The meeting is open to the public. Public comment opportunity will be provided and individuals will have the opportunity to address the Committee at that time.

On Thursday, the 19th of September, the Plan Team will meet starting at 1 p.m. through Friday the 20th.

Agenda items include: assembling the 2002 Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands (BSAI) King and Tanner Crab Stock Assessment Fishery Evaluation (SAFE), reviewing BSAI King and Tanner survey information and guideline harvest limits (GHLs) for the 2002-03 fishery season, reviewing a report on reference points and overfishing definitions, and developing recommendations for BSAI King and Tanner crab fisheries.

Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified 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 the public has been notified of the Council’s intent to take final action to address the emergency.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Gail Bendixen, 907-271-2809, at least 5 working days prior to the meeting date.

The African Growth and Opportunity Act (Title I of the Trade and Development Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-2000) (AGOA) provides duty-free treatment for imports of certain textile and apparel products of beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries, including handloomed, handmade, or folklore articles that are certified as such by the competent authorities of the beneficiary country. Section 2 of Executive Order 13191 of January 17, 2001 authorized CITA to consult with beneficiary countries and to determine which particular textile and apparel goods shall be treated as being handloomed, handmade, or folklore articles.

On January 18, 2001, the United States Trade Representative directed the U.S. Customs Service to require that importers provide an appropriate export visa from a beneficiary sub-Saharan African country to obtain preferential treatment for textiles and apparel under the AGOA (66 FR 7837). The first digit of the visa number corresponds to one of nine groupings of textile and apparel products that are eligible for preferential tariff treatment. Grouping 9 is for handmade, handloomed, or folklore articles.

CITA held consultations with the Government of Kenya on May 21, 2002. CITA has determined that handloomed fabrics and handmade articles made from such handloomed fabrics produced in and exported from Kenya are eligible for preferential tariff treatment under section 112(a) of the AGOA if accompanied by an AGOA export visa for Grouping 9 issued by the Government of Kenya. In the letter published below, CITA directs the Commissioner of Customs to allow entry of such products of Kenya under Harmonized Tariff Schedule provision 9819.11.27, when accompanied by an appropriate export visa. CITA may extend this treatment to additional products following future consultation with the Government of Kenya.

In the letter to the Commissioner of Customs published in the Federal Register on May 29, 2002 (67 FR 37398), in the table listing import restraint limits, please change the limit for Group I from 1,201,100,744 square meters equivalent to 1,206,507,535 square meters equivalent and Group II from 44,086,866 square meters equivalent to 38,680,076 square meters equivalent.

The limit changes are a result of an administrative correction to our integration methodology for China.

The short supply provision of the AGOA provides for duty-free and quota-free treatment for apparel articles that are both cut (or knit-to-shape) and sewn or otherwise assembled in one or more beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries from fabric or yarn that is not formed in the United States or a beneficiary sub-Saharan African country if it has been determined that such yarns or fabrics cannot be supplied by the domestic industry in commercial quantities in a timely manner and certain procedural requirements have been met. In Presidential Proclamation 7350, the President proclaimed that this treatment would apply to such apparel articles from fabrics or yarns designated by the appropriate U.S. government authority in the Federal Register. In Executive Order 13191, the President authorized the Committee to determine whether particular yarns or fabrics cannot be supplied by the domestic industry in commercial quantities in a timely manner under the AGOA.

On February 28, 2002, the Committee received a request alleging that certain fabrics, listed below, for use in trousers, shorts, skirts, dresses, handkerchiefs, dressing gowns, boxer shorts, and other apparel, cannot be supplied by the domestic industry in commercial quantities in a timely manner under the AGOA. It requested that apparel articles from such fabrics be eligible for preferential treatment under the AGOA. On March 8, 2002, the Committee requested public comment on the petition (67 FR 10682). On March 26, 2002, the Committee and the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) sought the advice of the Industry Sector Advisory Committee for Wholesaling and Retailing and the Industry Sector Advisory Committee for Textiles and Apparel. On March 26, 2002, the Committee and USTR offered to hold consultations with the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate (collectively, the Congressional Committees). On April 11, 2002, the U.S. International Trade Commission provided advice on the petition. Based on the information and advice received and its understanding of the industry, the Committee determined that the fabrics set forth in the request cannot be supplied by the domestic industry in commercial quantities in a timely manner. On June 14, 2002, the Committee and USTR submitted a report to the Congressional Committees that set forth the action proposed, the reasons for such action, and advice obtained. A period of 60 calendar days since this report was submitted has expired, as required by the AGOA.

The Committee hereby designates as eligible for preferential treatment under subheading 9819.11.24 of the HTSUS, the following apparel articles, that are both cut and sewn or otherwise assembled in one or more eligible beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries, from the fabrics set forth below not formed in the United States, provided that all other fabrics are wholly formed in the United States from yarns wholly formed in the United States, that are imported directly into the customs territory of the United States from an eligible beneficiary sub-Saharan African country.

An “eligible beneficiary sub-Saharan African country” means a country which the President has designated as a beneficiary sub-Saharan African country under section 506A of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2466a) and which has been the subject of a finding, published in the Federal Register, that the country has satisfied the requirements of section 113 of the AGOA (19 U.S.C. 3722) and resulting in the enumeration of such country in U.S. note 1 to subchapter XIX of chapter 98 of the HTSUS.

The text of the Agreement and Order appears below.

1. This Settlement Agreement, made by and between the staff (“the staff”) of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (the “Commission”) and Aerus LLC, a limited liability company, formerly known as Electrolux LLC, in accordance with 16 CFR 1118.20 of the Commission's Procedures for Investigations, Inspections, and Inquiries under the Consumer Product Safety Act (“CPSA”), is a settlement of the staff allegations set forth below.

2. The Commission is an independent federal regulatory agency responsible for the enforcement of the Consumer Product Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 2051-2084.

3. Aerus LLC is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, and its principal office is located at 5956 Sherry Lane, Dallas, Texas. Aerus LLC owns certain assets that previously were owned by Electrolux Corporation. (Aerus LLC and Electrolux Corporation are referred to herein collectively as “Aerus”).

4. Section 15(b) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b), requires a manufacturer of a consumer product distributed in commerce who obtains information which reasonably supports the conclusion that such product contains a defect which could create a substantial product hazard, or creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, to immediately inform the Commission of the defect or risk.

5. Between May 1991 and September 1993, Aerus manufactured and sold throughout the United States approximately 226,000 “pony-top corded Genesis, Genesis LX, Genesis LXE, Prolux, Prolux Plus, Prolux S/R, Prolux Warehouse, Regency, and Special Edition vacuum cleaner models” (hereinafter “vacuums”).

6. A vacuum is a “consumer product” and Aerus is a “manufacturer” of a “consumer product”, which is “distributed in commerce” as those terms are defined in section 3(a)(1), (4), (11) and (12) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(1), (4), (11) and (12).

7. The vacuums are defective because the power cords on the vacuums can break inside the handle or the casing around the cord can break, leaving wires exposed. When consumers use the pony-top cord, which extends out of the very top of the handle assembly, as a handle extension, consumers may accidentally touch the exposed wires and receive shocks and/or burns.

8. Between November 1991 and October 1998, Aerus received reports of approximately 75 incidents attributable to this defect. In 56 cases, consumers received shocks or burns, and in 11 cases, consumers suffered serious injuries resulting in second or third degree burns, shocks, and/or combinations thereof.

9. From early 1992 through 1998, Aerus engaged in a number of modifications to its warning labels and changes to its services polices, implemented design changes to the handles on its vacuums, and engaged in a corrective action and notice program in attempts to eliminate the subject defect and hazard.

10. Not until October 13, 1998, after receiving a letter from the staff requesting information about vacuum incidents, did Aerus provide to the Commission any information about the shock and/or burn hazard associated with the vacuums.

11. Although Aerus had obtained sufficient information to reasonably support the conclusion that the vacuums contained a defect which could create a substantial product hazard, or created an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, long before October 1998, it failed to report such information to the Commission, as required by section 15(b) of the CPSA, in violation of section 19(a)(4) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2068(a)(4).

12. Aerus' failure to report to the Commission, as required by section 15(b) of the CPSA, was committed “knowingly,” as that term is defined in section 20(d) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2069(d), and Aerus is subject to civil penalties under section 20 of the CPSA.

13. Aerus LLC denies the staff allegations in paragraphs 4 through 12, above. Aerus LLC denies that it violated the CPSA, or that Aerus LLC is liable for a reporting violation, if any, that allegedly was committed by a predecessor of Aerus LLC.

14. Aerus LLC undertook a voluntary recall in this matter, pursuant to the Commission's “Fast Track” recall program, promptly upon learning of the alleged defect in the vacuums in 1998.

15. Aerus LLC enters this Settlement Agreement and Order for settlement purposes only, to avoid incurring additional legal costs and expenses.

16. The Commission has jurisdiction over this matter and over Aerus under the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2051-2084.

17. Aerus LLC agrees to pay to the U.S. Treasury a civil penalty in the amount of two hundred fifty-thousand and no/dollars ($250,000.00), in settlement of this matter, payable within twenty (20) calendar days of receiving service of the final Settlement Agreement and Order.

18. Aerus LLC knowingly, voluntarily and completely waives any rights it may have in the above captioned case (1) to the issuance of a Complaint in this matter; (2) to an administrative or judicial hearing with respect to the staff allegations cited herein; (3) to judicial review or other challenge or contest of the validity of the Settlement Agreement or the Commission's Order; (4) to a determination by the Commission as to whether a violation of Section 15(b) of the CPSA, 15 U.S.C. 2064(b), has occurred; (5) to a statement of findings of fact and conclusions of law with regard to the staff allegations; and (6) to any claims under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

19. Upon provisional acceptance of this Settlement Agreement and Order by the Commission, this Settlement Agreement and Order shall be placed on the public record and shall be published in the Federal Register in accordance with 16 CFR 1118.20. If the Commission does not receive any written requests not to accept the Settlement Agreement and Order within 15 days, the Settlement Agreement and Order shall be deemed finally accepted on the 16th day after the date it is published in the Federal Register , in accordance with 16 CFR 1118.20(f).

20. The Settlement Agreement and Order becomes effective upon its final acceptance by the Commission and service of the final order upon Aerus LLC.

21. This Settlement Agreement and Order is not deemed or construed as an admission by Aerus (a) of any liability or wrongdoing by Aerus; (b) that Aerus violated any law or regulation; (c) that the vacuums are defective, create a substantial product hazard or are unreasonably dangerous; (d) that the vacuums have caused any injuries; (e) that Aerus LLC assumed any liability with respect to the vacuums either as a successor of Electrolux Corporation or under any other theory of law; (f) of the truth of any claims or other matters stated in this Settlement Agreement and Order (except as set forth in paragraph 16), or alleged or otherwise stated by the Commission or any other person either against Aerus or with respect to the vacuums. Nothing contained in this Settlement Agreement and Order precludes Aerus from raising any defenses in any future litigation not arising out of the terms of this Settlement Agreement and Order.

22. Upon final acceptance of this Settlement Agreement by the Commission, the issuance of the Order, and the full and timely payment by Aerus LLC to the United States Treasury of a civil penalty in the amount of two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000.00), all Commission claims for civil penalties relating to any of the events that gave rise to the CPSC staff's allegations in paragraphs 4 through 12, above, against (a) Aerus; (b) any of Aerus' current or former subsidiaries, affiliates, divisions or related entities; (c) any shareholder, member, director, officer, employee, agent or attorney of any entity referenced in (a) or (b) above; and (d) any predecessor, successor, heir, or assign of any entity referenced in (a), (b) above, including but not limited to Haw River Realty, Inc., will be considered to be released.

23. Upon provisional acceptance by the Commission, the Commission may publicize the terms of the Settlement Agreement and Order.

24. Aerus LLC agrees to the entry of the attached Order, which is incorporated herein by reference, and agrees to be bound by its terms.

25. This Settlement Agreement and Order is binding upon and inure to the benefit of Aerus LLC, its parent and each of its assigns or successors.

26. Agreements, understandings, representations, or interpretations made outside this Settlement Agreement and Order may not be used to vary or to contradict its terms.

27. If, after the effective date hereof, any provision of this Settlement Agreement and Order is held to be illegal, invalid, or unenforceable under present or future laws effective during the terms of the Settlement Agreement and Order, such provision shall be fully severable. The rest of the Settlement Agreement and Order shall remain in full effect, unless the Commission and Aerus LLC determine that severing the provision materially impacts the purpose of the Settlement Agreement and Order.

28. This Settlement Agreement and Order shall not be waived, changed, amended, modified, or otherwise altered, except in writing executed by the party against whom such amendment, modification, alteration, or waiver is sought to be enforced and approved by the Commission.

29. This Settlement Agreement may be used in interpreting the Order. Agreements, understandings, representations, or interpretations made outside of this Settlement Agreement and Order may not be used to vary or contradict its terms.

Upon consideration of the Settlement Agreement between Aerus LLC, a limited liability company, formerly known as Electrolux LLC, and the staff of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Commission having jurisdiction over the subject matter and over Aerus LLC, and it appearing the Settlement Agreement is in the public interest, it is

Ordered, that the Settlement Agreement be, and hereby is, accepted and it is

Further ordered, that Aerus LLC, shall pay the U.S. Treasury a civil penalty in the amount of two hundred fifty thousand and 00/100 dollars, ($250,000.00) payable within twenty (20) days of the service of the Final Order upon Aerus LLC.

Provisionally accepted and Provisional Order issued on the 29th day of August, 2002.

The Corporation is a federal government corporation that encourages Americans of all ages and backgrounds to engage in national and community service to meet the nation's educational, public safety, environmental, and other human needs and to achieve direct and demonstrable results. In doing so, the Corporation fosters civic responsibility, strengthens the ties that bind us together as a people, and provides educational opportunity for those who make a substantial commitment to service. For more information about the Corporation and the activities it supports go to http://www.nationalservice.org .

On November 8, 2001, President Bush announced that the Corporation will support homeland security in the coming year in three major areas: public safety, public health, and disaster preparedness and relief. Through the award of $10.3 million in grants to 43 private groups and public agencies in 26 states and the District of Columbia, the Corporation is mobilizing more than 37,000 homeland security volunteers across the nation to support these efforts. The President said:

The Corporation's support for homeland security includes:

Public Safety . Public safety is one of the four primary service activities for AmeriCorps, Senior Corps, and Learn and Serve America. Thousands of volunteers serve with police departments and land management agencies. The volunteers are not armed and cannot make arrests, but they do carry out vital tasks including organizing neighborhood watch groups and helping with community policing, victim assistance, fingerprinting, and other tasks that free officers and other professionals to do front-line work. In five years, AmeriCorps has organized 46,000 safety patrols, and last year alone senior volunteers carried out 131,000 patrols that freed up 540,000 hours of police time.

Public Health . AmeriCorps members and Senior Corps volunteers provide a variety of public health roles including assisting in immunizing children and adults, serving as case managers, distributing health information, and providing health screenings. Last year, AmeriCorps members distributed health information materials to 500,000 people and provided health screenings to 181,000 individuals, while Senior Corps volunteers assisted in assuring that 270,000 children and adults were immunized.

Disaster Preparedness and Relief . AmeriCorps members, including National Civilian Community Corps and Senior Corps volunteers, have a long record of working with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and other relief agencies in helping communities respond to disasters. Learn and Serve America students respond to local disasters as well. National and community service participants help run emergency shelters, assist law enforcement, provide food and shelter, manage donations, assess and repair damage, and help families and communities rebuild. Since September 11th , many Corporation-supported volunteers have been actively engaged in relief efforts.

The Corporation is permitting organizations that it funds to redirect their activities to support homeland security. The Corporation also made homeland security a priority for new grants awarded in fiscal year 2002. The training and technical assistance (T/TA) Provider will work to assist new grantees and projects with program start-up, and to help existing grantees improve services associated with homeland security.

Section 198 of the National and Community Service Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 12653, authorizes the Corporation to provide, directly or through contracts or cooperative agreements, training and technical assistance in support of activities under the national service laws. Section 125 of that Act and titles I and II of the Domestic Volunteer Service Act provide additional authority.

An award made under this Notice will be in the form of a cooperative agreement. Cooperative agreements are subject to Corporation regulations or general administrative requirements: 45 CFR part 2541 (for agreements with State and local government agencies) and 45 CFR part 2543 (for agreements with institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations, and commercial entities). The Provider must comply with reporting requirements, including submitting semi-annual financial reports and progress reports linking progress on deliverables to expenditures.

Cooperative agreements require substantial involvement on the part of the Corporation. Substantial involvement includes frequent and regular communication with and monitoring by the Corporation's cognizant training officer (COTR). The COTR will confer with the Provider on a regular basis to review project status and service delivery, including work plans, budgets, periodic reports, materials developed, preparation for and implementation of training events, targeting of the Provider's services, and assessment of the Provider's effectiveness.

The Corporation expects that activities assisted under the agreement awarded through this Notice will commence on or about December 1, 2002, following the conclusion of the selection and award process.

The Corporation will make an award covering a period not to exceed three years. Applications must include a detailed work plan of proposed activities and a line-item budget for year one of the agreement, and note projected changes to proposed activities for years two and three of the award period. If the Corporation approves an application and enters into a multiyear award agreement, funding will be provided for the first year only. Funding for the second and third years of an award period is contingent upon need, quality of service, the nature and scope of activities to be supported, and availability of appropriations for the purpose of the award. The Corporation has no obligation to provide additional funding in subsequent years.

To ensure that materials generated with Corporation funding for training and technical assistance purposes are available to the public and readily accessible to grantees and sub-grantees, the Corporation reserves a royalty-free, non-exclusive, and irrevocable right to obtain, use, reproduce, publish, or disseminate publications and materials produced under the agreement, including data, and to authorize others to do so. The Provider must agree to make such publications and materials available to the national service field, as identified by the Corporation, at no cost or at the cost of reproduction. All materials developed for the Corporation must be consistent with Corporation editorial and publication guidelines and must be accessible to individuals with disabilities to the extent required by law.

State and local government entities, non-profit organizations, institutions of higher education, Indian tribes, and commercial entities are eligible to apply. Pursuant to the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, an organization described in section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 26 U.S C. 501(c)(4), which engages in lobbying is not eligible to apply. Organizations that operate or intend to operate Corporation-supported programs are eligible.

The Corporation anticipates making a single award to support all homeland security T/TA activities, and will therefore consider proposals from single applicants. However, when prospective applicants have expertise in only one or two of the three homeland security areas, the Corporation will consider proposals from principal applicants who, acting in partnership with other applicants, can provide the required services.

Organizations may apply to provide training and technical assistance in partnership with organizations seeking other Corporation funds. Based on previous training and technical assistance competitions and our estimate of potential applicants, we expect fewer than ten applications to be submitted.

The provider selected under this Notice will provide training and technical assistance services, and develop and disseminate training curricula and materials to support Corporation programs and projects engaged in homeland security.

The Corporation expects the Provider to accomplish the tasks below:

a. Identify and maintain a network of geographically dispersed expert resource people and organizations around the country and create a mechanism for sharing these resources with local programs in need of assistance in achieving their homeland security objectives. The provider will identify expert resources—organizations and individuals—that can work in partnership with local programs and projects to build the capacity of staff to achieve their homeland security objectives. Among the potential sources of such expertise are Citizen Corps Councils, which are the components of the President's USA Freedom Corps that create opportunities for volunteers to help their communities prepare for and respond to emergencies. Others are the National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster, university-based experts, and first-responder volunteer fire departments. Applicants are encouraged to demonstrate their familiarity with and connection to such entities across the country. The Provider will not train members or volunteers, but may develop training materials for members and volunteers and local provider organizations. They may train local staff on the use of these materials. The Corporation's Web site and the services of the National Service Resource Center and National Service Learning Clearinghouse will form part of the strategy for sharing knowledge about these resources with local programs in need of assistance. The Provider will train resource people as needed to ensure that they understand the Corporation and its programs. The Provider will also gather information from national service grantees regarding known resource personnel in areas of homeland security.

b. Identify characteristics of successful homeland security service and volunteer programs, based on research and input from grantees and programs in the field, and develop a menu of training and technical assistance resources and materials linked to those characteristics and designed to support programs in achieving them. To respond to this notice, applicants need to demonstrate the capacity to design training curricula and materials and make them available to local programs and projects through a variety of methods including e-learning, train-the-trainer models, peer assistance through listservs, and in-person training sessions using locally identified resource persons. Training and technical assistance materials are usually disseminated through the National Service Resource Center and individual providers. The Corporation emphasizes developing Web-based materials as opposed to printing quantities of hardcopy documents.

c. Gather and provide critical information to Corporation programs and projects engaged in homeland security activities. The Provider will identify important literature and other information resources on public safety, public health, and disaster preparedness and relief. This might include effective practices in community volunteering and service as strategies for addressing homeland security issues, and information on project planning and member/volunteer development. The information will be catalogued and made available to grantees through a variety of methods including listservs, online publications, print materials, the Corporation's database of effective program practices, the National Service Resource Center, and the National Service-Learning Clearinghouse.

The Corporation is committed to accountability and the measuring of performance for all its grantees, including training and technical assistance providers. The Provider must develop effective systems to identify the critical outcomes of its work, indicators of its success in this work, and how these can be judged or measured. The Corporation needs tangible information documenting the effectiveness and outcomes of the Provider's work.

In its proposal, the applicant must demonstrate its understanding of accountability in grant-funded programs and its experience in and plans for identifying and reporting on the significant outcomes of its work with programs. Specific performance measures and reporting guidelines will be finalized between the Corporation and the awardee at the time of the award negotiation, based on the Corporation's FY 2003 Administrative Guidance.

The Provider will develop a plan to assess the impact of its services for clients. The assessment must be ongoing and must be used to inform program planning. It must also encompass immediate as well as long term training impact. The Provider must submit evaluation summaries, and records of evaluations must be available for review.

The Corporation may also require an independent assessment of the Provider's performance.

The Provider is responsible for submitting timely progress and financial reports to the Corporation during and after the award period as follows:

(a) Semi-annual Progress Reports. Progress reports must be submitted semi-annually for each budget period during the cooperative agreement. The Provider must submit this information electronically. At a minimum, progress reports must provide the information below:

(1) A comparison of accomplishments with the goals and objectives for the reporting period;

(2) An annotated version of the approved budget that compares actual costs with budgeted costs by line item, and explains differences. The explanation should include, as appropriate, an analysis of cost overruns and high-cost units and a description of service requests not anticipated in the Provider's original budget;

(3) A description of the services provided to include:

(i) Number of requests received by topic area and program type (AmeriCorps, Learn & Serve, Senior Corps);

(ii) Activity conducted to address each request ( e.g. , training, on-site technical assistance, phone consultation and other electronic communication, and materials development and shipment) and mode of delivery ( e.g. , staff member, consultant, peer and/or other Provider);

(iii) Number of participants at each training and technical assistance event;

(iv) Client feedback on the services rendered (including the aggregate evaluation of each training event); and

(v) Problems encountered in delivering services with recommendations for correcting them.

(vi) List of upcoming activities and events with dates and locations;

(vii) Recommended training and technical assistance focus areas as suggested by analyses of service activities and trends;

(viii) Discussion of developments that hindered, or may hinder, compliance with the cooperative agreement;

(ix) List of materials submitted to the National Service Resource Center and National Service-Learning Clearinghouse;

(x) List of practices and supporting documentation or materials submitted to EpiCenter.

(b) Financial Reports

Financial reports must be submitted semi-annually and must include a summary of expenditures for the period. The reports are cumulative and must be submitted on the Financial Status Report (FSR) form SF 269A.

(c) Final Reports. (1) Providers completing the final year of their agreement must submit, in lieu of the last semi-annual progress report, a final progress report that is cumulative over the entire award period. The final progress report is due 90 days after the end of the agreement.

(2) Providers completing the final year of their award must submit, in lieu of the last semi-annual FSR, a final FSR that is cumulative over the entire award period. The final FSR is due 90 days after the end of the agreement and must be submitted to the Office of Grants Management.

(d) Other Reports. The Provider must meet as necessary with the cognizant training officer or other staff or consultants designated by the cognizant training officer to exchange views, ideas, and information concerning training and technical assistance. The Provider must submit such special reports as may be reasonably requested by the Corporation.

Ensure that all training and technical assistance resources including Web sites are accessible to persons with disabilities, as required by law, by doing the following:

(a) Notifying potential participants that reasonable accommodations will be provided upon request;

(b) Providing reasonable accommodations when requested to do so, to include sign language interpreters, special assistance, and documents in alternate formats;

(c) Using accessible locations for training events;

(d) Using accessible technology, captioning videos, avoiding non-voice-over formats, and when indicating a telephone number, including a non-voice telephone alternative such as TTY or e-mail;

The Provider must:

(a) Ensure that Provider staff and consultants are fully versed in the background, objectives, and approaches of the Corporation and each of its programs.

(b) Participate in the planning and implementation of national Provider meetings and training events as requested by the Corporation.

(c) Collaborate in materials development and training events organized by other providers or the Corporation, as requested.

(d) Share effective practices with other providers through the training and technical assistance listserv, the EpiCenter, and other mechanisms such as the National Service-Learning Clearinghouse and the National Service Resource Center.

(e) Use technology creatively and effectively as a cost-effective strategy for reaching large numbers of grantees, subgrantees, and others related to national service programs.

Applicants must submit one unbound, original proposal and two bound copies. Proposals may not be submitted by facsimile. Proposals must include the following components and should not exceed 50 pages:

The cover page must include the name, address, phone number, fax number, e-mail address of the contact person, and World Wide Web site URL (if available) of the applicant organization; a 250-500 word summary of proposed training and technical assistance activities; and the total funding amount requested for the first year.

A one-to-two page list of all proposed training and technical assistance activities and materials.

A bulleted narrative of no more than 20 double-spaced, single-sided, typed pages in no smaller than 12-point font that includes:

(a) The applicant's proposed first-year strategy and rationale for providing training and technical assistance to national and community service programs, with proposed changes (if any) for years two and three. The applicant should use the specific deliverables and requirements outlined in Section IV of this Notice as a starting point for a plan, and should present these deliverables in a way that creatively reflects the applicant's areas of expertise and knowledge of national service audiences. It is not appropriate to simply re-list the tasks stated in this Notice.

(b) Information on proposed needs assessment process.

(c) A description of each proposed training and technical assistance activity, product, or event: type, number, frequency, audience, estimated audience size, skill level, and desired learning outcomes.

(d) A detailed one-year work plan and timeline for completing all training and technical assistance activities. The work plan will include all deliverables and the tasks leading to them.

(e) A plan for regularly evaluating performance and using findings for continuous improvement.

A 250-500 word description for one face-to-face training course in a content area relevant to the homeland security. The face-to-face course should be considered part of a two-day event for 50-75 national service program or project directors. Applicant should submit a session description that includes desired learning outcomes and an outline of session content and the activities that will accomplish the desired outcomes.

A one-page description of how the applicant proposes to use technology to extend the reach of the training and technical assistance delivered. Description should include the target audience, proposed use of technology, rationale for approach, and concepts and skills to be delivered.

(a) A narrative of no more than three double-spaced, single-sided, typed pages in no smaller than 12-point font which describes:

(1) The organization's capacity to provide training and technical assistance services nationwide and recent work similar to that being proposed;

(2) The organization's knowledge of and/or experience with national service programs;

(3) Names and contact information of three to five references that can comment on the work described above.

(4) A list of proposed staff with their areas of expertise ( Note: key staff will be subject to Corporation approval) and resumes of the individuals who will be primarily responsible for the proposed deliverables with their relevant experience highlighted (up to 10 pages of one-sided resumes will be accepted).

(5) An organizational chart that shows the relationship of the training and technical assistance service Provider (including partners, if any) to the overall structure of the legal applicant to this Notice.

A detailed, line-item budget with costs organized by personnel, task and sub-task that lead to the deliverables as outlined in the proposal narrative and work plan. Costs in proposed budgets must consist solely of costs allowable under applicable cost principles found in OMB Circulars (OMB Circular A-87 for state and local governments, A-121 for non-profit organizations, A-21 for institutions of higher education) and in F.A.R. part 31 for commercial entities.

Applicants should be mindful that a demonstrated commitment to providing services in the most cost-effective manner possible will be a major consideration in the evaluation of proposals. Provider match is not required. The budget should include:

(a) Proposed staff and expert-consultant hours and pay rates by task and sub-task (include daily maximums for consultants);

(b) Types and quantities of other direct costs being proposed by task and subtask (for example, amounts of travel and volume of other task-related resources, such as communications, postage, etc.).

Provide a budget narrative that corresponds with all items in the line-item budget and that includes an explanation of all cost estimates that appear in the line-item budget. The narrative should clearly show how each cost was derived, using equations to reflect all factors considered.

To ensure fairness to all applicants, the Corporation reserves the right to take remedial action, up to and including disqualification, in the event a proposal fails to comply with the requirements related to page limits, line spacing, and font size. The Corporation will assess applications based on the criteria listed below.

The Corporation will consider the quality of the proposed activities based on the soundness of the strategy to carry them out; on the relevance, effectiveness and creativity of the approach and workplan; and on the applicant's demonstrated knowledge of adult learning and experience in training adults.

The Corporation will consider the capacity of the applicant to deliver the proposed services based on:

(a) Evidence of the organization's experience and that of its proposed staff and consultants in delivering high-quality adult training and technical assistance in the category under consideration and their experience in using technology as a teaching tool.

(b) Demonstrated ability to manage a federal grant or apply sound fiscal management principles to grants as evidenced by an annotated list of the applicant's previous grants experience (include agency, time frame, grant size, and subject area).

(c) Demonstrated ability to provide training and technical assistance services nationwide as evidenced by the proposed technology plan and staffing and by previous experience.

(d) Demonstrated ability of staff and consultants to conduct the proposed activities as evidenced by their education and similar past experiences.

(e) Demonstrated knowledge of staff and consultants in content areas related to this agreement (public safety, public health, and disaster preparedness and relief) as well as in training design and methodologies.

The Corporation will consider how the applicant:

(a) Proposes to measure the need for and outcomes of their products and services.

(b) Plans to collect data and use assessments to modify and improve their products and services.

The Corporation will consider the budget based on:

(a) Cost-effectiveness of the proposed training and technical assistance activities in relation to the scope of the services proposed ( i.e. , the number of participants and proposed activities); and

(b) The clarity and thoroughness of the budget and budget narrative (see specifications under “Budget Narrative”).

Entities funded directly by the Corporation. These may include: state commissions on national and community service, national non-profit organizations, Indian tribes, and entities in states or U.S. Territories that do not have a state commission.

Organizations receiving funds from Grantees of the Corporation.

The National Service Resource Center (NSRC) serves as a repository of information on all aspects of national service. The NSRC manages most of the Corporation's listservs and maintains and operates a library of print and media materials related to service and a toll-free information and referral service. Training and technical assistance publications are posted or distributed by the NSRC and its Web site at www.etr.org;/nsrc, includes a calendar of training events and links to all current providers.

National Service-Learning Clearinghouse serves as the primary resource on service-learning for Learn and Serve America grantees in higher education, K-12, community-based organizations and tribes, as well as the entire service-learning community. Its resources include a Web site (http://www.servicelearning.org), a library collection, reference and referral, Learn and Serve America project directory, listservs, and expert technical support. CFDA No. 94.009 Training and Technical Assistance

The Corporation is a Federal Government corporation that encourages Americans of all ages and backgrounds to engage in national and community service to meet the nation's educational, public safety, environmental and other human needs and to achieve direct and demonstrable results. In doing so, the Corporation fosters civic responsibility, strengthens the ties that bind us together as a people, and provides educational opportunity for those who make a substantial commitment to service. For more information about the Corporation and the activities it supports, go to http://www.nationalservice.org.

Learn and Serve America supports service and service-learning programs in schools, higher education institutions, and community organizations that support more than 1.5 million participants from kindergarten through college in meeting community needs while improving their academic skills and learning the habits of good citizenship. Learn and Serve America grants are used to support local collaborative partnerships between educational institutions and community organizations. Funds may be used to create new programs or replicate existing programs, as well as to provide training and professional development to staff, faculty, and volunteers. Most Learn and Serve America grantees make sub-grants to entities such as local education agencies, higher education institutions, and non-profit organizations.

In addition to training and technical assistance, Learn and Serve America also supports the National Service-Learning Clearinghouse and three recognition programs: Presidential Freedom Scholarships, President's Student Service Awards, and National Service-Learning Leader Schools.

Section 198 of the National and Community Service Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 12653, authorizes the Corporation to provide, directly or through contracts or cooperative agreements, training and technical assistance in support of activities under the national service laws. Section 125 of that Act and titles I and II of the Domestic Volunteer Service Act (42 U.S.C. 4250) provide additional authority.

An award made under this Notice will be in the form of a cooperative agreement. Cooperative agreements are subject to control by Corporation regulations on general administrative requirements, 45 CFR Part 2541 (for agreements with State and local government agencies) and 45 CFR Part 2543 (for agreements with institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations and commercial entities). The Provider must comply with reporting requirements, including submitting semi-annual financial reports and progress reports linking progress on deliverables to expenditures.

Cooperative agreements require substantial involvement on the part of the Corporation. Substantial involvement includes frequent and regular communication with, and monitoring by, the Corporation's program officer. The program officer will confer with the Provider on a regular basis to review project status and service delivery, including work plans, budgets, periodic reports, materials developed, preparation for and implementation of training events, targeting of the Provider's services, and assessment of the Provider's effectiveness.

The Corporation expects that activities assisted under the agreement awarded through this Notice will commence on or about December 1, 2002, following the conclusion of the selection and award process.

The Corporation will make an award covering a period not to exceed three years. Applications must include a detailed work plan of proposed activities and a line-item budget for year one of the agreement and note projected changes to proposed activities for years two and three of the award period. If the Corporation approves an application and enters into a multi-year award agreement, initial funding will be provided for approximately the first five months only. Funding for the balance of the first year, and then for the second and third years of an award period, is contingent upon need, quality of service, the nature and scope of activities to be supported, and availability of appropriations for the purpose of the award. The Corporation has no obligation to provide additional funding for the remainder of the first year or in subsequent years.

To ensure that materials generated with Corporation funding for training and technical assistance purposes are available to the public and readily accessible to grantees and sub-grantees, the Corporation reserves a royalty-free, non-exclusive, and irrevocable right to obtain, use, reproduce, publish, or disseminate publications and materials produced under the agreement, including data, and to authorize others to do so. The Provider must agree to make such publications and materials available to the national service field, as identified by the Corporation, at no cost or at the cost of reproduction. All materials developed for the Corporation must be consistent with Corporation editorial and publication guidelines and must be accessible to individuals with disabilities to the extent required by law.

State and local government entities, non-profit organizations, institutions of higher education, Indian tribes, and commercial entities are eligible to apply. Pursuant to the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, an organization described in section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(4), which engages in lobbying, is not eligible to apply. Organizations that operate or intend to operate Corporation-supported programs are eligible.

The Corporation anticipates making a single award for this purpose. We will consider proposals from single applicants, applicants with sub-agreements, and applicants proposing other approaches that we consider responsive to this Notice.

Organizations may apply to provide training and technical assistance in partnership with organizations seeking other Corporation funds. Based on previous training and technical assistance competitions and our estimate of potential applicants, we expect fewer than ten applications to be submitted.

The purpose of these funds is to build the capacity of Learn and Serve America grantees to assist sub-grantees in developing and implementing high-quality service and service-learning programs at the local level. While sub-grantees are expected to benefit from the activities, the main focus will be on the primary or direct grantees. The majority of workshops should be delivered in a “train the trainer” format, or one that will enable grantees to train their sub-grantees. Any materials created and disseminated under the cooperative agreement should reflect the diverse settings of Learn and Serve America programs—schools, higher education institutions, tribes, and community-based organizations, and partnerships among these, located in urban, rural, and suburban areas. The experience level of service-learning practitioners ranges from novice to seasoned. It is also likely that other Corporation-funded programs, AmeriCorps and Senior Corps programs specifically, as well as the service-learning field in general, will take advantage of the services offered by this training and technical assistance program. All activities should be designed to improve the quality of service-learning programs.

The Corporation is committed to accountability and measuring the performance of all of its grantees. As this Notice pertains to the training of grantees as well as others in the field, the proposal should demonstrate the Provider's understanding of the significance of accountability in grant-funded programs and any prior experience with reporting on outcomes.

The Provider selected under this Notice will provide training services and ongoing technical assistance as well as develop and disseminate training curricula and materials. The Corporation will be identified as the primary sponsor of any developed materials and activities in all print, electronic, and other communications.

The Corporation expects the Provider selected under this Notice to engage in the following activities:

The Provider will design and deliver training programs, curricula, and materials in support of service and service-learning. Topics will range from those generally applicable to all grantees, such as: evaluation; history and civics education; working with faith-based institutions; sustaining your program; building effective partnerships; and consortia management issues, to those designed to address issues specific to each program, such as: K-12 schools (content standards, working with local school boards, transportation and liability); community-based organizations (building capacity to work with service participants, working with schools and higher education institutions); and higher education institutions (promotion and tenure, attracting senior faculty, etc).

A variety of delivery mechanisms beyond or in combination with traditional face-to-face training should be considered, such as telebriefings, teleconferences, webcasts, and videoconferencing. In order to maximize training delivery, training costs may be met by using a combination of provider-held Corporation funds and grantee-expended funds ( e.g., cost-sharing between the Provider and grantee). The number and distribution of training activities should establish the Provider as an ongoing, respected presence in the field. Training support will include but not be limited to the following materials and activities:

a. Implementing “train the trainer” and other workshops;

b. Participating as trainers in Learn and Serve America meetings, as well as other national, state-wide, and regional conferences, as appropriate;

c. Developing and disseminating materials to support the foregoing training activities.

The Provider will develop and maintain materials and systems that identify and respond to the needs of Corporation grantees and the broader service field. Activities include but are not limited to:

a. Develop a Learn and Serve America program director's handbook;

b. Establish, promote, and support Affinity Groups for grantees in areas such as health care, history and civics education, curriculum standards, and/or Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to develop and share information and products for dissemination that further and improve service and service-learning;

c. Develop and distribute materials that correspond with trainings;

d. Build a website that promotes training services and disseminates training and technical assistance tools, to be housed on the National Service-Learning Clearinghouse website and the Corporation's training website;

e. Identify characteristics of successful service and service-learning programs for K-12 youth and higher education based on research and field experience, and incorporate them into a menu of training and technical assistance resources designed to support programs in achieving those characteristics;

f. Operate a toll-free number for inquiries and referrals;

g. Support existing statewide or regional technical assistance efforts;

h. Organize and manage the content of the Learn and Serve America Fall 2003 Grantee Meeting to be held in the Washington, DC metropolitan area.

The Corporation is committed to accountability and the measuring of performance for all its grantees, including training and technical assistance providers. The Providers must develop effective systems to identify the critical outcomes of its work, indicators of its success in this work, and how these can be judged or measured. The Corporation needs tangible information documenting the effectiveness and outcomes of the Provider's work.

In its proposal, the applicant must demonstrate its understanding of accountability in grant-funded programs and its experience in and plans for identifying and reporting on the significant outcomes of its work with programs. Specific performance measures and reporting guidelines will be finalized between the Corporation and the awardee at the time of the award negotiation based on the Corporation's FY 2003 Administrative Guidance.

The Provider will develop a plan to assess the impact of its services for clients. The assessment must be on-going and must be used to inform program planning. It must also encompass immediate as well as long-term training impact. The Provider must submit evaluation summaries and records of evaluations must be available for review. The Corportion may also require an independent assessment of the Provider's performance.

Upon being awarded funding under this Notice, the Provider must do the following:

The Provider is responsible for ensuring that all training and technical assistance and resources, including web sites, are accessible to persons with disabilities, as required by law, to include the following:

a. Notify potential participants that reasonable accommodations will be provided upon request;

b. Provide reasonable accommodations when requested to do so, including provision of sign language interpreters, special assistance, and documents in alternate formats;

c. Use accessible locations for training events;

d. Provide training and technical assistance materials that are accessible to persons with disabilities by using accessible technology, providing materials in alternate formats upon request, captioning videos, avoiding non-voice-over formats, and when indicating a telephone number, including a non-voice telephone alternative such as T.D.D. or e-mail.

The Provider is responsible for submitting timely progress and financial reports to the Corporation during and at the conclusion of the award period as follows:

a. Semi-Annual Progress Reports. Progress reports must be submitted semi-annually and are due on July 31 for the period ending June 30 and January 31 for the period ending December 31 for each budget period during the cooperative agreement. The Provider must submit this information electronically. The Corporation will provide guidance as to the contents of these reports, to include the agreed upon performance measures.

b. Financial Reports. Financial reports must be submitted semi-annually and must include a summary of expenditures for the period. The reports are cumulative and must be submitted on the Financial Status Report (FSR) form SF 269A.

c. Final Reports. Final reports must be submitted when the program is completed. Guidance for these reports will be provided prior to the end of the agreement.

We stress to potential applicants that the funding provided under this Notice will be in the form of a cooperative agreement. (See III.B, above) Regular and candid communication with the Corporation's assigned program officer as to the planning of and follow-up assessment of the activities undertaken under the agreement is essential. In this spirit of positive cooperation, the Provider must:

a. Communicate regularly with the program officer and as necessary with other staff or consultants designated by the Corporation training official to exchange views, ideas, and information concerning training and technical assistance.

b. Ensure that Provider staff and consultants are fully versed in the background, approach, vocabulary, assets, needs and objectives of the Corporation as well as each of its programs, with particular emphasis on Learn and Serve America.

c. Participate in the planning and implementation of national meetings and training events, including meetings of all Corporation training and technical assistance providers, as requested by the Corporation.

d. Collaborate in materials development and training events organized by other Providers or the Corporation, as requested.

e. Submit such special reports as may be reasonably requested by the Corporation.

f. Share effective practices with the field and other Providers through Corporation listservs, and other mechanisms, such as the National Service-Learning Clearinghouse and the National Service Resource Center.

g. Use technology creatively and effectively as a cost-effective strategy for reaching large numbers of grantees, sub-grantees, and others in the service-learning field.

Applicants must submit one unbound, original proposal and two bound copies. Proposals may not be submitted by facsimile. You must complete the Standard Form 424 (SF 424)—Application for Federal Assistance, Standard Form 424A (SF 424A)—Budget Forms, and Standard Form 424B (SF 424B)—Assurances. These forms are available on the web at: http://www.nationalservice.org/whatshot/notices. In addition to completing the SF 424, proposals must include the following:

Provide a 250-500 word summary of the proposed training and technical assistance strategy, including and the total amount requested for the year.

An organized narrative of no more than 15 double-spaced, single-sided, typed pages in no smaller than 12-point font that includes:

a. Your plan to deliver training and technical assistance to the audiences described in this Notice for year one, with proposed changes (if any) for years two and three. Explain the rationale for your strategy, including why some topics might be delivered via telebriefing or web, while others should be delivered face-to-face. Include a general schedule for training delivery and any existing conferences you would recommend attending in order to deliver grantee training. You should use the specific deliverables and requirements outlined in this Notice as a starting point for a plan and should present these deliverables in a way that creatively reflects your areas of expertise and knowledge of service and service-learning audiences. It is not appropriate to simply re-list the tasks stated in this Notice. The proposed topics to be covered should reflect understanding of the field and its resources. Once awarded, the successful applicant will receive input from Learn and Serve America and its constituents to ensure appropriate topics will be addressed.

b. A plan for regularly evaluating performance and using those findings to continuously improve service to the field.

Submit a sample description for a training workshop on “Sustaining Service-Learning Programs.” This should be a train-the-trainer workshop that will give primary grantees the tools to support their local programs' sustainability efforts. A follow-up plan should be included as well as an evaluation plan for this training.

Provide a one to two page description that proposes ways to use technology effectively in order to broaden the reach of training and technical assistance delivery. The description should include the target audience, proposed use of technology, rationale for approach and its role in the overall plan, and how the strategy's effectiveness will be evaluated.

Include a narrative of no more than three double-spaced, single-sided, typed pages in no smaller than 12-point font that describes:

a. The organization's capacity to provide service and service-learning training and technical assistance services nationwide, including descriptions of recent work similar to that being proposed;

b. The organization's knowledge of and/or experience with service and/or service-learning programs;

c. A list of proposed staff, and sub-agreement holders if appropriate, with areas of expertise.

In the appendix, include:

a. an organizational chart that clearly shows the relationship of the training and technical assistance Provider(s) to the overall structure of the legal applicant to this Notice;

b. names and contact information of references that can be contacted with regard to the above work;

c. a detailed one-year work plan and timeline for completing all training and technical assistance activities (the work plan should include all deliverables and the tasks leading to them); and

d. résumés of the individuals primarily responsible for the deliverables proposed in the application.

e. You may submit one additional appendix, but no videos or CDROMs.

Your budget must be submitted on a Standard Form 424A (SF 424A)—Budget Form. Costs in proposed budgets must consist solely of costs allowable under applicable cost principles found in OMB Circulars (OMB Circular A-87 for state and local governments, A-121 for non-profit organizations and A-21 for institutions of higher learning, and in F.A.R. Part 31 for commercial entities). Applicants should be mindful that a demonstrated commitment to providing services in the most cost-effective manner possible will be a major consideration in the evaluation of proposals. Provider match is not required.

To ensure fairness to all applicants, the Corporation reserves the right to take remedial action, up to and including disqualification, in the event a proposal fails to comply with the requirements relating to page limits, line spacing, and font size. The Corporation will assess applications based on the criteria listed below.

The Corporation will consider the quality of the proposed activities based on:

a. Evidence of the applicant's knowledge and understanding of the role of national and community service and service-learning, and the role of training and technical assistance in supporting this program.

b. The appropriateness for the audience: quality of delivery strategy (for example, breadth of audience and potential for the activity to build grantee capacity); potential for effectiveness; creativity of the applicant's approach and work plan; and evidence of the applicant's knowledge of adult learning and experience in training adults.

The Corporation will consider the organizational capacity of the applicant to deliver the proposed services based on:

a. Evidence of the organization's experience in delivering high-quality training and technical assistance in a flexible, responsive, collaborative and creative manner, and experience using technology as a teaching tool.

b. Evidence of experience providing training and technical assistance on the part of the proposed staff and consultants as demonstrated by annotated staff lists or résumés.

c. Demonstrated ability to provide training and technical assistance services nationwide as evidenced by proposed technology plan, proposed staffing and previous levels of activity and experience.

d. Demonstrated ability to manage a federal grant or apply sound fiscal management principles to grants and cost accounting as evidenced by an annotated list of applicant's previous grants experience.

The Corporation will consider how the applicant:

a. Proposes to assess the effectiveness and need for its services and products delivered under the award.

b. Plans to use assessments of its services and products to modify and improve subsequent services and products.

c. Proposes to measure both short term outputs of its performance and the long-term outcomes.

The Corporation will consider the budget based on:

a. Scope and cost-effectiveness of the proposed training and technical assistance activities in relation to the scope and depth of the services proposed (i.e., the number of Learn and Serve America grantees that the proposed activities are expected to reach and the degree to which the Provider provides a reasonable estimate of the amount of services the organization will be able to provide);

b. The clarity and thoroughness of the budget and budget narrative (see specifications under “Budget Narrative”).

For additional information, please visit the following Web sites:

• Corporation for National and Community Service: http://www.nationalservice.org

• National Service-Learning Clearinghouse: http://www.servicelearning.org

• Presidential Freedom Scholarships: http://www.nationalservice.org/scholarships/index.html

• President's Student Service Awards: http://www.student-service-awards.org/

• National Service-Learning Leader Schools: http://www.leaderschools.org/ CFDA No. 94.009 Training and Technical Assistance

The Corporation is a federal government corporation that encourages Americans of all ages and backgrounds to engage in national and community-based service to meet the nation's educational, public safety, environmental and other human needs and to achieve direct and demonstrable results. In doing so, the Corporation fosters civic responsibility, strengthens the ties that bind us together as a people, and provides educational opportunity for those who make a substantial commitment to service. For more information about the Corporation and the activities it supports, go to http://www.nationalservice.org.

Section 198 of the National and Community Service Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 12653, authorizes the Corporation to provide, directly or through contracts or cooperative agreements, training and technical assistance in support of activities under the national service laws. Section 125 of that Act and titles I and II of the Domestic Volunteer Service Act (42 U.S.C. 4250) provide additional authority.

An award made under this Notice will be in the form of a cooperative agreement. Cooperative agreements are subject to Corporation regulations on general administrative requirements: 45 CFR part 2541 (for agreements with State and local government agencies and Indian tribal governments) and 45 CFR part 2543 (for agreements with institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations and commercial entities). The Provider must comply with reporting requirements, including submitting semi-annual financial reports and progress reports linking progress on deliverables to expenditures.

Cooperative agreements require substantial involvement on the part of the Corporation. Substantial involvement includes frequent and regular communication with and monitoring by the Corporation's cognizant training officer (COTR). The COTR will confer with the Provider on a regular basis to review project status and service delivery, including work plans, budgets, periodic reports, materials developed, preparation for and implementation of training events, targeting of the Provider's services, and assessment of the Provider's effectiveness.

The Corporation expects that activities assisted under the agreement awarded through this Notice will commence on or about December 1, 2002, following the conclusion of the selection and award process.

The Corporation will make an award covering a period not to exceed three years. If the Corporation approves an application and enters into a multi-year award agreement, funding will be provided for the first year only. Funding for the second and third years of an award period is contingent upon need, quality of service, the nature and scope of activities to be supported, and availability of appropriations for the purpose of the award. The Corporation has no obligation to provide additional funding in subsequent years.

To ensure that materials generated with Corporation funding for training and technical assistance purposes are available to the public and readily accessible to grantees and sub-grantees, the Corporation reserves a royalty-free, non-exclusive, and irrevocable right to obtain, use, reproduce, publish, or disseminate publications and materials produced under the agreement, including data, and to authorize others to do so. The Provider must agree to make such publications and materials available to the national service field, as identified by the Corporation, at no cost or at the cost of reproduction. All materials developed for the Corporation must be consistent with Corporation editorial and publication guidelines and must be accessible to individuals with disabilities to the extent required by law.

State and local government entities, non-profit organizations, institutions of higher education, Indian tribes, and commercial entities are eligible to apply. Pursuant to the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, an organization described in section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(4), which engages in lobbying, is not eligible to apply. Organizations that operate or intend to operate Corporation-supported programs are eligible.

The Corporation anticipates making a single award for this purpose. We will consider proposals from single applicants, applicants in partnership and applicants proposing other approaches we consider responsive to this Notice.

Organizations may apply to provide training and technical assistance in partnership with organizations seeking other Corporation funds. Based on previous training and technical assistance competitions and our estimate of potential applicants, we expect fewer than ten applications to be submitted.

The Corporation for National and Community Service supports a wide range of programs under the National and Community Service Act and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act, under which projects use service and service learning as the means to respond to serious educational, environmental, public safety, and other human needs on Native American lands or affecting Native American populations. Corporation programs operated by Indian Tribes or involving Native Americans include AmeriCorps*Tribal programs and Tribal Civilian Community Corps residential programs, AmeriCorps*VISTA projects, National Senior Service Corps projects (including Foster Grandparent, Senior Companion, and RSVP projects), Learn and Serve America programs, AmeriCorps Promise Fellow programs, and AmeriCorps*State and National programs involving Native Americans. More information may be found under the above-named programs on the national service Web site (www.nationalservice.org); under National Service in Your State (www.nationalservice.org/stateprofiles/index.html); and under National Service in Indian Country (www.nationalservice.org/stateprofiles/it_intro.html).

The Provider should develop a training and technical assistance strategy that will serve programs operated directly by Indian tribes as well as those serving Native Americans, but managed by other entities. These might include such wide variations as a tribally operated AmeriCorps program on a reservation, a tribally operated Learn & Serve America program at a tribal or non-tribal school or college, or even a non-tribally operated Senior Corps or VISTA project that has activities both on and off a reservation or serves Native Americans in an urban area. The Provider will broker the services of consultants and other national and local providers, as appropriate, and offer direct services when they fall within the range of expertise of the Provider. Whatever the context, the Provider should deliver a T/TA program that reflects the diverse and unique needs of Native Americans involved in service and service-learning projects.

In presenting its T/TA plan, the applicant should describe the strategies and methodologies it will use to assure that the following objectives are achieved:

1. The identification of characteristics of successful Native American programs, based on research and input from programs operating in the field, and the development of a menu of training and technical assistance resources linked to those characteristics and designed to support programs in achieving them;

2. The utilization of training and technical assistance activities and products that are interactive, culturally appropriate, experiential, based on the principles of adult learning, and adaptable to participants at various levels of existing experience, knowledge and skills.

3. A collaborative, partnership relation with programs in the creation and conduct of needs assessments, exploration and clarification of needs, and determination of the most suitable strategies for responses to needs.

4. The use of an appropriate variety of methodologies in responding to T/TA needs, including, among others:

a. The promotion and use of electronic, telephone and other means of communication and technology to link programs with relevant resources and with each other;

b. Targeted training, periodic workshops and on-site consultancies for program staff on specific issues (such as program management techniques, action planning, partnership development strategies, service-learning techniques, etc.);

c. The development and dissemination, on a regular basis, of articles, resource materials and information, calendars of training events and conferences, service-learning information, orientation curricula and materials for program staff, members, participants, volunteers, and other resources of relevance to Native American programs;

d. The development and promotion of a variety of strategies for using expert peers;

e. Referral to other consultants/providers, as appropriate;

f. An annual national conference on service in Indian country.

5. Capacity-building and demonstrable skill development on the part of programs in the following areas:

a. The creation and use of effective systems for documenting, tracking and highlighting program, member, volunteer, participant, and community achievements;

b. Improvement in the quality of program objectives, desired outcomes, assessment of performance, and accountability;

c. The development of programs' internal training and technical assistance capacity, such as improving skills in problem identification, problem solving, training, and assessing and using local T/TA resources;

6. A system of pro-active, targeted outreach to programs needing T/TA services in particular areas or fields, such as financial management, volunteer generation, tutoring, etc.

7. The linking of all T/TA activities to the greatest extent possible to the goals of:

a. program sustainability, including community and citizen involvement, resource mobilization and development, volunteer generation and management, partnership development, community outreach, and program identity; and

b. program accountability, including the development of meaningful objectives, as well as effective program plans to achieve them and document their outcomes.

8. The facilitation of partnerships with other providers and organizations that may be of assistance to Native American programs and activities, including:

a. The promotion of awareness and provision of training and orientation to Native Americans on Corporation and other potential resources and activities for programs, and on opportunities for collaboration and partnership;

b. The promotion of awareness and provision of training and orientation to other organizations, training providers, and potential partners, as needed, on Native American programs, issues and collaboration opportunities;

c. The conduct of joint training sessions when appropriate;

d. The review and evaluation of resource materials developed by other organizations and providers to assure that they are appropriate and useful for Indian tribes operating national and community service and service learning programs.

9. Collaboration with the National Service Resource Center (NSRC) and National Service Learning Clearinghouse (NSLC) to establish and promote a resource library of materials specifically related to the needs of Indian tribes operating national and community service and service-learning programs.

10. The recruitment of a qualified pool of consultants, with an appropriate range of skills and expertise and Native American representation.

The Corporation is committed to accountability and the measuring of performance for all its grantees, including training and technical assistance providers. The Provider must develop effective systems to identify the critical outcomes of its work, indicators of its success in this work, and how these can be judged or measured. The Corporation needs tangible information documenting the effectiveness and outcomes of the Provider's work.

In its proposal, the applicant must demonstrate its understanding of accountability in grant-funded programs and its experience in and plans for identifying and reporting on the significant outcomes of its work with programs. Specific performance measures and reporting guidelines will be finalized between the Corporation and the awardee at the time of the award negotiation, based on the Corporation's FY 2003 Administrative Guidance.

The Provider will develop a plan to assess the impact of its services for clients. The assessment must be ongoing and must be used to inform program planning. It must also encompass immediate as well as long term training impact. The Provider must submit evaluation summaries, and records of evaluations must be available for review.

The Corporation may also require an independent assessment of the Provider's performance.

The Provider is responsible for submitting timely progress and financial reports to the Corporation during and after the award period, as follows:

a. Semi-annual Progress Reports. Progress reports must be submitted semi-annually and are due within thirty days of the end of each budget period during the cooperative agreement. The Provider must submit this information electronically. As noted above, the Corporation will provide guidance as to the contents of these reports.

b. Financial Reports. Financial reports must be submitted semi-annually, within 30 days of the end of the budget period, and must include a summary of expenditures for the period. The reports are cumulative and must be submitted on the Financial Status Report (FSR) form SF 269A.

c. Final Reports.

i. Providers completing the final year of their agreement must submit, in lieu of the last semi-annual progress report, a final progress report that is cumulative over the entire award period. The final progress report is due 90 days after the end of the agreement.

ii. Providers completing the final year of their award must submit, in lieu of the last semi-annual FSR, a final FSR that is cumulative over the entire award period. The final FSR is due 90 days after the end of the agreement and must be submitted to the Office of Grants Management. Further guidance for final reports will be provided prior to the end of the agreement.

d. Other Reports. The Provider must submit such special reports as may be reasonably requested by the Corporation.

Ensure that all training and technical assistance resources, including Web sites, are accessible to persons with disabilities, as required by law, by doing the following:

a. Notifying potential participants that reasonable accommodations will be provided upon request;

b. Providing reasonable accommodations when requested to do so, to include sign language interpreters, special assistance, and documents in alternate formats;

c. Using accessible locations for training events;

d. Using accessible technology, captioning videos, avoiding non-voice-over formats, and when indicating a telephone number, including a non-voice telephone alternative such as TTY or e-mail;

Grant provisions will be provided as a part of the signed cooperative agreement. Regular and candid communication with the cognizant training officer is essential. A set of general expectations of the Provider is as follows.

The Provider must:

a. Meet as necessary with the cognizant training officer or other staff or consultants designated by the cognizant training officer to exchange views, ideas, and information concerning training and technical assistance.

b. Ensure that Provider staff and consultants are fully versed in the background, approach, vocabulary, assets, needs, and objectives of the Corporation and each of its programs.

c. Participate in the planning and implementation of national meetings and training events, including meetings of all Corporation training and technical assistance providers, as requested by the Corporation.

d. Collaborate in materials development and training events organized by other providers or the Corporation, as requested.

e. Share effective practices with the field and other providers through Corporation listservs, the Corporation's effective practices database, and other mechanisms such as the National Service-Learning Clearinghouse and the National Service Resource Center.

f. Use technology creatively and effectively as a cost-effective strategy for reaching large numbers of grantees, subgrantees, and others related to national and community service and service-learning programs.

Applicants must submit one unbound, original proposal and two bound copies. Proposals must include the following components and should not exceed a total of 50 pages in length:

The cover page must include (a) the name, address, phone number, fax number, and e-mail address of the contact person, and the World Wide Web site URL (if available) of the applicant organization; (b) a 250-500 word executive summary of the proposed training and technical assistance strategy; and, (c) the total funding amount requested for the first year.

A one-to-two page list of all proposed training and technical assistance activities and materials.

A bulleted narrative of no more than 15 double-spaced, single-sided, typed pages in no smaller than 12-point font that includes:

The applicant's proposed first-year strategy for providing training and technical assistance to service and service-learning programs operated by Indian tribes or involving Native Americans, with proposed changes (if any) for years two and three. Using the objectives, components and requirements outlined in Section V of this Notice as a point of departure, the applicant organization should describe its specific strategies, methodologies, techniques and plans for achieving successful T/TA results with programs in the most effective way. In this section, the Corporation wishes to know, among other things, how the applicant organization will help programs identify needs; how it will approach, reach and work with the programs to respond to those needs; the tools and resources it will use and how it will use them; the outcomes it will be looking for and how it will define and demonstrate them; and the strategies it will use to learn from its experiences and then apply those lessons learned to improve results. The section should include a detailed timeline and work plan showing training and technical assistance deliverables—activities, products and events—planned for the first year.

A narrative of no more than four pages (in the same double-spaced format) describing one face-to-face training course in a content area relevant to tribal programs. The face-to-face course should be considered part of a two-day event for national service program or project staff. Applicant should submit a session description that includes desired learning outcomes and an outline of session content and the activities that will accomplish the desired outcomes.

A description of no more than three pages (in the same format) of how the applicant proposes to use technology to extend the reach of the training and technical assistance delivery. The description should include the target audience, proposed uses of technology, rationale for approach, concepts and skills to be delivered, and how the strategy's effectiveness will be evaluated.

a. A narrative of no more than four pages (in the same format) that describes:

i. The organization's knowledge of and/or experience with service programs operated by Indian tribes and/or involving Native Americans;

ii. The organization's capacity to provide relevant training and technical assistance services on a nationwide scope, and recent work similar to that being proposed;

b. Names and contact information of three to five references that can comment on the work described above.

c. A list of proposed staff with their areas of expertise ( Note: Key staff will be subject to Corporation approval) and resumes of the individuals who will be primarily responsible for the proposed deliverables with their relevant experience highlighted.

d. An organizational chart that shows the relationship of the training and technical assistance service Provider (including partners, if any) to the overall structure of the legal applicant to this Notice.

A detailed, line-item budget with costs organized by personnel, task and sub-task that lead to the deliverables as outlined in the proposal narrative and work plan. Costs in proposed budgets must consist solely of costs allowable under applicable cost principles found in OMB Circulars (OMB Circular A-87 for state and local governments, A-121 for non-profit organizations, A-21 for institutions of higher education) and in F.A.R. part 31 for commercial entities.

Applicants should be mindful that a demonstrated commitment to providing services in the most cost-effective manner possible will be a major consideration in the evaluation of proposals. Provider match is not required. The budget should include:

a. Proposed staff and expert-consultant hours and pay rates by task and sub-task (include daily maximums for consultants);

b. Types and quantities of other direct costs being proposed by task and sub-task (for example, amounts of travel and volume of other task-related resources, such as communications, postage, etc.).

Provide a budget narrative that corresponds with all items in the line-item budget and that includes an explanation of all cost estimates that appear in the line-item budget. The narrative should clearly show how each cost was derived, using equations to reflect all factors considered.

To ensure fairness to all applicants, the Corporation reserves the right to take remedial action, up to and including disqualification, in the event a proposal fails to comply with the requirements related to page limits, line spacing, and font size. The Corporation will assess applications based on the criteria listed below.

The Corporation will consider the quality of the proposed activities based on:

a. Evidence of the applicant's knowledge and understanding of the role national and community service and service-learning programs can play in meeting Indian tribal and Native American goals and needs, and the role of training and technical assistance in supporting this effort.

b. The soundness of the strategies and activities the applicant will use to accomplish the training and technical assistance objectives presented in this Notice (see particularly Sections V.A.1-10, T/TA Objectives, and V.B.1, Performance Measurement and Accountability, above) to support national and community service and service-learning programs involving Native Americans.

The Corporation will consider the capacity of the applicant to deliver the proposed services based on:

a. Demonstrated ability to design and deliver high-quality, adult, experiential training and technical assistance relevant to Native Americans;

b. Demonstrated ability to design and deliver training and technical assistance in a responsive, flexible and creative manner, using a variety of techniques and at a variety of levels; demonstrated knowledge of staff and consultants in training and capacity-building design and delivery methodologies;

c. Evidence of the organization's experience in problem identification and needs assessment, clarification of needs, and development of suitable T/TA strategies to meet those needs;

d. Evidence of the organization's experience in collaborative partnering with other organizations in T/TA activities;

e. Evidence of the organization's experience in developing and using practical, appropriate materials in support of its T/TA activities;

f. Evidence of the organization's experience using technology as a strategy in training and technical assistance;

g. Demonstrated knowledge of staff and consultants in content areas relevant to the types of T/TA which might be required under this agreement, including sustainability and program evaluation and accountability topics;

h. Evidence of the organization's experience in identifying and documenting appropriate relevant and significant outcomes of training and technical assistance;

i. Demonstrated ability to manage a federal grant or apply sound fiscal management principles to grants as evidenced by the applicant's previous grants experience.

The Corporation will consider how the applicant:

a. proposes to measure the need for and outcomes of their products and services;

b. plans to collect data and use assessments to modify and improve their products and services.

The Corporation will consider the budget based on:

a. Cost-effectiveness of the proposed training and technical assistance activities;

b. The clarity and thoroughness of the budget and budget narrative (see specifications under “Budget Narrative”).

Entities funded directly by the Corporation. These may include: state commissions on national and community service, national non-profit organizations, Indian tribes, and entities in states or U.S. Territories that do not have a state commission.

Organizations receiving funds from Grantees of the Corporation.

The National Service Resource Center (NSRC) serves as a repository of information on all aspects of national service. The NSRC manages most of the Corporation's listservs and maintains and operates a library of print and media materials related to service and a toll-free information and referral service. Training and technical assistance publications are posted or distributed by the NSRC and its Web site ( www.etr.org/nsrc ) includes a calendar of training events and links to all current providers.

National Service-Learning Clearinghouse serves as the primary resource on service-learning for Learn and Serve America grantees in higher education, K-12, community-based organizations and tribes, as well as the entire service-learning community. Its resources include a Web site (http://www.servicelearning.org), a library collection, reference and referral, Learn and Serve America project directory, listservs, and expert technical support.

This collection instrument is for use by beneficiaries under the TRICARE Program [formerly the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services (TRICARE/CHAMPUS)]. TRICARE/CHAMPUS is a health benefits entitlement program for the dependents of active duty Uniform Services members and deceased sponsors, retirees and their dependents, dependents of Department of Transportation (Coast Guard) sponsors, and certain North Atlantic Treaty Organizations, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and Public Health Service eligible beneficiaries. DD Form 2642 is used solely by TRICARE/CHAMPUS beneficiaries to file for reimbursement of costs paid to provider and suppliers for authorized health care services or supplies.

Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. The Leader, Regulatory Information Management Group, Office of the Chief Information Officer, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped by office, contains the following: (1) Type of review requested, e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information; (5) Respondents and frequency of collection; and (6) Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. The Leader, Regulatory Information Management Group, Office of the Chief Information Officer, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped by office, contains the following: (1) Type of review requested, e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information; (5) Respondents and frequency of collection; and (6) Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment.

Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. The Leader, Regulatory Information Management Group, Office of the Chief Information Officer, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped by office, contains the following: (1) Type of review requested, e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information; (5) Respondents and frequency of collection; and (6) Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment.

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE and its regulators in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.

Tentative Agenda:

This agenda is subject to change at least one day in advance of the meeting.

Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Committee either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Menice Manzanares at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Each individual wishing to make public comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments at the beginning of the meeting.

Minutes: Minutes of this meeting will be available for public review and copying at the Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday-Friday, except Federal holidays. Minutes will also be available at the Public Reading Room located at the Board's office at 1660 Old Pecos Trail, Suite B, Santa Fe, NM. Hours of operation for the Public Reading Room are 9 a.m.-4 p.m. on Monday through Friday. Minutes will also be made available by writing or calling Menice Manzanares at the Board's office address or telephone number listed above. Minutes and other Board documents are on the Internet at: http:www.nnmcab.org.

This section contains the following information about the energy information collection submitted to OMB for review: (1) The collection numbers and title; (2) the sponsor ( i.e. , the Department of Energy component); (3) the current OMB docket number (if applicable); (4) the type of request (i.e, new, revision, extension, or reinstatement); (5) response obligation ( i.e. , mandatory, voluntary, or required to obtain or retain benefits); (6) a description of the need for and proposed use of the information; (7) a categorical description of the likely respondents; and (8) an estimate of the total annual reporting burden ( i.e. , the estimated number of likely respondents times the proposed frequency of response per year times the average hours per response).

1. EIA-176, 191, 857, 895, 910 and 912, “Natural Gas Data Collection Program Package”

2. Energy Information Administration

3. OMB Number 1905-0175

4. Three-year approval requested—In addition to the changes to the surveys outlined in the Federal Register notice published February 25, 2002, on pages 8530—8532, EIA is also requesting that companies file electronically, either by fax or e-mail, unless they lack the technology.

5. Mandatory (Form EIA-895 is voluntary)

6. The Natural Gas Data Collection Program Package forms collect basic and detailed natural gas production, processing, transmission, storage, deliveries, and price data. The data are published by the EIA and are used by both public and private analysts. Respondents include natural gas pipeline companies, distributors, storage operators, marketers, processing plant operators, and State agencies.

7. Business or other for-profit; State, Local or Tribal Government

8. 45,464 hours ( 2,047 respondents x 6.14 responses per year x 3.6 hours per response).

This second meeting of the Superfund Subcommittee will involve reports from the Subcommittee's working groups about their activities since the last Subcommittee meeting in June 2002. The agenda for the meeting will be available online at http://www.epa.gov/oswer/SFsub.htm one week prior to the meeting's occurrence.

The public is welcome to attend all portions of the meeting. Members of the public who plan to file written statements and/or make brief (suggested 5-minute limit) oral statements at the public sessions are encouraged to contact the Designed Federal Officer. Each day will have one public comment period.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0110.

Title: Application for Renewal of License for AM, FM, TV Translator, or LPTV Station.

Form Number: FCC Form 303-S.

Type of Review: Extension of currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit institutions.

Number of Respondents: 5,492.

Estimated Time per Response: 1.0 hours (avg.).

Frequency of Response: Reporting once every 8 years.

Total Annual Burden: 5,288 hours.

Total Annual Costs: $1,560,851.

Needs and Uses: FCC Form 303-S is used to apply for renewal of a commercial or noncommercial AM, FM, or TV broadcast station and FM translator, TV translator, or Low Power TV (LPTV) broadcast station license. Form 303-S is used to seek the joint renewal of licenses for an FM or TV translator station and its co-owned primary FM, TV, or LPTV station. The FCC staff use data from Form 303-S to assure that requisite reports for an application renewal have been filed and that the licensee continues to meet basic statutory requirements for broadcast station license. An applicant must post a public notice to inform the public that the station has filed for license renewal.

OMB Control Number: 3060-XXXX.

Title: Digital Audio Broadcasting Systems And Their Impact On the Terrestrial Radio Broadcast Service.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: New collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

Number of Respondents: 12,000.

Estimated Time per Response: 2 hours.

Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping; One-time reporting requirement.

Total annual burden: 24,000 hours.

Total Annual Costs: $30,000.

Needs and Uses: The FCC will require station licensees to provide information relative to implementation of interim hybrid digital operations. This information will provide be used to provide guidance on the rate of the transition from analog to digital radio broadcasting in the various radio markets; to confirm continuing compliance with current radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure restrictions; to provide updated transmitter output power (TPO) levels for FM stations; and to assist in the resolution of interference complaints, if any, which may arise due to the commencement of digital broadcasting.

The text of the Public Notice is as follows:

The Instructions to FCC Forms 314 (Application for Consent to Assignment of Broadcast Station Construction Permit or License), 315 (Application for Consent to Transfer Control of Entity Holding Broadcast Station Construction Permit or License), and 316 (Short-Form Application for Consent To Assign Broadcast Construction Permit or License or Transfer of Control of Entity Holding Broadcast Station Construction Permit or License) currently require the filing of “a complete and final copy of the unredacted contract for the sale of the authorizations * * *, including all exhibits and attachments.” Applicants also must certify whether they have complied with this requirement.

In a Memorandum Opinion and Order released today, the Commission concludes that the contract submission requirements should be relaxed to permit applicants to exclude contract attachments that are not material to the Commission's analysis of the transaction and directs the staff to revise the Forms' Instructions and certifications accordingly. See LUJ, Inc., Assignor , FCC No. 02-235 (released August 22, 2002) (the “LUJ Decision” ) ¶ 7. Until the revised Forms are issued, the Media Bureau hereby announces interim filing and certification procedures, effective immediately, as set forth in the LUJ Decision . Applicants that submit a complete and final copy of the sales contract, including all exhibits and attachments, may respond “Yes” to the applicable Item of the relevant Form. Applicants—Assignors/Licensees/Transferors and Assignees/Transferees alike—that choose to omit certain of the transaction documents which contain information that is not material for Commission processing purposes must respond “No” to the applicable Item of the Form. In the latter circumstance, applicants must also submit an exhibit describing each of the omitted documents, stating both the specific reason(s) for the omission and the basis for the determination that the omitted documentation is not material to the Commission's consideration of the subject application. Examples of documents that normally would not be material to the Commission's processing of the application are employee benefit plans and lists of vendor supply contracts being assumed by the buyer.

We remind applicants that the failure to submit documentation containing all material terms of an agreement for the assignment or transfer of control of a broadcast authorization, including the sales price, will delay processing of the application and may result in the Bureau providing the public with an additional thirty-day public comment period following the submission of all such documentation.

You may call 202-452-3206 beginning at approximately 5 p.m. two business days before the meeting for a recorded announcement of bank and bank holding company applications scheduled for the meeting; or you may contact the Board's Web site at http://www.federalreserve.gov for an electronic announcement that not only lists applications, but also indicates procedural and other information about the meeting.

Based on in-depth discussions with industry representatives, the agencies have reached certain conclusions regarding the necessity to assure the resilience of critical U.S. financial markets in the face of wide-scale, regional disruptions and identified a number of sound practices to strengthen the resiliency of the overall U.S. financial system and the respective U.S. financial centers. Ensuring the resilience of critical financial markets requires that core clearing and settlement organizations and other firms that play significant roles in critical financial markets, many of which enjoy the benefits of operating out of major financial centers, will be able to perform their critical activities even in the event of a wide-scale, regional disruption.

The agencies are seeking comment on the sound practices discussed below. Upon issuance of a final paper, the agencies intend to incorporate these sound practices into supervisory expectations or other forms of guidance. This paper is meant to supplement the agencies' respective existing policies and other guidance on business continuity planning by financial institutions. Because of the criticality of protecting the financial system after September 11, the sound practices focus on minimizing immediate systemic effects of wide-scale regional disruption of critical wholesale financial markets and therefore do not address issues relating to retail financial services.

Section I of this paper discusses business continuity objectives that have special importance after September 11 and their scope of application. Section II provides the agencies' preliminary conclusions with respect to key factors affecting the resilience of critical markets and activities in the U.S. financial system; sound practices to strengthen financial system resilience; and an appropriate timetable for implementing these sound practices. Section III contains a summary and analysis of the industry discussions that provided a basis for the agencies' preliminary conclusions, with a focus on private-sector perspectives; recovery of critical activities; confidence in recovery and resumption plans through use or testing; and implementation considerations. Section IV outlines next steps following issuance of the agencies' final views. Section V concludes this paper with a request for comment on the sound practices.

The Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the New York State Banking Department (the agencies) have been meeting with industry participants to analyze the lessons learned from the events of September 11, with a view towards strengthening the overall resilience of the U.S. financial system in the event of a wide-scale, regional disruption. This effort began with a set of interviews with a number of large banking and securities firms, clearing and settlement organizations, and payment system operators to identify “what worked” and what could be improved going forward. On February 13, 2002, the agencies issued a discussion note on lessons learned and their implications for business continuity. 1 On February 26, the agencies met with a group of large financial firms and financial utilities to discuss these findings, identify areas of consensus, and exchange views on how industry members can act as catalysts in achieving greater internal and industry resilience. 2 Out of these and a series of in-depth, follow-up discussions, the agencies identified broad consensus on three business continuity objectives that have special importance after September 11:

• Rapid recovery and timely resumption of critical operations following a wide-scale, regional disruption;

• Rapid recovery and timely resumption of critical operations following the loss or inaccessibility of staff in at least one major operating location; and

• A high level of confidence, through ongoing use or robust testing, that critical internal and external continuity arrangements are effective and compatible.

Based on this extensive dialogue, the agencies have reached certain preliminary conclusions with respect to the factors affecting the resilience of critical markets and activities in the U.S. financial system; sound practices to strengthen financial system resilience; and an appropriate timetable for implementing these sound practices. Following a public comment period, the agencies will issue in final form their views on sound practices for strengthening the resilience of the financial system in the event of a wide-scale, regional disruption. The agencies are issuing their views to guide financial organizations as they complete their reviews of business continuity plans and make strategic investments to strengthen their capabilities.

The agencies view these sound practices as being most applicable to organizations that present a type of systemic risk should they be unable to recover or resume critical activities that support critical markets. In this context, “systemic risk” includes the risk that the failure of one participant in a transfer system or financial market to meet its required obligations will cause other participants to be unable to meet their obligations when due, causing significant liquidity or credit problems and threatening the stability of financial markets. 3 The organizations that could present such systemic risk should they be unable to recover ( i.e., complete) and resume ( i.e., carry on) critical activities consist of core clearing and settlement organizations. Other firms that play a significant role in critical financial markets also could contribute to systemic risk should they be unable to recover critical activities. These organizations and key terms are described more fully below.

Critical markets provide the means for banks, securities firms, and other financial institutions to adjust their key cash and securities positions and those of their customers in order to manage significant liquidity, market, and other risks to their organizations. Critical markets also provide support for the provision of a wide range of financial services to businesses and consumers in the United States. Certain markets such as the Federal funds and government securities markets also support the implementation of monetary policy. For purposes of this paper, “critical markets” are defined as the markets for

• Federal funds, foreign exchange and commercial paper

• Government, corporate, and mortgage-backed securities

• “Core clearing and settlement organizations” consist of market utilities that provide critical clearing and settlement services for financial markets and large value payment system operators. Core clearing and settlement organizations also consist of firms that provide similar critical clearing and settlement services for critical financial markets in sufficient volume or value to present systemic risk in their sudden absence, and for whom there are no viable immediate substitutes.

• “Firms that play significant roles in critical financial markets” are those that participate in sufficient volume or value such that their failure to perform critical activities by the end of the business day could present systemic risk. There are different ways to gauge the significance of such firms in critical markets. The agencies believe that many if not most of the 15-20 major banks and the 5-10 major securities firms, and possibly others, play at least one significant role in at least one critical market. In the context of these sound practices, the agencies are considering the benefit of providing additional guidance ( e.g. , in terms of market-share or dollar-value thresholds) to help firms identify the category into which they fall for the specific activities they perform.

For purposes of these sound practices, a “wide scale, regional disruption” is one that causes a severe disruption of transportation, telecommunications, power, or other critical infrastructure components across a metropolitan or other geographic area and its adjacent communities that are economically integrated with it; or that results in a wide-scale evacuation or inaccessibility of the population within normal commuting range of the disruption's origin.

Critical Markets. The resilience of the U.S. financial system in the event of a wide-scale, regional disruption rests on the rapid recovery and resumption of critical financial markets defined above and the activities that support them.

Recovery of Critical Activities. The rapid restoration of critical financial markets, and the avoidance of potential systemic risk, requires firms that play significant roles in those markets to recover business processes and functions sufficient to complete critical activities by the end of each business day. These critical activities are:

(a) Completing pending large-value payment instructions;

(b) Clearing and settling material pending transactions;

(c) Meeting material end-of-day funding and collateral obligations necessary to assure the performance of items (a) and (b) above;

(d) Managing material open firm and customer risk positions, as appropriate and necessary to assure the performance of items (a) through (c) above;

(e) Communicating firm and customer positions necessary to assure the performance of items (a) through (d) above, reconciling the day's records, and safeguarding firm and customer assets; and

(f) Performing all support and related functions that are integral to the above critical activities.

Recovery and Resumption of Critical Activities. The rapid resumption of critical financial markets requires that core clearing and settlement organizations be able to recover and resume within the business day the critical activities they perform that support the recovery of critical markets. These include the recovery of critical activities discussed above as well as the resumption of:

(a) Processing new large-value payment instructions;

(b) Clearing and settling material new transactions;

(c) Managing material ongoing funding and collateral requirements necessary to assure the performance of items (a) and (b) above;

(d) Managing material ongoing firm and customer risk positions, as appropriate and necessary to assure the performance of items (a) through (c) above;

(e) Communicating changes in firm and customer positions necessary to assure the performance of items (a) through (d) above, reconciling the day's records, and safeguarding firm and customer assets; and

(f) Performing all support and related functions that are integral to the above critical activities.

The agencies have identified the following sound practices for core clearing and settlement organizations and other firms that play significant roles in critical financial markets. The sound practices address the risks of a wide-scale, regional disruption and strengthen the resilience of the financial system. They also reduce the potential for a regional disruption to have an undue impact on one or more critical markets because primary and back-up processing facilities and staffs are concentrated in a particular geographic region.

1. Identify critical activities. Core clearing and settlement organizations and other firms that play significant roles in critical financial markets should identify all the critical activities they perform in support of critical markets.

2. Determine the appropriate recovery and resumption objectives. Firms that play significant roles in critical financial markets should, at a minimum, plan to recover on the same business day the critical activities they perform that support the recovery of critical markets. In fact, an emerging industry objective appears to be for firms that play significant roles in critical financial markets generally to set a recovery-time target of no later than four hours after the event. Core clearing and settlement organizations should plan both to recover and to resume fully within the day their critical activities that support critical financial markets. An emerging industry objective appears to be for such organizations generally to set a resumption-time target no later than two hours after the event.

3. Maintain sufficient out-of-region resources to meet recovery and resumption objectives. Firms that play significant roles in critical markets, at a minimum, should have back-up arrangements with sufficient out-of-region staff, equipment, and data to recover their critical activities within their recovery-time objectives. 4 These arrangements can range from a firm establishing its own out-of-region back-up facility for data and operations, to arranging for the use of remote outsourced facilities. The objective is to minimize the risk that a primary and a back-up site, and their respective labor pools, could both be impaired by a single wide-scale, regional disruption, including one centered somewhere in between them. Core clearing and settlement organizations should have sufficient out-of-region resources both to recover and to resume fully their critical activities within their recovery and resumption-time objectives. Although there may be a variety of approaches that could be effective, out-of-region back-up locations should not be dependent on the same labor pool or infrastructure components used by the primary site, and their respective labor pools should not both be vulnerable to simultaneous evacuation or inaccessibility. Infrastructure components include transportation, telecommunications, water supply and electric power.

4. Routinely use or test recovery and resumption arrangements. Firms that play significant roles in critical financial markets and core clearing and settlement organizations should routinely use or test their individual internal recovery and resumption arrangements for required connectivity, functionality, and volume capacity. Such institutions should also work cooperatively to design and to schedule appropriate cross-organization tests to assure the compatibility of individual recovery and resumption strategies within and across critical markets.

Firms should be enhancing their business continuity plans to address wide-scale, regional disruptions, including adoption of implementation plans to achieve these sound practices. To the extent that these sound practices require revisions of the plans, they should be completed as soon as possible and no later than 180 days after the agencies issue their final views. The agencies recognize that firms that play significant roles in critical financial markets are in different stages of their planning and investment cycles regarding new facilities, technology, staffing, and business processes. Furthermore, some have built, or are in the process of establishing, back-up sites or other arrangements that, while improving resilience, may not be fully consistent with these sound practices. Given their different circumstances, it may take some firms longer than others to implement all of these sound practices in a cost-effective manner. Accordingly, while the agencies recognize the need for some flexibility in implementation timetables, firms nevertheless should strive to achieve these sound practices as soon as practicable. All core clearing and settlement organizations, however, should begin to implement plans to establish out-of-region back-up resources within the next year.

The events of September 11 underscored the fact that the financial system operates as a network of interrelated markets and participants. The behavior of an individual participant can have a wide-ranging effect beyond its immediate counterparties. Firms agreed that all participants in the financial system should strive to incorporate the three business continuity objectives into their plans; however, they also made clear that “one size does not fit all.” There was agreement that some critical activities, including safeguarding and transferring funds and financial assets, are so vital to the operation of the financial system that they should continue with minimal disruption, even in the event of a wide-scale, regional disruption.

All firms recognize the importance of critical financial markets to their own operations and to the financial system overall in the event of a wide-scale, regional disruption. Core clearing and settlement organizations play a particularly crucial role in permitting firms and markets that are affected by the event to recover and resume operations as well as in permitting firms and markets that are unaffected to continue to operate. For example, in order for firms affected by a disruption to recover critical activities by the end of the day, including clearing and settling pending transactions, clearing and settlement organizations must themselves be able to recover and resume operations within the day. In addition, if some firms are unaffected by the disruption and are able to support the continued operation of critical markets to some degree, clearing and settlement organizations must be able to conduct operations. If clearing and settlement organizations are not able to operate in such circumstances, they likely will contribute to the amplification of potential systemic risks. For core clearing and settlement organizations, the dimensions of this systemic risk would likely be national and even international. As a result of these considerations, core clearing and settlement organizations recognize that in the event of a wide-scale, regional disruption they must be able to both recover and fully resume critical activities within the day, and typically within a very limited period of time. Firms that play significant roles in critical financial markets also should meet high recovery standards.

The agencies have found that industry participants generally recognize their respective roles in improving the overall resilience of the financial system and have made it a priority to complete internal preparations, share information and coordinate efforts. Firms indicated that economic trades-offs and competitive considerations exist in making strategic decisions about business continuity that require the continuing leadership of senior management and should not be left to the discretion of individual business units.

Business continuity plans address a variety of issues, including emergency response procedures assuring the safety of personnel, effective internal and external communications, and implementation of business recovery and business resumption strategies. The business continuity planning process involves a careful enterprise-wide analysis, including an assessment of the impact of an unexpected disruption of business processes and associated risks. Among other things, plans are designed to manage those risks by arranging for the recovery of critical activities to permit an orderly resolution of outstanding obligations. Firms also are expected to monitor their business continuity risks by testing and updating plans periodically. 5

Business recovery preparations enable a firm to recover the operation of a disrupted business process or function in order to manage firm and customer risks. 6 At a minimum this includes recovery of those “critical activities” necessary to permit the clearance and settlement of pending transactions; management and reconcilement of firm and customer positions; completion of the day's large value payments; and arranging for collateral or end-of-day funding. This also includes recovery of activities or systems that support or are integrally related to the performance of these critical business processes or functions. Business recovery preparations related to these critical activities are crucial to the smooth operation of the financial system. Given the complex interdependencies of markets and among participants, thorough preparations reduce the potential that a sudden disruption experienced by a few firms will cascade into market-wide inefficiencies and liquidity dislocations. 7 All firms recognize that business recovery is a core element of more comprehensive business continuity plans.

In discussions with industry members, firms often stated that the financial system is only as strong as its “weakest link.” Each firm has to ensure that its business continuity plans provide robust business recovery arrangements for the activities it performs that are critical to the smooth functioning of the financial system: wholesale payments processing, and clearance and settlement of money market instruments, government securities, foreign exchange, commercial paper and other corporate securities. Industry participants also recognize that core clearing and settlement organizations represent potential single points of failure in the financial system and therefore have the greatest responsibility for ensuring that they can recover and fully resume those activities in a timely manner. They also believe that firms that are significant participants in one or more critical markets or that effect a substantial volume or value of wholesale payments should develop robust recovery plans for critical activities in the event of a wide scale disruption when their primary sites and staffs may be inaccessible for some duration.

Once a firm identifies its critical business functions and processes, it must establish recovery-time targets sufficient to ensure that it can carry out those functions and processes in a manner that will result in minimal disruption to the financial system. This facilitates the compatibility of recovery plans across firms and helps assure firms are able to participate in the financial system in times of wide-scale, regional disruptions. A number of firms stated that current technology permits recovery-time targets of between one to four hours for many critical activities, even when factoring in the possibility of needing to reconstruct lost data.

In establishing recovery targets for critical activities, firms are coordinating their plans with the expectations of their respective core clearing and settlement organizations and peers. Some payment systems already have established robust recovery targets. Core clearing and settlement organizations are holding themselves to an intra-day recovery target—generally a few hours—and it is expected that technology will continue to improve upon those recovery times. Some also have, or are establishing, recovery times for their participants and, in such cases suggest that firms establish no later than end-of-day recovery targets. For example, wholesale payment systems have typically required participants to recover from a disruption in less than four hours, and many firms, including the payment systems themselves, are now able to achieve recovery times of substantially less than two hours.

Industry members generally agree that recovery of critical activities and processes during a wide-scale, regional disruption requires establishment of some level of out-of-region arrangements for critical operations and the personnel and data that support them. The objective of establishing out-of-region arrangements is to minimize the risk that a primary site and a back-up site, and their respective labor pools could be impaired by a single, wide-scale, regional disruption. Although there may be other approaches that could be effective, firms generally agree that out-of-region locations should not be dependent on the same labor pool or infrastructure components used by the primary site and should not be affected by a wide-scale evacuation or the inaccessibility of the region's population. Examples of such arrangements include a fully operational out-of-region back-up facility for data and operations, 8 and utilizing outsourced facilities in which equipment, software and data are stored for staff to activate. With this in mind, certain core clearing and settlement organizations, which are widely expected to recover and resume operations at full capacity indefinitely, and other firms that play significant roles in critical financial markets are establishing remote back-up facilities, in some cases hundreds or even thousands of miles away from the primary site. Some firms that already have a national or multi-region presence are planning to utilize out-of-region offices to establish back-up sites. Many are finding that there is the potential to achieve out-of-region staffing and system efficiencies by cross training staff or utilizing underused systems to share or shift loads. Other firms that play significant roles in markets or in effecting payments also are developing remote arrangements to ensure that they can recover critical data and operations during a wide-scale outage within expected recovery time targets. A number of firms in the process of identifying appropriate recovery arrangements stated that the events of September 11 have underscored the importance of building recovery strategies and capacities into their basic business processes. 9

Recovery plans must anticipate the need to have sufficient trained staff located at or near the back-up site to meet recovery objectives and plans for resuming a critical function at normal volumes for an extended duration. Firms are staffing remote back-up sites in a variety of practical and cost-effective ways. For example, firms operating active back-up sites often have full-time staffs who regularly perform the critical activities. Other firms plan to cross-train staff already located at remote sites so that they are able to assume responsibility for performing more critical back-up operations during an outage at the primary site. Firms that outsource their business resumption facilities to an out-of-region facility may have some staff located there. In general, firms that establish out-of-region facilities recognize that relocating employees is useful during the start-up/training period of developing a facility; however, it may be necessary to develop and maintain “local talent” to operate these facilities in the event of an extended outage and loss or inaccessibility of staff at the primary site. Some firms do not have sufficient volumes to warrant establishing geographically remote back-up facilities capable of providing full resumption over the near term. Nevertheless, many are taking steps to provide for the out-of-region recovery of transactional data and other resources to complete critical activities within target recovery times.

Ensuring that back-up facilities have access to current data is a critical component of business recovery. Firms recognize that out-of-region facilities fall beyond the current distance capacity of some high-volume, synchronous mirrored disk back-up technology, 10 and those establishing such facilities are taking a number of steps to minimize the potential for losing data in transit. For example, a number of firms are transmitting data continuously to local and remote back-up data centers resulting in multiple back-up databases. Others are sending more frequent batches to their remote back-up sites or to data storage locations electronically. Some firms maintain multiple replicas of their databases at various locations that can be accessed for production and other uses. In addition, a number of firms are establishing active back-up arrangements that permit the primary site automatically to shift production with little or no staff involvement, providing a very rapid recovery capability. These steps can significantly reduce the amount of time it takes to recover lost transactions and improve the ability of a firm to recover the function or process. Technology is evolving rapidly in this area; for example, software and hardware innovations are expected to provide the ability to maintain synchronous databases at even longer distances. Some firms are establishing systems and business strategies that permit the use of continued improvements in technology to achieve the greatest geographical diversity practicable.

Sound planning includes developing flexible plans that incorporate alternative recovery and resumption arrangements. These plans often can be activated to respond to more commonly experienced contingencies that affect fairly small geographic areas and were the subject of most plans before September 11. For example, some firms that require real-time data back-up have or are establishing in-region back-up sites that employ synchronous technology and are easily accessible in situations that do not involve a wide area disruption. Other examples include developing numerous small recovery sites that are locally accessible by employees and can be used to perform essential business functions; requiring a percentage of employees in a function to telecommute each day; dividing employees into shifts over a 24 hour period; and modifying information systems security access protocols to permit access to desk tops and data from home (virtual offices). These measures provide additional resilience in responding to a disruption in an appropriate and practical manner.

In responding to the events of September 11, many firms used plans developed during Year 2000 preparations. Although these plans worked well, some found that back-up data bases, facilities, contact information and other aspects of their plans were not sufficiently up-to-date. As a result, firms expressed a renewed commitment to ensure that critical internal and external business recovery and resumption arrangements are effective, communicated and rehearsed by all staff on a regular basis. Some firms report that they are achieving a high level of confidence through the continuous use of two sites ( i.e. , active'active model), or by switching over to alternate facilities on a regular basis. Periodic testing is an important and long-standing component of the business continuity planning process. Firms typically stage tests of particular systems, processes ( e.g. , communications facilities) or business lines to limit risks inherent in tests utilizing production workloads. Sound practice includes designing tests to simulate high impact scenarios, e.g. , through switch or fail over to back-up facilities with no advance warning.

One of the lessons learned during September 11 is that testing of internal systems alone is no longer sufficient. It also is critical to test back-up facilities with the primary and back-up facilities of markets, core clearing and settlement organizations and service providers to ensure connectivity, capacity and the integrity of data transmission. Moreover, firms are planning to share back-up contact information and test arrangements with counterparties and important customers. A number of firms and trade associations also have expressed a willingness to participate in or sponsor industry-wide testing. As firms successfully complete the more limited testing discussed above, appropriately scaled industry-wide testing could prove beneficial. Discussions within the industry on possible approaches are ongoing, and the prospect provides an incentive for firms to complete internal preparations so that there can be maximum participation. One possibility may be to take a staged approach by organizing respective tests with the core clearing and settlement organizations. As confidence grows, end-to-end tests could be organized.

After September 11, financial firms naturally initiated a lessons learned process with a view towards strengthening their business continuity plans. Industry meetings with the agencies in February 2002 and throughout the Spring confirmed that this process is nearing completion at many firms. The process has two components. First, firms are taking immediate steps to ensure that they address obvious gaps and refine plans to address near-term risks. Many are participating in industry initiatives aimed at improving private sector coordination and identifying sound practices with the intent of assuring that their plans are compatible with their peers. Some of these steps include sharing contact information; procuring alternative telecommunications facilities; and meeting with disaster recovery authorities to determine the availability of resources to facilitate business recovery activities. Second, firms are well along in reviewing and strengthening long-term strategic plans for business recovery and continuity of operations. A number of firms already are discussing alternative solutions at the most senior level to ensure that final plans are consistent with overall business objectives, risk management strategies and financial resources.

Most firms indicate that they will complete their strategic plans and implementation timetables by year-end or shortly thereafter. Some core clearing and settlement organizations already are in the process of establishing out-of-region, fully staffed and operational back-up facilities and expect to be operational within the next year. Sound practice for all firms includes implementing long-range plans as soon as practicable in order to protect and enhance their franchise  11 and promote confidence in the strength of the financial system. It also is important for firms that play significant roles in the financial markets and payments systems to ensure that their implementation plans are consistent with the expectations of those markets, systems and peers. Firms also are finding it appropriate to share information about the status of implementation with their core clearing and settlement organizations, counterparties and important customers. 12

Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. Collection of information is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each renewal of an existing collection, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Veterinary Adverse Drug Reaction, Lack of Effectivenss, Product Defect Report—21 CFR Part 510—(OMB Control Number 0910-0012)—Extension

Section 512(l) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 U.S.C. 360b(l)), and 21 CFR 510.300, 510.301, and 510.302 require that applicants of approved NADAs submit within 15 working days of receipt, complete records of reports of certain adverse drug reactions and unusual failure of new animal drugs. Other reporting requirements of adverse reactions to these drugs must be reported annually or semiannually in a specific format. This continuous monitoring of approved new animal drugs, affords the primary means by which FDA obtains information regarding potential problems in safety and effectiveness of marketed animal drugs and potential manufacturing problems. Data already on file with FDA is not adequate because animal drug effects can change over time and less apparent effects may take years to manifest themselves. Reports are reviewed along with those previously submitted for a particular drug to determine if any change is needed in the product or labeling, such as package insert changes, dosage changes, additional warnings or contraindications, or product reformulation.

Adverse reaction reports are required to be submitted by the drug manufacturer on FDA Forms 1932 or 1932a (voluntary reporting form), following complaints from animal owners or veterinarians. Likewise, product defects and lack of effectiveness complaints are submitted to FDA by the drug manufacturer following their own detection of a problem or complaints from product users or their veterinarians using forms FDA Forms 1932 and 1932a. Form FDA 2301 is available for the required transmittal of periodic reports and promotional material for new animal drugs. Respondents to this collection of information are applicants of approved NADAs.

FDA estimates the burden for this collection of information as follows:

In the Federal Register of June 7, 2002 (67 FR 39406), the agency announced that the proposed information collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44 U.S.C. 3507. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB has now approved the information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0338. The approval expires on August 31, 2005. A copy of the supporting statement for this information collection is available on the Internet at http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets .

FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance entitled “Guidance for Industry, 21 CFR Part 11; Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures, Maintenance of Electronic Records.” In the Federal Register of March 20, 1997 (62 FR 13430), FDA published a regulation providing criteria under which the agency considers electronic records and electronic signatures to be trustworthy, reliable, and generally equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures executed on paper (part 11 (21 CFR part 11)). The preamble to part 11 stated that the agency anticipated issuing supplemental guidance documents and would afford all interested parties the opportunity to comment on draft guidance documents.

The draft guidance addresses issues pertaining to the maintenance of electronic records. Part 11 establishes requirements for such maintenance, and the draft guidance is intended to assist people who must meet these requirements; it may also assist FDA staff who apply part 11 to persons subject to the regulation.

The draft guidance provides specific information on key principles and practices, and it addresses some frequently asked questions. It also describes two examples of approaches to maintaining electronic records. However, this draft guidance is not intended to cover everything about maintaining electronic records, and it does not apply to electronic records that are submitted to FDA, but that submitters are not required to maintain.

By direct reference, this draft guidance incorporates definitions of terms contained in a companion draft guidance entitled “Guidance for Industry, 21 CFR Part 11; Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures, Glossary of Terms” that published in the Federal Register of September 24, 2001 (66 FR 48886).

This level 1 draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulations (21 CFR 10.115). This draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the agency's current thinking on maintaining electronic records in electronic form. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may be used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

In the Federal Register of April 4, 2001 (66 FR 17914), FDA published a notice of availability for a draft guidance entitled “How the Center for Veterinary Medicine Intends to Handle Deficient Submissions Filed During the Investigation of a New Animal Drug,” giving interested persons until July 3, 2001, to submit comments.

CVM determined that there was a need for such a guidance for two reasons: (1) Having reviewers attempt to review submissions that have significant deficiencies is an inefficient use of CVM's limited resources, and (2) its practice of keeping submissions requiring significant additional information or rehabilitation “active,” (i.e., in the review queue), has contributed to a backlog in the review of pending submissions. This final guidance for industry and reviewers announces CVM's policy regarding the circumstances under which CVM intends to not accept for review submissions filed during the investigation of a new animal drug, notify the sponsor that the submission will not be reviewed, and remove the submission from the review queue.

CVM's primary goal is to approve safe and effective new animal drugs in a timely manner. To further this goal, CVM's responsibility is to ensure the quality of the review process. On the other hand, it is the sponsor's responsibility to ensure the quality of its submissions.

The quality of a submission can prevent or severely hinder its review. Poor quality submissions can be impossible or difficult to review. FDA received comments to the draft guidance suggesting that the problem CVM attributes to poor quality submissions is in part the variation in format and content of submissions as required by individual reviewers. However, an informal survey of reviewers in the Office of New Animal Drug Evaluation (ONADE) revealed that submissions were deficient because, among other things: They contained data discrepancies, incorrect statistical analyses, final reports that did not reflect actual data, electronic copies of data that did not match paper copies of raw data, or no documentation of drug source. ONADE has also received supplemental applications in which sponsors submitted the same data or information for the supplement that they submitted for the original application, i.e., without changing the relevant indications or conditions of use for which the supplement was submitted.

CVM has determined that it can no longer expend time and resources attempting to review submissions that have significant deficiencies. Poor quality submissions decrease the efficiency of the new animal drug application review and approval process by diverting limited resources from the review of submissions that are complete. Furthermore, as one comment to the draft guidance noted, a sponsor who submits a quality submission should not have its submission wait in the queue while a reviewer spends an inordinate amount of time reviewing a poor quality submission.

The final guidance clarifies that ONADE should use criteria and procedures similar to those found in 21 CFR 514.110 to determine whether it will not accept a submission for review, i.e., refuse to review the submission further. ONADE should, among other reasons, not review a submission if on its face the information is so inadequate that the submission is clearly not reviewable. ONADE should consider a submission to be inadequate if the numbers or types of errors in the submission or flaws in the development plan, call into question the quality of the entire submission to the extent it is deemed by ONADE that the submission cannot reasonably be reviewed.

ONADE should notify the sponsor by letter within 60 days of the receipt of the submission of its decision not to accept the submission for review. The letter notifying the sponsor that ONADE will not accept the submission for review should summarize in detail commensurate with the quality of the submission the reasons it cannot be reviewed. A sponsor who submits a deficient submission should not resubmit the submission until the submission has been reviewed rigorously for accuracy and completeness.

Refusing to review deficient submissions is only part of CVM's strategy to facilitate the timely approval of safe and effective new animal drugs. CVM intends to continue issuing guidance that will clarify approval requirements and the procedures and formats for various types of submissions. CVM intends to balance the need for guidance with the need to complete pending review work. CVM encourages sponsors to request presubmission conferences to reach agreement on investigational and approval requirements for specific new animal drugs. In addition, CVM continues to encourage sponsors to submit protocols for studies that are key to approval to CVM for review well in advance of beginning the studies. Finally, CVM is committed to continuing to work to improve its processes and approve safe and effective new animal drugs in a timely manner.

This level 1 final guidance document is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). This guidance represents the agency's current thinking on its handling of deficient submissions filed during the investigation of a new animal drug. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may be used as long as it satisfies the requirements of applicable statutes and regulations.

As with all of FDA's guidance, the public is encouraged to submit written or electronic comments with new data or other new information pertinent to this guidance. FDA will periodically review the comments in the docket and, where appropriate, will amend the guidance. The public will be notified of any such amendments through a notice in the Federal Register .

Persons with access to the Internet may obtain a copy of the final guidance document entitled “Guidance for Industry and Reviewers: “How the Center for Veterinary Medicine Intends to Handle Deficient Submissions Filed During Investigation of a New Animal Drug” from the CVM home page at http://www.fda.gov/cvm .

Section 513(a)(1)(C) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 U.S.C. 360c(a)(1)(C)) describes a class III device, in part, as represented for use in supporting or sustaining human life, in preventing impairment of human health or presenting an unreasonable risk of illness or injury. An individual or firm that commercially distributes a class III device, in interstate commerce, without an approved premarket approval application (PMA) or a substantially equivalent premarket notification (510(k)) is in violation of the act. In legal terms, the device is adulterated in accordance with section 501(f)(1) of the act (21 U.S.C. 351(f)(1)) and misbranded within the meaning of section 502(o) of the act (21 U.S.C. 352(o)).

On February 26, 1991, FDA issued the CPG entitled “Sec. 300.700 Direct Reference Authority for Class III Medical Devices Without a Premarket Notification (510(k)) or an Approved Premarket Approval Application (PMA) (CPG 7124.30).” This CPG authorizes FDA's field districts to issue a Warning Letter or recommend a seizure action, if warranted, without prior concurrence and review by FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) for the referenced violations. This procedure no longer reflects current agency policy. Field districts should forward all Warning Letter and seizure recommendations concerning device premarket clearance violations to CDRH for concurrence. The Regulatory Procedures Manual includes the latter procedure.

FDA is revoking CPG 7124.30, in its entirety, to eliminate obsolete compliance policy.

Prior to the revocation effective date (see DATES ), a copy of the CPG may also be downloaded to a personal computer with access to the Internet. The Office of Regulatory Affairs home page includes the CPG that may be accessed at http://www.fda.gov/ora/compliance_ref/cpg/cpgdev/cpg300-700.html .

This closure applies to all the public, on foot or in vehicles. The public lands affected by this closure are described as follows:

The above restrictions do not apply to emergency or law enforcement personnel or event officials. The authority for this closure is 43 CFR 8364.1. Persons who violate this closure order are subject to arrest and, upon conviction, may be fined not more than $1,000 and/or imprisoned for not more than 12 months.

A map of the closed area is posted in the Carson City Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management.

The lands described in paragraph 1(b) have been conveyed out of Federal ownership.

Since construction of the Red Bluff Diversion Dam, concern has been expressed regarding the dam's effect on both upstream and downstream fish migration. The dam was built with 11 movable gates. Raising the gates eliminates the dam's effect and allows the river to flow unimpeded. Lowering the dam gates allows for gravity diversion into canals and results in the creation of Lake Red Bluff.

Over the years, the dam gates have been raised more frequently in an attempt to enhance fish passage. Therefore, the ability to divert irrigation water has been gradually decreased from year-round to the current 4-month (gates-in) operations from May 15 to September 14. During the remainder of the year, the dam gates are open, allowing a free flowing, unimpeded river. Detailed studies show the current design of the fish ladders and the operations of the dam gates do not adequately allow passage of threatened and endangered fish species.

The DEIS/EIR addresses impacts related to the proposed alternatives. Through detailed feasibility studies, six alternatives, including the “No action” alternative, have been created to address the identified water delivery and fish passage issues.

The alternatives identified in the DEIS/EIR are:

1. No action—The current operating conditions remain the same with a 4-month dam “gates-in,” that creates Lake Red Bluff from May 15 to September 14. The impacts of this option must be studied to a similar level of detail as the others. It is used as a baseline of comparison for the other alternatives.

2. Bypass—This option creates a fish-friendly channel around the dam with sufficient water flow to attract and transport fish moving upstream and deliver juvenile fish moving downstream when the dam gates are lowered in late summer and early fall. Gates would continue to be lowered in the May 15 to September 14 period. A new pumping station would be required to provide reliable agricultural water supply from the river into the water delivery canals.

3. Improved fish ladders—Two alternatives are being considered and are aimed at improving the efficiency of the “fish ladders” designed to create a passage for fish to swim around the dam. The design improvements will increase the flow of water through the fish ladders. By increasing the flow, more fish will be attracted to the ladders and successfully pass the dam. The two alternatives differ in the operations of the dam gates. One option proposes lowering the dam gates for the current 4-month operation and the other for a 2-month operation (July 1 through August 31). A new pumping station would be required to provide reliable agricultural water supply from the river into the water delivery canals.

4. Existing fish ladders—This alternative retains the current fish ladders and decreases lowering of the dam gates to 2 months (July 1 through August 31). The only source of improved fish passage would be the reduction in gate operations. A new pumping station would be required to provide reliable agricultural water supply from the river into the water delivery canals.

5. Gates out—This option keeps the dam gates open year round, creating a free flowing river, unimpeded by the dam. Fish ladders or other bypass options would no longer be necessary and Lake Red Bluff would no longer be created. A new pumping station would be required to provide reliable agricultural water supply from the river into the water delivery canals.

Additional information is also available at the project Web site: http://www.tccafishpassage.org/ .

Comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, will be available for public review. Individual respondents may request that their home address be withheld from public disclosure, which will be honored to the extent allowable by law.

If you wish your name and/or address withheld, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comment. Submissions from organizations or businesses, and individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be available for public disclosure in their entirety.

The Fort Peck Tribes and the Dry Prairie Rural Water Association Incorporated submitted the “Water Conservation Plan for the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System: Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water System and Dry Prairie Rural Water System”, dated April 10, 2002, that includes prudent and reasonable water conservation measures for the operation of the Assiniboine Sioux Rural Water System that have been shown to be economically and financially feasible.

In addition to authorizing construction of the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System, the Act authorizes appropriations of $175,000,000 to Reclamation over a period of 10 fiscal years. The Act states under section 4(g)(3) that “The Secretary shall not obligate funds for construction of the Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water System until the Secretary publishes a written finding that the water conservation plan developed under section 7 includes prudent and reasonable water conservation measures for the operation of the Assiniboine Sioux Rural Water System that have been shown to be economically and financially feasible.” Identical provisions limiting obligations of funds for construction of the Dry Prairie Rural Water System are stated under section 5(e)(3) of the Act.

The requirements for the conservation plan are described under section 7 of the Act that states:

“(a) In General.—The Fort Peck Tribes and Dry Prairie Rural Water Association Incorporated shall develop a water conservation plan containing—

(1) a description of water conservation objectives;

(2) a description of appropriate water conservation measures; and

(3) a time schedule for implementing the measures and this Act to meet the water conservation objectives.

(b) Purpose.—The water conservation plan under subsection (a) shall be designed to ensure that users of water from the Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water System and the Dry Prairie Rural Water System will use the best practicable technology and management techniques to conserve water.”

To fulfill the requirements of section 7, the Fort Peck Tribes and Dry Prairie Rural Water Association Incorporated transmitted a water conservation plan (Plan) to Reclamation, dated April 10, 2002. The Plan fulfills all the requirements of the Act as discussed below.

In fulfillment of section 7(a)(1), the Plan contains six reasonable and prudent water conservation objectives appropriate for the pre-construction phase of this multi-phase project:

1. Achieve average in-house water use of 69 gpcd (gallons per capita day) starting in 2005 and fully implemented by 2011.

• Lower average in-house water use to 57 gpcd beginning in 2011 and fully implemented by 2030.

• Lower average in-house water use to 45 gpcd beginning in 2030.

2. Achieve average outside residential water use of 66 gpcd beginning in 2005 and fully implemented by 2011.

3. Maintain variable operating costs at Final Engineering Report levels plus inflation beginning in 2005.

4. Provide emergency preparedness to limit interruptions to 24 hours beginning in 2005.

5. Public information dissemination beginning in 2005.

6. Limit Missouri River diversions to 6,200 acre-feet annually beginning in 2005.

To accomplish these objectives, and in fulfillment of section 7(a)(2) of the Act, the Plan identifies 17 water conservation measures to be implemented starting in 2005 with full implementation scheduled for 2011.

• Installation of meters on all accounts

• Installation of meters on community non-account water

• Record keeping and water audits

• Control connection pressures at 65 pounds per square inch (psi)

• Implement system and household leakage repair; limit to 7 gpcd

• Publish lawn and garden water use data

• Cost-of-service accounting

• Water audits and associated costs to public

• Dry Prairie annual water review to promote conservation

• Assiniboine and Sioux leak repair program

• Disseminate clear billing and educational materials

• Disseminate water use statistics and retrofit guidance

• Promote landscape efficiency on a voluntary basis

• Promote lawn and garden water use efficiencies

• Disseminate cost information via radio, television, etc.

• Analysis of peak water use

• Annual review of water conservation measures and new proposals

Reclamation Manual Directives and Standards (WTR 01-01), published in December 1996, identify “Fundamental Water Conservation Measures” that are considered economically and financially feasible and applicable to all water conservation programs. The fundamental measures include a water measurement and accounting system, water pricing structure, and an information and education program. All but one of the water conservation measures included in the Plan are considered by Reclamation as fundamental. The conservation measure “Control connection pressures at 65 psi”, while not considered fundamental, is an appropriate water conservation measure and will not result in increased project cost. It is an acceptable design standard because it will reduce the potential for leakage from excess water pressure which can also damage residential plumbing systems causing major leakage and significant property damage.

In fulfillment of section 7(a)(3), the plan contains a time schedule for implementing the measures to meet the water conservation objectives. This time schedule is included with the above description of the objectives and measures.

In fulfillment of section 7(b), Reclamation has reviewed the planning and engineering designs included in the Final Engineering Report for this project and has conducted a “Value Engineering” (VE) study to assure that the best available engineering design and techniques are utilized for construction and operation of the project. Additional VE studies will be performed during the final design phase of major system components.

On April 1, 1996, the Commission instituted a preliminary antidumping investigation in response to a petition filed on April 1, 1996, by the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange, Orlando, FL; Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association, Orlando, FL; Florida Farm Bureau Federation, Gainesville, FL; South Carolina Tomato Association, Inc., Charleston, SC; Gadsden County Tomato Growers Association, Inc., Quincy, FL; Accomack County Farm Bureau, Accomack, VA; Florida Tomato Exchange, Orlando, FL; Bob Crawford, Commissioner of Agriculture, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Tallahassee, FL; and the Ad Hoc Group of Florida, California, Georgia, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia Tomato Growers (61 FR 15968, April 10, 1996). On May 16, 1996, the Commission notified the Department of Commerce (Department) of its affirmative preliminary injury determination (61 FR 18891, June 6, 1996). On October 10, 1996, the Department and Mexican tomato growers/exporters initialed a proposed agreement suspending the antidumping investigation, and on October 28, 1996, the Department preliminarily determined that imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico are being sold at LTFV in the United States (61 FR 56607, November 1, 1996). Also on October 28, 1996, the Department and certain growers/exporters of fresh tomatoes from Mexico signed the final suspension agreement (61 FR 56617, November 1, 1996). Accordingly, effective November 1, 1996, the Commission suspended its antidumping investigation involving imports from Mexico of fresh tomatoes (61 FR 58217, November 13, 1996). On October 1, 2001, the Commission instituted a five-year review of the suspension agreement concerning fresh tomatoes from Mexico to determine whether its termination would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury (66 FR 49975, October 1, 2001). On January 4, 2002, the Commission determined that responses to its notice of institution were such that a full review should proceed (67 FR 3229, January 23, 2002), and subsequently the Commission established a schedule for its full five year review (67 FR 30962, May 8, 2002). On May 31, 2002, Mexican tomato growers/exporters accounting for a significant percentage of all fresh tomatoes imported into the United States from Mexico submitted to the Department a notice of their withdrawal from the agreement suspending the antidumping investigation on fresh tomatoes from Mexico. On July 30, 2002, because the suspension agreement no longer covered substantially all imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico, the Department terminated the suspension agreement, terminated its review of the suspension agreement, and resumed the antidumping investigation (67 FR 50858, August 6, 2002). Accordingly, the Commission terminated its review involving imports from Mexico of fresh tomatoes effective July 30, 2002 (67 FR 53361, August 15, 2002) and the final phase of this investigation is being resumed and scheduled.

Participation in the investigation and public service list. Persons, including industrial users of the subject merchandise and, if the merchandise is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations, wishing to participate in the final phase of this investigation as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in § 201.11 of the Commission's rules, no later than 21 days prior to the hearing date specified in this notice. The Secretary will maintain a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the investigation.

Former Commission employees who are seeking to appear in this final phase investigation are reminded that they are required, pursuant to 19 CFR 201.15 to seek Commission approval if the matter in which they are seeking to appear was pending in any manner or form during their Commission employment. Former employees may seek informal advice from Commission ethics officials with respect to this and the related issue of whether the employee's participation was “personal and substantial.” However, any informal consultation will not relieve former employees of the obligation to seek approval to appear from the Commission under its rule 201.15. For ethics advice, contact Carol McCue Verratti, Deputy Agency Ethics Official, at 202-205-3088.

Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under an administrative protective order (APO) and BPI service list. Pursuant to § 207.7(a) of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make BPI gathered in the final phase of this investigation available to authorized applicants under the APO issued in the investigation, provided that the application is made no later than 21 days prior to the hearing date specified in this notice. Authorized applicants must represent interested parties, as defined by 19 U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to the investigation. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO.

Staff report. The prehearing staff report in the final phase of this investigation will be placed in the nonpublic record on December 3, 2002, and a public version will be issued thereafter, pursuant to § 207.22 of the Commission's rules.

Hearing. The Commission will hold a hearing in connection with the final phase of this investigation beginning at 9:30 a.m. on December 16, 2002, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building. Requests to appear at the hearing should be filed in writing with the Secretary to the Commission on or before December 9, 2002. A nonparty who has testimony that may aid the Commission's deliberations may request permission to present a short statement at the hearing. All parties and nonparties desiring to appear at the hearing and make oral presentations should attend a prehearing conference to be held at 9:30 a.m. on December 12, 2002, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building. Oral testimony and written materials to be submitted at the public hearing are governed by §§ 201.6(b)(2), 201.13(f), and 207.24 of the Commission's rules. Parties must submit any request to present a portion of their hearing testimony in camera no later than 7 days prior to the date of the hearing.

Written submissions. Each party who is an interested party shall submit a prehearing brief to the Commission. Prehearing briefs must conform with the provisions of § 207.23 of the Commission's rules; the deadline for filing is December 10, 2002. Parties may also file written testimony in connection with their presentation at the hearing, as provided in § 207.24 of the Commission's rules, and posthearing briefs, which must conform with the provisions of § 207.25 of the Commission's rules. The deadline for filing posthearing briefs is December 23, 2002; witness testimony must be filed no later than three days before the hearing. In addition, any person who has not entered an appearance as a party to the investigation may submit a written statement of information pertinent to the subject of the investigation on or before December 23, 2002. On January 8, 2003, the Commission will make available to parties all information on which they have not had an opportunity to comment. Parties may submit final comments on this information on or before January 10, 2003, but such final comments must not contain new factual information and must otherwise comply with § 207.30 of the Commission's rules. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of § 201.8 of the Commission's rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of §§ 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's rules do not authorize filing of submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic means.

In accordance with §§ 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission's rules, each document filed by a party to the investigation must be served on all other parties to the investigation (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service.

The Commission instituted this patent-based investigation, which concerns allegations of unfair acts in violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the importation and sale of certain set-top boxes, on March 14, 2001. 66 FR 15887 (2001). Complainants Gemstar-TV Guide International, Inc. of Pasadena, California, and StarSight Telecast, Inc. of Fremont, California, named Pioneer Corporation, Pioneer North America, Inc., Pioneer Digital Technologies, Inc., Pioneer New Media Technologies, Inc., Scientific-Atlanta, Inc., EchoStar Communications Corporation, and SCI Systems, Inc. as respondents.

The ALJ held an evidentiary hearing from December 3, 2001, through December 19, 2001, and issued his final ID on June 21, 2002, in which he concluded that there was no violation of section 337, based on the following findings: (a) Complainants have failed to establish that the asserted claims 18-24, 26-28, 31-33, 36, 42-43, 48-50, 54, 57, 59-61, and 66 of U.S. Letters Patent 4,706,121 (the ‘121’ patent); claims 1, 3, 8, and 10 of United States Patent 5,479,268 (the ‘268’ patent); and claims 1, 3, 8, and 10 of U.S. Letters Patent 5,809,204 (the ‘204’ patent) are infringed by respondents; (b) respondents have failed to establish that the asserted claims are not valid; (c) respondents have established that the ‘121’ patent is unenforceable for failure to name a co-inventor; (d) complainants have engaged in patent misuse with respect the ‘121’ patent; (e) no industry exists in the United States, as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337, that exploits each of the ‘121’, ‘268’, and ‘204’ patents in issue; and (f) there has been an importation of the set-top boxes which are the subject of this investigation.

On July 5, 2002, all parties to this investigation, including the Commission investigative attorney, filed petitions for review of various portions of the final ID. On July 12, 2002, all the parties filed responses to the petitions for review.

Having examined the record in this investigation, including the final ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto, the Commission determined that there is no violation of section 337 in this investigation.

This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) and Subpart G of Part 210 of the Commission's rules of practice and procedure (19 CFR Subpart G, Part 210).

You may submit comments in response to this document by (1) hard copy, (2) FAX transmission (facsimile), or (3) electronically through the OSHA webpage. Please note that you cannot attach materials such as studies or journal articles to electronic comments. If you have additional materials, you must submit three copies of them to the OSHA Docket Office at the address above. The additional materials must clearly identify your electronic comments by name, date, subject and docket number so we can attach them to your comments. Because of security-related problems there may be a significant delay in the receipt of comments by regular mail. Please contact the OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693-2350 for information about security procedures concerning the delivery of materials by express delivery, hand delivery and messenger service.

The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burdens, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on proposed and continuing information collection requirements in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA-95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). OSHA will be requesting approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for certain information collection requirements contained in the Strategic Partnerships for Worker Safety and Health. This notice initiates the process for OSHA to request OMB approval. The need to collect information in order to gauge program success is an integral part of OSHA's strategic planning processes, and partnerships, like other agency activities, are required to regularly provide information to the agency. The agency uses this information to assess the effectiveness of its programs, identify needed improvements, and ensure that its resources are being used to good and effective purpose.

OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:

• Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the Agency's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• The accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; and

• The quality, utility, and clarity of the information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

OSHA proposed to extend OMB's approval of the collection of information requirements specified in 5 CFR 1320.8(d). OSHA will summarize the comments submitted in response to this notice, and will include this summary in its request to OMB to extend the approval of the information-collection requirements for the OSPP. The burden hour increase is a result of the increasing number of partnerships.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved information-collection requirement.

Title: OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health (OSPP).

OMB Number: 1218-0244.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit; not-for-profit institutions; Federal government, State, local or tribal governments.

Number of Respondents: 4410.

Frequency: Annually.

Average time per Response: 11 hours.

Estimating Total Burden Hours: 49,194.

This document was prepared under the direction of John L. Henshaw, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.

This action is taken pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).

The proposed meetings are for the purpose of panel review, discussion, evaluation and recommendation on applications for financial assistance under the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, including discussion of information given in confidence to the agency by the grant applicants. Because the proposed meetings will consider information that is likely to disclose trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential and/or information of a personal nature the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, pursuant to authority granted me by the Chairman's Delegation of Authority to Close Advisory Committee meetings, dated July 19, 1993, I have determined that these meetings will be closed to the public pursuant to subsections (c) (4), and (6) of section 552b of Title 5, United States Code.

1. Date: September 10, 2002.

Time: 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.

Room: 415.

Program: This meeting will review applications for Local History Initiative Finalists, submitted to the Office of Challenge Grants at the May 1, 2002 deadline.

Title of Collection: Request for Review and Correction of Information under Section 515.

OMB Control No.: 3145-NEW.

Proposed Project: In accordance with section 515 of Public Law 106-554, codified at 44 U.S.C. 3516, note, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has developed mechanisms to allow affected persons to seek and obtain correction of information maintained and disseminated by this agency. To seek a correction under section 515 of information maintained or disseminated by the National Science Foundation, individuals should follow the procedure described at http://www.nsf.gov/home/pubinfo/infoqual.htm.

As part of this effort, NSF has developed a form to assist the public in reviewing NSF's information products. The form also may be found at the website above.

Estimate of Burden: 15 minutes.

Respondents: Individuals.

Estimated Number of Responses: 50.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 12.5 hours, based on 15 minutes per respondent.

Frequency of Responses: On occasion.

The AGOA (Title I of the Trade and Development Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-200) provides preferential tariff treatment for imports of certain textile and apparel products of beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries. The textile and apparel trade benefits under the AGOA are available to imports of eligible products from countries that the President designates as “beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries,” provided that these countries (1) have adopted an effective visa system and related procedures to prevent unlawful transshipment and the use of counterfeit documents, and (2) have implemented and follow, or are making substantial progress toward implementing and following, certain customs procedures that assist the Customs Service in verifying the origin of the products.

In Proclamation 7350 (Oct. 2, 2002), the President designated Cape Verde as a “beneficiary sub-Saharan African country.” Proclamation 7350 delegated to the United States Trade Representative the authority to determine whether designated countries have met the two requirements described above. The President directed the USTR to announce any such determinations in the Federal Register and to implement them through modifications of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS). Based on actions that Cape Verde has taken, I have determined that Cape Verde has satisfied these two requirements.

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority vested in the USTR by Proclamation 7350, U.S. note 7(a) to subchapter II of chapter 98 of the HTS and U.S. note 1 to subchapter XIX of chapter 98 of the HTS are each modified by inserting “Cape Verde” in alphabetical sequence in the list of countries. The foregoing modifications to the HTS are effective with respect to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after the effective date of this notice. Importers claiming preferential tariff treatment under the AGOA for entries of textile and apparel articles should ensure that those entries meet the applicable visa requirements. See Visa Requirements Under the African Growth and Opportunity Act, 66 FR 7837 (2001).

Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is hereby given for a Special Committee 181/EUROCAE Working Group 13 meeting. Note: Working Groups 1& 4 will meet separately September 17-19. The Plenary agenda will include:

• September 20:

• Opening Plenary Session (Chairman Remarks, Review/Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes)

• MOPS Status

• Working Group Reports

• Report on Charter and TOR discussions

• Industry Activities

• Closing Plenary Session (New Business, Review of Action Items, Future Meeting Schedule, Adjourn)

Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may present a written statement to the committee at any time.