The Buckman Water Diversion Project (the Project) is designed to address the immediate need for accessing water supplies for the Project Applicants. The Forest Service and BLM are joint lead agencies for this project, and the Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, City of Santa Fe, and Santa Fe County are cooperating agencies. The City of Santa Fe, Santa Fe County, and Las Campanas Limited Partnership are the “Project Applicants.”

The BLM's and Forest Service's decision is to authorize rights-of-way and easements to the Project Applicants so that they may construct, operate, and maintain the road improvements, major facilities and associated infrastructure, and their locations as described in the Proposed Action. In addition, several options have been selected for the proposed sediment facility and sand disposal systems; and for a section of treated water pipeline. Power upgrades to service the proposed facilities are also described in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).

This decision conforms to existing laws and regulations, provides for resource protection and mitigation, and is consistent with the Santa Fe National Forest Plan and the Taos Resource Management Plan. This decision is based on a comparison of the potential environmental effects of the Proposed Action, other alternatives considered in the FEIS, and comments received during scoping and the 60-day public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

The decisions made by the Forest Service and the BLM, respectively, affect only those lands managed by each agency. The decision related to National Forest System lands is subject to administrative review (appeal) in accordance with 36 CFR 215 (June 2003). A written notice of appeal—clearly stating it is a notice of appeal being filed pursuant to 36 CFR 215.14—must be filed within 45 days from the date of publication of legal notice of this decision in the Albuquerque Journal . The publication date in the Albuquerque Journal , newspaper of record, is the exclusive means for calculating the time to file an appeal. Those wishing to appeal this decision should not rely upon dates or timeframe information provided by any other source. Individuals or organizations that submitted substantive comments during the comment period specified at 36 CFR 215.6 may appeal this decision. The notice of appeal must meet the appeal content requirements at 36 CFR 215.14. An appeal must be filed (regular mail, fax, e-mail, hand delivery, or express delivery) with the Appeal Deciding Officer. Written appeals must be submitted to: Deputy Regional Forester, Southwestern Region Appeal Deciding Officer, 333 Broadway Blvd., SE., Albuquerque, NM 87102. Appeals may be faxed or e-mailed at Fax: (505) 842-3173, and E-mail: appeals-southwestern@fs.fed.us .

The Forest Service's office business hours for those submitting hand-delivered appeals are: 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. Electronic comments must be submitted in a format such as an e-mail message, plain text (.txt), rich text format (.rtf), Adobe (.pdf) and Word (.doc) to appeals-southwestern@fs.fed.us . The appeal must have an identifiable name attached or verification of identity will be required. A scanned signature may serve as verification on electronic appeals.

The decision related to BLM managed lands may be appealed to the Interior Board of Land Appeals, Office of the Secretary, in accordance with the regulations contained in 43 CFR 2801.10(a). If an appeal is filed, the notice of appeal must be filed with the Bureau of Land Management, Taos Field Office, Field Office Manager, 226 Cruz Alta Road, Taos, NM 87571, within 30 days of the date the notice of the decision appears in the Federal Register . If you wish to file a petition pursuant to 43 CFR 2801.10(b) for a stay (suspension) of the effectiveness of this decision during the time that your appeal is being reviewed by the Board, the petition for a stay must accompany your notice of appeal. Copies of the notice of appeal and petition for a stay must also be submitted to the Interior Board of Land Appeals and to the Regional Office of the Solicitor at the same time the original documents are filed with this office.

The DOC is authorized to award grants and cooperative agreements under a wide range of programs that support economic development; international trade; minority businesses; standards and technology; oceanic/atmospheric services; and telecommunications and information.

It is the policy of the DOC to seek full and open competition for award of discretionary financial assistance funds whenever possible. Moreover, DOC financial assistance must be awarded through a merit-based review and selection process. Notices announcing the availability of Federal funds for new awards for each DOC competitive financial assistance program will be published in the Federal Register and posted on http://www.grants.gov by the sponsoring operating unit in the uniform format for an announcement of Federal Funding Opportunity (FFO) mandated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). These announcements will reference or include the DOC Pre-Award Notification Requirements identified in sections A and B of this notice, and the program-specific information identified in section C of this notice, and will follow the uniform format for announcements of funding opportunities as identified in section D.

This announcement provides notice of the DOC Pre-Award Notification Requirements that apply to all DOC-sponsored grant and cooperative agreement programs and that may supplement those program announcements which make reference to this notice. Some of the DOC general provisions published herein contain, by reference or substance, a summary of the pertinent statutes or regulations published in the U.S. Code (U.S.C.), Federal Register , or Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), or requirements provided in Executive Orders, OMB Circulars (circulars), or Assurances (Forms SF-424B and SF-424D). This notice does not intend to be a derogation of, or amend, any statute, regulation, Executive Order, circular, or Standard Form.

Each individual award notice will complete and include the relevant analyses pursuant to the requirements in Executive Order 12866, Executive Order 13132, the Administrative Procedure Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and the Paperwork Reduction Act, as applicable.

A. The following pre-award notice provisions will apply to all applicants for and recipients of DOC grants and cooperative agreements:

1. Federal Policies and Procedures. Applicants, recipients and subrecipients are subject to all Federal laws and Federal and DOC policies, regulations, and procedures applicable to Federal financial assistance.

2. Debarment, Suspension, Drug-Free Workplace, and Lobbying Provisions. All applicants must comply with the requirements of subpart C of 2 CFR part 1326, “Nonprocurement Debarment and Suspension,” 15 CFR part 29, “Governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Financial Assistance)” (November 26, 2003, 68 FR 66534), and 15 CFR part 28, “New Restrictions on Lobbying,” including the submission of required forms and obtaining certification from lower tier applicants/bidders.

3. Pre-Award Screening of Applicant's and Recipient's Management Capabilities, Financial Condition, and Present Responsibility. It is the policy of the DOC to make awards to applicants and recipients that are competently managed, responsible, financially capable and committed to achieving the objectives of the award(s) they receive. Therefore, pre-award screening may include, but is not limited to, the following reviews:

(a) Past Performance. Unsatisfactory performance under prior Federal awards may result in an application not being considered for funding.

(b) Credit Checks. A credit check will be performed on individuals, for-profit, and non-profit organizations.

(c) Delinquent Federal Debts. No award of Federal funds shall be made to an applicant that has an outstanding delinquent Federal debt until:

(1) The delinquent account is paid in full;

(2) A negotiated repayment schedule is established and at least one payment is received; or

(3) Other arrangements satisfactory to the DOC are made.

Pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3720B, unless waived, the DOC is not permitted to extend financial assistance in the form of a loan, loan guarantee, or loan insurance to any person delinquent on a nontax debt owed to a Federal agency. This prohibition does not apply to disaster loans.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 3201(e), a debtor who has a judgment lien against the debtor's property for a debt to the United States shall not be eligible to receive any grant or loan which is made, insured, guaranteed, or financed directly or indirectly by the United States or to receive funds directly from the Federal Government in any program, except funds to which the debtor is entitled as beneficiary, until the judgment is paid in full or otherwise satisfied. The DOC sponsoring operating units may promulgate regulations to allow for waiver of this restriction on eligibility for such grants and cooperative agreements.

(d) Financial Pre-Award Screening. The DOC's Office of Inspector General (OIG) performs pre-award screening procedures to review an applicant's credit rating and related financial information, the status of previous Federal audit findings and recommendations for the applicant, and other relevant data. The following three categories of applicants are exempt from this review: (1) Applicants for awards in amounts of $100,000 or less; (2) applicants who have been recipients of financial assistance from the DOC for three or more consecutive years without any adverse programmatic or audit findings; and (3) applicants that are units of a State or local government or that are accredited colleges and universities.

(e) Individual Background Screening. Unless an exemption applies, an individual background screening will be performed by the OIG on key individuals of organizational units associated with the application at the beginning of the award and at three year intervals thereafter for the life of the award. The exemptions are: the proposed award amount is $100,000 or less; applicants are accredited colleges and universities; applicants are units of a State or local government; applicants are economic development districts designated by EDA, including those entities whose designations are pending, and councils of governments; or the key individual(s) is/are elected officials of State and local governments who are serving in capacities other than their elected capacities when applying for assistance. In addition, if there is a change in the status of the organization and/or key individuals, or the program officer, OIG, or Grants Officer believes there is good reason to conduct a review sooner, a background screening may be requested more frequently. Individual background screenings are conducted to reveal if any key individuals associated with the applicant have been convicted of or are presently facing criminal charges (e.g., fraud, theft, perjury), or other matters which significantly reflect on the applicant's business integrity, responsibility, or financial integrity. If any of the conditions listed below in paragraphs (1), (2), or (3) occur, then the DOC reserves the right to take one or more of the following actions: consider suspension/termination of an award immediately for cause; require the removal of any key individual from association with management of and/or implementation of the award and require Grants Officer approval of personnel replacements; require the recipient to make other changes as appropriate; and/or designate the recipient as high risk and amend the award to assign special award conditions, as appropriate, including making changes with respect to the method of payment and/or financial reporting requirements.

(1) A key individual fails to submit the required Form CD-346, Applicant for Funding Assistance within 30 days of receipt of the award;

(2) A key individual makes a false statement or omits a material fact on the Form CD-346; or

(3) The individual background screening reveals significant adverse findings that reflect on the business integrity, responsibility, or financial integrity of the recipient and/or key individual.

(f) List of Parties Excluded from Procurement and Nonprocurement Programs. The Excluded Parties Listing System (EPLS) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) (found at http://www.epls.gov ) that lists parties excluded from Federal procurement and nonprocurement programs will be checked to assure that an applicant is not debarred or suspended on a government-wide basis from receiving financial assistance.

(g) Pre-Award Accounting System Surveys. The Grants Office, in cooperation with the OIG when appropriate, may require a pre-award survey of the applicant's financial management system in cases where the recommended applicant has had no prior Federal support, the operating unit has reason to question whether the financial management system meets Federal financial management standards, or the applicant is being considered for a high-risk designation.

4. No Obligation for Future Funding. If an application is selected for funding, the DOC has no obligation to provide any additional future funding in connection with that award. Any amendment of an award to increase funding or to extend the period of performance is at the total discretion of the DOC.

5. Pre-Award Activities. If an applicant incurs any costs prior to receiving an award, it does so solely at its own risk of not being reimbursed by the Government. Notwithstanding any verbal or written assurance that may have been received, there is no obligation on the part of DOC to cover pre-award costs unless approved by the Grants Officer as part of the terms when the award is made, or as authorized for awards that support research by 15 CFR 14.25(e)(4).

6. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Disclosure. The FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552 and DOC regulations at 15 CFR part 4) sets forth the process and procedure by which the DOC follows to make requested material, information, and records publicly available. Unless prohibited by law and to the extent required under the FOIA, contents of applications, proposals, and other information submitted by applicants may be released in response to FOIA requests.

7. False Statements. A false statement on an application is grounds for denial or termination of an award, and/or possible punishment by a fine or imprisonment as provided in 18 U.S.C. 1001.

8. Application Forms. Unless the individual programs specify differently in their Federal Register notice of availability of funding and/or in the Federal Funding Opportunity announcement, the following forms, family of forms, and/or certifications are required, as applicable, for DOC grants and cooperative agreements: OMB Standard Forms (SF) SF-424, Application for Federal Assistance; SF-424A, Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs ; SF-424B, Assurances—Non-Construction Programs ; SF-424C, Budget Information—Construction Programs; SF-424D, Assurances—Construction Programs ; SF-424 Family of Forms for Research and Related Programs; SF-424 Short Organizational Family; SF-424 Individual Form Family; and SF-424 Mandatory Family. In addition, Commerce Department (CD) Forms CD-346, Applicant for Funding Assistance ; CD-511, Certification Regarding Lobbying ; CD-512, Certification Regarding Lobbying—Lower-Tier Covered Transactions ; and SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities , will be used as appropriate.

9. Environmental Requirements. Environmental impacts must be considered by Federal decision makers in their decisions whether or not to (1) approve a proposal for Federal assistance; (2) approve the proposal with mitigation; or (3) approve a different proposal/grant having less adverse environmental impacts. Federal environmental laws require that the funding agency initiate a planning process with an early consideration of potential environmental impacts that projects funded with Federal assistance may have on the environment. Applicants, recipients and subrecipients must comply with all environmental standards, to include those prescribed under the following statutes and Executive Orders, and shall identify to the awarding agency any impact the award may have on the environment. The failure to do so shall be grounds for not selecting an application. In some cases, if additional information is required after an application is selected, funds can be withheld by the Grants Officer under a special award condition requiring the recipient to submit additional environmental compliance information sufficient to enable the DOC to make an assessment on any impacts that a project may have on the environment.

(a) The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ). Recipients of Federal assistance are required to identify to the awarding agency any impact an award will have on the quality of the human environment, and assist the agency to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, when the award activities remain subject to Federal authority and control. Applicants for assistance may be required to prepare environmental impact information as part of a proposal.

(b) Floodplain Management, Executive Order 11988 and, Protection of Wetlands, Executive Order 11990, May 24, 1977. Recipients must identify proposed actions located in Federally defined floodplains and wetlands to enable the agency to make a determination whether there is an alternative to minimize any potential harm.

(c) Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, and Executive Order 11738. Recipients must comply with the provisions of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. ), Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §§ 1251 et seq. ), and Executive Order 11738. Recipients shall not use a facility that EPA has placed on the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS) ( http://www.epls.gov ) in performing any award that is nonexempt under Subpart J of 2 CFR part 1532.

(d) The Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (42 U.S.C. 4002 et seq. ). Flood insurance, when available, is required for Federally assisted construction or acquisition in flood-prone areas.

(e) The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ). Recipients must identify any impact or activities that may involve a threatened or endangered species. Federal agencies have the responsibility for ensuring that a protected species or habitat does not incur adverse effects from actions under Federal assistance awards, and for conducting the required reviews under the Endangered Species Act, as applicable.

(f) The Coastal Zone Management Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq. ). Funded projects must be consistent with a coastal state's approved management program for the coastal zone.

(g) The Coastal Barriers Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ). Restrictions are placed on Federal funding for actions within a Coastal Barrier System.

(h) The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq. ). This Act applies to awards that may affect existing or proposed components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers system.

(i) The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended (42 U.S.C. 300f-j). This Act precludes Federal assistance for any project that the EPA determines may contaminate a sole source aquifer so as to threaten public health.

(j) The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. ). This act regulates the generation, transportation, treatment, and disposal of hazardous wastes, and also provides that recipients of Federal funds give preference in their procurement programs to the purchase of recycled products pursuant to EPA guidelines.

(k) The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended, the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, and the Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act of 1992, as amended (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. ). These requirements address responsibilities for actual or threatened hazardous substance releases and environmental cleanup. There are also requirements regarding reporting and community involvement to ensure disclosure of the release or disposal of regulated substances and cleanup of hazards.

(l) Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations, Executive Order 12898, February 11, 1994. This Order identifies and addresses adverse human health or environmental effects of programs, policies and activities on low income and minority populations.

10. Limitation of Liability. In no event will the Department of Commerce be responsible for proposal preparation costs if a program fails to receive funding or is cancelled because of other agency priorities. The publication of an announcement of funding availability does not oblige the agency to award any specific project or to obligate any available funds.

B. The following general provisions will apply to all DOC grant and cooperative agreement awards:

1. Administrative Requirements and Cost Principles. The uniform administrative requirements for all DOC grants and cooperative agreements are codified at 15 CFR part 14, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, Other Non-Profit, and Commercial Organizations,” and at 15 CFR part 24, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements to State and Local Governments.” The following list of cost principles, which are incorporated by reference in 15 CFR parts 14 and 24, are included in the DOC's grants and cooperative agreements: OMB Circular A-21 (2 CFR part 220), “Cost Principles for Educational Institutions”; OMB Circular A-87 (2 CFR part 225), “Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments”; OMB Circular A-122 (2 CFR part 230), “Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations”; and Federal Acquisition Regulation subpart 31.2, “Contracts with Commercial Organizations,” codified at 48 CFR 31.2. Applicable administrative requirements and cost principles are identified in each award and are incorporated by reference into the award. Expenditures for any financial assistance award must be necessary to carry out the authorized project and be consistent with the applicable cost principles.

2. Award Payments. Advances will be limited to the minimum amounts necessary to meet immediate disbursement needs, but in no case should advances exceed the amount of cash required for a 30-day period. Any advanced funds that are not disbursed in a timely manner must be returned promptly to the DOC. Certain bureaus within the DOC use the Department of Treasury's Automated Standard Application for Payment (ASAP) system. In order to receive payments under ASAP, recipients will be required to enroll electronically in the ASAP system by providing their Federal Awarding Agency with pertinent information to begin the enrollment process, which allows them to use the on-line and Voice Response System (VRS) method of withdrawing funds from their ASAP established accounts. It is the recipient's responsibility to ensure that its contact information is correct. The funding agency must be provided a Point of Contact name, mailing address, e-mail address, telephone number, DUNS and TIN numbers to commence the enrollment process. In order to be able to complete the enrollment process, the recipient will need to identify a Head of Organization, an Authorizing Official, and a Financial Officer. It is very important that the recipient's banking data be linked to the funding agency's Agency Location Code in order to ensure proper payment under an award. For additional information on this requirement, prospective applicants should contact their Federal Awarding Agency.

3. Federal and Non-Federal Cost Sharing.

(a) Awards that include Federal and non-Federal cost sharing will incorporate a budget consisting of shared allowable costs. If actual allowable costs are less than the total approved budget, the Federal and non-Federal cost shares shall be calculated by applying the approved Federal and non-Federal cost share ratios to actual allowable costs. If actual allowable costs are greater than the total approved budget, the Federal share will not exceed the total Federal dollar amount authorized by the award.

(b) The non-Federal share, whether in cash or in-kind, will be expected to be paid out at the same general rate as the Federal share. Exceptions to this requirement may be granted by the Grants Officer based on sufficient documentation demonstrating previously determined plans for or later commitment of cash or in-kind contributions. In any case, recipients must meet the cost share commitment over the life of the award.

4. Budget Changes and Transfers Among Cost Categories. When the terms of an award allow the recipient to transfer funds among approved direct cost categories, the transfer authority does not authorize the recipient to create new budget categories within an approved budget unless the Grants Officer has provided prior approval. In addition, the recipient will not be authorized at any time to transfer amounts budgeted for direct costs to the indirect costs line item or vice versa, without written prior approval of the Grants Officer.

5. Indirect Costs.

(a) Indirect costs will not be allowable charges against an award unless specifically included as a line item in the approved budget incorporated into the award. (The term “indirect cost” has been replaced with the term “facilities and administrative costs” under OMB Circular A-21 (2 CFR part 220), “Cost Principles for Educational Institutions.”)

(b) Excess indirect costs may not be used to offset unallowable direct costs.

(c) If the recipient has not previously established an indirect cost rate with a Federal agency, the negotiation and approval of a rate will be subject to the procedures in the applicable cost principles and the following subparagraphs:

(1) a. State, local, and Indian Tribal Governments; Educational Institutions; and Non-Profit Organizations (Non-Commercial Organizations).

For those organizations for which the DOC is cognizant or has oversight, the DOC or its designee will either negotiate a fixed rate with carryforward provisions or, in some instances, limit its review to evaluating the procedures described in the recipient's cost allocation methodology plan. Indirect cost rates and cost allocation methodology reviews are subject to future audits to determine actual indirect costs.

b. Commercial Organizations.

For commercial organizations, “cognizant federal agency” is defined as the agency that provides the largest dollar amount of negotiated contracts, including options. If the only federal funds received by a commercial organization are DOC award funds, then the DOC becomes the cognizant federal agency for the purpose of indirect cost negotiations. For those organizations for which the DOC is cognizant, DOC or its designee will negotiate a fixed rate with carry forward provisions for the recipient. “Fixed rate” means an indirect cost rate which has the same characteristics as a pre-determined rate, except that the difference between the estimated costs and the actual costs of the period covered by the rate is carried forward as an adjustment to the rate computation of the subsequent period. DOC or its designee will negotiate indirect cost rates using the cost principles found in 48 CFR part 31, “Contract Cost Principles and Procedures.” For guidance on how to put an indirect cost plan together go to: http://www.dol.gov/oasm/programs/boc/costdeterminationguide/main.htm.

(2) Within 90 days of the award start date, the recipient shall submit to the address listed below documentation (indirect cost proposal, cost allocation plan, etc.) necessary to perform the review. The recipient shall provide the Grants Officer with a copy of the transmittal letter.

(3) The recipient can use the fixed rate proposed in the indirect cost plan until such time as the DOC provides a response to the submitted plan. Actual indirect costs must be calculated annually and adjustments made through the carryforward provision used in calculating next year's rate. This calculation of actual indirect costs and the carryforward provision is subject to audit. Indirect cost rate proposals must be submitted annually. Organizations that have previously established indirect cost rates must submit a new indirect cost proposal to the cognizant agency within six months after the close of each recipient's fiscal year.

(4) When the DOC is not the oversight or cognizant Federal agency, the recipient shall provide the Grants Officer with a copy of a negotiated rate agreement or a copy of the transmittal letter submitted to the cognizant or oversight Federal agency requesting a negotiated rate agreement.

(5) If the recipient fails to submit the required documentation to the DOC within 90 days of the award start date, the recipient may be precluded from recovering any indirect costs under the award. If the DOC, oversight, or cognizant Federal agency determines there is a finding of good cause to excuse the recipient's delay in submitting the documentation, an extension of the 90-day due date may be approved by the Grants Officer.

(6) Regardless of any approved indirect cost rate applicable to the award, the maximum dollar amount of allocable indirect costs for which the DOC will reimburse the recipient shall be the lesser of the line item amount for the Federal share of indirect costs contained in the approved budget of the award, or the Federal share of the total allocable indirect costs of the award based on the indirect cost rate approved by an oversight or cognizant Federal agency and current at the time the cost was incurred, provided the rate is approved on or before the award end date.

6. Tax Refunds. Refunds of FICA/FUTA taxes received by a recipient during or after an award period must be refunded or credited to the DOC where the benefits were financed with Federal funds under the award. Recipients are required to contact the Grants Officer immediately upon receipt of these refunds. Recipients are required to refund portions of FICA/FUTA taxes determined to belong to the Federal Government, including refunds received after the award end date.

7. Other Federal Awards with Similar Programmatic Activities. Recipients will be required to provide written notification to the Federal Program Officer and the Grants Officer in the event that, subsequent to receipt of the DOC award, other financial assistance is received to support or fund any portion of the scope of work incorporated into the DOC award. The DOC will not pay for costs that are funded by other sources.

8. Non-Compliance With Award Provisions. Failure to comply with any or all of the provisions of an award, or the requirements of this notice, may have a negative impact on future funding by the DOC and may be considered grounds for any or all of the following enforcement actions: Establishment of an account receivable, withholding payments under any DOC awards to the recipient, changing the method of payment from advance to reimbursement only , or the imposition of other special award conditions, suspension of any DOC active awards, and termination of any DOC active awards.

9. Prohibition Against Assignment by the Recipient. Notwithstanding any other provision of an award, recipients may not transfer, pledge, mortgage, or otherwise assign an award, or any interest therein, or any claim arising thereunder, to any party or parties, banks, trust companies, or other financing or financial institutions without the express written approval of the Grants Officer.

10. Non-Discrimination Requirements. There are several Federal statutes, regulations, Executive Orders, and policies relating to nondiscrimination. No person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin, handicap, religion, age, or sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. These requirements include but are not limited to:

(a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq. ) and the DOC's implementing regulations published at 15 CFR part 8 prohibiting discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin under programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance;

(b) Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. ) and the DOC's implementing regulations at 15 CFR part 8a prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sex under Federally assisted education programs or activities;

(c) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794) and the DOC's implementing regulations published at 15 CFR part 8b prohibiting discrimination on the basis of handicap under any program or activity receiving or benefiting from Federal assistance;

(d) The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6101 et seq. ) and the DOC's implementing regulations published at 15 CFR part 20 prohibiting discrimination on the basis of age in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance;

(e) The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq. ) prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability under programs, activities, and services provided or made available by state and local governments or instrumentalities or agencies thereto, as well as public or private entities that provide public transportation;

(f) Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq. ), relating to nondiscrimination in the sale, rental or financing of housing;

(g) Parts II and III of Executive Order 11246, as amended by Executive Orders 11375 and 12086 requiring Federally assisted construction contracts to include the nondiscrimination provisions of sections 202 and 203 of that Executive Order and the Department of Labor's regulations at 41 CFR 60-1.4(b) implementing Executive Order 11246;

(h) Executive Order 13166 (August 11, 2000), “Improving Access to Services for Persons With Limited English Proficiency,” and DOC policy guidance issued on March 24, 2003 (68 FR 14180) to Federal financial assistance recipients on the Title VI prohibition against national origin discrimination affecting Limited English Proficient (LEP) persons; and

(i) In recognition of the constitutionally-protected interest of religious organizations in making religiously-motivated employment decisions, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq. , which expressly exempts religious organizations from the prohibition against discrimination on the basis of religion. See 42 U.S.C. 2000e-1(a).

11. Audits of Organizations Covered by OMB Circular A-133, “Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations” and the related Compliance Supplement. Recipients that are subject to OMB Circular A-133, and that expend $500,000 or more in Federal awards in a fiscal year shall have an audit conducted for that year in accordance with the requirements of OMB Circular A-133, issued pursuant to the Single Audit Act of 1984 (Pub. L. No. 98-502), as amended by the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 (Pub. L. No. 104-156).

12. Unless otherwise specified in the terms and conditions of the award, in accordance with 15 CFR 14.26(c) and (d), for-profit hospitals, commercial entities, and other organizations not required to follow the audit provisions of OMB Circular A-133 shall have an audit performed when the federal share amount awarded is $500,000 or more over the duration of the project period. An audit is required at least once every two years using the following schedule for audit report submission.

(a) For awards less than 24 months, an audit is required within 90 days from the project expiration date, including the close-out period for the award.

(b) For 2-, or 3-year awards, an audit is required within 90 days after the end of the first year and within 90 days from the project expiration date including the close-out period for the award.

(c) For 4-, or 5-year awards, an audit is required within 90 days after the end of the first year and third year, and within 90 days from the project expiration date including the close-out period for the award.

Some DOC programs have specific audit guidelines that will be incorporated into the award. When DOC does not have a program-specific audit guide available for the program, the auditor will follow the requirements for a program-specific audit as described in OMB Circular A-133, _.235. The Recipient may include a line item in the budget for the cost of the audit.

13. Policies and Procedures for Resolution of Audit-Related Debts. The DOC has established policies and procedures for handling the resolution and reconsideration of financial assistance audits which have resulted in, or may result in, the establishment of a debt (account receivable) for financial assistance awards. These policies and procedures are contained in the Federal Register notice dated January 27, 1989. See 54 FR 4053. The policies and procedures also are provided in more detail in the Department of Commerce Financial Assistance Standard Terms and Conditions .

14. Debts. Any debts determined to be owed the Federal Government shall be paid promptly by the recipient. In accordance with 15 CFR 21.4, a debt will be considered delinquent if it is not paid within 15 days of the due date, or if there is no due date, within 30 days of the billing date. Failure to pay a debt by the due date, or if there is no due date, within 30 days of the billing date, shall result in the imposition of late payment charges. In addition, failure to pay the debt or establish a repayment agreement by the due date, or if there is no due date, within 30 days of the billing date, will also result in the referral of the debt for collection action and may result in the DOC taking further action as specified in the terms of the award. Funds for payment of a debt must not come from other federally sponsored programs. Verification that other Federal funds have not been used will be made, e.g., during on-site visits and audits.

15. Post-Award Discovery of Adverse Information. After an award is made, if adverse information on a recipient or any key individual associated with a recipient is discovered which reflects significantly and adversely on the recipient's responsibility, the Grants Officer may take the following actions:

(a) Require the recipient to correct the conditions.

(b) Consider the recipient to be “high risk” and unilaterally impose special award conditions to protect the Federal Government's interest.

(c) Suspend or terminate an active award. The recipient will be afforded due process while effecting such actions.

(d) Require the removal of personnel from association with the management of and/or implementation of the project and require Grants Officer approval of personnel replacements.

16. Competition and Codes of Conduct.

(a) Pursuant to the certification in Form SF-424B, paragraph 3, recipients must maintain written standards of conduct to establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using their positions for a purpose that constitutes or presents the appearance of a personal or organizational conflict of interest, or personal gain in the administration of this award and any subawards.

(b) Recipients must maintain written standards of conduct governing the performance of their employees engaged in the award and administration of subawards. No employee, officer, or agent shall participate in the selection, award, or administration of a subaward supported by Federal funds if such participation would cause a real or apparent conflict of interest. Such a conflict would arise when the employee, officer, or agent, any member of his or her immediate family, his or her partner, or an organization in which he/she serves as an officer or which employs or is about to employ any of the parties mentioned in this section, has a financial or other interest in the organization selected or to be selected for a subaward. The officers, employees, and agents of the recipient may not solicit or accept anything of monetary value from subrecipients. However, the recipient may set standards for situations in which the financial interest is not substantial or the gift is an unsolicited item of nominal value. The standards of conduct must provide for disciplinary actions to be applied for violations of such standards by officers, employees, or agents of a recipient.

(c) All subawards will be made in a manner to provide, to the maximum extent practicable, open and free competition. Recipients must be alert to organizational conflicts of interest as well as other practices among subrecipients that may restrict or eliminate competition. In order to ensure objective subrecipient performance and eliminate unfair competitive advantage, subrecipients that develop or draft work requirements, statements of work, or requests for proposals will be excluded from competing for such subawards.

(d) For purposes of the award, a financial interest may include employment, stock ownership, a creditor or debtor relationship, or prospective employment with an applicant. An appearance of impairment of objectivity could result from an organizational conflict where, because of other activities or relationships with other persons or entities, a person is unable or potentially unable to act in an impartial manner. It also could result from non-financial gain to the individual, such as benefit to reputation or prestige in a professional field.

17. Minority Owned Business Enterprise. The DOC encourages recipients to utilize minority and women-owned firms and enterprises in contracts under financial assistance awards. The Minority Business Development Agency can assist recipients in matching qualified minority owned enterprises with contract opportunities.

18. Subaward and/or Contract to a Federal Agency. Recipients, subrecipients, contractors, and/or subcontractors may not sub-grant or sub-contract any part of an approved project to any Federal department, agency, instrumentality, or employee thereof, without the prior written approval of the Grants Officer.

19. Foreign Travel. Recipients must comply with the provisions of the Fly America Act, 49 U.S.C. 40118. The Fly America Act requires that Federal travelers and others performing U.S. Government-financed foreign air travel must use U.S. flag carriers, to the extent that service by such carriers is available. Foreign air carriers may be used only in specific instances, such as when a U.S. flag air carrier is unavailable, or use of U.S. flag carrier service will not accomplish the agency's mission. The implementing Federal Travel Regulations are found at 41 CFR 301-10.131 through 301-10.143.

20. Purchase of American-Made Equipment and Products. Recipients are hereby notified that they are encouraged, to the greatest extent practicable, to purchase American-made equipment and products with funding provided under DOC financial assistance awards.

21. Intellectual Property Rights.

(a) Inventions. The rights to any invention made by a recipient under a DOC financial assistance award are determined by the Bayh-Dole Act, as amended (Pub. L. No. 96-517), and codified at 35 U.S.C. 200 et seq. , except as otherwise required by law. The specific rights and responsibilities are described in more detail in 37 CFR part 401 and in particular, in the standard patent rights clause in 37 CFR 401.14, which is incorporated by reference into awards. Recipients of DOC financial assistance awards are required to submit their disclosures and elections electronically using the Interagency Edison extramural invention reporting system (iEdison) at http://www.iedison.gov. Recipients may obtain a waiver of this electronic submission requirement by providing to the DOC compelling reasons for allowing the submission of paper copies of reports related to inventions.

(b) Patent Notification Procedures. Pursuant to Executive Order 12889, the DOC is required to notify the owner of any valid patent covering technology whenever the DOC or its financial assistance recipients, without making a patent search, knows (or has demonstrable reasonable grounds to know) that technology covered by a valid United States patent has been or will be used without a license from the owner. To ensure proper notification, if the recipient uses or has used patented technology under this award without a license or permission from the owner, the recipient will be required to notify the Grants Officer. This notice does not necessarily mean that the government authorizes and consents to any copyright or patent infringement occurring under the financial assistance.

(c) Data, Databases, and Software. The rights to any work produced or purchased under a DOC financial assistance award are determined by 15 CFR 14.36 or 24.34, as applicable. Such works may include data, databases or software. The recipient owns any work produced or purchased under a DOC financial assistance award subject to DOC's right to obtain, reproduce, publish or otherwise use the work or authorize others to receive, reproduce, publish or otherwise use the data for Federal Government purposes.

(d) Copyright. The recipient may copyright any work produced under a DOC financial assistance award subject to the DOC's royalty-free nonexclusive and irrevocable right to reproduce, publish or otherwise use the work or authorize others to do so for Federal Government purposes. Works jointly authored by the DOC and recipient employees may be copyrighted but only the part authored by the recipient is protected because, under 17 U.S.C. 105, works produced by Government employees are not copyrightable in the United States. On occasion, the DOC may ask the recipient to transfer to DOC its copyright in a particular work when the DOC is undertaking the primary dissemination of the work. Ownership of copyright by the Federal Government through assignment is permitted by 17 U.S.C. 105.

22. Seat Belt Use. Pursuant to Executive Order 13043, recipients shall seek to encourage employees and contractors to enforce on-the-job seat belt policies and programs when operating recipient/company-owned, rented or personally owned vehicles.

23. Research Involving Human Subjects. All proposed research involving human subjects must be conducted in accordance with 15 CFR part 27, “Protection of Human Subject.” No research involving human subjects is permitted under any DOC financial assistance award unless expressly authorized by the Grants Officer.

24. Federal Employee Expenses. Federal agencies are generally barred from accepting funds from a recipient to pay transportation, travel, or other expenses for any Federal employee unless specifically approved in the terms of the award. Use of award funds (Federal or non-Federal) or the recipient's provision of in-kind goods or services for the purposes of transportation, travel, or any other expenses for any Federal employee, may raise appropriation augmentation issues. In addition, DOC policy prohibits the acceptance of gifts, including travel payments for Federal employees, from recipients or applicants regardless of the source.

25. Preservation of Open Competition and Government Neutrality Towards Government Contractors' Labor Relations on Federal and Federally Funded Construction Projects. Pursuant to Executive Order 13202, “Preservation of Open Competition and Government Neutrality Towards Government Contractors' Labor Relations on Federal and Federally Funded Construction Projects,” as amended by Executive Order 13208, unless the project is exempted under section 5(c) of the Order, bid specifications, project agreements, or other controlling documents for construction contracts awarded by recipients of grants or cooperative agreements, or those of any construction manager acting on their behalf, shall not: (1) Include any requirement or prohibition on bidders, offerors, contractors, or subcontractors about entering into or adhering to agreements with one or more labor organizations on the same or related construction project(s); or (2) otherwise discriminate against bidders, offerors, contractors, or subcontractors for becoming or refusing to become or remain signatories or otherwise adhering to agreements with one or more labor organizations, on the same or other related construction project(s).

26. Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs) Initiative. Pursuant to Executive Orders 13256, 13230, and 13270, the DOC is strongly committed to broadening the participation of MSIs in its financial assistance award programs. The DOC's goals include achieving full participation of MSIs in order to advance the development of human potential, strengthen the Nation's capacity to provide high-quality education, and increase opportunities for MSIs to participate in and benefit from Federal financial assistance programs. The DOC encourages all applicants and recipients to include meaningful participation of MSIs. Institutions eligible to be considered MSIs are listed on the Department of Education's Web site at: http://www.ed.gov/offices/OCR/minorityinst.html.

27. Access to Records. The Inspector General of the DOC, or any of his or her duly authorized representatives, the Comptroller of the United States and, if appropriate, the State, shall have access to any pertinent books, documents, papers and records of the parties to a grant or cooperative agreement, whether written, printed, recorded, produced, or reproduced by any electronic, mechanical, magnetic or other process or medium, in order to make audits, inspections, excerpts, transcripts, or other examinations as authorized by law. An audit of an award may be conducted at any time.

28. Scientific or Research Misconduct. Scientific or research misconduct refers to the fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. It does not include honest errors or differences of opinion. The recipient organization has the primary responsibility to investigate allegations and provide reports to the Federal Government. Funds expended on an activity that is determined to be invalid or unreliable because of scientific misconduct may result in a disallowance of costs for which the institution may be liable for repayment to the awarding agency. The Office of Science and Technology Policy at the White House published in the Federal Register on December 6, 2000, a final policy that addressed research misconduct. The policy was developed by the National Science and Technology Council (65 FR 76260). The DOC requires that any allegation be submitted to the Grants Officer, who will also notify the OIG of such allegation. Generally, the recipient organization shall investigate the allegation and submit its findings to the Grants Officer. The DOC may accept the recipient's findings or proceed with its own investigation. The Grants Officer shall inform the recipient of the DOC's final determination.

29. Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4728-4763). Recipients must comply with this Act relating to prescribed standards for merit systems for programs funded under one of the 19 statutes or regulations specified in Appendix A of the Office of Personnel Management Standards for a Merit System of Personnel Administration (5 CFR part 900, Subpart F).

30. Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4601 et seq. ) and the DOC's implementing regulations issued at 15 CFR part 11. These provide for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced or whose property is acquired as a result of Federal or Federally-assisted programs. These requirements apply to all interests in real property acquired for project purposes regardless of Federal participation in purchases.

31. Historic Preservation. Recipients must assist the DOC in assuring compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Guidelines (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq. ); the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 469a-1 et seq. ); Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment, Executive Order 11593; Locating Federal Facilities on Historic Properties in our Nation's Central Cities, Executive Order 13006; and Indian Sacred Sites, Executive Order 13007.

32. Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. 4801 et seq. ). This Act prohibits the use of lead-based paint in construction or rehabilitation of residential structures.

33. Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. 1501-1508 and 7324-7328). This Act limits the political activities of employees or officers of State or local governments whose principal employment activities are funded in whole or in part with Federal funds.

34. Labor standards for Federally-assisted construction subagreements (wage guarantees). Recipients must comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276a to 276a-7); the Copeland Act (40 U.S.C. 276c and 18 U.S.C. 874); and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. 327—333).

35. Care and Use of Live Vertebrate Animals. Recipients must comply with the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 (Pub. L. No. 89-544), as amended (7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq. ) (animal acquisition, transport, care, handling, and use in projects) and implementing regulations, 9 CFR parts 1, 2, and 3; the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ); Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ) (taking possession, transport, purchase, sale, export or import of wildlife and plants); The Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act (16 U.S.C. 4701 et seq. ) (ensure preventive measures are taken or that probable harm of using species is minimal if there is an escape or release); and all other applicable statutes pertaining to the care, handling, and treatment of warm blooded animals held for research, teaching, or other activities supported by Federal financial assistance. No research involving vertebrate animals is permitted under any DOC financial assistance award unless authorized by the Grants Officer.

36. Publications, Videos, and Acknowledgment of Sponsorship. Publication of the results of a research project in appropriate professional journals and production of videos or other media is encouraged as an important method of recording and reporting scientific information. It is also a constructive means to expand access to federally funded research. The recipient is required to submit a copy to the funding agency and when releasing information related to a funded project include a statement that the project or effort undertaken was or is sponsored by DOC. The recipient is also responsible for assuring that every publication of material (including Internet sites and videos) based on or developed under an award, except scientific articles or papers appearing in scientific, technical or professional journals, contains the following disclaimer: “This [report/video] was prepared by [recipient name] under award [number] from [name of operating unit], U.S. Department of Commerce. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the [name of operating unit] or the U.S. Department of Commerce.”

37. Homeland Security Presidential Directive—12. If the performance of a grant award requires recipient organization personnel to have unsupervised physical access to a Federally controlled facility for more than 180 days or access to a Federal information system, such personnel must undergo the personal identity verification credential process. In the case of foreign nationals, the DOC will conduct a check with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' (USCIS) Verification Division, a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), to ensure the individual is in a lawful immigration status and that they are eligible for employment within the U.S. Any items or services delivered under a financial assistance award shall comply with the Department of Commerce personal identity verification procedures that implement Homeland Security Presidential Directive—12, FIPS PUB 201, and OMB Memorandum M-05-24. The recipient shall insert this clause in all subawards or contracts when the subaward recipient or contractor is required to have physical access to a Federally controlled facility or access to a Federal information system.

38. Compliance with Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security Export Administration Regulations

(a) This clause applies to the extent that a financial assistance award involves access to export-controlled information or technology.

(b) In performing a financial assistance award, the recipient may gain access to export-controlled information or technology. The recipient is responsible for compliance with all applicable laws and regulations regarding export-controlled information and technology, including deemed exports. The recipient shall establish and maintain effective export compliance procedures at non-DOC facilities throughout performance of the financial assistance award. At a minimum, these export compliance procedures must include adequate controls relating to physical, verbal, visual and electronic access to export-controlled information and technology.

(c) Definitions

(1) Deemed Export. The Export Administration Regulations (EAR) define a deemed export as any release of technology or source code subject to the EAR to a foreign national, both in the United States and abroad. Such release is “deemed” to be an export to the home country of the foreign national. 15 CFR 734.2(b)(2)(ii).

(2) Export-controlled information and technology. Export-controlled information and technology subject to the EAR (15 CFR 730-774), implemented by the DOC's Bureau of Industry and Security, or the International Traffic In Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR 120-130), implemented by the Department of State, respectively. This includes, but is not limited to, dual-use items, defense articles and any related assistance, services, software or technical data as defined in the EAR and ITAR.

(d) The recipient shall control access to all export-controlled information and technology that it possesses or that comes into its possession in performance of a financial assistance award, to ensure that access is restricted, or licensed, as required by applicable Federal laws, Executive Orders, and/or regulations.

(e) Nothing in the terms of this financial assistance award is intended to change, supersede, or waive the requirements of applicable Federal laws, Executive Orders or regulations.

(f) The recipient shall include this clause, including this paragraph (f), in all lower tier transactions (subawards, contracts, and subcontracts) under this financial assistance award that may involve access to export-controlled information technology.

39. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 U.S.C. 7104(g)), as amended, and the implementing regulations at 2 CFR part 175. This Act authorizes termination of financial assistance provided to a private entity, without penalty to the Federal Government, if the recipient or subrecipient engages in certain activities related to trafficking in persons.

40. The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Pub. L. No. 109-282). This Act requires that the Federal government establish a single searchable awards Web site by January 1, 2008 to enable the public to see where Federal funds for grant and contract awards are being spent. Subaward and subcontract data will be required on the Web site by January 1, 2009. Funding data retroactive to October 1, 2006 must be reported by all Federal agencies and their recipient and subrecipient organizations. Data elements will include:

• Name of entity receiving award;

• Award amount;

• Transaction type, funding agency, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number, and descriptive award title;

• Location of: Entity, primary location of performance (City/State/Congressional District/Country); and

• Unique identifier of entity.

The data will be required within 30 days of an award. The DOC will be implementing this Act, which will require recipients and subrecipients to report the required data.

C. The Federal Register notice announcing the availability of Federal funds for each DOC competitive financial assistance program will contain only the following program-specific information: Summary description of program; deadline date for receipt of applications; addresses for submission of applications; information contacts (including electronic access); the amount of funding available; statutory authority; the applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number(s); eligibility requirements; cost-sharing or matching requirements; Intergovernmental Review requirements; evaluation criteria used by the merit reviewers; selection procedures, including funding priorities/selection factors/policy factors to be applied by the selecting official; and administrative and national policy requirements.

D. The DOC follows the uniform format for an announcement of Federal Funding Opportunity (FFO) for discretionary grants and cooperative agreements established by OMB in a policy letter published in the Federal Register (68 FR 37370, June 23, 2003). These FFOs are available at http://www.grants.gov or from the information contact listed in the Federal Register notice. Applicants are strongly encouraged to apply through http://www.grants.gov. It can take seven (7) to ten (10) business days to register with http://www.grants.gov , and registration is required only once. Applicants should consider the time needed to register with http://www.grants.gov , and should begin the registration process well in advance of the application due date if they have never registered. Applicants should allow themselves adequate time to submit the proposal through http://www.grants.gov , as the deadline for submission cannot be extended and there is the potential for human or computer error during the electronic submission process.

E. Universal Identifier: Applicants should be aware that they will be required to provide a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System number during the application process. See the June 27, 2003 Federal Register notice (68 FR 38402) for additional information. Organizations can receive a DUNS number at no cost by calling the dedicated toll-free Duns number request line at 1-866-705-5711 or by accessing the Grants.gov Web site at: http://www.grants.gov.

This notice has been determined to be “not significant” for purposes of Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review.”

Because notice and comment are not required under 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other law, for this notice relating to public property, loans, grants benefits or contracts (5 U.S.C. 553(a)), a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required and has not been prepared for this notice.

It has been determined that this notice does not contain policies with Federalism implications as that term is defined in Executive Order 13132.

These regulatory actions do not impose any new reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Notwithstanding any other provisions of the law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection-of-information, subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. , unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number. The use of the following family of forms has been approved by OMB under the following control numbers: (1) SF-424 Family: 0348-0041, 0348-0044, 4040-0003, and 4040-0004; (2) SF-424 Research and Related Family: 4040-0001; SF-424 Individual Family: 4040-0005; (3) SF-424 Mandatory Family: 4040-0002; and (4) SF-424 Short Organizational Family: 4040-0003. The use of Forms SF-LLL and CD-346 are approved by OMB under the control numbers 0348-0046 and 0605-0001, respectively.

This notice affects all of the grant and cooperative agreement programs funded by the DOC. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance can be accessed on the Internet under the DOC Grants Management Web site at http://www.cfda.gov.

Accounting, Administrative practice and procedures, Grants administration, Grant programs—economic development, Grant programs—oceans, atmosphere and fisheries management, Grant programs—minority businesses, Grant programs—technology, Grant programs—telecommunications, Grant programs—international, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Since the publication of the Preliminary Results , the following events have occurred. As provided in 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department conducted a verification of the questionnaire responses submitted by the Government of India (GOI), Garware, and MTZ from September 11 through September 25, 2007. We used standard verification procedures, including on-site examination of relevant records and original source documents. Our verification results are outlined in the verification memoranda, public versions of which are on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU), room 1117 of the Main Commerce Building. See “Verification of the Questionnaire Responses Submitted by the Government of India (GOI)” (December 7, 2007) ( GOI Verification Report ); “Verification of the Questionnaire Responses Submitted by Garware Polyester, Ltd. (Garware)” (December 7, 2007) ( Garware Verification Report ); and “Verification of the Questionnaire Responses Submitted by MTZ Polyfilms Ltd. (MTZ)” (December 7, 2007) ( MTZ Verification Report ). On December 20, 2007, Dupont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi Polyester Film of America, and Toray Plastics (America), Inc. (collectively, the Petitioners), Garware, and MTZ filed case briefs. Garware, MTZ and Petitioners filed rebuttal briefs on December 28, 2007. Based on a request by MTZ, a public hearing was held on January 10, 2008.

For purposes of the order, the products covered are all gauges of raw, pretreated, or primed Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet and Strip, whether extruded or coextruded. Excluded are metallized films and other finished films that have had at least one of their surfaces modified by the application of a performance-enhancing resinous or inorganic layer of more than 0.00001 inches thick. Imports of PET film are classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item number 3920.62.00. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

Following the release of the verification reports for the GOI, Garware and MTZ, we gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on our Preliminary Results . All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this administrative review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum for the 2005 Countervailing Duty Administrative Review of Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from India , from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration (February 4, 2008) ( Issues and Decision Memorandum ), which is hereby adopted by this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum also contains a complete analysis of the programs covered by this review and the methodologies used to calculate the subsidy rates. A list of the comments raised in the briefs and addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is appended to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is on file in the CRU, and can be accessed directly on the Web at http://www.trade.gov/ia/ .

Based on our verification and analysis of comments received, we have made some adjustments in the methodology that was used in the Preliminary Results for calculating Garware's and MTZ's subsidy rates under several programs. All changes are discussed in detail in the Issues and Decision Memorandum .

In accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5), we calculated individual ad valorem subsidy rates for the producers/exporters, Garware and MTZ, the only producers/exporters subject to review for the calendar year 2005, the period of review (POR) for this administrative review.

The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review to liquidate shipments of subject merchandise by Garware and MTZ entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005, at 10.37 percent and 33.94 percent, respectively, ad valorem of the entered value. We will also instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties, at these rates, on shipments of the subject merchandise by Garware and MTZ entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of these final results of review. For all non-reviewed companies, the Department has instructed CBP to assess countervailing duties at the cash deposit rates in effect at the time of entry, for entries between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2005. The cash deposit rates for all companies not covered by this review are not changed by the results of this review.

This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to the administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under the APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

On October 26, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated the antidumping duty investigations of polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip (PET Film) from Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Thailand, and the United Arab Emirates. See Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip (PET Film) from Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Thailand, and the United Arab Emirates: Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations , 72 FR 60801 (October 26, 2007). The notice of initiation stated that the Department would issue its preliminary determinations for these investigations no later than 140 days after the date of issuance of the initiation (i.e., March 6, 2008) in accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Id. at 60806.

On January 23, 2008, DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi Polyester of America, SKC Inc. and Toray Plastics (America), Inc. (collectively, petitioners) made a timely request pursuant to section 733(c)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(e) for a postponement of the preliminary determinations with respect to Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Thailand, and the United Arab Emirates. The petitioners requested postponement of the preliminary determinations with respect to these four countries, explaining that they need time to evaluate questionnaire responses, the submissions of which were extended by the Department. Additionally, petitioners stated that they intend to file sales-below-cost allegations with respect to Thailand and the United Arab Emirates, and anticipated that the Department will need time to adequately analyze these allegations.

For the reasons identified by the petitioners and because there are no compelling reasons to deny the request, the Department is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determinations with respect to Brazil, the People's Republic of China, Thailand, and the United Arab Emirates pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act by 50 days to April 25, 2008. The deadline for the final determinations will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determinations, unless extended.

This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 733(c)(2) and 777(I) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).

On August 6, 2007, the Department published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from Mexico for the period July 1, 2005, to June 30, 2006. See Preliminary Results . In response to the Department's invitation to comment on the preliminary results of this review, Allegheny Ludlum Corporation, United Auto Workers Local 3303, Zanesville Armco Independent Organization, Inc. and the United Steelworkers of America (collectively, petitioners) and Mexinox filed their case briefs on November 13, 2007. 1 Mexinox submitted its rebuttal brief on November 19, 2007, while petitioners filed their rebuttal brief on November 20, 2007. Also, at Mexinox's request, the Department held a public hearing on December 6, 2007.

On September 4, 2007, we published in the Federal Register our notice partially extending the time limit for this review until January 10, 2008. See Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico: Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review , 72 FR 50663 (September 4, 2007). On January 14, 2008, we published in the Federal Register our notice fully extending the time limit for this review until February 4, 2008. See Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico: Second Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review , 73 FR 2222 (January 14, 2008).

The period of review (POR) is July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006.

For purposes of this administrative review, the products covered are certain stainless steel sheet and strip in coils. Stainless steel is an alloy steel containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or without other elements. The subject sheet and strip is a flat-rolled product in coils that is greater than 9.5 mm in width and less than 4.75 mm in thickness, and that is annealed or otherwise heat treated and pickled or otherwise descaled. The subject sheet and strip may also be further processed ( e.g. , cold-rolled, polished, aluminized, coated, etc. ) provided that it maintains the specific dimensions of sheet and strip following such processing. The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) at subheadings: 7219.13.0031, 7219.13.0051, 7219.13.0071, 7219.13.00.81, 7219.14.0030, 7219.14.0065, 7219.14.0090, 7219.32.0005, 7219.32.0020, 7219.32.0025, 7219.32.0035, 7219.32.0036, 7219.32.0038, 7219.32.0042, 7219.32.0044, 7219.33.0005, 7219.33.0020, 7219.33.0025, 7219.33.0035, 7219.33.0036, 7219.33.0038, 7219.33.0042, 7219.33.0044, 7219.34.0005, 7219.34.0020, 7219.34.0025, 7219.34.0030, 7219.34.0035, 7219.35.0005, 7219.35.0015, 7219.35.0030, 7219.35.0035, 7219.90.0010, 7219.90.0020, 7219.90.0025, 7219.90.0060, 7219.90.0080, 7220.12.1000, 7220.12.5000, 7220.20.1010, 7220.20.1015, 7220.20.1060, 7220.20.1080, 7220.20.6005, 7220.20.6010, 7220.20.6015, 7220.20.6060, 7220.20.6080, 7220.20.7005, 7220.20.7010, 7220.20.7015, 7220.20.7060, 7220.20.7080, 7220.20.8000, 7220.20.9030, 7220.20.9060, 7220.90.0010, 7220.90.0015, 7220.90.0060, and 7220.90.0080. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise under review is dispositive.

Excluded from the review of this order are the following: (1) sheet and strip that is not annealed or otherwise heat treated and pickled or otherwise descaled, (2) sheet and strip that is cut to length, (3) plate ( i.e. , flat-rolled stainless steel products of a thickness of 4.75 mm or more), (4) flat wire ( i.e. , cold-rolled sections, with a prepared edge, rectangular in shape, of a width of not more than 9.5 mm), and (5) razor blade steel. Razor blade steel is a flat-rolled product of stainless steel, not further worked than cold-rolled (cold-reduced), in coils, of a width of not more than 23 mm and a thickness of 0.266 mm or less, containing, by weight, 12.5 to 14.5 percent chromium, and certified at the time of entry to be used in the manufacture of razor blades. See chapter 72 of the HTSUS, “Additional U.S. Note” 1(d).

Flapper valve steel is also excluded from the scope of the order. This product is defined as stainless steel strip in coils containing, by weight, between 0.37 and 0.43 percent carbon, between 1.15 and 1.35 percent molybdenum, and between 0.20 and 0.80 percent manganese. This steel also contains, by weight, phosphorus of 0.025 percent or less, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of 0.020 percent or less. The product is manufactured by means of vacuum arc remelting, with inclusion controls for sulphide of no more than 0.04 percent and for oxide of no more than 0.05 percent. Flapper valve steel has a tensile strength of between 210 and 300 ksi, yield strength of between 170 and 270 ksi, plus or minus 8 ksi, and a hardness (Hv) of between 460 and 590. Flapper valve steel is most commonly used to produce specialty flapper valves in compressors.

Also excluded is a product referred to as suspension foil, a specialty steel product used in the manufacture of suspension assemblies for computer disk drives. Suspension foil is described as 302/304 grade or 202 grade stainless steel of a thickness between 14 and 127 microns, with a thickness tolerance of plus-or-minus 2.01 microns, and surface glossiness of 200 to 700 percent Gs. Suspension foil must be supplied in coil widths of not more than 407 mm, and with a mass of 225 kg or less. Roll marks may only be visible on one side, with no scratches of measurable depth. The material must exhibit residual stresses of 2 mm maximum deflection, and flatness of 1.6 mm over 685 mm length.

Certain stainless steel foil for automotive catalytic converters is also excluded from the scope of this order. This stainless steel strip in coils is a specialty foil with a thickness of between 20 and 110 microns used to produce a metallic substrate with a honeycomb structure for use in automotive catalytic converters. The steel contains, by weight, carbon of no more than 0.030 percent, silicon of no more than 1.0 percent, manganese of no more than 1.0 percent, chromium of between 19 and 22 percent, aluminum of no less than 5.0 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.045 percent, sulfur of no more than 0.03 percent, lanthanum of less than 0.002 or greater than 0.05 percent, and total rare earth elements of more than 0.06 percent, with the balance iron.

Permanent magnet iron-chromium-cobalt alloy stainless strip is also excluded from the scope of this order. This ductile stainless steel strip contains, by weight, 26 to 30 percent chromium, and 7 to 10 percent cobalt, with the remainder of iron, in widths 228.6 mm or less, and a thickness between 0.127 and 1.270 mm. It exhibits magnetic remanence between 9,000 and 12,000 gauss, and a coercivity of between 50 and 300 oersteds. This product is most commonly used in electronic sensors and is currently available under proprietary trade names such as “Arnokrome III.” 2

Certain electrical resistance alloy steel is also excluded from the scope of this order. This product is defined as a non-magnetic stainless steel manufactured to American Society of Testing and Materials (“ASTM”) specification B344 and containing, by weight, 36 percent nickel, 18 percent chromium, and 46 percent iron, and is most notable for its resistance to high temperature corrosion. It has a melting point of 1390 degrees Celsius and displays a creep rupture limit of 4 kilograms per square millimeter at 1000 degrees Celsius. This steel is most commonly used in the production of heating ribbons for circuit breakers and industrial furnaces, and in rheostats for railway locomotives. The product is currently available under proprietary trade names such as “Gilphy 36.” 3

Certain martensitic precipitation-hardenable stainless steel is also excluded from the scope of this order. This high-strength, ductile stainless steel product is designated under the Unified Numbering System (“UNS”) as S45500-grade steel, and contains, by weight, 11 to 13 percent chromium, and 7 to 10 percent nickel. Carbon, manganese, silicon and molybdenum each comprise, by weight, 0.05 percent or less, with phosphorus and sulfur each comprising, by weight, 0.03 percent or less. This steel has copper, niobium, and titanium added to achieve aging, and will exhibit yield strengths as high as 1700 Mpa and ultimate tensile strengths as high as 1750 Mpa after aging, with elongation percentages of 3 percent or less in 50 mm. It is generally provided in thicknesses between 0.635 and 0.787 mm, and in widths of 25.4 mm. This product is most commonly used in the manufacture of television tubes and is currently available under proprietary trade names such as “Durphynox 17.” 4

Finally, three specialty stainless steels typically used in certain industrial blades and surgical and medical instruments are also excluded from the scope of this order. These include stainless steel strip in coils used in the production of textile cutting tools ( e.g. , carpet knives). 5 This steel is similar to AISI grade 420 but containing, by weight, 0.5 to 0.7 percent of molybdenum. The steel also contains, by weight, carbon of between 1.0 and 1.1 percent, sulfur of 0.020 percent or less, and includes between 0.20 and 0.30 percent copper and between 0.20 and 0.50 percent cobalt. This steel is sold under proprietary names such as “GIN4 Mo.” The second excluded stainless steel strip in coils is similar to AISI 420-J2 and contains, by weight, carbon of between 0.62 and 0.70 percent, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, manganese of between 0.45 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.025 percent and sulfur of no more than 0.020 percent. This steel has a carbide density on average of 100 carbide particles per 100 square microns. An example of this product is “GIN5” steel. The third specialty steel has a chemical composition similar to AISI 420 F, with carbon of between 0.37 and 0.43 percent, molybdenum of between 1.15 and 1.35 percent, but lower manganese of between 0.20 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.025 percent, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of no more than 0.020 percent. This product is supplied with a hardness of more than Hv 500 guaranteed after customer processing, and is supplied as, for example, “GIN6.” 6

As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Tariff Act), we verified sales and cost information provided by Mexinox, using standard verification procedures such as the examination of relevant sales and financial records. Our verification results are outlined in the public and proprietary versions of our verification reports, which are on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU) in room 1117 of the main Department building. See “Verification of the Sales Response of Mexinox in the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico,” dated August 16, 2007 (Sales Verification Report). See also “Verification of the Cost Response of Mexinox in the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico,” dated November 2, 2007 (Cost Verification Report).

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this administrative review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum (Decision Memorandum) from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated February 4, 2008, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded, all of which are in the Decision Memorandum, is attached to this notice as an appendix. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the CRU in room B-099 of the main Department building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly via the Internet at www.ia.ita.doc.gov/fm/index.html . The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made the following changes to the margin calculation:

• In accordance with the major input test we made adjustments to the reported costs of direct material costs for certain grades. See “Cost of Production and Constructed Value Calculation Adjustments for the Final Results - ThyssenKrupp Mexinox S.A. de C.V., “ dated February 4, 2008 (Final Results Cost Calculation Memorandum).

• We revised Mexinox's reported cost of production to include a certain depreciation expense related to a new production line installed during the POR. See id .

• We revised Mexinox's and Ken-Mac Metal Inc.'s financial expense ratio to exclude certain interest income offsets from the numerator, and exclude packing from the denominator. See id .

• We revised Mexinox's general and administrative expenses to exclude a portion of one of the income offsets originally claimed by Mexinox. See id .

In addition, we have made changes made to Mexinox's reported cost database as a result of first day corrections identified by Mexinox during our cost verification. See Cost Verification Report at Exhibit 1.

We determine the following weighted-average percentage margin exists for the period July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2006:

The Department will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries, pursuant to section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b). The Department calculated an assessment rate for each importer of the subject merchandise covered by the review. Upon issuance of the final results of this review, for any importer-specific assessment rates calculated in the final results that are above de minimis ( i.e. , at or above 0.50 percent), we will issue appraisement instructions directly to CBP to assess antidumping duties on appropriate entries by applying the assessment rate to the entered value of the merchandise. Pursuant to 19 CFR 356.8(a), the Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 41 days after the date of publication of these final results of review.

The Department clarified its “automatic assessment” regulation on May 6, 2003. See Notice of Policy Concerning Assessment of Antidumping Duties , 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Mexinox for which Mexinox did not know the merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the 30.85 percent all-others rate if there is no company-specific rate for an intermediary involved in the transaction. See id . for a full discussion of this clarification.

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of these final results for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of these final results of administrative review, consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Tariff Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for the reviewed company will be the rate listed above; (2) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, but was covered in a previous review or the original less than fair value (LTFV) investigation, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original LTFV investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 30.85 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation. See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from Mexico , 64 FR 40560 (July 27, 1999). These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until publication of the final results of the next administrative review.

This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Department's presumption that reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (APOs) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act.

Comment 1: Revocation

Comment 2: Offsetting for U.S. Sales that Exceed Normal Value

Comment 3: U.S. Indirect Selling Expenses

Comment 4: Temporary Import Bonds

Comment 5: Handling Expense

Comment 6: Circumstance-of-Sale Adjustment

Comment 7: Major Input Rule

Comment 8: Employee Profit Sharing

Comment 9: Year-End Inflation Adjustment to G&A

Comment 10: Depreciation

Comment 11: Interest Expense

Comment 12: Packing Expense

Comment 13: G&A Expense

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is responsible for the management, conservation, and protection of living marine resources within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. The SWFSC in La Jolla, California, manages and conducts research involving Pacific fisheries and marine mammal research for the protection and management of these resources throughout the Western Pacific and the Antarctic. The existing SWFSC facility, built in 1964, is currently adjacent to a coastal bluff that is undergoing severe erosion and retreat. NOAA proposes to construct a new SWFSC building to replace its existing NMFS administrative and marine research facilities currently located in La Jolla, California. A minimum of two existing at risk SWFSC structures would be removed and the property currently used by NOAA would be returned to the UCSD for other appropriate uses.

NOAA is the lead Federal agency for implementation of the NEPA. The University of California is the lead agency under the CEQA. The existing and preferred sites for the SWFSC headquarters are at the UCSD campus. The NMFS, SIO and other marine research organizations conduct independent and joint research at the SWFSC and its salt water laboratory facilities.

The proposed project will require construction of a new facility to support SWFSC administrative and marine research operations. The preferred site will enable NMFS, SIO, and others to continue collaboration within a wide range of programmatic marine research disciplines. NOAA, in cooperation with UCSD, has decided to prepare a joint EIS/EIR to analyze the environmental impacts of relocating the SWFSC facilities at UCSD.

Other alternative actions considered are:

Use of other NOAA facility locations in California and other Pacific Coast states;

Use of alternative sites at or adjacent to SIO for collaborative research; and

Use of existing alternative NOAA facilities and properties away from UCSD.

This joint EIS/EIR will analyze environmental impacts that may result from construction and/or operation of the proposed facilities. These potential environmental issues to be addressed include: land use and coastal zone management; aesthetics; geology; hydrology and water resources; biological resources and protected species; utilities and public services; transportation and traffic circulation, recreational resources; air quality; noise and vibration; visual effects and aesthetics; cultural resources; and socioeconomics and land use; and cumulative effects.

The most salient and foreseeable environmental topics of greatest interest are expected to be aesthetics, transportation and traffic, hydrology, and short term noise effects.

Interested parties who wish to submit suggestions or comments regarding the scope or content on the proposed EIS/EIR are invited to attend the public scoping meeting.

The amendment is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ), and the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216).

Permit No. 10080, issued on December 18, 2007 (72 FR 72996) and valid through December 31, 2012, authorizes research to examine expanding populations of the Western North Atlantic stocks of harbor seals ( Phoca vitulina concolor ) and gray seals (Halichoerus grypus) in the Gulf of Maine. In addition to capture and sampling activities, the permit authorizes harassment of up to 1000 gray seals annually incidental to boat approaches to seals on haul outs. In consideration of the increasing size of this population, the applicant has requested an increase in the number of seals that may be harassed by this activity: up to 2000 annually.

In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ), NMFS has initially determined that issuance of the proposed permit is consistent with a category of activities identified in NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 that do not individually or cumulatively have the potential to pose significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and are therefore exempted from further environmental review and requirements to prepare environmental review documents.

Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal Register , NMFS is forwarding copies of this application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140, and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the membership of the Missile Defense Advisory Committee about its mission and functions. Written statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of a planned meeting of the Missile Defense Advisory Committee.

All written statements shall be submitted to the Designated Federal Officer for the Missile Defense Advisory Committee, in the following formats: One hard copy with original signature and one electronic copy via e-mail (acceptable file formats: Adobe Acrobat PDF, MS Word or MS PowerPoint), and this individual will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration. Contact information for the Designated Federal Officer is as stated above and can also be obtained from the GSA's Federal Advisory Committee Act Database— https://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/public.asp .

Statements being submitted in response to the agenda mentioned in this notice must be received by the Designated Federal Officer at the address listed at least five calendar days prior to the meeting which is the subject of this notice. Written statements received after this date may not be provided to or considered by the Missile Defense Advisory Committee until its next meeting. The Designated Federal Officer will review all timely submissions with the Missile Defense Advisory Committee Chairperson and ensure they are provided to all members of the Missile Defense Advisory Committee before the meeting that is the subject of this notice.

The Office of the Secretary of Defense systems of records notices subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The proposed system report, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(r), of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, was submitted on February 4, 2008, to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to paragraph 4c of Appendix I to OMB Circular No. A-130, ‘Federal Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals,’ dated February 8, 1996 (February 20, 1996, 61 FR 6427).

The Defense Logistics Agency notices for systems of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address above.

The specific changes to the record system being amended are set forth below followed by the notice, as amended, published in its entirety. The proposed amendment is not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or altered system report.

Any member of the public is permitted to file a written statement with the USMA Board of Visitors. Written statements should be sent to the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at: United States Military Academy, Office of the Secretary of the General Staff (MASG), 646 Swift Road, West Point, NY 10996-1905 or faxed to the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) at (845) 938-3214. Written statements must be received no later than five working days prior to the next meeting in order to provide time for member consideration. By rule, no member of the public attending open meetings will be allowed to present questions from the floor or speak to any issue under consideration by the Board.

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 IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management, 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.

Type of Review: Reinstatement.

Title: Annual Protection and Advocacy for Assistive Technology (PAAT) Program Performance Report.

Frequency: Annually.

Affected Public: Not-for-profit institutions; State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs.

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden: Responses: 57. Burden Hours: 912.

Abstract: The Annual PAAT Program Performance Report will be used to analyze and evaluate the PAAT Program administered by eligible systems in states. These systems provide services to eligible individuals with disabilities to assist in the acquisition, utilization, or maintenance of assistive technology devices or assistive technology services. The Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) uses the form to meet specific data collection requirements of section 5 of the Assistive Technology Act of 1998, as amended (AT Act). PAAT programs must report annually using the form, which is due on or before December 30 of each year. The Annual PAAT Performance Report has enabled RSA to furnish the President and Congress with data on the provision of protection and advocacy services and has helped to establish a sound basis for future funding requests. Data from the form have been used to evaluate the effectiveness of eligible systems within individual states in meeting annual priorities and objectives. These data also have been used to indicate trends in the provision of services from year to year.

Requests for copies of the information collection submission for OMB review may be accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov , by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3535. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4537. Requests may also be electronically mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202-401-0920. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request.

Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov . Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.

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 IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management, 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.

Type of Review: New.

Title: Adult ESL Literacy Impact Study.

Frequency: On Occasion; Weekly; Annually.

Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs; Individuals or household.

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden: Responses: 9,080. Burden Hours: 2,108.

Abstract: The Adult ESL Literacy Impact Study is an evaluation of the effectiveness of a literacy curriculum in improving the English reading and speaking skills of adult ESL learners who have low levels of literacy in their native language. This evaluation employs a random assignment design to compare the outcomes of adult learners who receive the literacy instruction to those who receive the instruction that is normally provided through adult education programs.

Requests for copies of the proposed information collection request may be accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov , by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3580. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4537. Requests may also be electronically mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202-401-0920. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request.

Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov . Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.

Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose of this meeting is to provide advice and guidance with respect to the basic energy sciences research program.

Tentative Agenda: Agenda will include discussions of the following:

• News from DOE.

• News from the Office of Basic Energy Sciences.

• Update on COV of the Chemical Sciences, Geosciences and Biosciences Division.

• Reports of the BESAC Grand Challenges Subcommittee.

• Update of the Linac Coherent Light Source.

• Update on Nanotechnology.

Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. If you would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral statements regarding any of the items on the agenda, you should contact Karen Talamini at (301) 903-6594 (fax) or karen.talamini@science.doe.gov (e-mail). You must make your request for an oral statement at least 5 business days prior to the meeting. Reasonable provision will be made to include the scheduled oral statements on the agenda. The Chairperson of the Committee will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Public comment will follow the 10-minute rule. This notice is being published less than 15 days before the date of the meeting due to programmatic issues.

Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available for public review and copying within 30 days 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 through Friday, except holidays.

Purpose of the Board: To make recommendations to the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy regarding goals and objectives, programmatic and administrative policies, and to otherwise carry out the Board's responsibilities as designated in the State Energy Efficiency Programs Improvement Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-440).

Tentative Agenda: Update members on routine business matters.

Public Participation: The teleconference is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Members of the public who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Gary Burch at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests to make oral comments must be received five days prior to the conference call; reasonable provision will be made to include requested topic(s) on the agenda. The Chair of the Board is empowered to conduct the call in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. This notice is being published less than 15 days before the date of the meeting due to programmatic issues.

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. Forms EIA-1, 3, 4, 5, 6Q, 7A, 8A and 20, “Coal Program Package.”

2. Energy Information Administration.

3. OMB Number 1905-0167.

4. Revision and three-year extension.

5. Mandatory.

6. The coal surveys collect data on coal production, consumption, stocks, prices, imports and exports. Data are published in various EIA publications. Respondents are manufacturing plants, producers of coke, purchasers and distributors of coal, coal mining operators, and coal-consuming electric utilities.

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

8. 4,474 hours.

Due to the changing structure of the electric power industry over the course of the last several years, the EIA-20 standby survey will include independent power producers in the event of an emergency, thus activating the use of the survey to provide information on the primary sources of electric power in the U.S.

Please refer to the supporting statement as well as the proposed forms and instructions for more information about the purpose, who must report, when to report, where to submit, the elements to be reported, detailed instructions, provisions for confidentiality, and uses (including possible nonstatistical uses) of the information. For instructions on obtaining materials, see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

The information collected under the requirements of FERC-566 “Annual Report of a Utility's Twenty Largest Purchasers” (OMB No. 1902-0114) is used by the Commission to implement the statutory provisions of section 305 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), (16 U.S.C. 825d), as amended by Title II, section 211 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA). FPA section 305—Officials Dealing in Securities; Interlocking Directorates—requires that each public utility annually “publish” a list, pursuant to rules prescribed by the Commission, of the purchasers of the 20 largest annual amounts of electric energy sold by such public utility during any one of three previous calendar years. The required filers, the filing deadline, the specific information to be filed, and the requirement to publicly provide the information are all specifically mandated by the FPA. The Commission is not empowered to amend or waive these statutory requirements. Requirements the Commission has the authority to amend, such as the filing format and method, are found in the Commission's regulations in 18 CFR 46.3.

The FPA requires public utilities to publish and file with the Commission a list of their largest customers and the identification of public utility board members who are also board members of the utility's largest customers. 1 This data on interlocking directorates allows the Commission to inquire into and determine whether public or private interests will be adversely affected by the holding of such positions.

Under the current OMB authorization, the Commission requires the filing of FERC-566 in hardcopy. However, the Commission has directed under RM07-16-000  2 to allow for the voluntary electronic submittal of many required filings, including the FERC-566, which is expected by early 2008. The implementation of eFiling 7.0 would eliminate the current burden of mailing or hand-delivering these filings in hardcopy.

Action: The Commission is requesting a three-year extension of the current expiration date and proposes to make the filing of the FERC-566 more efficient by the end of 2007 under RM07-16-000.

Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for this collection is estimated as:

The reporting burden includes the total time, effort, or financial resources expended to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide the information including: (1) Reviewing instructions; (2) developing, acquiring, installing, and using technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, verifying, processing, maintaining, disclosing and providing information; (3) adjusting existing ways to comply with any previously applicable filing instructions and requirements; (4) training personnel to respond to a collection of information; (5) searching data sources; (6) completing and reviewing the collection of information; and (7) transmitting or otherwise disclosing the information.

The cost estimate for respondents is based upon salaries for professional and clerical support, as well as direct and indirect overhead costs. Direct costs include all costs directly attributable to providing this information, such as administrative costs and the cost for information technology. Indirect or overhead costs are costs incurred by an organization in support of its mission. These costs apply to activities which benefit the whole organization rather than any one particular function or activity.

Comments are invited on: (1) The accuracy of the agency's burden estimate of the proposed information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used to calculate the reporting burden; (2) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (3) the proposal to provide the option to collect FERC-566 electronically during 2008, as indicated under RM07-16-000 000 and any reduction in burden that option might allow filers.

The information collected under the requirements of FERC Form 561 “Annual Report of Interlocking Positions” (OMB No. 1902-0099) is used by the Commission to implement the statutory provisions of section 305 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), as amended by Title II, section 211 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA) (16 U.S.C. 825d). FPA section 305—Officials Dealing in Securities—Interlocking Directorates requires the annual reporting by public utility officers and directors of similar types of positions they hold with financial institutions, insurance companies, utility equipment and fuel providers, and with any of an electric utility's twenty largest purchasers of electric energy. 1 The FPA mandates the information that must be filed, the required filers, the requirement to make the information available to the public, and the filing deadline. The Commission is not empowered to amend or waive these statutory requirements. Requirements the Commission has the authority to amend, such as filing format and method, can be found in 18 CFR part 46 and section 131.31.

Without this information collection, the Commission and the public would not be able to inquire into and determine whether public or private interests will be adversely affected by the holding of such positions.

Under the current OMB authorization, the Commission requires the FERC Form 561 filings in hardcopy with an optional diskette containing a spreadsheet of the interlocking directorate information. However, the Commission has indicated under RM07-16-000, 2 to allow for the voluntary electronic submittal of many required filings, including the FERC Form 561, by early 2008. Through eFiling 7.0, the form will be filed in Adobe Acrobat with an optional electronic spreadsheet attachment. Implementation of eFiling 7.0 will eliminate the current burden of mailing and hand-delivering the filings in hardcopy.

Action: The Commission is requesting a three-year extension of the current expiration date, and proposes to make the filing of the FERC Form 561 more efficient during 2008 under RM07-16-000.

Burden Statement: Public reporting burden for this collection is estimated as:

The estimated total cost to respondents is $21,516. [499 hours divided by 2080 hours  3 per year, times $126,384  4 equals $30,320]. The cost per respondent is $15 (rounded off).

EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On November 27, 2007 (72 FR 66165), EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received one comment during the comment period, which is addressed in the ICR. Any additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice.

EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OA-2007-0933, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Office of Environmental Information Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202-566-1744, and the telephone number for the Environmental Information Docket is 202-566-9744.

Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select “docket search,” then key in the docket ID number identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing at www.regulations.gov as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the electronic docket, go to www.regulations.gov.

Title: Confidential Financial Disclosure Form for Special Government Employees Serving on Federal Advisory Committees at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Renewal).

ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2260.02, OMB Control No. 2090-0029.

ICR status: This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on 02/29/2008. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. 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. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.

Abstract: The purpose of this information collection request is to assist the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) in selecting Federal advisory committee members who will be appointed as Special Government Employees (SGEs), mostly to EPA's scientific and technical committees. To select SGE members as efficiently and cost effectively as possible, the Agency needs to evaluate potential conflicts of interest before a candidate is hired as an SGE and appointed as a member to a committee by EPA's Administrator or Deputy Administrator. Agency officials developed the “Confidential Financial Disclosure Form for Special Government Employees Serving on Federal Advisory Committees at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,” also referred to as Form 3110-48, for a greater inclusion of information to discover any potential conflicts of interest as recommended by the Government Accountability Office.

Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average one hour per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

Respondents/Affected Entities: Candidates for membership as Special Government Employees (SGEs) on EPA federal advisory committees.

Estimated total number of potential respondents: 300.

Frequency of response: Annual.

Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 1.

Estimated total annual burden hours: 300 hours.

Estimated total annual costs: $33,000. There are no capital or O&M costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is an increase of 24 hours in the total estimated burden currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR Burdens. The burden estimates have been changed to reflect an expected increase of the number of respondents (from 276 to 300), as well as an increase of respondents costs to complete the form, to cover the next 3 years.

General Information

Any member of the public interested in receiving a draft BOSC agenda or making a presentation at any of the meetings may contact Monica Rodia, the Designated Federal Officer, via any of the contact methods listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above. In general, each individual making an oral presentation will be limited to a total of three minutes.

Proposed agenda items for the meetings include, but are not limited to: Teleconference #1: discussion of each of the submissions to the charge questions used to develop the draft report; Teleconference #2: a review of subsequent changes used to create the final draft, discussion of changes to the final draft and approval of the report. The meetings are open to the public. The subcommittee roster and charge can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/osp/bosc/subcomm-gc_mid.htm .

Information on Services for Individuals with Disabilities: For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Monica Rodia at (202) 564-8322 or rodia.monica@epa.gov. To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Monica Rodia, preferably at least 10 days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0986.

Title: Competitive Carrier Line Count Report.

Form Number: FCC Form 525.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 1,300 respondents; 4,753 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 0.5-6 hours.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits.

Frequency of Response: On occasion, quarterly and annual reporting requirements; third party disclosure requirement.

Total Annual Burden: 3,707 hours.

Total Annual Cost: $0.00.

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impacts.

Nature of Extent of Confidentiality : The Commission is not requesting that the respondents submit confidential information to the FCC. Respondents may, however, request confidential treatment for information they believe to be confidential under 47 CFR 0.459 of the Commission's rules.

Needs and Uses : The Commission will use the information requirements to determine whether and to what extent rural telecommunications carriers and competitive eligible telecommunications carriers (ETCs) providing the data are eligible to receive universal service support. This information includes loop counts, by disaggregation zone, for rural incumbent carriers, which is used to calculate the per-line high-cost universal service support amount available to competitive ETCs serving their territories. It also includes loop counts, by disaggregation zone or unbundled network element zone, for competitive ETCs, which is used to calculate the total high-cost universal service support amount available to competitive ETCs. This competitive ETC loop count requirement includes areas served by incumbent non-rural carriers, in addition to incumbent rural carriers, due to the consolidation of information collections included in a previous revision. Additionally, this information collection requires states to certify that incumbent rural carriers and competitive ETCs are using the high-cost universal service support only for the provision, maintenance, and upgrading of facilities and services for which the support is intended. Finally, this information collection includes cost data filed by incumbent rural carriers on an as-needed basis to establish eligibility for the safety net and safety valve high-cost universal service support mechanisms.

The Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee: The thirteen-member Committee is chaired by William Haskell, PhD, Professor of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine. The Vice-Chair is Miriam Nelson, PhD, Director, John Hancock Center for Physical Activity and Nutrition, Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University. Other members of the Committee include Rod K. Dishman, PhD, Professor of Exercise Science and Director, Exercise Psychology Laboratory, Department of Kinesiology, University of Georgia; Edward Howley, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Department of Exercise, Sport, and Leisure Studies, University of Tennessee; Wendy Kohrt, PhD, Professor of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center; William Kraus, M.D., Professor, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine; I-Min Lee, M.D., Sc.D., Associate Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Associate Professor of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health; Anne McTiernan, M.D., PhD, Director, Prevention Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; Russell Pate, PhD, Associate Vice President for Health Sciences, Office of Research and Health Sciences and Professor, Department of Exercise Science, University of South Carolina; Kenneth Powell, M.D., M.P.H., Public Health and Epidemiologic Consultant; Judith Regensteiner, PhD, Professor Department of Medicine and Director, Center for Women's Health Research, University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center; James Rimmer, PhD, Professor and Director, National Center on Physical Activity and Disability, Department of Disability and Human Development, University of Illinois at Chicago; and Antronette Yancey, M.D., M.P.H., Professor, Department of Health Services, University of California at Los Angeles School of Public Health.

Purpose of the Meeting: The Advisory Committee will present and discuss the final report and their recommendations to the Secretary. The report to the Secretary will outline the scientific background and rationale for the issuance of Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans. The report will also identify areas where further scientific research is needed. The Committee's recommendations will be utilized by the Department to prepare the final Physical Activity Guidelines. The intent is to develop physical activity recommendations for all Americans that will be tailored as necessary for specific subgroups of the population. The Committee will also hear oral comments from the public.

Public Participation at Meeting: Members of the public are invited to observe the Advisory Committee meeting. On February 29, a portion of the meeting agenda will be allocated for committee members to hear public comments. All individuals wishing to observe and/or make comments at the meeting must indicate their intention to do so by pre-registering at http://www.health.gov/PAguidelines. Due to time constraints, a limited number of scheduled time slots for public comments will be made available on a first-come-first-served basis through pre-registration. Comments will also be limited to 1-2 minutes per individual. Attendees that do not pre-register to make comments cannot be guaranteed an opportunity to have his or her comments heard during the meeting. Individuals are encouraged to submit their comments in writing in advance of the meeting through the pre-registration process. Additionally, individuals wishing to only submit written comments may also do so through pre-registration or by e-mail to PA.Guidelines@hhs.gov. Please note there will be no public comment session during the Advisory Committee meeting on February 28. Registrations must be completed by February 22. Space for the meeting is limited and registrations will be accepted until maximum room capacity is reached. A waiting list will be maintained should registrations exceed room capacity. Individuals on the waiting list will be contacted as additional space for the meeting becomes available.

Registrants for the Physical Activity Advisory Guidelines Committee meeting must present valid government- issued photo identification (i.e., driver's license) and should arrive 45 minutes prior to the start of the meeting to clear through security. Security will provide registered attendees badges that must be worn at all times and returned to security prior to exiting the Hubert Humphrey Building.

Registration questions may be directed to Experient at PAguidelines@experient-inc.com (e-mail), (703) 525-8333 x3346 (phone) or (703) 525-8557 (fax).

FDA is announcing the availability of a draft document entitled “Guidance for Industry: Validation of Growth-Based Rapid Microbiological Methods for Sterility Testing of Cellular and Gene Therapy Products,” dated February 2008. This draft guidance applies to somatic cellular therapy and gene therapy products. This draft guidance does not apply directly to human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue products (HCT/Ps) which are regulated solely under section 361 of the Public Health Service Act as described under 21 CFR 1271.10, or HCT/Ps which are regulated as medical devices under 21 CFR part 820. Such products are not subject to the sterility testing provision in § 610.12 (21 CFR 610.12), or to the requirement in 21 CFR 610.9 to demonstrate that an alternative RMM is equivalent to the sterility method specified in the regulations. However, HCT/P and device establishments seeking to validate an RMM may find these recommendations useful.

The principles of RMM validation described in this draft guidance apply only to growth-based RMMs. Growth-based RMMs, like traditional methods of detecting viable microorganisms as described in § 610.12, rely on the ability to recover and detect organisms from the product and demonstrate their viability by multiplication in liquid media. The specific recommendations in this document may not be applicable for non-growth-based RMMs which detect microbiological surrogates. This draft guidance focuses on RMMs with qualitative results (i.e., detection of microorganisms). If the RMM does not have the capability to speciate microorganisms, an additional method for speciation will be needed for investigation of detected contaminants. Early discussions with product review staff at CBER are encouraged for individuals intending to use or develop an RMM at any time in the product lifecycle using growth-based, viability-based, surrogate-based, or RMMs that provide quantitative results.

The draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent FDA's current thinking on this topic. 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 requirement of the applicable statutes and regulations.

This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of information found in FDA Regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information to which this draft guidance refers are covered by 21 CFR parts 601 (on BLAs) and 312 (on INDs), and were approved under OMB Control No. 0910-0338 and 0910-0014, respectively.

The draft guidance is being distributed for comment purposes only and is not intended for implementation at this time. Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES ) written or electronic comments regarding the draft guidance. Submit a single copy of electronic comments or two paper copies of any mailed comments, except that individuals may submit one paper copy. Comments are to be identified with the docket number found in the brackets in the heading of this document. A copy of the draft guidance and received comments are available for public examination in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

Please note that on January 15, 2008, the FDA Web site transitioned to the Federal Dockets Management System (FDMS). FDMS is a Government-wide, electronic docket management system. Electronic submissions will be accepted by FDA through FDMS only.

Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft guidance at either http://www.fda.gov/cber/guidelines.htm or http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/default.htm .

FDA; the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health; and the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of the Secretary and Office of Public Health and Science are co-sponsoring this public workshop. The primary goal of the workshop is to discuss what is known about the safety of HBOCs, and possible paths forward for development of these products. Topics to be discussed on April 29, 2008, will include: (1) Introduction to the issues and unmet needs surrounding HBOC development, (2) overview of the physiology and chemistry of hemoglobin in HBOCs, (3) nitric oxide physiology and pathophysiology related to HBOCs, (4) review of nonclinical studies of HBOCs, (5) risk-benefit considerations in clinical trials of HBOCs, (6) proposed clinical indications for HBOCs, and (7) industry's experience with HBOC clinical trials. Panel deliberations on the safety and efficacy of HBOCs in various clinical settings and potential mechanisms of effects on organs will be the main topics of discussion on April 30, 2008. We also will discuss future development pathways with a focus on the use and development of animal models, biochemical redesign approaches, and alternative clinical designs where benefit exceeds risk.

Please note that on January 15, 2008, the FDA Web site transitioned to the Federal Dockets Management System (FDMS). FDMS is a Government-wide, electronic docket management system. Electronic submissions will be accepted by FDA through FDMS only.

Transcripts : Transcripts of the public workshop may be requested in writing from the Freedom of Information Office (HFI-35), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, rm. 6-30, Rockville, MD 20857, approximately 15 working days after the public workshop at a cost of 10 cents per page. A transcript of the public workshop will be available on the Internet at http://www.fda.gov/cber/minutes/workshop-min.htm .

Under the authorities that established the ACICBL, the Federal Advisory Committee Act of October 6, 1972 (Pub. L. 92-463), and section 2119 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 00aa-19, as added by Pub. L. 99-660 and amended, HRSA is requesting nominations for five (5) voting members.

The ACICBL provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary and to the Congress concerning policy, program development and other matters of significance related to interdisciplinary, community-based training grant programs authorized under sections 751-756, Title VII, Part D of the Public Health Service Act. The ACICBL prepares an annual report describing the activities conducted during the fiscal year, identifying findings and developing recommendations to enhance Title VII Interdisciplinary, Community-Based Training Grant Programs. The Annual Report is submitted to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and ranking members of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions of the Senate, and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives.

The Department of Health and Human Services is requesting a total of five (5) nominations for voting members of the ACICBL from schools that have administered or are currently administering awards from the following programs: Allied Health—one (1) nominee, Geriatric Education and Training Programs—one (1) nominee, and Health Education and Training Centers (HETCs)—one (1) nominee. Nominations are also requested for two (2) students, residents, and/or fellow representatives.

The legislation governing this Committee requires a fair balance of health professionals who represent the general population with regard to a broad geographic distribution and an evenness of urban and rural areas, along with professionals who are women and minorities. As such, the pool of appropriately qualified nominations should reflect these requirements to the degree possible.

Interested individuals may nominate multiple qualified professionals for membership to the ACICBL to allow the Secretary a diverse listing of highly qualified potential candidates. Nominees willing to serve as members of the ACICBL should not have an appearance of a conflict of interest that would preclude their participation. Potential candidates will be asked to provide detailed information concerning consultancies, research grants, or contracts to permit an evaluation of possible sources of conflicts of interest. In addition, a curriculum vitae and a statement of interest will be required of the nominee to support experience working with Title VII Interdisciplinary, Community-Based Training Grant Programs, expertise in the field, and personal desire in participating on a National Advisory Committee. Qualified candidates will be invited to serve a two or three-year term. All nominations must be received no later than March 12, 2008.

Notice is hereby given that on February 5, 2008, pursuant to subpart B of part 177, Customs Regulations (19 CFR part 177, subpart B), CBP issued a final determination concerning the country of origin of certain military-grade flashlights and their replacement parts to be offered to the United States Government under an undesignated government procurement contract. The CBP ruling number is H017620. This final determination was issued at the request of Energizer Battery, Inc. under procedures set forth at 19 CFR part 177, subpart B, which implements Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511-18).

The final determination concluded that, based upon the facts presented, assembly in the United States of various foreign-origin components with a U.S.-origin light emitting diode (LED) substantially transforms both the subject flashlight and its replacement part into products of the United States. Therefore, the country of origin of both the military-grade flashlight and the replacement part is the United States for purposes of U.S. Government procurement.

Section 177.29, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.29), provides that notice of final determinations shall be published in the Federal Register within 60 days of the date the final determination is issued. Section 177.30, CBP Regulations (19 CFR 177.30), states that any party-at-interest, as defined in 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial review of a final determination within 30 days of publication of such determination in the Federal Register .

Category: Marking.

This is in response to your letter dated September 13, 2007, requesting a final determination on behalf of Energizer Battery, Inc. (“Energizer”), pursuant to subpart B of part 177, Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) Regulations (19 CFR 177.21 et seq. ). Under these regulations, which implement Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (codified at 19 U.S.C. 2511 et seq. ), CBP issues country of origin advisory rulings and final determinations on whether an article is or would be a product of a designated country or instrumentality for the purpose of granting waivers of certain “Buy American” restrictions in U.S. law or practice for products offered for sale to the U.S. Government.

This final determination concerns the country of origin of a military-grade flashlight and replacement part. We note that Energizer is a party-at-interest within the meaning of 19 CFR 177.22(d)(1) and is entitled to request this final determination. Confidential treatment for certain business information identified in your request for a final determination will be extended in accordance with your request. Photographs of the flashlight and the replacement part, at various stages of manufacture, were submitted with your request.

You advise that Energizer intends to sell the subject flashlight to consumers and to the U.S. military. A subcomponent of the flashlight, the lens head subassembly, may be sold separately as a replacement part for the subject flashlights. You indicate that the flashlight has many features that render it suitable for military use. The flashlight provides long-lasting light emitting diode (“LED”) lighting and infrared lighting, the latter of which is invisible to the naked eye. It has a heavy-duty design and can withstand the impact of being dropped twenty or more feet. In addition, it can also be clipped to a standard issue military vest.

Both the subject military flashlight and the replacement lens head subassembly are manufactured in the United States from U.S. and foreign-origin components. The following operations occur within the United States:

1. The LED is manufactured to Energizer's specifications by a third party in the United States.

2. The LED is mounted to a foreign-origin “hex board” by another third party in the United States and shipped to an Energizer facility in Vermont.

3. A foreign-origin, partially assembled half lens and separate printed circuit board (“PCB”) are imported to Energizer's Vermont facility. At the facility, the LED/hex board subassembly is mounted to a heat sink on the half lens with the use of two small screws.

4. Wires are spot soldered to the positive and negative terminals of the LED.

5. The following foreign-origin components are assembled together: a lens reflector, lens, and rubber gasket.

6. The resulting subassembly from step 5 is attached to the LED and half lens to form the lens head subassembly that will be used either in the flashlight or sold separately as a replacement part.

7. The lens head subassembly's wiring, soldering, and physical connections are inspected.

1. If the lens head subassembly described above will be incorporated into a finished flashlight, its wires are routed through a foreign-origin plastic body or case to corresponding battery contacts.

2. Foreign-origin gaskets are attached for weatherproofing.

3. The second half of the body or case is attached with six screws.

4. Final testing is performed, which includes the use of devices capable of perceiving infrared light.

You explain that all final products undergo testing of their white, red, blue and infrared lights by the use of an infrared detection device. Manufacturing and inspection staff at the Vermont facility will use troubleshooting skills to identify and, if possible, correct any mechanical or electronic deficiencies revealed by the testing. In addition, you state that Energizer has expended significant resources in connection with the design exploration, development, detailing, and modeling of this product in the United States.

What are the countries of origin of the flashlight and the replacement part for purposes of U.S. Government procurement?

Pursuant to subpart B of part 177, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.21 et seq. ), which implements Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (“TAA,” codified at 19 U.S.C. 2511 et seq. ), CBP issues country of origin advisory rulings and final determinations on whether an article is or would be a product of a designated country or instrumentality for the purpose of granting waivers of certain “Buy American” restrictions in U.S. law or practice for products offered for sale to the U.S. Government.

Under the rule of origin set forth at 19 U.S.C. 2518(4)(B):

In rendering advisory rulings and final determinations for purposes of U.S. Government procurement, CBP applies the provisions of subpart B of part 177 consistent with the Federal Procurement Regulations. See 19 CFR 177.21. In this regard, CBP recognizes that the Federal Procurement Regulations restrict the U.S. Government's purchase of products to U.S.-made or designated country end products for acquisitions subject to the TAA. See 48 CFR 25.403(c)(1). The Federal Procurement Regulations define “U.S.-made end product” as:

Therefore, the question presented in this final determination is whether, as a result of the operations performed in the United States, the flashlight and replacement part are substantially transformed into products of the United States.

In determining whether the combining of parts or materials constitutes a substantial transformation, the determinative issue is the extent of the operations performed and whether the parts lose their identity and become an integral part of the new article. Belcrest Linens v. United States, 6 Ct. Int'l Trade 204, 573 F. Supp. 1149 (1983), aff'd, 741 F.2d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1984). If the manufacturing or combining process is a minor one that leaves the identity of the imported article intact, a substantial transformation has not occurred. Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States, 3 Ct. Int'l Trade 220, 542 F. Supp. 1026 (1982). Assembly operations that are minimal or simple, as opposed to complex or meaningful, generally will not result in a substantial transformation. See C.S.D. 80-111, C.S.D. 85-25, C.S.D. 89-110, C.S.D. 89-118, C.S.D. 90-51, and C.S.D. 90-97.

In order to determine whether a substantial transformation occurs when components of various origins are assembled to form completed articles, CBP considers the totality of the circumstances and makes such decisions on a case-by-case basis. The country of origin of the article's components, the extent of the processing that occurs within a given country, and whether such processing renders a product with a new name, character, and use are primary considerations in such cases. Additionally, facts such as resources expended on product design and development, the extent and nature of post-assembly inspection procedures, and the worker skill required during the actual manufacturing process will be considered when analyzing whether a substantial transformation has occurred; however, no one such factor is determinative.

You assert that the U.S.-origin LED imparts the essential character to the flashlight and the replacement lens head subassembly. In addition to having a high monetary value relative to the other components, it generates the primary light in both products. The LED is manufactured to Energizer's specifications in order to provide certain desirable characteristics regarding the light's color, intensity, durability, coverage, and efficiency. You also note that the foreign-origin reflector is engineered to maximize these particular characteristics.

You claim that as a result of the manufacturing, assembly, and testing processes performed in the United States, the foreign-origin components undergo a substantial transformation such that both the flashlight and the replacement lens head subassembly become products of the United States for purposes of U.S. Government procurement.

In Headquarters Ruling Letter (“HRL”) 563236, dated July 6, 2005, CBP examined whether multi-line telephone sets assembled in Mexico from parts of Mexican and foreign origin were products of Mexico for purposes of U.S. Government procurement. Among the foreign components imported into Mexico for the assembly of the telephone sets were printed circuit assemblies (“PCAs”) from Malaysia. The handsets, liquid crystal displays, microphone assemblies, and stands incorporated into the telephones were of Mexican origin. In reaching a determination that the telephone sets were products of Mexico, CBP noted that the telephone sets were comprised of certain essential parts (such as the handsets) that were of Mexican origin. Moreover, many of the components lacked any functionality prior to their assembly within the telephone set.

In HRL 962528, dated February 18, 2000, CBP considered the eligibility of a rechargeable power failure light for duty free treatment under the Generalized System of Preferences. In that case, the power failure light was assembled in Thailand from various Thai and foreign origin components, including a PCB assembled in Thailand. CBP found that the process of assembling various components into a PCB resulted in a substantial transformation of the imported components. Moreover, CBP found that the assembly of the PCB with a bulb holder assembly, a plug blade assembly, and the upper and lower housing assemblies to make the finished power failure light substantially transformed the PCB.

Based on the totality of the circumstances and consistent with the CBP rulings cited above, we find that the various imported components (individual parts and subassemblies) are substantially transformed as a result of the operations performed in the United States to produce both the replacement lens head subassembly and the finished flashlight. Under each manufacturing scenario, the imported components lose their individual identities and become an integral part of a new article possessing a new name, character, and use. In support of this conclusion, we agree that the U.S.-origin LED imparts the essential character to both the replacement part and the finished product, as it generates the primary light of both products. We also recognize that Energizer has expended significant resources in connection with the design and development of the subject flashlight in the United States. Moreover, the U.S.-origin LED and the labor performed in the United States during the assembly and testing operations represent a majority of the costs associated with the production of both the replacement lens head subassembly and the finished flashlight.

Based upon the specific facts of this case, we find that the imported components of the flashlight and replacement lens head subassembly are substantially transformed as a result of the described manufacturing operations performed in the United States. The country of origin of the flashlight and the replacement lens head subassembly is the United States.

Sincerely,

Section 224 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715o) provides that debentures issued under the Act with respect to an insured loan or mortgage (except for debentures issued pursuant to section 221(g)(4) of the Act) will bear interest at the rate in effect on the date the commitment to insure the loan or mortgage was issued, or the date the loan or mortgage was endorsed (or initially endorsed if there are two or more endorsements) for insurance, whichever rate is higher. This provision is implemented in HUD's regulations at 24 CFR 203.405, 203.479, 207.259(e)(6), and 220.830. These regulatory provisions state that the applicable rates of interest will be published twice each year as a notice in the Federal Register .

Section 224 further provides that the interest rate on these debentures will be set from time to time by the Secretary of HUD, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, in an amount not in excess of the annual interest rate determined by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant to a statutory formula based on the average yield of all outstanding marketable Treasury obligations of maturities of 15 or more years.

The Secretary of the Treasury (1) has determined, in accordance with the provisions of section 224, that the statutory maximum interest rate for the period beginning January 1, 2008, is 4 1/2 percent; and (2) has approved the establishment of the debenture interest rate by the Secretary of HUD at 4 1/2 percent for the 6-month period beginning January 1, 2008. This interest rate will be the rate borne by debentures issued with respect to any insured loan or mortgage (except for debentures issued pursuant to section 221(g)(4)) with insurance commitment or endorsement date (as applicable) within the first 6 months of 2008.

For convenience of reference, HUD is publishing the following chart of debenture interest rates applicable to mortgages committed or endorsed since January 1, 1980:

Section 215 of Division G, Title II of Pub. L. 108-199, enacted January 23, 2004 (HUD's 2004 Appropriations Act) amended section 224 of the Act, to change the debenture interest rate for purposes of calculating certain insurance claim payments made in cash. Therefore, for all claims paid in cash on mortgages insured under section 203 or 234 of the National Housing Act and endorsed for insurance after January 23, 2004, the debenture interest rate will be the monthly average yield, for the month in which the default on the mortgage occurred, on United States Treasury Securities adjusted to a constant maturity of 10 years, as found in Federal Reserve Statistical Release H-15. The Federal Housing Administration has codified this provision in HUD regulations at 24 CFR 203.405(b) and 24 CFR 203.479(b).

Section 221(g)(4) of the Act provides that debentures issued pursuant to that paragraph (with respect to the assignment of an insured mortgage to the Secretary) will bear interest at the “going Federal rate” in effect at the time the debentures are issued. The term “going Federal rate” is defined to mean the interest rate that the Secretary of the Treasury determines, pursuant to a statutory formula based on the average yield on all outstanding marketable Treasury obligations of 8-to 12-year maturities, for the 6-month periods of January through June and July through December of each year. Section 221(g)(4) is implemented in the HUD regulations at 24 CFR 221.255 and 24 CFR 221.790.

The Secretary of the Treasury has determined that the interest rate to be borne by debentures issued pursuant to section 221(g)(4) during the 6-month period beginning January 1, 2008, is 4 1/8 percent.

HUD expects to publish its next notice of change in debenture interest rates in July 2008.

The subject matter of this notice falls within the categorical exemption from HUD's environmental clearance procedures set forth in 24 CFR 50.19(c)(6). For that reason, no environmental finding has been prepared for this notice.

I. Submission or Resubmission of Applications with PureEdge

On December 11, 2007 (72 FR 70458), HUD published its FY2007 NOFA for the Public Housing Neighborhood Networks Program and posted it to Grants.gov , making applications available in both PureEdge and Adobe 8.1.1 formats. HUD has recently determined that applications submitted using the Adobe Application Package posted to Grants.gov will cause problems during submission if any individuals working on the application have not used Adobe 8.1.1 to complete the application. Specifically, if any individual working on the application does not use Adobe 8.1.1, the application becomes corrupt and not accepted by Grants.gov. To ensure there are no issues with applicants being able to successfully submit their application, HUD is withdrawing the Adobe application package (COMP ID NN-01) from the Grants.gov Web site but leaving the PureEdge package in place. Applicants who have signed up for the Grants.gov notification service will be automatically notified when the Adobe package has been removed. Applicants that have not signed up for the notification service should check the Grants.gov Web site at https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/forms_apps_idx.html for the modification to the announcement posting following publication of this Notice. Applicants must use the PureEdge package; Adobe packages will be rejected. Applicants can download the PureEdge version from the Grants.gov Web site at: https://apply07.grants.gov/apply/forms_apps_idx.html . Applicants who were working with the PureEdge application (Comp ID: NN-PUREEDGE-FORMAT) do not have to download again. Only those working with the Adobe application (Comp ID: NN-0) must download the PureEdge version.

HUD is extending the Neighborhood Networks deadline date to March 14, 2008, to provide applicants the opportunity and time to download the PureEdge application, complete the application including all attachments and faxes, and submit the application to Grants.gov in time to meet the new deadline date. Applicants that previously submitted a PureEdge application do not have to resubmit a new application, unless they want to add information revising the original submission. Applicants that attempted to submit using Adobe 8.1.1 must download the PureEdge application format and resubmit the application plus all attachments and faxes.

Applicants filing a revised application electronically must also submit a new set of any documents faxed to HUD but should do so only after they submit an entire, complete application to Grants.gov and after the applicant receives validation of the application from Grants.gov . Applicants should allow 48 hours for validation of their revised application to occur and then resend the faxed material. This process will ensure that the resubmitted faxes are associated with the resubmitted application. Failure to follow these instructions will result in faxes not being associated to the most recent application and therefore not available to HUD reviewers. HUD will not search previously submitted applications for faxed materials.

Executive Order 13112 on Invasive Species (EO 13112) was issued in 1999 and established the National Invasive Species Council (NISC) which is co-chaired by the Secretaries of the Interior, Agriculture and Commerce. EO 13112 directed the Secretary of the Interior to establish an Invasive Species Advisory Committee (ISAC) composed of diverse nonfederal stakeholders to advise NISC. The broad mission of NISC is to provide planning, coordination and national leadership to prevent and control the harmful impacts of invasive species to the economy, the environment as well as animal and human health.

Section 5 of EO 13112 directed NISC to issue the National Invasive Species Management Plan, as well as to revise and update the Plan on a regular basis. The first version of the National Invasive Species Management Plan, “Meeting the Challenge” , was issued in January of 2001 (2001 Plan). The purpose of the Plan was to provide a general blueprint for federal action in coordination with State, local, Tribal, and private programs and international cooperation to prevent the introduction of invasive species, provide for their control and minimize the economic, environmental and human health impacts.

This document is the first revision of the 2001 Plan, as mandated by EO 13112. The 2008-2012 National Invasive Species Management Plan (2008 Plan) will provide direction for federal efforts (including overall strategy and objectives) to prevent, control and minimize invasive species and their impacts within the next five (5) fiscal years (2008 through 2012). If necessary, it may be updated more frequently to reflect changes in circumstances, agency plans and priorities. NISC member agencies, ISAC members, NISC staff, stakeholders and other experts have provided input in drafting this revision, which is intended to replace the 2001 Plan.

Federal, State, local and Tribal governments, as well as the private sector, have taken significant steps to meet the challenges posed by invasive species. These steps set the stage for the 2008 Plan and provide direction and focus. An estimated 67% of the 2001 Plan's 57 action items have been completed or are in progress. However significant challenges remain and much remains to be done to prevent and control invasive species in a coordinated and cost efficient manner. Long-range strategic planning, consistent with other government agencies' strategic plans is necessary to address complex invasive species issues. The 2008 Plan establishes five, long-term Strategic Goals that focus Federal efforts in the areas of invasive species work related to:

(1) Prevention;

(2) Early Detection and Rapid Response;

(3) Control and Management;

(4) Restoration; and

(5) Organizational Collaboration.

The Strategic Goals are ongoing and serve as guideposts for managing invasive species. Each Strategic Goal has an associated Strategic Action Plan with long-term Objectives and shorter-term Implementation Tasks and Performance Elements. Where practicable, Implementation Tasks define specific Performance Elements that can be used to gauge progress. Work in Research, Information and Data Management and International Cooperation (which were addressed in separate sections in the 2001 Plan) are elements critical to achieving each of the five Strategic Goals and are included in the pertinent sections of the 2008 Plan.

The 2008 Plan is not a comprehensive list of all Federal invasive species actions. It is a targeted set of priority Strategic Action Plans and Objectives that are intended to be completed in the next five years. The accomplishment of specific Implementation Tasks and Performance Elements will be dependent upon agency budgets, and in some cases, legal or regulatory changes.

Invasive species issues cannot be addressed by Federal programs and actions alone. As reflected in EO 13112, State, local, Tribal and private programs and policies are critical to success. Therefore, receiving public comment on this proposed 2008 Plan is an important component of any strategy to address and reduce the harmful impacts of invasive species.

Submitting Comments: Text of the 2008-2012 National Invasive Species Management Plan is available in PDF format at http://www.invasivespeciesinfo.gov. Printed copies of the Plan may be obtained by mail or e-mail request to the address below. Written comments should be addressed to Lori Williams, NISC Executive Director, U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of the Secretary, National Invasive Species Council (OS/NISC), 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240. Comments can also be e-mailed to invasivespecies@ios.doi.gov. The public comment period for the draft Plan has been extended. Comments must now be received by close of business on March 12, 2008.

This notice is published to comply with the requirement of 25 CFR 151.12(b) that notice be given to the public of the Secretary's decision to acquire land in trust at least 30 days prior to signatory acceptance of the land into trust. The purpose of the 30-day waiting period in 25 CFR 151.12(b) is to afford interested parties the opportunity to seek judicial review of final administrative decisions to take land in trust for Indian tribes and individual Indians before transfer of title to the property occurs. On January 4, 2008, the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs decided to accept approximately 203.5 acres of land into trust for the Elk Valley Rancheria of California under the authority of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, 25 U.S.C. 465. The 203.5 acre parcel is located in Del Norte County, California. The parcel will be used for construction and operation of a class II and class III gaming facility. The real property situated in the County of Del Norte, State of California, is described as follows:

That portion of Section 35, Township 16 North, Range 1 West, Humboldt Meridian, described as follows:

PARCEL 2 as shown on the Parcel Map filed in the office of the County Recorder of Del Norte County, California, on December 28, 1979, in Book 4 of Parcel Maps, page 75.

EXCEPT therefrom those portions thereof conveyed to the County of Del Norte, by deeds recorded October 18,1979, in Book 237, Official Records, page 609, and May 19, 1986, in Book 310, Official Records, page 444.

A 30-foot wide easement for road and utility purposes lying 30 feet westerly of and adjacent to the following described line:

BEGINNING at a point on the west line of Parcel 3 of the land conveyed to Del Norte County by OWEN W. BAUER by deed dated August 31, 1979, said point being North 185.0 feet from the most southwesterly corner of said Parcel 3, and running; thence northerly along westerly lines of Parcels 3 and 2 of the land conveyed to the County of Del Norte by OWEN W. BAUER to the south line of Parcel 1 as said parcel is shown on the parcel map filed for OWEN W. BAUER on December 28, 1979 in Book 4 of Parcel Maps, pages 75 through 78, in the office of the County Recorder of Del Norte County, California.

An easement for water removal purposes on the following described parcel of land.

BEGINNING at a point S 32 degrees 00 minutes 20 seconds W (equals S 30 degrees 36 minutes 09 seconds W true meridian) a distance of 1607.35 feet from the northeast corner of section 34, Township 16 North, Range 1 West, Humboldt Meridian, and running:

(1) Thence South 60 degrees East, 45.21 feet;

(2) Thence South 30 degrees West, 70.00 feet;

(3) Thence North 60 degrees West, 150.00 feet;

(4) Thence North 30 degrees East, 70.00 feet;

(5) Thence South 60 degrees East, 104.79 feet to the point of beginning.

The bearings and distances contained in this easement description are based upon the California Coordinate System, Zone 1, multiply distances by 0.9999742 to obtain ground level distances.

An easement for water pipe lines, said easement to be 20.0 feet in width, lying 10.0 feet on each side of the following described centerline:

BEGINNING at a point S 32 degrees 00 minutes 20 seconds W (equals S 30 degrees 36 minutes 09 seconds W true meridian) a distance of 1607.35 feet from the northeast corner of Section 34, Township 16 North, Range 1 West, Humboldt Meridian, and running:

(1) Thence South 76 degrees 39 minutes 35 seconds East, 153.58 feet;

(2) Thence South 76 degrees 46 minutes 42 seconds East, 206.05 feet;

(3) Thence South 72 degrees 25 minutes 39 seconds East, 153.79 feet;

(4) Thence South 81 degrees 07 minutes 49 seconds East, 162.47 feet;

(5) Thence North 84 degrees 03 minutes 26 seconds East, 158.59 feet;

(6) Thence North 36 degrees 54 minutes 36 seconds East, 75 feet, more or less, to Parcel “2” as said parcel is shown on the parcel map filed for OWEN W. BAUER on December 28, 1979 in Book 4 of Parcel Maps, pages 75 through 78 inclusive, in the office of the County Recorder of Del Norte County, California. The sidelines of this easement shall coincide with the boundary of the land described in Easement “B” hereinabove described on the west and Parcel 2 of said Bauer map on the east.

The bearings and distances contained in this easement description are based upon the California Coordinate System, Zone 1, multiply distances by 0.9999742 to obtain ground level distances. APN: 115-02-28

Title: Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP).

OMB Control Number: 1010-0170.

Abstract: With the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), the Minerals Management Service (MMS) was given responsibility for the Coastal Impact Assistance Program (CIAP) through the amendment of section 31 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1356a, Appendix A).

The CIAP recognizes that impacts from Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas activities fall disproportionately on the coastal states and localities nearest to where the activities occur, and where associated facilities are located. The CIAP legislation appropriates money for eligible states and coastal political subdivisions for coastal restoration/improvement projects. The MMS shall disburse $250 million to eligible producing states and coastal political subdivisions (CPSs) through a grant program. The funds allocated to each state are based on the proportion of qualified OCS revenues offshore the individual state to total qualified OCS revenues from all states. In order to receive funds, the states submit CIAPs detailing how the funds will be expended. Alabama, Alaska, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas are the only eligible states under EPAct. Counties, parishes or equivalent units of government within those states lying all or in part within the coastal zone, as defined by section 304(1) of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) 1972, as amended, are the Coastal Political Subdivisions (CPSs) eligible for CIAP funding, a total of 67 local jurisdictions. All funds will be disbursed through a grant process.

In September 2006, CIAP draft guidelines were written which were then amended in May 2007. As this program has evolved and developed, more information needs to be submitted by the government jurisdictions to meet all the requirements of the CIAP State Plan Guidelines as well as requirements on the procurement contracts. To approve a plan, legislation requires that the Secretary of the Interior must be able to determine that the funds will be used in accordance with EPAct criteria and that projects will use the funds according to the EPAct. To confirm appropriate use of funds, MMS requires affirmation of grantees meeting Federal, state, and local laws and adequate project descriptions.

This information collection request revises the original ICR to include the additional information needed to fulfill the requirements of the MMS CIAP grant program.

We will protect information from respondents considered proprietary under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and its implementing regulations (43 CFR part 2). No items of a sensitive nature are collected. Responses are required to obtain or retain benefits.

Frequency: On occasion.

Estimated Number and Description of Respondents: Approximately 6 states and 67 CPSs.

Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping “Hour” Burden: The currently approved annual reporting burden for this collection is 12,600 hours. The following chart details the individual components and respective hour burden estimates of this ICR. In calculating the burdens, we assumed that respondents perform certain requirements in the normal course of their activities. We consider these to be usual and customary and took that into account in estimating the burden.

Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping “Non-Hour Cost” Burden: We have identified no “non-hour cost” burdens for this collection.

Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. ) provides that an agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Until OMB approves a collection of information, you are not obligated to respond.

Comments: Before submitting an ICR to OMB, PRA section 3506(c)(2)(A) requires each agency “ * * * to provide notice * * * and otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of information * * * ”. Agencies must specifically solicit comments to: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the agency to perform its duties, including whether the information is useful; (b) evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Agencies must also estimate the “non-hour cost” burdens to respondents or recordkeepers resulting from the collection of information. Therefore, if you have costs to generate, maintain, and disclose this information, you should comment and provide your total capital and startup cost components or annual operation, maintenance, and purchase of service components. You should describe the methods you use to estimate major cost factors, including system and technology acquisition, expected useful life of capital equipment, discount rate(s), and the period over which you incur costs. Capital and startup costs include, among other items, computers and software you purchase to prepare for collecting information, monitoring, and record storage facilities. You should not include estimates for equipment or services purchased: (i) Before October 1, 1995; (ii) to comply with requirements not associated with the information collection; (iii) for reasons other than to provide information or keep records for the Government; or (iv) as part of customary and usual business or private practices.

We will summarize written responses to this notice and address them in our submission for OMB approval. As a result of your comments, we will make any necessary adjustments to the burden in our submission to OMB.

Public Comment Procedures: Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

MMS Information Collection Clearance Officer: Arlene Bajusz, (202) 208-7744.

On November 1, 2007, a second five-year review on fresh tomatoes from Mexico was instituted to determine whether termination of the suspended investigation on fresh tomatoes from Mexico would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury (72 FR 61903, November 1, 2007). On November 26, 2007, Mexican tomato growers/exporters accounting for a significant percentage of all fresh tomatoes imported into the United States from Mexico provided written notice to Commerce of their withdrawal from the agreement suspending the antidumping investigation on fresh tomatoes from Mexico. Effective January 18, 2008, the Department of Commerce terminated the suspension agreement, terminated the five-year review of the suspended investigation, and resumed the antidumping investigation on fresh tomatoes from Mexico because the suspension agreement no longer covered substantially all imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico (73 FR 2887, January 16, 2008). Accordingly, effective January 18, 2008, the U.S. International Trade Commission terminated its review and resumed its antidumping investigation involving imports of fresh tomatoes from Mexico (73 FR 5869, January 31, 2008).

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is withdrawing Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.176, “An Approach for Plant-Specific, Risk-Informed Decisionmaking: Graded Quality Assurance,” which was published in August 1998, but has been superseded by subsequent rulemaking.

In November 2004, the NRC promulgated Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) section 50.69, “Risk-informed categorization and treatment of structures, systems, and components for nuclear power reactors,” (69 FR 68008) to permit power reactor licensees and license applicants to implement an alternative regulatory framework with respect to “special treatment,” where special treatment refers to those requirements that provides increased quality assurance beyond normal industrial practices that structures, systems, and components (SSCs) perform their design-basis functions. In support of 10 CFR 50.69, the staff issued RG 1.201, “Guidelines for Categorizing Structures, Systems and Components in Nuclear Power Plants According to Their Safety Significance,” in January 2006 for trial use. This new framework, consisting of the rule along with RG 1.201, has made the guidance in RG 1.176 obsolete.

The withdrawal of RG 1.176 does not, in and of itself, alter any prior or existing licensing commitments based on its use. The current version of RG 1.176 represents a method that is no longer acceptable to the staff. RGs may be withdrawn when their guidance is superseded by congressional action, the methods or techniques described in the RG no longer describe an acceptable approach, or the RG does not provide useful information.

RGs are available for inspection or downloading through the NRC's public Web site under “Regulatory Guides” collection in the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections. RGs are also available for inspection at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), Room O-1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852-2738. The PDR's mailing address is U.S. NRC PDR, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The PDR staff can be reached by telephone at 301-415-4737 or 800-397-4209, by fax at 301-415-3548, and by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

RGs are not copyrighted and NRC approval is not required to reproduce them.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is withdrawing without replacement Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.150, “Ultrasonic Testing of Reactor Vessel Welds During Preservice and Inservice Examinations,” which was published in February 1983, because it has been superseded by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) section 50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(C)(1), “Inservice inspection requirements,” incorporation by reference of an American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) standard.

Specifically, 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(6)(ii)(C)(1) requires both preservice and inservice inspection activities to be performed using personnel, equipment, and procedures qualified in accordance with the ASME, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, section XI, Appendix VIII.

The withdrawal of RG 1.150 does not, in and of itself, alter any prior or existing licensing commitments based on its use. The current version of RG 1.150 represents a method that is no longer acceptable to the staff. RGs may be withdrawn when their guidance is superseded by congressional action, the methods or techniques described in the RG no longer describe an acceptable approach, or the RG does not provide useful information.

RGs are available for inspection or downloading through the NRC's public Web site in the “Regulatory Guides” collection of the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections. RGs are also available for inspection at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), Room O-1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852-2738. The PDR's mailing address is U.S. NRC PDR, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The PDR staff can be reached by telephone at 301-415-4737 or 800-397-4209, by fax at 301-415-3548, and by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

RGs are not copyrighted and NRC approval is not required to reproduce them.

The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the Commission's Public Reference Desk, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-0102 (tel. 202-551-5850).

1. The Trust is an open-end management investment company registered under the Act and formed as a Delaware statutory trust. The Trust is organized as a series fund with one initial series: Bear Stearns Current Yield Fund (the “Current Yield Fund”). The investment objective of the Current Yield Fund will be to seek as high a level of current income as is consistent with the preservation of capital and liquidity by investing primarily in short-term debt obligations, repurchase agreements and reverse repurchase agreements that meet certain minimum ratings requirements (or if unrated, that the Advisor determines are of comparable quality). The Current Yield Fund's portfolio will have an average dollar-weighted maturity of approximately 180 days.

2. The Advisor plans to introduce future series of the Trust or of other open-end management investment companies (“Future Funds”). The Future Funds will invest primarily in investment grade fixed-income securities (or, if unrated, that the Advisor determines are of a comparable quality). 1 Applicants request that the order apply to any such Future Funds. Any Future Fund will be (a) advised by the Advisor or an entity controlled by or under common control with the Advisor, and (b) comply with the terms and conditions of the application. 2 The Current Yield Fund and Future Funds together are the “Funds.” Each Fund will operate as an actively-managed exchange-traded fund (“ETF”).

3. The Advisor, a New York corporation, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Bear Stearns Companies Inc., a holding company that through its subsidiaries (including its principal subsidiary, Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc.) is a United States investment banking, securities trading and brokerage firm serving U.S. and foreign corporations, governments, and institutional and individual investors. The Advisor is registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”) and will serve as investment adviser to all the Funds. The Advisor may retain other investment advisers to act as “sub-advisors” to Future Funds (“Subadvisors”). Any Subadvisor will be registered under the Advisers Act. The Distributor, a broker-dealer registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, will act as each Fund's distributor and principal underwriter.

4. ETS of the Funds will be sold in Creation Unit Aggregations initially of 50,000 ETS. All orders to purchase Creation Unit Aggregations must be placed with the Distributor by or through a party that has entered into an agreement with the Distributor (“Authorized Participant”). An Authorized Participant must be a participant in the Depository Trust Company (“DTC,” and such participant, “DTC Participant”). Creation Unit Aggregations will be created and redeemed solely in cash at net asset value (“NAV”). Each Fund will sell and redeem Creation Unit Aggregations on each day required by section 22(e) of the Act (each such day, a “Business Day”).

5. An investor purchasing a Creation Unit Aggregation from a Fund will be charged a fixed fee (“Transaction Fee”) to protect the continuing ETS holders against the possible dilutive transactional expenses in connection with the purchase of Creation Unit Aggregations. From time to time, a Fund may waive or modify the Transaction Fee. The exact amounts of the Transaction Fee will be determined separately for each Fund. The Transaction Fee relevant to each Fund will be fully disclosed in the prospectus (“Prospectus”) and the method of calculating that Transaction Fee will be fully disclosed in the statement of additional information of such Fund. All orders to purchase Creation Unit Aggregations will be placed with the Distributor by or through an Authorized Participant and it will be the Distributor's responsibility to transmit such orders to the Trust. The Distributor also will be responsible for delivering the Prospectus to those persons purchasing Creation Unit Aggregations, and for maintaining records of both the orders placed with it and the acknowledgments furnished by it. In addition, the Distributor will maintain a record of the instructions given to the Trust to implement the delivery of ETS.

6. Purchasers of ETS in Creation Unit Aggregations may hold such ETS or may sell such ETS into the secondary market. ETS will be listed and traded on a national securities exchange as defined in section 2(a)(26) of the Act (“Exchange”). It is expected that one or more member firms of a listing Exchange will be designated to act as a specialist and maintain a market for ETS on the Exchange (the “Exchange Specialist”). Prices of ETS trading on an Exchange will be based on the current bid/offer market. 3 ETS sold in the secondary market will be subject to customary brokerage fees or commissions.

7. Applicants expect that purchasers of Creation Unit Aggregations will include institutional investors and arbitrageurs. The Exchange Specialist, in providing a fair and orderly secondary market for the ETS, also may purchase Creation Unit Aggregations for use in its market-making activities. Applicants expect that secondary market purchasers of ETS will include both institutional investors and retail investors. 4 Applicants expect that the price at which the ETS trade will be disciplined by arbitrage opportunities created by the ability to continually purchase or redeem Creation Unit Aggregations at their NAV, which should ensure that the ETS will not trade at a material discount or premium in relation to their NAV.

8. ETS will not be individually redeemable, and owners of ETS may acquire those ETS from a Fund, or tender such ETS for redemption to the Fund, in Creation Unit Aggregations only. To redeem, an investor will have to accumulate enough ETS to constitute a Creation Unit Aggregation. Redemption orders must be placed by or through an Authorized Participant. A redeeming investor may pay a Transaction Fee, calculated in the same manner as a Transaction Fee payable in connection with purchases of Creation Unit Aggregations.

9. Neither the Trust nor any Fund will be advertised, marketed or otherwise held out as an “open-end investment company” or a “mutual fund.” Instead, each Fund will be marketed as an “actively-managed exchange-traded fund.” All marketing materials that describe the method of obtaining, buying or selling ETS, or refer to redeemability, will prominently disclose that ETS are not individually redeemable and that the owners of ETS may purchase or redeem ETS from a Fund in Creation Unit Aggregations only. The same approach will be followed in shareholder reports and other communications and investor educational materials issued or circulated in connection with the ETS. The Funds will provide copies of their annual and semi-annual shareholder reports to DTC Participants for distribution to beneficial owners of ETS.

10. The Funds' Web site, which will be publicly available prior to the public offering of ETS, will include the Prospectus and other information about the Funds that is updated on a daily basis, including the reported mid-point of the bid-ask spread at the time of the calculation of NAV (“Bid/Ask Price”). On each Business Day, before the commencement of trading in ETS on the Exchange, each Fund will disclose on its Web site the identities and quantities of the portfolio securities and other assets held by the Fund that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of NAV at the end of the Business Day. 5 Applicants assert that the Web site disclosure of each Fund's portfolio securities and other assets will provide a level of portfolio transparency that is substantially similar to that of index-based ETFs.

1. Applicants request an order under section 6(c) of the Act granting an exemption from sections 2(a)(32), 5(a)(1) and 22(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act.

2. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security or transaction, or any class of persons, securities or transactions, from any provision of the Act, if and to the extent that such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.

3. Section 5(a)(1) of the Act defines an “open-end company” as a management investment company that is offering for sale or has outstanding any redeemable security of which it is the issuer. Section 2(a)(32) of the Act defines a redeemable security as any security, other than short-term paper, under the terms of which the holder, upon its presentation to the issuer, is entitled to receive approximately his proportionate share of the issuer's current net assets, or the cash equivalent. Because ETS will not be individually redeemable, applicants request an order that would permit each Fund, as a series of an open-end management investment company, to issue ETS that are redeemable in Creation Unit Aggregations only. Applicants state that investors may purchase ETS in Creation Unit Aggregations from each Fund and redeem Creation Unit Aggregations from each Fund. Applicants further state that because the market price of ETS will be disciplined by arbitrage opportunities, investors should be able to sell ETS in the secondary market at prices that do not vary substantially from their NAV.

4. Section 22(d) of the Act, among other things, prohibits a dealer from selling a redeemable security, which is currently being offered to the public by or through a principal underwriter, except at a current public offering price described in the prospectus. Rule 22c-1 under the Act generally requires that a dealer selling, redeeming, or repurchasing a redeemable security do so only at a price based on its NAV. Applicants state that secondary market trading in ETS will take place at negotiated prices, not at a current offering price described in the Prospectus, and not at a price based on NAV. Thus, purchases and sales of ETS in the secondary market will not comply with section 22(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act. Applicants request an exemption under section 6(c) from these provisions.

5. Applicants assert that the concerns sought to be addressed by section 22(d) of the Act and rule 22c-1 under the Act with respect to pricing are equally satisfied by the proposed method of pricing ETS. Applicants maintain that while there is little legislative history regarding section 22(d), its provisions, as well as those of rule 22c-1, appear to have been designed to (a) prevent dilution caused by certain riskless-trading schemes by principal underwriters and contract dealers, (b) prevent unjust discrimination or preferential treatment among buyers, and (c) assure an orderly distribution of investment company shares by eliminating price competition from dealers offering shares at less than the published sales price and repurchasing shares at more than the published redemption price.

6. Applicants believe that none of these purposes will be thwarted by permitting ETS to trade in the secondary market at negotiated prices. Applicants state that (a) secondary market trading in ETS does not involve the Funds as parties and cannot result in dilution of an investment in ETS, and (b) to the extent different prices exist during a given trading day, or from day to day, such variances occur as a result of third-party market forces, such as supply and demand. Therefore, applicants assert that secondary market transactions in ETS will not lead to discrimination or preferential treatment among purchasers. Finally, applicants contend that the proposed distribution system will be orderly because arbitrage activity will ensure that the difference between the market price of ETS and their NAV remains narrow.

The applicants agree that any order of the Commission granting the requested relief will be subject to the following conditions:

1. Neither the Trust nor any of the Funds will be advertised or marketed as an open-end investment company or a mutual fund. Each Fund's Prospectus will prominently disclose that the Fund is an “actively managed exchange-traded fund.” Each Prospectus also will prominently disclose that ETS are not individually redeemable and will disclose that owners of ETS may acquire those ETS from the Fund and tender those ETS for redemption to a Fund in Creation Unit Aggregations only. Any advertising material that describes the purchase or sale of Creation Unit Aggregations or refers to redeemability will prominently disclose that ETS are not individually redeemable and that owners of ETS may acquire those ETS from a Fund and tender those ETS for redemption to a Fund in Creation Unit Aggregations only.

2. Each Fund's Prospectus will clearly disclose that, for purposes of the Act, ETS are issued by a registered investment company, and that the acquisition of ETS by investment companies and companies relying on sections 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7) of the Act is subject to the restrictions of section 12(d)(1) of the Act, except as permitted by an exemptive order that permits registered investment companies to invest in a Fund beyond the limits in section 12(d)(1), subject to certain terms and conditions, including that the registered investment company enter into an agreement with the Fund regarding the terms of the investment.

3. The Web site for the Funds, which is and will be publicly accessible at no charge, will contain the following information, on a per-ETS basis, for each Fund: (a) The prior Business Day's NAV and the Bid/Ask Price, and a calculation of the premium or discount of the Bid/Ask Price against such NAV; and (b) data in chart format displaying the frequency distribution of discounts and premiums of the Bid/Ask Price against the NAV, within appropriate ranges, for each of the four previous calendar quarters (or for the life of the Fund, if shorter).

4. The Prospectus and annual report for each Fund will also include: (a) the information listed in condition 3(b), (i) in the case of the Prospectus, for the most recently completed year (and the most recently completed quarter or quarters, as applicable) and (ii) in the case of the annual report, for the immediately preceding five years, as applicable; and (b) the cumulative total return and the average annual total return based on NAV and Bid/Ask Price, calculated on a per ETS basis for one-, five- and ten-year periods (or life of the Fund).

5. As long as the Funds operate in reliance on the requested order, ETS will be listed on an Exchange.

6. On each Business Day, before the commencement of trading in ETS on each Fund's Exchange, the Fund will disclose on its Web site the identities and quantities of the portfolio securities and other assets held by the Fund that will form the basis for the Fund's calculation of NAV at the end of the Business Day.

7. The requested order will expire on the effective date of any Commission rule under the Act that provides relief permitting the operation of actively managed exchange-traded funds.

The following is a summary of the application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the Commission's Public Reference Desk, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-0102 (tel. 202-551-5850).

1. The Trust, an open-end management investment company registered under the Act, is organized as a Delaware statutory trust and as a series fund with multiple series. The Trust will offer two new series that will invest substantially all of their assets in foreign money market securities: iShares Euro Currency Fund and iShares Pound Sterling Currency Fund (each a “New Fund”). Each New Fund will seek to preserve capital and maintain stability of principal by investing in short-term securities that are denominated in the specified local currency and have remaining maturities of sixty days or less (“Portfolio Securities”). Applicants state each New Fund is designed to decrease in value when the value of the U.S. dollar increases relative to the applicable local currency and increase in value when the value of the U.S. dollar falls relative to the applicable local currency. While the value of each New Fund's Portfolio Securities is expected to be relatively constant in local currency terms, a New Fund's net asset value (“NAV”) will be expressed in U.S. dollars. Because of this, fluctuations in the per Share NAV of each New Fund will be caused by fluctuations in the exchange rate between U.S. dollars and the applicable local currency.

2. The Trust plans to offer future series that will hold money market securities denominated in a different local currency than the New Funds (“Future Funds”). Applicants request that the order apply to any such Future Funds. Any Future Fund will be (a) advised by the Adviser, and (b) comply with the terms and conditions of the order. The New Funds and the Future Funds together are the “New Funds.” Each New Fund will operate as an actively-managed exchange-traded fund.

3. The Adviser, a California corporation, is registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”) and will serve as investment adviser to each New Fund. The Distributor, a Pennsylvania corporation, is registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and serves as principal underwriter and distributor for the New Funds.

4. Shares of the New Funds will be sold in Creation Units of 25,000 or more. All orders to purchase Creation Units must be placed with the Distributor by or through an “Authorized Participant,” an entity that has entered into an agreement with the Distributor and that is a participant in the Depository Trust Company (“DTC,” and such participant, “DTC Participant”). Shares of each New Fund will be sold in Creation Units in exchange for a designated amount of the applicable local currency (the “Currency Deposit”). Each New Fund reserves the right to permit or require the substitution of an amount of securities denominated in the applicable local currency (“Deposit Securities,” together with the Currency Deposit, the “Fund Deposit”) to replace a portion of the Currency Deposit. 1 An investor purchasing a Creation Unit from a New Fund will be charged a fee (“Transaction Fee”) to cover certain transaction costs associated with the issuance of Creation Units. The Distributor will maintain a record of Creation Unit purchases.

5. Purchasers of Shares in Creation Units may hold such Shares or may sell such Shares into the secondary market. Shares will be listed on a national securities exchange, as defined in section 2(a)(26) of the Act (a “Listing Market”). It is expected that one or more member firms of a Listing Market will be designated to act as a specialist and maintain a market for Shares on the Listing Market (the “Specialist”). Prices of Shares trading on a Listing Market will be based on the current bid/offer market. Shares sold in the secondary market will be subject to customary brokerage commissions and charges.

6. Applicants expect that purchasers of Creation Units will include institutional investors and arbitrageurs (which could include institutional investors). The Specialist, in providing a fair and orderly secondary market for the Shares, also may purchase Creation Units for use in its market-making activities. Applicants expect that secondary market purchasers of Shares will include both institutional investors and retail investors. 2 Applicants expect that the price at which the Shares trade will be disciplined by arbitrage opportunities created by the ability to continually purchase or redeem Creation Units at their NAV, which should ensure that the Shares will not trade at a material discount or premium in relation to their NAV.