Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2006-04-18 · Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT) · Proposed Rules

Proposed Rules. Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

35,328 words·~161 min read·/register/2006/04/18/06-3656

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

BILLING CODE 6725-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration [Docket No. FAA-2006-24496; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-141-AD] 14 CFR Part 39 RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 Series Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for certain Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes. This proposed AD would require repetitive inspections to detect cracks in the vertical beam webs of the body station
(BS)178 bulkhead, and corrective actions if necessary. This proposed AD also would require a terminating modification for the repetitive inspections. This proposed AD results from reports of numerous cracks in the vertical beam webs. We are proposing this AD to prevent fatigue cracks in certain vertical beam webs, which could result in loss of structural integrity of the BS 178 bulkhead, and consequently could impair the operation of the control cables for the elevators, speed brakes, and landing gear, or could cause the loss of cabin pressure. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 2, 2006. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following addresses to submit comments on this proposed AD. • DOT Docket Web site: Go to *http://dms.dot.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Government-wide rulemaking Web site: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street SW., Nassif Building, room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590. • Fax:
(202)493-2251. • Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207, for the service information identified in this proposed AD. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Howard Hall, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone
(425)917-6430; fax
(425)917-6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to submit any relevant written data, views, or arguments regarding this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed in the ADDRESSES section. Include the docket number “FAA-2006-24496; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-141-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend the proposed AD in light of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://dms.dot.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact with FAA personnel concerning this proposed AD. Using the search function of that web site, anyone can find and read the comments in any of our dockets, including the name of the individual who sent the comment (or signed the comment on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* Examining the Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* , or in person at the Docket Management Facility office between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The Docket Management Facility office (telephone
(800)647-5227) is located on the plaza level of the Nassif Building at the DOT street address stated in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after the Docket Management System receives them. Discussion We have received several reports of numerous cracks in the vertical beam webs at buttock lines
(BL)5.7 and 17.0 of the body station
(BS)178 bulkhead on Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, line numbers 1 through 3132 inclusive. Five cracks nearly severed the upper web of the BL 17.0 vertical beam. One crack severed the lower web of the BL 17.0 vertical beam. The cracks initiate from holes in the web of the vertical beams and at fastener locations common to the forward and aft chords of the vertical beams. These airplanes have accumulated between 15,556 and 64,881 total flight cycles. The cracks occur as a result of structural fatigue due to cabin pressure loads. Fatigue cracks in the vertical beam webs at BL 5.7 and 17.0 of BS 178 bulkhead, if not detected and corrected, could result in loss of structural integrity of the bulkhead, which could impair the operation of the control cables for the elevators, speed brakes, and landing gear, or could cause the loss of cabin pressure. Other Relevant Rulemaking We have previously issued AD 2000-05-29, amendment 39-11639 (65 FR 14834, March 20, 2000), applicable to Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, line numbers 1 through 2,737 inclusive. That AD requires repetitive inspections to detect fatigue cracking of the web, vertical chords, and side chords of the forward pressure bulkhead, and repair if necessary. That AD also provides for certain optional preventative modifications (reference Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1173, Revision 3, dated May 6, 1999), which, if done, ends the repetitive inspection requirements for the affected areas. In addition, we have previously issued AD 2001-02-01, amendment 39-12085 (66 FR 7576, January 24, 2001), applicable to Boeing Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, line numbers 2,738 through 3,071 inclusive. That AD requires repetitive inspections to detect fatigue cracking in the vertical chords and side chords of the forward pressure bulkhead, and repair if necessary. That AD also requires certain preventative modifications (reference Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1208, dated May 6, 1999), which ends the repetitive inspection requirements for the affected areas. For certain airplanes, accomplishing the preventative modification in this proposed AD may affect accomplishing the preventative modifications specified as optional in AD 2000-05-29 and required by AD 2001-02-01. See “Effect of Accomplishing Concurrent Requirements” section for further information. Relevant Service Information We have reviewed Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225, Revision 1, dated April 14, 2005. The service bulletin describes procedures for repetitive high frequency eddy current
(HFEC)and detailed inspections to detect cracks in the BS 178 vertical beam webs, and corrective actions if necessary. The corrective actions include repairing or replacing any cracked vertical beam web and associated parts with a new vertical beam web and associated parts. The service bulletin also describes procedures for a preventative modification ( *i.e.* , repairing or replacing the vertical beams at BL 5.7 and 17.0 of the BS 178 bulkhead), which ends the repetitive inspections. For certain airplanes, Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225 recommends accomplishing concurrently the terminating preventative modifications specified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1173 or 737-53A1208, as applicable, due to common access and structure. Accomplishing the actions specified in the service information is intended to adequately address the unsafe condition. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD We have evaluated all pertinent information and identified an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on other airplanes of this same type design. For this reason, we are proposing this AD, which would require accomplishing the actions specified in the service information described previously, except as discussed under “Difference Between the Proposed AD and Service Information.” Difference Between Proposed AD and Service Information Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225 specifies to contact the manufacturer for instructions on how to repair certain conditions, but this proposed AD would require repairing those conditions in one of the following ways: • Using a method that we approve; or • Using data that meet the certification basis of the airplane, and that have been approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization whom we have authorized to make those findings. Effect of Accomplishing Concurrent Requirements Operators who have not done the preventative modifications specified in AD 2000-05-29 (reference Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1173, Revision 3, dated May 6, 1999) or required by AD 2001-02-01 (reference Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1208, dated May 6, 1999), as applicable, as of the effective date of this AD, must do those preventative modifications concurrently with the preventative modification of this proposed AD in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225, Revision 1. We realize that the concurrent requirements of this proposed AD will force some operators to do the preventative modifications required by AD 2001-02-01 early and to do the optional preventative modification specified in AD 2000-05-29. However, accomplishing the applicable preventative modifications together is necessary to avoid repeated disassembly and re-assembly of common parts, which increases the likelihood of additional assembly errors. Costs of Compliance There are about 3,132 airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The following table provides the estimated costs for U.S. operators to comply with this proposed AD. Estimated Costs Action Work hours Average labor rate per hour Parts Cost per airplane Number of U.S.-registered airplanes Fleet cost Inspection, per inspection cycle 4 $80 None $320, per inspection cycle 1,172 $375,040, per inspection cycle. Preventative Modification 240 80 Between $960 and $13,620 depending on kit purchased Between $20,160 and $32,820 depending on configuration 1,172 (720 airplanes have had the preventative modification incorporated) Between $14,515,200 and $23,630,400. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, “General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify that the proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section for a location to examine the regulatory evaluation. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA)amends § 39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness directive (AD): **Boeing:** Docket No. FAA-2006-24496; Directorate Identifier 2005-NM-141-AD. Comments Due Date
(a)The FAA must receive comments on this AD action by June 2, 2006. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Boeing Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, -500 series airplanes, certificated in any category; as identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225, Revision 1, dated April 14, 2005. Unsafe Condition
(d)This AD results from reports of numerous cracks in the vertical beam webs. We are issuing this AD to prevent fatigue cracks in certain vertical beam webs, which could result in loss of structural integrity of the body station
(BS)178 bulkhead, and consequently could impair the operation of the control cables for the elevators, speed brakes, and landing gear, or could cause the loss of cabin pressure. Compliance
(e)You are responsible for having the actions required by this AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the actions have already been done. Repetitive Inspections
(f)At the applicable times specified in Table 1 of this AD, do a high frequency eddy current
(HFEC)inspection and detailed inspection to detect cracks in the BS 178 vertical beam webs, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225, Revision 1, dated April 14, 2005. Table 1.—Compliance Times For airplanes on which— Inspect— And repeat the HFEC and detailed inspections thereafter at—
(1)An HFEC or a detailed inspection specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225, dated October 19, 2000, has not been done as of the effective date of this AD Before the accumulation of 15,000 total flight cycles, or within 4,500 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later Intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight cycles.
(2)An HFEC or detailed inspection specified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225, dated October 19, 2000, has been done before the effective date of this AD Within 6,000 flight cycles since the last HFEC inspection, or within 1,200 flight cycles since the last detailed inspection, whichever occurs later Intervals not to exceed 6,000 flight cycles. Corrective Actions
(g)If any crack is detected during any inspection required by paragraph
(f)of this AD, before further flight, repair or replace the vertical beam web and associated parts with a new vertical beam web, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225, Revision 1, dated April 14, 2005, except as provided by paragraph
(h)of this AD.
(h)If any damage is beyond the scope of the service bulletin or structural repair manual, before further flight, repair the damaged vertical beam web in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA; or using a method approved in accordance with paragraph
(l)of this AD. Terminating Preventative Modification
(i)Before the accumulation of 50,000 total flight cycles, or within 25,000 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, repair or replace the vertical beams at buttock lines
(BL)5.7 and 17.0 of the BS 178 bulkhead, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225, Revision 1, dated April 14, 2005. Accomplishing the repair or replacement ends the repetitive inspections required by paragraph
(f)of this AD.
(j)Actions done before the effective date of this AD in accordance with Boeing BOECOM M-7200-01-00546, dated March 1, 2001, are acceptable for compliance with the requirements of paragraph
(i)of this AD. Concurrent Requirements
(k)For Group 1 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225, Revision 1, dated April 14, 2005: Concurrently with the requirements of paragraph
(i)of this AD, unless already done before the effective date of this AD, do the preventative modifications of the center web, vertical chords, and side chord areas, including the side chord areas at water line 207, of the forward pressure bulkhead, specified in paragraph
(c)of AD 2000-05-29, amendment 39-11639 (reference Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1173, Revision 3, dated May 6, 1999).
(l)For Group 2 airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 737-53A1225, Revision 1, dated April 14, 2005: Concurrently with the requirements of paragraph
(i)of this AD, but no later than the time specified in AD 2001-02-01, amendment 39-12085, do the preventative modifications of the vertical and side chord areas of the forward pressure bulkhead required by paragraph
(c)of AD 2001-02-01 (reference Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737-53A1208, dated May 6, 1999). Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (m)(1) The Manager, Seattle ACO, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in accordance with the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19.
(2)Before using any AMOC approved in accordance with § 39.19 on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify the appropriate principal inspector in the FAA Flight Standards Certificate Holding District Office.
(3)An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used for any repair required by this AD, if it is approved by an Authorized Representative for the Boeing Commercial Airplanes Delegation Option Authorization Organization who has been authorized by the Manager, Seattle ACO, to make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval must specifically refer to this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on April 4, 2006. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E6-5723 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary [Docket No. OST-2006-23999] 14 CFR Part 382 RIN 2105-AD41 Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Air Travel—Accommodations for Individuals Who Are Deaf, Hard of Hearing, or Deaf-Blind AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Extension of comment period on proposed rule. SUMMARY: The Department is extending through June 24, 2006, the period for interested persons to submit comments to its proposed rule on accommodations for individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, or deaf-blind. DATES: Comments must be received by June 24, 2006. Comments received after this date will be considered to the extent practicable. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the docket number [OST-2005-23999] by any of the following methods:
(1)Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov* (follow the instructions for submitting comments);
(2)Web site: *http://dms.dot.gov* (follow the instructions for submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site);
(3)Fax: 1-202-493-2251;
(4)Mail: Docket Management System; U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590-001; or
(5)Hand Delivery: To the Docket Management System; Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. You must include the agency name and docket number [OST-2005-23999] or the Regulatory Identification Number
(RIN)for this notice at the beginning of your comment. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to *http://dms.dot.gov* including any personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act section of this document. You may view the public docket through the Internet at *http://dms.dot.gov* or in person at the Docket Management System office at the above address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Blane A. Workie, Office of Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, 400 7th Street, SW., Room 4116, Washington, DC 29590. Phone: 202-366-9342. TTY: 202-366-0511. Fax: 202-366-7152. E-mail: *blane.workie@dot.go* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 23, 2006, the Department of Transportation (DOT or Department) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)that proposed to amend 14 CFR Part 382 (Part 382), the rule that implements the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), to provide for additional accommodations for air travelers who are deaf, hard of hearing or deaf-blind. *See* 71 FR 9285. The NPRM would apply to U.S. air carriers, to foreign air carriers for their flights into and out of the United States, to airport facilities located in the U.S. that are owned, controlled or leased by carriers, and to aircraft that serve a U.S. airport. On March 16, 2006, the European Civil Aviation Conference
(ECAC)requested an extension of the comment period, in order to permit it to gather expert opinion from many sources on the “complex” issues addressed in the NPRM. It requested an extension of at least a few weeks from the original comment closing date of April 24, 2006. This request was supported by the Air Carrier Association of America (ACAA), the Air Transport Association (ATA), the National Air Carrier Association (NACA), and the Regional Airline Association (RAA). The carrier associations further requested that the comment period for the NPRM be extended to June 24, 2006, to consider “the multiple and complicated technical and operational issues raised by the NPRM (for domestic and international operations) and the accompanying initial regulatory assessment.” The Department concurs that an extension of the comment period is necessary to allow intergovernmental organizations such as ECAC as well as members of industry sufficient time to analyze the impact of the proposed rule and is granting a 60-day extension, which we expect will result in more thorough comments to the docket than might otherwise be possible. Accordingly, the Department finds that good cause exists to extend the comment period on the proposed rule from April 24, 2006, to June 24, 2006. Issued in Washington, DC this 11th day of April, 2006, under authority assigned to me by 14 CFR 385.17 (c). Neil Eisner, Assistant General Counsel for Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Department of Transportation. [FR Doc. E6-5717 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD 36 CFR Parts 1193 and 1194 [Docket No. 2006-1] Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines; Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards AGENCY: Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. ACTION: Notice of intent to establish advisory committee. SUMMARY: The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) announces its intent to establish an Advisory Committee (Committee) to make recommendations for revisions and updates to accessibility guidelines for telecommunications products and accessibility standards for electronic and information technology. The Access Board requests applications from interested organizations for representatives to serve on the Committee. DATES: Applications should be received by May 18, 2006. ADDRESSES: Applications should be sent to the Office of Technical and Information Services, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1331 F Street, NW., suite 1000, Washington, DC 20004-1111. Fax number
(202)272-0081. Applications may also be sent via electronic mail to the Access Board at the following address: *creagan@access-board.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy Creagan, Office of Technical and Information Services, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1331 F Street, NW., suite 1000, Washington, DC 20004-1111. Telephone number
(202)272-0016 (Voice);
(202)272-0082 (TTY). Electronic mail address: *creagan@access-board.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On February 8, 1996, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was enacted. The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) 1 was given the responsibility for developing accessibility guidelines for telecommunications equipment and customer premises equipment in conjunction with the Federal Communications Commission. The Board was also instructed to review and update the guidelines periodically. The Board published the guidelines on February 3, 1998. 63 FR 5608 (February 3, 1998); 36 CFR part 1193. The guidelines were based on recommendations from a Telecommunications Access Advisory Committee that the Board had created. 1 The Access Board is an independent Federal agency established by section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 792) whose primary mission is to promote accessibility for individuals with disabilities. The Access Board consists of 25 members. Thirteen are appointed by the President from among the public, a majority of who are required to be individuals with disabilities. The other twelve are heads of the following Federal agencies or their designees whose positions are Executive Level IV or above: The departments of Health and Human Services, Education, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Interior, Defense, Justice, Veterans Affairs, and Commerce; the General Services Administration; and the United States Postal Service. On August 7, 1998, the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, which includes the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1998, was signed into law. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act Amendments generally requires that when Federal departments or agencies develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and information technology, they must ensure that the technology is accessible to people with disabilities, unless an undue burden would be imposed on the department or agency. Section 508 required the Access Board to publish standards setting forth a definition of electronic and information technology and technical and functional performance criteria for such technology. In developing the standards, the Board was instructed to consult with various Federal agencies 2 , the electronic and information technology industry, and appropriate public or nonprofit agencies or organizations, including organizations representing individuals with disabilities. The Board was also required to periodically review and, as appropriate, amend the standards to reflect technological advances or changes in electronic and information technology. The Board published the standards on December 21, 2000. 65 FR 80500 (December 21, 2000); 36 CFR part 1194. The standards were based on recommendations from an Electronic and Information Technology Access Advisory Committee that the Board had created to assist it in developing the standards. 2 The Access Board is required to consult with the Secretary of Education, the Administrator of General Services, the Secretary of Commerce, the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, the Secretary of Defense, and the head of any other Federal department or agency that the Access Board determines to be appropriate. It has been over eight years since the Board issued the Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines and over five years since the Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards were issued. Technology has changed during that time. Additionally, several organizations have asked the Board to update its Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards so that they are harmonized with efforts taking place around the globe. The telecommunications provisions in the Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards are based on and are consistent with the Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines. Therefore, updating and revising the Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards and the Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines could be done together. Advisory Committee At its November 9, 2005 meeting, the Access Board voted to form a Federal Advisory Committee (Committee) to revise and update its Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines and Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards in one rulemaking and that the committee should include representation from other countries and international standards setting organizations in addition to other groups. The Access Board will begin the process of updating its Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines and Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards by establishing an Advisory Committee. The establishment of the Committee is in the public interest and will assist the Board in meeting its obligation for broad consultation with Federal agencies, the telecommunications and electronic and information technology industry, organizations representing individuals with disabilities, and others in the update and revision of the guidelines and standards. The Committee will make recommendations to the Access Board on issues such as: • Types of products to be covered; • Barriers to the use of such products by persons with disabilities; • Solutions to such barriers, if known, and research on such barriers; • Harmonization with international standards efforts in this area; and • Contents of the revised and updated guidelines and standards. The Committee will be expected to present a report with its recommendations to the Access Board within 10 months of the Committee's first meeting. The Access Board requests applications for representatives of the following interests for membership on the Committee: • Federal agencies; • The telecommunications and electronic and information technology industry, including manufacturers; • Organizations representing the access needs of individuals with disabilities; • Representatives from other countries and international standards setting organizations; and • Other organizations affected by these accessibility guidelines and standards. The number of Committee members will be limited to effectively accomplish the Committee's work and will be balanced in terms of interests represented. Organizations with similar interests are encouraged to submit a single application to represent their interest. Although the Committee will be limited in size, there will be opportunities for the public to present information to the Committee, participate through subcommittees, and to comment at Committee meetings. Applications should be sent to the Access Board at the address listed at the beginning of this notice. The application should include the name of the organization; person who will represent the organization (and an alternate); title; address, telephone number, and e-mail address; a statement of the interests represented; and a description of the representative's qualifications, including engineering, technical, and design expertise and knowledge of making telecommunications products or electronic and information technology accessible to individuals with disabilities. Committee members will not be compensated for their service. The Access Board may, at its own discretion, pay travel expenses for a limited number of persons who would otherwise be unable to participate on the Committee. Committee members will serve as representatives of their organizations, not as individuals. They will not be considered special government employees and will not be required to file confidential financial disclosure reports. After the applications have been reviewed, the Access Board will publish a notice in the **Federal Register** announcing the appointment of Committee members and the first meeting of the Committee. The first meeting of the Committee is tentatively scheduled for September 6-7, 2006 in Arlington, VA. The Committee will operate in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app 2. All Committee meetings will be held in the Washington, DC metropolitan area. Each meeting will be open to the public. A notice of each meeting will be published in the **Federal Register** at least 15 days in advance of the meeting. Records will be kept of each meeting and made available for public inspection. Availability of Copies and Electronic Access Single copies of this notice may be obtained at no cost by calling the Access Board's automated publications order line
(202)272-0080, by pressing 2 on the telephone keypad and then 1. Please record your name, address, telephone number and request the advisory committee notice. Persons using a TTY should call
(202)272-0082. This notice is available in alternate formats upon request. Persons who want this notice in an alternate format should specify the type of format (cassette tape, Braille, large print, or ASCII disk). This notice is also available on the Board's Web site ( *http://www.access-board.gov* ). Lawrence W. Roffee, Executive Director. [FR Doc. E6-5761 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8150-01-P POSTAL SERVICE 39 CFR Part 111 New Standards for Mailing Sharps and Other Regulated Medical Waste AGENCY: Postal Service. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: The Postal Service is proposing new standards for mailing sharps and other regulated medical waste containers. Our proposal includes changes to the packaging, the package testing, and the process for authorizing and suspending authorization. DATES: We must receive your comments on or before May 18, 2006. ADDRESSES: Mail or deliver written comments to the Manager, Mailing Standards, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW., Room 3436, Washington, DC 20260-3436. You may inspect and photocopy all written comments at USPS Headquarters Library, 475 L'Enfant Plaza SW., 11th Floor N, Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bert Olsen, 202-268-7276. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Customers requesting authorization to mail sharps and other medical waste containers must submit to the Postal Service the results of package testing performed by an independent testing facility. In the past, we have found that container testing methods were not applied consistently. This proposal provides pass/fail criteria to support uniform testing methods for all sharps and medical waste containers and new standards to enhance the integrity of these mailpieces. In many cases, we authorize containers for vendors who distribute them to third parties. This proposal would require that vendors provide the name and address of their distributors, and update that information on a quarterly basis. We also clarify that vendors, as part of the application process, must accept responsibility for the containers they distribute and cover disposal or cleanup costs if spills occur while the containers are in our possession. All currently authorized sharps and other regulated medical waste containers will maintain their authorization until it expires: 24 months from the most recent approval, or when a change is made to the container or mailpiece. Customers applying for authorization or reauthorization after the effective date of this change must follow the new standards. Although we are exempt from the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act [5 U.S.C. 553(b), (c)] regarding proposed rulemaking by 39 U.S.C. 410(a), we invite public comment on the following proposed revisions to Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM), incorporated by reference in the Code of Federal Regulations. See 39 CFR 111.1. We provide the new standards below. We propose to implement these standards on July 6, 2006. List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 111 Administrative practice and procedure, Postal Service. Accordingly, 39 CFR part 111 is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 111—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for 39 CFR part 111 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 39 U.S.C. 101, 401, 403, 404, 414, 416, 3001-3011, 3201-3219, 3403-3406, 3621, 3626, 5001. 2. Revise the following sections of Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM), as follows: 600 Basic Standards for All Mailing Services 601 Mailability 10.0 Hazardous Materials 10.17 Infectious Substances (Hazard Class 6, Division 6.2) [Revise title of 10.17.7 to read as follows:] 10.17.7 Sharps Medical Waste and Regulated Medical Waste [Replace “distributor or manufacturer” with “vendor” throughout 10.17.7.] [Revise the authorization information in item a1 to read as follows:] 1. An irrevocable and continual $50,000 surety bond or letter of credit. The surety bond or letter of credit serves as proof of sufficient financial responsibility to cover disposal costs if the vendor or its distributors cease doing business before all its waste container systems are disposed of or to cover cleanup costs if spills occur while the containers are in USPS possession. The surety bond or letter of credit must be issued in the name of the vendor seeking the authorization and must name the USPS as the beneficiary. Vendors who market their containers to distributors are responsible for disposal and cleanup costs for those containers. [Add new item a2 to read as follows; renumber items a3 through a8 as items a4 though a9:] 2. A list of distributors, including firm name, address, and phone number. Vendors must provide this list to the USPS on a quarterly basis and when a distributor is added or removed. [Revise item a4 to add “name” and “phone number,” to read as follows:] 4. The name, address, and phone number of each storage and disposal site. [Add text at the end of item a9 to read as follows:] 9. * * * and verification that the merchandise return service
(MRS)permit fee and accounting fee have been paid. [Add new item a10 to read as follows:] 10. The post office or postage due unit where the containers are delivered. [Revise the package testing information in item b1 by adding a new last sentence to read as follows:] 1. * * * Package testing results must show that the primary container was not penetrated by its contents during package testing and that the primary container can maintain its integrity at temperatures as low as 0 °F and as high as 120 °F. [Revise item b2 to read “4 mil” in the third sentence:] 2. * * * If one of the components is a plastic bag, it must be at least 4 mil in thickness and be used in conjunction with a fiberboard box. * * * [Revise the fourth sentence in item b3 to read as follows:] 3. * * * Fiberboard boxes with interlock bottom flaps are not permitted as outer shipping containers. * * * [Add two new sentences at the end of item b4 as follows:] 4. * * * The secondary container system must consist of a fiberboard box inside a secured plastic bag. Package testing results must show that the secondary container can be turned upside down for 5 minutes without evidence of leakage after placing 150 ml of deionized water into the secondary box. [Revise item b5 to read as follows:] 5. Each mailpiece must not weigh more than 25 pounds. The container's maximum allowable weight must be printed on the outside of the box and on the assembly and closure instructions included with each mailpiece. The mailpiece must be tested at the maximum allowable weight identified by the vendor. [Add a new sentence at the end of item c1 to read as follows:] 1. * * * Place the label on the top or on a side of the container. [Add a new sentence at the end of item c2 to read as follows:] 2. * * * The symbol must be at least 3 inches high and 4 inches wide. [Add new item c7 to read as follows:] 7. Vendors must retrieve mailpieces held at processing facilities due to improper labeling, such as no return address, or due to improperly completed shipping papers. [Revise item d to read as follows:] d. Package Testing. Vendors must submit to the manager, Mailing Standards (see 608.8 for address) package testing results from an independent testing facility for each package for which the vendor is requesting authorization. In addition, vendors must submit package testing results from an independent testing facility when the design of a container system changes or every 24 months, whichever occurs first. The test results must show that if every mailpiece prepared for mailing were subject to the environmental and test conditions in 49 CFR and the additional test requirements in 10.17.7e, there would be no release of the contents to the environment and no significant reduction in the effectiveness of the packaging. The Postal Service may require proof of accreditation or other documentation to support the credentials of an independent testing facility. [Add new item e to read as follows:] e. Testing Criteria. Each mailpiece must pass each of the tests described below: 1. *Leak-proof test.* One primary receptacle must withstand the test in 49 CFR 178.604. The test must be conducted on the primary receptacle with the lid in place, without the secondary and outer packaging. The test duration must be at least 5 minutes and must be conducted at 20 kPa (3 psi). The pass/fail criterion is: No leakage of air from anywhere other than the closure of the primary receptacle. Air leakage at the closure is not considered a failure if the primary receptacle passes the test for water tightness as determined by placing 50 ml of deionized water into the primary receptacle, securing the closure, and then turning the container on its side and observing for any evidence of leakage. Any evidence of water leaking from the primary receptacle is a failure. 2. *Stacking test.* One mailpiece must withstand the test in 49 CFR 178.606. The dynamic compression test must be conducted on the empty, unsealed mailpiece assembled for mailing, without the primary receptacle(s). The test mass is the vendor-identified maximum weight, not to exceed 25 pounds, as indicated on the outer shipping container and on the assembly and closing instructions. A compensation factor of 1.5 must be used to compute the test load, based on the vendor-identified weight. The pass/fail criteria are: No buckling of the sidewalls sufficient to cause damage to the contents in the primary container, and in no case does the deflection exceed 1 inch. 3. *Vibration test.* One mailpiece filled with sharps or other regulated medical waste must withstand the test in 49 CFR 178.608. The test mailpiece is filled with sharps or other regulated medical waste to the vendor-identified maximum weight, not to exceed 25 pounds, as indicated on the outer shipping container and on the assembly and closing instructions. The test sample is prepared as it would be for mailing. The pass/fail criteria are: No rupture, cracking, or splitting of any primary receptacle. 4. *Wet drop test.* Five mailpieces filled with sharps or other regulated medical waste must withstand the test in 49 CFR 178.609(e). Each test mailpiece is filled with sharps or other regulated medical waste to the vendor-identified maximum weight, not to exceed 25 pounds, as indicated on the outer shipping container and on the assembly and closing instructions included with each mailpiece. Each mailpiece is prepared as it would be for mailing and subjected to the water spray as described in the test. A separate, untested mailpiece is used for each drop orientation: Top, longest side, shortest side, and corner. The pass/fail criteria are: No rupture, cracking, or splitting of any primary receptacle, and no contents may penetrate into or through the body or lid of any primary receptacle. 5. *Cold drop test.* Five mailpieces filled with sharps or other regulated medical waste must withstand the test in 49 CFR 178.609(f). Each test mailpiece is filled with sharps or other regulated medical waste to the vendor-identified maximum weight, not to exceed 25 pounds, as indicated on the outer shipping container and on the assembly and closing instructions included with each mailpiece. Each mailpiece is prepared as it would be for mailing and chilled as described in the test. A separate, untested mailpiece is used for each drop orientation: Top, longest side, shortest side, and corner. The pass/fail criteria are: No rupture, cracking, or splitting of any primary receptacle, and no contents may penetrate into or through the body or lid of any primary receptacle. 6. *Impact test.* One mailpiece filled with sharps or other regulated medical waste must withstand the test in 49 CFR 178.609(h). The test mailpiece is filled with sharps or other regulated medical waste to the vendor-identified maximum weight, not to exceed 25 pounds, as indicated on the outer shipping container and on the assembly and closing instructions included with each mailpiece. The mailpiece is prepared as it would be for mailing. The pass/fail criteria are: No rupture, cracking, or splitting of any primary receptacle, and no contents may penetrate into or through the body or lid of any primary receptacle. 7. *Puncture-resistant test.* Package testing results must show that the primary container was not penetrated by its contents during all of the previous testing. 8. *Temperature test.* Package testing results must show that each primary receptacle maintained its integrity when exposed to temperatures as low as 0 °F and as high as 120 °F. 9. *Absorbency test.* Package testing results must show that the primary receptacle(s) contain enough absorbent material to absorb three times the total liquid allowed within the primary receptacle in case of leakage. Absorbency is determined by pouring 150 ml of deionized water into the primary receptacle(s), then turning the receptacle(s) upside down and observing for any evidence of free liquid not absorbed on contact. Any evidence of free liquid is a failure. 10. *Watertight test.* Package testing results must show that no leakage occurred when 50 ml of deionized water was placed into the secondary box, a plastic bag was secured around the box with a tie closure, and the entire secondary container was turned upside down for 5 minutes. [Add new item f to read as follows:] f. Suspension of Authorization. 1. The Postal Service may suspend an authorization based on information that a mailpiece no longer meets the standards for mailing sharps medical waste and regulated medical waste containers, or that the mailpiece poses an unreasonable safety risk to Postal Service employees or the public. The suspension can be made immediately, making the mailpiece nonmailable immediately. The vendor may contest a decision to suspend authorization by writing to the manager, Mailing Standards (see 608.8 for address) within 7 days from the date of the letter of suspension. The appeal should provide evidence demonstrating why the decision should be reconsidered. Any order suspending authorization remains in effect during an appeal or other challenge. 2. Vendors notified that their authorization to mail sharps or other regulated medical waste is suspended must immediately: a. Recall all identified containers. b. Notify all customers that they cannot mail the identified containers. c. Suspend sales and distribution of all identified containers. d. Collect the identified containers from distributors, consumers, and the Postal Service without using the mail and in accordance with all Federal and State regulations. We will publish an appropriate amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to reflect these changes if our proposal is adopted. Neva R. Watson, Attorney, Legislative. [FR Doc. E6-5695 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 260, 261, 262, 263, 264, 265, and 271 [EPA-HQ-RCRA-2001-0032; FRL-8159-3] RIN 2050-AE21 Hazardous Waste Management System; Modification of the Hazardous Waste Manifest System AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice of data availability and request for comment. SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of additional information on the electronic manifest (e-manifest ) project. Specifically, subsequent to EPA's proposal to develop a nearly paperless electronic approach for implementing the manifest requirements, EPA's Office of Solid Waste held a two-day public meeting to discuss and obtain public input on a national e-manifest system. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss with stakeholders our rulemaking progress and to solicit their input and preferences on the development and implementation of the e-manifest project. EPA also presented material on alternative information technology
(IT)approaches to the e-manifest, including a centralized approach under which EPA would host a web-based national system. As a result of these discussions and subsequent analysis of possible means to fund the development and operation of an e-manifest system, EPA now believes that a centralized, national e-manifest system is the preferred approach as we proceed with the rulemaking authorizing the use of electronic manifests. EPA will consider the data obtained from the public meeting and any new data from public comments received on this notice in making a final decision on whether to develop a national electronic manifest (e-manifest) system. Because the Agency expects to go final based on the comments it receives on this notice, as well as other comments received, any party interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 19, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2001-0032 by one of the following methods: • *www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • E-mail: *rcra-docket@epa.gov.* • Fax: 202-566-0272 • Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)Docket, 5305T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of 3 copies. • Hand Delivery: Public Reading Room, Room B102, EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. Such deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2001-0032. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. The *www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *www.regulations.gov,* your e-mail address will be captured automatically and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at *http:// www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.* Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the *www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is
(202)566-1744, and the telephone number for the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA)Docket is
(202)566-0270. Copies cost $0.15/page. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information regarding specific aspects of this document, contact Richard LaShier, Office of Solid Waste,
(703)308-8796, *lashier.rich@epa.gov,* or Bryan Groce, Office of Solid Waste,
(703)308-8750, *groce.bryan@epa.gov.* Mail inquiries may be directed to the Office of Solid Waste, (5304W), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Does This Rule Apply to Me? This rule would affect up to 139,000 entities in at least 45 industries involved in shipping approximately 12 million tons of RCRA hazardous wastes annually (non-wastewaters and wastewaters), using between 2.4 and 5.1 million EPA Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifests (EPA Form 8700-22 and continuation sheets EPA Form 8700-22A). These entities include, but are not limited to: Hazardous waste generators; transporters; treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs); federal facilities; state governments; and governmental enforcement personnel dealing with hazardous waste transportation issues. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this rule to a particular entity, consult the people listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. *Submitting CBI.* Do not submit CBI information to EPA through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR Part 2. 2. *Tips for Preparing Your Comments.* When submitting comments, remember to: Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). Follow directions—The agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR)part or section number. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives. Explain your views as clearly as possible. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. The contents of today's notice are listed in the following outline: I . Background of E-Manifest System A. May 2001 Proposed Rule Standards and Approach B. Comments on the Proposal C. Stakeholder Meeting to Discuss Centralized Alternatives D. Collaboration with GSA and Stakeholders after May 2004 II. The Agency's General Approach to a Centralized E-Manifest System A. Conceptual Design of the E-Manifest III . Request for Comments I. Background of E-Manifest System A. May 2001 Proposed Rule Standards and Approach On May 22, 2001, EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)aimed at reducing the manifest system's paperwork burden on users, while enhancing the effectiveness of the manifest as a tool to track hazardous waste shipments from the site of generation to treatment, storage, or disposal facilities (TSDFs). The proposed rule included proposed manifest system reforms of two distinct types:
(1)Revisions to the manifest form itself and the procedures for using the form; and
(2)revisions to the paper-based manifest system aimed at replacing it with a nearly paperless electronic approach for completing, signing, transmitting and storing manifests, and tracking hazardous waste shipments (hereafter, e-manifest). The proposed e-manifest regulation represented a decentralized approach in which EPA would issue several information technology
(IT)standards, and private parties such as waste management firms and IT vendors would develop and market their own e-manifest systems complying with EPA's standards. The proposed standards addressed such areas as Electronic Data Interchange
(EDI)transaction sets and mapping conventions, Extensible Markup Language
(XML)representations of the manifest, electronic signature methods, and computer security standards that were viewed as necessary to ensure trustworthy systems and data that would be free from tampering or corruption. Significantly, under the proposed rule approach, EPA's role would be limited to the development of the e-manifest standards, and the Agency would not have had any role in developing an IT system or in collecting electronic manifests. EPA explained in the 2001 proposed rule that it did not collect paper manifests from the public, nor did it intend in 2001 to create either a centralized reporting system for electronic manifests, nor a national data base for tracking manifest data. While the Agency desired to foster the development of electronic manifest systems by issuing national standards that would guide the system development efforts of private parties, EPA did not envision playing a role with respect to electronic manifesting that was any different from the standard-setting role the Agency had played in the past with respect to the Uniform Manifest paper form. However, public comments criticized the decentralized approach in our proposed rule and instead stated that the e-manifest system would be unreliable without a nationally centralized approach under which EPA would develop a single national IT system to host e-manifest services. Most stakeholders who attended our two-day public meeting in May 2004 also favored a centralized system for tracking hazardous waste shipments and transmitting/storing manifest data. B. Comments on the Proposal EPA received 64 sets of public comments in response to the May 22, 2001 proposed rule from hazardous waste generators, transporters, waste management firms, consultants, an information technology vendor and ten state hazardous waste management agencies. Commenters generally supported our goals of further standardizing the manifest form elements and reducing variability among the manifests that authorized RCRA State agencies currently distribute. However, there were a substantial number of comments that took issue with our proposed decentralized approach to the e-manifest, particularly with respect to the technical detail and prescriptiveness of the proposed regulatory standards, and the proposed rule's assumption that the regulated industry and IT vendors could or would develop private e-manifest systems adhering to EPA's standards. Other comments criticized the decentralized approach, because it was not viewed as being cost-effective and, therefore, only a few entities might be able to develop private systems, and these likely would be inconsistent with one another. Several of these commenters expressed the need for a nationally centralized approach, under which EPA would take on a more ambitious role by developing a single national IT system to host e-manifest services. The commenters believed that a national web-based system would provide a more consistent, secure, and cost-effective platform for e-manifest services. They also believed that a national system would offer greater benefits to users and regulators, such as one-stop manifest reporting, more effective oversight and enforcement of the manifest requirements, nearly real-time tracking services for waste shippers and receivers, and the possible consolidation of duplicative State and Federal systems now in place to collect and manage manifest data and similar waste receipt data collected for biennial reporting purposes. They believed that a centralized e-manifest approach would result in the development of a consistent, interoperable and secure IT system that would offer more benefits than would result from the operation of several decentralized private systems. The comments addressing the e-manifest proposal raised significant substantive issues that, in our opinion, required further analysis and stakeholder outreach prior to adopting a final approach. Therefore, in developing final actions on the May 2001 proposed rule, EPA separated the e-manifest from the form revisions portion of the rulemaking. We announced our final rule approach with respect to the manifest form revisions in the March 4, 2005 **Federal Register** (70 FR 10776). C. Stakeholder Meeting To Discuss Centralized Alternatives EPA announced in the **Federal Register** that the Office of Solid Waste was holding a two-day public meeting on May 19-20, 2004, to discuss and obtain public input on the e-manifest issue (69 FR 17145, April 1, 2004). The purpose of this meeting was to engage interested stakeholders in an exchange of ideas aimed at helping us identify how best to proceed with selecting and implementing the future direction of the e-manifest. The two-day meeting provided us with invaluable information, all of which is available in the docket to today's notice. Specifically, we heard from the attendees at the meeting that there is a strong consensus in favor of implementing a centralized e-manifest system. However, views varied on whether a national system should be privately or publicly hosted and funded or developed as a joint public/private venture. For instance, some stakeholders suggested that EPA design and operate both the e-manifest “front end” interface that would supply and process manifests during the movement of waste shipments in transportation, as well as the “back end” repository component of the system that would collect and archive official copies of completed manifests. Others favored an approach where the e-manifest “front end” interface might be designed, funded, and operated by a private consortium. The consortium then would look to EPA to clarify what is necessary to constitute a valid electronic manifest transaction ( *e.g.* , by defining the legal and performance standards for such a system, as well as the auditing requirements) and perhaps to develop and operate the “back end” repository. Second, all the attendees of the meeting believed that a central service provider, whether it be EPA, a private entity, or a public/private combination, must be reliable and trusted if a centralized e-manifest system is to be successful. The stakeholders expect a trustworthy system operated with minimal downtime so that it would not disrupt or inconvenience waste handler operations. They also noted that a governance structure enabling regular interactions between the user community, the IT vendor, and government interests would be necessary to ensure that the system is developed and operated in a manner that meets the needs and expectations of all affected interests. Third, stakeholders from the user community who attended the meeting emphasized that a centralized e-manifest system should be optional and, thus, able to accommodate those manifest users who want to continue to use paper manifests in the future. On the other hand, the IT vendor community would prefer to have EPA mandate that users access the centralized e-manifest system to complete and transmit all their manifests, particularly if the vendor community will be asked to bid on a centralized e-manifest system development contract, so that there would be greater certainty for the vendor attempting to price e-manifest services, based on the size of the e-manifest market and expected volumes of use. ( **Note:** See discussion in Section I.D for further explanation of this.) EPA, at this time, believes that the savings to be realized by those users who complete significant quantities of manifests will provide sufficient incentives for these users to commit to the e-manifest voluntarily, without a mandate from EPA that might be disruptive to or cause hardship for other users. EPA recognizes that a key ingredient in any procurement process where the vendor community will be bidding on such a task that leads to the development and successful operation of the centralized e-manifest system will be a dialogue between the user community and the vendors bidding on the task. This dialogue is necessary to develop mutual understandings about likely levels of usage and likely e-manifest transmission volumes, so that the vendor may accurately project these parameters and price its services accordingly. Nevertheless, the Agency specifically solicits comments on whether the use of the e-manifest should be mandatory or voluntary. In providing comments, we ask that you include your rationale and any supporting data regarding this matter. In addition, we also solicit comment from the states, as well as other stakeholders, as to whether a centralized e-manifest system that is voluntary will require the states to maintain two separate manifest systems, and, if so, what concerns or problems this may raise. Finally, and most significantly, the user community indicated at the May 2004 stakeholder meeting that it is willing to help fund the establishment and operation of an e-manifest system through the payment of reasonable service or transactional fees for e-manifest services. Stakeholders stated that they would be willing to pay reasonable service fees as the means to fund the establishment of a national e-manifest system, if they could be assured that the collected fees would be earmarked to the payment of the e-manifest system costs only, and not deflected to other program accounts or costs. Stakeholders also stated that they expect service fee arrangements, including the collection of any such fees and the reporting of expenditures, to be handled in a very transparent manner so that stakeholders can be assured that they are receiving value for the fees they contribute to the system. The full proceedings for this meeting have been posted on our EPA Web site at *http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/gener/manifest/e-man.htm.* Comments from stakeholders about a centralized e-manifest system have been submitted to the RCRA docket (EPA Docket (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-RCRA-2001-0032)), which can be found at *http://www.epa.gov/edocket.* Since the May 2004 stakeholder meeting, we have been exploring whether there is a way for EPA to proceed with the development of a nationally-centralized e-manifest system, as well as exploring in more detail the design and performance requirements of any such system. While the notion of a centralized e-manifest system has strong appeal to states and industry, it would require adequate funding to build and operate. In 2000 to 2002, we estimated the initial start-up cost for the design, development and installation, plus the future annual operating and maintenance (O&M) cost, for a “centralized” e-manifest IT system procurement. This cost estimate is based on a benefit-cost analysis conducted by Logistics Management Institute, Inc. (LMI). LMI's study is dated September 20, 2002, and is available for public review (with accompanying spreadsheet file) in the docket cited above in the ADDRESSES section. This study is an expansion of LMI's October 2000 initial benefit-cost study in support of our May 22, 2001 proposed rule for the e-manifest ( *http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/gener/manifest/pdf/cba-rprt.pdf* ). The 2002 LMI study estimated the benefits and costs associated with three alternative e-manifest data flow configurations (i.e., electronic system options), all involving hosting the e-manifest on EPA's existing CDX computer hub ( *http://www.epa.gov/cdx* ), and connecting the central e-manifest system electronically to industrial facilities and to state governments via EPA's partnership National Environmental Information Exchange Network (NEIEN; *http://www.exchangenetwork.net* ), which is operational in 38 states as of October 2005. The estimated cost for e-manifest system start-up ranges from $2.0 million to $7.0 million in the initial year, plus $0.8 million to $3.2 million per year for future annual operation and maintenance (O&M). In addition to this system cost, industrial facilities are expected to spend upwards of $60.2 million to $68.8 million, and state governments upwards of $2.3 million to $3.1 million, in start-up costs for modifying existing IT systems to process e-manifests (assuming 100% participation in the centralized e-manifest system). Industrial facilities and state governments also may spend upwards of $32.2 million to $37.0 million in annual future costs for apportionment of a fraction of existing business IT system costs for e-manifesting purposes. Although there appear to be substantial initial and recurring annual costs associated with e-manifesting, the expected average annual reduction in paperwork burden for handling the current paper manifest forms that e-manifest will provide industrial facilities and state governments is expected to offset these costs by a net annual savings upwards of $103 million per year. While an e-manifest would lead to significant savings, EPA recognizes, as described above, that startup and maintenance costs of a centralized e-manifest system could require considerable funds. EPA believes that the costs of this system should be shared by entities that will benefit from it. Therefore, EPA has been examining various user-fee and other IT funding alternatives within the context of OSW's May 2004 stakeholder meeting ( * http:// www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/gener/manifest/present/funding.pdf * ). D. Collaboration With GSA and Stakeholders After May 2004 One approach the Agency explored closely as a means to fund and implement the centralized e-manifest system was the Share-in-Savings
(SiS)contract approach that was authorized under the E-Government Act of 2002 (E-Gov Act). We consulted with the General Services Administration (GSA), which managed the E-Gov Act Share-in-Savings program, on a possible procurement action that might have enabled the centralized e-manifest system to be developed and operated for EPA by an IT vendor under a “Share-in-Savings”
(SiS)type contract ( *http://www.gsa.gov/shareinsavings* ). The SiS IT contracting mechanism was authorized under the E-Gov Act of 2002 on a provisional basis as an innovative tool for Federal agencies to develop new IT systems with little direct Federal investment. The premise of the SiS contracting approach was that the IT vendor awarded an SiS contract would build the IT system at the vendor's initial expense, and then recover its costs and profit from the cost savings or enhanced revenue that results to the sponsoring agency from the new IT system. With this approach, for example, the successful e-manifest IT contractor would have incurred the initial financial risk and outlay to build the centralized e-manifest system to meet EPA's performance objectives, and then would have recovered its costs and earned its agreed profit from the revenue stream generated by the service fees paid by the users for manifest transactions. GSA established an SiS contract vehicle (i.e., blanket purchase agreement or BPA) under which GSA qualified six IT vendors to compete for Federal IT projects during FY 2005. While EPA was very interested in initiating a procurement action under the GSA Share-in-Savings BPA during FY 2005, we and GSA concluded that the procurement action should not proceed until there was in place a final rule authorizing the use of electronic manifests. Unfortunately, the initial Congressional authorization for the SiS program expired on September 30, 2005, and it does not now appear that the authority for this program will be extended. While the expiration of the SiS program introduces some uncertainty about the funding arrangements for the national e-manifest system, the Agency is aware that some Congressional representatives are considering legislative proposals that would provide the Agency with the authority, including perhaps user fee authority, to implement a centralized e-manifest system. Thus, we are proceeding with this regulatory action so that we can proceed in the future with the necessary contract actions that would lead to the development of a national e-manifest system, provided that appropriate authorizing legislation is enacted in the interim. Should the necessary authorizing legislation not materialize, EPA could decide to adopt a final e-manifest rule that is based on the proposed rule approach, if we determine that such an approach is better than no e-manifest system, or another approach that is not dependent on new federal funding legislation being authorized. EPA's current schedule would have its final regulation authorizing the use of electronic manifests in place in time to enable us to award a contract in FY 2007, assuming any legislation needed to address the funding of e-manifest is enacted within that timeframe. II. The Agency's General Approach to a Centralized E-Manifest System Based on information provided at the May 2004 public meeting and discussions with our stakeholders during and subsequent to this meeting, EPA believes that the vast majority of stakeholders support an e-manifest system. They also prefer a consistent national framework for supplying, preparing, transmitting and maintaining e-manifests. Stakeholders attending the public meeting also indicated that they are willing to pay fees for their electronic manifest transactions in order to develop and maintain a centralized e-manifest system. EPA agrees with the position, from commenters to the May 2001 proposal and from stakeholder participants in the May 2004 public meeting, that a centralized e-manifest system is the preferred approach for developing an electronic manifest system. First, we are concerned that the user participation in the decentralized approach for an e-manifest system is limited to some extent by the customers' relationships to firms that elect to establish e-manifest systems. There should not be similar concerns about user participation in the centralized e-manifest system since it would be developed to serve all interested users, and participation would be open to all those with Internet access who choose to access the system or who deal with waste handlers who provide access to the system. Second, our preferred approach is the more effective means to address concerns that arise under the decentralized approach about the potential inability of different systems to operate with each other, as well as other concerns that arise regarding whether data from these different systems can be exchanged and processed consistently. A final rule adopting a decentralized e-manifest approach would require, among other things, rigorous standards to address the consistent processing and interoperability issues posed by multiple vendors' systems. Such an approach would likely involve a process to evaluate the various systems to determine if they are in compliance with our interoperability and system security standards. In contrast, a centralized approach would not need to address interoperability concerns, as the development of a single, national e-manifest system would ensure the consistency of the processing, completion, and transmission of electronic manifests. Moreover, the centralized approach would simplify the execution of system and data security with respect to e-manifests, as the necessary security requirements could be addressed within the national e-manifest procurement process, rather than as detailed regulatory standards that would have to be met by the various vendors who might develop systems under the decentralized approach. Third, other capabilities and enhancements could be realized through a centralized e-manifest system that are not possible under a decentralized approach. For instance, a centralized e-manifest system could be designed to store electronic manifest data centrally in a national data repository, so that manifest users and regulators could extract the stored manifest data to develop analyses from that data. Such a national data repository could collect manifest data from both domestic and transboundary waste movements, and it could also become a basis for easing the production of reports under RCRA biennial reporting requirments (the Hazardous Waste Report) and other reports that are required under authorized state programs. The manifest users who now must incur the burden and expense of supplying paper copies of manifest forms through the mail to individual authorized states could instead submit their manifest copies one time electronically to one centralized hub system, which would distribute copies as needed to interested states through their nodes on the Exchange Network. In addition to this one-stop submission feature, the users may be able to maintain their official copies of manifest records on secure storage sites on the national system, rather than continuing to retain manifest copies locally. We believe that the centralized collection of manifest copies by the e-manifest system would also afford advantages to RCRA inspectors by providing a simple and efficient means for accessing and inspecting manifest records electronically. Therefore, today's notice announces that EPA's preferred approach, at this time, for proceeding with the e-manifest rule is to develop a centralized web-based IT system that EPA will host on its IT architecture. This national system likely would be funded, in whole or in part, by service fees that would be paid to EPA or its contractor. This notice discusses a conceptual design of the nationally-centralized e-manifest system and requests comment on our approach. Today, we are announcing that EPA intends to develop a final rule to authorize the use of electronic manifests that are created and transmitted through the use of a centralized e-manifest system. EPA will consider the comments received pursuant to this notice, along with comments on the e-manifest proposal in the May 2001 proposed rule and the May 2004 Stakeholder meeting, as we prepare a final rule on the e-manifest. The final rule would amend existing manifest regulations which require manifests to be created only as paper forms. These regulatory changes would be necessary to ensure that electronic manifests are as valid as the traditional paper manifests that are signed with ink and manually processed and transmitted. The usage of EPA's national e-manifest system to obtain and process valid electronic manifests would be the key component of the final rule. EPA believes that as a result of this change in approach for the e-manifest system, the final regulation authorizing the use of electronic manifests would be much simpler than the regulation suggested by the May 2001 proposed rule. The final rulemaking will be constrained in its scope to authorizing the use of electronic manifests created and transmitted in the national system, and to several other key policy issues that must be resolved prior to implementation. EPA thus expects to limit, as far as possible, the subject matter of the final rule on electronic manifesting to the key policy issues associated with authorizing the use of electronic manifests and with implementing the electronic manifest as a means of tracking hazardous waste shipments and recording and transmitting waste shipment information. EPA believes it is far more sensible to address the more detailed technical system design and performance requirements for the centralized e-manifest system within the contracting process than to codify performance requirements and other technical matters within the rulemaking process. We also recognize that State participation and input during the planning stage of the e-manifest development process is critical, because there will be significant implementation issues associated with moving to an electronic manifest system. EPA will work closely with our State partners as we develop both the final rulemaking and the detailed system design and performance requirements. A. Conceptual Design of the E-Manifest The centralized e-manifest system will include the necessary applications and components to supply, complete, electronically sign, transmit, and retain electronic manifests. The centralized e-manifest system that will be developed initially will provide only the core services necessary to manage the basic waste shipment tracking and waste data collection functions of the manifest process, including manifest creation, completion, signing, routing and communication services (i.e., services required to create, view, update, transmit, and close manifests) and the collection, distribution, and archiving of official manifest records. In accordance with requests expressed by stakeholders in the May 2004 public meeting, the system initially will not support any more advanced reporting or business integration services. The system would be designed with scalability so that additional EPA reporting functions (e.g., Biennial Report integration or transboundary waste reporting), or additional commercial services that may be desired by users could be added as future upgrades. The development of the e-manifest system will use a web services-oriented architecture and will be hosted on EPA's CDX ( *http://www.epa.gov/cdx* ) and NEIEN architecture. The CDX would act as the Agency's central reporting hub for receiving, processing, and routing the in-bound electronic manifests to waste shipment management entities and to state governments. As the e-manifest would be hosted within our CDX/Exchange Network architecture, the submission of e-manifests to the national system would be governed by the standards and procedures included in EPA's Cross Media Electronic Reporting Rule (CROMERR), which EPA published in the **Federal Register** on October 13, 2005 (70 FR 59847). The CROMERR Rule provides the legal and policy framework for electronic reporting to the CDX hub, and will address such matters as user registration, user authentication, execution of electronic signatures, and the procedures for producing records of electronic manifest submissions. We believe that the use of a services-oriented architecture involving web services applications will enable a high level of interoperability with users' legacy and future system investments. Thus, EPA plans to develop the e-manifest applications in conformance with Internet “web services” standards which now are supported by CDX. Also, schemas (i.e., models for describing the structure of information within a document to allow machine validation of document structure) and stylesheets developed in the Extensible Mark-up Language
(XML)will be the means EPA will use for the electronic exchange of e-manifest data, and these XML documents will conform to the data elements of the hazardous waste manifest (EPA Form 8700-22) and continuation sheet (EPA Form 8700-22A) that EPA recently announced in the March 4, 2005 Form Revisions final rule (70 FR 10776). EPA further will develop the e-manifest applications with the appropriate access controls to ensure that only authorized users may enter the system, complete and sign manifests, and access manifest data. We plan to limit access to particular manifest records and related data to only those entities that are involved with the handling of a waste shipment, as well as to RCRA regulators. The centralized e-manifest system also will support, as far as possible, the provision of reliable and uninterrupted manifest services to the user community and will adopt necessary measures and controls that meet EPA and Federal policies for protecting information security, privacy, and confidential business information (CBI). The Federal regulations concerning CBI are found at 40 CFR Part 2. Confidential business information obtained under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act is handled in accordance with 40 CFR Part 2, and will be disclosed by EPA only to the extent allowed by, and by means of, the procedures set forth in 40 CFR Part 2. Anyone wishing to claim that some or all of the information provided in their Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest is confidential business information must make this claim at the time the manifest is transmitted electronically to EPA. Claims of confidentiality must be specific: The generator, transporter, or designated facility must clearly indicate which manifest item number is being declared confidential (e.g., Item 18a.). Any information not claimed as confidential when being submitted will not be treated as confidential business information. III. Request for Comments EPA requests comments on the approach described in today's notice for electronically completing and transmitting manifests through a national, centralized e-manifest system. EPA will consider the comments received pursuant to this notice, along with comments on the e-manifest proposal in the May 2001 proposed rule and the May 2004 Stakeholder meeting, as it prepares a final rule on the e-manifest. Dated: April 11, 2006. Susan Parker Bodine, Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. [FR Doc. E6-5745 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P 71 74 Tuesday, April 18, 2006 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request April 12, 2006. The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), *OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV* or fax
(202)395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling
(202)720-8681. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Rural Utilities Service *Title:* 7 CFR Part 1728, Electric Standards and Specifications for Materials and Construction. *OMB Control Number:* 0572-0131. *Summary of Collection:* The Rural Electrification Act of 1936, 7 U.S.C. 901 *et seq.* , as amended, (RE Act) in Sec. 4 (7 U.S.C. 904) authorizes and empowers the Administrator of the Rural Utilities Service
(RUS)to make loans in the several States and Territories of the United States for rural electrification and the furnishing and improving of electric energy to persons in rural areas. RUS' Administrator is authorized to provide financial assistance to borrowers for purposes provided in the RE Act by guaranteeing loans made by the National Rural Utilities Cooperative Finance Corporation, the Federal Financing Bank, and other lending agencies. These loans are for a term of up to 35 years and are secured by a first mortgage on the borrower's electric system. Manufacturers, wishing to sell their products to RUS electric borrowers, request RUS consideration for acceptance of their products and submit letters of request with certifications as to the origin of manufacture of the products and include certified data demonstrating their products' compliance with RUS specifications. *Need and Use of the Information:* RUS will collect information to evaluate the data to determine that the quality of the products is acceptable and that their use will not jeopardize loan security. The information is closely reviewed to be certain that test data; product dimensions and product material compositions fully comply with RUS technical standards and specifications that have been established for the particular product. Without this information, RUS has no means of determining the acceptability of products for use in the rural environment. *Description of Respondents:* Business or other for-profit. *Number of Respondents:* 38. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: on occasion. *Total Burden Hours:* 2,000. Charlene Parker, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E6-5754 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-15-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request April 12, 2006. The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), *OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV* or fax
(202)395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling
(202)720-8681. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Rural Housing Service *Title:* 7 CFR Part 1944-N—Housing Preservation Grants. *OMB Control Number:* 0575-0115. *Summary of Collection:* The Rural Housing Service
(RHS)is authorized to make grants to eligible applicants to provide repair and rehabilitation assistance so that very low- and low-income rural residents can obtain adequate housing. Such assistance is made by grantees to very low- and low-income persons, and to co-ops. Grant funds are used by grantees to make loans, grants, or other comparable assistance to eligible homeowners, rental unit owners, and co-ops for repair and rehabilitation of dwellings to bring them up to code or minimum property standards. These grants were established by Public Law 98-181, the Housing Urban Rural Recovery Act of 1983, which amended the Housing Act of 1949 (Pub. L. 93-383) by adding section 533, 42 U.S.C. S 2490(m), Housing Preservation Grants. *Need and Use of the Information:* An applicant will submit a “Statement of Activity” describing its proposed program. RHS will collect information to determine eligibility for a grant to justify its selection of the applicant for funding; to report program accomplishments and to justify and support expenditure of grant funds. RHS uses the information to determine if the grantee is complying with its grant agreement and to make decisions regarding continuing with modifying, or terminating grant assistance. If the information were not collected and presented to RHS, the Agency could not monitor the program or justify disbursement of grant funds. *Description of Respondents:* Not-for-profit institutions; business or other for-profit; individuals or households; State, local or tribal government. *Number of Respondents:* 2,423. *Frequency of Responses:* Recordkeeping; Reporting: On occasion; Quarterly. *Total Burden Hours:* 11,678. Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E6-5755 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-XT-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request April 12, 2006. The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), *OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV* or fax
(202)395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling
(202)720-8681. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Agricultural Research Service *Title:* Electronic Mailing List Subscription Form—Water Quality Information Center. *OMB Control Number:* 0518-NEW. *Summary of Collection:* The National Agricultural Library's Water Quality Information Center
(WQIC)currently maintains Enviro-News, an on-line announcement list. The proposed voluntary “Electronic Mailing List Subscription Form” would give individuals interested in the subject area of water quality and agriculture an opportunity to receive and post messages to this list. The Electronic Mailing List Subscription will be available for completion on-line at the Web site of the Water Quality Information Center. The authority for the National Agricultural Library to collect the information can be found at CFR, Title 7, Volume 1, Part 2 Subpart K, § 2.65 (92). *Need and Use of the Information:* The information requested on the form includes: Name, e-mail address, job title, work affiliation, and topics of interest. Data collected using the form will help WQIC determine a person's eligibility to join the announcement list. In order to make sure people have a significant interest in the topic area, it is necessary to collect the information. WQIC will use the collected information to approve subscription for a water quality and agriculture on-line announcement list. *Description of Respondents:* Individuals or households; Business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions; Farms; Federal Government; State, local, or tribal government. *Number of Respondents:* 750. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: On occasion. *Total Burden Hours:* 13. Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E6-5757 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-03-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request April 13, 2006. The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), *OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV* or fax
(202)395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling
(202)720-8681. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Forest Service *Title:* Special Use Administration. *OMB Control Number:* 0596-0082. *Summary of Collection:* Several statutes authorize the Forest Service
(FS)to issue and administer authorizations for use and occupancy of National Forest System
(NFS)lands and require the collection of information from the public for those purposes including Title 5 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA, Pub. L. 94-579), the Organic Administration Act of 1897, (16 U.S.C. 551); the National Forest Ski Area Permit Act (16 U.S.C. 497b); section 28 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 185); the National Forest Roads and Trails Act (FRTA, 16 U.S.C. 532-538); section 7 of the Granger-Thye Act (16 U.S.C. 480d); the Act of May 20, 2000 (16 U.S.C. 460-6d); and the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (16 U.S.C. 6801-6814). Forest Service regulations implementing these authorities, found at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 251, Subpart B (36 CFR 251, Subpart B), contain information collection requirements, including submission of applications, execution of forms, and imposition of terms and conditions that entail information collection requirements, such as the requirement to submit annual financial information; to prepare and update an operating plan; to prepare and update a maintenance plan; and to submit compliance reports and information updates. *Need and Use of the Information:* The information collected is evaluated by the FS to ensure that authorized uses of NFS lands are in the public interest and are compatible with the agency mission. The information helps the agency identify environmental and social impacts of special uses for purposes of compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and program administration. There are six categories of information collected:
(1)Information required from proponents and applicants to evaluate proposals and applications to use or occupy NFS lands;
(2)information required from applicants to complete special use authorizations;
(3)annual financial information required from holders to determine land use fees;
(4)information required from holders to prepare and update operating plans;
(5)information required from holders to prepare and update maintenance plans; and
(6)information required from holders to complete compliance reports and information updates. *Description of Respondents:* Individuals or households; business or other for-profit; not-for-profit institutions; farms; Federal Government; State, local or tribal government. *Number of Respondents:* 76,780. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: On occasion; Quarterly. *Total Burden Hours:* 155,554. Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E6-5758 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-11-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Commodity Credit Corporation Termination of the Upland Cotton User Marketing Certificate (Step 2) Program AGENCY: Commodity Credit Corporation, USDA. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the termination of the Upland Cotton User Marketing Certificate Program, commonly referred to as the Step 2 Program. DATES: The effective date of the action announced by this notice is August 1, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy R. Murray, Cotton Program Manager, Warehouse and Inventory Division, Farm Service Agency, USDA, STOP 0553, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-0553. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact the USDA Target Center at
(202)720-2600 (voice and TDD). Telephone:
(202)720-6215. Electronic mail: *Tim.Murray@wdc.usda.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 1103 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-171) repeals the authorizing language found in Section 136 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7236) in its entirety, and amends Section 1207 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 7937) eliminating the Upland Cotton User Marketing Certificate Program. The Commodity Credit Corporation is notifying all interested parties. The effective date of this repeal is August 1, 2006. Therefore, upland cotton used domestically, or exported under the terms and conditions of the Upland Cotton Domestic User/Exporter Agreement after July 31, 2006, will not be eligible for payment under the Upland Cotton User Marketing Certificate Program. Signed at Washington, DC, on April 4, 2006. Teresa C. Lasseter, Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit Corporation. [FR Doc. E6-5751 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-05-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Funding Opportunity Title: Commodity Partnerships for Risk Management Education (Commodity Partnerships Program) *Announcement Type:* Availability of Funds and Request for Application for Competitive Cooperative Partnership Agreements—Initial. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number (CFDA):* 10.457. *Dates:* Applications are due June 2, 2006. *Executive Summary:* The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC), operating through the Risk Management Agency (RMA), announces the availability of approximately $5.0 million for Commodity Partnerships for Risk Management Education (the Commodity Partnerships Program). The purpose of this cooperative partnership agreement program is to deliver training and information in the management of production, marketing, and financial risk to U.S. agricultural producers. The program gives priority to educating producers of crops currently not insured under Federal crop insurance, specialty crops, and underserved commodities, including livestock and forage. A maximum of 40 cooperative partnership agreements will be funded, with no more than four in each of the ten designated RMA Regions. The maximum award for any of the 40 cooperative partnership agreements will be $150,000. Recipients of awards must demonstrate non-financial benefits from a cooperative partnership agreement and must agree to the substantial involvement of RMA in the project. *This Announcement Consists of Eight Parts:* Part I—Funding Opportunity Description A. Legislative Authority B. Background C. Definition of Priority Commodities D. Project Goal E. Purpose Part II—Award Information A. Type of Award B. Funding Availability C. Location and Target Audience D. Maximum Award E. Project Period F. Description of Agreement Award—Recipient Tasks G. RMA Activities H. Other Tasks Part III—Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants B. Cost Sharing or Matching C. Other—Non-Financial Benefits Part IV—Application and Submission Information A. Address To Submit an Application Package B. Content and Form of Application Submission C. Submission Dates and Times D. Funding Restrictions E. Limitation on Use of Project Funds for Salaries and Benefits F. Indirect Cost Rates G. Other Submission Requirements H. Electronic submissions I. Acknowledgement of Applications Part V—Application Review Process A. Criteria B. Selection and Review Process Part VI—Award Administration A. Award Notices B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements 1. Requirement To Use Program Logo 2. Requirement To Provide Project Information to an RMA-selected Representative 3. Private Crop Insurance Organizations and Potential Conflict of Interest 4. Access to Panel Review Information 5. Confidential Aspects of Applications and Awards 6. Audit Requirements 7. Prohibitions and Requirements Regarding Lobbying 8. Applicable OMB Circulars 9. Requirement To Assure Compliance With Federal Civil Rights Laws 10. Requirement To Participate in a Post Award Conference C. Reporting Requirements Part VII—Agency Contact Part VIII—Additional Information A. Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)B. Required Registration With the Central Contract Registry for Submission of Proposals C. Related Programs I. Funding Opportunity Description A. Legislative Authority The Commodity Partnerships Program is authorized under section 522(d)(3)(F) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act
(Act)(7 U.S.C. 1522(d)(3)(F)). B. Background RMA promotes and regulates sound risk management solutions to improve the economic stability of American agriculture. On behalf of FCIC, RMA does this by offering Federal crop insurance products through a network of private-sector partners, overseeing the creation of new risk management products, seeking enhancements in existing products, ensuring the integrity of crop insurance programs, offering outreach programs aimed at equal access and participation of underserved communities, and providing risk management education and information. One of RMA's strategic goals is to ensure that its customers are well informed as to the risk management solutions available. This educational goal is supported by section 522(d)(3)(F) of the Act, which authorizes FCIC funding for risk management training and informational efforts for agricultural producers through the formation of partnerships with public and private organizations. With respect to such partnerships, priority is to be given to reaching producers of Priority Commodities, as defined below. C. Definition of Priority Commodities For purposes of this program, Priority Commodities are defined as: • *Agricultural commodities covered by (7 U.S.C. 7333).* Commodities in this group are commercial crops that are not covered by catastrophic risk protection crop insurance, are used for food or fiber (except livestock), and specifically include, but are not limited to, floricultural, ornamental nursery, Christmas trees, turf grass sod, aquaculture (including ornamental fish), and industrial crops. • *Specialty crops.* Commodities in this group may or may not be covered under a Federal crop insurance plan and include, but are not limited to, fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, syrups, honey, roots, herbs, and highly specialized varieties of traditional crops. • *Underserved commodities.* This group includes:
(a)Commodities, including livestock and forage, that are covered by a Federal crop insurance plan but for which participation in an area is below the national average; and
(b)commodities, including livestock and forage, with inadequate crop insurance coverage. A project is considered as giving priority to Priority Commodities if the majority of the educational activities of the project are directed to producers of any of the three classes of commodities listed above or any combination of the three classes. D. Project Goal The goal of this program is to ensure that “* * * producers will be better able to use financial management, crop insurance, marketing contracts, and other existing and emerging risk management tools.” E. Purpose The purpose of the Commodity Partnership Program is to provide U.S. farmers and ranchers with training and informational opportunities to be able to understand: • The kinds of risks addressed by existing and emerging risk management tools; • The features and appropriate use of existing and emerging risk management tools; and • How to make sound risk management decisions. II. Award Information A. Type of Award Cooperative Partnership Agreements, which require the substantial involvement of RMA. B. Funding Availability Approximately $5,000,000 is available in fiscal year 2006 to fund up to 40 cooperative partnership agreements. The maximum award will be $150,000. It is anticipated that a maximum of four agreements will be funded for each designated RMA Region. Applicants should apply for funding under that RMA Region where the educational activities will be directed. In the event that all funds available for this program are not obligated after the maximum number of agreements are awarded or if additional funds become available, these funds may, at the discretion of the Manager of FCIC, be used to award additional applications that score highly by the technical review panel or allocated pro-rata to award recipients for use in broadening the size or scope of awarded projects if agreed to by the recipient. In the event that the Manager of FCIC determines that available RMA resources cannot support the administrative and substantial involvement requirements of all agreements recommended for funding, the Manager may elect to fund fewer agreements than the available funding might otherwise allow. It is expected that the awards will be made approximately 60 days after the application deadline. All awards will be made and agreements finalized no later than September 30, 2006. C. Location and Target Audience RMA Regional Offices and the States serviced within each Region are listed below. Staff from the respective RMA Regional Offices will provide substantial involvement for projects conducted within their Region. Billings, MT Regional Office: (MT, WY, ND, and SD). Davis, CA Regional Office: (CA, NV, UT, AZ, and HI). Jackson, MS Regional Office: (KY, TN, AR, LA, and MS). Oklahoma City, OK Regional Office: (OK, TX, and NM). Raleigh, NC Regional Office: (ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, NJ, PA, MD, DE, WV, VA, and NC). Spokane, WA Regional Office: (WA, ID, OR, and AK). Springfield, IL Regional Office: (IL, IN, OH, and MI). St. Paul, MN Regional Office: (MN, WI, and IA). Topeka, KS Regional Office: (KS, MO, NE, and CO). Valdosta, GA Regional Office: (AL, GA, SC, FL, and Puerto Rico). Applicants must designate in their application narratives the RMA Region where educational activities will be conducted and the specific groups of producers within the region that the applicant intends to reach through the project. Priority will be given to producers of Priority Commodities. Applicants proposing to conduct educational activities in more than one RMA Region must submit a separate application for each RMA Region. This requirement is not intended to preclude producers from areas that border a designated RMA Region from participating in that region's educational activities. It is also not intended to prevent applicants from proposing the use of certain informational methods, such as print or broadcast news outlets, that may reach producers in other RMA Regions. D. Maximum Award Any application that requests Federal funding of more than $150,000 will be rejected. E. Project Period Projects will be funded for a period of up to one year from the project starting date. F. Description of Agreement Award Recipient Tasks In conducting activities to achieve the purpose and goal of this program in a designated RMA Region, the award recipient will be responsible for performing the following tasks: • Develop and conduct a promotional program. This program will include activities using media, newsletters, publications, or other appropriate informational dissemination techniques that are designed to:
(a)Raise awareness for risk management;
(b)inform producers of the availability of risk management tools; and
(c)inform producers and agribusiness leaders in the designated RMA Region of training and informational opportunities. • Deliver risk management training and informational opportunities to agricultural producers and agribusiness professionals in the designated RMA Region. This will include organizing and delivering educational activities using instructional materials that have been assembled to meet the local needs of agricultural producers. Activities should be directed primarily to agricultural producers, but may include those agribusiness professionals that have frequent opportunities to advise producers on risk management tools and decisions. • Document all educational activities conducted under the partnership agreement and the results of such activities, including criteria and indicators used to evaluate the success of the program. The recipient may also be required to provide information to an RMA-selected contractor to evaluate all educational activities and advise RMA as to the effectiveness of activities. G. RMA Activities FCIC, working through RMA, will be substantially involved during the performance of the funded project through RMA's ten Regional Offices. Potential types of substantial involvement may include, but are not limited to the following activities. • Assist in the selection of subcontractors and project staff. • Collaborate with the recipient in assembling, reviewing, and approving risk management materials for producers in the designated RMA Region. • Collaborate with the recipient in reviewing and approving a promotional program for raising awareness for risk management and for informing producers of training and informational opportunities in the RMA Region. • Collaborate with the recipient on the delivery of education to producers and agribusiness leaders in the RMA Region. This will include:
(a)Reviewing and approving in advance all producer and agribusiness leader educational activities;
(b)advising the project leader on technical issues related to crop insurance education and information; and
(c)assisting the project leader in informing crop insurance professionals about educational activity plans and scheduled meetings. • Conduct an evaluation of the performance of the recipient in meeting the deliverables of the project. Applications that do not contain substantial involvement by RMA will be rejected. H. Other Tasks In addition to the specific, required tasks listed above, the applicant may propose additional tasks that would contribute directly to the purpose of this program. For any proposed additional task, the applicant must identify the objective of the task, the specific subtasks required to meet the objective, specific time lines for performing the subtasks, and the specific responsibilities of partners. The applicant must also identify specific ways in which RMA would have substantial involvement in the proposed project task. III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants Eligible applicants include State departments of agriculture, universities, non-profit agricultural organizations, and other public or private organizations with the capacity to lead a local program of risk management education for farmers and ranchers in an RMA Region. Individuals are not eligible applicants. Although an applicant may be eligible to compete for an award based on its status as an eligible entity, other factors may exclude an applicant from receiving Federal assistance under this program governed by Federal law and regulations (e.g. debarment and suspension; a determination of non-performance on a prior contract, cooperative agreement, grant or partnership; a determination of a violation of applicable ethical standards; a determination of being considered “high risk”). Applications from ineligible or excluded persons will be rejected in their entirety. B. Cost Sharing or Matching Although RMA prefers cost sharing by the applicant, this program has neither a cost sharing nor a matching requirement. C. Other—Non-Financial Benefits To be eligible, applicants must also be able to demonstrate that they will receive a non-financial benefit as a result of a partnership agreement. Non-financial benefits must accrue to the applicant and must include more than the ability to provide employment income to the applicant or for the applicant's employees or the community. The applicant must demonstrate that performance under the partnership agreement will further the specific mission of the applicant (such as providing research or activities necessary for graduate or other students to complete their educational program). Applicants that do not demonstrate a non-financial benefit will be rejected. IV. Application and Submission Information A. Contact To Request Application Package Program application materials for the Commodity Partnerships Program under this announcement may be downloaded from *http://www.rma.usda.gov/aboutrma/agreements* . Applicants may also request application materials from: Lon Burke, USDA-RMA-RME, phone:
(202)720-5265, fax:
(202)690-3605, e-mail: *RMA.Risk-Ed@rma.usda.gov.* B. Content and Form of Application Submission A complete and valid application package must include an electronic copy (Microsoft Word format preferred) of the narrative portion (Forms RME-1 and RME-2) of the application package on a compact disc and an original and two copies of the completed and signed application must be submitted in one package at the time of initial submission, which must include the following: 1. A completed and signed OMB Standard Form 424, “Application for Federal Assistance.” 2. A completed and signed OMB Standard Form 424-A, “Budget Information—Non-construction Programs.” Federal funding requested (the total of direct and indirect costs) must not exceed $150,000. 3. A completed and signed OMB Standard Form 424-B, “Assurances, Non-constructive Programs.” 4. Risk Management Education Project Narrative (Form RME-1). Complete all required parts of Form RME-1: Part I—Title Page. Part II—A written narrative of no more than 10 single-sided pages which will provide reviewers with sufficient information to effectively evaluate the merits of the application according to the evaluation criteria listed in this notice. Although a Statement of Work, which is the third evaluation criterion, is to be completed in detail in RME Form-2, applicants may wish to highlight certain unique features of the Statement of Work in Part II for the benefit of the evaluation panel. If your narrative exceeds the page limit, only the first 10 pages will be reviewed. • No smaller than 12 point font size. • Use an easily readable font face ( *e.g.* , Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, Times Roman). • 8.5 by 11 inch paper. • One-inch margins on each page. • Printed on only one side of paper. • Held together only by rubber bands or metal clips; not bound or stapled in any other way. Part III—A Budget Narrative, describing how the categorical costs listed on SF 424-A are derived. Part IV—Provide a “Statement of Non-financial Benefits.” (Refer to Section III, Eligibility Information, C. Other—Non-financial Benefits, above). 5. “Statement of Work,” Form RME-2, which identifies tasks and subtasks in detail, expected completion dates and deliverables, and RMA's substantial involvement role for the proposed project. C. Submission Dates and Times *Applications Deadline:* June 2, 2006. Applicants are responsible for ensuring that RMA receives a complete application package by the closing date and time. Incomplete or late application packages will not receive further consideration. D. Funding Restrictions Cooperative partnership agreement funds may not be used to: a. Plan, repair, rehabilitate, acquire, or construct a building or facility including a processing facility; b. Purchase, rent, or install fixed equipment; c. Repair or maintain privately owned vehicles; d. Pay for the preparation of the cooperative partnership agreement application; e. Fund political activities; f. Purchase alcohol, food, beverage, or entertainment; g. Pay costs incurred prior to receiving a partnership agreement; h. Fund any activities prohibited in 7 CFR Parts 3015 and 3019, as applicable. E. Limitation on Use of Project Funds for Salaries and Benefits Total costs for salary and benefits allowed for projects under this announcement will be limited to not more than 25 percent reimbursement of the funds awarded under the cooperative partnership agreement as indicated in Section III. Eligibility Information, C. Other—Non-financial Benefits. One goal of the Commodity Partnerships program is to maximize the use of the limited funding available for risk management education for producers of Priority Commodities. In order to accomplish this goal, RMA needs to ensure that the maximum amount of funds practicable is used for directly providing the educational opportunities. Limiting the amount of funding for salaries and benefits will allow the limited amount of funding to reach the maximum number of farmers and ranchers. F. Indirect Cost Rates a. Indirect costs allowed for projects submitted under this announcement will be limited to ten
(10)percent of the total direct cost of the cooperative partnership agreement. b. RMA will withhold all indirect cost rate funds for an award to an applicant requesting indirect costs if the applicant has not negotiated an indirect cost rate with its cognizant Federal agency. c. If an applicant is in the process of negotiating an indirect cost rate with its cognizant Federal agency, RMA will withhold all indirect cost rate funds from that applicant until the indirect cost rate has been established. d. If an applicant's indirect cost rate has expired or will expire prior to award announcements, a clear statement on renegotiation efforts must be included in the application. e. It is incumbent on all applicants to have a current indirect cost rate or begin negotiations to establish an indirect cost rate prior to the submission deadline. Because it may take several months to obtain an indirect cost rate, applicants needing an indirect cost rate are encouraged to start work on establishing these rates well in advance of submitting an application. The U.S. Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)is responsible for assigning cognizant Federal agencies. f. Applicants may be asked to provide a copy of their indirect cost rate negotiated with their cognizant agency. G. Other Submission Requirements *Mailed submissions:* Applications submitted through express, overnight mail or another delivery service will be considered as meeting the announced deadline if they are received in the mailroom at the address stated below for express, overnight mail or another delivery service on or before the deadline. Applicants are cautioned that express, overnight mail or other delivery services do not always deliver as agreed. Applicants should take this into account because failure of such delivery services will not extend the deadline. Mailed applications will be considered as meeting the announced deadline if they are received on or before the deadline in the mailroom at the address stated below for mailed applications. Applicants are responsible for mailing applications well in advance, to ensure that applications are received on or before the deadline time and date. Applicants using the U.S. Postal Services should allow for the extra security handling time for delivery due to the additional security measures that mail delivered to government offices in the Washington DC area requires. Address when using private delivery services or when hand delivering: Attention: Risk Management Education Program, USDA/RMA/RME, Room 5720, South Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250. Address when using U.S. Postal Services: Attention: Risk Management Education Program, USDA/RMA/RME/Stop 0808, Room 5720, South Building, 1400 Independence Ave, SW., Washington, DC 20250-0808. H. Electronic Submissions Applications transmitted electronically via Grants.gov will be accepted prior to the application date or time deadline. The application package can be accessed via Grants.gov, go to *http://www.grants.gov* , click on “Find Grant Opportunities,” click on “Search Grant Opportunities,” and enter the CFDA number (located at the beginning of this RFA) to search by CFDA number. From the search results, select the item that correlates to the title of this RFA. If you do not have electronic access to the RFA or have trouble downloading material and you would like a hardcopy, you may contact Lon Burke, USDA-RMA-RME, phone:
(202)720-5265, fax:
(202)690-3605, e-mail: *RMA.Risk-Ed@rma.usda.gov.* I. Acknowledgement of Applications Receipt of applications will be acknowledged by e-mail, whenever possible. Therefore, applicants are encouraged to provide e-mail addresses in their applications. If an e-mail address is not indicated on an application, receipt will be acknowledged by letter. There will be no notification of incomplete, unqualified or unfunded applications until the awards have been made. When received by RMA, applications will be assigned an identification number. This number will be communicated to applicants in the acknowledgement of receipt of applications. An application's identification number should be referenced in all correspondence regarding the application. If the applicant does not receive an acknowledgement within 15 days of the submission deadline, the applicant should notify RMA's point of contact indicated in Section VII, Agency Contact. V. Application Review Information A. Criteria Applications submitted under the Commodity Partnerships Program will be evaluated within each RMA Region according to the following criteria: Priority—maximum 10 points. The applicant can submit projects that are not related to Priority Commodities. However, priority is given to projects relating to Priority Commodities and the degree in which such projects relate to the Priority Commodities. Projects that relate solely to Priority Commodities will be eligible for the most points. Project Benefits—maximum 35 points. The applicant must demonstrate that the project benefits to farmers and ranchers warrant the funding requested. Applicants will be scored according to the extent they can:
(a)Reasonably estimate the total number of producers reached through the various educational activities described in the Statement of Work;
(b)justify such estimates with clear specifics;
(c)identify the actions producers will likely be able to take as a result of the activities described in the Statement of Work; and
(d)identify the specific measures for evaluating results that will be employed in the project. Reviewers' scoring will be based on the scope and reasonableness of the applicant's estimates of producers reached through the project, clear descriptions of specific expected project benefits, and well-designed methods for measuring the project's results and effectiveness. Statement of Work—maximum 15 points. The applicant must produce a clear and specific Statement of Work for the project. For each of the tasks contained in the Description of Agreement Award (refer to Section II Award Information), the applicant must identify and describe specific subtasks, responsible entities, expected completion dates, RMA substantial involvement, and deliverables that will further the purpose of this program. Applicants will obtain a higher score to the extent that the Statement of Work is specific, measurable, reasonable, has specific deadlines for the completion of subtasks, relates directly to the required activities and the program purpose described in this announcement, which is to provide producers with training and informational opportunities so that the producers will be better able to use financial management, crop insurance, marketing contracts, and other existing and emerging risk management tools. Applicants are required to submit this Statement of Work on Form RME-2. Partnering—maximum 15 points. The applicant must demonstrate experience and capacity to partner with and gain the support of grower organizations, agribusiness professionals, and agricultural leaders to carry out a local program of education and information in a designated RMA Region. Applicants will receive higher scores to the extent that they can document and demonstrate:
(a)That partnership commitments are in place for the express purpose of delivering the program in this announcement;
(b)that a broad group of farmers and ranchers will be reached within the RMA Region; and
(c)that a substantial effort has been made to partner with organizations that can meet the needs of producers. Project Management—maximum 15 points. The applicant must demonstrate an ability to implement sound and effective project management practices. Higher scores will be awarded to applicants that can demonstrate organizational skills, leadership, and experience in delivering services or programs that assist agricultural producers in the respective RMA Region. Applicants that will employ, or have access to, personnel who have experience in directing local educational programs that benefit agricultural producers in the respective RMA Region will receive higher rankings. Past Performance—maximum 10 points. If the applicant has been a recipient of other Federal or other government grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts, the applicant must provide information relating to their past performance in reporting on outputs and outcomes under past or current federal assistance agreements. The applicant must also detail that they have consistently complied with financial and program reporting and auditing requirements. RMA reserves the right to add up to 10 points to applications due to past performance. Applicants with very good past performance will receive a score from 6-10 points. Applicants with acceptable past performance will receive a score from 1-5 points. Applicants with unacceptable past performance will receive a score of minus 5 points for this evaluation factor. Applicants without relevant past performance information will receive a neutral score of the mean number of points of all applicants with past performance. Under this cooperative partnership agreement, RMA will subjectively rate the recipient on project performance as indicated in Section II, G. The applicant must list all current public or private support to which personnel identified in the application have committed portions of their time, whether or not salary support for persons involved is included in the budget. An application that duplicates or overlaps substantially with an application already reviewed and funded (or to be funded) by another organization or agency will not be funded under this program. The projects proposed for funding should be included in the pending section. Budget Appropriateness and Efficiency—maximum 15 points. Applicants must provide a detailed budget summary that clearly explains and justifies costs associated with the project. Applicants will receive higher scores to the extent that they can demonstrate a fair and reasonable use of funds appropriate for the project and a budget that contains the estimated cost of reaching each individual producer. The applicant must provide information factors such as: • The allowability and necessity for individual cost categories; • The reasonableness of amounts estimated for necessary costs; • The basis used for allocating indirect or overhead costs; and • The appropriateness of allocating particular overhead costs to the proposed project as direct costs. B. Review and Selection Process Applications will be evaluated using a two-part process. First, each application will be screened by RMA personnel to ensure that it meets the requirements in this announcement. Applications that do not meet the requirements of this announcement or are incomplete will not receive further consideration. Applications that meet announcement requirements will be sorted into the RMA Region in which the applicant proposes to conduct the project and will be presented to a review panel for consideration. Second, the review panel will meet to consider and discuss the merits of each application. The panel will consist of not less than three independent reviewers. Reviewers will be drawn from USDA, other Federal agencies, and others representing public and private organizations, as needed. After considering the merits of all applications within an RMA Region, panel members will score each application according to the criteria and point values listed above. The panel will then rank each application against others within the RMA Region according to the scores received. A lottery will be used to resolve any instances of a tie score that might have a bearing on funding recommendations. If such a lottery is required, the names of all tied applicants will be entered into a drawing. The first tied applicant drawn will have priority over other tied applicants for funding consideration. The review panel will report the results of the evaluation to the Manager of FCIC. The panel's report will include the recommended applicants to receive partnership agreements for each RMA Region. Funding will not be provided for an application receiving a score less than 60. Funding will not be provided for an application that is highly similar to a higher-scoring application in the same RMA Region. Highly similar is one that proposes to reach the same producers likely to be reached by another applicant that scored higher by the panel and the same general educational material is proposed to be delivered. An organization, or group of organizations in partnership, may apply for funding under other FCIC or RMA programs, in addition to the program described in this announcement. However, if the Manager of FCIC determines that an application recommended for funding is sufficiently similar to a project that has been funded or has been recommended to be funded under another RMA or FCIC program, then the Manager may elect to not fund that application in whole or in part. The Manager of FCIC will make the final determination on those applications that will be awarded funding. VI. Award Administration Information A. Award Notices Following approval by the awarding official of RMA of the applications to be selected for funding, project leaders whose applications have been selected for funding will be notified. Within the limit of funds available for such a purpose, the awarding official of RMA shall enter into partnership agreements with those selected applicants. The agreements provide the amount of Federal funds for use in the project period, the terms and conditions of the award, and the time period for the project. The effective date of the agreement shall be on the date the agreement is executed by both parties and it shall remain in effect for up to one year or through September 30, 2007, whichever is later. After a partnership agreement has been signed, RMA will extend to award recipients, in writing, the authority to draw down funds for the purpose of conducting the activities listed in the agreement. All funds provided to the applicant by FCIC must be expended solely for the purpose for which the funds are obligated in accordance with the approved agreement and budget, the regulations, the terms and conditions of the award, and the applicability of Federal cost principles. No commitment of Federal assistance beyond the project period is made or implied for any award resulting from this notice. Notification of denial of funding will be sent to applicants after final funding decisions have been made. Reasons for denial of funding can include, but are not limited to, incomplete applications, applications with evaluation scores that are lower than other applications in an RMA Region, or applications that propose to deliver education to groups of producers in an RMA Region that are largely similar to groups reached in a higher ranked application. B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements 1. Requirement To Use Program Logo Applicants awarded partnership agreements will be required to use a program logo and design provided by RMA for all instructional and promotional materials. 2. Requirement To Provide Project Information to an RMA-selected Representative Applicants awarded partnership agreements will be required to assist RMA in evaluating the effectiveness of its educational programs by providing documentation of educational activities and related information to any representative selected by RMA for program evaluation purposes. 3. Private Crop Insurance Organizations and Potential Conflicts of Interest Private organizations that are involved in the sale of Federal crop insurance, or that have financial ties to such organizations, are eligible to apply for funding under this announcement. However, such entities will not be allowed to receive funding to conduct activities that would otherwise be required under a Standard Reinsurance Agreement or any other agreement in effect between FCIC and the entity. Also, such entities will not be allowed to receive funding to conduct activities that could be perceived by producers as promoting one company's services or products over another's. If applying for funding, such organizations are encouraged to be sensitive to potential conflicts of interest and to describe in their application the specific actions they will take to avoid actual and perceived conflicts of interest. 4. Access to Panel Review Information Upon written request from the applicant, scores from the evaluation panel, not including the identity of reviewers, will be sent to the applicant after the review and awards process has been completed. 5. Confidential Aspects of Applications and Awards The names of applicants, the names of individuals identified in the applications, the content of applications, and the panel evaluations of applications will all be kept confidential, except to those involved in the review process, to the extent permitted by law. In addition, the identities of review panel members will remain confidential throughout the entire review process and will not be released to applicants. At the end of the fiscal year, names of panel members will be made available. However, panelists will not be identified with the review of any particular application. When an application results in a partnership agreement, that agreement becomes a part of the official record of RMA transactions, available to the public upon specific request. Information that the Secretary of Agriculture determines to be of a confidential, privileged, or proprietary nature will be held in confidence to the extent permitted by law. Therefore, any information that the applicant wishes to be considered confidential, privileged, or proprietary should be clearly marked within an application, including the basis for such designation. The original copy of a application that does not result in an award will be retained by RMA for a period of one year. Other copies will be destroyed. Copies of applications not receiving awards will be released only with the express written consent of the applicant or to the extent required by law. An application may be withdrawn at any time prior to award. 6. Audit Requirements Applicants awarded partnership agreements are subject to audit. 7. Prohibitions and Requirements With Regard to Lobbying Section 1352 of Public Law 101-121, enacted on October 23, 1989, imposes prohibitions and requirements for disclosure and certification related to lobbying on recipients of Federal contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, and loans. It provides exemptions for Indian Tribes and tribal organizations. Current and prospective recipients, and any subcontractors, are prohibited from using Federal funds, other than profits from a Federal contract, for lobbying Congress or any Federal agency in connection with the award of a contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or loan. In addition, for each award action in excess of $100,000 ($150,000 for loans) the law requires recipients and any subcontractors:
(1)To certify that they have neither used nor will use any appropriated funds for payment of lobbyists;
(2)to disclose the name, address, payment details, and purpose of any agreements with lobbyists whom recipients of their subcontractors will pay with profits or other non-appropriated funds on or after December 22, 1989; and
(3)to file quarterly updates about the use of lobbyists if material changes occur in their use. The law establishes civil penalties for non-compliance. A copy of the certification and disclosure forms must be submitted with the application and are available at the address and telephone number listed in Section VII. Agency Contact. 8. Applicable OMB Circulars All partnership agreements funded as a result of this notice will be subject to the requirements contained in all applicable OMB circulars. 9. Requirement To Assure Compliance With Federal Civil Rights Laws Project leaders of all partnership agreements funded as a result of this notice are required to know and abide by Federal civil rights laws and to assure USDA and RMA that the recipient is in compliance with and will continue to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d *et seq* .), 7 CFR part 15, and USDA regulations promulgated thereunder, 7 CFR 1901.202. RMA requires that recipients submit Form RD 400-4, Assurance Agreement (Civil Rights), assuring RMA of this compliance prior to the beginning of the project period. 10. Requirement To Participate in a Post-Award Conference RMA requires that project leaders attend a post-award conference to become fully aware of agreement requirements and for delineating the roles of RMA personnel and the procedures that will be followed in administering the agreement and will afford an opportunity for the orderly transition of agreement duties and obligations if different personnel are to assume post-award responsibility. In their applications, applicants should budget for possible travel costs associated with attending this conference. C. Reporting Requirements Award recipients will be required to submit quarterly progress reports, quarterly financial reports (OMB Standard Form 269), and quarterly Activity Logs (Form RME-3) throughout the project period, as well as a final program and financial report not later than 90 days after the end of the project period. Recipients will be required to submit prior to the award: • A completed and signed Form RD 400-4, Assurance Agreement (Civil Rights). • A completed and signed OMB Standard Form LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.” • A completed and signed AD-1047, “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters—Primary Covered Transactions.” • A completed and signed AD-1049, “Certification Regarding Drug-Free Workplace.” • A completed and signed Faith-Based Survey on EEO. VII. Agency Contact *For Further Information Contact:* Applicants and other interested parties are encouraged to contact: Lon Burke, USDA-RMA-RME, 1400 Independence Ave., SW., Stop 0808, Room 5720, Washington, DC 20250-0808, phone: 202-720-5265, fax: 202-690-3605, e-mail: *RMA.Risk-Ed@rma.usda.gov.* You may also obtain information regarding this announcement from the RMA Web site at: *http://www.rma.usda.gov/aboutrma/agreements.* VIII. Other Information A. Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit sequence recognized as the universal standard for identifying and keeping track of over 70 million businesses worldwide. The Office of Management and Budget published a notice of final policy issuance in the **Federal Register** June 27, 2003 (68 FR 38402) that requires a DUNS number in every application (i.e., hard copy and electronic) for a grant or cooperative agreement on or after October 1, 2003. Therefore, potential applicants should verify that they have a DUNS number or take the steps needed to obtain one. For information about how to obtain a DUNS number, go to *http://www.grants.gov.* Please note that the registration may take up to 14 business days to complete. B. Required Registration With the Central Contract Registry for Submission of Proposals The Central Contract Registry
(CCR)is a database that serves as the primary Government repository for contractor information required for the conduct of business with the Government. This database will also be used as a central location for maintaining organizational information for organizations seeking and receiving grants from the Government. Such organizations must register in the CCR prior to the submission of applications. A DUNS number is needed for CCR registration. For information about how to register in the CCR, visit ”Get Started” at the Web site, *http://www.grants.gov.* Allow a minimum of 5 business days to complete the CCR registration. C. Related Programs Funding availability for this program may be announced at approximately the same time as funding availability for similar but separate programs—CFDA No. 10.455 (Community Outreach and Assistance Partnerships), CFDA No. 10.456 (Risk Management Research Partnerships), CFDA No. 10.458 (Crop Insurance Education in Targeted States), and CFDA No. 10.459 (Commodity Partnerships Small Sessions Program). These programs have some similarities, but also key differences. The differences stem from important features of each program's authorizing legislation and different RMA objectives. Prospective applicants should carefully examine and compare the notices for each program. Signed in Washington, DC on April 10, 2006. Eldon Gould, Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation. [FR Doc. E6-5752 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-08-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Commodity Partnerships for Small Agricultural Risk Management Education Sessions (Commodity Partnerships Small Sessions Program) *Announcement Type:* Announcement of Availability of Funds and Request for Application for Competitive Cooperative Partnership Agreements—Initial. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number (CFDA):* 10.459. *Dates:* Applications are due June 2, 2006. *Executive Summary:* The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC), operating through the Risk Management Agency (RMA), announces the availability of approximately $500,000 for Commodity Partnerships for Small Agricultural Risk Management Education Sessions (the Commodity Partnerships Small Sessions Program). The purpose of this cooperative partnership agreement program is to deliver training and information in the management of production, marketing, and financial risk to U.S. agricultural producers. The program gives priority to educating producers of crops currently not insured under Federal crop insurance, specialty crops, and underserved commodities, including livestock and forage. A maximum of 50 cooperative partnership agreements will be funded, with no more than five in each of the ten designated RMA Regions. The maximum award for any cooperative partnership agreement will be $10,000. Recipients of awards must demonstrate non-financial benefits from a cooperative partnership agreement and must agree to the substantial involvement of RMA in the project. Funding availability for this program may be announced at approximately the same time as funding availability for similar but separate programs—CFDA No. 10.455 (Community Outreach and Assistance Partnerships), CFDA No. 10.456 (Risk Management Research Partnerships), CFDA No. 10.457 (Commodity Partnerships for Risk Management Education), and CFDA No. 10.458 (Crop Insurance Education in Targeted States). Prospective applicants should carefully examine and compare the notices for each program. *This announcement consists of eight parts:* Part I—Funding Opportunity Description A. Legislative Authority B. Background C. Definition of Priority Commodities D. Project Goal E. Purpose Part II—Award Information A. Type of Award B. Funding Availability C. Location and Target Audience D. Maximum Award E. Project Period F. Description of Agreement Award-Recipient Tasks G. RMA Activities H. Other Tasks Part III—Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants B. Cost Sharing or Matching C. Other—Non-Financial Benefits Part IV—Application and Submission Information A. Address To Submit an Application Package B. Content and Form of Application Submission C. Submission Dates and Times D. Intergovernmental Review E. Funding Restrictions F. Limitation on Use of Project Funds for Salaries and Benefits G. Indirect Cost Rates H. Other Submission Requirements I. Electronic Submissions J. Acknowledgement of Applications Part V—Application Review Process A. Criteria B. Selection and Review Process Part VI—Award Administration A. Award Notices B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements 1. Requirement To Use Program Logo 2. Requirement To Provide Project Information to an RMA-selected Representative 3. Private Crop Insurance Organizations and Potential Conflict of Interest 4. Access to Panel Review Information 5. Confidential Aspects of Applications and Awards 6. Audit Requirements 7. Prohibitions and Requirements Regarding Lobbying 8. Applicable OMB Circulars 9. Requirement to Assure Compliance With Federal Civil Rights Laws 10. Requirement To Participate in a Post Award Conference C. Reporting Requirements Part VII—Agency Contact Part VIII—Additional Information A. Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)B. Required Registration With the Central Contract Registry for Submission of Proposals C. Related Programs Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description A. Legislative Authority The Commodity Partnerships Small Sessions Program is authorized under section 522(d)(3)(F) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act
(Act)(7 U.S.C. 1522(d)(3)(F). B. Background RMA promotes and regulates sound risk management solutions to improve the economic stability of American agriculture. On behalf of FCIC, RMA does this by offering Federal crop insurance products through a network of private-sector partners, overseeing the creation of new risk management products, seeking enhancements in existing products, ensuring the integrity of crop insurance programs, offering outreach programs aimed at equal access and participation of underserved communities, and providing risk management education and information. One of RMA's strategic goals is to ensure that its customers are well informed as to the risk management solutions available. This educational goal is supported by section 522(d)(3)(F) of the Act, which authorizes FCIC funding for risk management training and informational efforts for agricultural producers through the formation of partnerships with public and private organizations. With respect to such partnerships, priority is to be given to reaching producers of Priority Commodities, as defined below. C. Definition of Priority Commodities For purposes of this program, Priority Commodities are defined as: • *Agricultural commodities covered by (7 U.S.C. 7333).* Commodities in this group are commercial crops that are not covered by catastrophic risk protection crop insurance, are used for food or fiber (except livestock), and specifically include, but are not limited to, floricultural, ornamental nursery, Christmas trees, turf grass sod, aquaculture (including ornamental fish), and industrial crops. • *Specialty crops.* Commodities in this group may or may not be covered under a Federal crop insurance plan and include, but are not limited to, fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, syrups, honey, roots, herbs, and highly specialized varieties of traditional crops. • *Underserved commodities.* This group includes:
(a)Commodities, including livestock and forage, that are covered by a Federal crop insurance plan but for which participation in an area is below the national average; and
(b)commodities, including livestock and forage, with inadequate crop insurance coverage. A project is considered as giving priority to Priority Commodities if the majority of the educational activities of the project are directed to producers of any of the three classes of commodities listed above or any combination of the three classes. D. Project Goal The goal of this program is to ensure that “* * * producers will be better able to use financial management, crop insurance, marketing contracts, and other existing and emerging risk management tools”. E. Purpose The purpose of the Commodity Partnership Small Session Program is to provide U.S. farmers and ranchers with training and informational opportunities to be able to understand: • The kinds of risks addressed by existing and emerging risk management tools; • The features and appropriate use of existing and emerging risk management tools; and • How to make sound risk management decisions. II. Award Information A. Type of Award Cooperative Partnership Agreements, which require the substantial involvement of RMA. B. Funding Availability Approximately $500,000 is available in fiscal year 2006 to fund up to 50 cooperative partnership agreements. The maximum award for any agreement will be $10,000. It is anticipated that a maximum of five agreements will be funded in each of the ten designated RMA Regions. In the event that all funds available for this program are not obligated after the maximum number of agreements are awarded or if additional funds become available, these funds may, at the discretion of the Manager of FCIC, be used to award additional applications that score highly by the technical review panel or allocated pro-rata to award recipients for use in broadening the size or scope of awarded projects if agreed to by the recipient. In the event that the Manager of FCIC determines that available RMA resources cannot support the administrative and substantial involvement requirements of all agreements recommended for funding, the Manager may elect to fund fewer agreements than the available funding might otherwise allow. It is expected that the awards will be made approximately 60 days after the application deadline. All awards will be made and agreements finalized no later than September 30, 2006. C. Location and Target Audience RMA Regional Offices and the States serviced within each Region are listed below. Staff from the respective RMA Regional Offices will provide substantial involvement for projects conducted within the Region. Billings, MT Regional Office: (MT, WY, ND, and SD) Davis, CA Regional Office: (CA, NV, UT, AZ, and HI) Jackson, MS Regional Office: (KY, TN, AR, LA, and MS) Oklahoma City, OK Regional Office: (OK, TX, and NM) Raleigh, NC Regional Office: (ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, NJ, PA, MD, DE, WV, VA, and NC) Spokane, WA Regional Office: (WA, ID, OR, and AK) Springfield, IL Regional Office: (IL, IN, OH, and MI) St. Paul, MN Regional Office: (MN, WI, and IA) Topeka, KS Regional Office: (KS, MO, NE, and CO) Valdosta, GA Regional Office: (AL, GA, SC, FL, and Puerto Rico) Applicants must designate in their application narratives the RMA Region where educational activities will be conducted and the specific groups of producers within the region that the applicant intends to reach through the project. Priority will be given to producers of Priority Commodities. Applicants proposing to conduct educational activities in more than one RMA Region must submit a separate application for each RMA Region. This requirement is not intended to preclude producers from areas that border a designated RMA Region from participating in that region's educational activities. It is also not intended to prevent applicants from proposing the use of certain informational methods, such as print or broadcast news outlets, that may reach producers in other RMA Regions. D. Maximum Award Any application that requests Federal funding of more than $10,000 for a project will be rejected. E. Project Period Projects will be funded for a period of up to one year from the project starting date. F. Description of Agreement Award Recipient Tasks In conducting activities to achieve the purpose and goal of this program in a designated RMA Region, the award recipient will be responsible for performing the following tasks: • Develop and conduct a promotional program. This program will include activities using media, newsletters, publications, or other appropriate informational dissemination techniques that are designed to:
(a)Raise awareness for risk management;
(b)inform producers of the availability of risk management tools; and
(c)inform producers and agribusiness leaders in the designated RMA Region of training and informational opportunities. • Deliver risk management training and informational opportunities to agricultural producers and agribusiness professionals in the designated RMA Region. This will include organizing and delivering educational activities using the instructional materials that have been assembled to meet the local needs of agricultural producers. Activities should be directed primarily to agricultural producers, but may include those agribusiness professionals that have frequent opportunities to advise producers on risk management tools and decisions. • Document all educational activities conducted under the cooperative partnership agreement and the results of such activities, including criteria and indicators used to evaluate the success of the program. The recipient will also be required to provide information to an RMA-selected contractor to evaluate all educational activities and advise RMA as to the effectiveness of activities. G. RMA Activities FCIC, working through RMA, will be substantially involved during the performance of the funded project through RMA's ten Regional Offices. Potential types of substantial involvement may include, but are not limited to the following activities. • Assist in the selection of subcontractors and project staff. • Collaborate with the recipient in assembling, reviewing, and approving risk management materials for producers in the designated RMA Region. • Collaborate with the recipient in reviewing and approving a promotional program for raising awareness for risk management and for informing producers of training and informational opportunities in the RMA Region. • Collaborate with the recipient on the delivery of education to producers and agribusiness leaders in the RMA Region. This will include:
(a)Reviewing and approving in advance all producer and agribusiness leader educational activities;
(b)advising the project leader on technical issues related to crop insurance education and information; and
(c)assisting the project leader in informing crop insurance professionals about educational activity plans and scheduled meetings. • Conduct an evaluation of the performance of the recipient in meeting the deliverables of the project. Applications that do not contain substantial involvement by RMA will be rejected. H. Other Tasks In addition to the specific, required tasks listed above, the applicant may propose additional tasks that would contribute directly to the purpose of this program. For any proposed additional task, the applicant must identify the objective of the task, the specific subtasks required to meet the objective, specific time lines for performing the subtasks, and the specific responsibilities of partners. The applicant must also identify specific ways in which RMA would have substantial involvement in the proposed project task. III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants Eligible applicants include State departments of agriculture, universities, non-profit agricultural organizations, and other public or private organizations with the capacity to lead a local program of risk management education for farmers and ranchers in an RMA Region. Individuals are not eligible applicants. Although an applicant may be eligible to compete for an award based on its status as an eligible entity, other factors may exclude an applicant from receiving Federal assistance under this program governed by Federal law and regulations (e.g. debarment and suspension; a determination of non-performance on a prior contract, cooperative agreement, grant or cooperative partnership; a determination of a violation of applicable ethical standards; a determination of being considered “high risk”). Applications from ineligible or excluded persons will be rejected in their entirety. B. Cost Sharing or Matching Although RMA prefers cost sharing by the applicant, this program has neither a cost sharing nor a matching requirement. C. Other—Non-Financial Benefits To be eligible, applicants must also be able to demonstrate that they will receive a non-financial benefit as a result of a cooperative partnership agreement. Non-financial benefits must accrue to the applicant and must include more than the ability to provide employment income to the applicant or for the applicant's employees or the community. The applicant must demonstrate that performance under the cooperative partnership agreement will further the specific mission of the applicant (such as providing research or activities necessary for graduate or other students to complete their educational program). Applications that do not demonstrate a non-financial benefit will be rejected. IV. Application and Submission Information A. Contact To Request Application Package Program application materials for the Commodity Partnerships Program under this announcement may be downloaded from *http://www.rma.usda.gov/aboutrma/agreements* . Applicants may also request application materials from: Lon Burke, USDA-RMA-RME, phone:
(202)720-5265, fax:
(202)690-3605, e-mail: *RMA.Risk-Ed@rma.usda.gov.* B. Content and Form of Application Submission A complete and valid application package must include an electronic copy (Microsoft Word format preferred) of the narrative portion (Forms RME-1 and RME-2) of the application package on a compact disc and an original and two copies of the completed and signed application must be submitted in one package at the time of initial submission, which must include the following: 1. A completed and signed OMB Standard Form 424, “Application for Federal Assistance”. 2. A completed and signed OMB Standard Form 424-A, “Budget Information—Non-construction Programs”. Federal funding requested (the total of direct and indirect costs) must not exceed $10,000. 3. A completed and signed OMB Standard Form 424-B, “Assurances, Non-constructive Programs”. 4. Risk Management Education Project Narrative (Form RME-1). Complete all required parts of Form RME-1: Part I—Title Page. Part II—A written narrative of no more than 2 single-sided pages which will provide reviewers with sufficient information to effectively evaluate the merits of the application according to the evaluation criteria listed in this notice. Although a Statement of Work, which is the third evaluation criterion, is to be completed in detail in RME Form-2, applicants may wish to highlight certain unique features of the Statement of Work in Part II for the benefit of the evaluation panel. If your narrative exceeds the page limit, only the first 2 pages will be reviewed. • No smaller than 12-point font size. • Use an easily readable font face (e.g., Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, Times Roman). • 8.5 by 11 inch paper. • One-inch margins on each page. • Printed only on one side of paper. • Unbound, held together only by rubber bands or metal clips; not bound or stapled in any other way. Part III—A Budget Narrative, describing how the categorical costs listed on SF 424-A are derived. Part IV—Provide a “Statement of Non-financial Benefits”. (Refer to Section III, Eligibility Information, above). 5. “Statement of Work”, Form RME-2, which identifies tasks and subtasks in detail, expected completion dates and deliverables, and RMA's substantial involvement role for the proposed project. C. Submission Dates and Times *Applications Deadline:* June 2, 2006. Applicants are responsible for ensuring that RMA receives a complete application package by the closing date and time. Incomplete or late application packages will not receive further consideration. D. Intergovernmental Review Not applicable. E. Funding Restrictions Cooperative partnership agreement funds may not be used to: a. Plan, repair, rehabilitate, acquire, or construct a building or facility including a processing facility; b. Purchase, rent, or install fixed equipment; c. Repair or maintain privately owned vehicles; d. Pay for the preparation of the cooperative partnership agreement application; e. Fund political activities; f. Alcohol, food, beverage or entertainment; g. Pay costs incurred prior to receiving a cooperative partnership agreement; h. Fund any activities prohibited in 7 CFR Parts 3015 and 3019, as applicable. F. Limitation on Use of Project Funds for Salaries and Benefits Total costs for salary and benefits allowed for projects under this announcement will be limited to not more than 25 percent reimbursement of the funds awarded under the cooperative partnership agreement as indicated in Section III. Eligibility Information, C. Other—Non-financial Benefits. One goal of the Commodity Partnerships Small Sessions Program is to maximize the use of the limited funding available for risk management education for producers of Priority Commodities. In order to accomplish this goal, RMA needs to ensure that the maximum amount of funds practicable is used for directly providing the educational opportunities. Limiting the amount of funding for salaries and benefits will allow the limited amount of funding to reach the maximum number of farmers and ranchers. G. Indirect Cost Rates a. Indirect costs allowed for projects submitted under this announcement will be limited to ten
(10)percent of the total direct cost of the cooperative partnership agreement. b. RMA will withhold all indirect cost rate funds for an award to an applicant requesting indirect costs if the applicant has not negotiated an indirect cost rate with its cognizant Federal agency. c. If an applicant is in the process of negotiating an indirect cost rate with its cognizant Federal agency, RMA will withhold all indirect cost rate funds from that applicant until the indirect cost rate has been established. d. If an applicant's indirect cost rate has expired or will expire prior to award announcements, a clear statement on renegotiation efforts must be included in the application. e. It is incumbent on all applicants to have a current indirect cost rate or begin negotiations to establish an indirect cost rate prior to the submission deadline. Because it may take several months to obtain an indirect cost rate, applicants needing an indirect cost rate are encouraged to start work on establishing these rates well in advance of submitting an application. The U.S. Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)is responsible for assigning cognizant Federal agencies. f. Applicants may be asked to provide a copy of their indirect cost rate negotiated with their cognizant agency. H. Other Submission Requirements *Mailed submissions:* Applications submitted through express, overnight mail or another delivery service will be considered as meeting the announced deadline if they are received in the mailroom at the address stated below for express, overnight mail or another delivery service on or before the deadline. Applicants are cautioned that express, overnight mail or other delivery services do not always deliver as agreed. Applicants should take this into account because failure of such delivery services will not extend the deadline. Mailed applications will be considered as meeting the announced deadline if they are received on or before the deadline in the mailroom at the address stated below for mailed applications. Applicants are responsible for mailing applications well in advance, to ensure that applications are received on or before the deadline time and date. Applicants using the U.S. Postal Services should allow for the extra security handling time for delivery due to the additional security measures that mail delivered to government offices in the Washington, DC area requires. Address when using private delivery services or when hand delivering: Attention: Risk Management Education Program, USDA/RMA/RME, Room 5720, South Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250. Address when using U.S. Postal Services: Attention: Risk Management Education Program, USDA/RMA/RME/Stop 0808, Room 5720, South Building, 1400 Independence Ave, SW., Washington, DC 20250-0808. I. Electronic Submissions Applications transmitted electronically via Grants.gov will be accepted prior to the application date or time deadline. The application package can be accessed via Grants.gov, go to *http://www.grants.gov,* click on “Find Grant Opportunities”, click on “Search Grant Opportunities,” and enter the CFDA number (beginning of the RFA) to search by CFDA number. From the search results, select the item that correlates to the title of this RFA. If you do not have electronic access to the RFA or have trouble downloading material and you would like a hardcopy, you may contact Lon Burke, USDA-RMA-RME, phone:
(202)720-5265, fax:
(202)690-3605, e-mail: *RMA.Risk-Ed@rma.usda.gov.* J. Acknowledgement of Applications Receipt of applications will be acknowledged by e-mail, whenever possible. Therefore, applicants are encouraged to provide e-mail addresses in their applications. If an e-mail address is not indicated on an application, receipt will be acknowledged by letter. There will be no notification of incomplete, unqualified or unfunded applications until after the awards have been made. When received by RMA, applications will be assigned an identification number. This number will be communicated to applicants in the acknowledgement of receipt of applications. An application's identification number should be referenced in all correspondence regarding the application. If the applicant does not receive an acknowledgement within 15 days of the submission deadline, the applicant should notify RMA's point of contact indicated in Section VII, Agency Contact. V. Application Review Information A. Criteria Applications submitted under the Commodity Partnerships Small Sessions Program will be evaluated within each RMA Region according to the following criteria: Priority—Maximum 10 Points The applicant can submit projects that are not related to Priority Commodities. However, priority will be given to projects relating to Priority Commodities and the degree in which such projects relate to the Priority Commodities. Projects that relate solely to Priority Commodities will be eligible for the most points. Project Benefits—Maximum 25 Points The applicant must demonstrate that the project benefits to farmers and ranchers warrant the funding requested. Applicants will be scored according to the extent they can:
(a)Reasonably estimate the number of producers reached through the various educational activities described in the Statement of Work;
(b)justify such estimates with clear specifics;
(c)identify the actions producers will likely be able to take as a result of the activities described in the Statement of Work; and
(d)identify the specific measures for evaluating results that will be employed in the project. Reviewers' scoring will be based on the scope and reasonableness of the applicant's estimates of producers reached through the project, clear descriptions of specific expected project benefits, and well-designed methods for measuring the project's results and effectiveness. Statement of Work—Maximum 15 Points The applicant must produce a clear and specific Statement of Work for the project. For each of the tasks contained in the Description of Agreement Award (refer to Section II Award Information), the applicant must identify and describe specific subtasks, responsible entities, expected completion dates, RMA substantial involvement, and deliverables that will further the purpose of this program. Applicants will obtain a higher score to the extent that the Statement of Work is specific, measurable, reasonable, has specific deadlines for the completion of subtasks, relates directly to the required activities and the program purpose described in this announcement, which is to provide producers with training and informational opportunities so that the producers will be better able to use financial management, crop insurance, marketing contracts, and other existing and emerging risk management tools. Applicants are required to submit this Statement of Work on Form RME-2. Project Management—Maximum 15 Points The applicant must demonstrate an ability to implement sound and effective project management practices. Higher scores will be awarded to applicants that can demonstrate organizational skills, leadership, and experience in delivering services or programs that assist agricultural producers in the respective RMA Region. Applicants that will employ, or have access to, personnel who have experience in directing local educational programs that benefit agricultural producers in the respective RMA Region will receive higher rankings. Past Performance—Maximum 10 Points If the applicant has been a recipient of other Federal or other government grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts, the applicant must provide information relating to their past performance in reporting on outputs and outcomes under past or current federal assistance agreements. The applicant must also detail that they have consistently complied with financial and program reporting and auditing requirements. RMA reserves the right to add up to 10 points and subtract 5 points to applications due to past performance. Applicants with very good past performance will receive a score from 6-10 points. Applicants with acceptable past performance will receive a score from 1-5 points. Applicants with unacceptable past performance will receive a score of minus 5 points for this evaluation factor. Applicants without relevant past performance information will receive a neutral score of the mean number of points of all applicants with past performance. Under this cooperative partnership agreement, RMA will subjectively rate the recipient on project performance as indicated in Section II, G. The applicant must list all current public or private support to which personnel identified in the application have committed portions of their time, whether or not salary support for persons involved is included in the budget. An application that duplicates or overlaps substantially with an application already reviewed and funded (or to be funded) by another organization or agency will not be funded under this program. The projects proposed for funding should be included in the pending section. Budget Appropriateness and Efficiency—Maximum 15 Points Applicants must provide a detailed budget summary that clearly explains and justifies costs associated with the project. Applicants will receive higher scores to the extent that they can demonstrate a fair and reasonable use of funds appropriate for the project and a budget that contains the estimated cost of reaching each individual producer. The applicant must provide information factors such as: • The allowability and necessity for individual cost categories; • The reasonableness of amounts estimated for necessary costs; • The basis used for allocating indirect or overhead costs; and • The appropriateness of allocating particular overhead costs to the proposed project as direct costs. B. Review and Selection Process Applications will be evaluated using a two-part process. First, each application will be screened by RMA personnel to ensure that it meets the requirements in this announcement. Applications that do not meet the requirements of this announcement or that are incomplete will not receive further consideration. Applications that meet announcement requirements will be sorted into the RMA Region in which the applicant proposes to conduct the project and will be presented to a review panel for consideration. Second, the review panel will meet to consider and discuss the merits of each application. The panel will consist of not less than three independent reviewers. Reviewers will be drawn from USDA, other Federal agencies, and others representing public and private organizations, as needed. After considering the merits of all applications within an RMA Region, panel members will score each application according to the criteria and point values listed above. The panel will then rank each application against others within the RMA Region according to the scores received. A lottery will be used to resolve any instances of a tie score that might have a bearing on funding recommendations. If such a lottery is required, the names of all tied applicants will be entered into a drawing. The first tied applicant drawn will have priority over other tied applicants for funding consideration. The review panel will report the results of the evaluation to the Manager of FCIC. The panel's report will include the recommended applicants to receive cooperative partnership agreements for each RMA Region. Funding will not be provided for an application receiving a score less than 45. Funding will not be provided for an application that is highly similar to a higher-scoring application in the same RMA Region. Highly similar is one that proposes to reach the same producers likely to be reached by another applicant that scored higher by the panel and the same general educational material is proposed to be delivered. An organization, or group of organizations in partnership, may apply for funding under other FCIC or RMA programs, in addition to the program described in this announcement. However, if the Manager of FCIC determines that an application recommended for funding is sufficiently similar to a project that has been funded or has been recommended to be funded under another RMA or FCIC program, then the Manager may elect to not fund that application in whole or in part. The Manager of FCIC will make the final determination on those applications that will be awarded funding. VI. Award Administration Information A. Award Notices Following approval by the awarding official of RMA of the applications to be selected for funding, project leaders whose applications have been selected for funding will be notified. Within the limit of funds available for such a purpose, the awarding official of RMA shall enter into cooperative partnership agreements with those selected applicants. The agreements provide the amount of Federal funds for use in the project period, the terms, and conditions of the award, and the time period for the project. The effective date of the agreement shall be on the date the agreement is executed by both parties and it shall remain in effect for up to one year or through September 30, 2007, whichever is later. After a partnership agreement has been signed, RMA will extend to award recipients, in writing, the authority to draw down funds for the purpose of conducting the activities listed in the agreement. All funds provided to the applicant by FCIC must be expended solely for the purpose for which the funds are obligated in accordance with the approved agreement and budget, the regulations, the terms and conditions of the award, and the applicability of Federal cost principles. No commitment of Federal assistance beyond the project period is made or implied for any award resulting from this notice. Notification of denial of funding will be sent to applicants after final funding decisions have been made. Reasons for denial of funding can include, but are not limited to, incomplete applications, applications with evaluation scores that are lower that other applications in an RMA Region, or applications that are highly similar to a higher-scoring application in the same RMA Region. Highly similar is an application that proposes to reach the same producers likely to be reached by another applicant that scored higher by the panel and the same general educational material is proposed to be delivered. B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements 1. Requirement To Use Program Logo Applicants awarded cooperative partnership agreements will be required to use a program logo and design provided by RMA for all instructional and promotional materials. 2. Requirement To Provide Project Information to an RMA-Selected Contractor Applicants awarded cooperative partnership agreements may be required to assist RMA in evaluating the effectiveness of its educational programs by providing documentation of educational activities and related information to any contractor selected by RMA for program evaluation purposes. 3. Private Crop Insurance Organizations and Potential Conflicts of Interest Private organizations that are involved in the sale of Federal crop insurance, or that have financial ties to such organizations, are eligible to apply for funding under this announcement. However, such entities will not be allowed to receive funding to conduct activities that would otherwise be required under a Standard Reinsurance Agreement or any other agreement in effect between FCIC and the entity. Also, such entities will not be allowed to receive funding to conduct activities that could be perceived by producers as promoting one company's services or products over another's. If applying for funding, such organizations are encouraged to be sensitive to potential conflicts of interest and to describe in their application the specific actions they will take to avoid actual and perceived conflicts of interest. 4. Access to Panel Review Information Upon written request from the applicant, scores from the evaluation panel, not including the identity of reviewers, will be sent to the applicant after the review and awards process has been completed. 5. Confidential Aspects of Applications and Awards The names of applicants, the names of individuals identified in the applications, the content of applications, and the panel evaluations of applications will all be kept confidential, except to those involved in the review process, to the extent permitted by law. In addition, the identities of review panel members will remain confidential throughout the entire review process and will not be released to applicants. At the end of the fiscal year, names of panel members will be made available. However, panelists will not be identified with the review of any particular application. When an application results in a partnership agreement, that agreement becomes a part of the official record of RMA transactions, available to the public upon specific request. Information that the Secretary of Agriculture determines to be of a confidential, privileged, or proprietary nature will be held in confidence to the extent permitted by law. Therefore, any information that the applicant wishes to be considered confidential, privileged, or proprietary should be clearly marked within an application, including the basis for such designation. The original copy of an application that does not result in an award will be retained by RMA for a period of one year. Other copies will be destroyed. Copies of applications not receiving awards will be released only with the express written consent of the applicant or to the extent required by law. An application may be withdrawn at any time prior to award. 6. Audit Requirements Applicants awarded cooperative partnership agreements are subject to audit. 7. Prohibitions and Requirements With Regard to Lobbying Section 1352 of Public Law 101-121, enacted on October 23, 1989, imposes prohibitions and requirements for disclosure and certification related to lobbying on recipients of Federal contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, and loans. It provides exemptions for Indian Tribes and tribal organizations. Current and prospective recipients, and any subcontractors, are prohibited from using Federal funds, other than profits from a Federal contract, for lobbying Congress or any Federal agency in connection with the award of a contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or loan. In addition, for each award action in excess of $100,000 ($150,000 for loans) the law requires recipients and any subcontractors:
(1)To certify that they have neither used nor will use any appropriated funds for payment of lobbyists;
(2)to disclose the name, address, payment details, and purpose of any agreements with lobbyists whom recipients of their subcontractors will pay with profits or other non-appropriated funds on or after December 22, 1989; and
(3)to file quarterly up-dates about the use of lobbyists if material changes occur in their use. The law establishes civil penalties for non-compliance. A copy of the certification and disclosure forms must be submitted with the application, are available at the address, and telephone number listed in Section VII. Agency Contact. 8. Applicable OMB Circulars All partnership agreements funded as a result of this notice will be subject to the requirements contained in all applicable OMB circulars. 9. Requirement To Assure Compliance With Federal Civil Rights Laws Award recipients of all cooperative partnership agreements funded as a result of this notice are required to know and abide by Federal civil rights laws and to assure USDA and RMA that the recipient is in compliance with and will continue to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d *et seq.* ), 7 CFR Part 15, and USDA regulations promulgated thereunder, 7 CFR 1901.202. RMA requires award recipients to submit Form RD 400-4, Assurance Agreement (Civil Rights), assuring RMA of this compliance prior to the beginning of the project period. 10. Requirement To Participate in a Post Award Teleconference RMA requires that project leaders participate in a post award teleconference to become fully aware of agreement requirements and for delineating the roles of RMA personnel and the procedures that will be followed in administering the agreement and will afford an opportunity for the orderly transition of agreement duties and obligations if different personnel are to assume post-award responsibility. C. Reporting Requirements Award recipients will be required to submit quarterly progress reports, quarterly financial reports (OMB Standard Form 269), and quarterly Activity Logs (Form RME-3) throughout the project period, as well as a final program and financial report not later than 90 days after the end of the project period. Recipients will be required to submit prior to the award: • A completed and signed Form RD 400-4, Assurance Agreement (Civil Rights). • A completed and signed OMB Standard Form LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities”. • A completed and signed AD-1047, “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters—Primary Covered Transactions.” • A completed and signed AD-1049, “Certification Regarding Drug-Free Workplace”. • A completed and signed Faith-Based Survey on EEO. VII. Agency Contact *For Further Information Contact:* Applicants and other interested parties are encouraged to contact: Lon Burke, USDA-RMA-RME, 1400 Independence Ave. SW., Stop 0808, Washington, DC 20250-0808, phone: 202-720-5265, fax: 202-690-3605, e-mail: *RMA.Risk-Ed@rma.usda.gov.* You may also obtain information regarding this announcement from the RMA Web site at: *http://www.rma.usda.gov/aboutrma/agreements.* VIII. Other Information A. Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit sequence recognized as the universal standard for identifying and keeping track of over 70 million businesses worldwide. The Office of Management and Budget published a notice of final policy issuance in the **Federal Register** June 27, 2003 (68 FR 38402) that requires a DUNS number in every application ( *i.e.* , hard copy and electronic) for a grant or cooperative agreement on or after October 1, 2003. Therefore, potential applicants should verify that they have a DUNS number or take the steps needed to obtain one. For information about how to obtain a DUNS number, go to *http://www.grants.gov.* Please note that the registration may take up to 14 business days to complete. B. Required Registration With the Central Contract Registry for Submission of Proposals The Central Contract Registry
(CCR)is a database that serves as the primary Government repository for contractor information required for the conduct of business with the Government. This database will also be used as a central location for maintaining organizational information for organizations seeking and receiving grants from the Government. Such organizations must register in the CCR prior to the submission of applications. A DUNS number is needed for CCR registration. For information about how to register in the CCR, visit “Get Started” at the Web site, *http://www.grants.gov.* Allow a minimum of 5 business days to complete the CCR registration. C. Related Programs Funding availability for this program may be announced at approximately the same time as funding availability for similar but separate programs—CFDA No. 10.455 (Community Outreach and Assistance Partnerships), CFDA No. 10.456 (Risk Management Research Partnerships), CFDA No. 10.457 (Commodity Partnerships for Risk Management Education), and CFDA No. 10.458 (Crop Insurance Education in Targeted States). These programs have some similarities, but also key differences. The differences stem from important features of each program's authorizing legislation and different RMA objectives. Prospective applicants should carefully examine and compare the notices for each program. Signed in Washington, DC, on April 10, 2006. Eldon Gould, Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation. [FR Doc. E6-5753 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-08-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Funding Opportunity Title: Crop Insurance Education in Targeted States (Targeted States Program) *Announcement Type:* Announcement of Availability of Funds and Request for Application for Competitive Cooperative Agreements—Initial. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number (CFDA):* 10.458. *Dates:* Applications are due June 2, 2006. *Executive Summary:* The Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC), operating through the Risk Management Agency (RMA), announces the availability of approximately $4.5 million to fund cooperative agreements under the Crop Insurance Education in Targeted States program (the Targeted States Program). The purpose of this cooperative agreement program is to deliver crop insurance education and information to U.S. agricultural producers in certain States that have been designated as historically underserved with respect to crop insurance. The states, collectively referred to as Targeted States, are Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming. A maximum of 15 cooperative agreements will be funded, one in each of the 15 Targeted States. Recipients of awards must agree to the substantial involvement of RMA in the project. Funding availability for this program may be announced at approximately the same time as funding availability for similar but separate programs—CFDA No. 10.455 (Community Outreach and Assistance Partnerships), CFDA No. 10.456 (Risk Management Research Partnerships) CFDA No. 10.457 (Commodity Partnerships for Risk Management Education), and CFDA No. 10.459 (Commodity Partnerships for Small Agricultural Risk Management Education Sessions). Prospective applicants should carefully examine and compare the notices for each program. *This Announcement Consists of Eight Parts:* Part I—Funding Opportunity Description A. Legislative Authority B. Background C. Project Goal D. Purpose Part II—Award Information A. Type of Award B. Funding Availability C. Location and Target Audience D. Maximum Award E. Project Period F. Description of Agreement Award-Recipient Tasks G. RMA Activities H. Other Tasks Part III—Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants B. Cost Sharing or Matching C. Other—Non-Financial Benefits Part IV—Application and Submission Information A. Address To Submit an Application Package B. Content and Form of Application Submission C. Submission Dates and Times D. Intergovernmental Review E. Funding Restrictions F. Limitation on Use of Project Funds for Salaries and Benefits G. Indirect Cost Rates H. Other Submission Requirements I. Electronic Submissions J. Acknowledgement of Applications Part V—Application Review Process A. Criteria B. Selection and Review Process Part VI—Award Administration A. Award Notices B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements 1. Requirement To Use Program Logo 2. Requirement To Provide Project Information to an RMA-selected Representative 3. Private Crop Insurance Organizations and Potential Conflict of Interest 4. Access to Panel Review Information 5. Confidential Aspects of Applications and Awards 6. Audit Requirements 7. Prohibitions and Requirements Regarding Lobbying 8. Applicable OMB Circulars 9. Requirement To Assure Compliance With Federal Civil Rights Laws 10. Requirement To Participate in a Post Award Conference C. Reporting Requirements Part VII—Agency Contact Part VIII—Additional Information A. Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)B. Required Registration With the Central Contract Registry for Submission of Proposals C. Related Programs Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description A. Legislative Authority The Targeted States Program is authorized under section 524(a)(2) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act (Act). B. Background RMA promotes and regulates sound risk management solutions to improve the economic stability of American agriculture. On behalf of FCIC, RMA does this by offering Federal crop insurance products through a network of private-sector partners, overseeing the creation of new risk management products, seeking enhancements in existing products, ensuring the integrity of crop insurance programs, offering outreach programs aimed at equal access and participation of underserved communities, and providing risk management education and information. One of RMA's strategic goals is to ensure that its customers are well informed as to the risk management solutions available. This educational goal is supported by section 524(a)(2) of the Act. This section authorizes funding for the establishment of crop insurance education and information programs in States that have historically been underserved by the Federal crop insurance program. In accordance with the Act, the fifteen States designated as “underserved” are Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming (collectively referred to as “Targeted States”). C. Project Goal The goal of the Targeted States Program is to ensure that farmers and ranchers in the Targeted States are sufficiently informed so as to take full advantage of existing and emerging crop insurance products. D. Purpose The purpose of the Targeted States Program is to provide farmers and ranchers in Targeted States with education and information to be able to understand: • The kinds of risk addressed by crop insurance; • The features of existing and emerging crop insurance products; • The use of crop insurance in the management of risk; • How the use of crop insurance can affect other risk management decisions, such as the use of marketing and financial tools; and • How to make informed decisions on crop insurance prior to the sales closing date deadline. II. Award Information A. Type of Award Cooperative Agreements, which require the substantial involvement of RMA. B. Funding Availability Approximately $4,500,000 is available in fiscal year 2006 to fund up to 15 cooperative agreements, a maximum of one agreement for each of the Targeted States. The maximum funding amount anticipated for each Targeted State's agreement is as follows. Applicants should apply for funding for that Targeted State where the applicant intends on delivering educational activities. Maine $225,000 New Hampshire 173,000 Vermont 226,000 Connecticut 225,000 Rhode Island 157,000 Massachusetts 209,000 New York 617,000 New Jersey 272,000 Pennsylvania 754,000 Maryland 370,000 Delaware 261,000 West Virginia 209,000 Nevada 208,000 Utah 301,000 Wyoming 293,000 Total 4,500,000 Funding amounts were determined by first allocating an equal amount of $150,000 to each Targeted State. Remaining funds were allocated on a pro rata basis according to each Targeted State's share of 2000 agricultural cash receipts relative to the total for all Targeted States. Both allocations were totaled for each Targeted State and rounded to the nearest $1,000. In the event that additional funds become available under this program or in the event that no application for a given Targeted State is recommended for funding by the evaluation panel, these additional funds may, at the discretion of the Manager of FCIC, be allocated pro-rata to State award recipients for use in broadening the size or scope of awarded projects within the Targeted State if agreed to by the recipient. In the event that the Manager of FCIC determines that available RMA resources cannot support the administrative and substantial involvement requirements of all agreements recommended for funding, the Manager may elect to fund fewer agreements than the available funding might otherwise allow. It is expected that the awards will be made approximately 60 days after the application deadline. All awards will be made and agreements finalized no later than September 30, 2006. C. Location and Target Audience Targeted States serviced by RMA Regional Offices are listed below. Staff from the respective RMA Regional Offices will provide substantial involvement for Targeted States projects conducted within the respective Regions. Billings, MT Regional Office: (WY). Davis, CA Regional Office: (NV and UT). Raleigh, NC Regional Office: (ME, NH, VT, MA, RI, CT, NY, NJ, PA, MD, DE, and WV). Applicants must designate in their application narrative the Targeted State where crop insurance educational activities for the project will be delivered. Applicants may apply to deliver education to producers in more than one Targeted State, but a separate application must be submitted for each Targeted State. D. Maximum Award Any application that requests Federal funding of more than the amount listed above for a project in a given Targeted State will be rejected. E. Project Period Projects will be funded for a period of up to one year from the project starting date. F. Description of Agreement Award Recipient Tasks In conducting activities to achieve the purpose and goal of this program in a designated Targeted State, the award recipient will be responsible for performing the following tasks: • Develop and conduct a promotional program. This program will include activities using media, newsletters, publications, or other appropriate informational dissemination techniques that are designed to:
(a)Raise awareness for crop insurance;
(b)inform producers of the availability of crop insurance;
(c)inform producers of the crop insurance sales closing dates prior to the deadline; and
(d)inform producers and agribusiness leaders in the designated Targeted State of training and informational opportunities. • Deliver crop insurance training and informational opportunities to agricultural producers and agribusiness professionals in the designated Targeted State in a timely manner in order for producers to make informed decisions prior to the crop insurance sales closing dates deadline. This will include organizing and delivering educational activities using instructional materials that have been assembled to meet the local needs of agricultural producers. Activities should be directed primarily to agricultural producers, but may include those agribusiness professionals that have frequent opportunities to advise producers on crop insurance tools and decisions. • Document all educational activities conducted under the cooperative agreement and the results of such activities, including criteria and indicators used to evaluate the success of the program. The recipient may also be required to provide information to an RMA-selected contractor to evaluate all educational activities and advise RMA as to the effectiveness of activities. G. RMA Activities FCIC, working through RMA, will be substantially involved during the performance of the funded project through three of RMA's ten Regional Offices. Potential types of substantial involvement may include, but are not limited to the following activities. • Assist in the selection of subcontractors and project staff. • Collaborate with the recipient in assembling, reviewing, and approving risk management materials for producers in the designated RMA Region. • Collaborate with the recipient in reviewing and approving a promotional program for raising awareness for risk management and for informing producers of training and informational opportunities in the RMA Region. • Collaborate with the recipient on the delivery of education to producers and agribusiness leaders in the RMA Region. This will include:
(a)Reviewing and approving in advance all producer and agribusiness leader educational activities;
(b)advising the project leader on technical issues related to crop insurance education and information; and
(c)assisting the project leader in informing crop insurance professionals about educational activity plans and scheduled meetings. • Conduct an evaluation of the performance of the recipient in meeting the deliverables of the project. Applications that do not contain substantial involvement by RMA will be rejected. H. Other Tasks In addition to the specific, required tasks listed above, the applicant may propose additional tasks that would contribute directly to the purpose of this program. For any proposed additional task, the applicant must identify the objective of the task, the specific subtasks required to meet the objective, specific time lines for performing the subtasks, and the specific responsibilities of partners. The applicant must also identify specific ways in which RMA would have substantial involvement in the proposed project task. III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants Eligible applicants include State departments of agriculture, universities, non-profit agricultural organizations, and other public or private organizations with the capacity to lead a local program of crop insurance education for farmers and ranchers within a Targeted State. Individuals are eligible applicants. Although an applicant may be eligible to compete for an award based on its status as an eligible entity, other factors may exclude an applicant from receiving Federal assistance under this program governed by Federal law and regulations ( *e.g.* , debarment and suspension; a determination of non-performance on a prior contract, cooperative agreement, grant or partnership; a determination of a violation of applicable ethical standards; a determination of being considered “high risk”). Applications from ineligible or excluded persons will be rejected in their entirety. B. Cost Sharing or Matching Although RMA prefers cost sharing by the applicant, this program has neither a cost sharing nor a matching requirement. IV. Application and Submission Information A. Contact To Request Application Package Program application materials for the Targeted States Program under this announcement may be downloaded from *http://www.rma.usda.gov/aboutrma/agreements.* Applicants may also request application materials from: Lon Burke, USDA-RMA-RME, phone:
(202)720-5265, fax:
(202)690-3605, e-mail: *RMA.Risk-Ed@rma.usda.gov.* B. Content and Form of Application Submission A complete and valid application package must include an electronic copy (Microsoft Word format preferred) of the narrative portion (Forms RME-1 and RME-2) of the application package on a compact disc and an original and two copies of the completed and signed application must be submitted in one package at the time of initial submission, which must include the following: 1. A completed and signed OMB Standard Form 424, “Application for Federal Assistance.” 2. A completed and signed OMB Standard Form 424-A, “Budget Information—Non-construction Programs.” Federal funding requested (the total of direct and indirect costs) must not exceed the maximum level for the respective Targeted State, as specified in Section II, Award Information. 3. A completed and signed OMB Standard Form 424-B, “Assurances, Non-constructive Programs.” 4. Risk Management Education Project Narrative (Form RME-1). Complete all required parts of Form RME-1: Part I—Title Page. Part II—A written narrative of no more than 10 single-sided pages which will provide reviewers with sufficient information to effectively evaluate the merits of the application according to the evaluation criteria listed in this notice. Although a Statement of Work, which is the second evaluation criterion, is to be completed in detail in RME Form-2, applicants may wish to highlight certain unique features of the Statement of Work in Part II for the benefit of the evaluation panel. If your narrative exceeds the page limit, only the first 10 pages will be reviewed. • No smaller than 12 point font size. • Use an easily readable font face ( *e.g.* , Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, Times Roman). • 8.5 by 11 inch paper. • One-inch margins on each page. • Printed on only one side of paper. • Held together only by rubber bands or metal clips; not bound or stapled in any other way. Part III—A Budget Narrative, describing how the categorical costs listed on SF 424-A are derived. Part IV—(Not required for Targeted States Program). 5. “Statement of Work,” (Form RME-2), which identifies tasks and subtasks in detail, expected completion dates and deliverables, and RMA's substantial involvement role for the proposed project. C. Submission Dates and Times *Applications Deadline:* June 2, 2006. Applicants are responsible for ensuring that RMA receives a complete application package by the closing date and time. Incomplete or late application packages will not receive further consideration. D. Funding Restrictions Cooperative agreement funds may not be used to: a. Plan, repair, rehabilitate, acquire, or construct a building or facility including a processing facility; b. Purchase, rent, or install fixed equipment; c. Repair or maintain privately owned vehicles; d. Pay for the preparation of the cooperative agreement application; e. Fund political activities; f. Alcohol, food, beverage, or entertainment; g. Pay costs incurred prior to receiving a cooperative agreement; h. Fund any activities prohibited in 7 CFR parts 3015 and 3019, as applicable. E. Limitation on Use of Project Funds for Salaries and Benefits Total costs for salary and benefits allowed for projects under this announcement will be limited to not more than 25 percent reimbursement of the funds awarded under the cooperative agreement. One goal of the Targeted States Program is to maximize the use of the limited funding available for crop insurance education for Targeted States. In order to accomplish this goal, RMA needs to ensure that the maximum amount of funds practicable is used for directly providing the educational opportunities. Limiting the amount of funding for salaries and benefits will allow the limited amount of funding to reach the maximum number of farmers and ranchers. F. Indirect Cost Rates a. Indirect costs allowed for projects submitted under this announcement will be limited to ten
(10)percent of the total direct cost of the cooperative agreement. b. RMA will withhold all indirect cost rate funds for an award to an applicant requesting indirect costs if the applicant has not negotiated an indirect cost rate with its cognizant Federal agency. c. If an applicant is in the process of negotiating an indirect cost rate with its cognizant Federal agency, RMA will withhold all indirect cost rate funds from that applicant until the indirect cost rate has been established. d. If an applicant's indirect cost rate has expired or will expire prior to award announcements, a clear statement on renegotiation efforts must be included in the application. e. It is incumbent on all applicants to have a current indirect cost rate or begin negotiations to establish an indirect cost rate prior to the submission deadline. Because it may take several months to obtain an indirect cost rate, applicants needing an indirect cost rate are encouraged to start work on establishing these rates well in advance of submitting an application. The U.S. Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)is responsible for assigning cognizant Federal agencies. f. Applicants may be asked to provide a copy of their indirect cost rate negotiated with their cognizant agency. G. Other Submission Requirements *Mailed submissions:* Applications submitted through express, overnight mail or another delivery service will be considered as meeting the announced deadline if they are received in the mailroom at the address stated below for express, overnight mail or another delivery service on or before the deadline. Applicants are cautioned that express, overnight mail or other delivery services do not always deliver as agreed. Applicants should take this into account because failure of such delivery services will not extend the deadline. Mailed applications will be considered as meeting the announced deadline if they are received on or before the deadline in the mailroom at the address stated below for mailed applications. Applicants are responsible for mailing applications well in advance, to ensure that applications are received on or before the deadline time and date. Applicants using the U.S. Postal Service should allow for the extra time for delivery due to the additional security measures that mail delivered to government offices in the Washington DC area requires. Address when using private delivery services or when hand delivering: Attention: Risk Management Education Program, USDA/RMA/RME, Room 5720, South Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250. Address when using U.S. Postal Services: Attention: Risk Management Education Program, USDA/RMA/RME/Stop 0808, Room 5720, South Building, 1400 Independence Ave, SW., Washington, DC 20250-0808. H. Electronic Submissions Applications transmitted electronically via Grants.gov will be accepted prior to the application date or time deadline. The application package can be accessed via Grants.gov, go to *http://www.grants.gov,* click on “Find Grant Opportunities,” click on “Search Grant Opportunities,” and enter the CFDA number (beginning of the RFA) to search by CFDA number. From the search results, select the item that correlates to the title of this RFA. If you do not have electronic access to the RFA or have trouble downloading material and you would like a hardcopy, you may contact Lon Burke, USDA-RMA-RME, phone:
(202)720-5265, fax:
(202)690-3605, e-mail: *RMA.Risk-Ed@rma.usda.gov.* I. Acknowledgement of Applications Receipt of applications will be acknowledged by e-mail, whenever possible. Therefore, applicants are encouraged to provide e-mail addresses in their applications. If an e-mail address is not indicated on an application, receipt will be acknowledged by letter. There will be no notification of incomplete, unqualified or unfunded applications until the awards have been made. When received by RMA, applications will be assigned an identification number. This number will be communicated to applicants in the acknowledgement of receipt of applications. An application's identification number should be referenced in all correspondence regarding the application. If the applicant does not receive an acknowledgement within 15 days of the submission deadline, the applicant should notify RMA's point of contact indicated in Section VII, Agency Contact. V. Application Review Information A. Criteria Applications submitted under the Targeted States program will be evaluated within each Targeted State according to the following criteria: Project Benefits—Maximum 35 Points The applicant must demonstrate that the project benefits to farmers and ranchers warrant the funding requested. Applicants will be scored according to the extent they can:
(a)Reasonably estimate the total number of producers reached through the various educational activities described in the Statement of Work;
(b)justify such estimates with clear specifics;
(c)identify the actions producers will likely be able to take as a result of the activities described in the Statement of Work; and
(d)identify the specific measures for evaluating results that will be employed in the project. Reviewers' scoring will be based on the scope and reasonableness of the applicant's estimates of producers reached through the project, clear descriptions of specific expected project benefits, and well-designed methods for measuring the project's results and effectiveness. Statement of Work—Maximum 25 Points The applicant must produce a clear and specific Statement of Work for the project. For each of the tasks contained in the Description of Agreement Award (refer to Section II Award Information), the applicant must identify and describe specific subtasks, responsible entities, expected completion dates, RMA substantial involvement, and deliverables that will further the purpose of this program. Applicants will obtain a higher score to the extent that the Statement of Work is specific, measurable, reasonable, has specific deadlines for the completion of subtasks, relates directly to the required activities and the program purpose described in this announcement. Applicants are required to submit this Statement of Work on Form RME-2. Partnering—Maximum 15 Points The applicant must demonstrate experience and capacity to partner with and gain the support of grower organizations, agribusiness professionals, and agricultural leaders to carry out a local program of education and information in a designated Targeted State. Applicants will receive higher scores to the extent that they can document and demonstrate:
(a)That partnership commitments are in place for the express purpose of delivering the program in this announcement;
(b)that a broad group of farmers and ranchers will be reached within the Targeted State; and
(c)that a substantial effort has been made to partner with organizations that can meet the needs of producers. Project Management—Maximum 15 Points The applicant must demonstrate an ability to implement sound and effective project management practices. Higher scores will be awarded to applicants that can demonstrate organizational skills, leadership, and experience in delivering services or programs that assist agricultural producers in the respective Targeted State. Applicants that will employ, or have access to, personnel who have experience in directing local educational programs that benefit agricultural producers in the respective Targeted State will receive higher rankings. Past Performance—Maximum 10 Points If the applicant has been a recipient of other Federal or other government grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts, the applicant must provide information relating to their past performance in reporting on outputs and outcomes under past or current Federal assistance agreements. The applicant must also detail that they have consistently complied with financial and program reporting and auditing requirements. RMA reserves the right to add up to 10 points and subtract 5 points to applications due to past performance. Applicants with very good past performance will receive a score from 6-10 points. Applicants with acceptable past performance will receive a score from 1-5 points. Applicants with unacceptable past performance will receive a score of minus 5 points for this evaluation factor. Applicants without relevant past performance information will receive a neutral score of the mean number of points of all applicants with past performance. Under this cooperative partnership agreement, RMA will subjectively rate the recipient on project performance as indicated in Section II, G. The applicant must list all current public or private support to which personnel identified in the application have committed portions of their time, whether or not salary support for persons involved is included in the budget. An application that duplicates or overlaps substantially with an application already reviewed and funded (or to be funded) by another organization or agency will not be funded under this program. The projects proposed for funding should be included in the pending section. Budget Appropriateness and Efficiency—Maximum 15 Points Applicants must provide a detailed budget summary that clearly explains and justifies costs associated with the project. Applicants will receive higher scores to the extent that they can demonstrate a fair and reasonable use of funds appropriate for the project and a budget that contains the estimated cost of reaching each individual producer. The applicant must provide information factors such as: • The allowability and necessity for individual cost categories; • The reasonableness of amounts estimated for necessary costs; • The basis used for allocating indirect or overhead costs; and • The appropriateness of allocating particular overhead costs to the proposed project as direct costs. B. Review and Selection Process Applications will be evaluated using a two-part process. First, each application will be screened by RMA personnel to ensure that it meets the requirements in this announcement. Applications that do not meet the requirements of this announcement or are incomplete will not receive further consideration. Applications that meet announcement requirements will be sorted into the Targeted State in which the applicant proposes to conduct the project and will be presented to a review panel for consideration. Second, the review panel will meet to consider and discuss the merits of each application. The panel will consist of not less than three independent reviewers. Reviewers will be drawn from USDA, other Federal agencies, and others representing public and private organizations, as needed. After considering the merits of all applications within a Targeted State, panel members will score each application according to the criteria and point values listed above. The panel will then rank each application against others within the Targeted State according to the scores received. A lottery will be used to resolve any instances of a tie score that might have a bearing on funding recommendations. If such a lottery is required, the names of all tied applicants will be entered into a drawing. The first tied applicant drawn will have priority over other tied applicants for funding consideration. The review panel will report the results of the evaluation to the Manager of FCIC. The panel's report will include the recommended applicants to receive cooperative agreements for each Targeted State. Funding will not be provided for an application receiving a score less than 60. An organization, or group of organizations in partnership, may apply for funding under other FCIC or RMA programs, in addition to the program described in this announcement. However, if the Manager of FCIC determines that an application recommended for funding is sufficiently similar to a project that has been funded or has been recommended to be funded under another RMA or FCIC program, then the Manager may elect to not fund that application in whole or in part. The Manager of FCIC will make the final determination on those applications that will be awarded funding. VI. Award Administration Information A. Award Notices Following approval by the awarding official of RMA of the applications to be selected for funding, project leaders whose applications have been selected for funding will be notified. Within the limit of funds available for such a purpose, the awarding official of RMA shall enter into cooperative agreements with those applicants. The agreements provide the amount of Federal funds for use in the project period, the terms and conditions of the award, and the time period for the project. The effective date of the agreement shall be on the date the agreement is executed by both parties and it shall remain in effect for up to one year or through September 30, 2007, whichever is later. After a cooperative agreement has been signed, RMA will extend to award recipients, in writing, the authority to draw down funds for the purpose of conducting the activities listed in the agreement. All funds provided to the applicant by FCIC must be expended solely for the purpose for which the funds are obligated in accordance with the approved agreement and budget, the regulations, the terms and conditions of the award, and the applicability of Federal cost principles. No commitment of Federal assistance beyond the project period is made or implied for any award resulting from this notice. Notification of denial of funding will be sent to applicants after final funding decisions have been made. Reasons for denial of funding can include, but are not limited to, incomplete applications, applications with evaluation scores below 60, or applications with evaluation scores that are lower than those of other applications in a Targeted State. B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements 1. Requirement To Use Program Logo Applicants awarded cooperative agreements will be required to use a program logo and design provided by RMA for all instructional and promotional materials. 2. Requirement To Provide Project Information to an RMA-Selected Contractor Applicants awarded cooperative agreements may be required to assist RMA in evaluating the effectiveness of its educational programs by providing documentation of educational activities and related information to any contractor selected by RMA for program evaluation purposes. 3. Private Crop Insurance Organizations and Potential Conflicts of Interest Private organizations that are involved in the sale of Federal crop insurance, or that have financial ties to such organizations, are eligible to apply for funding under this announcement. However, such entities will not be allowed to receive funding to conduct activities that would otherwise be required under a Standard Reinsurance Agreement or any other agreement in effect between FCIC and the entity. Also, such entities will not be allowed to receive funding to conduct activities that could be perceived by producers as promoting one company's services or products over another's. If applying for funding, such organizations are encouraged to be sensitive to potential conflicts of interest and to describe in their application the specific actions they will take to avoid actual and perceived conflicts of interest. 4. Access to Panel Review Information Upon written request from the applicant, scores from the evaluation panel, not including the identity of reviewers, will be sent to the applicant after the review and awards process has been completed. 5. Confidential Aspects of Applications and Awards The names of applicants, the names of individuals identified in the applications, the content of applications, and the panel evaluations of applications will all be kept confidential, except to those involved in the review process, to the extent permitted by law. In addition, the identities of review panel members will remain confidential throughout the entire review process and will not be released to applicants. At the end of the fiscal year, names of panel members will be made available. However, panelists will not be identified with the review of any particular application. When an application results in a cooperative agreement, that agreement becomes a part of the official record of RMA transactions, available to the public upon specific request. Information that the Secretary of Agriculture determines to be of a confidential, privileged, or proprietary nature will be held in confidence to the extent permitted by law. Therefore, any information that the applicant wishes to be considered confidential, privileged, or proprietary should be clearly marked within an application, including the basis for such designation. The original copy of an application that does not result in an award will be retained by RMA for a period of one year. Other copies will be destroyed. Copies of applications not receiving awards will be released only with the express written consent of the applicant or to the extent required by law. An application may be withdrawn at any time prior to award. 6. Audit Requirements Applicants awarded cooperative agreements are subject to audit. 7. Prohibitions and Requirements With Regard to Lobbying Section 1352 of Public Law 101-121, enacted on October 23, 1989, imposes prohibitions and requirements for disclosure and certification related to lobbying on recipients of Federal contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, and loans. It provides exemptions for Indian Tribes and tribal organizations. Current and prospective recipients, and any subcontractors, are prohibited from using Federal funds, other than profits from a Federal contract, for lobbying Congress or any Federal agency in connection with the award of a contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or loan. In addition, for each award action in excess of $100,000 ($150,000 for loans) the law requires recipients and any subcontractors:
(1)To certify that they have neither used nor will use any appropriated funds for payment of lobbyists;
(2)to disclose the name, address, payment details, and purpose of any agreements with lobbyists whom recipients of their subcontractors will pay with profits or other non-appropriated funds on or after December 22, 1989; and
(3)to file quarterly updates about the use of lobbyists if material changes occur in their use. The law establishes civil penalties for non-compliance. A copy of the certification and disclosure forms must be submitted with the application and are available at the address and telephone number listed in Section VII. Agency Contact. 8. Applicable OMB Circulars All cooperative agreements funded as a result of this notice will be subject to the requirements contained in all applicable OMB circulars. 9. Requirement To Assure Compliance With Federal Civil Rights Laws Project leaders of all cooperative agreements funded as a result of this notice are required to know and abide by Federal civil rights laws and to assure USDA and RMA that the recipient is in compliance with and will continue to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d *et. seq.* ), 7 CFR part 15, and USDA regulations promulgated thereunder, 7 CFR 1901.202. RMA requires that recipients submit Form RD 400-4, Assurance Agreement (Civil Rights), assuring RMA of this compliance prior to the beginning of the project period. 10. Requirement To Participate in a Post Award Conference RMA requires that project leaders attend a post award conference to become fully aware of cooperative agreement requirements and for delineating the roles of RMA personnel and the procedures that will be followed in administering the agreement and will afford an opportunity for the orderly transition of agreement duties and obligations if different personnel are to assume post-award responsibility. In their applications, applicants should budget for possible travel costs associated with attending this conference. C. Reporting Requirements Award recipients will be required to submit quarterly progress reports, quarterly financial reports (OMB Standard Form 269), and quarterly Activity Logs (Form RME-3) throughout the project period, as well as a final program and financial report not later than 90 days after the end of the project period. Recipients will be required to submit prior to the award: • A completed and signed Form RD 400-4, Assurance Agreement (Civil Rights). • A completed and signed OMB Standard Form LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.” • A completed and signed AD-1047, “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters—Primary Covered Transactions.” • A completed and signed AD-1049, “Certification Regarding Drug-Free Workplace.” • A completed and signed Faith-Based Survey on EEO. VII. Agency Contact *For Further Information Contact:* Applicants and other interested parties are encouraged to contact: Lon Burke, USDA-RMA-RME, phone: 202-720-5265, fax: 202-690-3605, e-mail: *RMA.Risk-Ed@rma.usda.gov.* You may also obtain information regarding this announcement from the RMA Web site at: *http://www.rma.usda.gov/aboutrma/agreements/.* VIII. Other Information A. Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)A DUNS number is a unique nine-digit sequence recognized as the universal standard for identifying and keeping track of over 70 million businesses worldwide. The Office of Management and Budget published a notice of final policy issuance in the **Federal Register** June 27, 2003 (68 FR 38402) that requires a DUNS number in every application ( *i.e.* , hard copy and electronic) for a grant or cooperative agreement on or after October 1, 2003. Therefore, potential applicants should verify that they have a DUNS number or take the steps needed to obtain one. For information about how to obtain a DUNS number, go to *http://www.grants.gov.* Please note that the registration may take up to 14 business days to complete. B. Required Registration With the Central Contract Registry for Submission of Proposals The Central Contract Registry
(CCR)is a database that serves as the primary Government repository for contractor information required for the conduct of business with the Government. This database will also be used as a central location for maintaining organizational information for organizations seeking and receiving grants from the Government. Such organizations must register in the CCR prior to the submission of applications. A DUNS number is needed for CCR registration. For information about how to register in the CCR, visit ”Get Started” at the Web site, *http://www.grants.gov* . Allow a minimum of 5 business days to complete the CCR registration. C. Related Programs Funding availability for this program may be announced at approximately the same time as funding availability for similar but separate programs—CFDA No. 10.455 (Community Outreach and Assistance Partnerships), CFDA No. 10.456 (Risk Management Research Partnerships), CFDA No. 10.457 (Commodity Partnerships for Risk Management Education), and CFDA No. 10.459 (Commodity Partnerships Small Sessions Program). These programs have some similarities, but also key differences. The differences stem from important features of each program's authorizing legislation and different RMA objectives. Prospective applicants should carefully examine and compare the notices for each program. Signed in Washington, DC on April 10, 2006. Eldon Gould, Manager, Federal Crop Insurance Corporation. [FR Doc. E6-5756 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-08-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service North Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Resource Advisory Committee
(RAC)AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of meetings. SUMMARY: The North Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Resource Advisory Committee
(RAC)will meet at the Mt. Baker Ranger District Office in Sedro Woolley, Washington. The first meeting will include electing this year's chairperson, followed by reviewing proposed Title II projects. The second meeting will be to complete the review, and prioritize proposal to recommend for FY 2007. DATES: Tuesday, May 9, and Friday, May 19, 2006. Both meetings will be from 9 a.m. until 4 p.m. ADDRESSES: Mt. Baker Ranger District Office, 810 State Route 20, Sedro Woolley, Washington. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon Vanderheyden, Designated Federal Official, USDA Forest Service, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, Mt. Baker Ranger District, 810 State Route 20, Sedro Woolley, WA 9824-1263 (phone: 360-856-5700 extension 201). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: All North Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie RAC meetings are open to the public. Interested citizens are encouraged to attend. The North Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie RAC reviews project proposals, and makes recommendations to the Forest Supervisor for projects to be funded by Title II dollars, under Public Law 106-393, H.R. 2389. The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000, also called the “Payments to States” Act. Dated: April 10, 2006. Allen Gibbs, Acting Designated Federal Official. [FR Doc. 06-3656 Filed 4-17-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 21
Traces to 21 documents
U.S. Code
28 references not yet in our index
  • 14 CFR 39
  • 14 CFR 382
  • 36 CFR 1193
  • 36 CFR 1194
  • 39 CFR 111
  • 49 CFR 178.604
  • 49 CFR 178.606
  • 49 CFR 178.608
  • 49 CFR 178.609(e)
  • 49 CFR 178.609(f)
  • 49 CFR 178.609(h)
  • 40 CFR 2
  • Pub. L. 104-13
  • 7 CFR 1728
  • 7 CFR 1944
  • Pub. L. 98-181
  • Pub. L. 93-383
  • Pub. L. 94-579
  • 16 USC 532-538
  • 16 USC 480d
  • 16 USC 460-6d
  • 16 USC 6801-6814
  • 36 CFR 251
  • Pub. L. 109-171
  • Pub. L. 101-121
  • 7 CFR 15
  • 7 CFR 1901.202
  • Pub. L. 106-393
Citation graph
cites case law
Proposed Rules
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
Fed. Reg.Proposed Rules
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 106
C.F.R.§ 39.19
C.F.R.§ 385.17
U.S.C.§ 792
U.S.C.§ 553
U.S.C.§ 410
C.F.R.§ 111.1
Cite14 CFR 39
Cite14 CFR 382
Cite36 CFR 1193
Cites 49 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.