[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 40 (Friday, February 28, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11413-11417]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04475]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and Technology

[Docket Number: 140218152-4152-01]
RIN 0693-ZB07


Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Center for Florida; 
Availability of Funds

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), United 
States Department of Commerce (DoC).

ACTION: Notice of Funding Availability.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NIST invites applications from eligible applicants for funding 
one (1) MEP center in the State of Florida. The objective of the MEP 
center is to provide manufacturing extension services to primarily 
small- and medium-sized manufacturers in the state of Florida. The MEP 
center will become part of the MEP national system of extension service 
providers, currently comprised of more than 400 centers and field 
offices located throughout the United States and Puerto Rico.

DATES: Electronic applications must be received no later than 11:59 
p.m. Eastern Time on May 14, 2014. Paper applications must be received 
by NIST by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on May 14, 2014. Applications 
received after the respective deadline will not be reviewed or 
considered. The earliest anticipated start date for awards made under 
this notice and the corresponding Federal Funding Opportunity (FFO) 
announcement is expected to be October 1, 2014.

ADDRESSES: For applicants without Internet access, the standard 
application package may be obtained by contacting Diane Henderson, 
National Institute of Standards and Technology, Manufacturing Extension 
Partnership, 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 4800, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-4800, 
phone (301) 975-5105. Applicants with Internet access should obtain the 
standard application package by downloading the application package 
through Grants.gov. Paper submissions should be sent to: Diane 
Henderson, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 
Manufacturing Extension Partnership, 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 4800, 
Gaithersburg, MD 20899-4800. Electronic submissions should be submitted 
to www.grants.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Administrative, budget, cost-sharing, 
and eligibility questions and other programmatic questions should be 
directed to Diane Henderson at Tel: (301) 975-5105; Email: 
[email protected]; Fax: (301) 963-6556. Grants Administration 
questions should be addressed to: Jannet Cancino, Grants and Agreements 
Management Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 
100 Bureau Drive, Stop 1650, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1650; Tel: (301) 
975-6544; Email: [email protected]; Fax: (301) 926-6319. For 
assistance with using Grants.gov contact Christopher Hunton at Tel: 
(301) 975-5718; Email: [email protected]; Fax: (301) 975-
8884. All questions and responses will be posted on the MEP Web site, 
www.nist.gov/mep.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Electronic access: Applicants are strongly encouraged to read the 
corresponding Federal Funding Opportunity (FFO) announcement available 
at www.grants.gov for complete information about this program, 
including all program requirements and instructions for applying by 
paper or electronically. The FFO may be found by searching under the 
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Name and Number provided below.
    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 278k, as implemented in 15 CFR part 290.
    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Name and Number: 
Manufacturing Extension Partnership--11.611.
    Webinar Information Session: NIST MEP will hold an information 
session for organizations that are considering applying to this 
opportunity. This webinar will provide general information regarding 
MEP and offer general guidance on preparing proposals. NIST/MEP staff 
will be available on the webinar to answer general questions. During 
the webinar, proprietary technical discussions about specific project 
ideas will not be permitted. Also, NIST/MEP staff will not critique or 
provide feedback on any project ideas during the webinar or at any time 
before submission of a proposal to MEP. However, NIST/MEP staff will 
provide information about the MEP eligibility and cost-sharing 
requirements, evaluation criteria and selection factors, selection 
process, and the general characteristics of a competitive MEP proposal 
during this webinar, and by phone and email. The webinar will be held 
approximately 14 business days after posting of the FFO and publication 
in the Federal Register. The exact date and time of the webinar will be 
posted on the MEP Web site at www.nist.gov/mep. The webinar will be 
recorded and a link to the recording will be posted on the MEP Web 
site. In addition, the webinar presentation will be available after the 
webinar on the MEP Web site. Organizations wishing to participate in 
the webinar must sign up by contacting Diane Henderson at 
[email protected].
    Program Description: NIST invites applications from eligible 
applicants for funding one (1) MEP center to provide manufacturing 
extension services to primarily small- and medium-sized manufacturers 
in the state of Florida. The MEP center will become part of the MEP 
national system of extension service providers, currently comprised of 
more than 400 centers and field offices located throughout the United 
States and Puerto Rico.
    The objective of an MEP center is to provide manufacturing 
extension services that enhance productivity, innovative capacity, and 
technological performance, and strengthen the global competitiveness of 
primarily small- and

[[Page 11414]]

medium-sized U.S.-based manufacturing firms in its service region. 
Manufacturing extension services are provided by utilizing the most 
cost effective, local, leveraged resources for those services through 
the coordinated efforts of a regionally-based MEP center and local 
technology resources. The management and operational structure of an 
MEP center is not prescribed, but should be based upon the 
characteristics of the manufacturers in the region and locally 
available resources with demonstrated experience working with 
manufacturers.
    It is not the intent of this program that the centers perform 
research and development.
    Information regarding MEP and these centers is available at 
www.nist.gov/mep.
    Funding Availability: NIST anticipates funding one (1) application 
at the level of approximately $3,500,000 for an initial award for an 
MEP Center in the state of Florida. The project awarded under the FFO 
will have a budget and performance period of one (1) year. The award 
may be renewed on an annual basis in accordance with 15 CFR Sec.  
290.4. NIST may provide annual renewal funding at a higher or lower 
level in the future based on availability of funds.
    Cost Share Requirements: Non-Federal cost sharing of at least 50 
percent of the total project costs is required for the first year of 
operation. Any renewal funding of an award will require non-Federal 
cost sharing as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Minimum non-
           Year of center operation               Maximum      federal
                                                 NIST share     share
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-3...........................................          1/2          1/2
4.............................................          2/5          3/5
5 and beyond..................................          1/3          2/3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Non-Federal cost sharing is that portion of the project costs not 
borne by the Federal Government. The applicant's share of the MEP 
center expenses may include cash, services, and third party in-kind 
contributions, as described at 15 CFR Sec.  14.23 or Sec.  24.24, as 
applicable, and the MEP program rule, 15 CFR Sec.  290.4(c). No more 
than 50% of the applicant's total non-Federal cost share may be third 
party in-kind contributions of part-time personnel, equipment, 
software, rental value of centrally located space, and related 
contributions, per 15 CFR Sec.  290.4(c)(5). The source and detailed 
rationale of the cost share, including cash, full- and part-time 
personnel, and in-kind donations, must be documented in the budget 
submitted with the application and will be considered as part of the 
evaluation review under Section V.1(c) of the FFO.
    All non-Federal cost share contributions require a letter of 
commitment signed by an authorized official from each source.
    Any cost sharing must be in accordance with the ``cost sharing or 
matching'' provisions of 15 CFR Part 14, Uniform Administrative 
Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements with Institutions of 
Higher Education, Hospitals, Other Non-Profit, and Commercial 
Organizations or 15 CFR part 24, Uniform Administrative Requirements 
for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments, 
as applicable.
    As with the Federal share, any proposed costs included as non-
Federal cost sharing must be an allowable/eligible cost under this 
Program and the following applicable Federal cost principles: (1) 
Institutions of Higher Education: 2 CFR part 220 (OMB Circular A-21); 
(2) Nonprofit Organizations: 2 CFR part 230 (OMB Circular A-122); and 
(3) State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments: 2 CFR part 225 (OMB 
Circular A-87).
    As with the Federal share, any proposed non-Federal cost sharing 
will be made a part of the cooperative agreement award and will be 
subject to audit if the project receives MEP funding.
    Eligibility: The eligibility requirements given in this section 
will be used for this competition only in lieu of those published in 
the MEP regulations found at 15 CFR part 290, specifically 15 CFR Sec.  
290.5(a)(1). Each award recipient must be a U.S.-based nonprofit 
institution or organization. For the purpose of this funding 
opportunity, nonprofit organizations include universities and state and 
local governments. An eligible organization may work individually or 
include proposed subawards or contracts with others in a project 
application, effectively forming a team. Existing MEP awardees who meet 
the eligibility criteria set forth in this section may apply. However, 
as discussed in Section III.3.b. of the FFO, NIST will generally not 
fund applications that propose an organizational or operational 
structure that, in whole or in part, delegates or transfers to another 
person, institution, or organization the applicant's responsibility for 
core MEP management and oversight functions.
    Application Requirements: Applications must be submitted in 
accordance with the requirements set forth in the corresponding FFO 
announcement.
    Application/Review Information: The evaluation criteria, selection 
factors, and review and selection process provided in this section will 
be used for this competition only in lieu of those provided in the MEP 
regulations found at 15 CFR part 290, specifically 15 CFR Sec. Sec.  
290.6 and 290.7.
    The evaluation criteria that will be used in evaluating 
applications and assigned weights, with a maximum score of 100, are 
listed below.
    a. Project Narrative. (60 points; Sub-criteria i-iii will be 
weighted equally) The extent to which the applicant's proposal 
demonstrates how the applicant will efficiently and effectively 
establish an MEP center to provide manufacturing extension services to 
primarily small- and medium-sized manufacturers in the state of Florida 
will be evaluated. Reviewers will consider the following topics when 
evaluating the Project Narrative:
    i. Market Understanding. Reviewers will assess the strategy 
proposed for the Center to define the target market, understand the 
needs of manufacturers, with an emphasis on the small- and medium-sized 
manufacturers, and determine appropriate services to meet identified 
needs. The following sub-topics will be evaluated:
    (1) Geographic Scope and Targeting. Reviewers will assess the 
extent to which the applicant
     delineates target service regions and manufacturers;
     makes use of appropriate quantitative and qualitative data 
sources and market intelligence to support proposed strategies and 
approaches to defining and segmenting the market; and
     aligns priority industries and regions with other state 
and regional priorities and investments.
    (2) Needs Identification and Service Offerings. Reviewers will 
assess the extent to which the applicant's proposed Center
     serves the region's manufacturing base, industry types, 
and technology requirements;
     meets existing and emerging needs of manufacturers in the 
service region;
     makes use of multiple sources of qualitative and 
quantitative information to determine manufacturers' needs and how to 
address them;
     makes use of resources, tools and services appropriate for 
the targeted small- and medium-sized manufacturers to meet identified 
needs of the region; and
     incorporates a range of complementary service providers 
and partners to deliver broad expertise and

[[Page 11415]]

maximum value to manufacturing clients.
    ii. Center Strategy. Reviewers will assess the strategy proposed 
for the Center to deliver services that meet manufacturers' needs and 
generate impact. Reviewers will assess the extent to which the proposed 
Center:
     Incorporates the market analysis described in criterion 
(i) above to inform strategies, products and services;
     defines a strategy for delivering services that balances 
market penetration with impact and revenue generation, addressing the 
needs of manufacturers, with an emphasis on the small- and medium-sized 
manufacturers;
     defines a state or regional ecosystem in which the Center 
will operate, including universities, community colleges, technology-
based economic developers, and others; and
     supports achievements of the MEP mission and objectives 
while also satisfying the interests of other stakeholders, investors, 
and partners.
    iii. Business Model. Reviewers will assess the proposed business 
model of the Center and its ability to execute the strategy proposed in 
criterion (ii) based on the market understanding described in Section 
V.1.a.i. above. The following sub-topics will be evaluated:
    (1) Approach to the Market. Reviewers will assess the extent to 
which the proposed Center:
     Reaches area manufacturers;
     enables the use of delivery methods (direct delivery, 
third party, account management); and
     facilitates the engagement of manufacturers' leadership in 
strategic discussions related to new technologies, new products, and 
new markets.
    (2) Products and Services. Reviewers will assess the extent to 
which the proposed Center:
     Engages expertise both from within the Center and from 
other sub-recipients and partners to make available a wide range of 
experts and services to manufacturers;
     delivers services to small- and medium-sized manufacturers 
to encourage adoption of new technologies, developing new products, and 
selling products in new markets;
     balances delivering process improvement services with 
services that will transform and grow manufacturers; and
     delivers advanced manufacturing technology to small- and 
medium-sized manufacturers and mechanisms for accelerating the adoption 
of technologies for both process improvement and new product adoption.
    (3) Partnership Leverage and Linkages. Reviewers will assess the 
extent to which the proposed Center:
     Establishes a sustainable business model, incorporating 
investment from NIST, other public investors (federal, state, and 
local), small- and medium-sized manufacturing clients, and other 
sources; and
     makes use of effective resources or partnerships with 
third parties such as industry, universities, nonprofit economic 
organizations, and state governments likely to amplify the Center's 
capabilities for delivering growth services.
    b. Qualifications of the Applicant and Program Management (20 
points; Sub-criteria i and ii will be weighted equally). Reviewers will 
assess the ability of the key personnel and the management structure 
proposed to deliver the program and services envisioned for the Center. 
Reviewers will consider the following topics when evaluating the 
Qualifications of the Applicant and Program Management
    i. Key Personnel and Organizational Structure. Reviewers will 
assess the extent to which:
     Proposed key personnel have the appropriate experience and 
education in manufacturing, outreach and partnership development to 
support achievements of the MEP mission and objectives;
     proposed key personnel have the appropriate experience and 
education to plan, direct, monitor, organize and control the monetary 
resources of the proposed Center to achieve its business objectives and 
maximize its value;
     the proposed management structure (leadership and 
governance) is aligned to support the execution of the strategy, 
products and services;
     the proposed staffing plan flows logically from the 
specified approach to the market and products and service offerings.
     the organizational roles and responsibilities of key 
personnel and staff are clearly delineated;
     the proposed field staff structure sufficiently supports 
the geographic concentrations and industry targets for the region; and
     a workable governance structure is delineated, including 
an oversight Board with a membership representing small- and medium-
sized manufacturers in the region.
    ii. Program Management. Reviewers will assess the extent to which:
     The proposed methodology of program management and 
internal evaluation is likely to ensure effective operations and 
oversight and meet program and service delivery objectives;
     the proposed evaluation plan is aligned to support the 
execution of the proposed Center's strategy and business model; and
     the proposed approach aligns effectively with the proposed 
key personnel, staff and organizational structure.
    c. Budget Narrative and Financial Plan. (20 points; Sub-criteria i 
and ii will be weighted equally) Reviewers will assess the suitability 
and focus of the applicant's detailed one-year budget. The application 
will be assessed in the following areas:
    i. Plans for Financial Cost Share. Reviewers will assess the extent 
to which:
     The applicant's funding commitments for cost share are 
identified and demonstrate stability and duration; and
     the applicant clearly describes the total level of cost 
share and detailed rationale of the cost share, including cash and in-
kind, within the proposed budget.
    ii. Financial Viability. Reviewers will assess the extent to which:
     The proposed projections for income and expenditures are 
appropriate for the scale of services that are to be delivered by the 
proposed Center and the service delivery model envisioned;
     the proposal's narrative of each of the budgeted items 
explains the rationale for each of the budgeted items, including 
assumptions the applicant used in budgeting for the Center;
     the overall financial plan is sufficiently robust and 
diversified so as to support the long term sustainability of the 
Center; and
     the proposed financial plan is aligned to support the 
execution of the proposed Center's strategy and business model.
    Selection Factors. The Selecting Official shall select applications 
for award based upon the rank order of the applications, and may select 
an application out of rank based on one or more of the following 
selection factors:
    a. The availability of Federal funds.
    b. Relevance of the proposed project to MEP program goals and 
policy objectives.
    c. Reviewers' evaluations, including technical comments.
    d. The need to assure appropriate distribution within Florida and 
the surrounding region.
    e. Whether the project duplicates other projects funded by DoC or 
by other Federal agencies.
    Review and Selection Process:
    (1) Initial Administrative Review of Applications. An initial 
review of

[[Page 11416]]

timely received applications will be conducted to determine 
eligibility, completeness, and responsiveness to this notice and the 
corresponding FFO and the scope of the stated program objectives. 
Applications determined to be ineligible, incomplete, and/or non-
responsive may be eliminated from further review. However, NIST, in its 
sole discretion, may continue the review process for an application 
that is missing non-substantive information that can easily be 
rectified or cured.
    (2) Full Review of Eligible, Complete, and Responsive Applications. 
Applications that are determined to be eligible, complete, and 
responsive will proceed for full reviews in accordance with the review 
and selection processes below:
    (3) Evaluation and Review. Each application will be reviewed by at 
least three technically qualified reviewers, who will evaluate each 
application based on the evaluation criteria (see Section V.1. of the 
FFO). Each reviewer will assign each application a numeric score for 
each application. If a non-Federal employee reviewer is used, the 
reviewers may discuss the applications with each other, but scores will 
be determined on an individual basis, not as a consensus. Reviewers 
will assign each application a score, based on the application's 
responsiveness to the criteria above, with a maximum score of 100. 
Applicants whose applications receive an average score of 70 or higher 
out of 100 will be deemed finalists.
    Finalists may receive written follow-up questions in order for the 
reviewers to gain a better understanding of the applicant's proposal. 
Once the reviewers have completed their review of the applicant's 
responses, a conference call or site visit may be deemed necessary. If 
deemed necessary, either all finalists will participate one-on-one with 
reviewers in a conference call or all finalists will receive site 
visits that will be conducted by the reviewers referenced in the 
preceding paragraph. Finalists will be reviewed and evaluated, and 
reviewers may revise their assigned numeric scores based on the 
evaluation criteria (see Section V.1. of the FFO) as a result of the 
conference call or site visit.
    (4) Ranking and Selection. Based on the reviewers' final numeric 
scores, a rank order will be prepared and provided to the Selecting 
Official for further consideration. The Selecting Official, who is the 
Director of the NIST MEP Program, will then select funding recipients 
based upon the rank order and the selection factors (see Section V.2. 
of the FFO).
    NIST reserves the right to negotiate the budget costs with any 
applicant selected to receive an award, which may include requesting 
that the applicant remove certain costs. Additionally, NIST may request 
that the successful applicant modify objectives or work plans and 
provide supplemental information required by the agency prior to award. 
NIST also reserves the right to reject an application where information 
is uncovered that raises a reasonable doubt as to the responsibility of 
the applicant. NIST may select part, some, all, or none of the 
applications. The final approval of selected applications and issuance 
of awards will be by the NIST Grants Officer. The award decisions of 
the NIST Grants Officer are final.
    Anticipated Announcement and Award Date. Review, selection, and 
award processing is expected to be completed in September 2014. The 
earliest anticipated start date for awards made under this notice and 
the corresponding FFO is expected to be October 1, 2014.

Additional Information

    a. Application Replacement Pages. Applicants may not submit 
replacement pages and/or missing documents once an application has been 
submitted. Any revisions must be made by submission of a new 
application that must be received by NIST by the submission deadline.
    b. Notification to Unsuccessful Applicants. Unsuccessful applicants 
will be notified in writing.
    c. Retention of Unsuccessful Applications. For paper applications, 
one (1) of each non-selected application will be retained for three (3) 
years for record keeping purposes and the other two (2) copies will be 
destroyed. After three (3) years, the remaining copy will be destroyed. 
For electronic applications, an electronic copy of each non-selected 
application will be retained for three (3) years for record keeping 
purposes. After three (3) years, it will be destroyed.

Administrative and National Policy Requirements.

    The Department of Commerce Pre-Award Notification Requirements: The 
DoC Pre-Award Notification Requirements for Grants and Cooperative 
Agreements, which are contained in the Federal Register notice of 
December 17, 2012 (77 FR 74634), are applicable to this notice and the 
corresponding FFO and are available at http://www.osec.doc.gov/oam/grants_management/policy/documents/Department%20of%20Commerce%20Financial%20Assistance%20Pre%20Award%20Notice%20-%2077%20FR%2074634.pdf
    Employer/Taxpayer Identification Number (EIN/TIN), Dun and 
Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS), and System for Award 
Management (SAM): All applicants for Federal financial assistance are 
required to obtain a universal identifier in the form of DUNS number 
and maintain a current registration in the Federal government's primary 
registrant database, SAM. On the form SF-424 items 8.b. and 8.c., the 
applicant's 9-digit EIN/TIN and 9-digit DUNS number must be consistent 
with the information in SAM (https://www.sam.gov/) and the Automated 
Standard Application for Payment System (ASAP). For complex 
organizations with multiple EINs/TINs and DUNS numbers, the EIN/TIN and 
DUNS numbers MUST be the numbers for the applying organization. 
Organizations that provide incorrect/inconsistent EIN/TIN and DUNS 
numbers may experience significant delays in receiving funds if their 
application is selected for funding. Confirm that the EIN/TIN and DUNS 
number are consistent with the information on the SAM and ASAP. Please 
note that a federal assistance award cannot be issued if the designated 
recipient's registration in the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) 
is not current at the time of the award.
    Per 2 CFR part 25, each applicant must:
    1. Be registered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) 
before submitting an application, noting the CCR now resides in SAM;
    2. Maintain an active CCR registration, noting the CCR now resides 
in SAM, with current information at all times during which it has an 
active Federal award or an application under consideration by an 
agency; and
    3. Provide its DUNS number in each application or application it 
submits to the agency.
    The applicant can obtain a DUNS number from Dun and Bradstreet. A 
DUNS number can be created within one business day. The CCR or SAM 
registration process may take five or more business days to complete. 
If you are currently registered with the CCR, you may not need to make 
any changes. However, please make certain that the EIN/TIN associated 
with your DUNS number is correct. Also note that you will need to 
update your CCR registration annually. This may take three or more 
business days to complete. Information about SAM is available at 
www.sam.gov. See also 2 CFR part 25 and the Federal Register

[[Page 11417]]

notice published on September 14, 2010, at 75 FR 55671.
    See also 2 CFR part 25 and the Federal Register notice published on 
September 14, 2010, at 75 FR 55671.
    Paperwork Reduction Act: The standard forms in the application kit 
involve a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction 
Act. The use of Standard Forms 424, 424A, 424B, SF-LLL, and CD-346 have 
been approved by OMB under the respective Control Numbers 0348-0043, 
0348-0044, 0348-0040, 0348-0046, and 0605-0001. MEP program-specific 
application requirements have been approved by OMB under Control Number 
0693-0056.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no person is 
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty 
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the 
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, unless that collection of 
information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.
    DoC Representation by Corporations Regarding an Unpaid Delinquent 
Tax Liability or a Felony Conviction Under Any Federal Law. In 
accordance with the Federal appropriations law expected to be in effect 
at the time of project funding, NIST anticipates that the selected 
applicants will be provided a form and asked to make a representation 
regarding any unpaid delinquent tax liability or felony conviction 
under any Federal law.
    Funding Availability and Limitation of Liability: Funding for the 
program listed in this notice and the corresponding FFO is contingent 
upon the availability of appropriations. In no event will NIST or DoC 
be responsible for application preparation costs if this program fails 
to receive funding or is cancelled because of agency priorities. 
Publication of this notice and the corresponding FFO does not oblige 
NIST or DoC to award any specific project or to obligate any available 
funds.
    Executive Order 12866: This funding notice was determined to be not 
significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    Executive Order 13132 (Federalism): It has been determined that 
this notice does not contain policies with federalism implications as 
that term is defined in Executive Order 13132.
    Executive Order 12372: Proposals under this program are not subject 
to Executive Order 12372, ``Intergovernmental Review of Federal 
Programs.''
    Administrative Procedure Act/Regulatory Flexibility Act: Notice and 
comment are not required under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 
U.S.C. 553) or any other law, for matters relating to public property, 
loans, grants, benefits or contracts (5 U.S.C. 553 (a)). Moreover, 
because notice and comment are not required under 5 U.S.C. 553, or any 
other law, for matters relating to public property, loans, grants, 
benefits or contracts (5 U.S.C. 553(a)), a Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis is not required and has not been prepared for this notice, 5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq.

    Dated: February 24, 2014.
Phillip Singerman,
Associate Director for Innovation & Industry Services.
[FR Doc. 2014-04475 Filed 2-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-P