        DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
        Forest Service
        36 CFR Part 242
        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        Fish and Wildlife Service
        50 CFR Part 100
        RIN 1018-AU05
        Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska, Subpart C and Subpart D: 2006-07 Subsistence Taking of Fish and Shellfish Regulations

          AGENCIES:
          Forest Service, Agriculture; Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          This proposed rule would establish regulations for fishing seasons, harvest limits, methods, and means related to taking of fish and shellfish for subsistence uses during the 2006-07 regulatory year. The rulemaking is necessary because subpart D is subject to an annual public review cycle. When final, this rulemaking would replace the fish and shellfish taking regulations included in the “Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska, Subpart D: 2005-06 Subsistence Taking of Fish and Wildlife Regulations,” which expire on March 31, 2006. This rule would also amend the Customary and Traditional Use Determinations of the Federal Subsistence Board and the General Regulations related to the taking of fish and shellfish.

          DATES:

          The Federal Subsistence Board must receive your written public comments and proposals to change this proposed rule no later than March 25, 2005. Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Councils (Regional Councils) will hold public meetings to receive proposals to change this proposed rule on dates ranging from February 21, 2005, through March 25, 2005. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional information on the public meetings.

          ADDRESSES:
          Please submit proposals electronically to Subsistence@fws.gov. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for file formats and other information about electronic filing. You may also submit written comments and proposals to the Office of Subsistence Management, 3601 C Street, Suite 1030, Anchorage, Alaska 99503. The public meetings will be held at various locations in Alaska. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional information on locations of the public meetings.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Chair, Federal Subsistence Board, c/o U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Attention: Thomas H. Boyd, Office of Subsistence Management; (907) 786-3888. For questions specific to National Forest System lands, contact Steve Kessler, Regional Subsistence Program Leader, USDA, Forest Service, Alaska Region, (907) 786-3592.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Public Review Process—Regulation Comments, Proposals, and Public Meetings
        The Federal Subsistence Board (Board) will hold meetings on this proposed rule at the following locations in Alaska:

        Region 1—Southeast Regional Council, Petersburg, February 21, 2005
        Region 2—Southcentral Regional Council, Anchorage, March 15, 2005
        Region 3—Kodiak/Aleutians Regional Council, Port Lions, March 21, 2005
        Region 4—Bristol Bay Regional Council, Naknek, February 24, 2005
        Region 5—Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta Regional Council, Toksook Bay, February 24, 2005
        Region 6—Western Interior Regional Council, Allakaket, March 8, 2005
        Region 7—Seward Peninsula Regional Council, Nome, February 23, 2005
        Region 8—Northwest Arctic Regional Council, Kotzebue, March 9, 2005
        Region 9—Eastern Interior Regional Council, Venetie, March 2, 2005
        Region 10—North Slope Regional Council, Barrow, March 2, 2005

        We will publish notice of specific dates, times, and meeting locations in local and statewide newspapers prior to the meetings. We may need to change locations and dates based on weather or local circumstances. The amount of work on each Regional Council's agenda will determine the length of the Regional Council meetings.

        Electronic filing of comments (preferred method): Please submit electronic comments (proposals) and other data to Subsistence@fws.gov. Please submit as either WordPerfect or MS Word files, avoiding the use of any special characters and any form of encryption.
        During May 2005, we will compile and distribute for additional public review the written proposals to change subpart D fishing regulations and in subpart C the customary and traditional use determinations. A 30-day public comment period will follow distribution of the compiled proposal packet. We will accept written public comments on distributed proposals during the public comment period, which is presently scheduled to end on June 30, 2005.
        We will hold a second series of Regional Council meetings in September and October 2005, to assist the Regional Councils in developing recommendations to the Board. You may also present comments on published proposals to change fishing and customary and traditional use determination regulations to the Regional Councils at those fall meetings.
        The Board will discuss and evaluate proposed changes to the subsistence taking of fish and shellfish regulations during a public meeting to be held in Anchorage in January 2006. You may provide additional oral testimony on specific proposals before the Board at that time. The Board will then deliberate and take final action on proposals received that request changes to this proposed rule at that public meeting.

            Please Note.

          The Board will not consider proposals for changes relating to hunting or trapping regulations at this time. The Board will be calling for proposed changes to those regulations in August 2005.

        The Board's review of your comments and fish and shellfish proposals will be facilitated by your providing the following information: (a) Your name, address, and telephone number; (b) the section and/or paragraph of the proposed rule for which your change is being suggested; (c) a statement explaining why the change is necessary; (d) the proposed wording change; (e) any additional information you believe will help the Board in evaluating your proposal. Proposals that fail to include the above information, or proposals that are beyond the scope of authorities in § _ .24 subpart C, and §§ _ .25, _ .27, or _ .28, subpart D, may be rejected. The Board may defer review and action on some proposals if workload exceeds work capacity of staff, Regional Councils, or Board. These deferrals will be based on recommendations of the affected Regional Council, staff members, and on the basis of least harm to the subsistence user and the resource involved. Proposals should be specific to customary and traditional use determinations or to subsistence fishing seasons, harvest limits, and/or methods and means.
        Background
        Title VIII of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 3111-3126) requires that the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture (Secretaries) implement a joint program to grant a preference for subsistence uses of fish and wildlife resources on public lands, unless the State of Alaska enacts and implements laws of general applicability that are consistent with ANILCA and that provide for the subsistence definition, preference, and participation specified in sections 803, 804, and 805 of ANILCA. The State implemented a program that the Department of the Interior previously found to be consistent with ANILCA.

        However, in December 1989, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled in McDowell v. State of Alaska that the rural preference in the State subsistence statute violated the Alaska Constitution. The Court's ruling in McDowell required the State to delete the rural preference from the subsistence statute and, therefore, negated State compliance with ANILCA. The Court stayed the effect of the decision until July 1, 1990.
        As a result of the McDowell decision, the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture (Departments) assumed, on July 1, 1990, responsibility for implementation of Title VIII of ANILCA on public lands. On June 29, 1990, the Temporary Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska were published in the Federal Register (55 FR 27114). Consistent with subparts A, B, and C of these regulations, as revised October 14, 2004 (69 FR 60957), the Departments established a Federal Subsistence Board to administer the Federal Subsistence Management Program. The Board's composition includes a Chair appointed by the Secretary of the Interior with concurrence of the Secretary of Agriculture; the Alaska Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; the Alaska Regional Director, U.S. National Park Service; the Alaska State Director, U.S. Bureau of Land Management; the Alaska Regional Director, U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs; and the Alaska Regional Forester, USDA Forest Service. Through the Board, these agencies participate in the development of regulations for subparts A, B, and C, and the annual subpart D regulations.
        All Board members have reviewed this proposed rule and agree with its substance. Because this proposed rule relates to public lands managed by an agency or agencies in both the Departments of Agriculture and the Interior, identical text would be incorporated into 36 CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100.
        Applicability of Subparts A, B, and C

        Subparts A, B, and C (unless otherwise amended) of the Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska, 50 CFR 100.1 to 100.23 and 36 CFR 242.1 to 242.23, remain effective and apply to this proposed rule. Therefore, all definitions located at 50 CFR 100.4 and 36 CFR 242.4 would apply to regulations found in this subpart.
        Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Councils
        Pursuant to the Record of Decision, Subsistence Management Regulations for Federal Public Lands in Alaska, April 6, 1992, and the Subsistence Management Regulations for Federal Public Lands in Alaska, 36 CFR 242.11 (2004) and 50 CFR 100.11 (2004), and for the purposes identified therein, we divide Alaska into 10 subsistence resource regions, each of which is represented by a Regional Council. The Regional Councils provide a forum for rural residents with personal knowledge of local conditions and resource requirements to have a meaningful role in the subsistence management of fish and wildlife on Alaska public lands. The Regional Council members represent varied geographical, cultural, and user diversity within each region.
        The Regional Councils have a substantial role in reviewing the proposed rule and making recommendations for the final rule. Moreover, the Council Chairs, or their designated representatives, will present their Council's recommendations at the Board meeting in January 2006.
        Proposed Changes From 2005-06 Seasons and Harvest Limit Regulations

        Subpart D regulations are subject to an annual cycle and require development of an entire new rule each year. Customary and traditional use determinations (§ _ .24 of subpart C) are also subject to an annual review process providing for modification each year. The text of the 2004-05 subparts C and D final rule, as modified by Federal Subsistence Board actions during its January 11-13, 2005, public meeting, serves as the foundation for the 2006-07 subparts C and D proposed rule. Please see the 2004-05 subparts C and D final rule published in the February 3, 2004 (69 FR 5018), issue of the Federal Register. The modifications for 2005-06 made by the Board during its January 2005 meeting may be viewed on the Office of Subsistence Management Web site at http://www.alaska.fws.gov/asm/home.html. The regulations contained in this proposed rule would take effect on April 1, 2006, unless elements are changed by subsequent Board action following the public review process outlined herein.
        Conformance With Statutory and Regulatory Authorities

          National Environmental Policy Act Compliance—A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) that described four alternatives for developing a Federal Subsistence Management Program was distributed for public comment on October 7, 1991. That document described the major issues associated with Federal subsistence management as identified through public meetings, written comments, and staff analysis and examined the environmental consequences of the four alternatives. Proposed regulations (subparts A, B, and C) that would implement the preferred alternative were included in the DEIS as an appendix. The DEIS and the proposed administrative regulations presented a framework for an annual regulatory cycle regarding subsistence hunting and fishing regulations (subpart D). The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was published on February 28, 1992.
        Based on the public comment received, the analysis contained in the FEIS, and the recommendations of the Federal Subsistence Board and the Department of the Interior's Subsistence Policy Group, it was the decision of the Secretary of the Interior, with the concurrence of the Secretary of Agriculture, through the U.S. Department of Agriculture—Forest Service, to implement Alternative IV as identified in the DEIS and FEIS (Record of Decision on Subsistence Management for Federal Public Lands in Alaska (ROD), signed April 6, 1992). The DEIS and the selected alternative in the FEIS defined the administrative framework of an annual regulatory cycle for subsistence hunting and fishing regulations. The final rule for Subsistence Management Regulations for Public Lands in Alaska, subparts A, B, and C (57 FR 22940, published May 29, 1992), implemented the Federal Subsistence Management Program and included a framework for an annual cycle for subsistence hunting and fishing regulations.

        An environmental assessment was prepared in 1997 on the expansion of Federal jurisdiction over fisheries and is available from the office listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. The Secretary of the Interior with the concurrence of the Secretary of Agriculture determined that the expansion of Federal jurisdiction did not constitute a major Federal action, significantly affecting the human environment and has, therefore, signed a Finding of No Significant Impact.

          Compliance with Section 810 of ANILCA—A Section 810 analysis was completed as part of the FEIS process on the Federal Subsistence Management Program. The intent of all Federal subsistence regulations is to accord subsistence uses of fish and wildlife on public lands a priority over the taking of fish and wildlife on such lands for other purposes, unless restriction is necessary to conserve healthy fish and wildlife populations. The final Section 810 analysis determination appeared in the April 6, 1992, ROD, which concluded that the Federal Subsistence Management Program, under Alternative IV with an annual process for setting hunting and fishing regulations, may have some local impacts on subsistence uses, but it does not appear that the program may significantly restrict subsistence uses.
        During the environmental assessment process, an evaluation of the effects of this rule was also conducted in accordance with Section 810. This evaluation supports the Secretaries' determination that the rule will not reach the “may significantly restrict” threshold for notice and hearings under ANILCA Section 810(a) for any subsistence resources or uses.

          Paperwork Reduction Act—The information collection requirements contained in this rule have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and assigned OMB control number 1018—0075, which expires August 31, 2006. We may not conduct or sponsor, and you are not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a current valid OMB control number.

          Economic Effects—This rule is not a significant rule subject to OMB review under Executive Order 12866. This rulemaking will impose no significant costs on small entities; this rule does not restrict any existing sport or commercial fishery on the public lands, and subsistence fisheries will continue at essentially the same levels as they presently occur. The exact number of businesses and the amount of trade that will result from this Federal land—related activity is unknown. The aggregate effect is an insignificant positive economic effect on a number of small entities, such as tackle, boat, and gasoline dealers. The number of small entities affected is unknown; however, the fact that the positive effects will be seasonal in nature and will, in most cases, merely continue preexisting uses of public lands indicates that they will not be significant.

        In general, the resources to be harvested under this rule are already being harvested and consumed by the local harvester and do not result in an additional dollar benefit to the economy. However, we estimate that 24 million pounds of fish (including 8.3 million pounds of salmon) are harvested by the local subsistence users annually and, if given a dollar value of $3.00 per pound for salmon [Note: $3.00 per pound is much higher than the current commercial value for salmon] and $0.58 per pound for other fish, would equate to about $34 million in food value Statewide.
        The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation of flexibility analyses for rules that will have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities, which include small businesses, organizations, or governmental jurisdictions. The Departments certify based on the above figures that this rulemaking will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), this rule is not a major rule. It does not have an effect on the economy of $100 million or more, will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, and does not have significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
        Title VIII of ANILCA requires the Secretaries to administer a subsistence priority on public lands. The scope of this program is limited by definition to certain public lands. Likewise, these regulations have no potential takings of private property implications as defined by Executive Order 12630.

        The Secretaries have determined and certify pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this rulemaking will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any given year on local or State governments or private entities. The implementation of this rule is by Federal agencies and there is no cost imposed on any State or local entities or tribal governments.
        The Secretaries have determined that these regulations meet the applicable standards provided in Sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, regarding civil justice reform.
        In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. Title VIII of ANILCA precludes the State from exercising subsistence management authority over fish and wildlife resources on Federal lands unless it meets certain requirements.
        In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, “Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments” (59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated possible effects on Federally recognized Indian tribes and have determined that there are no effects. The Bureau of Indian Affairs is a participating agency in this rulemaking.
        On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 on regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, or use. This Executive Order requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. As this rule is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 13211, affecting energy supply, distribution, or use, this action is not a significant action and no Statement of Energy Effects is required.

          Drafting Information: William Knauer drafted these regulations under the guidance of Thomas H. Boyd, of the Office of Subsistence Management, Alaska Regional Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska. Taylor Brelsford, Alaska State Office, Bureau of Land Management; Bob Gerhard, Alaska Regional Office, National Park Service; Dr. Glenn Chen, Alaska Regional Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs; Rod Simmons, Alaska Regional Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and Steve Kessler, USDA-Forest Service provided additional guidance.

          List of Subjects
          36 CFR Part 242
          Administrative practice and procedure, Alaska, Fish, National forests, Public lands, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife.
          50 CFR Part 100
          Administrative practice and procedure, Alaska, Fish, National forests, Public lands, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife.

        For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Federal Subsistence Board proposes to amend 36 CFR 242 and 50 CFR 100 for the 2006-07 regulatory year. The text of the amendments would be the same as the final rule for the 2004-05 regulatory year (69 FR 5018) as modified by Federal Subsistence Board actions January 11-13, 2005.

          Dated: November 30, 2004.
          Steve Kessler,
          Subsistence Program Leader, USDA-Forest Service.
          Dated: November 30, 2004.
          Thomas H. Boyd,
          Acting Chair, Federal Subsistence Board.

      [FR Doc. 05-270 Filed 1-5-05; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4310-55-P; 3410-11-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 648
        [I.D. 010703A]
        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 January 28, 29, and 30, 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 January 28, 29, and 30, 2003.  The meeting will begin at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday and 8:30 a.m. on Wednesday and Thursday.

          ADDRESSES:
          The meeting will be held at the Marriott Courtyard, 1000 Market Street, Portsmouth, NH 03801; telephone (603) 436-2121.  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, January 28, 2003
        Following introductions, there will be a public review workshop held to discuss the results of the 36th Northeast Regional Stock Assessment Workshop (SAW). Species to be reviewed include yellowtail flounder, winter flounder, northern shrimp, and striped bass.  At the conclusion of the SAW presentation, the Transboundary Management Guidance Committee will brief the Council on its December 17-18, 2002, meeting on the U.S./Canada Resource Sharing Agreement discussions.  The Groundfish Committee will report following a lunch break.  Items to be covered include review of the time line for development of Amendment 13 to the Northeast Multispecies Fishery Management Plan (FMP), including a discussion of analytic and peer review requirements necessary to complete the amendment; implications of considering different rebuilding periods, alternatives that should be analyzed under different rebuilding time periods, and possible elimination of alternatives from further consideration; development of a recommendation to NOAA Fisheries for implementation of a DAS leasing program to be implemented prior to the adoption of Amendment 13 and preliminary discussion of measures to implement the U.S./Canada Resource Sharing Agreement.  The Council also has scheduled a scoping meeting for Amendment 2 to the Spiny Dogfish FMP on Tuesday January 28 at 7 p.m.
        Wednesday, January 29, 2003
        The Scallop Committee will review and seek approval of the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for Amendment 10 to the Atlantic Sea Scallop FMP.  Issues to be considered include:   an area rotation system and access to the Georges Bank groundfish closed areas; measures to minimize habitat and bycatch impacts; changes to the framework adjustment process, as well as day-at-sea adjustments and other changes to the plan as required. Interim measures to access the Georges Bank areas and closed areas elsewhere in 2004 also will be included. Following approval of this document, the Council will schedule a series of public hearings to seek public comments on the draft Amendment 10 alternatives and the associated SEIS.
        Thursday, January 30, 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. This 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 NOAA Fisheries Regional Administrator will then conduct a formal consultation with the Council on the American Lobster FMP, providing members with an opportunity to comment on regulations, both proposed and future, developed by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.  The Whiting Committee will ask for approval of final action on Framework Adjustment 38 to the Northeast Multispecies FMP (whiting, red hake, and offshore hake).  Measures include the establishment of an exempted grate raised footrope trawl fishery in the inshore Gulf of Maine, with specifications for a season, fishing area, mesh size, gear restrictions, whiting possession limits, and other incidental catch limits.  The Council also will consider a new control date to determine future participation in the small mesh multispecies fishery.  Before adjourning for the day, the Council is expected to approve final Northeast Skate Complex FMP submission documents, including a description of management measures, draft regulations, and a summary of impacts. The FMP includes permit and reporting requirements; prohibitions on the possession of barndoor skate, thorny skate, and smooth skate in the Gulf of Maine and a possession limit for the skate wing fishery.
        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: January 7, 2003.
          Bruce C. Morehead,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 03-635 Filed 1-10-03; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-S


        DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
        Federal Railroad Administration
        49 CFR Part 232
        [Docket No. FRA-2006-26175, Notice No. 3]
        RIN 2130-AB84
        Electronically Controlled Pneumatic Brake Systems

          AGENCY:
          Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT).

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule; partial reopening of comment period.

          SUMMARY:
          This document announces an additional 15-day period to file comments in this proceeding. This extension provides interested parties an opportunity to comment on recently revised or new standards developed by the Association of American Railroads (AAR) that are related to the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in this proceeding.

          DATES:
          Written comments must be received by May 5, 2008. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent possible without incurring additional expenses or delays.

          ADDRESSES:

            Comments: Comments related to Docket No. FRA-2006-26175, may be submitted by any of the following methods:
          1. Web site: Comments should be filed at the Federal eRulemaking Portal, http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the Web site's online instructions for submitting comments.
          2. Fax: 202-493-2251.
          3. Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
          4. Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

            Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and docket number or Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov including any personal information. Please see the Privacy Act heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for Privacy Act information related to any submitted comments or materials.

            Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov or to Room W12-140 on the Ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          James Wilson, Office of Safety Assurance and Compliance, Motive Power and Equipment Division, RRS-14, Mail Stop 25, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202-493-6259); or Jason Schlosberg, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, Mail Stop 10, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202-493-6032).

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        I. Background
        On September 4, 2007, FRA published in the Federal Register an NPRM seeking comments on proposed rules relating to the implementation and use of electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) brake systems on freight trains and freight cars. See 72 FR 50820. The NPRM proposed incorporation by reference of existing AAR Standards and Recommended Practices related to ECP brake systems. At the time FRA published the NPRM, those standards, collectively known as the AAR S-4200 Series Standards, included the following:
        (1) AAR S-4200, ECP Cable-Based Brake Systems—Performance Requirements (2004);
        (2) AAR S-4210, ECP Cable-Based Brake System Cable, Connectors, and Junction Boxes—Performance Specifications (2002);
        (3) AAR S-4220, ECP Cable-Based Brake DC Power Supply—Performance Specification (2002);
        (4) AAR S-4230, Intratrain Communication (ITC) Specification for Cable-Based Freight Train Control System (2004);
        (5) AAR S-4250, Performance Requirements for ITC Controlled Cable-Based Distributed Power Systems (2004); and
        (6) AAR S-4260, ECP Brake and Wire Distributed Power Interoperability Test Procedures (2007).
        In the NPRM, FRA noted that the AAR S-4200 Series do not provide requirements for hardware and software configuration management plans and acknowledged that AAR was in the process of developing standards related to ECP brake system configuration management. The NPRM further noted that if a configuration management standard were to be adopted and published by the AAR subsequent to the closing of the NPRM's comment period, FRA would consider other forums for receiving comments, including, but not limited to, issuing a supplemental notice informing interested parties of the standard's availability.
        Subsequent to the closing of the comment period in this proceeding, AAR made changes to the S-4200 Series Standards by modifying individual standards S-4200 and S-4210 and by proposing a new standard S-4270. FRA has preliminarily reviewed these changes and notes that they are in each case either (i) more protective of safety or (ii) safety neutral but designed to make ECP brake systems more practical for field application. Accordingly, FRA presents the proposed changes for comment with a view toward potential incorporation in the final rule.

        After a period for comment by AAR members, AAR published a revised S-4200 standard and postponed the implementation date from February 16, 2008, to June 1, 2008. See AAR Circular Letters C-10686 and C-10697; AAR Standard S-4200 (2008). AAR Circular Letter C-10686 summarized the changes to the S-4200 standard as follows:

          Section 4.2.2.1 Description of Setup: This section was revised to limit changes of the empty/load setting to changes of E/L from empty to loaded only.
          Section 4.2.2.2.4 Empty/Load: A sentence was added to stipulate that the engineer shall not be allowed to change the train's empty/load setting from loaded to empty while the train is in motion.
          Section 4.2.2.2.4.1 Empty Load Selection While the Train is Enroute: A sentence was revised to require that the train be stopped with a full service brake application or a full service brake application must have been commanded for at least 2 minutes in order to change the train's empty/load setting from loaded to empty.
          Section 4.2.2.2.5 Train Net Braking Ratio: This section was revised to require that, if the OEM provides the optional ability to change the train NBR, the engineer will not be given the opportunity to change the setting.
          Section 4.2.2.2.6 Configuration Confirmation: Empty/load value was added to brake pipe pressure setpoint for which the HEU shall display the entered values and request a confirmation from the engineer.
          Section 4.3.12 Mechanical Brake Cylinder and Reservoir Venting: This section was revised to require a means to manually vent pressure from the brake cylinder and reservoir at every CCD location from both sides of the car without reliance on electronic activation or control.
          Note 1 has been revised to require that the brake cylinder release valve be capable of releasing air pressure from all brake cylinders; regardless of the charge status of the brake pipe.
          Note 3 is new.
          Note 4 is old Note 3 revised.
          Note 6 is old Note 7 revised.
          Note 7 is new (pneumatic backup functionality when brake cylinder release valve has been activated)
          Section 4.4.2.1.1.1 Recovering from a Missed EOT Beacon Fault: A sentence has been added requiring re-initialization of the train if the EOT beacon is lost for more than 15 seconds while in RUN mode.
          Section 4.4.16 Recovery from Emergency, Fault-Induced, or Penalty Brake Applications: When recovering from an emergency brake application, the operator will position the brake lever to 100% brake application to release the interlock.
          Section 6.0 Approval Procedure: This detailed section has been replaced with a cross reference to AAR Standard S-4240 (adopted January 16, 2007, Circular Letter c-10454).

        After a period for comment by AAR members, AAR also issued revisions to its S-4210 standard. See AAR Circular Letter C-10650; AAR Standard S-4210 (2007). While the standard was apparently implemented in November 2007, its accompanying AAR Circular Letter C-10650 was issued on December 6, 2007. AAR Circular Letter C-10650 summarized the changes to the S-4210 standard as follows:

          Section 3.1 General Characteristics: The overall outside dimension of the cable was changed from 0.70 inch minimum/0.75 inch maximum to 0.675 inch minimum/0.725 inch maximum.
          Section 6.0 CONNECTOR ASSEMBLIES: This revised section covers the intercar connector, cable, strength member (lanyard), and car body junction box plug connector.
          Section 7.0 INTERCAR CONNECTOR PERFORMANCE AND TESTING DESCRIPTIONS: This section has been significantly expanded.
          Section 8.0 This is a new section with a TESTING SEQUENCE:
          Section 9.0 CAR BODY CONNECTIONS: The car body connector mounting envelope has been clarified and expanded with a figure added. Figures for the various end air hose mounting arrangements and brackets have been added. The length of the entire connector assembly would be revised to 36 inches + or − 1 inch for conventional cars versus 40 inches now.

        AAR has also proposed a new standard S-4270 to address ECP brake system configuration management plans. According to AAR Circular Letter C-10750, this specification describes how the industry will control and track hardware and software changes to the ECP equipped interchange car fleet. AAR is currently seeking comment on proposed standard S-4270.
        To ensure that the final rule in this proceeding does not rely on outdated information or technical standards, FRA is proposing to replace the NPRM's references to S-4200 and S-4210 with the aforementioned updated versions of those standards. Parties may be reluctant to adopt technology whose standards may be soon outdated or obsolete. Thus, implementation of a final rule relying on outdated standards or procedures may further delay the proliferation, implementation, and use of ECP brake systems.
        For these same reasons, FRA also seeks comments on the proposed draft standard S-4270. In the NPRM, FRA proposed the incorporation by reference of standard S-4270 if the standard was adopted by AAR prior to the date necessary for its inclusion in the final rule. However, FRA will not include S-4270 in the final rule if substantial changes are made from the current draft or AAR's adoption of S-4270 is not complete in the near future.
        Accordingly, FRA is hereby reopening and extending the comment period in this proceeding for an additional 15 days from the date of this notice. During this additional comment period, FRA is seeking comments solely on the updated versions of S-4200 and S-4210 and the new standard S-4270, subject to the caveats explained above. FRA will not consider comments relating to any issues outside of this narrow scope. FRA has placed the revised and new standards and their concomitant circular letters referenced herein in the public docket to this proceeding.
        Privacy Act

        Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the document (or signing the document, 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 (65 FR 19477) or at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

          Issued in Washington, DC, on April 14, 2008.
          Grady C. Cothen, Jr.,
          Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program Development.

      [FR Doc. E8-8432 Filed 4-17-08; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        Bureau of Land Management
        43 CFR Parts 2800 and 2880
        [WO-350-06-1430-PP]
        RIN 1004-AD87
        Update of Linear Right-of-Way Rental Schedule

          AGENCY:
          Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

          ACTION:
          Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

          SUMMARY:
          The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) requests comments and suggestions to assist in the writing of a proposed rule to update the linear right-of-way rental schedule in 43 CFR parts 2800 and 2880. The rental schedule covers most linear rights-of-way granted under section 28 of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended (MLA), and Title V of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA). Both laws require the holder of a right-of-way to pay annually, in advance, the fair market value to occupy, use, or traverse public lands for facilities such as power lines, fiber optic lines, pipelines, roads, and ditches.
          Section 367 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (the Act) directs the Secretary of the Interior to update the per-acre rental fee schedule found in 43 CFR 2806.20. This update is to be completed not later than one year after the date of enactment of the Act, which occurred on August 8, 2005. The Act requires that the BLM revise the per-acre rental fee-zone value schedule by state, county, and type of linear right-of-way use to reflect current land values in each zone. The Act also requires the Secretary of Agriculture (Forest Service) to make the same revisions for rights-of-way on National Forest System lands. We encourage members of the public to provide comments and suggestions to help with updating the BLM's and the Forest Service's rental schedule, as described in the Act.

          DATES:
          We will accept comments and suggestions on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking until May 30, 2006.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments by any of the following methods listed below.

            Mail: Director (630) Bureau of Land Management, Administrative Record, Room 401 LS, Eastern States Office, 7450 Boston Boulevard, Springfield, Virginia 22153.

            Personal or messenger delivery: Room 401, 1620 L Street, NW,, Washington, DC 20036.

            Federal eRulemaking Portal:
            http://www.regulations.gov.

            E-mail:
            comments_washington@blm.gov. (Include “Attn: AD87”).

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          For information on the substance of the Advance Notice, please contact Christian Crowley at (202) 208-3799. For information on procedural matters, please contact Ian Senio at (202) 452-5049. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339, to contact the above individuals during business hours. FIRS is available twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        I. Public Comment Procedures
        Commenting on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
        Written comments or suggestions should:
        • Be specific;
        • Explain the reasoning behind your comments and suggestions;
        • Address the issues outlined in the Notice; and
        • Where possible, reference the specific section or paragraph of existing laws or regulations that you are addressing.
        For comments and recommendations to be most useful, and most likely to influence decisions on the content of the proposed rule, they should:
        • Be substantive;
        • Facilitate development of a uniform, cost effective administrative process for calculating rental payments;
        • Result in a fair and reasonable payment of fair market rent; and
        • Include citations to, and analyses of, applicable laws and regulations.

        The BLM is particularly interested in receiving comments and suggestions about the topics listed in Section III of this Notice. All communication on these topics should refer to RIN 1004-AD87, and may be submitted by several methods listed under the ADDRESSES section of this Notice.

        Comments received after the close of the comment period (see DATES) need not be considered or included in the Administrative Record for the proposed rule. Likewise, comments delivered to an address other than those listed above (see ADDRESSES) need not be considered or included in the Administrative Record for the proposed rule.
        Reviewing Comments Submitted by Others

        Comments, including names and street addresses of respondents, will be available for public review at the address listed under “ADDRESSES: Personal or messenger delivery” during regular business hours (7:45 a.m. to 4:15 a.m.), Monday through Friday, except holidays. Individual respondents may request confidentiality, which will be honored to the extent allowable by law. Those wishing to withhold their name or address (except for the city or town) must state this prominently at the beginning of their comment. Submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for public inspection in their entirety.
        II. Background
        Statutory
        Section 367 of the Act, Fair Market Value Determinations for Linear Rights-of-Way Across Public Lands and National Forests, directs the Secretary of the Interior to: (1) Update 43 CFR 2806.20, which contains the per-acre rent schedule for linear rights-of-way; (2) revise the per acre rental fee zone value schedule by state, county, and type of linear right-of-way uses to reflect current values of land in each zone; and (3) complete the update within one year of enactment of the Act. The Act also directs the Secretary of Agriculture to make the same revisions to the regulations that apply to rights-of-way granted on National Forest System (NFS) lands. This provision supplements existing Secretarial authority to assess and collect fair market value of the right to use, cross, or traverse public or NFS lands.
        Current Linear Rent Schedule
        On July 8, 1987, and September 30, 1987, the BLM published regulations establishing rental schedules for linear rights-of-way granted under Section 28 of the MLA and Title V of FLPMA (52 FR 25818 and 52 FR 36576). The Forest Service uses these same schedules to charge rent for rights-of-way across NFS lands. Therefore, updates to these schedules would also impact the Forest Service and users of NFS lands.
        The 1987 rental schedule was developed to set fair market rent, while minimizing the need for individual real estate appraisals for each right-of-way requiring rent payments, as well as to avoid the costs, delays, and unpredictability of the appraisal process in reasonably setting fair market rent.
        The 1987 rental schedule defines eight fee zones based on the distribution of average land values by county in each of the states, except Alaska. (The existing rent schedule does not apply to Alaska. Linear right-of-way rental fees in Alaska are currently determined on a case-by-case basis based on local market values.) A county was assigned to one of the eight Zone Values, based on land values in the county: lower-value counties were assigned lower-numbered zones. The eight Zone Values were set at $50, $100, $200, $300, $400, $500, $600, and $1,000 per acre. A county's Zone Value is translated into a per-acre Zone Rent by use of the adjustment formula described below. To calculate the annual right-of-way rental payment, the Zone Rent is multiplied by the total acreage within the right-of-way. The formula for Zone Rent is:

        Zone Rent = (Zone Value) × (Impact Adjustment) × (Price Index) × (Treasury Security Rate)

        The Zone Value term in the formula is the land value that was established for each of the eight zones. The Zone Values established in 1987 have not been updated since that time; however, it is generally recognized that land values have increased in most areas over the past 20 years.
        The Impact Adjustment term in the formula reflects the differences in land-use impacts between (1) oil, gas, and other energy-related pipelines, roads, ditches, and canals, and (2) electrical transmission and distribution lines, telephone lines, and non-energy related pipelines. Energy-related pipelines and roads were considered as having a greater surface disturbance impact on the land, and were adjusted to 80 percent of the Zone Value. Electrical transmission and distribution lines, phone lines, and non-energy related pipelines with a smaller area of disturbance, were adjusted to 70 percent of the Zone Value.
        The Price Index term in the formula allows the rental values to increase with inflation. This number changes annually reflecting the change in the Gross Domestic Product, Implicit Price Deflator Index.
        The Treasury Security term in the formula reflects a reasonable rate of return to the United States for the use of the land within the right-of-way. The 1987 regulations were based on a rate of return of 6.41 percent for a one year Treasury Security.
        BLM Right-of-Way Program and Revenues
        The BLM generated over $15 million in right-of-way rental receipts for fiscal year 2005. The BLM administers nearly 90,000 rights-of-way, of which over 48,000 are subject to a rental payment. Wyoming and New Mexico together account for slightly more than 30,000 of the rights-of-way subject to rent. Seventy-five percent of all right-of-way revenues were collected by five BLM State Offices. These five State Offices and the revenues collected are listed in Table 1 below.

          Table 1.—Right-of-Way Rental Receipts for “Top Five” BLM State Offices

            State office
            Rental receipts(FY 2005)

            Nevada
            $3,678,823

            California
            2,946,170

            Wyoming
            1,804,274

            New Mexico
            1,661,834

            Arizona
            1,272,795

            Total
            11,363,896

        Non-linear rights-of-way, including communication site authorizations, account for nearly 3,500 authorizations generating over $5 million in revenue. Subtracting the communication site revenue from the $15 million reported for all rights-of-way results in an average rent of approximately $250 for linear rights-of-way. The average rental payment in 2005, including communication site authorizations, was approximately $320.
        Description of Issues
        The rental schedule is a cost-effective means for calculating and billing right-of-way holders for the use of public lands. In general, the rental schedule must be fair and reasonable and rent must be calculated in a consistent manner, depending on the type of authorized use.
        To facilitate the billing process, the rental schedule itself must be a cost-effective way to administer the right-of-way program relative to the amount of revenue collected. In addition, right-of-way holders should be able to estimate rental payments and forecast changes in billed rent in accordance with the terms and conditions of the right-of-way. Updating the rental schedule formula will require changes to current rental payments; depending on the magnitude of the changes in various components of the formula, rents are likely to increase as a result of the general increase in land values. Impacts on groups or individual holders ultimately depend on the formula options considered.

        As part of the rulemaking process, impacts of any increase in rent on current holders and small businesses will be evaluated. In addition, the proposed regulation will likely include a phase-in period and other provisions designed to facilitate the transition to the new rents. In cases where the applicant feels that the calculated rent is excessive, additional relief may include provisions for reduction or waiver of rent as is currently provided for by 43 CFR 2806.15 or for an alternative calculation of rent, based on an appraisal report. For such an appraisal report to be admissible, the applicant would be required to follow applicable Departmental and Agency instructions, pay for the cost of the appraisal report, and ensure that the report meets Federal standards.
        The BLM is considering using existing published information or statistical data for updating the rental schedule, such as information published by the National Agricultural Statistic Service (NASS). NASS publishes two reports: (1) The Census of Agriculture published every five years (Five Year Census), and (2) the annual Land Values and Cash Rents Summary (Annual Report).
        The Five Year Census includes land values by county for each state. The land values are reported for cropland, woodland, permanent pasture, and rangeland and includes buildings.

        The NASS data in the Annual Report includes state average pastureland values. The statewide average for pastureland may approximate rural agricultural types of land (woodlands and rangelands) that are administered by the BLM. You can find more detailed information about these two reports at the NASS Web site at: http://www.nass.usda.gov/index.asp.
        III. Description of Information Requested
        The BLM is particularly interested in receiving comments on the following questions:
        1. What available published information, statistical data, or reports should BLM use to update the current linear right-of-way rental fee Zone Values?
        2. What, if any, other terms, e.g., impact adjustment or rate of return, used in the 1987 rental formula should BLM update, clarify, or revise? Should the one-year Treasury Rate (rate of return) used in the current formula, i.e., 6.41 percent, be revised to reflect the current rate? If yes, should the rate be updated annually?
        3. What, if any, provisions should BLM include in the proposed regulation to provide relief from large, unexpected increases in individual rental payments?
        4. How should the number of rental zones be changed in the new linear right-of-way rental schedule, if at all?
        5. Should the new linear right-of-way rental schedule split some states and counties into more than one zone?
        6. Should the new linear right-of-way rental schedule apply to BLM-administered lands in Alaska?
        The BLM further solicits public comments on other approaches for updating the 1987 linear right-of-way rental schedule. Other suggestions will be considered inasmuch as they may facilitate updating the current schedule.

          Dated: April 17, 2006.
          Chad Calvert,
          Acting Assistant Secretary of the Interior.

      [FR Doc. E6-6338 Filed 4-26-06; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 4310-84-P


        FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
        47 CFR Part 73
        [MB Docket No. 21-128; RM-11895; DA 21-397; FR ID 20569]
        Television Broadcasting Services Bristol, Virginia

          AGENCY:
          Federal Communications Commission.

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule.

          SUMMARY:
          The Commission has before it a petition for rulemaking filed by Sinclair Media Licensee, LLC (Petitioner), the licensee of WCYB-TV (NBC), channel 5, Bristol, Virginia. The Petitioner requests the substitution of channel 35 for channel 5 at Bristol, Virginia in the DTV Table of Allotments.

          DATES:
          Comments must be filed on or before May 24, 2021 and reply comments on or before June 7, 2021.

          ADDRESSES:
          Federal Communications Commission, Office of the Secretary, 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the FCC, interested parties should serve counsel for the Petitioner as follows: Paul A. Cicelski, Esq., Lerman Senter, PLLC, 2001 L Street NW, Washington, DC 20036.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

          Joyce Bernstein, Media Bureau, at (202) 418-1647; or Joyce Bernstein, Media Bureau, at Joyce.Bernstein@fcc.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        In support of its channel substitution request, the Petitioner states that the Commission has recognized that VHF channels have certain propagation characteristics which may cause reception issues for some viewers, and also that the reception of VHF signals require larger antennas, that are generally not well suited to the mobile applications expected under flexible use, relative to UHF channels. According to the Petitioner, WCYB-TV has received numerous complaints from viewers unable to receive over-the-air signal, despite being able to receive signals from other station. In addition, the Petitioner states that while the proposed channel 35 noise limited contour does not completely encompass the relevant channel 5 noise limited contour, WCYB-TV is an NBC affiliate and there are six other NBC affiliated stations that serve some portion of the loss area. In aggregate, these six stations serve the entire area of the channel 5 noise limited contour not encompassed by the proposed channel 35 contour. The Bureau used the technical parameters of WCYB-TV's original post-transition digital channel 5 facility (File No. BPCDT-20080327AFS) in determining any predicted loss which may occur from the proposed channel substitution.
        This is a synopsis of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, MB Docket No. 21-128; RM-11895; DA 21-397, adopted April 5, 2021, 2021, and released April 5, 2021. The full text of this document is available for download at https://www.fcc.gov/edocs. To request materials in accessible formats (braille, large print, computer diskettes, or audio recordings), please send an email to FCC504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & Government Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (VOICE), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

        This document does not contain information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed information collection burden “for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, do not apply to this proceeding.
        Members of the public should note that all ex parte contacts are prohibited from the time a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is issued to the time the matter is no longer subject to Commission consideration or court review, see 47 CFR 1.1208. There are, however, exceptions to this prohibition, which can be found in § 1.1204(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.1204(a).
        See §§ 1.415 and 1.420 of the Commission's rules for information regarding the proper filing procedures for comments, 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

          List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
          Television.

          Federal Communications Commission.
          Thomas Horan,
          Chief of Staff, Media Bureau.

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

          PART 73—Radio Broadcast Service

        1. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

          Authority:
           47 U.S.C. 154, 155, 301, 303, 307, 309, 310, 334, 336, 339.

          § 73.622
          [Amended]

        2. In § 73.622 in paragraph (i), amend the Post-Transition Table of DTV Allotments under Virginia by revising the entry for Bristol to read as follows:

          § 73.622
          Digital television table of allotments.

          (i) * * *

              Community
              Channel No.

              *    *    *    *    *

                Virginia

              *    *    *    *    *

              Bristol
              35

              *    *    *    *    *

      [FR Doc. 2021-08366 Filed 4-22-21; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        RIN 0648-BF15
        Fisheries Off West Coast States; Comprehensive Ecosystem-Based Amendment 1; Amendments to the Fishery Management Plans for Coastal Pelagic Species, Pacific Coast Groundfish, U.S. West Coast Highly Migratory Species, and Pacific Coast Salmon

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of availability; request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          NMFS announces that the Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) has submitted Comprehensive Ecosystem-Based Amendment 1 (CEBA 1) for Secretarial review. CEBA 1 would bring new ecosystem component species (collectively, “Shared EC Species”) into each of the Council's four fishery management plans (FMPs) through amendments to those FMPs, and would prohibit the future development of new directed commercial fisheries for Shared EC Species within the U.S. West Coast Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

          DATES:
          Comments on CEBA 1 must be received on or before February 9, 2016.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments on CEBA 1, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2015-0123, by any of the following methods:
          • Electronic Submission: Submit all electronic public comments via the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NOAA-NMFS-2015-0123, click the “Comment Now!” icon, complete the required fields, and enter or attach your comments.
          • Mail: Submit written comments to William W. Stelle, Jr., Regional Administrator, West Coast Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE., Seattle, WA 98115-0070; Attn: Yvonne deReynier.

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

          Electronic copies of CEBA 1 may be obtained from the Council Web site at http://www.pcouncil.org.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Yvonne deReynier, 206-526-6129, yvonne.dereynier@noaa.gov.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

        Ocean fisheries in the EEZ off Washington, Oregon, and California are managed under the CPS, Groundfish, HMS, and Salmon FMPs. CEBA 1 includes the following amendments to the Council's FMPs: Amendment 15 to the CPS FMP, Amendment 25 to the Pacific Coast Groundfish FMP, Amendment 3 to the FMP for U.S. West Coast HMS, and Amendment 19 to the Pacific Coast Salmon FMP. All FMPs are implemented under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., by regulations at 50 CFR part 660. The MSA requires that each regional fishery management council submit any FMP or amendment to NMFS for review and approval, partial approval, or disapproval. The MSA also requires that NMFS, upon receiving a plan or amendment, publish an announcement in the Federal Register notifying the public that the plan or amendment is available for review and comment. NMFS will consider the public comments received during the comment period described above in determining whether to approve the FMP amendments that would implement CEBA 1.
        Background

        The Council maintains a Fishery Ecosystem Plan, which includes an ecosystem initiative process for reviewing fisheries management issues that may affect multiple FMPs and for developing policies and regulations to address those issues under the authority of its FMPs. Under the ecosystem initiative process, the Council has reviewed trophic connections between the West Coast EEZ's unfished forage fish species and the EEZ's predator species managed under the MSA, the Endangered Species Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Through that review, the Council determined that it wanted to bring a suite of unfished and unmanaged forage fish species into its FMPs as ecosystem component (EC) species, and to prohibit directed commercial fisheries for those species.

        The Council has recommended including the following species as Shared EC Species in all four of its FMPs: Round herring (Etrumeus teres) and thread herring (Opisthonema libertate and O. medirastre); mesopelagic fishes of the families Myctophidae, Bathylagidae, Paralepididae, and Gonostomatidae; Pacific sand lance (Ammodytes hexapterus); Pacific saury (Cololabis saira); silversides (family Atherinopsidae); smelts of the family Osmeridae; and pelagic squids (families: Cranchiidae, Gonatidae, Histioteuthidae, Octopoteuthidae, Ommastrephidae except Humboldt squid (Dosidicus gigas), Onychoteuthidae, and Thysanoteuthidae). Under Federal regulations at 50 CFR 600.310(d)(5)(iii), a species may be included in an FMP as an EC species: For data collection purposes; to inform the understanding of ecosystem considerations related to specification of OY for the associated fishery; to assist in the development of conservation and management measures for the associated fishery; or to address other ecosystem issues. The Council recommended including the suite of Shared EC Species in its FMPs as EC species to address “other ecosystem issues,” because these species are broadly used as prey by marine mammals, seabird, and fish of the U.S. West Coast EEZ. The Council also noted that Shared EC Species are among the known prey of fishery management unit species of all four of the Council's FMPs; therefore, Shared EC Species support predator species' growth and development and may also be identified as EC species “for ecosystem considerations related to specification of optimum yield for the associated fishery.”
        CEBA 1, through its implementing FMP amendments and regulations, would prohibit the future development of fisheries for Shared EC Species within the U.S. West Coast EEZ until the Council has had an adequate opportunity to assess the scientific information relating to any proposed directed fishery and to consider potential impacts to existing fisheries, fishing communities, and the greater marine ecosystem. The Council deemed this action necessary to proactively protect unmanaged, unfished forage fish of the U.S. West Coast EEZ, in recognition of the importance of these forage fish to the species managed under the Council's FMPs and to the larger California Current Ecosystem. This action would not supersede tribal or state fishery management for these species.
        Consideration of Public Comments

        NMFS welcomes comments on CEBA 1 and the proposed FMP amendments through the end of the comment period. CEBA 1 is available on the Council's Web site (www.pcouncil.org). The Council also transmitted a proposed rule to implement CEBA 1 for Secretarial review and approval. NMFS expects to publish and request public review and comment on that rule in the near future. Public comments on the proposed rule must be received by the end of the comment period for CEBA 1 in order to be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on the FMP amendments. All comments received by the end of the CEBA 1 comment period, whether specifically directed to the FMP amendments or the proposed rule, will be considered in the approval/disapproval decision.

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

          Dated: December 8, 2015.
          Alan D. Risenhoover,
          Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 2015-31236 Filed 12-10-15; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


        DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
        Defense Acquisition Regulations System
        48 CFR Parts 204 and 244
        RIN 0750-AF61
        Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Closeout of Contract Files (DFARS Case 2006-D045)

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

          ACTION:
          Proposed rule with request for comments.

          SUMMARY:
          DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to remove text addressing DoD procedures for closeout of contract files. The text proposed for removal will be relocated to the DFARS companion resource, Procedures, Guidance, and Information.

          DATES:
          Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted in writing to the address shown below on or before May 29, 2007, to be considered in the formation of the final rule.

          ADDRESSES:
          You may submit comments, identified by DFARS Case 2006-D045, using any of the following methods:
          • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
          • E-mail: dfars@osd.mil. Include DFARS Case 2006-D045 in the subject line of the message.
          • Fax: (703) 602-0350.
          • Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Ms. Deborah Tronic, OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), IMD 3C132, 3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-3062.
          • Hand Delivery/Courier: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Crystal Square 4, Suite 200A, 241 18th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-3402.

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

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Ms. Deborah Tronic, (703) 602-0289.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        A. Background

        This proposed rule revises DFARS 204.804 to remove text addressing DoD procedures for closeout of contract files. The text will be relocated to the DFARS companion resource, Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI). The proposed rule also amends DFARS 244.304 to clarify an existing reference to corresponding PGI text.

        Additional information on PGI is available at http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/pgi/index.htm.

        This rule was not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under Executive Order 12866, dated September 30, 1993.
        B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

        DoD does not expect this rule to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., because the rule pertains to administrative procedures for contract closeout functions performed by the Government. Therefore, DoD has not performed an initial regulatory flexibility analysis. DoD invites comments from small businesses and other interested parties. DoD also will consider comments from small entities concerning the affected DFARS subparts in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610. Such comments should be submitted separately and should cite DFARS Case 2006-D045.
        C. Paperwork Reduction Act

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

          List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 204 and 244
          Government procurement.

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

        Therefore, DoD proposes to amend 48 CFR Parts 204 and 244 as follows:

        1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 204 and 244 continues to read as follows:

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

          PART 204—ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
          2. Section 204.804 is revised to read as follows:

            204.804
            Closeout of contract files.
            Contracting officers shall close out contracts in accordance with the procedures at PGI 204.804. The closeout date for file purposes shall be determined and documented by the procuring contracting officer.

            204.804-1 and 204.804-2
             [Removed]
            3. Sections 204.804-1 and 204.804-2 are removed.

          PART 244-SUBCONTRACTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
          4. Section 244.304 is amended in paragraph (b) by revising the second sentence to read as follows:

            244.304
            Surveillance.
            (b) * * * See PGI 244.304(b) for guidance on how weaknesses may arise and may be discovered.

      [FR Doc. E7-5473 Filed 3-26-07; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE 5001-08-P


        DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
        50 CFR Part 660
        [I.D. 021902D]
        Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings

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

          ACTION:
          Notice of public meetings/public hearings.

          SUMMARY:

          The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council)and its Scientific and Statistical Committee (SSC) will meet in March (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific times, dates, and agenda items).

          ADDRESSES:
          The SSC meeting will be held in the Council conference room, 1164 Bishop Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI; telephone: (808) 522-8220.  The Council meeting and the hearings will be held at the Ala Moana Hotel, 410 Atkinson Drive, Honolulu, HI; telephone: 808-955-4811.

          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
          Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director; telephone:  808-522-8220.

        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
        Dates and Locations
        Scientific and Statistical Committee
        The SSC will meet Tuesday, March 12 through 14, 2002, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.  Public comment periods will be provided throughout the meeting.  The order in which agenda items are addressed may change.  The SSC will meet as late as necessary to complete scheduled business.
        The agenda for the SSC will include the items listed here:
        1. Introductions
        2. Approval of draft agenda and assignment of rapporteurs
        3. Approval of the minutes of the 78th meeting
        4. Crustaceans fisheries (NWHI lobsters)
        A. Report on the modeling workshop
        5. Bottom Fisheries
        A. Research
        (i) Acoustic research
        (ii) Ulua/other species tagging
        B. Report on main Hawaiian Islands (MHI) bottomfish area closures
        C. NWHI amendment to adjustment permit renewal criteria
        6.  Hawaiian Monk Seals
        A.  Quarterly report on activities of the Marine Mammal Recovery Plan (MMRP)
        (i) Update on the population status/monitoring efforts
        (ii) Update on new/ongoing research
        (iii) Findings from the foraging ecology workshop
        (iv) Results from the shark culling project in the NWHI
        B. Report on the progress of the recovery team meeting
        C. Update on the satellite tagging of great white sharks
        7.  Pelagic Fisheries
        A.  4th quarter 2001 Hawaii and American Samoa longline fishery reports
        B. Options for managing Cross Seamount/NOAA weather buoy fishery
        C. American Samoa
        (i) Closed area final rule
        (ii)Limited entry program
        D.  Sea turtle conservation and management
        (i) Workshop and findings
        (ii) Sea turtle research
        (a) Section 10 permitted Honolulu lab mitigation research
        (b) Honolulu Lab turtle population modeling workshops
        (c) Estimated incidental catches of turtles in Hawaii longline fishery
        (iii) FMP regulatory amendment implementing turtle Biological Opinion/New Biological Opinion
        (iv) Implementation status of Pacific sea turtle recovery plan action items
        E.  Seabird conservation and management
        (i) Underwater setting chute deployment in Hawaii longline fishery
        (ii) Update on seabird breeding populations in the Western Pacific Region
        (iii) Update on U.S. Geological Service demographic modeling of North Pacific Albatross populations
        (iv) Estimated incidental catches of seabirds in Hawaii longline fishery
        (v) FMP regulatory amendment implementing Short-tail albatross Biological Opinion
        (vi) Update on National Plan of Action requirements
        F. Redrafting of Amendment 9 to the Pelagic Fishery Management Plan for shark management measures
        G. Report on International Meetings Co Interim Scientific Committee (ISC) for tuna and tuna-like species in the North Pacific Ocean prepatory conference, Pelagic fisheries research program protected species modeling workshop
        8. Precious Corals Fisheries
        A. Report on research at Makapu’u
        9.  Ecosystem and Habitat
        A. Inclusion Amendment EFH alternative, final meeting
        B. State of Hawaii NWHI fishery management area regulatory proposal
        C. Reef fish stock assessment workshop
        D. Marine Protected Area (MPA)related studies
        E. MPA working group report
        10.  Other Business
        A. Comprehensive Sustainable Fisheries Act (SFA) amendments for bycatch, overfishing and communities
        B. NMFS cooperative research
        C. Council/NMFS long term research planning for Western Pacific Region
        D. New NMFS Pacific Islands Region
        E. Council’s 5 year program plan
        11.  Summary of Recommendations to Council
        12.  SSC meeting Schedule for 2002
        Public Hearings
        Public hearings will be held at 4 p.m. on Tuesday, March 19, 2002, for final action on inclusion amendment to consider EFH alternatives; at 11 a.m. on Wednesday, March 20, 2002, for initial action adjustment to NWHI bottomfish annual landing requirements; at 5 p.m. on Wednesday, March 20, 2002, for American Samoa limited entry and Cross Seamount management options; and at 3 p.m. on Thursday, March 21, 2002, for final action on revisions to the comprehensive SFA amendment that will define overfishing, bycatch and communities.
        Committee Meetings
        The following Standing Committees of the Council will meet on March 18, 2002.  Enforcement/Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) from 8 a.m. to 10 a.m.; Fishery Rights of Indigenous People from 9 a.m. to 10 a.m.; International Fisheries/Pelagics from 10 a.m. to 12 noon; Precious Corals from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m.; Crustaceans from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m.; Bottomfish from 3 p.m. to 4:30 p.m; Ecosystem and Habitat from 3 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.; Research from 4:30 to 6 p.m. and Executive/Budget and Program from 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m.
        In addition, the Council will hear recommendations from its advisory panels, plan teams, SSC, and other ad hoc groups.  Public comment periods will be provided throughout the agenda.  The order in which agenda items are addressed may change.  The Council will meet as late as necessary to complete scheduled business.
        The agenda during the full Council meeting will include the items listed here:
        1. Introductions
        2. Approval of agenda
        3. Approval of 111th meeting minutes
        4. Island reports
        A. American Samoa
        B. Guam
        C. Hawaii
        D. CNMI
        5.  Federal fishery agency and organization reports
        A. Department of Commerce
        (1) NMFS
        (a) Southwest Region, Pacific Islands Area Office
        (b) Southwest Fisheries Science Center, La Jolla and Honolulu Laboratories
        (2) NOAA General Counsel, Southwest Region
        (3) National Ocean Service NWHI sanctuary designation
        B. Department of the Interior/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
        C.  U.S. State Department
        6. Enforcement/Vessel monitoring systems (VMS)
        A. Report on U.S. Coast Guard activities
        B. Report on NMFS activities
        C. Commonwealth, Territories and State Activities

        D. Status of violations
        E. Report on VMS/Enforcement meeting
        7. Ecosystems and Habitat
        A. Report on the status of the Coral Reef Ecosystems Fishery Management Plan
        B. State of Hawaii NWHI fishery management area regulatory proposal/Memorandum of Agreement
        C. EFH Final Rule
        D. EFH Consultation update
        E. EFH alternatives requirements for new bottomfish species
        F. Invasive Species
        (i) Major Issues
        (ii) Discussion of potential mitigation measures
        G. MPAs
        (i) MPA related studies
        (ii) MPA working group report
        H. Vessel Grounding Workshop report
        I. Public Hearing
        The Council will hold a public hearing on an amendment to include as managed areas, CNMI and the PRIAs exclusive economic zone (EEZ), under the Fishery Management Plans (FMP) for Crustaceans, Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish, and Precious Corals Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region.  The amendment will allow fishery management measures under these FMPs to be applied in these areas.
        The amendment will also designate 49 additional management unit species for the Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish FMP.  The inclusion of these species will provide for a more accurate representation of the species currently being harvested by bottomfish fisheries operating in the Western Pacific Region.  EFH for these new species will also be designated by this amendment.
        8.  Crustaceans Fisheries
        A. Report on the modeling workshop
        B. Status of Draft Environmental Impact Statement  and Biological Opinion
        9.  Precious Corals Fisheries
        A. November 2001 Research at Makapu’u
        B. Status of framework measures
        10. Guest Speaker: Eldon Hout Co NOAA Services
        11. Observer Program
        A. NMFS Pacific Islands Area Office
        (i) Bottomfish
        (ii) American Samoa
        (iii) Hawaii longline
        B. Native Observer Program
        12. Hawaiian Monk Seals
        A. Status of revised recovery plan, delisting criteria and recovery team
        B. MMRP quarterly report
        (i) Update on the population status/monitoring efforts
        (ii) Update on new/ongoing research
        (iii) Findings from the foraging ecology workshop
        (iv) Results from the shark culling project in the NWHI
        (v) Update on Hawaiian monk seal models
        C. Update on the satellite tagging of great white sharks
        13. Bottomfish Fisheries
        A. NWHI Framework Action: adjustment to landing requirements
        B. Status of Biological Opinion and Draft Environmental Impact Statement
        C. Report on MHI area closures
        D. Acoustics research
        E. Public hearing
        The Council will consider an amendment to its Fishery Management Plan for Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region to modify the annual landing requirements or permit renewal and prohibitions on the lease and charter of permits from the NWHI Ho’omalu and Mau zone management regimes. The Council expects that these adjustments will best address the key objectives to maintain opportunities for small scale fisheries, maintain availability of high-quality fresh bottomfish, and balance harvest capacity with harvestable fishery stocks.  The basic approach is to structure the permit system so that evidence of participation is used for new entry and the total number of permits are maintained at target levels.
        14.  Fishery rights of indigenous peoples
        A. Marine conservation plans
        B. Report on Community demonstration projects
        C. Community development program
        15.  Pelagic Fisheries
        A. 4th quarter 2001 Hawaii and American Samoa longline reports
        B. American Samoa longline fishery management
        (i) Closed area final rule
        (ii) Limited entry program
        C. Options for managing Cross Seamount/NOAA weather buoy fishery
        D. Public hearing
        The Council will hold a public hearing on American Samoa limited entry and Cross Seamount management options.  The number of fishing vessels participating in the American Samoa longline fishery doubled in 2001, and the level of fishing effort in terms of hooks set quadrupled. The new entrants comprised mainly large conventional longliners which are fifty feet or larger, as opposed to the small 30-40 ft (9.144-12.192 m)outboard-powered alia-catamarans with hand deployed longline gear with which the American Samoa fishery originated.
        In 2002 the Council implemented a 50 nm-area closure around the American Samoa islands which excludes longline vessels larger than 50 ft (15.2 m).  However there are concerns about unconstrained entry of fishing vessels into the American Samoa fishery.  Unlike Hawaii, fishing vessels in the American Samoa fishery are confined to fishing within the EEZ, and gear conflict and competition for resources are likely to increase as the level of fishing increases.  Consequently, the Council is developing a limited entry program for the fishery, and this will be the initial Council meeting in the fishery management plan amendment process at which alternatives will be discussed and comments solicited from the public.
        The offshore tuna handline fishery in Hawaii, based primarily on the Cross Seamount, continues to generate concerns due to the high volume of juvenile yellowfin and bigeye tunas caught at this location, and its effects on tuna stocks around Hawaii.  Handline fishermen using the Cross Seamount have in the past expressed concerns about longline vessels fishing in the same location, due to gear interactions and safety at-sea issues. Concerns were also expressed about uncontrolled entry into the handline fishery by longline vessels displaced by recent management measures imposed on the Hawaii-based longline fishery.
        The Council responded in part by implementing a new control date for the fishery of July 15, 2000.  More recently, the downturn in the economy may lead to an increase in the level of new entrants into to the Cross Seamount fishery from other fishery sectors.  The Council wants  to consider management options for the Cross Seamount for the various fisheries that participate in fishing at this location.  The Council will prepare an options paper for consideration at the 112th Council meeting and take comments from the public on the options therein. The Council may wish to proceed with the development of management alternatives for fisheries that make use of the  Cross Seamount and request that this topic be placed on the agenda for the next Council meeting.
        E. Litigation
        F. Sea turtle conservation and management
        (i) Cooperative sea turtle research and conservation workshop
        (ii) Research (progress since October 2001)
        (a) Status of field experiments to reduce longline turtle bycatch
        (b) Laboratory research to reduce longline turtle bycatch
        (c) Turtle population biology workshops
        (d) Estimated incidental catches of turtles in Hawaii longline fishery

        (iii) FMP regulatory amendment implementing turtle Biological Opinion
        (iv) Implementation status of Pacific sea turtle recovery plan action items
        G. Seabird conservation and management
        (i) Underwater setting chute deployment in Hawaii longline fishery
        (ii) Estimated incidental catches of seabirds in Hawaii longline fishery
        (iii) FMP regulatory amendment implementing Short-tail albatross Biological Opinion
        (iv) Update on National Plan of Action requirements
        H. Sharks
        (i) Shark finning regulations final rule
        (ii) Redrafting of Amendment 9 to the Pelagic Fishery Management Plan for shark management measures
        I. International meetings
        (i) ISC
        (ii) Second International Fishers Forum
        16. Program planning
        A.  NMFS cooperative research
        B. Education initiatives
        C. Comprehensive Sustainable Fisheries Amendment (SFA) revisions to define overfishing, bycatch and communities
        D. Funding allocations
        (ii) Pelagics
        E. Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary (5 year review)
        F. Digital video monitoring pilot project
        G. Council/NMFS long term research planning for the Western Pacific Region
        H. New NMFS Pacific Island Region
        I. NWHI Hokule’a voyage
        K. Public hearing on Comprehensive SFA amendment revisions.
        In 1998, the Council submitted a comprehensive amendment to all the Council’s fishery management plans, which was generated in response to the 1996 re-authorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.  This amendment received only partial approval.  The disapproved sections included maximum sustainable yield and overfishing reference points for bottomfish, crustaceans and pelagics, bycatch provisions for bottomfish and pelagics, and the definition of Hawaii as a single fishing community.  The Council has addressed NMFS’ concerns about the disapproved sections of the original comprehensive amendment and will solicit public comment prior to taking final action.
        17. Administrative Matters
        A.  Financial reports
        B.  Administrative report
        C.  Meetings and workshops
        Other Business
        Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before the Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal Council action during this meeting.  Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this document and to any issue arising after publication of this document that requires emergency action under section 305 (c) of the Magnuson-Stevens 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 Kitty M. Simonds, 808-522-8220 (voice) or 808-522-8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

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

          Dated: February 22, 2002.
          Bruce C. Morehead,
          Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

      [FR Doc. 02-4674 Filed 2-26-02; 8:45 am]
      BILLING CODE  3510-22-S