The merchandise subject to the Order   1 is certain steel nails from the UAE. The products are currently classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings 7317.00.55, 7317.00.65, and 7317.00.75. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description, remains dispositive. 2

The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). Access to IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http://iaaccess.trade.gov and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html. A list of the topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an Appendix to this notice. The signed and electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

The Department conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Export price is calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

For the preliminary results, we have relied, in part, on facts available. Because we lack necessary Dubai Wire sales and cost data, we determine that it is appropriate to apply “facts otherwise available” pursuant to section 776(a)(2)(B) of the Act. We further determine that an adverse inference is not warranted in accordance with section 776(b) of the Act because, pursuant to section 782(e) of the Act, Dubai Wire acted to the best of its ability to comply with our requests for information and we have sufficient sales and cost information on the record to calculate a margin for Dubai Wire. Because Precision did not act to the best of its ability to respond to the Department's request for information, we have drawn an adverse inference in selecting from among the facts otherwise available, pursuant to 776(a) and (b) of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins on certain steel nails from the UAE exist for the period November 3, 2011, through April 30, 2013 at the following rates:

We intend to disclose the calculations performed to parties in this proceeding within five days after the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c), interested parties may submit cases briefs not later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than five days after the date for filing case briefs. 3 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) A brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 4

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or to participate if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, filed electronically via IA ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by the Department's electronic records system, IA ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern Time within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case and rebuttal briefs. The Department intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of the issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1).

Upon issuance of the final results, the Department shall determine and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. If we continue to rely on adverse facts available to establish Precision's weighted-average dumping margin, we will instruct CBP to apply an ad valorem assessment rate of 184.41 percent to all entries of subject merchandise during the POR which were produced and/or exported by Precision. If Dubai Wire's weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis in the final results of this review, we will calculate importer-specific ad valorem assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of antidumping duties calculated for an importer's examined sales and the total entered value of such sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). If Dubai Wire's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis in the final results of review, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties in accordance with the Final Modification for Reviews, i.e., “{w}here the weighted-average margin of dumping for the exporter is determined to be zero or de minimis, no antidumping duties will be assessed.”  5 We will instruct CBP to take into account the “provisional measures cap” in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(d).

The Department clarified its “automatic assessment” regulation on May 6, 2003. 6 This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Dubai Wire for which it did not know its merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.

We intend to issue instructions to CBP 15 days after publication of the final results of this review.

The following deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of nails from the UAE entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication as provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for Dubai Wire and Precision will be the rate established in the final results of this administrative review; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original investigation but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the manufacturer of the merchandise for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 4.30 percent. 7 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

This notice serves as a preliminary 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 Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1).

On December 20, 2013, the Department published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades from the PRC. 1 We received case and rebuttal briefs with respect to the Preliminary Results and, at the request of an interested party, held a hearing on April 23, 2014. We extended the due date for the final results of review to June 18, 2014. 2 We conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

The merchandise subject to the order is diamond sawblades. The diamond sawblades subject to the order are currently classifiable under subheadings 8202 to 8206 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), and may also enter under 6804.21.00. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. A full description of the scope of the order is contained in the Final Decision Memorandum. 3 The written description is dispositive.

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this administrative review are addressed in the Final Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised is attached to this notice as an appendix. The Final Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (IA ACCESS). Access to IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http://iaaccess.trade.gov . The Final Decision Memorandum is also available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room 7046 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Final Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Enforcement and Compliance Web site at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html . The signed and electronic versions of the Final Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

We continue to find that Qingdao Shinhan Diamond Industrial Co., Ltd., and Saint-Gobain Abrasives (Shanghai) Co., which received separate rates in previous segments of the proceeding and are subject to this review, did not have any exports of subject merchandise during the POR. 4 Consistent with our “automatic assessment” clarification, we will issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on our final results. 5

Based on our analysis of comments received, we made revisions that have changed the results for certain companies, including the valuation of certain factors of production. Additionally, we made calculation programming changes for the final results. For further details on the changes we made for these final results, see the company-specific analysis memoranda, the Final Decision Memorandum, and the final surrogate value memorandum dated concurrently with this notice.

As a result of this administrative review, we determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period November 1, 2011, through October 31, 2012:

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b), the Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. For customers or importers of Weihai Xiangguang Mechanical Industrial Co., Ltd. (Weihai) for which we do not have entered value, we calculated customer-/importer-specific antidumping duty assessment amounts based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping duties calculated for the examined sales of subject merchandise to the total sales quantity of those same sales. 8 For customers or importers of Bosun Tools Co., Ltd., and Weihai for which we received entered-value information, we have calculated customer/importer-specific antidumping duty assessment rates based on customer-/importer-specific ad valorem rates in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1).

For all non-selected respondents that received a separate rate, we will instruct CBP to apply an antidumping duty assessment rate of 4.83 percent  9 to all entries of subject merchandise that entered the United States during the POR. For all other companies, we will instruct CBP to apply an antidumping duty assessment rate of the PRC-wide entity, 164.09 percent, 10 to all entries of subject merchandise exported by these companies.

The Department announced a refinement to its assessment practice in NME cases. 11 Pursuant to this refinement in practice, for entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales databases submitted by companies individually examined during this review, the Department will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the PRC-wide rate. In addition, for companies where the Department determined that the exporter under review had no shipments of the subject merchandise, any suspended entries that entered under that exporter's case number ( i.e., at that exporter's rate) will be liquidated at the PRC-wide rate.

We intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of the final results of review.

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of these final results of review for all shipments of the subject merchandise from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For subject merchandise exported by the companies listed above that have separate rates, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in these final results of review for each exporter as listed above; (2) for previously investigated or reviewed PRC and non-PRC exporters not listed above that received a separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate; (3) for all PRC exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be that for the PRC-wide entity;  12 (4) for all non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the PRC exporter that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit requirements shall remain in effect until further notice.

This notice 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 Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of the antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of double antidumping duties.

This notice also serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). 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 terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

These final results of review are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i) of the Act.

On October 17, 2013, Navneet Education requested that the Department conduct a CCR to determine whether it is the successor-in-interest to Navneet Publications, for purposes of determining antidumping duties due as a result of the CLPP Order. 2 On April 18, 2014, the Department published its Preliminary Results, in which it preliminarily determined that Navneet Education is the successor-in-interest to Navneet Publications. 3 The Department invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. 4 We received no comments or requests for a hearing from interested parties.

The merchandise covered by the CLPP Order is certain lined paper products, typically school supplies (for purposes of this scope definition, the actual use of or labeling these products as school supplies or non-school supplies is not a defining characteristic) composed of or including paper that incorporates straight horizontal and/or vertical lines on ten or more paper sheets (there shall be no minimum page requirement for looseleaf filler paper). The products are currently classified under the following Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheadings: 4811.90.9035, 4811.90.9080, 4820.30.0040, 4810.22.5044, 4811.90.9050, 4811.90.9090, 4820.10.2010, 4820.10.2020, 4820.10.2030, 4820.10.2040, 4820.10.2050, 4820.10.2060, and 4820.10.4000. Although the HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written product description remains dispositive. 5

Because no parties submitted comments opposing the Department's Preliminary Results, and because there is no other information or evidence on the record that calls into question the Preliminary Results, the Department determines that Navneet Education is the successor-in-interest to Navneet Publications for the purpose of determining antidumping duty liability.

As a result of this determination, we find that Navneet Education should receive the cash deposit rate previously assigned to Navneet Publications in the most recently completed review of the antidumping duty order on certain lined paper products from India. Consequently, the Department will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to collect estimated antidumping duties for all shipments of subject merchandise exported by Navneet Education and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of this notice in the Federal Register at the current cash deposit rate for Navneet Publications, which is de minimis. 6 This cash deposit requirement shall remain in effect until further notice.

This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.306. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

This notice is published in accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and 777(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.216(e).

In accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.210(c), on May 5, 2014, the Department published its affirmative final determinations of sales at less-than-fair-value in the antidumping duty investigations of PC tie wire from Mexico and the PRC, respectively. 1 On June 17, 2014, the ITC notified the Department of its affirmative determinations that an industry in the United States is materially injured within the meaning of section 735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act by reason of less-than-fair-value imports of PC tie wire from Mexico and the PRC. 2

The products covered by these orders are high carbon steel wire; stress relieved or low relaxation; indented or otherwise deformed; meeting at a minimum the physical, mechanical, and chemical requirements of the American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) A881/A881M specification; regardless of shape, size or alloy element levels; suitable for use as prestressed tendons in concrete railroad ties (PC tie wire). High carbon steel is defined as steel that contains 0.6 percent or more of carbon by weight.

PC tie wire is classified under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheading 7217.10.8045, but may also be classified under subheadings 7217.10.7000, 7217.10.8025, 7217.10.8030, 7217.10.8090, 7217.10.9000, 7229.90.1000, 7229.90.5016, 7229.90.5031, 7229.90.5051, 7229.90.9000, and 7312.10.3012. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of these orders is dispositive.

As stated above, on June 17, 2014, in accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, the ITC notified the Department of its final determinations in these investigations, in which it found material injury with respect to PC tie wire from Mexico and the PRC. 3 Because the ITC determined that imports of PC tie wire from Mexico and the PRC are materially injuring a U.S. industry, all unliquidated entries of such merchandise from Mexico and the PRC, entered or withdrawn from warehouse, are subject to the assessment of antidumping duties.

Therefore, in accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, the Department will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties equal to the amounts listed below for all relevant entries of PC tie wire from Mexico and the PRC. These antidumping duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of PC tie wire from Mexico and the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after December 12, 2013, the date of publication of the preliminary determinations, 4 but will not include entries occurring after the expiration of the provisional measures period and before publication of the ITC's final injury determination as further described below.

In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct CBP to continue to suspend liquidation on all entries of PC tie wire from Mexico and the PRC. We will also instruct CBP to require cash deposits equal to the amounts as indicated below. These instructions suspending liquidation will remain in effect until further notice.

Accordingly, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determinations, CBP will require, at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on this subject merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the estimated weighted-average antidumping duty margins listed below. 5

Section 733(d) of the Act states that instructions issued pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months except where exporters representing a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise request the Department to extend that four-month period to no more than six months. At the request of exporters that account for a significant proportion of PC tie wire from Mexico and the PRC, we extended the four-month period to no more than six months. 6 In the underlying investigations, the Department published the preliminary determinations on December 12, 2013. Therefore, the six-month period beginning on the date of publication of the preliminary determinations ended on June 10, 2014. Furthermore, section 737(b) of the Act states that definitive duties are to begin on the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination.

Therefore, in accordance with section 733(d) of the Act and our practice, we will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate, without regard to antidumping duties, unliquidated entries of PC tie wire from Mexico and the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption after June 10, 2014, the date the provisional measures expired, until and through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determinations in the Federal Register . Suspension of liquidation will resume on the date of publication of the ITC's final determination in the Federal Register .

The weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

This notice constitutes the antidumping duty orders with respect to PC tie wire from Mexico and the PRC pursuant to section 736(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of antidumping duty orders currently in effect at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/stats/iastats1.html.

These orders are published in accordance with section 736(a) of the Act and section 351.211 of the Department's regulations.

SAW is a formal scientific peer-review process for evaluating and presenting stock assessment results to managers for fish stocks in the offshore US waters of the northwest Atlantic. Assessments are prepared by SAW working groups and reviewed by an independent panel of stock assessment experts called SARC. For further information please visit the Northeast Fisheries Science Center Web site at http://nefsc.noaa.gov/. For additional information about the SARC Meeting and the stock assessment review of the GOM Haddock and the Sea Scallop, please visit the NMFS NEFSC SAW Web site at http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/saw/.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Anne O'Brien at the NEFSC, (508) 495-2177, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

On March 1, 2013, notice was published in the Federal Register (78 FR 13863) that a request for a permit to conduct research and enhancement on Hawaiian monk seals had been submitted by the above-named applicant. The requested permit has been issued under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ), and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR parts 222-226).

Permit No. 16632-00 authorizes the PIFSC to carry out research and enhancement activities designed to conserve and recover the endangered Hawaiian monk seal. Activities may occur on beaches and in nearshore waters throughout the Hawaiian Archipelago (Northwestern Hawaiian Islands [NWHI] and main Hawaiian Islands [MHI]) and Johnston Atoll, and in facilities housing captive monk seals. Research activities include visual and photographic monitoring, tagging, pelage bleach marking, health screening, foraging studies, deworming research, experimental translocation, necropsies, tissue sampling, import/export of parts, behavioral modification research, and vaccination research. Enhancement activities include translocations (excluding two-stage translocations involving moving young seals from the NWHI and releasing them in the MHI), hazing and removal of aggressive adult male seals that harm or kill other seals, disentangling, dehooking, deworming, treating injured seals in-situ, behavioral modification, vaccination, and supplemental feeding of post-release rehabilitated seals. Incidental harassment of monk seals, bottlenose dolphins ( Tursiops truncatus ), and spinner dolphins ( Stenella longistrostris ) is authorized. Research studies may also be conducted on seals in captivity. The permit expires on June 30, 2019.

In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ), NMFS has determined that the activities proposed in Permit No. 16632-00 are consistent with the Preferred Alternative (Alternative 3: Limited Translocation) in the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Hawaiian monk seal Recovery Actions ( http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/eis/hawaiianmonksealeis.htm ), and that issuance of the permit would not have a significant adverse impact on the human environment.

As required by the ESA, issuance of this permit was based on a finding that such permit: (1) Was applied for in good faith; (2) will not operate to the disadvantage of such endangered species; and (3) is consistent with the purposes and policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Medical Screening of Military Personnel; DD Form 2807-1: Report of Medical History; DD Form 2807-2: Medical Prescreen of Medical History Report; OMB Number: 0704-0413.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary per Title 10, U.S.C. Chapter 31: Section 504 and 505, and Chapter 33, section 532, which requires applicants to meet accession medical standards prior to enlistment into the Armed Forces (including the Coast Guard). If applicants' medical history reveals a medical condition that does not meet the accession medical standards, they are medically disqualified for military entrance. This form also will be used by all Service members not only in their initial medical examination but also for periodic medical examinations.

Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

Annual Burden Hours: 352,500.

Number of Respondents: 423,000.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Average Burden per Response: 50 minutes.

Frequency: On occasion.

These forms obtain medical information which affects entrance physical examinations, routine in-service physical examinations, separation physical examinations, and other medical examinations as required. The respondents are all applicants for enlistment, induction or commissioning, or service members. The respondents complete the medical history information recorded on the form. Medical professionals complete the remaining sections and the information collected provides the Armed Services with the medical history of applicants. The DD Forms 2807-1 and 2807-2 are the method of collecting and verifying medical data on applicants applying for entrance as well as, for service members for medical evaluation purposes.

Title, Associated Form and OMB Number: Military OneSource Case Management System (CMS)—Intake; OMB Control Number 0704-XXXX.

Type of Request: New Collection.

Number of Respondents: 900,000.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 900,000.

Average Burden per Response: 3 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 45,000.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to support the Military OneSource Case Management System which will document an individual's eligibility; identification of the caller's inquiry or issue to provide a warm hand-off, referral and/or requested information; the development towards a final solution and referral information. Records may be used as a management tool for statistical analysis, tracking, reporting, and evaluating program effectiveness and conducting research. Information about individuals indicating a threat to self or others will be reported to the appropriate authorities in accordance with DoD/Military Branch of Service and Component regulations and established protocols.

Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be sent to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra at the Office of Management and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.

You may also submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by the following method:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov . Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

DOD Clearance Officer: Ms. Patricia Toppings.

Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. Toppings at WHS/ESD Information Management Division, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

Title, Associated Form and OMB Number: Dependency Statements; Parent (DD Form 137-3), Child Born Out of Wedlock under Age 21 (DD form 137-4), Incapacitated Child Over Age 21 (DD Form 137-5), Full Time Student 21-22 Years of Age (DD Form 137-6), and Ward of a Court (DD Form 137-7); OMB Control Number 0730-0014.

Type of Request: Reinstatement with Change.

Number of Respondents: 15,766.

Responses per Respondent: 1.33.

Annual Responses: 20,969.

Average Burden per Response: 50 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 17,474.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to certify dependency or obtain information to determine entitlement to basic allowance for housing (BAH) with dependent rate, travel allowance, or uniformed services identification and privilege card. Information regarding a parent, child born out-of-wedlock, an incapacitated child over age 21, a student age 21-22, or a ward of a court is provided by the military member. A medical doctor or psychiatrist, college administrator, or a dependent's employer may need to provide information for claims. Pursuant to 37 U.S.C. 401, 403, 406, and 10 U.S.C. 1072 and 1076, the member must provide more than one half of the claimed dependent's monthly expenses. DoDFMR 700.14-R, Vol. 7A, defines dependency and directs that dependency be proven. Dependency claim examiners use the information from these forms to determine the degree of benefits. The requirement to provide the information decreases the possibility of monetary allowances being approved on behalf of ineligible dependents.

Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Required to Obtain or Retain Benefits.

OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

Written comments and recommendations on the proposed information collection should be sent to Ms. Jasmeet Seehra at the Office of Management and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.

You may also submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by the following method:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov . Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, docket number and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

DOD Clearance Officer: Ms. Patricia Toppings.

Written requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Ms. Toppings at WHS/ESD Information Management Division, 4800 Mark Center Drive, East Tower, Suite 02G09, Alexandria, VA 22350-3100.

The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. 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. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: Loan Discharge Applications (DL/FFEL/Perkins).

OMB Control Number: 1845-0058.

Type of Review: A revision of an existing information collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 30,051.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 15,027.

Abstract: These forms serve as the means by which a federal student loan borrower requests a closed school, false certification, or unpaid refund discharge. The burden hours associated with this collection is increasing for one reason; mainly, that the collection is being combined with the collection with OMB Control Number 1845-0015 so that all loan discharge forms are contained in one collection with the same OMB Control Number.

The Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. 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. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program, Federal Direct PLUS Loan Request for Supplemental Information.

OMB Control Number: 1845-0103.

Type of Review: A revision of an existing information collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 1,230,000.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 615,000.

Abstract: The Federal Direct PLUS Loan Request for Supplemental Information serves as the means by which a parent or graduate/professional student Direct PLUS Loan applicant may provide certain information to a school that will assist the school in originating the borrower's Direct PLUS Loan award, as an alternative to providing this information to the school by other means established by the school.

Invitation to Comment: We invite you to submit comments regarding this notice. To ensure that your comments have maximum effect in developing the notice of final priorities and definitions, we urge you to identify clearly the specific proposed priority or definition that each comment addresses.

We invite you to assist us in complying with the specific requirements of Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and their overall requirement of reducing regulatory burden that might result from these proposed priorities and definitions. Please let us know of any further ways we could reduce potential costs or increase potential benefits while preserving the effective and efficient administration of our programs.

During and after the comment period, you may inspect all public comments about this notice by accessing Regulations.gov. You may also inspect the comments in person in Room 4W335, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., Washington, DC, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, Monday through Friday of each week except Federal holidays.

Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities in Reviewing the Rulemaking Record: On request we will provide an appropriate accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability who needs assistance to review the comments or other documents in the public rulemaking record for this notice. If you want to schedule an appointment for this type of accommodation or auxiliary aid, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT .

Proposed Priorities:

This notice contains 15 proposed priorities.

Background:

On December 15, 2010, the Department published in the Federal Register final supplemental priorities and definitions for discretionary grant programs (75 FR 78485), which were corrected and republished in the Federal Register on May 12, 2011 (76 FR 27637) (the 2010 Supplemental Priorities).

The Department proposes to repeal the 2010 Supplemental Priorities and definitions and replace them with a set of new and revised priorities and definitions for discretionary grant programs. The new priorities and definitions reflect the lessons learned from implementing discretionary grant programs using the 2010 Supplemental Priorities, our current policy objectives, and emerging needs in education. Note that we do not include priorities for building evidence of effectiveness, supporting projects for which there is moderate or strong evidence of effectiveness, or improving productivity, all of which were included in the 2010 Supplemental Priorities. These policy objectives are codified in the Education Department Grant Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), effective August 13, 2013 (see 78 FR 49338), and can be used in discretionary grant competitions through that mechanism.

To support our comprehensive education agenda, we are proposing priorities that span students' full academic and career trajectories. These priorities will support early learning and development programs that ensure children are ready to succeed in school; elementary and secondary schools and programs that keep all students on track to graduate from high school with the skills necessary to succeed in college and in their careers; and postsecondary programs, including adult educational programs, that provide individuals with the skills and knowledge they need to succeed in the workforce.

Our intent is to propose priorities that can be used widely across our discretionary grant programs, thereby aligning these programs with the Secretary's policy objectives, rather than proposing priorities specifically designed for individual programs.

This notice includes 15 proposed priorities, which are a combination of new priorities and amended versions of priorities from the 2010 Supplemental Priorities. The Department will choose which, if any, of the proposed priorities will be used for any particular discretionary grant competition; and such decisions will be made consistent with each program's current authorizing statute and regulations.

Proposed Priority 1—Improving Early Learning and Development Outcomes.

Background:

In his January 28, 2014, State of the Union address, the President repeated his request from the previous year to help states make high-quality preschool available to all children, noting that lack of access to high-quality early learning and development programs can cast a shadow over a child for the rest of his or her life. Further, research suggests that participation in high-quality early learning and development programs may lead to improved school readiness for children in the short term, as well as higher graduation rates and higher earnings in the long term. 1 Thus, through this proposed priority, the Department will support projects that are designed to improve early learning and developmental outcomes across the essential domains of school readiness (as defined in this notice) for children from birth through third grade. Further, we seek to expand on the early learning priority included in the 2010 Supplemental Priorities by also proposing to support projects designed to increase access to high-quality early learning and development programs, improve the quality and effectiveness of the early learning workforce, include preschool as part of elementary and secondary education programs and systems, and improve data-sharing, coordination, and alignment between early learning and development systems and elementary education systems.

Additionally, children from low-income families are under-represented in early learning and development programs across the country. 2 Through this proposed priority, the Department would support projects that increase children's access to high-quality early learning and development programs, particularly for children with high needs (as defined in this notice). High-quality early learning and development programs across the birth-through-third-grade continuum include the following elements, as appropriate: High staff qualifications, including attainment of a bachelor of arts degree for teachers; effective professional development for teachers and staff; low staff-child ratios; small class sizes; a full-day program; developmentally appropriate, evidence-based curricula and learning environments aligned with State early learning standards; employee salaries comparable to those of kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) teaching staff; ongoing program evaluation to ensure continuous improvement; and on-site comprehensive services for children (e.g., health screenings, meals, nutrition services, family engagement strategies).

In the Race to the Top-Early Learning Challenge program, the Department collaborates with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to emphasize that an early learning and development system is most effective for children when seamlessly coordinated with an elementary education system. 3 This coordination may include, alone or in combination, aligning standards, comprehensive assessments, data systems, workforce systems, family engagement, and health promotion strategies. By aligning and coordinating early learning and development systems and elementary education systems, children are more likely to enter kindergarten ready to succeed and to sustain improved outcomes through the early elementary years. This proposed priority aims to support projects that will provide all children with a high-quality foundation that will prepare them for success in school and in life.

Proposed Priority 1—Improving Early Learning and Development Outcomes.

Projects that are designed to improve early learning and development outcomes across one or more of the essential domains of school readiness (as defined in this notice) for children from birth through third grade (or for any age group within this range) through a focus on one or more of the following:

(a) Increasing access to high-quality early learning and development programs and comprehensive services, particularly for children with high needs (as defined in this notice).

(b) Improving the quality and effectiveness of the early learning workforce so that early childhood educators have the knowledge, skills, and abilities necessary to improve young children's health, social-emotional, and cognitive outcomes.

(c) Improving the coordination and alignment between early learning and development systems and elementary education systems, in accordance with applicable privacy laws, to improve transitions for children from birth through third grade.

(d) Including preschool as part of elementary education programs and systems in order to expand opportunities for preschool students and teachers.

(e) Sustaining improved early learning and development outcomes throughout the early elementary school years.

Proposed Priority 2—Influencing the Development of Non-Cognitive Factors.

Background:

A promising body of research suggests that non-cognitive factors play an important role in students' academic, career, and life outcomes. 4 Non-cognitive factors include a broad range of behaviors, strategies, and attitudes, such as academic behaviors (e.g., attendance, homework completion), academic mindsets (e.g., sense of belonging in the academic community, believing academic achievement improves with effort), perseverance (e.g., tenacity, self-discipline), social and emotional skills (e.g., cooperation, empathy, adaptability), and approaches toward learning strategies (e.g., executive functions, attention, goal-setting, curiosity, problem solving, self-regulating learning, study skills). 5 With this proposed priority, the Department intends to support projects that develop and strengthen students' mastery of non-cognitive skills and behaviors so that they develop and attain the skills necessary for success in school, career, and life.

This proposed priority is new and was not included in the 2010 Supplemental Priorities.

Proposed Priority 2—Influencing the Development of Non-Cognitive Factors.

Projects that are designed to improve students' mastery of non-cognitive skills and behaviors (e.g., academic behaviors, academic mindset, perseverance, self-regulation, social and emotional skills, and approaches toward learning strategies) and enhance student motivation and engagement in learning.

Proposed Priority 3—Promoting Personalized Learning.

Background:

Personalized learning (as defined in this notice) aims to differentiate content, tools, and materials for each learner so that he or she can meet college- and career-ready standards. Teacher and student interactions are strengthened when, through ongoing personalized assessments, a teacher has access to timely and targeted information about each student's particular needs and interests.

Personalized learning can be implemented through use of digital tools, adopting universal design principles, and aligning activities during non-school hours with students' unique needs. When well designed and appropriately implemented, personalized learning can narrow achievement gaps by using academic interventions that promote excellence. For example, a recent large-scale effectiveness study found that a technology-based, personalized, and blended-learning mathematics curriculum could effectively raise a high school student from the 50th to the 58th percentile. 6 This sort of intervention has great potential to narrow achievement gaps between groups of students.

At its most effective, personalized learning can inspire students at all levels by effectively challenging those students who are furthest ahead on a specific topic, providing targeted assistance to those furthest behind, and engaging with the students in the middle. Personalized learning supports mastery-based differentiation, which also allows for regrouping students as appropriate.

This proposed priority aims to support projects that use personalized learning to prepare students to master the content and skills required for college- and career-readiness.

This proposed priority is new and was not included in the 2010 Supplemental Priorities.

Proposed Priority 3—Promoting Personalized Learning.

Projects that are designed to improve student academic outcomes and close academic opportunity or attainment gaps through one of the following:

(a) Implementing personalized learning (as defined in this notice) approaches that will ensure appropriate support and produce academic excellence for all students.

(b) Awarding credit or digital credentials (as defined in this notice) based on personalized learning or adaptive assessments of academic performance, cognitive growth, or behavioral improvements and aligned with college- and career-ready standards.

Proposed Priority 4—Improving Academic Outcomes for High-Need Students.

Background:

The Department is committed to pursuing equity at all stages of education, from birth through adulthood, and aims to ensure that all students are afforded the opportunity to succeed academically. However, persistent and significant gaps in achievement still exist between high-need students (as defined in this notice)  7 and their more advantaged peers. By supporting projects that improve student learning or encourage targeted subgroups of students to develop new skills, the Department is furthering its commitment to ensure that all students have the opportunity to succeed academically and to learn essential skills that support success in their careers and in life.

We included a similar priority in the 2010 Supplemental Priorities, which focused on accelerating learning and improving high school graduation rates for high-need students. Adding these groups to the proposed priority would allow for broader use across the Department's discretionary grant programs. In addition to including an expanded set of student subgroups, we are also revising this priority to support projects that are designed to improve academic outcomes or learning environments.

Proposed Priority 4—Improving Academic Outcomes for High-Need Students.

Projects that are designed to improve:

(a) Academic outcomes, or

(b) Learning environments, for one or more of the following groups of students:

(i) High-need students (as defined in this notice).

(ii) Students in rural local educational agencies (as defined in this notice).

(iii) Students with disabilities.

(iv) English learners.

(v) Students in lowest performing schools (as defined in this notice).

(vi) Students who are living in poverty and are served by schools with high concentrations of students living in poverty.

(vii) Disconnected youth, such as youth who are homeless, in foster care, have come into contact with the juvenile justice system, unemployed, or are not enrolled in an educational institution, or migrant youth.

(viii) Low-skilled adults (as defined in this notice).

Proposed Priority 5—Increasing Postsecondary Access, Affordability, and Completion .

Background:

Postsecondary education, including career and technical education, is increasingly necessary for individuals to compete in a global economy. Therefore, the Nation must boost completion rates for associate's and bachelor's degrees, as well as for industry-recognized credentials or certificates. The President has set a goal that, by 2020, the United States will have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. This proposed priority aligns with the President's goal by supporting projects that prepare students, particularly high-need students (as defined in this notice), for college and careers; enroll more students in postsecondary education; and increase the number of those who complete programs of study with a degree or certificate. This proposed priority also supports career and technical training that provides students with the knowledge and skills to succeed in the workforce.

With this proposed priority, we also aim to support adult learners who must first strengthen their basic skills before they are able to succeed in postsecondary education. Basic skills may include reading, comprehension, and mathematic skills, as well as abstraction, system thinking, and experimentation. Basic skills may also include workforce-related skills, such as timeliness, responsibility, cooperation, and communication.

In addition to supporting projects that prepare students for college and careers, we must improve students' ability to afford postsecondary education, including career and technical education. The average net cost of a college education has risen for many undergraduates, particularly full-time students attending four-year public colleges and universities, 8 widening the affordability gap. Giving students the information they need to select the institution most appropriate to their academic abilities, as well as their personal, professional, and financial goals, is essential. Further, making true college costs transparent and providing students more affordable college options will allow students to make informed choices from a meaningful range of college options. Another strategy for reducing the cost of education while also improving the quality of teaching and learning is through developing and implementing high-quality online, credit-bearing, and accessible learning opportunities. Such strategies may help achieve the President's goal of the United States having the highest proportion of college graduates in the world.

The 2010 Supplemental Priorities also included a priority on postsecondary success. We are revising the priority to focus specifically on access, affordability, and completion of postsecondary education, including career and technical education, to further support the President's goal.

Proposed Priority 5—Increasing Postsecondary Access, Affordability, and Completion .

Projects that are designed to address one or more of the following:

(a) Reducing the net cost, median student loan debt, and student loan default rate for high-need students (as defined in this notice) who enroll in college, other postsecondary education, or other career and technical education.

(b) Increasing the number and proportion of high-need students (as defined in this notice) who are academically prepared for, enroll in, or complete on time college, other postsecondary education, or other career and technical education.

(c) Increasing the number and proportion of high-need students (as defined in this notice) who, through college preparation, awareness, recruitment, application, selection, and other activities and strategies, enroll in or complete college, other postsecondary education, or other career and technical education.

(d) Increasing the number of individuals who return to the educational system to obtain a regular high school diploma or its recognized equivalent; enroll in and complete college, other postsecondary education, or career and technical training; or obtain basic and academic skills needed to succeed in college, other postsecondary education, other career and technical education, or the workforce.

(e) Increasing the number and proportion of high-need students (as defined in this notice), particularly low-skilled adults (as defined in this notice), adults with disabilities, and disconnected youth or youth who are at risk of becoming disconnected, who enroll in and complete postsecondary programs.

(f) Supporting the development and implementation of high-quality online or hybrid credit-bearing and accessible learning opportunities that reduce the total cost of higher education, accelerate time to degree completion, or allow students to progress at their own pace.

Proposed Priority 6—Improving Job-Driven Training and Employment Outcomes .

Background:

In his January 28, 2014, State of the Union address, the President introduced an effort to “train Americans with the skills employers need and match them to good jobs that need to be filled right now.” Research suggests that the most successful strategies for effective job-driven training are those that closely align training with local labor market needs. For example, one successful approach is encouraging local agencies to foster sector partnerships with local industry. Such employment and training strategies have increased both employment rates and earnings by obtaining accurate workforce needs assessments from local business and industry groups. 9 In addition, programs that connect workers directly to the labor market through subsidized employment and registered apprenticeships have seen promising results. 10 11

However, despite recent employment gains, far too many hard-working individuals have not been able to find a job or increase their earnings, and many businesses report difficulty hiring workers with the right skills for jobs they want to fill. The Department, in collaboration with other Federal agencies, is working to ensure its career, technical, and adult education and training programs and policies are aligned with the President's job-driven training goals and assist individuals to acquire the skills necessary to pursue in-demand jobs and careers and obtain employment. In addition to programs administered by the Department's Office of Career, Technical, and Adult Education, the Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants Program provides a wide range of services designed to assist individuals with disabilities to prepare for, obtain, and retain employment. The VR Grants Program is the largest Federal training program.

Through this proposed priority, the Department would support projects that align programs in the workforce and training system to equip the Nation's workers with skills matching the needs of employers looking to hire. It is imperative that employers identify the skills and credentials required for in-demand jobs; have multiple mechanisms for finding workers who have or can acquire those skills; and help develop training programs. Workers and job seekers must have access not only to education and training that meets their unique needs, skills, and abilities, but also assistance from personnel with the requisite education, skills, and experience to provide employment counseling that will enable them to acquire jobs that lead to meaningful careers. This proposed priority was not included in the 2010 Supplemental Priorities and is proposed to reflect the Department's current policy goals.

Proposed Priority 6—Improving Job-Driven Training and Employment Outcomes .

Projects that are designed to improve job-driven training and employment outcomes through a focus on one or more of the following:

(a) Increasing employer engagement (as defined in this notice).

(b) Providing work-based learning opportunities (e.g., Registered Apprenticeship, other apprenticeships, internships, externships, on-the-job training, co-operative learning, practica, and work experience) for low-skilled adults (as defined in this notice) or other high-need students (as defined in this notice).

(c) Integrating education and training into a career pathways program or system that offers connected education and training, related stackable credentials, and other support services that enable low-skilled adults (as defined in this notice) or other high-need students (as defined in this notice) to secure industry-relevant certification and obtain employment within an occupational area with the potential to advance to higher levels of future education and employment in that area. 12

(d) Providing labor market information, career information, advising, counseling, job search assistance, and other supports including performance-based or other income supports or stipends, transportation and child care assistance and information, or others as deemed appropriate.

(e) Improving the knowledge and skills of personnel and service providers that will enable such providers to better assist their customers to obtain the competencies and job skills required in the competitive labor market.

Proposed Priority 7—Promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education .

Background:

The demand for highly skilled workers in many fields is projected to outpace the number of qualified workers. To meet the needs of the labor market and spur an increase in technological innovation, creation, and study across the Nation, the Department proposes this priority to support the education and training of individuals in fields that draw heavily on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) knowledge, such as health care, advanced manufacturing, clean energy, and information technology.

It is essential to the health of our economy to increase the number of students attracted to and prepared for careers in STEM and to increase the proportion of students who are from groups historically under-represented in these careers (e.g., minorities, individuals with disabilities, and women), and to retain all of these students in STEM fields.

The 2012 report from the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) estimated that about 40 percent of all students who start their postsecondary degree in a STEM field will finish their program. Moreover, even among those who attained a bachelor's degree in a STEM field, only about 56 percent of those working for pay one year after graduation worked in a STEM-related career. 13 Therefore, we propose to revise the priority on STEM from the 2010 Supplemental Priorities to address access to, and persistence in, rigorous and engaging STEM coursework. To increase students' engagement and interest in STEM fields, it is imperative that students are provided opportunities to pursue rigorous STEM coursework and gain research experience prior to entering postsecondary study and the workforce.

In addition, because of continued issues facing the STEM P-12 teaching profession, including teacher shortages and staffing difficulties, the President has challenged governors, philanthropists, scientists, engineers, educators, and the private sector to join a national campaign to find new ways to recruit, train, reward, and retain STEM teachers and to collectively prepare 100,000 STEM teachers over the next decade. Recruitment efforts that attract the best talent into STEM teaching will improve student learning and engagement in STEM subjects. Finally, ensuring STEM teachers have adequate knowledge of the subjects they are teaching and the ability to teach them will improve effectiveness and relevance of instruction in STEM subjects. This priority would also help to bolster local or regional partnerships that enhance students' access to real-world STEM experiences and teachers' access to high-quality STEM-related professional learning.

Proposed Priority 7—Promoting Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education .

Projects that are designed to improve student achievement (as defined in this notice) or other related outcomes by addressing one or more of the following:

(a) Increasing the preparation of teachers or other educators in STEM subjects, including teachers of career and technical education, through activities that may include building content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge, and increasing the number and quality of authentic STEM experiences (as defined in this notice).

(b) Providing students with increased access to rigorous and engaging STEM coursework and authentic STEM experiences (as defined in this notice).

(c) Identifying and implementing instructional strategies, systems, and structures that improve postsecondary learning and retention, resulting in completion of a degree in a STEM field.

(d) Increasing the number of individuals from groups historically under-represented in STEM, including minorities, individuals with disabilities, and women, who are provided with access to rigorous and engaging coursework in STEM or who are prepared for postsecondary study and careers in STEM.

(e) Supporting local or regional partnerships to give students access to real-world STEM experiences and to give educators access to high-quality STEM-related professional learning.

Proposed Priority 8—Implementing Internationally Benchmarked College- and Career-Ready Standards and Assessments .

Background:

Since 2009, 45 States and the District of Columbia have partnered in a State-led effort to develop common, internationally benchmarked college- and career-ready standards in English language arts and mathematics for elementary and secondary school students. Three other States are implementing their own college- and career-ready standards. In order to ensure effective implementation of these college- and career-ready standards and thereby further the goal of preparing students to compete in a global economy, it is essential to develop and implement teacher and principal preparation and professional development programs; student assessments or performance-based tools aligned with the standards, including adaptive assessments, simulations, and performance tasks; and other strategies that translate the standards and assessment data into classroom practices that meet the needs of all students, including English learners and students with disabilities.

The Department has emphasized the importance of high-quality formative, interim, and summative assessments to measure the extent to which students are meeting or exceeding college- and career-ready standards. States that set clear, high expectations for students must be able to assess and accurately measure student performance against those expectations. Projects that are designed to implement these standards and assessments will improve teaching and learning and can support greater accountability to students, families, and school or district staff by providing timely, relevant, and actionable information about student learning over time.

A version of this priority was included in the 2010 Supplemental Priorities under a slightly different title. In this notice, we are proposing minor changes to the previous priority.

Proposed Priority 8—Implementing Internationally Benchmarked College- and Career-Ready Standards and Assessments .

Projects that are designed to support the implementation of and transition to internationally benchmarked college- and career-ready standards and assessments, including projects in one or more of the following:

(a) Developing and implementing student assessments (e.g., formative assessments, interim assessments, summative assessments) or performance-based tools aligned with those standards and accessible to all students.

(b) Developing and implementing professional development or teacher preparation programs that are aligned with those standards.

(c) Developing and implementing strategies that translate the standards and information from assessments into classroom practices that meet the needs of all students.

Proposed Priority 9—Improving Teacher Effectiveness and Promoting Equal Access to Effective Teachers .

Background:

It is well established that teacher effectiveness contributes more to student academic outcomes than any other in-school measure; yet, there is dramatic variation in teacher effectiveness within and across schools, including significant inequity in students' access to effective teachers, particularly for low-income and minority students.

As such, it is essential to attract a high-performing and diverse pool of talented individuals into the teaching profession and to ensure that they have access to high-quality preparation programs that have high standards for successful completion. Equally important is supporting and retaining effective teachers through practices such as creating or enhancing opportunities for professional growth, reforming compensation and advancement systems, and creating conditions for successful teaching and learning. As part of their teacher development efforts, local educational agencies (LEAs or districts) should have in place strategies for ensuring teacher success, such as evaluation and support systems that consider multiple measures including student growth (as defined in this notice) and that result in actionable feedback, support, and incentives for improvement at every stage of a teacher's career.

In the 2010 Supplemental Priorities, we included a single priority that supported projects focused on both teachers and principals. This notice includes separate priorities for projects supporting teachers and principals. By creating separate priorities, discretionary grant programs can choose to focus on either teachers or principals and are provided the opportunity for more targeted support to each group.

This proposed priority focuses solely on strengthening teacher recruitment, selection, preparation, development, retention, support, recognition, assessment, and reach in ways that are consistent with the Department's policy goals for professionalizing teaching, improving outcomes for all students, and ensuring that low-income students and minority students have equal access to effective teachers. This priority would encourage grantees to exceed the requirements of Section 1112(c)(1)(L) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) by focusing on effective teachers measured using a high-quality teacher evaluation and support system (as defined in this notice).

Proposed Priority 9—Improving Teacher Effectiveness and Promoting Equal Access to Effective Teachers .

Projects that are designed to address one or more of the following:

(a) Increasing the number and percentage of effective teachers in lowest performing schools (as defined in this notice) or schools with high concentrations of low-income and minority students, through such activities as:

(1) Improving the preparation, recruitment, selection, and early career development of teachers; implementing performance-based certification systems; reforming compensation and advancement systems; and reforming hiring timelines and systems.

(2) Improving the retention of effective teachers through such activities as creating or enhancing opportunities for teachers' professional growth; reforming compensation and advancement systems; and improving workplace conditions to create opportunities for successful teaching and learning; or

(b) Promoting equal access to effective teachers for low-income and minority students across and within schools and districts.

For the purposes of this priority, teacher effectiveness must be measured using a high-quality teacher evaluation and support system (as defined in this notice).

Proposed Priority 10—Improving the Effectiveness of Principals. 14

Background:

While there is no overall shortage of candidates who have the credentials States require for principals, these candidates are often ill-prepared to meet the demands of the principal position. 15 Both novice and experienced principals often lack the necessary skills and support to respond to the increased pressures of their positions, such as changes to evaluation systems and the implementation of key organizational processes in their schools. The quality, not the quantity, of credentialed candidates for principal positions is a common criticism of principal preparation programs. Specifically, many district leaders and policy makers are critical of principal preparation programs that lack a rigorous screening and selection process for program candidates, courses that are aligned with standards of practice, and clinical experiences. 16 Additionally, once credentialed candidates become principals, they are often not provided the necessary support and development opportunities that enable them to enhance their skills, particularly in shaping a strong professional community and collective responsibility for student learning by evaluating and providing feedback to teachers, analyzing student data, developing school leadership teams, and creating a positive school climate.

This proposed priority underscores the value of principals and takes into account the influence principals have over teacher effectiveness and student achievement in their schools. 17 Through this proposed priority, we seek to support projects that expand the pool of effective and highly effective principals, support ongoing professional development that is aligned with principals' needs, and build district capacity and systems that will provide principals the instructional focus, core leadership competencies, support, policies, and conditions that will positively affect the schools they lead.

As noted in the background discussion of proposed priority 9, we propose to separate priorities addressing teachers and principals, therefore allowing discretionary grant programs to focus on either teachers or principals in a manner that is specific to each group's unique needs.

Proposed Priority 10—Improving the Effectiveness of Principals.

Projects that are designed to increase the number and percentage of highly effective principals by addressing one or more of the following:

(a) Creating or expanding practices and strategies to recruit, select, prepare, and support talented individuals to lead and significantly improve instruction in the lowest performing schools (as defined in this notice) or schools with high concentrations of high-need students (as defined in this notice).

(b) Identifying, implementing, and supporting policies and school conditions that facilitate efforts by principals to turn around lowest performing schools (as defined in this notice).

(c) Creating or expanding principal preparation programs that include clinical experiences, induction and other supports for program participants, strategies for tracking the effect program graduates have on teaching and learning, and coursework that is aligned with pre-kindergarten through grade 12 college- and career-ready standards.

(d) Implementing professional development for current principals, especially in lowest performing schools (as defined in this notice), that is designed to improve teacher and student learning by supporting principals in their mastery of essential instructional and organizational leadership skills.

(e) Implementing practices or strategies that support districts in hiring, evaluating, and supporting principals to effectively lead schools.

For the purposes of this priority, principal effectiveness must be measured using a high-quality principal evaluation and support system (as defined in this notice).

Proposed Priority 11—Leveraging Technology to Support Instructional Practice and Professional Development.

Background:

Leveraging technology to support instructional practice and professional development is crucial to ensure Americans have access to a high-quality education and are prepared to be globally competitive. Schools, educators, students, and families all benefit when effective digital tools and materials are thoughtfully integrated into classrooms and communities.

Technology can accelerate or enhance the implementation of the other priorities proposed in this document by:

• Providing personalized data for early learning providers;

• Assessing and supporting students' mastery of non-cognitive skills and behaviors;

• Enabling the creation of personalized learning environments;

• Targeting and differentiating material specifically for high-need students (as defined in this notice);

• Increasing access to higher education and reducing instructional costs;

• Accessing open educational resources (as defined in this notice) aligned with internationally benchmarked college- and career-ready standards;

• Supporting teachers in sharing best practices and collaborating with experts to improve instructional approaches;

• Encouraging teacher observation and principal feedback;

• Engaging more effectively with diverse families and communities;

• Providing access to advanced coursework and other learning opportunities where otherwise not available; and

• Increasing the reach of highly effective teachers, particularly for students in rural and isolated areas.

While the use of digital tools was part of the 2010 Supplemental Priorities, we are revising this priority to include more specific strategies to promote technology integration and enhance student and educator learning. This proposed priority would explicitly support projects that help students and educators take full advantage of access to high-speed Internet, digital tools and materials, and open educational resources (as defined in this notice).

Proposed Priority 11—Leveraging Technology to Support Instructional Practice and Professional Development.

Projects that are designed to leverage technology through one or more of the following:

(a) Using high-need Internet access and devices that increase students' and educators' access to high-quality digital tools, materials, and assessments, particularly open educational resources (as defined in this notice).

(b) Developing and implementing high-quality accessible digital tools, materials, and assessments that are aligned to rigorous college- and career-ready standards.

(c) Developing and implementing high-quality, accessible online courses, learning communities, or simulations, including those for which educators could earn professional development credit or continuing education units through digital credentials (as defined in this notice) based on demonstrated mastery of competencies and performance-based outcomes, instead of traditional time-based metrics.

(d) Using data platforms that enable the development, visualization, and rapid analysis of data to produce evidence on teaching and learning, while also protecting privacy in accordance with applicable laws.

Proposed Priority 12—Promoting Diversity.

Background:

The 2010 Supplemental Priorities included a priority on diversity that allows the Department to give priority to projects that “are designed to promote student diversity, including racial and ethnic diversity, or avoid racial isolation.” In announcing this priority in 2010, we noted that LEAs and postsecondary institutions have found that “providing diverse learning environments . . . can provide substantial educational benefits.” To further this goal, in 2011 and again in 2013, the Department, in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Justice, issued guidance regarding the use of race and ethnicity to promote diversity and reduce racial isolation. 18

The Department continues to encourage schools, school districts, and postsecondary institutions to take lawful steps to increase student body diversity based on race and ethnicity, and, in the case of school districts, to avoid racial isolation. Any steps taken by school districts and postsecondary institutions to further these efforts must be done in accordance with applicable law, including United States Supreme Court precedent, and the guidance should be helpful in that respect.

Promoting diversity is a compelling educational goal for students from many backgrounds. Today's global economy demands that students graduate ready to interact with individuals from all walks of life and experience. LEAs and postsecondary institutions have a critical role in preparing students for success in an increasingly diverse workforce and society, and can help students reap substantial educational benefits by providing them with learning environments in which they can develop important skills, such as the ability to communicate and collaborate with peers of different backgrounds, perspectives, and abilities.

The 2010 priority highlighted racial and ethnic diversity, but did not preclude an applicant from receiving priority consideration for proposing projects promoting diversity in other ways, such as diversity based on socioeconomic status, another objective of Federal education programs. Consequently, the proposed diversity priority also covers projects that promote student body diversity based on other factors, including a student's socioeconomic status. Highlighting efforts to promote diversity based on socioeconomic status is also consistent with the 2011 and 2013 guidance documents, which explain that schools, school districts, and postsecondary institutions may elect to take account of students' socioeconomic status to achieve student body racial and ethnic diversity and, in the case of preschool, elementary, or secondary programs, to avoid racial isolation.

Proposed Priority 12—Promoting Diversity.

Projects that are designed to prepare students for success in an increasingly diverse workforce and society by increasing the diversity, including racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic diversity, of students enrolled in schools or postsecondary programs; or in the case of preschool, elementary, or secondary programs, decreasing the racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic isolation of students served by the project.

Proposed Priority 13—Improving School Climate, Behavioral Supports, and Correctional Education.

Background:

For all students to have the best chance for academic success, it is imperative they attend safe schools with nurturing climates that support active academic engagement through comprehensive supports for their physical, mental, and behavioral well-being. Too many students are negatively affected by violence, bullying, and exclusionary discipline practices, including suspension, expulsion, and unnecessary placement in alternative educational programs. The Department's Civil Rights Data Collection indicates that, for districts that reported expulsions, Hispanic and African American students represent 56 percent of the students expelled, but only 40 percent of the enrolled students in these districts. Additionally, students covered under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) were twice as likely as students who were not covered under IDEA to be suspended from school at least once. 19 Identifying and addressing the causes for disproportionate discipline and reducing school discipline practices that remove students from the learning environment will increase opportunities for student success.

Similarly, too many individuals who are or who have been incarcerated lack access to high-quality education or job training programs that will support their reintegration into the community. According to a recent study, inmates who participated in correctional education programs were, on average, 13 percentage points less likely to return to prison than inmates who did not participate in such programs. 20 Providing these individuals with the skills and knowledge essential for their futures will assist them in their transition to becoming productive citizens and decrease the likelihood of recidivism.

The 2010 Supplemental Priorities broadly addressed school climate. Through this proposed priority, we focus on specific challenges related to school climate, including disparities in and overuse of exclusionary discipline practices, and add a focus on social, emotional, and behavioral supports. 21 In supporting projects that improve school climate and reduce school discipline issues, assess and address the root causes of disproportionate discipline, and improve the quality of education programs in juvenile justice and adult correctional facilities, the Department aims to support projects that support positive student behavior and students' success in college and in their careers.

Proposed Priority 13—Improving School Climate, Behavioral Supports, and Correctional Education.

Projects that are designed to improve student outcomes through one or more of the following:

(a) Improving school climate through strategies that may include establishing tiered behavioral supports (as defined in this notice) or strengthening student social, emotional, and behavioral skills.

(b) Reducing or eliminating disparities in school disciplinary practices and the use of exclusionary discipline (such as suspensions, expulsions, and unnecessary placements in alternative education programs) for particular groups of students, including minority students and students with disabilities, by identifying and addressing the root causes of such disparities.

(c) Improving the quality of education programs in juvenile justice facilities (such as detention facilities and secure and non-secure placements) or adult correctional facilities, and linking the youth or adults to education or job training programs post-release.

Proposed Priority 14—Improving Parent, Family, and Community Engagement.

Background:

In order for families to be meaningfully engaged in their children's education and development, they must have a sense of shared responsibility with schools and communities for their children's academic outcomes. They must also have opportunities to support learning and school improvement and feel that their engagement is welcomed and supported by school and district staff.

In the 2010 Supplemental Priorities, we included a single priority that combined efforts to improve family and community engagement with efforts to improve school engagement, environment, and safety. This proposed priority would separate efforts to improve parent, family, and community engagement from those focused on improving school engagement, environment, and safety. Further, the 2010 priority addressed improving parent and family engagement broadly. Under this proposed priority, however, we would specify and expand on the types of projects we would like to support.

For example, this proposed priority would support the alignment of the Department's policies, practices, and programs concerning parent and family engagement (as defined in this notice) and community engagement (as defined in this notice). We view family engagement as a shared responsibility from cradle to career that takes place across multiple settings (i.e., home, school, and community). Further, this proposed priority focuses on building the capacity of parents, families, communities, and school and district staff to support academic achievement. This capacity-building focus can be integrated into many aspects of a school's or LEA's strategy to achieve learning goals, including the recruitment and training of effective teachers and leaders, the mechanisms used to evaluate and assess both teachers and students, and the tools that provide parents with access to information about students' academic progress and performance and information on how to use that data to support their children's education.

Proposed Priority 14—Improving Parent, Family, and Community Engagement.

Projects that are designed to improve students' academic outcomes through one or more of the following:

(a) Developing and implementing systemic initiatives (as defined in this notice) to improve parent and family engagement (as defined in this notice) by expanding and enhancing the skills, strategies, and knowledge (i.e., techniques needed to effectively communicate, advocate, support, and make informed decisions about the student's education) of parents and families.

(b) Providing professional development that enhances the skills and competencies of school leaders, principals, teachers, or other administrative and support staff to build meaningful relationships with students' parents or families.

(c) Implementing initiatives that improve community engagement (as defined in this notice) or the relationships between parents or families and school staff by cultivating sustained partnerships (as defined in this notice).

Proposed Priority 15—Supporting Military Families and Veterans.

Background:

There are more than 1.2 million school-aged children who have at least one parent that is a member of the uniformed services. 22 Approximately 10 percent of those children have a parent deployed to a combat zone, and students of deployed parents can live in any community across our Nation and attend any school. Research suggests that military children experience stressors due to relocation that can negatively affect student achievement and participation in school activities. A 2010 military family lifestyle survey found that 34 percent of respondents are “less or not confident” that their children's school is responsive to the unique aspects of military family life. 23

Through a memorandum of understanding, the Department of Education and the Department of Defense acknowledge the unique educational needs and challenges faced by the children of military servicemen and women, including the need to reduce the negative consequences of frequent relocations and absences. Additionally, on April 27, 2012, the President signed Executive Order 13607, “Principles of Excellence for Educational Institutions Serving Service Members, Veterans, Spouses, and Other Family Members.” In implementing the Executive order, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs has established seven Principles of Excellence that encourage institutions of higher education (IHEs) to support veterans. Building on that initiative, the Department developed the “Eight Keys to Veterans' Success,” which highlight specific ways that IHEs can support veterans in their pursuit of higher education and employment.

This proposed priority aims to ensure the healthy development of military children, including children of active duty service members and veterans, and to improve educational experiences and career opportunities for students who are active duty or reserve component service members, spouses of active duty or reserve component service members, and veterans. Additionally, through this proposed priority, we would update the 2010 priority to encourage better alignment between projects we support and the President's Executive order.

Proposed Priority 15—Supporting Military Families and Veterans.

Projects that are designed to address the needs of military- or veteran-connected students (as defined in this notice).

Types of Priorities:

When inviting applications for a competition using one or more priorities, we designate the type of each priority as absolute, competitive preference, or invitational through a notice in the Federal Register . The effect of each type of priority follows:

Absolute priority: Under an absolute priority, we consider only applications that meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(3)).

Competitive preference priority: Under a competitive preference priority, we give competitive preference to an application by (1) awarding additional points, depending on the extent to which the application meets the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting an application that meets the priority over an application of comparable merit that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(ii)).

Invitational priority: Under an invitational priority, we are particularly interested in applications that meet the priority. However, we do not give an application that meets the priority a preference over other applications (34 CFR 75.105(c)(1)).

Proposed Definitions:

Background:

We propose definitions to ensure a common understanding of terms used in the proposed priorities. These proposed definitions are intended to replace the definitions in the 2010 Supplemental Priorities.

Authentic STEM experiences means laboratory, research-based, or experiential learning opportunities in a STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) subject in informal or formal settings.

Children with high needs means children from birth through kindergarten entry who are from low-income families or otherwise in need of special assistance and support, including children who have disabilities or developmental delays; who are English learners; who reside on “Indian lands” as that term is defined by section 8013(6) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA); who are migrant, homeless, or in foster care; and other children as identified by the State.

Community engagement means the systematic inclusion of community organizations as partners with State educational agencies, local educational agencies, or other educational institutions, or their school staff. These organizations may include faith- and community-based organizations, institutions of higher education (including minority-serving institutions authorized under Title III of the Higher Education Act and historically black colleges and universities), business and industry, labor, State and local government entities, or Federal entities other than the Department.

Digital credentials means evidence of a teacher's or student's mastery of specific competencies or performance-based abilities, provided in digital rather than physical medium (e.g., through digital badges). These digital credentials may then be used to supplement or satisfy continuing education or professional development requirements.

Employer engagement means the active involvement of employers, employer associations, and labor organizations in identifying skills and competencies, designing programs, offering real workplace problem sets, facilitating access to leading-edge equipment and facilities, providing “return to work”-type professional development opportunities for faculty, and providing work-based learning and mentoring opportunities for participants.

Essential domains of school readiness means the domains of language and literacy development, cognition and general knowledge (including early mathematics and early scientific development), approaches toward learning, physical well-being and motor development (including adaptive skills), and social and emotional development.

High-minority school means a school as that term is defined by a local educational agency (LEA), which must define the term in a manner consistent with its State's Teacher Equity Plan, as required by section 1111(b)(8)(C) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA). The applicant must provide the definition(s) of “high-minority school” used in its application.

High-need students means students at risk of educational failure or otherwise in need of special assistance and support, such as students who are living in poverty, who attend high-minority schools (as defined in this notice), who are far below grade level, who have left school before receiving a regular high school diploma, who are at risk of not graduating with a diploma on time, who are homeless, who are in foster care, who have been incarcerated, who have disabilities, or who are English learners.

High-quality teacher evaluation and support system means a system that provides for continuous improvement of instruction; differentiates performance using at least three performance levels; uses multiple valid measures to determine performance levels, including data on student growth (as defined in this notice) as a significant factor and other measures of professional practice; evaluates teachers on a regular basis; provides clear and timely feedback that identifies needs and guides professional development; is developed with teacher and principal involvement; and is used to inform personnel decisions.

High-quality principal evaluation and support system means a system that provides for continuous improvement of instruction; differentiates performance using at least three performance levels; uses multiple valid measures to determine performance levels, including data on student growth (as defined in this notice) as a significant factor and other measures of professional practice; evaluates principals on a regular basis; provides clear and timely feedback that identifies needs and guides professional development; is developed with teacher and principal involvement; and is used to inform personnel decisions.

Low-skilled adult means an adult with low literacy and numeracy skills.

Lowest performing schools means—

For a State with an approved request for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) flexibility, priority schools (as defined in this notice) or Tier I and Tier II schools (as defined in this notice) identified under the School Improvement Grants program.

For any other State, Tier I and Tier II schools (as defined in this notice) identified under the School Improvement Grants program.

Military- or veteran-connected student means—

(a) A child participating in an early learning and development program, a student enrolled in preschool through grade 12, or a student enrolled in postsecondary education or career and technical training who has a parent or guardian who is a member of the uniformed services (as defined by 37 U.S.C. 101, in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, National Guard, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or Public Health Service);

(b) A student who is a member of the uniformed services, a veteran of the uniformed services, or who is the spouse of a service member or veteran; or

(c) A child participating in an early learning and development program or a student enrolled in preschool through grade 12 who has a parent or guardian who is a veteran of the uniformed services (as defined by 37 U.S.C. 101).

Open educational resources (OER) means teaching, learning, and research resources that reside in the public domain or have been released under an intellectual property license that permits their free use and repurposing by others.

Parent and family engagement means the systematic inclusion of parents and families, working in partnership with State educational agencies (SEAs), State lead agencies (under Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) or the State's Race to the Top-Early Learning Challenge grant), local educational agencies (LEAs), or other educational institutions, or their staff, in their child's education, which may include strengthening the ability of (a) parents and families to support their child's education and (b) school staff to work with parents and families.

Persistently-lowest achieving schools means, as determined by the State—

(a)(1) Any Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that—

(i) Is among the lowest achieving five percent of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring or the lowest achieving five Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring in the State, whichever number of schools is greater; or

(ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) that is less than 60 percent over a number of years; and

(2) Any secondary school that is eligible for, but does not receive, Title I funds that—

(i) Is among the lowest achieving five percent of secondary schools or the lowest achieving five secondary schools in the State that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds, whichever number of schools is greater; or

(ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) that is less than 60 percent over a number of years.

(b) To identify the lowest achieving schools, a State must take into account both—

(i) The academic achievement of the “all students” group in a school in terms of proficiency on the State's assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA), in reading/language arts and mathematics combined; and

(ii) The school's lack of progress on those assessments over a number of years in the “all students” group.

Personalized learning means instruction that is aligned to rigorous college- and career-ready standards where the pace of learning and the instructional approach are tailored to the needs of individual learners. Learning objectives and content, as well as the pace, may all vary depending on a learner's needs. In addition, learning activities are aligned to specific interests of each learner. Data from a variety of sources (including formative assessments, student feedback, and progress in digital learning activities), along with teacher recommendations, are often used to personalize learning.

Priority schools means schools that, based on the most recent data available, have been identified as among the lowest performing schools in the State. The total number of priority schools in a State must be at least five percent of the Title I schools in the State. A priority school is—

(a) A school among the lowest five percent of Title I schools in the State based on the achievement of the “all students” group in terms of proficiency on the statewide assessments that are part of the SEA's differentiated recognition, accountability, and support system, combined, and has demonstrated a lack of progress on those assessments over a number of years in the “all students” group;

(b) A Title I-participating or Title I-eligible high school with a graduation rate less than 60 percent over a number of years; or

(c) A Tier I or Tier II school under the SIG program that is using SIG funds to implement a school intervention model.

Rural local educational agency means a local educational agency (LEA) that is eligible under the Small Rural School Achievement (SRSA) program or the Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) program authorized under Title VI, Part B of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA). Eligible applicants may determine whether a particular LEA is eligible for these programs by referring to information on the Department's Web site at www2.ed.gov/nclb/freedom/local/reap.html.

Student achievement means—

For grades and subjects in which assessments are required under section 1111(b)(3) of the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA): (1) A student's score on such assessments; and (2) other measures of student learning, such as those described in the subsequent paragraph, provided they are rigorous and comparable across schools within a local educational agency (LEA).

For grades and subjects in which assessments are not required under section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA: (1) Alternative measures of student learning and performance, such as student results on pre-tests, end-of-course tests, and objective performance-based assessments; (2) student learning objectives; (3) student performance on English language proficiency assessments; and (4) other measures of student achievement that are rigorous and comparable across schools within an LEA.

Student growth means the change in student achievement (as defined in this notice) for an individual student between two or more points in time.

Sustained partnerships means relationships that have demonstrably adequate resources and other support to continue beyond the funding period and that consist of a local educational agency, one or more of its schools, and one or more of the following:

(1) Faith- or community-based organizations.

(2) Institutions of higher education, including community colleges, technical colleges, or technical institutions.

(3) Minority-serving institutions authorized under Title III of the Higher Education Act or historically black colleges or universities.

(4) Business, industry, or labor.

(5) Other Federal, State, or local government entities.

Systemic initiatives means policies, programs, or activities that include parent and family engagement as a core component and are designed to meet critical educational goals, such as school readiness, student achievement (as defined in this notice), and school turnaround.

Tier I schools means—

(a) A Tier I school is a Title I school in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that is identified by the State educational agency (SEA) under paragraph (a)(1) of the definition of “persistently lowest-achieving schools.”

(b) At its option, an SEA may also identify as a Tier I school an elementary school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds that—

(1)(i) Has not made adequate yearly progress for at least two consecutive years; or

(ii) Is in the State's lowest quintile of performance based on proficiency rates on the State's assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) in reading/language arts and mathematics combined; and

(2) Is no higher achieving than the highest-achieving school identified by the SEA under paragraph (a)(1)(i) of the definition of “persistently lowest-achieving schools.”

Tier II schools means—

(a) A Tier II school is a secondary school that is eligible for, but does not receive, Title I, Part A funds and is identified by the State educational agency (SEA) under paragraph (a)(2) of the definition of “persistently lowest-achieving schools.”

(b) At its option, an SEA may also identify as a Tier II school a secondary school that is eligible for Title I, Part A funds that—

(1)(i) Has not made adequate yearly progress for at least two consecutive years; or

(ii) Is in the State's lowest quintile of performance based on proficiency rates on the State's assessments under section 1111(b)(3) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA), in reading/language arts and mathematics combined; and

(2)(i) Is no higher achieving than the highest-achieving school identified by the SEA under paragraph (a)(2)(i) of the definition of “persistently lowest- achieving schools”; or

(ii) Is a high school that has had a graduation rate as defined in 34 CFR 200.19(b) that is less than 60 percent over a number of years.

Tiered behavioral supports means a continuum of increasingly intensive and evidence-based social, emotional, and behavioral supports, including a framework of universal strategies for students and school staff to promote positive behavior and data-based strategies for matching more intensive supports to individual student needs.

Final Priorities and Definitions:

We will announce the final priorities and definitions in a notice in the Federal Register . We will determine the final priorities and definitions after considering responses to this notice and other information available to the Department. This notice does not preclude us from proposing additional priorities or definitions, subject to meeting applicable rulemaking requirements.

Under Executive Order 12866, the Secretary must determine whether this regulatory action is “significant” and, therefore, subject to the requirements of the Executive order and subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 defines a “significant regulatory action” as an action likely to result in a rule that may—

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely affect a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities in a material way (also referred to as an “economically significant” rule);

(2) Create serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles stated in the Executive Order.

This proposed regulatory action is a significant regulatory action subject to review by OMB under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866.

We have also reviewed this proposed regulatory action under Executive Order 13563, which supplements and explicitly reaffirms the principles, structures, and definitions governing regulatory review established in Executive Order 12866. To the extent permitted by law, Executive Order 13563 requires that an agency—

(1) Propose or adopt regulations only upon a reasoned determination that their benefits justify their costs (recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify);

(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives and taking into account—among other things and to the extent practicable—the costs of cumulative regulations;

(3) In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, select those approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity);

(4) To the extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than the behavior or manner of compliance a regulated entity must adopt; and

(5) Identify and assess available alternatives to direct regulation, including economic incentives—such as user fees or marketable permits—to encourage the desired behavior, or provide information that enables the public to make choices.

Executive Order 13563 also requires an agency “to use the best available techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and costs as accurately as possible.” The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB has emphasized that these techniques may include “identifying changing future compliance costs that might result from technological innovation or anticipated behavioral changes.”

We are issuing these proposed priorities and definitions only on a reasoned determination that their benefits would justify their costs. In choosing among alternative regulatory approaches, we selected those approaches that would maximize net benefits. Based on the analysis that follows, the Department believes that this regulatory action is consistent with the principles in Executive Order 13563.

We also have determined that this regulatory action would not unduly interfere with State, local, and tribal governments in the exercise of their governmental functions.

In accordance with both Executive orders, the Department has assessed the potential costs and benefits, both quantitative and qualitative, of this regulatory action. The potential costs associated with this regulatory action are those resulting from regulatory requirements and those we have determined as necessary for administering the Department's programs and activities.

Discussion of Costs and Benefits:

The proposed priorities and definitions would not impose significant costs on entities that would receive assistance through the Department's discretionary grant programs. Additionally, the benefits of implementing the proposals contained in this notice outweigh any associated costs because they would result in the Department's discretionary grant programs selecting high-quality applications to implement activities that are most likely to have a significant national effect on educational reform and improvement.

Application submission and participation in a discretionary grant program are voluntary. The Secretary believes that the costs imposed on applicants by the proposed priorities and definitions would be limited to paperwork burden related to preparing an application for a discretionary grant program that is using one or more of the proposed priorities and definitions in its competition. Because the costs of carrying out activities would be paid for with program funds, the costs of implementation would not be a burden for any eligible applicants, including small entities.

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification:

For these reasons as well, the Secretary certifies that these proposed regulations would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Intergovernmental Review: Some of the programs affected by these proposed priorities and definitions are subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. One of the objectives of the Executive order is to foster an intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened federalism. The Executive order relies on processes developed by State and local governments for coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance.

This document provides early notification of our specific plans and actions for these programs.

Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) on request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT .

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register . Free Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register , in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA is soliciting comments and information to enable it to: (i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (ii) evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (iii) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (iv) minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB.

Abstract: The purpose of this information collection request is to assist EPA 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 greater inclusion of information to discover any potential conflicts of interest as recommended by the Government Accountability Office.

Form Numbers: EPA Form 3110-48.

Respondents/affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are approximately 250 candidates for membership as SGEs on EPA federal advisory committees. SGEs are required to file a confidential financial disclosure report (Form 3110-48) when first appointed to serve on EPA advisory committees, and then annually thereafter. Committee members may also be required to update the confidential form before each meeting while they serve as SGEs.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Required in order to serve as a SGE on an EPA federal advisory committee (5 CFR 2634.903).

Estimated number of respondents: 250 (total).

Frequency of response: Annual.

Total estimated burden: 250 hours per year (1 hour per respondent). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

Total estimated cost: $22,000 (per year). There are no capital investment or maintenance and operational costs.

Changes in Estimates: The estimated number of respondents and hourly labor costs have been reduced resulting in a lower total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB.

The SAB was established pursuant to the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAA), codified at 42 U.S.C. 4365, to provide independent scientific and technical advice to the Administrator on the technical basis for Agency positions and regulations. The SAB is a Federal Advisory Committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2. The SAB will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies. Pursuant to FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby given that the SAB EJTG Review Panel will hold a public teleconference. The purpose of the teleconference is to discuss the panel's draft report. This SAB panel will provide advice to the Administrator through the chartered SAB.

Background: The EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics along with the Office of Environmental Justice has requested that the SAB peer review their Draft Technical Guidance for Assessing Environmental Justice in Regulatory Analysis (May 1, 2013). The SAB EJTG Review Panel met on January 30-31, 2014 to conduct a peer review of the draft technical guidance (78 FR 77673-77674). Additional information about this advisory activity, including the formation of the SAB EJTG Review Panel, can be found at the following URL: http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/fedrgstr_activites/EJ%20Technical%20Guidance?OpenDocument. The July 22, 2014 teleconference is being held for the EJTG Review Panel to discuss its draft peer review report.

Technical Contacts: Any technical questions concerning EPA's draft technical document should be directed to Dr. Kelly Maguire at (202) 566-2273 or by email at maguire.kelly@epa.gov.

Availability of Meeting Materials: Prior to the meeting, the review documents, agenda and other materials will be accessible through the calendar link on the blue navigation bar at http://www.epa.gov/sab/. Materials may also be accessed at the following SAB Web page http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/fedrgstr_activites/EJ%20Technical%20Guidance?OpenDocument.

Procedures for Providing Public Input: Public comment for consideration by EPA's federal advisory committees and panels has a different purpose from public comment provided to EPA program offices. Therefore, the process for submitting comments to a federal advisory committee is different from the process used to submit comments to an EPA program office. Federal advisory committees and panels, including scientific advisory committees, provide independent advice to the EPA. Interested members of the public may submit relevant information on the topic of this advisory activity, and/or the group conducting the activity, for the SAB to consider during the advisory process. Input from the public to the SAB will have the most impact if it provides specific scientific or technical information or analysis for SAB committees and panels to consider or if it relates to the clarity or accuracy of the technical information. Members of the public wishing to provide comment should contact the DFO directly. Oral Statements: In general, individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation on a teleconference will be limited to 3 minutes and oral presentation at a face-to-face meeting will be limited to five minutes. Interested parties should contact Dr. Sue Shallal, DFO, in writing (preferably via email) at the contact information noted above by July 11, 2014 to be placed on the list of public speakers for the teleconference. Written Statements: Written statements will be accepted throughout the advisory process; however, for timely consideration by Committee/Panel members, statements should be supplied to the DFO via email at the contact information noted above at least one week prior to a public meeting. Written statements should be supplied in one of the following electronic formats: Adobe Acrobat PDF, MS Word, MS PowerPoint, or Rich Text files in IBM-PC/Windows 98/2000/XP format. It is the SAB Staff Office general policy to post written comments on the Web page for the advisory meeting or teleconference. Submitters are requested to provide an unsigned version of each document because the SAB Staff Office does not publish documents with signatures on its Web sites. Members of the public should be aware that their personal contact information, if included in any written comments, may be posted to the SAB Web site. Copyrighted material will not be posted without explicit permission of the copyright holder.

Accessibility: For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Dr. Sue Shallal at (202) 564-2057 or shallal.suhair@epa.gov. To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Dr. Shallal preferably at least ten days prior to the meeting to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request.

Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA.

The White Earth Nation of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe owns and operates two fuel oil-fired and two propane-fired boilers at its Shooting Star Casino and Event Center in Mahnomen, Minnesota. The casino and the four boilers are located on the White Earth Nation of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe's reservation. The boilers are used for space heating at the casino.

On September 10, 2013, EPA received a permit application from TSS Consultants on behalf of the White Earth Nation of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe requesting a minor NSR construction to be permit issued pursuant to the requirements of the Federal Minor New Source Review Program in Indian Country, codified at 40 CFR 49.151-49.161. In its application, the White Earth Nation of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe specifically requested the construction of a new 5 MMBTU/hr biomass-fired boiler and annual operating hour limitations on the existing propane- and fuel oil-fired boilers at the facility. The new biomass-fired boiler will provide space heating to the facility alongside the existing boilers.

On October 24, 2013, EPA determined that the permit application was administratively complete pursuant to the permit application requirements of 40 CFR 49.154. Based on the information in the application, EPA prepared a draft permit for public review according to the permit content requirements at 40 CFR 49.155 in which EPA proposed to authorize the construction of the new biomass-fired boiler and to establish annual operating hour limitations for all new and existing boilers at the casino as requested in the permit application.

In accordance with the public participation requirements of 40 CFR 49.157, EPA mailed the public notice and the draft permit documents to all required parties. EPA also mailed the public notice, the draft permit documents, and a copy of the application to the Mahnomen Public Library to facilitate review for interested members of the public in the area. EPA published the public notice in the Mahnomen Pioneer, a newspaper with local circulation in the affected area, on February 20, 2014. The public comment period ended on March 24, 2014, 30 days after publication in the Mahnomen Pioneer.

During the public comment period, EPA received one comment letter from the Minnesota Historical Society. The Minnesota Historical Society concurred with EPA's National Historic Preservation Act conclusion and also reminded EPA that the White Earth Nation's Tribal Historic Preservation Officer shares review responsibility with the Minnesota Historical Society. The comment letter did not specifically request any permit changes or object to any permit conditions.

EPA issued a final minor NSR construction permit, permit number MIN-WE-27087R0001-2013-01, on April 15, 2014, in accordance with the final permit issuance requirements of 40 CFR 49.159. The final permit became effective on May 15, 2014. EPA sent the final permit decision and a copy of the final permit documents to the Shooting Star Casino and Event Center on April 17, 2014. EPA posted the final permit decision and final permit documents on its Web site at http://yosemite.epa.gov/r5/r5ard.nsf/Tribal+Permits!OpenView.

EPA is notifying the public of the issuance of a minor NSR construction permit, number MIN-WE-27087R0001-2013-01, issued to the White Earth Nation of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, on April 15, 2014. The permit became effective on May 15, 2014.

As stipulated by the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2 Section 9(c), the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is hereby giving notice of the renewal of the NPRSB charter for an additional two-year period. The Board shall provide expert advice and guidance to the Secretary on scientific, technical, and other matters of special interest to the Department of Health and Human Services regarding current and future chemical, biological, nuclear, and radiological agents, whether naturally occurring, accidental, or deliberate. The Board may also provide advice and guidance to the Secretary on other matters related to public health emergency preparedness and response.

Ubiquitin-specific proteases (USPs) have in recent years emerged as a promising therapeutic target class in the ubiquitin-proteasome system (UPS). Velcade® (bortezomib), a small molecule proteasome inhibitor, has established the ubiquitin-proteasome system as a valid target for anticancer treatment. However, proteasome inhibitors in general suffer from a narrow therapeutic index and acquired resistance. A promising alternative to proteasome inhibition has been to target the enzymes upstream of proteasome-mediated protein degradation, i.e. the ubiquitin ligases and deubiquitinating enzymes (DUBs), to generate more specific, less toxic therapeutic agents.

The advantage of inhibiting DUB lies in the specificity of therapeutic intervention that can lead to better efficacy and reduced side effects. It has become clear that the DUB activities are indispensable for the normal cellular functions. Abnormal cellular expression of DUBs or the loss of function due to mutation in certain DUB genes have been linked to various human diseases( 2, 3 ). Among the five DUB subfamilies, ubiquitin-specific protease (USP) is emerging as promising targets for pharmacological intervention because of their connection to many human diseases, including prostate, colon and breast cancer, pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and familial cylindromatosis( 2, 4 ). From the past successes in targeting proteases with small molecule antagonists, it is expected that efforts of targeting human USPs will lead to potent and specific therapeutic agents.

The human ubiquitin-specific protease 1 (or USP1) occupies a special position because it has been implicated in DNA damage response in higher vertebrates and humans. Previous studies showed that disruption of USP1 in chicken DT40 cells resulted in increased sensitivity to DNA crosslinkers( 5 ) and knockout of the murine USP1 gene in a mouse model resulted in hypersensitivity to mitomycin C( 6 ). Previously we have demonstrated that inhibiting the cellular activity of human USP1 by pharmacologically active small molecules sensitized cisplatin-resistant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cells to DNA crosslinking agent( 77 ). Thus, USP1 inhibitors hold promise in combination therapy with the existing anti-cancer drugs to improve the efficacy and lower the toxic effect of the existing drugs.

More recently we have developed small molecules that target the USP1/UAF1 DUB complex( 1 ). These compounds were identified via a high-throughput screen and subjected to medicinal chemistry optimization, leading to one of the most potent and selective DUB inhibitors reported to date. Moreover, the inhibitors act synergistically with cisplatin, a DNA damaging anti-cancer drug, to overcome chemoresistance and enhance cytotoxicity. These results suggest the inhibitors may also improve the efficacy and potency of other commonly prescribed chemotherapeutic agents that are known to induce DNA damage. Furthermore the USP1/UAF1 small molecule inhibitors also hold promise in the single-agent therapy.

Under the CRADA, the chemical series will be further characterized and optimized to address specific aspects of this target product profile. The CRADA scope will also include studies beyond candidate selection including all aspects of preclinical studies such as toxicity studies, xenograft studies and chemistry GMP scale up of selected compounds and manufacture of control leading to a successful investigational new drug (IND) application. Collaborators should have experience in pre-clinical development of small molecules with a focus on cancer and a track record of successful submission of IND applications to the FDA.

The full CRADA proposal should include a capability statement with a detailed description of (1) collaborator's expertise in the areas of modulation of small molecule physicochemical and pharmacokinetic properties; (2) expertise in formulation of small molecules and ability to manufacture sufficient quantities of chemical compounds according to FDA guidelines and under Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP); (3) expertise with oncology and/or other diseases which may benefit from USP1/UAF1 inhibition; (4) expertise in regulatory affairs, particularly at the IND filing and early clinical trial stages; (5) collaborator's ability to support, directly or through contract mechanisms, and ability, upon the successful completion of relevant milestones, to support the ongoing pharmacokinetics and biological studies, long term toxicity studies, process chemistry and other pre-clinical development studies needed to obtain regulatory approval of a given molecule so as to ensure a high probability of eventual successful commercialization; (6) collaborator's ability to provide adequate funding to support some of the project's pre-clinical studies.

Technology descriptions follow.

Description of Technology: This technology relates to a malaria vaccine composed of a protein complex of Apical Membrane Antigen (AMA1) and rhoptry neck protein 2 (RON2) with an adjuvant. AMA1 is a crucial component of the Plasmodium invasion machinery and is a leading candidate for antimalarial vaccine development. AMA1-based vaccines have shown ability to block red cell invasion in in vitro assays, but protection has so far not translated to in vivo human infections. NIAID investigators have demonstrated that interaction between AMA1 and RON2 (or peptide thereof) is essential for malaria parasites to successfully enter human red blood cells (RBCs). Vaccination with un-complexed AMA1 and RON2 did not protect against lethal malaria. However, vaccination with a pre-formed AMA1-RON2 complex, highlighted in this technology, produced antibodies that protected against lethal malaria in an in vivo mouse model ( P. yoelli ) and blocked the entry of human malaria parasites into RBCs in vitro. Additionally, the inhibitory antibody response induced by the AMA1-RON2 complex was greater than AMA1 alone or when AMA1 and RON2 proteins were administered in a un-complexed form.

Immunization using the AMA1-RON2 complex of this technology represents a candidate for an effective malaria vaccine against multiple Plasmodium species.

Potential Commercial Applications: Malaria vaccine.

Competitive Advantages: Lower-cost malarial prevention for developing/developed countries.

Development Stage:

• Early-stage.

• In vitro data available.

• In vivo data available (animal).

Inventors: Prakash Srinivasan and Louis Miller (NIAID).

Publications:

1. Srinivasan P, et al. Binding of Plasmodium merozoite proteins RON2 and AMA1 triggers commitment to invasion. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Aug 9;108(32):13275-80. [PMID 21788485].

2. Srinivasan P, et al. Disrupting malaria parasite AMA1-RON2 interaction with a small molecule prevents erythrocyte invasion. Nat Commun. 2013;4:2261. [PMID 23907321].

Intellectual Property: HHS Reference No. E-066-2013/0—U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/841,479 filed 01 Jul 2013.

Licensing Contact: Edward (Tedd) Fenn; 424-297-0336; Tedd.fenn@nih.gov .

Collaborative Research Opportunity: The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases is seeking statements of capability or interest from parties interested in collaborative research to further develop, evaluate or commercialize MA1-RON2 vaccine by providing well established human adjuvants and clinical trial funding. For collaboration opportunities, please contact Mala Dutta, Ph.D. at 240-627-3684 or mala.dutta@nih.gov .

Description of Technology: Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM) is the most common and devastating form of brain cancer. Despite existing conventional therapies, including an initial surgical resection followed by chemotherapy and radiation, GBM is currently incurable with a median survival of approximate 15 months and a two-year survival of 30%.

This invention discloses a novel therapeutic technology to treat GBM by using induced electric fields that are applied to the brain tissue via an array of coils placed over the scalp. The device of the invention consists of a portable current generator with a customized coil array. It has been shown to reduce pain for patients and be easy to use.

Potential Commercial Applications:

• Treatment of patients with Glioblastoma Multiforme (GBM).

• Clinical research device for Glioblastoma Multiforme.

• Possible application to other cancers.

• Research tool to study mechanisms of electric field effects on mitosis and other cell and tissue processes.

• May be useful in improving effectiveness and enhancing delivery of adjuvant therapies.

Competitive Advantages:

• Portable.

• Painless.

• Easy to operate.

• No scalp burns that occur when using current electrodes.

Development Stage:

• Early-stage.

• Prototype.

Inventor: Peter J. Basser (NICHD).

Publications:

1. Silva S, et al. Elucidating the mechanisms and loci of neuronal excitation by transcranial magnetic stimulation using a finite element model of a cortical sulcus. Clin Neurophysiol. 2008 Oct;119(10):2405-13. [PMID 18783986].

2. Salvador R, el al. Determining which mechanisms lead to activation in the motor cortex: A modeling study of transcranial magnetic stimulation using realistic stimulus waveforms and sulcal geometry. Clin Neurophysiol. 2011 Apr;122(4):748-58. [PMID 21035390].

3. Miranda PC, et al. Tissue heterogeneity as a mechanism for localized neural stimulation by applied electric fields. Phys Med Biol. 2007 Sep 21;52(18):5603-17. [PMID 17804884].

4. Miranda PC, et al. The electric field induced in the brain by magnetic stimulation: A 3-D finite-element analysis of the effect of tissue heterogeneity and anisotropy. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2003 Sep;50(9):1074-85. [PMID 12943275].

5. Basser PJ. Focal magnetic stimulation of an axon. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1994 Jun;41(6):601-6. [PMID 7927380]

6. Miranda PC, et al. Modeling the current distribution during transcranial direct current stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol. 2006 Jul;117(7):1623-9. [PMID 16762592].

Intellectual Property: HHS Reference No. E-187-2012/0—US Patent Application No. 61/954,494 filed 17 March 2014.

Licensing Contact: John Stansberry, Ph.D.; 301-435-5236; stansbej@mail.nih.gov .

Collaborative Research Opportunity: The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Program on Pediatric Imaging and Tissue Sciences, Section on Tissue Biophysics and Biomimetics, is seeking statements of capability or interest from parties interested in collaborative research to further develop, evaluate or commercialize technology that uses a.c. current electrodes to try to kill GBM cells. For collaboration opportunities, please contact Alan Hubbs, Ph.D. at hubbsa@mail.nih.gov .

Description of Technology: The uses for human anti-HIV monoclonal antibody 10E8 and its variants include passive immunization, therapeutic vaccination, and the development of vaccine immunogens. 10E8 is one of the most potent HIV-neutralizing antibodies isolated and it neutralizes up to 98% of diverse HIV-1 strains. 10E8 is specific to the membrane-proximal external region (MPER) of the HIV envelope protein gp41 and 10E8 is orthogonal to other anti-HIV antibodies. In combination with other antibodies 10E8 may provide an antibody response that neutralizes nearly all strains of HIV-1. Additionally, 10E8 effectively induces antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) indicating its potential use for therapeutic vaccine strategies. Further, 10E8 is a tool for immunogen design and validation of immunogen structure.

NIAID is currently developing certain embodiments of 10E8 for clinical use. Therefore, for some fields of use, NIH will evaluate a license applicant's capabilities and experience in advancing similar technologies through the regulatory process. This technology is not eligible for the NIH's start-up license program.

Potential Commercial Applications:

• Passive protection to prevent HIV infection.

• Passive protection to prevent mother-to-infant HIV transmission.

• Topical microbicide to prevent HIV infection.

• Gene-based vectors for anti-gp41 antibody expression.

• Therapeutic for the elimination of HIV infected cells that are actively producing virus.

Competitive Advantages:

• One of the most potent Human broadly-neutralizing anti HIV antibodies isolated to date.

• Broad reactivity and high affinity to most HIV-1 strains.

• Activity is highly complementary to existing broadly neutralizing antibodies, such as CD4 binding site antibodies.

• Not auto-reactive.

Development Stage:

• In vitro data available.

• In vivo data available (animal).

Inventors: Mark Connors, Jinghe Huang, Leo Laub, John Mascola, Gary Nabel, Peter Kwong, Baoshan Zhang, Rebecca Rudicell, Ivelin Geogiev, Yongping Yang, Jiang Zhu, and Giled Oflek.

Publication: Huang J, et al. Broad and potent neutralization of HIV-1 by a gp41-specific human antibody. Nature. 2012 Nov 15;491(7424):406-12. [PMID 23151583].

Intellectual Property: HHS Reference Nos. E-253-2011/0,1,2,3—Neutralizing gp41 antibodies and their use.

• US Provisional Patent Application Nos. 61/556,660 filed 07 Nov 2011; 61/672,708 filed 17 Jul 2012; and 61/698,480 filed 07 Sep 2012.

• PCT Patent Application No. PCT/US2012/063958 (Publication No. WO/2013/070776) filed 07 Nov 2012; and corresponding applications filed in BR, CN, EP, IN, RU, US, and ZA.

Licensing Contact: Cristina Thalhammer-Reyero, Ph.D., MBA; +1 301-435-4507; thalhamc@mail.nih.gov .

Collaborative Research Opportunity: The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases is seeking statements of capability or interest from parties interested in collaborative research to further develop, evaluate or commercialize 10E8-related vaccines or immunotherapies. For collaboration opportunities, please contact Bill Ronnenberg at +1 240-627-3726 or wronnenberg@niaid.nih.gov .

This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection, and other important information describing the Collections. There is one ICR for each Collection.

The Coast Guard invites comments on whether these ICRs should be granted based on the Collections being necessary for the proper performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the Collections; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collections; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information subject to the Collections; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the Collections on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. These comments will help OIRA determine whether to approve the ICRs referred to in this Notice.

We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments and related materials. Comments to Coast Guard or OIRA must contain the OMB Control Number of the ICR. They must also contain the docket number of this request, [USCG 2014-0090], and must be received by July 24, 2014. We will post all comments received, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov. They will include any personal information you provide. We have an agreement with DOT to use their DMF. Please see the “Privacy Act” paragraph below.

If you submit a comment, please include the docket number [USCG-2014-0090]; indicate the specific section of the document to which each comment applies, providing a reason for each comment. You may submit your comments and material online (via http://www.regulations.gov ), by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online via www.regulations.gov, it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the DMF. We recommend you include your name, mailing address, an email address, or other contact information in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.

You may submit comments and material by electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the DMF at the address under ADDRESSES , but please submit them by only one means. To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov, and type “USCG-2014-0090” in the “Search” box. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8 1/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period and will address them accordingly.

To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this Notice as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the “read comments” box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the “Search” box insert “USCG-2014-0090” and click “Search.” Click the “Open Docket Folder” in the “Actions” column. You may also visit the DMF in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs online at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain after the comment period for each ICR. An OMB Notice of Action on each ICR will become available via a hyperlink in the OMB Control Numbers: 1625-0092.

Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received in dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act statement regarding Coast Guard public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

This request provides a 30-day comment period required by OIRA. The Coast Guard published the 60-day notice (79 FR 18044, March 31, 2014) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That Notice elicited no comments.

1. Title: Sewage and Graywater Discharge Records for Certain Cruise Vessels Operating on Alaskan Waters.

OMB Control Number: 1625-0092.

Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Owners, operators and masters of vessels.

Abstract: To comply with Public Law 106-554, this information collection is needed to enforce sewage and graywater discharges requirements from certain cruise ships operating on Alaskan waters. Respondents are owners and operators of vessels.

Forms: None.

Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has decreased from 2,121 hours to 1,218 hours a year due to a decrease in the number of respondents.

This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection, and other important information describing the Collections. There is one ICR for each Collection.

The Coast Guard invites comments on whether these ICRs should be granted based on the Collections being necessary for the proper performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the Collections; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collections; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information subject to the Collections; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the Collections on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. These comments will help OIRA determine whether to approve the ICRs referred to in this Notice.

We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments and related materials. Comments to Coast Guard or OIRA must contain the OMB Control Number of the ICR. They must also contain the docket number of this request, [USCG 2014-0091], and must be received by July 24, 2014. We will post all comments received, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov. They will include any personal information you provide. We have an agreement with DOT to use their DMF. Please see the “Privacy Act” paragraph below.

If you submit a comment, please include the docket number [USCG-2014-0091]; indicate the specific section of the document to which each comment applies, providing a reason for each comment. You may submit your comments and material online (via http://www.regulations.gov ), by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online via www.regulations.gov , it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the DMF. We recommend you include your name, mailing address, an email address, or other contact information in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.

You may submit comments and material by electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the DMF at the address under ADDRESSES , but please submit them by only one means. To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov , and type “USCG-2014-0091” in the “Search” box. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8 1/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period and will address them accordingly.

To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this Notice as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the “read comments” box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the “Search” box insert “USCG-2014-0091” and click “Search.” Click the “Open Docket Folder” in the “Actions” column. You may also visit the DMF in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs online at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain after the comment period for each ICR. An OMB Notice of Action on each ICR will become available via a hyperlink in the OMB Control Numbers: 1625-0058.

Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received in dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act statement regarding Coast Guard public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

This request provides a 30-day comment period required by OIRA. The Coast Guard published the 60-day notice (79 FR 18045, March 31, 2014) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That Notice elicited no comments.

1. Title: Application for Permit to Transport Municipal and Commercial Waste.

OMB Control Number: 1625-0058.

Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Owners and operators of vessels.

Abstract: This information collection provides the basis for issuing or denying a permit for the transportation of municipal or commercial waste in the coastal waters of the United States. Respondents are owners and operators of vessels.

Forms: None.

Burden Estimate: The estimated burden remains unchanged at 13 hours a year.

This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection, and other important information describing the Collections. There is one ICR for each Collection.

The Coast Guard invites comments on whether these ICRs should be granted based on the Collections being necessary for the proper performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard would appreciate comments addressing: (1) the practical utility of the Collections; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collections; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information subject to the Collections; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the Collections on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. These comments will help OIRA determine whether to approve the ICRs referred to in this Notice.

We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments and related materials. Comments to Coast Guard or OIRA must contain the OMB Control Number of the ICR. They must also contain the docket number of this request, [USCG 2014-0207], and must be received by July 24, 2014. We will post all comments received, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov . They will include any personal information you provide. We have an agreement with DOT to use their DMF. Please see the “Privacy Act” paragraph below.

If you submit a comment, please include the docket number [USCG-2014-0207]; indicate the specific section of the document to which each comment applies, providing a reason for each comment. You may submit your comments and material online (via http://www.regulations.gov ), by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. If you submit a comment online via www.regulations.gov , it will be considered received by the Coast Guard when you successfully transmit the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, or mail your comment, it will be considered as having been received by the Coast Guard when it is received at the DMF. We recommend you include your name, mailing address, an email address, or other contact information in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.

You may submit comments and material by electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the DMF at the address under ADDRESSES , but please submit them by only one means. To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov , and type “USCG-2014-0207” in the “Search” box. If you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8 1/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period and will address them accordingly.

To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this Notice as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, click on the “read comments” box, which will then become highlighted in blue. In the “Search” box insert “USCG-2014-0207” and click “Search.” Click the “Open Docket Folder” in the “Actions” column. You may also visit the DMF in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs online at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain after the comment period for each ICR. An OMB Notice of Action on each ICR will become available via a hyperlink in the OMB Control Numbers: 1625-0073.

Anyone can search the electronic form of comments received in dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review a Privacy Act statement regarding Coast Guard public dockets in the January 17, 2008, issue of the Federal Register (73 FR 3316).

This request provides a 30-day comment period required by OIRA. The Coast Guard published the 60-day notice (79 FR 22153, April 21, 2014) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That Notice elicited no comments.

1. Title: Alteration of Unreasonably Obstructive Bridges.

OMB Control Number: 1625-0073.

Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Public and private owners of bridges over navigable waters of the United States.

Abstract: 33 U.S.C. 494, 502, 511, 513, 514, 515, 516, 517, 521, 522, 523, and 524 authorizes the Coast Guard to determine if a bridge is an unreasonable obstruction to navigation and can require plans and specifications from bridge owners to apportion costs between the U.S. and bridge owners and use as a starting point for bridge alteration projects.

Forms: None.

Burden Estimate: The estimated annual burden remains unchanged at 240 hours a year.

We encourage you to submit comments (or related material) in response to this notice.

We will consider all submissions and may adjust our final action based on your comments. Comments should be marked with docket number USCG-2014-0406 and should provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. You should provide personal contact information so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your comments; but please note that all comments will be posted to the online docket without change and that any personal information you include can be searchable online (see the Federal Register Privacy Act notice regarding our public dockets, 73 FR 3316, Jan. 17, 2008).

Mailed or hand-delivered comments should be in an unbound 8 1/2 x 11 inch format suitable for reproduction. The Docket Management Facility will acknowledge receipt of mailed comments if you enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope with your submission.

Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public comments, are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and can be viewed by following the Web site's instructions. You can also view the docket at the Docket Management Facility (see the mailing address under ADDRESSES ) between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

We do not now plan to hold a public meeting, but you may submit a request for one, using one of the methods specified under ADDRESSES . Please explain why you believe a public meeting would be beneficial. If we determine that one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place announced by a later notice in the Federal Register .

Under 33 CFR 127.007(a), an owner or operator planning new construction to expand or modify marine terminal operations in an existing facility handling Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) or Liquefied Hazardous Gas (LHG), where the construction, expansion, or modification would result in an increase in the size and/or frequency of LNG or LHG marine traffic on the waterway associated with the facility, must submit a Letter of Intent (LOI) to the COTP of the zone in which the facility is located. Under 33 CFR 127.007(e), an owner or operator planning such an expansion must also file or update a Waterway Suitability Assessment (WSA) that addresses the proposed increase in LNG or LHG marine traffic in the associated waterway. Enterprise Terminalling LLC located in Vidor, Texas submitted an LOI and WSA on February 27, 2014 regarding the company's proposed construction and operation of LHG capabilities at its Vidor, Texas facility.

Under 33 CR 127.009, after receiving an LOI, the COTP issues a Letter of Recommendation (LOR) as to the suitability of the waterway for LNG or LHG marine traffic to the appropriate jurisdictional authorities. The LOR is based on a series of factors outlined in 33 CFR 127.009 that related to the physical nature of the affected waterway and issues of safety and security associated with LNG or LHG marine traffic on the affected waterway.

The purpose of this notice is to solicit public comments on the proposed increase in LHG marine traffic on the Sabine-Neches Waterway. The Coast Guard believes that input from the public may be useful to the COTP with respect to development of the LOR. Additionally, the Coast Guard intends to task the Area Maritime Security Committee, Port Arthur, Texas and the Southeast Texas Waterways Advisory Council (SETWAC) with forming a subcommittee comprised of affected port users and stakeholders. The goal of these subcommittees will be to gather information to help the COTP assess the suitability of the associated waterway for increased LHG marine traffic as it relates to navigational safety and security.

On January 24, 2011, the Coast Guard published Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC) 01-2011, “Guidance Related to Waterfront Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Facilities.” NVIC 01-2011 provides guidance for owners and operators seeking approval to build and operate LNG facilities. While NVIC 01-2011 is specific to LNG, it provides useful process information and guidance for owners and operators seeking approval to build and operate LHG facilities as well. The Coast Guard will refer to NVIC 01-2011 for process information and guidance in evaluating Enterprise Terminalling LLC WSA. A copy of NVIC 01-2011 is available on the Coast Guard's Web site at http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/nvic/2010s.asp.

This notice is issued under authority of 33 U.S.C. 1223-1225, Department of Homeland Security Delegation Number 0170.1(70), 33 CFR 127.009, and 33 CFR 103.205.

Notice is hereby given pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, that Certispec Services USA, Inc., 1448 Texas Avenue, Texas City, TX 77590, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Certispec Services USA, Inc., is approved for the following gauging procedures for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the American Petroleum Institute (API):

Certispec Services USA, Inc., is accredited for the following laboratory analysis procedures and methods for petroleum and certain petroleum products set forth by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Laboratory Methods (CBPL) and American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):

Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquiries regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to perform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling (202) 344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to cbp.labhq@dhs.gov . Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories.

http://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/gaulist_3.pdf