        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 665
        [Docket No. 060606149-6149-01; I.D. 052506A]
        RIN 0648-AT95
        Fisheries in the Western Pacific; Omnibus Amendment for the Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish Fisheries, Crustacean Fisheries, and Precious Coral Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          This proposed rule would amend three fishery management plans to include fisheries and waters around the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) and Pacific Remote Island Areas (PRIA). These amendments affect United States domestic fisheries that offload or operate in Federal waters around the CNMI and the PRIA. These amendments would establish new permitting and reporting requirements for vessel operators targeting bottomfish species around the PRIA to improve understanding of the ecology of these species and the activities and harvests of the vessel operators that target them. They would also establish new permitting and reporting requirements for vessel operators targeting crustacean species and precious corals around the CNMI and PRIA.

          DATES:
          Comments on the proposed rule must be received by August 7, 2006.

          ADDRESSES:
          Comments on the proposed rule, identified by 0648-AT95, should be sent to any of the following addresses:
          • E-mail: AT95Omnibus@noaa.gov. Include in the subject line of the e-mail comment the following document identifier AAT95 Omnibus. Comments sent via e-mail, including all attachments, must not exceed a 5 megabyte file size.
          • Federal e-Rulemaking portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • Mail: William L. Robinson, Administrator, NMFS, Pacific Islands Region (PIR), 1601 Kapiolani Boulevard, Suite 1110, Honolulu, HI 96814-4700.

          Copies of the FMPs, Amendments, and Environmental Assessment (EA) may be obtained from Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director, Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (WPFMC), 1164 Bishop Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, or the Internet at www.wpcouncil.org.

          Written comments regarding the burden-hour estimates or other aspects of the collection-of-information requirements contained in this proposed rule may be submitted to William L. Robinson (see ADDRESSES), or by e-mail to David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov, or fax to 202-395-7285.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Robert Harman, NMFS PIR, 808-944-2271.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        The NMFS Pacific Islands region encompasses Federal waters, i.e., the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), around the Territories of Guam and American Samoa, the State of Hawaii, the CNMI, and the PRIA. The EEZ extends from this inner boundary to 200 nautical miles (nm) offshore. The inner boundary of the EEZ is the seaward limit of each coastal state, commonwealth, territory and possession. The EEZ extends from this inner boundary to 200 nautical miles (nm) offshore. For the CNMI and PRIA, the inner boundary of the EEZ is extends to the shoreline, while for the seaward limits of Guam, American Samoa, and Hawaii, the inner boundary of the EEZ is extend to 3 nm from the shoreline.
        The WPFMC has developed, and NMFS has approved and implemented, five fishery management plans that cover pelagic species, crustaceans, bottomfish and seamount groundfish, precious corals, and coral reef ecosystems fisheries. The Federal waters surrounding the CNMI are currently not included in the Fishery Management Plans for the Bottomfish, Crustaceans, or Precious Corals Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region (Bottomfish FMP), (Crustaceans FMP), and (Precious Corals FMP). Similarly, Federal waters surrounding the PRIA are not included in the Bottomfish or Crustaceans FMPs. Vessels have been known to fish for bottomfish and crustaceans in the Federal waters surrounding the CNMI and the PRIA, although on a small scale. While there are currently no known fisheries operating in the PRIA, and no precious corals fisheries operating in the CNMI, interest may arise in the future. These proposed amendments would include the fisheries operating in these areas under the FMPs.

        The CNMI bottomfish fishery consists primarily of small boats (< 30 ft, 9.1 m) engaged in commercial and subsistence fishing. These boats are usually limited to fishing in daylight hours within 50 nm of Saipan, with fishermen relying on land features for navigation (as opposed to GPS and fathometers). In addition to the small boats, a few larger vessels (> 50 ft, 15.2 m) sometimes participate in the fishery, ranging farther north on multi-day trips, and with more sophisticated navigation tools. Data about bottomfish landings from the larger vessels are collected only voluntarily, so the future reliability of data collection cannot be assured. Similarly, an offshore deep-water shrimp fishery at one time operated in the CNMI, but knowledge of the fishery and collection of data about the catch was not timely. Additionally, precious corals have been landed from Federal waters around the CNMI, with little or no information about the fishery collected. This history led the WPFMC to recommend the preliminary step of including CNMI waters under the Bottomfish, Crustaceans, and Precious Corals FMPs. This would facilitate further steps to monitor catches and, if needed in the future, to implement other management measures for these fisheries. While the EEZ around the CNMI extends from the shoreline to 200 nm, the WPFMC recommended deferring to the CNMI regulatory control for fishing toby by CNMI citizens, including fishery permitting and data collection, in waters 0 to 3 nm of the EEZ around CNMI. These FMP amendments do not, however, confer authority to the CNMI over EEZ resources.
        Although no fishing is being conducted currently in the PRIA, there has been some recent historical activity by vessels using mixed fishing gear in the PRIA. These vessels have targeted bottomfish with handlines, and they troll for pelagic species, or trap for deep-water shrimp. A 2002 regulatory amendment to the Pelagics FMP (67 FR 30346, May 6, 2002) requires Federal reporting for vessels trolling for and landing pelagic management unit species (PMUS) in the PRIA. Data collection for other PRIA fisheries occurs at the landing port which, to date, has been exclusively in Hawaii. However, Hawaii's state-required landings data do not include details on effort, bycatch, location, or protected species interactions. There is currently no mechanism to gather fishery statistics for bottomfish landings from the PRIA. As in the case of the CNMI, the Council determined that the PRIA need to be included under its management plans to allow for the collection of fishery data and the timely implementation of further management actions should they become necessary.
        The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) manages a number of National Wildlife Refuges (NWR) in the western Pacific, including fishing activities within refuge boundaries pursuant to the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act (NWRSAA) of 1966, as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, and other authorities. Under the NWRSAA, as amended, NWR waters are closed to all uses until they are specifically opened for such uses, and that the USFWS determines whether to open NWR waters for any use that is compatible with the refuges'= primary purpose(s) and mission. While commercial fishing is generally prohibited in NWR waters, specific regulations are absent. Including NWR areas under the Bottomfish, Crustaceans, and Precious Corals FMPs, as proposed in these amendments, would add specific regulations to these areas. However, these regulations would not supersede any valid existing Federal regulations that are more restrictive to fishing operations.
        Amendments 8, 12, and 6 also consider including in the management unit a variety of bottomfish and crustacean species that are currently or potentially targeted by fishermen. The importance of these species as a component of catches is known from both existing data collection programs and anecdotal information, and before Federal management measures can be applied to these species they must be included in the management unit. After consideration, the Council decided to designate 48 bottomfish species as part of the management unit. Subsequently, however, these 48 species were included in the management unit of the Fishery Management Plan for Coral Reef Ecosystems in the Western Pacific Region, developed by the WPFMC and implemented in 2004. Thus, this document does not include the designation of bottomfish species in the preferred alternative. The WPFMC did not designate the three crustacean species or species groups because they determined that these species groups Federal waters are not sufficiently harvested in Federal waters to warrant designation at this time. This action is designed to establish monitoring systems and management mechanisms to implement specific regulatory controls should the need arise; specific management measures (such as time and area closures, or effort and landing limits) are not included.
        Classification
        At this time, NMFS has not determined that the FMP amendments that this rule would implement are consistent with the national standards of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and other applicable laws. NMFS, in making that determination, will take into account the data, views, and comments received during the comment period.
        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.

          This rule would amend three fishery management plans to include fisheries and waters around the CNMI and PRIA in the management units. Amendment 8 to the Bottomfish FMP would establish new permitting and reporting requirements for vessel operators targeting bottomfish species around the PRIA in order to improve our understanding of the ecology of the species, and the activities and harvests of the vessel operators that target them. For the same reasons, Amendment 12 to the Crustaceans FMP would establish new permitting and reporting requirements for vessel operators targeting crustacean species around the CNMI or the PRIA, and Amendment 6 to the Precious Corals FMP would establish new permitting and reporting requirements for vessel operators targeting precious corals around the CNMI.
          This action is anticipated to affect the entire universe of active bottomfish fishery participants (approximately 43) based in the CNMI who fish more than three miles from shore, as well as an unknown number of vessel operators who may enter the fishery in the future. The CNMI bottomfish fishery consists primarily of small boats (< 30 ft, 9.1 m) engaged in commercial and subsistence fishing. These boats are usually limited to fishing in daylight hours within 50 nm of Saipan, with fishermen relying on land features for navigation (as opposed to GPS and fathometers). In addition to the small boats, a few larger vessels (> 50 ft, 15.2 m) sometimes participate in the fishery, ranging farther north on multi-day trips, and with more sophisticated navigation tools. Data about bottomfish landings from the larger vessels are now collected only voluntarily. Given this fleet's aggregate annual ex-vessel revenue of $142,260, the annual average per-vessel revenue is $3,308; therefore, all affected operations are classified as “small entities” because their annual revenues are below the $4 million threshold set for this determination. The affected entities, CNMI bottomfish vessels, landed a total of 54,400 lb (24,675 kg) of fish in 2004.

          Also affected will be future participants in the CNMI-based offshore crustacean and precious coral fisheries. Available information indicates that there are no current participants in these fisheries and it is unlikely that an offshore commercial crustacean (i.e., lobster) fishery will develop, as the topography beyond three miles in most locations has limited lobster habitat and access is difficult. Should such a lobster fishery develop, however, the potential costs to fishermen would be minimal (i.e., no more than those associated with permitting and reporting, discussed below). Also affected would be future participants in the bottomfish and crustacean fisheries around the PRIA, but available information indicates that there are no current participants in these fisheries, either.
          The largest potential impact to affected participants would be compliance costs associated with new Federal permitting and reporting requirements. There is no monetary cost for these permits, but a time burden of 30 minutes is required for each permit application and renewal. The completion of Federal reporting forms will be required for each fishing trip, with an associated time cost of 5 minutes per reporting action. Lesser and uUnquantifiable impacts may result from the future prohibition of the use of destructive fishing gear (e.g., bottom set trawls, poisons and explosives) in the current or future CNMI and PRIA bottomfish fisheries, and the future prohibition of the use of non-selective gear in any future NMI precious corals fishery. There is no evidence that such gears are in use at this time, so any futurethe prohibition against using such gear would have no immediate impact on current fishery participants.
          Because there are no management actions that affect operations of the fishery, other than providing for potential data collection, there will be no significant reductions in profitability for a substantial number of small entities in any user groups, and there will be no disproportionate impacts between gear types, vessels, or port of landing.
          The proposed rule does not impose impacts on a substantial number of small entities. The proposed action is administrative in nature and will not impact operations of the fishery. Most vessels in the CNMI fishery are small vessels that operate in nearshore areas, so the majority of small entities in the CNMI will be unaffected by the action. A very small proportion of larger vessels that may be impacted would be subject to the permit and reporting requirements of the action.
          The CNMI fishery is characterized based on data collected through the Commercial Purchase Database, which indirectly records actual landings by recording all local fish sales to commercial establishments. This data collection program is dependeant on voluntary participation by first level purchasers of locally caught fresh fish to record purchases on specially designed invoices. These figures are then expanded by 30 percent to represent the CNMI as a whole, assuming 60 percent coverage of the commercial sales on Saipan, and that Saipan is 90 percent of the total market.

        As a result, an initial regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared.
        This proposed rule contains a collection-of-information requirement subject to review and approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). This requirement has been submitted to OMB for approval. The public reporting burden for the permit application process is 30 minutes per application. In the crustaceans fishery, it is estimated that one permit application would be submitted annually for the permit area, resulting in a paperwork burden of 30 min/yr. In the bottomfish fishery, it is estimated that no more than five permit applications would be received annually for the permit area, resulting in a paperwork burden of 2.5 hr/yr. In the precious corals fishery, it is estimated that one permit would be applied for annually for the permit area, resulting in 30 min/yr in paperwork burden. Therefore, the total paperwork burden of these collections of information would be no more than four hours annually. The public burden for the proposed reporting requirements is five minutes per daily logsheet. It is estimated that eight vessels would be subject to the reporting requirement at any given time, and that each vessel would fish, on average, no more than 50 days/yr, resulting in a total paperwork burden of approximately 35 hr/yr. These estimates include the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information.

        Public comment is sought regarding: whether this proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments on these or any other aspects of the collection of information to William L. Robinson (see ADDRESSES), and email to David_Rostker@omb.eop.gov or fax to 202-395-7285.
        Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is required to respond to, and no person shall be subject to penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number.

          List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 665
          Administrative practice and procedure, American Samoa, Fisheries, Fishing, Guam, Hawaii, Hawaiian natives, Northern Mariana Islands, Pacific Remote Island Areas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

          Dated: June 20, 2006.
          James W. Balsiger,
          Acting Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service.

        For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 665 is proposed to be amended as follows:

          PART 665—FISHERIES IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC

        1. The authority citation for part 665 continues to read as follows:

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

        In § 665.12, the definitions for “Crustaceans management area”, “Crustaceans permit area 3”, and “Crustaceans receiving vessel” are revised, the definitions of “Crustaceans permit area 4”, “Pacific Remote Island Areas bottomfish fishing permit”, and “Pacific Remote Island Areas crustacean fishing permit” are added, and under the definition of “Precious coral permit area” paragraph (4)(v) is added to read as follows:

          § 665.12
          Definitions.

            Crustaceans management area means the EEZ waters around American Samoa, the CNMI, Guam, Hawaii, and the PRIA.

            Crustacean Permit Area 3 (Permit Area 3) means the EEZ around Guam and American Samoa, and the EEZ seaward of points 3 nautical miles from the shoreline of the CNMI.Crustaceans Permit Area 4 (Permit Area (4) means the EEZ around the PRIA, with the exception of EEZ waters around Midway Atoll.

            Crustaceans receiving vessel means a vessel of the United States to which lobsters taken in the crustaceans management area are transferred from another vessel.

            Pacific Remote Island Areas (PRIA) bottomfish fishing permit means the permit required by § 665.61 to use a vessel to fish for bottomfish management unit species (MUS) in the EEZ, or to land bottomfish MUS shoreward of the outer boundary of the EEZ around the PRIA, with the exception of waters around Midway Atoll.

            Pacific Remote Island Areas (PRIA) crustacean fishing permitmeans the permit required by § 665.41 to use a vessel to fish for crustacean management unit species (MUS) in the EEZ, or to land crustacean MUS shoreward of the outer boundary of the EEZ around the PRIA, with the exception of waters around Midway Atoll.

            Precious coral permit area * * *
          (4) * * *
          (v) Permit Area X-P-CNMI includes all coral beds, other than established beds, conditional beds, or refugia, in the EEZ seaward of points 3 nautical miles from the shoreline of the CNMI.

          3. In § 665.14, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:

          § 665.14
          Reporting and recordkeeping.
          (a) Fishing record forms. The operator of any fishing vessel subject to the requirements of §§ 665.21, 665.41, 665.81, or 665.602 must maintain on board the vessel an accurate and complete record of catch, effort, and other data on report forms provided by the Regional Administrator. All information specified on the forms must be recorded on the forms within 24 hr after the completion of each fishing day. Each form must be signed and dated by the fishing vessel operator. For the fisheries managed under §§ 665.21, 665.41, and 665.81, the original logbook form for each day of the fishing trip must be submitted to the Regional Administrator within 72 hr of each landing of MUS, unless the fishing was authorized under a PRIA troll and handline permit, a PRIA crustaceans fishing permit, or a PRIA precious corals fishing permit, in which case the original logbook form for each day of fishing within the PRIA EEZ waters must be submitted to the Regional Administrator within 30 days of each landing of MUS. For fisheries managed under § 665.602, the original logbook form for each day of the fishing trip must be submitted to the Regional Administrator within 30 days of each landing of MUS.

        4. In § 665.41, paragraph (a)(2) is revised to read as follows:

          § 665.41
          Permits.
          (a) * * *
          (2) The owner of any vessel used to fish for lobster in Permit Area 2, Permit Area 3, or Permit Area 4, must have a permit issued for that vessel.

          5. In § 665.42, paragraph (c) is added to read as follows:

          § 665.42
          Prohibitions.

          (c) In Permit Area 3 and Permit Area 4, it is unlawful for any person to refuse to make available to an authorized officer or employee of NMFS designated by the Regional Administrator for inspection and copying any records that must be made available in accordance with § 665.14(f)(2).
          6. In § 665.61, paragraph (a)(1) is revised to read as follows:

          § 665.61
          Permits.
          (a) * * *
          (1) The owner of any vessel used to fish for bottomfish management unit species in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Subarea or Pacific Remote Island Areas Subarea must have a permit issued under this section and the permit must be registered for use with that vessel.

        7. In § 665.62 paragraph (b) is revised, and paragraph (f) is added to read as follows:

          § 665.62
          Prohibitions.

          (b) Fish for, or retain on board a vessel, bottomfish management unit species in the Hoomalu Zone, the Mau Zone, or the Pacific Remote Island Areas without the appropriate permit registered for use with that vessel issued under § 665.13.

          (f) Falsify or fail to make or file all reports of bottomfish management unit species landings taken in the Pacific Remote Island Areas, containing all data in the exact manner, as specified in § 665.14(a).

        8. In § 665.69, paragraphs (a) introductory text, (b), and (c) are revised, and paragraphs (a)(6), (a)(7), and (a)(8) are added, to read as follows:

          § 665.69
          Management subareas.
          (a) The bottomfish fishery management area is divided into eight subareas with the following designations and boundaries:

          (6) CNMI Inshore Area means that portion of the EEZ shoreward of 3 nautical miles of the shoreline of the CNMI.
          (7) CNMI Offshore Area means that portion of the EEZ seaward of 3 nautical miles from the shoreline of the CNMI.
          (8) Pacific Remote Island Areas means that portion of the EEZ seaward of the Pacific Remote Island Areas, with the exception of Midway Atoll.
          (b) The inner boundary of each fishery management area is a line coterminous with the seaward boundaries of the State of Hawaii, the Territory of American Samoa, the Territory of Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
          (c) The outer boundary of each fishery management area is a line drawn in such a manner that each point on it is 200 nautical miles from the baseline from which the territorial sea is measured, or is coterminous with adjacent international maritime boundaries. The boundary between the fishery management areas of Guam and the Northern Mariana IslandsCNMI extends to those points which are equidistant between Guam and the island of Rota in the CNMINorthern Mariana Islands.

      [FR Doc. E6-9966 Filed 6-22-06; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
        Transportation Security Administration
        49 CFR Parts 1540, 1544, and 1560
        [Docket No. TSA-2007-28572]
        RIN 1652-AA45
        Secure Flight Program

          AGENCY:
          Transportation Security Administration, DHS.

          ACTION:
          Proposed Rule: Extension of Comment Period.

          SUMMARY:
          The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is extending the comment period on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding the Secure Flight Program published on August 23, 2007. TSA has decided to grant, in part, two requests for an extension of the comment period and will extend the comment period for thirty (30) days. The comment period will now end on November 21, 2007, instead of October 22, 2007.

          DATES:
          The comment period for the proposed rule at 72 FR at 48356, August 23, 2007, is extended until November 21, 2007.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by the TSA docket number to this rulemaking, to the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS), a government-wide, electronic docket management system, using any one of the following methods:

            Electronically: You may submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking portal at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

            Mail, In Person, or Fax: Address, hand-deliver, or fax your written comments to the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001; Fax 202-493-2251. The Department of Transportation (DOT), which maintains and processes TSA's official regulatory dockets, will scan the submission and post it to FDMS.
          See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for format and other information about comment submissions.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Kevin Knott, Policy Manager, Secure Flight, Office of Transportation Threat Assessment and Credentialing, TSA-19, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220, telephone (240) 568-5611.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Comments Invited

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

        With each comment, please identify the docket number at the beginning of your comments. TSA encourages commenters to provide their names and addresses. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the document, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. You may submit comments and material electronically, in person, by mail, or fax as provided under ADDRESSES, but please submit your comments and material by only one means. If you submit comments by mail or delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8.5 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing.
        If you want TSA to acknowledge receipt of comments submitted by mail, include with your comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the docket number appears. We will stamp the date on the postcard and mail it to you.
        TSA will file in the public docket all comments received by TSA, except for comments containing confidential information and sensitive security information (SSI),1
           TSA will consider all comments received on or before the closing date for comments and will consider comments filed late to the extent practicable. The docket is available for public inspection before and after the comment closing date.

            1 “Sensitive Security Information” or “SSI” is information obtained or developed in the conduct of security activities, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy, reveal trade secrets or privileged or confidential information, or be detrimental to the security of transportation. The protection of SSI is governed by 49 CFR part 1520.

        Handling of Confidential or Proprietary Information and Sensitive Security Information (SSI) Submitted in Public Comments

        Do not submit comments that include trade secrets, confidential commercial or financial information, or SSI to the public regulatory docket. Please submit such comments separately from other comments on the action. Comments containing this type of information should be appropriately marked as containing such information and submitted by mail to the address listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
        Upon receipt of such comments, TSA will not place the comments in the public docket and will handle them in accordance with applicable safeguards and restrictions on access. TSA will hold documents containing SSI, confidential business information, or trade secrets in a separate file to which the public does not have access, and place a note in the public docket that TSA has received such materials from the commenter. However, if TSA determines that portions of these comments may be made publicly available, TSA may include a redacted version of the comment in the public docket. If TSA receives a request to examine or copy information that is not in the public docket, TSA will treat it as any other request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552) and the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS”) FOIA regulation found in 6 CFR part 5.
        Reviewing Comments in the Docket

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

        You may review TSA's electronic public docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov. In addition, DOT's Docket Management Facility provides a physical facility, staff, equipment, and assistance to the public. To obtain assistance or to review comments in TSA's public docket, you may visit this facility between 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays, or call (202) 366-9826. This docket operations facility is located in the West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140 at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
        Availability of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Comments Received
        You can get an electronic copy using the Internet by—

        (1) Searching the electronic Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) Web page at http://www.regulations.gov;
        (2) Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html; or
        (3) Visiting TSA's Security Regulations Web page at http://www.tsa.gov and accessing the link for “Research Center” at the top of the page.

        In addition, copies are available by writing or calling the individual in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Make sure to identify the docket number of this rulemaking.
        Comment Period Extension

        On August 23, 2007, TSA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on the Secure Flight Program (see 72 FR 48356, August 23, 2007). The NPRM had a 60-day comment period that would end on October 22, 2007. In a request dated September 28, 2007, the Air Transport Association of America (ATA) requested that the deadline for filing comments on the Secure Flight NPRM be extended from October 22, 2007 to December 21, 2007. In a request dated October 4, 2007, the International Air Transport Association (IATA) similarly requested that the deadline for filing comments on the Secure Flight NPRM be extended until January 21, 2008.
        TSA has decided to grant, in part, ATA and IATA's requests for an extension and will extend the comment period for thirty (30) days. The comment period will now be a total of 90 days and will end on November 21, 2007. This extension will allow the aviation industry and other interested entities and individuals additional time to complete their comments on the NPRM.
        With this extension, the comment period for the Secure Flight NPRM will be the same as the comment period that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) provided for the NPRM on Passenger Manifests for Commercial Aircraft Arriving in and Departing From the United States; Passenger and Crew Manifests for Commercial Vessels Departing From the United States (“Pre-Departure APIS”). 71 FR 43681 (Aug. 23, 2006) (extending the original comment period from 30 days to 90 days). As discussed in the Secure Flight NPRM, the Pre-Departure APIS rulemaking is related to the Secure Flight NPRM in that together, the two rulemakings explain the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS’) proposed unified approach to watchlist matching for international and domestic passenger flights.

          Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on October 18, 2007.
          Gale Rossides,
          Acting Deputy Administrator.

      [FR Doc. 07-5254 Filed 10-19-07; 3:33 pm]
      BILLING CODE 9110-05-P


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 64
        [WC Docket No. 02-112, CC Docket No. 00-175; FCC 03-111]
        Sunset of the BOC Separate Affiliate and Related Requirements and 2000 Biennial Regulatory Review Separate Affiliate Requirements

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          In this proceeding, the Commission seeks comment on the appropriate classification of Bell Operating Companies' (BOCs) and incumbent independent local exchange carriers' (independent LECs) provision of in-region, interstate and international interexchange telecommunications services. It seeks comment on how changes to the competitive landscape within the interexchange market should affect this classification and on what approach is appropriate for BOCs and independent LECs, if and when these carriers may provide in-region, interexchange services outside of a separate affiliate. The Commission also asks parties to comment on whether there are alternative regulatory approaches, in lieu of dominant carrier regulation, that the Commission could adopt to detect or deter any potential anticompetitive behavior.

          DATES:
          Comments are due June 30, 2003, and Reply Comments are due July 28, 2003.

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

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Robert Tanner, Attorney-Advisor, and Pamela Megna, Senior Economist, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, at (202) 418-1580, or via the Internet at rtanner@fcc.gov and pmegna@fcc.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        This is a summary of the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) in WC Docket No. 02-112 and CC Docket No. 00-175, FCC 03-111, adopted May 15, 2003, and released May 19, 2003. The complete text of this FNPRM is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC, 20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating 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. It is also available on the Commission's Web site at http://www.fcc.gov.

        Synopsis of the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
        1. Background. In the Competitive Carrier proceeding, which included the Section 272(f)(1) Sunset of the BOC Separate Affiliate and Related Requirements, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, WC Docket No. 02-112, (67 FR 42211, June 21, 2002) and the Section 272(f)(1) Sunset of the BOC Separate Affiliate and Related Requirements, Memorandum Opinion and Order, WC Docket No. 02-112, (68 FR 6351, February 7, 2003), the Commission established a regulatory framework to distinguish between carriers with market power (i.e., dominant carriers) and those without market power (i.e., non-dominant carriers). Currently, BOCs (with the exception of Verizon in the state of New York where the requirements sunset this past December 23, 2002) are required to provide in-region, interLATA services through a separate section 272 affiliate, and independent LECs are required to provide in-region, interstate services through a separate affiliate. Both types of interexchange affiliates are regulated as non-dominant. Both BOCs and independent LECs are permitted to provide interexchange services out-of-region on an integrated basis and are regulated as non-dominant.

        2. The Commission has concluded that the section 272 separate affiliate and related requirements sunset on a state by state basis, and it has allowed the requirements to sunset in New York by operation of law. The Commission has also sought comment in the 2000 Biennial Regulatory Review: Separate Affiliate Requirements of Section 64.1903 of the Commission's Rules (66 FR 50139, October 2, 2001) proceeding on whether to eliminate the separate affiliate requirements imposed on independent LECs when they provide in-region, domestic interstate or international interexchange services. To the extent that the Commission permits BOCs and independent LECs to provide long distance services on an integrated basis, the FNPRM seeks comment on how these carriers should be classified.

        3. Identification of BOC and Independent LEC In-Region, Interstate and International Interexchange Markets. The Commission seeks comment on the relevant markets in which BOCs and independent LECs provide these interstate and international interexchange services. The Commission seeks comment on whether the mass market and enterprise markets are the appropriate customer classes for this proceeding. The Commission also asks commenters to consider services provided over traditional wireline local telephone networks as well as comparable services provided over other platforms. This FNPRM seeks comment on the relevant service and geographic markets in which these carriers provide services and the ability of BOCs and independent LECs to exercise market power in any relevant market. The Commission seeks to develop a record on both the retail long distance and upstream access markets.
        4. Market Power Analysis. The FNPRM recognizes that there have been significant changes in the competitive landscape since the Commission considered whether to categorize the incumbent LECs' long distance affiliates as dominant or non-dominant, including: BOC authority to offer in-region, interLATA services in 41 states (and the District of Columbia); an increase in bundled telecommunications services offerings; an increase in offerings of wide area pricing plans by mobile telephony carriers; and an increase in the provision of Internet-based applications. Accordingly, the Commission seeks comment on how these changes should affect its relevant market and market power analysis.
        5. Appropriate Regulatory Requirements. The Commission seeks comment on whether there is a continued need for dominant carrier regulation of BOCs' in-region, long distance services after sunset of the section 272 structural and related requirements. In addition, the Commission asks whether it should classify independent LECs as non-dominant or dominant in their provision of in-region, long distance services if it eliminates or modifies the separate affiliate requirements currently imposed on independent LECs. The Commission also seeks comment on alternatives to dominant carrier regulation as a means of addressing any issues that arise when telephone companies provide in-region, long distance services on an integrated basis.
        6. The Commission seeks comment on whether the statutory requirements that continue to apply to BOCs under section 272(e) reduce the need for dominant carrier regulation. For instance, the Commission asks parties whether sections 272(e)(1) and (e)(3) provide adequate safeguards to deter anticompetitive behavior and whether the Commission should rely on enforcement activity alone or should adopt additional requirements to implement these provisions.
        7. The Commission also asks parties to comment on whether adoption of the measures considered in the Special Access Performance Metrics proceeding would aid enforcement of section 272(e)(1), and thus provide sufficient post-sunset safeguards. In addition, it asks whether similar measures would be appropriate to apply to independent LECs. Finally, the Commission seeks comment on whether additional safeguards are necessary to prevent potential cost misallocation and discrimination.
        Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

        8. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared the present Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities by the policies and rules proposed in this FNPRM. Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the Further Notice provided previously. The Commission will send a copy of the FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. In addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.
        Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

        9. In this proceeding, the Commission seeks comment on: (1) The appropriate regulatory classification of BOCs for the provision of in-region, interstate and international interexchange services post sunset of the section 272 safeguards; (2) the appropriate regulatory classification of independent LECs for the provision of in-region, interstate and international interexchange services absent the Fifth Report and Order requirements; (3) the relevant identification of service markets affecting the provision of in-region, interstate and international interexchange services; and (4) the appropriate regulatory requirements for the provision of in-region, interstate and international interexchange services by BOCs and independent LECs, given current market conditions. The basic elements of the existing dominant carrier regulatory requirements were initially developed some 25 years ago and have focused on constraining the ability of dominant carriers to exercise market power. Application of these requirements to carriers without the ability to leverage market power by restricting output could lead to incongruous results. Thus, the Commission asks interested parties to address whether dominant carrier regulations are well or ill-suited to prevent the risks associated with the BOCs' and independent LECs' provision of in-region, interstate and international interexchange services post section 272 sunset (for the BOCs) and absent the separation safeguards (applicable to independent LECs). The Commission also requests that parties address how it can best balance the goals of deterring BOC and independent LEC anticompetitive and discriminatory behavior and eliminating unnecessary regulation.
        Legal Basis
        10. The legal basis for any action that may be taken pursuant to the FNPRM is contained in sections 1, 2, 4(i)-4(j), 201, 202, 272 and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i)-4(j), 201, 202, 272 and 303(r).
        Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Proposed Rules Will Apply
        11. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that will be affected by the proposed rules. The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA).

        12. The Commission has included small incumbent LECs in this present RFA analysis. As noted above, a “small business” under the RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small business size standard (e.g., a telephone communications business having 1,500 or fewer employees), and “is not dominant in its field of operation.” The SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small incumbent LECs are not dominant in their field of operation because any such dominance is not “national” in scope. It has therefore included small incumbent LECs in this RFA analysis, although the Commission emphasizes that this RFA action has no effect on FCC analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
        13. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically directed toward providers of incumbent local exchange service. The closest applicable size standard under the SBA rules is for Wired Telecommunications Carriers. This provides that such a carrier is small entity if it employs no more than 1,500 employees. Commission data from 2000 indicate that there are 1,329 incumbent local exchange carriers, total, with approximately 1,024 having 1,500 or fewer employees. The small carrier number is an estimate and might include some carriers that are not independently owned and operated; we are therefore unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of these carriers that would qualify as small businesses under SBA's size standard. Consequently, the Commission estimates that there are no more than 1,024 ILECS that are small businesses possibly affected by our action.
        Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance Requirements
        14. The Commission expects that any proposal we may adopt pursuant to this Further Notice will decrease existing reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements. As noted previously, dominant carriers are currently subject to a broad range of regulatory requirements that are generally intended to protect consumers from unjust and unreasonable rates, terms, and conditions and unreasonable discrimination in the provision of communications services. The Commission's dominant carrier regulation includes rate regulation and tariff filing requirements, and also requires supporting information, which in some cases includes detailed cost data, to be filed by dominant carriers with their tariff filings. Moreover, the Commission has international dominant carrier tariff filing requirements. This FNPRM seeks comment on whether continued dominant carrier regulation is appropriate post sunset of the section 272 separate affiliate requirements on a state-by-state basis, and whether it is necessary to streamline or modify the traditional dominant carrier regulations of BOCs' provision of in-region, interstate and international interexchange services. This FNPRM also seeks comment on whether dominant carrier regulation of independent LECs is necessary should the Commission eliminate the separation requirements currently imposed on such carriers for their provision of in-region, interstate and international interexchange services.
        Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
        15. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant, specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.
        16. The overall objective of this proceeding is to reduce regulatory burdens on BOCs and independent LECs to the extent consistent with the public interest. The Further Notice seeks specific proposals as to which existing regulations might be removed or streamlined in their application to a BOC's or independent LEC's provision of interstate and international interexchange services absent current safeguards, and asks parties to comment on whether BOCs and independent LECs should be classified as non-dominant in the provision of such services post sunset or, in the case of independent LECs, once separation safeguards are removed. The Further Notice also asks parties to discuss whether, and to what extent, dominant carrier regulation is aptly suited to achieving the Commission's objectives to promote competition and to deter anticompetitive behavior by BOCs and independent LECs. This Further Notice addresses whether there are specific aspects of dominant carrier regulation that continue to be necessary to constrain BOCs and independent LECs from engaging in certain types of anticompetitive behavior, and whether there are specific aspects of the regulations that do not address potential problems that may arise in the interexchange marketplace, absent the separate affiliate requirements. Again, the Commission seeks comment on these matters, especially as they might affect small entities subject to the rules.
        Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rules
        17. None.
        Ordering Clauses
        18. Pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1, 2, 4(i)-4(j), 201, 202, 272 and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i)-4(j), 201, 202, 272 and 303(r), this FNPRM is adopted.
        19. The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of this FNPRM, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          Marlene H. Dortch,
          Secretary.

      [FR Doc. 03-13231 Filed 5-28-03; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Office of the Secretary
        49 CFR Part 40
        [Docket OST-99-6578]
        RIN 2105-AC49
        Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs

          AGENCY:
           Office of the Secretary, DOT.

          ACTION:
           Notice of public meetings.

          SUMMARY:

           The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) is scheduling three public listening sessions on its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to revise the Department's drug and alcohol testing procedures, published in the Federal Register on December 9, 1999 ( 64 FR 69076 ). The meetings are scheduled approximately 90 days after the publication of the NPRM to provide the public time to read and review the document. The intent of the meetings is to obtain additional information from the public that was not submitted in formal comments to the docket.

          DATES AND ADDRESSES:
           The public meetings will be held on March 20 and 21, 2000, at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004; on March 28, 2000, at the Hilton Los Angeles Airport, 5711 West Century Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90045, telephone number (310) 410-4000, fax (310) 410-6177; and on March 30, 2000, at the Crowne Plaza, Dallas Market Center, 7050 Stemmons Freeway, Dallas, TX 75247, telephone number (214) 630-8500, fax (214) 630-0037. Meeting facilities may accommodate only a limited number of attendees and all participants and commenters must pre-register to ensure entry into the meetings. Registration procedures are specified under supplemental information below. Other persons will be accommodated as space and time permit.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
           For general meeting information and to register for one of the meetings, contact the DOT contractor, Marti Bludworth, Transportation Safety Institute (TSI), Special Programs Division, DTI-100, 4400 Will Rogers Parkway, Suite 205, Oklahoma City, OK 73108-2057, telephone number (800) 862-4832, extension 323, fax number (405) 946-4268, or e-mail marti_bludworth@tsi.jccbi.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        A. Purpose
        The purpose of the meetings is to provide all segments of the transportation industry and the general public with an opportunity to make statements, which have not already been made previously, to the docket. These meetings would also give DOT the opportunity to ask questions and ensure that the public comments are clearly understood by the Department. It may also give the Department the opportunity to clarify issues related to comments that had already been submitted to the docket during the early days of the formal comment period. Questions by commenters and other attendees to the DOT will be permitted as time allows.
        B. Procedural Matters
        The meeting in Washington, DC will be held for a day and a half to provide ample opportunity for attendees to make comments and for DOT to have additional time, if needed, to ask follow up questions. This geographic location will also provide added opportunity for additional DOT staff and industry representatives from the Capital area to attend the meeting. All facilities will be ADA accessible. The Department will provide sign-language interpreters, if requested. Attendees needing this accommodation should notify TSI no later than February 28, 2000. If no requests are received, this service may not be available.
        Because these are listening sessions, DOT will not offer space for vendors or exhibitors to display their products.

        All meetings will have limited, first-come-first-served capacity due to physical constraints of the facilities. “First come” will be based on the date that the registration information is received by TSI. Once the capacity of the meeting room is reached, DOT will not be able to ensure entry to subsequent applicants. TSI will confirm those who are registered as attendees, those who are registered to speak, and those for whom space is not available. Provisions may be made at the meeting sites to grant additional admission to offset “no-shows” who previously registered for attendance.
        C. Registration Procedures
        All attendees, to include commenters, must pre-register with TSI for these meetings. For all attendees, the following information is requested: Full name, full mailing address, and telephone number (in case the address is not legible or additional information is needed); the name of the city at which you want to attend the meeting; and if you will register at the hotel to take advantage of blocked rooms (Los Angeles and Dallas only). TSI will confirm your attendance by mail.

        Commenters must provide the same information listed above and, in addition, indicate which agency, association, company, or institution they are representing and which issue they will address (e.g., Collection, MRO, Laboratory).
        For convenience to the public, a form has been developed to simplify registration for these meetings. A copy may be obtained from TSI or from the DOT Fax-On-Demand system, by calling (800) 225-3784 and requesting document number 140; the registration form will be faxed to the requestor. Use of the form will expedite the process of registration and provide quicker notification to attendees.
        Please note that attendees at the Washington, DC meeting will have to make arrangements for hotels and other lodging facilities on their own, since the meeting is being held in a Federal building. Names, addresses, and telephone numbers of local hotels can be obtained from TSI and will be included in the registration packet. The hotels in Los Angeles and Dallas have blocked out rooms for attendees at group rates. These will be available on a first-come basis. Room reservations must be made by the attendees directly with the hotel. Group rates will be available until March 6, 2000, at the Los Angeles and Dallas hotels, after which, they may revert to normal rates.
        D. Written Statements
        Individuals, whether speaking in a personal or a representative capacity on behalf of an organization, will be limited to a 4-minute statement. The Department will try to accommodate all individuals wishing to present statements at these meetings. If the available time does not permit this, individuals will be scheduled based on the date their registration is received by TSI. However, the Department reserves the right to exclude some individuals from speaking to avoid duplication or if it is necessary to present a balance of viewpoints and issues.
        Individuals wishing to make statements are requested to submit three copies of their comments to be received by TSI no later than February 28, 2000; statements received after that date may not be selected. These should be typed for clarity, include the commenters name, address, phone number, and which agency or group you represent. These will be placed into the docket following the meetings and will be available to the public for review. The Department will not be recording the statements read at the meetings. However, the Department plans to record the two scheduled question and answer sessions and any questions asked by the panel of the commenters or the attendees and their answers.
        E. Tentative Agenda
        The following is a draft agenda and may be modified based on commenters input and type of statements submitted. There will be a question and answer session after the morning session and again after the afternoon session. Questions should be submitted at the meeting site on 3 x 5 cards at the time of registration for the morning sessions and at the registration desk following lunch, for the afternoon sessions. Please note that the Washington, DC meeting will be scheduled for one and a half days, will start at 9 a.m. both days, and will end at 5 p.m. on the first day and 1 p.m. on the second day. Also, there will be no registration on the previous evening; registration will begin at 7:30 a.m. on the day of the meeting. The Washington, DC meeting agenda will be similar to the one day agenda, with additional time for statements and question and answer sessions.
        Tentative Agenda for Los Angeles, CA and Dallas, TX Meetings
        Previous evening: Registration 6 p.m.-8 p.m.
        7-7:45 Registration
        8-8:15 Opening remarks—administrative announcements
        8:15-9 presentation
        9-9:45 Collection Issues
        9:45-10:15 Break
        10:15-11:15 Labor/Management/Employee Issues
        11:15-12 Alcohol Testing Issues
        12-12:30 Questions and Answers
        12:30-2 LUNCH
        2-2:45 Medical Review Officer (MRO) Issues
        2:45-3:30 Substance Abuse Professional (SAP) Issues
        3:30-4 Break
        4-4:45 Service Agents/Public Interest Exclusion Issues
        4:45-5:30 Laboratory Issues
        5:30-6:30 Questions and Answers; General Comments and Wrap Up

        These meetings are intended to solicit additional information and public views on the NPRM.

          Issued this 11th Day of January, 2000, at Washington, DC.
          Mary Bernstein,
          Director, Office of Drug and Alcohol, Policy and Compliance, Department of Transportation.

      [FR Doc. 00-1004 Filed 1-14-00; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-62-U


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE-------
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 635
        [I.D. 070803B]
        Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; Swordfish and Bluefin Tuna Quotas; Public Hearings

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of public hearings.

          SUMMARY:

          NMFS will hold three public hearings to receive comments from fishery participants and other members of the public regarding two proposed regulations.  The first proposed rule, previously published in the Federal Register on June 20, 2003, would implement the recommendations from the 2002 meeting of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) regarding North and South Atlantic swordfish.  The second proposed rule, previously published in the Federal Register on July 10, 2003, would implement the 2003 fishing year specifications for the Atlantic bluefin tuna (BFT) fishery to set BFT quotas for each of the established fishing categories, to set General category effort controls, to allocate 25 metric tons of BFT to account for incidental catch of BFT by pelagic longline vessels in the vicinity of the management boundary area, to define the management boundary area and applicable restrictions, and to revise permit requirements to allow General category vessels to participate in registered recreational HMS fishing tournaments and to allow permit applicants a 10-day period to make permit category changes to correct errors.  To accommodate people unable to attend a hearing or wishing to provide written comments, NMFS also solicits written comments on these proposed rules.

          DATES:
          The public hearings are scheduled as follows:
          1. Tuesday, July 29, 2003-Gloucester, MA 7-9 p.m.
          2. Tuesday, July 29, 2003-Madeira Beach, FL 7-9 p.m.
          3. Friday, August 1, 2003-Silver Spring, MD 1-3 p.m.
          Written comments on the proposed rule regarding swordfish must be received by 5 p.m. on August 4, 2003.  Written comments on the proposed rule regarding bluefin tuna must be received on or before August 8, 2003.

          ADDRESSES:
          The locations for the public hearings are as follows:
          1.  Sawyer Free Library, 2 Dale Ave, Gloucester, MA 01930
          2.  City Hall, 300 Municipal Drive, Madeira Beach, FL 33708
          3.  NOAA Science Center, 1301 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910
          Written comments on the swordfish proposed rule should be sent to:  Christopher Rogers, Chief, Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Office of Sustainable Fisheries (F/SF1), NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Comments also may be sent via facsimile (fax) to 301-713-1917.  Written comments on the bluefin tuna proposed rule should be sent to:  Brad McHale, Highly Migratory Species Management Division, Office of Sustainable Fisheries (F/SF1), NMFS, One Blackburn Dr. Gloucester, MA 01930.  Comments also may be sent via facsimile (fax) to 978-281-9340.  Comments will not be accepted if submitted via e-mail or the Internet.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Tyson Kade at 301-713-2347 regarding the proposed rule for swordfish or Brad McHale at 978- 281-9260 regarding the proposed rule for bluefin tuna.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The proposed regulations that are the subject of the hearings are necessary to address requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act for the conservation and management of HMS.Complete descriptions of the measures, and the purpose and need for the proposed actions, are contained in the proposed rules and are not repeated here.  The swordfish proposed rule published June 20, 2003 (68 FR 36967), and the bluefin tuna proposed rule published July 10, 2003 (68 FR 41103).  Copies of the proposed rule may be obtained by writing (see
          ADDRESSES) or by calling the listed contact person (see
          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
        Public Hearings

        The hearings for each proposed rule will be conducted jointly at the identified locations (see
          ADDRESSES).  NMFS intends to dedicate half of the hearing time to each rule.  The public is reminded that NMFS expects participants at the public hearings to conduct themselves appropriately.  At the beginning of each public hearing, a NMFS representative will explain the ground rules (e.g., alcohol is prohibited from the hearing room; attendees will be called to give their comments in the order in which they registered to speak; each attendee will have an equal amount of time to speak; and attendees should not interrupt one another).  The NMFS representative will attempt to structure the hearing so that all attending members of the public will be able to comment, if they so choose, regardless of the controversial nature of the subject(s).  Attendees are expected to respect the ground rules, and, if they do not, they will be asked to leave the hearing.
        Special Accommodations

        The public hearings are physically accessible to people with disabilities.  Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Tyson Kade (see
          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7 days prior to the hearing or meeting.

          Dated:  July 9, 2003.
          Bruce C. Morehead,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 03-17867 Filed 7-14-03; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [I.D. 020703D]
        New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

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

          ACTION:
          Public meeting.

          SUMMARY:
          The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a 3-day Council meeting on March 4, 5, and 6, 2003, to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

          DATES:
          The meeting will be held on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday March 4, 5, and 6, 2003.  The meeting will begin at 1:30 a.m. on Tuesday and 8:30 a.m. on Wednesday and Thursday.

          ADDRESSES:
          The meeting will be held at the Providence Biltmore Hotel, 11 Dorrance Street, Kennedy Plaza, Providence, RI 02903; telephone 401/412-0700.  Requests for special accommodations should be addressed to the New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950; telephone (978) 465-0492.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council, (978) 465-0492.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Tuesday, March 4, 2003
        Following introductions, the Council will address a number of groundfish fishery-related issues during this first afternoon session.  There will be a briefing on the February 3-5, 2003 Groundfish Peer Review meeting, and a discussion about incorporation of those meeting results, including advice on biological reference points, into the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP) Amendment 13 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS).
        Wednesday, March 5, 2003
        The meeting will reconvene with reports on recent activities from the Council Chairman and Executive Director, the NMFS Regional Administrator, Northeast Fisheries Science Center and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council liaisons, NOAA General Counsel and representatives of the U.S. Coast Guard, NMFS Enforcement and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.  The Groundfish Committee will report on and ask the Council to identify management alternatives for further development and inclusion in the Amendment 13 DSEIS.  Their discussion also will relate to measures that would implement the U.S./Canada Resource Sharing Agreement, groundfish stock rebuilding time periods and modifications to alternatives as necessary to meet any revised fishing mortality targets.  The Groundfish Committee report will continue until the end of the day.
        Thursday, March 6, 2003
        The third day of the meeting will begin with a presentation by NMFS staff on the agency's new coastwide initiative to collect recreational fishing data.  The report will include details about the methodology that will be employed to collect catch and effort data from the for-hire recreational fleet.  The presentation will be followed by a brief public comment period during which any member of the public may bring forward items relevant to Council business but not otherwise listed on the agenda for this meeting.  The Habitat Committee will report on recommendations developed at the recent Groundfish, Scallop and Monkfish Joint Advisors meeting on habitat alternatives for Council consideration in Amendment 10 to the Atlantic Sea Scallop FMP and in Amendment 13 to the Northeast Multispecies FMP.  The Habitat Committee also will identify a preferred alternative for Scallop Amendment 10.  Finally, the Council will review the habitat section, with all alternatives and analyses, of the Northeast Multispecies Amendment 13 DSEIS, select a preferred alternative and conduct a final vote to approve this element of the DSEIS.  The Council meeting will adjourn following the conclusion of any other outstanding business. Although other non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subjects of formal action during this meeting.  Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided that the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.
        Special Accommodations

        This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities.  Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul J. Howard (see ADDRESSES) at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

          Dated: February 11, 2003.
          Richard W. Surdi,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 03-3990 Filed 2-18-03; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 25
        [IB/SD IB Docket No. 12-267; DA 12-2046]
        Comprehensive Review of Licensing and Operating Rules for Satellite Services

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; extension of comment and reply comment period.

          SUMMARY:

          In this document, the International Bureau granted a request for an extension of time to file comments in response to a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that initiated a comprehensive review of the Commission's rules governing space stations and earth stations. The original deadline for filing comments was December 24, 2012; the original deadline for filing reply comments was January 22, 2013. The International Bureau extended the deadlines for filing both comments and reply comments by three weeks.

          DATES:
          Comments must be received on or before January 14, 2013. Reply comments must be received on or before February 13, 2013.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments and reply comments, identified by IB Docket No. 12-267, by any of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov or phone 202-418-0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.

          For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          William Bell (202) 418-0741, Satellite Division, International Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554. For additional information concerning the information collection(s) contained in this document, contact Judith B. Herman at 202-418-0214, or via the Internet at Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        The original Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published in the Federal Register at 77 FR 67172, November 8, 2012. This is a summary of the Order in IB Docket No. 12-267, Comprehensive Review of Licensing and Operating Rules for Satellite Services, adopted and released on December 19, 2012. The full text of this document is available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 202-488-5300, facsimile 202-488-5563, or via email FCC@BCPIWEB.com.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          Gardner H. Foster,
          Assistant Bureau Chief.

      [FR Doc. 2012-31391 Filed 12-28-12; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-P