        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Transit Administration
        49 CFR Part 661
        [Docket No. FTA-2008-0057]
        RIN 2132-AA99
        Buy America Requirements; Bi-Metallic Composite Conducting Rail

          AGENCY:
          Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOT.

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

          SUMMARY:
          Following the two recent Buy America rulemakings pursuant to the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) received a petition for reconsideration of the treatment of bi-metallic composite conducting rail as a steel product that must be manufactured in the United States.
          At present, FTA's Buy America regulation treats both running rail and contact rail as a steel or iron product which must be manufactured entirely in the United States. During the recent rulemakings, several commenters proposed that bi-metallic rail be instead categorized as “traction power equipment.” If adopted, the proposal would have changed the regulatory treatment of contact rail based on the rail's composition. As traction power equipment, bi-metallic rail would have been subject to a lower 60 percent domestic content requirement, in contrast to running rail made of steel and iron, which must contain 100 percent domestic content. In addition, as traction power equipment, bi-metallic rail would be subject only to “final assembly” in the United States, which may be a less rigorous process than the manufacturing process required for other forms of power rail, including steel and iron.
          Because FTA believed adopting the proposal in the Final Rule would have altered the regulatory environment for affected parties who may have been unaware of the proposal, including manufacturers of steel and iron contact rail, without subjecting the issue to full notice-and-comment from all affected parties, FTA declined to adopt the proposal, instead deferring action to this separate rulemaking.
          Through this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NRPM), FTA proposes to amend its Buy America regulations to re-categorize bi-metallic composite conducting rail as “traction power equipment” which need only consist of 60 percent domestic content, with final assembly taking place in the United States.

          DATES:
          Comments must be submitted on or before January 23, 2009. Late filed comments will be considered to the extent practicable.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments [identified by DOT DMS Docket Number FTA-2008-0057] by any of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
          • Mail: Docket Management Facility: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
          • Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
          • Fax: 202-493-2251.
          See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for more information on submitting comments.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Richard Wong, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Transit Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366-4011 or Richard.Wong@dot.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

          Instructions for submitting comments: You must include the agency name (Federal Transit Administration) and Docket number (FTA-2008-0057) or the Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for this rulemaking at the beginning of your comments. You should submit two copies of your comments if you submit them by mail. If you wish to receive confirmation that FTA received your comments, you must include a self-addressed stamped postcard. Note that all comments received will be posted, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov including any personal information provided and will be available to Internet users. You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477) or you may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

        I. Background

        On November 28, 2005, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register (70 FR 71246) that discussed several proposals mandated by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (Pub. L. 109-59, August 10, 2005), and proposed to provide further clarification of existing FTA decisions on Buy America.

        During the open comment period, several commenters recommended that aluminum composite conducting rail, otherwise known as Bimetallic Power Transmission (BPTS) equipment, which is a combination of an aluminum conductor and a stainless steel abrasion-resistant cap, be added to the list of traction power equipment in 49 CFR 661.11(v) because of its power-delivery function as part of the traction power system. However, FTA's current regulation at 49 CFR 661.11(w) states that “[t]he power or third rail is not considered traction power equipment and is thus subject to the requirements of 49 U.S.C. 5323(j) and the requirements of 49 CFR 661.5.” In other words, any rail used to provide power must be produced in the United States, which includes all manufacturing processes except for metallurgical processes involving refinement of steel additives.
        According to commenters supporting the proposal, BPTS is a “new power transmission product developed to address the needs of modern traction power systems” that offers a higher conductivity (2.5 times greater) combined with a lighter weight (three times lighter) when compared with steel. They stated that BPTS is part of an “integrated electrical transmission system or an integrated equipment configuration rather than a third rail” and that FTA needed to update its regulations to reflect changes in new technology.
        In its September 20, 2007 Final Rule (72 FR 53688), FTA stated that it believed that the commenters' recommendations went beyond the scope of the rulemaking. The NPRM narrowly asked whether specific items should be added to the list of traction power equipment in section 661.11(v). The commenters' recommendation, if adopted, not only would have amended section 661.11(v) to include an item not proposed in the initial NPRM but also would have required a modification to the regulatory classification of rail in section 661.5 of the existing rule. Adopting these changes which were not proposed in the NPRM would not have provided other parties, specifically, firms manufacturing other types of power-conducting rail, to comment on the treatment of BPTS. Therefore, in the interest of fairness, FTA declined to make such a change in the 2007 Final Rule and instead is publishing this NPRM seeking public comment whether BPTS should continue to be covered as a manufactured product under section 661.5 or whether it should now be treated as traction power equipment under section 661.11(v).

        Currently, all power or third rails, regardless of whether made primarily from aluminum, steel, iron, or some other material, are excluded from the definition of “traction power equipment” and instead are subject to 49 CFR 661.5 as a steel or iron product. If the rail is made of any percentage of steel or iron, the product must comply with 49 CFR 661.5(c); thus, it must be manufactured in the United States. Under this NPRM, FTA is proposing to adopt the petitioner's proposal that BPTS be treated as traction power equipment which need only consist of 60 percent domestic content, with final assembly taking place in the United States.
        FTA seeks comments regarding this proposal—should BPTS be held to a lighter “final assembly” standard rather than the “manufacturing” standard? Should FTA maintain domestic origin requirements for both the steel and aluminum components of BPTS? How would the treatment of BPTS as traction power equipment affect domestic manufacturers of steel or iron conducting rail? Should all conducting rail be categorized as traction power equipment, without regard to composition? FTA asks that commenters offer any pertinent data or information in support of their views as to whether it is appropriate that BPTS be treated as traction power equipment rather than a manufactured rail product.
        Regulatory Analyses and Notices
        A. Statutory/Legal Authority
        Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures
        This NPRM is a nonsignificant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. This NPRM is also nonsignificant under the Regulatory Policies and Procedures of the Department of Transportation (44 FR 11034, Feb. 26, 1979). This NPRM imposes no new compliance costs on the regulated industry.
        B. Executive Order 13132
        This NPRM has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 (“Federalism”). This NPRM does not include any regulation that has substantial direct effects on the States, the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.
        C. Executive Order 13175
        This NPRM has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13175 (“Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments”). Because this NPRM does not have tribal implications and does not impose direct compliance costs, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply.
        D. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272
        The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-611) requires each agency to analyze regulations and proposals to assess their impact on small businesses and other small entities to determine whether the rule or proposal will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This NPRM imposes no new costs. Therefore, FTA certifies that this proposal does not require further analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. FTA requests public comment on whether the proposals contained in this NPRM have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
        E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
        This NPRM does not propose unfunded mandates under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. If the proposals are adopted into a final rule, it will not result in costs of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation), in the aggregate, to any of the following: State, local, or Native American tribal governments, or the private sector.
        F. Paperwork Reduction Act
        This NPRM proposes no new information collection requirements.
        G. Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)
        A regulation identifier number (RIN) is assigned to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. The RIN number contained in the heading of this document may be used to cross-reference this action with the Unified Agenda.
        H. Environmental Assessment

        The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), requires Federal agencies to consider the consequences of major Federal actions and prepare a detailed statement on actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. There are no significant environmental impacts associated with this NPRM.

        I. Privacy Act

        Anyone is able to search the electronic form for all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comments (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.

          List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 661
          Grant programs—transportation, Public transportation, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

        Accordingly, for the reasons described in the preamble, 49 CFR part 661 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 661—BUY AMERICA REQUIREMENTS
          1. The authority citation for part 661 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            49 U.S.C. 5323(j) (formerly sec. 165, Pub. L. 97-424; as amended by sec.337, Pub. L. 100-17; sec.1048, Pub. L. 102-240; sec. 3020(b), Pub. L. 105-178; and sec. 3023(i) and (k), Pub. L. 109-59); 49 CFR 1.51.

          2. Revise Appendix A to § 661.3 to read as follows:

            § 661.3
            Definitions.

            Appendix A to § 661.3—End Products

              The following is a list of representative end products that are subject to the requirements of Buy America. This list is representative, not exhaustive.

              (1) Rolling stock end products: All individual items identified as rolling stock in § 661.3 (e.g., buses, vans, cars, railcars, locomotives, trolley cars and buses, ferry boats, as well as vehicles used for support services); train control, communication, and traction power equipment that meets the definition of end product at § 661.3 (e.g., a communication or traction power system, including manufactured bimetallic power rail).
              (2) Steel and iron end products: Items made primarily of steel or iron such as structures, bridges, and track work, including running rail, contact rail, and turnouts.
              (3) Manufactured end products: Infrastructure projects not made primarily of steel or iron, including structures (terminals, depots, garages, and bus shelters), ties and ballast; contact rail not made primarily of steel or iron; fare collection equipment; computers; information, security, and data processing equipment; mobile lifts, hoists, and elevators.

            3. Revise § 661.5, paragraph (c), to read as follows:

            § 661.5
            General requirements.

            (c) The steel and iron requirements apply to all construction materials made primarily of steel or iron and used in infrastructure projects such as transit or maintenance facilities, rail lines, and bridges. These items include, but are not limited to, structural steel or iron, steel or iron beams and columns, running rail and contact rail. These requirements do not apply to steel or iron used as components or subcomponents of other manufactured products or rolling stock, or to bimetallic power rail incorporating steel or iron components.

            4. Amend § 661.11 by adding paragraph (v)(31) to read as follows:

            § 661.11
            Rolling stock procurements.

            (v) * * *
            (31) Bimetallic power rail.

            Issued in Washington, DC this 14th day of November 2008.
            James S. Simpson,
            Administrator.

       [FR Doc. E8-27820 Filed 11-21-08; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-57-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Aviation Administration
        14 CFR Part 71
        [Airspace Docket No. 01-ASO-19]
        Proposed Establishment of Class E5 Airspace; Batesville, MS

          AGENCY:
          Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

          ACTION:
          Notice of proposed rulemaking.

          SUMMARY:
          This notice proposes to establish Class E5 airspace at Batesville, MS. A Localizer (LOC)/Distance Measuring Equipment (DME) Runway (RWY) 19, a Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) RWY 1 and a RNAV (GPS) RWY 19 Standard Instrument Approach Procedures (SIAP) have been developed for Panola County Airport, Batesville, MS. As a result, controlled airspace extending upward from 700 feet Above Ground Level (AGL) is needed to contain the SIAP and other Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at Panola County Airport. The operating status of the airport would change from Visual Flight Rules (VFR) to include IFR operations concurrent with the publication of the SIAP.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before February 4, 2002.

          ADDRESSES:
          Send comments on the proposal in triplicate to: Federal Aviation Administration, Docket No. 01-ASO-19, Manager, Airspace Branch, ASO-520, PO Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320.
          The official docket may be examined in the Office of the Regional Counsel for Southern Region, Room 550, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337, telephone (404) 305-5627.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Walter R. Cochran, Manager, Airspace Branch, Air Traffic Division, Federal Aviation Administration, PO Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320; telephone (404) 305-5627.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Comments Invited
        Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking  by submitting such written data, views or arguments as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal. Communications should identify the airspace docket number and be submitted in triplicate to the address listed above. Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with those comments as self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to Airspace Docket No. 01-ASO-19.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter. All communications received before the specified closing date for comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the comments received. All comments submitted will be available for examination in the Office of Regional Counsel for Southern Region, Room 550, 1701 Columbia Avenue, College Park, Georgia 30337, both before and after the closing date for comments. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.
        Availability of NPRMs
        Any person may obtain a copy of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) by submitting a request to the Federal Aviation Administration, Manager, Airspace Branch, ASO-520, Air Traffic Division, PO Box 20636, Atlanta Georgia 30320. Communications must identify the notice number of this NPRM. Persons interested in being placed on a mailing list for future NPRMs should also request a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11-2A which describes the application procedure.
        The Proposal
        The FAA is considering an amendment to Part 71 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to establish Class E5 airspace at Batesville, MS. Class E airspace designations for airspace areas extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth are published in Paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9J, dated August 31, 2001, and effective September 16, 2001, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designation listed in this document would be published subsequently in the Order.
        The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to kept the operationally current. It, therefore, (1) is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic  procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

          List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
          Airspace, Incorporation by Reference, Navigation (Air).

        The Proposed Amendment
        In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

          PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS
          1. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:

            Authority:
            49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

            § 71.1
            [Amended]
            2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9J, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 31, 2001, and effective September 16, 2001, is amended as follows:

              Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward from 700 feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

              ASO MS E5 Batesville, MS [New]
              Panola County Airport, MS
              (Lat. 34°21′59″N, long. 89°54′32″W)

              That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile radius of Panola County Airport.

            Issued in College Park, Georgia, on December 20, 2001.
            Wade T. Carpenter,
            Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Southern Region.

      [FR Doc. 02-165  Filed 1-3-02; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-13-M


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 622
        [Docket No. 0906241088-91089-01]
        RIN 0648-AX92
        Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Commercial Sector of the Reef Fish, Queen Conch, and Spiny Lobster Fisheries of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands; Control Date

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

          ACTION:
          Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; consideration of a control date.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS announces that it is establishing a control date that may be used to control future access to the commercial sector of the reef fish, queen conch, and spiny lobster fisheries operating in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the U.S. Caribbean. If changes to the management regime are developed and implemented under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), a control date could be used to limit the number of participants in these fisheries. This announcement is intended, in part, to promote awareness of the potential eligibility criteria for future access so as to discourage speculative entry into the fisheries while the Caribbean Fishery Management Council (Council) and NMFS consider whether and how access to the commercial sector of the reef fish, queen conch, or spiny lobster fishery should be controlled.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received by August 7, 2009.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments, identified by RIN 0648-AX92, may be submitted by any one of the following methods:

          • Electronic submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov.

          • Mail: Jason Rueter, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, Sustainable Fisheries Division, 263 13th Avenue South, Saint Petersburg, Florida 33701.

          Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

          To submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov enter “NOAA-NMFS-2009-0137” in the keyword search, then select “Send a Comment or Submission.” NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the required fields, if you wish to remain anonymous). You may submit attachments to electronic comments in Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Jason Rueter; phone 727-824-5305; fax 727-824-5308; or Graciela Garcia-Moliner; phone 787-766-5927; fax 787-766-6239.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The commercial sector of the U.S. Caribbean reef fish fishery is managed under the Fishery Management (FMP) Plan for the Reef Fish Resources of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, the commercial sector of the U.S. Caribbean queen conch fishery is managed under the FMP for the Queen Conch Resources of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the commercial sector of the U.S. Caribbean spiny lobster fishery is managed under the FMP for the Spiny Lobster Resources of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The FMPs were prepared by the Council, and implemented under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

        This notice would inform participants in the U.S. Caribbean reef fish, queen conch, and spiny lobster fisheries of the Council's intentions to consider limiting access within the commercial sector of the U.S. Caribbean reef fish, queen conch, or spiny lobster fisheries. Specifically, the Council may consider requiring a permit that would limit fishing in the EEZ to only those participants that have catch histories in excess of some minimum landings threshold or to those participants who possess a valid Territorial/Commonwealth Permit. Should the Council take such future action to further restrict participation in the commercial sector of the U.S. Caribbean reef fish, queen conch, or spiny lobster fishery, it intends to use March 24, 2009, as a possible control date regarding the eligibility of catch histories. This date was announced at the Council's March 2009 meeting. Publication of the control date in the Federal Register informs participants of the Council's considerations, and gives notice to anyone entering the fisheries after the control date they would not be assured of future access should a management regime be implemented using the control date as a means to restrict participation. Implementation of any such program would require preparation of an amendment to the FMPs and subsequent rulemaking with appropriate public comment periods.
        Consideration of a control date does not commit the Council or NMFS to any particular management regime or criteria for eligibility in the commercial sector of the U.S. Caribbean reef fish, queen conch, or spiny lobster fishery. The Council may or may not make use of this control date as part of the qualifying criteria for participation in that sector of the fisheries. Fishermen are not guaranteed future participation in a fishery regardless of their entry date or intensity of participation in the fishery before or after the control date under consideration. The Council subsequently may choose a different control date or management regime that does not make use of a control date. The Council also may choose to take no further action to control entry or access to the fisheries, in which case the control date may be rescinded.

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

          Dated: July 1, 2009.
          John Oliver,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator For Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. E9-16069 Filed 7-7-09; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
        Defense Acquisition Regulations System
        48 CFR Parts 227, 239, and 252
        [Docket DARS-2019-0067]
        RIN 0750-AK87
        Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Noncommercial Computer Software (DFARS Case 2018-D018)

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

          ACTION:
          Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; notification of meeting.

          SUMMARY:
          DoD is seeking information that will assist in the development of a revision to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to implement a section of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018, which establishes considerations for the acquisition of all noncommercial computer software, related data and documentation, and associated license rights. In addition to the request for written comments on this advance notice of proposed rulemaking, DoD will hold a public meeting to hear the views of interested parties.

          DATES:

            Comment Date: Interested parties should submit written comments to the address shown below on or before March 16, 2020, to be considered in the formation of any proposed rule.

            Public Meeting Date: The public meeting will be held on February 18, 2020, from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m., Eastern time. The public meeting will end at the stated time, or when the discussion ends, whichever comes first. Further information for the public meeting may be found under the heading SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

            Registration Date: Registration to attend the public meeting must be received no later than close of business on February 11, 2020.

          ADDRESSES:

            Public Meeting: The public meeting will be held in the Pentagon Library and Conference Center (PLCC), Conference Room B6, 1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301. Conference Room B6 is located on the lower level of the PLCC.

            Submission of Comments: Submit written comments identified by DFARS Case 2018-D018, using any of the following methods:
          ○ Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Search for “DFARS Case 2018-D018.” Select “Comment Now” and follow the instructions provided to submit a comment. Please include “DFARS Case 2018-D018” on any attached documents.
          ○ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include DFARS Case 2018-D018 in the subject line of the message.
          ○ Fax: 571-372-6094.
          ○ Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Jennifer D. Johnson, OUSD(A&S)DPC/DARS, Room 3B941, 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:
          Ms. Jennifer D. Johnson, telephone 571-372-6100.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        I. Background
        DoD is seeking information from experts and interested parties in Government and the private sector that will assist in the development of a revision to the DFARS to implement 10 U.S.C. 2322a, which was added by section 871 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 (Pub. L. 115-91). Section 10 U.S.C. 2322a requires that, as part of any negotiation for an acquisition of noncommercial computer software, the Secretary of Defense consider to the maximum extent practicable during the appropriate time in the life cycle, all the noncommercial and related materials necessary to meet the needs of the agency. As a result, any noncommercial computer software or related materials identified should be acquired to the extent appropriate.
        II. Public Meeting
        DoD is hosting a public meeting to obtain the views of experts and interested parties in Government and the private sector regarding amending the DFARS to implement statutory amendments and revise policies and procedures for acquisition of all noncommercial computer software, related data and documentation, and associated license rights. DoD also seeks to obtain information on the potential increase or decrease in public costs or savings that would result from such amendments to the DFARS.

          Registration: To facilitate security screening and entry to the PLCC, individuals wishing to attend the public meeting must register by close of business on the date listed in the DATES section of this document, by sending the following information via email to osd.dfars@mail.mil:

        (1) Full name.
        (2) Valid email address.
        (3) Valid telephone number.
        (4) Company or organization name.
        (5) Whether the individual is a U.S. citizen.
        (6) The date of the public meeting the individual wishes to attend.
        (7) Whether the individual intends to make a presentation, and, if so, the individual's title.

          Building Entry: Upon receipt of an email requesting registration, the Defense Acquisition Regulations System will provide notification to the Pentagon Force Protection Agency (PFPA) that the individual is requesting approval for entry to the PLCC on the date provided. PFPA will send additional instructions to the email address provided in the request for registration. The registrant must follow the instructions in the PFPA email in order to be approved for entry to the PLCC; failure to follow the instructions in the PFPA email may result in the registrant being restricted from entry to the Pentagon to attend the public meeting.
        One valid government-issued photo identification card (i.e., driver's license or passport) will be required in order to enter the building.
        Attendees are encouraged to arrive at least 45 minutes prior to the start of the meeting to accommodate security procedures.
        Public parking is not available at the PLCC.

          Presentations: If you wish to make a presentation, please submit an electronic copy of your presentation to osd.dfars@mail.mil no later than the registration date listed in the DATES section of this document. Each presentation should be in PowerPoint to facilitate projection during the public meeting and should include the presenter's name, organization affiliation, telephone number, and email address on the cover page. Please submit presentations only and cite “Public Meeting, DFARS Technical Data Rights Cases” in all correspondence related to the public meeting. There will be no transcription at the meeting. The submitted presentations will be the only record of the public meeting and will be posted to the following website at the conclusion of the public meeting: https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/technical_data_rights.html.

          Special accommodations: The public meeting is physically accessible to persons with disabilities. Requests for reasonable accommodations, sign language interpretation, or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Valencia Johnson, telephone 571-372-6099, by no later than the registration date listed in the DATES section of this document.
        The TTY number for further information is: 1-800-877-8339. When the operator answers the call, let the operator know the agency is the Department of Defense and the point of contact is Valencia Johnson at 571-372-6099.
        III. Discussion and Analysis

        An initial draft of the proposed revisions to the DFARS to implement section 871 of the NDAA for FY 2018 is available in the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, by searching for “DFARS Case 2018-D018”, selecting “Open Docket Folder” for RIN 0750-AK87, and viewing the “Supporting Documents”. The following is a summary of DoD's proposed approach and the feedback DoD is seeking from industry and the public.

          A. Requirement for consideration of certain matters during acquisition of noncommercial computer software. The primary proposed changes to implement 10 U.S.C. 2322a would revise DFARS 227.7203-2. The requirements of subsection (a) of 10 U.S.C. 2322a are added to DFARS 227.7203-2(b) to require that, to the maximum extent practicable, the Government's needs determinations must address the acquisition at appropriate times in the life cycle of all computer software, related data, and associated license rights necessary to meet the Government's needs for specific computer software life cycle activities (e.g., reproducing, building, recompiling, testing, and deploying the software).
        The requirements of subsection (b) of 10 U.S.C. 2322a are proposed to be added as a new paragraph (6) under DFARS 227.7203-2(c), to require that noncommercial computer software or data required to be delivered as a result of the considerations addressed during the needs determination (as revised at 227.7203-2(b)), to the extent appropriate, includes:
        • Computer software delivered in a digital format compatible with applicable computer programs on relevant system hardware; and
        • All necessary external or additional computer software or data, along with all necessary license rights; or
        • Delivery of sufficient information to support maintenance and understanding of interfaces and software revision history, along with all necessary license rights, if the necessary external or additional computer software or data will not be delivered.
        The proposed implementation of these new requirements includes adaptations of the statutory language intended to take advantage of existing DFARS defined terms and nomenclature, and to better support the implementation of the statutory objectives in DoD acquisitions. For example, although the statute focuses on detailed aspects of the delivery requirements for noncommercial computer software, the proposed DFARS revisions also recognize that the Government must consider and acquire appropriate license rights in order to utilize those deliverables. Accordingly, references to “necessary license rights” or “associated license rights” are included throughout the proposed implementation.
        Additionally, the proposed revisions use the established DFARS defined term “computer program” in place of the statutory reference to “working computer software system binary files,” and add a new definition for the term “data.” The new definition for the term “data” is proposed for inclusion in DFARS 227.001, and is an adaptation of the definition of that term in FAR 52.227-14(a). As a result, the definition of “technical data” at DFARS 252.227-7013(a)(15), 252.227-7015(a)(5), and 252.227-7018(a)(20) is revised slightly to avoid an inconsistent use of the term “data.”
        The proposed revisions also add appropriate cross-references to the new proposed implementing coverage. For example, a new paragraph was added to DFARS 227.7202-1(d), so that factors identified in 227.7203-2(b) and (c), when adapted as appropriate, are considered for commercial computer software and computer software documentation. In addition, DFARS 239.101 is revised to add a reference to the coverage of noncommercial computer acquisitions in 227.7203.

          B. Section 813 Panel Final Report of the Government-Industry Advisory Panel on Technical Data Rights.

        The proposed revisions to DFARS 227.7203-2 also address concerns raised in the Final Report of the Government-Industry Advisory Panel on Technical Data Rights (Section 813 Panel) submitted to the Congressional Defense Committees in mid-November 2018. For example, the 813 Panel's Tension Point Paper No. 27, “Failure to Define and Order CDRLs (Reliance on Deferred Ordering and DAL to Obtain Data),” emphasizes the importance of the Government identifying its data needs early in the program life cycle, and a preference for upfront ordering of data rather than relying on mechanisms such as deferred ordering pursuant to DFARS 252.227-7027. The paper suggests that the Government's approach to data ordering should be consistent with the program's intellectual property strategy, which should be developed and updated to account for potential changes in the life cycle sustainment plan.

          C. Seeking Public Comment on Additional Topics.

        In addition to seeking public comment on the substance of the draft DFARS revisions, DoD is also seeking information regarding any corresponding change in the burden, including associated costs or savings, resulting from contractors and subcontractors complying with the draft revised DFARS implementation. More specifically, DoD is seeking information regarding any anticipated increase or decrease in such burden and costs relative to the burden and costs associated with complying with the current DFARS implementing language.
        IV. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
        Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This is not a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was not subject to review under section 6(b) of E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804.
        V. Executive Order 13771
        This advance notice of proposed rulemaking is not subject to E.O. 13771.

          List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 227, 239, and 252
          Government procurement.

          Jennifer Lee Hawes,
          Regulatory Control Officer, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

      [FR Doc. 2020-00430 Filed 1-13-20; 8:45 am]
      BILLINGCODE 5001-06-P


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 73
        [DA 03-3886, Docket No. 02-368, RM-10610]
        Radio Broadcasting Services; Lockney, TX

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule, dismissal.

          SUMMARY:

          This document dismisses a pending petition for rulemaking to add an FM allotment in Lockney, Texas. The Audio Division had requested comment on a petition filed by Linda Crawford, proposing the allotment of Channel 271C3 at Lockney, Texas. See 67 FR 78,402, December 24, 2002. Petitioner did not file comments supporting the requested allotment. This document dismisses the petition for failure to demonstrate a continuing interest in the requested allotment. The document therefore terminates the proceeding.

          ADDRESSES:
          Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Deborah A. Dupont, Media Bureau (202) 418-7072.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        This is a synopsis of the Commission's Report and Order, MB Docket No. 02-368, adopted December 3, 2003, and released December 8, 2003. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Qualex International, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone (202) 863-2893, facsimile (202) 863-2898, or via e-mail qualexint@aol.com.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          John A. Karousos,
          Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau.

      [FR Doc. 03-31604 Filed 12-22-03; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        RIN 0648-XG660
        Fisheries Off West Coast States; Coastal Pelagic Species Fisheries; Amendment 17 to the Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan

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

          ACTION:
          Announcement of availability of fishery management plan amendment; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS announces that the Pacific Fishery Management Council has submitted Amendment 17 to the Coastal Pelagic Species Fishery Management Plan for review by the Secretary of Commerce. Amendment 17 would remove the pre-specified incidental landing limit that would become effective for live bait were a stock managed under the Fishery Management Plan to become overfished. Currently, if a coastal pelagic species stock were to become overfished, and even prior to adoption of a rebuilding plan, the Fishery Management Plan would automatically limit retention of live bait of that stock to incidentally caught fish with no more than 15 percent of any load being live bait from the overfished stock. The intent of Amendment 17 is to allow the Council flexibility in recommending restrictions on the live bait portion of the fishery when a stock is overfished. NMFS will consider public comments in deciding whether to approve, disapprove, or partially approve Amendment 17.

          DATES:
          Comments on Amendment 17 must be received by May 21, 2019.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on this document, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2018-0137, by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2018-0137, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to Barry A. Thom, Regional Administrator, West Coast Region, NMFS, 501 W Ocean Blvd., Ste. 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4250; Attn: Lynn Massey.

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

          Copies of the draft Coastal Pelagic Species (CPS) Fishery Management Plan (FMP) as amended through Amendment 17, with notations showing how Amendment 17 would change the FMP, if approved, are available via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov, docket NOAA-NMFS-2018-0137, or by contacting the Pacific Fisheries Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220-1384.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Lynn Massey, Sustainable Fisheries Division, NMFS, at 562-436-2462; or Kerry Griffin, Pacific Fishery Management Council, at 503-820-2280.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The CPS fishery in the U.S. exclusive economic zone off the West Coast is managed under the CPS FMP. The Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) developed the CPS FMP pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. The Secretary of Commerce approved the CPS FMP and implemented the provisions of the plan through regulations at 50 CFR part 660, subpart I. Species managed under the CPS FMP include Pacific sardine, Pacific mackerel, jack mackerel, northern anchovy, market squid and krill.

        The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires each regional fishery management council to submit any amendment to an FMP to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval. The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving an amendment to an FMP, publish notification in the Federal Register that the amendment is available for public review and comment. NMFS will consider the public comments received during the comment period described above in determining whether to approve, disapprove, or partially approve Amendment 17.
        The live bait fishery provides live bait to anglers and commercial vessels in California, Oregon, and Washington, making it an extremely important component of the West Coast's recreational fishing community, as well as some commercial fishery sectors such as the albacore tuna fishery. At the June 2018 Council meeting, in anticipation that the Northern subpopulation of Pacific sardine might be declared overfished if there were even a minor decline in the 2019 biomass estimate, the Council initiated an FMP amendment to address the prosecution of the live bait sector of the CPS fishery (primarily consisting of Pacific sardine and northern anchovy) after a stock is declared overfished. Additionally, several industry members offered testimony at the June and September 2018 Council meetings about probable adverse impacts to the live bait fishery if Pacific sardine were to become overfished in the 2019-2020 fishing year. At the November 2018 meeting, the Council took final action and approved Amendment 17 to the CPS FMP for submission to the Secretary for review under section 304(a) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, 16 U.S.C. 1854(a).

        Amendment 17 would remove the pre-specified incidental catch limit in the live bait fishery that would become effective were a CPS stock declared overfished. Currently, if a CPS stock were to become overfished, and even before adoption of a rebuilding plan, the CPS FMP would automatically limit retention of live bait of that stock to incidentally caught fish with no more than 15 percent of any load being live bait from the overfished stock. Live bait is sold in units of single species; therefore the live bait fishery targets pure loads of the desired species since it is not operationally feasible to separate mixed loads. Stopping all live bait fishing would likely cause a de facto closure for catching the overfished species as live bait, which would seriously disrupt various recreational fisheries, most notably in Southern California, and the commercial albacore fishery that purchase and rely on live bait managed under the CPS FMP.
        If a CPS stock becomes overfished, Amendment 17 would provide NMFS and the Council the ability to either set incidental catch limits or allow directed fishing in the live bait fishery with consideration of biological, environmental, or socio-economic factors during each management cycle or under a developed rebuilding plan without being restricted to predetermined limits. The intent of Amendment 17 is to allow more flexibility in setting restrictions on the live bait portion of the fishery when a stock is overfished and would not weaken any statutory requirements to rebuild an overfished stock.
        There are no implementing regulations associated with Amendment 17, therefore NMFS will not promulgate a proposed rule to implement this amendment.

        Public comments on Amendment 17 must be received by May 21, 2019. All comments received by the end of the comment period on Amendment 17 will be considered in the Secretary's decision to approve, disapprove, or partially approve this amendment. To be considered in this decision, comments must be received by close of business on the last day of the comment period; that does not mean postmarked or otherwise transmitted by that date. NMFS will respond to any substantive comments received by the end of the comment period on Amendment 17 in a subsequent Federal Register notice, either in conjunction with or following the agency's decision.

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

          Dated: March 18, 2019.
          Samuel D. Rauch III,
          Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2019-05455 Filed 3-21-19; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Parts 10 and 11
        [PS Docket No. 15-91, PS Docket No. 15-94; Report No. 3061]
        Petition for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Petition for reconsideration.

          SUMMARY:
          A Petition for Reconsideration (Petition) has been filed in the Commission's rulemaking proceeding by Brian M. Josef, on behalf of CTIA.

          DATES:
          Oppositions to the Petition must be filed on or before January 3, 2017. Replies to an opposition must be filed on or before January 13, 2017.

          ADDRESSES:
          Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          James Wiley, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, phone: (202) 418-1678; email: James.Wiley@fcc.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        This is a summary of the Commission's document, Report No. 3061, released December 8, 2016. The full text of the Petition is available for viewing and copying at the FCC Reference Information Center, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. It also may be accessed online via the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System at: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filing/10919110011734/document/10919110011734e7d2. The Commission will not send a copy of this document pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because this document does not have an impact on any rules of particular applicability.

          Subject: Wireless Emergency Alerts; Amendments to part 11 of the Commission's Rules Regarding the Emergency Alert System, FCC 16-127, Report and Order, in PS Docket Nos. 15-91 and 15-94, published at 81 FR 75710, November 1, 2016. This document is being published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). See also 47 CFR 1.4(b)(1) and 1.429(f), (g).

          Number of Petitions Filed: 1.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          Marlene H. Dortch,
          Secretary.

      [FR Doc. 2016-30168 Filed 12-16-16; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        Fish and Wildlife Service
        50 CFR Part 17
        RIN 1018-AJ03
        Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Removing the Eastern Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of the Gray Wolf From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

          AGENCY:
          U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

          ACTION:
          Notice of public hearing.

          SUMMARY:

          The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announces that we will hold one additional public hearing on the proposed rule to remove the Eastern Distinct Population Segment of the gray wolf (Canis lupus) from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife established under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. In a notice made in the Federal Register on August 13, 2004 (69 FR 50147), we announced the locations for nine other public hearing previously scheduled.

          DATES:
          See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for hearing date.

          ADDRESSES:
          See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for hearing addresses.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Direct all questions or requests for additional information to the Service using the Gray Wolf Phone Line: 612-713-7337, facsimile: 612-713-5292, the general gray wolf electronic mail address: GRAYWOLFMAIL@FWS.GOV, or write to: Gray Wolf Questions, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Federal Building, 1 Federal Drive, Ft. Snelling, Minnesota 55111-4056. Additional information is also available on our World Wide Web site at http://midwest.fws.gov/wolf. In the event that our internet connection is not functional, please contact the Service by the alternative methods mentioned above. Individuals who are hearing-impaired or speech-impaired may call the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8337 for TTY assistance.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Background—On July 21, 2004, we published a proposed rule (69 FR 43664) to remove the Eastern Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of the gray wolf (Canis lupus) from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife established under the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). We proposed this action because available data indicate that this DPS no longer meets the definition of threatened or endangered under the Act. The gray wolf population is stable or increasing in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan, and exceeds its numerical recovery criteria. Completed State wolf management plans will provide adequate protection and management to the species in these three States if the gray wolf is delisted in the Eastern DPS. The proposed rule would remove this DPS from the protections of the Act by ending its threatened classification. This proposed rule would also remove the currently designated critical habitat for the gray wolf in Minnesota and Michigan, and remove the current special regulations for gray wolves in Minnesota and other Midwestern States. This proposal would not change the status or special regulations currently in place for the Western or Southwestern DPS of the gray wolf or for the red wolf (C. rufus).
        In our July 21, 2004, proposed rule, we stated that we would hold public hearings. Consistent with that document, we announced the dates and locations of nine hearings (69 FR 50147). In response to several requests, we are now announcing the date and location for one additional public hearing.

          Hearing Information: We will hold only one public hearing on October 20, 2004, at the Black Bear Inn and Conference Center, 4 Godfrey Drive, Orono, Maine.
        The hearing will consist of a 1-hour informational meeting from 6:30 to 7:30 p.m., and the official public hearing from 7:30 to 9:30 p.m.

          Dated: August 30, 2004.
          Marvin E. Moriarty,
          Regional Director, Region 5.

      [FR Doc. 04-21810 Filed 9-28-04; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4310-55-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 622
        RIN 0648-BG77
        Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region; Amendment 41

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of availability; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (South Atlantic Council) has submitted Amendment 41 to the Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South Atlantic Region (Snapper-Grouper FMP) for review, approval, and implementation by NMFS. Amendment 41 would revise management reference points, annual catch limits (ACLs), optimum yield (OY), and management measures for mutton snapper in the South Atlantic based on the results of the most recent stock assessment. The purpose of Amendment 41 is to ensure that mutton snapper is managed based on the best scientific information available to achieve OY and to prevent overfishing, while minimizing adverse social and economic effects to the extent practicable.

          DATES:
          Written comments on Amendment 41 must be received by November 27, 2017.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on Amendment 41, identified by “NOAA-NMFS-2017-0103,” by either of the following methods:
          • Electronic submission: Submit all electronic comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2017-0103, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to Mary Vara, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, 263 13th Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701.

            Instructions: Comments sent by any other method, to any other address or individual, or received after the end of the comment period, may not be considered by NMFS. All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted for public viewing on www.regulations.gov without change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address, etc.), confidential business information, or otherwise sensitive information submitted voluntarily by the sender will be publicly accessible. NMFS will accept anonymous comments (enter “N/A” in required fields if you wish to remain anonymous).
          Electronic copies of Amendment 41 may be obtained from www.regulations.gov or the Southeast Regional Office Web site at http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov. Amendment 41 includes an environmental assessment, regulatory impact review, Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis, and fishery impact statement.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Mary Vara, NMFS Southeast Regional Office, telephone: 727-824-5305, or email: mary.vara@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires each regional fishery management council to submit FMPs or amendments to NMFS for review and approval, partial approval, or disapproval. The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving an FMP or amendment, publish an announcement in the Federal Register notifying the public that the FMP or amendment is available for review and comment.

        Amendment 41 to the Snapper-Grouper FMP was prepared by the South Atlantic Council and, if approved, would be implemented by NMFS through regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
        Background
        The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires that NMFS and regional fishery management councils prevent overfishing and achieve, on a continuing basis, the OY from federally managed fish stocks. These mandates are intended to ensure that fishery resources are managed for the greatest overall benefit to the nation, particularly with respect to providing food production and recreational opportunities, and protecting marine ecosystems. To further this goal, the Magnuson-Stevens Act requires fishery management councils to minimize bycatch and bycatch mortality to the extent practicable.
        Mutton snapper are harvested throughout the Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) and South Atlantic, although harvest predominately occurs around the Florida Keys. In the South Atlantic, mutton snapper are part of the snapper-grouper fishery, and the South Atlantic Council manages this fishery under the Snapper-Grouper FMP. In the Gulf, mutton snapper are part of the reef fish fishery, and the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Gulf Council) manages this fishery under the FMP for Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico. The jurisdictional boundary between the South Atlantic and Gulf Councils is specified at 50 CFR 600.105(c), and is located approximately in the Florida Keys (Monroe County, FL). The mutton snapper stock in the Gulf and South Atlantic was assessed in 2008 (Southeast Data, Assessment, and Review Assessment 15A (SEDAR 15A)), with a single acceptable biological catch (ABC) that encompasses both councils' areas of jurisdiction. The South Atlantic and Gulf Councils, with the advice of their Scientific and Statistical Committees (SSCs), apportioned this total ABC between the councils' FMPs based on historical landings. The final rules for the South Atlantic Council's Comprehensive ACL Amendment (77 FR 15916, March 16, 2012) and the Gulf Council's Generic ACL Amendment (76 FR 82044, December 29, 2011) allocated the total mutton snapper ABC as 82 percent in the South Atlantic and 18 percent in the Gulf.
        In 2015, there was an update to SEDAR 15A for the mutton snapper stock in the South Atlantic and Gulf using data through 2013 (SEDAR 15A Update). The SEDAR 15A Update indicated that in the South Atlantic and Gulf, the mutton snapper stock is neither overfished nor undergoing overfishing. However, improvements to the modeling approach used in the SEDAR 15A Update resulted in smaller population estimates than demonstrated in SEDAR 15A. The South Atlantic and Gulf Councils' SSCs reviewed the SEDAR 15A Update and recommended a reduction in the stock's total ABC. Based on results from the SEDAR 15A Update and recommendations from its SSC, the South Atlantic Council is taking action through Amendment 41 to revise its management of mutton snapper in the South Atlantic. The Gulf Council is also examining management alternatives for mutton snapper in the Gulf exclusive economic zone (EEZ) through a framework amendment to the FMP for Reef Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico.
        Actions Contained in Amendment 41
        Amendment 41 contains actions to revise management reference points, fishing levels, and management measures for mutton snapper in the South Atlantic. Unless otherwise noted, all weights of mutton snapper are described in round weight.
        Maximum Sustainable Yield and Minimum Stock Size Threshold

        Currently, the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) for mutton snapper in the South Atlantic equals the yield produced by the fishing mortality rate at MSY (FMSY) (where F equals fishing mortality that if applied constantly, would achieve MSY under equilibrium conditions). The FMSY proxy is F30
          %
          SPR, or the fishing mortality that will produce a static spawning per recruit. Amendment 41 would change the MSY definition to the yield produced by FMSY or the FMSY proxy, with the MSY and FMSY proxy recommended by the most recent stock assessment. If this MSY definition is implemented, future MSY numerical values could be updated following a stock assessment, SSC review and recommendation, and acceptance of that recommendation by the South Atlantic Council. Currently, MSY numerical values for mutton snapper are not specified because the South Atlantic Council did not specify the MSY estimate from SEDAR 15A. Based on the SEDAR 15A Update and the new MSY definition, the resulting MSY for the mutton snapper stock in the South Atlantic would be 912,500 lb (413,903 kg).

        Currently, the minimum stock size threshold (MSST) is equal to the spawning stock biomass at MSY (SSBMSY)*(1-M) or 0.5, whichever is greater (where M equals natural mortality). Amendment 41 would change the MSST definition to 75 percent of SSBMSY, which results in an MSST of 3,486,900 lb (1,581,631 kg). The SEDAR 15A Update estimated the natural mortality for mutton snapper at 0.17, and the proposed MSST for mutton snapper in Amendment 41 is consistent with how the South Atlantic Council has defined MSST for other snapper-grouper stocks with similarly low natural mortality estimates.
        Commercial and Recreational ACLs
        The current total ABC for mutton snapper in the South Atlantic and Gulf jurisdictions is 1,130,000 lb (512,559 kg). Based on the South Atlantic and Gulf Councils' agreed apportionment of the mutton snapper ABC between their FMPs, the current ABC for mutton snapper in the South Atlantic is 926,600 lb (420,299 kg), and the South Atlantic Council set the ABC equal to the OY and the total ACL. The South Atlantic Council then further allocated the total ACL between the commercial sector (17.02 percent) and recreational sector (82.98 percent), resulting in the commercial ACL of 157,743 lb (71,551 kg) and the recreational ACL of 768,857 lb (348,748 kg). Amendment 41 would revise the ABC and the commercial and recreational ACLs for mutton snapper in the South Atlantic for the 2017 through 2020 and subsequent fishing years, consistent with the existing apportionment between the two councils' FMPs and the existing sector allocations.

        As described in Amendment 41, the South Atlantic Council's SSC recommended that the ABC be specified in numbers of fish, based on landing projections from the stock assessment. The South Atlantic Council agreed with this recommendation for the ABC, but specified the commercial ACL in pounds and the recreational ACL in numbers of fish because commercial landings are already tracked in pounds, while recreational landings are tracked in numbers of fish. In addition, because Amendment 41 would increase the minimum size limit for mutton snapper, the South Atlantic Council was concerned that specifying the recreational ACL in pounds could increase the risk of exceeding the recreational ACL if the method for converting the ACL in numbers to pounds does not sufficiently address the change in average weight of larger, heavier fish. Therefore, the South Atlantic Council determined that there would be a reduced risk of exceeding the recreational ACL due to an increase in the minimum size limit if the ABC and recreational ACL were specified in numbers of fish. Because the current ABC and recreational ACL are specified in pounds, and the new ABC and recreational ACL are specified in numbers of fish, Appendix J to Amendment 41 includes a detailed account of the methodology used to specify the ABC and recreational ACL in numbers of fish. As a reference for comparing numbers of fish to pounds of fish, the average weight of a recreationally harvested mutton snapper in 2017 is 4.2 lb (1.9 kg) per fish.
        Based on results from the SEDAR 15A Update and the SSC's recommended ABC, Amendment 41 would decrease the ABC for mutton snapper in the South Atlantic to 129,150 fish for the 2017 fishing year, 134,890 fish for 2018, 138,826 fish for 2019, and 141,614 fish for 2020 and subsequent fishing years.
        The proposed commercial ACLs for mutton snapper are 100,015 lb (45,366 kg) for 2017, 104,231 lb (47,278 kg) for 2018, 107,981 lb (48,979 kg) for 2019, and 111,354 lb (50,509 kg) for 2020 and subsequent fishing years.
        The proposed recreational ACLs for mutton snapper are 116,127 fish for 2017, 121,318 fish for 2018, 124,766 fish for 2019, and 127,115 fish for 2020 and subsequent fishing years.
        Recreational ACTs
        The current recreational ACT for South Atlantic mutton snapper is 668,906 lb (303,411 kg). Amendment 41 would specify a recreational ACT (equal to 85 percent of the recreational ACL) of 98,708 fish for 2017. The recreational ACT would increase annually from 2017 through 2020, and would remain in effect until modified. The recreational ACT would be 103,121 fish for 2018, 106,051 fish for 2019, and 108,048 fish for 2020 and subsequent fishing years. NMFS notes that the current and proposed recreational ACTs are used only for monitoring and do not trigger a recreational accountability measure.
        Minimum Size Limit
        The current minimum size limit for the commercial and recreational sectors of mutton snapper is 16 inches (40.6 cm), total length (TL), and Amendment 41 would increase the minimum size limit to 18 inches (45.7 cm), TL. Recent scientific information indicates that the size at which 50 percent of mutton snapper are sexually mature is 16 inches (40.6 cm), TL, for males and 18 inches (45.7 cm), TL, for females. Increasing the minimum size limit to 18 inches (45.7 cm), TL, would allow more individuals to reach reproductive activity before being susceptible to harvest, and is also projected to increase the average size and the corresponding average weight of fish harvested.
        Spawning Months
        Currently, there is no designated spawning season for mutton snapper in the South Atlantic; however, to protect spawning fish, a May through June seasonal harvest limitation applies to vessels with a Federal commercial permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper. There are no similar management measures in place to constrain recreational harvest in May and June. Amendment 41 would designate April through June as spawning months, during which certain management measures, such as the proposed commercial trip limits, would apply.
        Commercial Trip Limits
        Currently, there is no year-round commercial trip limit for mutton snapper in the South Atlantic. However, during May and June of each year, there is a seasonal harvest limitation (equivalent to a commercial trip limit) for the possession of mutton snapper in or from the EEZ on board a vessel that has a Federal commercial permit for South Atlantic snapper-grouper. During these two months, the commercial harvest of mutton snapper is limited to 10 per person per day or 10 per person per trip, whichever is more restrictive (50 CFR 622.184(b)).
        Amendment 41 would replace the current seasonal harvest limitation for the commercial sector each year in May and June, and would implement commercial trip limits for the purposes of maintaining a year-round commercial fishing season and reducing harvest on mutton snapper spawning aggregations. During the proposed mutton snapper spawning months of April through June, Amendment 41 would establish a commercial trip limit of five fish per person per day or five fish per person per trip, whichever is more restrictive. For the remainder of the year (January through March and July through December), Amendment 41 would establish a 500-lb (227-kg) commercial trip limit.
        Recreational Bag Limits
        Currently, mutton snapper is part of the 10 snapper combined recreational bag limit in the South Atlantic that applies throughout the fishing year (50 CFR 622.187(b)(4)). Through Amendment 41, mutton snapper would remain within the 10 snapper combined recreational bag limit in the South Atlantic, but a recreational bag limit of 5 mutton snapper per person per day would apply within the overall 10 snapper combined bag limit, year-round. Amendment 41 would modify the bag and possession limits for the purposes of maintaining a year-round recreational fishing season, and reducing harvest on mutton snapper spawning aggregations.
        Proposed Rule for Amendment 41

        A proposed rule that would implement Amendment 41 has been drafted. In accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Act, NMFS is evaluating the proposed rule to determine whether it is consistent with the FMP, the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable laws. If that determination is affirmative, NMFS will publish the proposed rule in the Federal Register for public review and comment.
        Consideration of Public Comments
        The South Atlantic Council has submitted Amendment 41 for Secretarial review, approval, and implementation. Comments on Amendment 41 must be received by November 27, 2017. Comments received during the respective comment periods, whether specifically directed to Amendment 41 or the proposed rule, will be considered by NMFS in the decision to approve, disapprove, or partially approve Amendment 41. Comments received after the comment periods will not be considered by NMFS in this decision. All comments received by NMFS on Amendment 41 or the proposed rule during their respective comment periods will be addressed in the final rule.

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

          Dated: September 20, 2017.
          Alan D. Risenhoover,
          Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2017-20480 Filed 9-25-17; 8:45 am]
       BILLING CODE 3510-22-P