Notices. Notice

14,663 words·~67 min read·/register/2005/12/08/05-23765

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 8010-01-M SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-52869; File No. SR-OCC-2005-16] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The Options Clearing Corporation; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Gasoline Index Futures December 1, 2005. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 notice is hereby given that on October 26, 2005, The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change described in Items I, II, and III below, which items have been prepared primarily by OCC.

OCC filed the proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 2 and Rule 19b-4(f)(4) thereunder 3 making the proposal effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested parties. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 3 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The proposed rule change would permit OCC to clear and settle cash-settled futures contracts proposed to be listed by the CBOE Futures Exchange (“CFE”) that are intended to track the price of reformulated, regular octane gasoline sold through retail outlets (“Gasoline Index Futures”).

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, OCC included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. OCC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and

(C)below, of the most significant aspects of these statements. 4 4 The Commission has modified the text of the summaries prepared by OCC.

(A)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change A. Gasoline Index Futures The purpose of this rule change is to permit OCC to clear and settle Gasoline Index Futures contracts proposed to be listed by CFE. Gasoline Index Futures will have as their underlying interest indexes of retail gasoline prices (“Gasoline Indexes”) published by the Energy Information Administration (“EIA”) of the U.S. Department of Energy. The Gasoline Indexes are compiled and released each Monday evening from surveys of prices at retail gasoline outlets conducted by the EIA each Monday morning. CFE is proposing to list Gasoline Index Futures on six underlying Gasoline Indexes, one for the entire United States and one for each of five “Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts.” Gasoline Index Futures would cease trading on the third Friday of the expiration month and would settle on the following Tuesday using as a final settlement price

(a)The Gasoline Index levels published on the Monday preceding the settlement date multiplied by

(b)a contract multiplier of 10,500. For example, a Gasoline Index of $3.00 per gallon would result in a final settlement price of $31,500. OCC currently clears and settles futures on stock indexes. Although Gasoline Index Futures will be the first non-stock index futures contracts cleared and settled by OCC, OCC can clear them under its existing By-Laws and Rules applicable to clearing futures contracts with the minor amendments proposed in this filing. OCC will collect margin and make variation payments with respect to Gasoline Index Futures as in the case of any other futures contract. However, because the Gasoline Indexes are published only once a week, OCC will be required to estimate one-day volatilities in calculating initial margin. Because OCC will estimate volatilities conservatively, margins are likely to be higher than if underlying prices were available on a daily basis. Gasoline Index Futures will be cleared under the current clearing agreement between OCC and CFE subject only to the execution by OCC and CFE of a new Schedule C listing the Gasoline Indexes as permissible underlyings. B. Rule Changes The terms Broad-Based Index Future and Narrow-Based Index Future were defined in OCC's rule filing permitting it to clear security futures in a manner that limited OCC's futures clearing and settlement activities to futures on narrow-based stock indexes. There is no longer a need to describe any such limitation because OCC is registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) as a derivatives clearing organization, and the Commission and the CFTC have previously approved rules permitting OCC to clear commodity futures contracts. In order to simplify OCC's Rules and to provide for non-stock index futures, those terms are removed, and the definition of “Index Future” is being amended to apply to a future on an index of securities or commodities. Like the definition of Index Future, Sections 4(a) and

(b)of Article XII of OCC's By-Laws are amended so that underlying indexes need not consist only of indexes of securities. A new sentence is added at the end of Article XII, Section 4(c) to account for the possibility that if the Gasoline Indexes (or similar indexes not derived from market-traded instruments) become unavailable, a substitute index may not be available. In that instance, OCC would terminate the index future and fix a settlement price in accordance with Section 5, and any options on such future would be automatically exercised if in-the-money based on the settlement price set by OCC. Options that were out-of-the-money would terminate. Section 5 is amended to account for the fact that the prices that are used to calculate Gasoline Indexes are not derived from an organized market. Currently, Section 5(a) assumes that the price or value of all underlying interests or the constituents of all underlying indexes will be taken from organized markets where such underlying interests or constituents are traded. Because different rules are necessary when the prices or values of underlying interests or constituents are not available from an organized market, introductory language is added to Section 5(a) to limit that paragraph's applicability to market-traded interests or constituents, and a new paragraph

(b)is added so that OCC may act when a price or value of an underlying interest or constituent that is not traded on a market is unavailable. Current paragraph (a)(2) is being redesignated as (c)(2), and a new provision is added to that paragraph so that OCC may

(i)fix the final settlement price for a non-market-traded underlying interest or constituent using a price or value or a combination or average of prices or values deemed appropriate by OCC or

(ii)simply fix the final settlement price at the most recently determined settlement price for the future. Because in the latter case the final settlement price would equal the previous settlement price, no final variation payment would be made. The introductory paragraph to Chapter XIII is simplified by replacing lists of underlying interests and contracts cleared and settled by OCC with more generic terms incorporating all underlying interests and all futures and futures options OCC is permitted to clear under its current rules. This change conforms that paragraph to the corresponding introductory paragraph in Article XII. The proposed changes to OCC's By-Laws and Rules are consistent with Section 17A of the Act 5 and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to OCC because they are designed to promote the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of derivative transactions, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in the clearance and settlement of such transactions, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a national system for the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of such transactions, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The proposed rule change is not inconsistent with any other provision of the By-Laws and Rules of OCC. 5 15 U.S.C. 78q-1.

(B)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition OCC does not believe that the proposed rule change would impose any burden on competition.

(C)Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others Written comments were not and are not intended to be solicited with respect to the proposed rule change, and none have been received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act 6 and Rule 19b-4(f)(4) 7 thereunder because it effects a change in an existing service that

(i)does not adversely affect the safeguarding of securities or funds in the custody or control of the clearing agency or for which it is responsible and

(ii)does not significantly affect the respective rights or obligations of the clearing agency or persons using the service. At any time within sixty days of the filing of such rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. 6 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii). 7 17 CFR 240.19b-4(F)(4). IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ) or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-OCC-2005-16 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-9303. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2005-16. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Section, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of OCC and on OCC's Web site at *http://www.optionsclearing.com.* All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-OCC-2005-16 and should be submitted on or before December 29, 2005. For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 8 8 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-7065 Filed 12-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5242] Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs

(ECA)Request for Grant Proposals: Open Competition Seeking Professional Exchanges Programs in Africa, East Asia, Eurasia, Europe, the Near East, North Africa, South Asia and the Western Hemisphere *Announcement Type:* New Grant. *Funding Opportunity Number:* ECA/PE/C-06-01. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:* 19.415. *Key Dates:* *Application Deadline:* February 9, 2006. *Executive Summary:* The Office of Citizen Exchanges of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs announces an open competition for grants that support exchanges and build relationships between U.S. non-profit organizations and civil society groups in Africa, East Asia, Eurasia, Europe, the Near East, North Africa, South Asia and the Western Hemisphere. U.S. public and non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3) may submit proposals that support the goals of The Professional Exchanges Program. Projects should promote mutual understanding and partnerships between key professional groups in the United States and counterpart groups in other countries through multi-phased exchanges taking place over one to three years. Proposals should further transformational democracy which seeks to encourage and support the development of more democratic societies and institutions, with a view toward creating a more stable world. To the fullest extent possible, programs should be two-way exchanges supporting roughly equal numbers of participants from the U.S. and foreign countries. Proposed projects should promote the transformation of institutional and individual understanding, foster dialogue, share expertise and develop capacity in one of five thematic areas:

(1)Responsible Governance;

(2)Developing Professional Standards in Media;

(3)Creating Economic Growth to Fight Poverty and Strengthen Democracy;

(4)Dialogue on Intellectual Property or Municipal Governance as a Device for Bridging Conflict; and

(5)Integration of Marginalized Populations, Particularly Youth, in Western Europe. Through these people-to-people exchanges, the Bureau seeks to break down stereotypes that divide peoples, to promote good governance, to contribute to conflict prevention and management, and to build respect for cultural expression and identity in a world that is experiencing rapid globalization. Projects should be structured to allow American professionals and their international counterparts in target countries to develop a common dialogue for dealing with shared challenges and concerns. Projects should include current or potential leaders who will effect positive change in their communities. Exchange participants might include community leaders, elected and professional government officials, religious leaders, educators, and proponents of democratic ideals and institutions, including for example, the media and judiciary, or others who influence the way in which different communities approach these issues. The Bureau is especially interested in engaging socially and economically diverse groups that may not have had extensive contact with counterpart institutions in the United States. *The Bureau encourages the submission of proposals that engage these audiences in countries with significant Muslim populations, or that engage educators or groups that influence youth in innovative ways.* Applicants may not submit proposals that address more than one region or for countries that are not designated in the RFGP. For the purposes of this competition, eligible regions are Africa, East Asia, Eurasia, Europe, the Near East, North Africa, South Asia, and the Western Hemisphere. No guarantee is made or implied that grants will be awarded in all themes and for all countries listed. Requests for grant proposals on the creation, performance, or presentation of artistic work will be announced in a separate competition. *Please refer to section III.3 for information on eligibility requirements.* I. Funding Opportunity Description Authority Overall grant-making authority for this program is contained in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, Public Law 87-256, as amended, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the Act is “to enable the Government of the United States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries * * *; to strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations * * * and thus to assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful relations between the United States and the other countries of the world.” The funding authority for the program above is provided through legislation. Purpose The Bureau seeks proposals that will address the following priority themes:

(1)Responsible Governance;

(2)Developing Professional Standards in Media;

(3)Creating Economic Growth to Fight Poverty and Strengthen Democracy;

(4)Dialogue on Intellectual Property or Municipal Governance as a Device for Bridging Conflict; and

(5)Integration of Marginalized Populations, Particularly Youth, in Western Europe. The competition is based on the premise that people-to-people exchanges encourage and strengthen understanding of democratic values and nurture the social, political, and economic development of societies. Exchanges supported by institutional grants from the Bureau should operate at two levels: they should enhance partnerships between U.S. and foreign institutions, and they should establish a common dialogue to develop practical solutions for shared problems and concerns. The Bureau is particularly interested in projects that will create mutually beneficial and self-sustaining linkages between professional communities in the U.S. and their counterpart communities in other countries. Applicants must identify the U.S. and foreign organizations and individuals with whom they are proposing to collaborate and describe previous cooperative activities, if any. Information about the mission, activities, and accomplishments of partner organizations should be included in the submission. Proposals should contain letters of commitment or support from partner organizations for the proposed project. Applicants should clearly outline and describe the role and responsibilities of all partner organizations in terms of project logistics, management and oversight. Proposals that show strong prospects for enhancing existing long-term collaboration or establishing new collaborative efforts among participating organizations will be deemed more competitive under the Program Planning and Ability to Achieve Objectives review criterion, per item V.1 below. Competitive proposals will include the following: • A brief description of the problem as it relates to the target country or region. (Proposals that request resources for an initial needs assessment will be deemed less competitive under the review criterion Program Planning and Ability to Achieve Objectives, per item V.1 below.); • A clear statement of program objectives and projected outcomes that respond to Bureau goals for each theme in this competition. Desired outcomes should be described in qualitative and quantitative terms. (See the Program Monitoring and Evaluation section per item V.1 below, for more information on project objectives and outcomes.); • A proposed timeline, listing the optimal schedule for each program activity; • A description of participant recruitment and selection processes; • Letters of support from foreign and U.S. partners. ( *Letters from prospective partner institutions should demonstrate an ability to arrange and conduct U.S. and overseas activities.* ); • An outline of the applicant organization's relevant expertise in the project theme and country(ies); • An outline of relevant experience managing previous exchange programs; • Resumes of experienced staff who have demonstrated a commitment to monitor projects and ensure implementation; • A comprehensive plan to evaluate whether program outcomes achieved met the specific objectives described in the narrative. (See the Program Monitoring and Evaluation section [IV.3d.d below] for further guidance on evaluation.); • A post-grant plan that demonstrates how the grantee plans to maintain contacts initiated through the program. Applicants should discuss ways that U.S. and foreign participants or host institutions could collaborate and communicate after the ECA-funded grant has concluded. (See Review Criterion #5, per item V.1 below for more information on post-grant activities.) • Successful projects will demonstrate the importance Americans place on community service as an element of a strong civil society and may include ideas and projects to strengthen civil society through community service either during participants' stay in the U.S. or upon their return to their countries. • In addition to addressing the themes described below, proposals should develop partner organizations' capacity in such areas as strategic planning, performance management, fund raising, financial management, human resources management, and decision-making. It is important that the proposal narrative clearly state the applicant's commitment to consult closely with the Public Affairs Section of the U.S. embassy in the relevant country(ies) to develop plans for project implementation and to select project participants. Proposals should also acknowledge U.S. embassy involvement in the final selection of all participants. Applicants should state their willingness to invite representatives of the embassy(ies) and/or consulate(s) to participate in program sessions or site visits. Applicants are also *strongly* encouraged to consult with Public Affairs Officers at U.S. embassies in relevant countries as they develop proposals responding to this RFGP. Narratives should state that all material developed for the project will prominently acknowledge Department of State ECA Bureau funding for the program. In addition, before submitting a proposal, applicants are strongly encouraged to be in touch with the Washington, DC-based State Department contact for the themes/regions listed after each program description below. Themes I. Responsible Governance • Educate citizens and youth influencers, including teachers and leaders of youth organizations, on rights and responsibilities in a democracy and empower them to participate in the development of public policy, public discussions and debates by developing their individual skills and organizations. Projects should engage government and NGO leaders in dialogue. • Engage government leaders—national and local—in the importance of citizen participation in governmental decision-making and develop/examine specific practices that promote an effective, accountable, transparent and responsive government and public administration that is crucial to the development of democracy. Projects should engage government and NGO leaders in dialogue. *Audience:* Representatives from government and non-governmental organizations, teachers, community leaders. Ideal Program Model • U.S. grantee identifies U.S. citizens to conduct in-country seminar for citizen activists, teachers, NGO representatives, responsible media, elected local government officials, and legal professionals to discuss transparency and accountability. In-country partner (a local university or other appropriate professional group) would co-host the event with the U.S. grantee institution; selection of participants for U.S. program. • U.S. program that would include a seminar on the role of government/citizen in the U.S.; internships in local elected officials' offices, NGO organizations, and citizen organizations; and a one-day debriefing and evaluation. • In-country program conducted by U.S. experts that served as internship hosts or seminar leaders. Participants in U.S. program design the seminar and serve as co-presenters. Project would also support materials translated into target language, small grants for projects designed to expand the exchange experience and support for the development of alumni association. Eligible Countries *Africa* (single-country and multiple-country projects accepted) Angola, Ethiopia, Kenya, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Swaziland Contact: Curtis Huff, tel:

(202)453-8159, e-mail: *HuffCE@State.gov* *East Asia Pacific* (single-country projects only) China, Indonesia, Vietnam Contact: Clint Wright, tel:

(202)453-8164, e-mail: *WrightHC@state.gov* *Europe and Eurasia* (single-country projects only) Turkey, Ukraine, Kosovo *Europe and Eurasia* (multiple-country projects only) Kyrgyz Republic, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan Contact: Brent Beemer, tel:

(202)453-8147, e-mail: *BeemerBT@state.gov* *Near East/North Africa* (single-country and multiple-country projects accepted for themes listed above) Syria, Algeria, Oman, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Yemen *Near East/North Africa* (multiple-country project only for theme listed below) Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestinian Authority Proposals will be only accepted for: • Engage young political leaders and activists—those active in political parties, university student politics and NGOs—in order to strengthen the participation of youth in the political field. Contact: Thomas Johnston, tel:

(202)453-8162, e-mail: *JohnstonTJ@state.gov* South Asia (single-country and multiple-country projects accepted) Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka Contact: Thomas Johnston, tel:

(202)453-8162, e-mail: *JohnstonTJ@state.gov* II. Developing Professional Standards in Media • Educate media professionals, both journalists, editors and media managers, in professional standards, including accountability, objective reporting, and investigative journalism in order to ensure widespread, accurate media coverage on one of the following issues: HIV/AIDS, anti-corruption, business development or cultural/ethnic diversity. Projects should also raise media professionals' awareness of the issue. Applicants should propose meetings with advocacy groups and assistance organizations that work to address the target issue. • Empower professionals to develop internal media that is independent and accountable to the public. Separate programs for broadcast (radio/television) and print media are envisioned. • Support journalism teachers in designing curricula that promote the development of a responsible and financially sound media. *Audience:* Broadcast, print and Web-based journalists and media managers; teachers Ideal Program Model • In-country workshop on topics to be determined depending on audience (teachers of journalism, editors, reporters, publishers); selection of participants for U.S. program. In-country workshops should include NGO representatives working on the target issue. • Four- to five-week U.S. program that includes a week-long academic seminar through a journalism educational institution on the role of the media in the U.S., practices and professional skills development and a three- to four-week internship program in U.S. media outlets that match the size and type of participant's home outlet. • U.S. media experts travel to country to conduct a follow-on academic seminar for program participants and their colleagues on best practices and lessons learned and to do on-site consultancies in local media outlets. Eligible Countries *Africa* (single-country and multiple-country projects accepted) Cameroon, Ethiopia, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Tanzania, Uganda Contact: Curtis Huff, tel:

(202)453-8159, e-mail: *HuffCE@State.gov* *East Asia and Pacific* (single-country projects only) Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Laos, Malaysia, Philippines, Vietnam Contact: Clint Wright, tel:

(202)453-8164, e-mail: *WrightHC@state.gov* *Europe and Eurasia* (single-country projects only) Armenia, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Russia, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan Contact: Brent Beemer, tel:

(202)453-8147, e-mail: *BeemerBT@state.gov* *Near East/North Africa* (single-country and multiple-country projects accepted) Iraq, the Palestinian Authority, Syria, Libya, Algeria, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia Contact: Thomas Johnston, tel:

(202)453-8162, e-mail: *JohnstonTJ@state.gov* *South Asia* (single-country and multiple-country projects accepted) Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan Contact: Thomas Johnston, tel:

(202)453-8162, e-mail: *JohnstonTJ@state.gov* *Western Hemisphere* (single-country and multiple-country projects accepted) Bolivia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Haiti, Nicaragua, Peru, Venezuela Contact: Laverne Johnson, tel:

(202)453-8160, e-mail: *JohnsonLV@state.gov* III. Creating Economic Growth to Fight Poverty and Strengthen Democracy • Engage community and business leaders, including those involved in science and technology, to promote economic growth and prosperity among youth by sharing practical methods and developing leadership skills in business, including the importance of corporate social responsibility. • Educate youth and women in entrepreneurial thinking and business leadership skills to empower them to engage in business creation. *Audience:* Young entrepreneurs, teachers, community leaders, including representatives from governmental and non-governmental organizations Ideal Program Model • Successful businessmen conduct workshops for audiences on effective, practical methods of stimulating entrepreneurial skills in target countries. • Key members of in-country workshops invited to U.S. for business facilitation or mentoring to promote innovation and networking skills. Develop action plans for business implementation upon return home. • Upon return participants implement business action plans with guidance from U.S. mentors utilizing e-mail and other direct communication. • Business mentors travel to country to evaluate implementation of action plan and offer assistance. Eligible Countries *Africa* (single-country and multiple-country projects accepted) Benin, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Ghana, Liberia, Mauritania, Niger, Sierra Leone, Tanzania Contact: Curtis Huff, tel:

(202)453-8159, e-mail: *HuffCE@State.gov* *East Asia Pacific* (multiple-country projects only) Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam *East Asia Pacific* (single-country projects only) Mongolia Contact: Clint Wright, tel:

(202)453-8164, e-mail: *WrightHC@state.gov* *Near East/North Africa* (single-country projects only) Algeria, Palestinian Authority, Syria, Yemen Contact: Thomas Johnston, tel:

(202)453-8162, e-mail: *JohnstonTJ@state.gov* *Western Hemisphere* (single-country and multiple-country projects accepted) Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Haiti, Mexico, Nicaragua, Peru, Venezuela. Particular focus on indigenous and Afro-Latino communities. Contact: Laverne Johnson, tel:

(202)453-8160, e-mail: *JohnsonLV@state.gov* *South Asia* (single-country and multiple-country projects accepted) Afghanistan, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka Contact: Thomas Johnston, tel:

(202)453-8162, e-mail: *JohnstonTJ@state.gov* IV. Dialogue on Intellectual Property or Municipal Governance as a Device for Bridging Conflict • Engage citizens from China and Taiwan in a dialogue on intellectual property or municipal governance in order to foster increased understanding. *Audience:* Local government representatives, lawyers, representatives from the NGO sector, community leaders Ideal Program Model • In-country program that includes workshops and outreach to wide audience. Recruitment and selection of participants for U.S. program from those that have attended workshops. • U.S. program that includes site visits, meetings and internships • In-country program that includes workshops, led by American experts and participants in the U.S. program. The development of handbooks, educational materials and long-term institutional relationships. Eligible Countries *East Asia and Pacific* —China and Taiwan Only Contact: Clint Wright, tel:

(202)453-8164, e-mail: *WrightHC@state.gov* V. Integration of Marginalized Populations, Particularly Youth, in Western Europe • Engage community leaders, educators, youth influencers, journalists, representatives of community organizations and government departments in examination of programs and practices to facilitate integration, assimilation and empowerment of minority populations, particularly youth. *Audience:* Community leaders, educators, youth influencers, journalists, NGO and government representatives. Ideal Program Model • In-country workshops for 20-40 foreign and U.S. participants to examine the process of integration/assimilation of marginalized populations in Europe and to evaluate the programs, both governmental and non-governmental, to support immigrants. • U.S. program for 10-15 foreign participants to examine the history of and current U.S. practices of integrating immigrant populations into society. Examine and compare immigrant groups in European and U.S. societies, looking at access to education, employment opportunities, political involvement, community leadership, and government and private sector roles in outreach to marginalized youth. Eligible Countries *Europe* (single-country projects only) United Kingdom, France, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, Germany Contact: Brent Beemer, tel:

(202)453-8147, e-mail: *BeemerBT@state.gov* Suggested Program Designs Bureau-supported exchanges may include internships; study tours; short-term, non-technical experiential learning; extended and intensive workshops; and seminars taking place in the United States or overseas as long as these seminars promote intensive exchange of ideas among participants in the project. Examples of program activities include: 1. A U.S.-based program that includes an orientation to program purposes and to U.S. society; study tour/site visits; professional internships/placements; interaction and dialogue; hands-on training; professional development; and action plan development. 2. Capacity-building/training-of-trainer

(TOT)workshops to help participants to identify priorities, create work plans, strengthen professional and volunteer skills, share their experience with committed people within each country, and become active in a practical and valuable way. 3. Site visits by U.S. facilitators/experts to monitor projects in the region and to encourage further development, as appropriate. Participant Selection Proposals should clearly describe the types of persons that will participate in the program as well as the participant recruitment and selection processes. For programs that include U.S. internships, applicants should submit letters of support from host institutions. In the selection of foreign participants, the Bureau and U.S. embassies retain the right to review all participant nominations and to accept or refuse participants recommended by grantee institutions. When U.S. participants are selected, grantee institutions must provide their names and brief biographical data to the Office of Citizen Exchanges. Priority in two-way exchange proposals will be given to foreign participants who have not previously traveled to the United States. Security Considerations With regard to projects focusing on Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq, applicants should be aware of security concerns that will affect the ability of the grantee organization to arrange for the travel of U.S. citizens to these countries or to conduct site visits, participant interviews, seminars, workshops, or training sessions there. All travel to, and activities conducted in, these countries will be subject to consultation with and approval of official U.S. security personnel in country. The applicant organization should be prepared to modify timing or to reconfigure project implementation plans as required by security considerations. II. Award Information *Type of Award:* Grant. *Fiscal Year Funds:* FY-2006. *Approximate Total Funding:* Pending availability of funding, $5.8 million. *Approximate Number of Awards:* 25-30. *Approximate Average Award:* $150,000-$250,000. *Floor of Award Range:* $30,000. *Ceiling of Award Range:* Approximately $250,000. *Anticipated Award Date:* Pending availability of funds, August 31, 2006. *Anticipated Project Completion Date:* July 31, 2007-May 31, 2009. Projects under this competition may range in length from one to three years depending on the number of project components, the country/region targeted and the extent of the evaluation plan proposed by the applicant. The Office of Citizen Exchanges strongly encourages applicant organizations to plan enough time after project activities to measure project outcomes. Please refer to the Program Monitoring and Evaluation section, item IV.3d.3 below, for further guidance on evaluation. III. Eligibility Information III.1. Eligible applicants: Applications may be submitted by public and private non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3). III.2. Cost Sharing or Matching Funds: There is no minimum or maximum percentage required for this competition. However, the Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. Cost sharing is an important element of the ECA-grantee institution relationship, and it demonstrates the implementing organization's commitment to the program. Cost sharing is included as one criterion for grant proposal evaluation. Applicants are strongly encouraged to cost share a portion of overhead and administrative expenses. Cost-sharing, including contributions from the applicant, proposed in-country partner(s), and other sources should be included in the budget request. Proposal budgets that do not reflect cost sharing will be deemed not competitive under the Cost Effectiveness and Cost Sharing criterion (item V.1 below). When cost sharing is offered, it is understood and agreed that the applicant must provide the amount of cost sharing as stipulated in its proposal and later included in an approved grant agreement. Cost sharing may be in the form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For accountability, you must maintain written records to support all costs that are claimed as your contribution, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal Government. Such records are subject to audit. The basis for determining the value of cash and in-kind contributions must be in accordance with OMB Circular A-110, (Revised), Subpart C.23—Cost Sharing and Matching. In the event you do not provide the minimum amount of cost sharing as stipulated in the approved budget, ECA's contribution will be reduced in like proportion. III.3. Other Eligibility Requirements:

(a)Grants awarded to eligible organizations with less than four years of experience in conducting international exchange programs will be limited to $60,000.

(b)Technical Eligibility: In addition to the requirements outlined in the Proposal Submission Instructions

(PSI)technical format and instructions document, all proposals must comply with the following or they will result in your proposal being declared technically ineligible and given no further consideration in the review process. 1. The Office does not support proposals limited to conferences or seminars ( *i.e.* , one- to fourteen-day programs with plenary sessions, main speakers, panels, and a passive audience). It will support conferences only when they are a small part of a larger project in duration that is receiving Bureau funding from this competition. 2. No funding is available exclusively to send U.S. citizens to conferences or conference-type seminars overseas; nor is funding available for bringing foreign nationals to conferences or to routine professional association meetings in the United States. 3. The Office of Citizen Exchanges does not support academic research or faculty or student fellowships. 4. Applicants may not submit more than four

(4)proposals total for this competition. Organizations that submit proposals that exceed these limits will result in having all of their proposals declared technically ineligible, and none of the submissions will be reviewed by a State Department panel. 5. Proposals that target countries/regions or themes not listed in the RFGP will be deemed technically ineligible. 6. Proposals involving the production or interpretation of artistic work WILL NOT be accepted under this competition, and if received, will be declared technically ineligible. IV. Application and Submission Information Note: Please read the complete **Federal Register** announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. IV.1 Contact Information to Request an Application Package: Please contact the Office of Citizen Exchanges, ECA/PE/C, Room 220, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC, 20547, tel.: 202-453-8181; fax: 202-453-8168; or e-mail *gustafsondp@state.gov* or *rectorva@state.gov* to request a Solicitation Package. Please refer to the Funding Opportunity Number (ECA/PE/C-06-01) located at the top of this announcement when making your request. The Solicitation Package contains the Proposal Submission Instruction

(PSI)document which consists of required application forms, and standard guidelines for proposal preparation. Please specify the Bureau Program Officer listed for each region and theme above and refer to the Funding Opportunity Number (ECA/PE/C-06-01) located at the top of this announcement on all other inquiries and correspondence. IV.2. To Download a Solicitation Package Via Internet: The entire Solicitation Package may be downloaded from the Bureau's Web site at *http://exchanges.state.gov/education/rfgps/menu.htm* . Please read all information before downloading. IV.3. Content and Form of Submission: Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. The original and ten copies of the application should be sent per the instructions under IV.3f. “Submission Dates and Times section” below. IV.3a. You are required to have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System

(DUNS)number to apply for a grant or cooperative agreement from the U.S. Government. This number is a nine-digit identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a DUNS number, access *http://www.dunandbradstreet.com* or call 1-866-705-5711. Please ensure that your DUNS number is included in the appropriate box of the SF-424 which is part of the formal application package. IV.3b. All proposals must contain an executive summary, proposal narrative and budget. Please Refer to the Solicitation Package. It contains the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions

(PSI)document for additional formatting and technical requirements. IV.3c. You must have nonprofit status with the IRS at the time of application. If your organization is a private nonprofit which has not received a grant or cooperative agreement from ECA in the past three years, or if your organization received nonprofit status from the IRS within the past four years, you must submit the necessary documentation to verify nonprofit status as directed in the PSI document. Failure to do so will cause your proposal to be declared technically ineligible. IV.3d. Please take into consideration the following information when preparing your proposal narrative: IV.3d.1 Adherence To All Regulations Governing The J Visa. The Office of Citizen Exchanges of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs is the official program sponsor of the exchange program covered by this RFGP, and an employee of the Bureau will be the “Responsible Officer” for the program under the terms of 22 CFR 62, which covers the administration of the Exchange Visitor Program (J visa program). Under the terms of 22 CFR 62, organizations receiving grants under this RFGP will be third parties “cooperating with or assisting the sponsor in the conduct of the sponsor's program.” The actions of grantee program organizations shall be “imputed to the sponsor in evaluating the sponsor's compliance with” 22 CFR 62. Therefore, the Bureau expects that any organization receiving a grant under this competition will render all assistance necessary to enable the Bureau to fully comply with 22 CFR 62 *et seq.* The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs places great emphasis on the secure and proper administration of Exchange Visitor (J visa) Programs and adherence by grantee program organizations and program participants to all regulations governing the J visa program status. Therefore, proposals should *explicitly state in writing* that the applicant is prepared to assist the Bureau in meeting all requirements governing the administration of Exchange Visitor Programs as set forth in 22 CFR 62. If your organization has experience as a designated Exchange Visitor Program Sponsor, the applicant should discuss its record of compliance with 22 CFR 62 *et seq.* , including the oversight of its Responsible Officers and Alternate Responsible Officers, screening and selection of program participants, provision of pre-arrival information and orientation to participants, monitoring of participants, proper maintenance and security of forms, record-keeping, reporting and other requirements. The Office of Citizen Exchanges of ECA will be responsible for issuing DS-2019 forms to participants in this program. A copy of the complete regulations governing the administration of Exchange Visitor

(J)programs is available at *http://exchanges.state.gov* or from: United States Department of State, Office of Exchange Coordination and Designation, ECA/EC/ECD—SA-44, Room 734, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, Telephone:

(202)203-5029, Fax:

(202)453-8640. IV.3d.2 Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines. Pursuant to the Bureau's authorizing legislation, programs must maintain a non-political character and should be balanced and representative of the diversity of American political, social, and cultural life. “Diversity” should be interpreted in the broadest sense and encompass differences including, but not limited to ethnicity, race, gender, religion, geographic location, socio-economic status, and physical challenges. Applicants are strongly encouraged to adhere to the advancement of this principle both in program administration and in program content. Please refer to the review criteria under the ‘Support for Diversity’ section for specific suggestions on incorporating diversity into your proposal. Public Law 104-319 provides that “in carrying out programs of educational and cultural exchange in countries whose people do not fully enjoy freedom and democracy,” the Bureau “shall take appropriate steps to provide opportunities for participation in such programs to human rights and democracy leaders of such countries.” Public Law 106-113 requires that the governments of the countries described above do not have inappropriate influence in the selection process. Proposals should reflect advancement of these goals in their program contents, to the full extent deemed feasible. IV.3d.3. Program Monitoring and Evaluation. Proposals must include a plan to monitor and evaluate the project's success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the program. The Bureau recommends that your proposal include a draft survey questionnaire or other technique plus a description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original project objectives. The Bureau expects that the grantee will track participants or partners and be able to respond to key evaluation questions, including satisfaction with the program, learning as a result of the program, changes in behavior as a result of the program, and effects of the program on institutions (institutions in which participants work or partner institutions). The evaluation plan should include indicators that measure gains in mutual understanding as well as substantive knowledge. Successful monitoring and evaluation depend heavily on setting clear goals and outcomes at the outset of a program. Your evaluation plan should include a description of your project's objectives, your anticipated project outcomes, and how and when you intend to measure these outcomes (performance indicators). The more that outcomes are “smart” (specific, measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and placed in a reasonable time frame), the easier it will be to conduct the evaluation. You should also show how your project objectives link to the goals of the program described in this RFGP. Your monitoring and evaluation plan should clearly distinguish between program *outputs* and *outcomes.* *Outputs* are products and services delivered, often stated as an amount. Output information is important to show the scope or size of project activities, but it cannot substitute for information about progress towards outcomes or the results achieved. Examples of outputs include the number of people trained or the number of seminars conducted. *Outcomes,* in contrast, represent specific results a project is intended to achieve and is usually measured as an extent of change. Findings on outputs and outcomes should both be reported, but the focus should be on outcomes. We encourage you to assess the following four levels of outcomes, as they relate to the program goals set out in the RFGP (listed here in increasing order of importance): 1. Participant satisfaction with the program and exchange experience. 2. Participant learning, such as increased knowledge, aptitude, skills, and changed understanding and attitude. Learning includes both substantive (subject-specific) learning and mutual understanding. 3. Participant behavior, concrete actions to apply knowledge in work or community; greater participation and responsibility in civic organizations; interpretation and explanation of experiences and new knowledge gained; continued contacts between participants, community members, and others. 4. Institutional changes, such as increased collaboration and partnerships, policy reforms, new programming, and organizational improvements. Please note: Consideration should be given to the appropriate timing of data collection for each level of outcome. For example, satisfaction is usually captured as a short-term outcome, whereas behavior and institutional changes are normally considered longer-term outcomes. Overall, the quality of your monitoring and evaluation plan will be judged on how well it

(1)specifies intended outcomes;

(2)gives clear descriptions of how each outcome will be measured;

(3)identifies when particular outcomes will be measured; and

(4)provides a clear description of the data collection strategies for each outcome (i.e., surveys, interviews, or focus groups). (Please note that evaluation plans that deal only with the first level of outcomes [satisfaction] will be deemed less competitive under the present evaluation criteria.) Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. IV.3e. Please take the following information into consideration when preparing your budget: IV.3e.1. Applicants must submit a comprehensive budget for the entire program. For this competition, requests should not exceed approximately $250,000. There must be a summary budget as well as breakdowns reflecting both administrative and program budgets. Applicants may provide separate sub-budgets for each program component, phase, location, or activity to provide clarification. IV.3e.2. Allowable costs for the program include the following: 1. *Travel.* International and domestic airfare; visas; transit costs; ground transportation costs. Please note that all air travel must be in compliance with the Fly America Act. There is no charge for J-1 visas for participants in Bureau sponsored programs. 2. *Per Diem.* For U.S.-based programming, organizations should use the published Federal per diem rates for individual U.S. cities. Domestic per diem rates may be accessed at: *http://policyworks.gov/org/main/mt/homepage/mtt/perdiem/perd03d.html.* ECA requests applicants to budget realistic costs that reflect the local economy and do not exceed Federal per diem rates. Foreign per diem rates can be accessed at: *http://www.state.gov/m/a/als/prdm/html.* 3. *Interpreters.* For U.S.-based activities, ECA strongly encourages applicants to hire their own locally based interpreters. However, applicants may ask ECA to assign State Department interpreters. One interpreter is typically needed for every four participants who require interpretation. When an applicant proposes to use State Department interpreters, the following expenses should be included in the budget: Published Federal per diem rates (both “lodging” and “M&IE”) and “home-program-home” transportation in the amount of $400 per interpreter. Salary expenses for State Department interpreters will be covered by the Bureau and should not be part of an applicant's proposed budget. Bureau funds cannot support interpreters who accompany delegations from their home country or travel internationally. 4. *Book and Cultural Allowances.* Foreign participants are entitled to a one-time cultural allowance of $150 per person, plus a book allowance of $50. Interpreters should be reimbursed up to $150 for expenses when they escort participants to cultural events. U.S. program staff, trainers or participants are not eligible to receive these benefits. 5. *Consultants.* Consultants may be used to provide specialized expertise or to make presentations. Honoraria rates should not exceed $250 per day. Organizations are encouraged to cost-share rates that would exceed that figure. Subcontracting organizations may also be employed, in which case the written agreement between the prospective grantee and sub-grantee should be included in the proposal. Such sub-grants should detail the division of responsibilities and proposed costs, and subcontracts should be itemized in the budget. 6. *Room rental.* The rental of meeting space should not exceed $250 per day. Any rates that exceed this amount should be cost shared. 7. *Materials.* Proposals may contain costs to purchase, develop and translate materials for participants. Costs for high quality translation of materials should be anticipated and included in the budget. Grantee organizations should expect to submit a copy of all program materials to ECA, and ECA support should be acknowledged on all materials developed with its funding. 8. *Equipment.* Applicants may propose to use grant funds to purchase equipment, such as computers and printers; these costs should be justified in the budget narrative. Costs for furniture are not allowed. 9. *Working meal.* Normally, no more than one working meal may be provided during the program. Per capita costs may not exceed $15-$25 for lunch and $20-$35 for dinner, excluding room rental. The number of invited guests may not exceed participants by more than a factor of two-to-one. When setting up a budget, interpreters should be considered “participants.” 10. *Return travel allowance.* A return travel allowance of $70 for each foreign participant may be included in the budget. This allowance would cover incidental expenses incurred during international travel. 11. *Health insurance.* Foreign participants will be covered during their participation in the program by the ECA-sponsored Accident and Sickness Program for Exchanges (ASPE), for which the grantee must enroll them. Details of that policy can be provided by the contact officers identified in this solicitation. The premium is paid by ECA and should not be included in the grant proposal budget. However, applicants are permitted to include costs for travel insurance for U.S. participants in the budget. 12. *Wire transfer fees.* When necessary, applicants may include costs to transfer funds to partner organizations overseas. Grantees are urged to research applicable taxes that may be imposed on these transfers by host governments. 13. *In-country travel costs* for visa processing purposes. Given the requirements associated with obtaining J-1 visas for ECA-supported participants, applicants should include costs for any travel associated with visa interviews or DS-2019 pick-up. 14. *Administrative Costs.* Costs necessary for the effective administration of the program may include salaries for grantee organization employees, benefits, and other direct and indirect costs per detailed instructions in the Application Package. While there is no rigid ratio of administrative to program costs, proposals in which the administrative costs do not exceed 25% of the total requested ECA grant funds will be more competitive under the cost effectiveness and cost sharing criterion, per item V.1 below. Proposals should show strong administrative cost sharing contributions from the applicant, the in-country partner and other sources. Please refer to the Solicitation Package for complete budget guidelines and formatting instructions. IV.3f. Submission Dates and Times: *Application Deadline Date:* Thursday, February 9, 2006. *Explanation of Deadlines:* Due to heightened security measures, proposal submissions must be sent via a nationally recognized overnight delivery service (i.e., DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or U.S. Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc.) and be shipped no later than the above deadline. The delivery services used by applicants must have in-place, centralized shipping identification and tracking systems that may be accessed via the Internet and delivery people who are identifiable by commonly recognized uniforms and delivery vehicles. Proposals shipped on or before the above deadline but received at ECA more than seven days after the deadline will be ineligible for further consideration under this competition. Proposals shipped after the established deadlines are ineligible for consideration under this competition. It is each applicant's responsibility to ensure that each package is marked with a legible tracking number and to monitor/confirm delivery to ECA via the Internet. ECA will *not* notify you upon receipt of application. Delivery of proposal packages *may not* be made via local courier service or in person for this competition. Faxed documents will not be accepted at any time. Only proposals submitted as stated above will be considered. Applications may not be submitted electronically at this time. Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. Important note: When preparing your submission please make sure to include one extra copy of the completed SF-424 form and place it in an envelope addressed to “ECA/EX/PM”. The original and ten copies of the application should be sent to: U.S. Department of State, SA-44, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.: ECA/PE/C-06-01 Program Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 534, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547. Along with the Project Title, all applicants must enter the above Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF-424 contained in the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions

(PSI)of the solicitation document. IV.3g. Intergovernmental Review of Applications: Executive Order 12372 does not apply to this program. IV.3h. Applicants must also submit the “Executive Summary” and “Proposal Narrative” sections of the proposal in text (.txt) format on a PC-formatted disk. The Bureau will provide these files electronically to the appropriate Public Affairs Section(s) at the U.S. embassy(ies) for its (their) review. V. Application Review Information V.1. Review Process. The Bureau will review all proposals for technical eligibility. Proposals will be deemed ineligible if they do not fully adhere to the guidelines stated herein and in the Solicitation Package. All eligible proposals will be reviewed by the program office, as well as the Public Diplomacy section overseas, where appropriate. Eligible proposals will be subject to compliance with Federal and Bureau regulations and guidelines and forwarded to Bureau grant panels for advisory review. Proposals may also be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Adviser or by other Department elements. Final funding decisions are at the discretion of the Department of State's Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final technical authority for grants resides with the Bureau's Grants Officer. Review Criteria Technically eligible applications will be competitively reviewed according to the criteria stated below. These criteria are not rank ordered and all carry equal weight in the proposal evaluation: 1. *Program Planning and Ability to Achieve Objectives:* Program objectives should be stated clearly and should reflect the applicant's expertise in the subject area and region. Objectives should respond to the topics in this announcement and should relate to the current conditions in the target country/countries. A detailed agenda and relevant work plan should explain how objectives will be achieved and should include a timetable for completion of major tasks. The substance of workshops, internships, seminars and/or consulting should be described in detail. Sample training schedules should be outlined. Responsibilities of proposed in-country partners should be clearly described. A discussion of how the applicant intends to address language issues should be included, if needed. 2. *Institutional Capacity:* Proposals should include

(1)the institution's mission and date of establishment;

(2)detailed information about proposed in-country partner(s) and the history of the partnership;

(3)an outline of prior awards-U.S. Government and/or private support received for the target theme/country/region; and

(4)descriptions of experienced staff members who will implement the program. The proposal should reflect the institution's expertise in the subject area and knowledge of the conditions in the target country/countries. Proposals should demonstrate an institutional record of successful exchange programs, including responsible fiscal management and full compliance with all reporting requirements for past Bureau grants as determined by Bureau Grants Staff. The Bureau will consider the past performance of prior recipients and the demonstrated potential of new applicants. Proposed personnel and institutional resources should be adequate and appropriate to achieve the program's goals. The Bureau strongly encourages applicants to submit letters of support from proposed in-country partners. 3. *Cost Effectiveness and Cost Sharing:* Overhead and administrative costs in the proposal budget, including salaries, honoraria and subcontracts for services, should be kept to a minimum. * Proposals whose administrative costs are less than twenty-five

(25)per cent of the total funds requested from the Bureau will be deemed more competitive under this criterion. * Applicants are strongly encouraged to cost share a portion of overhead and administrative expenses. Cost-sharing, including contributions from the applicant, proposed in-country partner(s), and other sources should be included in the budget request. Proposal budgets that do not reflect cost sharing will be deemed not competitive in this category. 4. *Support of Diversity:* Proposals should demonstrate substantive support of the Bureau's policy on diversity. Achievable and relevant features should be cited in both program administration (selection of participants, program venue and program evaluation) and program content (orientation and wrap-up sessions, program meetings, resource materials and follow-up activities). Applicants should refer to the Bureau's Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines in the Proposal Submission Instructions

(PSI)and the Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines section, Item IV.3d.2, above for additional guidance. 5. *Post-Grant Activities:* Applicants should provide a plan to conduct activities after the Bureau-funded project has concluded in order to ensure that Bureau-supported programs are not isolated events. Funds for all post-grant activities must be in the form of contributions from the applicant or sources outside of the Bureau. Costs for these activities must not appear in the proposal budget, but should be outlined in the narrative. 6. *Program Monitoring and Evaluation:* Proposals should include a detailed plan to monitor and evaluate the program. Program objectives should target clearly defined results in quantitative terms. Competitive evaluation plans will describe how applicant organizations would measure these results, and proposals should include draft data collection instruments (surveys, questionnaires, etc.) in Tab E. See the “Program Management/Evaluation” section, item IV.3d.3 above for more information on the components of a competitive evaluation plan. Successful applicants (grantee institutions) will be expected to submit a report after each program component concludes or on a quarterly basis, whichever is less frequent. The Bureau also requires that grantee institutions submit a final narrative and financial report no more than 90 days after the expiration of a grant. Please refer to the “Program Management/Evaluation” section, item IV.3d.3 above for more guidance. VI. Award Administration Information VI.1a. Award Notices: Final awards cannot be made until funds have been appropriated by Congress, allocated and committed through internal Bureau procedures. Successful applicants will receive an Assistance Award Document

(AAD)from the Bureau's Grants Office. The AAD and the original grant proposal with subsequent modifications (if applicable) shall be the only binding authorizing document between the recipient and the U.S. Government. The AAD will be signed by an authorized Grants Officer, and mailed to the recipient's responsible officer identified in the application. Unsuccessful applicants will receive notification of the results of the application review from the ECA program office coordinating this competition. VI.2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: Terms and Conditions for the Administration of ECA agreements include the following: Office of Management and Budget Circular A-122, “Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations.” Office of Management and Budget Circular A-21, “Cost Principles for Educational Institutions.” OMB Circular A-87, “Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Governments.” OMB Circular No. A-110 (Revised), Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Nonprofit Organizations. OMB Circular No. A-102, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and Local Governments. OMB Circular No. A-133, Audits of States, Local Government, and Non-profit Organizations Please reference the following Web sites for additional information: *http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants. http://exchanges.state.gov/education/grantsdiv/terms.htm#articleI.* VI.3. Reporting Requirements: You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus two copies of the following reports: 1. A final program and financial report no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award; 2. Any interim report(s) required in the Bureau grant agreement document. Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. (Please refer to Application and Submission Instructions [IV.3d.3] above for Program Monitoring and Evaluation information.) All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. All reports must be sent to the ECA Grants Officer and ECA Program Officer listed in the final assistance award document. VI.4. Program Data Requirements: Organizations awarded grants will be required to maintain specific data on program participants and activities in an electronically accessible database format that can be shared with the Bureau as required. As a minimum, the data must include the following:

(1)Name, address, contact information and biographic sketch of all persons who travel internationally on funds provided by the grant or who benefit from the grant funding but do not travel.

(2)Itineraries of international and domestic travel, providing dates of travel and cities in which any exchange experiences take place. Final schedules for in-country and U.S. activities must be received by the ECA Program Officer at least three workdays prior to the official opening of the activity. VII. Agency Contacts For questions about this announcement, contact: The Office of Citizen Exchanges, ECA/PE/C, Room 220, ECA/PE/C-06-01, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547; tel.: 202-453-8181; fax: 202-453-8168; *gustafsondp@state.gov* or *rectorva@state.gov.* All correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFGP should reference the above title and number ECA/PE/C-06-01. Please read the complete **Federal Register** announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. VIII. Other Information Notice: The terms and conditions published in this RFGP are binding and may not be modified by any Bureau representative. Explanatory information provided by the Bureau that contradicts published language will not be binding. Issuance of the RFGP does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and the availability of funds. Awards made will be subject to periodic reporting and evaluation requirements per section VI.3 above. Dated: November 29, 2005. Dina Habib Powell, Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E5-7073 Filed 12-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5240] Notice Convening an Accountability Review Board to Examine the Circumstances of the Death of DS Special Agent Stephen Sullivan and Seven Security Contractors in September 2005 Pursuant to section 301 of the Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986, as amended (22 U.S.C. 4831 *et seq.* ), the Secretary of State has determined that recent attacks on two official motorcades in Iraq involved loss of life that was at or related to a U.S. mission abroad. Therefore, the Secretary has convened an Accountability Review Board to examine the facts and the circumstances of the attacks and to report to me such findings and recommendations as it deems appropriate, in keeping with the enclosed mandate. In these two attacks, Diplomatic Security Special Agent Stephen Sullivan was killed along with seven security contractors. The Secretary has appointed Edward G. Lanpher, a retired U.S. Ambassador, as Chair of the Board. He will be assisted by M. Bart Flaherty, Frederick Mecke, Mike Absher, Laurie Tracy and Executive Secretary to the Board, Robert A. Bradtke. They bring to their deliberations distinguished backgrounds in government service and/or in the private sector. The Board will submit its conclusions and recommendations to Secretary Rice within 60 days of its first meeting, unless the Chair determines a need for additional time. Appropriate action will be taken and reports submitted to Congress on any recommendations made by the Board. Anyone with information relevant to the Board's examination of these incidents should contact the Board promptly at

(202)647-5204 or send a fax to the Board at

(202)647-3282. This notice shall be published in the **Federal Register** . Dated: December 1, 2005. Henrietta H. Fore, Under Secretary for Management, Department of State. [FR Doc. E5-7075 Filed 12-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-35-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5241] Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs; Notice of Receipt of Application for a Presidential Permit to Construct a New Commercial Border Crossing at San Luis, Arizona AGENCY: Department of State. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Department of State has received an application for a Presidential Permit authorizing the construction, operation and maintenance of a new commercial border crossing at San Luis, Arizona, known hereafter as the “San Luis II” crossing. This application has been filed by the Greater Yuma (Arizona) Port Authority. The construction project, which would be carried out in partnership with a number of local, state, federal and bi-national entities, is designed to alleviate pressure on the current Port of Entry at San Luis, Arizona (designated as San Luis I) by allowing for the separation of commercial traffic from non-commercial/privately operated vehicles. The Department of State's jurisdiction with respect to this application is based upon Executive Order 11423, dated August 16, 1968, as amended by Executive Order 12847, dated May 17, 1993, Executive Order 13284, dated January 23, 2003 and Executive Order 13337, dated April 30, 2004. As provided in E.O. 11423, the Department is circulating this application to concerned agencies for comment. DATES: Interested parties are invited to submit, in duplicate, comments relative to this application on or before January 13, 2006 to John A. Ritchie, Coordinator, U.S.-Mexico Border Affairs, WHA/MEX, Room 4258, Department of State, 2201 C St., NW., Washington, DC 20520. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John A. Ritchie, Coordinator, U.S.-Mexico Border Affairs, WHA/MEX, Room 4258, Department of State, 2201 C St., NW., Washington, DC 20520. Telephone:

(202)647-8529, fax:

(202)647-5752. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The application and related documents made part of the record to be considered by the Department of State in connection with this application are available for review in the Office of Mexican Affairs, Border Affairs Unit, Department of State, during normal business hours throughout the comment period. Any questions related to this notice may be addressed to Mr. Ritchie using the contact information above. Dated: December 2, 2005. Roberta S. Jacobson, Director, Office of Mexican Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E5-7074 Filed 12-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-29-P OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE Free Trade Agreements; Invitation for Applications for Inclusion on U.S.-Chile FTA Dispute Settlement Rosters AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative. ACTION: Invitation for Applications. SUMMARY: The United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement (Chile FTA) requires the establishment of four rosters of individuals that would be available to serve as panelists in dispute settlement proceedings under the Agreement. A general roster is required to be established under Chapter Twenty-Two: Dispute Settlement. Chapter Twelve on Financial Services, Chapter Eighteen on Labor, and Chapter Nineteen on Environment require the establishment of specific rosters requiring financial services, labor, and environment expertise, respectively. DATES: Applications should be received no later than December 30, 2005. ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted

(i)electronically, to *FR0602@ustr.eop.gov,* Attn: “U.S.-Chile FTA Panelist Applications” in the subject line, or

(ii)by fax to Sandy McKinzy at

(202)395-3640. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding the form of the application, contact Sandy McKinzy, Litigation Assistant, USTR Office of Monitoring and Enforcement, at

(202)395-3582. For other inquiries, contact María L. Pagán, Associate General Counsel, at

(202)395-7305. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dispute Settlement Mechanism of U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement The Chile FTA sets out detailed procedures for the resolution of disputes over compliance with the obligations set out in the agreement. Dispute settlement involves three stages:

(1)Lower level consultations between the Parties to try to arrive at a mutually satisfactory resolution of the matter;

(2)cabinet-level consultations; and,

(3)resort to a neutral panel to make a determination as to whether a Party is in compliance with its obligations under the agreement. The panel is composed of three individuals chosen by the Parties. The Chile FTA requires the establishment of a general dispute settlement roster from which panelists shall normally be selected. The roster must be comprised of at least 20 individuals, at least six of whom should be non-nationals of either Party. Once established, the roster remains in effect for a minimum of three years. See Chile FTA, Article 22.7. The Chile FTA also requires the establishment of three additional rosters, one each for disputes under the Financial Services Chapter (Chapter Twelve), the Labor Chapter (Chapter Eighteen), and the Environment Chapter (Chapter Nineteen). The financial services roster must be comprised of up to 10 individuals, up to four of whom must be non-nationals of either Party. See Chile FTA, Article 12.17. The labor roster must be comprised of up to 12 individuals, four of whom must be non-nationals of either Party. See Chile FTA, Article 18.7. The environment roster must be comprised of at least 12 individuals, four of whom must be non-nationals of either Party. See Chile FTA, Article 19.7. Upon each request for establishment of a panel, potential panelists will be requested to complete a disclosure form, which will be used to identify possible conflicts of interest or appearances thereof. The disclosure form requests information regarding financial interests and affiliations, including information regarding the identity of clients of the potential panelist and, if applicable, clients of the potential panelist's firm. The text of the Chile FTA can be found through the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative Web site ( *www.ustr.gov/Trade_ Agreements/Section_Index.html* ). Criteria for Eligibility for Qualification as Panelist To qualify as a panelist for the general roster an individual must:

(1)Have expertise or experience in law, international trade, other matters covered by the Agreement, or the resolution of disputes arising under international trade agreements;

(2)be objective, reliable, and possess sound judgment;

(3)be independent of, and not be affiliated with or take instructions from any Party; and

(4)comply with a code of conduct. The United States seeks at least 10 individuals, at least three of whom must be non-nationals of the United States or Chile. To qualify as a panelist for the financial services roster an individual must have expertise or experience in financial services law or practice, which may include the regulation of financial institutions, and meet the qualifications set out in

(2)through

(4)above. The United States seeks at least five individuals, up to two of whom should be non-nationals of the United States or Chile. To qualify as a panelist for the labor roster an individual must have expertise or experience in labor law or its enforcement, or in the resolution of disputes arising under international agreements, and meet the qualifications set out in

(2)through

(4)above. The United States seeks six individuals, two of whom must be non-nationals of the United States or Chile. To qualify as a panelist for the environment roster an individual must have expertise or experience in environmental law or its enforcement, international trade, or the resolution of disputes arising under international trade agreements, and meet the qualifications set out in

(2)through

(4)above. The United States seeks at least six individuals, at least two of whom must be non-nationals of the United States or Chile. Procedures for Selection of Roster Members An interagency committee chaired by USTR prepares a preliminary list of candidates eligible for inclusion on the various rosters and lists. After consultation with the Senate Committee on Finance and the House Committee on Ways and Means, USTR selects the final list of individuals chosen by the United States for inclusion on the rosters and lists. Applications Eligible individuals who wish to be considered for the Chile FTA rosters are invited to submit applications. Persons submitting applications may either send one copy by fax to Sandy McKinzy at

(202)395-3640, or transmit a copy electronically to FR0602@ustr.eop.gov, with “Chile FTA Panelist Application” in the subject line. USTR encourages the submission of documents in Adobe PDF format, as attachments to an electronic mail. Interested persons who make submissions by electronic mail should not provide separate cover letters; information that might appear in a cover letter should be included in the submission itself. Similarly, to the extent possible, any attachments to the submission should be included in the same file as the submission itself, and not as separate files. Applications must be typewritten, and should be headed “Application for Consideration as a Chile FTA Panelist.” Applicants must specify for which of the four rosters they wish to be considered: General, Financial Services, Labor, or Environment. Applicants may specify more than one roster. Applications should include the following information, and each section of the application should be numbered as indicated: 1. Name of the applicant. 2. Business address, telephone number, fax number, and e-mail address. 3. Citizenship(s). 4. Current employment, including title, description of responsibility, and name and address of employer. 5. Relevant education and professional training. 6. Spanish language fluency, written and spoken. 7. Post-education employment history, including the dates and addresses of each prior position and a summary of responsibilities. 8. Relevant professional affiliations and certifications, including, if any, current bar memberships in good standing. 9. A list and copies of publications, testimony, and speeches, if any, concerning the relevant area of expertise. Judges or former judges should list relevant judicial decisions. Only one copy of publications, testimony, speeches, and decisions need be submitted. 10. A list of international trade proceedings or domestic proceedings relating to international trade matters in which the applicant has provided advice to a party or otherwise participated. 11. Summary of any current and past employment by, or consulting or other work for, the Government of the United States or for the Government of Chile. 12. The names and nationalities of all foreign principals for whom the applicant is currently or has previously been registered pursuant to the Foreign Agents Registration Act, 22 U.S.C. 611 *et seq.* , and the dates of all registration periods. 13. A short statement of qualifications and availability for service on the FTA dispute settlement panels, including information relevant to the applicant's familiarity with international trade law and relevant area(s) for the roster(s) for which the applicant seeks to be considered, and willingness and ability to make time commitments necessary for service on panels. 14. On a separate page, the names, addresses, telephone and fax numbers of three individuals willing to provide information concerning the applicant's qualifications for service, including the applicant's character, reputation, reliability, judgment, and familiarity with the relevant area of expertise. Public Disclosure Applications normally will not be subject to public disclosure. Applications may be shared with other agencies, the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives, the Finance Committee of the Senate, and the Government of Chile for their consideration in determining whether to appoint persons to the rosters. False Statements False statements by applicants regarding their personal or professional qualifications, or financial or other relevant interests that bear on the applicants' suitability for placement on the roster or appointment to a panel are subject to criminal sanctions under 18 U.S.C. 1001. Paperwork Reduction Act This notice contains a collection of information provision subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”) that has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”). Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to respond to nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB number. This notice's collection of information burden is only for those persons who wish voluntarily to apply for consideration as a possible Chile FTA panelist. It is expected that the collection of information burden will be under 3 hours. This collection of information contains no annual reporting or recordkeeping burden. This collection of information was approved by OMB under OMB Control Number 0350-0013. Please send comments regarding the collection of information burden or any other aspect of the information collection to USTR at the above e-mail address or fax number. Privacy Act The following statements are made in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a). Provision of the information requested above is voluntary; however, failure to provide the information will preclude your consideration as a candidate to be a Chile FTA panelist. The information provided is needed, and will be used by USTR, other federal government trade policy officials concerned with dispute settlement under the Chile FTA, and officials of the Government of Chile to select well-qualified individuals to serve as panelists. Daniel E. Brinza, Assistant United States Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement. [FR Doc. E5-7028 Filed 12-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3190-W6-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary Aviation Proceedings, Agreements Filed the Week Ending November 25, 2005 The following Agreements were filed with the Department of Transportation under the sections 412 and 414 of the Federal Aviation Act, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1382 and 1384) and procedures governing proceedings to enforce these provisions. Answers may be filed within 21 days after the filing of the application. *Docket Number:* OST-2005-23125. *Date Filed:* November 22, 2005. *Parties:* Members of the International Air Transport Association. *Subject:* TC23/TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference (SP-4120), Geneva, September 5-9, 2005. TC23/123 Europe-Japan/Korea Resolutions (Memo 0131). TC23/TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference (SP-4185), Geneva, September 5-9, 2005. TC23/123 Europe-Japan/Korea Resolutions (Memo 0134). Minutes: TC23/TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference, Geneva, September 5-9, 2005. (Memo 0136). Tables: TC23/TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference (SP-4185), Geneva, 5-9 September 2005 Specified Fares Tables. (Memo 0069 and Memo 0071). Technical Correction: TC23/TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conference (SP-4185). Geneva, September 5-9, 2005 Specified Fares Tables (Memo 072). *Intended effective date:* April 1, 2006. *Docket Number:* OST-2005-23126. *Date Filed:* November 22, 2005. *Parties:* Members of the International Air Transport Association. *Subject:* PTC3 Mail Vote 468. Special Passenger Amending Resolution 010b, from Singapore to Brunei, Macao SAR, Philippines. *Intended effective date:* December 1, 2005. *Docket Number:* OST-2005-23139. *Date Filed:* November 22, 2005. *Parties:* Members of the International Air Transport Association. *Subject:* TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordinating Conferences, Bangkok, October 24-November 1, 2005. TC123 South Atlantic Resolution 002ce (Memo 0318). Technical Correction: TC123 Passenger Tariff Coordination Conferences, Bangkok, October 24-November 1 2005. TC123 South Atlantic Resolution 002ce (Memo 0320). *Intended effective date:* December 15, 2005. *Docket Number:* OST-2005-23140. *Date Filed:* November 22, 2005. *Parties:* Members of the International Air Transport Association. *Subject:* PTC23 Mail Vote 467. Special Passenger Amending Resolution 010a, from Korea (Rep. of) to Middle East. *Intended effective date:* December 1, 2005. *Docket Number:* OST-2005-23146. *Date Filed:* November 23, 2005. *Parties:* Members of the International Air Transport Association. *Subject:* PAC/1/2/3 dated October 28, 2005. Mail Vote Number A 124. Amended Procedure for Updates to the BSP Manual for Agents. PAC 3 dated October 28, 2005. Mail Vote Number A 125. Implementation of Resolution 810 in Sri Lanka. *Intended effective date:* January 1, 2006. *Docket Number:* OST-2005-23154. *Date Filed:* November 25, 2005. *Parties:* Members of the International Air Transport Association. *Subject:* PTC3 Mail Vote 469. Special Passenger Amending Resolution 010c, from Korea (Rep. of) to Japan (Memo 0902). *Intended effective date:* December 5, 2005. Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, **Federal Register** Liaison. [FR Doc. E5-7066 Filed 12-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration [Policy Statement Number PS-ACE100-2005-10039] Standardization and Clarification of Application of 14 CFR Part 23, Sections 23.1301 and 23.1309, Regarding Environmental Qualification AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments. SUMMARY: This notice announces a Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA)proposed policy that clarifies and standardizes the application of the subject sections on environmental qualification. This notice advises the public, especially manufacturers of normal, utility, and acrobatic category airplanes, and commuter category airplanes and their suppliers, that the FAA intends to adopt this policy. This notice is necessary to advise the public of this FAA policy and give all interested persons an opportunity to present their views on it. DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 9, 2006. ADDRESSES: Send all comments on the proposed policy statement to the individual identified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Comments may be inspected at the Small Airplane Directorate, Standards Office (ACE-110), Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri, between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. weekdays, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ervin Dvorak, Federal Aviation Administration, Small Airplane Directorate, Regulations & Policy, ACE-111, 901 Locust Street, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:

(816)329-4123; fax: 816-329-4090; e-mail: *erv.dvorak@faa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited Interested persons are invited to comment on this proposed policy statement by submitting written data, views, or arguments. Identify the proposed policy statement number, PS-ACE100-2005-10039, on your comments. If you submit your comments in writing, send two copies of your comments to the above address. The Small Airplane Directorate will consider all communications received on or before the closing date for comments. We may change the proposal contained in the policy because of the comments received. Comments sent by fax or the Internet must contain “Comments to proposed policy statement PS-ACE100-2005-10039” in the subject line. You do not need to send two copies if you fax your comments or send them through the Internet. If you send comments over the Internet as an attached electronic file, format it in Microsoft Word for Windows. State what specific change you are seeking to the proposed policy memorandum and include justification (for example, reasons or data) for each request. Copies of the proposed policy statement, PS-ACE100-2005-10039, may be requested from the following: Small Airplane Directorate, Standards Office (ACE-110), Aircraft Certification Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 901 Locust Street, Room 301, Kansas City, MO 64106. In a few days, the proposed policy statement will also be available on the Internet at the following address: *http://www.airweb.faa.gov/policy.* Issued in Kansas City, Missouri on November 28, 2005. David R. Showers, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E5-7022 Filed 12-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Maritime Administration [USCG-2004-18474] Pearl Crossing LNG Terminal LLC, Liquefied Natural Gas Deepwater Port License Application AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS; Maritime Administration, DOT. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard and the Maritime Administration (MARAD) announce the cancellation of all actions related to the processing of a license application for the proposed Pearl Crossing LNG Terminal LLC deepwater port. The action announced here includes cancellation of all activities related to the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)that was announced on Monday, August 16, 2004, in **Federal Register** Volume 69 Number 157 (Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement). The action is taken in response to the applicant's decision to withdraw the application. DATES: The cancellation of all actions related to this license application was effective October 19, 2005. ADDRESSES: The Docket Management Facility maintains the public docket for this project. The docket may be viewed electronically at *http://dms.dot.gov* under docket number USCG-2004-18474, or in person at the Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590-0001. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about the Pearl Crossing LLC Deepwater Port project, contact LCDR Derek Dostie, Deepwater Ports Standards Division, USCG at

(202)267-0662 or *ddostie@comdt.uscg.mil* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 19, 2005, the Coast Guard and MARAD received notification from the applicant, Pearl Crossing LNG Terminal LLC, that it withdrew its application for a liquefied natural gas deepwater port with associated pipeline facilities 41 miles off the coast of Louisiana in lease block West Cameron number 220. Consequently, the Coast Guard and MARAD are terminating all activities relating to the application. Further information pertaining to this application may be found in the public docket ( *see* ADDRESSES ). Dated: November 17, 2005. Howard L. Hime, Acting Director of Standards, Marine Safety, Security, and Environmental Protection, U.S. Coast Guard. H. Keith Lesnick, Senior Transportation, Specialist, Deepwater Ports Program Manager, U.S. Maritime Administration. [FR Doc. E5-7029 Filed 12-7-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Denial of Motor Vehicle Defect Petition AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation. ACTION: Denial of petition for a defect investigation. SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the reasons for the denial of a petition submitted by Mr. Ronald Strickland to NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigation (ODI), received on June 24, 2005, under 49 U.S.C. 30162, requesting that the agency commence a proceeding to determine the existence of a defect related to motor vehicle safety with respect to the performance of the ignition coil plugs on model year

(MY)2000-2003 Volkswagen

(VW)Jetta, Golf and Passat sedans with 4, 6, or 8 cylinder engines. After a review of the petition and other information, NHTSA has concluded that further expenditure of the agency's investigative resources on the issues raised by the petition does not appear to be warranted. The agency accordingly has denied the petition. The petition is hereinafter identified as DP05-004. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Gregory Magno, Defects Assessment Division, Office of Defects Investigation, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By letter received on June 24, 2005, Mr. Ronald M. Strickland of Raleigh, NC, submitted a petition requesting that the agency investigate the performance of the ignition coils on model year

(MY)2000-2003 Volkswagen Jetta, Golf and Passat sedans. The petitioner alleges that he had experienced multiple stalling events as a result of one or more ignition coils malfunctioning on his 2002 VW Jetta. As a result of the engine stalling, the petitioner reported a loss of power steering and the need for increased braking effort when he pulled the vehicle over to the side of the road. After a few minutes parked on the shoulder, he was able to restart and drive the vehicle, although the engine operated at reduced power. VW issued a Customer Satisfaction Campaign

(CSC)on January 31, 2003, instructing their dealerships to inspect 2001-2002 VW vehicles for malfunctioning ignition coils. Pre-campaign letters were sent to owners in February 2003. Any such coils were to be replaced at no cost to the vehicle owner. In May 2003, VW issued a dealer circular, which addressed their need to notify consumers as replacement ignition coils became available. Consumers were notified to bring their vehicles to their dealerships via owner letters mailed out on June 6, 2003. In September 2003, additional notification targeting 2002-2003 VW Golf GTI and Jetta 6-cylinder models was mailed to those owners. In November 2003, reminder notifications were mailed to owners who have not had the campaign repairs done. Initially, VW instructed the dealerships to replace only the malfunctioning ignition coil. However, revised CSCs were issued to dealerships in December 2003 and January 2004, instructing dealerships to replace all ignition coils regardless of their performance and to include wiring harness modifications needed to perform the campaign on specific MY 2002-2003 Jetta vehicles. To date, ODI has received a total of 516 consumer complaints (including one from the petitioner) about the ignition coil performance in MY 2000 to 2003 VW vehicles. ODI analyzed the material and identified 133 complaints (25.7% of the total) that experienced the same stall event as the petitioner. The remaining reports voiced concerns regarding the engine drivability issues ( *i.e.* , reduced engine power, hesitation and surging), none of which involved a crash, injury, or fatality. Three of the complainants indicated to ODI that their malfunctioning ignition coils overheated but caused no additional vehicle damage. A fourth consumer reported an engine fire from a failed coil and was able to extinguish the flames, which were localized to the top of the engine intake manifold without further incident. EN08DE05.001 Within the last 12 months ODI has received only 17 complaints regarding either stalling or drivability issues with these ignition coils. Within the last two years ODI has received only 38 complaints. After the first CSC was sent to dealerships on January 31, 2003, by VW, the number of complaints regarding this issue has rapidly declined. (Figure 1) Although the concerns of the petitioner could theoretically lead to a safety problem, two years of real-world data shows very little risk due to the fact that in the majority of events the engine continues to operate at a reduced power level. The absence of reported real-world crash experience is consistent with the minimal consequence on the vehicle control systems associated with ignition coil failure. This is largely due to the fact that the failure happens on an individual coil and there is no trend of multiple and simultaneous coil failures that would tend to drive up the rate of reported stalling events. Should the vehicle stall, the power brake system will maintain a reserve of two or more brake pedal applications before reverting to a manual braking application mode. Any loss of power steering assist will increase steering effort at low speeds but at highway speeds the increase in steering effort will be minimal to none. Once the vehicle operator becomes aware of the problem (by experiencing a loss of power due to one of the ignition coils malfunctioning), he or she is able to take precautionary and compensatory measures and still maintain control of the vehicle. In sum, VW's service campaign seems to be effectively alleviating the problem the petitioner has raised; the frequency of the alleged defect has declined considerably; and the alleged defect does not, based on current evidence, seem likely to lead to a significant safety problem. In view of the foregoing, it is unlikely that the NHTSA would issue an order for the notification and remedy of the alleged defect as defined by the petitioner at the conclusion of the investigation requested in the petition. Therefore, in view of the need to allocate and prioritize the NHTSA's limited resources to best accomplish the agency's safety mission, the petition is denied. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30162(d); delegations of authority at CFR 1.50 and 501.8. Issued on: December 2, 2005. Daniel Smith, Associate Administrator for Enforcement. [FR Doc. 05-23765 Filed 12-7-05; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 15

Traces to 15 documents

U.S. Code