        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 223
        RIN 0648-BC10
        Sea Turtle Conservation; Shrimp Trawling Requirements; Correction

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

          ACTION:
          Correction to a proposed rule; request for comments; notice of public hearings.

          SUMMARY:
          On May 10, 2012, we published a proposed rule to withdraw the alternative tow time restriction and require all skimmer trawls, pusher-head trawls, and wing nets (butterfly trawls) rigged for fishing to use turtle excluder devices (TEDs) in their nets, and announced five public hearings to be held in Morehead City, NC, Larose, LA, Belle Chasse, LA, D'Iberville, MS, and Bayou La Batre, AL. In this document, we are correcting the time for the public hearing to be held in Larose, LA.

          DATES:

          A public hearing will be held on June 4, 2012, from 6 to 8 p.m. in Larose, LA. Written comments (see ADDRESSES) will be accepted through July 9, 2012. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further details.

          ADDRESSES:
          As published on May 10, 2012 (77 FR 27411), you may submit comments on this proposed rule, identified by 0648-BC10, by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.

          • Mail: Michael Barnette, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
          • Fax: 727-824-5309; Attention: Michael Barnette.

            Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information. We will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the required fields, if you wish to remain anonymous). You may submit attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Michael Barnette, 727-551-5794.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Background
        On May 10, 2012 (77 FR 27411), we published a proposed rule, a request for comments, and a notice of public hearings. However, the time of the June 4, 2012, Larose, LA public hearing was listed wrong and must be corrected.
        Correction
        Accordingly, the proposed rule, request for comments, and notice of public hearings published on May 10, 2012 (77 FR 27411), is corrected as follows: On page 27415, column 1, line 13, correct the public hearing to read as “2. June 4, 2012, 6 p.m. to 8 p.m., Larose, LA.”

          Dated: May 11, 2012.
          Samuel D. Rauch III,
          Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2012-12013 Filed 5-17-12; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        Fish and Wildlife Service
        50 CFR Part 17
        Notice of Availability of a Draft Recovery Plan for Five Plants From Monterey County, CA, for Review and Comment

          AGENCY:
          Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

          ACTION:
          Notice of document availability.

          SUMMARY:

          We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the availability for public review of a Draft Recovery Plan for Five Plants from Monterey County, California. This recovery plan includes the following species: coastal dunes milk-vetch (Astragalus tener var. titi), Yadon's piperia (Piperia yadonii), Hickman's potentilla (Potentilla hickmanii), Monterey clover (Trifolium trichocalyx), and Gowen cypress (Cupressus goveniana ssp. goveniana). These plant species are found primarily along the coast of northern Monterey County, California. Hickman's potentilla also occurs in San Mateo County and has occurred historically in Sonoma County. Coastal dunes milk-vetch has occurred historically in Los Angeles and San Diego Counties, California. The Service solicits review and comment from local, State, and Federal agencies, and the public on this draft recovery plan.

          DATES:
          Comments on the draft recovery plan must be received on or before July 12, 2002 to receive consideration by the Service.

          ADDRESSES:
          Copies of the draft recovery plan are available for inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the following location: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, California 93003 (phone: 805-644-1766). Requests for copies of the draft recovery plan, and written comments and materials regarding this plan should be addressed to Ms. Diane K. Noda, Field Supervisor, at the above Ventura address.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Heidi E.D. Crowell, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at the above address.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Background
        Restoring endangered or threatened animals and plants to the point where they are again secure, self-sustaining members of their ecosystems is a primary goal of the Service's endangered species program. To help guide the recovery effort, the Service is working to prepare recovery plans for most of the listed species native to the United States. Recovery plans describe actions considered necessary for the conservation of the species, establish criteria for the recovery levels for downlisting or delisting them, and estimate time and cost for implementing the recovery measures needed.

        The Endangered Species Act, as amended in 1988 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act), requires the development of recovery plans for listed species unless such a plan would not promote the conservation of a particular species. Section 4(f) of the Act requires that public notice and an opportunity for public review and comment be provided during recovery plan development. The Service will consider all information presented during the public comment period prior to approval of each new or revised recovery plan. Substantive technical comments will result in changes to the plans. Substantive comments regarding recovery plan implementation may not necessarily result in changes to the recovery plans, but will be forwarded to appropriate Federal or other entities so that they can take these comments into account during the course of implementing recovery actions. Individualized responses to comments will not be provided.
        Coastal dunes milk-vetch, Yadon's piperia, Hickman's potentilla and Monterey clover are listed as endangered. Gowen cypress is listed as a threatened species.
        Coastal dunes milk-vetch is restricted to sandy soils that occur within 30 meters (m) (98 feet (ft)) of the ocean beach on relatively flat coastal terraces that are exposed to ocean sprays and periodic saturation. Only one extant population is currently known to occur, made up of approximately 11 scattered patches of plants that are separated by 17-Mile Drive on the western edge of the Monterey Peninsula. The land is owned by the Pebble Beach Company and the Monterey Peninsula Country Club.
        Yadon's piperia is endemic to Monterey County and has a center of distribution within large undeveloped tracts of Monterey pine forest. Its range extends from the Los Lomos area near the border of Santa Cruz County in the north to approximately 25 kilometers (km) (15 miles (mi)) south of the Monterey Peninsula near Palo Colorado Canyon where it occurs in a maritime chaparral habitat. Some of the plants occur on protected property, while a large proportion of plants occur on unprotected private property.
        Hickman's potentilla is currently known from one site on the Monterey Peninsula and at one site in San Mateo County. The population in Monterey County grows in fine sandy soils within an opening of Monterey pine forest that supports wet conditions for a variety of native and nonnative grassland species. The population in San Mateo County was presumed extirpated until it was rediscovered on private land in 1995 by biologists conducting surveys for a highway project.
        Monterey clover is known from only one area in the vicinity of Huckleberry Hill within the Monterey Peninsula. Only a few scattered individuals were reported in the late 1990's. This species is a classic fire-follower, taking advantage of reduced forest cover that allows a significantly higher proportion of light to reach the herbaceous ground cover for the first few years after a fire. Fire suppression activities and development within the Pebble Beach Company property are likely negatively affecting this species' habitat and seed bank.
        Gowen cypress is currently found in only two stands, in addition to individuals that occur locally in cultivation. The largest stand (Del Monte Forest) is near Huckleberry Hill on the west side of the Monterey Peninsula and covers approximately 40 hectares (ha) (100 acres (ac)) within lands owned by the Pebble Beach Company and the Del Monte Forest Foundation. The second stand (Point Lobos) occurs 10 km (6 mi) south of Huckleberry Hill on the north side of Gibson Creek inland of the Point Lobos Peninsula. This stand occurs on a 60-ha (150-ac) parcel owned by the California Department of Parks and Recreation and is somewhere between 16 and 32 ha (40 and 80 ac) in size. The stands occur in mixed conifer forest and maritime chaparral habitats. Within the chaparral habitat, the cypress also grows in a dense, dwarf or pygmy forest.
        These plants are threatened by one or more of the following: alteration, destruction, and fragmentation of habitat resulting from urban and golf course  development; recreational activities; competition with nonnative plant species; herbivory from native or nonnative species; demographic stochasticity; and disruption of natural fire cycles due to fire suppression associated with increasing residential development around and within occupied habitat.
        The objective of this recovery plan is to provide a framework for the recovery of coastal dunes milk-vetch, Yadon's piperia, Hickman's potentilla, Monterey clover, and Gowen cypress so that protection by the Act is no longer necessary. This recovery plan establishes criteria necessary to accomplish delisting of Gowen cypress and downlisting of coastal dunes milk-vetch, Yadon's piperia, Hickman's potentilla, and Monterey clover to threatened status. These criteria include: (1) Permanent protection of habitat presently occupied by the species and the surrounding ecosystem on which they depend, with long-term commitments to conserving the species; (2) in a protected habitat, successful control of invasive, nonnative plants and successful management of other problems (management success must be demonstrated through at least 10 years of biological monitoring); (3) development of management strategies that include results from research on the life histories of the taxa, and results from monitoring the species' response to vegetation management; (4) successful reintroduction or establishment of populations for coastal dunes milk-vetch, Hickman's potentilla, and Monterey clover; (5) implementation of a prescribed burn plan or successful alternative management strategy for Gowen cypress; (6) monitoring to demonstrate long-term viability of existing populations, including successful recruitment and reproduction; and (7) establishment of seed banks at recognized institutions. Criteria for delisting of coastal dunes milk-vetch, Yadon's piperia, Hickman's potentilla, and Monterey clover may be addressed in future revisions of this recovery plan when additional information about the biology of the species is available.
        Authority
        The authority for this action is section 4(f) of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1533(f).

          Dated: May 6, 2002.
          D. Kenneth McDermond,
          Manager, California/Nevada Operations Office, Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

      [FR Doc. 02-11802 Filed 5-10-02; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4310-55-P


        DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
        Office of Inspector General
        42 CFR Part 1001
        Solicitation of New Safe Harbors and Special Fraud Alerts

          AGENCY:
          Office of Inspector General (OIG), HHS.

          ACTION:
          Notice of intent to develop regulations.

          SUMMARY:
          In accordance with section 205 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996, this annual notice solicits proposals and recommendations for developing new and modifying existing safe harbor provisions under the Federal anti-kickback statute (section 1128B(b) of the Social Security Act), as well as developing new OIG Special Fraud Alerts.

          DATES:
          To assure consideration, public comments must be delivered to the address provided below by no later than 5 p.m. on February 9, 2007.

          ADDRESSES:
          Please mail or deliver your written comments to the following address: Office of Inspector General, Department of Health and Human Services, Attention: OIG-111-N, Room 5246, Cohen Building, 330 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20201.
          We do not accept comments by facsimile (FAX) transmission. In commenting, please refer to file code OIG-111-N. Comments received timely will be available for public inspection as they are received, generally beginning approximately 3 weeks after publication of a document, in Room 5541 of the Office of Inspector General at 330 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC, on Monday through Friday of each week from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Joel Schaer, (202) 619-0089, OIG Regulations Officer.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        I. Background
        A. OIG Safe Harbor Provisions

        Section 1128B(b) of the Social Security Act (the Act) (42 U.S.C. 1320a-7b(b)) provides criminal penalties for individuals or entities that knowingly and willfully offer, pay, solicit or receive remuneration in order to induce or reward business reimbursable under the Federal health care programs. The offense is classified as a felony and is punishable by fines of up to $25,000 and imprisonment for up to 5 years. OIG may also impose civil money penalties, in accordance with section 1128A(a)(7) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1320a-7a(a)(7)), or exclusion from the Federal health care programs, in accordance with section 1128(b)(7) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 1320a-7(b)(7)).
        Since the statute on its face is so broad, concern has been expressed for many years that some relatively innocuous commercial arrangements may be subject to criminal prosecution or administrative sanction. In response to the above concern, the Medicare and Medicaid Patient and Program Protection Act of 1987, section 14 of Public Law 100-93, specifically required the development and promulgation of regulations, the so-called “safe harbor” provisions, specifying various payment and business practices which, although potentially capable of inducing referrals of business reimbursable under the Federal health care programs, would not be treated as criminal offenses under the anti-kickback statute and would not serve as a basis for administrative sanctions. OIG safe harbor provisions have been developed “to limit the reach of the statute somewhat by permitting certain non-abusive arrangements, while encouraging beneficial and innocuous arrangements” (56 FR 35952, July 29, 1991). Health care providers and others may voluntarily seek to comply with these provisions so that they have the assurance that their business practices will not be subject to liability under the anti-kickback statute or related administrative authorities.
        Existing OIG safe harbors describing those practices that are sheltered from liability are codified in 42 CFR 1001.
        B. OIG Special Fraud Alerts
        OIG has also periodically issued Special Fraud Alerts to give continuing guidance to health care providers with respect to practices OIG finds potentially fraudulent or abusive. The Special Fraud Alerts encourage industry compliance by giving providers guidance that can be applied to their own practices. OIG Special Fraud Alerts are intended for extensive distribution directly to the health care provider community, as well as to those charged with administering the Federal health care programs.
        In developing these Special Fraud Alerts, OIG has relied on a number of sources and has consulted directly with experts in the subject field, including those within OIG, other agencies of the Department, other Federal and State agencies, and those in the health care industry.
        C. Section 205 of Public Law 104-191

        Section 205 of Public Law 104-191 requires the Department to develop and publish an annual notice in the Federal Register formally soliciting proposals for modifying existing safe harbors to the anti-kickback statute and for developing new safe harbors and Special Fraud Alerts.
        In developing safe harbors for a criminal statute, OIG is required to engage in a thorough review of the range of factual circumstances that may fall within the proposed safe harbor subject area so as to uncover potential opportunities for fraud and abuse. Only then can OIG determine, in consultation with the Department of Justice, whether it can effectively develop regulatory limitations and controls that will permit beneficial and innocuous arrangements within a subject area while, at the same time, protecting the Federal health care programs and their beneficiaries from abusive practices.
        II. Solicitation of Additional New Recommendations and Proposals

        In accordance with the requirements of section 205 of Public Law 104-191, OIG last published a Federal Register solicitation notice for developing new safe harbors and Special Fraud Alerts on December 9, 2005 (70 FR 73186). As required under section 205, a status report of the public comments received in response to that notice is set forth in Appendix F to the OIG's Semiannual Report covering the period April 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006.1
           OIG is not seeking additional public comment on the proposals listed in Appendix F at this time. Rather, this notice seeks additional recommendations regarding the development of proposed or modified safe harbor regulations and new Special Fraud Alerts beyond those summarized in Appendix F to the OIG Semiannual Report referenced above.

            1 The OIG Semiannual Report can be accessed through the OIG Web site at http://oig.hhs.gov/publications/semiannual.html.

        A. Criteria for Modifying and Establishing Safe Harbor Provisions
        In accordance with section 205 of HIPAA, we will consider a number of factors in reviewing proposals for new or modified safe harbor provisions, such as the extent to which the proposals would effect an increase or decrease in—
        • Access to health care services,
        • The quality of services,
        • Patient freedom of choice among health care providers,
        • Competition among health care providers,
        • The cost to Federal health care programs,
        • The potential overutilization of the health care services, and
        • The ability of health care facilities to provide services in medically underserved areas or to medically underserved populations.
        In addition, we will also take into consideration other factors, including, for example, the existence (or nonexistence) of any potential financial benefit to health care professionals or providers that may take into account their decisions whether to (1) order a health care item or service or (2) arrange for a referral of health care items or services to a particular practitioner or provider.
        B. Criteria for Developing Special Fraud Alerts
        In determining whether to issue additional Special Fraud Alerts, we will also consider whether, and to what extent, the practices that would be identified in a new Special Fraud Alert may result in any of the consequences set forth above, as well as the volume and frequency of the conduct that would be identified in the Special Fraud Alert.
        A detailed explanation of justifications for, or empirical data supporting, a suggestion for a safe harbor or Special Fraud Alert would be helpful and should, if possible, be included in any response to this solicitation.

          Dated: December 6, 2006.
          Daniel R. Levinson,
          Inspector General.

       [FR Doc. E6-20994 Filed 12-8-06; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4150-04-P


        DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
        Defense Acquisition Regulations System
        48 CFR Part 216
        RIN 0750-AF81
        Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Letter Contract Definitization Schedule (DFARS Case 2007-D011)

          AGENCY:
          Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule with request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to clarify requirements regarding definitization of letter contracts. The rule specifies that DoD letter contracts will be definitized using the DFARS procedures applicable to all other undefinitized contract actions.

          DATES:
          Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted in writing to the address shown below on or before September 14, 2009, to be considered in the formation of the final rule.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by DFARS Case 2007-D011, using any of the following methods:

            Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

            E-mail:
            dfars@osd.mil. Include DFARS Case 2007-D011 in the subject line of the message.

            Fax: 703-602-7887.

            Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Cassandra Freeman, OUSD (AT&L) DPAP (DARS), IMD 3D139, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062.

            Hand Delivery/Courier: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Crystal Square 4, Suite 200A, 241 18th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-3402.

          Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Ms. Cassandra Freeman, 703-602-8383.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        A. Background
        Section 16.603 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) permits the use of a letter contract as a preliminary, undefinitized contractual instrument, when negotiating a definitive contract is not possible in sufficient time to meet the Government's requirements. FAR 16.603-2(c)(3) requires the definitization of a letter contract within 180 days after the date of the letter contract, or before completion of 40 percent of the work to be performed, whichever occurs first. In extreme cases and according to agency procedures, the contracting officer may authorize an additional period.
        DFARS Subpart 217.74 contains requirements applicable to all DoD undefinitized contract actions, consistent with 10 U.S.C. 2326. DFARS 217.7404-3(a) requires definitization of such actions by 180 days after issuance of the action (this date may be extended but may not exceed 180 days after the contractor submits a qualifying proposal), or the date on which the amount of funds obligated exceeds 50 percent of the not-to-exceed price, whichever is earlier. If the contractor submits a qualifying proposal before 50 percent of the not-to-exceed price has been obligated by the Government, the limitation on obligations before definitization may be increased to no more than 75 percent.
        In view of the differences between the FAR and DFARS definitization requirements, confusion has arisen in this area. This proposed rule clarifies that the definitization requirements at DFARS 217.7404-3(a) apply to DoD letter contracts instead of the requirements at FAR 16.603-2(c)(3). This approach provides consistency in the manner in which DoD manages its undefinitized contract actions, and is in line with the specific provisions of 10 U.S.C. 2326 relating to DoD use of undefinitized contract actions.
        This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order 12866, dated September 30, 1993.
        B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

        DoD does not expect this proposed rule to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., because the proposed rule is a clarification of existing requirements pertaining to undefinitized contract actions. Therefore, DoD has not performed an initial regulatory flexibility analysis. DoD invites comments from small businesses and other interested parties. DoD also will consider comments from small entities concerning the affected DFARS subpart in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Such comments should be submitted separately and should cite DFARS Case 2007-D011.
        C. Paperwork Reduction Act

        The Paperwork Reduction Act does not apply, because the proposed rule does not contain any information collection requirements that require the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.

          List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 216
          Government procurement.

          Michele P. Peterson,
          Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

        Therefore, DoD proposes to amend 48 CFR Part 216 as follows:

          PART 216—TYPES OF CONTRACTS
          1. The authority citation for 48 CFR Part 216 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR Chapter 1.

          2. Section 216.603-2 is added to read as follows:

            216.603-2
             Application.
            (c)(3) In accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2326, establish definitization schedules for letter contracts following the requirements at 217.7404-3(a) instead of the requirements at FAR 16.603-2(c)(3).

       [FR Doc. E9-16665 Filed 7-14-09; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 5001-08-P