreational quotas for red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico reef fish fishery for the 2015, 2016, and 2017 fishing years Quotas for subsequent fishing years would remain at 2017 levels unless changed by future rulemaking. This proposed rule is intended to help achieve optimum yield (OY) for the Gulf red snapper resource without increasing the risk of red snapper experiencing overfishing.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received on or before April 16, 2015.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on the proposed rule, identified by “NOAA-NMFS-2015-0036” by either of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docket Detail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015-0036, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to Cynthia Meyer, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.

            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, 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).

          Electronic copies of the framework action, which includes an environmental assessment, Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) analysis and a regulatory impact review, may be obtained from the Southeast Regional Office Web site at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sustainable_fisheries/gulf_fisheries/reef_fish.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Cynthia Meyer, telephone 727-824-5305; email: Cynthia.Meyer@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        NMFS and the Council manage the Gulf reef fish fishery under the FMP. The Council prepared the FMP and NMFS implements the FMP through regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).
        Background
        All weights given in this rule are in round weight. The total quota for Gulf red snapper (combined commercial and recreational quotas) has increased annually from 5 million lb (2.268 million kg), in 2009, to 11 million lb (4.990 million kg), and since 2013, has been fixed at 11 million lb (4.990 million kg). In order to reduce the likelihood that the recreational sector will exceed its quota, the Council and NMFS implemented an annual catch target (ACT) set at 20 percent below the recreational quota through the 2014 framework amendment (80 FR 14328, March 19, 2015), which is used to set the recreational season length. The commercial sector is managed by an individual fishing quota (IFQ) program that was implemented in 2007, and effectively constrains commercial landings to the commercial quota.
        Status of Stock
        The Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) benchmark assessment for Gulf red snapper, conducted in 2013 and 2014 (SEDAR 31), determined that the red snapper stock is still overfished, but is not undergoing overfishing, and that the acceptable biological catch (ABC) may be increased. The stock is still under a rebuilding plan through 2032.
        The Council's Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) met in February 2015, to review the assessment results with updated provisional 2014 landings data and recommended a new ABC for the 2015, 2016, and 2017 fishing years. The SSC recommended an ABC of 14.30 million lb (6.49 million kg) for 2015, 13.96 million lb (6.33 million kg) for 2016, and 13.74 million lb (6.23 million kg) for 2017. The Council met in March 2015, and voted to adjust the commercial and recreational quotas to reflect these new ABCs through the 2015 Gulf red snapper framework action.
        Management Measures Contained in This Proposed Rule
        This rule would set the commercial and recreational quotas and the recreational ACTs for the 2015, 2016, and 2017 fishing years for red snapper based on the ABCs recommended by the SSC and on the current commercial and recreational allocations (51-percent commercial and 49-percent recreational). Quotas for subsequent fishing years would remain at 2017 levels unless changed by future rulemaking. For 2015, the commercial quota would be set at 7.293 million lb (3.308 million kg) and the recreational quota would be set at 7.007 million lb (3.178 million kg); for 2016, the commercial quota would be set at 7.120 million lb (3.230 million kg) and the recreational quota would be set at 6.840 million lb (3.103 million kg); and for 2017 and subsequent fishing years, the commercial quota would be set at 7.007 million lb (3.178 million kg) and the recreational quota would be set at 6.733 million lb (3.054 million kg.
        Through the 2014 framework amendment, the Council and NMFS implemented a recreational ACT set at 20 percent below the recreational quota. Based on the revised recreational quotas contained in this rule, the revised recreational ACTs for the 2015, 2016, and 2017 would be as follows: For 2015, the recreational ACT would be 5.606 million lb (2.543 million kg); for 2016, the recreational ACT would be 5.472 million lb (2.482 million kg); and for 2017, the recreational ACT would be 5.384 million lb (2.442 million kg). Recreational ACTs for subsequent fishing years would remain at 2017 levels unless changed by future rulemaking.
        The Gulf Headboat Collaborative Fishing Permit (Collaborative) program, implemented through an exempted fishing permit, will continue through 2015 (as a continuation of the 2-year program begun in 2014). The Collaborative program allocates harvest rights to a specified portion of the red snapper recreational sector (2.4396 percent of the recreational quota), and this quantity is subsequently allocated to individual vessels. This program allows anglers to harvest red snapper when fishing on Collaborative vessels throughout the fishing year (until that portion of the quota is met). The proposed increase in the red snapper recreational quota in 2015 would increase the amount of quota allocated to the 19 vessels in this program.
        The red snapper management measures contained in this proposed rule would achieve the goal set by National Standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which states that conservation and management measures shall prevent overfishing while achieving, on a continuing basis, the OY for the fishery.
        Red Snapper Recreational Fishing Season
        Under 50 CFR 622.34(b), the red snapper recreational fishing season opens each year on June 1. Prior to June 1 each year, NMFS projects the closing date based on the previous year's data, and notifies the public of the closing date for the upcoming season. The red snapper recreational season closure date will be based on when the recreational ACT is projected to be met (as required by the 2014 Gulf red snapper framework amendment). After the final 2014 recreational landings data are available and before the season opens on June 1, 2015, NMFS will announce the 2015 season closure date, which may be in the final rule associated with this action.
        Amendment 40 to the FMP

        The Council developed Amendment 40 to the FMP and NMFS published a notice of availability (NOA) on January 16, 2015 (80 FR 2379) and a proposed rule on January 23, 2015 (80 FR 3541). The public comment period on the proposed rule ended on March 9, 2015, and the NOA comment period ended on March 17, 2015. If approved by the Secretary of Commerce, Amendment 40 and the implementing rule would establish a Federal charter vessel/headboat (for-hire) component and a private angling component within the recreational sector, allocate the red snapper recreational quota and annual catch target (ACT) between the components, and establish separate seasonal closures for the two components. Additionally, Amendment 40 and the rule would establish commercial and recreational ACLs for red snapper, which would be equal to the commercial and recreational quotas. Previously, rather than establishing ACLs for red snapper management, the Council chose to refer to the sector quotas as the functional equivalent of sector ACLs, and the sum of all quotas as the stock ACLs. If Amendment 40 is approved and a final rule is implemented, the final rule implementing this framework action would include the ACLs, component quotas, and ACTs from Amendment 40 in the regulatory text, but they would be adjusted to reflect the increases proposed in this rule.
        Additional Changes to Codified Text

        This proposed rule would make two administrative changes to the Gulf IFQ program regulations. In §§ 622.21 and 622.22, the Web site for the Gulf IFQ program would change from “ifq.sero.fisheries.noaa.gov” to “https://portal.southeast.fisheries.noaa.gov/cs/main.html” to align with the renaming of NMFS Web sites for all of the regions in the U.S. The second change would revise the minimum share transfer percentage for the Gulf red snapper IFQ program from “0.0001 percent” to “0.000001 percent” to align with the Gulf grouper/tilefish program minimum share transfer percentage and allow for smaller percentages of red snapper IFQ shares to be transferred. When the red snapper IFQ program was implemented in 2007, NMFS determined, based on the share cap and red snapper commercial quota, that 0.0001 percent was the appropriate minimum share transfer percentage. Because the red snapper commercial quota has been increasing, NMFS has now determined that the minimum share transfer percentage should be 0.000001 percent. This will give shareholders greater flexibility by allowing transfers of smaller increments of shares. In addition, modifying the minimum share transfer percentage for red snapper would help avoid confusion among shareholders who trade both red snapper and grouper/tilefish shares because both programs would have the same minimum share transfer percentage.
        Classification
        Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the FMP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable law, subject to further consideration after public comment.
        This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
        The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA) that this proposed rule, if implemented, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The factual basis for this determination is as follows:
        The purpose of this proposed rule is to set quotas for the commercial and recreational harvest of red snapper in the Gulf that are consistent with the red snapper rebuilding plan in order to achieve OY, and to make two administrative changes to the IFQ programs. The Magnuson-Stevens Act provides the statutory basis for this proposed rule.
        This rule, if implemented, would set the red snapper quotas for the commercial and recreational sectors for the 2015 fishing year, 2016 fishing year, and 2017 fishing year and subsequent fishing years. As a result, this rule would be expected to directly affect commercial vessels that harvest red snapper. Over the period 2009-2013, an average of 353 vessels per year recorded commercial red snapper harvests, based on mandatory logbook data. The maximum number of vessels with recorded commercial red snapper harvests during this period was 375 in 2010. However, in 2010, 384 vessels were identified in the red snapper IFQ on-line account program, which tracks red snapper activity. This system, however, is not the official record for trip harvests, nor does it capture all landings, or associated revenues, from all species harvested on all trips by vessels that harvest red snapper. Therefore, data from both sources are used for this assessment to estimate the number of potentially affected entities. As a result, this rule would be expected to apply to 353-384 commercial fishing vessels. The average annual gross revenue from all species harvested on all trips by the vessels identified with recorded red snapper harvests in logbook data over the period 2009-2013 (353 vessels) was approximately $110,000 (2013 dollars).

        With respect to the proposed changes in the red snapper recreational quotas, only recreational anglers are allowed to recreationally harvest red snapper in Federal waters in the Gulf and would be directly affected in changes in the allowable harvest. However, recreational anglers are not small entities under the RFA. Although for-hire businesses (charter vessels and headboats) operate in the recreational sector, these businesses only sell fishing services to recreational anglers and do not, with the exception discussed in the next paragraph, have harvest rights to the red snapper recreational quota. For-hire vessels provide a platform for the opportunity to fish and not a guarantee to catch or harvest any species, though expectations of successful fishing, however defined, likely factor into the decision by anglers to purchase these services. Changing the red snapper recreational quota only defines how much red snapper can be harvested and the quota is a factor in the determination of the length of the red snapper recreational fishing season. Changing the quota does not explicitly prevent the continued offer or sale of for-hire fishing services. In the event of a closed season (zero bag limit), precipitated by a quota reduction, catch and release fishing for a target species can continue, as can fishing for other species. In the event of a quota increase and associated increase in the open season, the basic service offered remains the same, though the list of species that may be retained is expanded. Because the proposed change in the red snapper quota would not directly alter the basic service sold by for-hire vessels, in general, this proposed rule would not directly apply to or regulate their operations. Any change in vessel business would be a result of changes in angler demand for these fishing services that occurs as a result of the behavioral decision by anglers, i.e., to fish or not. This behavioral decision would be a consequence of how anglers determine the change in allowable harvest will affect them. Therefore, any effects on the associated for-hire vessels would be one step removed from the anglers' decision and an indirect effect of the proposed rule. Because the effects on for-hire vessels would be indirect, they fall outside the scope of the RFA.

        The exception to this determination is, however, for the 19 headboats participating in the Collaborative program in 2015 (as a continuation of the 2-year program begun in 2014). The Collaborative program allocates harvest rights to a specified portion (2.4396 percent) of the red snapper recreational allowable catch to the Collaborative, and this quantity is subsequently allocated to individual vessels. This program allows anglers to harvest red snapper when fishing on Collaborative vessels outside the season available to non-participating vessels if the total allowable harvest for the recreational sector has not been taken. Although these fish can still only be harvested by recreational anglers, and not vessel captains or crew, the allocation of harvest rights to these vessels and the increased flexibility on when red snapper may be retained enables the vessels in this program to offer an enhanced product relative to other for-hire vessels. The proposed increase in the red snapper recreational quota in 2015 would increase the amount of quota allocated to the vessels in this program. Average revenue information for these 19 vessels is unknown. However, the average headboat operating in the Gulf is estimated to receive approximately $245,000 (2013 dollars) in annual gross revenue.
        NMFS has not identified any other small entities that would be expected to be directly affected by this proposed rule.
        The Small Business Administration has established size criteria for all major industry sectors in the U.S., including fish harvesters. A business involved in fish harvesting is classified as a small business if it is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of operation (including its affiliates), and has combined annual receipts not in excess of $20.5 million (NAICS code 114111, finfish fishing) for all its affiliated operations worldwide. The revenue threshold for a business involved in the for-hire fishing industry is $7.5 million (NAICS code 487210, fishing boat charter operation). All commercial and headboat fishing vessels expected to be directly affected by this proposed rule are determined to be small business entities.
        This proposed rule would increase the red snapper commercial quota in 2015, 2016, and 2017 and subsequent fishing years, by 1.683 million lb (0.763 million kg) gutted weight, 1.510 million lb (0.685 million kg), and 1.397 million lb (0.634 million kg), respectively, relative to the status quo. These increases would be expected to result in an increase in total gross revenue (ex-vessel revenue minus the 3-percent cost recovery fee, all vessels) for commercial vessels that harvest red snapper of approximately $6.974 million (2013 dollars), $6.268 million, and $5.811 million, each year, respectively. Across all 3 years, the resultant total increase in gross revenue would be approximately $19.053 million (2013 dollars). The average increase per vessel (353-384 vessels) per year would range (low to high average) from approximately $15,133-$16,462 per vessel ($5.81 million/384 vessels = $15,133 per vessel; $5.81/353 vessels = $16,462 per vessel) in 2017 to approximately $18,161-$19,756 per vessel ($6.97 million/384 vessels = $18,161 per vessel; $6.97/353 vessels = $19,756 per vessel) in 2015. As a result, the expected economic effect of the proposed rule would be increased revenue to the affected small business entities.

        This proposed rule would increase the red snapper recreational quota in 2015, 2016, and 2017 and subsequent fishing years by 1.617 million lb (0.733 million kg), 1.450 million lb (0.658 million kg), and 1.343 million lb (0.609 million kg), respectively, relative to the status quo. As discussed above, the proposed quota increase in 2015 would be expected to directly affect 19 headboats that participate in the Collaborative program. These vessels would not be expected to be directly affected by the proposed quota increases in 2016 and 2017 and subsequent fishing years because the program will only continue through 2015. Quantitative estimates of the expected economic effects of the proposed quota increase in 2015 on these 19 entities are not available. Although the amount of increased quota that would be allocated to this program can be calculated, how this increase would be distributed amongst the vessels in the program cannot be determined because the distribution is subject to decision within the program and not dependent on historical activity or distribution of allowable harvest to date in 2015. Additionally, it is not possible with available data to produce a meaningful estimate of the portion of the increased quota that would be harvested by anglers on new trips (resulting in an increase in the revenue to respective vessels) or would be harvested on trips that would occur in the absence of a change in available harvest (resulting in no change in revenue), or to determine whether the change in available harvest would affect the price per trip that would be charged. Nevertheless, the effects of the increase in quota on these vessels would be expected to be either neutral at worst (i.e., no economic effect) or, more likely, positive, resulting in an increase in vessel revenue and associated profits.
        The proposed changes to the IFQ programs, discussed in the preamble of this proposed rule, are administrative changes and would not be expected to have any direct adverse economic effect on any small entities.
        Based on the discussion above, NMFS determines that this proposed rule, if implemented, would not have a significant adverse economic effect on a substantial number of small entities. As a result, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 622
          Commercial, Fisheries, Fishing, Gulf of Mexico, Quotas, Recreational, Red Snapper.

          Dated: March 27, 2015.
          Samuel D. Rauch III,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

        For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 622 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF OF MEXICO, AND SOUTH ATLANTIC

        1. The authority citation for part 622 continues to read as follows:

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

        2. In § 622.21, the third sentence in paragraph (b)(1), the second sentence in paragraph (b)(2), the last sentence in paragraph (b)(3)(i), the first sentence in paragraph (b)(3)(iii), the second sentence in paragraph (b)(3)(iv), the only sentence in paragraph (b)(5)(i)(B), the third sentence in paragraph (b)(5)(v), the second and third sentences in paragraph (b)(6)(ii), the second sentence in paragraph (b)(6)(iv), and the first sentence in paragraph (b)(10) are revised to read as follows:

          § 622.21
          Individual fishing quota (IFQ) program for Gulf red snapper.

          (b) * * *

          (1) * * * An owner of a vessel with a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish, who has established an IFQ account for Gulf red snapper as specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section, online via the NMFS IFQ Web site https://portal.southeast.fisheries.noaa.gov/cs/main.html, may establish a vessel account through that IFQ account for that permitted vessel. * * *
          (2) * * * A dealer with a Gulf and South Atlantic dealer permit can download a Gulf IFQ dealer endorsement from the NMFS IFQ Web site. * * *
          (3) * * *
          (i) * * * All IFQ landings and their actual ex-vessel prices must be reported via the IFQ Web site.

          (iii) The dealer must complete a landing transaction report for each landing of Gulf red snapper via the IFQ Web site on the day of offload, except if the fish are being trailered for transport to a dealer as specified in paragraph (b)(5)(iv) of this section (in which case the landing transaction report may be completed prior to the day of offload), and within 96 hours from the time of landing reported on the most recent landing notification, in accordance with the reporting form(s) and instructions provided on the Web site. * * *
          (iv) * * * This form is available via the IFQ Web site. * * *

          (5) * * *
          (i) * * *
          (B) * * * Authorized methods for contacting NMFS and submitting the report include calling IFQ Customer Service at 1-866-425-7627, completing and submitting to NMFS a landing notification provided through the VMS unit, or providing the required information to NMFS through the web-based form available on the IFQ Web site.

          (v) * * * Proposed landing locations may be submitted online via the IFQ Web site, or by calling IFQ Customer Service at 1-866-425-7627, at any time; however, new landing locations will be approved only at the end of each calendar-year quarter. * * *

          (6) * * *
          (ii) * * * An IFQ shareholder must initiate a share transfer request by logging onto the IFQ Web site. Following the instructions provided on the IFQ Web site, the shareholder must enter pertinent information regarding the transfer request including, but not limited to, amount of shares to be transferred, which must be a minimum of 0.000001 percent; name of the eligible transferee; and the value of the transferred shares. * * *

          (iv) * * * An IFQ account holder must initiate an allocation transfer by logging onto the IFQ Web site, entering the required information, including but not limited to, name of an eligible transferee and amount of IFQ allocation to be transferred and price, and submitting the transfer electronically. * * *

          (10) * * * On or about January 1 each year, IFQ shareholders will be notified, via the IFQ Web site, of their IFQ share and allocation for the upcoming fishing year. * * *

        3. In § 622.22, the third sentence in paragraph (b)(1), the second sentence in paragraph (b)(2), the last sentence in paragraph (b)(3)(i), the first sentence in paragraph (b)(3)(iii), the second sentence in paragraph (b)(3)(iv), the only sentence in paragraph (b)(5)(i)(B), the third sentence in paragraph (b)(5)(v), the second sentence in paragraph (b)(6)(ii), the second sentence in paragraph (b)(6)(iv), and the first sentence in paragraph (b)(10) are revised to read as follows:

          § 622.22
          Individual fishing quota (IFQ) program for Gulf groupers and tilefishes.

          (b) * * *

          (1) * * * An owner of a vessel with a commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef fish, who has established an IFQ account for the applicable species, as specified in paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section, online via the NMFS IFQ Web site https://portal.southeast.fisheries.noaa.gov/cs/main.html, may establish a vessel account through that IFQ account for that permitted vessel. * * *
          (2) * * * A dealer with a Gulf and South Atlantic dealer permit can download a Gulf IFQ dealer endorsement from the NMFS IFQ Web site. * * *
          (3) * * *
          (i) * * * All IFQ landings and their actual ex-vessel prices must be reported via the IFQ Web site.

          (iii) The dealer must complete a landing transaction report for each landing of Gulf groupers or tilefishes via the IFQ Web site on the day of offload, except if the fish are being trailered for transport to a dealer as specified in paragraph (b)(5)(iv) of this section (in which case the landing transaction report may be completed prior to the day of offload), and within 96 hours from the time of landing reported on the most recent landing notification, in accordance with the reporting form(s) and instructions provided on the Web site. * * *
          (iv) * * * This form is available via the IFQ Web site. * * *

          (5) * * *
          (i) * * *
          (B) * * * Authorized methods for contacting NMFS and submitting the report include calling IFQ Customer Service at 1-866-425-7627, completing and submitting to NMFS a landing notification provided through the VMS unit, or providing the required information to NMFS through the web-based form available on the IFQ Web site.

          (v) * * * Proposed landing locations may be submitted online via the IFQ Web site, or by calling IFQ Customer Service at 1-866-425-7627, at any time; however, new landing locations will be approved only at the end of each calendar-year quarter. * * *

          (6) * * *
          (ii) * * * An IFQ shareholder must initiate a share transfer request by logging onto the IFQ Web site. * * *

          (iv) * * * An IFQ account holder must initiate an allocation transfer by logging onto the IFQ Web site, entering the required information, including but not limited to, the name of an eligible transferee and amount of IFQ allocation to be transferred and price, and submitting the transfer electronically. * * *

          (10) * * * On or about January 1 each year, IFQ shareholders will be notified, via the IFQ Web site, of their IFQ shares and allocations, for each of the five share categories, for the upcoming fishing year. * * *

        4. In § 622.39, paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (a)(2)(i) are revised to read as follows:

          § 622.39
          Quotas.

          (a) * * *
          (1) * * *
          (i) Commercial quota for red snapper.

          (A) For fishing year 2015—7.293 million lb (3.308 million kg), round weight.
          (B) For fishing year 2016—7.120 million lb (3.230 million kg), round weight.
          (C) For fishing year 2017 and subsequent fishing years—7.007 million lb (3.178 million kg), round weight.

          (2) * * *
          (i) Recreational quota for red snapper.

          (A) Total recreational quota (Federal charter vessel/headboat and private angling component quotas combined).

          (1) For fishing year 2015—7.007 million lb (3.178 million kg), round weight.
          (2) For fishing year 2016—6.840 million lb (3.103 million kg), round weight.
          (3) For fishing year 2017 and subsequent fishing years—6.733 million lb (3.054 million kg), round weight.
          (B) Federal charter vessel/headboat component quota. The Federal charter vessel/headboat component quota applies to vessels that have been issued a valid Federal charter vessel/headboat permit for Gulf reef fish any time during the fishing year. This component quota is effective for only the 2015, 2016, and 2017 fishing years. For the 2018 and subsequent fishing years, the applicable total recreational quota specified in § 622.39(a)(2)(i)(A) will apply to the recreational sector.
          (1) For fishing year 2015—2.964 million lb (1.344 million kg), round weight.

          (2) For fishing year 2016—2.893 million lb (1.312 million kg), round weight.
          (3) For fishing year 2017—2.848 million lb (1.292 million kg), round weight.
          (C) Private angling component quota. The private angling component quota applies to vessels that fish under the bag limit and have not been issued a Federal charter vessel/headboat permit for Gulf reef fish any time during the fishing year. This component quota is effective for only the 2015, 2016, and 2017 fishing years. For the 2018 and subsequent fishing years, the applicable total recreational quota specified in § 622.39(a)(2)(i)(A) will apply to the recreational sector.
          (1) For fishing year 2015—4.043 million lb (1.834 million kg), round weight.
          (2) For fishing year 2016—3.947 million lb (1.790 million kg), round weight.
          (3) For fishing year 2017—3.885 million lb (1.762 million kg), round weight.

        5. In § 622.41, paragraph (q), as added at 80 FR 14331 (March 19, 2015), effective April 18, 2015, is revised to read as follows:

          § 622.41
          Annual catch limits (ACLs), annual catch targets (ACTs), and accountability measures (AMs).

          (q) Red snapper—(1) Commercial sector. The IFQ program for red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico serves as the accountability measure for commercial red snapper. The commercial ACL for red snapper is equal to the applicable commercial quota specified in § 622.39(a)(1)(i).
          (2) Recreational sector. (i) The AA will determine the length of the red snapper recreational fishing season based on when recreational landings are projected to reach the applicable recreational ACT specified in paragraph (q)(2)(iii) of this section, and announce the closure date in the Federal Register. This will serve as an in-season accountability measure. On and after the effective date of the recreational closure notification, the bag and possession limit for red snapper is zero. The recreational ACL is equal to the applicable total recreational quota specified in § 622.39(a)(2)(i).
          (ii) In addition to the measures specified in paragraph (q)(2)(i) of this section, if red snapper recreational landings, as estimated by the SRD, exceed the applicable recreational ACL (quota) specified in § 622.39(a)(2)(i), and red snapper are overfished, based on the most recent Status of U.S. Fisheries Report to Congress, the AA will file a notification with the Office of the Federal Register to reduce the recreational ACL (quota) by the amount of the quota overage in the prior fishing year, and reduce the applicable recreational ACT specified in paragraph (q)(2)(iii) of this section (based on the buffer between the ACT and the quota specified in the FMP), unless the best scientific information available determines that a greater, lesser, or no overage adjustment is necessary.
          (iii) Recreational ACT for red snapper.

          (A) Total recreational ACT (Federal charter vessel/headboat and private angling component ACTs combined).

          (1) For fishing year 2015—5.605 million lb (2.542 million kg), round weight.
          (2) For fishing year 2016—5.473 million lb (2.483 million kg), round weight.
          (3) For fishing year 2017 and subsequent fishing years—5.386 million lb (2.443 million kg), round weight.
          (B) Federal charter vessel/headboat component ACT. The Federal charter vessel/headboat component ACT applies to vessels that have been issued a valid Federal charter vessel/headboat permit for Gulf reef fish any time during the fishing year. This component ACT is effective for only the 2015, 2016, and 2017 fishing years. For the 2018 and subsequent fishing years, the applicable total recreational quota specified in § 622.39(a)(2)(i)(A) will apply to the recreational sector.
          (1) For fishing year 2015—2.371 million lb (1.075 million kg), round weight.
          (2) For fishing year 2016—2.315 million lb (1.050 million kg), round weight.
          (3) For fishing year 2017—2.278 million lb (1.033 million kg), round weight.
          (C) Private angling component ACT. The private angling component ACT applies to vessels that fish under the bag limit and have not been issued a Federal charter vessel/headboat permit for Gulf reef fish any time during the fishing year. This component ACT is effective for only the 2015, 2016, and 2017 fishing years. For the 2018 and subsequent fishing years, the applicable total recreational quota specified in § 622.39(a)(2)(i)(A) will apply to the recreational sector.
          (1) For fishing year 2015—3.234 million lb (1.467 million kg), round weight.
          (2) For fishing year 2016—3.158 million lb (1.432 million kg), round weight.
          (3) For fishing year 2017—3.108 million lb (1.410 million kg), round weight.

      [FR Doc. 2015-07459 Filed 3-31-15; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Research and Special Programs Administration
        49 CFR Parts 174 and 177
        [Docket No. HM-212]
        RIN 2137-AC24
        Hazardous Materials: Tank Cars and Cargo Tank Motor Vehicles; Attendance Requirements

          AGENCY:
          Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), DOT.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; withdrawal.

          SUMMARY:
          RSPA is withdrawing the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) issued in 1992 under this docket on attendance requirements for tank cars and cargo tank motor vehicles. RSPA will address the issues raised in that NPRM, including the proposed rewrite of tank car unloading regulations, in rulemaking under RSPA Docket HM-223 (RSPA-98-4952). The HM-223 rulemaking is intended to clarify the applicability of the Hazardous Materials Regulations to specific functions and activities, including hazardous materials loading and unloading operations.

          DATES:
          The proposed rule is withdrawn as of March 27, 2000.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Susan Gorsky (202) 366-8553, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards, Research and Special Programs Administration, Department of Transportation.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        I. Background
        On September 14, 1992, the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA, “we”) published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) under Docket HM-212 (57 FR 42466), proposing several changes to the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) as they apply to loading and unloading of hazardous materials from rail tank cars and cargo tanks. We proposed to amend the following sections of the HMR:
        Section 174.67(i) pertaining to unloading of tank cars and § 177.834(i) pertaining to the loading of cargo tanks to provide for the use of signaling systems to meet attendance requirements.
        • Sections 174.67(i) and 174.67(j) to allow a tank car containing hazardous materials, under certain conditions, to remain standing with the unloading connections attached when no hazardous material is being transferred.
        • Section 177.834 to remove a requirement that an attendant must be within 25 feet of the cargo tank motor vehicle during loading operations that are monitored by a signaling system.
        II. HM-225 and -225A Cargo Tank Rulemaking
        Because of safety concerns, we addressed cargo tank attendance requirements in separate rulemakings under Docket Nos. RSPA-97-2133 (HM-225) and RSPA-97-2718 (HM-225A). In a final rule published May 24, 1999 (64 FR 28030), we revised the regulations applicable to transportation and unloading of liquefied compressed gases in cargo tank motor vehicles. The final rule, which became effective on July 1, 1999, established a comprehensive safety program intended to reduce the risk of an unintentional release of a liquefied compressed gas during unloading, assure prompt detection and control of an unintentional release, and make the regulatory requirements easier to understand and comply with. Among the changes effected by that final rule were revisions to the attendance requirements in § 177.834(i). We do not believe that it is appropriate to implement changes to the cargo tank loading requirements before we have had an opportunity to evaluate industry experience under that recent rule.
        III. HM-223 Rulemaking on Applicability of the HMR
        Since the HM-212 NPRM was issued in 1992, we have initiated a broad rulemaking under HM-223 (Docket No. RSPA-98-4952) designed to clarify the meaning of “transportation in commerce” as it is used in federal hazardous material transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5101-5127) and to delineate specific activities that are included in that term and, therefore, subject to regulation under the HMR. In developing this rulemaking, we have four goals. First, we want to ensure that there are uniform national standards applicable to functions performed in advance of transportation that affect the safe transportation of hazardous materials in commerce. Second, we want to ensure that there are uniform national standards applicable to the actual transportation of hazardous materials in commerce. Third, we want to distinguish functions that are subject to the HMR from functions that are not subject to the HMR. Finally, we want to clarify that facilities within which functions subject to the HMR occur may be subject to federal, state, or local regulations governing occupational safety and health and environmental protection.
        In 1996, we issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM; 61 FR 39522) under HM-223 and hosted a series of public meetings to elicit ideas, proposals, and recommendations on the applicability of the HMR. The ANPRM identified loading, unloading, and storage of hazardous materials as areas of particular confusion and concern. On April 27, 1999, we published a supplemental ANPRM (64 FR 22718) requesting additional information on these issues.

        We are currently evaluating comments submitted in response to the two ANPRMs and at the public meetings. We expect to issue an NPRM later this year. The NPRM may propose to interpret the statutory definition of “transportation in commerce” in a way that could affect how the HMR apply to certain loading, unloading, and storage operations, particularly loading, unloading, and storage of hazardous materials in bulk packages, such as tank cars. Thus, we believe it is more appropriate to address tank car unloading issues in the context of the HM-223 rulemaking. Indeed, commenters to the HM-212 docket recommended that the scope of the 1992 NPRM should be broadened. Several commenters suggested that the tank car unloading requirements in Part 174 be moved to Part 173 because unloading is not typically performed by rail carriers, but by non-transportation entities. Commenters also suggested that we revise the HMR to more clearly define the term “in transportation” and to clarify the regulatory jurisdiction of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and RSPA with respect to the transfer of hazardous materials.
        IV. Withdrawal of NPRM
        For the reasons outlined above, we are withdrawing the 1992 NPRM published on September 14, 1992 (57 FR 42466), concerning cargo tank and tank car loading and unloading operations that was issued under HM-212 and closing the HM-212 docket. We are deferring action on the overall rewrite of § 174.67 that was proposed in the 1992 NPRM. Changes to this section will be considered as part of HM-223. Comments submitted to the HM-212 docket will be placed in the HM-223 docket. This action should not be read as an indication of how we intend to resolve the questions at issue in HM-223.

          Issued in Washington, DC on March 20, 2000, under authority delegated in 49 CFR Part 106.
          Robert A. McGuire,
          Acting Associate Administrator for Hazardous Materials Safety, Research and Special Programs Administration.

      [FR Doc. 00-7469 Filed 3-24-00; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-60-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
        49 CFR Part 395
        [Docket No. FMCSA-2010-0230]
        Hours of Service; Limited Exemption for the Distribution of Anhydrous Ammonia in Agricultural Operations

          AGENCY:
          Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

          ACTION:
          Proposed exemption; request for public comment.

          SUMMARY:
          FMCSA announces its proposal to grant a 2-year, limited exemption from the Federal hours-of-service regulations for the transportation of anhydrous ammonia from any distribution point to a local farm retailer or to the ultimate consumer, and from a local farm retailer to the ultimate consumer, as long as the transportation takes place within a 100 air-mile radius of the retail or wholesale distribution point. This exemption would extend the agricultural operations exemption established by section 345 of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995, as amended, by the sections 4115 and 4130 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) to certain drivers and motor carriers engaged in the distribution of anhydrous ammonia during the planting and harvesting seasons, as defined by the States in which the carriers and drivers operate. The Agency believes that the exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption, based on the terms and conditions imposed. This exemption would preempt inconsistent State and local requirements applicable to interstate commerce.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before August 13, 2010.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments identified by Federal Docket Management System Number FMCSA-2010-0230 by any of the following methods
          • Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the Federal electronic docket site.
          • Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
          • Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of Transportation, Room W-12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 20590-0001.
          • Hand Delivery: Ground Floor, Room W12-140, DOT Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.

            Instructions: All submissions must include the Agency name and docket number. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the exemption process, see the “Public Participation” heading below. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Please see the “Privacy Act” heading below.

            Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to the ground floor, room W12-140, DOT Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

            Privacy Act: 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 DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket Management System published in the Federal Register on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you may visit http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-785.pdf.

            Public Participation: The www.regulations.gov Web site is generally available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. You can obtain electronic submission and retrieval help and guidelines under the “help” section of the http://www.regulations.gov Web site and also at the DOT's http://docketsinfo.dot.gov Web site. If you want us to notify you that we received your comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting comments online.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before August 13, 2010.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Thomas L. Yager, Chief, Driver and Carrier Operations Division, Office of Bus and Truck Standards and Operations, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE., Washington, DC 20590.
          E-mail: MCPSD@dot.gov. Phone (202) 366-4325.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Legal Basis
        Section 4007(a) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (Pub. L. 105-178, 112 Stat. 107, 401, June 9, 1998) provided the Secretary of Transportation (the Secretary) the authority to grant exemptions from any of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) issued under chapter 313 of title 49 of the United States Code or 49 U.S.C. 31136, to a person(s) seeking regulatory relief (49 U.S.C. 31136, 31315(b)). Prior to granting an exemption, the Secretary must request public comment and make a determination that the exemption is likely to achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety that would be obtained in the absence of the exemption. Exemptions may be granted for a period of up to two years and may be renewed.
        The FMCSA Administrator has been delegated authority under 49 CFR 1.73(e)(1) and (g) to carry out the functions vested in the Secretary by 49 U.S.C. chapter 313 and subchapters I and III of chapter 311, relating, respectively, to the commercial driver's license program and to commercial motor vehicle (CMV) programs and safety regulation.
        Background
        On March 22, 2010, FMCSA published a notice in the Federal Register announcing a limited 90-day waiver from the Federal hours-of-service (HOS) regulations for the transportation of anhydrous ammonia from any distribution point to a local farm retailer or to the ultimate consumer, and from a local farm retailer to the ultimate consumer, as long as the transportation takes place within a 100 air-mile radius of the retail or wholesale distribution point (54 FR 13441). The waiver extended the agricultural operations exemption established by section 345(a) of the National Highway System Designation Act of 1995 (NHS Act) (Pub. L. 104-59, November 28, 1995, 109 Stat. 568, 613, 49 U.S.C. 31136 note, as amended by section 4130, redesignated by section 4115(a)(2) of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59, August 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1144, 1726) and implemented by 49 CFR 395.1(k)) to certain drivers and motor carriers engaged in the distribution of anhydrous ammonia during the 2010 spring planting season.
        The FMCSA's notice indicated that the Agency had been contacted by members of Congress concerning the Agency's interpretation of the agricultural exemption provided in section 345(a) of the NHS. Constituents engaged in the transportation of farm supplies—particularly anhydrous ammonia—contacted the members to express concerns that the Agency's interpretation of the agricultural exemption results in the exclusion of certain distribution activities from the regulatory relief intended by Congress.
        As amended by section 4130(a) of SAFETEA-LU, the agricultural provision reads as follows:

            Transportation of agricultural commodities and farm supplies.—Regulations prescribed by the Secretary under sections 31136 and 31502 regarding maximum driving and on-duty time for drivers used by motor carriers shall not apply during planting and harvest periods, as determined by each State, to drivers transporting agricultural commodities or farm supplies for agricultural purposes in a State if such transportation is limited to an area within a 100 air mile radius from the source of the commodities or the distribution point for the farm supplies (119 Stat. 1743).

        In its Notice, the Agency indicated that it has long understood that limited farm storage capacity necessitates a “just in time” delivery system from retail distributors of certain farm supplies to farms (or other locations where the farm supply product will be used) during the busy planting and harvesting seasons. Longstanding FMCSA guidance on its HOS regulations has consistently held that the agricultural operations exemption applies to the transportation of farm supplies from the local farm retailer to the ultimate consumer within a 100 air-mile radius. FMCSA's interpretation, however, has not extended the HOS exemption to deliveries from wholesalers to either local farm retailers or farms. (See Question 33, 49 CFR 395.1 on the Agency's Web site: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov.) Question 33 reads as follows:

            Question 33: How is “point of origin” defined for the purpose of § 395.1(k)?

            Guidance: The term “point of origin” is not used in the NHS Designation Act; the statutory term is “source of the [agricultural] commodities.” The exemption created by the Act applies to two types of transportation. The first type is transportation from the source of the agricultural commodity -where the product is grown or raised—to a location within a 100 air-mile radius of the source. The second type is transportation from a retail distribution point of the farm supply to a location (farm or other location where the farm supply product would be used) within a 100 air-mile radius of the retail distribution point.
          The legislative history of the agricultural exemption indicates it was intended to only apply to retail store deliveries. Thus, it is clear Congress intended to limit this exemption to retail distributors of farm supplies.
          Second-stage movements, such as grain hauled from an elevator (or sugar beets from a cold storage facility) to a processing plant, are more likely to fall outside the exempt radius. Similarly, the exemption does not apply to a wholesaler's transportation of an agricultural chemical to a local cooperative because this is not a retail delivery to an ultimate consumer, even if it is within the100 air-mile radius.

        The Agency believes that the exclusive emphasis of its regulatory guidance on deliveries from local retailers to the ultimate farm consumer may not reflect today's economic reality as it pertains to the transportation of anhydrous ammonia during planting and harvesting seasons. Like farms, local retailers have limited storage capacity and therefore must constantly replenish certain supplies during the planting and harvesting seasons. They are part of the “just in time” distribution system that extends from a wholesaler to the ultimate consumer of the supplies.
        Because of storage and time constraints on the demand for the transportation of anhydrous ammonia to support agricultural operations, and the likelihood that such constraints will continue for some time, FMCSA is proposing a two-year, limited exemption to provide regulatory relief for the transportation of anhydrous ammonia during the planting and harvesting seasons, as defined by the States in which the anhydrous ammonia transporters operate. This action would provide limited regulatory relief to facilitate planting activities that will ultimately result in the production of agricultural commodities at prices to which consumers have become accustomed, with no foreseeable degradation of safety.
        The exemption would extend the agricultural operations exemption from the Federal HOS regulations to motor carriers in the distribution system, provided that: (1) The driver is delivering anhydrous ammonia; (2) none of the transportation movements within the distribution chain exceeds a 100 air-mile radius—whether from the retail or wholesale distribution point; and (3) the driver is employed by a motor carrier that has a “satisfactory” safety rating or is unrated; drivers for motor carriers with “conditional” or “unsatisfactory” safety ratings are prohibited from taking advantage of the exemption. Therefore, the exemption would allow drivers for motor carriers with a satisfactory safety rating or unrated motor carriers to use the HOS exemption when delivering anhydrous ammonia from any distribution point to a local farm retailer or to the ultimate consumer, and from a local farm retailer to the ultimate consumer, as long as the transportation takes place within a 100 air-mile radius of the retail or wholesale distribution point. This exemption would take effect on the date of publication of a final decision.
        Safety Determination
        FMCSA is committed to ensuring high standards of motor carrier safety. The Agency has considered the available data concerning the safety performance of agricultural operations in general, and the safety performance of anhydrous ammonia transporters during the 90-day, limited waiver granted earlier this year.
        FMCSA compared safety performance data for agricultural carriers currently operating under the statutory HOS exemption provided by the NHS Act, as amended, with non-agricultural carriers that are not exempt from HOS regulations to determine whether the exemption would be likely to achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety that would be obtained in the absence of the exemption. The data were collected as part of a study, “Agricultural Commodity and Utility Carriers Hours of Service Exemption Analysis,” May 2010, FMCSA-RRA-10-448 A copy of the report has been placed in the public docket identified at the beginning of this notice.
        The study was conducted in two phases. Phase 1 compares the safety performance of agricultural and non-agricultural carriers for the period 2005 through 2008, and also examines two additional industries, livestock and utility carriers, whose operations were not exempt from HOS regulations prior to the passage of SAFETEA-LU.1
           The Phase 1 analysis used carrier registration, inspection and crash data from FMCSA's Motor Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS). The study used cargo classification information on the FMCSA Motor Carrier Identification Report (Form MCS-150) in MCMIS to identify the carrier's industry group (agricultural, livestock, or utility carrier), and used MCS-150 information to identify carriers operating within and beyond a 100-air-mile radius. The operating radius information was used to create two agricultural carrier subgroups: (1) Agricultural carriers with 100 percent of drivers operating within a 100-air-mile radius; and (2) agricultural carriers with 100 percent of drivers operating beyond a 100-air-mile radius. The analysis used the first subgroup as representative of agricultural carriers exempt from the HOS requirements, and the second subgroup as representative of agricultural carriers not exempt from the HOS requirements.

            1 Section 4130(a).

        For the Phase 2 analysis, inspection data of agricultural commodity and utility carriers (which are also exempt from HOS regulations) was collected during an FMCSA special study of a sample of States. These data included only those inspections occurring during the States' planting and harvesting seasons and indicated both the commodity being transported and whether the driver was operating within or beyond the 100-air-mile radius exempt from HOS regulations. The Phase 2 analysis assessed the safety performance of the HOS exempt agricultural commodity and utility service carriers identified in the survey in comparison with non-HOS-exempt carriers based on their out of service (OOS) violation rates and crash rates.
        The Agency did not place as much of an emphasis on the OOS rates because there were no HOS violation data to consider, given that the agricultural carriers for which data were available were operating under a statutory exemption from the HOS rule. Differences between the OOS rates for other issues such as driver qualifications and vehicle defects and deficiencies, while important in considering overall safety management controls of the carriers, were not necessarily related to the potential safety impact of the exemption.
        The Phase 1 analysis indicates that nationally, agricultural carriers operating within a 100-air-mile radius had lower crash rates per 100 power units than those operating beyond this radius, except for in 2008, when there was no difference in the crash rates.
        To provide additional validation of the crash analysis, which uses power unit data reported on the Form MCS-150, a separate analysis was performed using data only for carriers domiciled in States participating in the Performance and Registration Information Systems Management (PRISM) program that enforces MCS-150 updating.2
           PRISM links State motor vehicle registration systems with carrier safety data in order to identify unsafe commercial motor carriers. The PRISM State carriers are required to update their MCS-150 annually. By contrast, non-PRISM State carriers are required by FMCSA to update their MCS-150 biennially. As a result, the PRISM State data are considered more current and reliable than non-PRISM State data where there are no direct consequences for not updating the data. Data from PRISM States that enforce MCS-150 updating show that agricultural carriers operating within a 100-air-mile radius had more varied results, with crash rates higher than carriers operating beyond a 100-air-mile radius in 2008, lower in 2006 and 2007, and nearly the same in 2005.

            2 Current PRISM States that enforce the MCS-150 updating requirement are Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia.

        The Phase 2 analysis indicates that in the four States participating in the survey (Idaho, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan), agricultural carriers that were subject to the HOS requirements had higher crash rates per 100 power units than agricultural carriers exempt from the HOS requirements.
        In addition to the study, the Agency considered information from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's (PHMSA) Hazardous Materials Incident Reporting Systems and from FMCSA field offices concerning the safety performance of anhydrous ammonia transporters during the limited 90-day waiver mentioned above. With respect to information from PHMSA, the Agency received information about five anhydrous ammonia incidents. Only one of the five involved a crash and that crash involved a driver who had been on duty only two hours after having two consecutive days off duty. Copies of all five incident reports are included in the docket referenced at the beginning of this notice.
        With regard to information from FMCSA's field offices, the Agency did not receive any information about accidents, as defined in 49 CFR 390.5, involving motor carriers transporting anhydrous ammonia using drivers operating under the limited 90-day waiver. The Agency acknowledges that there is a gap between the date that a crash occurs and the date the States would typically submit crash reports. However, because FMCSA sought information through its field offices rather than relying solely on routine crash reporting by State enforcement agencies, it is unlikely that there have been any crashes resulting in fatalities or injuries, involving a driver operating under the limited 90-day waiver. The Agency requests comments from all interested parties that may have information concerning any crashes involving drivers operating under the limited 90-day waiver.
        In the absence of any data or information to the contrary, the Agency believes the real-world experience of anhydrous ammonia transporters during the 90-day limited waiver suggests that the level of safety under an exemption would be equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption.
        FMCSA Proposal
        In light of the information described above, FMCSA is proposing a two-year limited exemption from the Federal HOS regulations for interstate motor carriers engaged in the distribution of anhydrous ammonia during the planting and harvesting seasons as defined by the States. A review of the available crash data comparing exempt and non-exempt motor carriers, and a review of crash data from anhydrous ammonia transporters operating during the limited 90-day waiver provide a reasonable basis to believe that a limited exemption would achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that would be achieved absent such exemption, based on the terms and conditions that would be imposed.
        Proposed Terms and Conditions of the Exemption
        The FMCSA would provide a two-year, limited exemption from the requirements of 49 CFR part 395 concerning the HOS requirements for drivers of property-carrying vehicles engaged in the distribution of anhydrous ammonia during the relevant planting and harvesting seasons. This limited exemption would extend the agricultural operations exemption from the Federal HOS regulations to drivers used by motor carriers in the distribution system, provided that: (1) The driver is delivering anhydrous ammonia; (2) none of the transportation movements within the distribution chain exceeds a 100 air-mile radius—whether from the retail or wholesale distribution point; and (3) the motor carrier using the driver has a “satisfactory” safety rating or is “unrated;” drivers for motor carriers with “conditional” or “unsatisfactory” safety ratings are prohibited from taking advantage of the exemption.
        The exemption would allow drivers for “unrated” motor carriers and those with a satisfactory safety rating to use the HOS exemption when the drivers are delivering anhydrous ammonia from any distribution point to a local farm retailer or to the ultimate consumer, and from a local farm retailer to the ultimate consumer, as long as the transportation takes place within a 100 air-mile radius of the retail or wholesale distribution point.
        Safety Rating

        Motor carriers that have received compliance reviews and want their drivers to be exempt from the HOS regulations are required to have a “satisfactory” rating. The compliance review is an on-site examination of a motor carrier's operations, including records on drivers' hours of service, maintenance and inspection, driver qualification, commercial driver's license requirements, financial responsibility, accidents, hazardous materials, and other safety and transportation records to determine whether a motor carrier meets the safety fitness standard. The assignment of a “satisfactory” rating means the motor carrier has in place adequate safety management controls to comply with the Federal safety regulations, and that the safety management controls are appropriate for the size and type of operation of the motor carrier.
        FMCSA would also allow drivers for “unrated” carriers to take advantage of the exemption. Unrated motor carriers are those that have not received a compliance review. FMCSA is allowing drivers for unrated motor carriers to participate because it would be unfair to exclude them simply because these carriers were not selected by the Agency for a compliance review. The absence of a compliance review is in no way an indication that the carrier has done anything wrong or has safety problems.
        The Agency would not allow drivers for motor carriers with conditional or unsatisfactory ratings to participate because both of those ratings indicate that the carrier has safety management control problems. There is little reason to believe that carriers rated either unsatisfactory or conditional could be relied upon to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption.
        Accident and Hazardous Materials Reporting Requirement

        Within 10 business days following an accident (as defined in 49 CFR 390.5) or any unintentional discharge of anhydrous ammonia that requires the submission of the Department of Transportation Hazardous Materials Incident Report (DOT Form F 5800.1) (see 49 CFR 171.16) involving any of the CMVs operated by a motor carrier whose drivers are using the exemption, irrespective of whether the CMV involved in the accident or discharge was being operated by a driver using the exemption, the motor carrier must submit the following information:
        (a) Date of the accident;
        (b) City or town in which the accident occurred, or city or town closest to the scene of the accident;
        (c) Driver's name and license number;
        (d) Vehicle number and State license number;
        (e) Number of injuries;
        (f) Number of fatalities;
        (g) Whether hazardous materials, other than fuel spilled from the fuel tanks of the motor vehicles involved in the accident, were released;
        (h) The police-reported cause of the accident;
        (i) Whether the driver was cited for violating any traffic laws, motor carrier safety regulations, or hazardous materials discharge; and
        (j) Whether the driver was operating under the exemption, and if so, an estimate of the total driving time, on-duty time for the day of the accident and each of the seven calendar days prior to the accident.
        Duration of the Exemption
        The exemption would be effective upon publication in the Federal Register and would be valid for up to two years unless revoked earlier by FMCSA. The exemption may be renewed by the Agency; the Agency would provide notice and an opportunity for public comment prior to renewing the exemption. The exemption would preempt inconsistent State or local requirements applicable to interstate commerce.
        Safety Oversight of Carriers Operating Under the Exemption
        FMCSA expects that any drivers and their employing motor carrier operating under the terms and conditions of the exemption will maintain their safety record. Should any deterioration occur, however, FMCSA would, consistent with the statutory requirements of TEA-21, take all steps necessary to protect the public interest. Use of the exemption would be voluntary, and FMCSA will immediately revoke the exemption for any interstate driver or motor carrier for failure to comply with the terms and conditions exemption.
        Request for Comments

        In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(4) and 31136(e), FMCSA requests public comment on the proposed exemption from the HOS requirements of 49 CFR part 395 for drivers and their employing motor carriers transporting anhydrous ammonia. The Agency will consider all comments received by close of business on August 13, 2010. Comments will be available for examination in the docket at the location listed under the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The Agency will consider to the extent practicable comments received in the public docket after the closing date of the comment period.

          Issued on: July 8, 2010.
          Anne S. Ferro,
          Administrator.

      [FR Doc. 2010-17138 Filed 7-13-10; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        Fish and Wildlife Service
        50 CFR Part 17
        [Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2015-0139; 4500090022]
        Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding for the California Spotted Owl

          AGENCY:
          Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

          ACTION:
          Notification of 12-month finding.

          SUMMARY:

          We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 12-month finding on petitions to list the California spotted owl (Strix occidentalis occidentalis) as an endangered or threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). After a thorough review of the best available scientific and commercial information, we find that it is not warranted at this time to list the California spotted owl. However, we ask the public to submit to us at any time any new information relevant to the status of the subspecies or its habitat.

          DATES:
          The finding in this document was made on November 8, 2019.

          ADDRESSES:

          A detailed description of the basis for this finding is available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov under docket number FWS-R8-ES-2015-0139.

          Supporting information used to prepare this finding is available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours, by contacting the person specified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Please submit any new information, materials, comments, or questions concerning this finding to the person specified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Josh Hull, telephone: 916-414-6742, email: josh_hull@fws.gov. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        Under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), we are required to make a finding whether or not a petitioned action is warranted within 12 months after receiving any petition for which we have determined contained substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted (“12-month finding”). We must make a finding that the petitioned action is: (1) Not warranted; (2) warranted; or (3) warranted but precluded. “Warranted but precluded” means that (a) the petitioned action is warranted, but the immediate proposal of a regulation implementing the petitioned action is precluded by other pending proposals to determine whether species are endangered or threatened species, and (b) expeditious progress is being made to add qualified species to the Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants (Lists) and to remove from the Lists species for which the protections of the Act are no longer necessary. Section 4(b)(3)(C) of the Act requires that we treat a petition for which the requested action is found to be warranted but precluded as though resubmitted on the date of such finding, that is, requiring that a subsequent finding be made within 12 months of that date. We must publish these 12-month findings in the Federal Register.
        Summary of Information Pertaining to the Five Factors
        Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533) and the implementing regulations at part 424 of title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth procedures for adding species to, removing species from, or reclassifying species on the Lists. The Act defines “endangered species” as any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(6)), and “threatened species” as any species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range (16 U.S.C. 1532(20)). Under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, a species may be determined to be an endangered species or a threatened species because of any of the following five factors:
        (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 considering whether a species may meet the definition of an endangered species or a threatened species because of any of the five factors, we must look beyond the mere exposure of the species to the threat to determine whether the species responds to the threat in a way that causes actual impacts to the species. If there is exposure to a threat, but no response, or only a positive response, that threat does not cause a species to meet the definition of an endangered species or a threatened species. If there is exposure and the species responds negatively, we determine whether that threat drives or contributes to the risk of extinction of the species such that the species warrants listing as an endangered or threatened species. The mere identification of threats that could affect a species negatively is not sufficient to compel a finding that listing is or remains warranted. For a species to be listed or remain listed, we require evidence that these threats are operative threats to the species and its habitat, either singly or in combination, to the point that the species meets the definition of an endangered or a threatened species under the Act.

        In conducting our evaluation of the five factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of the Act to determine whether the California spotted owl (Strix occidentalis occidentalis) meets the definition of “endangered species” or “threatened species,” we considered and thoroughly evaluated the best scientific and commercial information available regarding the past, present, and future threats. We reviewed the petition, information available in our files, and other available published and unpublished information. This evaluation may include information from recognized experts; Federal, State, and tribal governments; academic institutions; foreign governments; private entities; and other members of the public.

        The species assessment for the California spotted owl contains more detailed biological information, a thorough analysis of the listing factors, and an explanation of why we determined that this subspecies does not meet the definition of an endangered species or a threatened species. This supporting information can be found on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov under docket number FWS-R8-ES-2015-0139. The following is an informational summary of the finding in this document.
        Previous Federal Actions

        For a detailed history of prior petitions, listing actions, and litigation, please see the 12-month finding published on May 24, 2006 (71 FR 29886). Subsequent to that finding, the Service was petitioned twice to list the California spotted owl as endangered or threatened with critical habitat under the Act. The first petition was submitted in December 2014, by the Wild Nature Institute and John Muir Project of Earth Island Institute, and the second was submitted in August 2015, by Sierra Forest Legacy and Defenders of Wildlife. On September 18, 2015, the Service published a 90-day finding (80 FR 56423) that the petitions presented substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that listing may be warranted for the California spotted owl. On March 16, 2016, the Center for Biological Diversity challenged the Service's failure to timely issue the 12-month finding in response to the recent petitions (CBD v. Jewell, et al., No. 1:16-cv-00503-JDB (D.D.C.)). The parties entered into a settlement agreement whereby the Service committed to submit a 12-month finding on California spotted owl to the Federal Register by September 30, 2019. On May 2, 2019, the court extended the deadline until November 4, 2019, due to a previous lapse in appropriations that stopped all progress on the California spotted owl petition finding for a period of time.
        Summary of Finding
        The California spotted owl is a subspecies of spotted owl that occurs throughout the Sierra Nevada mountain range in California and Nevada; in southern and coastal California in the Coastal, Transverse, and Peninsular mountain ranges; and in Sierra San Pedro Martir in Baja California Norte, Mexico.

        In the Sierra Nevada range, a majority of California spotted owls occur within mid-elevation ponderosa pine, mixed-conifer, white fir, and mixed-evergreen forest types, with fewer owls occurring in the lower elevation oak woodlands of the western foothills. On the central coast of California and in southern California, California spotted owls are found in riparian/hardwood forests and woodlands, live oak/big cone fir forests, and redwood/California laurel forests. California spotted owls primarily prey upon a variety of small- to medium-sized mammals, such as northern flying squirrels (Glaucomys sabrinus) and woodrats (Neotoma spp.). California spotted owls require multi-layered high canopy cover, large trees, coarse woody debris, forest heterogeneity, and nest trees within a patch size large enough to fulfill the needs of the owls and in a particular pattern across the landscape.
        We have carefully assessed the best scientific and commercial information available regarding the past, present, and future threats to the California spotted owl, and we evaluated all relevant considerations under the five listing factors, including any regulatory mechanisms and conservation measures addressing the identified threats. The primary threats affecting the California spotted owl's status include large-scale, high-severity fire; increased tree mortality; drought; effects of climate change; and the invasion of barred owls into the California spotted owl's range. Many of these threats, such as wildfire and increased tree mortality, have been acting on the landscape for several decades, yet over half of the Sierra Nevada portion of the range is in moderate or high condition, meaning that populations in those areas are currently likely to be able to persist through a catastrophic event, and the California spotted owl currently demonstrates high representation and moderate redundancy.
        While some threats such as drought, tree mortality, and effects of climate change cannot be addressed by conservation measures, existing conservation measures and regulatory mechanisms will help increase resiliency so that the subspecies can withstand future threats, particularly in the northern Sierra Nevada portion of the owl's range. Specifically, measures described in the 2004 Sierra Nevada Forest Plan Amendment, the 2005 Southern California National Forest Land Management Plans, and other conservation measures will continue to decrease the negative effects of clearcutting and mechanical thinning. They will benefit the California spotted owl by maintaining high canopy cover and large trees within owl territories. Further, increased mechanical thinning will help to reduce the risk of large-scale high-severity fire on the landscape. Though these forest plans and conservation measures cannot fully remove the risk of large-scale high-severity fire, they are reducing the overall potential for wildfires to become the large-scale high-severity fires that are particularly detrimental to California spotted owl habitat. Additionally, the Barred Owl Removal Project is currently reducing the density of barred owls on the landscape. Continued removal of barred owls is expected to stem the expansion of barred owl further into the California spotted owl range.
        Though the conditions of California spotted owl habitat and populations are expected to decline in some areas, existing conservation measures and regulatory mechanisms are expected to continue and will reduce the effects of threats to the owl such that the California spotted owl will retain sufficient redundancy, resiliency and representation to allow it to persist into the foreseeable future. Overall, the threats are not affecting the subspecies at such a level to cause it to be in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range or to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

        Therefore, we find that listing the California spotted owl as an endangered species or threatened species under the Act is not warranted. A detailed discussion of the basis for this finding can be found in the California spotted owl species assessment and other supporting documents (see ADDRESSES, above).
        New Information

        We request that you submit any new information concerning the taxonomy of, biology of, ecology of, status of, or threats to the California spotted owl to the person specified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, whenever it becomes available. New information will help us monitor this subspecies and make appropriate decisions about its conservation and status. We encourage local agencies and stakeholders to continue cooperative monitoring and conservation efforts.
        References Cited

        The list of the references cited in the petition finding is available on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov under docket number FWS-R8-ES-2015-0139 and upon request from the person specified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
        Authors
        The primary authors of this document are the staff members of the Species Assessment Team, Ecological Services Program.
        Authority

        The authority for this action is section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

          Dated: November 1, 2019.
          Margaret E. Everson,
          Principal Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Exercising the Authority of the Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

      [FR Doc. 2019-24336 Filed 11-7-19; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 4333-15-P


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 73
        [DA 01-1859; MM Docket No. 01-175, RM-10197]
        Radio Broadcasting Services; Old Fort, Fletcher, and Asheville, NC; Surgoinsville, TN; and Augusta, GA

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:

          The Commission requests comments on a petition jointly filed by Dolphin Communications, North Carolina, Clear Channel Broadcasting Licenses, Inc., and Capstar TX Limited Partnership, proposing the reallotment of Channel 282A from Old Fort to Fletcher, North Carolina, and the modification of Station WQNQ-FM's license accordingly. To accommodate the reallotment, petitioners also propose (a) the reallotment of Channel 260C from Asheville to Old Fort, North Carolina, as a replacement service, and the modificaton of Station WKSF(FM)'s license accordingly; (b) the modification of the transmitter site of Station WEYE-FM, Channel 282A, Surgoinsville, Tennessee; and (c) the modification of the transmitter site of Station WBBQ-FM, Channel 282C, Augusta, Georgia. Channel 282A can be reallotted to Fletcher in compliance with the Commission's minimum distance separation requirements without the imposition of site restriction at petitioners' requested site. See Supplementary Information, infra.

          DATES:
          Comments must be fled on or before September 24, 2001, and reply comments on or before October 9, 2001.

          ADDRESSES:
          Federal Communications Commission, Washington DC 20054. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve the petitioner, or its counsel or consultant, as follows: Mark N. Lipp, and J. Thomas Nolin, Esqs, Shook, Hardy & Bacon, 600 14th Street, NW., Suite 800, Washington, DC 20005-2004 (Counsel for Petitioners).

          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. 01-175, adopted July 25, 2001, and released August 3, 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.
        To accommodate the reallotments, the reference coordinates for Channel 282A at Surgoinsville; and the reference coordinates for Channel 282C at Augusta, Georgia, can be modified at petitioners' requested sites. The reference coordinates for Channel 282A at Fletcher are 35-32-28 North Latitude and 82-32-32. Additionally, the reference coordinates for Channel 260C at Old Fort are 35-25-32 North Latitude and 82-45-25 West Longitude. The modified reference coordinates for Channel 282A at Surgoinsville are 36-33-11 North Latitude and 82-51-23 West Longitude; and the modified reference coordinates for Channel 282C at Augusta are 33-34-24 North Latitude and 81-54-17 West Longitude. In accordance with Section 1.420(i) of the Commission's Rules, we will not accept competing expressions of interest in the use of Channel 282A at Fletcher, North Carolina, or Channel 260C at Old Fort, North Carolina.
        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.

        For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR Part 73 as follows:

          PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES
          1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.

            § 73.202
            [Amended]
            2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under North Carolina, is amended by removing Channel 282A at Old Fort and adding Channel 260C at Old Fort; removing Asheville, Channel 260C; and adding Fletcher, Channel 282A.

            Federal Communications Commission.
            John A. Karousos,
            Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media Bureau.

      [FR Doc. 01-20295 Filed 8-13-01; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


        NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
        48 CFR Parts 1835 and 1852
        RIN 2700-AC64
        Research and Development Abstracts

          AGENCY:
          National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          This is a proposed rule to amend the NASA FAR Supplement (NFS) to include a requirement for the electronic submission of abstracts of the planned research to be conducted under contracts containing research and development (R&D) effort valued at over $25,000. This requirement is being established to support NASA's implementation of section 207(g) of the E-Government Act of 2002 that mandates the development and maintenance of a repository that integrates information on research and development funded by the Federal Government. This proposed rule would help improve access to information on NASA funded research and development activities, thus providing public and private research managers improved capability for R&D program planning.

          DATES:
          Comments should be submitted on or before December 30, 2003.

          ADDRESSES:

          Interested parties should submit written comments to Thomas Sauret, NASA Headquarters, Office of Procurement, Contract Management Division (Code HK), Washington, DC 20546. Comments may also be submitted by e-mail to: Thomas.E.Sauret@nasa.gov.

          Comments that concern information collection requirements must be sent to the Office of Management and Budget at the address listed in the Paperwork Reduction Act section of this document. A copy of those comments may also be sent to the Agency representative named in the preceding paragraph.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Thomas Sauret, Code HK, (202) 358-1068, e-mail: Thomas.E.Sauret@nasa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
         A. Background

        This proposed rule would add a new section 1835.003-70, NASA Research and Development (R&D) Abstracts, and a related clause, 1852.235-75, NASA Research and Development (R&D) Abstracts. The new clause provides for the collection of abstracts or summaries for NASA funded awards with R&D effort greater than $25,000. The requirements of section 207(g) of the E-Government Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-347) provide the basis for this change. Section 207(g) mandates the development and maintenance of a repository that integrates information on research and development funded by the Federal Government. In furtherance of that requirement, NASA has developed a Web-based database system to collect summaries or abstracts for all the Agency's procurements containing research and development effort valued over $25,000. For procurements that include a combination of R&D with other types of services and supplies, submission of an abstract would be required only when the value of the R&D portion of the acquisition exceeds $25,000. A NASA Web site (Abstract Collection and Transmittal System (ACTS), http://proposals.hq.nasa.gov/acts/) has been established for recipients of NASA R&D contracts to enter their abstract data. ACTS will transfer submitted abstracts to a government-wide database sponsored by the National Science Foundation (NSF). The NSF sponsored government-wide database is available to other agencies and to the public. NASA's ACTS database is designed only as a collection and transmittal tool and will not be open to the general public.
        B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
        This proposed rule is not expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small business entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et. seq.), because the administrative costs associated with the one time submission of the R&D abstract is not expected to exceed the micro-purchase threshold and should be included in the contract price.
        C. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

        This proposed rule contains information collection requirements. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507 (d)), NASA has submitted a copy of the information collection requirements to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for its review and approval. OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information contained in these proposed regulations between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment to OMB regarding this information collection is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication of this notice. This does not affect the deadline for the public to comment on the proposed regulations. All comments regarding this information collection should be sent to: Desk Officer for NASA; Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building; Washington, DC 20503.
        Collection of Information: NASA Research and Development Abstracts Collection
        The public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to be 1,500 hours. The estimated burden has been calculated as follows:

              Responses

            3000

              Hours per response

            × 0.5 (30 min.)

              Annual reporting burden

            1500 hours

        The estimated number of responses shown above is the total number of NASA research-related contracts awards, as well as awards made through grants and agreements. This estimate reflects the combined paperwork clearance request the Agency is submitting to OMB.

          List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 1835 and 1852
          Government procurement.

          Tom Luedtke,
          Assistant Administrator for Procurement.

        Accordingly, 48 CFR Parts 1835 and 1852 are proposed to be amended as follows:

        1. The authority citation for 48 CFR Parts 1835 and 1852 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
          42 U.S.C. 2473(c)(1).

          PART 1835—RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACTING
          2. Section 1835.003-70 is added to read as follows:

            1835.003-70
            NASA Research and Development (R&D) Abstracts.
            (a) The E-Government Act of 2002 (Pub. L. No. 107-347) mandates the development and maintenance of a repository that integrates information on research and development funded by the Federal Government. In support of that requirement, NASA will collect research abstracts and forward them to an appropriate central repository where they will be available for use by government agencies and other users.
            (b) Information on R&D awards subject to the clause at 1852.235-75, NASA Research and Development (R&D) Abstracts, including contractor name and contract number, shall be automatically entered by NASA into the NASA R&D Abstract Collection and Transmittal System (ACTS) database on a monthly basis. The database may be accessed via the Web site listed in the clause. Contracting officers shall check the Web site to determine if the selected contractor is listed as an entity already registered in the ACTS database. If the contractor is registered, then no further action by the contracting officer is required. If the contractor is not already registered in ACTS, the contracting officer must obtain from their Center ACTS point of contact a new ACTS user identification and password for the selected contractor. The contracting officer shall provide the user identification and password to the contractor.
            3. Section 1835.070 is amended by adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:

            1835.070
            NASA contract clauses and solicitation provision.

            (f) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 1852.235-75, NASA Research and Development (R&D) Abstracts, in all contracts that include research and development effort that exceeds $25,000. This requirement does not apply to intragovernmental transfers.

          PART 1852—SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES
          4. Section 1852.235-75 is added to read as follows:

            1852.235-75
            NASA Research and Development (R&D) Abstracts.
            As prescribed in 1835.070(f), insert the following clause:

              NASA Research and Development (R&D) Abstracts
              (XX/XX)

              (a) The Contractor shall, within 60 days after award (or 30 days after the award information is entered into the NASA R&D Abstract Collection and Transmittal System (ACTS) database, whichever is later), enter a summary or abstract of the research and development activity to be conducted under this contract into the ACTS database. The database may be accessed at the following URL: http://proposals.hq.nasa.gov/acts/.

              (b) The abstract should range from 250 to 500 words in length. The abstract will be made available to the public without restrictions; therefore, caution is advised against inclusion of any material for which dissemination in the public domain may be prohibited such as trade secrets, proprietary information or export controlled information.
              (c) The abstract and other pertinent award information will be included in a database of R&D abstracts from across the Federal Government. The government-wide database will include abstracts and other information concerning awards, such as the dollar value and estimated completion date. The government-wide database will be accessible to other government agencies and private organizations and will allow entities to search the database for a variety of information regarding current research awards. The NASA ACTS database will not be searchable by the general public.
              (d) Access to the NASA ACTS database requires user identification and a password to ensure that only authorized personnel enter abstract information. The Contracting Officer will provide instructions regarding user identification and password access if the Contractor does not already possess an ACTS identification and password.

      [FR Doc. 03-27492 Filed 10-30-03; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 7510-01-P