        DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
        Federal Emergency Management Agency
        44 CFR Part 67
        [Docket ID FEMA-2010-0003; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1166]
        Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations

          AGENCY:
          Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          Comments are requested on the proposed Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and proposed BFE modifications for the communities listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek general information and comment regarding the proposed regulatory flood elevations for the reach described by the downstream and upstream locations in the table below. The BFEs and modified BFEs are a part of the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). In addition, these elevations, once finalized, will be used by insurance agents and others to calculate appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and the contents in those buildings.

          DATES:
          Comments are to be submitted on or before March 29, 2011.

          ADDRESSES:
          The corresponding preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the proposed BFEs for each community is available for inspection at the community's map repository. The respective addresses are listed in the table below.

          You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-1166, to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-4064, or (e-mail) luis.rodriguez1@dhs.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-4064, or (e-mail) luis.rodriguez1@dhs.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) proposes to make determinations of BFEs and modified BFEs for each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
        These proposed BFEs and modified BFEs, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These proposed elevations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after these elevations are made final, and for the contents in those buildings.
        Comments on any aspect of the Flood Insurance Study and FIRM, other than the proposed BFEs, will be considered. A letter acknowledging receipt of any comments will not be sent.

          National Environmental Policy Act. This proposed rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental Consideration. An environmental impact assessment has not been prepared.

          Regulatory Flexibility Act. As flood elevation determinations are not within the scope of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.

          Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. This proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, as amended.

          Executive Order 13132, Federalism. This proposed rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.

          Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This proposed rule meets the applicable standards of Executive Order 12988.

          List of Subjects in 44 CFR Part 67
          Administrative practice and procedure, Flood insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

        Accordingly, 44 CFR part 67 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 67—[AMENDED]
          1. The authority citation for part 67 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
             42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. 12127, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, 1979 Comp., p. 376.

            § 67.4
            [Amended]

            2. The tables published under the authority of § 67.4 are proposed to be amended as follows:

                Flooding source(s)
                Location of referenced elevation **
                * Elevation in feet(NGVD)
                  + Elevation in feet
                  (NAVD)
                  # Depth in feet
                  above ground
                  ⁁ Elevation in meters
                  (MSL)

                Effective
                Modified
                Communities affected

                  Levy County, Florida, and Incorporated Areas

                Bronson North Ditch
                At Ifshie Avenue
                None
                +55
                Town of Bronson, Unincorporated Areas of Levy County.

                Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of U.S. Route 27A
                None
                +57

                Bronson South Ditch
                Just upstream of Lime Rock Road
                None
                +59
                Town of Bronson, Unincorporated Areas of Levy County.

                Approximately 600 feet upstream of West Main Street
                None
                +60

                Long Pond
                At Levy County Route 345
                None
                +27
                City of Chiefland, Unincorporated Areas of Levy County.

                Just downstream of Northwest 60th Street
                None
                +28

                * National Geodetic Vertical Datum.

                + North American Vertical Datum.

                # Depth in feet above ground.

                ⁁ Mean Sea Level, rounded to the nearest 0.1 meter.

                ** BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream reach between the referenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate Map located at the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed.

                Send comments to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.

                  ADDRESSES

                  City of Chiefland

                Maps are available for inspection at City Hall, 214 East Park Avenue, Chiefland, FL 32626.

                  Town of Bronson

                Maps are available for inspection at the Town Hall, 650 Oak Street, Bronson, FL 32621.

                  Unincorporated Areas of Levy County

                Maps are available for inspection at the Levy County Building Department, 9010 Northeast 79th Street, Bronson, FL 32621.

                  Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania (All Jurisdictions)

                Crooked Creek
                Approximately 0.88 mile downstream of Beaver Lane
                None
                +628
                Township of Walker.

                Approximately 0.70 mile downstream of Beaver Lane
                None
                +633

                Hares Valley Creek
                Approximately 800 feet downstream of Pennsylvania Railroad
                None
                +586
                Township of Union.

                Approximately 500 feet upstream of Pennsylvania Railroad
                None
                +586

                Hill Valley Creek
                Approximately 240 feet downstream of Norfolk Southern Railroad
                None
                +555
                Township of Shirley.

                Approximately 90 feet upstream of Norfolk Southern Railroad
                None
                +555

                Juniata River
                Approximately 0.39 mile downstream of Bridge Street
                None
                +584
                Township of Union.

                Approximately 1,670 feet downstream of Bridge Street
                None
                +584

                Juniata River
                Approximately 0.75 mile downstream of North Jefferson Street
                None
                +569
                Township of Brady, Township of Shirley.

                Approximately 0.53 mile downstream of North Jefferson Street
                None
                +569

                Juniata River
                Just upstream of U.S. Route 22 (William Penn Highway)
                +612
                +613
                Township of Henderson, Township of Smithfield.

                Approximately 200 feet upstream of U.S. Route 22 (William Penn Highway)
                +613
                +614

                Juniata River
                Approximately 2 miles downstream of the confluence with Shaver Creek
                None
                +671
                Township of Logan.

                Approximately 140 feet downstream of the confluence with Shaver Creek
                None
                +674

                Juniata River
                Approximately 1.72 miles upstream of Bridge Street (Cypress Island Bridge)
                None
                +638
                Township of Porter.

                Approximately 1.78 miles upstream of Bridge Street (Cypress Island Bridge)
                None
                +638

                Little Juniata River
                Approximately 1,450 feet upstream of Norfolk Southern Railroad
                None
                +847
                Borough of Birmingham.

                Approximately 0.52 mile upstream of Norfolk Southern Railroad
                None
                +848

                Little Juniata River
                Approximately 440 feet downstream of the Pemberton Road Bridge
                None
                +797
                Township of Spruce Creek.

                Approximately 300 feet downstream of Birmingham Pike (Railroad Bridge)
                None
                +813

                Murray Run
                Approximately 280 feet downstream of Murray Run Road
                None
                +691
                Township of Henderson.

                Approximately 170 feet downstream of Murray Run Road
                None
                +691

                Standing Stone Creek
                Approximately 1.57 miles downstream of Stone Creek Ridge Road
                None
                +661
                Township of Oneida.

                Approximately 1.55 miles downstream of Stone Creek Ridge Road
                None
                +661

                Three Springs Creek
                Approximately 800 feet downstream of Hudson Street
                None
                +700
                Borough of Three Springs.

                Approximately 800 feet upstream of Elliots Run Road
                None
                +713

                Unnamed Tributary to Shoup Run
                Approximately 400 feet upstream of Broad Top Mountain Road
                None
                +1139
                Township of Carbon.

                Approximately 520 feet upstream of Broad Top Mountain Road
                None
                +1142

                * National Geodetic Vertical Datum.

                + North American Vertical Datum.

                # Depth in feet above ground.

                ⁁ Mean Sea Level, rounded to the nearest 0.1 meter.

                ** BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream reach between the referenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate Map located at the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed.

                Send comments to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.

                  ADDRESSES

                  Borough of Birmingham

                Maps are available for inspection at the Borough Building, 2450 Tyrone Street, Birmingham, PA 16686.

                  Borough of Three Springs

                Maps are available for inspection at the Borough Building, 8444 Hudson Street, Three Springs, PA 17264.

                  Township of Brady

                Maps are available for inspection at the Brady Township Building, 11311 Beatty Road, Mill Creek, PA 17060.

                  Township of Carbon

                Maps are available for inspection at the Carbon Township Building, 20188 Little Valley Road, Saxton, PA 16678.

                  Township of Henderson

                Maps are available for inspection at the Henderson Township Building, 9024 Sugar Grove Road, Huntingdon, PA 16652.

                  Township of Logan

                Maps are available for inspection at the Logan Township Building, 7228 Diamond Valley, Alexandria, PA 16611.

                  Township of Oneida

                Maps are available for inspection at the Oneida Township Building, 9775 Blair Road, Huntingdon, PA 16652.

                  Township of Porter

                Maps are available for inspection at the Porter Township Building, 7551 Bridge Street, Alexandria, PA 16611.

                  Township of Shirley

                Maps are available for inspection at the Shirley Township Building, 15480 Croghan Pike, Shirleysburg, PA 17260.

                  Township of Smithfield

                Maps are available for inspection at the Smithfield Township Building, 202 South 13th Street, Suite. 3, Huntingdon, PA 16652.

                  Township of Spruce Creek

                Maps are available for inspection at the Spruce Creek Township Building, 4602 Eden Road, Tyrone, PA 16686.

                  Township of Union

                Maps are available for inspection at the Union Township Building, 14129 Trough Creek Valley Pike, Huntingdon, PA 16652.

                  Township of Walker

                Maps are available for inspection at the Walker Township Building, 5568 Bouquet Street, McConnellstown, PA 16660.

                  Clark County, Washington, and Incorporated Areas

                Burnt Bridge Creek
                Just upstream of I-205
                +193
                +192
                City of Vancouver, Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Approximately 1,056 feet upstream of Northeast 152nd Street
                None
                +200

                China Ditch
                Just upstream of Northeast Ward Road
                None
                +252
                Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Approximately 0.4 mile upstream of Northeast 144th Street
                None
                +275

                Curtin Creek
                At the confluence with Salmon Creek
                +174
                +172
                Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Approximately 700 feet upstream of Anderson Road
                None
                +260

                Dead Lake
                Entire shoreline within community
                None
                +191
                City of Camas, Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Fifth Plain Creek
                At the confluence with Lacamas Creek
                None
                +208
                City of Vancouver, Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Approximately 0.7 mile upstream of Northeast Davis Road
                None
                +342

                Gee Creek
                Just downstream of Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad
                +29
                +27
                City of Ridgefield, Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of I-5
                None
                +315

                Lacamas Creek
                Just downstream of Northeast 3rd Avenue
                None
                +35
                City of Camas, Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Approximately 1.3 miles upstream of Northeast 3rd Avenue
                None
                +163

                Approximately 1 mile downstream of Northeast Goodwin Road
                None
                +191

                Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of Northeast 217th Avenue
                None
                +281

                Lake Lacamas
                Entire shoreline within community
                None
                +191
                City of Camas, Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Mill Creek
                At the confluence with Salmon Creek
                +138
                +137
                City of Battle Ground, Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Just downstream of Northwest 20th Avenue
                None
                +279

                Packard Creek
                Approximately 375 feet downstream of Northwest 179th Street
                None
                +66
                Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Approximately 1,040 feet upstream of Northwest 11th Avenue
                None
                +290

                Padden Creek
                Approximately 460 feet downstream of Northeast 83rd Street
                None
                +214
                Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Approximately 160 feet upstream of Northeast 88th Street
                None
                +228

                Round Lake
                Entire shoreline within community
                None
                +191
                City of Camas, Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Salmon Creek
                At the confluence with Weaver Creek
                +211
                +210
                City of Battle Ground, Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Just upstream of Risto Road
                None
                +363

                Spring Branch Creek
                At the confluence with Lacamas Creek
                +200
                +198
                Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Approximately 1.25 miles upstream of the confluence with Lacamas Creek
                +202
                +200

                Weaver Creek
                Approximately 320 feet upstream of Northeast 169th Street
                None
                +215
                City of Battle Ground, Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Approximately 1.1 miles upstream of Northeast 152nd Avenue
                None
                +345

                Whipple Creek
                Just downstream of Northwest Krieger Road
                None
                +28
                Unincorporated Areas of Clark County.

                Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of Northeast 179th Street
                None
                +241

                * National Geodetic Vertical Datum.

                + North American Vertical Datum.

                # Depth in feet above ground.

                ⁁ Mean Sea Level, rounded to the nearest 0.1 meter.

                ** BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream reach between the referenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate Map located at the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed.

                Send comments to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.

                  ADDRESSES

                  City of Battle Ground

                Maps are available for inspection at 109 Southwest 1st Street, Battle Ground, WA 98604.

                  City of Camas

                Maps are available for inspection at 616 Northeast 4th Avenue, Camas, WA 98607.

                  City of Ridgefield

                Maps are available for inspection at 230 Pioneer Street, Ridgefield, WA 98642.

                  City of Vancouver

                Maps are available for inspection at 210 East 13th Street, Vancouver, WA 98668.

                  Unincorporated Areas of Clark County

                Maps are available for inspection at 1300 Franklin Street, Vancouver, WA 98668.

                  Preston County, West Virginia, and Incorporated Areas

                Back Run
                At the confluence with Deckers Creek
                None
                +1698
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1,670 feet upstream of the confluence with Deckers Creek
                None
                +1702

                Barnes Run
                At the confluence with Cherry Run
                None
                +1702
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 450 feet upstream of State Route 26
                None
                +2075

                Barnes Run Tributary 2
                At the confluence with Barnes Run
                None
                +1750
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.9 mile upstream of the confluence with Barnes Run
                None
                +1976

                Big Sandy Creek
                Approximately 310 feet downstream of the confluence of Glade Run
                None
                +1507
                Town of Brandonville, Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 300 feet upstream of County Highway 4/2
                None
                +1550

                Big Sandy Creek Tributary 1
                At the confluence with Big Sandy Creek
                None
                +1530
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.9 mile upstream of County Highway 8
                None
                +1791

                Bull Run
                Approximately 580 feet upstream of the confluence with Cheat River
                None
                +923
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 420 feet upstream of County Highway 21
                None
                +1419

                Bull Run Tributary 1
                At the confluence with Bull Run
                None
                +1325
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1.4 miles upstream of County Highway 21/2
                None
                +1743

                Cheat River
                Approximately 1.9 miles downstream of the Albright Power Plant Dam
                None
                +1198
                Town of Rowlesburg, Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                At the Tucker County boundary
                None
                +1483

                Cherry Run
                Approximately 250 feet downstream of the confluence of Barnes Run
                None
                +1699
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1.8 miles upstream of County Highway 5/2
                None
                +2272

                Cherry Run Tributary 1
                At the confluence with Cherry Run
                None
                +1969
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1,560 feet downstream of County Highway 5
                None
                +2069

                Cherry Run Tributary 2
                At the confluence with Cherry Run
                None
                +1972
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of the confluence with Cherry Run Tributary 2A
                None
                +2099

                Cherry Run Tributary 2A
                At the confluence with Cherry Run Tributary 2
                None
                +2045
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of the confluence with Cherry Run Tributary 2
                None
                +2091

                Cherry Run Tributary 3
                At the confluence with Cherry Run
                None
                +2017
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1.1 miles upstream of the confluence with Cherry Run
                None
                +2236

                Deckers Creek
                At the downstream Monongalia County boundary
                None
                +1488
                Town of Masontown, Town of Rowlesburg, Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                At the upstream Monongalia County boundary
                None
                +1861

                Deckers Creek Tributary 1
                At the confluence with Deckers Creek
                None
                +1709
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 300 feet upstream of Zinn Chapel Road
                None
                +1741

                Dillan Creek
                At the confluence with Deckers Creek
                None
                +1701
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of Dillan Creek Road
                None
                +1749

                Dillan Creek Tributary 1
                At the confluence with Dillan Creek
                None
                +1701
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.9 mile upstream of County Highway 7/4
                None
                +1831

                Dillan Creek Tributary 2
                At the confluence with Dillan Creek
                None
                +1701
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1.9 miles upstream of the confluence with Dillan Creek
                None
                +1919

                Glade Run
                At the confluence with Big Sandy Creek
                None
                +1508
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1.7 miles upstream of County Highway 6
                None
                +1814

                Glade Run East
                At the confluence with Big Sandy Creek
                None
                +1531
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 960 feet upstream of County Highway 26/63
                None
                +2202

                Glade Run Tributary 1
                At the confluence with Glade Run
                None
                +1655
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of County Highway 6/1
                None
                +1716

                Glade Run Tributary 2
                At the confluence with Glade Run
                None
                +1667
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of County Highway 6/1
                None
                +1834

                Hog Run
                At the confluence with Cherry Run
                None
                +1838
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.8 mile upstream of the confluence with Hog Run Tributary 3
                None
                +2062

                Hog Run Tributary 1
                At the confluence with Hog Run
                None
                +2019
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1,830 feet upstream of State Route 26
                None
                +2077

                Hog Run Tributary 2
                At the confluence with Hog Run
                None
                +2036
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1,820 feet upstream of State Route 26
                None
                +2061

                Hog Run Tributary 3
                At the confluence with Hog Run
                None
                +2040
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1,190 feet upstream of State Route 26
                None
                +2082

                Kanes Creek
                At the confluence with Deckers Creek
                None
                +1701
                Town of Reedsville, Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.6 mile upstream of County Highway 56
                None
                +1781

                Little Sandy Creek
                At the confluence with Big Sandy Creek
                None
                +1537
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.44 mile upstream of County Highway 8
                None
                +1544

                Little Wolf Creek
                At the confluence with Wolf Creek
                None
                +1460
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 300 feet upstream of County Highway 110
                None
                +1596

                Maple Run
                Approximately 570 feet upstream of the confluence with Youghiogheny River
                None
                +2425
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.9 mile upstream of County Highway 116/2
                None
                +2645

                Middle Run
                At the confluence with Bull Run
                None
                +1329
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1.8 miles upstream of the confluence with Bull Run
                None
                +1724

                Mill Run
                At the confluence with Cherry Run
                None
                +1864
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1.6 miles upstream of the confluence with Mill Run Tributary 2
                None
                +2387

                Mill Run Tributary 1
                At the confluence with Mill Run
                None
                +1971
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1.2 miles upstream of the confluence with Mill Run
                None
                +2177

                Mill Run Tributary 2
                At the confluence with Mill Run
                None
                +2054
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 640 feet upstream of County Highway 112
                None
                +2246

                Piney Run
                At the confluence with Cherry Run
                None
                +1843
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 1.2 miles upstream of County Highway 5
                None
                +1869

                Saltlick Creek
                At the confluence with the Cheat River
                +1389
                +1399
                Town of Rowlesburg, Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.7 mile upstream of F Road
                None
                +2000

                Spruce Run
                At the confluence with Saltlick Creek
                None
                +1580
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 2.1 miles upstream of County Highway 86
                None
                +1796

                Swamp Run
                At the confluence with Dillan Creek
                None
                +1701
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of Herring Road
                None
                +1745

                Wolf Creek
                At the confluence with the Cheat River
                None
                +1449
                Unincorporated Areas of Preston County.

                Approximately 0.5 mile upstream of County Highway 110
                None
                +1542

                * National Geodetic Vertical Datum.

                + North American Vertical Datum.

                # Depth in feet above ground.

                ⁁ Mean Sea Level, rounded to the nearest 0.1 meter.

                ** BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream reach between the referenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate Map located at the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed.

                Send comments to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.

                  ADDRESSES

                  Town of Brandonville

                Maps are available for inspection at the Brandonville Town Hall, 37 Poplar Street, Bruceton Mills, WV 26525.

                  Town of Masontown

                Maps are available for inspection at Main Pharmacy, 160 Main Street, Masontown, WV 26542.

                  Town of Reedsville

                Maps are available for inspection at the Town Hall, 207 South Robert Stone Way, Reedsville, WV 26547.

                  Town of Rowlesburg

                Maps are available for inspection at the Community Building, 44 Poplar Street, Rowlesburg, WV 26425.

                  Unincorporated Areas of Preston County

                Maps are available for inspection at the Preston County Office of Emergency Management, 1031/2 West Main Street, Kingwood, WV 26537.

              (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”)

            Dated: December 10, 2010.
            Sandra K. Knight,
            Deputy Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administrator, Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

      [FR Doc. 2010-32702 Filed 12-28-10; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


        AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
        48 CFR Chapter 7
        RIN 0412-AA94
        U. S. Agency for International Development Acquisition Regulation (AIDAR): Designation of Personal Services Contractors (PSCs) as Contracting Officers and Agreement Officers

          AGENCY:
          U.S. Agency for International Development.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) proposes to amend the Agency for International Development Acquisition Regulation (AIDAR) to allow for the designation of U.S. Personal Services Contractors (US PSCs) and Cooperating Country National Personal Services Contractors (CCN PSCs) as contracting officers and agreement officers. The proposed revisions will address a shortage of U.S. direct-hire staff by delegating the proposed authorities to qualified US and CCN PSCs. The delegation of limited contracting/agreement officer authorities to a select number of CCN PSCs will also bolster the Agency to succeed in terms of building long-term, host country technical capacity to materially assist the Missions with procurement responsibility.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received no later than August 13, 2019.

          ADDRESSES:
          Address all comments concerning this notice to Anne Sattgast, Bureau for Management, Office of Acquisition and Assistance, Policy Division (M/OAA/P), Room 867-D, SA-44, Washington, DC 20523-2052. Submit comments, identified by title of the action and Regulatory Information Number (RIN) by any of the following methods:
          1. Through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov by following the instructions for submitting comments.
          2. By Mail addressed to: USAID, Bureau for Management, Office of Acquisition & Assistance, Policy Division, Room 867-D, SA-44, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20523-2052.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Anne Sattgast, Telephone: 202-567-5094 or Email: asattgast@usaid.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        A. Instructions
        All comments must be in writing and submitted through one of the methods specified in the Addresses section above. All submissions must include the title of the action and RIN for this rulemaking. Please include your name, title, organization, postal address, telephone number, and email address in the text of the message.
        Please note that USAID recommends sending all comments to the Federal eRulemaking Portal because security screening precautions have slowed the delivery and dependability of surface mail to USAID/Washington.

        At the end of the comment period and until finalization of the action, all comments will be made available at http://www.regulations.gov for public review without change, including any personal information provided. We recommend you do not submit information that you consider Confidential Business Information (CBI) or any information that is otherwise protected from disclosure by statute. USAID will only address substantive comments on the rule. Comments that are insubstantial or outside the scope of the rule may not be considered.
        B. Background
        On August 19, 2016 USAID published a proposed rule at 81 FR 55405 revising the U.S. Agency for International Development Acquisition Regulation (AIDAR) to incorporate the USAID Cooperating Country National Warrant Program into the regulation. The proposed rule was subsequently withdrawn on June 23, 2017, at 82 FR 28617, due to changes in the regulatory requirements and processes.
        USAID has further analyzed the need for contracting/agreement officers and has determined that the ability to designate both US PSCs and CCN PSCs as contracting/agreement officers would be a benefit to the Agency. It would relieve USAID staff from the administrative burden of processing deviations and exceptions currently required in Agency regulation and ultimately result in cost savings to the Agency.
        USAID is seeking comments on the proposed rule as described below:

          Designation of U.S. personal services contractors as contracting officers and agreement officers.

        The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) is located in offices in over 80 countries with programs in over 100 nations. USAID operates in a fluid environment responding to a myriad of crises such as war, natural disasters, epidemics, as well as working towards its long term mission of reducing poverty, strengthening democratic governance, and helping people emerge from humanitarian crises and progress beyond assistance.
        The current warranted work force to manage these efforts consists of 120 US direct-hire foreign service officers overseas, 84 direct-hire civil service officers, 63 warranted foreign service executive officers, 10 warranted US PSCs, and eleven warranted CCN PSCs. Additionally, the foreign service contracting staff has one of the highest attrition rates in USAID's work force that needs to be supplemented by additional personnel. There has been a decrease of over 20% in the Agency's direct-hire contracting officer staff from 2016 to 2018. The ability to designate US PSCs as contracting/agreement officers will help offset this decrease in the number of warranted direct-hire civil service and foreign service employees and increase the capacity of the Agency's acquisition workforce to process actions in an expeditious manner.
        Currently, a US PSC can be designated as a contracting officer only when a deviation from AIDAR 701.603-70 is approved; and when the Assistant Administrator for the Bureau for Management (AA/M) approves an exception in accordance with AIDAR Appendix D 4(b)(3)e. The proposed rule will also reduce the administrative burden on Management Bureau employees in processing requests for deviations and exceptions, allowing them to focus on other priorities.
        US PSCs will be designated as contracting/agreement officers similar to the direct-hire employees upon meeting the requirements in FAR subpart 1.6 and the Agency's warrant program requirements.

          Designation of Cooperating Country Nationals personal services contractors as contracting officers and agreement officers.

        In 2011, USAID approved a two-year Worldwide CCN Administrative Contracting and Agreement Officer (ACO/AAO) Pilot Warrant Program. The purposes of this program were to address the shortage of USAID contracting/agreement officers, alleviate the workload of contracting/agreement officers, and build long-term, host country technical capacity to materially assist the Missions with procurement responsibility.
        USAID made a strategic decision to create a cadre of highly qualified CCN PSCs, who demonstrated high potential for assuming responsibilities to serve as administrative contracting/agreement officers within designated Missions. The program evolved into a permanent program in 2014, as detailed below. During the two phases of the program, USAID has issued a total of 12 CCN warrants. Currently, there are eight warranted CCN administrative contracting/agreement officers. By the end of calendar year 2018, the Agency anticipates that there will be approximately 10 warranted CCN PSCs contracting/agreement officers. While a seemingly small number, it would represent a five percent increase in USAID's overseas US direct-hire warranted contracting/agreement officers.

        When designing the CCN Pilot Warrant Program, USAID consulted with the Senior Procurement Executive at the State Department and the USAID employee unions. The State Department's SPE advised that State conducted a similar pilot several years ago, to great success. They now have a permanent program that extends limited authority to their locally-employed staff in selected countries. The vice president of the American Foreign Service Association concurred with the Pilot, and was pleased by several of its protections.
        Based on that two-year pilot program, revisions were made to the program structure to better suit the Agency's needs before the permanent program was launched in September 2014. USAID eliminated the portion of the program that allowed for third country nationals to receive warrants. Participation was broadened by the revision of qualifications and inclusion of full obligation warrant authority up to the simplified acquisition threshold of $150,000 per transaction and an annual cumulative amount of $1 million at the potential CCN Grade 13 Level to assist the Missions' procurement function. To mitigate CCN inexperience from leading to mistakes or malfeasance, the revised 2014 CCN Warrant Program included three levels of obligation authority and non-monetary administrative responsibility correlating to CCN grade/experience within the acquisition backstop. Increasing degrees of responsibility and/or obligation authority, as applicable, were granted. The levels of contracting/agreement officer responsibilities designated to a CCN was based on the needs of each mission, complexity and dollar value of the acquisitions, and the individual's experience, training, education, business acumen, judgment, reputation and grade level.

        After implementing the 2014 CCN PSC warrant program for almost six years (including the pilot period before 2014), USAID is further revising the program based on Agency needs, experience with the current program, and in response to public comments received under the proposed rule at 81 FR 55405 published in the Federal Register on August 19, 2016. The new program will have a single warrant level that will combine the first two warrant levels from the 2014 program. This new warrant level will be available to qualified CCN PSCs at specific grade levels who meet training, years of experience, and education requirements. This warrant authority delegates select contract administration functions listed in (48 CFR) FAR 42.302(a), including, for example, conducting post-award orientation conferences, approving contractors' requests for payments under the progress payments or performance-based payments clauses. This warrant authority will also include the ability to obligate incremental funding of any amount within the scope and total estimated cost of a contract (to include task orders and purchase orders). This change in the CCN warrant program also responds to a request from some USAID Missions, where assistance with incremental-funding actions is needed.

        The revised warrant program also eliminates the third warrant level set at the simplified acquisition threshold. This change responds to several public comments received under the proposed rule at 81 FR 55405 published in the Federal Register on August 19, 2016. Authorizing CCNs to execute new awards on behalf of the U.S. Government had inherent risks that could not be sufficiently mitigated. As such, USAID decided to eliminate the simplified acquisition threshold warrant. Additionally, no simplified acquisition threshold warrants had been issued under the 2014 CCN warrant program.

          Analysis of risk associated with designating Non-U.S. citizens as contracting and agreement officers.

        While many CCNs that work for USAID do so for many years with demonstrated commitment to the United States mission in their country, non-U.S. citizens with contracting officer authorities inherently present additional risks, including litigation risk for the Government. Since CCNs are ingrained in their communities and economic markets, there can be greater risk of procurement integrity issues with taxpayer funds or local suits brought directly against the CCN for actions taken in their official capacity. In suits against the U.S., a CCN might have less incentive to act as a witness for the Government's defense as a non-citizen. Prior to establishing the permanent CCN warrant program, the Agency reviewed additional risks associated with issuing contracting/agreement officer warrants to non-U.S. citizens who are not direct-hire employees of USAID. In particular, such factors as proper accountability, adequate security considerations, conflicts of interest, and appropriate legal jurisdiction over the employee were considered. Adequate management controls and warrant limitations established under the CCN PSC warrant program, as discussed below, were established to mitigate such risks.
        To address the risks associated with adequate accountability, commitment to USAID, and conflict of interest, the warrant program requires candidates for the CCN PSC warrant program to show commitment to the profession and USAID by meeting stringent acquisition competencies, education and training requirements. In addition to meeting these requirements, potential candidates must have extensive experience in direct U.S. Federal Government contracting/assistance and clearly demonstrate professional and ethical behavior. When reviewing applications for a CCN PSC warrant, the Agency contacts past performance references (typically, the candidate's last three Supervisory Contracting Officers) and any other sources deemed appropriate for signs of potential risks or cautions that may be detrimental to the responsibilities inherent in this Program. The candidate's supervisor must also attest to the candidate's education, training, experience, business acumen, judgment, character, reputation and ethical behavior.
        Additionally, the Program requires the CCN contracting officer's supervisor to closely and frequently monitor the CCN PSC's work and review performance and progress every six months. The review includes an assessment of all actions where the warrant was used. This review is followed by periodic reviews conducted by the Bureau for Management, Office of Acquisition and Assistance, Evaluation Division, which is responsible for the program implementation.

        Warranted CCN PSCs will support the functions of the overseas Mission's Office of Acquisition & Assistance (A&A), which typically include acquisition and assistance awards implementing the Agency's foreign assistance programs and activities. In part to mitigate litigation risks, warranted CCN PSCs are currently not delegated authority to make new awards or execute any personal services contracts. The program also limits delegated authority for select contract administration functions listed in (48 CFR) FAR 42.302(a), specifically, the contracting officer functions in which disputes or possible legal challenges may arise due to decisions of the contracting officer, functions related to novation and contractor name changes, which may be a result of changes in a contractor's business structure as governed under applicable U.S. state law and other functions based on U.S. state laws, functions related to small business contracting matters and those requiring extensive knowledge of specific U.S. laws and government-wide policies not specifically related to contracting. Accordingly, the functions specified in items 5-7, 9-12, 18, 21-26, 29, 32, 50, 52-55, 62-63, 66 and 68-71 of (48 CFR) FAR 42.302(a) will not be redelegated to CCN PSC contracting officers.

        To address conflict of interest and procurement integrity concerns, the program relies on the standard clause entitled “Compliance with Laws and Regulations Applicable Abroad”, included in all personal services contracts with CCNs, that mandates compliance with the Standards of Conduct for Executive Branch Employees. These standards, available at https://www2.oge.gov/web/oge.nsf/All%20Documents/5D633072D0B2DB5085257E96006A90E7?opendocument, contain two provisions addressing financial interests that conflict with an individual's official duties. The first provision, entitled “Disqualifying financial interests,” prohibits an employee from participating in an official government capacity in a matter in which he has a financial interest or in which his spouse, minor child, employer, or any one of several other specified persons has a financial interest. The second provision, entitled “Prohibited financial interests,” contains authority by which agencies may prohibit employee from acquiring or retaining certain financial interests.
        To address the security concerns, the Program uses the current process, in which the USAID Office of Security and Department of State Office of Security conduct background checks on potential personal service contractors.
        Recognizing the fact that some countries may not have adequate legal systems or may be unwilling to provide assistance in prosecuting or defending their citizens for alleged U.S. procurement infractions, the CCN PSC Warrant Program established the following management controls designed to minimize the risk that such legal actions might be necessary:

        —Stringent eligibility criteria,
        —Inability for CCN PSCs to enter into new awards,
        —CCN participation in this program is limited to two candidates per overseas mission. This limitation may be expanded only if it is deemed by the Senior Procurement Executive to be in the best interest of the Agency.
        —Ongoing risk assessments are performed throughout the Program implementation to assure compliance with the program requirements. The warrant program may be revised as a result of these assessments.

          Regulatory authorities and limitations.

        (48 CFR) FAR part 1 establishes the authority for Agency heads to select and appoint contracting officers and it does not specify that contracting officers must be U.S. citizen direct-hire employees of the Federal government. (48 CFR) FAR subpart 7.5 includes contracting officer duties in the list of inherently governmental functions or functions that must be treated as such, but does not exclude personal services contractors hired under a statutory authority from performing such functions.
        (48 CFR) AIDAR 701.603-70 currently limits delegations of contracting officer authorities to U.S. citizen direct-hire employees of the U.S. Government as a matter of Agency policy. However, section 4(b)(3) of (48 CFR) AIDAR Appendix D and the corresponding section of Appendix J contain an exception for PSCs to be delegated authority to sign obligating and subobligating documents with approval from the Assistant Administrator for the Bureau of Management.
        In September 2014, USAID issued a two-year class deviation from 48 CFR AIDAR 701.603-70 to establish the permanent CCN PSC warrant program to allow a limited number of selected and qualified CCN PSCs to be delegated contracting officer authorities. In conjunction with the approval of the class deviation described above, the Assistant Administrator for the Bureau for Management (AA/M) approved a class exception to the limitations in (48 CFR) AIDAR Appendix J4(b)(3). Subsequent two-year class deviations were issued for the CCN warrant program in September 2016 and September 2018. The September 2018 class deviation also allows for the designation of US PSCs as contracting officers without requiring prior approval from AA/M. By this rule USAID is proposing to revise (48 CFR) AIDAR to permanently authorize delegation of contracting/agreement officer authorities to a limited number of selected and qualified US PSCs and CCN PSCs.
        USAID is seeking public comments on the proposed changes to the AIDAR. These proposed changes will eliminate the need for an exception from AA/M currently required before the Director, Bureau for Management, Office of Acquisition and Assistance (M/OAA Director) can designate qualified US and CCN PSCs as contracting/agreement officers. The proposed changes also eliminate the need for a class deviation from AIDAR 701.603-70. As the M/OAA Director both approves AIDAR class deviations and delegates individual warrant authority this proposed change will eliminate a redundancy in the designation of qualified US and CCN PSCs as contracting/agreement officers.
        C. Impact Assessment
        (1) Regulatory Planning and Review. Under E.O. 12866, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) has determined this regulatory action is “significant” and therefore subject to the requirements of the E.O. and subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OIRA has determined that this Rule is not an “economically significant regulatory action” under Section 3(f)(1) of E.O. 12866. This proposed rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.
        This rule codifies the Agency's deviation from the current rule in the CFR. The costs calculated in this section are based on conservative estimates to illustrate the impact of these revisions from the baseline costs of the current rule. The proposed rule's cost benefit is due to the ability to designate CCN PSCs as Contracting Officers, eliminating the need to assign a warranted Foreign Service Officers (FSOs) to a Mission. It costs the Agency approximately an average of $250,000 per year to post a warranted FSO to a Mission. This figure is based upon the Foreign Service pay scale and data from the Department of State's Office of Allowances.
        The Agency's warranted FSO staff is comprised of individuals at the FS-4 to the FS-1 grade levels with the majority at the FS-2 and FS-3 grade levels. The $250,000 figure assumes a base salary of $100,000, which is within an average range of the FS-2 and FS-3 grade levels. An FSO's annual compensation and benefits package easily exceeds this base salary and can vary based upon the FSO's number of dependents and a variety of allowances that may be claimed including cost of living allowance, post differential, danger pay, separate maintenance allowance, housing allowance, education allowance, home leave, etc. Based upon data pulled from the Department of State's Office of Allowances, $250,000 per annum is considered a conservative estimate of the cost to field a warranted FSO. Given that the Agency currently has eleven warranted CCN PSCs, this eliminates the need to post the equivalent number of warranted FSOs, resulting in annual cost savings to the Agency of approximately $2.75 million.
        The ability to issue a warrant to PSCs does not result in any increase in costs to the Agency. Eligible CCN PSCs live in country and are already working at the Missions. There is also no additional cost to the Agency to process a PSC warrant as compared to a US direct-hire employee.

        As a regulatory matter, the cost of the rule making process to incorporate these revisions into the regulation is justified. The Agency requires these revisions in order to eliminate the administrative burden of processing deviations and exceptions and to realize a cost savings resulting from the ability to issue CCN PSCs warrants.

        (2) Regulatory Flexibility Act. The rule will not have an impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq. Therefore, an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not been performed.
        (3) Paperwork Reduction Act. The proposed rule does not establish a new collection of information that requires the approval of the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35).

          List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 701 and Appendices D and J to Chapter 7

        Government procurement.
        For the reasons discussed in the preamble, USAID proposes to amend 48 CFR Chapter 7 as set forth below:
        1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 7 part 701 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
           Sec. 621, Pub. L. 87-195, 75 Stat. 445, (22 U.S.C. 2381) as amended; E.O. 12163, Sept. 29, 1979, 44 FR 56673; and 3 CFR 1979 Comp., p. 435.

          PART 701—FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION SYSTEM

            Subpart 701.6—Career Development, Contracting Authority, and Responsibilities

        2. Revise 701.603-70 to read as follows:

          701.603-70
           Designation of contracting officers.
          A contracting officer represents the U.S. Government through the exercise of his/her delegated authority to negotiate, sign, and administer contracts on behalf of the U.S. Government. The contracting officer's duties are sensitive, specialized, and responsible. To ensure proper accountability, and to preclude possible security, conflict of interest, or jurisdiction problems, USAID contracting officers must be U.S. citizen direct-hire employees of the U.S. Government. However, Director, Bureau for Management, Office of Acquisition and Assistance (M/OAA Director) may also designate a U.S. Personal Services Contractor (USPSC) or a Cooperating Country National Personal Services Contractor (CCNPSC) as a contracting officer with a specific level of warrant authority. To qualify for a designation as a contracting officer, an individual must meet the requirements in FAR subpart 1.6 and the Agency's applicable warrant program.

        3. In appendix D to chapter 7, revise paragraph 4(b)(3)b. and add paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows:
        Appendix D to Chapter 7—Direct USAID Contracts With a U.S. Citizen or a U.S. Resident Alien for Personal Services Abroad

            4—Policy * * *
          (b) * * *
          (3) * * *
          b. They may not be delegated authority to sign obligating or subobligating documents except when specifically designated as a contracting officer or an agreement officer in accordance FAR subpart 1.6 and the Agency's applicable warrant program.

          (4) Exceptions. The Assistant Administrator Bureau for Management (AA/M) must approve exceptions to the limitations in paragraph (b)(3). Approval of an exception by the AA/M is not required when the Director, Bureau for Management, Office of Acquisition and Assistance (M/OAA Director) designates a USPSC as a contracting officer or an agreement officer.

        4. In appendix J to chapter 7, under the heading “4. Policy,” revise paragraphs (b)(3)b. and (b)(4) to read as follows:
        Appendix J to Chapter 7—Direct USAID Contracts With a Cooperating Country National and With a Third Country National for Personal Services Abroad

            4—Policy

          (b) * * *
          (3) * * *
          b. They may not be delegated authority to sign obligating or subobligating documents except when a cooperating country national personal services contractor is specifically designated as a contracting officer or an agreement officer in accordance FAR subpart 1.6 and the Agency's applicable warrant program.

          (4) Exceptions. The Assistant Administrator Bureau for Management (AA/M) must approve exceptions to the limitations in paragraph (b)(3). Approval of an exception by the AA/M is not required when the Director, Bureau for Management, Office of Acquisition and Assistance (M/OAA Director) designates a cooperating country national personal services contractor as a contracting officer or an agreement officer.

          Mark Walther,
          Acting Chief Acquisition Officer.

      [FR Doc. 2019-12270 Filed 6-13-19; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 6116-01-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Parts 622, 635, 640, and 654
        [Docket No. 010410086-1086-01; I.D. 020801A]
        RIN 0648-AN83
        Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Amendment to the Fishery Management Plans of the Gulf of Mexico

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:

          NMFS issues this proposed rule to implement the Generic Amendment Addressing the Establishment of the Tortugas Marine Reserves in the Fishery Management Plans of the Gulf of Mexico (Tortugas Amendment), as prepared by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Gulf of Mexico Council).  This action would provide enhanced protections for existing marine reserves in the vicinity of the Dry Tortugas, Florida, and would be taken under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).  The proposed regulations would complement regulations previously issued by NOAA under the authority of the National Marine Sanctuary Act by better informing the public of applicable restrictions and providing enhanced enforcement authority and stricter penalties for violations.  Consistent with NOAA’s existing regulations, these regulations prohibit fishing for any species and anchoring by fishing vessels within the reserves.  The intended effect is to inform the public of these restrictions and to further protect and conserve important marine resources.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received on or before March 25, 2002.

          ADDRESSES:
          Written comments on the proposed rule must be sent to Peter Eldridge, Southeast Regional Office, NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Drive N., St. Petersburg, FL  33702.  Comments may also be sent via fax to 727-570-5583.  Comments will not be accepted if submitted via e-mail or the Internet.Requests for copies of the Tortugas Amendment, which includes a regulatory impact review (RIR), an initial regulatory flexibility analysis (IRFA), and a final supplemental environmental impact statement (FSEIS), should be sent to the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 3018 U.S. Highway 301 North, Suite 1000, Tampa, FL  33619-2266; phone:  813-228-2815; fax:  813-225-7015; e-mail:  gulf.council@noaa.gov.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Peter Eldridge, phone:  727-570-5305; fax:  727-570-5583; e-mail:  Peter.Eldridge@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The Dry Tortugas are located approximately 70 miles (112 km) west of Key West, a strategic location for a marine reserve.  The Dry Tortugas contain the healthiest coral reefs found in the Florida Keys.  Coral pinnacles as high as 40 feet (12 m), with the highest coral cover (over 30 percent) found in the Florida Keys, rise up from the ocean floor.  These coral formations are bathed by some of the cleanest waters found in the Florida Keys and occur where the tropical waters of the Caribbean mingle with the more temperate waters of the Gulf of Mexico.
        The Tortugas region is important because of its location and the resulting effect of unique oceanographic processes.  The Dry  Tortugas play a dynamic role in supporting marine ecosystems throughout south Florida and the Florida Keys.  Marine organisms that spawn in the Tortugas area produce larvae that are spread throughout the Keys by a persistent system of ocean eddies and currents.  As the larval stages of various species range in duration from hours for some coral species, to as much as a year for spiny lobster, these eddies and currents provide the retention time in the water column and current pathways necessary for successful recruitment for numerous species.  In addition, the upwelling and convergence of the ocean currents in the Dry Tortugas area act to concentrate food supplies for the larvae of numerous animal species.
        The Tortugas region, relative to the rest of the Florida Keys, appears to have a greater population abundance and larger average individual size of many key species (e.g., groupers, snappers, and lobster).  However, throughout the Florida Keys, including the Tortugas region, there appears to be an overfishing problem.  Furthermore, the coral resources of the Florida Keys are under significant ecological stress resulting from coastal development and fishing activities (e.g., sedimentation and pollution, and fishing gear impacts).
        The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) is managed under NOAA’s National Ocean Service.  FKNMS managers completed a collaborative effort with the State of Florida, the Dry Tortugas National Park (managed by the National Park Service), and NMFS to establish the boundaries for two inter-jurisdictional marine reserves known as Tortugas North ecological reserve and Tortugas South ecological reserve.  The Tortugas North ecological reserve encompasses an area of 120 square nautical miles (nm2); the Tortugas Amendment affects a 13 nm2 portion of this reserve located in the EEZ.  The Tortugas South ecological reserve encompasses 60 nm2 , totally located in the EEZ; the Tortugas Amendment includes this entire area.  The Tortugas South ecological reserve includes the Riley’s Hump mutton snapper spawning aggregation site proposed by the Gulf of Mexico Council and approved and implemented by NMFS in 1994.
        Based on available literature, these two marine reserves are expected to supply adults and larvae to adjacent areas.  Additional expected benefits of the Tortugas marine reserves include the  following:  Establishment of a refuge and replenishment area to ensure continued abundance and diversity of coral reef resources; protection of critical fish spawning stock biomass and recruits from overfishing; physical protection of the coral reef structures; and “spillover” effects wherein organisms, such as fish, move from within to outside the reserve area, thereby providing improved fishing opportunities in the vicinity of the reserve.
        The Gulf of Mexico fisheries for coastal migratory pelagics, coral and coral reefs, red drum, reef fish, shrimp, spiny lobster, and stone crab are managed under fishery management plans (FMPs) prepared by the Gulf of Mexico Council and approved and implemented by NMFS.  These FMPs were prepared by the Gulf of Mexico Council, except for the FMPs for coastal migratory pelagics and spiny lobster, which were prepared jointly by the Gulf of Mexico Council and the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (South Atlantic Council).
        The Tortugas Amendment implemented by this rule amends the following FMPs to provide additional protections in the portion of the Tortugas North ecological reserve that falls within the Gulf of Mexico exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and in the Tortugas South ecological reserve, which resides entirely within the EEZ:  Fishery Management Plan for Coral and Coral Reefs of the Gulf of Mexico; Fishery Management Plan for the Red Drum Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Fishery Management Plan for the Stone Crab Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Fishery Management Plan for the Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico; Fishery Management Plan for Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic; and Fishery Management Plan for the Spiny Lobster Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic.  All of these FMPs, except the FMPs for spiny lobster and stone crab, are implemented under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act by regulations at 50 CFR part 622.  The FMP for spiny lobster is implemented by regulations at 50 CFR part 640; the FMP for stone crab is implemented by regulations at 50 CFR part 654.

        The approved measures of the Tortugas Amendment prohibit fishing for any species, other than Atlantic highly migratory species (Atlantic HMS), within these marine reserves.  Additionally, the amendment also prohibits anchoring by all fishing vessels within the marine reserves.  These fishing and anchoring prohibitions are intended to achieve the maximum benefits (see discussion above) from the two marine reserves over their initially anticipated duration of 10 years.
        Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS, acting on behalf of the Secretary of Commerce, has full management responsibility for Atlantic highly migratory species (HMS).  In its Tortugas Amendment, the Gulf of Mexico Council proposed that its fishing and anchoring prohibitions within the reserves apply to Atlantic HMS for several reasons, including significant enforcement considerations as well as the overall biological benefits to the marine reserve ecosystem.  The U.S. Coast Guard and NMFS advised the Council that unless fishing for all species and anchoring of all fishing vessels were prohibited within the Tortugas Reserves, there was no way to enforce adequately such prohibitions for just those species managed under the Gulf of Mexico Council’s FMPs.  Regarding the biological benefits of protecting Atlantic HMS species within the reserves, the region serves as a spawning ground for a variety of Atlantic HMS, including bluefin tuna.  The Tortugas region has also been identified under the Fishery Management Plan for Atlantic Tunas, Swordfish, and Sharks as constituting a portion of the essential fish habitat for several tuna species and a variety of shark species.  NMFS will consider the comments received on the Tortugas Amendment and on this proposed rule, which contains proposed regulatory language regarding the fishing and anchoring prohibitions as applied to Atlantic HMS.  NMFS may adopt fishing and anchoring prohibitions with respect to Atlantic HMS, within the two Reserves.
        The Tortugas Amendment protects the marine reserves for a period of at least 10 years, during which period the ecological benefits of the reserves will be evaluated.  The prohibition on fishing and anchoring of fishing vessels should minimize human disturbances in the Tortugas reserves and help to restore and maintain their ecological integrity, including a full assemblage of fish, coral, and other benthic invertebrates.  The reserves will also create a reference or baseline area for studying human impacts on coral reef ecosystems.

        After NMFS published a notice of availability of the Gulf of Mexico Council’s Tortugas Amendment for  public comment in the Federal Register on March 7, 2001 (66 FR 13692).  On June 6, 2001, NMFS approved those Tortugas Amendment management measures that amend the following FMPs:  Fishery Management Plan for Coral and Coral Reefs of the Gulf of Mexico; Fishery Management Plan for the Red Drum Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Fishery Management Plan for the Stone Crab Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Fishery Management Plan for the Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; and Fishery Management Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico.  However, the Tortugas Amendment’s proposed measures that would amend the two FMPs prepared jointly (joint FMPs) by the Gulf of Mexico Council and the South Atlantic Council (namely, the Fishery Management Plan for Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic and the Fishery Management Plan for the Spiny Lobster Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic) had not yet been adopted by the South Atlantic Council.  Therefore, those measures were not eligible for Secretarial review and approval under the Magnuson-Stevens Act at the time the Gulf of Mexico Council submitted its Tortugas amendment to NMFS.
        At its meeting of June 18-23, 2001, the South Atlantic Council adopted the measures that would amend the two joint FMPs.  Based on this action, NMFS determined that these measures had been properly submitted by the Gulf of Mexico Council and South Atlantic Council and could be reviewed and, if approved, implemented.  Accordingly, on July 19, 2001, NMFS published a notice of availability of these amendment measures for public comment through September 17, 2001 (66 FR 37635).  On October 16, 2001, NMFS approved the measures amending the Fishery Management Plan for Coastal Migratory Pelagic Resources of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic and the Fishery Management Plan for the Spiny Lobster Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic.
        This proposed rule includes all Tortugas Amendment measures that NMFS approved on June 6, 2001, and October 16, 2001.  All comments received by NMFS on the Tortugas Amendment, under both  current and previous Secretarial review periods, or on this proposed rule during its comment period will be summarized and addressed in the preamble of the final rule issued to implement the amendment’s approved measures.
        Classification
        NMFS has determined that the Tortugas Amendment is consistent with the national standards of the Magnuson-Stevens Act and other applicable law.
        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 that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, as follows:

          The proposed rule would enhance protections for two existing marine reserves in the vicinity of the Dry Tortugas, Florida, under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Management Act, complementing regulations already established under the authority of the National Marine Sanctuary Act (NMSA).

          The regulations proposed by the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) and published in the Federal Register on May 18, 2000 (65 FR 31634) were made effective on March 8, 2001 (66 FR 16120).  Those regulations currently prohibit all commercial and recreational fishing as well as anchoring of all vessels (including fishing vessels) within the area of the reserves affected by this action.
          While the FKNMS regulations currently prohibit all commercial and recreational fishing, which results in the protection and conservation of important marine resources, there are additional benefits from implementing complementary regulations under the Magnuson-Stevens Act via this proposed rule.  The Magnuson-Stevens Act is the primary source of authority for regulating Federal fisheries.  Public awareness, particularly of commercial and recreational fishermen that utilize the affected areas, would likely be increased through the adoption of this proposed action.  Increased enforcement and stricter penalties for violations would be available under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
          The Council initially prepared an IRFA, prior to effectiveness of NOAA’s NMSA regulations.  However, since the preparation of this IRFA, the NOAA’s NMSA regulations became effective, rendering the basis for and conclusions of the IRFA moot.  Nevertheless, the following summary of the initial IRFA is included to provide historical context on the use of the Tortugas area by commercial entities:

          This proposed rule is being considered because several fish species within the Gulf of Mexico are overfished and because there is a need to protect coral and coral reef habitats.  The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires the Council to take action to prevent overfishing and to protect essential fish habitat (EFH).  The establishment of two marine reserves in the vicinity of the Dry Tortugas contributes to these objectives.  Although the Tortugas North and Tortugas South marine ecological reserves are being established under the initiative of the FKNMS, about 48 percent of the proposed marine reserve area is within the Council's jurisdiction.  The IRFA indicates that up to 12 for-hire vessels, mainly dive boats, would be affected by the proposed action.  In addition, about 164 commercial vessels, mainly shrimp and reef fish vessels, would be directly affected by the proposed rule.  About 11 percent of the annual for-hire revenues of $1.4 million and about 12 percent of the annual commercial revenues of $6.9 million could be negatively affected by the establishment of the marine reserves.  No additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance costs were identified, and no duplicative, overlapping, or conflicting Federal rules were identified.  Note that the findings of the original IRFA are no longer applicable because of the implementation of the FKNMS regulations.
          The determination of significant economic impact can be ascertained by examining two criteria, disproportionality and profitability.  The disproportionality question is:  do the regulations place a substantial number of small entities at a significant competitive disadvantage compared to large entities?  All entities affected by this proposed rule are classified as small entities.  Thus, the issue of disproportionality is irrelevant in the present case.
          The profitability question is:  do the regulations significantly reduce profit for a substantial number of small entities?  As fishing businesses engaged in the Tortugas area have already been displaced by regulations implemented by the FKNMS, these entities will not experience any significant or adverse economic impacts as a result of this rule.

        Accordingly, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis was not required for this proposed rule.  However, copies of the RIR and original IRFA are available (see ADDRESSES).

        The Council prepared a final supplemental environmental impact statement (FSEIS) for the FMP that was filed with the Environmental Protection Agency for public review and comment.  A notice of its availability for public comment for 30 days was published in the Federal Register on March 16, 2001 (66 FR 15241).  According to the FSEIS, the elimination of consumptive uses within the marine reserves will protect EFH from fishery-related impacts and eliminate fishing mortality.  Establishment of the marine reserves may result in many benefits to the ecosystem, including increased size and abundance of marine species.  This may potentially improve reproductive success which could enhance recruitment to other areas of the Gulf of Mexico and the Florida Keys.  The FSEIS states that although commercial and recreational fishermen could experience increased costs because of further restrictions on their activities within the marine reserves, they and non-consumptive users are expected to realize long-term benefits resulting from the maintenance of healthy and diverse marine ecosystems.  It is noted that following NMFS’ publication in the Federal Register of the notice of availability of the Tortugas Amendment for public comment, the FKNMS regulations became effective, thereby prohibiting all commercial and recreational fishing in the marine reserve areas.  Accordingly, this proposed rule should not impact commercial and recreational fishermen in terms of a new prohibition on fishing and anchoring in the reserves.

          List of Subjects
          50 CFR Part 622
          Fisheries, Fishing, Puerto Rico, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Virgin Islands.
          50 CFR Part 635
          Fisheries, Fishing, Fishing vessels, Foreign relations, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Statistics, Treaties.
          50 CFR Part 640
          Fisheries, Fishing, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
          50 CFR Part 654
          Fisheries, Fishing.

          Dated: February 1, 2002.
          William T. Hogarth,
          Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

          For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 622, 635, 640, and 654 are proposed to be amended as follows:

            PART 622—FISHERIES OF THE CARIBBEAN, GULF, 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 § 622.34, paragraph (d) is revised to read as follows:

            § 622.34
            Gulf EEZ seasonal and/or area closures.

            (d) Tortugas marine reserves. The following activities are prohibited within the Tortugas marine reserves:  Fishing for any species and anchoring by fishing vessels.
            (1) EEZ portion of Tortugas North. The area is bounded by rhumb lines connecting the following points:  From point A at 24°40′00″ N. lat., 83°06′00″ W. long. to point B at 24°46′00″ N. lat., 83°06′00″ W. long. to point C at 24°46′00″ N. lat., 83°00′00″ W. long.; thence along the line denoting the seaward limit of Florida’s waters, as shown on the current edition of NOAA chart 11438, to point A at 24°40′00″ N. lat., 83°06′00″ W. long.
            (2) Tortugas South. The area is bounded by rhumb lines connecting, in order, the following points:

                Point
                North lat.
                West long.

                A
                24°33′00″
                83°09′00″

                B
                24°33′00″
                83°05′00″

                C
                24°18′00″
                83°05′00″

                D
                24°18′00″
                83°09′00″

                A
                24°33′00″
                83°09′00″

            PART 635—ATLANTIC HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES

          3.  The authority citation for part 635 continues to read as follows:

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

          4.  In § 635.21, paragraph (a)(3) is added to read as follows:

            § 635.21
            Gear operation and deployment restrictions.
            (a) * * *
            (3) No person may fish for, catch, possess or retain any Atlantic highly migratory species or anchor a fishing vessel in the areas designated at § 622.34(d) of this chapter.

          5.  In § 635.71, paragraph (a)(35) is added to read as follows:

            § 635.71
            Prohibitions.

            (a) * * *
            (35) Deploy or fish with any fishing gear from a vessel or anchor a fishing vessel in any closed area as specified at § 635.21.

            PART 640—SPINY LOBSTER FISHERY OF THE GULF OF MEXICO AND SOUTH ATLANTIC

          6.  The authority citation for part 640 continues to read as follows:

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

          7.  In § 640.7, paragraph (v) is added to read as follows:

            § 640.7
            Prohibitions.

          (v) Fish for any species or anchor a fishing vessel in a marine reserve as specified in § 640.26.

          8.  Section 640.26 is added to subpart B to read as follows:

            § 640.26
            Tortugas marine reserves.

          The following activities are prohibited within the Tortugas marine reserves:  Fishing for any species and anchoring by fishing vessels.
          (a) EEZ portion of Tortugas North. The area is bounded by rhumb lines connecting the following points:  From point A at 24°40′00″ N. lat., 83°06′00″ W. long. to point B at 24°46′00″ N. lat., 83°06′00″ W. long. to point C at 24°46′00″ N. lat., 83°00′00″ W. long.; thence along the line denoting the seaward limit of Florida’s waters, as shown on the current edition of NOAA chart 11438, to point A at 24°40′00″ N. lat., 83°06′00″ W. long.
          (b) Tortugas South. The area is bounded by rhumb lines connecting, in order, the following points:

              Point
              North lat.
              West long.

              A
              24°33′00″
              83°09′00″

              B
              24°33′00″
              83°05′00″

              C
              24°18′00″
              83°05′00″

              D
              24°18′00″
              83°09′00″

              A
              24°33′00″
              83°09′00″

            PART 654—STONE CRAB FISHERY OF THE GULF OF MEXICO

          9.  The authority citation for part 654 continues to read as follows:

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

          10.  In § 654.7, paragraph (o) is added to read as follows:

            § 654.7
            Prohibitions.

            (o) Fish for any species or anchor a fishing vessel in a marine reserve as specified in § 654.28.

          11.  Section 654.28 is added to subpart B to read as follows:

            § 654.28
            Tortugas marine reserves.
            The following activities are prohibited within the Tortugas marine reserves:  Fishing for any species and anchoring by fishing vessels.
            (a) EEZ portion of Tortugas North. The area is bounded by rhumb lines connecting the following points:  From point A at 24°40′00″ N. lat., 83°06′00″ W. long. to point B at 24°46′00″ N. lat., 83°06′00″ W. long. to point C at 24°46′00″ N. lat., 83°00′00″ W. long.; thence along the line denoting the seaward limit of Florida’s waters, as shown on the current edition of NOAA chart 11438, to point A at 24°40′00″ N. lat., 83°06′00″ W. long.
            (b) Tortugas South. The area is bounded by rhumb lines connecting, in order, the following points:

                Point
                North lat.
                West long.

                A
                24°33′00″
                83°09′00″

                B
                24°33′00″
                83°05′00″

                C
                24°18′00″
                83°05′00″

                D
                24°18′00″
                83°09′00″

                A
                24°33′00″
                83°09′00″

      [FR Doc. 02-2997 Filed 2-6-02; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE  3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Parts 222 and 223
        [I.D. 101701B]
        RIN 0648-AN62
        Endangered and Threatened Wildlife; Sea Turtle Conservation Requirements

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

          ACTION:
          Public hearing notice.

          SUMMARY:

          Notice is hereby given that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce, will hold public hearings for the purpose of receiving comments on the proposed rule to amend the regulations protecting sea turtles to enhance their effectiveness in reducing sea turtle mortality resulting from shrimp trawling in the Atlantic and Gulf Areas of the southeastern United States, published in the Federal Register on October 2, 2001.  Turtle excluder devices (TEDs) have proven to be effective at excluding sea turtles from shrimp trawls; however, NMFS has determined that modifications to the design of TEDs need to be made to exclude leatherbacks and large, sexually mature loggerhead and green turtles; several approved TED designs are structurally weak and do not function properly under normal fishing conditions; and modifications to the trynet and bait shrimp exemptions to the TED requirements are necessary to decrease lethal take of sea turtles.  These proposed amendments are necessary to protect endangered and threatened sea turtles in the Atlantic and Gulf Areas.

          DATES:
          See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific dates, times and addresses of the hearings.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Robert Hoffman (ph. 727-570-5312, fax 727-570-5517, e-mail Robert.Hoffman@noaa.gov), or Therese A. Conant (ph. 301-713-1401, fax 301-713-0376, e-mail Therese.Conant@noaa.gov).

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The hearings are scheduled as follows:
        1.  October 24, 2001 at 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., Madeira Beach, FL
        2.  November 1, 2001, at 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., Charleston, SC
        3.  November 5, 2001, at 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., Beaufort, NC
        4.  November 5, 2001, at 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., Kenner, LA
        5.  November 6, 2001, at 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., Brunswick, GA
        6.  November 7, 2001, at 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., Galveston, TX
        7.  November 8, 2001, at 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., Port Isabel, TX
        8.  November 9, 2001, at 7 p.m. to 9 p.m., Cocoa, FL
        The hearings will be held in the following locations:
        1. Madeira Beach City Hall, 300 Municipal Dr., Madeira Beach, FL 33708
        2. South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, Marine Resources Research Institute Main Auditorium, 217 Fort Johnson Rd., Charleston, SC 29412
        3. Duke Marine Laboratory, I.E. Grey Library Auditorium Building, 135 Duke Marine Lab Rd., Beaufort, NC 28516
        4. Airport Hilton, Main Ballroom, 901 Airline Dr., Kenner, LA 70062
        5. University of Georgia, Marine Extension Service Office, 715 Bay St., Brunswick, GA 31520
        6. Texas A&M University, Classroom Laboratory Building, Room 100, 200 Seawolf Parkway, Galveston, TX 77553
        7. Laguna Madre Learning Center at the Port Isabel High School Lecture Hall, Highway 100, Port Isabel, TX 78578
        8. Brevard Agricultural Center Auditorium, 3695 Lake Dr., Cocoa, FL 32926

          Dated: October 16, 2001.
          Wanda L. Cain,
          Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 01-26552 Filed 10-19-01; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE  3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
        Defense Acquisition Regulations System
        48 CFR Parts 202, 212, 215, and 252
        RIN 0750-AI64
        Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Evaluating Reasonableness of Price for Commercial Items (DFARS Case 2013-D034)

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; extension of comment period.

          SUMMARY:
          DoD issued a proposed rule (DFARS Case 2013-D034) on August 3, 2015 to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement a section of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013. The comment period on the proposed rule is being reopened and the deadline for submitting comments is being extended to November 13, 2015.

          DATES:
          For the proposed rule published on August 3, 2015 (80 FR 45918), submit comments by November 13, 2015.

          ADDRESSES:
          Submit comments identified by DFARS Case 2013-D034, using any of the following methods:
          ○ Regulations.gov: http://www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by entering “DFARS Case 2013-D034” under the heading “Enter keyword or ID” and selecting “Search.” Select the link “Submit a Comment” that corresponds with “DFARS Case 2013-D034.” Follow the instructions provided at the “Submit a Comment” screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and “DFARS Case 2013-D034” on your attached document.
          ○ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include DFARS Case 2013-D034 in the subject line of the message.
          ○ Fax: 571-372-6094.
          ○ Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Mr. Mark Gomersall, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP/DARS, Room 3B855, 3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3060.

          Comments received generally will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting (except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail).

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Mr. Mark Gomersall, telephone 571-372-6099.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        I. Background
        On August 3, 2015, DoD published a proposed rule in the Federal Register at 80 FR 45918 to implement section 831 of the NDAA for FY 2013. Section 831 requires the issuance of guidance on the use of the authority to require the submission of other than cost or pricing data. The comment period for the proposed rule, which closed on October 2, 2015, is being reopened to provide additional time for interested parties to submit comments on the proposed rule. The deadline for submission of public comments is extended to November 13, 2015.

          List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 202, 212, 215, and 252
          Government procurement.

          Jennifer L. Hawes,
          Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

      [FR Doc. 2015-26044 Filed 10-9-15; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 5006-01-P