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 · 2007-03-01 · DEPARTMENT OF LABOR · Notices

Notices. Notice

38,305 words·~174 min read·/register/2007/03/01/07-921

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

BILLING CODE 4410-15-M DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Secretary Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request February 23, 2007. The Department of Labor
(DOL)has submitted the following public information collection request
(ICR)to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A copy of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained at *http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain* , or contact Ira Mills on 202-693-4122 (this is not a toll-free number) or e-mail: *Mills.Ira@dol.gov.* Comments should be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for U.S. Department of Labor/Employment and Training Administration (ETA), Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, 202-395-7316 (this is not a toll free number), within 30 days from the date of this publication in the **Federal Register** . The OMB is particularly interested in comments which: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Agency:* Employment and Training Administration. *Type of Review:* Extension without change of a currently approved collection. *Title:* Quick Turnaround Surveys on Workforce Act Implementation. *OMB Number:* 1205—0436. *Frequency:* On occasion. *Affected Public:* Individuals or households, Business or other for-profit, Not-for-profit institutions, and State, Local, or Tribal Government. *Type of Response:* Reporting. *Number of Respondents:* 5,000. *Annual Responses:* 5,000. *Average Response time:* 90 minutes. *Total Annual Burden Hours:* 7,500. *Total Annualized Capital/Startup Costs:* 0. *Total Annual Costs (operating/maintaining systems or purchasing services):* 0. *Description:* Quick turnaround surveys fill a critical gap in the ETA's information needs about how the workforce system is unfolding and inform development of legislation, regulations and technical assistance. Ira L. Mills, Departmental Clearance Officer/ Team Leader. [FR Doc. E7-3545 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Secretary Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request February 23, 2007. The Department of Labor
(DOL)has submitted the following public information collection request
(ICR)to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35). A copy of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained from RegInfo.gov at *http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain* or by contacting Darrin King on 202-693-4129 (this is not a toll-free number) / e-mail: *king.darrin@dol.gov.* Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, Telephone: 202-395-7316 / Fax: 202-395-6974 (these are not toll-free numbers), within 30 days from the date of this publication in the **Federal Register** . The OMB is particularly interested in comments which: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, *e.g.* , permitting electronic submission of responses. *Agency:* Employee Benefits Security Administration. *Type of Review:* Extension without change of currently approved collection. *Title:* PTE 88-59—Residential Mortgage Financing Arrangements Involving Employee Benefit Plans. *OMB Number:* 1210-0095. *Type of Response:* Recordkeeping and Third party disclosure. *Affected Public:* Private Sector: Business or other for-profits. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 1,785. *Estimated Number of Annual Responses:* 8,925. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 744. *Estimated Total Annualized capital/startup costs:* $0. *Estimated Total Annual Costs (operating/maintaining systems or purchasing services):* $0. *Description:* Prohibited Transaction Exemption
(PTE)88-59 provides an exemption from certain prohibited transaction provisions of the Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 and from certain taxes imposed by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for transactions in which an employee benefit plan provides mortgage financing to purchasers of residential dwelling units, provided specified conditions are met. Among other conditions, PTE 88-59 requires that adequate records pertaining to exempted transactions be maintained for the duration of the pertinent loan. Darrin A. King, Acting Departmental Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7-3546 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-29-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Secretary Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request February 15, 2007. The Department of Labor
(DOL)has submitted the following public information collection requests
(ICR)to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35). A copy of each ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained from RegInfo.gov at *http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain* or by contacting Darrin King on 202-693-4129 (this is not a toll-free number)/e-mail: king.darrin@dol.gov. Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the Employment Standards Administration (ESA), Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, Telephone: 202-395-7316/Fax: 202-395-6974 (these are not a toll-free numbers), within 30 days from the date of this publication in the **Federal Register** . The OMB is particularly interested in comments which: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, *e.g.* , permitting electronic submission of responses. *Agency:* Employment Standards Administration. *Type of Review:* Extension without change of currently approved collection. *Title:* Certification By School Official. *OMB Number:* 1215-0061. *Form Number:* CM-981. *Frequency:* Annually. *Type of Response:* Reporting. *Affected Public:* Individuals or households. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 400. *Estimated Number of Annual Responses:* 400. *Estimated Average Response Time:* 10 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 67. *Total Estimated Annualized capital/startup costs:* $0. *Total Estimated Annual Costs (operating/maintaining systems or purchasing services):* $0. *Description:* CM-981 is completed by a school official to verify whether a Black Lung beneficiary's dependent, aged 18 to 23, qualifies as a full-time student. *Agency:* Employment Standards Administration. *Type of Review:* Extension without change of currently approved collection. *Title:* Davis-Bacon and Related Acts/Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act Reporting Requirements—Regulations, 29 CFR part 5. *OMB Number:* 1215-0140. *Frequency:* On occasion. *Type of Response:* Reporting. *Affected Public:* Business and other for-profit and Federal Government. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 3,006. *Estimated Number of Annual Responses:* 3,006. *Estimated Average Response Time:* 15 minutes for conformance reports and 1 hour for requests to approve unfunded fringe benefit plans. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 756. *Total Annualized capital/startup costs:* $0. *Total Annual Costs (operating/maintaining systems or purchasing services):* $1,263. *Description:* Regulations 29 CFR Part 5 prescribe labor standards for federally financed and assisted construction contracts subject to the Davis-Bacon Act (DBA), 40 U.S.C. 3141 *et seq.* , the Davis-Bacon Related Acts (DBRA), and labor standards for all contracts subject to the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (CWHSSA), 40 U.S.C. 3701 *et seq.* The DBA and DBRA require payment of locally prevailing wages and fringe benefits, as determined by the Department of Labor (DOL), to laborers and mechanics on most federally financed or assisted construction projects. See 40 U.S.C. 3142(a) and 29 CFR 5.5(a)(1). The CWHSSA requires the payment of one and one-half times the basic rate of pay for hours worked over forty in a week on most federal contracts involving the employment of laborers or mechanics. See 40 U.S.C. 3702(c) and 29 CFR 5.5(b)(1). The requirements of this information collection consist of:
(A)reports of conformed classifications and wage rates, and
(B)requests for approval of unfunded fringe benefit plans. A. *Conformance Reports (29 CFR 5.5(a)(1)(ii)):* DBA section 1(a) provides that every contract subject to the DBA must contain a provision (a wage determination) stating the minimum wages and fringe benefits to be paid the various classes of laborers and mechanics employed on the contract. See 40 U.S.C. 3141(c)(1) and 29 CFR 5.5(a)(1)(i). This requirement necessitates a method for establishing minimum rates for classes of employees omitted from wage determinations, primarily due to wage data being unavailable; therefore, regulations 29 CFR 5.5(a)(1)(ii) requires that any class of laborer or mechanic not listed in the wage determination that is to be employed under the contract shall be classified in conformance with the wage determination. A report of the conformance action (or, where there is disagreement among the parties, the questions and views of all parties) shall be submitted through the contracting officer to DOL for review and approval. 29 CFR 5.5(a)(3)(i). B. *Unfunded Fringe Benefit Plans (29 CFR 5.5(a)(1)(iv)):* The DBA provides that “wages” may include “costs to the contractor or subcontractor which may be reasonably anticipated in providing benefits to laborers or mechanics pursuant to an enforceable commitment to carry out a financially responsible plan or program.” 40 U.S.C. 3141(2)(B)(ii). Where a benefit plan is not of the conventional type described in the DBA and/or common in the construction industry that is established under a customary fund or program, it is necessary to determine from the circumstances whether the benefit is bona fide, as required by the DBA; thus, regulations 29 CFR 5.5(a)(1)(iv) provides for contractors to request approval of unfunded fringe benefit plans. *Agency:* Employment Standards Administration. *Type of Review:* Extension without change of currently approved collection. *Title:* Claim for Compensation by Dependents Information Reports. *OMB Number:* 1215-0155. *Frequency:* On occasion and Annually. *Type of Response:* Reporting. *Affected Public:* Individuals or households. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 1,880. Form/letter Estimated number of annual responses Average response time Estimated annual burden hours CA-5 150 90 225 CA-5b 20 90 30 CA-1031 150 15 37 CA-1074 10 60 10 Student/Dependency 1,050 30 525 Comp Due at Death 500 30 250 Total 1,880 1,077 *Total Annualized capital/startup costs:* $0. *Total Annual Costs (operating/maintaining systems or purchasing services):* $452. *Description:* These reports request information from the survivors of deceased Federal employees which verify dependents status when making a claim for benefits and on a periodic basis in accepted claims. Some of the forms are used to obtain information on claimed dependents in disability cases. Darrin A. King, Acting Departmental Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7-3547 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-CN-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Request for Certification of Compliance—Rural Industrialization Loan and Grant Program AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration, Labor. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Employment and Training Administration is issuing this notice to announce the receipt of a “Certification of Non-Relocation and Market and Capacity Information Report” (Form 4279-2) for the following: *Applicant/Location:* Hope Lake Investors, LLC/Cortland, New York. *Principal Product:* The loan, guarantee, or grant application is to finance the building of a hotel with health spa, water park, and restaurant. The NAICS industry codes for this enterprise are: 721110 Hotels (except Casino Hotels) and Motels; 713110 Amusement and Theme Parks; and, 722110 Full-Service Restaurants. DATES: All interested parties may submit comments in writing no later than March 15, 2007. Copies of adverse comments received will be forwarded to the applicant noted above. ADDRESSES: Address all comments concerning this notice to Anthony D. Dais, U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room S-4231, Washington, DC 20210; or e-mail *Dais.Anthony@dol.gov;* or transmit via fax 202-693-3015 (this is not a toll-free number). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony D. Dais, at telephone number
(202)693-2784 (this is not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 188 of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act of 1972, as established under 29 CFR part 75, authorizes the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA)to make or guarantee loans or grants to finance industrial and business activities in rural areas. The Secretary of Labor must review the application for financial assistance for the purpose of certifying to the Secretary of Agriculture that the assistance is not calculated, or likely, to result in:
(a)A transfer of any employment or business activity from one area to another by the loan applicant's business operation; or,
(b)An increase in the production of goods, materials, services, or facilities in an area where there is not sufficient demand to employ the efficient capacity of existing competitive enterprises unless the financial assistance will not have an adverse impact on existing competitive enterprises in the area. The Employment and Training Administration
(ETA)within the Department of Labor is responsible for the review and certification process. Comments should address the two bases for certification and, if possible, provide data to assist in the analysis of these issues. Dated at Washington, DC this 22nd day of February, 2007. Gay M. Gilbert, Administrator, Office of Workforce Investment, Employment and Training Administration. [FR Doc. E7-3544 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Proposed Collection; Comment Request SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 which provides opportunity for public comment on new or revised data collections, the Railroad Retirement Board
(RRB)will publish periodic summaries of proposed data collections. *Comments are invited on:*
(a)Whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the RRB's estimate of the burden of the collection of the information;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(d)ways to minimize the burden related to the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Title and Purpose of Information Collection Certification Regarding Rights to Unemployment Benefits; OMB 3220-0079. Under Section 4 of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act (RUIA), an employee who leaves work voluntarily is disqualified for unemployment benefits unless the employee left work for good cause and is not qualified for unemployment benefits under any other law. RRB Form UI-45, Claimant's Statement—Voluntary Leaving of Work, is used by the RRB to obtain the claimant's statement when it is indicated by the claimant, the claimant's employer, or another source that the claimant has voluntarily left work. The RRB proposes a minor non-burden impacting editorial change to Form UI-45. Completion of Form UI-45 is required to obtain or retain benefits. One response is received from each respondent. The completion time for Form UI-45 is estimated at 15 minutes per response. The RRB estimates that approximately 2,900 responses are received annually. *Additional Information or Comments:* To request more information or to obtain a copy of the information collection justification, forms, and/or supporting material, please call the RRB Clearance Officer at
(312)751-3363 or send an e-mail request to *Charles.Mierzwa@RRB.gov.* Comments regarding the information collection should be addressed to Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611-2092 or send an e-mail to *Ronald.Hodapp@RRB.gov.* Written comments should be received within 60 days of this notice. Charles Mierzwa, Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7-3576 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7905-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. IC-27739] Notice of Applications for Deregistration Under Section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 February 23, 2007. The following is a notice of applications for deregistration under section 8(f) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for the month of February, 2007. A copy of each application may be obtained for a fee at the SEC's Public Reference Branch (tel. 202-551-5850). An order granting each application will be issued unless the SEC orders a hearing. Interested persons may request a hearing on any application by writing to the SEC's Secretary at the address below and serving the relevant applicant with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing requests should be received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on March 20, 2007, and should be accompanied by proof of service on the applicant, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the Secretary, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. *For Further Information Contact:* Diane L. Titus at
(202)551-6810, SEC, Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment Company Regulation, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-4041. Eagle Growth Shares Investing Programs [File No. 811-2018] *Summary:* Applicant, a unit investment trust, seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On November 27, 2001, applicant made a liquidating distribution to its shareholders, based on net asset value. Expenses of $2,145 incurred in connection with the liquidating distribution were paid by Baxter Financial Corp., applicant's sponsor, and Eagle Growth Shares, Inc. *Filing Dates:* The application was filed on October 20, 2006, and amended on January 26, 2007. *Applicant's Address:* Federated Investors Tower, 5800 Corporate Dr., Pittsburgh, PA 15237-1200 North Federal Hwy., Suite 424, Boca Raton, FL 33432. Credit Suisse Institutional Fixed Income Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-8917] Credit Suisse Small Cap Growth Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-7909] Credit Suisse Fixed Income Fund [File No. 811-5039] *Summary:* Each applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Between November 29, 2006 and December 22, 2006, each applicant made a liquidating distribution to its shareholders, based on net asset value. Expenses of $8,500 incurred in connection with each liquidation were paid by Credit Suisse Asset Management, LLC, investment adviser to each applicant. Applicants have retained cash in the amount of $32,472, $22,334 and $106,421, respectively, to cover certain additional outstanding liabilities. *Filing Date:* The applications were filed on February 7, 2007. *Applicants' Address:* c/o Credit Suisse Asset Management, LLC, Eleven Madison Ave., New York, NY 10010. Federated Municipal High Yield Advantage Fund, Inc. [File No. 811-4533] *Summary:* Applicant seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. On November 10, 2006, applicant transferred its assets to Federated Municipal High Yield Advantage Fund, a portfolio of Federated Municipal Securities Income Trust, based on net asset value. Expenses of $86,399 incurred in connection with the reorganization were paid by applicant and the acquiring fund. *Filing Date:* The application was filed on January 16, 2007. *Applicant's Address:* Federated Investors Tower, 5800 Corporate Dr., Pittsburgh, PA 15237-7010. Pioneer Tax Qualified Dividend Fund [File No. 811-21459] Pioneer International Income and Growth Trust [File No. 811-21535] Pioneer Municipal High Yield Trust [File No. 811-21717] *Summary:* Each applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicants have never made a public offering of their securities and do not propose to make a public offering or engage in business of any kind. *Filing Date:* The applications were filed on February 6, 2007. *Applicants' Address:* 60 State St., Boston, MA 02109. Liberty All-Star Mid-Cap Fund [File No. 811-21733] *Summary:* Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant has never made a public offering of its securities and does not propose to make a public offering or engage in business of any kind. *Filing Dates:* The application was filed on December 29, 2006, and amended on February 2, 2007. *Applicant's Address:* 100 Federal St., Boston, MA 02110. Ameritrade Automatic Common Exchange Security Trust [File No. 811-9319] *Summary:* Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant has never made a public offering of its securities and does not propose to make a public offering or engage in business of any kind. *Filing Dates:* The application was filed on December 5, 2006, and amended January 31, 2007. *Applicant's Address:* Attn: Heather Sahrbeck, Goldman, Sachs & Co., 85 Broad St., New York, NY 10004. Pioneer AllWeather Fund LLC [File No. 811-21408] *Summary:* Applicant, a closed-end investment company, seeks an order declaring that it has ceased to be an investment company. Applicant has never made a public offering of its securities and does not propose to make a public offering or engage in business of any kind. *Filing Dates:* The application was filed on October 27, 2004, and amended on February 6, 2007. *Applicant's Address:* 60 State St., Boston, MA 02109. For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management, pursuant to delegated authority. Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-3555 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-55336; File No. SR-ISE-2006-59] Self-Regulatory Organizations; International Securities Exchange, LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to Foreign Currency Options February 23, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”), 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on September 29, 2006, the International Securities Exchange, LLC (“ISE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the ISE. On February 23, 2007, the Exchange filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. 3 The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange:
(1)Reduced the number of currencies on which the Exchange proposes to list and trade cash-settled FCOs;
(2)amended the position limit amounts for the currencies that are proposed in this Amendment No.1;
(3)removed the listing and trading of foreign currency options that expire in weekly intervals from the proposed rule text;
(4)made certain non-substantive changes to the proposed rule text; and
(5)adopted a margin rule similar to Commentary .16 of the Philadelphia Stock Exchange's Rule 722. Amendment No. 1 replaced and superseded the original filing in its entirety. I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change The ISE is proposing to adopt rules for the listing and trading of cash-settled foreign currency options (“FCOs”) on the following currencies: the euro, the British pound, the Australian dollar, the New Zealand dollar, the Japanese yen, the Canadian dollar, the Swiss franc, the Chinese renminbi, the Mexican peso, the Swedish krona, the Russian ruble, the South African rand, the Brazilian real, the Israeli shekel, the Norwegian krone, the Polish zloty, the Hungarian forint, the Czech koruna, and the Korean won (individually, a “Currency” and collectively, the “Currencies”). The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site ( *http://www.iseoptions.com* ), at the Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, the ISE included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The ISE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of the proposed rule change is to adopt rules enabling the Exchange to list and trade FCOs. The Exchange proposes to adopt rules for the listing and trading of cash-settled FCOs on the following currencies: the euro, the British pound, the Australian dollar, the New Zealand dollar, the Japanese yen, the Canadian dollar, the Swiss franc, the Chinese renminbi, the Mexican peso, the Swedish krona, the Russian ruble, the South African rand, the Brazilian real, the Israeli shekel, the Norwegian krone, the Polish zloty, the Hungarian forint, the Czech koruna and the Korean won. 4 FCOs would, in all other respects, be traded pursuant to the Exchange's trading rules and procedures and be covered under the Exchange's existing surveillance program. The Exchange notes that the Philadelphia Stock Exchange (“PHLX”) currently has rules that permit the listing and trading of both physically-settled FCOs 5 and U.S. Dollar-settled FCOs on a number of foreign currencies. 6 FCOs listed and traded by the Exchange pursuant to this proposed rule change will not be fungible with those listed and traded by PHLX. 4 The Exchange is proposing to trade cash-settled FCOs only on those currencies whose futures contracts, and options on such futures contracts, are currently traded on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (“CME”). 5 Unlike cash-settled FCOs, a physically-settled FCO gives its owner the right to receive physical delivery (if it is a call) or to make physical delivery (if it is a put), of the underlying foreign currency when the option is exercised. 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54989 (December 21, 2006), 71 FR 78506 (December 29, 2006) (SR-PHLX-2006-34). *See also* PHLX Rules 1000-1093. The Exchange proposes to list and trade cash-settled FCOs using the Reuters Composite Currency Rate, 7 an industry benchmark, and modify that rate to create an underlying value that represents the prevailing rate of a currency pair in an index-like format. ISE proposes to use modifiers of 1, 10, or 100 depending on the exchange rate level of the underlying foreign currency. 8 For example, if one U.S. Dollar buys .84177 euros, a modifier of 100 would be used so that the modified exchange rate would become 84.18. Modified exchange rates are rounded to two decimal places ( *i.e.* , to the nearest one one-hundredth). Modified exchange rates are rounded up if they end in values greater than or equal to five one-thousandths, and rounded down if less than five one-thousandths. In the example above, if one U.S. Dollar buys .84174 euros, the modified exchange rate, using the same 100 modifier, would become 84.17. The Reuters data is based on an amalgamation of midpoint dealer quotes on its foreign exchange dealing system. 7 The Exchange notes that there are many major trading platforms for spot market currencies including single bank portals (Deutsche Bank, Citigroup, UBS, Barclays, etc.), multi-bank portals (FXall, Currenex, FXConnect, etc.), broker-neutral portals (Reuters Dealing and EBS), portal aggregators (Bloomberg, LavaFX, FlexTrade), as well as many online broker portals. Additionally, several major ISE members, including OptionsXpress and Interactive Brokers, provide access to CME futures products. ISE therefore believes that sufficient market access is available to both institutional as well as retail investors. Foreign exchange prices are also widely available via public websites, broker websites, as well as in print publications. Additionally, websites such as Bloomberg.com, Reuters.com, Yahoo! Finance, CNBC.com, OANDA.com, Nasdaq.com, and many others provide free currency data. Investors Business Daily, Wall Street Journal, and the New York Times also provide currency data as part of their daily coverage. Furthermore, ISE will disseminate real-time underlying data on OPRA for all the currency rates it intends to list options on. 8 *See* Exhibit 3 to the proposed rule change (listing the modifiers for each Currency pair). Modifiers used for creating underlying values will also be posted on the Exchange's website no later than the first day on which FCOs begin trading on ISE. Once a modifier has been assigned to a currency pair, it can only be changed upon a filing of a proposed rule change with the Commission. Under the proposed rule change, FCOs listed by the Exchange will be cleared by The Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”), and will enable holders of options contracts to receive U.S. Dollars representing the difference between the modified exchange rate 9 and the exercise price of the option. Specifically, upon exercise of an in-the-money cash-settled FCO call option, the holder will receive, from OCC, U.S. Dollars representing the difference between the exercise strike price and the closing settlement value of the cash-settled FCO contract multiplied by 100. Upon exercise of an in-the-money cash-settled FCO put option, the holder will receive, from OCC, U.S. Dollars representing the excess of the exercise price over the closing settlement value of the cash-settled FCO contract multiplied by 100. Additionally, cash-settled FCOs that are in-the-money by any amount on expiration date will be exercised automatically by OCC, while cash-settled FCOs that are out-of-the-money on expiration date will expire worthless. 9 A “modified exchange rate” is defined in proposed ISE Rule 2201(8). The Exchange hereby proposes to adopt new rules and amend certain existing rules in order to list and trade FCOs. The Exchange has also attached an exhibit to this proposed rule change that illustrates the contract specifications applicable to FCOs. The Exchange's proposed ISE Rule 2201, Definitions, defines terms applicable to FCOs. Proposed ISE Rule 2202, Criteria for Foreign Currency Options, states that the Currencies may be approved for trading on the Exchange. Proposed ISE Rule 2202 also states that if any of the sovereign governments or the European Economic Community's European Monetary System issuing one of the Currencies replaces it with a new currency, that new currency, subject to filing a proposed rule change with the Commission, shall also be approved for listing and trading under these proposed rules. Proposed ISE Rule 2203, Foreign Currency Options Contracts To Be Traded, states that the Exchange may open for trading put options and call options on the Currencies and that only options contracts of a series of options approved by the Exchange and currently open for trading may be traded on the Exchange. Proposed ISE Rule 2204, Withdrawal of Approval of Foreign Currency Options, states that, in the interest of a fair and orderly market and for the protection of investors, the Exchange may withdraw approval of the trading of a foreign currency option. For example, in the case of the European Economic Community's European Monetary System, the Exchange will withdraw approval of the trading of a foreign currency option if such currency is eligible to and does in fact merge with the euro. Proposed ISE Rule 2205, Series of Foreign Currency Options Opened for Trading, states that after a class of options contracts on any of the Currencies has been approved for listing and trading, the Exchange may open for trading series of FCOs that expire in consecutive monthly intervals, in three or “cycle” month intervals, or that have up to 36 months to expiration. 10 Under this proposed rule change, the Exchange may list cash-settled FCOs with expirations that are the same as the expirations permitted for index options pursuant to ISE Rules 2000 and 2001, except that cash-settled FCOs shall have expirations up to 36 months only. Though no long-term series will be listed initially, this proposal would allow the Exchange to list long-term series, *i.e.* , up to 36 months. The expiration date for the consecutive and cycle month options will be 11:59 p.m. Eastern time on the Saturday immediately following the third Friday of the expiration month. Under Proposed ISE Rule 2205, as the modified exchange rate moves, the Exchange may list additional series of FCOs in order to maintain sufficient numbers of in-the-money and out-of-the-money series. Further, the strike price of each series of FCOs opened for trading by the Exchange shall be reasonably close to the modified exchange rate. 10 The Exchange notes that consecutive month and cycle month expirations of a given series will never overlap. Proposed ISE Rule 2206, Terms of Foreign Currency Options Contracts, states that, among other things, all FCOs shall be quoted in U.S. Dollars, shall be European-style, and that the interval between strike prices of series of FCOs shall be no less than $0.10. Additionally, under the Exchange's current rules, the minimum trading increment for a FCO contract trading at less than $3.00 will be $0.05, and for a FCO contract trading at $3.00 or higher, the minimum trading increment will be $0.10. Proposed ISE Rule 2207, Dissemination of Information, states that the Exchange shall ensure that the current modified exchange rate is disseminated at least once every fifteen seconds by the Options Price Reporting Authority (“OPRA”) or one or more major market data vendors during the time FCOs are traded on the Exchange. The Exchange will also disseminate FCO quotes and trades over OPRA. Proposed ISE Rule 2208, Position Limits for Foreign Currency Options, sets the position limit for FCOs, on the same side of the market, as follows: 1,200,000 contracts for the euro; 600,000 contracts for the Australian dollar, the British pound, the Canadian dollar, the Israeli shekel, the Japanese yen, the Swedish krona and the Swiss franc; 300,000 contracts for the Brazilian real, the Chinese renminbi, the Czech koruna, the Hungarian forint, the Korean won, the Mexican peso, the New Zealand dollar, the Norwegian krone, the Polish zloty, the Russian ruble and the South African rand. For the purpose of determining which positions are on the same side of the market, under Proposed ISE Rule 2208, long call positions are to be aggregated with short put positions and short call positions are to be aggregated with long put positions. Proposed ISE Rule 2209, Exercise Limits for Foreign Currency Options, generally states that exercise limits for FCOs shall be equivalent to the position limits prescribed to that FCO. Thus, the exercise limit for FCOs over any five consecutive business days shall be as follows: 1,200,000 contracts for the euro; 600,000 contracts for the Australian dollar, the British pound, the Canadian dollar, the Israeli shekel, the Japanese yen, the Swedish krona and the Swiss franc; 300,000 contracts for the Brazilian real, the Chinese renminbi, the Czech koruna, the Hungarian forint, the Korean won, the Mexican peso, the New Zealand dollar, the Norwegian krone, the Polish zloty, the Russian ruble and the South African rand. Under Proposed ISE Rule 2209, the Exchange may from time to time, subject to Commission approval, establish exercise limits that are different from the position limits established for FCOs on a Currency or across all Currencies. Proposed ISE Rule 2210, Trading Sessions, provides that transactions in FCOs may be effected on the Exchange between the hours of 9:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Eastern Time, except that on the last trading day of the week during which a FCO is set to expire, trading shall cease at 12 p.m. Eastern Time. Trading in cash-settled FCOs will follow the holiday schedule of the U.S. equity markets. If Friday is an Exchange holiday, the settlement value for cash-settled FCOs will be determined on the preceding trading day, which will also be the last trading day for the expiring option. The Exchange's Proposed Rules 2210(b) and
(c)make certain adjustments to current processes because FCO openings, unlike openings of equity and index options, do not depend on the opening of trading of the underlying market, because the currency market does not have specified trading hours. Accordingly, the opening rotation for FCOs shall be held at or as soon as practicable after the Exchange's market opens, unless an Exchange official determines to delay the opening rotation in the interest of maintaining a fair and orderly market. Proposed ISE Rule 2210 lists some of the factors an Exchange official may consider in delaying the opening rotation. Additionally, in the interest of a fair and orderly market, an Exchange official may, under certain circumstances, halt or suspend trading in a FCO until such time that the circumstances that led to the halt or suspension no longer exist. Proposed ISE Rule 2211, Reporting of Foreign Currency Options Position, requires each Member of the Exchange to file a report with respect to all accounts that have an aggregate position of 12,500 or more FCO contracts on the same side of the market in any underlying foreign currency. Under this proposed rule, Members shall be required to file all such reports within one business day following the day that the reportable transactions occur. Proposed ISE Rule 2212, Foreign Currency Options Closing Settlement Value, states that the closing settlement value, which shall be posted by the Exchange on its Web site, shall be the Noon Buying Rate, as determined by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, on the last trading day during expiration week. 11 If the Noon Buying Rate is not announced by 2 p.m. Eastern Time, the closing settlement value will be the most recently announced Noon Buying Rate, unless the Exchange determines to apply an alternative closing settlement value as a result of extraordinary circumstances. 12 11 The closing settlement value, whether based on the Noon Buying Rate or the WM/Reuters Closing Spot rate, will also be modified using the applicable modifier, *i.e.* , 1, 10 or 100, that is used in calculating the respective modified exchange rate. 12 The Exchange may use the WM/Reuters Closing Spot rate if the Noon Buying Rate is not available. The Exchange notes that the Commission has recently approved listing standards for securities issued by a trust that represent investors' discrete identifiable and undivided beneficial ownership interests in non-U.S. currency deposited into a trust that utilizes the Noon Buying Rate for the calculation of the Net Asset Value of the trust. *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52843 (November 28, 2005), 70 FR 72486 (December 5, 2005) (order granting accelerated approval of SR-NYSE-2005-65). In the event the Noon Buying Rate is not published for an underlying currency, the Exchange proposes to apply the WM/Reuters Closing Spot rate to determine the closing settlement value of any underlying currency. 13 The WM/Reuters Closing Spot rate is determined at 16:00 UK time, also known as the ‘fix’ time (1 p.m., New York time). WM/Reuters typically publishes its closing rates 15 minutes after the fix time. The Reuters System is the primary source of spot foreign exchange rates used in the calculation of the WM/Reuters Closing Spot rate. WM/Reuters, however, may use alternative sources such as a country's Central Bank or rates from EBS, which is another major FX venue and market data service provider for 156 currencies, including all of the currencies underlying the products proposed by ISE under this filing. 13 The Federal Reserve Bank of New York currently does not publish a Noon Buying Rate for the Czech koruna, the Hungarian forint, the Israeli shekel, the Korean won, the Polish zloty and the Russian ruble. As a result, the Exchange proposes to use the WM/Reuters Closing Spot rate for these 6 currencies to determine their closing settlement value. In the event the Federal Reserve Bank of New York determines to publish a Noon Buying Rate for any of these 6 currencies in the future, the Exchange shall resort to the Noon Buying Rate in place of the WM/Reuters Composite Spot rate to determine the closing settlement value for the applicable FCO. WM/Reuters has two main methods for calculating its Closing Spot rate. The methodology used depends on whether a currency is determined by WM/Reuters to be a “trade currency” or a “non-trade currency.” 14 WM/Reuters applies a unique methodology for each category. Closing Spot rates for “non-trade currencies” are determined primarily by using data from Reuters. This methodology involves taking snapshots of quoted bids and offers for each currency at 15-second intervals over a two minute period. The median is then calculated independently for each currency's bid and offer. The midpoint of that median bid and offer becomes the final value. 14 The Australian dollar, British pound, Canadian dollar, Czech koruna, Danish krone, euro, Japanese yen, New Zealand dollar, Norwegian krone, Singapore dollar, South African rand, Swedish krona, and Swiss franc are all considered by WM/Reuters to be “trade currencies,” while all others are considered “non-trade currencies.” The instant filing proposes to trade FCOs on all the “trade currencies” except the Danish krone and the Singapore dollar. Closing Spot rates for “trade currencies” are determined primarily by using data from both Reuters and EBS. This methodology involves taking snapshots of actual traded rates every second for a period of 30 seconds before the fix to 30 seconds after the fix. Trades are identified as a bid or offer and a spread is applied to calculate the opposite bid or offer. The spread applied is determined by the spread between buy and sell orders captured at the same time. The median is then independently calculated for each currency's bid and offer, resulting in a midpoint trade rate. The midpoint of that median bid and offer becomes the final value. Proposed ISE Rule 2212 additionally disclaims the Exchange's (and that of any agent of the Exchange's) liability and that of the Reporting Authority due to force majeure. Proposed ISE Rule 2213, Market Maker Trading Licenses, creates two new classes of market makers on the Exchange, FXPMMs and FXCMMs, who shall have similar obligations as the PMMs and CMMs of the Exchange's equity and index markets. These new memberships will entitle firms to quote and trade FCOs only. Proposed ISE Rule 2213 sets out the rules and the obligations of market makers under which a FXPMM and/or FXCMM may purchase a trading license from the Exchange, subject to an annual fee paid to the Exchange in monthly installments. Under this proposed rule, market maker trading licenses, which do not hold any equity interest in the Exchange, will be sold annually through an auction conducted during the fourth quarter of each year. A firm may not hold more than four FXPMM trading licenses across all currencies and no more than one FXCMM trading license per currency pair. Additionally, market makers may not hold and act as both a FXPMM and FXCMM in the same currency pair. Market maker trading licenses will not be able to be leased or transferred, although they will be permitted to be transferred to an affiliated Member, or to another qualified Member which continues substantially the same business as the Member that currently holds the market maker trading license. Additionally, market maker trading licenses that are sold between annual auctions shall be assessed a premium of ten percent of the price at which the market maker trading license was sold during the preceding auction. 15 15 The sale of additional market maker trading licenses during the year shall be at a premium to the auction price, pro rated for the amount of time remaining for the year, in order to, among other things, ensure that the supply of market maker trading licenses is adequate to meet demand for market maker trading licenses should conditions change after an auction, and to accommodate new businesses that commence operations after the beginning of the year. The premium will help defray out-of-cycle administrative costs and encourage participation in the annual auction, thereby promoting the optimal price and quantity discovery in the auction. In accordance with proposed ISE Rule 2210(f)(7), market maker trading licenses that are sold at any time except during the fourth quarter of a calendar year shall expire either in December of the 3rd year if the auction is conducted prior to June 30th of the current year, or in December of the 4th year if the auction is conducted after June 30th of the current year. For example, a FXPMM trading license that goes into effect on June 1, 2007 will expire on December 31, 2009, for a total license period of 2 years and 7 months. A FXPMM trading license that goes into effect on August 1, 2007 will expire on December 31, 2010, for a total license period of 3 years and 5 months. Proposed ISE Rule 2213(f) relates specifically to FXPMMs and states that a FXPMM's trading license shall have a three year term and that at the end of the three year term, the incumbent FXPMM shall have the right of first refusal to match the highest bid and market quality commitment from another bidding firm, enabling that FXPMM to remain a market maker in the currency pair for which it has a trading license. Under proposed ISE Rule 2213(f), sales of FXPMM trading licenses will be conducted by a sealed bid auction and prospective FXPMMs will be required to submit both a bid amount and a market quality commitment using parameters similar to those currently used by the Exchange for ETF and index options. Proposed ISE Rule 2213(f) further states that a FXPMM that continuously fails to meet its stated market quality commitments will have its trading license terminated by the Exchange, which will subsequently conduct an auction to sell the failing FXPMM's trading license to another firm. Proposed ISE Rule 2213(f) also states that a FXPMM generally cannot terminate its trading license and that in the event a FXPMM is unable to fulfill its obligations, a backup FXPMM shall be designated by the Exchange. Under proposed ISE Rule 2213(g), which relates specifically to FXCMMs, the Exchange intends to initially sell ten FXCMM trading licenses per currency pair, with each trading license having a term of one year. Based on market demand, the Exchange may increase the number of FXCMM trading licenses available at the next regularly scheduled auction. Proposed ISE Rule 2213(g)(2) sets out the manner in which a “Dutch auction” to sell FXCMM trading licenses will be conducted. A FXCMM shall have the ability to terminate its trading license prior to its scheduled expiration, so long as the FXCMM provides the requisite written notice and a pays a termination fee, as set forth in proposed ISE Rule 2213(g)(4). The Exchange believes that the procedures under which market maker trading licenses will be made available are calculated to comply with the requirements of Section 6(b)(2) of the Act regarding fair access to the facilities of a registered exchange. The Dutch auction, by which FXCMM trading licenses will be sold, is itself a fair way to determine access, especially given that it is subject to provisions calculated to ensure that market maker trading licenses are widely available, such as the provisions
(i)Specifying a reasonable minimum Reserve Price,
(ii)limiting the number of market maker trading licenses that may be bid by a single Member, and
(iii)the ability to sell additional unsold market maker trading licenses during the year at a 10% premium. The sealed bid auction, by which FXPMM trading licenses will be sold, requires potential bidders to provide the Exchange with market quality commitments along with a bid. The Exchange believes that this added measure of qualification will enable the Exchange to sell these market maker trading licenses in an objective manner without solely awarding a trading license to the highest bidder. The procedures under which market maker trading licenses will be made available are also intended to comply with the requirements of Section 6(b)(4) of the Act, which requires that a registered exchange provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its facilities. The price of a market maker trading license is reasonable because it will be determined by “the market,” that is, by Members that wish to obtain a market maker trading license. A Dutch auction allows its participants to themselves determine the price, while the sealed bid auction will be conducted with a relatively low Reserve Price established by the Exchange. The auctions are closely related to the way access to the Exchange was traditionally priced, with supply and demand governing the price at which memberships were purchased or leased. The pricing of market maker trading licenses between auctions is also reasonable, as it is based on the auction price, but with a premium to the auction price, which will encourage participation in the regular auctions, which in turn will strengthen the price discovery mechanism that the auctions provide. The Exchange is also proposing to amend its Rule 1202 regarding margin requirements by adopting a rule for FCOs that is substantially similar to the PHLX's margin rules for foreign currency options. Accordingly, under proposed ISE Rule 1202(d), cash-settled FCOs will have the same customer margin requirements as are provided in PHLX Rule 722, “Margin Accounts,” Commentary.16. 16 Chapter 6 of the Exchange's rules is designed to protect public customer trading and shall apply to trading in FCOs. Specifically, ISE Rules 608(a) and
(b)prohibit Members from accepting a customer order to purchase or write an option, including on a cash-settled FCO, unless such customer's account has been approved in writing by a designated Options Principal of the Member. 17 Additionally, ISE's Rule 610 regarding suitability is designed to ensure that options, including cash-settled FCOs, are only sold to customers capable of evaluating and bearing the risks associated with trading in this instrument. Further, ISE Rule 611 permits members to exercise discretionary power with respect to trading options, including trading cash-settled FCOs, in a customer's account only if the Member has received prior written authorization from the customer and the account had been accepted in writing by a designated Options Principal. ISE Rule 611 also requires designated Options Principals or Representatives of a Member to approve and initial each discretionary order, including discretionary orders for cash-settled FCOs, on the day the discretionary order is entered. Finally, ISE Rule 609, Supervision of Accounts, Rule 612, Confirmation to Customers, and Rule 616, Delivery of Current Options Disclosure Documents and Prospectus, 18 will also apply to trading in FCOs. 16 Similar to PHLX Rule 722, Commentary .16, the Exchange will calculate the margin requirement for customers that assume short FCO positions by adding a percentage of the current market value of the underlying foreign currency contract to the option premium price less an adjustment for the out-of-the-money amount of the option contract. On a quarterly calendar basis, ISE will review five-day price changes over the preceding three-year period for each underlying currency and set the add-on percentage at a level which would have covered those price changes at least 97.5% of the time (the “confidence level”). If the results of subsequent reviews show that the current margin level provides a confidence level below 97%, ISE will increase the margin requirement for that individual currency up to a 98% confidence level. If the confidence level is between 97% and 97.5%, the margin level will remain the same but will be subject to monthly follow-up reviews until the confidence level exceeds 97.5% for two consecutive months. If during the course of the monthly follow-up reviews, the confidence level drops below 97%, the margin level will be increased to a 98% level and if it exceeds 97.5% for two consecutive months, the currency will be taken off monthly reviews and will be put back on the quarterly review cycle. If the currency exceeds 98.5%, the margin level will be reduced to a 98% confidence level during the most recent 3 year period. Finally, in order to account for large price movements outside the established margin level, if the quarterly review shows that the currency had a price movement, either positive or negative, greater than two times the margin level during the most recent 3 year period, the margin requirement will be set at a level to meet a 99% confidence level (“Extreme Outlier Test”). The Exchange will inform Members and the public of the margin levels for each currency option immediately following the quarterly reviews described in Rule 1202(d). 17 Pursuant to ISE Rule 602, Representatives of a Member may solicit or accept customer orders for FCOs. 18 The OCC, together with the Exchange, has prepared an amendment to the Options Disclosure Document (“ODD”), which ISE expects OCC to shortly submit to the Commission for approval. The amended ODD will include characteristics of the Exchange's FCOs and trading examples. As previously noted, the Exchange represents that it has an adequate surveillance program in place for FCOs, and intends to apply the same program procedures that it applies to the Exchange's index options. The Exchange is also a member of the Intermarket Surveillance Group (“ISG”) under the Intermarket Surveillance Group Agreement, dated June 20, 1994, and may obtain trading information via the ISG from other exchanges who are members or affiliates of the ISG. The members of the ISG include all of the U.S. registered stock and options markets. The ISG members work together to coordinate surveillance and investigative information sharing in the stock and options markets. In addition, the major futures exchanges are affiliated members of the ISG, which allows for the sharing of surveillance information for potential intermarket trading abuses. Specifically, ISE can obtain such information from the CME in connection with futures trading on that exchange. 19 19 CME is an affiliate member of ISG. Finally, the Exchange represents that it has the necessary systems capacity to support new options series that will result from the introduction of cash-settled FCOs. The Exchange has provided the Commission with system capacity information that supports its system capacity representations. 20 20 *See* Letter from Michael Simon, General Counsel, ISE, to John Roeser, Assistant Director, Commission, dated February 23, 2007. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that this filing is consistent with Section 6(b) under the Act, 21 in general, and furthers the objectives of Section 6(b)(1) 22 in particular, in that it enables the Exchange to be so organized as to have the capacity to be able to carry out the purposes of the Act and to comply, and to enforce compliance by its Members and persons associated with its Members, with the provisions of the Act, the rules and regulations thereunder, and the rules of the Exchange. 21 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 22 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(1). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The proposed rule change does not impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit, comments on this proposed rule change. The Exchange has not received any written comments from members or other interested parties. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** or within such longer period
(i)As the Commission may designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or
(ii)as to which the Exchange consents, the Commission will:
(A)By order approve such proposed rule change, or
(B)institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov* . Please include File Number SR-ISE-2006-59 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2006-59. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ISE-2006-59 and should be submitted on or before March 22, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 23 23 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-3558 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-55335; File No. SR-NASDAQ-2007-005] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Modify the Date for Compliance With Regulation NMS February 23, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on February 2, 2007, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by Nasdaq. The Exchange has filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Nasdaq proposes to modify certain of its rules that become effective upon the compliance date for Regulation NMS under the Act. The Commission has established March 5, 2007, as the date of compliance for all automated trading centers such as Nasdaq. 5 Accordingly, Nasdaq proposes to modify its approved rules to demonstrate compliance with Regulation NMS by March 5, 2007, to conform with the Commission's scheduled compliance date. The text of the proposed rule change is available at Nasdaq, the Commission's Public Reference Room, and *http://www.nasdaq.com.* 5 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 55160 (January 24, 2007), 72 FR 4202 (January 30, 2007). II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, Nasdaq included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. Nasdaq has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose Nasdaq proposes to modify certain of its rules that become effective upon the compliance date for Regulation NMS under the Act. The Commission has established March 5, 2007, as the date of compliance for all automated trading centers such as Nasdaq. 6 Accordingly, Nasdaq proposes to modify its approved rules to demonstrate compliance with Regulation NMS by March 5, 2007, to conform with the Commission's scheduled compliance date. 6 *Id.* 2. Statutory Basis Nasdaq believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act, 7 in general, and with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 8 in particular, in that the proposal is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. The proposed rule change clarifies certain terms in Nasdaq's rules. 7 15 U.S.C. 78f. 8 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition Nasdaq does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others Written comments were neither solicited nor received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the forgoing rule change does not:
(1)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)become operative for 30 days after the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 9 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 10 9 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 10 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 11 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 12 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest because such waiver would permit the Exchange to immediately update its rules to reflect that the compliance date for Regulation NMS has been changed to March 5, 2007. For this reason, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing with the Commission. 13 11 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. The Commission has decided to waive the five-day pre-filing notice requirement. 12 *Id.* 13 For the purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule change the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File Number SR-NASDAQ-2007-005 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2007-005. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Nasdaq. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NASDAQ-2007-005 and should be submitted on or before March 22, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 14 14 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-3554 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-55337; File No. SR-NYSE-2006-04] Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange LLC; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change as Modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2 Thereto Relating to NYSE Rule 116 (“Stop” Constitutes Guarantee) and NYSE Rule 123B (Exchange Automated Order Routing Systems) February 23, 2007. I. Introduction On February 9, 2006, the New York Stock Exchange LLC (f/k/a New York Stock Exchange, Inc.) (“NYSE” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 a proposal to amend NYSE Rule 116 (“Stop” Constitutes Guarantee) and NYSE Rule 123B (Exchange Automated Order Routing Systems) regarding a specialist's ability to “stop” stock and report such a transaction. On April 5, 2006, NYSE filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change. On September 8, 2006, NYSE filed Amendment No. 2 to the proposed rule change. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the **Federal Register** on October 18, 2006. 3 The Commission received one comment regarding the proposal. 4 This order approves the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 54592 (October 12, 2006), 71 FR 61524. 4 *See* letter from George Rutherfurd, Consultant, dated April 24, 2006 to Commission's rule-comments e-mail. II. Description of the Proposal NYSE Rule 116 provides that an agreement by a member to “stop” stock at a specified price constitutes a guarantee of a purchase or sale by the member of the security at that price. Paragraph .30 in the Rule's Supplementary Material provides three circumstances in which a specialist may stop stock, including:
(i)At the opening or reopening of trading in a stock;
(ii)when a broker in the trading crowd is representing another order at the stop price; or
(iii)when requested to by another member. 5 The practice of stopping stock by specialists on the Exchange refers to a guarantee by a specialist that an order he or she receives will be executed at no worse a price than the contra side price in the market at the time the order was stopped, with the understanding that the order may in fact receive a better price. 5 A specialist may only stop stock when requested to by another member if certain other conditions are met. *See* Exchange Rule 116.30(3). The Exchange proposes to remove the provisions in NYSE Rule 116.30 that permit a specialist to “stop” stock. According to the Exchange, the practice of specialists stopping stock makes less sense in the Hybrid Market, primarily due to the dynamics of increased speed of trading and automated functioning of the market. The Exchange further stated that the procedures in NYSE Rule 116.30(3) for granting stops are not an efficient mechanism for seeking price improvement an automated market due to the time required to perform the current manual procedures. III. Comment Summary The Commission received one comment letter on the proposal, 6 to which NYSE has filed a response letter. 7 In the comment letter, the commenter argued the proposal is not in the public interest because the Hybrid Market, and specifically NYSE's Auction Market and Auction Limit Orders, do not provide investors with the price improvement opportunities that the NYSE's auction market did. The commenter stated that he believed that specialists in the Hybrid Market have been relieved of their responsibility to obtain price improvement for orders. 6 *See* note 4 *supra* . 7 *See* letter from Mary Yeager, Assistant Secretary, NYSE, to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Commission, dated January 19, 2007. In its response letter, NYSE noted that specialists are not currently obligated to stop stock and further noted that, in fact, specialists infrequently choose to stop stock. NYSE reiterated its belief that there are many opportunities for price improvement in the Hybrid Market and stated that specialists were not “being relieved of their responsibility to obtain price improvement.” The Exchange argued that it was eliminating a practice that its data showed was rarely used. The Exchange also argued that retaining the manual process for the specialist to stop stock would increase specialist risk if used. The commenter also asserted that NYSE could easily reprogram its systems to replicate electronically the manual practice of stopping stock. In response, NYSE disagreed, indicating that there are difficulties inherent in maintaining the stopping stock functionality amid systems designed to enable increased automatic executions. Further, NYSE argued that the decision to remove systemic support for stopped orders was based in part on data that showed that specialists do not stop stock frequently. IV. Discussion The Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities exchange 8 and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6 of the Act. 9 Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act, 10 which requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest. 8 In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 9 15 U.S.C. 78f. 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). According to the Exchange, the practice of stopping stock by specialists is rarely used. Therefore, the Exchange decided that it would not develop an electronic, systemic process to support this little used, voluntary function. The Exchange also argued that retaining a manual process to stop stock in the Hybrid Market would be inefficient. Accordingly, the Commission finds that eliminating specialists' ability to stop stock is reasonable and consistent with the Act. IV. Conclusion *It is therefore ordered,* pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act, 11 that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSE-2006-04), as modified by Amendment Nos. 1 and 2, be, and it hereby is approved. 11 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 12 12 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-3556 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-55338; File No. SR-Phlx-2007-04] Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Listing LEAPS Pursuant to the $2.50 Strike Price Program February 23, 2007. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”) 1 and Rule 19b-4 thereunder, 2 notice is hereby given that on February 21, 2007, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (“Phlx” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by Phlx. The Exchange has filed the proposal as a “non-controversial” rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder, 4 which renders it effective upon filing with the Commission. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 17 CFR 240.19b-4. 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 4 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Phlx proposes to clarify that LEAPS 5 can be listed at $2.50 strike price intervals pursuant to the $2.50 Strike Price Program set forth in Commentary .05 to Phlx Rule 1012 (Series of Options Open for Trading). There is no new rule text. 5 LEAPS are Long-term Equity Anticipation Securities or long-term options series. *See* Phlx Rules 1079, 1012, and 1101A. II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change In its filing with the Commission, Phlx included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements. A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change 1. Purpose The purpose of the proposal is to clarify that LEAPS can be listed at $2.50 strike price intervals pursuant to the $2.50 Strike Price Program. The current $2.50 Strike Price Program is set forth in Commentary .05 to Phlx Rule 1012. The $2.50 Strike Price Program permits the Exchange to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals for selected options trading at strike prices greater than $25 but less than $75. In addition, each options exchange is permitted to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals on any option class that another options exchange selects under the $2.50 Strike Price Program. Initially adopted in 1995 as a pilot program, the pilot $2.50 Strike Price Program allowed options exchanges to list options with $2.50 strike price intervals for options trading at strike prices greater than $25 but less than $50 on a total of up to 100 option classes. 6 In 1998, the pilot program was permanently approved and expanded to allow the options exchanges to select up to 200 option classes for the $2.50 Strike Price Program. 7 Of the 200 options classes eligible for the $2.50 Strike Price Program, 46 have been allocated to Phlx. 8 In 2005, the $2.50 Strike Price Program was expanded to permit the listing of options with $2.50 strike price intervals for options with strike prices between $50 and $75, provided that the $2.50 strike price intervals are no more than $10 from the closing price of the underlying stock in its primary market 9 on the preceding day. 10 With the expansion of the $2.50 Strike Price Program to options with strike prices below $75, for example, if an option class has been selected as part of the $2.50 Strike Price Program, and the underlying stock closed at $48.50 in its primary market, the Exchange may list options with strike prices of $52.50 and $57.50 on the next business day; and if an underlying security closed at $54, the Exchange may list options with strike prices of $52.50, $57.50, and $62.50 on the next business day. Moreover, an option class would remain in the $2.50 Strike Price Program until the Exchange otherwise designates and sends a decertification notice to the Options Clearing Corporation. 6 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35993 (July 19, 1995), 60 FR 38073 (July 25, 1995) (SR-Phlx-95-08, SR-Amex-95-12, SR-PSE-95-07, SR-CBOE-95-19, and SR-NYSE-95-12). 7 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 40662 (November 12, 1998), 63 FR 64297 (November 19, 1998) (SR-Amex-98-21, SR-CBOE-98-29, SR-PCX-98-31, and SR-Phlx-98-26). 8 The allocation is not changed by this proposed rule filing. 9 The term “primary market” is defined in Phlx Rule 1000 in respect of an underlying stock or Exchange-Traded Fund Share as the principal market in which the underlying stock or Exchange-Traded Fund Share is traded. 10 *See* Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52961 (December 15, 2005), 70 FR 76095 (December 22, 2005) (SR-Phlx-2005-77). *See also* Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 52893 (December 5, 2005), 70 FR 73488 (December 12, 2005) (SR-Amex-2005-067); 52892 (December 5, 2005), 70 FR 73492 (December 12, 2005) (SR-CBOE-2005-39); 52960 (December 15, 2005), 70 FR 76090 (December 22, 2005) (SR-ISE-2005-59); and 52986 (December 20, 2005), 70 FR 76897 (December 28, 2005) (SR-PCX-2005-137). The Exchange is hereby clarifying that it, like other options exchanges with the $2.50 Strike Price Program, may list LEAPS at $2.50 strike price intervals at all strike prices that are available pursuant to the $2.50 Strike Price Program. The Exchange believes that the $2.50 Strike Price Program has benefited the marketplace by creating additional trading opportunities for customers in all options including LEAPS by affording such customers the ability to more closely tailor investment strategies to the precise movement of the underlying security. The availability of $2.50 strike price intervals for LEAPS will likewise benefit the marketplace and is in conformity with current industry practice. 2. Statutory Basis The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act 11 in general, and furthers the objective of Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 12 in particular, in that it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in facilitating transactions in securities, and to remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and the national market system. 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others No written comments were either solicited or received. III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for Commission Action Because the foregoing rule change does not:
(1)Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public interest;
(2)impose any significant burden on competition; and
(3)become operative for 30 days from the date of this filing, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 13 and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder. 14 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). 14 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). A proposed rule change filed under 19b-4(f)(6) normally may not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of filing. 15 However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) 16 permits the Commission to designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has requested that the Commission waive the 30-day operative delay. The Commission believes that waiving the 30-day operative delay is consistent with the protection of investors and in the public interest so that it is clear that the Exchange has the immediate ability to list and trade LEAPS at $2.50 strike price intervals at all strike prices that are available pursuant to the $2.50 Strike Price Program. For this reason, the Commission designates the proposed rule change to be operative upon filing with the Commission. 17 15 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires that a self-regulatory organization submit to the Commission written notice of its intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as designated by the Commission. Phlx has satisfied the five-day pre-filing requirement. 16 *Id.* 17 For purposes only of waiving the operative delay, the Commission has considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation. *See* 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the Act. IV. Solicitation of Comments Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods: Electronic Comments • Use the Commission's Internet comment form ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ); or • Send an e-mail to *rule-comments@sec.gov.* Please include File No. SR-Phlx-2007-04 on the subject line. Paper Comments • Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Phlx-2007-04. This file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml* ). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing will also be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of Phlx. All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-Phlx-2007-04 and should be submitted on or before March 22, 2007. For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority. 18 18 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12). Florence E. Harmon, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-3563 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-P SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION [Docket No. SSA 2007-0013] Privacy Act of 1974 as Amended; Computer Matching Program (SSA/Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Veterans Benefit Administration (VBA))—Match Number 1008 AGENCY: Social Security Administration (SSA). ACTION: Notice of a renewal of a computer matching program. SUMMARY: In accordance with the provisions of the Privacy Act, as amended, this notice announces a renewal of a computer matching program that SSA will conduct with VA/VBA. DATES: SSA will file a report of the subject matching program with the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, the Committee on Government Reform of the House of Representatives, and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The matching program will be effective as indicated below. ADDRESSES: Interested parties may comment on this notice by either telefaxing to
(410)965-8582 or writing to the Associate Commissioner, Office of Income Security Programs, 252 Altmeyer Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235-6401. All comments received will be available for public inspection at this address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Associate Commissioner for Income Security Programs as shown above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. General The Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-503), amended the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) by describing the manner in which computer matching involving Federal agencies could be performed and adding certain protections for individuals applying for, and receiving, Federal benefits. Section 7201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-508) further amended the Privacy Act regarding protections for such individuals. The Privacy Act, as amended, regulates the use of computer matching by Federal agencies when records in a system of records are matched with other Federal, State, or local government records. It requires Federal agencies involved in computer matching programs to:
(1)Negotiate written agreements with the other agency or agencies participating in the matching programs;
(2)Obtain the Data Integrity Boards' approval of the match agreements;
(3)Publish notice of the computer matching program in the **Federal Register** ;
(4)Furnish detailed reports about matching programs to Congress and OMB;
(5)Notify applicants and beneficiaries that their records are subject to matching; and
(6)Verify match findings before reducing, suspending, terminating, or denying an individual's benefits or payments. B. SSA Computer Matches Subject to the Privacy Act We have taken action to ensure that all of SSA's computer matching programs comply with the requirements of the Privacy Act, as amended. Dated: February 22, 2007. Martin H. Gerry, Deputy Commissioner for Disability and Income Security Programs. Notice of Computer Matching Program, Social Security Administration
(SSA)With Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Veterans Benefit Administration
(VBA)Match Number 1008 A. Participating Agencies SSA and VA/VBA. B. Purpose of the Matching Program The purpose of this matching program is to establish the conditions for VA/VBA as the source agency to disclose VA compensation and pension payment data to SSA, the recipient agency. This disclosure will provide SSA with information necessary to identify certain Supplemental Security Income
(SSI)and Special Veterans Benefit
(SVB)recipients under titles XVI and VIII of the Social Security Act (the Act) respectively, who receive VA-administered benefits. SSA will then update the SSI/SVB records to reflect the presence of such payments. The disclosure will also enable SSA to efficiently implement a Medicare outreach program mandated by Section 1144 of title XI of the Act. Information disclosed by VA will enable SSA to identify income limits for certain individuals; to determine their potential eligibility for Medicare Savings Programs, and to identify these individuals to the States. C. Authority for Conducting the Matching Program The legal authority for SSA to conduct this matching activity is contained in sections 1631(e)(1)(B) and 1631(f) of the Act, (42 U.S.C. 1383(e)(1)(B) and 1383(f)(SSI)), and section 806(b) of the Act, (42 U.S.C. 1006(b)(SVB)) and section 1144 of the Act, (42 U.S.C. 1320b-14). SSA is required to verify declarations of applicants for, and recipients of, SSI payments before making a determination of eligibility or payment amount. The legal authority for VA to disclose information for this match is contained in section 1631(f) of the Act, (42 U.S.C. Section 1383(f)). That section requires Federal agencies to provide such information as the Commissioner of Social Security needs for purposes of determining eligibility for or amount of benefits, or verifying other information with respect thereto. D. Categories of Records and Individuals Covered by the Matching Program VA will provide SSA with electronic files containing compensation and pension payment data from its system of records entitled the Compensation, Pension, Education and Rehabilitation Records—VA (58VA21/22) first published at 41 FR 9294 (March 3, 1976), and last amended at 70 FR 34186 (June 13, 2005), with other amendments as cited therein. SSA will then match VA data with SSI/SVB payment information maintained in its system of records entitled Supplemental Security Income Record and Special Veterans Benefits (SSA/OEEAS 60-0103.) Routine use 21 of 58VA21/22 and routine use 3 of 60-0103 permits disclosure of the subject records for matching purposes. E. Inclusive Dates of the Matching Program The matching program will become effective no sooner than 40 days after notice of the matching program is sent to Congress and OMB, or 30 days after publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** , whichever date is later. The matching program will continue for 18 months from the effective date and may be extended for an additional 12 months thereafter, if certain conditions are met. [FR Doc. E7-3578 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION [Docket No. SSA-2007-0014] Privacy Act of 1974 as Amended; Computer Matching Program (Social Security Administration (SSA)/Law Enforcement Agencies (LA))—Match Number 5001 AGENCY: Social Security Administration (SSA). ACTION: Notice of a renewal computer matching program, which is expected to begin April 9, 2007. SUMMARY: In accordance with the provisions of the Privacy Act, as amended, this notice announces a computer matching program that SSA plans to conduct with the Law Enforcement Agencies. DATES: SSA will file a report of the subject matching program with the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The matching program will be effective as indicated below. ADDRESSES: Interested parties may comment on this notice by either telefaxing to
(410)965-8582 or writing to the Associate Commissioner, Office of Income Security Programs, 252 Altmeyer Building, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235-6401. All comments received will be available for public inspection at this address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Associate Commissioner for Income Security Programs as shown above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. General The Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-503), amended the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a) by describing the manner in which computer matching involving Federal agencies could be performed and adding certain protections for individuals applying for, and receiving, Federal benefits. Section 7201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-508) further amended the Privacy Act regarding protections for such individuals. The Privacy Act, as amended, regulates the use of computer matching by Federal agencies when records in a system of records are matched with other Federal, State, or local government records. It requires Federal agencies involved in computer matching programs to:
(1)Negotiate written agreements with the other agency or agencies participating in the matching programs;
(2)Obtain the Data Integrity Boards' approval of the match agreements;
(3)Publish notice of the computer matching program in the **Federal Register** ;
(4)Furnish detailed reports about matching programs to Congress and OMB;
(5)Notify applicants and beneficiaries that their records are subject to matching; and
(6)Verify match findings before reducing, suspending, terminating, or denying an individual's benefits or payments. B. SSA Computer Matches Subject to the Privacy Act We have taken action to ensure that all of SSA's computer matching programs comply with the requirements of the Privacy Act, as amended. Dated: February 23, 2007. Martin H. Gerry, Deputy Commissioner for Disability and Income Security Programs. Notice of Computer Matching Program, Social Security Administration
(SSA)With Law Enforcement Agencies
(LA)A. Participating Agencies SSA and LA. B. Purpose of the Matching Program The purpose of this matching program is to establish the conditions under which LA agree to disclose fugitive felon and parole or probation violator information to SSA. SSA will use this information to determine eligibility under titles II, VIII, and XVI of the Social Security Act and to select representative payees. C. Authority for Conducting the Matching Program This matching program is carried out under the authority of sections 202(x)(1)(A)(iv) and (v), 202(x)(3), 205(j)(2), 804(a)(2), 807(b) and (d), 1611(e)(4) and
(5)and 1631(a)(2) of the Social Security Act. D. Categories of Records and Individuals Covered by the Matching Program LA will submit names and other identifying information of individuals who are fugitive felons or parole or probation violators. The Master Files of Social Security Numbers
(SSN)Holder and SSN Applications system of records, SSA/OEEAS 60-0058, contains the SSNs and identifying information for all SSN holders. The Master Beneficiary Record system of records, SSA/ORSIS 60-0090, and the Supplemental Income Record/Special Veterans Benefit system of records, SSA/OEEAS 60-0103, contain beneficiary and payment information. The Master Representative Payee File system of records, SSA/OISP 60-0222, contains information on individuals acting in a representative payee capacity. SSA will match data from these systems of records with data received from the LAs as a first step in detecting certain fugitive felons and parole or probation violators who should not be receiving benefits under titles II, VIII or XVI or who are prohibited from serving as a representative payee. E. Inclusive Dates of the Matching Program The matching program will become effective no sooner than 40 days after notice of the matching program is sent to Congress and OMB, or 30 days after publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** , whichever date is later. The matching program will continue for 18 months from the effective date and may be extended for an additional 12 months thereafter, if certain conditions are met. [FR Doc. E7-3580 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5703] Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
(ECA)Request for Grant Proposals: Youth Leadership Program for Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and Nicaragua *Announcement Type:* New Grant. *Funding Opportunity Number:* ECA/PE/C/PY-07-23. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:* 00.000. *Application Deadline:* April 20, 2007. *Executive Summary:* The Office of Citizen Exchanges, Youth Programs Division, of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
(ECA)announces an open competition for the Youth Leadership Program for Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and Nicaragua. Public and private non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3) may submit proposals to recruit and select youth and adult participants in Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, and/or Nicaragua and to provide the participants with short-term, U.S.-based exchanges focused on civic education, community activism, and leadership along with follow-on projects in their home communities. I. Funding Opportunity Description Authority Overall grant making authority for this program is contained in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, as amended, Public Law 87-256, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the Act is “to enable the Government of the United States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries * * *; to strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations * * * and thus to assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic, and peaceful relations between the United States and the other countries of the world.” The funding authority for the program above is provided through legislation. Overview This Youth Leadership Program will enable teenagers (ages 15-18) and adult educators to participate in intensive, thematic, month-long (25-30 days) projects that are designed to promote high-quality leadership, civic responsibility, and civic activism among the future leaders of Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Peru, Venezuela, and the United States. Projects will involve a practical examination of the principles of democracy and civil society as practiced in the United States and provide participants with training that allows them to develop their leadership skills. Participants will be engaged in a variety of activities such as workshops, community and/or school-based programs, seminars, and other activities that are designed to achieve the projects' stated goals and objectives. Multiple opportunities for participants to interact with American youth and educators must be included. The goals of the programs are:
(1)To promote mutual understanding between the United States and the people of Central and South America;
(2)To develop a sense of civic responsibility and commitment to community development among youth;
(3)To foster relationships among youth from different ethnic, religious, and national groups. With the specific focus of this program, the following outcomes will indicate a successful project: • Participants will demonstrate a better understanding of the elements of a participatory democracy as practiced in the United States. • Participants will demonstrate critical thinking and leadership skills. • Participants will demonstrate skill at developing project ideas and planning a course of action to bring the projects to fruition. Applicant organizations should identify their own specific objectives and measurable outcomes based on these program goals and the project specifications provided in this solicitation. It is anticipated that the total amount of funding available is $500,000. Final assistance awards are contingent on the availability of FY-2007 funding. Depending on the quality of proposals submitted, the Bureau anticipates supporting five discrete projects, each funded at approximately $100,000, one for each of the five specified Central and South American countries. The Bureau makes no assurances that it will award projects in all five countries. Organizations may apply to implement one or more projects. Proposals must clearly indicate the country or countries with which the applicant plans to work, and budgets should be matched to the projects. For instance, if an applicant submits a proposal for one country/project, its grant request should be approximately $100,000. For two, a request would be approximately $200,000, and so on. The Bureau prefers applications for two or more projects that can offer economies of scale and administrative efficiencies. Since cost effectiveness is one of the proposal review criteria, the number of participants that can be accommodated in each project will be a factor in the proposal review process, though this will be balanced with program quality and a realistic budget. For each project, applicants must focus on the primary theme of civic education. The secondary themes are ethics and ethical leadership and student-organized campaigns or programs that address societal problems such as the environment (including littering), drug addiction prevention, HIV/AIDS awareness, or public safety for cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers. Applicants may propose other social issues appropriate for a youth program. Secondary themes should be woven into the activities as feasible, without creating an overwhelming array of topics. The applicant should present a program plan that allows the participants to thoroughly explore civic education in a creative, memorable, and practical way. Activities should be designed to be replicable and provide practical knowledge and skills that the participants can apply to school and civic activities at home. These projects will offer bright and ambitious youth and teachers who work with youth the opportunity to develop their personal skills in a positive and productive way. Organizational Capacity Applicant organizations must demonstrate their capacity for doing projects of this nature, focusing on three areas of competency:
(1)Provision of programs that address the goals and themes outlined in this document;
(2)age-appropriate programming for youth; and
(3)previous experience working on programs with Central and/or South America. Applicants must have the organizational capacity in the partner country(ies) necessary to implement the in-country activities, or they must partner with an organization or institution with the requisite capacity to recruit and select participants for the program and to provide follow-on activities. Organizations applying to implement more than one of the five projects must convincingly demonstrate their capacity to manage a complex, multi-phase program with several separate projects. The organization's ability to administer more than one project successfully must be thoroughly discussed and proven in the proposal. Guidelines Pending the availability of funds, the grants will begin on or about September 1, 2007. The grant period will be 12 to 18 months in duration, as appropriate for the applicant's program design. Each 25- to 30-day exchange program in the United States will take place during the school break in the partner country; see specific information below. The exact timing of the project may be adjusted through the mutual agreement of the Department of State and the grant recipient. The grant recipients will be responsible for the following: • Recruitment and selection of youth and adult educators from diverse geographic regions in the partner countries. The Public Affairs Section of the U.S. Embassy in the partner country will have a key role in developing a recruitment strategy and deciding how finalists are chosen. • Provision of orientations for exchange participants and for those participating in the host communities. • Designing and planning of activities that provide a substantive project on the theme of civic education, as well as on leadership development, community service, and suggested secondary themes. Some activities should be school and/or community-based, as feasible, and the projects will involve as much sustained interaction with American peers as possible. • Arrangement of homestays with American families. • Logistical arrangements, including visa applications, international and domestic travel, accommodations, and disbursement of stipends. • Follow-on activities in the partner country that reinforce the ideas, values and skills imparted during the U.S. program through community projects. *Recruitment and Selection:* The grant recipients will manage the recruitment and merit-based selection of participants in cooperation with the Public Affairs Sections of the U.S. Embassies in La Paz, Quito, Managua, Lima, and Caracas. Once a grant is awarded, the grant recipient must consult with the Public Affairs Section at the U.S. Embassy to review a recruitment and participant selection plan and to determine the degree of Embassy involvement in the process. Organizers must strive for regional, socio-economic, and ethnic diversity, as well as gender balance. Collaboration with Bi-National Commissions is suggested, if possible. The Department of State and/or its overseas representatives are responsible for final approval of all selected delegations. *Participants:* The youth participants will be teenagers 15 to 18 years old who have demonstrated leadership aptitude and a commitment to their communities. The exchange participants will also include adults who are teachers, school administrators, and/or community leaders who work with youth; they will have the dual role of both exchange participant and chaperone. Participants will have enough proficiency in English to communicate with their host families and their American peers but, if necessary, the grantee organization will provide interpretation to assist with educational activities. *U.S. Program:* High schools students and educators will spend 25 to 30 days in the United States—in Washington, DC, and in one or two other communities—on an intensive program that is designed to develop the participants' knowledge and skill base in civic education and community activism as well as in youth leadership development. The U.S. program should focus primarily on interactive activities, practical experiences, and other hands-on opportunities related to the program themes. All programming should include American teenagers wherever possible. The program will also provide opportunities for the adult educators to work with their American peers. Cultural, social, and recreational activities will balance the schedule. Participants will live with American families in homestays for at least half of the exchange period. *Follow-on Activities and In-Country Programming:* In-country activities that help to support alumni in their post-exchange activities are required, and should enable the alumni to share their experiences and apply their skills. Applicant organizations should present creative and effective ways to address the project themes, for both program participants and their peers, as a means to amplify the program impact. U.S. project staff or trainers may travel to the partner country several months after the exchange to conduct trainings that reinforce the themes of the exchange; they may be accompanied by American teenagers if supported through cost-sharing. Country Specific Information Applicants are required to follow program information for each country, where provided. *Bolivia:* Timeframe for U.S. exchange—November 15, 2007, to January 31, 2008. Include topic of creating a sound national identity that unites citizens and the role of the citizen in confronting issues such as corruption and accountability. *Ecuador:* Timeframe for U.S. exchange—January 2008. Recruitment should be in both the highlands and in the coastal area, though please note that with an exchange in January, students in the highlands would miss some school at home. *Nicaragua:* Timeframe for U.S. exchange—December 1, 2007, to January 30, 2008. Include topic of student-organized campaigns by looking at socio-economic, educational and political empowerment groups. *Peru:* Timeframe for U.S. exchange—January 1 to February 20, 2008. Applicants should plan on collaborating with Bi-National Commissions
(BNCs)for recruitment. Contact the embassy for more information. *Venezuela:* Timeframe for U.S. exchange—August 1 to September 15, 2008. Proposals must demonstrate how the stated objectives will be met. The proposal narrative should provide detailed information on the major program activities, and applicants should explain and justify their programmatic choices. Programs must comply with J-1 visa regulations for the International Visitor category. Please be sure to refer to the complete Solicitation Package—this RFGP, the Project Objectives, Goals, and Implementation (POGI), and the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI)—for further information. II. Award Information *Type of Award:* Grant Agreement. *Fiscal Year Funds:* 2007. *Approximate Total Funding:* $500,000. *Approximate Number of Awards:* One to five. *Floor of Award Range:* $100,000. *Ceiling of Award Range:* $500,000. *Anticipated Award Date:* September 1, 2007, pending the availability of funds. *Anticipated Project Completion Date:* 12-18 months after start date, to be specified by applicant based on project plan. *Additional Information:* Pending successful implementation of this program and the availability of funds in subsequent fiscal years, it is ECA's intent to renew these grants for two additional fiscal years before openly competing them again. III. Eligibility Information III.1. *Eligible applicants:* Applications may be submitted by public and private non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3). III.2. *Cost Sharing or Matching Funds:* There is no minimum or maximum percentage required for this competition. However, the Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. When cost sharing is offered, it is understood and agreed that the applicant must provide the amount of cost sharing as stipulated in its proposal and later included in an approved grant agreement. Cost sharing may be in the form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For accountability, you must maintain written records to support all costs that are claimed as your contribution, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit. The basis for determining the value of cash and in-kind contributions must be in accordance with OMB Circular A-110, (Revised), Subpart C.23—Cost Sharing and Matching. In the event you do not provide the minimum amount of cost sharing as stipulated in the approved budget, ECA's contribution will be reduced in like proportion. III.3. *Other Eligibility Requirements:*
(a)Bureau grant guidelines require that organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges be limited to $60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA anticipates awarding grants in amounts over $60,000 to support program and administrative costs required to implement this exchange program. Therefore, organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges are not eligible to apply under this competition. The Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. IV. Application and Submission Information Note: Please read the complete announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. IV.1 *Contact Information to Request an Application Package:* Please contact the Youth Programs Division (ECA/PE/C/PY), Room 568, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, Telephone
(202)203-7505, Fax
(202)203-7529, E-mail: *LantzCS@state.gov* to request a Solicitation Package. Please refer to the Funding Opportunity Number (ECA/PE/C/PY-07-23) located at the top of this announcement when making your request. Alternatively, an electronic application package may be obtained from grants.gov. Please see section IV.3f for further information. The Solicitation Package contains the Proposal Submission Instruction
(PSI)document, which consists of required application forms and standard guidelines for proposal preparation. It also contains the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation
(POGI)document, which provides specific information, award criteria, and budget instructions tailored to this competition. Please specify Bureau Program Officer Carolyn Lantz and refer to the Funding Opportunity Number located at the top of this announcement on all other inquiries and correspondence. IV.2. *To Download a Solicitation Package Via Internet:* The entire Solicitation Package may be downloaded from the Bureau's Web site at *http://exchanges.state.gov/education/rfgps/menu.htm,* or from the Grants.gov Web site at *http://www.grants.gov.* Please read all information before downloading. IV.3. *Content and Form of Submission:* Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. The application should be submitted per the instructions under IV.3f. “Application Deadline and Methods of Submission” section below. IV.3a. You are required to have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number to apply for a grant or cooperative agreement from the U.S. Government. This number is a nine-digit identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a DUNS number, access *http://www.dunandbradstreet.com* or call 1-866-705-5711. Please ensure that your DUNS number is included in the appropriate box of the SF-424 form that is part of the formal application package. IV.3b. All proposals must contain an executive summary, proposal narrative and budget. Please Refer to the Solicitation Package. It contains the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions
(PSI)document and the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation
(POGI)document for additional formatting and technical requirements. IV.3c. You must have nonprofit status with the IRS at the time of application. If your organization is a private nonprofit which has not received a grant or cooperative agreement from ECA in the past three years, or if your organization received nonprofit status from the IRS within the past four years, you must submit the necessary documentation to verify nonprofit status as directed in the PSI document. Failure to do so will cause your proposal to be declared technically ineligible. IV.3d. Please take into consideration the following information when preparing your proposal narrative: IV.3d.1 Adherence to All Regulations Governing The J Visa. The Office of Citizen Exchanges of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs is the official program sponsor of the exchange program covered by this RFGP, and an employee of the Bureau will be the Responsible Officer for the program under the terms of 22 CFR part 62, which covers the administration of the Exchange Visitor Program (J visa program). Under the terms of 22 CFR part 62, organizations receiving grants under this RFGP will be third parties “cooperating with or assisting the sponsor in the conduct of the sponsor's program.” The actions of grantee program organizations shall be “imputed to the sponsor in evaluating the sponsor's compliance with” 22 CFR part 62. Therefore, the Bureau expects that any organization receiving a grant under this competition will render all assistance necessary to enable the Bureau to fully comply with 22 CFR part 62 *et seq.* The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs places great emphasis on the secure and proper administration of Exchange Visitor (J visa) Programs and adherence by grantee program organizations and program participants to all regulations governing the J visa program status. Therefore, proposals should *explicitly state in writing* that the applicant is prepared to assist the Bureau in meeting all requirements governing the administration of Exchange Visitor Programs as set forth in 22 CFR part 62. If the applicant organization has experience as a designated Exchange Visitor Program Sponsor, the applicant should discuss its record of compliance with 22 CFR part 62 *et seq.,* including the oversight of their Responsible Officers and Alternate Responsible Officers, screening and selection of program participants, provision of pre-arrival information and orientation to participants, monitoring of participants, proper maintenance and security of forms, recordkeeping, reporting and other requirements. The Office of Citizen Exchanges of ECA will be responsible for issuing DS-2019 forms to participants in this program. A copy of the complete regulations governing the administration of Exchange Visitor
(J)programs is available at *http://exchanges.state.gov* or from: United States Department of State, Office of Exchange Coordination and Designation, ECA/EC/ECD—SA-44, Room 734, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, Telephone:
(202)203-5029, FAX:
(202)453-8640. IV.3d.2 Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines. Pursuant to the Bureau's authorizing legislation, programs must maintain a non-political character and should be balanced and representative of the diversity of American political, social, and cultural life. “Diversity” should be interpreted in the broadest sense and encompass differences including, but not limited to ethnicity, race, gender, religion, geographic location, socio-economic status, and disabilities. Applicants are strongly encouraged to adhere to the advancement of this principle both in program administration and in program content. Please refer to the review criteria under the ‘Support for Diversity' section for specific suggestions on incorporating diversity into your proposal. Public Law 104-319 provides that “in carrying out programs of educational and cultural exchange in countries whose people do not fully enjoy freedom and democracy,” the Bureau “shall take appropriate steps to provide opportunities for participation in such programs to human rights and democracy leaders of such countries.” Public Law 106-113 requires that the governments of the countries described above do not have inappropriate influence in the selection process. Proposals should reflect advancement of these goals in their program contents, to the full extent deemed feasible. IV.3d.3. Program Monitoring and Evaluation. Proposals must include a plan to monitor and evaluate the project's success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the program. The Bureau recommends that your proposal include a draft survey questionnaire or other technique plus a description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original project objectives. The Bureau expects that the grantee will track participants or partners and be able to respond to key evaluation questions, including satisfaction with the program, learning as a result of the program, changes in behavior as a result of the program, and effects of the program on institutions (institutions in which participants work or partner institutions). The evaluation plan should include indicators that measure gains in mutual understanding as well as substantive knowledge. Successful monitoring and evaluation depend heavily on setting clear goals and outcomes at the outset of a program. Your evaluation plan should include a description of your project's objectives, your anticipated project outcomes, and how and when you intend to measure these outcomes (performance indicators). The more that outcomes are “smart” (specific, measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and placed in a reasonable time frame), the easier it will be to conduct the evaluation. You should also show how your project objectives link to the goals of the program described in this RFGP. Your monitoring and evaluation plan should clearly distinguish between program *outputs* and *outcomes. Outputs* are products and services delivered, often stated as an amount. Output information is important to show the scope or size of project activities, but it cannot substitute for information about progress towards outcomes or the results achieved. Examples of outputs include the number of people trained or the number of seminars conducted. *Outcomes,* in contrast, represent specific results a project is intended to achieve and is usually measured as an extent of change. Findings on outputs and outcomes should both be reported, but the focus should be on outcomes. We encourage you to assess the following four levels of outcomes, as they relate to the program goals set out in the RFGP (listed here in increasing order of importance): 1. *Participant satisfaction* with the program and exchange experience. 2. *Participant learning,* such as increased knowledge, aptitude, skills, and changed understanding and attitude. Learning includes both substantive (subject-specific) learning and mutual understanding. 3. *Participant behavior,* concrete actions to apply knowledge in work or community; greater participation and responsibility in civic organizations; interpretation and explanation of experiences and new knowledge gained; continued contacts between participants, community members, and others. 4. *Institutional changes,* such as increased collaboration and partnerships, policy reforms, new programming, and organizational improvements. Please note: Consideration should be given to the appropriate timing of data collection for each level of outcome. For example, satisfaction is usually captured as a short-term outcome, whereas behavior and institutional changes are normally considered longer-term outcomes. Overall, the quality of your monitoring and evaluation plan will be judged on how well it
(1)Specifies intended outcomes;
(2)gives clear descriptions of how each outcome will be measured;
(3)identifies when particular outcomes will be measured; and
(4)provides a clear description of the data collection strategies for each outcome ( *i.e.* , surveys, interviews, or focus groups). (Please note that evaluation plans that deal only with the first level of outcomes [satisfaction] will be deemed less competitive under the present evaluation criteria.) Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. IV.3e. Please take the following information into consideration when preparing your budget: IV.3e.1. Applicants must submit a comprehensive budget for the entire program. Awards may not exceed the amount specified. There must be a summary budget as well as breakdowns reflecting both administrative and program budgets. Applicants applying to implement more than one project must provide separate sub-budgets for each. Please refer to the other documents in the Solicitation Package for complete budget guidelines and formatting instructions. IV.3f. Application Deadline and Methods of Submission: *Application Deadline Date:* April 20, 2007. *Reference Number:* ECA/PE/C/PY-07-23. *Methods of Submission* Applications may be submitted in one of two ways:
(1)In hard-copy, via a nationally recognized overnight delivery service ( *i.e.* , DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or U.S. Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc.), or
(2)Electronically through *http://www.grants.gov.* Along with the Project Title, all applicants must enter the above Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF-424 contained in the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions
(PSI)of the solicitation document. IV.3f.1 Submitting Printed Applications. Applications must be shipped no later than the above deadline. Delivery services used by applicants must have in-place, centralized shipping identification and tracking systems that may be accessed via the Internet and delivery people who are identifiable by commonly recognized uniforms and delivery vehicles. Proposals shipped on or before the above deadline but received at ECA more than seven days after the deadline will be ineligible for further consideration under this competition. Proposals shipped after the established deadlines are ineligible for consideration under this competition. ECA will *not* notify you upon receipt of application. It is each applicant's responsibility to ensure that each package is marked with a legible tracking number and to monitor/confirm delivery to ECA via the Internet. Delivery of proposal packages *may not* be made via local courier service or in person for this competition. Faxed documents will not be accepted at any time. Only proposals submitted as stated above will be considered. Important note: When preparing your submission please make sure to include one extra copy of the completed SF-424 form and place it in an envelope addressed to “ECA/EX/PM”. The original, one fully-tabbed copy, and six copies of the application with Tabs A-E (for a total of 8 copies) should be sent to: U.S. Department of State, SA-44, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.: ECA/PE/C/PY-07-23, Program Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 534, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547. Along with the Project Title, all applicants must enter the above Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF-424 contained in the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions
(PSI)of the solicitation document. Applicants must also submit the executive summary, proposal narrative, budget section, and any important appendices as e-mail attachments in Microsoft Word and Excel to the following e-mail address: *LantzCS@state.gov.* In the e-mail message subject line, include the name of the applicant organization and the partner country. The Bureau will transmit these files electronically to the Public Affairs Sections of the U.S. Embassies in the participating countries for their review. IV.3f.2 Submitting Electronic Applications. Applicants have the option of submitting proposals electronically through Grants.gov ( *http://www.grants.gov* ). Complete solicitation packages are available at Grants.gov in the “Find” portion of the system. Please follow the instructions available in the ‘Get Started’ portion of the site ( *http://www.grants.gov/GetStarted* ). Several of the steps in the Grants.gov registration process could take several weeks. Therefore, applicants should check with appropriate staff within their organizations immediately after reviewing this RFGP to confirm or determine their registration status with Grants.gov. Once registered, the amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors including the size of the application and the speed of your internet connection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you not wait until the application deadline to begin the submission process through Grants.gov. Direct all questions regarding Grants.gov registration and submission to: Grants.gov Customer Support, Contact Center Phone: 800-518-4726, Business Hours: Monday-Friday, 7 a.m.-9 p.m. Eastern Time, E-mail: *support@grants.gov.* Applicants have until midnight (12 a.m.), Washington, DC time of the closing date to ensure that their entire application has been uploaded to the Grants.gov site. There are no exceptions to the above deadline. Applications uploaded to the site after midnight of the application deadline date will be automatically rejected by the grants.gov system, and will be technically ineligible. Applicants will receive a confirmation e-mail from grants.gov upon the successful submission of an application. ECA will *not* notify you upon receipt of electronic applications. It is the responsibility of all applicants submitting proposals via the Grants.gov web portal to ensure that proposals have been received by Grants.gov in their entirety, and ECA bears no responsibility for data errors resulting from transmission or conversion processes. IV.3g. Intergovernmental Review of Applications: Executive Order 12372 does not apply to this program. V. Application Review Information V.1. Review Process The Bureau will review all proposals for technical eligibility. Proposals will be deemed ineligible if they do not fully adhere to the guidelines stated herein and in the Solicitation Package. All eligible proposals will be reviewed by the program office, as well as the Public Diplomacy section overseas, where appropriate. Eligible proposals will be subject to compliance with Federal and Bureau regulations and guidelines and forwarded to Bureau grant panels for advisory review. Proposals may also be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Adviser or by other Department elements. Final funding decisions are at the discretion of the Department of State's Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final technical authority for assistance awards (grants) resides with the Bureau's Grants Officer. Review Criteria Please see the review criteria in the accompanying Project Objectives, Goals, and Implementation
(POGI)document. VI. Award Administration Information VI.1a. Award Notices Final awards cannot be made until funds have been appropriated by Congress, allocated and committed through internal Bureau procedures. Successful applicants will receive an Assistance Award Document
(AAD)from the Bureau's Grants Office. The AAD and the original grant proposal with subsequent modifications (if applicable) shall be the only binding authorizing document between the recipient and the U.S. Government. The AAD will be signed by an authorized Grants Officer, and mailed to the recipient's responsible officer identified in the application. Unsuccessful applicants will receive notification of the results of the application review from the ECA program office coordinating this competition. VI.2 Administrative and National Policy Requirements Terms and Conditions for the Administration of ECA agreements include the following: Office of Management and Budget Circular A-122, “Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations.” Office of Management and Budget Circular A-21, “Cost Principles for Educational Institutions.” OMB Circular A-87, “Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Governments”. OMB Circular No. A-110 (Revised), Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Nonprofit Organizations. OMB Circular No. A-102, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and Local Governments. OMB Circular No. A-133, Audits of States, Local Government, and Non-profit Organizations. Please reference the following Web sites for additional information: *http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants., http://exchanges.state.gov/education/grantsdiv/terms.htm#articleI. * VI.3. Reporting Requirements. You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus one copy of the following reports:
(1)A final program and financial report no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award;
(2)Interim reports, as required in the Bureau grant agreement. Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. (Please refer to IV. Application and Submission Instructions (IV.3.d.3) above for Program Monitoring and Evaluation information. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. All reports must be sent to the ECA Grants Officer and ECA Program Officer listed in the final assistance award document. VI.4. Program Data Requirements Organizations awarded grants will be required to maintain specific data on program participants and activities in an electronically accessible database format that can be shared with the Bureau as required. As a minimum, the data must include the following:
(1)Name, address, contact information and biographic sketch of all persons who travel internationally on funds provided by the grant or who benefit from the grant funding but do not travel.
(2)Itineraries of international and domestic travel, providing dates of travel and cities in which any exchange experiences take place. Final schedules for in-country and U.S. activities must be received by the ECA Program Officer at least three workdays prior to the official opening of the activity. VII. Agency Contacts For questions about this announcement, contact: Carolyn Lantz, Program Officer, Youth Programs Division (ECA/PE/C/PY), Room 568, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, Telephone
(202)203-7505, Fax
(202)203-7529, E-mail: *LantzCS@state.gov.* All correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFGP should reference the above title and number ECA/PE/C/PY-07-23. Please read the complete announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. VIII. Other Information Notice The terms and conditions published in this RFGP are binding and may not be modified by any Bureau representative. Explanatory information provided by the Bureau that contradicts published language will not be binding. Issuance of the RFGP does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and the availability of funds. Awards made will be subject to periodic reporting and evaluation requirements per section VI.3 above. Dated: February 22, 2007. Dina Habib Powell, Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-3635 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 5704] Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA); Request for Grant Proposals: Youth Leadership Program for Indonesia *Announcement Type:* New Grant. *Funding Opportunity Number:* ECA/PE/C/PY-07-29. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:* 00.000. *Key Dates:* Application Deadline: April 26, 2007. *Executive Summary:* The Office of Citizen Exchanges, Youth Programs Division, of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs announces an open competition for a Youth Leadership Program with Indonesia. Public and private non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3) may submit proposals to recruit and select youth and adult participants overseas and to provide the participants with a U.S.-based exchange project focused on civic education, leadership, tolerance and respect for diversity, and community activism. I. Funding Opportunity Description *Authority:* Overall grant making authority for this program is contained in the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961, Public Law 87-256, as amended, also known as the Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the Act is “to enable the Government of the United States to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries * * *; to strengthen the ties which unite us with other nations by demonstrating the educational and cultural interests, developments, and achievements of the people of the United States and other nations * * * and thus to assist in the development of friendly, sympathetic and peaceful relations between the United States and the other countries of the world.” The funding authority for the program above is provided through legislation. *Purpose:* The Youth Leadership Program for Indonesia enables teenagers (ages 15-17) and adult educators to participate in intensive, thematic, month-long project in the United States that complement a more formal education in the principles of a civil society. Participants will be engaged in a variety of activities such as workshops, community and/or school-based programs, cultural activities, seminars and other activities designed to achieve the project's stated goals and objectives. Opportunities for participants to interact with American youth and adult educators will be included as much as possible. The goals of the program are:
(1)To develop a sense of civic responsibility and commitment to community development among youth;
(2)to develop a cadre of community activists who will share their knowledge and skills with their peers through positive action;
(2)To foster relationships among youth from different ethnic, religious, and national groups;
(3)To promote mutual understanding between the United States and the people of other countries. *Program Objective:* To introduce students and educators from Indonesia to the principles of democracy, civil society, and youth leadership as they are practiced in the United States, with an additional focus on volunteerism, community activism and peer education (how one can influence one's peers toward positive change; for example, an anti-smoking campaign directed to teens). Applicants should identify their own specific objectives and measurable outcomes based on these program goals and the project specifications provided in this solicitation. Applicants must demonstrate their capacity for doing projects of this nature, focusing on three areas of competency:
(1)Provision of programs that address the goals and themes outlined in this document;
(2)age-appropriate programming for youth; and
(3)previous experience in working with Indonesia. Applicants, or their partner organizations, need to have the necessary capacity in Indonesia to recruit and select participants for the program and to provide follow-on activities. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and the availability of funds. *Guidelines:* Grants should begin on or about September 1, 2007, subject to the availability of funds. The grant period will be approximately 14 to 20 months in duration, according to the applicant's program plan. In pursuit of the goals outlined above, the programs will include the following: • Recruitment and selection of a diverse group of youth and adult educators in Indonesia. • A pre-departure orientation program. • Designing and planning of activities in the United States that provide a substantive program on civic education, leadership, tolerance and respect for diversity, and community activism. Some activities should be school and/or community-based, as feasible, and the project will involve as much interaction with American peers as possible. • Logistical arrangements, home-stay arrangements and other accommodation, provisions for religious observance, disbursement of stipends/per diem, local travel, and travel between sites. • Follow-on activities in the participants' home countries designed to reinforce the ideas, values, and skills imparted during the U.S. program. *Recruitment and Selection:* Once a grant is awarded, the grant recipient must consult with the Public Affairs Section at the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta to review a recruitment and participant selection plan. Organizers must strive for the broadest regional and ethnic diversity within Indonesia. The Department of State and/or its overseas representatives reserve final approval of all selected delegations. *Participants:* The participants will be 15-20 students and educators selected from a variety of schools—public (secular) schools, pesantrens (Islamic boarding schools), and non-Islamic parochial schools. Participants should represent Indonesia's diversity. The ratio of students to educators should be approximately 5:1. The students need not have English skills; the grant recipient should be prepared to provide professional interpretation services appropriate to the project. Criteria for selection of participants will be leadership skills, an interest in service to the community, strong academic and social skills, overall composure, and openness and flexibility. It is desirable that 2-3 participants attend or teach at the same school or live in the same community so that they can support each other upon return. *U.S. Program:* Applicants should propose a four-week exchange in the United States that takes place between March and August 2008. The project may take place in one or two communities and should offer the participants exposure to the variety of American life. The program should focus primarily on interactive activities, practical experiences, and other hands-on opportunities to learn about the fundamentals of a civil society, community service, tolerance and respect for diversity, and building leadership skills. Suggestions include simulations, a volunteer service project, and leadership training exercises. All programming should include American participants wherever possible. Cultural and recreational activities will balance the schedule. Please see the POGI for more details. *Follow-on Activities and In-Country Programming:* Follow-on activities for U.S. program alumni are required, and additional in-country programming is strongly recommended. Applicants should present creative and effective ways to address the project themes, for both program participants and their peers, as a means to amplify the program impact. Proposals must demonstrate how the stated objectives will be met. The proposal narrative should provide detailed information on the major program activities, and applicants should explain and justify their programmatic choices. Programs must comply with J-1 visa regulations. Please be sure to refer to the complete Solicitation Package—this RFGP, the Project Objectives, Goals, and Implementation (POGI), and the Proposal Submission Instructions (PSI)—for further information. II. Award Information *Type of Award:* Grant Agreement. *Fiscal Year Funds:* 2007. *Approximate Total Funding:* $180,000. *Approximate Number of Awards:* One. *Anticipated Award Date:* September 1, 2007, pending availability of funds. *Anticipated Project Completion Date:* 14-20 months after start date, to be specified by applicant based on project plan *Additional Information:* Pending successful implementation of the project and the availability of funds in subsequent fiscal years, ECA reserves the right to renew grants for up to two additional fiscal years before openly competing grants under this program again. III. Eligibility Information III.1. Eligible applicants: Applications may be submitted by public and private non-profit organizations meeting the provisions described in Internal Revenue Code section 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3). III.2. Cost Sharing or Matching Funds: There is no minimum or maximum percentage required for this competition. However, the Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. When cost sharing is offered, it is understood and agreed that the applicant must provide the amount of cost sharing as stipulated in its proposal and later included in an approved grant agreement. Cost sharing may be in the form of allowable direct or indirect costs. For accountability, you must maintain written records to support all costs that are claimed as your contribution, as well as costs to be paid by the Federal government. Such records are subject to audit. The basis for determining the value of cash and in-kind contributions must be in accordance with OMB Circular A-110, (Revised), Subpart C.23—Cost Sharing and Matching. In the event you do not provide the minimum amount of cost sharing as stipulated in the approved budget, ECA's contribution will be reduced in like proportion. III.3. Other Eligibility Requirements: Bureau grant guidelines require that organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges be limited to $60,000 in Bureau funding. ECA anticipates awarding one grant not to exceed $180,000 to support program and administrative costs required to implement this exchange program. Therefore, organizations with less than four years experience in conducting international exchanges are ineligible to apply under this competition. The Bureau encourages applicants to provide maximum levels of cost sharing and funding in support of its programs. IV. Application and Submission Information Note: Please read the complete announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. IV.1 Contact Information to Request an Application Package: Please contact the Youth Programs Division (ECA/PE/ C/PY), Room 568, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, Telephone
(202)453-8158, Fax
(202)453-8169, E-mail: *SchulzAJ@state.gov* to request a Solicitation Package. Please refer to the Funding Opportunity Number (ECA/PE/C/PY-07-29) located at the top of this announcement when making your request. Alternatively, an electronic application package may be obtained from grants.gov. Please see section IV.3f for further information. The Solicitation Package contains the Proposal Submission Instruction
(PSI)document, which consists of required application forms and standard guidelines for proposal preparation. It also contains the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation
(POGI)document, which provides specific information, award criteria, and budget instructions tailored to this competition. Please specify Bureau Program Officer Amy Schulz and refer to the Funding Opportunity Number (ECA/PE/C/PY-07-29) located at the top of this announcement on all other inquiries and correspondence. IV.2. To Download a Solicitation Package Via Internet: The entire Solicitation Package may be downloaded from the Bureau's Web site at *http://exchanges.state.gov/education/rfgps/menu.htm,* or from the Grants.gov Web site at *http://www.grants.gov.* Please read all information before downloading. IV.3. Content and Form of Submission: Applicants must follow all instructions in the Solicitation Package. The application should be submitted per the instructions under IV.3f. “Submission Dates and Times section” below. IV.3a. You are required to have a Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number to apply for a grant or cooperative agreement from the U.S. Government. This number is a nine-digit identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a DUNS number, access *http://www.dunandbradstreet.com* or call 1-866-705-5711. Please ensure that your DUNS number is included in the appropriate box of the SF-424 form that is part of the formal application package. IV.3b. All proposals must contain an executive summary, proposal narrative and budget. Please Refer to the Solicitation Package. It contains the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions
(PSI)document and the Project Objectives, Goals and Implementation
(POGI)document for additional formatting and technical requirements. IV.3c. You must have nonprofit status with the IRS at the time of application. If your organization is a private nonprofit which has not received a grant or cooperative agreement from ECA in the past three years, or if your organization received nonprofit status from the IRS within the past four years, you must submit the necessary documentation to verify nonprofit status as directed in the PSI document. Failure to do so will cause your proposal to be declared technically ineligible. IV.3d. Please take into consideration the following information when preparing your proposal narrative: IV.3d.1. Adherence To All Regulations Governing The J Visa. The Office of Citizen Exchanges of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs is the official program sponsor of the exchange program covered by this RFGP, and an employee of the Bureau will be the “Responsible Officer” for the program under the terms of 22 CFR part 62, which covers the administration of the Exchange Visitor Program (J visa program). Under the terms of 22 CFR part 62, organizations receiving grants under this RFGP will be third parties “cooperating with or assisting the sponsor in the conduct of the sponsor's program.” The actions of grantee program organizations shall be “imputed to the sponsor in evaluating the sponsor's compliance with” 22 CFR part 62. Therefore, the Bureau expects that any organization receiving a grant under this competition will render all assistance necessary to enable the Bureau to fully comply with 22 CFR part 62 *et seq.* The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs places great emphasis on the secure and proper administration of Exchange Visitor (J visa) Programs and adherence by grantee program organizations and program participants to all regulations governing the J visa program status. Therefore, proposals should explicitly state in writing that the applicant is prepared to assist the Bureau in meeting all requirements governing the administration of Exchange Visitor Programs as set forth in 22 CFR part 62. If your organization has experience as a designated Exchange Visitor Program Sponsor, the applicant should discuss their record of compliance with 22 CFR part 62 *et seq.* , including the oversight of their Responsible Officers and Alternate Responsible Officers, screening and selection of program participants, provision of pre-arrival information and orientation to participants, monitoring of participants, proper maintenance and security of forms, record-keeping, reporting and other requirements. The Office of Citizen Exchanges of ECA will be responsible for issuing DS-2019 forms to participants in this program. A copy of the complete regulations governing the administration of Exchange Visitor
(J)programs is available at *http://exchanges.state.gov* or from: United States Department of State, Office of Exchange Coordination and Designation, ECA/EC/ECD-SA-44, Room 734, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, Telephone:
(202)203-5029, FAX:
(202)453-8640. IV.3d.2. Diversity, Freedom and Democracy Guidelines. Pursuant to the Bureau's authorizing legislation, programs must maintain a non-political character and should be balanced and representative of the diversity of American political, social, and cultural life. “Diversity” should be interpreted in the broadest sense and encompass differences including, but not limited to ethnicity, race, gender, religion, geographic location, socio-economic status, and disabilities. Applicants are strongly encouraged to adhere to the advancement of this principle both in program administration and in program content. Please refer to the review criteria under the ‘Support for Diversity’ section for specific suggestions on incorporating diversity into your proposal. Public Law 104-319 provides that “in carrying out programs of educational and cultural exchange in countries whose people do not fully enjoy freedom and democracy,” the Bureau “shall take appropriate steps to provide opportunities for participation in such programs to human rights and democracy leaders of such countries.” Public Law 106-113 requires that the governments of the countries described above do not have inappropriate influence in the selection process. Proposals should reflect advancement of these goals in their program contents, to the full extent deemed feasible. IV.3d.3. Program Monitoring and Evaluation. Proposals must include a plan to monitor and evaluate the project's success, both as the activities unfold and at the end of the program. The Bureau recommends that your proposal include a draft survey questionnaire or other technique plus a description of a methodology to use to link outcomes to original project objectives. The Bureau expects that the grantee will track participants or partners and be able to respond to key evaluation questions, including satisfaction with the program, learning as a result of the program, changes in behavior as a result of the program, and effects of the program on institutions (institutions in which participants work or partner institutions). The evaluation plan should include indicators that measure gains in mutual understanding as well as substantive knowledge. Successful monitoring and evaluation depend heavily on setting clear goals and outcomes at the outset of a program. Your evaluation plan should include a description of your project's objectives, your anticipated project outcomes, and how and when you intend to measure these outcomes (performance indicators). The more that outcomes are “smart” (specific, measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and placed in a reasonable time frame), the easier it will be to conduct the evaluation. You should also show how your project objectives link to the goals of the program described in this RFGP. Your monitoring and evaluation plan should clearly distinguish between program outputs and outcomes. Outputs are products and services delivered, often stated as an amount. Output information is important to show the scope or size of project activities, but it cannot substitute for information about progress towards outcomes or the results achieved. Examples of outputs include the number of people trained or the number of seminars conducted. Outcomes, in contrast, represent specific results a project is intended to achieve and is usually measured as an extent of change. Findings on outputs and outcomes should both be reported, but the focus should be on outcomes. We encourage you to assess the following four levels of outcomes, as they relate to the program goals set out in the RFGP (listed here in increasing order of importance): 1. Participant satisfaction with the program and exchange experience. 2. Participant learning, such as increased knowledge, aptitude, skills, and changed understanding and attitude. Learning includes both substantive (subject-specific) learning and mutual understanding. 3. Participant behavior, concrete actions to apply knowledge in work or community; greater participation and responsibility in civic organizations; interpretation and explanation of experiences and new knowledge gained; continued contacts between participants, community members, and others. 4. Institutional changes, such as increased collaboration and partnerships, policy reforms, new programming, and organizational improvements. Please note: Consideration should be given to the appropriate timing of data collection for each level of outcome. For example, satisfaction is usually captured as a short-term outcome, whereas behavior and institutional changes are normally considered longer-term outcomes. Overall, the quality of your monitoring and evaluation plan will be judged on how well it
(1)specifies intended outcomes;
(2)gives clear descriptions of how each outcome will be measured;
(3)identifies when particular outcomes will be measured; and
(4)provides a clear description of the data collection strategies for each outcome (i.e., surveys, interviews, or focus groups). (Please note that evaluation plans that deal only with the first level of outcomes [satisfaction] will be deemed less competitive under the present evaluation criteria.) Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. IV.3e. Please take the following information into consideration when preparing your budget: IV.3e.1. Applicants must submit a comprehensive budget for the entire program. Awards may not exceed the amounts specified. Funding for the project is not to exceed $180,000. There must be a summary budget as well as breakdowns reflecting both administrative and program budgets. Applicants may provide separate sub-budgets for each program component, phase, location, or activity to provide clarification. Please refer to the other documents in the Solicitation Package for complete budget guidelines and formatting instructions. IV.3F. Application Deadline and Methods of Submission. *Application Deadline Date:* April 26, 2007. *Reference Number:* ECA/PE/C/PY-07-29. *Methods of Submission:* Applications may be submitted in one of two ways:
(1)In hard-copy, via a nationally recognized overnight delivery service (i.e., DHL, Federal Express, UPS, Airborne Express, or U.S. Postal Service Express Overnight Mail, etc.), or
(2)Electronically through *http://www.grants.gov.* Along with the Project Title, all applicants must enter the above Reference Number in Box 11 on the SF-424 contained in the mandatory Proposal Submission Instructions
(PSI)of the solicitation document. IV.3f.1 Submitting Printed Applications. Applications must be shipped no later than the above deadline. Delivery services used by applicants must have in-place, centralized shipping identification and tracking systems that may be accessed via the Internet and delivery people who are identifiable by commonly recognized uniforms and delivery vehicles. Proposals shipped on or before the above deadline but received at ECA more than seven days after the deadline will be ineligible for further consideration under this competition. Proposals shipped after the established deadlines are ineligible for consideration under this competition. ECA will not notify you upon receipt of application. It is each applicant's responsibility to ensure that each package is marked with a legible tracking number and to monitor/confirm delivery to ECA via the Internet. Delivery of proposal packages may not be made via local courier service or in person for this competition. Faxed documents will not be accepted at any time. Only proposals submitted as stated above will be considered. Important note: When preparing your submission please make sure to include one extra copy of the completed SF-424 form and place it in an envelope addressed to “ECA/EX/PM”. The original, one fully-tabbed copy, and five copies of the application with Tabs A-E (for a total of 7 copies) should be sent to: U.S. Department of State, SA-44, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Ref.: ECA/PE/C/PY-07-29, Program Management, ECA/EX/PM, Room 534, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547. Applicants must also submit the executive summary, proposal narrative, budget section, and any important appendices as e-mail attachments in Microsoft Word and Excel to the following e-mail address: *SchulzAJ@state.gov* . In the e-mail message subject line, include the name of the applicant organization. The Bureau will transmit these files electronically to the Public Affairs Section in the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta for review. IV.3f.2 Submitting Electronic Applications. Applicants have the option of submitting proposals electronically through Grants.gov ( *http://www.grants.gov* ). Complete solicitation packages are available at Grants.gov in the “Find” portion of the system. Please follow the instructions available in the ‘Get Started’ portion of the site ( *http://www.grants.gov/GetStarted* ). Several of the steps in the Grants.gov registration process could take several weeks. Therefore, applicants should check with appropriate staff within their organizations immediately after reviewing this RFGP to confirm or determine their registration status with Grants.gov. Once registered, the amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors including the size of the application and the speed of your internet connection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you not wait until the application deadline to begin the submission process through Grants.gov. Direct all questions regarding Grants.gov registration and submission to: Grants.gov Customer Support, Contact Center Phone: 800-518-4726, Business Hours: Monday-Friday, 7 a.m.-9 p.m. Eastern Time E-mail: *support@grants.gov* . Applicants have until midnight (12 a.m.) of the closing date to ensure that their entire applications have been uploaded to the grants.gov site. Applications uploaded to the site after midnight of the application deadline date will be automatically rejected by the grants.gov system, and will be technically ineligible. Applicants will receive a confirmation e-mail from grants.gov upon the successful submission of an application. ECA will not notify you upon receipt of electronic applications. It is the responsibility of all applicants submitting proposals via the Grants.gov Web portal to ensure that proposals have been received by Grants.gov in their entirety, and ECA bears no responsibility for data errors resulting from transmission or conversion processes. IV.3g. Intergovernmental Review of Applications: Executive Order 12372 does not apply to this program. V. Application Review Information V.1. Review Process The Bureau will review all proposals for technical eligibility. Proposals will be deemed ineligible if they do not fully adhere to the guidelines stated herein and in the Solicitation Package. All eligible proposals will be reviewed by the program office, as well as the Public Diplomacy section overseas, where appropriate. Eligible proposals will be subject to compliance with Federal and Bureau regulations and guidelines and forwarded to Bureau grant panels for advisory review. Proposals may also be reviewed by the Office of the Legal Adviser or by other Department elements. Final funding decisions are at the discretion of the Department of State's Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs. Final technical authority for assistance awards (grants) resides with the Bureau's Grants Officer. Review Criteria Please see the review criteria in the accompanying Project Objectives, Goals, and Implementation
(POGI)document. VI. Award Administration Information VI.1a. Award Notices Final awards cannot be made until funds have been appropriated by Congress, allocated and committed through internal Bureau procedures. Successful applicants will receive an Assistance Award Document
(AAD)from the Bureau's Grants Office. The AAD and the original grant proposal with subsequent modifications (if applicable) shall be the only binding authorizing document between the recipient and the U.S. Government. The AAD will be signed by an authorized Grants Officer, and mailed to the recipient's responsible officer identified in the application. Unsuccessful applicants will receive notification of the results of the application review from the ECA program office coordinating this competition. VI.2 Administrative and National Policy Requirements Terms and Conditions for the Administration of ECA agreements include the following: Office of Management and Budget Circular A-122, “Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations.” Office of Management and Budget Circular A-21, “Cost Principles for Educational Institutions.” OMB Circular A-87, “Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Governments”. OMB Circular No. A-110 (Revised), Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Nonprofit Organizations. OMB Circular No. A-102, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants-in-Aid to State and Local Governments. OMB Circular No. A-133, Audits of States, Local Government, and Non-profit Organizations. Please reference the following websites for additional information: *http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants* , *http://exchanges.state.gov/education/grantsdiv/terms.htm#articleI* . VI.3. Reporting Requirements You must provide ECA with a hard copy original plus one copy of the following reports:
(1)A final program and financial report no more than 90 days after the expiration of the award;
(2)Interim reports, as required in the Bureau grant agreement. Grantees will be required to provide reports analyzing their evaluation findings to the Bureau in their regular program reports. (Please refer to IV. Application and Submission Instructions (IV.3d.3) above for Program Monitoring and Evaluation information.) All data collected, including survey responses and contact information, must be maintained for a minimum of three years and provided to the Bureau upon request. All reports must be sent to the ECA Grants Officer and ECA Program Officer listed in the final assistance award document. VI.4. Program Data Requirements Organizations awarded grants will be required to maintain specific data on program participants and activities in an electronically accessible database format that can be shared with the Bureau as required. As a minimum, the data must include the following:
(1)Name, address, contact information and biographic sketch of all persons who travel internationally on funds provided by the grant or who benefit from the grant funding but do not travel.
(2)Itineraries of international and domestic travel, providing dates of travel and cities in which any exchange experiences take place. Final schedules for in-country and U.S. activities must be received by the ECA Program Officer at least three workdays prior to the official opening of the activity. VII. Agency Contacts For questions about this announcement, contact: Amy Schulz, Program Officer, Youth Programs Division (ECA/PE/C/PY), Room 568, U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20547, Telephone
(202)453-8158, Fax
(202)453-8169, E-mail: *SchulzAJ@state.gov* . All correspondence with the Bureau concerning this RFGP should reference the above title and number ECA/PE/C/PY-07-29. Please read the complete announcement before sending inquiries or submitting proposals. Once the RFGP deadline has passed, Bureau staff may not discuss this competition with applicants until the proposal review process has been completed. VIII. Other Information Notice The terms and conditions published in this RFGP are binding and may not be modified by any Bureau representative. Explanatory information provided by the Bureau that contradicts published language will not be binding. Issuance of the RFGP does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the Government. The Bureau reserves the right to reduce, revise, or increase proposal budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and the availability of funds. Awards made will be subject to periodic reporting and evaluation requirements per section VI.3 above. Dated: February 20, 2007. Dina Habib Powell, Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State. [FR Doc. E7-3623 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-05-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary [OST Docket No. OST-2007-27401] RIN 2105-ADO4 Application To Renew Information Collection Request OMB No. 2105-0551 AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation (Department or DOT). ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended) this notice announces the Department of Transportation intention to apply to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)to renew approval of the information collection request
(ICR)OMB No. 2105-0551, “Reporting Requirements for Disability-Related Complaints.” The current information collection request approved by OMB expires April 30, 2007. DATES: Comments on this notice must be received by April 30, 2007. ADDRESSES: Comments on this action must refer to the docket and notice numbers cited at the beginning of this document and must be submitted to the Docket Management Facility (SVC-124), Office of the Secretary, located on the Plaza Level of the Nassif Building, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. The DOT Docket Facility is open to the public from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329. Comments will be available for inspection at this address and will also be viewable via the Web site for the Docket Management System at *http://dms.dot.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Damon P. Whitehead or Blane A. Workie, Office of the General Counsel, 400 7th Street, SW., Room 4116, Washington, DC 20590,
(202)366-9342 (voice),
(202)366-7152
(Fax)or *damon.whitehead@ dot.gov* or *blane.workie@dot.gov* (E-mail). Arrangements to receive this document in an alternative format may be made by contacting the above-named individuals. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Reporting Requirements for Disability-Related Complaints. *OMB Control Number:* 2105-0551. *Type of Request:* Renewal of currently approved Information Collection Request. *Background:* On July 8, 2003, the Office of the Secretary published a final rule that requires most certificated U.S. and foreign air carriers operating to, from and within the U.S. that conduct passenger-carrying service utilizing large aircraft to record complaints that they receive alleging inadequate accessibility or discrimination on the basis of disability. The carriers must also categorize these complaints according to the type of disability and nature of complaint, prepare a summary report annually of the complaints received during the preceding calendar year, submit the report to the Department of Transportation's Aviation Consumer Protection Division, and retain copies of correspondence and records of action taken on the reported complaints for three years. The Rule requires carriers to submit their annual report via the World Wide Web except if the carrier can demonstrate an undue burden by doing so and receives permission from the Department to submit it in an alternative manner. The first required report covered complaints received during calendar year 2004 and was due by January 25, 2005. Subsequent reports of disability-related complaints received by carriers are due each year on the last Monday in January for the prior calendar year. On April 23, 2004, OMB approved information collection of disability-related complaints, “Reporting Requirements for Disability-related Complaints” through April 30, 2007. *Respondents:* Certificated U.S. and foreign air carriers operating to, from and within the United States that conduct passenger-carrying service with large aircraft. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 370. *Estimated Total Burden on Respondents:* 185 hours. *Comment are invited on:*
(a)Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(b)the accuracy of the Department's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection;
(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Issued in Washington, DC, on February 26, 2007, under authority delegated in 49 CFR part 1. Rosalind A. Knapp, Acting General Counsel. [FR Doc. E7-3665 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary [Docket OST-2007-27370] Notice of Order Soliciting Community Proposals AGENCY: Department of Transportation, Office of the Secretary. ACTION: Notice of Order Soliciting Community Proposals (Order 2007-2-22). SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation is soliciting proposals from communities or consortia of communities interested in receiving a grant under the Small Community Air Service Development Program. The full text of the Department's order is attached to this document. There are two mandatory requirements for filing of applications, both of which must be completed for a community's application to be deemed timely and considered by the Department. The first requirement is the submission of the community's proposal to Dockets, as described below; the second requirement is the filing of SF424 through *http://www.grants.gov.* DATES: Grant Proposals as well as the SF424 should be submitted no later than April 27, 2007. ADDRESSES: Interested parties can submit applications either electronically using the procedures at *http://dms.dot.gov* or by hard copy. For the latter, an original and two copies of the application should be submitted to Dockets Operations and Media Management, M-30, Room PL-401, Department of Transportation, 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Whichever method used, the application and any copies should bear the title “Proposal under the Small Community Air Service Development Program, Docket OST-2007-27370, as well as the name of the applicant community or consortium of communities, the legal sponsor, and the applicant's DUNS number. The SF424 is submitted electronically through *http://www.grants.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aloha Ley, Office of Aviation Analysis, 400 7th Street SW., Washington, DC 20590,
(202)366-2347. Dated: February 26, 2007. Michael W. Reynolds, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs. Issued by the Department of Transportation on the 26th day of February, 2007. [Docket OST-2007-27370] In the Matter of Grant Applications; Small Community Air Service Development Program Under 49 U.S.C. 41743 et seq. ; Order Soliciting Community Grant Proposals Overview By this order, the Department invites proposals from communities and/or consortia of communities interested in obtaining a federal grant under the Small Community Air Service Development Program (Small Community Program) to develop cost-effective air services in their communities. Proposals should be submitted in the above-referenced docket no later than April 27, 2007. Applicants *must* submit form SF424, a standard federal government application form, in Grants.gov. An application will *not* be deemed complete until and unless all required documents are filed. (All applicants must register as Grants.gov users and are advised that the registration process can take two weeks to complete. See Appendix C for additional information on filing form SF424 using Grants.gov.) Funding Opportunity The Small Community Program was established under the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR-21), Public Law 106-181, as a three-year “pilot” program and was designed to provide financial assistance to small communities to help them enhance their air service. The Department provides this assistance in the form of financial grants that are disbursed on a reimbursable basis. The program was subsequently reauthorized for an additional five years, through fiscal year 2008, under the Vision 100-Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act, Public Law 108-176 (Vision 100), which also eliminated the “pilot” status of the program. 1 On February 15, 2007, the President signed in to law the Revised Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2007 (Pub. L. 110-005), which provides the Department with $10 million to administer the Small Community Program. 2 1 For detailed background on the Small Community Program, see our Web site at: *http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/X-50%20Role_files/smallcommunity.htm#Funds* . 2 This funding is subject to a 1% across-the-board rescission. Furthermore, the program's funding for this year may be affected by a provision that provides the Secretary with authority to transfer funds from any program within or administered by the Office of the Secretary to the Essential Air Service
(EAS)program if the EAS program does not have sufficient funds to meet its statutory obligations. In addition, a portion of the funds available for the Small Community Program may be used by the Department for grants-management purposes. The program's authorizing statute limits the Department to a maximum of 40 grant awards, with a maximum of four grants per state, in each year the program is funded. However, the law does not prescribe any limits on the amounts of individual awards, and the amounts awarded will vary depending upon the features and merits of the proposals selected. Over the past five years, the Department's individual grants have ranged from $20,000 to nearly $1.6 million. Awarded grant funds do not have to be expended in the year of award, nor do they need to be used within a one-year period. Authorized grant projects may include activities that extend over a multi-year period under a single grant award; however, grant funds are to be used in a timely manner. Generally speaking, grant awards have not exceeded a three-to-four-year period. Eligibility Information Who is Eligible to Apply for a Grant? Basic Criteria Eligible applicants are those communities that
(1)are served by an airport that was not larger than a small hub airport for calendar year 1997 and
(2)had insufficient air service or unreasonably high airfares. 3 Communities that do not currently have commercial air service are also eligible, but they must have met or be able to meet in a reasonable period all necessary requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration for the type of service involved in their grant proposals. Communities served by medium and large hubs are *not* eligible to apply. 3 The hub classifications are based on the Federal Aviation Administration's CY 1997 enplanement data. EAS Communities May Apply Small communities that meet the basic criteria and currently receive subsidized air service under the Essential Air Service
(EAS)program are eligible to apply for funds under the Small Community Program. Indeed, a number of EAS-subsidized communities applied in past years and some have received grant awards. However, grant awards to EAS-subsidized communities are limited to
(1)marketing or promotion projects that support existing or newly subsidized air services or
(2)new air services, such as on-demand air taxi service. Furthermore, grants funds will not be authorized for EAS-subsidized communities to support either additional flights by EAS carriers or changes to those carriers' existing schedules. Additional Consideration for Communities/Members of Consortia That Have Previously Received a Grant Communities or members of a consortia that were awarded grants in previous years and want to apply for a grant this year should be aware that
(1)they are precluded from seeking funds for projects for which they have already received an award under the Small Community Program, and
(2)they cannot accept a new grant while they are a party to an existing grant under the program, either as an individual community or as a member of a consortium. *New projects are eligible.* Previous grant recipients may submit grant proposals and seek funds for *new* projects in a different category. For example, although a community which had received a grant for a market study could not apply for a new grant for another market study, it could apply for funding for a revenue guarantee for new air service. Communities should note, however, that interest in this program could exceed both the funds available and the number of communities that can participate in any one year. For this reason, the fact that a community has already received one or more grants will be a consideration when comparing its new proposal with those of other applicant communities. *No concurrent grants are permitted.* A community or member of a consortia may participate in the program a subsequent time only after its participation in a prior grant has terminated. 49 U.S.C. 41743(c)(4). Simply stated, for a grant applicant to enter into a subsequent grant, its most recent grant must have expired or its participation in the grant otherwise terminated. If a grant applicant is applying for a subsequent grant and its current grant has not yet expired, it must notify the Department of its intent to terminate the current grant prior to entering into the new grant. In addition, for grant applicants that are members of a consortia grant, permission must be granted from both the grant sponsor and the Department to withdraw from the current grant prior to being eligible to receive a subsequent grant. City-pair Subsidies for a Carrier to Compete Against an Incumbent Raise Concerns Communities that propose to use the grant funds for service in a city-pair market that is already served by a carrier must explain in detail why the existing service is insufficient or unsatisfactory, or provide other compelling information to support such proposals. This information is necessary for the Department to consider the competitive implications of giving financial or other tangible incentives for one carrier that the other carrier is not receiving. The Department is concerned generally about subsidizing one carrier but not others in a competitive market and that, while bringing new competition may benefit the community in the short term, a market may prove insufficient to support two carriers and service may deteriorate to the point that the community's service is less beneficial than before. A Consortium Is More Than a Collection of Communities The statute permits individual communities and consortia of communities to apply for grant awards under this program. In some instances in the past, several communities in a state have filed a single application as a “consortium” while in effect the application is a collection of individual community requests that involve different projects. We do not view this as a consortium. Rather, an application representing a consortium would be one that facilitates efforts of communities working together toward a joint grant project. For example, several communities surrounding an airport may apply together to improve air services at that airport, or surrounding airports may work together to provide regional air service. Multiple Applications by a Community Will Not Be Considered The Department requests that communities file only one application for a grant. In the past, some communities have filed both individual applications and requests as part of a consortium. In many cases these applications have involved the same project at the same or different funding levels. We will not consider the stand-alone application if a community is also submitting a largely identical request as part of a consortium. To the extent that a community files separately and as part of a consortium for complementary projects—for example, one request for funding a revenue guarantee and one for marketing—we will consider such proposals. However, communities should be aware that they can still only receive one grant, either the stand-alone grant or as a member of a consortium, since a community may not have concurrent grants. Cost Sharing and Local Contributions Are Important Factors The statute does not require communities to contribute toward a grant project, but those communities that contribute from local sources other than airport revenues are accorded priority consideration. One core objective of the Small Community Program is to promote community involvement in addressing air service/air fare issues through public/private partnerships. As a financial stakeholder in the process, the community gains greater control over the type, quality, and success of the air service initiatives that will best meet its needs, and demonstrates a greater commitment towards achieving the stated goals. The Department has historically received many more applications than can be accommodated and nearly all of those applications have proposed a community financial contribution to the project. Thus, proposals that do not propose a community financial contribution will be at a competitive disadvantage. Types of Contributions Contributions should represent a *new* financial commitment or *new* financial resources devoted to attracting new or improved service, or addressing specific high-fare or other service issues, such as improving patronage of existing service at the airport. Contributions from already-existing programs or projects (e.g., designating a portion of an airport's existing annual marketing budget to the project) are considered less favorably than contributions for new and innovative programs or projects. For those communities that propose to contribute to the grant project, that contribution can be in the following forms: *Cash from non-airport revenues.* This cash contribution can include funds from the State, the County or the local government, and/or from local businesses, or other private organizations in the community. Cash contributions exclude intangible or non-cash items, such as the “value” of donated advertising. *Cash from airport revenues.* This includes contributions from funds generated by airport operations. Federal law (49 U.S.C. sections 47107(b), (l)-(p)) and policy concerning the use of airport revenue (64 FR 7696, February 16, 1999) preclude the use of airport revenues for revenue guarantees to airlines. Community proposals that include local contributions based on airport revenues do not receive priority consideration for selection. *In-Kind Contributions from the airport.* This can include such items as waivers of landing fees, terminal rents, fuel fees, and/or parking fees. *In-Kind Contributions from the community.* This can include such items as donated advertising from media outlets, catering services for inaugural events, or in-kind trading, such as advertising in exchange for free air travel. Travel banks and travel commitments/pledges are regarded as an in-kind contribution. Similarly, reduced fares by airlines will be considered an in-kind contribution. Cash vs. In-Kind Contributions Only cash contributions will be eligible for reimbursement. “In-kind” contributions involve services or benefits that do not include a cash transaction between the parties. Because grant funding under the Small Community Program is provided on a *reimbursable basis* , the Department cannot reimburse the grant sponsor for “in-kind” or non-cash contributions. Therefore, in-kind contributions are not considered as part of the community's *cash* financial contribution to the project. Of course, communities are free to include in-kind contributions in their proposals. In fact, communities are encouraged to offer in-kind inducements as an *extra* incentive to facilitate air service/fare improvements. While these contributions will not be considered as part of the community's cash contribution toward the project on which reimbursements are made, they *will* be considered as illustrative of the community's overall commitment to the proposed grant project. If there is any question about whether a proposed contribution would be considered as “in-kind” or cash, the applicant should contact the Department before submitting its proposal. Financial Commitments Must Be Fulfilled Applicant communities should also note that, as part of the grant agreement between the Department and the community, the community has legally committed itself to fulfilling its proposed financial contribution to the project. Community participation with respect to all aspects of the proposal, including the financial aspects, is critical to the success of the authorized project initiative. As with the grant awards in past years, receipt of the full federal contribution awarded will thus be linked to the community's fulfillment of its financial contribution. Furthermore, communities cannot propose a certain level of cash contribution from non-airport sources, and subsequent to being awarded a grant, seek to substitute or replace that contribution with either “in-kind” contributions or contributions from airport revenues, or both. Given the statute's priority for contributions from *non-airport* sources and the competitive nature of the selection process, a community's grant award could be reduced or terminated altogether if it is unable to replace the committed funds from non-airport revenue sources. Application and Submission Information Filing Deadline and Procedures Grant applications are due by April 27, 2007. They may be submitted in hard-copy form or by electronic filing. Regardless of the filing method used, however, applicants must also register for and complete SF424, Application For Federal Domestic Assistance. In addition, the cover page of each application should contain the information specified under “Cover page contents,” below. Questions regarding the program or the filing of proposals should be directed to the Office of Aviation Analysis, at
(202)366-2347 or *aloha.ley@dot.gov* . Hard-copy Submission Applications may be submitted by hand, mail, or express delivery. Proposals postmarked after the due date will *not* be accepted. There are two mandatory requirements for hard-copy filing of applications, both of which must be completed for a community's application to be deemed timely and considered by the Department. • First, the applicant must submit a proposal that includes all of the information required by this Application and Submission section, including the Summary Sheet that appears in Appendix B. Applicants should submit an original and two copies of their proposals, including the Summary Information Sheet, if submitting their proposals using the hard-copy option. • Second, the application (including original and two copies) must be sent/delivered to Dockets Operations and Media Management, M-30, Room PL-401, Department of Transportation, 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Electronic Submission Communities may submit their proposals electronically by following the instructions at our Web site, *http://dms.dot.gov* . If a community elects to file electronically, it should *not* submit a hard copy of the application to the Dockets Operations and Media Management Office. Questions about electronic filing procedures should be addressed to Renee Wright, Dockets Operations and Media Management, at
(202)493-0402. 4 4 Interested communities can view proposals submitted in prior years in Docket OST-2002-11590, Docket OST-2003-15065, Docket OST-2004-17343, Docket OST-2005-20127, and Docket OST-2006-23671 for FY 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 grants, respectively, through the Department's docket management system at the following Web address: *http://dms.dot.gov/* . SF424 Required To comply with Grants.gov initiative, a mandate of the President's Management Agenda, all applicants must submit form SF424, Application for Federal Domestic Assistance, found on *http://www.grants.gov* . Applicants must complete a one-time registration process in order to submit the SF424 application. This registration process can take approximately three to five days to complete. For this reason, communities intending to file applications should complete the registration process as soon as practicable to ensure they can meet the application deadline. Appendix C provides additional information with respect to the registration process in Grants.gov as well as instructions on submitting SF424 once the registration process has been completed. An application will *not* be deemed complete unless the proposal has been submitted to the Department's Docket Operations and Media Management office (hard copy or electronic submission) *and* the SF424 application has been submitted through Grants.gov by the April 27 deadline. Cover Page Contents The cover page for all applications, regardless of the method of submission, should bear the title “Proposal Under the Small Community Air Service Development Program,” and should include the docket number as shown on the first page of this order, the name of the community or consortium of communities applying, the legal sponsor, and the community's Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS)number. Additional Materials Additional materials such as DVDs and videos cannot be included in the Docket Management System. If communities want to include such information in their proposals, they should provide that information, along with a copy of their application, to the Department's Office of Aviation Analysis, X-50, Room 6401, 400 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Confidential Treatment of Information Applicants will be able to provide certain information relevant to their proposals on a confidential basis. Under the Department's regulations, such information is limited to commercial or financial information that, if disclosed, would either significantly harm the competitive position of a business or enterprise or make it more difficult for the Federal Government to obtain similar information in the future. Applicants seeking confidential treatment of a portion of their applications must segregate the confidential material in a sealed envelope marked “Confidential Submission of X (the applicant) in Docket OST-2007-27370” and include with that material a request in the form of a motion seeking confidential treatment of the material under 14 CFR 302.12 (Rule 12) of the Department's regulations. The applicant should submit an original and two copies of its motion and an original and two copies of the confidential material in the sealed envelope. The confidential material should *not* be included in the original *or in any of the copies* of the applicant's proposal that are submitted to the Department. Those submissions, however, should indicate clearly where the confidential material would have been inserted. If applicants invoke Rule 12, the confidential portion of the filing will be treated as confidential pending a final determination. All confidential material must also be received by April 27, 2007. Types of Projects and Application Content The statute is very general about the types of projects that can be authorized so that communities are provided greater flexibility in addressing their particular air service and airfare issues. Since circumstances may differ among communities, applicants have some latitude in identifying their own objectives and developing strategies for accomplishing them. Another objective of the Small Community Program is to help communities secure enhancements that will be responsive to their air transportation/air fare needs on a long-term basis after the financial support of the grant has discontinued. There are many ways that a community might enhance its current air service or attract new service, such as: • Promoting awareness among residents of locally available service; • Attracting a new carrier through revenue guarantees or operating cost offsets; • Attracting new forms of service, such as on-demand air taxi service; • Offering an incumbent carrier financial or other incentives to lower its fares, increase its frequencies, add new routes, or deploy more suitable aircraft, including upgrading its equipment from turboprops to regional jets; • Combining traffic support from surrounding communities with regionalized service through one airport; or • Providing local ground transportation service to improve access to air service to the community and the surrounding area. 5 5 These examples are illustrative only and are not meant as a list of projects favored by the Department. Communities are encouraged to be innovative and to consider a wide range of initiatives and air transportation services in developing their proposals. At the same time, general, vague, or unsupported proposals will not be entertained. The more highly defined and focused the proposal, the more likely it will enhance its attractiveness, particularly given the statute's priority consideration for applicants who can use the funds in a timely manner. (49 U.S.C. 41743 (c)(5)(E)). There is no set format that must be used in submitting grant proposals. At a minimum, however, a proposal must provide the following information: • *A description of the community's existing air service,* including the carrier(s) providing service, service frequency, direct and connecting destinations offered, available fares, and equipment types. • *A synopsis of the community's historical service,* including destinations, traffic levels, service providers, and any extenuating factors that might have affected traffic in the past or that can be expected to influence service needs in the near to intermediate term. • *A description of the community's air service needs or deficiencies,* including any major origin/destination markets not now served or not served adequately. In addition, communities are free to submit any information about their fare levels that they deem relevant to consideration of their grant request. • *A strategic plan for meeting those needs under the Small Community Program,* including the community's specific project goal(s) and detailed plan for attaining that goal(s). Proposals should: ✓ Clearly identify the target audience of each component of the proposed transportation initiative, including all advertising and promotional efforts. ✓ Set forth a realistic timetable for implementation of the grant project. In this regard, the statute includes timely use of the grant funds as a priority consideration. Consequently, communities must have a well-developed project plan and detailed timetable for implementing that plan. In establishing the timetable, however, communities should be realistic about their ability to meet their project deadlines. 6 6 The projected timetable will be an integral part of the grant agreements between the selected communities and the Department. Therefore, there is no advantage to a community in proposing an aggressive timetable that cannot be met, and there may be disadvantages if the community finds that it cannot meet its timetable. Communities should carefully consider all factors affecting implementation of their projects and develop realistic timeframes for achieving those objectives, keeping in mind that authorized projects generally have averaged three to four years. ✓ Proposals involving new or improved service explain how the service will become self-sufficient since, under the statute, a community cannot seek grant funding in subsequent years in support of the same project. It is important that communities seriously consider the scale of their proposed projects in developing their proposals and the timetable for achieving them. To the extent that a proposed project is dependent upon or relevant to completion of other federally funded capital improvement projects, the community should provide a description of, and the construction time-line for, those projects, keeping in mind the statutory requirement to use Small Community Program funding in a timely manner. ✓ Of particular importance when drafting a proposal, applicants should fully and clearly outline the goals and objectives sought to be achieved, e.g., “to broaden the awareness by residents in the Tri-County area of the operations provided by passenger carriers at the Tri-County airport,” or “to obtain new and affordable service to a hub airport in a direction where there is no such service.” When an application is selected, these goals and objectives will be incorporated into the grant agreement and define its basic project scope. Once an agreement is signed, if circumstances change and an amendment is sought to allow for different activities or a different approach, the Department will look to whether the change being sought is consistent with those fundamental project goals and objectives. Proposed changes that would alter those fundamental goals and objectives cannot be authorized, because doing so would undermine the competitive nature of the selection process. Applicants are also encouraged to include in their proposals alternative or back-up strategies for achieving their desired goals and objectives. By incorporating such information into the grant agreement, desired changes may be more easily accommodated. • *A description of any public-private partnership that will participate in the project.* Full community involvement is a key aspect of the Small Community Program. The statute gives a priority to those communities that already have established, or will establish, a public-private partnership to facilitate air service to the public. The proposal should give a full description of the public-private partnership that will participate in the community's proposal and how the partnership will actively participate in the implementation of the proposed project. In addition, applicants should identify each member of the partnership, the role that each will play, and its specific responsibilities in the implementation of the project. If the application does not include specific information on the partnership participation in the project, the Department cannot evaluate how well a community has met this consideration, and the applicant will *not* be deemed as having met this priority consideration in the Department's evaluation of the community's proposal. • *A detailed description of the funding necessary for implementation of the community's project, including the federal and non-federal contributions.* Proposals should clearly identify the level of federal funding sought. They should also clearly identify the other cash contributions toward the proposed project, “in-kind” contributions from the airport, and “in-kind” contributions from the community. Cash contributions from airport revenues should be identified separately from cash contributions from other community sources. Similarly, cash contributions from the state and/or local government should be separately identified and described. 7 7 In this regard, instances have arisen in the past where communities have relied extensively on what they characterize as travel banks for a significant portion of their local contribution. A travel “bank” involves an actual deposit of funds from the participating entities into a bank for the purpose of purchasing committed air travel on the selected airline and defined procedures for use of those funds under an agreement with the airline. Most often, however, what communities refer to as a travel “bank” in reality involves travel “pledges” from businesses in the community without any collection of funds or formal procedures for use of the funds. In either case, communities that include travel banks in their proposals must also include a written confirmation from an airline supporting it. Applicant communities should be aware that, if awarded a grant, the Department will not reimburse the community for pre-award expenses such as the cost of preparing the grant application or for any expenses incurred prior to the community executing a grant agreement with the Department. In addition, 10 percent of the grant funds will be withheld until the Department receives the final report of the grant project. See “Award Administration Information,” below. • *An explanation of how the community will ensure that its own funding contribution is spent in the manner proposed* . • *Descriptions of how the community will monitor the progress of the grant project* and identify critical milestones during the life of the grant, including the need to modify or discontinue funding if identified milestones cannot be met. This is an important component of the community's proposal and serves to demonstrate the thoroughness of the community's planning of the proposed grant project. Applicant communities are on notice that any modifications must first be approved by the Department. Moreover, modifications to the project will be considered only to the extent that the changes do not deviate from the original goal and scope of the authorized grant project. As noted above, the Department will not permit fundamental changes to a community's proposal in order to preserve a grant award. • *A description of how the community plans to continue with the project if it is not self-sustaining after the grant award expires.* A particular goal of the Small Community Program is to provide long-term, self-sustaining improvements to air service at small communities. A community cannot seek further grant funding in support of the same project. 49 U.S.C. 41743(c)(4). It is possible that a new or improved service at a community will be well on its way to becoming self-sustaining, but will not have reached that goal when the grant has expired. Similarly, it is possible that extensive marketing and promotional efforts may be in process, but not completed, at the end of the grant period and will require continued support. Therefore, in developing its proposal, the community should carefully consider and describe its plans for continued financial support for the project after the grant funding is no longer available. This aspect of the application reflects on the community's commitment to the grant project and is an important component to the Department's consideration of the community's proposal for selection for a grant award. • *A description of the community's air service development efforts over the past five years and the results of those efforts.* Many communities have been active on an on-going basis for many years in air service development efforts, while others are just beginning. To the extent that a community has previously engaged in other air service initiatives, including through public/private partnerships, it should describe those efforts and their results in its grant proposal. This should include marketing and promotional efforts of airport services as well as efforts to recruit additional or improved air service and airfare initiatives. • *Designation of a legal sponsor responsible for administering the program.* The legal sponsor *must* be a government entity. If the applicant is a public-private partnership, a public government member of the organization must be identified as the community's sponsor to accept program reimbursements. In this regard, communities can designate only a single government entity as the legal sponsor, even if a consortium, for example, consists of two or more local government entities. Private organizations cannot be designated as the legal sponsor of a grant under the Small Community Program. 8 8 The community has the responsibility to ensure that the recipient of any funding has the legal authority under State and local laws to carry out all aspects of the grant. Air Service Development Zone Designation The statute authorizing the Small Community Program also provides that the Department will designate one of the grant recipients as an Air Service Development Zone. The purpose of the designation is to provide communities interested in attracting business to the area surrounding the airport and/or developing land-use options for the area to work with the Department on means to achieve those goals. The Department will assist the designated community in establishing contacts with and obtaining advice and assistance from appropriate government agencies, including the Department of Commerce as well as other offices within the Department of Transportation, and in identifying other pertinent resources that may aid the community in its efforts to attract businesses and to formulate land-use options. However, the community receiving the designation will be responsible for developing, implementing, and managing activities related to the air service development zone initiative. Only communities that are interested in these objectives and have a plan to accomplish them should compete for the available designation. There are no additional funds associated with this designation, and applying for the designation will provide no special benefit or preference to a community in receiving a grant award under the Small Community Program. Grant applicants interested in selection for the Air Service Development Zone designation must include in their applications a separate section, titled, *Support for Air Service Development Zone Designation* . That section should include: ✓ Detailed information regarding the property and facilities available for development such as an existing airpark or land for such an airpark; ✓ The other modes of transportation that would be available to support additional economic development, such as rail, road, and/or water access; ✓ Information concerning historic, existing, and any future business activity in the area that would support further development; ✓ Demographic information concerning the community and its environs relevant to the developmental efforts, including population, employment, and per capita income data; and ✓ Any other information that the community believes is relevant to its plans to enhance air service development. The community should provide as detailed a plan as possible, including what goals it expects to achieve from the air service development zone designation and the types of activities on which it would like to work with the Department in achieving those goals. The community should also indicate whether further local government approvals are required in order to implement the proposed activities. Application Review Information The Department will carefully review each proposal and the staff may contact applicants if clarification is needed. The grant awards will be made as quickly as possible so that communities awarded grants can complete the grant agreement process and proceed to implement their plans. Pending unforeseen circumstances, this process should be completed before September 2007. Given the competitive nature of the grant process, the Department will not meet with grant applicants with respect to their grant proposals. Our selection of communities for grant awards will be based on the communities' written submissions. Priority Factors Considered The law directs the Department to give priority consideration to those communities or consortia where: • Air fares are higher than the national average air fares for all communities; • The community or consortium will provide a portion of the cost of the activity from local sources other than airport revenue sources; • The community or consortium has established or will establish a public-private partnership to facilitate air carrier service to the public; • The assistance will provide material benefits to a broad segment of the traveling public, including business, educational institutions, and other enterprises, whose access to the national air transportation system is limited; and • The assistance will be used in a timely manner. Additional Factors Considered Applications will be evaluated against the priority considerations listed above. Our experience has been that more applications are received than can be funded under the Small Community Program. Consequently, consistent with the criteria stated above, the selection process will take into consideration such additional factors as: • The relative size of each applicant community; • The geographic location of each applicant, including the community's proximity to larger centers of air service and low-fare service alternatives; • The community's existing level of air service and whether that service has been increasing or decreasing; • Whether the community's proposal, if successfully implemented, could serve as a working model for other communities; • Current demographic indicators for the community, such as population, income and business activity; • The community's demonstrated commitment to and participation in the proposed grant project; • The grant amount requested compared with total funds available for all communities; • The proposed federal grant amount requested compared with the local share offered; • Whether the community has a realistic plan to use the funds in a timely manner; • The uniqueness of an applicant's claimed problems and whether the proposed project addresses those problems; • The extent to which the applicant's proposed solution(s) to solving the problem(s) is new or innovative; • Whether the community's proximity to an existing grant recipient could impact its proposal; and • Whether the applicant community has previously received a grant award under this program. Full community participation is a key goal of this program as demonstrated by the statute's focus on local contributions and active participation in the project. Therefore, applications that demonstrate broad community support will be more attractive. For example, communities providing proportionately higher levels of cash contributions from other than airport revenues will have more attractive proposals. Communities that provide multiple levels of contributions—cash and in-kind contributions—also will have more attractive proposals. Similarly, communities that demonstrate historic and/or active participation in the proposed air service project will have the attractiveness of their proposals enhanced. In this regard, the Department welcomes letters of intent from airlines on behalf of community proposals that are specifically intended to enlist new or expanded air carrier presence. Such letters will be accorded greater credence when authorized by airline planning departments. Proposals that offer innovative solutions to the transportation issues facing the community will be more attractive. Small communities have faced many problems retaining and improving their air services and in coping with air fares that are higher than typical for larger communities. Therefore, proposals that offer new, creative approaches to addressing these problems, to the extent that they are reasonable, will have their attractiveness enhanced. Proposals that provide a well-defined plan, a reasonable timetable for use of the grant funds, and a plan for continuation and/or monitoring of the project after the grant expires also will possess greater attractiveness. Award Administration Information The Department will announce its grant selections by Order, which will be served on each grant recipient, all other applicants, and all parties served with this order. The selection order will also be posted on the Department's Docket Management System and Web page. Grant Agreement Communities awarded grants are required to execute a grant agreement with the Department *before* they begin to spend funds under the grant award. Grant funds will be provided on a *reimbursable basis* only, with reimbursements made only for expenses incurred and billed during the period that the grant agreement is in effect. Applicants should not assume they have received a grant, nor should they obligate or spend local funds prior to receiving and fully executing a grant agreement with the Department. Expenditures made prior to the execution of a grant agreement, including costs associated with preparation of the grant application, will *not* be reimbursed. Moreover, numerous assurances are required to be made and honored when federal funds are awarded. All communities receiving a grant under the Small Community Program will be required to accept the responsibilities of these assurances and to execute the assurances when they execute their grant agreements. 9 Copies of the applicable assurances are available for review on the Department's Web page at *http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/X-50%20Role_files/smallcommunity.htm#Funds* . 10 9 With respect to grants administration generally, the Department is considering possible actions to streamline and simplify certain aspects of its existing administrative processes. Grantees will be apprised if any such actions are to be implemented. 10 The applicable regulations include, among others:
(1)49 CFR Parts 21 and 27 and 14 CFR Parts 271 and 382—Nondiscrimination in federally-assisted programs of the Department of Transportation—Effectuation of title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; 49 CFR Part 27—Nondiscrimination on the basis of disability in programs and activities receiving or benefiting from Federal financial assistance; and 14 CFR Part 382—Nondiscrimination on the basis of disability in air travel;
(2)49 CFR Part 29—Government-wide debarment and suspension (non-procurement) and government-wide requirements for drug-free workplace (grants); and
(3)49 CFR Part 20—New restrictions on lobbying. The complete list of the applicable assurances is on the cited webpage. The assurances noted are for reference purposes only and should not be included in the community's application. The assurances are part of the grant agreement that will be sent to each grant recipient and should be completed at that time. Grantee Reports The grant agreements between the Department and the selected communities will require quarterly reports on the progress of implementation of the grant project, as well as the submission on a quarterly or other time-specific basis of additional material relevant to the grant project, such as copies of advertising and promotional material and copies of contracts with consultants and service providers. In addition, communities will be required to submit a final report to the Department with respect to their grant projects, and 10 percent of the grant funds available will not be reimbursed to the community until the final report has been received. Communities will be permitted to seek reimbursement of project implementation costs on a regular basis. The frequency of such requests will be established in the grant agreement, which will be tailored to the specific features of the community's grant project. In most cases, reimbursements will be made on a monthly basis. In this regard, the Department will provide the grant recipient communities with details and procedures for securing reimbursements electronically. Grant Amendments A grantee may wish to amend its agreement with the Department in the event of a material change in circumstances after the date the agreement is executed. Typically, amendments involve an extension to the time period for completing the grant or a change in the types of activities authorized for reimbursement under the goals and objectives (“project scope”) of the grant agreement. Grantees are cautioned, however, that the Department cannot authorize amendments that are incompatible with the scope of the agreement. For example, a grant awarded solely for the purpose of developing an airport marketing plan cannot be amended to permit subsidization of an air carrier's startup costs, since the latter was never contemplated by the original agreement. Likewise, an agreement intended to subsidize new service expressly to an “eastern hub city” cannot be amended to permit a subsidy for service to a hub on the West Coast. Accommodating such a change would effectively require the Department to consent to a new grant agreement, an action for which we have no legal authority. Grantees are also advised that the Department will not extend the expiration date of an agreement simply to allow more time for a community to solicit air carriers for new air service. Many grants have been awarded for the purpose of subsidizing new or additional air service for a small community, with the goal of that service becoming self-sustaining by the end of the subsidy period. In virtually all cases, the community seeking the grant funds has received expressions of interest from one or more air carriers. In some instances, these expressions of interest failed to pan out and the community was left without any immediate prospects, at which time it would ask for a grant extension to allow more time to pursue other carriers. Because we are charged by law to consider timely use of funds when selecting grant recipients, the Department will grant an extension only when the community can provide strong evidence of a firm commitment on the part of an air carrier to deliver the desired service. To avoid misunderstandings, grantees contemplating amendments to their agreements are urged to discuss their situations with the Small Community Program staff before requesting a formal amendment. This order is issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.56a(f). Accordingly, 1. Community proposals for funding under the Small Community Air Service Development Program should be submitted in Docket OST-2007-27370 no later than April 27, 2007; 11 and 11 Proposals must be postmarked no later than April 27, 2007. The original application should be submitted on 8.5″ x 11″ paper, in dark ink (not green) and without tabs to facilitate inclusion in the Department's docket management system. The remaining copies may be tabbed and include use of any color ink. 2. This order will be published in the **Federal Register** and also will be served on the Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities, the National Governors Association, the National Association of State Aviation Officials (NASAO), the Association of County Executives, the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), and the Airports Council International-North America (ACI), and posted on *http://www.grants.gov* By: Michael W. Reynolds, *Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs* . An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide Web at *http://dms.dot.gov* . Appendix A United States Code Annotated Title 49. Transportation Subtitle VII. Aviation Programs Part A. Air Commerce and Safety Subpart II. Economic Regulation Chapter 417. Operations of Carriers Subchapter II. Small Community Air Service § 41743 Airports not receiving sufficient service
(a)Small community air service development program.—The Secretary of Transportation shall establish a program that meets the requirements of this section for improving air carrier service to airports not receiving sufficient air carrier service.
(b)Application required.—In order to participate in the program established under subsection (a), a community or consortium of communities shall submit an application to the Secretary in such form, at such time, and containing such information as the Secretary may require, including—
(1)An assessment of the need of the community or consortium for access, or improved access, to the national air transportation system; and
(2)An analysis of the application of the criteria in subsection
(c)to that community or consortium.
(c)Criteria for participation.—In selecting communities, or consortia of communities, for participation in the program established under subsection (a), the Secretary shall apply the following criteria:
(1)Size.—For calendar year 1997, the airport serving the community or consortium was not larger than a small hub airport, and—
(A)Had insufficient air carrier service; or
(B)Had unreasonably high air fares.
(2)Characteristics.—The airport presents characteristics, such as geographic diversity or unique circumstances, that will demonstrate the need for, and feasibility of, the program established under subsection (a).
(3)State limit.—Not more than 4 communities or consortia of communities, or a combination thereof, from the same State may be selected to participate in the program in any fiscal year.
(4)Overall limit.—No more than 40 communities or consortia of communities, or a combination thereof, may be selected to participate in the program in each year for which funds are appropriated for the program. No community, consortia of communities, nor combination thereof may participate in the program in support of the same project more than once, but any community, consortia of communities, or combination thereof may apply, subsequent to such participation, to participate in the program in support of a different project.
(5)Priorities.—The Secretary shall give priority to communities or consortia of communities where—
(A)Air fares are higher than the average air fares for all communities;
(B)The community or consortium will provide a portion of the cost of the activity to be assisted under the program from local sources other than airport revenues;
(C)The community or consortium has established, or will establish, a public-private partnership to facilitate air carrier service to the public;
(D)The assistance will provide material benefits to a broad segment of the traveling public, including business, educational institutions, and other enterprises, whose access to the national air transportation system is limited; and
(E)The assistance will be used in a timely fashion.
(d)Types of assistance.—The Secretary may use amounts made available under this section—
(1)To provide assistance to an air carrier to subsidize service to and from an underserved airport for a period not to exceed 3 years;
(2)To provide assistance to an underserved airport to obtain service to and from the underserved airport; and
(3)To provide assistance to an underserved airport to implement such other measures as the Secretary, in consultation with such airport, considers appropriate to improve air service both in terms of the cost of such service to consumers and the availability of such service, including improving air service through marketing and promotion of air service and enhanced utilization of airport facilities.
(e)Authority to make agreements.—
(1)In general.—The Secretary may make agreements to provide assistance under this section.
(2)Authorization of appropriations.—There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2001, $27,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 and 2003, and $35,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2008 to carry out this section. Such sums shall remain available until expended.
(f)Additional action.—Under the program established under subsection (a), the Secretary shall work with air carriers providing service to participating communities and major air carriers (as defined in section 41716(a)(2)) serving large hub airports to facilitate joint-fare arrangements consistent with normal industry practice.
(g)Designation of responsible official.—The Secretary shall designate an employee of the Department of Transportation—
(1)To function as a facilitator between small communities and air carriers;
(2)To carry out this section;
(3)To ensure that the Bureau of Transportation Statistics collects data on passenger information to assess the service needs of small communities;
(4)To work with and coordinate efforts with other Federal, State, and local agencies to increase the viability of service to small communities and the creation of aviation development zones; and
(5)To provide policy recommendations to the Secretary and Congress that will ensure that small communities have access to quality, affordable air transportation services.
(h)Air Service Development Zone.—The Secretary shall designate an airport in the program as an Air Service Development Zone and work with the community or consortium on means to attract business to the area surrounding the airport, to develop land use options for the area, and provide data, working with the Department of Commerce and other agencies. Appendix B Small Community Air Service Development Program [Docket OST-2007-27370] Summary Information All applicants *must* submit this information along with their proposal. In addition, applicants *must* also fill out form SF424 on *http://www.grants.gov* . (See Appendix C for the SF424 filing process) A. Applicant Information: (Check All That Apply) ☐ Not a Consortium ☐ Interstate Consortium ☐ Intrastate Consortium ☐ Community now receives EAS subsidy ☐ Community (or Consortium member) previously received a Small Community Grant If previous recipient, expiration date of grant: B. Public/Private Partnerships: (List Organization Names) *Public* 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. *Private* 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. C. Project Proposal: (Check All That Apply) ☐ Marketing ☐ Personnel ☐ Travel Bank ☐ Upgrade Aircraft ☐ Increase Frequency ☐ Service Restoration ☐ New Route ☐ Low Fare Service ☐ Subsidy ☐ Surface Transportation ☐ Revenue Guarantee ☐ Start Up Cost Offset ☐ Study ☐ Regional Service ☐ Launch New Carrier ☐ First Service ☐ Secure Additional Carrier ☐ Other (specify) D. Existing Landing Aids at Local Airport: ☐ Full ILS ☐ Outer/Middle Marker ☐ Published Instrument Approach ☐ Localizer ☐ Other (specify) E. Project Cost: Federal amount requested: Total local cash financial contribution: Airport funds: Non-Airport funds: State cash financial contribution: Existing funds: New funds: Airport In-kind contribution: (amount & description) Other In-Kind contribution: (amount & description) Total cost of project: F. Enplanements: 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 G. Is this application subject to review by State under Executive Order 12372 process? ☐ a. This application was made available to the State under the Executive Order 12372 Process for review on
(date). ☐ b. Program is subject to E.O. 12372, but has not been selected by the State for review. ☐ c. Program is not covered by E.O. 12372. H. Is the Applicant delinquent on any Federal debt? (if “yes”, provide explanation) ☐ No ☐ Yes (explain) Appendix C Filing Form SF424—Application for Federal Domestic Assistance Grants.gov, originally called the E-Grants Initiative, a mandate of the President's Management Agenda, states, “Agencies will allow applicants for Federal Grants to apply for and ultimately manage grant funds online through a common Web site, simplifying grants management and eliminating redundancies.” Public Law 106-107, the legislation that mandates streamlining and improved accountability for Federal grants, and related references in the President's Management Agenda, requires that Federal grant management activities be standardized. As a result, the Office of Management and Budget recently issued a *policy directive* requiring that all Federal agencies post grant opportunities online as of November 7, 2006. Therefore, this year, to comply with the Grants.gov initiative, the Department will begin accepting grant applications via *http://www.grants.gov* . In order for an application to be considered in the Small Community Air Service Development Program, the community must submit its application of form SF424—Application for Federal Domestic Assistance—via *http://www.grants.gov* . Below are instructions on: • How to FIND the SCASDP application online at *http://www.grants.gov* ; • How to register to submit applications; and • How to APPLY or complete and submit the application form SF424. Finding the SCASDP Grant Opportunity on Grants.Gov Start your search for the Small Community Air Service Development Program grant opportunity by entering *http://www.grants.gov* and clicking the *Find Grant Opportunities* tab at the top of the page. In the search box titled “Search for Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA)number” enter 20.930. You will see a summary of the SCASDP requirements. Register to Submit Applications Prior to applying, you must register to create a Grants.gov account and receive approval from *your organization* to submit applications. Detailed instructions on how to complete the registration is available on *http://www.grants.gov* . 1. Register your Organization. • Obtain a Data Universal Number System
(DUNS)number. • Register the organization with a Central Contractor Registry (CCR). 2. Register yourself as an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR). • Obtain a username and password. • Register with Grants.gov. 3. Get Authorized as an AOR by your Organization. • Obtain E-Business Point of Contact authorization. Applying for the Grant Once you have located the Small Community Air Service Development Program grant opportunity, you will need to enter the Funding Opportunity and/or the Catalog of Federal Domestic Application
(CFDA)number 20.930 to access the application package and instructions online. However, you must complete the registration process before applying (see B above). In order to view the application package and instructions, you will also need to download and install the PureEdge Viewer. 1. Download PureEdge Viewer [Required]. 2. Download an Application Package. 3. Complete an Application Package. 4. Submit an Application Package. Enter the SCASDP CFDA number (20.930) to download the application form SF424 and begin the process to apply for the grant through *http://www.grants.gov.* It is a 4-step process: Apply Step 1: Download the Grant Application Form SF424 and Application Instructions You will need to enter the Funding Opportunity and/or CFDA number to access the application package and instructions. Download and install the *PureEdge Viewer (available on http://www.grants.gov)* . This small, free program will allow you to access, complete, and submit applications electronically and securely. Apply Step 2: Complete the Selected Grant Application Package You can complete the application offline—giving you the flexibility to complete grant applications when and where you want. It also enables you to easily route it through your organization for review, or completion of various components, just like any other e-mail attachment. Apply Step 3: Submit a Completed Grant Application Package You will submit the application online. When you are ready to submit the completed application form SF424, you must have already completed the *Get Started* Steps. You will then need to log into *http://www.grants.gov* using the username and password you entered when you registered with a *Credential Provider* to submit the application. Note: To submit electronic grant applications, you must be fully authorized by your organization, i.e., been given status as an *Authorized Organization Representative (AOR)* . You can easily check your status by logging into *http://www.grants.gov* by accessing the *Applicant* link at the top of the screen. If you have registered your user name and password with Grants.gov, you will be able to log in. After logging in, access the ‘Manage Profile’ link. Your status, located below your title, will state: “AOR—request sent” or “AOR—Approved”. If your status is ‘AOR—request sent’, you cannot yet submit grant applications. You may correct this by contacting your *E-Business Point of Contact (POC)* . He or she will need to log in by accessing the *Ebiz* link at the top of the screen. They will need your organization's DUNs number and MPIN, to approve you as an AOR. Apply Step 4: Track the Status of a Completed Grant Application Package Once you have submitted an application, you can check the status of your application submission. You can identify your application by CFDA Number, Funding Opportunity Number, Competition ID, and/or Grants.gov Tracking Number. [FR Doc. E7-3581 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Electronic Subscription Service for Airworthiness Directives and Special Airworthiness Information Bulletins AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of policy change. SUMMARY: This notice publishes additional information about the FAA's planned transition to electronic distribution of airworthiness directives
(ADs)and special airworthiness information bulletins
(SAIB)through an e-mail subscription service. This notice gives more details and the schedule for the electronic distribution system, and addresses comments we received in response to Aircraft Engineering Division's previous notice about the plan. The previous notice was titled “Printing and Distribution Changes for Airworthiness Directives and Special Airworthiness Information Bulletins” and was published in the **Federal Register** on August 24, 2006. DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 2, 2007. ADDRESSES: Send your comments on the planned policy changes electronically by logging onto the following Web site: *http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/draft_docs/* or you may e-mail comments to: 9-amc-air-140-policy. You may mail a hard copy of your comments to: Federal Aviation Administration, Aircraft Engineering Division, Delegation and Airworthiness Programs Branch, AIR-140, MMAC, P.O. Box 26460, Oklahoma City, OK 73125. Attn: Mary Ellen Anderson. Finally, you may deliver comments to: Federal Aviation Administration, Room 815, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Ellen Anderson, Federal Aviation Administration, Aircraft Certification Service, Aircraft Engineering Division, Delegation and Airworthiness Programs Branch, AIR-140, 6500 S. MacArthur Blvd., ARB 308; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73169; phone:
(405)954-7071; fax:
(405)954-2209. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited Interested persons are invited to comment on the planned policy changes by submitting written data, views, or arguments to the above address. Comments received may be examined, both before and after the closing date, at the Federal Aviation Administration, Room 815, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, weekends except Federal holidays, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. The Director, Aircraft Certification Service, will consider all comments received on or before the closing date. Background ADs are enforceable rules that apply to products (aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and appliances), published to address an unsafe condition per CFR Part 39 criteria. All ADs are currently available to the public via:
(1)**Federal Register** at *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/advanced.html* ;
(2)FAA's Regulatory and Guidance Library
(RGL)Web site at *http://rgl/faa.gov;* and
(3)paper mailings to all registered owners and operators of the affected product. We also issue a type of AD called an emergency AD when an unsafe condition exists that requires immediate corrective action. We mail or fax emergency ADs to all registered owners and operators of the affected product, and publish a final rule version soon after in the **Federal Register** . SAIBs provide recommended actions that owners and operators may use to improve the safety of their products. Because the information contained in SAIBs is not mandatory, we do not publish SAIBs in the **Federal Register** . Effective January 2007, we added SAIBs to our RGL Web site, making it much easier to access and search on these safety documents. Paper mailing of ADs and SAIBs is a slow, expensive, and inefficient method of delivering safety-related information to affected parties, requiring a massive paper printing and distribution management system. In 2005, we processed and mailed more than 1,000,000 copies of ADs to affected owners and operators. It often takes 5 to 6 days for the owner or operator to receive the mailed copy. And, because of inaccurate or obsolete addresses in FAA's Aircraft Registry database, we typically receive thousands of returned ADs. In light of these difficulties as well as ongoing budgetary constraints, we are pursuing ways to improve our efficiency in distribution of safety information. Discussion This notice introduces “GovDelivery” for all ADs and SAIBs—an e-mail subscription management system designed specifically for the public sector. Owners, operators, and any interested party will be able to sign up through FAA's RGL Web site at *http://rgl.faa.gov* , and will receive both ADs and SAIBs once subscription is completed. Subscribers will be able to select to receive all documents or only those pertaining to a specific product make and model. They will also have the option to receive general categories such as ‘small airplane’ or ‘engine.’ The subscription service will generally deliver the AD or SAIB to each e-mail address within minutes after publication in our RGL Web site. All ADs will continue to be published in the **Federal Register** , and all ADs and SAIBs will continue to be available at our RGL Web site. Once we are assured that the GovDelivery service is working correctly, we will transition away from paper mailings of ADs. We are asking industry representative groups to help with this transition by making aviation stakeholders aware of the new subscription service for ADs and SAIBs. While we anticipate that GovDelivery service will provide a timely and cost-effective method of ensuring that affected parties receive the safety information they need, we will be monitoring the system to validate that the service is meeting the needs of our customers. We issued a previous notice in the **Federal Register** on August 24, 2006, titled “Printing and Distribution Changes for Airworthiness Directives and Special Airworthiness Information Bulletins.” That notice outlined immediate changes to our mailing processes for ADs and SAIBs. We provided the public the opportunity to comment on that notice and have considered all comments we received. Our responses to those comments are provided following the policy discussed below. Policy We expect to make the GovDelivery electronic e-mail service available for ADs and SAIBs available in May 2007. All interested parties are encouraged to subscribe to this service on our RGL Web site at *http://rgl.faa.gov* . Once GovDelivery is available and we are confident in the accurate and timely electronic dissemination of ADs and SAIBs to our subscribers, we will begin implementation of the following changes to our AD/SAIB distribution processes:
(a)We will phase out paper mailing of ADs within a two-month period after GovDelivery becomes available except as described in
(b)below. We will manage the phase-out based on the number and types of subscribers signed up in the GovDelivery system.
(b)For now, we will continue to mail or fax emergency ADs to affected owners and operators. We are working on a method to deliver emergency ADs electronically in future, that will assure and record receipt when sent to affected parties.
(c)We will discontinue the existing emergency AD subscription service that is currently available on the RGL Web site, since the GovDelivery service will send emergency ADs (and their final rule versions) to subscribers who have selected to receive ADs of that make/model or category.
(d)We will discontinue the existing SAIB subscription service that is currently available on the FAA Web site, to allow integration with the AD portion of the subscription service.
(e)We will no longer mail or e-mail ADs or SAIBw to FAA offices and civil airworthiness authorities
(CAAs)of other countries. Instead, we will encourage all interested FAA personnel as well as the CAAs to sign-up through GovDelivery to receive these documents. Comments to Previous Notice Several commenters expressed support for the planned electronic distribution of ADs and SAIBs. One commenter stated that it would be easier to receive ADs and SAIBs electronically instead of “logging on and searching through databases to find applicable ADs and SAIBs.” We agree. GovDelivery service will allow subscribers to receive ADs and SAIBs by e-mail. Recommendation to Continue Paper Mailings AOPA recommended that we continue paper mailing of ADs and SAIBs until we make enhancements to our e-mail subscription service to ensure the continued availability and dissemination of relevant safety information. We partially agree. Due to the existing e-mail service for SAIBs we discontinued these mailings in 2006. However, we will continue mailing ADs until we are assured the new GovDelivery service is available and working correctly for both ADs and SAIBs. To publicize the service we have added “alerts” on our RGL AD web page and are announcing the coming GovDelivery service on the back of every AD mailed out. Recommendation To Update the SAIB e-mail Subscription Service AOPA recommended we enhance the existing SAIB e-mail service to allow selection of SAIBs based on aircraft or engine make and model. We agree. GovDelivery service will allow the user to subscribe to and receive SAIBs selected by make/model instead of having to receive all issued SAIBs. Continuation of FAA AD Bi-Weekly A representative for a repair station asked whether the FAA will continue to compile and issue the bi-weekly list of ADs. We are making no change to the AD Bi-weekly process at this time, and will continue to publish the Bi-Weekly report until further notice. Recommendation To Continue Mailing “Engine type” ADs Continental Airlines, AOPA, NATCA and others expressed concern that we misstated the user's ability to ‘register an engine’ in the FAA Aircraft Registry. We agree that this terminology was incorrect, since aircraft owners cannot register their engine in the Registry. When they register an airframe they can choose to also identify the engine installed on the airframe; our intent was to use this engine data to support AD mailings. However, we have decided to continue mailing ADs to all owners of engine models identified in an AD, as well as owners of airframe models called out in the “installed on, but not limited to” applicability. We will continue this practice until we implement the GovDelivery service. Recommendation To Mail/Final Rule version of Emergency ADs AOPA and NATCA stated that sometimes the content of an emergency AD changes between its issuance and the issuance of the final rule version, and for this reason we should mail the final rule copy of the emergency AD as well. We disagree. The final rule version must be substantively equal to the emergency AD to avoid serious legal consequences. If it changes in substance from the emergency AD version, we assign a different AD number and issue another AD. Since the final rule version is equivalent it is not necessary to mail it in addition to the emergency AD. Not that once the GovDelivery service is in place, both versions (the emergency AD and its final rule) will be e-mailed to subscribers for the AD's applicability. Notification of the Public About This Policy Change NATCA wrote that the distribution of paper copies of ADs has been the standard for decades. This is a significant policy change that should be made aware to the public and open for public debate. NATCA requests that we withdraw the notice and resubmit it for comment. NATCA also states that FAA has been heavy-handed in lowering the safety level of aircraft by making significant changes in (other) policies. This final policy change must not be implemented for a period of time (six months) and be distributed in writing (published on paper) to all affected organizations, foreign authorities, and every registered aircraft owner, operator, repair stations, airline, etc. this would allow those in the public that do not currently have internet access time to obtain access. We partially agree. Since the previous notice, issued in August 2006, contained a request for comments, we see no need to withdraw the notice and resubmit it. We also do not concur that we have in any way lowered the safety level of aircraft. Rather, we expect to improve safety by increasing the timeliness and accuracy of our delivery system. However, we agree that the public should have the opportunity to review and comment on these changes, which was the purpose of the previous notice as well as this one. With these notices we will have informed interested parties more than six months prior to our expected implementation date. Conflict With Existing FAA Policy NATCA stated that this notice is in conflict with (AD Manual) M-8040.1, Section 17 that mandates the procedures the FAA will follow to distribute paper copies to the public. The proposed policy must note any and all FAA policies/orders that will be affected. We agree that changes to the AD Manual will be necessary in order to align with this planned policy change. We will include these changes in a future revision to the AD Manual once this policy is finalized. Notification of the Union About This Policy Change NATCA commented that FAA has failed to coordinate this planned policy change with the NATCA union. This is a significant change in the working conditions of the NATCA bargaining unit employees in AIR, especially AIR-140. If the agency proceeds with these changes, NATCA expects the agency to comply with the legal requirements to notify and negotiate with NATCA prior to implementation. No training has been identified for the workforce. FAA will comply with all legal requirements. Per the requirements we have assessed this planned policy change and have determined that there is no significant change to working conditions and any impact to bargaining unit employees is ‘de minimis.’ No new skills, resources, equipment, or training are expected to be required to order to implement this change. Questionable Use of Federal Funds NATCA stated that FAA should make public the current costs of publishing ADs and SAIBs, and it should be made part of the public record where the money that should have been used for publishing will be spent instead. It should also be noted if this is a “business plan” item and if any managers will receive an award/bonus/pay increase due to the implementation of this notice. We considered current costs as a factor in deciding to change this policy, and have estimated the savings in reduced printing costs at about $240,000 per year. However, we have no way of determining where these funds will be spent instead, so are unable to provide this information. No managers have received or will receive extra compensation for its implementation. This policy change is not a “business plan” item but supports an FAA Flight Plan item. Issued in Washington, DC, on February 26, 2007. Susan J.M. Cabler, Acting Manager, Aircraft Engineering Division, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 07-921 Filed 2-28-07; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 19
Traces to 19 documents
U.S. Code
20 references not yet in our index
  • Pub. L. 104-13
  • 29 CFR 5
  • 29 CFR 75
  • 17 CFR 240.19
  • Pub. L. 100-503
  • Pub. L. 101-508
  • Pub. L. 87-256
  • 22 CFR 62
  • Pub. L. 104-319
  • Pub. L. 106-113
  • 49 CFR 1
  • Pub. L. 106-181
  • Pub. L. 108-176
  • Pub. L. 110-005
  • 49 CFR 27
  • 14 CFR 382
  • 49 CFR 29
  • 49 CFR 20
  • 49 CFR 1.56
  • Pub. L. 106-107
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice
U.S.C.§ 3141
U.S.C.§ 3701
U.S.C.§ 3142
C.F.R.§ 5.5
U.S.C.§ 3702
U.S.C.§ 78s
U.S.C.§ 78f
U.S.C.§ 552
C.F.R.§ 200.30-3
Pub. L.Pub. L. 104-13
Cite29 CFR 5
Cite29 CFR 75
Cites 39 · 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.