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 · 2006-08-28 · Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT) · Notices

Notices. Notice of the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) meeting

23,972 words·~109 min read·/register/2006/08/28/06-7199

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

BILLING CODE 4910-EX-M DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration [Docket No. FRA-2000-7257; Notice No. 40] Railroad Safety Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee
(RSAC)meeting. SUMMARY: FRA announces the next meeting of the RSAC, a Federal Advisory Committee that develops railroad safety regulations through a consensus process. The RSAC meeting topics include opening remarks from the FRA Administrator, the private crossing safety inquiry, electronically controlled pneumatic brakes, a summary of the Collision Analysis Working Group Final Report, an update on Remote Control Locomotive training efforts, and a status report on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Railroad Operating Rules. Status reports will be given on the Passenger Safety, Roadway Worker, Continuous Welded Rail, and Locomotive Standards working groups. The Committee may possibly be asked to vote to accept a task on medical standards. This agenda is subject to change, and may include briefings on railroad security and other issues. DATES: The meeting of the RSAC is scheduled to commence at 9:30 a.m., and conclude at 4 p.m., on Thursday, September 21, 2006. ADDRESSES: The meeting of the RSAC will be held at the Washington Plaza Hotel, 10 Thomas Circle, NW., Washington, DC 20005,
(202)842-1300. The meeting is open to the public on a first-come, first-serve basis, and is accessible to individuals with disabilities. Sign and oral interpretation can be made available if requested 10 calendar days before the meeting. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Butera, RSAC Coordinator, FRA, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., Stop 25, Washington, DC 20590,
(202)493-6212 or Grady Cothen, Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program Development, FRA, 1120 Vermont Avenue, NW., Mailstop 25, Washington, DC 20590,
(202)493-6302. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), FRA is giving notice of a meeting of the RSAC. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m., and conclude at 4 p.m., on Thursday, September 21, 2006. The meeting of the RSAC will be held at the Washington Plaza Hotel, 10 Thomas Circle, NW., Washington, DC 20005,
(202)842-1300. RSAC was established to provide advice and recommendations to the FRA on railroad safety matters. The RSAC is composed of 54 voting representatives from 31 member organizations, representing various rail industry perspectives. In addition, there are non-voting advisory representatives from the agencies with railroad safety regulatory responsibility in Canada and Mexico, the National Transportation Safety Board, the Federal Transit Administration, and the Transportation Security Administration. The diversity of the Committee ensures the requisite range of views and expertise necessary to discharge its responsibilities. See the RSAC Web site for details on pending tasks at: *http://rsac.fra.dot.gov/.* Please refer to the notice published in the **Federal Register** on March 11, 1996, (61 FR 9740) for more information about the RSAC. Issued in Washington, DC, on August 23, 2006. Grady C. Cothen, Jr., Deputy Associate Administrator for Safety Standards and Program Development. [FR Doc. E6-14257 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-06-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Maritime Administration Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA)/Joint Planning Advisory Group
(JPAG)AGENCY: Maritime Administration, DOT. ACTION: Synopsis of July 26 and 27, 2006 meeting with VISA participants. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Taylor E. Jones II, Director, Office of Sealift Support,
(202)366-2323. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The VISA program requires that a notice of the time, place, and nature of each JPAG meeting be published in the **Federal Register** . The full text of the VISA program, including these requirements, is published in 70 FR 55947-55955, dated September 23, 2005. On July 26 and 27, 2006, the Maritime Administration (MARAD) and the U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) co-hosted a meeting of the VISA JPAG at the Military Sealift Command in Washington, DC. Meeting attendance was by invitation only, due to the nature of the information discussed and the need for a government-issued security clearance. Of the 52 U.S.-flag carrier corporate participants enrolled in the VISA program, 17 companies participated in the JPAG meeting. In addition, representatives from MARAD and the Department of Defense
(DOD)attended the meeting. Margaret LeClaire, Deputy Director, Strategy, Plans, Policy & Programs, USTRANSCOM, and James Caponiti, Associate Administrator for National Security, MARAD, welcomed the participants. Ms. LeClaire noted that this JPAG was a table-top exercise to match industry capabilities to military requirements related to the findings of DOD's Mobility Capabilities Study (MCS). She asked industry participants to be creative and to collaborate as necessary to offer solutions. She noted that there were DOD representatives present to answer specific questions related to the exercise. Mr. Caponiti remarked that while some progress has been made in recent JPAG meetings regarding the findings of DOD's Mobility Capabilities Study, he expected that this exercise would provide the government with a better appreciation of industry capabilities. He requested that industry representatives itemize their concerns related to the exercise so that they might be addressed after the meeting. VISA participants coordinated their efforts to ensure that commercial resources were utilized in an efficient and innovative manner. As a result of the exercise there was general agreement that there was more capability in the commercial industry than was assumed in the MCS to meet timelines and satisfy requirements. The participants noted that their responses were based on numerous assumptions. It was agreed that a closer examination of equipment, infrastructure and intermodal constraints was needed, and that factors such as market conditions and trade seasonality should be considered and evaluated before final conclusions could be reached. The following VISA companies participated in the July 26 and 27, 2006 JPAG meeting: American President Lines, Ltd.; American Roll-On Roll-Off Carrier, LLC; American Shipping Group; APL Marine Services, Ltd.; APL Maritime Ltd; Central Gulf Lines, Inc.; CP Ships USA, LLC; Farrell Lines Incorporated; Fidelio Limited Partnership; Liberty Global Logistics, LLC; Liberty Shipping Group Limited Partnership; Maersk Line, Limited; Matson Navigation Company, Inc.; Patriot Shipping, LLC; Patriot Titan, LLC; Sealift Inc.; and Waterman Steamship Corporation. (Authority: 49 CFR 1.66) By Order of the Maritime Administrator. Dated: August 22, 2006. Joel C. Richard, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-14260 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-81-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2006-25546, Notice 1] Koenigsegg Automotive AB; Receipt of Application for a Temporary Exemption From Headlamp Requirements of FMVSS No. 108; Advanced Air Bag Requirements of FMVSS No. 208; and Bumper Standard of Part 581 AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for temporary exemption from provisions of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 108, *Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment,* FMVSS No. 208, *Occupant Crash Protection,* and 49 CFR part 581, *Bumper Standard.* SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures in 49 CFR part 555, Koenigsegg Automotive AB (“Koenigsegg”) has petitioned the agency for a temporary exemption from certain head lighting requirements of FMVSS No. 108, advanced air bag requirements of FMVSS No. 208, and bumper standard requirements of 49 CFR part 581. The basis for the application is that compliance would cause substantial economic hardship to a manufacturer that has tried in good faith to comply with the standard. 1 1 To view the application, go to: *http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchFormSimple.cfm* and enter the docket number set forth in the heading of this document. This notice of receipt of an application for temporary exemption is published in accordance with the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(2). NHTSA has made no judgment on the merits of the application. DATES: You should submit your comments not later than September 12, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ed Glancy or Mr. Eric Stas, Office of the Chief Counsel, NCC-112, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room 5219, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:
(202)366-2992; Fax:
(202)366-3820. *Comments:* We invite you to submit comments on the application described above. You may submit comments identified by docket number at the heading of this notice by any of the following methods: • Web Site: * http://dms.dot.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site by clicking on “Help and Information” or “Help/Info.” • Fax: 1-(202)-493-2251. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590. • 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. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. *Instructions:* All submissions must include the agency name and docket number or Regulatory Identification Number
(RIN)for this rulemaking. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to *http://dms.dot.gov* , including any personal information provided. *Docket:* For access to the docket in order to read background documents or comments received, go to *http://dms.dot.gov* at any time or to 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. *Privacy Act:* Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* We shall consider all comments received before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated above. To the extent possible, we shall also consider comments filed after the closing date. I. Advanced Air Bag Requirements and Small Volume Manufacturers In 2000, NHTSA upgraded the requirements for air bags in passenger cars and light trucks, requiring what are commonly known as “advanced air bags.” 2 The upgrade was designed to meet the goals of improving protection for occupants of all sizes, belted and unbelted, in moderate-to-high-speed crashes, and of minimizing the risks posed by air bags to infants, children, and other occupants, especially in low-speed crashes. 2 *See* 65 FR 30680 (May 12, 2000). The advanced air bag requirements were a culmination of a comprehensive plan that the agency announced in 1996 to address the adverse effects of air bags. This plan also included an extensive consumer education program to encourage the placement of children in rear seats. The new requirements were phased in beginning with the 2004 model year. Small volume manufacturers are not subject to the advanced air bag requirements until September 1, 2006, but their efforts to bring their respective vehicles into compliance with these requirements began several years ago. However, because the new requirements were challenging, major air bag suppliers concentrated their efforts on working with large volume manufacturers, and thus, until recently, small volume manufacturers had limited access to advanced air bag technology. Because of the nature of the requirements for protecting out-of-position occupants, “off-the-shelf” systems could not be readily adopted. Further complicating matters, because small volume manufacturers build so few vehicles, the costs of developing custom advanced air bag systems compared to potential profits discouraged some air bag suppliers from working with small volume manufacturers. The agency has carefully tracked occupant fatalities resulting from air bag deployment. Our data indicate that the agency's efforts in the area of consumer education and manufacturers' providing depowered air bags were successful in reducing air bag fatalities even before advanced air bag requirements were implemented. As always, we are concerned about the potential safety implication of any temporary exemptions granted by this agency. In the present case, we are seeking comments on a petition for a temporary exemption from the advanced air bag requirements. As part of the same document, the petitioner also seeks a temporary exemption from the agency's headlamp requirements and bumper standard. The petitioner is a manufacturer of very expensive, low volume, exotic sports cars. II. Overview of Petition for Economic Hardship Exemption In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30113 and the procedures in 49 CFR part 555, Koenigsegg has petitioned the agency for a temporary exemption from certain headlight requirements of FMVSS No. 108 (S7), advanced air bag requirements of FMVSS No. 208 (S14), and bumper requirements of 49 CFR part 581. The basis for each portion of the application is that compliance would cause substantial economic hardship to a manufacturer that has tried in good faith to comply with these standards. A copy of the petition 3 is available for review and has been placed in the docket for this notice. 3 The company requested confidential treatment under 49 CFR part 512 for certain business and financial information submitted as part of its petition for temporary exemption. Accordingly, the information placed in the docket does not contain such information that the agency has determined to be confidential. III. Statutory Background for Economic Hardship Exemptions A manufacturer is eligible to apply for a hardship exemption if its total motor vehicle production in its most recent year of production did not exceed 10,000 vehicles, as determined by the NHTSA Administrator (49 U.S.C. 30113). In determining whether a manufacturer of a vehicle meets that criterion, NHTSA considers whether a second vehicle manufacturer also might be deemed the manufacturer of that vehicle. The statutory provisions governing motor vehicle safety (49 U.S.C. Chapter 301) do not include any provision indicating that a manufacturer might have substantial responsibility as manufacturer of a vehicle simply because it owns or controls a second manufacturer that assembled that vehicle. However, the agency considers the statutory definition of “manufacturer” (49 U.S.C. 30102) to be sufficiently broad to include sponsors, depending on the circumstances. Thus, NHTSA has stated that a manufacturer may be deemed to be a sponsor and thus a manufacturer of a vehicle assembled by a second manufacturer if the first manufacturer had a substantial role in the development and manufacturing process of that vehicle. IV. Petition of Koenigsegg *Background.* Koenigsegg Automotive is a Swedish corporation formed in 1999 to produce high-performance sports cars. This application concerns the Koenigsegg CCX which was developed as the next generation of Koenigsegg vehicles, after production of the CCR model ended on December 30, 2005. The CCX model (the company's only model at this point) is scheduled to go into production in 2006 and to continue at least through the end of 2009. Originally, Koenigsegg planned to sell vehicles only in the European, Mid-East, and Far-East markets, but the company decided in late 2005 to seek entry to the U.S. market for reasons related to ongoing financial viability. The petitioner argues that it tried in good faith, but could not bring the vehicle into compliance with the headlamp, advanced air bag, and bumper requirements, and would incur substantial economic hardship if it cannot sell vehicles in the U.S. after January 1, 2007. *Eligibility.* Koenigsegg is a small, privately-owned company with 30 full-time staff members and several part-time employees. The company is a small volume manufacturer whose total production is less than 50 cars per year, having produced between four and eight vehicles per year for the past four years. According to the company, its sales revenues have averaged approximately $3.7 million per year. Koenigsegg is not affiliated with any other automobile manufacturer. According to its current forecasts, Koenigsegg anticipates the following number of CCX vehicles would be imported into the United States, if its requested exemptions were to be granted: 25 in calendar year
(CY)2007; 30 in CY 2008, and 30 in CY 2009. *Requested exemptions.* Koenigsegg states that it intends to certify the CCX as complying with the rigid barrier belted test requirement using the 50th-percentile adult male test dummy set forth in S14.5.1 of FMVSS No. 208. The petitioner states that it previously determined the CCX's compliance with rigid barrier unbelted test requirements using the 50th-percentile adult male test dummy through the S13 sled test using a generic pulse rather than a full vehicle test. Koenigsegg states that it, therefore, cannot at present say with certainty that the CCX will comply with the unbelted test requirement under S14.5.2, which is a 25 mph rigid barrier test. As for the CCX's compliance with the other advanced air bag requirements, Koenigsegg states that it does not know whether the CCX will be compliant because to date it has not had the financial ability to conduct the necessary testing. As such, Koenigsegg is requesting an exemption for the CCX from the rigid barrier unbelted test requirement with the 50th-percentile adult male test dummy (S14.5.2), the rigid barrier test requirement using the 5th-percentile adult female test dummy (belted and unbelted, S15), the offset deformable barrier test requirement using the 5th-percentile adult female test dummy (S17), the requirements to provide protection for infants and children (S19, S21, and S23) and the requirement using an out-of-position 5th-percentile adult female test dummy at the driver position (S25). Koenigsegg further requests an exemption from the headlamp requirements set forth in S7 of FMVSS No. 108 and the bumper standard in 49 CFR part 581. Koenigsegg stated its intention to produce a second generation of the CCX model by late 2009, which would be certified as complying with all applicable U.S. standards, including ones for headlamps (FMVSS No. 108 S7), advanced air bags (FMVSS No. 208 S14), and bumpers (49 CFR part 581). Accordingly, Koenigsegg seeks an exemption from the enumerated requirements from January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2009. *Economic hardship.* Publicly available information and also the financial documents submitted to NHTSA by the petitioner indicate that the CCX project will result in financial losses unless Koenigsegg obtains a temporary exemption. In the past three years (2003 to 2005), the company has had losses totaling $1,637,399, and during this time period, the company's factory burned to the ground and had to be rebuilt. Koenigsegg did make a profit of $58,341 in 2003 and $722,406 in 2004, but it incurred a substantial loss of $2,418,416 in 2005. As of the time of the application, Koenigsegg has invested over $3.2 million on the CCX project in order to have the vehicle meet U.S. standards—not including the three provisions which are the subject of the present petition for temporary exemption. The company has stated that it cannot hope to attain profitability if it incurs additional research and development expenses at this time. Koenigsegg stated that costs for external assistance with developing an advanced air bag system would cost over $3 million (over $9 million if internal costs are included for interior redesign, testing, and tooling), and meeting the headlamp and bumper requirements would entail an additional $1 million in expenditures. In its petition, Koenigsegg reasoned that worldwide sales (including the U.S. market) of the current CCX in higher volumes over the next 3 years is necessary to reduce production costs and to make available funding for development of the next generation of the CCX, which would be compliant with all U.S. air bag, headlamp, and bumper requirements. In essence, Koenigsegg argued that the exemption is necessary to allow the company to “bridge the gap” until fully compliant vehicles can be funded, developed, tooled, and introduced. If the exemption is denied, Koenigsegg projects a net loss of $82.4 million over the period from 2006-2009. However, if the petition is granted, the company anticipates a profit of over $27 million during that same period. The petitioner argued that a denial of this petition could preclude entry into the U.S. market until 2010 or later, a development which would have a highly adverse impact on the company. According to the petitioner, if the exemption request is not granted, the company would face a “virtually insurmountable problem” in terms of funding and introducing a vehicle that meets all applicable U.S. requirements, and it might ultimately drive the company out of business because the rest of the world export market would be inadequate to ensure profitability. *Good faith efforts to comply* . As stated above, Koenigsegg initially planned to produce vehicles for the European, Mid-East, and Far-East markets, but once it was determined in 2005 that entry into the U.S. market was a necessary part of its business plan, the company invested over $3.2 million on research and development and tooling for its U.S. CCX program. In 18 months, the company was able to bring the vehicle into compliance with all applicable NHTSA regulations (other than those which are the subject of the present exemption petition), as well as the emissions regulations administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In light of limited resources, the petitioner stated that it was necessary to first develop the vehicle with a standard U.S. air bag system. The company reengineered the CCX with an Audi TT driver air bag system and developed a new passenger air bag system, a $641,000 project which is nearing completion. According to its petition, Koenigsegg anticipates that 2 years will be needed to install an advanced air bag system on the CCX. Modifications would involve development of new components, such as changes to the instrument panel design and advanced air bag installation components such as mountings and brackets. Vehicle testing would also be conducted during that time. Furthermore, because the vehicle was not originally designed for the U.S. market, it likewise did not have headlamps or a bumper system or an underlying bumper structure that complies with U.S. requirements. According to Koenigsegg, achieving compliance with those requirements will necessitate a redesign of the vehicle body and headlamps at the same time, so to that extent, the petitioner argued that these two modifications should be considered together. To provide a part 581-compliant bumper would require re-engineering and retooling the current CCX bumper system. The company explained that it has undertaken redesign of its front and rear bumper systems in an effort to achieve compliance with U.S. bumper standard requirements, including inserting foam and reinforcements, increasing rear deck offset, and moving the front bumper cut line as high and inboard as possible. However, Koenigsegg stated that it has been unable to fully meet the requirements of part 581, for the following reasons. First, the petitioner stated that extremely low vehicle height and aerodynamic requirements for the vehicle dictate that the standard 20-inch pendulum height falls above the current bumper cut lines. In addition, the company stated that packaging constraints for the structure required to fulfill the high-speed crash requirements of FMVSS No. 208 and the requirements of the roof stowage under the front hood dictate the maximum size of the front bumpers. Koenigsegg argued that despite its good faith efforts, additional time will be required to achieve full compliance with part 581, and the company does not currently have the resources to fund the requisite development efforts. As to headlamps, Koenigsegg explained that it has undertaken significant efforts in pursuit of CCX compliance with the headlamp requirements of FMVSS No. 108, but problems have stemmed from the company's inability to find a supplier. The petitioner stated that given the unique shape of the CCX, there is no available “off-the-shelf” headlamp system available, and efforts to find a supplier willing to undertake the project to produce a FMVSS No. 108-compliant headlamp for the CCX have been unavailing, presumably due to the ultra-low quantity of vehicles involved. 4 Instead, Koenigsegg decided to produce a headlamp for the CCX in-house (homologated to European Union requirements), utilizing a lighting source from a major lighting manufacturer (Hella). The petitioner stated that the plexiglass lens of the headlamp box is an integral part of the vehicle body and design. The company explained that despite its good faith efforts, the headlamps for the CCX as yet do not fully comply with the headlamp requirements of FMVSS No. 108. Specifically, while the CCX headlamps have been designed to pass the geometry requirements of FMVSS No. 108, the required aerodynamic lens will not pass environmental testing and must be re-engineered. 4 In an August 10, 2006 supplement to its application (included in this docket, following the Koenigsegg petition), Koenigsegg stated that it may have now identified a large lighting manufacturer interested in developing a FMVSS No. 108-compliant headlighting system for the CCX, but it would be “at a price higher than the $500,000 thus far estimated.” According to Koenigsegg, the company did explore the possibility of developing an “interim U.S. headlamp” without a polycarbonate cover. However, that alternative was determined to be unworkable for the following reasons. First, there were concerns that the absence of the polycarbonate lens “ruins the design of the body,” a result which customers were deemed unlikely to accept and which was expected to result in decreased sales. 5 Second, it was determined that an interim headlamp without a polycarbonate lens would have unacceptable aerodynamic effects which would negatively impact vehicle performance. Third, there were concerns that by engineering an interim headlamp exclusively for the U.S. market, the company would lose the advantages associated with producing a “world car” which can be introduced into any market, something of great importance for an ultra-low-volume manufacturer. In addition, Koenigsegg determined that the cost of developing the interim headlamp could not be justified when amortized over the small number of units involved. 5 The petitioner asserted that such considerations were a factor in the agency's earlier decision to grnt a “waiver” for the headlamp of the Lotus Elise. In light of the above, the company again stated that because of the cost and length of this project, such headlighting efforts must await the second generation of the U.S. CCX. In short, Koenigsegg argued that, despite good faith efforts, limited resources prevent it from bringing the vehicle into compliance with all applicable requirements, and it is beyond the company's current capabilities to bring the vehicle into full compliance until such time as additional resources become available as a result of U.S. sales. With funding from sale of the current generation of U.S. CCX, the company expects that additional development efforts could start in 2007, thereby allowing production of a fully compliant vehicle in late 2009. *Koenigsegg argues that an exemption would be in the public interest.* The petitioner put forth several arguments in favor of a finding that the requested exemption is consistent with the public interest. Specifically, Koenigsegg argued that the vehicle would be equipped with a fully-compliant standard U.S. air bag system (i.e., one meeting the requirements of FMVSS No. 208 except for the advanced air bag requirements). As to headlamps, Koenigsegg stated that the CCX's current headlamps (designed to European specifications) are very close to meeting the photometric requirements of FMVSS No. 108, and consequently, they do not pose a safety risk. The petitioner stated that the CCX's carbonfibre body system should reduce low-speed damage repair costs even in the absence of a conventional bumper that meets the requirements of part 581. However, the company stated that it would also place information in the vehicle owner's manual regarding the need for greater care due to the absence of a conventional bumper system. In all other areas, Koenigsegg emphasized that the CCX will comply with applicable FMVSSs. As additional bases for showing that its requested exemption would be in the public interest, Koenigsegg offered the following. The company asserted that there is consumer demand in the U.S. for the CCX, and granting this application will allow the demand to be met, thereby expanding consumer choice. The company also suggested another reason why granting the exemption would not be expected to have a significant impact on safety, specifically because the vehicle is unlikely to be used extensively by owners, due to its “sporty (second car) nature.” Koenigsegg reasoned that given its very low production volume and customer base, the possibility of any child being in the vehicle is extremely small. Finally, Koenigsegg indicated that the CCX incorporates advanced engineering and certain advanced safety features that are not required by the FMVSSs, including racing brakes with anti-lock capability and traction control. In addition, the company argued that the CCX has enhanced fuel efficiency due to its highly aerodynamic design. V. Issuance of Notice of Final Action We are providing a 15-day comment period, in light of the short period of time between now and the time the advanced air bag requirements become effective for small volume manufacturers (i.e., September 1, 2006). After considering public comments and other available information, we will publish a notice of final action on the application in the **Federal Register** . Issued on: August 18, 2006. Ronald L. Medford, Senior Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety. [FR Doc. E6-14247 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2006-25544, Notice 1] SS II of America, Inc.; Receipt of Application for a Temporary Exemption From the Air Bag Requirements of FMVSS No. 208 AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for temporary exemption from provisions of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208, *Occupant Crash Protection* . SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures in 49 CFR part 555, SS II of America, Inc. (SS II) has petitioned the agency for a temporary exemption from the air bag requirements of FMVSS No. 208. The basis for the application is that compliance would cause substantial economic hardship to a manufacturer that has tried in good faith to comply with the standard. 1 1 To view the application, go to: *http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchFormSimple.cfm* and enter the docket number set fourth in the heading of this document. This notice of receipt of an application for temporary exemption is published in accordance with the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(2). NHTSA has made no judgment on the merits of the application. DATES: You should submit your comments not later than September 12, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ed Glancy or Mr. Eric Stas, Office of the Chief Counsel, NCC-112, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room 5219, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:
(202)366-2992; Fax:
(202)366-3820. *Comments:* We invite you to submit comments on the application described above. You may submit comments identified by docket number at the heading of this notice by any of the following methods: • Web site: *http://dms.dot.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site by clicking on “Help and Information” or “Help/Info.” • Fax: 1-(202)-493-2251. • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590. • 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. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. *Instructions:* All submissions must include the agency name and docket number or Regulatory Identification Number
(RIN)for this rulemaking. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to *http://dms.dot.gov* , including any personal information provided. *Docket:* For access to the docket in order to read background documents or comments received, go to *http://dms.dot.gov* at any time or to 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. *Privacy Act:* Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov* . We shall consider all comments received before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated above. To the extent possible, we shall also consider comments filed after the closing date. I. Air Bag Requirements and Small Volume Manufacturers Under S4.1.5.3 of FMVSS No. 208, new passenger vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 1997 are required to be equipped with an inflatable restraint system ( *i.e.* , an air bag) at the driver's and right front passenger's positions. These air bags must provide the vehicle occupants in those seating positions with frontal crash protection meeting the requirements of S5.1 of the standard by means that require no action on the part of those occupants. In 2000, NHTSA upgraded the requirements for air bags in passenger cars and light trucks, requiring what are commonly known as “advanced air bags.” 2 The upgrade was designed to meet the goals of improving protection for occupants of all sizes, belted and unbelted, in moderate-to-high-speed crashes, and of minimizing the risks posed by air bags to infants, children, and other occupants, especially in low-speed crashes. 2 See 65 FR 30680 (May 12, 2000). The advanced air bag requirements were a culmination of a comprehensive plan that the agency announced in 1996 to address the adverse effects of air bags. This plan also included an extensive consumer education program to encourage the placement of children in rear seats. The new requirements were phased in beginning with the 2004 model year. Small volume manufacturers are not subject to the advanced air bag requirements until September 1, 2006, but their efforts to bring their respective vehicles into compliance with these requirements began several years ago. However, because the new requirements were challenging, major air bag suppliers concentrated their efforts on working with large volume manufacturers, and thus, until recently, small volume manufacturers had limited access to advanced air bag technology. Because of the nature of the requirements for protecting out-of-position occupants, “off-the-shelf” systems could not be readily adopted. Further complicating matters, because small volume manufacturers build so few vehicles, the costs of developing custom advanced air bag systems compared to potential profits discouraged some air bag suppliers from working with small volume manufacturers. The agency has carefully tracked occupant fatalities resulting from air bag deployment. Our data indicate that the agency's efforts in the area of consumer education and manufacturers' providing depowered air bags were successful in reducing air bag fatalities even before advanced air bag requirements were implemented. As always, we are concerned about the potential safety implication of any temporary exemptions granted by this agency. In the present case, we are seeking comments on a petition for a temporary exemption from the air bag requirements submitted by a manufacturer of very expensive, low volume, exotic sports cars. II. Overview of Petition for Economic Hardship Exemption In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30113 and the procedures in 49 CFR part 555, SS II has petitioned the agency for a temporary exemption from the air bag requirements of FMVSS No. 208 (S4.1.5.3 and S14). The basis for the application is that compliance would cause substantial economic hardship to a manufacturer that has tried in good faith to comply with the standard. A copy of the petition is available for review and has been placed in the docket for this notice. III. Statutory Background for Economic Hardship Exemptions A manufacturer is eligible to apply for a hardship exemption if its total motor vehicle production in its most recent year of production did not exceed 10,000 vehicles, as determined by the NHTSA Administrator (49 U.S.C. 30113). In determining whether a manufacturer of a vehicle meets that criterion, NHTSA considers whether a second vehicle manufacturer also might be deemed the manufacturer of that vehicle. The statutory provisions governing motor vehicle safety (49 U.S.C. Chapter 301) do not include any provision indicating that a manufacturer might have substantial responsibility as manufacturer of a vehicle simply because it owns or controls a second manufacturer that assembled that vehicle. However, the agency considers the statutory definition of “manufacturer” (49 U.S.C. 30102) to be sufficiently broad to include sponsors, depending on the circumstances. Thus, NHTSA has stated that a manufacturer may be deemed to be a sponsor and thus a manufacturer of a vehicle assembled by a second manufacturer if the first manufacturer had a substantial role in the development and manufacturing process of that vehicle. IV. Petition of SS II of America, Inc. *Background* . SS II is a privately-held company that was incorporated in the State of Nevada in 2005 and began operations in January 2006. According to the petitioner, SS II acquired the tooling for the Shelby Series 1 vehicle under a licensing agreement from Shelby American Corporation, pursuant to which SS II has the right to produce 250 Shelby Series II, a convertible sports car based upon the Shelby Series 1 design. The Shelby Series II will utilize the same chassis as the Shelby Series 1, but it will use modified exterior, interior, and powertrain components. SS II operates independently and is not affiliated with any other vehicle manufacturer. In a supplement to its petition, SS II stated that Shelby American Inc. (another small volume manufacturer) produced Shelby Series 1 vehicles for sale only in model year 1999, and these vehicles were sold without an inflatable restraint system, because NHTSA granted that company a temporary exemption under part 555 ( *see* 64 FR 6736 (Feb. 10, 1999)). As a result, when SS II acquired the tooling for the Shelby Series 1, there was no air bag system, so development efforts in this area must, by necessity, start from a very fundamental level. The petitioner argued that it tried in good faith, but could not bring the vehicle into compliance with the air bag requirements of FMVSS No. 208, and that it would incur substantial economic hardship if it cannot sell vehicles in the U.S. after September 1, 2006. *Eligibility* . SS II is a U.S. company incorporated in Nevada in 2005. The company is a small volume manufacturer of specialty sports cars with approximately 30 employees. The organization obtained the rights to produce 250 “Shelby” vehicles under a licensing agreement from Shelby American Corporation. However, SS II is an independent automobile manufacturer; no vehicle manufacturer has an ownership interest in SS II, and the reverse is likewise true. As a relatively new company, SS II has not produced any vehicles in prior years. According to its current forecasts, SS II anticipates the following production of Shelby Series II vehicles over calendar years
(CY)2006-2008: 86 vehicles in CY 2006; 120 vehicles in CY 2007, and 44 vehicles in CY 2008. *Requested exemption* . SS II stated its intention to certify compliance of Shelby II vehicles with all applicable U.S. standards by July 2008, including advanced air bags. The company envisions a later generation of Shelby III vehicles that would similarly comply with all applicable standards. Accordingly, SS II seeks an exemption from the requirements of S4.1.5.3 and S14 of FMVSS No. 208 from the date of approval of its petition to July 31, 2008. *Economic hardship.* The financial documents submitted to NHTSA by the petitioner indicate that the SS II Shelby Series II project will result in financial losses unless SS II obtains a temporary exemption. As discussed below, the company has invested significant resources to ensure that the Shelby Series II meets current U.S. standards, and it has plans for the development of an inflatable restraint system that meets the “advanced air bag” requirements of FMVSS No. 208. As of the time of the application, SS II has invested over $1.4 million on the design, development, and homologation of the Shelby Series II project in order to have the vehicle meet U.S. standards—not including the air bag requirements which are the subject of the present petition for temporary exemption. The company has stated that it cannot hope to attain profitability if it incurs additional research and development expenses at this time. SS II stated that costs associated with air bag engineering and development (including materials, tooling, testing, and test vehicles) have been estimated to be almost $4.2 million. In its petition, SS II reasoned that sales in the U.S. market must commence in order to finance this work and that the exemption is necessary to allow the company to “bridge the gap” until fully compliant vehicles can be funded, developed, tooled, and introduced. If the exemption is denied, SS II projects a net loss of nearly $4.8 million over the period from calendar years 2006-2008. However, if the petition is granted, the company anticipates a net profit of over $1.7 million during that same period. 3 According to the petitioner, if its exemption request is denied, the company would not have sufficient funds to sustain its air bag development program, and it would have to discontinue the Shelby Series II and subsequent vehicle programs for USA-compliant vehicles, thereby causing substantial economic hardship to the company. 3 It should be noted that the two sets of financial projections supplied by SS II reflect slightly different timeframes. For the scenario in which the agency denies the company's requested exemption, figures are provided for January 2006 to December 2008. However, for the scenario in which the agency grants the company's requested exemption, figures are provided for January 2006 to June 2008. The truncated financial figures under the “grant” scenario reflect the fact that if the petition is granted, SS II expects to have produced all 250 Shelby Series II vehicles permitted under its licensing agreement by mid-2008. *Good faith efforts to comply.* As noted above, SS II has invested over $1.4 million on the design, development, and homologation of the Shelby Series II project in order to have the vehicle meet U.S. standards (other than the air bag provisions). Furthermore, to date, SS II has invested over $22,500 related to the installation of passenger and driver air bags in Shelby Series II vehicles. Since the company's start-up, it has been able to bring the vehicle into compliance with all applicable NHTSA regulations, except for the air bag provisions of FMVSS No. 208. SS II considered the alternative of installing a standard air bag system ( *i.e.* , one that meets the requirements of FMVSS No. 208, except for the advanced air bag provision) in the Shelby Series II, but it was determined that a temporary exemption would still be necessary, because such an interim measure could not be implemented before the second quarter of 2008. Thus, in light of limited resources, the petitioner reasoned that it would be logical to move directly to the development of an air bag system that meets the advanced air bag requirements of FMVSS No. 208, without first seeking to develop a standard air bag system. According to SS II, installation of an advanced air bag system would require just a few more months in terms of development time at slightly higher cost. In contrast, SS II stated that it would have been cost-prohibitive for the company to develop and install a non-advanced air bag, which would then be followed by an advanced air bag system. According to the petitioner, the modifications to the vehicle to implement any inflatable restraint system are substantial, and not all the changes that would be appropriate for a non-advanced system would be suitable for an advanced system, so the company reasoned that it would be a waste of resources not to immediately pursue the advanced air bag technology already mandated under FMVSS No. 208. The petitioner estimates that development of an advanced air bag system for the SS II would entail an average expenditure of $174,000 per month for the approximately 24 months it would take to develop and validate the system. According to its petition, even though air bags are beyond its current capabilities, SS II is nonetheless planning for the introduction of these devices. The company expects to subcontract most of the air bag development project to an experienced outside company, and as noted above, current plans estimate a cost of nearly $4.2 million and a minimum lead time of 24 months for the advanced air bag project. SS II stated that the following engineering efforts are needed to equip the Shelby Series II with an advanced air bag system:
(1)Tooling for both prototypes and production vehicles;
(2)contractor engineering;
(3)air bag system materials;
(4)cost of test vehicles;
(5)integration of air bag wiring;
(6)radio frequency interference/electromagnetic compatibility (RFI/EMC) testing and engineering;
(7)design and development of a new seat with sensors;
(8)frontal barrier crash testing; and
(9)system validation. In terms of specific vehicle modifications necessary to install air bags in the Shelby Series II, the petitioner stated that the following changes are required:
(1)Redesign of the dashboard exterior and supporting skeletal structure to add a passenger-side air bag;
(2)redesign of the steering column to install a driver-side air bag;
(3)installation of new seats with sensors;
(4)integration of the air bag system's wiring harness with the vehicle's main wiring harness, and
(5)installation of crash sensors and a properly calibrated restraint control module. In short, SS II argued that, despite good faith efforts, limited resources prevent it from bringing the vehicle into compliance with all applicable requirements, and it is beyond the company's current capabilities to bring the vehicle into full compliance until such time as additional resources become available as a result of U.S. sales. With funding from sale of the current generation of Shelby Series II vehicles, the company expects that additional development efforts could commence as would permit production of a fully compliant vehicle in July 2008. *SS II argues that an exemption would be in the public interest.* The petitioner put forth several arguments in favor of a finding that the requested exemption is consistent with the public interest and would not have a significant adverse impact on safety. Specifically, SS II emphasized that the Shelby Series II will comply with all applicable FMVSSs, except for air bags. The company asserted that granting the exemption will benefit U.S. employment, companies, and citizens, because Shelby Series II vehicles will be produced in the U.S., will have major components ( *e.g.* , chassis, body, and engine) produced by U.S. companies, and will be sold and serviced through U.S. dealers. SS II also argued that denial of the exemption request would have an adverse impact on consumer choice, suggesting that there is domestic demand for Shelby Series II vehicles. As an additional basis for showing that its requested exemption would be in the public interest, SS II stated that Shelby Series II vehicles have utilized advanced composite technology and lightweight materials, which provide both strength and durability. According to SS II, this reduced weight translates into improved emissions and fuel efficiency. V. Issuance of Notice of Final Action We are providing a 15-day comment period, in light of the short period of time between now and the time the advanced air bag requirements become effective for small volume manufacturers ( *i.e.* , September 1, 2006). After considering public comments and other available information, we will publish a notice of final action on the application in the **Federal Register** . Issued on: August 18, 2006. Ronald L. Medford, Senior Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety. [FR Doc. E6-14261 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration [Docket No. NHTSA-2006-25545, Notice 1] YES! Sportscars; Receipt of Application for a Temporary Exemption From the Advanced Air Bag Requirements of FMVSS No. 208 AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for temporary exemption from provisions of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 208, *Occupant Crash Protection* . SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures in 49 CFR part 555, YES! Sportscars has petitioned the agency for a temporary exemption from certain advanced air bag requirements of FMVSS No. 208. The basis for the application is that compliance would cause substantial economic hardship to a manufacturer that has tried in good faith to comply with the standard. 1 1 To view the application, go to: *http://dms.dot.gov/search/searchFormSimple.cfm* and enter the docket number set fourth in the heading of this document. This notice of receipt of an application for temporary exemption is published in accordance with the statutory provisions of 49 U.S.C. 30113(b)(2). NHTSA has made no judgment on the merits of the application. DATES: You should submit your comments not later than September 12, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ed Glancy or Mr. Eric Stas, Office of the Chief Counsel, NCC-112, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Room 5219, Washington, DC 20590. Ttlephone:
(202)366-2992; fax:
(202)366-3820. *Comments:* We invite you to submit comments on the application described above. You may submit comments identified by docket number at the heading of this notice by any of the following methods: • *Web site: http://dms.dot.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site by clicking on “Help and Information” or “Help/Info.” • *Fax:* 1-(202)-493-2251. • *Mail:* Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, Washington, DC 20590. • *Hand Delivery:* Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 am and 5 pm, Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays. • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. *Instructions:* All submissions must include the agency name and docket number or Regulatory Identification Number
(RIN)for this rulemaking. Note that all comments received will be posted without change to *http://dms.dot.gov,* including any personal information provided. *Docket:* For access to the docket in order to read background documents or comments received, go to *http://dms.dot.gov* at any time or to 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. *Privacy Act:* Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit *http://dms.dot.gov.* We shall consider all comments received before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated above. To the extent possible, we shall also consider comments filed after the closing date. I. Advanced Air Bag Requirements and Small Volume Manufacturers In 2000, NHTSA upgraded the requirements for air bags in passenger cars and light trucks, requiring what are commonly known as “advanced air bags.” 2 The upgrade was designed to meet the goals of improving protection for occupants of all sizes, belted and unbelted, in moderate-to-high-speed crashes, and of minimizing the risks posed by air bags to infants, children, and other occupants, especially in low-speed crashes. 2 *See* 65 FR 30680 (May 12, 2000). The advanced air bag requirements were a culmination of a comprehensive plan that the agency announced in 1996 to address the adverse effects of air bags. This plan also included an extensive consumer education program to encourage the placement of children in rear seats. The new requirements were phased in beginning with the 2004 model year. Small volume manufacturers are not subject to the advanced air bag requirements until September 1, 2006, but their efforts to bring their respective vehicles into compliance with these requirements began several years ago. However, because the new requirements were challenging, major air bag suppliers concentrated their efforts on working with large volume manufacturers, and thus, until recently, small volume manufacturers had limited access to advanced air bag technology. Because of the nature of the requirements for protecting out-of-position occupants, “off-the-shelf” systems could not be readily adopted. Further complicating matters, because small volume manufacturers build so few vehicles, the costs of developing custom advanced air bag systems compared to potential profits discouraged some air bag suppliers from working with small volume manufacturers. The agency has carefully tracked occupant fatalities resulting from air bag deployment. Our data indicate that the agency's efforts in the area of consumer education and manufacturers' providing depowered air bags were successful in reducing air bag fatalities even before advanced air bag requirements were implemented. As always, we are concerned about the potential safety implication of any temporary exemptions granted by this agency. In the present case, we are seeking comments on a petition for a temporary exemption from the advanced air bag requirements submitted by a manufacturer of very expensive, low volume, exotic sports cars. II. Overview of Petition for Economic Hardship Exemption In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30113 and the procedures in 49 CFR part 555, YES! Sportscars has petitioned the agency for a temporary exemption from certain advanced air bag requirements of FMVSS No. 208. The basis for the application is that compliance would cause substantial economic hardship to a manufacturer that has tried in good faith to comply with the standard. A copy of the petition 3 is available for review and has been placed in the docket for this notice. 3 The company requested confidential treatment under 49 CFR part 512 for certain business and financial information submitted as part of its petition for temporary exemption. Accordingly, the information placed in the docket does not contain such information that the agency has determined to be confidential. III. Statutory Background for Economic Hardship Exemptions A manufacturer is eligible to apply for a hardship exemption if its total motor vehicle production in its most recent year of production did not exceed 10,000 vehicles, as determined by the NHTSA Administrator (49 U.S.C. 30113). In determining whether a manufacturer of a vehicle meets that criterion, NHTSA considers whether a second vehicle manufacturer also might be deemed the manufacturer of that vehicle. The statutory provisions governing motor vehicle safety (49 U.S.C. Chapter 301) do not include any provision indicating that a manufacturer might have substantial responsibility as manufacturer of a vehicle simply because it owns or controls a second manufacturer that assembled that vehicle. However, the agency considers the statutory definition of “manufacturer” (49 U.S.C. 30102) to be sufficiently broad to include sponsors, depending on the circumstances. Thus, NHTSA has stated that a manufacturer may be deemed to be a sponsor and thus a manufacturer of a vehicle assembled by a second manufacturer if the first manufacturer had a substantial role in the development and manufacturing process of that vehicle. IV. Petition of YES! Sportscars *Background.* YES! Sportscars is a division of Funke & Will Aktiengesellschaft (AG), a German corporation formed in 2000. Funke & Will AG is a specialized engineering firm which offers engineering services to the automobile industry on small volume projects. Although the parent company's two founders together own 85 percent of the corporation's shares, the German state of Saxony does have a 15-percent ownership stake. 4 4 According to the petitioner, the German state government took an ownership interest in the firm in exchange for subsidies for capital investment in facilities and equipment. According to YES! Sportscars, these subsidies cannot be used for operational expenditures and research and development funding. YES! Sportscars, a separate vehicle manufacturing part of the company, began production in 2001 of high-performance sports cars based on an aluminum spaceframe. This application concerns the YES! Roadster (currently the company's only model) which is expected to retail for $59,000. To date, the primary markets for the YES! Roadster have been Europe and the Middle East, with the following numbers of vehicles being produced over the past five years: 12 vehicles in 2001; 37 vehicles in 2002; 42 vehicles in 2003; 48 vehicles in 2004, and 54 vehicles in 2005. None of those vehicles has been sold in the U.S. market. According to the petition, the company had originally planned to produce vehicles for the European market, but it has been determined to be a matter of financial necessity for YES! Sportscars to enter the U.S. market, particularly given the limited but global market for these high-end sports cars. The company anticipates that approximately 65 percent of its total sales will be to the U.S. market. The petitioner argued that it tried in good faith, but could not bring the vehicle into compliance with the advanced air bag requirements, and would incur substantial economic hardship if it cannot sell vehicles in the U.S. after September 1, 2006. *Eligibility.* As discussed in the petition, YES! Sportscars is a division of Funke & Will AG, a German corporation formed in 2000. The entire organization currently employs 49 people. No other vehicle manufacturer has an ownership interest in either YES! Sportscars or Funke & Will AG, and the reverse is likewise true. Stated another way, YES! Sportscars is an independent automobile manufacturer which does not have any common control or is otherwise affiliated with any other vehicle manufacturer. The company is a small volume manufacturer whose total production has ranged from 12 to 54 vehicles per year over the period from 2001 to 2005. According to its current forecasts, YES! Sportscars anticipates that approximately 250 vehicles would be imported into the U.S. during the three-year period for its requested exemption, if such request were granted. *Requested exemption.* YES! Sportscars stated that it intends to certify the YES! Roadster as complying with the rigid barrier belted test requirement using the 50th-percentile adult male test dummy set forth in S14.5.1 of FMVSS No. 208. The petitioner stated that it previously determined the YES! Roadster's compliance with rigid barrier unbelted test requirements using the 50th-percentile adult male test dummy through the S13 sled test using a generic pulse rather than a full vehicle test. YES! Sportscars stated that it, therefore, cannot at present say with certainty that the YES! Roadster will comply with the unbelted test requirement under S14.5.2, which is a 25 mph rigid barrier test. As for the YES! Roadster's compliance with the other advanced air bag requirements, YES! Sportscars stated that it does not know whether the YES! Roadster will be compliant because to date it has not had the financial ability to conduct the necessary testing. As such, YES! Sportscars is requesting an exemption for the YES! Roadster from the rigid barrier unbelted test requirement with the 50th-percentile adult male test dummy (S14.5.2), the rigid barrier test requirement using the 5th-percentile adult female test dummy (belted and unbelted, S15), the offset deformable barrier test requirement using the 5th-percentile adult female test dummy (S17), the requirements to provide protection for infants and children (S19, S21, and S23) and the requirement using an out-of-position 5th-percentile adult female test dummy at the driver position (S25). YES! Sportscars stated its intention to certify compliance of a second generation of the YES! Roadster, to be produced by September 1, 2009, which would be certified as complying with all applicable U.S. standards, including advanced air bags. Accordingly, the company seeks an exemption from the above-specified requirements of FMVSS No. 208 from September 1, 2006 to August 31, 2009. *Economic hardship.* Publicly available information and also the financial documents submitted to NHTSA by the petitioner indicate that the YES! Roadster project will result in financial losses unless YES! Sportscars obtains a temporary exemption. Over the period 2001-2005, the YES! Sportscars division of Funke & Will AG has had net operational losses totaling 484,000 euros ($618,000 at an exchange rate of 1 euro = $1.277). 5 As of the time of the application, YES! Sportscars has invested over $3.0 million on the design, development, and homologation of the YES! Roadster project in order to have the vehicle meet U.S. standards—not including the advanced air bag requirements which are the subject of the present petition for temporary exemption. The company has stated that it cannot hope to attain profitability if it incurs additional research and development expenses at this time. 5 According to the YES! petition, the engineering portion of Funke & Will AG has made a modest profit in the past few years, but in total, such profits would only amount to 45 percent of the funding needed to finance the requisite advanced air bag work. YES! Sportscars stated that costs associated with advanced air bag engineering and development (including research and development, testing, tooling, and test vehicles) have been estimated to be $1.7 million (including internal costs). In its petition, YES! Sportscars reasoned that sales in the U.S. market must commence in order to finance this work and that non-U.S. sales alone cannot generate sufficient income for this purpose. In essence, YES! Sportscars argued that the exemption is necessary to allow the company to “bridge the gap” until fully compliant vehicles can be funded, developed, tooled, and introduced for the U.S. market. If the exemption is denied, YES! Sportscars projects a net loss of $1.1 million over the period from 2006-2008 (assuming a delayed start of U.S. sales until 2008). However, if the petition is granted, the company anticipates a profit of nearly $1.4 million during that same period. The petitioner argued that a denial of this petition could preclude financing of the project for USA-compliant vehicles, a development which would have a highly adverse impact on the company. *Good faith efforts to comply.* As stated above, YES! Sportscars initially planned to produce vehicles for the European, Mid-East, and Far-East markets, but once it was determined in 2005 that entry into the U.S. market was a necessary part of its business plan, the company invested over $3.0 million on research and development and tooling for its U.S. YES! Roadster program. In that time, the company was able to bring the vehicle into compliance with all applicable NHTSA regulations, except for than the advanced air bag provisions of FMVSS No. 208. In light of limited resources, the petitioner stated that it was necessary to first develop the vehicle with a standard U.S. air bag system. The company has spent over $630,000 to reengineer the YES! Roadster to include a standard air bag system, which it stated will then be “expanded” into an advanced air bag system. According to its petition, even though advanced air bags are beyond its current capabilities, YES! Sportscars is nonetheless planning for the introduction of these devices. The company stated that Siemens Restraint Systems will spearhead this effort, and current plans estimate a cost of $1.1 million (excluding internal costs) and a minimum lead time of 24 months for the advanced air bag project. YES! Sportscars stated that the following engineering efforts are needed to upgrade the YES! Roadster's standard air bag system to an advanced air bag system:
(1)Interior redesign work to the dashboard, steering column, and electronic systems;
(2)sourcing and organization of supplier and engineering personnel and resources for development work (including sensor calibration);
(3)construction of prototypes, and
(4)testing. In addition, YES! Sportscars stated that finding suppliers willing to work with a manufacturer with very low production volumes has proven extremely difficult, and as a result, the company must wait for technology to “trickle down” from larger manufacturers and suppliers. YES! Sportscars further stated that small volume manufacturers simply do not have the internal resources to do full U.S. homologation projects without reliance on outside suppliers of advanced engineering technologies. In short, YES! Sportscars argued that, despite good faith efforts, limited resources prevent it from bringing the vehicle into compliance with all applicable requirements, and it is beyond the company's current capabilities to bring the vehicle into full compliance until such time as additional resources become available as a result of U.S. sales. With funding from sale of the current generation of YES! Roadsters, the company expects that additional development efforts could start in 2007, thereby allowing production of a fully compliant vehicle in September 2009. *YES! Sportscars argues that an exemption would be in the public interest.* The petitioner put forth several arguments in favor of a finding that the requested exemption is consistent with the public interest and would not have a significant adverse impact on safety. Specifically, YES! Sportscars argued that the vehicle would be equipped with a fully-compliant *standard* U.S. air bag system (i.e., one meeting all requirements of FMVSS No. 208 prior to implementation of S14). Furthermore, the company emphasized that the YES! Roadster will comply with all other applicable FMVSSs. The company asserted that granting the exemption will benefit U.S. employment, companies, and citizens, because YES! Roadsters will be sold and serviced through a network of U.S. dealers. YES! Sportscars also argued that denial of the exemption request would have an adverse impact on consumer choice, suggesting that there is domestic demand for a performance vehicle in the YES! Roadster's price range. The company also argued that an exemption is unlikely to have a significant safety impact because these vehicles are not expected to be used extensively by their owners, due to their “second vehicle” nature and “minimalist design.” The company also reasoned that given the nature of the vehicle, it is less likely to be used to transport young children than most other vehicles. As an additional basis for showing that its requested exemption would be in the public interest, YES! Sportscars stated that the YES! Roadster has an extremely strong and protective chassis, which is composed of aluminum tubes and composite structure parts. According to YES! Sportscars, the vehicle design is such that occupants are effectively placed in a “protective ‘cell’ ” with the chassis structure built around them. V. Issuance of Notice of Final Action We are providing a 15-day comment period, in light of the short period of time between now and the time the advanced air bag requirements become effective for small volume manufacturers (i.e., September 1, 2006). After considering public comments and other available information, we will publish a notice of final action on the application in the **Federal Register** . Issued on: August 18, 2006. Ronald L. Medford, Senior Associate Administrator for Vehicle Safety. FR Doc. E6-14252 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-59-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Community Development Financial Institutions Fund *Funding Opportunity Title:* Revised Notice of Funds Availability
(NOFA)inviting applications for the FY 2007 Funding Round of the Community Development Financial Institutions
(CDFI)Program. *Announcement Type:* Initial announcement of funding opportunity. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA)Number:* 21.020. DATES: Applications for the FY 2007 Funding Round of the CDFI Program must be received by 5 p.m. ET on November 14, 2006. *Executive Summary:* On December 21, 2005, the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (the Fund) published a NOFA in the **Federal Register** (70 FR 75860) in connection with two consecutive funding rounds of the CDFI Program:
(i)The FY 2006 Funding Round and
(ii)the FY 2007 Funding Round. Through this revised NOFA, the Fund announces revised dates for the FY 2007 Funding Round. Because the FY 2006 Funding Round is now complete, this revised NOFA is being issued for the FY 2007 Funding Round only. Parties interested in the FY 2007 Funding Round should review and refer to this revised NOFA, disregarding the December 21, 2005 NOFA, as the FY 2007 Funding Round dates in the December 21, 2005 NOFA have been changed. I. Funding Opportunity Description A. Through the CDFI Program, the Fund provides:
(i)Financial Assistance
(FA)awards to CDFIs that have Comprehensive Business Plans for creating demonstrable community development impact through the deployment of credit, capital, and financial services within their respective Target Markets or the expansion into new Investment Areas, Low-Income Targeted Populations, or Other Targeted Populations, and
(ii)Technical Assistance
(TA)grants to CDFIs and entities proposing to become CDFIs in order to build their capacity to better address the community development and capital access needs of their particular Target Markets, to expand into new Investment Areas, Low-Income Targeted Populations, or Other Targeted Populations, and/or to become certified CDFIs. B. The regulations governing the CDFI Program are found at 12 CFR Part 1805 (the Interim Rule) and provide guidance on evaluation criteria and other requirements of the CDFI Program. The Fund encourages Applicants to review the Interim Rule. Detailed application content requirements are found in the applicable funding application and related guidance materials. Each capitalized term in this NOFA is more fully defined in the Interim Rule, the application or the guidance materials. C. The Fund reserves the right to fund, in whole or in part, any, all, or none of the applications submitted in response to this NOFA. The Fund reserves the right to re-allocate funds from the amount that is anticipated to be available under this NOFA to other Fund programs, particularly if the Fund determines that the number of awards made under this NOFA is fewer than projected. II. Award Information A. Funding Availability 1. FY 2007 Funding Round Through this NOFA, and subject to funding availability, the Fund expects that it may award approximately $26 million in appropriated funds, of which:
(i)Approximately $2 million in appropriated funds may be awarded to Category I/SECA Applicants in the form of FA awards that may be coupled with TA grants;
(ii)approximately $22 million in appropriated funds may be awarded to Category II/Core Applicants in the form of FA awards that may be coupled with TA grants; and
(iii)approximately $2 million in appropriated funds may be awarded to Applicants in the form of TA grants only. The Fund reserves the right to award in excess of $26 million in appropriated funds to Applicants (and/or more or less than $2 million to Category I/SECA Applicants, and/or more or less than $22 million to Category II/Core Applicants) in the FY 2007 Funding Round, provided that the funds are available and the Fund deems it appropriate. 2. Availability of Funds for the FY 2007 Funding Round Funds for the FY 2007 Funding Round have not yet been appropriated. If funds are not appropriated for the FY 2007 Funding Round, there will not be a FY 2007 Funding Round. Further, it is possible that if funds are appropriated for the FY 2007 Funding Round, the amount of such funds may be less than the amounts set forth above. B. Types of Awards An Applicant may submit an application either for:
(i)A FA award only;
(ii)a FA award and a TA grant; or
(iii)a TA grant. 1. FA Awards The Fund may provide FA awards in the form of equity investments (including, in the case of certain Insured Credit Unions, secondary capital accounts), grants, loans, deposits, credit union shares, or any combination thereof. The Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to provide a FA award in a form and amount other than that which is requested by an Applicant; however, the award amount will not exceed the Applicant's award request as stated in its application. The Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to provide a FA award on the condition that the Applicant agrees to use a TA grant for specified capacity building purposes, even if the Applicant has not requested a TA grant. 2. TA Grants
(a)The Fund may provide TA awards in the form of grants. The Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to provide a TA grant for uses and amounts other than that which are requested by an Applicant; however, the award amount will not exceed the Applicant's award request as stated in its application.
(b)TA grants may be used to address a variety of needs including, but not limited to, development of strategic planning documents (such as business, strategic or capitalization plans), market analyses or product feasibility analyses, operational policies and procedures, curricula for Development Services (such as entrepreneurial training, home buyer education, financial education or training, borrower credit repair training), improvement of underwriting and portfolio management, development of outreach and training strategies to enhance product delivery, operating support to expand into a new Target Market, and tools that allow the Applicant to assess the impact of its activities in its community. Each Applicant for a TA grant through this NOFA is required to provide information in the application regarding the expected cost, timing and provider of the TA, and a narrative description of how the TA grant will enhance its capacity to provide greater community development impact and/or to become certified as a CDFI, if applicable.
(c)Eligible TA grant uses include, but are not limited to:
(i)Acquiring consulting services;
(ii)acquiring/enhancing technology items, including computer hardware, software and Internet connectivity;
(iii)acquiring training for staff, management and/or board members; and
(iv)paying recurring expenses, including staff salary and other key operating expenses, that will enhance the capacity of the Applicant to serve its Target Market and/or to become certified as a CDFI. C. Notice of Award; Assistance Agreement Each Awardee under this NOFA must sign a Notice of Award and an Assistance Agreement in order to receive a disbursement of award proceeds by the Fund. The Notice of Award and the Assistance Agreement contain the terms and conditions of the award. For further information, see Sections VI.A and VI.B of this NOFA. III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants The Interim Rule specifies the eligibility requirements that each Applicant must meet in order to be eligible to apply for assistance under this NOFA. The following sets forth additional detail and dates that relate to the submission of applications under this NOFA: 1. FA Applicant Categories All Applicants for FA awards through this NOFA must meet the criteria for one of the following two categories of CDFIs: FA applicant category Criteria What can it apply for? Category I/Small and/or Emerging CDFI Assistance
(SECA)A Category I/SECA Applicant is a Certified CDFI or Certifiable CDFI that: Has total assets, as of the end of the Applicant's most recent fiscal year end or September 30, 2006, as follows: A Category I/SECA Applicant may request up to and including $500,000 in FA funds, and up to and including $100,000 in TA funds. • Insured Depository Institutions and Depository Institution Holding Companies: Up to $250 million. • Insured Credit Unions: Up to $10 million. • Venture capital funds: Up to $10 million. • Other CDFIs: Up to $5 million. OR Began operations on or after January 1, 2003. AND Prior to the application deadline, has not been selected to receive in excess of $500,000 in FA award(s) in the aggregate from the CDFI Program or Native Initiatives Funding Programs. Category II/Core A Category II/Core Applicant is a Certified CDFI or a Certifiable CDFI that meets all other eligibility requirements described in this NOFA. A Category II/Core Applicant may request up to and including $2 million in FA funds, and up to and including $100,000 in TA funds. Please note: Any Applicant, regardless of total assets, years in operation, or prior Fund awards, that requests FA funding in excess of $500,000 is classified as a Category II/Core Applicant. For the purposes of this NOFA, the term “began operations” is defined as the month and year in which the Applicant first incurred operating expenses of any type. Also, for purposes of this NOFA, the term “Native Initiatives Funding Programs” refers to the following programs administered by the Fund: the Native American CDFI Technical Assistance (NACTA) Component of the CDFI Program, the Native American CDFI Development
(NACD)Program, the Native American Technical Assistance
(NATA)Component of the CDFI Program, and the Native American CDFI Assistance
(NACA)Program. The Fund will evaluate, rank and make awards to Category I/SECA Applicants separately from Category II/Core Applicants. The Fund, in its sole discretion, reserves the right to award amounts in excess of or less than the anticipated maximum award amounts permitted in this NOFA, if the Fund deems it appropriate. 2. TA Applicants TA applicants Criteria What can it apply for? All TA Applicants A TA Applicant must be a Certified CDFI, a Certifiable CDFI, or an Emerging CDFI The Fund anticipates making TA grants up to $100,000 each. The Fund, in its sole discretion, reserves the right to award amounts less than the anticipated maximum award amounts permitted in this NOFA, if the Fund deems it appropriate. 3. CDFI Certification Requirements For purposes of this NOFA, eligible FA Applicants include Certified CDFIs and Certifiable CDFIs; eligible TA Applicants include Certified CDFIs, Certifiable CDFIs and Emerging CDFIs, defined as follows:
(a)*Certified CDFIs:* A certified CDFI whose certification has not expired and that has not been notified by the Fund that its certification has been terminated. Each such Applicant must submit a “Certification of Material Event Form” to the Fund not later than October 11, 2006, or such other dates as the Fund may proscribe, in accordance with the instructions on the Fund's Web site at *http://www.cdfifund.gov* . Please note: The Fund provided a number of CDFIs with certifications expiring in 2003 through 2005 written notification that their certifications had been extended. The Fund will consider the extended certification date (the later date) to determine whether those CDFIs meet this eligibility requirement.
(b)*Certifiable CDFIs:* For purposes of this NOFA, a Certifiable CDFI is an entity from which the Fund receives a complete CDFI Certification Application no later than October 11, 2006, or such other dates as the Fund may proscribe, evidencing that the Applicant meets the requirements to be certified as a CDFI. Applicants may obtain the CDFI Certification Application through the Fund's Web site at *http://www.cdfifund.gov* . Applications for certification must be submitted as instructed in the application form. FA Applicants that are Certifiable CDFIs please note: while your organization may be conditionally selected for funding (as evidenced through the Notice of Award), the Fund will not enter into an Assistance Agreement or disburse award funds unless and until the Fund has certified your organization as a CDFI. If the Fund is unable to certify your organization as a CDFI based on the CDFI certification application that your organization submits to the Fund, the Notice of Award may be terminated and the award commitment may be cancelled, in the sole discretion of the Fund.
(c)*Emerging CDFIs:* For purposes of this NOFA, an Emerging CDFI is an entity that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Fund that it has a reasonable plan to be certified as a CDFI by December 31, 2009 or such other date selected by the Fund. Emerging CDFIs may only apply for TA grants; they are not eligible to apply for FA awards. Each Emerging CDFI that is selected to receive a TA grant will be required, pursuant to its Assistance Agreement with the Fund, to become certified as a CDFI by a date certain. 4. Contacting the Fund The Fund will respond to questions and provide support concerning CDFI certification related to this NOFA between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, through October 4, 2006. The Fund will not respond to questions or provide support concerning CDFI certification, related to this NOFA, that are received after 5 p.m. ET on October 4, 2006, until after the deadline for submitting applications under this NOFA. The CDFI Certification Application and other information regarding CDFI certification may be obtained from the Fund's Web site at *http://www.cdfifund.gov* . D. Prior Awardees Applicants must be aware that success in a prior round of any of the Fund's programs is not indicative of success under this NOFA. Prior awardees are eligible to apply under this NOFA, except as follows: 1. $5 Million Funding Cap The Fund is generally prohibited from obligating more than $5 million in assistance, in the aggregate, to any one organization and its Subsidiaries and Affiliates during any three-year period. In general, the three-year period extends back three years from the date that the Fund signs a Notice of Award; for purposes of this revised NOFA, and for ease of administration, the Fund will count any assistance documented with a Notice of Award dated between July 31, 2004 and July 31, 2007 (which is the anticipated date that the Fund will issue Notices of Award for the FY 2007 Funding Round). 2. Failure To Meet Reporting Requirements The Fund will not consider an application submitted by an Applicant if the Applicant, or an entity that Controls the Applicant, is Controlled by the Applicant or shares common management officials with the Applicant (as determined by the Fund) is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program and is not current on the reporting requirements set forth in a previously executed assistance, allocation or award agreement(s), as of the applicable application deadline of this NOFA. Please note that the Fund only acknowledges the receipt of reports that are complete. As such, incomplete reports or reports that are deficient of required elements will not be recognized as having been received. 3. Pending Resolution of Noncompliance If an Applicant is a prior Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program and if:
(i)It has submitted complete and timely reports to the Fund that demonstrate noncompliance with a previous assistance, allocation or award agreement; and
(ii)the Fund has yet to make a final determination as to whether the entity is in default of its previous assistance, allocation or award agreement, the Fund will consider the Applicant's application under this NOFA pending full resolution, in the sole determination of the Fund, of the noncompliance. Further, if another entity that Controls the Applicant, is Controlled by the Applicant or shares common management officials with the Applicant (as determined by the Fund), is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee and if such entity:
(i)Has submitted complete and timely reports to the Fund that demonstrate noncompliance with a previous assistance, allocation or award agreement; and
(ii)the Fund has yet to make a final determination as to whether the entity is in default of its previous assistance, allocation, or award agreement, the Fund will consider the Applicant's application under this NOFA pending full resolution, in the sole determination of the Fund, of the noncompliance. 4. Default Status The Fund will not consider an application submitted by an Applicant that is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program if, as of the applicable application deadline of this NOFA, the Fund has made a final determination that such Applicant is in default of a previously executed assistance, allocation or award agreement(s). Further, an entity is not eligible to apply for an award pursuant to this NOFA if, as of the applicable application deadline of this NOFA, the Fund has made a final determination that another entity that Controls the Applicant, is Controlled by the Applicant or shares common management officials with the Applicant (as determined by the Fund) is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program and has been determined by the Fund to be in default of a previously executed assistance, allocation or award agreement(s). 5. Termination in Default The Fund will not consider an application submitted by an Applicant that is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program if:
(i)Within the 12-month period prior to the applicable application deadline of this NOFA, the Fund has made a final determination that such Applicant's prior award or allocation terminated in default of a previously executed assistance, allocation or award agreement(s); and
(ii)the final reporting period end date for the applicable terminated assistance, allocation or award agreement(s) falls in Calendar Year 2006. Further, an entity is not eligible to apply for an award pursuant to this NOFA if:
(i)Within the 12-month period prior to the applicable application deadline, the Fund has made a final determination that another entity that Controls the Applicant, is Controlled by the Applicant or shares common management officials with the Applicant (as determined by the Fund), is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program whose award or allocation terminated in default of a previously executed assistance, allocation or award agreement(s); and
(ii)the final reporting period end date for the applicable terminated assistance, allocation or award agreement(s) falls in Calendar Year 2006. 6. Undisbursed Balances The Fund will not consider an application submitted by an Applicant that is a prior Fund Awardee under any Fund program if the Applicant has a balance of undisbursed funds (defined below) under said prior award(s), as of the applicable application deadline of this NOFA. Further, an entity is not eligible to apply for an award pursuant to this NOFA if another entity that Controls the Applicant, is Controlled by the Applicant or shares common management officials with the Applicant (as determined by the Fund), is a prior Fund Awardee under any Fund program, and has a balance of undisbursed funds under said prior award(s), as of the applicable application deadline of this NOFA. In a case where another entity that Controls the Applicant, is Controlled by the Applicant or shares common management officials with the Applicant (as determined by the Fund), is a prior Fund Awardee under any Fund program, and has a balance of undisbursed funds under said prior award(s), as of the applicable application deadline of this NOFA, the Fund will include the combined awards of the Applicant and such Affiliated entities when calculating the amount of undisbursed funds. For purposes of this section, “undisbursed funds” is defined as:
(i)In the case of a prior Bank Enterprise Award
(BEA)Program award(s), any balance of award funds equal to or greater than five
(5)percent of the total prior BEA Program award(s) that remains undisbursed more than three
(3)years after the end of the calendar year in which the Fund signed an award agreement with the Awardee; and
(ii)in the case of a prior CDFI Program or other Fund program award(s), any balance of award funds equal to or greater than five
(5)percent of the total prior award(s) that remains undisbursed more than two
(2)years after the end of the calendar year in which the Fund signed an assistance agreement with the Awardee. “Undisbursed funds” does not include:
(i)Tax credit allocation authority made available through the New Market Tax Credit
(NMTC)Program;
(ii)any award funds for which the Fund received a full and complete disbursement request from the Awardee by the applicable application deadline of this NOFA;
(iii)any award funds for an award that has been terminated, expired, rescinded or deobligated by the Fund; or
(iv)any award funds for an award that does not have a fully executed assistance or award agreement. The Fund strongly encourages Applicants requesting disbursements of “undisbursed funds” from prior awards to provide the Fund with a complete disbursement request at least 10 business days prior to the application deadline of this NOFA. 7. Exception for Applicants Impacted by Hurricanes Katrina and/or Rita Please note that the provisions of paragraphs 2 (Failure to meet reporting requirements) and 6 (Undisbursed balances) of this section do not apply to any Applicant that has an office located in, or that provides a significant volume of services or financing to residents of or businesses located in, a county that is within a “major disaster area” as declared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)as a result of Hurricanes Katrina and/or Rita. Said requirements are waived for those Applicants under this NOFA. 8. Contact the Fund Accordingly, Applicants that are prior Awardees are advised to:
(i)Comply with requirements specified in assistance, allocation and/or award agreement(s), and
(ii)contact the Fund to ensure that all necessary actions are underway for the disbursement or deobligation of any outstanding balance of said prior award(s). All outstanding reports, disbursement or compliance questions should be directed to the Grants Manager by E-mail at *grantsmanagement@cdfi.treas.gov* ; by telephone at
(202)622-8226; by facsimile at
(202)622-6453; or by mail to CDFI Fund, 601 13th Street, NW., Suite 200 South, Washington, DC 20005. The Fund will respond to Applicants' reporting, disbursement or compliance questions between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, starting the date of the publication of this NOFA through November 10, 2006 (two business days before the respective application deadlines). The Fund will not respond to Applicants' reporting, disbursement or compliance phone calls or E-mail inquiries that are received after 5 p.m. on said dates, until after the respective funding application deadlines. 9. Limitation on Awards An Applicant may receive only one award through either the CDFI Program or the Native American CDFI Assistance
(NACA)Program in the same funding year. An Applicant may apply under both the CDFI Program and the NACA Program, but will not be selected for funding under both. A CDFI Program Applicant, its Subsidiaries or Affiliates also may apply for and receive:
(i)A tax credit allocation through the NMTC Program, but only to the extent that the activities approved for CDFI Program awards are different from those activities for which the Applicant receives a NMTC Program allocation; and
(ii)an award through the BEA Program (subject to certain limitations; refer to the Interim Rule at 12 CFR 1805.102). 10. Other Targeted Populations as Target Markets Other Targeted Populations are defined as identifiable groups of individuals in the Applicant's service area for which there exists a strong basis in evidence that they lack access to loans, Equity Investments and/or Financial Services. The Fund has determined that there is strong basis in evidence that the following groups of individuals lack access to loans, Equity Investments and/or Financial Services on a national level: Blacks or African Americans, Native Americans or American Indians, and Hispanics or Latinos. In addition, for purposes of this NOFA, the Fund has determined that there is a strong basis in evidence that Alaska Natives residing in Alaska, Native Hawaiians residing in Hawaii, and Other Pacific Islanders residing in other Pacific Islands, lack adequate access to loans, Equity Investments or Financial Services. An Applicant designating any of the above-cited Other Targeted Populations is not required to provide additional narrative explaining the Other Targeted Population's lack of adequate access to loans, Equity Investments or Financial Services. For purposes of this NOFA, the Fund will use the following definitions, set forth in the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)Notice, Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity (October 30, 1997), as amended and supplemented:
(a)American Indian, Native American or Alaska Native: a person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and who maintains tribal affiliation or community attachment;
(b)Black or African American: a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa (terms such as “Haitian” or “Negro” can be used in addition to “Black or African American”);
(c)Hispanic or Latino: a person of Cuban, Mexican, or Puerto Rican, South or Central American or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race (the term “Spanish origin” can be used in addition to “Hispanic or Latino”); and
(d)Native Hawaiian: a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii; and
(e)Other Pacific Islander: a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Guam, Samoa or other Pacific Islands. E. Matching Funds 1. Matching Funds Requirements in General Applicants responding to this NOFA must obtain non-Federal matching funds from sources other than the Federal government on the basis of not less than one dollar for each dollar of FA funds provided by the Fund (matching funds are not required for TA grants). Matching funds must be at least comparable in form and value to the FA award provided by the Fund (for example, if an Applicant is requesting a FA grant from the Fund, the Applicant must have evidence that it has obtained matching funds through grant(s) from non-Federal sources that are at least equal to the amount requested from the Fund). Funds used by an Applicant as matching funds for a prior FA award under the CDFI Program or under another Federal grant or award program cannot be used to satisfy the matching funds requirement of this NOFA. If an Applicant seeks to use as matching funds monies received from an organization that was a prior Awardee under the CDFI Program, the Fund will deem such funds to be Federal funds, unless the funding entity establishes to the reasonable satisfaction of the Fund that such funds do not consist, in whole or in part, of CDFI Program funds or other Federal funds. For the purposes of this NOFA, BEA Program awards are not deemed to be Federal funds and are eligible as matching funds. The Fund encourages Applicants to review the Interim Rule at 12 CFR 1805.500 *et seq.* and matching funds guidance materials on the Fund's Web site for further information. 2. Matching Funds Requirements Per Applicant Category Due to funding constraints and the desire to quickly deploy Fund dollars, the Fund will not consider for a FA award any Applicant that has no matching funds in-hand or firmly committed as of the application deadline under this NOFA. Specifically, FA Applicants must meet the following matching funds requirements:
(a)*Category I/SECA Applicants:* A Category I/SECA Applicant must demonstrate that it has eligible matching funds equal to no less than 25 percent of the amount of the FA award requested in-hand or firmly committed, on or after January 1, 2005 and on or before the application deadline. The Fund reserves the right to rescind all or a portion of a FA award and re-allocate the rescinded award amount to other qualified Applicant(s), if an Applicant fails to obtain in-hand 100 percent of the required matching funds by March 14, 2008 (with required documentation of such receipt received by the Fund not later than March 31, 2008), or to grant an extension of such matching funds deadline for specific Applicants selected to receive FA, if the Fund deems it appropriate. For any Applicant that demonstrates that it has less than 100 percent of matching funds in-hand or firmly committed as of the application deadline, the Fund will evaluate the Applicant's ability to raise the remaining matching funds by March 14, 2008.
(b)*Category II/Core Applicants:* A Category II/Core Applicant must demonstrate that it has eligible matching funds equal to no less than 100 percent of the amount of the FA award requested in-hand or firmly committed, on or after January 5, 2006 and on or before the application deadline. The Fund reserves the right to rescind all or a portion of a FA award and re-allocate the rescinded award amount to other qualified Applicant(s), if an Applicant fails to obtain in-hand 100 percent of the required matching funds by March 14, 2008 (with required documentation of such receipt received by the Fund not later than March 31, 2008), or to grant an extension of such matching funds deadline for specific Applicants selected to receive FA, if the Fund deems it appropriate. 3. Matching Funds Terms Defined; Required Documentation
(a)*“Matching funds in-hand”* means that the Applicant has actually received the matching funds. If the matching funds are “in-hand,” the Applicant must provide the Fund with acceptable written documentation of the source, form and amount of the Matching Funds ( *i.e.* , grant, loan, and equity investment). For a loan, the Applicant must provide the Fund with a copy of the loan agreement and promissory note. For a grant, the Applicant must provide the Fund with a copy of the grant letter or agreement. For an equity investment, the Applicant must provide the Fund with a copy of the stock certificate and any related shareholder agreement. Further, if the matching funds are “in-hand,” the Applicant must provide the Fund with acceptable documentation that evidences its receipt of the matching funds proceeds, such as a copy of a check or a wire transfer statement.
(b)*“Firmly committed matching funds”* means that the Applicant has entered into or received a legally binding commitment from the matching funds source that the matching funds will be disbursed to the Applicant. If the matching funds are “firmly committed,” the Applicant must provide the Fund with acceptable written documentation to evidence the source, form, and amount of the firm commitment (and, in the case of a loan, the terms thereof), as well as the anticipated date of disbursement of the committed funds.
(c)The Fund may contact the matching funds source to discuss the matching funds and the documentation provided by the Awardee. If the Fund determines that any portion of the Applicant's matching funds is ineligible under this NOFA, the Fund, in its sole discretion, may permit the Applicant to offer alternative matching funds as substitute for the ineligible matching funds; provided, however, that
(i)the Applicant must provide acceptable alternative matching funds documentation within 2 business days of the Fund's request and
(ii)the alternative matching funds documentation cannot increase the total amount of Financial Assistance requested by the Applicant. 4. Special Rule for Insured Credit Unions Please note that the Interim Rule allows an Insured Credit Union to use retained earnings to serve as matching funds for a FA grant in an amount equal to:
(i)The increase in retained earnings that have occurred over the Applicant's most recent fiscal year;
(ii)the annual average of such increases that have occurred over the Applicant's three most recent fiscal years; or
(iii)the entire retained earnings that have been accumulated since the inception of the Applicant or such other financial measure as may be specified by the Fund. For purposes of this NOFA, if option
(iii)is used, the Applicant must increase its member and/or non-member shares or total loans outstanding by an amount that is equal to the amount of retained earnings that is committed as matching funds. This amount must be raised by the end of the Awardee's second performance period, as set forth in its Assistance Agreement, and will be based on amounts reported in the Applicant's Audited or Reviewed Financial Statements or NCUA Form 5300 Call Report. 5. Severe Constraints Exception to Matching Funds Requirement; Applicability to Applicants Located in FEMA-Designated Major Disaster Areas Created by Hurricanes Katrina and/or Rita In the case of any Applicant that has an office that is located in, or that provides a significant volume of services or financing to residents of or businesses located in, any county that is within a “major disaster area” as declared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA)as a result of Hurricanes Katrina and/or Rita, and that has severe constraints on available sources of matching funds, such Applicant may be eligible for a “severe constraints waiver” (see section 1805.203 of the Interim Rule) if
(i)it can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Fund that an Investment Area(s) or Targeted Population(s) would not be adequately served without such a waiver and
(ii)it projects to use the assistance to address issues resulting from Hurricanes Katrina and/or Rita (such as a significant volume of loan defaults) or to provide financial products, financial services, or Development Services to residents of or businesses located in any county that is within a “major disaster area” as declared by FEMA as a result of Hurricanes Katrina and/or Rita. If eligible for such a waiver, the Applicant may comply with the matching funds requirements of this NOFA as follows:
(i)The matching funds requirement for such Applicant would be reduced to 50 percent (meaning, the Applicant must match 50 percent of the Fund's FA award rather than 100 percent), or
(ii)such an Applicant may provide matching funds in alternative (meaning, non-monetary) forms if the Applicant has total assets of less than $100,000 at the time of the application deadline, serves non-metropolitan or rural areas, and is not requesting more than $25,000 in financial assistance from the Fund. In the case of item
(i)of this paragraph, the Applicant must demonstrate that it has eligible matching funds equal to no less than 25 percent of the amount of the FA award requested in-hand or firmly committed, on or after January 1, 2006 and on or before the application deadline. The Fund reserves the right to rescind all or a portion of a FA award and re-allocate the rescinded award amount to other qualified Applicant(s), if an Applicant fails to obtain in-hand 50 percent of the required matching funds by March 14, 2008 (with required documentation of such receipt received by the Fund not later than March 31, 2008), or to grant an extension of such matching funds deadline for specific Applicants selected to receive FA, if the Fund deems it appropriate. For any such Applicant that demonstrates that it has less than 50 percent of matching funds in-hand or firmly committed as of the application deadline, the Fund will evaluate the Applicant's ability to raise the remaining matching funds by March 14, 2008. In the case of item
(ii)of this paragraph, the CDFI Program funding application contains further instructions on the type of documentation that the Applicant must provide as evidence that such match was received and its valuation. The Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to disallow any such match for which adequate documentation or valuation is not provided. IV. Application and Submission Information A. Form of Application Submission Applicants may submit applications under this NOFA either
(i)electronically (via an Internet-based application) or
(ii)in paper form. Applications sent by facsimile or other form will not be accepted. B. Electronic Applications Electronic applications must be submitted solely by using the Fund's Web site and must be sent in accordance with the submission instructions provided in the electronic application form. Applications are accessible only through an active myCDFIFund account (see Section E, below). Applicants must have access to Internet Explorer 5.5 or higher or Netscape Navigator 6.0 or higher, Windows 98 or higher (or other system compatible with the above Explorer and Netscape software) and optimally at least a 56Kbps Internet connection in order to meet the electronic application submission requirements. The Fund's electronic application system will only permit the submission of applications in which all required questions and tables are fully completed; incomplete applications cannot be submitted. Please note that each application must include the signature of the Applicant's Authorized Representative and certain supporting documentation; for an electronic application, the Applicant must submit such documents separately, in paper form, to the address and by the deadlines set forth below. Additional information, including instructions relating to the submission of signature forms and supporting information, is set forth in further detail in the electronic application. C. Paper Applications If an applicant is unable to submit an electronic application, it must submit to the Fund a request for a paper application using the CDFI Program Paper Application Submission Form, and the request must be received by 5 p.m. ET on October 11, 2006. The CDFI Program Paper Application Submission Form may be obtained from the Fund's Web site at *http://www.cdfifund.gov* or the form may be requested by E-mail to *paper_request@cdfi.treas.gov* or by facsimile to
(202)622-7754. The completed CDFI Program Paper Application Submission Form should be directed to the attention of the Fund's Chief Information Officer and must be sent by facsimile to
(202)622-7754. These are not toll free numbers. Paper applications must be submitted in the format and with the number of copies specified in the application instructions. D. Application Content Requirements Detailed application content requirements are found in the application and guidance. Please note that, pursuant to OMB guidance (68 FR 38402), each Applicant must provide, as part of its application submission, a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number. In addition, each application must include a valid and current Employer Identification Number (EIN), with a letter or other documentation from the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS)confirming the Applicant's EIN. An electronic application that does not include an EIN is incomplete and cannot be transmitted to the Fund. A paper application that does not include a valid EIN is incomplete and will be rejected and returned to the sender. Applicants should allow sufficient time for the IRS and/or Dun and Bradstreet to respond to inquiries and/or requests for identification numbers. Once an application is submitted, the Applicant will not be allowed to change any element of the application. The preceding sentence does not limit the Fund's ability to contact an Applicant for the purpose of obtaining clarifying or confirming application information (such as a DUNS number or EIN information). E. MyCDFIFund Accounts All Applicants must register User and Organization accounts in myCDFIFund, the Fund's Internet-based interface. An Applicant must be registered as both a User and an Organization in myCDFIFund as of the applicable application deadline in order to be considered to have submitted a complete application. As myCDFIFund is the Fund's primary means of communication with Applicants and Awardees, organizations must make sure that they update the contact information in their myCDFIFund accounts. For more information on myCDFIFund, please see the “Frequently Asked Questions” link posted at *https://www.cdfifund.gov/myCDFI/Help/Help.asp. * F. Application Deadlines; Address for Paper Submissions; Late Delivery Applicants must submit all materials described in and required by the application by the applicable deadline. 1. Application Deadlines Electronic applications must be received by the Fund via the Applicant's myCDFIFund account and in accordance with the instructions provided on the Fund's Web site, by 5 p.m. ET on November 14, 2006. In addition, Applicants that submit electronic applications must separately submit (by mail or other courier/delivery service) a signature page, signed by the Applicant's Authorized Representative, and all other required paper attachments; said documents must be received at the address set forth below by 5 p.m. ET on November 17, 2006. Paper applications, including the requisitesigned signature page and all attachments, must be received at the address set forth below by 5 p.m. ET on November 17, 2006. 2. Address for Paper Submissions A complete paper application (or, in the case of an electronic application, the required paper submissions) must be received at the following address, within the applicable deadline: CDFI Fund Grants Manager, CDFI Program, Bureau of Public Debt, 200 Third Street, Parkersburg, WV 26101. The telephone number to be used in conjunction with overnight delivery or mailings to this address is
(304)480-6088 (this is not a toll free number). Any documents received in any other office, including the Fund's Washington, DC office, will be rejected and returned to the sender. 3. Late Delivery The Fund will neither accept a late application nor any portion of an application that is late; an application that is late, or for which any portion is late, will be rejected and returned to the sender. An electronic application, the required signed signature page, and all required paper attachments must be received by the applicable time and date set forth above. A paper application, including the required signed signature page, and all required paper attachments, must be received by the applicable time and date set forth above. The Fund will not grant exceptions or waivers for late delivery of documents including, but not limited to, late delivery that is caused by third parties such as the United States Postal Service, couriers or overnight delivery services. D. Intergovernmental Review Not applicable. E. Funding Restrictions For allowable uses of FA proceeds, please see the Interim Rule at 12 CFR 1805.301. V. Application Review Information A. Criteria The Fund will evaluate each application using numeric scores with respect to the following five sections: 1. Market Analysis (TA-only Applicants: 25 points; Category I/SECA: 25 points; Category II/Core: 20 points): The Fund will evaluate:
(i)The extent and nature of the economic distress within the designated Target Market including the Applicant's understanding of its current and prospective customers; and
(ii)the extent of demand for the Applicant's Financial Products, Development Services, and Financial Services within the designated Target Market. The Fund will give special consideration to any Applicant that has an office that is located in, or that provides a significant volume of services or financing to residents of or businesses located in,
(i)any county that is within the area declared to be a “major disaster” by FEMA as a result of Hurricanes Katrina and/or Rita; and/or
(ii)any state that has been declared a “reception state” by FEMA. The form and content of such special consideration will be further clarified in the CDFI Program application. 2. Business Strategy (TA-only Applicants: 25 points; Category I/SECA: 25 points; Category II/Core: 20 points): The Fund will evaluate the Applicant's business strategy for addressing market demand and creating community development impact through:
(i)Its Financial Products, Development Services, and/or Financial Services;
(ii)its marketing, outreach, and delivery strategy; and
(iii)the extent, quality and nature of coordination with other similar providers of Financial Products and Financial Services, government agencies, and other key community development entities within the Target Market. The Fund will take into consideration whether the Applicant is proposing to expand into a new Target Market. 3. Community Development Performance and Effective Use (TA-only Applicants: 20 points; Category I/SECA: 20 points; Category II/Core: 20 points): The Fund will evaluate
(i)The Applicant's vision for its Target Market, specific outcomes or impacts for measuring progress towards achieving this vision, and the extent to which this award will allow it to achieve them;
(ii)the Applicant's track record in providing Financial Products, Financial Services, and Development Services to the Target Market;
(iii)the extent to which proposed activities will benefit the Target Market;
(iv)the likelihood of achieving the impact projections, including the extent to which the activities proposed in the Comprehensive Business Plan will expand economic opportunities or promote community development within the designated Target Market by promoting homeownership, affordable housing development, job creation or retention, the provision of affordable financial services, and other community development objectives; and
(v)the extent to which the Applicant will maximize the effective use of the Fund's resources. If an Applicant has a prior track record of serving Investment Areas(s) or Targeted Population(s), it must demonstrate that
(i)it has a record of success in serving said Investment Area(s) or Targeted Population(s) and
(ii)it will expand its operations into a new Investment Area or to serve a new Targeted Population, offer more products or services, or increase the volume of its current business. 4. Management (TA-only Applicants: 20 points; Category I/SECA: 20 points; Category II/Core: 20 points): The Fund will evaluate the Applicant's organizational capacity to achieve the objectives set forth in its Comprehensive Business Plan as well as its ability to use its award successfully and maintain compliance with its Assistance Agreement through an evaluation of:
(i)The capacity, skills, size and experience of the Applicant's current and proposed Governing Board, management team, and key staff; and
(ii)the Applicant's management controls and risk mitigation strategies including policies and procedures for portfolio underwriting and review, financial management, risk management, management information systems. 5. Financial Health and Viability (TA-only Applicants: 10 points; Category I/SECA: 10 points; Category II/Core: 20 points): The Fund will evaluate the Applicant's:
(i)Audited or otherwise prepared Financial Statements;
(ii)safety and soundness, including an analysis of the Applicant's financial services industry ratios (capital, liquidity, deployment and self-sufficiency) and ability to sustain positive net revenue;
(iii)projected financial health, including its ability to raise operating support from sources other than the Fund and its capitalization strategy; and
(iv)portfolio performance including loan delinquency, loan losses, and loan loss reserves. If an Applicant does not have 100 percent of the required matching funds in-hand (versus committed), the Applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Fund that it will raise the outstanding balance of matching funds within the time table set forth above. 6. Technical Assistance Proposal Any Applicant applying for a TA grant, either alone or in conjunction with a request for a FA award, must complete a Technical Assistance Proposal
(TAP)as part of its application. The TAP consists of a summary of the organizational improvements needed to achieve the objectives of the application, a budget, and a description of the requested goods and/or services comprising the TA award request. The budget and accompanying narrative will be evaluated for the eligibility and appropriateness of the proposed uses of the TA award (described above). In addition, if the Applicant identifies a capacity-building need related to any of the evaluation criteria above (for example, if the Applicant requires a market need analysis or a community development impact tracking/reporting system), the Fund will assess its plan to use the TA grant to address said needs. An Applicant that is not a Certified CDFI and that requests TA to address certification requirements, must explain how the requested TA grant will assist the Applicant in meeting the certification requirement. The Fund will assess the reasonableness of the plan to become certified by December 31, 2009, taking into account the requested TA. For example, if the Applicant does not currently make loans and therefore does not meet the Financing Entity requirement, it might describe how the TA funds will be used to hire a consultant to develop underwriting policies and procedures to support the Applicant's ability to start its lending activity. An Applicant that requests a TA grant for recurring activities must clearly describe the benefit that would accrue to its capacity or to its Target Market(s) (such as plans for expansion of staff, market, or products) as a result of the TA award. If the Applicant is a prior Fund Awardee, it must describe how it has used the prior assistance and explain the need for additional Fund dollars over and above such prior assistance. Such an Applicant also must describe the additional benefits that would accrue to its capacity or to the Target Market(s) if the Applicant receives another award from the Fund, such as plans for expansion of staff, market, or products. The Fund will not provide funding for the same activities funded in prior awards. B. Review and Selection Process 1. Eligibility and Completeness Review The Fund will review each application to determine whether it is complete and the Applicant meets the eligibility requirements set forth above. An incomplete application will be rejected as incomplete and returned to the sender. If an Applicant does not meet eligibility requirements, its application will be rejected and returned to the sender. 2. Substantive Review If an application is determined to be complete and the Applicant is determined to be eligible, the Fund will conduct the substantive review of the application in accordance with the criteria and procedures described in the Interim Rule, this NOFA and the application and guidance. Each FA application will be reviewed and scored by multiple readers. Each TA application will be read and scored by one reader. Readers may include Fund staff and other experts in community development finance. As part of the review process, the Fund may contact the Applicant by telephone or through an on-site visit for the purpose of obtaining clarifying or confirming application information. The Applicant may be required to submit additional information to assist the Fund in its evaluation process. Such requests must be responded to within the time parameters set by the Fund. 3. Application Scoring; Ranking
(a)*Application Scoring:* The Fund will evaluate each application on a 100-point scale, comprising the five criteria categories described above, and assign numeric scores. An Applicant must receive a minimum score in each evaluation criteria in order to be considered for an award. In the case of an Applicant that has previously received funding from the Fund through any Fund program, the Fund will consider and will deduct points for:
(i)The Applicant's noncompliance with any active award or award that terminated in calendar year 2006 in meeting its performance goals, financial soundness covenants (if applicable), reporting deadlines and other requirements set forth in the assistance or award agreement(s) with the Fund during the Applicant's two complete fiscal years prior to the application deadline of this NOFA (generally FY 2005 and FY 2006);
(ii)the Applicant's failure to make timely loan payments to the Fund during the Applicant's two complete fiscal years prior to the application deadline of this NOFA (if applicable);
(iii)performance on any prior Assistance Agreement as part of the overall assessment of the Applicant's ability to carry out its Comprehensive Business Plan; and
(iv)funds deobligated from a FY 2003, FY 2004 or FY 2005 FA award (if the Applicant is applying for a FA award under this NOFA) if
(A)the amount of deobligated funds is at least $200,000 and
(B)the deobligation occurred subsequent to the expiration of the period of award funds availability (generally, any funds deobligated after the September 30th following the year in which the award was made). Any award deobligations that result in a point deduction under an application submitted pursuant to either funding round of this NOFA will not be counted against any future application for FA through the CDFI Program. All questions regarding outstanding reports or compliance should be directed to the Grants Manager by E-mail at *grantsmanagement@cdfi.treas.gov;* by telephone at
(202)622-8226; by facsimile at
(202)622-7754; or by mail to CDFI Fund, 601 13th Street, NW., Suite 200 South, Washington, DC 20005. These are not toll free numbers. The Fund will respond to reporting or compliance questions between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, starting the date of the publication of this NOFA through November 10, 2006. The Fund will not respond to reporting or compliance phone calls or e-mail inquiries that are received after 5 p.m. on November 10, 2006 until after the applicable funding application deadline.
(b)*Ranking:* The Fund then will rank the applications by their scores, from highest to lowest, as follows:
(i)*TA-only Applicants and Category I/SECA Applicants* will be ranked from highest to lowest, based on each Applicant's scores for all five criteria categories added together.
(ii)*Category II/Core Applicants* must receive scores in both the Management category and the Financial Health and Viability category that each equal at least 50 percent of the available points in each of those sections. For Category II/Core Applicants that exceed this threshold, the Fund will use the combined scores of the Market Analysis, Product Design and Implementation Strategy, and Community Development Performance categories to rank such Applicants, highest to lowest. 4. Award Selection The Fund will make its final award selections based on the rank order of Applicants by their scores and the amount of funds available. Subject to the availability of funding, the Fund will award funding in the order of the ranking. TA-only Applicants, Category I/ SECA and Category II/Core Applicants will be ranked separately. In addition, the Fund may consider the institutional and geographic diversity of Applicants when making its funding decisions. 5. Insured CDFIs In the case of Insured Depository Institutions and Insured Credit Unions, the Fund will take into consideration the views of the Appropriate Federal Banking Agencies; in the case of State-Insured Credit Unions, the Fund may consult with the appropriate State banking agencies (or comparable entity). The Fund will not approve a FA award or a TA grant to any Insured Credit Union (other than a State-Insured Credit Union) or Insured Depository Institution Applicant that has a CAMEL rating that is higher than a “3” or for which its Appropriate Federal Banking Agency indicates it has safety and soundness concerns, unless the Appropriate Federal Banking Agency asserts, in writing, that:
(i)An upgrade to a CAMEL 3 rating or better (or other improvement in status) is imminent and such upgrade is expected to occur not later than September 30, 2007 or within such other time frame deemed acceptable by the Fund, or
(ii)the safety and soundness condition of the Applicant is adequate to undertake the activities for which the Applicant has requested a FA award and the obligations of an Assistance Agreement related to such a FA award. 6. Award Notification Each Applicant will be informed of the Fund's award decision either through a Notice of Award if selected for an award (see Notice of Award section, below) or written declination if not selected for an award. Each Applicant that is not selected for an award based on reasons other than completeness or eligibility issues will be provided a written debriefing on the strengths and weaknesses of its application. This feedback will be provided in a format and within a timeframe to be determined by the Fund, based on available resources. The Fund will notify Awardees by E-mail using the addresses maintained in the Awardee's myCDFIFund account (postal mailings will be used only in rare cases). 7. The Fund reserves the right to reject an application if information (including administrative errors) comes to the attention of the Fund that either adversely affects an applicant's eligibility for an award, or adversely affects the Fund's evaluation or scoring of an application, or indicates fraud or mismanagement on the part of an Applicant. If the Fund determines that any portion of the application is incorrect in any material respect, the Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to reject the application. The Fund reserves the right to change its eligibility and evaluation criteria and procedures, if the Fund deems it appropriate; if said changes materially affect the Fund's award decisions, the Fund will provide information regarding the changes through the Fund's Web site. There is no right to appeal the Fund's award decisions. The Fund's award decisions are final. VI. Award Administration Information A. Notice of Award The Fund will signify its conditional selection of an Applicant as an Awardee by delivering a signed Notice of Award to the Applicant. The Notice of Award will contain the general terms and conditions underlying the Fund's provision of assistance including, but not limited to, the requirement that the Awardee and the Fund enter into an Assistance Agreement. The Applicant must execute the Notice of Award and return it to the Fund. By executing a Notice of Award, the Awardee agrees, among other things, that, if prior to entering into an Assistance Agreement with the Fund, information (including administrative error) comes to the attention of the Fund that either adversely affects the Awardee's eligibility for an award, or adversely affects the Fund's evaluation of the Awardee's application, or indicates fraud or mismanagement on the part of the Awardee, the Fund may, in its discretion and without advance notice to the Awardee, terminate the Notice of Award or take such other actions as it deems appropriate. Moreover, by executing a Notice of Award, the Awardee agrees that, if prior to entering into an Assistance Agreement with the Fund, the Fund determines that the Awardee is in default of any Assistance Agreement previously entered into with the Fund, the Fund may, in its discretion and without advance notice to the Awardee, either terminate the Notice of Award or take such other actions as it deems appropriate. The Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to rescind its award if the Awardee fails to return the Notice of Award, signed by the authorized representative of the Awardee, along with any other requested documentation, within the deadline set by the Fund. 1. Failure To Meet Reporting Requirements If an Awardee, or an entity that Controls the Awardee, is Controlled by the Awardee or shares common management officials with the Awardee (as determined by the Fund) is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program and is not current on the reporting requirements set forth in the previously executed assistance, allocation or award agreement(s), as of the date of the Notice of Award, the Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delay entering into an Assistance Agreement until said prior Awardee or allocatee is current on the reporting requirements in the previously executed assistance, allocation or award agreement(s). Please note that the Fund only acknowledges the receipt of reports that are complete. As such, incomplete reports or reports that are deficient of required elements will not be recognized as having been received. If said prior Awardee or allocatee is unable to meet this requirement within the timeframe set by the Fund, the Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to terminate and rescind the Notice of Award and the award made under this NOFA. 2. Pending Resolution of Noncompliance If an Applicant is a prior Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program and if:
(i)It has submitted complete and timely reports to the Fund that demonstrate noncompliance with a previous assistance, award or allocation agreement; and
(ii)the Fund has yet to make a final determination as to whether the entity is in default of its previous assistance, award or allocation agreement, the Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delay entering into an Assistance Agreement, pending full resolution, in the sole determination of the Fund, of the noncompliance. Further, if another entity that Controls the Applicant, is Controlled by the Applicant or shares common management officials with the Applicant (as determined by the Fund), is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee and if such entity:
(i)Has submitted complete and timely reports to the Fund that demonstrate noncompliance with a previous assistance, award or allocation agreement; and
(ii)the Fund has yet to make a final determination as to whether the entity is in default of its previous assistance, award or allocation agreement, the Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delay entering into an Assistance Agreement, pending full resolution, in the sole determination of the Fund, of the noncompliance. If the prior Awardee or allocatee in question is unable to satisfactorily resolve the issues of noncompliance, in the sole determination of the Fund, the Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to terminate and rescind the Notice of Award and the award made under this NOFA. 3. Default Status If, at any time prior to entering into an Assistance Agreement through this NOFA, the Fund has made a final determination that an Awardee that is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program is in default of a previously executed assistance, allocation or award agreement(s), the Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delay entering into an Assistance Agreement, until said prior Awardee or allocatee has submitted a complete and timely report demonstrating full compliance with said agreement within a timeframe set by the Fund. Further, if at any time prior to entering into an Assistance Agreement through this NOFA, the Fund has made a final determination that another entity that Controls the Awardee, is Controlled by the applicant or shares common management officials with the Awardee (as determined by the Fund), is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program and is in default of a previously executed assistance, allocation or award agreement(s), the Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delay entering into an Assistance Agreement, until said prior Awardee or allocatee has submitted a complete and timely report demonstrating full compliance with said agreement within a timeframe set by the Fund. If said prior Awardee or allocatee is unable to meet this requirement, the Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to terminate and rescind the Notice of Award and the award made under this NOFA. 4. Termination in Default If
(i)within the 12-month period prior to entering into an Assistance Agreement through this NOFA, the Fund has made a final determination that an Awardee that is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program whose award or allocation was terminated in default of such prior agreement; and
(ii)the final reporting period end date for the applicable terminated agreement falls in Calendar Year 2006, the Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delay entering into an Assistance Agreement. Further, if
(i)within the 12-month period prior to entering into an Assistance Agreement through this NOFA, the Fund has made a final determination that another entity that Controls the Awardee, is Controlled by the Awardee or shares common management officials with the Awardee (as determined by the Fund), is a prior Fund Awardee or allocatee under any Fund program whose award or allocation was terminated in default of such prior agreement; and
(ii)the final reporting period end date for the applicable terminated agreement falls in Calendar Year 2006, the Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delay entering into an Assistance Agreement. 5. Deobligated Awards An Awardee that receives a FA award pursuant to this NOFA for which an amount over $200,000 is deobligated by the Fund subsequent to the expiration of the period of award funds availability (generally, any funds deobligated after the September 30th following the year in which the award was made) but within the 12 months prior to the application deadline, may not apply for a new award through another NOFA for one CDFI or NACA Program funding round after the date of said deobligation. B. Assistance Agreement Each Applicant that is selected to receive an award under this NOFA must enter into an Assistance Agreement with the Fund in order to receive disbursement of award proceeds. The Assistance Agreement will set forth certain required terms and conditions of the award, which will include, but not be limited to:
(i)The amount of the award;
(ii)the type of award;
(iii)the approved uses of the award;
(iv)the approved Target Market to which the funded activity must be targeted;
(v)performance goals and measures; and
(vi)reporting requirements for all Awardees. FA and FA/TA Assistance Agreements under this NOFA generally will have three-year performance periods; TA-only Assistance Agreements generally will have two-year performance periods. The Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to terminate the Notice of Award and rescind an award if the Awardee fails to return the Assistance Agreement, signed by the authorized representative of the Awardee, and/or provide the Fund with any other requested documentation, within the deadlines set by the Fund. In addition to entering into an Assistance Agreement, each Awardee that receives an award either
(i)in the form of a loan, equity investment, credit union shares/deposits, or secondary capital, in any amount, or
(ii)a FA grant in an amount greater than $500,000, must furnish to the Fund an opinion from its legal counsel, the content of which will be specified in the Assistance Agreement, to include, among other matters, an opinion that the Awardee:
(A)Is duly formed and in good standing in the jurisdiction in which it was formed and/or operates;
(B)has the authority to enter into the Assistance Agreement and undertake the activities that are specified therein; and
(C)has no pending or threatened litigation that would materially affect its ability to enter into and carry out the activities specified in the Assistance Agreement. Each other Awardee must provide the Fund with a good standing certificate (or equivalent documentation) from its state (or jurisdiction) of incorporation. C. Reporting 1. Reporting Requirements The Fund will collect information, on at least an annual basis, from each Awardee including, but not limited to, an Annual Report that comprises the following components:
(i)Financial Report;
(ii)Institution Level Report;
(iii)Transaction Level Report (for Awardees receiving FA);
(iv)Financial Status Report (for Awardees receiving TA);
(v)Uses of Financial Assistance and Matching Funds Report (for Awardees receiving Financial Assistance);
(vi)Explanation of Noncompliance (as applicable); and
(vii)such other information as the Fund may require. Each Awardee is responsible for the timely and complete submission of the Annual Report, even if all or a portion of the documents actually is completed by another entity or signatory to the Assistance Agreement. If such other entities or signatories are required to provide Institution Level Reports, Transaction Level Reports, Financial Reports, or other documentation that the Fund may require, the Awardee is responsible for ensuring that the information is submitted timely and complete. The Fund reserves the right to contact such additional signatories to the Assistance Agreement and require that additional information and documentation be provided. The Fund will use such information to monitor each Awardee's compliance with the requirements set forth in the Assistance Agreement and to assess the impact of the CDFI Program. The Institution Level Report and the Transaction Level Report must be submitted through the Fund's web-based data collection system, the Community Investment Impact System (CIIS). The Financial Report may be submitted through CIIS, or by fax or mail to the Fund. All other components of the Annual Report may be submitted to the Fund in paper form or other form to be determined by the Fund. The Fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to modify these reporting requirements if it determines it to be appropriate and necessary; however, such reporting requirements will be modified only after notice to Awardees. 2. Accounting The Fund will require each Awardee that receives FA and TA awards through this NOFA to account for and track the use of said FA and TA awards. This means that for every dollar of FA and TA awards received from the Fund, the Awardee will be required to inform the Fund of its uses. This will require Awardees to establish separate administrative and accounting controls, subject to the applicable OMB Circulars. The Fund will provide guidance to Awardees outlining the format and content of the information to be provided on an annual basis, outlining and describing how the funds were used. Each Awardee that receives an award must provide the Fund with the required complete and accurate Automated Clearinghouse
(ACH)form for its bank account prior to award closing and disbursement. VII. Agency Contacts The Fund will respond to questions and provide support concerning this NOFA and the funding application between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, starting the date of the publication of this NOFA through November 10, 2006. The Fund will not respond to questions or provide support concerning the application that are received after 5 p.m. ET on said dates, until after the respective funding application deadline. Applications and other information regarding the Fund and its programs may be obtained from the Fund's Web site at *http://www.cdfifund.gov* . The Fund will post on its Web site responses to questions of general applicability regarding the CDFI Program. A. Information Technology Support Technical support can be obtained by calling
(202)622-2455 or by E-mail at *ithelpdesk@cdfi.treas.gov* . People who have visual or mobility impairments that prevent them from creating an Investment Area map using the Fund's Web site should call
(202)622-2455 for assistance. These are not toll-free numbers. B. Programmatic Support If you have any questions about the programmatic requirements of this NOFA, contact the Fund's Program office by e-mail at *cdfihelp@cdfi.treas.gov* , by telephone at
(202)622-6355, by facsimile at
(202)622-7754, or by mail at CDFI Fund, 601 13th Street, NW., Suite 200 South, Washington, DC 20005. These are not toll-free numbers. C. Grants Management Support If you have any questions regarding the administrative requirements of this NOFA, including questions regarding submission requirements, contact the Fund's Grants Manager by e-mail at *grantsmanagement@cdfi.treas.gov* , by telephone at
(202)622-8226, by facsimile at
(202)622-6453, or by mail at CDFI Fund, 601 13th Street, NW., Suite 200 South, Washington, DC 20005. These are not toll-free numbers. D. Compliance and Monitoring Support If you have any questions regarding the compliance requirements of this NOFA, including questions regarding performance on prior awards, contact the Fund's Compliance Manager by e-mail at *cme@cdfi.treas.gov* , by telephone at
(202)622-8226, by facsimile at
(202)622-6453, or by mail at CDFI Fund, 601 13th Street, NW., Suite 200 South, Washington, DC 20005. These are not toll-free numbers. E. Legal Counsel Support If you have any questions or matters that you believe require response by the Fund's Office of Legal Counsel, please refer to the document titled “How To Request a Legal Review,” found on the Fund's Web site at *http://www.cdfifund.gov* . Further, if you wish to review the Assistance Agreement form document from a prior funding round, you may find it posted on the Fund's Web site (please note that there may be revisions to the Assistance Agreement that will be used for Awardees under this NOFA and thus the sample document on the Fund's Web site is provided for illustrative purposes only and should not be relied on for purposes of this NOFA). F. Communication With the CDFI Fund The Fund will use its myCDFIFund Internet interface to communicate with Applicants and Awardees under this NOFA. Applicants must register through myCDFIFund in order to submit a complete application for funding. Awardees must use myCDFIFund to submit required reports. The Fund will notify Awardees by e-mail using the addresses maintained in each Awardee's myCDFIFund account. Therefore, the Awardee and any Subsidiaries, signatories, and Affiliates must maintain accurate contact information (including contact person and authorized representative, e-mail addresses, fax numbers, phone numbers, and office addresses) in their myCDFIFund account(s). For more information about myCDFIFund, please see the Help documents posted at *https://www.cdfifund.gov/myCDFI/Help/Help.asp* . VIII. Information Sessions and Outreach The Fund may conduct Information Sessions to disseminate information to organizations contemplating applying to, and other organizations interested in learning about, the Fund's programs. For further information on the Fund's Information Sessions, dates and locations, or to register to attend an Information Session, please visit the Fund's Web site at *http://www.cdfifund.gov* or call the Fund at
(202)622-9046. Authority: 12 U.S.C. 4703, 4703 note, 4704, 4706, 4707, 4717; 12 CFR part 1805. Dated: August 22, 2006. Arthur A. Garcia, Director, Community Development Financial Institutions Fund. [FR Doc. E6-14253 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4810-70-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Quarterly Publication of Individuals, Who Have Chosen To Expatriate, as Required by Section 6039G AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice is provided in accordance with IRC section 6039G, as amended, by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) of 1996. This listing contains the name of each individual losing United States citizenship (within the meaning of section 877(a)) with respect to whom the Secretary received information during the quarter ending June 30, 2006. Last name First name Middle name/ initials Pedersen Torben Bach. Pedersen Christine CHAN ABRAHAM LOK-SHUNG. FANG ALEX LOPEZ RAILI K. Hsu Joyce I-Yin. GURDJIAN ALEXIS P. EISENBEISS PHILIP WILLIAM. GOURY DU ROSLAN MARIE EDMEE C. LE TOURNEUR JULIEN DIDIER. BELENKAYA TATYANA Holliday-Smith Roderic FUJIMORI MITSUKO CADY SUSANNE CARMEN BOOTH. Kanai Umiko KANE PATRICIA MARY. Cookson Adam GRIFFIN STEVEN EUGENE. HAMMES VOLKER ALFONS. Ko Maria Yin. Fitzjohn Naomi Fitzjohn Jacqueline Fitzjohn David Roy. HUNT GISELA VLAD CONSTANTIN MIRCEA. Weibel Dominique Chan Henry Homing. BRIGGS HILARY BONNIE. GALLET ALAIN PALO ANTERO E. SETHI ANOOP Dated: July 25, 2006. Angie Kaminski, Examinations Operations, Philadelphia Compliance Services. [FR Doc. E6-14188 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Art Advisory Panel—Notice of Closed Meeting AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service, Treasury. ACTION: Notice of closed meeting of Art Advisory Panel. SUMMARY: Closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held in Washington, DC. DATES: The meeting will be held September 20 and 21, 2006. ADDRESSES: The closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held on September 20 and 21, 2006, in Room 4136 beginning at 9:30 a.m., Franklin Court Building, 1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Carolan, C:AP:ART, 1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. Telephone
(202)435-5609 (not a toll free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., that a closed meeting of the Art Advisory Panel will be held on September 20 and 21, 2006, in Room 4136 beginning at 9:30 a.m., Franklin Court Building, 1099 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. The agenda will consist of the review and evaluation of the acceptability of fair market value appraisals of works of art involved in Federal income, estate, or gift tax 2 returns. This will involve the discussion of material in individual tax returns made confidential by the provisions of 26 U.S.C. 6103. A determination as required by section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act has been made that this meeting is concerned with matters listed in section 552b(c)(3), (4), (6), and (7), and that the meeting will not be open to the public. Karen S. Ammons, Deputy Chief, Appeals. [FR Doc. E6-14189 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Open Meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (Including the States of Delaware, North Carolina, South Carolina, New Jersey, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia and the District of Columbia) AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted (via teleconference). The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. DATES: The meeting will be held Wednesday, September 20, 2006, at 2:30 p.m. ET. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Inez E. De Jesus at 1-888-912-1227, or 954-423-7977. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10 (a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App.
(1988)that an open meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Wednesday, September 20, 2006 at 2:30 p.m. ET via a telephone conference call. If you would like to have the TAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7977, or write Inez E. De Jesus, TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Rd., Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the telephone conference call meeting must be made with Inez E. De Jesus. Ms. De Jesus can be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7977, or post comments to the Web site: *http://www.improveirs.org* . The agenda will include the following: Various IRS issues. Dated: August 17, 2006. John Fay, Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. [FR Doc. E6-14223 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service Open Meeting of the Area 3 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (Including the States of Florida, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Puerto Rico) AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Area 3 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted (via teleconference). The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, September 19, 2006 from 11:30 a.m. ET. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sallie Chavez at 1-888-912-1227, or 954-423-7979. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10
(2)of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App.
(1988)that an open meeting of the Area 3 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Tuesday, September 19, 2006, from 11:30 a.m. ET via a telephone conference call. If you would like to have the TAP consider a written statement, please call 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7979, or write Sallie Chavez, TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Rd., Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate in the telephone conference call meeting must be made with Sallie Chavez. Ms. Chavez can be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7979, or post comments to the Web site: *http://www.improveirs.org.* The agenda will include: Various IRS issues. Dated: August 17, 2006. John Fay, Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel. [FR Doc. E6-14224 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Geriatrics and Gerontology Advisory Committee; Cancellation—Notice of Meeting The Department of Veterans Affairs gives notice under Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the meeting of the Geriatrics and Gerontology Advisory Committee scheduled to be held at VA Central Office, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC on September 19-20, 2006 *has been cancelled.* For more information, please contact Mrs. Marcia Holt-Delaney, Program Analyst, Office of Geriatrics and Extended Care, at
(202)273-8540. Dated: August 22, 2006. By Direction of the Secretary. E. Philip Riggin, Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. 06-7199 Filed 8-25-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 7
6 references not yet in our index
  • Pub. L. 92-463
  • 49 CFR 1.66
  • 49 CFR 581
  • 49 CFR 555
  • 49 CFR 512
  • 12 CFR 1805
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of the Railroad Safety Advisory Committee (RSAC) meeting
U.S.C.§ 30113
U.S.C.§ 30102
C.F.R.§ 1805.102
C.F.R.§ 1805.500
C.F.R.§ 1805.301
U.S.C.§ 4703
U.S.C.§ 6103
Pub. L.Pub. L. 92-463
Cite49 CFR 1.66
Cite49 CFR 581
Cite49 CFR 555
Cite49 CFR 512
Cites 13 · 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.